Last post on Oct 08, 2012 at 5:35 PM
You are in the Dodge Intrepid
What is this discussion about?
Dodge Intrepid, Sedan
#235 of 3457 300M Quality vs Dodge Intrepid
Sep 02, 2000 (3:49 am)
I've mentioned here before that my parents have an early production 99 300M, now with about 30,000 miles on it. I've driven it a number of times and I think the assertion that the 300M is of better build quality than an Intrepid is utter BS.
While my folks like their 300, it has had a number of "build" problems that have needed correction, far more than my lowly Intrepdi. The glove box door has been replaced twice due to faulty fit. The OEM windshield was replaced at 100 miles due to bubbling of the black edge trim and weather strip failures and the car has had several rattles corrected that certainly have not occurred in my Intrepid. The battery shorted internally at 5,000 miles and had to be replaced, and the OEM Eagle LS's were replaced under warranty with Michelin Pilot XGT Z4's due to the oft mentioned vibration.
Meanwhile, my newer Intrepid with about 21,000 miles has required one new power window motor, and that's IT. The doors close with an expensive thunk, the car has not one rattle, and overall, I'd say the build quality is BETTER than my parent's 300. In fact, after riding in my Intrepid a number of times, they're thinking of ditching their 300 for a 2001 Intrepid or Sebring Sedan.
Anyway, my point is (and I think I'm preaching to the choir, but bear with me)- 300M owners are paying for more features, NOT better quality.
#236 of 3457 davidu
Sep 02, 2000 (5:11 pm)
try to post that in the 300m conference, you'll get run out of town...!
Sep 02, 2000 (9:37 pm)
From what I read the last time one of us "lowly" Intrepid owners posted their, I'd probably get run out of there no matter what I posted!!
They've proably inhaled too much Zaino to understand anyway.
#238 of 3457 Well they're busy
Sep 03, 2000 (12:13 am)
today discussing the relative merits of the 99/00 tail lights versus the new 2001 tail lights with the clear lenses.
Sep 03, 2000 (12:17 am)
Did the 2001 Intrepid info that you found mention lowered horsepower due to some of the engines meeting Federal "Low Emission Vehicle" standards? The 3.5 is down several horsepower. I wonder if the 3.2 and 2.7 are also?
#240 of 3457 Here he goes
Sep 03, 2000 (12:22 am)
I'm not sure if the 300 group has decided yet which shade of neon coordinates best with the new 2001 tail lights. ;^)
Sep 03, 2000 (12:39 am)
I hope you're not lumping us altogether in the 300 group! ) I agree with all of you- the LH cars are basically all the same. Only the engines and features differ. There is no more quality care taken with the 300 as opposed to the other LH cars. Does anyone really think that when these cars are coming down the assembly line, the workers say- oh, here comes a 300M, slow down and make sure everything is better than the Intrepid! Yea, right.
If that was the case, then they must have all been hung over the day they built mine. )
Sep 03, 2000 (12:47 am)
not sure but will take a look later about the horsepower thing...
#243 of 3457 fastdriver and emale
Sep 03, 2000 (3:55 am)
Nah, only one of the 300 group didn't want us there....emale was brave and went ahead and said his piece....I was chicken and slunk back over here to my rightful place ;^) I'm just being silly with the neon thing....I promise I'll get it under control.
emale, thanks, I am just curious about the hp thing, like I said earlier, it's making me glad I got the 2000. I'm all for clean air but lowering horsepower is a step backwards in my book.
Sep 04, 2000 (12:22 am)
Don't be a chicken! I think I know who you're referring to! He does get out of control sometimes with other members in the same group. I guess it's just his youthful exuberance that makes him fly off the handle! LOL....