(EXPANDED FROM 9/18/2020)
The Chrysler 300C’s styling received high praise when the car first came out in 2004. “Bold. Brash. . . . Ballsy,” gushed Motor Trend writer Arthur St. Antoine (2005) in explaining why the magazine selected the 300C as its Car of the Year. He went on to note, “When design chiefs at rival automakers are overheard saying things like, ‘You’re going to start seeing cars like the 300 from us soon,’ well, you know you’re not just looking at a new automobile — you’re witnessing the onset of a paradigm shift.”
Something happened on the way to the revolution. The 300C has now been around for almost two decades and it arguably never had any imitators. This was hardly a 1965 Ford Mustang or 1961 Lincoln Continental in its design influence.
What went wrong? The answer is simple — and was always apparent to anyone who wasn’t mesmerized by the loud syncopation of Chrysler’s media blitz. The 300C suffered from two big problems: 1) it heavily trafficked in styling cues that were likely to have a short shelf life and 2) the quality of the design’s execution was mediocre.
2004-10 Chrysler 300C looked cartoonish
The 300C’s fundamental problem was that it looked more like a cartoon caricature than a serious luxury sedan. For one thing, the proportions were off. The greenhouse was so low relative to the rest of the body that it had a turret-topped quality.
In addition, the windshield was too upright and the overhangs too short. Add to that detailing which had a consistently cheap quality, such as thick, body-colored door frames intersected by black paint plastered across the B-pillar.
The quirky styling didn’t initially get in the way of strong sales, which peaked at roughly 144,000 in 2005. By 2010, the original 300C’s last year, sales were down to roughly 37,000 (Wikipedia, 2020). That was quite a fall.
An automaker would have typically geared up for an all-new design by the eighth year of a production run. Chrysler, mired in financial difficulties, instead opted for a reskinning. Designers weren’t able to fix the fundamental problems with the car, but they were able to significantly tone them down.
New front and side come off better than the rear
Let’s start with the front. The stubby-looking fascia was given a more streamlined V-shape, and the headlights and grille received a more upscale look with the help of Father Chrome. It all came together much better aesthetically than the original — and probably was also more aerodynamic.
The car’s side styling saw the most significant improvements. The basic proportions were mostly the same, but Chrysler used visual tricks to make them work better. The windshield was given a steeper rake and a sharper character line was added just below the belt line to reduce the turret-topped look.
Meanwhile, the addition of a lower-body crease and more aggressive wheel blisters gave the sides a lower and more sculpted appearance. Detail improvements included switching to chrome door handles and window frames.
The rear end was the least successful part of the 300C’s reskinning. Although the surface sculpting was more polished, the new shape exacerbated an already too stubby and tall look.
Perhaps the biggest mistake was to deemphasize the original 300C’s bumper, which served to give the rear a more horizontal appearance. Ditching the original’s Europeanesque taillights in favor of American-style mini-fins was also a step in the wrong direction. The resulting vibe was that of an over-styled truck rather than a luxury sedan.
The design problems with the rear end were at least partially remedied when the 300C received mild revisions later in the decade. Below is a 2019 model.
2011 Chrysler 300C damned with faint praise
Car and Driver magazine was impressed with the 2011 Chrysler’s new styling. Writer Jon Yanca (2011) noted that the “300C still looks commanding and is immediately recognizable, though, as if the old model had found a fine tailor to sharpen up its off-the-rack suit.”
That’s a nice way of saying that the original 300C wasn’t as classy as it needed to be. I would go a step further and argue that the original should never have seen the light of day. Chrysler should have instead come out with a 300C similar to the reskinned version. That the automaker went for the cheap caricature says a great deal about the caliber of its management at the time.
Yes, but weren’t the 2004-10 models more popular?
In a comment over at Curbside Classic, XR7Matt (2021) disagreed with my take. He argued that the 2004-10 Chrysler’s styling was “memorable” whereas the reskinned 2011 models were “boring.”
