2000 300m headlight replace-HELP

Okay, just when I thought it was safe to jump back into the Chrysler
waters, we bought a low mileage '00 300M for my wife. We both love the
way this car drives and performs. Two weeks into ownership, however, I
realize what a freakin' nightmare it going to be to repair this car.
The drivers side high beam headlight is IMPOSSIBLE to access-I'm
considering cutting the radiator core support, unless someone out there
has a better idea. I can touch the pigtail, but I can't get the plastic
mounting ring seated onto the headlamp assy.
I wonder if the Chrysler engineers that designed this car had passed
the 7th gradel?

What does it say in the manual? The 300M is a great car. We gave our 1999
to my in-laws and my wife replaced it with a honda Accord Hybrid. I bet if
she had it to do over again she would have kept the 300M and bought them the
new accord.


"Fred" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Okay, just when I thought it was safe to jump back into the Chrysler
> waters, we bought a low mileage '00 300M for my wife. We both love the
> way this car drives and performs. Two weeks into ownership, however, I
> realize what a freakin' nightmare it going to be to repair this car.
> The drivers side high beam headlight is IMPOSSIBLE to access-I'm
> considering cutting the radiator core support, unless someone out there
> has a better idea. I can touch the pigtail, but I can't get the plastic
> mounting ring seated onto the headlamp assy.
> I wonder if the Chrysler engineers that designed this car had passed
> the 7th gradel?
>

Ditto. We loved our '02 300M but I realize that an engineer's dream is also
a mechanic's nightmare.

Ken

--
"Now Phoebe Snow direct can go
from thirty-third to Buffalo.
From Broadway bright the tubes run right
Into the Road of Anthracite"
Erie - Lackawanna



"Art" > wrote in message
link.net...
> What does it say in the manual? The 300M is a great car. We gave our
> 1999 to my in-laws and my wife replaced it with a honda Accord Hybrid. I
> bet if she had it to do over again she would have kept the 300M and bought
> them the new accord.
>
>
> "Fred" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> Okay, just when I thought it was safe to jump back into the Chrysler
>> waters, we bought a low mileage '00 300M for my wife. We both love the
>> way this car drives and performs. Two weeks into ownership, however, I
>> realize what a freakin' nightmare it going to be to repair this car.
>> The drivers side high beam headlight is IMPOSSIBLE to access-I'm
>> considering cutting the radiator core support, unless someone out there
>> has a better idea. I can touch the pigtail, but I can't get the plastic
>> mounting ring seated onto the headlamp assy.
>> I wonder if the Chrysler engineers that designed this car had passed
>> the 7th gradel?
>>
>
>

Fred wrote:

> Okay, just when I thought it was safe to jump back into the Chrysler
> waters, we bought a low mileage '00 300M for my wife. We both love the
> way this car drives and performs. Two weeks into ownership, however, I
> realize what a freakin' nightmare it going to be to repair this car.
> The drivers side high beam headlight is IMPOSSIBLE to access-I'm
> considering cutting the radiator core support, unless someone out there
> has a better idea. I can touch the pigtail, but I can't get the plastic
> mounting ring seated onto the headlamp assy.
> I wonder if the Chrysler engineers that designed this car had passed
> the 7th gradel?

You're right - headlights are a PITA on the LH cars - it is jokingly
referred to as a headlight anti-theft feature. Do a search on the 300M
Club forums
(http://300mclub.org/forums/index.php...7dc347d2afee34)
for info. on how to do it. The facia (bumper) has to be partially removed.

Also, you do realize that Chrysler made a bonehead decision to use
special/unique-to-LH cars straight-based bulbs on the headlights - i.e.,
you can't plug in the otherwise-identical standard angle-based bulbs?
This cuts down on alternative bulbs without making PITA modifications
either to the bulbs or the headlight assembly.

Otherwise these are great cars. Oh - and the a.c. evaporators fail and
you have to pull the entire dash out to get to it. Oh - and the battery
is a minor PITA to get to. Same engineers I guess.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

In article >,
Bill Putney > wrote:
> You're right - headlights are a PITA on the LH cars - it is jokingly
> referred to as a headlight anti-theft feature. Do a search on the 300M
> Club forums
Not on my '95 LH; the headlights are very accessible.

> Otherwise these are great cars. Oh - and the a.c. evaporators fail and
> you have to pull the entire dash out to get to it.
True, but least Chrysler extended the evaporator warranty to 7 yrs.
After 3 replacements on Chryslers pocketbook mines been OK for several
years and somehow they didn't scratch my dash. The mechanics obviously
became very experienced at this job.
If it fails again I'll just do without the A/C.

>Oh - and the battery
> is a minor PITA to get to. Same engineers I guess.
Not my '95 LH re battery hidden, it's the Sebring and must be the later
LH cars (98+) for that you are referring to.
My wife's Sebring battery is nearing life end. I'll probably have to
remove the front wheel to change it, else I'll wreck my back.

The first LH cars, 93 to 98 I believe, are very easy to maintain.

Some O wrote:
> In article >,
> Bill Putney > wrote:
>
>>You're right - headlights are a PITA on the LH cars - it is jokingly
>>referred to as a headlight anti-theft feature. Do a search on the 300M
>>Club forums
>
> Not on my '95 LH; the headlights are very accessible.

Yep - I should have said 2nd gen. LH - I was thinking in context of the
OP's 300M ('99 and later only).

