PT Cruisers are one of the more polarizing vehicles—folks either love them or hate them. How about both, at the same time?
Yes, I have conflicted feelings about them, especially so when they’re sporting fake wood and a continental spare. Those are not generally accoutrements that I favor, but in the case of this PT Cruiser, I can feel my ironic and absurdist sides kicking in. I mean, if you’re going to have a PT, it might as well be a bit over the top, right?
The PT cruiser rather sucked me in when it first arrived. Obviously, the packaging was a huge factor, given what a nerd I am about tall and practical vehicles. The PT exposed a whole lot of folks to the benefit of not having to fold themselves down into a low car, as well as the obvious orthopedic benefits of sitting upright with the feet not stretched out ahead. And a genuinely usable rear seat in a very compact car.
And its retro styling grabbed me a bit too, because it was better than average. Not aping any specific car was undoubtedly a boon that way; anytime a retro sequel to a prior car is attempted, it almost invariably fails, at least for me. Did not like the New Beetle, and the Newer Beetle. Hated the neo T-bird. Absolutely adore the Nissan Pao, which does not imitate any specific car.
The PT Cruiser pulled it off reasonably well, even if it did get old because of over-exposure. It was simply too popular for its own good. You see the same gimmick 43 times per day, and soon you’re hating on it. That’s what happened to me with it during its heyday.
But as they’re steadily disappearing, heading off to sit in rows in the junkyards of America, it’s allowing me to appreciate the enduring quality of its proportions and design. This was a good one. The Chevy HHR, not. Loathed that desperate attempt to imitate the PT Cruiser.
And the “wood” is working for me, if I rid myself of any preexisting bias. Which isn’t always easy. But I did it when Stephanie and I saw this a few months back, and I’m doing it now, so it wasn’t just a fluke then. It…works.
I may need a wee bit more time back here; I’ll get back to you in ten minutes. Or so.
I think the “wood” selection here helps a lot. The, what is it, teak planking look, looks sort of boat-ish? If it was just half an acre of the standard DiNoc from a Colony Park it’d not be as appealing. But conversely this planked look wouldn’t work on a CP either, I suppose.
With a literal million sold they’ll be around for some time but are a staple of the junkyard, the great cull continues in force. Five years from now I predict far, far fewer on the road. Now’s the time to scoop one up while prices are low but parts are readily available. Do it, Paul, you have the driveway space and they even made them in white.
Woodie package – Available on all Chrysler PT Cruiser models from 2002 to 2004 models, the simulated wood panels were on the sides of the vehicle and on the rear hatch. The vinyl graphic featured a linear Medium Oak woodgrain framed with Light Ash surround moldings.
Supposedly based on Chrysler Town and Country 40’s cars, but they had unlined darker panels split horizontally in two sections. 1955-56 Ford Country Squires did have plank lines like the factory PT woodies
I’ve seen a nice PT with aftermarket actual T&C style fake wood.
This doesn’t look like a factory woodie, which did not have the “wood” mouldings edging the paneling. The factory one looked good, anyway. There are some still running around near me in Northern California.
There were countless customizing accessories for the PT in its day. Whether they suited one’s tastes aside, some looked like schlock while others looked well designed. Some engineering went into this Conti kit due to the mechanical hatch latch and key lock. On a 2006-2010 they were electric and would have been easier to design and make.
RLPlaut had a 2002 (second-year) PT Cruiser in his COAL series and said it was the second-best car he’d owned, behind only his Honda Accord.
The wood works OK for me, but not the Conti kit. The shape on the latter is just wrong for the PT’s curves. Have you ever driven one, Paul? Ive had a few as rentals and found them quite pleasant, primarily due to the driving position and general dash layout, but with decent dynamics as well. But not as practical for luggage capacity as one would hope for a family of four on vacation. From that perspective the HHR seems like it should have better space utilization.
Several years ago my wife ditched her mini-van (only 1 kid at the time) for a purple Cruiser with the wood grain and factory chrome clad wheels….literally a chrome plated plastic cap glued to an alloy wheel, strange. She loved that car. She got a lot of complements on that car. It had quite a striking appearance when it was cleaned up and shiny, so she took better care of that car than any before or since. Once the second child came along, it was back to mini-van life. I wouldn’t say I miss it exactly, but it was a good car for us.