Design is inevitably subjective, but XR7Matt (2021) did bring up a factual point — that I “conveniently left out” that the 2004-10 models “moved well over 100k units for 4 of the 8 model years and the 2011 refresh sold LESS than the 2010 before that design’s peak at 70k in 2012.”
Also see ‘2006-2010 Dodge Charger: A cartoonish attempt at rip-roaring nostalgia’
It’s true that the 2004-10 models sold better than their reskinned successors. But as you can see from the graph below, this reflected the general trajectory of the full-sized sedan market.
The 300 initially sold quite well, second only to the Chevrolet Impala. But when a recession hit in 2008, the Chrysler took the biggest hit — a 48-percent drop in sales. From then on its output tracked fairly closely with that of the Nissan Maxima, Toyota Avalon and a succession of Buicks.
Also note that while the 300 initially outsold the Dodge Charger, from 2008 onward its corporate sibling took the prize — mostly by substantial margins.
I suppose you could argue that the 300’s reskinning in 2011 did not help sales — at least as much as it did the Charger, which was also restyled that year. However, I don’t think the data suggests that the 300’s new looks hurt sales compared to competition from other automakers.
NOTES:
This story was originally posted on May 20, 2014 and expanded on Sept. 18, 2020 and Nov. 14, 2023. Sales figures and specifications are from Automobile Catalog (2023), Car Figures (2023) and Good Car Bad Car (2023).
Share your reactions to this post with a comment below or a note to the editor.
RE:SOURCES
- Automobile Catalog; 2023. Accessed Nov. 14.
- St. Antoine, Arthur; 2004. “2005 Motor Trend Car of the Year Winner: Chrysler 300C.” Motor Trend. Posted Dec. 3; accessed May 20, 2014.
- Car Figures; 2023. Accessed Nov. 14.
- Good Car Bad Car; 2023. Accessed Nov. 14.
- Yanca, Jon; 2011. “2011 Chrysler 300C: The V8-powered 300 improves where the last car came up short.” Car and Driver. Posted September; accessed May 20, 2014.
- Wikipedia; 2020. “Chrysler 300.” Page last edited September 16; accessed September 16.
- XR7Matt; 2021. Commentator in “Cohort Pic(k) of the Day: 1965 Chevrolet Impala SS Coupe – Its Roof Line Predicts The Future.” Curbside Classic. Posted 2:12 p.m., Sept. 9.
PHOTOGRAPHY:
- 2016 Chrysler 300 by Kevauto, Wikipedia Creative Commons 4.0.
There are some good observations here. The original 300 was welcomed because of it’s novelty and retro design. It could have been better, but what else was out there that looked some distinctively American? If initial sales were good it was because the car appealed to those that wanted to make a certain statement,an SUV would have be a safer choice. Part of the sales drop off I would attribute to previous buyers not trading up to a new one.”One and done!” My Daughter bought a new Beetle when it came out, but traded in for a Cabriolet for her next VW.
Novelty designs can only increase sales for the first couple of years until the novelty wears off. I bought a Ford Flex late into their run, but I’d bet that not many buyers opted to buy a new Flex to replace their older model.
Large sedans have been in decline for years, and the 300 wasn’t really a contender in the true luxury class, it was more of a pretender. As Lincoln found out with the new Continental, what the public/press says that they want isn’t always what they will actually buy.
The 300 was sold as a Lancia (ThemaI believe), exact same car other than name tags.Ads in Italian magazines stressed the “handcrafted” leather seating, NOTHING about Corinthian. Saw a car carrier load headed to Baltimore port from points north.
To me, the 300c always looked like it was designed by Cheech Marin. The two sideviews look like a “find the 6 differences” puzzle. I think Chrysler lost its near luxury cachet at this time, and became the car to take Madge and her bridge club to Denny’s for the early bird special. The Charger survived because there was at least a whiff of Hellcat about it, and the other full size sedans disappeared.
Yes, the original300 looked like a car Dick Tracy would drive. A black 300 with a Bently style aftermarket grille looked better (IMHO). But don’t forget that you could get a powerful Hemi engine and 4-wheel drive. With the Hemi the car was sort of macho that appealed to a number of buyers.