Jake’s Rotten Rental Car Reviews- 2011 Chrysler 300
Welcome to a new recurring series here on the Hooniverse. My name is Jake, and yes, I am the maniac who nominated the BMW 335d for car of the year last year.
In the way of background information, when I’m not messing around on the podcast from time to time, I travel a lot for my job (project manager for a medical software company). As a result, I’ve had ample experience demoing the best that Enterprise and National rent-a-car have to offer in their rental fleets. Or the best and worst, as it were. So, without further ado, I present the first installment of Jake’s rotten rental car reviews.
While visiting Shreveport, Louisiana, I had my first opportunity in a while to stop at the National desk and ask for the keys to whatever they had in the lot. Luckily for me, I suppose, it was a slow weekend (since nobody really visits Shreveport for a weekend getaway), and I got handed the keys to an “executive premium upgrade.” After clicking the alarm button, I was legitimately excited to see that I’d been handed the keys to a brand new 300. Not the C, mind you, but there wasn’t a cloth seat in sight, and I hoped I’d get to test the much-vaunted eight-speed transmission and the other “refinements” Chrysler claimed they’d made in the new model.
First impressions were somewhat mixed, though. The optional new transmission was nowhere in sight, with the familiar base five-speed autostick specced instead. On the upside, the interior was actually a pleasant place to spend time in, covered in fairly garish ivory white leather and nice-ish plastics. On the downside, the driver’s seat was permanently stuck in a gangsta lean. No amount of fiddling with the seat controls could fix it. The result, when combined with the Pitbull CD (M.I.A.M.I) which we found stuck in the jammed CD changer, was that the car made me feel like a thug.
Pulling the car out onto the highway immediately revealed a few dynamic flaws, though. One: Jesus Christ, this car is heavy. Like unbelievably ponderous. For a sedan of the 300′s size, one wouldn’t expect sharp dynamic responses, but this thing felt like a whale on sleeping pills.
This leads me neatly to problem two: the car was unbelievably slow. Short merges were borderline terrifying, because the acceleration just didn’t seem to ever arrive. The transmission always seemed to be two or three gears too high, possibly as a result of Chrysler’s push for fuel economy, and it was very reluctant to kick down. When you merged, you’d have to mash the gas, wait for the transmission to get its head out of its ass and just pray that the engine would hit the power band before you got creamed by a semi. The problem was partially alleviated by using the “manual” shift, but the car would rarely hang onto a gear long enough even with manual shift selected.
And yet, neither of these were the real deal breaker. I was willing to look past the beast’s size, and when the transmission found the right gear, it actually moved along quite well. But the real big issue was the car’s suspension: it was unbelievably soft. Given that Shreveport’s roads frequently buckle in summer heat, and are as pitted as the surface of the moon as a result, some slack in the suspension was almost a must. However, the 300 took softness to comical extremes. When switching lanes, the car would rock back and forth for a solid minute after the lane change maneuver. The car was so big that it felt like a boat, but the unresponsive handling and baggy suspension combined to make me feel seasick while I sawed at the wheel to make a right turn on red.
In short, the 300 was a bit of a letdown. With sport suspension, the C’s much brawnier engine and a less sloptacular gearbox, the 300 could have actually been a decent car. Chrysler’s attempts to improve cabin quality were certainly noticeable (and had the effect of making the 200′s slapped together interior look just that much shoddier). This particular example just suffered from its short but hard life, and really desperately needed stiffer suspension.
Rating: Three Trashcans out of five (1 is best, 5 is worst).
What do you think? Fair rating? Tell us in the comments below.
Related posts:
- Automotive Traveler: Chrysler Italianate Diversions; Part4: Chrysler TC by Maserati
- Chicago Auto Show 2011 Round-up: Chrysler
- The Chrysler Sno-Runner; A Small, Affordabe, and Fuel Efficient Chrysler!
- Hooniverse Parting Shot: The Chrysler Pacifica; The Blueprint for the Crossover Utility Vehicle.
- Hooniverse Maximum Convertible Weekend: A 1961 Chrysler 300 G
I'm going to like this new feature.
It sounds like it had learned a slow driver for gear shifts. That's why I always did my part and beat the everloving shit out of the rentals I used to clean up. That way they were always all too eager to redline.
I remember being excited when a rental place bumped me up to a 300 a few years ago, as I'd read all the positive reviews. Trudging along in the base car with the anemic V6 and awkward bulk made me feel like I'd been lied to. What a mediocre hippo of a car, without even the charm of a proper old detroit highway cruiser. I far preferred the mid-2000s Taurus I once got saddled with instead. The 300 was not the worst rental I've ever had, far from it, but it was one of the worst letdowns.
I'm with you 100%.
I was, at the time, DD-ing a '95 W124 Mercedes, the model prior to the car the 300 whose platform it was designed.
I thought, "I can't lose!"
Wrong.
I would take my 175K mile, now 16 year old W124, which hasn't had a functional reverse in three years, over a free base 300.
