When you buy the car just like the one in the advertisements.
It was late 1996 and I was ready to dispose of my troublesome 1987 Bonneville. But with what?
Well, after my experience with the Bonneville, GM products were very much not on my list. I still wanted to buy American if I could, though. Fords were still not an option for me. Years of programming as a GM kid left me with a knee-jerk reaction to Ford as being “the enemy.” Looking back, it was silly of me, but that was how I felt. I couldn’t see myself in any Ford product.
I didn’t have strong feelings about Chrysler Corporation, though. To some extent I admired their recent comeback. In the post-Iacocca years, they were certainly firing on all cylinders. The LH cars and the JA-platform “cloud” cars (Chrysler Cirrus, Dodge Stratus, and Plymouth Breeze) were a far cry from the endless stream origami-folded K-based cars from the decade prior. There had been stylistic signs of life like the LeBaron coupe and GTS, but the new products were startlingly new and different.
More importantly, the mid-sized “cloud” cars seemed truly competitive with their foreign counterparts. Now in the third year since introduction I was pretty confident that any new-model teething pains had been worked out.
It didn’t hurt that they were very attractive. In particular, the top-trim Chrysler Cirrus LXi in Forest Green (almost a British Racing Green) with the tan leather interior from the advertisements hit me in all the right places. The body-color grille and general absence of chrome said “sports sedan” and not “luxury cruiser.”
Chrysler stylists were at the top of their game.
One of my older sisters had fine experiences with her Plymouth Voyager(s), and in particular with a Chrysler/Plymouth dealer a few towns over, so I made it my first stop. I test drove a Cirrus LXi with the 2.5 liter V6 and it got out of its own way very nicely. At 168 horsepower it was actually a bit more powerful than the 2.6 liter V6 in my old Bonneville.
It’s hard to describe when a car just feels right. Despite it being unfamiliar to me, the Cirrus fit like a glove. Maybe it was because, philosophically it was filling the same market niche as the Bonneville in a smaller package. The seats were comfortable and the controls were placed logically. The cab-forward design made the car very spacious, including an enormous trunk. The price was right (this dealer did not play games and got right down to it) and soon the car was mine. I think that the family reference didn’t hurt either (I’m sure he wanted to sell my sister more minivans for years to come).
Other than the swapping of the radio and HVAC controls, the dashboard was similar in layout to that of the Bonneville.
My time with the Cirrus was uneventful, at least in terms of the car. During my ownership I met my future wife. (Coincidence?) She remembers the car fondly, largely because it was the car we used most during our dating and engagement. During that time, I also left my employer of nine years (I long since transitioned from programming to PCs and networks) to take a much more lucrative position with a regional IT consulting company. This meant a lot more time behind the wheel driving to customer sites, but I didn’t mind. For three years the car was a trouble-free, fun to drive and comfortable.
The cab forward design lent itself to weird packaging decisions like the placement of the battery in the front wheel well. Editorial comment pixelated for the sensitive.
It all came to an abrupt end in February of 2000. Snow was still on the grounds but warmer weather was melting it into a particularly thick morning fog. As I got ready to turn left from my side street onto the main road I didn’t see anything coming from either direction. Then I hit the gas and slammed right into the side of an old F-150 that had been approaching from the left. The airbags deployed as the Cirrus struck the truck behind the Ford’s passenger door. As I hit the brakes in alarm the Cirrus pivoted and side of the car whacked the side of the truck bed with a loud crash. Shards of glass flew everywhere.
The truck had a small dent in the side and was able to move away under its own power. The Cirrus was totaled, of course. The truck driver and his passenger were uninjured and refused medical attention. I had a small scratch on my forehead from the airbag deployment. That was it.
These are the only pictures I have of the Cirrus.
I took some pictures of the Cirrus at the tow lot later that day. What they don’t show is the claw hammer that was hanging out of the side passenger window, or the rolls of nail-gun nails that smashed through the window from the back of the truck into my back seat. If things had gone slightly differently the hammer and nails would have been flying at my head.
I had dodged a bullet, in more ways than one. My only guess was that the truck was driving in the fog without his headlights on, which is why I couldn’t see him. It didn’t matter. It was my fault, and that’s what the ticket and police report said. However, my insurance company had good news for me. The driver of the truck was driving on a suspended license and his passenger didn’t want to give his name to the police. He settled for $1000 and probably didn’t even bother to get his truck fixed.
