I rented an 07 Chrysler PT Cruiser 2 weeks ago. It only had 562 miles on it.
I put on an additional 1014 miles driving around Dallas-FortWorth-Houston, Texas.
Had about 150 lbs of tools, parts, and luggage. I never drove one of these
before. IMO, it was the strangest looking car/suv I have rented. Did not really
want it but it was either that or a some sort of Kia-Hundai.
4 cylinder. Averaged 23.7 mpg. Driven mostly above 60 mph. Its top speed is
probably around 85 mph. Car was underpowered for Central Texas hills but ran
great on flat land.
Short and to the point: I liked it better than any GM (GP, GA, G6, Malibu, Impala,
Tahoe, Pahoe, Trailblazer, etc) that I have ever rented.
Would I buy one? YES! I am just amazed at how much better it was than any GM
rental I have ever had. It would take some doing to get used to the strange shape
though.
I was actually considering buying a GM, but no more.
Good stuff:
The stereo was excellent! Absolutely great. Nice freq response - not the mushy
droning sound like GM's.
Outside lighting was very good. Unlike a GM, I could actually see the road at
night.
Visibility great all around.
Handling was pretty good. Gripped the road well. Not as front heavy as GM.
Mirrors great - Unlike GM I could actually see away from the sides of the car.
Did not have a close sideswiping call the entire trip
Arm rests ok, right height, but plastic hard - why don't auto makers pad arm rests
any more?
Auto down on both front windows was nice.
I could actually reach the front door when open to close it.
Ordinary seats but very comfortable - no back pain the entire trip.
Did not have to remove and reverse the headrests - unlike GM.
The visors extended and covered both front and side windows well - unlike GM.
I could hang my arm out the window ok. The door lock knob is recessed into the
top of the window sill so that it did not stick me in the arm. Did not have to
remove them - Unlike GM.
Road noise was bearable - only had to use ear plugs 4 times.
Strange stuff:
The dash was the same color as the outside of the car. Never did get used to the
red metallic dash.
Push button outside door handles - Retro, I guess.
The power window buttons are in mid center of dash (not the console). Never did
get used to that.
Round Analog clock in high center of dash - Retro.
Things I did not like:
Car did well at 75 mph on flat roads and low hills but the moderate hills of
central Texas made it down shift a lot. A 6 cylinder would be nice.
Cruise control over reacted to hills and gained 5-10 mph by the top of the hill.
Cruise control turns off when car turns off. It needs a non-toggle on/off switch.
Cannot see the dash gauges during twilight. When it was time for lights I had to
turn down the dash lighting all the way to see them until it got really dark out.
Turn signal lever to far away and too soft to be easily used. Chrysler design
people must have really long fingers and a velvet touch.
Conclusion: The PT was a nice vehicle but my 1992 Grand Am is still better than
any vehicle I've ever rented.
Harry Face - 05 Nov 2006 19:03 GMT
How does one remove & reverse the headrests? All my cars that had
headrest ( except 73 Impala ) the seat had to be diassembled to R &R the
headrest.
On my Bonneville a shive like tool has to be slid down inside the seat
to release a tab.
harryface
=?x-user-defined?Q?=AB?= Paul =?x-user-defined?Q?=BB?= - 05 Nov 2006 19:33 GMT
> How does one remove & reverse the headrests? All my cars that had
> headrest ( except 73 Impala ) the seat had to be diassembled to R &R the
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> harryface
All the rentals have been from 2003 up. Before that we had a company truck but
the boss sold it. Many of the different models have had different ways to un-do
the head rest. Unfortunately, I don't remember them except the last ones: G-6,
Saturns, etc.
They had buttons on both of the 2 rods. I usually have a good supply of tools
along with me. There were some that required more effort but I don't remember
which ones.
IMO, the GM designers all like to sit with the seat back laid back at about a 60
degree angle and head tilted forward. They must have very long arms and short
legs. I've noticed the same thing on doors that open way too wide for me to
reach, window sills way too high, etc.
Anyhow, I like to sit almost upright - probably 80-85 degree angle. That puts the
head rest way too far forward and I have to tilt my head down and eyes up to
drive.
phaeton - 06 Nov 2006 06:04 GMT
If I might ask, Paul..... why are you renting so many different
cars? If you mentioned this once before, I must've missed it.
-phaeton
=?x-user-defined?Q?=AB?= Paul =?x-user-defined?Q?=BB?= - 07 Nov 2006 00:41 GMT
> If I might ask, Paul..... why are you renting so many different
> cars? If you mentioned this once before, I must've missed it.
>
> -phaeton
I travel once or twice per month for work. I'm a senior project manager for the
environmental branch of Ryder System. About half my trips are to Dallas-Ft.Worth
and the other half to anywhere in the country. I'll be going back to Dallas again
in a week or so, then to Michigan in December/January (ugh, yech - I really hate
the cold).
phaeton - 07 Nov 2006 02:43 GMT
?? wrote:
> > If I might ask, Paul..... why are you renting so many different
> > cars? If you mentioned this once before, I must've missed it.
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> in a week or so, then to Michigan in December/January (ugh, yech - I really hate
> the cold).
I also hate the cold.
But I envy your travelling position, believe it or not. New places are
neat to see and take in.
Of course, you'll probably agree, but say that it got old after 1 year.
It *is* cool though that you get to drive all kinds of different
stuff.
-phaeton
=?x-user-defined?Q?=AB?= Paul =?x-user-defined?Q?=BB?= - 07 Nov 2006 02:55 GMT
> «» wrote:
> > >
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
>
> -phaeton
Good job, nice people, mostly mech/tech types, scientists and engineers.
The travel will never get old! Paid my way through a couple of science degrees
by being an ASE tech at a Ford and Chevy dealers. Specialized in electrial and
a/c.
=?x-user-defined?Q?=AB?= Paul =?x-user-defined?Q?=BB?= - 07 Nov 2006 02:58 GMT
> «» wrote:
> > >
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
>
> -phaeton
Ah, I see you are in/near Chicago. (Hello Hairy!)
I was there a couple years ago in January. 14 degrees F and people were out
shopping,
working construction, and driving! Absolutely amazing.
robinjoe61@yahoo.com - 07 Nov 2006 19:10 GMT
I've owned a PT Cruiser GT for 3 years now, and that's a very accurate
review of the PT Cruiser. Well done.
As for the lack of powerm, what you need is the Turbo PT Cruiser with
180 HP or a PT Cruiser Turbo GT with 230 HP. Both have the same or
more HP than a 1992 Grand Am GT (180 HP). Even the base PT has more HP
than the base 1992 Grand Am (150 vs 120). The PT Cruiser GT will even
out accelerate a 1982 Ferrari 308 GTB/Si Quattrovalvole in the 0-60 (PT
GT: 6.7 sec., Ferrari: 6.8 sec).
Curiously, the 2005 Grand Am GT with a V6 only produces 175 HP compared
to the 1992 Grand Am GT with 4 cyl. that produced 180 HP. The PT
Cruiser GT also only has 4 cyl. (turbo) and produces 230 HP. So
counting cylinders doesn't always mean you have more power.
Joe
?? wrote:
> I rented an 07 Chrysler PT Cruiser 2 weeks ago. It only had 562 miles on it.
> I put on an additional 1014 miles driving around Dallas-FortWorth-Houston, Texas.
[quoted text clipped - 55 lines]
> Conclusion: The PT was a nice vehicle but my 1992 Grand Am is still better than
> any vehicle I've ever rented.