Cannot unsee.
After the initial glow wore off (my ex-mother-in-law paid well over sticker for the first purple automatic to come off the truck) they started to languish on the lots. I wonder if some of these “customs” were dealer-created to squeeze more dough out of them when they started their sales decline.
I never minded the PT. Pretty clean design, and as Paul already said a successful attempt at the retro look. There are still a decent number of these around Europe, some with a Mercedes diesel.
The real issue with the PT Cruiser (and most every other retro-mobile) is that they’re stylistically a dead-end. There’s just nowhere to go with subsequent models, as VW found with the New Beetle, too. About all that can be done is a little freshening for the second generation versions, and then that’s it.
There have been comments from PT fans about how it was a shame that Chrysler never followed up with a new design beyond the minor 2006 facelift. But nobody, for all the speculation and some Internet redesign attempts, has come up with anything viable. The PT was not “more unique” or “one of the most unique,” which after all are nonsense phrases. The Chrysler PT Cruiser was UNIQUE which means there could be only ONE.
I’ve long thought the second gen Scion XB would have made a better look for a second gen PT. i dont think Toyota was going for early thrties with the roofline but that’s what I see.
If they were fine with ditching the super-retro look for something more “retro-inspired” for the PT’s second-gen the Lancia Delta or Ypsilon would have worked.
Get rid of the continental kit and its perfect!
I looked at them when they first came out and was so sad that the narrow foot wells and my fat feet couldn’t coexist.
i was super stoked as a young 15 year old lad when the pt cruiser came out – i thought it looked great, but my disappointment was immense when i sat in one at a car show for the first time – the interior just didn’t feel or look any good at all – the gearknob was nice though!
also, can we even discuss the PT cruiser without mentioning the Regular Car Reviews video on it? such a perfect video…
Customized PT Cruisers were quite the thing back in the day and, unusually, they were generally well done. This one is no exception, but for one thing: the front bumper should be chromed like the rear. I’ve never been enthralled with continental kits (especially the real ones that held an actual spare) but if you’ve just got to have the look, this one is okay.
There’s one thing I find fascinating about the PTC relative to some of the latest minivans (Sedona and Sienna). The PTC’s rear seats were easily removable without tools, thus abling Chrysler to classify it as a minivan. But, today, the Kia and Toyota minivans have 2nd row seats that are non-removable (at least not without a lot of wrenching). Of course, those 2nd row seats have a lot of features, too, like airbags everywhere and power reclining seatbacks and footrests.
Excellent observations. I drove a PT Cruiser once twenty years ago and was impressed with the packaging and the retro style. More recently I’ve been mystified at the general levels of hate for them in society. They’ve joined the Aztec and AMC Pacer for the bad-car cliché and the subject of jokes.
So, unpopular cars are pretty cheap to buy. I’ve looked for an affordable low mileage one in the province. They don’t seem to exist. Any for sale either have a premium price or, much more often are high mileage and used up. It seems they’re still loved and very useful for their owners.
The PT Cruiser GT with the high-output turbo 2.5L was quite the hot rod. My mother had one as a “midlife crisis” car and it was shockingly powerful. At the time I was driving a ‘94 Caprice 9C1 with a good-running LT1 350 and the PT Cruiser felt faster. When the boost hit the car would scoot…usually right towards a ditch as the torque steer was no joke, but wow what a sleeper.
The name was somewhat unfortunate though. I felt they should have gone with GT Cruiser.
They’re usually in junk yards because of poor head gasket design.
Something else about the PT Cruiser that took Chrysler by surprise was an unusual demographic that bought them, i.e., older, senior citizens. As one might imagine, the upright ‘command seating’ and small size made for an easy daily-driver, combined with a lot of versatility in the packaging, really appealed to geezers who couldn’t care less that performance wasn’t exactly stellar.
And, FWIW, that market seems to have moved on to the Soul for the very same reasons. I’ve always been a little curious to see how many PT Cruisers got traded in for the Kia.
My father was born in 1927, so I thought they’d be right up his alley style-wise. He hated them.
The older I get, the more I want a tall sedan/wagon–high seats and roof, low floor and door sills. My knees haven’t been the same since I went on statins this summer.
