"Boxer_4" (Boxer_4)
09/13/2013 at 15:28 • Filed to: None
0
9|
"Boxer_4" (Boxer_4)
09/13/2013 at 15:28 • Filed to: None | 0
| 9 |
Introducing a new, infrequently occurring series where I find two or more related vehicles in Erie, PA (and other places), and pose a question nobody thought of; "Which one would you choose?"
For today's episode, we travel back to the 90's, and delve into the topic of full-size Chrysler sedans:
From their spec sheets, they can be hard to tell apart. Both shared the newly pioneered cab-forward styling and packaging, the same basic dimensions, the same 3.3L EGA and 3.5L EGJ V6 engines, virtually the same interior, and even the and composite fenders (until 1996) and headlights. While both sedans shared a lot, certain features and options gave them each a distinct personality, aimed at different buyers.
The Chrysler Concorde was geared more for luxury. The exterior styling, two-toned paint, mesh-style wheels, and wood trimmed interior were meant to give an upscale appearance. It was available with a bench front seat and column mounted shifter, and the upper trim levels had leather trimmed door card inserts. The base suspension tuning kept things calm and unexciting. It was a large sedan meant for the traditional Chrysler buyer.
The Eagle Vision was intended to compete against the influx of European sedans on the market. It's no-nonsense, more monochrome appearance, both inside and out, gave it a more European feel, as did the minimalist front grille, amber rear turn signals and trunk mounted license plate holder. The intended European feel also meant that the Vision was only available with bucket front seats and a floor mounted shifter. Oddly, the optional leather interior did not include leather trimmed door card inserts. The Vision came standard with stiffer "Touring" suspension, and had the option for "Performance" suspension. This, coupled with the optional Autostick (starting in 1996, not available in the Concorde), made it the more sporting of the two sedans.
Two sedans; similar yet different. So, what's Your Choice?
dogisbadob
> Boxer_4
09/13/2013 at 15:33 |
|
The Vision. But I'd take an Intrepid over either of them because white gauges (the Intrepid actually was different from the Concorde/Vision)
shinsen
> Boxer_4
09/13/2013 at 15:40 |
|
is the first photo shot at the TOPS in buffalo new york by any chance?!?
|
Boxer_4
> shinsen
09/13/2013 at 15:44 |
|
It's actually one of the TOPS in Erie.
Nibbles
> dogisbadob
09/13/2013 at 15:46 |
|
Came here to basically say the same thing. Intrepid.
GreenN_Gold
> Boxer_4
09/13/2013 at 15:51 |
|
I'd take the Eagle because sportier pretenses, more appealing styling for my tastes, and it at least has the Autostick. Plus, who the fuck else drives an Eagle? Nobody.
Yowen - not necessarily not spaghetti and meatballs
> Boxer_4
09/13/2013 at 15:53 |
|
The Eagle Vision, because I don't ever see one, so at least I'd be driving a rare car, lol.
|
shinsen
> Boxer_4
09/13/2013 at 15:56 |
|
ooh, okay! This is the TOPS i was thinking it was.
https://www.google.com/maps/preview#!…
nataku83
> Boxer_4
09/13/2013 at 15:58 |
|
As a former Intrepid owner, I would go with the Intrepid - much better looking than any of the other LHS cars (especially with no front plate). However, out of these - I'd have to pick the Concorde with bench seat / column shifter. When I had my Intrepid, I was always envious of the floor shift cars and autostick because those features were much cooler to a budding car enthusiast. Looking back on it - nothing about the car is particularly cool - and the front bench was put to good use in college. Really - the best feature about the car is it's interior size. When I graduated, I replaced my Intrepid with a '92 Roadmaster wagon, and the passenger space was considerably smaller on the Buick. Why waste the fantastic space trying to pretend you have a manual transmission?
Sean Bartlett
> shinsen
09/13/2013 at 16:15 |
|
Tops never mops, just look at the floor!
Please tell me that wasn't just a Rochester thing.