11th Jan 2002, 03:36
We Love our PT Cruiser and have great fun with it. It is not the most exciting drive but with a family we are not looking for a Lamborghini performance at the moment anyway. Enjoy all you PT afficionados.
16th Jul 2002, 11:15
I love the way it looks. I'm not looking for the same old same old. I'm not too happy to hear that it has a cheaply made interior. The cost is to high for the word cheap to be used as often as I've seen it used. Other than that it seems to be all they say it is.
3rd Aug 2002, 09:30
The PT cruiser isn't exactly in the same class as the BMW so yeah, you're likely to notice the car doesn't measure up. I don't mind the look of the car though I don't think I would buy one because they are a little too on the feminine side. They are great for advertising businesses (ie. logo on side of car) as they are eye catching.
26th Sep 2002, 09:38
Why bother with the retro-rubbish?Get a REAL Chrysler Airflow or even a 1950 Ford Prefect...
26th Sep 2002, 16:29
I'm thinking of buying one on the grounds that its different! I don't expect it to be a BMW, but then there's a lot of suburban snobbery attached to them and their owners. I'm looking at the new diesel which has the Mercedes 2.2 engine and certainly provides much needed performance. Getting jealous beamer owners? I'm going to have fun because I'll stand out from the crowd and that's really what the PT is all about.
22nd Dec 2002, 17:16
I disagree with the original review. PT Cruisers are fabulous looking cars that are also taut and responsive to drive. It is just amazing that someone prefers a BMW 7-series to a car like this, I mean what is wrong with people? The 7 series is a plutocrats posing machine that like a Nissan Primera, does everything competently, but fun, style and character have been totally forgotten. Cruisers are just brilliant cars.
7th Oct 2003, 05:58
A BMW 7-series is better than a PT Cruiser, ha! When I see BMW 7-series (new model 2002- exception) I think, 1987 Toyota Carina. The 7-series has lacks style, the shape is utterly bland and forgettable (typically germanic).
How can you say the cruiser is a bad car, it's fantastic even if the build quality isn't upto the Japanese.
It looks brilliant, drives well and has panache, style and character. Chrysler say there is no room to fit a bigger engine under the bonnet, so why don't they make a 1.9i or 2.0iV6 turbo? Also, they should keep the original 2.0i unit and diesel as cheaper options. DTL.
16th Oct 2003, 14:48
I myself have just bought a PT Cruiser... and I LOVE it, having only had the car 3 weeks..... I have YET to meet anyone who does not like it.
Everybody you meet comment about the car, people come up to you and ask about it, just the colour alone attracts loads of interest... my limited is aquamarine.
BMW... you can keep them, they are the typical run of the mill 'like any other car on the road'.
What was Chrysler thinking of building the PT, by my thinking it was a fantastic move... they dared to be different and there is NO other car quite like them.
I happen to love 1950s American muscle cars, and the PT has all the accents which complements that very 'era.
BMW a pose... think again, the PT would win that hands down.
30th Jul 2004, 18:04
I own a 2003 Cruiser and I have enjoyed the feeling of being "back in time" as far as looks go. The only problem I've had is with the acceleration between 40 -55 mph: the car seems a little sluggish. Overall, I have loved everything else about it!
1st Aug 2004, 08:11
I think a negative personal taste review is not useful to a) write b) publish, I'm not keen on Van Gogh, but I would not slate him as a artist. I have just bought a 2.2 CRD because I personally think it looks great, yes it does look like a 1950's car that the point! It may not have the high quality of a BMW, but it also does not have the high price of a BMW. What you do get however is good well built car that has a unusual styling and lots of standard equipment at a competitive price.
6th Jul 2006, 16:58
Comparing a PT Cruiser to any BMW is absurd. They are completely different cars in completely different classes in completely different price ranges.
The biggest problem with BMWs is not their style (which I happen to like), but the nightmare of operating and servicing costs they offer - particularly the 7 series.
19th Aug 2006, 16:00
To who said there's no other car quite like the PT Cruiser, now there is: the Chevrolet HHR, which was designed by the same stylist Bryan Nesbitt, who worked for DaimlerChrysler before GM.
31st Aug 2006, 10:08
I guess the PT styling is either a love it or hate it proposition. I happen to think that they are Butt Ugly!!!
In fact, I call them the BU Cruiser.
They also have the turning radius of a school bus... (Well a very large car anyway)
31st Aug 2006, 14:26
Yes they DO have a horrendous turning circle... but like Marmite you either HATE IT or LOVE IT...
31st Aug 2006, 16:56
What is this comparison between 7 series bimmers and Chrysler PT cruisers? One costs 80k the other 13k. Apples and oranges? A more apt comparison is between a 3 series bimmer and the PT Cruiser. However, given the choice between ANY bimmer (or Honda for that matter) say no to the PT Cruiser. Their engineering and reliability is suspect.
19th Sep 2006, 05:44
I wouldn't carry a PT Cruiser in a BMW's trunk as a spare even if it were possible.
The PT Cruiser is a budget-rate automobile, built out of budget-rate parts. It is designed to be priced on the lower end of the price scale. It is unsophisticated, a little crude, and A LOT ugly! (All things that BMW's are not)
If that isn't enough, it is manufactured by Chrysler - need I say more?
Oh yeah, please don't say that it is a Mercedes. It is not!
24th Nov 2006, 01:16
It took me nearly 2 years to pay back the £1800 my Mazda cost me in 2003.
I think I could get to like a car that I won, regardless of what it looked like.
30th Nov 2007, 13:15
I can't believe you're comparing a PT cruiser to a BMW. Yes, I'd rather drive a beamer, but not all of us are in that price range.
Take it for what it is, an option for buyers to get a different-looking vehicle in a lower price range. And from what I've heard, they're decent as far as reliability goes.
18th Nov 2010, 15:22
If you were expecting BMW quality from a Chrysler, I'm sorry that you were disappointed. Both are top trim cars, so things like a good interior should be standard. But then again, PT's are more novelty than luxury.
PT's are somewhat different in terms of visuals, but with 50,000 of them on the road, they aren't exactly unique. If anyone wants a unique car, buy an AMC Pacer, sure they're very different than PTs, but they are unique.
28th Jul 2011, 10:03
Has anyone pointed out how ridiculous it sounds to compare a $15000 throwaway car like a PT Cruiser to a BMW that retails for 3x as much?
28th Jul 2011, 16:16
I agree; comparing a $15,000 car like a PT Cruiser to something that costs 3x as much is like apples and oranges.
But even comparing it to other cars around the same price, like the Honda Civic, Hyundai Elantra, Toyota Corolla, and Ford Focus, it doesn't quite measure up to those either. Chrysler just doesn't make very good cars these days; they used to, and I hope they can again.
29th Jul 2011, 19:05
Have you seen the new Chrysler line-up? It's very impressive. Chrysler is really pushing to get back in the race.
1st Aug 2011, 13:36
The cars in Chrysler's new line up do look good. But... will they be reliable? That is the question. I hope so. If these new cars in Chrysler's line up prove to be reliable, they could be real winners. Chrysler has a reputation of the worst reliability of the American car manufacturers to overcome. I hope they can.