Ill forever stand by what I said: If Iacocca didnt fumble his choice and had picked Lutz for CEO, Chrysler would look completely different today. The merger destroyed them, ruined the entire product range with decontening and cost cutting measures, and forcing them to kill off all the home grown projects and platforms for weird crossbreads of German platforms with american tweaks. Just imagine a timeline where chrysler gets to facelift the Jeep WJ instead of dropping it for the Mercedes-Based WK, and the LH cars finally receive their long overdue RWD variant under Castaing's watchful eye, instead of that haphazardly put together LX platform using Mercedes parts.
@@ronhoover5516 that is also a fact, but its undeniable that had Iacocca put aside his pride and the conflicts he had with Lutz, Chrysler would be in a much better position today
I agree with everything you said. But the last thing about the LX platform isn’t exactly true. Tom Gale, who was both the product and engineering chief for Chrysler during this time said that they had been working in house on a successor to the LH cars as early as 1997 and that the plan was to always go rear drive. The only components that Chrysler used for the LX platform from Mercedes was the rear suspension and the five speed automatic transmission.
My mother bought one brand new in 98. Gold, just the lx base model with the 2.7. Only option was the center console. And it was a piece of junk. It rode good, the dashboard felt like something right out of a Lexus. Soft padding everywhere. But that darn engine. Sludged up right out of warranty.
I was too young to be fully informed, but a cousin and her husband had a 99 3.2 LX that they put something like 300k on in around 6 years, and it was traded still working at least decently. I remember for a large amount of that time, the headlights were yellowed and the headlight gaskets were escaping the housings and flapping in the wind.
I love my 2003 - 300m I bought 7 years ago and I putting 160.297 miles still going strong This car has has nice big wheels 245,45,18 and it's fun to drive I'm sure not gonna sale it any time soon
The LHS/300 were the nicer cars. Loved the outgoing 97, the interior and suspension felt and road like American luxury. The redesign in 98 had a European feeling, never like the ride of the LHS, and the seats were firmer than the previous generation.
The 1993-97 Concorde is seriously one of the best looking Chrysler cars ever, gorgeous styling. The '98 is nice too, but I agree, stylewise it was a step back. The adaptation of the LHS face for 2002 improved the looks quite a bit, though.
The 300M was originally supposed to be the next Eagle Vision, but as we all know Eagle was dropped after ‘98. So it makes me wonder what could’ve happened if that 300M was the next and possibly last Eagle Vision.
These cars were impressive for their day, sleek and beautiful, two words rarely said about large American cars. However, they were poorly engineered with serious engine and transmission issues developing far too early, these cars were not known for their longevity even if maintained according to every letter of its service indicator. It's too bad, because they were really were desirable cars in many ways, still looking good 25 years later.
Great chassis for a big front-driver, but average otherwise with poor quality and subpar brand image. I can’t believe they thought anyone wanted these.
Chryslers reputation absolutely tanked in the early 2000s. Back when this came out Chrysler was with all the other domestics, if a little ahead right before the merger thanks to the LH platform and Jeep. The DaimlerChrysler merger ruined Chrysler.
Авто/Мото
The first gen was so stylish, this was stunning
Ill forever stand by what I said:
If Iacocca didnt fumble his choice and had picked Lutz for CEO, Chrysler would look completely different today. The merger destroyed them, ruined the entire product range with decontening and cost cutting measures, and forcing them to kill off all the home grown projects and platforms for weird crossbreads of German platforms with american tweaks.
Just imagine a timeline where chrysler gets to facelift the Jeep WJ instead of dropping it for the Mercedes-Based WK, and the LH cars finally receive their long overdue RWD variant under Castaing's watchful eye, instead of that haphazardly put together LX platform using Mercedes parts.
Imagine, if Chrysler had been a strong number 2 or even number 1 sales company under Lutz, and GM had declined or even gone under without him.
Agree on Lutz but he and Iacocca did not get along.