What. A. Heap.
For the record, the LX platform is more LH platform than W210 – the Benz only gave up its transmission and some suspension bits.
I rented a 'Full-size' for a trip in Oregon. I got to the garage where the rentals were and saw it full of Dodge Chargers. The keys were in the vehicles and I had to pick one and then confirm my selection with my paperwork. So my wife and I, with our 5 month old in the infant carrier mind you, we going Charger to Charger looking for one that at least had the 3.5L. Though still anemic, I was not going to spend a week with a 2.7L.
We must have been quite the sight.
I rented a 'Full-size' for a trip in Oregon. I got to the garage where the rentals were and saw it full of Dodge Chargers. The keys were in the vehicles and I had to pick one and then confirm my selection with my paperwork. So my wife and I, with our 5 month old in the infant carrier mind you, were going Charger to Charger looking for one that at least had the 3.5L. Though still anemic, I was not going to spend a week with a 2.7L.
We must have been quite the sight.
I, too, have a rental, it's a base model Corolla. Now, I drive a Matrix, and I actually like it a lot, so I figured a Corolla wouldn't be too big a change. While it's too snowy and icy to really judge the handling, otherwise this is somewhat worse than my regular ride. The seat fabric is this weird mouse fur, the gauges are cheaper, it seems way more cramped and I dearly miss my high mounted shifter – and shifting, though I don't expect that in a rental. My Matrix surprised and delighted me on a test drive, but if I was looking for a sedan this thing I would have passed right over. While driving it I said "Oh, so this is why internet people hate Toyotas so much, fair enough.
Over the last six months, I've rented a Cruze, Mustang, Cobalt, and a Camry. The Mustang was obviously my favorite, and the Cruze/Cobalt had enough pluses/minuses to be about equal. The interior on the Cruze was better, but the Cobalt I had was a bit quieter over the expansion joints on the freeway, which made a big difference.
I'm almost ashamed to admit that I paid extra to upgrade to the Camry, but in my defense, it was that or a Caliber. $8 is worth it to not spend time in a Caliber. Also, something I really liked about the Camry, that I've never noticed in any other car, is that you can turn the instrument panel lights all the way off. Makes night cruising much more relaxing. Set the cruise, and just roll.
I love the premise of this article series – keep it up!
I quite enjoy turning the dash lights nearly or all the way down in my Volvos – both the 244 and 745 can manage it. Saab's Night Panel feature is even better, dimming everything save for 0-90 on the speedometer, activating other gauge lighting as needed – the tach lights up if you hit a certain RPM, the remainder of the speedometer illuminates as needed (well, until that feature fails, naturally; don't ask me where I learned this), and of course low fuel and other warning light conditions still apply.
No! A 300 isn't a rotten rental car! It is for sure one of the better cars to have come out of Chrysler recently and I will not tolerate that opinion! Roar!
Now, going home to actually sit down and read the article. And, uh, I haven't even driven the new 300, but my opinion is totally unbiased and wholly valid! Totally! (I really want to read the article, I'm looking forward to home.)
Interesting read. I wonder what engine was in that car? I had to rent one recently and up in my neck of the woods Avis, the only one with Chargers, didn't have the Chargers I wanted. (Stroke of luck? It sure seems like it now.) I looked up the specs for it and surprisingly, Dodge actually have a below-base model for rental fleets only. It's got a 2.7 190hp V6 while the base civvie version's got a 3.5. I doubt they carried that powertrain over to the calender year 2011, but I don't believe a modern V6 car can be that slow. The rental Lucerne I ended up getting felt quite powerful and cruised well, too, but maybe that's a combination of its massive-to-me 4.1 V6 and also me being used to driving in a 4-cylinder Accord. I bet the 300's still faster then a 4cyl. Accord though.
The 2011 300 has the new 3.6L Pentastar, which in that trim, is good for 292hp. That said, it's a peakier engine, which isn't absolutely suited to something that big. As for the 2.7, we actually got that as the base engine in Canada for several years, instead of just the rental special. But now your choices are just Pentastar or Hemi.
Any car can be a rotten rental car if its been abused and trashed, i work a valet job sometimes and wow do we see some crazy rentals. The worst rental cars are the bone stock Impalas.
I will give Chrsysler a lot of credit for their interior redos. The difference between the interiors of the Patriot/Compass/Caliber prior and after the redos are quite impressive. They still are not class leading, but a much better place to spend. Chrysler did a very good job of updating the 300. The interior is rather nice (a not the dark coffin it used to be) and there are decent engine options ( the low lyind 2.7L sludge monster was sent to pasture as well the better but still underpowered 3.5L V6). I do agree that the car is heavy and softly sprung in any iteneration other than the C.
Wait, they offered the 2.7 in the 300? Seriously?!
a fleet special. I do not think it was offered to the general public
I'll take "Explanations for the Bankruptcy of Chrysler" for 600, Alex…
I've only ever had ONE good experience with a rental car and that was with the 1st Gen Neon. That was a hoot to drive.
