• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Chrsyler 300M vs Acura 3.2TL

P

Panakk

Senior member
I test drove a 2004 Chrsyler 300M last night and i loved the car. Was comparing it to an Acura 3.2 TL since it's my ultimate favorite car and i have realised what a rip off the Acura can be.. A 2003 Acura 3.2 TL with 20K miles is around 23K while the 2004 Chrysler 300M with the same mileage is around 18K.. More horses i think..


Edit
Cliff notes:
For much less you get more in the Chrysler 300M than the Acura 3.2TL
 
well, think about it, you sepdn 23 k now compared to 18k on a chrysler, later on in the chrysler's life your gonna need some major repairs depending on how long you wanna keep it, but the acura on the other hand shouldnt have too much problems later on
 
Originally posted by: BullyCanadian
well, think about it, you sepdn 23 k now compared to 18k on a chrysler, later on in the chrysler's life your gonna need some major repairs depending on how long you wanna keep it, but the acura on the other hand shouldnt have too much problems later on
Click to expand...

Over both of their lives, there is NO WAY that you will spend $5000 more in repairs on the 300M than on the Acura. You are absolutely retarded if you believe this.
 
Originally posted by: iamwiz82
Originally posted by: BullyCanadian
well, think about it, you sepdn 23 k now compared to 18k on a chrysler, later on in the chrysler's life your gonna need some major repairs depending on how long you wanna keep it, but the acura on the other hand shouldnt have too much problems later on
Click to expand...

Over both of their lives, there is NO WAY that you will spend $5000 more in repairs on the 300M than on the Acura. You are absolutely retarded if you believe this.
Click to expand...

Uh, on what basis?

Acura-Honda cars have proven time and time again that they are the most reliable, dependable cars available. (Actually, right below Toyota-Lexus, buts thats not the issue at hand) Chrsyler, on the other hand, is it even on the charts???
 
Originally posted by: Panakk
I test drove a 2004 Chrsyler 300M last night and i loved the car. Was comparing it to an Acura 3.2 TL since it's my ultimate favorite car and i have realised what a rip off the Acura can be.. A 2003 Acura 3.2 TL with 20K miles is around 23K while the 2004 Chrysler 300M with the same mileage is around 18K.. More horses i think..


Edit
Cliff notes:
For much less you get more in the Chrysler 300M than the Acura 3.2TL
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but you're an idiot

2004 Chrysler 300M MSRP for base: $29,185. That's a 39% depreciation in less than one year.
2003 Acura 3.2TL MSRP for base: $31,710. That's a 28% depreciation in less than two years.

Yep, the Acura is a huge rip-off. :roll:
 
Originally posted by: shuan24
Originally posted by: iamwiz82
Originally posted by: BullyCanadian
well, think about it, you sepdn 23 k now compared to 18k on a chrysler, later on in the chrysler's life your gonna need some major repairs depending on how long you wanna keep it, but the acura on the other hand shouldnt have too much problems later on
Click to expand...

Over both of their lives, there is NO WAY that you will spend $5000 more in repairs on the 300M than on the Acura. You are absolutely retarded if you believe this.
Click to expand...

Uh, on what basis?

Acura-Honda cars have proven time and time again that they are the most reliable, dependable cars available. (Actually, right below Toyota-Lexus, buts thats not the issue at hand) Chrsyler, on the other hand, is it even on the charts???
Click to expand...

Oh you are correct. Number 6 on the 2004 lemon charts proves this to us. And again, where are you going to spend $5000 MORE on maintenance and repairs than the Acura?
 
Originally posted by: iamwiz82
Originally posted by: shuan24
Originally posted by: iamwiz82
Originally posted by: BullyCanadian
well, think about it, you sepdn 23 k now compared to 18k on a chrysler, later on in the chrysler's life your gonna need some major repairs depending on how long you wanna keep it, but the acura on the other hand shouldnt have too much problems later on
Click to expand...

Over both of their lives, there is NO WAY that you will spend $5000 more in repairs on the 300M than on the Acura. You are absolutely retarded if you believe this.
Click to expand...