Now I was in the market for a new car. As much as I thought about buying something different to me, I truly liked the Cirrus and thought I’d use the insurance money as a down payment on a new one. My fiancée and I headed down to the Chrysler dealer to check out the 2000 Cirrus, but the dealer had something else to show us…
The cloud cars were during that post-Iacocca, pre-Eaton Chrysler period which I would sum up as being the Lutz years. It’s a real shame that Iacocca hated Lutz so much that the search for his replacement was code named ABL (“Anybody But Lutz”), something which Iacocca would later say he regretted. There’s quite an irony in the whole affair since Iaccoca’s dislike for Lutz mirrored Henry Ford II’s dislike for Iacocca.
And, just like Iacocca, whatever one thought of Lutz there’s no denying that he was a supremely capable auto executive, and the cloud cars reflect exactly that. It’s a shame Eaton sold-out so badly to Daimler, who simply didn’t have any use for Chrysler’s management. Unfortunately for Daimler, their ‘our way or the highway’ approach meant that, ultimately, it would be Daimler who would be leaving. Marchionne and FCA seems to have done a much better job.
Surely it was the other way around when Chrysler accountants cheapened MB cars starting with the 202 C class then the notorious 210 E class. ? I admired the Cloud cars especially the rag tops but most come with the self destructive 2.7 V6. A friends could not hold oil so he brought GM from then on. In the EU some came with the Neon 2.0 ltr for for tax reasons. Perhaps a better bet?.
The W202 was released in 1993, the W210 in 1995. The “merger” was in 1998, Chrysler had nothing to do with ether of those cars.
It was Daimler in charge, not the Chrysler accountants. They cost cut everything in sight across the entire lineup. The 2.7 was not installed until the 2001 model year in the Sebring and and stratus. The 2.5 Mitsubishi sourced V6 engine was used from from 1995-2000.
Every auto maker was cutting costs and slashing content during the mid to lake 90s. It was a management trend to find extra profit. The leaders of the trend received accolades in the press at the time, as if they were financial geniuses.
Of course the products became worse but the bean counters were more concerned with the short term bottom line over brand integrity. Maybe they hoped buyers wouldn’t notice, especially if all firms were participating.
I wanted to comment on the last paragraph of Rudiger’s post…
I moved to Michigan shortly after the “merger” and living here everybody is somehow involved in the auto industry. Friends of mine who had been working for Chrysler before the merger were shocked to see the way Daimler was handling things. The folks I knew were so highly disappointed with how events had turned out that they left for other jobs as soon as they could.
With regard to Marchionne, I was not a big fan of ol’ Serge, but he was right about a lot of things. I still think he was correct in predicting that there would be even more structural changes in the automotive industry as a whole and how market trends have played out to the SUV/CUVs favor.
FWIW, FCA during Marchionne’s time did turn a few pig’s ears into silk purses. It was a genius move to “lux-up” all of the legacy Chrysler USA cars and trucks. However the failure to establish a beach head with actual Fiat cars (including Alfa and Maserati) was a tactical miscalculation that only intensified the search for a merger partner.
I’m curious and afraid to see what will happen with Stellantis. I have a feeling that the USA brands will disappear…
Your “on the ground” perspective matches what I have read. Daimler came in with an attitude of command and control, and seemed to discount the experience of anyone in the American operation when it came to American-market cars. They drove a lot of talented people away in a short period of time.
They cheapened all the existing designs and botched most of the replacements, with the Ram trucks and the 300/Magnum being maybe the only exceptions. And even they had interiors that would repel all but the most dedicated Mopar buyers.
We test drove the second-generation Stratus as a possible replacement for my wife’s Saturn. You could see the cost-cutting all over it relative to my old Cirrus, and it was very sad.
We ended up getting her a Jetta VR6, which we kept for 14 years.
I think that Dodge, Ram and (especially) Jeep have far too much equity to go away. However, Chrysler will disappear. Their lineup currently consists of an aging luxury sedan with no replacement planned, and two minivans that are the exact same thing, artificially split into low-spec (Voyager) and high-spec (Pacifica) variants.
