I just saw a Chrysler 300 ad where the 300 pulls up next to a CTS (that they make look puny) while the voiceover talks about their exciting (but barfy)styling. The lady in the CTS looks out and visualizes herself behind the wheel of the (ugly) 300. I think the ad backfires because the 300 looks even worse when contrasted with the CTS.

I just saw a Chrysler 300 ad where the 300 pulls up next to a CTS (that they make look puny) while the voiceover talks about their exciting (but barfy)styling. The lady in the CTS looks out and visualizes herself behind the wheel of the (ugly) 300. I think the ad backfires because the 300 looks even worse when contrasted with the CTS.
The 300's a Chrysler, need you say anymore???? :lildevil:

Okay, the styling may be subjective (hey, some people wouldn't know car design if it ran them over), but as for the things that can be measured:

Our V6 bests theirs.
Our V8 bests theirs.
Our handling bests theirs.
Our <insert any other performance measurement> bests theirs.

They can make their sheetmetal look like anything they want, but at the end of the day, it's still a Cadillac versus a Chrysler. No contest, I would say.


Of course, with this new commercial and the recent one with the Lincoln LS comparing itself to the CTS, Cadillac should be flattered. Standard of the World? It's nice to see companies chasing Cadillac again. :)

The Penalty of Leadership

In every field of human endeavor, he that is first must perpetually live in the white light of publicity. Whether the leadership be vested in a man or in a manufactured product, emulation and envy are ever at work. In art, in literature, in music, in industry, the reward and the punishment are always the same. The reward is widespread recognition, the punishment fierce denial and detraction. When a man’s work becomes a standard for the whole world, it also becomes a target for the shafts of the envious few. If his work is merely mediocre, he will be left severely alone. If he achieve a masterpiece it will set a million tongues awagging. Jealousy does not protrude its forked tongue at the artist who produces a common-place painting. Whatsoever you write, or paint, or play, or sing, or build; no one will strive to surpass or to slander you unless your work be stamped with the seal of genius.

Long after a great work has been done, those who are disappointed or envious continue to cry out that it cannot be done. Spiteful little voices in the domain of art were raised against our own Whistler as a mountebank, long after the big world had acclaimed him its greatest artistic genius. Multitudes flocked to Bayreuth to worship at the musical shrine of Wagner, while the little group of those whom he had dethroned and displaced argued angrily that he was no musician at all. The little world continued to protest that Fulton could never build a steamboat, while the big world flocked to the river banks to see his boat steam by.

The Leader is assailed because he is a Leader, and the effort to equal him is merely added proof of that leadership. Failing to equal or to excel, the follower seeks to depreciate and to destroy, but only confirms once more the superiority of that which he strives to supplant. There is nothing new in this, it is as old as the world and as old as the human passions of envy, fear, greed, ambition, and the desire to surpass. And it all avails nothing. If the leader truly leads, he remains the leader. Master Poet, Master Painter, Master Workman; each in his turn is assailed, and each holds his laurels through the ages.

That which is great makes itself known, no matter how loud the clamor of denial. That which deserves to live, Lives.

This text appeared as an advertisement in the Saturday Evening Post, January 2, 1915. Copyright Cadillac Motor Car Division.

:lildevil:

:yawn: When I first saw a Chrysler 300, I thought it was a CTS. It bears more than a casual resemblence to a CTS. It's like when the Russians came out with their space shuttle and it looked almost like the U.S. shuttle. Whoa!:lildevil:

Okay, the styling may be subjective (hey, some people wouldn't know car design if it ran them over), but as for the things that can be measured:

Our V6 bests theirs.
Our V8 bests theirs.
Our handling bests theirs.
Our <insert any other performance measurement> bests theirs.

They can make their sheeymetal look like anything they want, but at the end of the day, it's still a Cadillac versus a Chrysler. No contest, I would say.


Of course, with this new commercial and the recent one with the Lincoln LS comparing itself to the CTS, Cadillac should be flattered. Standard of the World? It's nice to see companies chasing Cadillac again. :)


300C 340hp for $33000
CTS 255hp for $33000

It's not fair to compare 50K car to 33K car.

It's not fair to compare 50K car to 33K car.


I agree.

And believe me, it shows... ;)

300C 340hp for $33000
CTS 255hp for $33000

It's not fair to compare 50K car to 33K car.
He He. It's also not fair to compare a $33K Chrysler and a $33K Cadillac! :D

i hate to say it, but the 300 hemi is quite a value....but you give up alot for those ponies

Our V6 bests theirs.

As much as my entire family loves Cadillacs, I love the 300! We have several on the lot and wil be test driving!

