Learn Me 300M

I heard mention of these cars as great sleepers. I have also seen some RC cars with 300M bodies. Are they any good? Are there any aftermarket parts available? Were they ever raced? This is just a bit of automotive ADD.

They are a Dodge Intrepid with a different body. Originally designed as the new-gen Eagle Vision, Chrysler didn't want to waste the development money when they killed the Eagle brand - so the car was re-branded, luxury stuff was added, and we have the 300M.

Whoever told you they are a great sleeper must be smoking something weird. Considering the LH-cars' propensity to blow up spectacularly in stock form, I wouldn't try to do anything else to hop it up.

I have heard that they are the best handling of the LH-cars, but that's about all. I do not believe they were ever raced - the only car from that period I remember being campaigned was the Dodge Stratus.

EDIT: The 3.5L motor is also used in the current base Chrysler 300 as well as the Dodge Charger. You might be able to find something for the engine, as finicky as they are.

I had a rental once. At 90 mph in a rain slicked mall parking lot... it refused to turn. It was about as much fun as... well... er... as the opposite of a thing that is really fun.

The Neon with the E-brake locked on, however, was a total hoot.

I have a 2000 Intrepid R/T, LH chassis cousin to the 300M. My R/T has inherited some of the 300M's better pieces along the way too. The 300's seats, and 300M Special suspension.

Not much aftermarket support. OK, I should rephrase that. No real aftermarket support. The 3.5L is a very nice motor. Plenty of torque for a comfortable commuter/cruiser. I knock down 21-22MPG around town and on open highway it will do 27-28 MPG cruising at 65-70 MPH for hours on end. It's done 16.1 in the quarter with bad traction, and will do 121 MPH at Maxton still pulling through the traps. Was good enough to land me a 0-60 ticket within 100' in a 45 MPH zone at lunch today.

The last year or two years of the 300M had the Special as an upgraded package. Free(er) flowing exhaust, reprogrammed engine controller, more gear for the final drive. Chassis wise it got 18" wheels, lower suspension, firmer struts, thicker sway bars. Really is the best the factory had to offer in the chassis.

Both the R/T and the Special don't have a MPH limiter.

The extra final drive ratio was achieved by swapping in the transfer gears from a 2.7. I have a set for mine, but I've been satisfied with the current acceleration (as was the nice officer handing out the non-voluntary donation slips today).

At one time Kenny Bell supposedly had a retune for the engine, but they stopped that back when the car was still in production.

As long as the transmission had regular fluid changes with the proper fluid it will be fine. The 1st gen LH's had a transmission reputation, but there were several upgrades to them in the 2nd gen.

I have Mustang Bullitts on mine with 255/50 Kumho ESCTA all seasons. It turns awesome in the rain. Even with the 255 footprint it will break the drive wheel loose on dry ground. I'm running Hawk street pads on it with ATE rotors. Stock pads weren't so hot for street driving. Went with the fancier rotors since they weren't much more than the stock ones that the time. Stops great now.

My dash has a hairline crack at the passenger air bag seam too. But for a 10+ year old car with a dark interior that's been parked outside it's whole life that's OK in my book.

Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: The Neon with the E-brake locked on, however, was a total hoot.

I had a rental once. At 90 mph in a rain slicked mall parking lot... it refused to turn. It was about as much fun as... well... er... as the opposite of a thing that is really fun.

Edited to clarify what happened to the 300 before you rented it.

The mention of rc car bodies makes me think the OP may have meant 300C........

I'm wrong a lot though.

Whoever told you they are a great sleeper must be smoking something weird. Considering the LH-cars' propensity to blow up spectacularly in stock form, I wouldn't try to do anything else to hop it up.

The funny thing is that the fact that you think that means those people are right. The 2.7 cars are pretty much extinct, but noone said those were sleepers anyway. The 3.5 is a very solid motor.

The horrible build quality? How the car can't get over 100MPH on flat land? that it won't handle? how the brakes are quite bad? or how it will fall apart? That seems to be the general opinion around here of them.

Funny, isnt it? Considering GRM'rs have a propensity for loving the hell out of things that need constant work to stay running and then turn around and recommend some REALLY boring stuff when people ask about cars they NEED to stay running, you kinda wonder why they skip the 3.5 LH cars so much.. They are pretty entertaining and reliable compared to many similar cars you can buy, and they're very cheap for what you get.