It’s very telling that—in a world of SUVs and crossovers—Chrysler has only ever fielded two such vehicles, both of them discontinued over ten years ago. The Pacifica was actually an early prototype of the wagon-esque crossover (as was the Cadillac SRX), but was ultimately replaced by the Journey, a Dodge. (The Journey also replaces the SWB minivans, but that’s another story). The Aspen was a transparent attempt to dress up the second-generation Durango, and it failed. At least when GM could turn a base Tahoe LS into a fully-loaded Yukon Denali or Escalade, they weren’t being sold in the same showroom!
It seems to me that Chrysler might have done well with a Murano/Venza/Blazer/Edge-style crossover…a midsize, five-seat crossover on the same CUSW platform as the Cherokee, but a good deal wider and slightly longer. Such a product could prioritize comfort and soft-road manners above all else, and play counterpart to the Grand Cherokee’s macho image. Then again, such an endeavor may well have been as unprofitable as the 200 was.
I have a feeling that the USA brands will disappear…
I’m sorry, but that’s a rather absurd assumption. Jeep is a global powerhouse brand, and Ram is of course huge in NA, and possibly beyond if the pickup market keeps expanding globally. What would they possibly be replaced by in the US? Matra Rancho 4x4s and Peugeot pickups?
As to Dodge and Chrysler, who knows? They’ll probably continue to be niche brands, as they are now, as long as those niches are profitable. Clearly Jeep is the stronger brand in terms of today’s SUV/CUV dominated market.
The whole point of this merger is to capitalize on each company’s respective strengths. That’s PSA in Europe, and FCA in the US. And finding the right synergies in places like China, where both are not doing well right now.
Fiat’s failure in the US is a clear signal to Stellantis that bringing over Euro-market cars to the US is essentially a non-starter.
The really big benefit is to spread the cost of developing EVs and operating software across a larger base. This is going to redefine the industry, and more mergers and alliances are inevitable. Note how Honda is getting closer and closer to GM, and will use their EV technology for their NA products.
Smaller companies are not going survive the transition to cars becoming EVs as well as essentially smartphones on wheels. The software is going to become an even bigger issue than just EV technology. That’s what’s driving VW bonkers at the moment. But they’re determined to make it happen.
I think that FCA *could* have succeeded with European cars, just not the ones that it chose to send over. A brand dealing in subcompact cars with awkward styling was never going to do well.
Here in OKC, we lost our Fiat/Alfa Romeo store somewhat recently. It has been annexed into the Hyundai dealer next door, and will likely become a standalone Genesis store. We also had Maserati tied in with the Jaguar/Land Rover dealership. Well, they just tore down the old building and built a brand-new one, which prominently displays Jaguar and Land Rover, but not Maserati…suggesting that Maserati will soon be out of our market.
I think that FCA *could* have succeeded with European cars, just not the ones that it chose to send over.
They had no choice about Fiat. It was in the deal: Fiat got Chrysler for essentially nothing, but thye had to promise to sell cars with very high fuel economy, meaning the Fiat 500.
Anyway, I would hardly call the 500’s styling “awkward”. It’s very cute, and got off to a reasonably good start. But the market totally shifted away from small cars.
What European cars should Fiat have sent over to the US instead? Chryslers badged as Lancias? They had nothing that was going to be competitive.
The 500 was a niche product that might well have succeeded in a high-gas-price market
Anyway, it’s no great loss; Fiat got Chrysler in exchange. What a brilliant deal. .
Anecdotal, but the 2012 500 Abarth I purchased new in May of that year has been the lowest cost to operate and maintain of any car I’ve ever owned. Also the most enjoyable.
I didn’t articulate it very well, but I meant the car brands, not RAM and Jeep. I don’t see much of a future for Dodge, especially if much higher fuel mileage requirements are instituted. I really don’t think you can put a 2.0L turbo into a Charger and get anything satisfactory. The same thing with the remaining Chrysler products. Once these age out, that’s it for the brands. I could see FCA/PSA glomming onto the Pacifica chassis for the next Kangoo, for example.
I’d need to see what PSA has going on for EV technology, I haven’t kept up on it, because I couldn’t have possibly purchased one, until recently. And it still may be a while before I could, were I so inclined. FCA definitely doesn’t have much to offer in that regard. Maybe there will (finally) be some synergies that the hometown boys can take advantage of…
I was a fan of the Cloud cars, too. In the late 80’s to the late 90’s I had a couple of Chrysler products that served me very well and I also kept an eye on the Mopar lineup during that time. I also traveled a bit at that time and would usually seek out Chrysler products as my rental of choice.
