2010 Chrysler 300 Limited 3.5 from North America

Summary:

I would definitely buy the 2008-2010 models with a 3.5L and up

Faults:

Fall 2012: Toe was out on the front passenger side - Fixed.

Late fall/early winter 2012: The gas gauge stopped working properly, but we didn't realize because of not driving the car much and the gauge needle would still move. We ran out of gas when we were just about to turn left in rush hour - Towed to dealer and fixed.

Winter 2012: When we got the safety done because of moving to another province, the dealer saw that the steering was binding. I noticed a couple times that it was a bit stiff prior to this - Fixed.

Total cost: Approx. $1000.00 at Chrysler dealers (nothing fixed under warranty).

General Comments:

This car unfortunately went through some abuse with my dad smacking a curb really hard head on (Sept. 2012) and my mom packing the car so full when we moved that it stopped and shut off when I was turning into a parking lot (Nov. 2012). Yes, I sure did warn her about over-packing the car.

It was quite upsetting. I try to "protect" it as much as I can, but it is my mom's car.

- Performance is great. A very fast car.

- Overall, reliability is good! Those few months were unlucky for us though.

- It's a smooth ride for the most part and really nice on trips, but the seats can get uncomfortable. My back starts to hurt when driving it on long trips.

- The 2 dealers we've gone to for work were great, and do a good job.

- Oil changes cost a bit more because it takes an extra litre of oil, but besides that it's pretty reasonable.

My dad owned multiple Toyotas in the 70's-80's, and as a family we've had a 1992 Cavalier, 2000 Taurus, and this 2010 300. My favorite was definitely the Taurus as far as reliability goes; in time we'll see how the Chrysler holds up. My parents tend to keep cars a long time.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 24th August, 2013

20th Sep 2015, 20:54

LOL, a 2000 Ford Taurus being reliable...

31st Jan 2016, 00:37

I have a 2006 Taurus and have over 208K miles... ALL without a single problem! I had an older Taurus before this one... no problems with that one either... soooo, I don't doubt the poster on his reliability claims!

12th Feb 2016, 06:09

My friend's mother had 2 Taurus wagons; both gone by 80,000 miles or so.

My uncle owned 2 Taurus sedans; both went by 80,000 miles or so as well.

One of my coworkers owned one as well; that one went by 100,000 miles or so.

I've never heard a lot of good things about the Taurus from anybody I know or from much anything online. Generally, the older Taurus has been lambasted online and by word of mouth for being cheaply made and they generally don't last too long. People buy them used because they're fairly cheap (gee I wonder why?).

A lot of them suffer from electrical problems, the transmissions don't always hold up, the motors can have an appetite for head gaskets, the interiors fall apart, etc. Not all of them are lemons, but enough are to make me never want to own one. If it wasn't for the then-cool aero styling (which became all the rage in the 1980s and 1990s), they never would've gotten far with them.

I'm not bashing Ford or American cars either, because I know they make some very good cars, even back then and I could name them, but the Taurus was one of Ford's worst cars back then. However, the newer one is extremely nice and I've heard a lot of praise for them.

2nd Apr 2016, 04:14

Unfortunately a Taurus is anything but reliable.