Everything else has been a let down.
I have to admit, even thought the 1993 Intrepid my then GF, now wife, rented for wandering all over the US west, from Dallas to Montana and back, never let me down, even with the base engine.
Hell, I'd wager that car has been crushed, shipped overseas, melted down, and is now half-a-dozen Geelys. Still, there is some Utah mud in there from about 60 miles on a road which had a sign stating, "ROAD IMPASSABLE WHEN RAINING".
Well, it wasn't raining there…at that moment, but it was shortly afterward.
There are two vehicles which can go anywhere. A Wrangler with full lockers…
…and any rental car.
I've been pretty lucky with my rental cars – a Matrix, Suzuki SX4, Lincoln Town Car (incidentally, my own review was published today, if a little pimping's not in poor taste), and a Nissan Altima. They've all been clean and fully operational. The Matrix was an unmemorable appliance, but a decent little car. The SX4 was fairly fun, but it probably helped I was driving it up to Whistler. I adored the Town Car in all its anachronistic glory. The Altima was a bit of a surprise – I was expecting to hate the rubber band transmission (especially when my fiancee called after picking it up, worried because it was revving so high), but that worked well enough, for an exceptionally slushy slushbox – it seemed in tune enough with where I wanted it to be. But the seats were utterly atrocious. Like, violation of the Geneva Convention bad – I couldn't make it from Ottawa to Toronto without it getting seriously unpleasant. It was a pretty decent car otherwise, decent compromise between ride/handling, and power/economy (even if it did have a serious industrial drone).
Sorry, this review isn't passing my sniff test. What it smells like is a deeply biased "review" done by an M3 owner or reasonable facsimile.
Full disclosure – I sell new Chrysler & Jeep, as well as everything used.
Based on the pic, your drove a 2011 base 300. The painted 17" wheels & body color mirrors are proof. There is no "fairly garish ivory white leather" interior. In fact, no leather at all is available with the base model. And the leather colors for 2011 are Light Frost Beige (a nice sandy tan color) and black.
The CD player is not a changer. Only a single CD. In fact, the only changer sold by a Chrysler/ Jeep product is the Media Center 230, available as an option on Jeep Compass & Patriot. Chrysler/ Jeep are moving away from CD changers and into in-dash hard drives and Bluetooth streaming audio capability.
You didn't get an 8 speed because it was never shipped with 2011 models. We just got in two new 2012 300S models with the 3.6L V6 and they now include the new 8 speed. V8 models will stick with the 5 speed for now.
The 3.6L V6 cranks out 292HP in the 300, more than enough grunt to propel the car smartly. The Hemi is a great engine for the car, but also reinforces the street cruiser feel of the car. For someone who felt the car was "unbelievably ponderous", there is little chance you will prefer the Hemi when the road gets twisty. The V6 may not have the grunt, but it's more than enough and provides a nice balanced feel of the car.
As for the rest of the hyperbole…. whatever. I like the premise but the execution was far too contrived. If you want to dis a car, Jacob, fine. Just try be accurate with the facts.
Fair points, Bo. I can definitively tell you that the car had a full leather interior. I may have muffed the color slightly, but even if it was sandy, in the light that I actually saw it in, it looked pretty damn close to white. Of course, I was mostly driving around in it at night, but off-white was probably the best way to describe it. The CD changer thing was a misstatement on my part as well. All I know is that a Pitbull CD was stuck in there and wouldn't come out no matter what we did. The seat motor was also sort of fried, but I blame both of those things on people treating rental cars like shit, and not on the build quality of the car.
I didn't know that the eight-speed was new for this year, although it's possible that this particular example was a 2012, given that it had somewhere between 5 and 8k on the clock (can't remember which, might be confusing the number with another rental). I had hoped I might get a chance to drive it and I have a feeling that it would have significantly improved the experience.
As for the engine, it wasn't the real issue for me. It felt gutless, but someone mentioned that the transmission could have learned a slow driver, which would explain why it always seemed to be in the wrong gear for the occasion. Once the car was in the right gear, it moved pretty briskly, but it just never seemed to get there without some prompting. My main issue was not the engine, or the transmission, though. It was the suspension, which made the car feel way, way bigger than it actually was. It was soft to the point where car would rock back and forth five or six times after passing over the single speedbump into the hospital's parking lot. It could be that I got a really badly-treated example, and it was clear that it had been beaten up pretty well, but the suspension was just way too soft for my liking.
In the end, reviews are all down to subjectivity. I didn't have that much time to spend with the car, only about two days, but I did get to drive it in a bunch of different road conditions and I feel like my personal opinions about the car are valid. I'm certainly willing to give it another shot: I was actually pretty impressed by the 300. It wasn't a bad car by any means (as you will see in subsequent editions of this feature), I just think I got a particularly abused example from National. If I get another one next time I'm on the road, I'll happily revisit my conclusions. That's more than I will ever say about the Cobalt you guys will meet in two weeks.