Back then, I rented a Cirrus LXi for a Christmas holiday trip from our then-home in Atlanta to visit family in the Cleveland, OH area and found that I loved that car. The reason why the trip was so memorable was that my wife came down with the flu on the morning we departed back to Atlanta. I ended up doing the whole drive (14 hrs +) by myself, with multiple stops for her comfort.
Back then, I wanted a Neon ACR very badly, but with two growing children that was not a good plan. I seriously considered a Plymouth Breeze for a while, as they were inexpensive but had some room to grow. But, even with the 2.4L in the car, it could not accelerate like my Dodge Lancer turbo, so I shelved that idea, too. Neat cars, but it just never worked out for me.
I know lutz has a sterling reputation as a car guy, but is it deserved? Some of his perceived ability seems to do more with his straight talking style and commitment to product rather than any great executive decisions. He was at gm europe for several years in the 60s and didn’t prepare gm Europe for the fwd revolution. He was at bmw in the 70s and did help build a reputation for bmw. . . Then he brought merkur over which was a huge flop, brought over the gto from Australia replete with somnolent sunfire styling. A leftover catera platform, and Australian build quality, the solstice and sky. . . The miata doesn’t need competition. . . And some eminently forgettable cars like the chevy equinox and buick enclave. Is gm much better off today because of his leadership? Iacocca made ford hugely profitable in the 60s and 70s and carved out new market niches and saved Chrysler. Ford was better off at the end of down Petersen’s leadership with better quality, better cars. Lutz?
I know lutz has a sterling reputation as a car guy, but is it deserved?
Maybe as a “car guy” but not as an executive. That’s two distinctly different things.
I just bought a 2006 sebring convertible as a fun car. The handling and structure are amazing, it is fairly sporty, and encourages faster driving. It doesn’t creak or rattle over bumps. It’s a far cry from older convertibles. Chrysler did a good job with these. I’m hoping that the bugs in the 2.7 were worked out by this time, plus, it was pretty cheap so if it does blow up I can have the engine replaced or scrap it.
With the 2.7, it’s all about changing the oil and checking for coolant leaks. If coolant starts to ooze through the weep hole in the engine, the water pump, which is driven by an auxiliary timing chain is leaking and needs to be replaced immediately. Of course, if you can find a shop to take it on, they will recommend replacing all of the timing chains as well since the the front of the engine needs to be disassembled. It’s a $1500-$2000 job for most shops. BTW, the FWD 3.5 V6 by Ford has the same type of design. Good luck.
From what I recall about the 2.7 V6, the big deal was it was designed “entirely by computer” but that left quite a few small oil passages throughout the engine. Apparently, computers change their engine oil religiously, it must be part of their programming! However, most humans are not so religious or reliable. It may be a good idea to do an engine flush with your 2.7, to get those passages clear. If it survived this long, it is likely because someone took care of it.
I also second the water pump design – a bad idea that Ford somehow thought was a good idea, and it has caused many an engine to self-destruct.
In about 1998 I test drove a Dodge Stratus as my first wife and I looked to replace my aging Chevy Beretta. I was very impressed with it. I echo the “fits like a glove” sentiment.
Ultimately we realized we needed a wagon or minivan and passed on the Stratus. But I would have been perfectly happy to own it.
I remember when these came out and they made a very good impression. As I recall the magazines from the time, everyone loved the way the new Contour drove but in almost everything else (especially passenger room) the Clouds were better.
We had Plymouth Breezes in our corporate fleet. They were good cars and excellent in snow. I got caught in a blizzard on I-78 and it was one of the few cars that could make it up and down the hills on that highway without sliding around. No snow tires, either.
Our daughter had one. I drove with our son, who had taken the car to Miami for four months, and needed to return to New York over a weekend. We drove 900 miles the first day. My back was killing me. So, nice little package but not for the long haul.
I just got, but haven’t started, a copy of Taken for a Ride: How Daimler-Benz Drove Off With Chrysler by Bill Blasic and Bradley A. Stertz, ISBN 0-06-093448-4. I think it’s going to be interesting.
That one’s enlightening. I read it 20 years ago, before so much of this was obvious, and it was clear to me what happened. My Amazon review is still one of the top ones, and I think it’s dated in fall 2000. It was written well before the divestiture, but it was clear who was behind the wheel and where they were going.
FWIW, my copy is (c)2001 and has an epilogue.
Who in blazes decided to put a battery in the wheel well?? Well editorialized.