Honda found the same demographic for the Honda Element, for the same reasons. Honda intended it for younger active people, but found the middle aged and older generation loved it while the intended younger people wouldn’t be caught dead in one.
A friend in his sixties had one – blue with multicoloured flames and something like 20″ chrome wheels. And a nice snarly exhaust. Sort of revisiting his youth coupled with practicality and modern reliability? Wish I had a photo of it.
Traded it on a current-generation MX5, in that lovely metallic red.
Methinks the real question is “What was the last honorable fake wood car”?
Possibly my 89 Voyager… but I really dunno.
I remember these when they first came out and I met a couple who just bought a brand new one.WOW now you’re talking ! Finally something you could be proud of! Unfortunately they paid 30,000 thousand for a showroom floor model,and I remember when the dealers in Phoenix AZ after a year or so were offering them on sale for 11,000 dollars.They were revolutionary at the time and sold too many for their own good.Well,good for Chrysler,not good for collector minded people.I believe it was the last car Chrysler built that still used the K-car platform.Some K-cars were junkish,while some had pretty good reviews,albeit for an American made cookie cutters.I wonder how people fared with these?Well at least the K-car platform went out in a blaze of glory.Thanks everyone for your great stories,see you soon! Robert Levins.
The PT Cruiser did not use the K-car platform. Its closest chassis relative was the Neon, which itself was not a K-car derivative.
Might have been a bit closer to the cloud cars, since rhe PT used their 2.4L engine.
I rented a PT for a week while my Matrix was having its transmission replaced. These were functionally similar cars. The Matrix won hands down in utility, but the PT beat it in rear seat comfort.
Just before my dad bought a slightly used 2006 Ford Focus he had been hot to own a PT. But he was a dedicated Ford man and never actually test drove that PT before buying his Focus. I’d driven his Focus a time or two and it was SUCH a better car than the PT in terms of the general feeling of quality, and especially in handling. The PT felt unsure and sloppy where the Focus was planted and tight.
Many years ago, while driving in traffic I saw a PT Cruiser in my rearview mirror. For some reason it kept drawing my eye, and eventually it dawned on me: it had a chrome front bumper bar that looked really good. This car could really do with that to go with the chrome rear bar.
The bogus “Continental kit” could and should go away, though, if I’m being asked. The faux wood can stay.
More generally and leaving customisations aside, for quite awhile the PT Cruiser was the only Chrysler product I would willingly accept as a rental.
You’re right Daniel Stern!I had read years ago that the PT cruiser was built on a modified K-car platform,but never researched it until now.For me the old saying goes,don’t believe everything you read.Yeah,the PT cruiser was roaring success in the earlier years.I would bet that the rental car market kept it going longer than the nostalgia did.Gotta give Chrysler credit,now let’s see what happens with Stellantis brand.Will we have to say good bye to the Chrysler nameplate?
No, Stellantis is just the corporate name; they’ll carry on selling cars under the existing brands. Just like everyone in the US and Canada can still buy Peugeots and Citroëns, and nobody can buy a PSA, even though those two brands are under PSA’s corporate umbrella.
2001…I remember a co-worker was all about being on the waiting list and how difficult it was to get her PT Cruiser. At the same time, I was buying a new MINI, which had a very similar allure. Also somewhat difficult to get and definitely appealing to a different sort of aesthetic.
Interestingly, 20 years later the MINI soldiers on – albeit fatter, dissipated and nowhere near as cool as before — while the PT Cruiser sits row upon row in junkyards in the geezer-belt.
I think not only PT Cruiser but also LH and cloud cars came too early, people used with boxy and austere Chryslers got shocked with the radical changing and when Chrysler replaced the entire line for a too much conventional range people got kinda frustrated.
I think sales figures demonstrate the opposite of that idea.
When GM saw the success of the PT Cruiser, they poached the designer, Bryan Nesbitt, from Chrysler to head up the HHR.
I’ve driven both the later PT Cruisers (post merger) and the HHRs. They both have decent headroom and good seating position. The PT I drove was a rental unit, rather austere, but I liked the way it drove. On long trips, the boxy shape resulted in pick-up truck-like fuel mileage. If I’m going to get sub-20 MPG freeway mileage, I’ll take the truck, then.
