IF they had a different name - would it have made a difference?!

**CanadaCraig** · 12-13-2006, 09:07 AM

Hi Guys!!

Some have said that the 300C really should have been the 300N. And some have said that the V6 versions should have been called something else. [New Yorker, Newport, something]

First off.... what's your opinion on this?!

AND then - IF the names of the Chrysler LX's were different - would it have effected sales much?! [If at all?!] Would those of you who bought a V6 300 - still have bought your car IF it was called the 'New Yorker'?! [Or whatever]

And would those of you who bought a 300C - would it have made any difference at all if it was called the 300N?!

Part of me can't help but think that the 300C SRT8 should have just been the 300N. And all of the other 300's be called the 'New Yorker'. [In both V6 and V8 versions]

What do you think!?

Craig!!

**DMAG** · 12-13-2006, 09:10 AM

Interesting...the 300 was originally going to be called 300N. (I have some documentation to that effect). I always wondered if the Charger would have been a good Coronet or "Enforcer" (ying to Avenger's yang).

**chasb** · 12-13-2006, 09:13 AM

I had a 1999 300M when they first came out 3.5l V6. I liked the styling.

My theory is that since it was supposed to be a 2005 intro, they were playing off the 50th Anniversary of the first 300 hemi , the C300 in 1955 and the name was homage to it.

Just my theory.

**Jaak** · 12-13-2006, 10:17 AM

Wow, that sounds like a good discussion to go with "The new Charger isn't one because it's a four door." Of course we know the old Charger isn't really one, because the Charger was supposed to be a four door from the beginning and they messed up. The new one is the correct Charger.

So the current 300 should have actually been a 300O 'cause N sounds too much like M... Actually the M is wrong too, what happened to all the letters in between?

Oh wait... Who cares!!!!

I'll be at another table talking about something else...

**gn300** · 12-13-2006, 01:10 PM

Base should have been a New yorker very historic firmilier nameplate.

300 was always based on a model and upgraded (except the m)

Charger would have made a great newport or fury but not diplomat.

**momsrockinride** · 12-13-2006, 01:15 PM

I think if they had gone with the name New Yorker or Newport they might not have sold as well because the first thing you think of beind the wheel of a New Yorker is grandma/grandpa with the white hair. New Yorkers seemed to appeal to more of the older crowd. However - the way the 300C looks and performs I'd have probably bought anyway even it if they called it "the K car". LOL

**BlkHemiMag** · 12-13-2006, 01:22 PM

The people who actually care about this represent a very small fraction of potential customers.
Frankly I think it's pretty silly to personally boycott something that otherwise is a good product, just because of a name.

**pir8magnum** · 12-13-2006, 01:25 PM

I think the 'C' represented the heritage better given that it was going back to a V8/rear drive platform. I never really liked the idea of attaching the '300' name to a front drive V6 vehicle, even though it was regarded by many to be a nice car.

As far as less trimmed out versions having different names, I suppose that would have been ok, but I'm sure Chryslers take on it was that its easier to establish identity for a single model than for several. Look at GM and all their variations of the exact same vehicle. I don't think it helps them, really. By using a single nameplate for the entire line, chrysler only had to create buzz for the top of the line model that trickled down to the 'lesser' models (not trying to undermine the V6'es). People may not have gotten the Hemi, but they got the name badge and a lot of people dont know the difference. Also when sales numbers are reported it looks more impressive that xxx,000 300's were sold instead of xx,000 300's - xx,000 new yorkers, xx,000 newports, etc.

I personally think the current charger should have been a coronet. The Charger nameplate should have been reserved for a 2-door vehicle that had some kind of visual connection to the original (the '68, particularly..my personal favorite).

And whoever said the original Charger was supposed to be a 4 door, I don't think thats true. The original Charger II concept car (that eventually resulted in the 66 model) was a 2-door (see picture). I've been geeking out on Chrysler history for a long time and I never read anything that indicated it was supposed to be a 4-door. Even the very early roofless '64 Charger concept was a 2 door.

I'm not saying I can't be wrong, but if you've read that it was supposed to be, I'd be curious to know where.

**gn300** · 12-13-2006, 02:12 PM

Originally Posted by BlkHemiMag

The people who actually care about this represent a very small fraction of potential customers.
Frankly I think it's pretty silly to personally boycott something that otherwise is a good product, just because of a name.

Case in piont would you but a Chrysler Aspin?

Does that name call you to see what it is if you didn't know?

I think not!

Originally Posted by momsrockinride

I think if they had gone with the name New Yorker or Newport they might not have sold as well because the first thing you think of beind the wheel of a New Yorker is grandma/grandpa with the white hair. New Yorkers seemed to appeal to more of the older crowd. However - the way the 300C looks and performs I'd have probably bought anyway even it if they called it "the K car". LOL

300c yes is a special model .

I don't think anyone would be renaming that! Its the base and touring models they are talking about !

Historicly speaking, the eagle line of 4x4s coupe, sedan and wagon were all eagles!

But that was pre chrysler, so its all right!

**boggart** · 12-13-2006, 02:15 PM

Should have called it Magnum Sedan.

**Jaak** · 12-13-2006, 02:50 PM

Originally Posted by MagnumSXT

Should have called it Magnum Sedan.

LOL, the Magnum was a sedan, so they should both be Magnums. One's a sedan, the other's a wagon.

The Chrysler should have been a LeBaron. Or Cordova.

**BlkHemiMag** · 12-13-2006, 03:07 PM

Originally Posted by gn300

Case in piont would you but a Chrysler Aspin?

Does that name call you to see what it is if you didn't know?

I think not!

No, but neither would a Chrysler 300 if I didn't know. That's my point; being a DCX rookie myself, for the "masses" the new 300 made a buzz for it's unique styling, visual appeal, etc, not it's heritage. Only a small minority are concerned about that one letter. And that was the original question, would it have affected sales and my opinion is I highly doubt it.

**Leadfootluke** · 12-13-2006, 03:11 PM

I remember the 300N name from like 2002. A concept car that had the same hood design like the 300C.

**Dr Teeth** · 12-13-2006, 03:35 PM

Actually the 300 letter series was joined in the 60s by the "non-letter" 300s. The non-letter cars were still sporty but lacked the very high horse engines of the letter series cars, much same as what we have now, so it's really historically correct, as far as the non-letter cars go. As far as the "C" designation, at first I felt it should have been "N" but I've since mellowed. After all, the original letter cars changed letter designations yearly, so we should have had a 300N, then 300O, and now 300P by now. That's fine if the cars change significantly year to year, as they did in the 60s, but now it'd just be confusing. So I think DC did it right as far as the 300 goes.

As far as the Charger, sorry but I still can't get over the name. It's a great car, and I like it, but I bought a Magnum instead, partially because of the name. In the end I suppose it doesn't matter, because most people would probably either buy the Charger despite the name, or but a 300 or Magnum if it bothered them enough. And anyway, DC got the hint, as evidenced by the Challenger, so it's all good.