My 300 has it in the trunk, where it stays nice and dry.
I’d think that slush, debris, what have you would get on the battery terminals.
No. The wheelwell is well sealed and the battery stays pretty clean. My Concorde has the same system. It works well for the 99% of the population who never change a battery. Even then, its no big deal. On my Concorde, I’ve changed the battery from the top in about 15 minutes, regardlessof the ‘remove wheel’ instructions. No big deal. Lots of modern cars have components that aren’t too easy to access, this battery isn’t a big problem.
A young friend made the mistake of buying a Dodge Avenger, which continued that battery placement. The plastic wheel-well liner somehow got away from his car. From his description, exposing the battery to road-wash in wet weather went about the way you would expect.
You haven’t seen where they put the starting/lighting/ignition battery in the Ford C-Max.
My youngest sister owned a Chrysler Cirrus LXi for something like 185,000 miles. It was a very pleasant drive. Hers was spirited, with the 2.5l Mitsubishi V6 and 4-speed Ultradrive/A604/41TE automatic (which needed only regular fluid and filter every 50,000 miles, a speed sensor replacement), both standard. It felt more cozy than the larger, contemporary LH sedans and its interior was a step up in style, a glimpse of what would come next in the Chrysler 300M.
I also rented these cars as the Dodge Stratus. Though only little smaller in displacement, the 2.4 I-4 felt different. Its torque did not come on strong until it was revved, so it felt quite a bit slower although quarter mile times were not THAT much longer. Though the interior layout was the same, the rental Strati weren’t trimmed as opulently. But they were capable enough. I never drove a Stratus with the 2.0 liter I-4; Chrysler may have had in mind the resale market after the leases ran out…these Strati were rented from Thrifty, which Chrysler owned at the time. The V6 in the Stratus line came only in the highest trim ES.
The new 2001 models of the Stratus and Sebring (Cirrus successor) lost their lithely attractive styling, in what was rapidly becoming Daimler high-handedness, and the follow-on Sebring and Dodge Avenger were even worse. What was very disappointing was that from an objective standpoint, the newer versions weren’t any better cars. The anticipation of vaunted German engineering did not pan out as it appeared that Daimler decided that the money and attention would be spent on lowering cost so more profit could be sent home to the Fatherland. The result was that DaimlerChrysler fell farther and farther behind, surrendering the market where these cars competed. Of course they later walked away after siphoning off all the cash, leaving a bankruptcy-prone hulk for future owners, much like an automotive “scorched-earth” policy.
Thanks for the tips about the water pump. Looks like I’ll check it and possibly have that done soon. I’d really like to keep the car, it’s so much fun and nobody makes a nice convertible that you can fit four people in.
2.7 V6? Keep it from sludging. Use synthetic oil which is more sludge resistant, keep it topped off, and change it at 3000 miles. Do not neglect the PCV system, moisture from blowby fumes needs to be cleared. If sludge accumulates, the hydraulic timing chain tensioner sticks, the timing chain goes slack, and there is big trouble because it is an interference engine. And do watch for signs of water pump leakage and milky oil. Fix immediately, those do not go away and meanwhile the bearings will be suffering from the degrading of lubrication.
At one time there was an aftermarket auxiliary chain guide for the 2.7 V6 that would maintain chain tension if the hydraulic tensioner went slack, preventing valve damage. I don’t know if it is available any more, but it was recommended to be installed if the timing cover were removed. Cheap insurance at around $40 retail. Daimler should have installed them from the outset, they probably would have cost them less than $10.
The 2.7 got some improvements over time, post-2001 got oiling system and PCV upgrades.
My mom had a 1999 Stratus with the 2.4 four cylinder at the same time I was enjoying my 1989 LeBaron Coupe with the 2.5 four cylinder. Driving the Stratus was like driving a hot rod compared to my LeBaron. I constantly had to watch my speed driving the Stratus and the tip in on the gas pedal taking off was very different from the LeBaron. Applying the same foot to the LeBaron guaranteed the Stratus was going to have some wheel spinning before a spirited launch. Everything about the Stratus felt good as though I was the target audience for the car. My mom racked up quite a few miles on it and it was a trouble free car. The only glitch in ownership came when my dad put in a new timing belt. He found you absolutely had to put in a Mopar belt as the aftermarket belts at the time seemed to be just slightly off in size. He also thought the battery location was a pain. They replaced the Stratus with a 2003 Neon which also gave them a lot of happy years of driving.
