Mrs S wants a PT Cruiser.
Yes, I know.
But, just supposing that it was going to happen anyway, does anyone have any comments upon whether to go for the 2.0 litre or the 2.4 litre?
Economy? Performance? Smoothness?
Anything else?
Prices seem to be remarkably similar.
Thanks for any input,
BR
DrS
|
Try not to crash it ;-)
www.euroncap.com/content/safety_ratings/details.ph...8
For a car designed to transport the family around I would pick something that scores better the 3 stars in the EuroNcap crash test.
|
I think they still look cool - but have you seen this - not sure if it's UK bound just yet - billheardvegas.com/site/mti_gallery/dlr/891/en/hhr...l
& of course the offers on This Weeks Best Deals link to our left look verrrrry good value!!
The bigger engine is bound to be an improvement, the smaller petrol unit was no match for the diesel, when I tried them a couple years back.
Main drawback is the interior, it just doesn't seem to carry through the 'retro/funky image - still lots of opportunities to add your own style, looking at the owners groups out there!!
& if you can find one of the Route 66 models it won't get lost in the car park.
I like 'em - now where's Murphy The Cat - his Mrs has one, too!!
VB
|
My mifes got a PT Cruiser CRD LImited and absolutley loves it. I've no direct experience of the petrol versions, but the diesels (her's is the 'old' CRD with 122 bhp) herm along really well. When it comes up to replacement time, she fancies another one with the more powerful CRD engine - can't ask for more than that.
With her getting the limited, she also got the chromed plastic trim on the wheels - they look great when clean !!!! In the last month she has just had the entire set changed under warranty for new ones due to pitting on the wheels ------ but NOT on the chromed plastic bits. Her car is just over 2 years old.
BTW, if she doesn't replace ger car with a PT, she's tried a Caliber and liked it (a lot), and the new Dodge Avenger could be a contender as well.
MTC
|
My mifes got a PT Cruiser CRD LImited and absolutley loves it.
Slightly off-topic, but does anyone know why the Americans often use the word "Limited" in their car nomenclature? Is it maybe derived from "Limited Edition", but with the original meaning lost? Just curious...
Edited by Typ 8L on 24/10/2007 at 16:34
|
|
|
|
Generally the diesel is reckoned to be better all round than either of the petrols, I nearly bought a diesel & thought it quite good. The handling wasn't bad either & I was an Alfa dealer at the time. I thought servicing a tad expensive.
|
the only real downside to the pt cruise is parts prices, as an example headlights are £200 + each due to them having to be for our market and therefore not many are made.
Go the your local dealer and ask for prices of basic sundry items before you take the plunge.
Also make sure the handbrake works properly as im sure there was a recal on this .
I like the look of them by the way (something different in a boring car world).
One final thing ,they have a very poor lock to lock.
|
|
I've always had a sneaking liking for the Cruiser - at least Chrysler had the bottle to be different. I drove a petrol automatic a couple of years ago though and it was pretty dreadful.
|
Yes MH, they say the auto is very sluggish but the manual is all right although hardly a ball of fire. I agree with those who like the look of the thing, sort of, up to a point, and the detailing - door handles, badges, controls etc. - is actually very nice.
It doesn't seem sensible to buy a car on the basis of its crashproofness. Asking for trouble.
|
It doesn't seem sensible to buy a car on the basis of its crashproofness. Asking for trouble.
It does If some fool on the road crashes into you ;-)
Id rather be driving a 4 or 5 star car then a 3.
|
My son had a PT Cruiser (petrol) and kept it for only six months.
"Interesting" styling, but it was not a very practical car. A large turning circle and difficult visibility when parking. Jiggly ride.
Shoddy build, he had problems with the air conditioning, electrics and gearbox. Not very helpful dealers and VERY expensive servicing. An 8 week wait whilst a new electrical part (wiper motor) was ordered.
He was happy to be rid of it.
|
|
|
|
These things are very popular in the States and various manufacturers have copied the concept. The Chevrolet HHR particularly is virtually identical from a distance.
I drove a PT Cruiser a few years back though I don't know which engine it was, I'm guessing 2 litre as I think the 2.4 came later. Automatic obviously and a very lethargic one at that. When accelerating from standstill the engine/ transmission made a loud and unpleasant drone as both struggled to get this substantial piece of metal into motion. Fuel economy was not a strong point, I got around 14mpg (US), the manual version is probably better.
On the positive side, it was fairly comfortable and made for a spacious 4 seater plus luggage. The cabin suffered from what, based on experience, seem to be two generic Chrysler defects. The build quality was very poor with the trim showing signs of serious wear after only a few thousand miles, and the visibility towards the back and sides is badly restricted by the size and positioning of the pillars.
I guess most people buy it for the styling in which case the above criticism is presumably not relevant for the purchasing decision, as owners are probably happy driving around in something that looks a bit different. I definitely wouldn't go for an automatic though.
|
A few points from other people posts that I'd like to comment on from thepoint of ownership.
Regarding the price of spare parts - the car has proven to be 100% reliable in 2 and a bit yeras and 30000 miles - so I've no experience of parts prices.
Chrysler have cut servicing costs by 25% which was a welcome thing.
Rear visibility isn't brilliant, but reversing sensors help the job enormously.
On Mrs Cats car, the build quality is very good - I don't know if her car was made in Mexico or Austria, but whoever knocked it together did a good job.
The diesel engine is a nice piece of kit.
Mrs Cat enjoys driving her car enormously.
The turning circle - it all depends on what you are comparing it to. If your comparing it to nearly any other car on the road (including my 300C) the it doesn't compare to well. If your comparing it to an Oil Tanker, then its a close run thing.
MTC
|
Drove one as a hire car in the USA. 2.4 Petrol Automatic, of course.
OK car to drive - nothing particularly special. Performance was OK, but for a 2.4 with 140 odd bhp, it didn't feel fast. OK, it is quite a heavy beast. I did wonder at the time if a manual one would feel less sluggish, and as I read the comments above, I reckon it probably would have.
Handling seemed fine - nothing out of the ordinary, but since it was being driven on American roads, and was an automatic, I don't feel in a position to judge. Ride also seemed pretty good. Most reviews comment on the poor turning circle, and I'll take their word for it - but I didn't have a problem myself.
Reasonably quiet car - though a lot depended on road surfaces, and road surfaces on American highways vary a lot. At times there was a frightful din, at other times it was eerily silent.
It was roomy enough, and had enough cubbies - though I thought the door pockets were odd - very narrow and deep - clearly designed for maps!
I found the controls straight-forward, and quite liked the dash. Beside the temperature readout was a direction readout which would tell you whether you were heading N, NW, W, etc. It would also tell you "Door ajar" if your door was open. The oddest thing was the grab handle in front of the passenger seat below the airbag and above the glove pocket. What is it for???
The worst thing about the car was the visibility. I particularly like big windows, and an unimpressed with the visibility in most modern cars, but felt this one was particularly poor - and I notice reviewers tend to agree with me. It is especially bad for drivers looking over their shoulder on the near side - you see the B pillar and the C pillar, but not much window.
I got about 31 mpg which is pretty much according to the official figures - fine for a PT Cruiser I guess, but I'm used to hire cars in France which get over 50 mpg.
I would have liked to have tried a manual, or even better, a diesel manual - but obviously no chance in the USA.
So - all in all, a nice looking car, and otherwise good enough, but not particularly inspiring. I reckon that my Berlingo is much more fun to drive.
|
|
|
|