At 90 mph in a rain slicked mall parking lot... it refused to turn. It was about as much fun as... well... er... as the opposite of a thing that is really fun.

Are you surprised that cars understeer in the rain at 90mph? It is safer than the alternative.. The real question is whether you learned from it or not. Im withholding my guess.

Anyway.. I had a 97 intrepid which was a 1G lh car, but had the same basic motor and transmission, albeit older versions. I did a few things to mine.. eliminate the speed limiter, autostick conversion, 2.7 gears, 3300 stall converter, true dual exhaust, cowl induction CAI, dual 52mm throttle body upgrade (i think i am the only one EVER to do that..) and wheels/tires. Mine had wiring issues but when it ran right it ran extremely well... it would spin the tires (245/45r16) from any roll in 1st gear (it is sometimes fun to drive by in a big fwd family car and light the tires up at 30mph) and i had some good runs with (2-valve) 4.6 mustangs. I got it up to 130 mph (there was no speed limiter but it was effectively limited by a forced 4th gear upshift 1000 rpm early). It accelerated pretty hard part throttle because of the converter. It handled SURPRISINGLY well.. most new car reviews of these cars will mention that. The ones with ABS had very good stopping distances as well, like 60-0 115 ft on OEM tires. Mine sounded really aggressive with the cowl intake and flowmaster 40s at 6500 rpm. The 2nd gear passing on the highway was really nice (60-80mph).

2nd gen cars get some nice advantages over the 1g. The motor was rated 35hp higher and revved a bit higher and 300ms come with autostick to begin with...

Overall if you need a car that is decently quick but has a LOT of room and rides nice and can be had cheap, i would definitely recommend a 3.5 LH car.

Oh and the biggest thing: THE AC IS INCREDIBLY OVERPOWERED. That thing will MURDER ALL HEAT BRUTALLY!!!!!

failboat wrote: The mention of rc car bodies makes me think the OP may have meant 300C........ I'm wrong a lot though.

Nope I meant the 300M. See.

In reply to Vigo:

How did you set up the dual 52mm throttle body upgrade?

Are you surprised that cars understeer in the rain at 90mph? It is safer than the alternative.. The real question is whether you learned from it or not. Im withholding my guess.

I'm sorry if I called your baby ugly. All piggy full size american sedans need a lot of help to rotate. It was a a little bit of a surprise that it is worse by a whole order of magnitude than a P71, the suspension of which was engineered shortly after early man discovered fire. As a guy who teaches skidpad AND sleeps at Holiday Inns on occasion - I'm pretty qualified to make fun of it.

Funny, isnt it? Considering GRM'rs have a propensity for loving the hell out of things that need constant work to stay running and then turn around and recommend some REALLY boring stuff when people ask about cars they NEED to stay running, you kinda wonder why they skip the 3.5 LH cars so much.. They are pretty entertaining and reliable compared to many similar cars you can buy, and they're very cheap for what you get.

One of the mad scientist ideas bouncing around in my head is an Omni a 3.5 where the back seats should be. The trans would let the engine be installed in a longitudinal direction, keeping weight centered and looking awesome. I probably shouldn't put any Ferrari stickers on the engine even though it could be seen through the rear glass.

How did you set up the dual 52mm throttle body upgrade?

I actually just used 52mm throttle bodies like what comes on the 3.3. On one side i had to cut off the idle air motor part of the throttle body (stock 3.5 throttle bodies dont have the idle air motors, it is directly on the manifold in that app), and fill the passages with epoxy. Then i had to swap in the throttle shafts from the original (46 or 48mm?) throttle bodies to retain the factory linkage between the two throttle bodies. Because the throttle blades were bigger i had to mod the shafts slightly to fit them.

I'm sorry if I called your baby ugly. All piggy full size american sedans need a lot of help to rotate.

Its not my baby, i just owned one intrepid out of the ~45 cars ive owned and however many others ive driven. Compared to most american family cars of ANY size from that era (including all non-cop rwd barges), that platform was dynamically very good imo. I had no trouble getting my base-suspension intrepid to rotate. Granted, i have a little too much firsthand knowledge of murphy's laws to have tried it at 90 mph in the rain in a parking lot. In general i try to only be out of control for maybe 100 ft at a time..