>>Otherwise these are great cars. Oh - and the a.c. evaporators fail and
>>you have to pull the entire dash out to get to it.
>
> True, but least Chrysler extended the evaporator warranty to 7 yrs.
> After 3 replacements on Chryslers pocketbook mines been OK for several
> years and somehow they didn't scratch my dash. The mechanics obviously
> became very experienced at this job.
> If it fails again I'll just do without the A/C.
>
>
>>Oh - and the battery
>>is a minor PITA to get to. Same engineers I guess.
>
> Not my '95 LH re battery hidden, it's the Sebring and must be the later
> LH cars (98+) for that you are referring to.
> My wife's Sebring battery is nearing life end. I'll probably have to
> remove the front wheel to change it, else I'll wreck my back.
>
> The first LH cars, 93 to 98 I believe, are very easy to maintain.

To '98 - but not including. 2nd gen. started with '98.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

Bill Putney wrote:

> Fred wrote:
>
>> Okay, just when I thought it was safe to jump back into the Chrysler
>> waters, we bought a low mileage '00 300M for my wife. We both love the
>> way this car drives and performs. Two weeks into ownership, however, I
>> realize what a freakin' nightmare it going to be to repair this car.
>> The drivers side high beam headlight is IMPOSSIBLE to access-I'm
>> considering cutting the radiator core support, unless someone out there
>> has a better idea. I can touch the pigtail, but I can't get the plastic
>> mounting ring seated onto the headlamp assy.
>> I wonder if the Chrysler engineers that designed this car had passed
>> the 7th gradel?

You're being ridiculously harsh. Yes, SOME things are a pain to get at
on the LH series cars, and the headlamps are in that category... but
having owned one for 13 years and 240,000 miles I find that *most*
things are very well-thought-out for service PROVIDED that you follow
the procedures outlined in the service manual. For example, on initial
inspection I assumed that servicing the radiator, radiator fans, belts,
and timing belt (3.5L engine) would be a PITA because of the cramped
space... BUT the engineers thoughtfully made the hood latch cross-brace
removable with just 4 bolts, and that opens up the whole front area for
easy access. Similarly the steering rack is buried WAY back under the
cowl... BUT the whole cowl tray (carrying the wiper motor and wiper
linkages) comes out with a few bolts giving you wide-open access to the
area between the firewall and the back of the engine. There are
countless other examples, and if you compare servicing an LH-series to
servicing an Asian nightmare like a Honda, you can see a WORLD of
difference!

On Jan 24, 9:51 am, Steve > wrote:
> Bill Putney wrote:
> > Fred wrote:
>
> >> Okay, just when I thought it was safe to jump back into the Chrysler
> >> waters, we bought a low mileage '00 300M for my wife. We both love the
> >> way this car drives and performs. Two weeks into ownership, however, I
> >> realize what a freakin' nightmare it going to be to repair this car.
> >> The drivers side high beam headlight is IMPOSSIBLE to access-I'm
> >> considering cutting the radiator core support, unless someone out there
> >> has a better idea. I can touch the pigtail, but I can't get the plastic
> >> mounting ring seated onto the headlamp assy.
> >> I wonder if the Chrysler engineers that designed this car had passed
> >> the 7th gradel?You're being ridiculously harsh. Yes, SOME things are a pain to get at
> on the LH series cars, and the headlamps are in that category... but
> having owned one for 13 years and 240,000 miles I find that *most*
> things are very well-thought-out for service PROVIDED that you follow
> the procedures outlined in the service manual. For example, on initial
> inspection I assumed that servicing the radiator, radiator fans, belts,
> and timing belt (3.5L engine) would be a PITA because of the cramped
> space... BUT the engineers thoughtfully made the hood latch cross-brace
> removable with just 4 bolts, and that opens up the whole front area for
> easy access. Similarly the steering rack is buried WAY back under the
> cowl... BUT the whole cowl tray (carrying the wiper motor and wiper
> linkages) comes out with a few bolts giving you wide-open access to the
> area between the firewall and the back of the engine. There are
> countless other examples, and if you compare servicing an LH-series to
> servicing an Asian nightmare like a Honda, you can see a WORLD of
> difference!


Ridiculously harsh? When you have to disassemble the front end of a
vehicle to put in a head light, I think I acurately described the
engineers who designed this vehicle. By the way, the core support is
attached to the front bumper, so removing the 4 bolts will do you
little good when servicing belts, etc.

In article .com>,
"Fred" > wrote:

> Ridiculously harsh? When you have to disassemble the front end of a
> vehicle to put in a head light, I think I acurately described the
> engineers who designed this vehicle. By the way, the core support is
> attached to the front bumper, so removing the 4 bolts will do you
> little good when servicing belts, etc.
Not fair to blame the engineers.
It's the stylists who made the front sloped so much that there isn't
room for a battery or other servicing.
The engineers simply tried to accommodate the style. IMO style should
follow function. Perhaps Toyota wouldn't be growing so fast if the big
2.5 built cars in this way.

Parking this car as well as the '01+ Sebring is a problem because it's
very difficult to judge where the front bumper is.
The old VW Beetle had a similar parking problem.
I've owned both the above.

who wrote:

> In article .com>,
> "Fred" > wrote:
>
>
>>Ridiculously harsh? When you have to disassemble the front end of a
>>vehicle to put in a head light, I think I acurately described the
>>engineers who designed this vehicle. By the way, the core support is
>>attached to the front bumper, so removing the 4 bolts will do you
>>little good when servicing belts, etc.
>
> Not fair to blame the engineers.
> It's the stylists who made the front sloped so much that there isn't
> room for a battery or other servicing.
> The engineers simply tried to accommodate the style. IMO style should
> follow function.

I doubt the stylists had anything whatsoever to do with the special
straight-based headlight bulbs being used. That one decision makes no
sense at all - and I've never heard any rationale at all for it. It
couldn't have been for cost when the alternative otherwise same bulb
technically is a standard of the industry used by the millions.

> Parking this car...is a problem because it's
> very difficult to judge where the front bumper is.

I think judging the rear distance is even worse, at least in my Concordes.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')