Styling wasn’t the problem, I think they look fine. Price was too high for the size & performance offered. This one should have gotten the HEMI.

It’s no big shame, as it didn’t make much of an impact. I think That DCX’s focus on bling rather than “bang” is to blame.

Has anyone noticed that Dodge and Chrysler just don’t race anything they build anymore? Obviously I’m excluding NASCAR, which I wouldn’t be keen on counting anyway.

The car looked great in the front. But it looks like the designers got lazy when they approached the back end of the car.

I think styling was a problem—a big problem—the thing is ugly. One of my neighbors bought one, and it disappeared after several months. A failure from the get-go.

The price was too high, also the styling on the crossfire concept was fine, but the SLK that the production car was based on was far too small to make the proportions look good or to appeal to American tastes. That interior was incredibly small for me and I’m only 6’0.

The size issue is also the reason why styling the new sebring to look like the 300 would’ve been a disaster.

i have trouble calling this a sports car, it takes away from real sports cars like the z,s2000,corvette, and all the rest, it looked like it might be a sports car but was just a lebaron like boring convertible.

CTS Driver, I take it you never drove one. Like they said in the blog post, it is based on the R170 SLK. Do you not call that a sports car? I can guarantee that a base crossfire would out perform your precious CTS.

i bet you could get a killer deal on one right now. the drop top doesnt look bad and the SRT6 version is pretty quick. i think price was the problem. if scion can sell the xB (i own one) DCX can sell this. this should have been 23k for the base and 28k for the srt6 add 1000 to each for a convt. and it would have done fine. 30k for a base car is waaaay to much.

The travesty is that Crossfire owners will be left to fend for themselves after the model is dropped. The automobile itself has the goods, but it does not have the looks. Had they modeled it after a scaled-down version of the Firepower they would have had a winner?

yes carnut i have driven one and it was much slower than the sports cars i did mention, just because its based upon a slk doesnt mean it lived up to its potential. and i dont understand your point about this beating my cts i never compared them, if you want to compare my vehicles to this it dont stand a chance against my vfr or ducati 900ss. Anyways the slk was a better car than the crossfire, and with the crossfire it should be able to at least outperform a honda s2000/nissan z/or be on par with a standard vette. come on lets not compare apples and oranges, 215hp regular is way too low for a car like this the 330 hp in the srt-6 should have been standard with the srt being around 400. that being said it a civic si will outperform a cts but im not going to rush rite out and buy one. you mercedes fanboys really need to pull your heads from your behinds and realize mercedes is not the be all end all of cars, thats bmw`s place, they can make a good sports car. and what good is how nice the interior of a mercedes is when its in the shop once a month.

and its based upon an old platform, all the competition has cought up and surpassed this 1997 chasis.

AutoTelegraaf is a Dutch and not a German carmag/newspaper/website. http://www.autotelegraaf.nl

I guess the Crossfire was a pretty nice car to look at, but that’s about it…

i deff think they priced themselves out of the market for this car. It was a nice lookin car, just to much.

I “test” drove one a couple months back at some event Chrysler was having. I didn’t get to drive it hard, but it was quite evident it didn’t have the kind of power a base 350z does. I think it costs more and has less power than the Nissan. Further, the interior was just plain cheap and nasty to me.

Not sure where you gained your experience with a Crossfire, but at 149mph on German Autobahns and doing everything I can to hit 149mph on lesser roads, the Crossfire is a lot of fun. All that for $15k less than the SLK and you get a trunk!

I should hope any car that costs nearly twice as much (can you say Corvette) should do better! BTW my next car is a ‘Vette, only had enough cash for a Crossfire last time.

The car was ugly , 215hp was too low for a 30 roadster.
The car was just ill conceived.

I think its a beautiful, well engineered car. There just aren’t many people out there buying two door coupes in this price range. What a shame.

Well sounds like chrysler is going to be sold but the Dodge portion of it benz will keep.

i believe the majority of them sold were fleet. When I was in florida for training our rental car place was filled with them hah.

Crossfire = bargin bin SLK.

like everyone else said, up the hp, lower the price and should have had a mid model change and fixed the ugly rear.

I thought they officially stopped producing these in 2005 when they couldn’t get rid of the final ones on Overstock.com… so they instead retitled them as 2006 models and continue to sell them off slowly.

