13 Controversial Chrysler Cars

Chrysler, now a Stellantis subsidiary since 2021, is one of The Big Three American automakers, with the rest of the gang including General Motors and Ford. It’s quite fascinating to ponder on how far Chrysler has come and how much it has influenced the American and global automotive sectors since Walter Chrysler founded the company with the reorganization of the Maxwell Motor Company (est. 1904) into the Chrysler Corporation in 1925.

Today, the American marque helps make Stellantis the world’s fourth-biggest automaker by production volume and third-biggest by revenue, alongside globally renowned brands like Alfa Romeo, Dodge, Maserati, Jeep, Lancia, and RAM.

Chrysler is behind many iconic vehicles that helped shape the industry, some of which sparked debates, divided opinions, and stirred controversy among car enthusiasts, critics, and regular drivers. These 13 are the brand’s most controversial cars in history.

Chrysler Airflow (1934-1937)

It was the early 1930s and the Airflow showed up with a radical, aerodynamic design that deviated from the boxy shapes people were familiar with. It didn’t help that the car was born during the Great Depression, hardly a time for people to ‘take risks’ with their money.

It was a bold, revolutionary move on Chrysler’s part, but the car’s unconventional design mired it in controversy and ultimately led to its commercial failure.

As its name suggest, Chrysler designed the “Airflow” with aerodynamics in mind, effectively cutting air resistance and improving performance and fuel economy. Today, we see the Airflow as a beautiful classic car, but drivers in that era found it unattractive. The car was too ahead of its time for its own good.

Chrysler Turbine Car (1963-1964)

The revolutionary Turbine Car was one of the most controversial cars in history. Its turbine engine represented a technological marvel, but Chrysler never got to mass-produce the car and most of the few produced were later destroyed. Naturally, the 1960s Chrysler Turbine Car became the perfect subject of fascination and controversy.

There were no shortages of what to talk about. Its turbine engine meant fewer moving parts, lower maintenance needs, and the capacity to run on various fuels, including diesel, kerosene, and even vegetable oil.

It also had disadvantages — more debate materials, such as the engine’s slower throttle response, high-pitched noise, and poor fuel economy. Chrysler built 55 of the Turbine Cars, 50 of which it sent to select members of the public for ‘beta testing.’  The project ultimately proved unviable.

Chrysler Imperial (1955-1983)

The Chrysler Imperial was the architect of its own controversy, thanks to its volatile design changes and undefined market positioning. It was supposed to compete with the Lincolns and Cadillacs, but its controversial redesigns and lack of a proper identity robbed it of its luxury credentials.

It initially launched as a standalone brand like Cadillac and Lincoln but later rebranded as the “Chrysler Imperial,” and other times simply as “Imperial.” These frequent “rebranding” came with radical design changes throughout its production run — some praised and others rubbished.

Chrysler TC by Maserati (1989-1991)

The TC was the fruit of a ‘failed’ marriage between Chrysler and Maserati. The car was ultimately deemed overpriced and not worth the money due to its underwhelming performance. The goal of this marriage was to create a high-end, stylish roadster beautifully blending American engineering with Italian design.

Unfortunately, people couldn’t help noticing the uncanny resemblance between the TC and Chrysler LeBaron, a bottom-rung, much less expensive midsize car. In fact, the TC shared a lot with the ‘common’ LeBaron, including design and mechanical components. Naturally, people felt the TC did not deserve its $33,000 (equivalent to about $84,000 today) starting price.

Chrysler PT Cruiser (2001-2010)

While some people loved the PT Cruiser’s retro styling and perceived practicality, many more were not impressed by its lackluster performance and polarizing design. We said “perceived practicality” because the car’s tall stance and rounded lines gave it a roomy, compact SUV vibe.

In reality, the PT Cruiser rode on a modified version of the Chrysler Neon platform, which meant it wasn’t as roomy as it looked. Many felt straight-up misled by the car’s ambiguous exterior profile. It initially came with a 150-hp 2.4-liter inline-4 engine too underpowered for its size and weight.

Chrysler Crossfire (2004-2008)

The Crossfire is one of the most controversial cars Chrysler ever made. It has as many voices arguing for and against its distinctive styling, performance, reliability, and – above all — its Mercedes-Benz underpinning.

Critics point out that the Crossfire rode on a dated SLK platform that the German automaker already moved on from, while others argue that the Mercedes-Benz R170 architecture gave the Crossfire a solid foundation for Mercedes-Benz engineering, regardless.

