On Sun, 24 Mar 2013 11:14:32 -0700, Ashton Crusher >
wrote:

>>I was always suspect of Chrysler's build quality,
>
>I was too but bought a 2009 PT as it was the most car for the least
>money and satisfied all my criteria. It easily ranks (at 40K miles so
>far) as good or better built than any other new car I've had. I also
>had a 2005 Crown Vic, which I liked a lot, but truthfully the PT
>actually is more comfortable and less tiring on a long trip. Only
>real deficiency is lack of power.

I traded in my 2002 PT when I bought the 2012 200 and I can't begin to
tell you HOW MUCH I MISS that great little car! It only had 46K when I
traded it in. You're correct: Nice and comfy, even on long trips.

My only major complaint with the PT is the same as yours: Even with
the 3.0L 4-banger it was still very underpowered, and the 5-speed
stick did not help (still damn fun to drive though).

James Raui