ORIGINAL: DamnSkippy
No similarities what so ever in the Camry and LX cars. I trying to allude to the marketing decision to off a 2 dr version in the form of the Solara...
I think it makes a lot of sense to offer 2dr version of popular 4dr sedans.......that's all.....I was just using Toyota as an example, because they are one of the first in recent history to have the intelligence to expand a popular automobile to another demo who likes 2 dr cars....
I know the whole reason behind not offering the Charger as a 2 dr was because there was no platform and it would have required an additional investment in tooling up, designing and developing the other chasis....my point is now they have made this investment...don't get pigeon holed in "what kept you from doing it originally", I've seen it my business, a team will not do something because at a particular time there are obstacles or it's just flat out not possible...then things will change and they'll forget to re-approach....hell, I've done it myself...then something clicks and I figure "whoa, I can do it this way now 'cause I can now"....
Hopefully Chrysler will have enough vision to make the most of this platform, and find some winners on the same platform....as for why a 300c Coupe....if they're axing the Sebring coupe.....why not replace it w/ another tight ride....I think the 300c would look good as a 2dr and you could have a sport lux w/ some mopar soul to make it roll........
Okay, now I understand what you are saying. The Solara is not just a direct coupe version of the Camry like say the Accord Coupe was. There are quite a few styling differences between the two that could easily convince the eye of the observer that they are infact completely different cars. I think the Sebring coupe should return, I'm not necessarily convinced though that there would be a market segment for a coupe version of the 300C. Although there are a few European luxury coupes, I'm not sure if this would be the route Chrysler would want to take. To compete against the M6 and CL-class, Chrysler would probably need different styling.
Yankee, the problem that the Prowler had was a combination of it being extremely over priced and lacking the powertrain that people were interested in getting for that type of car. Unfortunately Chrysler, might not have had a powertrain that would have fulfilled those desires at that time without considerable investment as that was pre-Hemi and the 360 had not been used as a true performance engine for many years. The legacy that I see of the Prowler is the PT Cruiser since it resembles the front end. That should have been sold under Plymouth (or Eagle if they hadn't needlessly killed that division either) as it fit their target market better than Chrysler. The PT Crusier could have revived interest in Plymouth.
Although I believe Dodge models should have been superior in performance as that was Dodge's position, Plymouth shouldn't have had a powertrain that limited to a point where they couldn't compete against Ford and Chevrolet. That was part of the problem as well. I will have to disagree with you on the Crossfire. I think that car never should have happened in the first place under any division. A rebadged MB, no thanks. If anything it made a least some sense under the Chrysler badge as it was a sort of luxury coupe. It's interesting that you see the similarity of the potential mistake Chrysler is making by not bringing back the Cuda and the definite mistake GM is going to make about not bringing back the Firebird. At least we are the lucky ones who have a model that at least looks good. I feel sorry for the GM fans with the appearance of the Camaro.
I don't see the Catera either in that photo chop either. The Catera was a tasteless hunk of Opel garbage without any styling. I don't see how 2 doors would make a dramatic change in appearance like you seem to see in it.