Uh, on what basis?

Acura-Honda cars have proven time and time again that they are the most reliable, dependable cars available. (Actually, right below Toyota-Lexus, buts thats not the issue at hand) Chrsyler, on the other hand, is it even on the charts???
Click to expand...

Oh you are correct. Number 6 on the 2004 lemon charts proves this to us. And again, where are you going to spend $5000 MORE on maintenance and repairs than the Acura?
Click to expand...


Silly. EVERYONE knows that Japanese cars NEVER have mechanical problems. Conversely, Domestic cars are ticking time bombs as soon as they roll off the dealer's lot. :roll:
 
Yeah, thats right, Japanese cars never have any mechanical problems. Nice generalization. Like I said, they are the most reliable cars. Where in that statement does that say Japanese cars have no mechanical problems? You argue like a 5 year-old.

It would be difficult to say where the extra 5k would come from, since it would depend on how long you have your vehicle. The fact that Chryslers are not as reliable as Acuras, one would conclude that more mechanical problems are probable on the Chrysler than on the Acura. EVEN if both cars had the same amount of problems, because IMO Acura parts are alot more accessible than Chryslers, one would assume that the savings would come from both parts and labor when a mechanical problem does happen.
 
The tl would be nicer if it was rwd, although if it is just a regular 2003 tl that isn't such a big issue.

Either way, I'd take the tl over the 300M.
 
Originally posted by: iamwiz82
Originally posted by: BullyCanadian
well, think about it, you sepdn 23 k now compared to 18k on a chrysler, later on in the chrysler's life your gonna need some major repairs depending on how long you wanna keep it, but the acura on the other hand shouldnt have too much problems later on
Click to expand...

Over both of their lives, there is NO WAY that you will spend $5000 more in repairs on the 300M than on the Acura. You are absolutely retarded if you believe this.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. How will you spend more than 5K in repairs on a Chrysler compared to a Acura.. Absurd isn't it..

I'm no Japanese car lover or a American car hater, but some american cars are just a bang for your buck. Wish they were built in the US though.. More jobs for us.
 
Originally posted by: RagingBITCH
Originally posted by: Panakk
I test drove a 2004 Chrsyler 300M last night and i loved the car. Was comparing it to an Acura 3.2 TL since it's my ultimate favorite car and i have realised what a rip off the Acura can be.. A 2003 Acura 3.2 TL with 20K miles is around 23K while the 2004 Chrysler 300M with the same mileage is around 18K.. More horses i think..


Edit
Cliff notes:
For much less you get more in the Chrysler 300M than the Acura 3.2TL
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but you're an idiot

2004 Chrysler 300M MSRP for base: $29,185. That's a 39% depreciation in less than one year.
2003 Acura 3.2TL MSRP for base: $31,710. That's a 28% depreciation in less than two years.

Yep, the Acura is a huge rip-off. :roll:
Click to expand...

You're the idiot. I was talking about a used car. Not to mention MSRP is not the price you buy cars at.. You get huge discounts on these cars..
 
Originally posted by: deejayshakur
do they make chryslers in the US or germany now that daimler owns them?
Click to expand...

They didn't move the plants, if that's what you mean. That would be $$$$$$$$$$$
 
WTF are you arguing over reliability for? They're both under warranty for quite a while.

Acura may be more reliable over all in a large populace, but when you are comparing single cars you obviously can't use those numbers. The Acura could blow up shortly after leaving the lot and the Chrysler could go 200k with no problems.
 
Originally posted by: DougK62
WTF are you arguing over reliability for? They're both under warranty for quite a while.

Acura may be more reliable over all in a large populace, but when you are comparing single cars you obviously can't use those numbers. The Acura could blow up shortly after leaving the lot and the Chrysler could go 200k with no problems.
Click to expand...


Niice argument.

What about Chrysler blowing up shortly and the Acura going for 200k with no problems?

Are we in a tie then? Are all cars created equal?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top