The V6 in the 300/Touring/Limited is a 3.5 L High Output SOHC 24 valve SMPI rated at 250 hp @6400 rpm, and 250 lb-ft of torque @ 3800 rpm.

I thought that was more than the base CTS?

My Stepdad has ALWAYS bought GM cars. He is 67 years old. He has had :1955 Chevy
1958 Chevy
1961 Olds Dynamic 88 (I believe)
1971 Olds 442 (w-30)
1978 Chev truck (still mint!)
1979 Nova (still mint!)
1979 Olds "98"
several more and 2 Cadillacs.
THE ONLY Chrysler that he has ever commented on positively was when I showed him the new 300C. He LIKED IT! Something I have never heard him say about ANY Chrysler! My point, there is something people like about this car (subjective yes) so don't knock it too bad. At least it's American, built in Canada. Good for our economy and yours. Is a Lexus?

From what I understand the 300 is on the MBZ E class chassis. The interior (and well exterior styling too) is a love/hate thing much like the CTS.

I have driven a (fully loaded with 4 ppl) 300c and a stripped 3.6 CTS (again fully loaded with 4 ppl) back to back on the same Chrysler test drive course. The 300c feels bigger (bc it is! - MUCH), the ride is smoother (more of a comfy cruiser), the CTS feels sportier, handles considerably better (perormance oriented), and doesn't feel significantly less powerful bc the power comes on MUCH earlier (IMHO).

I have not driven the V6 300 to compare.

Does it count that I drove my CTS-V to and from this event? I would not put the CTS-V inot any of these comparos.

I find it VERY hard to compare these 2 cars on anything other than price, have similar displacement (in V6 trim), and they are 5 person 4 door automobiles. You could just as ealisy compare the CTS to a Avalon or the like.
-Ben

From what I understand the 300 is on the MBZ E class chassis.

I find it VERY hard to compare these 2 cars on anything other than price

Good points! That's probably what the commercial was trying to get across, meaning, the 300 is more of a Deville, full-size, family hauler. the CTS IS much smaller! It's a simple fact.

The V6 in the 300/Touring/Limited is a 3.5 L High Output SOHC 24 valve SMPI rated at 250 hp @6400 rpm, and 250 lb-ft of torque @ 3800 rpm.

The Chrysler 3.5L sucks. It's got a horrible power band, and anything over 3500lbs just chugs along with it inside. The CTS has 255hp.

The Chrysler 3.5L sucks. It's got a horrible power band, and anything over 3500lbs just chugs along with it inside. The CTS has 255hp.

There are a couple of things I'd like to know. (sorry I don't spend too much time in the CTS forum)

1. The CTS's torque, and weight.
2. The 300's weight. The Chrysler brochure makes no mention of it.

I'm pretty impressed by any V6 that gets that kind of power, and I'm more than sure the Cadillacs V6 is more refined.

Goth: The hemi beats a Northstar in power.

I really like the styling of the Chrysler 300 - it's like the poor man's Bentley. :D

Don't get all worked up. Considering that I bought a CTS, I think that my actions have proven that, for me, when choosing between a 300 and a CTS - there is no choice.

Weight, according to Chrysler comparison chart.

CTS-V 3850 CTS 3509 300C 4018

I like my CTS and I like the 300C, so I bought a 300C. When I get the 300C I'll have to decide which vehicle to drive, CTS-300C-Harley. Life is full of so many decisions. :hmm:

Drove the 300C Hemi. Very nice car and very fast. Loaded, including Nav and sunroof, about $36-37k. So I said to my wife maybe I'd get it for her. She said I told her I'd NEVER again buy another Chrysler after our Town and Country minivan in which I have replaced almost every major part and a slew of minor parts that nickel and dime me to death!:banghead: Thank God my wife brought me back to reality.:worship:

I love the look of the 300C, looks like a chopped hot rod. I test drove the hemi, and that is one sweet engine. However, the car overall just felt very big, much bigger then my current STS.

Not that it handled poorly, and generally I like bigger cars. This just was not my type of ride, although I doubt Chrysler will have any problem selling them.

There are a couple of things I'd like to know. (sorry I don't spend too much time in the CTS forum)

1. The CTS's torque, and weight.
2. The 300's weight. The Chrysler brochure makes no mention of it.

I'm pretty impressed by any V6 that gets that kind of power, and I'm more than sure the Cadillacs V6 is more refined.

Goth: The hemi beats a Northstar in power.
3.6l v6 in cts is rated 252lbft and 90% of it is available from 1600rpm ~ 5800rpm

edit: it will be an interesting match between the new sts w/new northstar v8 and the hemi powered 300c on the highway. (from stop nothing beats torque and hemi v8 has plenty of it)

Weight, according to Chrysler comparison chart.

