Chrysler Car Enthusiast Magazine

[TD]

Anybody out there getting the Chrysler Car Enthusiast engines etc Magazine? Do you like it and are you being treated fair? I had some bad experiences with them a couple of years ago, but it seems like they may be getting better. I received a subscription flyer from them today and I'm wondering if they're worth the risk. Do they have good articles or just mediocre? Thanks for whatever opinions you can give.

[Gary]

They used to have great articles, but since I moved to Texas, I can't find it on the news stands. I'd subscribe again if I ever find another issue.

[Tim_K]

TD:
I've been reading all 6 (now 5) Mopar magazines for 7 years now, and Performance for the Chrysler Car Enthusiast has been one of them.
Rather than go on about just one, I'll list my opinions of all 6.

#1. Mopar Action.
If you can only get one magazine, get this one. Their writers, especially Rick Ehrenberg, do the best tech articles, and they make sure their information is right before they print it. If a mistake is made, they admit it and add the right answer. Occasionally, I've found ways to improve on what they had done, but overall, they are the Mopar people to listen to.

#2. Mopar Collectors Guide.
Since they don't do tech articles, they can't be fairly compared against the rest. But they do have good environmentalist updates, and a good classified section to buy and sell cars and parts, which is the main idea of the magazine. They also do features on show cars.

#3. Mopar Muscle.
Another magazine which does features on show cars and tech articles too, but I've found errors more often in what they print in tech articles. For the most part good, but I'd check around for second opinions before putting a tech article to work on one of my Mopars.

#4. High Performance Mopar.
I'm sure they mean well, but they don't always do their research. I've found errors in their tech articles too, and although it was nothing catastrophic, I wouldn't use it as the one and only way to do things.

#5. Performance for the Chrysler Car Enthusiast.
I get it just so I can say I get all the Mopar magazines. Nothing I've ever read there proved to be ground-breaking information, or in some cases, totally accurate. Now and then they print something I didn't know before, but not often.

#6. Chrysler Power.
It's no longer on the newsstands around here, and I don't really miss it. Like #5, I got it each time in hope of finding some new Mopar information, which didn't often happen. Errors abound in their tech articles in many cases. Also, they went religious and changed the name to Chryslers and Christians or something like that, it was right about that time the local places quit getting it. Now, I believe in God as much as anyone, if not more, but I pick up a Mopar magazine to read about cars, not Racers for Christ or whatever they're babbling about. I'm pretty sure there wasn't much talk about 8500 rpm drag racing nitro hemis in the Bible. I saw their stand at the Mopar Nationals this year. Looked through a copy of the current issue they had out, and left it there.

Let me say that I'm not trying to make any magazine sound totally incompetent or anything, just that some of them are better than others. There are very clear differences in quality and reliability of the information, and some of them can't even spell or use proper sentence structure! They must have cut their english classes in school. After 7 years of reading them I have seen great stuff, and things they must have just guessed at, because their own article contradicted them! Sorry it took so long to reply, just now saw this message listed.



[This message has been edited by Tim_K (edited December 16, 1999).]

[caveman]

I pretty much agree with what you have said .Mopar action is the best ,and Chryslers and god don't mix.

[River]

i was a faithful reader of E-bergs Articles when he and his 6-pak 'runner were at HPM. i think HPM went a little downhill when he left. i dont get mopar action yet, but im starting to lose interest in HPM now, so a switch may not be too far off.