@@ronhoover5516 that is also a fact, but its undeniable that had Iacocca put aside his pride and the conflicts he had with Lutz, Chrysler would be in a much better position today
I agree with everything you said. But the last thing about the LX platform isn’t exactly true. Tom Gale, who was both the product and engineering chief for Chrysler during this time said that they had been working in house on a successor to the LH cars as early as 1997 and that the plan was to always go rear drive. The only components that Chrysler used for the LX platform from Mercedes was the rear suspension and the five speed automatic transmission.
@@lawrencehodge6273 we even saw that RWD LH platform in the Charger prototype. I guess I should've worded it better but what you are saying is correct
My mother bought one brand new in 98. Gold, just the lx base model with the 2.7. Only option was the center console. And it was a piece of junk. It rode good, the dashboard felt like something right out of a Lexus. Soft padding everywhere. But that darn engine. Sludged up right out of warranty.
Front fascia looks like the fisheye Camaro
Since this car was out before the redesigned Camaro, the Camaro look like the Concord!
@@dodgeguyz you are right , the 90’s look
Jaguar XK8 also, or i'm dreaming?
@@dodgeguyz Wow! true.
Thanks for sharing. Interesting car.
handling is very impressive
Very beautiful this Chrysler Concorde
Talk about a rare car to see on the road these days. It's been years since I saw the last one.
Good design let down by poor reliability.
I was too young to be fully informed, but a cousin and her husband had a 99 3.2 LX that they put something like 300k on in around 6 years, and it was traded still working at least decently. I remember for a large amount of that time, the headlights were yellowed and the headlight gaskets were escaping the housings and flapping in the wind.
It was that darn 2.7L engine that made these bad in the long run. From what I’ve read and owner reviews, the 3.2 and 3.5 V6s did ok.
They were great cars as long as you didn't buy the base motor, the 2.7 liter V6. The 3.2 and the 3.5 were reliable motors.
I love my 2003 - 300m I bought 7 years ago and I putting 160.297 miles still going strong
This car has has nice big wheels 245,45,18 and it's fun to drive I'm sure not gonna sale it any time soon
2.7L 😬
The LHS/300 were the nicer cars. Loved the outgoing 97, the interior and suspension felt and road like American luxury. The redesign in 98 had a European feeling, never like the ride of the LHS, and the seats were firmer than the previous generation.
The 1993-97 Concorde is seriously one of the best looking Chrysler cars ever, gorgeous styling. The '98 is nice too, but I agree, stylewise it was a step back. The adaptation of the LHS face for 2002 improved the looks quite a bit, though.
The 300M was originally supposed to be the next Eagle Vision, but as we all know Eagle was dropped after ‘98. So it makes me wonder what could’ve happened if that 300M was the next and possibly last Eagle Vision.
If they would have just made the 3.2/3.5 standard, so many of the problems would have been non-existent
Chrysler has had such beautiful designs throughout the years. They just cant seem to establish a reliable autoline.
This is the car you probably got when you got a promotion
These cars were impressive for their day, sleek and beautiful, two words rarely said about large American cars. However, they were poorly engineered with serious engine and transmission issues developing far too early, these cars were not known for their longevity even if maintained according to every letter of its service indicator. It's too bad, because they were really were desirable cars in many ways, still looking good 25 years later.
I had no engine or transmission issues with mine. I had a 1998 and a 2001. I'd like to know how you came to your conclusions.
If you can find a 3.2l, it's not a bad commuter. Pretty good mpg, very comfy, reliable. If you find a 2.7l, however... RUN
You’ll still see these cars but in the ghetto or dangerous neighborhoods 😂
They’re long gone mostly
The 2.7 was a horrible engine.
Yes it was, and I made a lot of money at the dealer replacing them!
Oil sludge, no?
Great chassis for a big front-driver, but average otherwise with poor quality and subpar brand image. I can’t believe they thought anyone wanted these.
Chryslers reputation absolutely tanked in the early 2000s. Back when this came out Chrysler was with all the other domestics, if a little ahead right before the merger thanks to the LH platform and Jeep.
The DaimlerChrysler merger ruined Chrysler.
The 2.7 has a nuce growl to it. Too bad it had so many issues at thr beginning. Made Chryslers reputation worse
SERIOUSLY NOT RELIABLE
Mine was very reliable.
handling is very impressive