CTS Driver

Much slower??? You do know that the pedal on the right is the gas, right? Not living up to its potential is to be blamed on high prices only. Everyone that I know that owns one is extremely happy with their car.

You want to compare an oil burning Honda to this car? 0-60s are within tenths of a second. The Crossfire would simply outlast this car in an endurance race hands down. The Z would beat the base model but the SRT would beat the Z hands down. The vette isn’t in the same class dude—don’t let the insurance companies tell you otherwise.

I never said MB is the best car out there. No one [manufacture] makes the best car out there, its all one person’s opinion. I do happen to think they make a great car because I own 2 and don’t have any problems as you seem to think they have (being in the shop once a month). I simply take you as a jealous kind, thats all.

Oh and I just about laughed my ass off when you said that your bicycles could beat my 514 inch turbocharged Fairlane [drag car] or my twin turbo 347 fox bodied mustang [road course car]. Really you are too funny, have you though about going into comedy?

Good Riddens

—————–>Its VERY SIMPLE: look how much better performance you get with a $27K Mustang GT than this car’s base $30k………even the PREVIOUS generation Mustang GT…………bump reliability, i wouldnt pay that much money for mediocre performance when there’s better deals out there in the first place……..that’s why i love my SRT-4 lol…….

… they were still building this?

it looked great, i think it was just hte price

Honestly I was totally disappointed when they changed the front end to that instead of keeping the design of the concept. That was classy and I think it would have worked a bit better. Performance… More bling than sing.

Let wounded dogs die. Maybe the “Demon” will beget a new Chrysler roadster based on the more tasteful Nassau styling..

DaimlerChrysler confirms Chrysler deal talks

I was just thinking about this the other day, since Chrysler will be sold sometime soon, and i was thinking to myself “what if chrysler is worth keeping? and i went through some of their cars and came to this and thought to myself “they will either scrap this, or come out with a new different design, different chassis… or… well, not gonna happen, a crossfire based off the new SLK platform, but thats exclusivly to mercedes”

I actually thought the Crossfire had been dropped 2 years ago. Says something about its sales numbers.

CARnut(ter),
I missed the bit where CTSdriver said that his beautiful Ducati would beat your mid-life-crisis-mobiles – perhaps your purchase-fuelling neurosis have made you defensive.
As to your original question, perhaps you have been driving muscle-bound numb-mobiles for too long, of course the R170 SLK was not a sports car, it just looked like one.

i just don’t get it… this thing costs less than a used previous generation SLK

I agree with you all: The Crossfire is too expensive, but the reason for that might be the production in Germany. Workforce is just too expensive over here. Here in Germany you get the Crossfire from 34000 Euros (taxes included) but for that price you could import a Ford Mustang coupé too… For Karmann an the region (I’m from there too) I’m hoping that they will build the Dodge Demon, but I think it won’t sell any better than the Crossfire. Karmann has big problems and lots of workers had to go. And the Crossfire is one big reason for that.
By the way: AutoTelegraaf is from Netherlands, not Germany.

Best Regards

Chris

Concept was good IMHO but Chrysler basically let it die on the vine. This package had the potential with some upgrades and some progressive evolution but it remained stagnant and folks lost interest.
These will be decent used tuner cars for someone eventually.

“You want to compare an oil burning Honda to this car? ”

Is this more ignorance regarding high reving engines?

Europerspective, I’ve owned my Fairlane since I was 17 and my mustang since I was 20 so I would hardly clasify them as “mid life crisis cars.” Shoot I haven’t even hit my mid life crisis (29) (I would hate to see what that brings). Based on your sign in name I would say that your background in cars is euro based. Well mine is American Iron. But as my sign in name implies I like cars, in general. So based on your comment of my muscle bound numb-mobiles—good one, I haven’t heard than a million times on this blog, get original man. The only thing numb about my cars is your brain after I smash the accelerator!

Smash whatever you want, you aint gonna hurt me in my 1986 Blazer, running on 35’s with Iron bumpers and rock sliders, I’ll even tow you home afterwards – how’s that for good manners.

I kinda liked this car when it first arrived but then I heard of its horrible manual transmission and presto…CRAP!

I thought it was nice, but a V6 at those prices ???

Failed cars like this include the Delorean and Acura NSX, (sorry NSX lovers but a car that looks like it should go……damned….it should GO !!!!!)

ok carnut im not hating the car, it was a good idea poorly executed. seriously the competition is much better, drive a nissan z then drive this and you will see the difference. same price range completely different performance range, that is my point. and a 5 year old on a skateboard could probably beat my car, it is slow.