CTS-V 3850 CTS 3509 300C 4018

I like my CTS and I like the 300C, so I bought a 300C. When I get the 300C I'll have to decide which vehicle to drive, CTS-300C-Harley. Life is full of so many decisions. :hmm:

Thanks for the numbers info guys! So I guess the 300 does compare more to a Deville than anything. Sounds like Chrysler was "pickng on the little Caddy" in this commercial. :p

The introduction of the 300 is what gave me the bug to start looking at a new car. I got an invitation to the premier and figured, what the hey? I was very interested and impressed with the 300. I did not test drive the 300C, because I don't need or want that much power. What I was impressed with was the overall aura and presence the 300 has. It looks very classy yet sinister at the same time. It's exactly what I'd have imagined the Green Hornet to have driven were he a contemporary figure.

I drove the 3.5L Limited and found it quite responsive and well mannered in handling. No, it won't wrench your neck when you floor it, but neither will the CTS 3.6L, IMO. I wasn't completely sold on the exterior design for my self-image so I decided to look at the CTS, Acura TL, Volvo S60, Lincoln LS, etc.

The last time I'd really looked at a CTS was in 2001 when they were very fresh and you saw them everywhere in Vegas with "Win this car!" signs on them. From a midget's perspective (with the cars being on rotating pedestals) the car didn't initally appeal to me, looking exaggerated in it's styling. However, when I went shopping this time around I was immediately drawn to the CTS. The Caddy feels more like a driver's car than I expected and more so than any of the other cars I test drove. That, and the fact that I liked the styling this time around is what sold me on the CTS. Yes, I like the power and the handling, but the 300 was a contender, in my experience. Besides, the 300 Touring and Limited only weigh around 150 pounds more than the CTS, so the power is very similar. The CTS does have a broader and flatter torque curve, but there's not enough difference between the two cars, performance-wise, for the average driver to notice, IMO.

The Chrysler name has no cachet for me though. Owning a Cadillac once again has meaning. Thank you GM!

Goth: The hemi beats a Northstar in power.

I wasn't speaking of the N* when I mentioned 'our V8'.
The V8 in the CTS-V is a 400hp LS6.


When I test drove the 300C, it didn't feel like a sport sedan to me. It straight lines real nice and is even well planted in the turns, but it reminded me more of driving a stiffer version of my Impala SS than my CTS...
Go test drive one. You'll see what I mean.

The 300's a Chrysler, need you say anymore???? :lildevil:
yup. no more. :lildevil:

Once again, I liked the 300C alot when I drove it. It's a family car. Lots of room and a big car feel. I think it's a great second car after your CTS, which is a true sports car. If you really want a Green Hornet car, look at the Dodge Magnum Hemi. Once again though, most Chrysler products owners over the last 10 years, don't want to buy another one:want: :banghead:

I haven't seen the ad, but this kind of thing can only be good for the CTS. It reinforces in the consumer's mind that the CTS is boss. If any newcomer entry-luxury sedan thinks they're tops, they have to beat the CTS first.

And the boss usually isn't the one that loses sales, no matter how hard others come after it. When the CTS and G35 first came out, the BMW-3 series held its ground, but other cars like the IS300 and Lincoln took a huge hit.

I personally do not like the front end of the Chrysler 300. I actually prefer the Dodge. The main problem I have is one of size. At 190 inches, even the CTS is a bit too big for me. I can count on my hand the number of times I've had 4 people sit in the car (so backseat space is not that big a deal), or that I've come close to filling the trunk. I have difficulty maneuvering the car when I visit big cities with narrow streets and cramped parking garages.

At 196 inches, the 300 is just too big. But I would consider other Chrysler RWD cars if they make smaller ones off the same platform.

The Chrysler 3.5L sucks. It's got a horrible power band, and anything over 3500lbs just chugs along with it inside. The CTS has 255hp.

I take it you never drove a new Intrepid with the 3.5? I was blown away! It could have almost matched my 4.9 except it lacked a little torque. It would have EASILY blown away my well-maintained Grand Marquis with a 5.0!

"But I would consider other Chrysler RWD cars if they make smaller ones off the same platform."

be patient , its coming , the dodge charger daytona , coming to nascar for approval next month

When I test drove the 300C, it didn't feel like a sport sedan to me. It straight lines real nice and is even well planted in the turns, but it reminded me more of driving a stiffer version of my Impala SS than my CTS...
Go test drive one. You'll see what I mean.
Amen! I'll second that. Altho the Int is roomy (and it should be) in the 300.

I liked the 300C when I first saw it... but...

The deal breaker: No manual transmission available.

The first thing I thought of when I heard about this ad was "The Penalty of Leadership", as posted on page one of this thread. Congratulations, Cadillac. You're back...