The HHR I drove was the SS model with the 250 HP turbo motor. You could tell that this was a me-too design, but I think the PT was roomier. On both of these vehicles, aping the period interior dimensions resulted in somewhat cramped interiors, at least to my eye. I think the HHR was worse, but maybe that’s because all of the examples I seemed to encounter had black interiors.
I think I wouldn’t mind a PT as a hobby car, at least it would be fairly useful. I could rock the car in the post, Connie kit be damned.
Haven’t seen many of these as of late, one local memorable PT was done up like a hearse complete with coach lanterns and blacked out windows, delivering pizzas !
Not sure if the 2.4 engine is the same as the one in my wife’s 1998 Dodge Caravan, but that soured me on Chrysler products.
As I mentioned above, my mother had a 2005ish PT Cruiser GT Convertible from new until about 2012. She had traded in a Mazda Miata which she only had for a few years. She liked the Miata and remembers it fondly, but she was using it as a daily driver and soon tired of the cramped accommodations.
The PT Cruiser was probably the nicest reasonably-priced convertible with a back seat suitable for adults. The trunk was small but still larger than the Miata’s. On the whole it was a rather practical car, much more so than the Miata for all-around use, and with the GT engine a bit of a sleeper. The car would seriously scoot; Wikipedia says it would have had “only” 215 to 230 hp but it felt like more with a strong bottom end. The car was black over black with some extra chrome detailing added and it looked very nice, like a budget Bentley.
The car held up okay but it was clearly not as well made as the Mazda it replaced. We had to replace a camshaft position sensor (very common failure) and for a couple of years the car had a bad habit of stalling in traffic occasionally. It drove my mother crazy because it would never do it for a mechanic and when towed back to the dealership it would run fine for them. It made numerous trips to several dealerships who could never replicate the problem. Finally a very good independent mechanic found the problem: a main connector at the ECM was loose. Probably a faulty clip or something. It could come loose and then the bumpy ride on a tow truck would reseat it.
On the whole, though, I remember the car fondly and enjoyed getting to take it on a few road trips around the California coast.
Although common enough at the time, these cars have become fairly rare. If someone found a good deal on a PT GT (especially with the unusual 5 speed) it would be a good car to hold on to and will certainly be “collectible” down the road.
I’m a bit mystified seeing all of these PT Cruisers are rare comments as they still survive in great numbers in Central Kentucky. A part of me would still like to have a PT, but I remember the first time I got a close look at one sitting on the used lot at a Chrysler dealer. I work on my own cars as much as possible and the gold standard for shadetree mechanic misery is still the time I had to put a starter in my 2002 Concorde. Looking under the hood of the PT Cruiser made my Concorde look like my 68 Fury by comparison. The only way I’d own one is if I never had to do anything more than oil changes and brakes to it. A shame as I loved everything else about how it was packaged. It would have been a perfect little hauler for taking my paintings to shows or galleries.
A friend of mine has one that has the 5 speed manual and he loves it still even if it turned out to be miserable for him to work on under the hood. Because of the 5 speed, he gets about 30 mpg highway which from what I understand from a former co-worker who had one with an automatic is pretty near miraculous.
Good call on the PT’s tight engine bay. This can also be the root cause as to why the car was so stylistically challenged. The hood had to be short to make it look right on such a small, FWD, two-box type car. Unfortunately, that short hood also meant not only a very tight engine bay for maintenance, but an extremely limited range of engine options. AFAIK, there was only one engine size ever available in the PT (2.4L NA and turbo). Nothing else would fit without a major enlargement of the vehicle.
The tire is a proper retro reference, not a Continental kit. In ’49, Chrysler’s big woody wagons (but not the Plymouth Suburban) had a similar built-in tire in the tailgate. The bumper somehow hinged down to accomodate it.
In 2006 we spent 2 weeks in North Carolina, where we rented a 2004 PT Cruiser with about 25,000 miles showing. I’m a serious gearhead, having owned many hundreds of vehicles since the age of 14. I ran an antique car restoration shop for over 30 years.