514 inch turbocharged Fairlane [drag car] or my twin turbo 347 fox bodied mustang [road course car]. Really you are too funny, have you though about going into comedy?

Comment by CARnut, posted on April3 at 6:58 pm

and by the way theese sound like sweet rides, nothing roars like an old fashioned big block on boost.

I thought they already were discontinued. This should have been priced somewhere near the 350Z. But its terible styling is carried on. Hey what doesn’t work on one car, certainly should work on another (failure).

CTS Driver Yea the Fairlane is my favorite but I have yet to mini-tub it to get some decent sized tires in the back. She’s quite a handfull w/9″ wide rubber!!!

Finally the crossfire’s gone. I don’t think that it was so much the styling, as it was the ridiculous price tag.

I just picked up a new ‘06 base model coupe for 18,700.
At that price, it’s a very nice car.

^^^ good score bill^^^

The head-turns this car gets from other drivers, with the “thumbs-up” and positive comments from strangers of all ages is pretty cool (it almost gets too much attention). It has a wonderful styling with combinations of sexy lines and curved shapes like no other vehicle out there. While it may be considered a retro-style, it’s design is fresh and timeless. this car will look cool 20 years from now. While there are faster cars out there, there is more to life than getting to the next stop light the fastest. I’ll just continue to enjoy driving it every mile.

Thought it was already dead.

Good idea, poor execution.

Blakkarr: I find NASCAR boring.

CTS DRIVER: the s2000 is not a sports car.

F451: “Had they modeled it after a scaled-down version of the Firepower they would have had a winner?”
Would have been more likely.

Get Real: NSX wasn’t really a failure. The people who most appreciated that class of car couldn’t afford it. The market dried up.

GOOD RIDDANCE TO BAD RUBBISH !

At my local Mopar store there currently are 11 of these taking up one row of the lot including 4 SRT versions. A lady I work with recently bought one for about the price of a used 6 cyl Charger. They are quality automobiles and quite fun to drive and, yes, they still do get attention. Styling is subjective, but I do think they could have done more to make the Crossfire less quirky and more suited to North American tastes.

Still, for the bargain hunter, I can’t think of anything else that even comes close.

Turkey, if the s2000 isnt a sports car, then what is it??? a ****ing crossover???

“the s2000 is not a sports car.”

Then what is it, a station wagon?

Good riddance.

agreed CA36GTP

It’s a miata knockoff, is the best way I can describe it. Mustang’s not a sports car, either. Nor the crossfire.

But the Corvette is.

It is a good buy at a good discount. We are talking Benz 3.2 liter V6 mated to the ol’reliable 5 speed slushbox. Look at it as 2 seater past model E class (or C class). For under 30K it is a great find. 20 years from now it will cost much more then was paid.

jjt, pull the foot out of the mouth, don’t embarrass yourself in front of children. We both know that you are not senile yet and I guarantee to the forum that you dont’ need diapers yet .You know that S2000 as much knock off of Miata as Camaro knock off of the “Bird. Totally 2 different animals for different markets and different costs.

saw this already on http://www.CARversation.com

good riddance POS

s2000=sports car & jackjimturkey=dumbass

The Crossfire was an old Mercedes-Benz that didn’t stick to the concept very well. The front end was screwed up from the more striking and elegant concept. On top of that, is was never pushed well. But then Daimler-Benz never meant for Chrysler to have anything good from their parts bin.

It is a shame it’s being killed off but this was coming for more than a year.

The Crossfire was really the Kappa cars before they were. While performance is an issue, The Kappas cost a good $10K less than the Crossfire listed for. The styling otherwise was never an issue, but Crossfire lacked performance $35K-$40K would seem to demand. It fell into that same whole the Thunderbird (Blunderbird) fell into. It was rolled out without considering the market or expectation.

The Thunderbird should have been a Vette-fighter. Just as the Crossfire should have been a “dressed up Viper Mini-me”. Instead we got underwhelming posers with great names, decent interiors but couldn’t beat anything in their class.

Maybe the FIrepower will turn up and make us forget this error in judgment.

I had a Crossfire limited coupe with the 6spd manual. There were good and bad things about the car.

Styling is subjective, but I liked it and think the rooline and rear fender area are examples of concept car styling that actually hit the road. And the most gorgeous wheels!