Used to see a lot of the first gen cloud cars and now I almost never see them.
In 2011, I replaced my LeBaron with a 1999 Concorde LXI with 3.2 V6 and that car was leaps and bounds ahead of the LeBaron with having the interior space of my ’79 St. Regis and the fuel economy of my four cylinder LeBaron with literally twice the horsepower. Loved that Concorde and would still have it today had I not been T-boned on my way to work one morning in 2012.
The replacement Concorde was a 2002 Lxi model and I was pretty shocked at how decontented it was and how much cheaper things felt driving it. One of the things I learned about the car is that you cannot put cheap auto part store parts on an second gen LH car and expect it to function correctly. I had to undo a fair amount of someone else’s attempt at maintenance before I could get it running smooth. When it came time to replace the battery, I figured out an easier way. Turn the wheel all the way to the right, take the fender panel off. Then from the engine compartment, remove the air box, free the battery from its hold down clamp on the tray, slide the battery towards the fender opening, remove the cables and then lift the battery out from the top. Don’t know if that would have worked on a cloud car, but it does for an LH.
Everything that was nice in the 1999 Concorde wasn’t so nice in the 2002 model and it put me through enough misery working on it (starter replacement anyone?) that I told my partner that her next go to work car was likely to be a 1970’s Valiant sedan. The effect Daimler had on second gen LH cars between 1999 and 2002 was startling. One thing I will say about my 2002 Concorde, in spite of it all, it’s still going. with 245,000 miles on it. The 3.5 V6 while only slightly less thrifty than the 3.2 still puts out way better gas mileage than anything else in my fleet. In spite of it not having anti lock brakes and traction control of the 1999 car, my 2002 turned out to be a great snow car on decent quality tires which I’ll get to see if keeps on doing that this winter.
I’ve owned 2 Cloud Cars. 1997 Stratus 2.4 and a used 1998 Cirrus 2.5 V6. I found both to be comfortable, good handling cars. The 2.4 four was rather crude and both engines had a lack of oomph but roomy and dependable. Stratus died at a 130,000 when a tree limb fell thru the windshield bending the “A” pillars and the Cirrus was totaled by my son at 145,000. Battery was never a problem. Never changed ’em!
I was a Mopar service advisor just as these things were coming out of warranty. Suffice to say that having it written off just when the warranty expired is not a bad thing.
-The 2.7 need oil changes at 5,000 km or three months. Good luck getting lazy North American car owners to do that.
-The battery location caused enormous problems with short circuits, etc.
-The front suspension fell apart at precisely 70,000 km.
-The a/c evap coil fails at about the same time.
I could go on but suffice to say Chrysler stopped making them rather early.
Many dealer techs don’t think very highly of the cars they work on. I knew a guy who worked for Mazda who cursed them for breaking so much under warranty. Dealer techs don’t make very much for warranty repairs, they much prefer out of warranty repairs.
Another guy worked for Subaru. He was also was not happy about warranty repairs, but wasn’t too upset because he did the same job over and over and got pretty good at beating book time. He replaced the rings to fix oil consumption complaints.
For the American makes, warranty jobs pay less than retail-a lot less.
VW, for example, does not use flat rate. All the techs are paid an eight hour day. There is no rush to beat the clock.
That’s interesting; how long have VW been using that payment model? I am still scarred from consistently awful dealer service experience on a ’90 Jetta purchased new.
Made a good looking touring sedan too.
Chrysler were usually so adept at finding fractional cents to shave and pinch, it’s a bit of a shock they didn’t put headlamp-shaped decals on these cars. Nobody would’ve noticed any difference versus the entirely useless, way-too-cheap, way-too-small headlite-shaped toys they did install. As with most all Mopars of that time, to drive one of these after dark was to pine for the good ol’ nights of pre-halogen sealed beams. And the European-spec ones were even worse.
The Cirrus was a fresh design and a looker. Enough that it pulled me into a Chrysler dealer in 1995 when I was replacing my 1987 Mercury Grand Marquis. I’m fairly big at 6’1″ and over 200, and it seemed a bit small to me coming out of a MGM. I thought the Cirrus was better looking than its bigger brother Chrysler Concorde, but the Concorde’s added room and available 3.5L 204hp V6 won me over.