It is probably at this point that critics counter with the “parts-bin” shot (approximately 80% of the Crossfire is borrowed from the SLK), suggesting that the AmeriGerman 2-door coupe lacked originality and true Chrysler DNA. The controversy could rage all day without a clear winner.

Chrysler Sebring (1995-2010)

Everyone was aware of the Sebring’s uninspired design, but what made it worse is its equally uninspiring performance and poor build quality. It ultimately made the car emblematic of Chrysler’s financial struggles in the late 2000s. We waited patiently for the Sebring to eventually discover its potentials but that day never came.

It was never special in that it didn’t have any particularly innovative features to boast of throughout its 5-year production run.

While its mates showed off advanced vehicular technologies and features, the Sebrings could not speak of basic modern amenities such as driver assistance features, and fuel-efficient powertrains, or advanced infotainment systems. If people think Chrysler is an unreliable brand, the Sebring was a big part of the problem.

Chrysler Aspen (2007-2009)

The Aspen was, first and foremost, a victim of poor timing. It was born as a full-size SUV right around the time the market gravitated towards more fuel-efficient segments. It was basically a rebadged Dodge Durango and endured its fair share of criticism due to its poor fuel economy amid rising gas prices and growing environmental concerns.

Based on the Durango and with very few distinguishing features, pundits questioned the wisdom in releasing a similar vehicle in a market already fed up with gas guzzling large cars. It didn’t help that the Aspen entered the market barely a year before the 2008 financial crisis.

Chrysler 200 (2011-2017)

Following the economic downturn of the late 2000s, Chrysler devised the 200 sedan as a midsize model to help revitalize the lineup. Unfortunately, the Chrysler 200 was not sufficiently equipped for this mission and quickly stirred controversies with its cramped interior, underwhelming performance, and reliability issues.

It was immediately clear that the 200 was Chrysler’s second shot at the failed Sebring. Instead of evolving, the 200 felt more like a refreshed Sebring, effectively putting people on the lookout for the reliability issues plaguing its predecessor. Users bemoaned the quality of the interior materials, relatively lackluster performance, and overall uninspiring road manners.

Chrysler Concorde (1993-2004)

As a member of Chrysler’s LH family, the Concorde was somewhat of a sore loser in the sense that it didn’t age well. This was the same platform underpinning the Sebring and served as the basics for many other Chrysler models, including the 300M, New Yorker, Eagle Vision, and Dodge Intrepid.

All of these cars have one thing in common; their “cab-forward” configuration that maximized interior space and improved handling. Likewise, the Concorde featured a cab-forward design but drew the ire of users and enthusiasts disappointed by its build quality and reliability issues. Meanwhile, the car’s long hood, short deck, and swept-back windshield drew as much praise as criticism.

Chrysler LeBaron (Various Years)

You wouldn’t change clothes as frequently as the LeBaron without becoming revving a good deal of controversy along the way. With roots trailing as far back as 1931 and produced until 1995, the LeBaron is one of the longest-running Chrysler nameplates.

Living this long and going through numerous changes over the years increased its odds of inadvertently turning up some well-received models alongside others knocked and criticized for one serious handicap or the other.

The LeBaron came in various body styles, including sedans, coupes, convertibles, and wagons. On the whole, it didn’t do a good job upholding Chrysler’s reputation for quality and innovation.

Chrysler Prowler (1997, 1999-2002)

The Prowler was destined to get as much love as hate. The idea of a modern hot rod sounds appealing to every ear, but Chrysler seemed to have overdone it with the Prowler’s extreme retro styling, effectively robbing it of every drop of practicality.

It was strictly a 2-seater, with virtually no trunk space or a proper convertible top. In other words, the Prowler was strictly a niche vehicle meant for enthusiasts charmed by the classic 1930s hot rods.

But then, the Prowler was underpowered for this purpose. Instead of the expected V8 mill, it used a V6 engine that didn’t match its aggressive styling. Plus, its front wheel design and overall setup impaired its handling characteristics. To clear any confusion, this is the same as the Plymouth Prowler, that is, until Plymouth shuttered its doors in 2001.

Chrysler K-Car (1981-1989)

The K-Car lineup helped save Chrysler from going belly up in the 1980s, despite strutting a rather plain design to match their underwhelming performance. The K-Car platform underpinned several compact and midsize Chrysler models, including the LeBaron, Dodge Aries, Dodge 400, and Plymouth Reliant.

These cars were remarkably boxy and looked outdated compared to more modern, aerodynamic cars of the time. Some pundits surmised that Chrysler developed the platform using cost-cutting measures at the expense of innovation and quality. They were often accused of reliability issues, from the engines and transmissions to the electrical systems.