My first reaction to the PT Cruiser was the car had to have 125,000 miles on it, but with the far left digit of the odometer still reading 0, and the lack of wear on things like pedal pads, steering wheel and seat surfaces, I knew it was a 25,000 mile car. But the way the car handled, drove, and sounded, it screamed HIGH MILEAGE. The steering was way to vague.
Then the was the multitude of problems our rental PT Cruiser possessed, from the A/C system’s intermittent hot or cold periods, the wipers acting like they were about to fall off, switches like the rear window defroster that were broken, and the rear door windows that could not be opened. The rear hatch would only open by using the key in the lock, and the headliner starting to fall down in spots. The power door locks would not unlock all 4 doors. Oh, and almost forgot to mention the clunks in the suspension and a clunk in the drive line on acceleration.
But the biggest problem, one that meant after 8 days, we had to bring it back and request a replacement car, was when I checked under the hood because the brake pedal “feel” began a rapid change, and on checking the master cylinder I noticed the fluid reservoir for the rear wheels was damn near empty. I was unable to locate an obvious brake fluid leak, but a month later a MoPaR mechanic I know told me it was likely the ABS system had an internal leak. Replaced the PT Cruiser with a 2002 Toyota Camry with about 50,000 miles. No problems, it was far better than the PT Cruiser, and a deciding factor in our decision to buy a new 2008 Toyota Camry.
Still have the [USA built] 2008 Camry, now approaching 250,000 miles, most of it during long distance high speed travel. The Camry has required 3 sets of front & 2 sets of rear brake pads, multiple sets of tires, & many oil changes. Next month I’m having all 4 struts, hubs & tie rod ends replaced, and the brake system M/cyl, calipers, rotors & flex lines replaced. Plus radiator hoses and belts. Already bought the parts, spent about $1,500.
The Camry is still on the original drive line, NO part in or on the engine, transmission, or rear differential [except for filters], has required replacement or repair. Still on it’s original cooling system fluids! never needed a tune up, it’s still running on all original ignition system parts, and delivers decent gas mileage! With 200,000 miles on it, we took it to Indiana and Michigan for a Packard Club national Meet, without worry.
My Camry still feels better as a driving car, than the PT Cruiser did with 1/10th the mileage as the Camry has today.
I have a love/hate relationship with these, too. My wife always wanted a purple PT, so in 2009 we found a low mile 2002. Extra chrome goodies, which she adores.
The Good…
These drove well. Not the most powerfull, but handling and steering were above average. Yes, easy to get in and out of, plenty of space for a couple of empty nesters. We drove it all over the state. Remove the rear seats and its good for hauling band equipment if you’re a musician. Both of us don’t mind retro styling. Some cars carry it off better than others.
The Bad…
Ever work on one of these things? I hope you have feeler gauges for fingers. I’ve had the pleasure of replacing the entire cooling system, cam sensor, engine mounts and other stuff on it. Hope you have patience. Most guys hate PTs on sight. Got a lot of remarks about driving one. We live in the middle of nowhere and trucks (mostly Rams I noticed) wanted to run us down. Good thing it out corners most anything. My wife drives well enough to dispatch most of these bozos.
The PT served us well for 7 years until the transmission gave up. I thought about replacing it, but a solid year and a half of medical issues meant it just sat. It got replaced by a Jeep Patriot, which has similar size packaging but with 4 wheel drive. It snow here. The PT left our driveway last summer. Goodbye and thanks. It was fun.
Certain cars acquire a repulsive image from the people who own them, such was the PT Cruiser ‘woody’ for me. Mr. F and Mr. M both had them. Each man is a ‘cooler-than-thou’ perpetual adolescent. Mr F. a glib, flooring salesman glad-hander and Mr. M a self-absorbed, spoiled, kept-man-child. Both in the 50’s then, 70’s now.
Of the two cars, Mr. F’s PT was only dark blue with the ‘wood’; but Mr M’s was plastered with pinstripes, sport wheels and chrome accessories. Both referred to them as “my PT” as if they were the most ultra-exclusive vehicles one could aspire to own. Oddly enough, though, neither had the ‘continental kit’ with which this one is beset.
I have been unsuccessfully looking for the continental kit for a 2005 Convertible PT Cruiser. Does anyone have an idea how to find one??? Will be very grateful!