hariku821

Like some one said before the srt 6 is nice but it seems to only come in auto? I looked at the crossfire for a little bit but it never made it to the test drive stage for me..

lookuphere

you should watch that Cross Fire video with that British guy that test drives cars. He really didn't like the Crossfire

hahaha, its a good video though.

dolebludger

Well, as I said before, the Crossfire was merely a "re-skinned" Mercedes SLK 320 roadster model that was sold here in the States between '98 and early '04, often called the R 170 model. As I am also a "Mercedes guy", I know that the R 170 was not a big seller either. It had a sedan-like driving feel, a cramped interior, and really was not very sporty in any way.

When Chrysler inherited the R 170 to re-skin as the Crossfire, it developed a fixed top coupe and a rag top convertible from what had been a retractable hard top. Chrysler also tried to make the Crossfire more sporty "on the cheap" by only stiffening the suspension. This resulted in a punishingly hard ride that couldn't "dance". As the result was a cramped, hard riding two seater that didn't do well on the track at all. In other words, a car that really appealed to NO market and was discontinued. You may be getting the idea that I don't like or want one of these, and you're fight.

As for the Mercedes SLK, it was redesigned from the ground up for '05 with real sports car handling, more interior room, more power, and much improved suspension, that all agree is a true sports car (though not as much so as the s2k). It is often called the R 171. The R 171 (unfortunately) has nothing in common with the Crossfire.

ace123

If want a comfortable sporty car that will serve you well driving around, the crossfire is a good option. I like the styling and briefly looked into them before I got the S.

If you want a car that is meant to be driven at the edge and be rewarding to drive, the S is a better pick. But if you want a GT car or a comfy cruiser, the S is far from it. If you care about torque, that's a big strike against the S as well.

patinum

Can you find an equivalent priced/mileage SLK320? Then you could get the convertible, but in the same car. Unless of course, the equivalent SLK's are priced higher because of the badge/better looks (imo). I would imagine maintenance would be similar since they are mechanically the same. You could probably bring an SLK320 to a Chrysler dealer for maintenance to save some $.

TakmaN

Wow I totally forgot the Chrysler Crossfire existed. For me, the looks and knowing that it is based on an outdated platform turns me off right away. It doesn't stand out or have that "oooo" factor. In fact, whenever I see one I just figure they overpaid for a vehicle that really has no standout attributes compared to other cars in its class and price range. The BMW Z4 would be a much better choice as a cruier roadster over the Crossfire. Also, considering that it's a 2004 with lower mileage going for $11k tells you enough about the car. It's resale value is horrible because no one wants one. I took this from the auto section at msn.com and it spells it out:

__________________________________________________ __________
Category for comparison:Entry Sports Cars

Basic Results: (vs. entry sports cars)
(-)Retail Price (MSRP): $34,735 (average: $24,850)
(-)Fuel Economy (City): 15 mpg. (average: 18.92 mpg.)
(-)Horsepower: 215 hp. (average: 232.68 hp.)

Standout Results: (vs. entry sports cars)
(+)Powertrain Warranty: Unlimited months/Unlimited miles (average: 97 months/119,909 miles)
(+)NHTSA Front Side Crash Test: 5 star(s) (average: 4.57 star(s))
(+)Passenger Volume: 48 cu. ft. (average: 84.04 cu. ft.)
Front Headroom: 36.9 in. (average: 38.42 in.)
__________________________________________________ __________

So that basically means you're paying more for an underperforming car that gets bad gas mileage compared to entry sports cars. But you get a great powertrain warranty, side crash test rating, and passenger volume (exactly what we look for in a sports car, right?!). Sorry for being crude, but I just think the answer is clear. I would get an s2k, boxter, z4, or 350z any day over the Crossfire.

Then again, it does come down to what YOU like. So drive both and let your heart decide!

s2kwhitepanama

crossfire = zzzzz

s2000 = cool

Chrisbert

Just for giggles go ask this on the rx8club.com boards. They are big fans of the crossfire over there.

fhsjrm

I would buy whichever one you think looks better. Also think about this...if you buy the Crossfire will you be pissed every time you see an S2000 pass by?

dolebludger

And I can't believe the Crossfire gets only 15 mpg. It has an engine identical to that in my '04 Mercedes C 320 sedan that weighs more, and it gets 22 mpg in town and 26 to 29 mpg on the highway (about what I get in my s2k). What did Chrysler do with that engine? Power is the same as in my C 320.