The Cirrus lost that one, but I ended up buying three brand new Mopars in the years after that brief look. An excellent ambassador for the Chrysler brand of the 1990s.
IIRC, moisture would accumulate along the front edge of the hood causing rust spots. There was a guy at work who had a Chrysler Cirrus. Being an engineer, he took good care of the car. However, when the “Cash for Clunkers” program came along, I noticed it disappeared from the company lot. Not sure what he replaced it with.
This is an excellent COAL, thank you. Last week I commented your Bonneville purchase closely paralleled my dad’s own positive Bonneville experience.
Like you, Dad, with my encouragement moved to Chrysler next, but we chose a Concorde for similar reasons as you outlined here. It’s been a positive experience, the car performs exceptionally well and has been reliable although some components have a bad reputation for failure. Dad recently passed away, leaving me with a well -dented 25k mile Concorde.
You’ll be replacing the upper ball joints, sway bar links and bushings, a/c evap coils and brakes. Only the evap is expensive. The other items are just wear items on an LH.
Stay tuned. We may have more cars in common. 🙂
I had a bunch of the cloud cars in my fleet. They started out as a decent car but then we started having head gaskets leaking oil, timing belt idler failures and the front brake pads wore grooves into the carrier which is the spindle so we stopped buying them and quickly phased them out. Chrysler was not willing to stand behind their products so we stopped purchasing the cars and trucks. The mini-vans were OK and much better than the Ford and Chevy products so we did stay with them.
Great COAL. As far as the comments, all carmakers are always looking to cut costs—preferably in areas customers won’t see or notice.
As for Daimler and Chrysler, we should lay the blame where it belongs: on the imperious Mr. Iaccoca. Even more so than his old boss who fired him, who after all had HIS name on the building and the cars and trucks, Iaccoca resented anyone who had a better idea than he did, and Iaccoca was cheap to a fault when it came to spending money on product (ignoring the ‘it takes money to make money’ concept of investing today for more tomorrow). His ABL campaign led to Eaton, which led to Daimler’s takeover. Daimler basically used the profitable American truckmaker and put little into it.
Paradoxically, I think some of Chrysler’s more clever cost-cutting ideas (after all, Chrysler cars sold on cost, not quality), rubbed off and Mercedes and hastened the cheapening of the brand…. a little ironic.
Had Iaccoca let Lutz succeed him, it would have been interesting to see what Lutz might have done with the resources he had.
It’s all hypothetical, but based on the LH cars, the Cirrus-Stratus, the 1992 Ram, I think Chrysler under Lutz would have done well and evolved into a pretty solid, viable maker of credible cars and trucks by 2006, much like Subaru is now, with some snazzy vehicles to spice things.
THAT firm would not have required a government bail out, and would have not have consequently been gifted of Fiat.
My wife had one of these (2.4 I4) when we first got married. While an attractive vehicle, I can concur about the seats not being so great for long road trips.
The oil filter placement on the bottom of that motor was not great for those drivers who just drove anywhere without thought for attack angle or care for the state of oil pressure indicator lights.
The second motor was killed when the oil pickup tube fell off into the sump. See above re: indicator light.
Moved her into Japanese which, although not perfect, have proven more difficult to kill.
I had many of these Cloud cars as rentals. They were the proverbial well enough designed driving car plagued with Chrysler crap quality control when the warranty ran out and several friends and family members with them had the usual head gasket/trans axle, electrical and A/C conking out failures. This was mainly with the 2.0 and 2.4 engine models. Not much experience with the 2.5 V6 but those seemed to be a more reliable unit compared to Mitsubishi’s prior 2.6 and 3.0 liter oil belchers.
My neighbors had a 1998 Breeze with the 2.0 and that car single handedly moved them into a Mercury Marquis and then to Honda years later. That POS not only needed a head gasket and shortly later and entire engine replaced it also had non functioning A/C that they never bothered fixing, numerous electrical glitches and then the trans Axle just quit working right in their drive way one morning. All this with under 60K miles!
As for Bonneville’s I wouldn’t be surprised to hear the very first model year (1997) when the car changed over to the H-body FWD was a bit troublesome. We sold plenty of 1988-1991 examples and they were generally very good cars with the 1992 onward examples being better still save the odd intake issue or Transmission pressure solenoid. If shopping for a used 1990 onward Bonneville versus a 1990’s Cloud car I would go Bonneville every time as the H body cars were some of the best during this time period!