The Good: The car is so well built. The doors are bank vault solid and shames the hollow feel of all it’s Japanese rivals. It’s exhaust sounds fantastic….none of that fart-cannery. Also it’s just so planted at all speeds….it’s got more grip than you can imagine. That said, it could hang with many sports cars but it’s really more of a GT.

The Bad: I think the real reason it didn’t sell, is because it’s got no headroom for anyone over 5′8″(and incredible blindspots that aren’t an issue if you know how to use mirrors). So most buyers seem to be women and most examples were automatics. The automatics are SO much slower. That said, the engine just barely had enough power to keep a manual tranny model fun. I could easily keep up with my friend’s S2000. Sure his car was ultimately quicker, but you had to drive the Honda like you hated it. The Crossfire has nice low-end torque. Still, it should have atleast had 250hp.

Tho the interior materials were substantial, some of the switchgear was old feeling (HVAC knobs) and some of the painted finishes had durability issues.

Overall, it was a solid concept car for the road that had a too high price, too tight interior and an engine that needed a boost. I’m happy that an American company took the chance to really unleash some styled cars. The Crossfire didn’t make it but the 300 did. For awhile, Chrysler was really rockin’ a cool Deco feel. That’s over now.

JJT,

I have to disagree with you. The Mustang is a sports cars, just not the same class of sports car. If you same the Monte Carlo/ Lumina coupe was not a sports car, I would agree. The Mustang falls neatly into that segment usually just called “performance”. It’s not the usual svelte definition of Sports Car, like a Vette, or S2000 (Honda make a new one or bury this one I really is starting to look ratty around the creases).

The Crossfire, while disappointing as a flat soda, was a sports car. This car was also not really a Miata knock off either. It would be like saying the Accord is a Camry knock off, or the GMC Pick-up is a Ford P/U Knock off, or the Viper is a Corvette Knock off. They are similar but neither is a knock off of the other.

But if you must look for “knock-offs” then the Miata is a knock-off of the old British sport coupes from MG and the like, which it Miata really is almost exactly like, with 30 years better tech and development.

Really it’s only a knock off if the car is a direct copy of an existing model. Just because two vehicles share the same class does not make it a knock off of another vehicle.

Quality was the problem. No one wants to drive something that feels like it came off the same assembly line as a Fisher-Price 9100

it deserves to die

Thank God! That car looks like a dog taking a **** with that ugly back end. Good riddens!

I thought it was an excellent design.

A V6 was pathetic….ala NSX.

Kind of like a stuffed bra.

Jeez everbody has to bash on the NSX V6 don’t they. Try making a car that light and mid-engined and putting a V8 in it while still keeping the 24/21 EPA rating. I happen to own a black 93 and I can tell you that in no way is it pathetic. AT ALL!

autonut: If the miata wasn’t a sucess, the s2000 wouldn’t exist. Now most of the miata knowckoffs are more powerful, but the concept is the same.

Blackarr: I didn’t literally mean a copy. And you’re right about miata heritage. mazda just figured out a way to make an MG that stayed out of the shop. Not sports cars, though.

F3INT))AP3X,

Kudos on owning an NSX. First or second owner? No insult intended. Just curious.

Anyway, I think most of us are really disappointed that HONDA never kept the car competitive by regularly updating the car and more over, never gave it more power. At $90k, who really gives a flip about f/econ? So would have killed HONDA to ship the car outside Japan with more than 280hp? I doubt it. But I think most Japanese Sports Cars are aimed at their home tracks and not really at international competition.

Agility more than power is the issue. I think they might be the first country to adopt an AWD specific road racing series or league before too long.

Because big power (and the speed that goes with it) is a major component to international competitiveness for Sports Cars, The NSX never really stood a chance outside of Japan. That and the car was exposed as having below par handling, probably a weakness built in to it’s specific power needs for racing in Japan. I don’t know.

I tend to feel that HONDA treats their Sports Cars like works of art first and equipment second. Most Automakers will go in equal parts. Because of this the S2000 has gotten old and is beatable with a Kappa car. The NSX got beat by the C4 Corvette not three years out the shoot. If HONDA took a more equipment stance with their Sports Cars, The NSX might have been more impressive.

As it is, at least in America, The NSX is “a basketball player trying to play football”.

Like Tony Gonzalez?

We’ll… miss it? I thought they stopped building this turd a few years ago.