Official Next Gen Chrysler 200 Thread
#151
interior looks way more upscale than the accord and camry that's for sure.
not too thrilled about the front end but it might grow on me like the cherokee did. I'm seeing a lot more of the cherokee on the road now. That front end with the LED's actually look pretty sharp and menacing. I'm hoping the 200 takes on the same route.
but nothing beats the 300 in terms of styling and pricing. what a bargain.
not too thrilled about the front end but it might grow on me like the cherokee did. I'm seeing a lot more of the cherokee on the road now. That front end with the LED's actually look pretty sharp and menacing. I'm hoping the 200 takes on the same route.
but nothing beats the 300 in terms of styling and pricing. what a bargain.
#152
If the old Chrysler 200 was discounted at the dollar store, the redesigned one feels like J Crew. Stylish and well-equipped, the 200 aims to appeal to the buyer who doesn't need all of the practicality of a Camry or Accord.
The new 200 is a collection of what Chrysler's been doing best lately.
The 2015 Chrysler 200C is powered by a 2.4 liter 4-cylinder engine named Tigershark. The power output is 184 horsepower and 173 lb-ft. of torque. A best 0-60 MPH time of 9.4 seconds was accomplished with the Drive Mode set to "Normal" and the Traction Control turned "On"
#153
Pole Position
The initial reviews of the Dart were positive. I question where these reviews came from because when I saw it person, it was typical Chrysler, which is to say, complete garbage. How can any consumer seriously consider such crap after a test drive?
I'm sorry, but in my opinion, the new 200 will be traveling down the same path as the outgoing model.
#154
Pole Position
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: AL
Posts: 327
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think we are missing the bigger picture here folks and that is why the OP brags in his sig about having a Corolla with a "Stage 1 Cold Air Intake" and below it has not only a B7 Alpina but a Rapide on order. LOL...sure, and I have a Veyron on order.
#155
Lead Lap
I wouldn't stretch it that far. Better, yes, but 10 times? The outgoing model was so poorly done, how could it not be better? In the end, though, it still will not come close to even pretending to compete with the Camry, Accord or Fusion. It will end up just like the last one, a poor excuse for a car in this class. Chrysler has been repeating itself over and over. Their cars are getting better, there's no question. That doesn't make them good.
The initial reviews of the Dart were positive. I question where these reviews came from because when I saw it person, it was typical Chrysler, which is to say, complete garbage. How can any consumer seriously consider such crap after a test drive?
I'm sorry, but in my opinion, the new 200 will be traveling down the same path as the outgoing model.
The initial reviews of the Dart were positive. I question where these reviews came from because when I saw it person, it was typical Chrysler, which is to say, complete garbage. How can any consumer seriously consider such crap after a test drive?
I'm sorry, but in my opinion, the new 200 will be traveling down the same path as the outgoing model.
The Dart 1.4L with the DDCT is crap, but the 2.4L is competitive. It's definitely at the bottom segment but no one is calling it crap. The 200 has no compromised drivetrains that will bring it down like the Dart.
Like I said before, there is no possible way the 200 will remain noncompetitive in the manner the previous model did. However, do I think its a segment leader? No.
#156
Pole Position
LOL. This comment couldn't be any more wrong. This won't even come close to competing with the Camry, Accord, or Fusion? How did you come to this conclusion? You are totally coming from a biased, dismissive perspective. The old 200 was nothing but a refresh of the wholly awful Sebring. It was too small and based on an inferior platform. None of those problems exist with the new 200.
The Dart 1.4L with the DDCT is crap, but the 2.4L is competitive. It's definitely at the bottom segment but no one is calling it crap. The 200 has no compromised drivetrains that will bring it down like the Dart.
Like I said before, there is no possible way the 200 will remain noncompetitive in the manner the previous model did. However, do I think its a segment leader? No.
The Dart 1.4L with the DDCT is crap, but the 2.4L is competitive. It's definitely at the bottom segment but no one is calling it crap. The 200 has no compromised drivetrains that will bring it down like the Dart.
Like I said before, there is no possible way the 200 will remain noncompetitive in the manner the previous model did. However, do I think its a segment leader? No.
Simple, Chrysler's history tells a long tale. They've never seriously competed in this segment. They've always been squashed like a bug by the others. Why would that change? There's no arguing that the new 200 will be better than the old one. Who knows, maybe it will "somewhat" compete with it's rivals but we're still left with the inexcusable poor quality and reliability that Chrysler has been known for. It has not changed and I don't see it changing going forward. As tolerable as it might be, we are still left with what we call best of the best and the worst of the worst. In my opinion, Chrysler still ranks among the worst of the worst.
#157
Lexus Fanatic
Originally Posted by jbayse99
My POS 300 will show 99% of cars on here its rear lights and sure gets attention at cars and coffee.
#158
Lexus Test Driver
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: NSW
Posts: 1,019
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I read a couple of reviews today and, while none were gushing, the consensus seems to be that the 200 is a sportier choice among sedans in this class, albeit with some sacrifices to interior room and comfort. And I was surprised to learn that top-level variants have genuine wood trim inside. Which other car in this class can boast that?
But I think the main issue will be drivetrain refinement and efficiency. And of coarse long term reliability..
But having said that the new 200 defiantly has some style to it;
Last edited by yowps3; 04-08-14 at 09:38 AM.
#159
I wouldn't stretch it that far. Better, yes, but 10 times? The outgoing model was so poorly done, how could it not be better? In the end, though, it still will not come close to even pretending to compete with the Camry, Accord or Fusion. It will end up just like the last one, a poor excuse for a car in this class. Chrysler has been repeating itself over and over. Their cars are getting better, there's no question. That doesn't make them good.
The initial reviews of the Dart were positive. I question where these reviews came from because when I saw it person, it was typical Chrysler, which is to say, complete garbage. How can any consumer seriously consider such crap after a test drive?
I'm sorry, but in my opinion, the new 200 will be traveling down the same path as the outgoing model.
The initial reviews of the Dart were positive. I question where these reviews came from because when I saw it person, it was typical Chrysler, which is to say, complete garbage. How can any consumer seriously consider such crap after a test drive?
I'm sorry, but in my opinion, the new 200 will be traveling down the same path as the outgoing model.
I would like 200 to be very competitive entry in the segment and to actually beat segment leaders.
Problem with that is that neither Fiat or Chrysler have ever had competitive entry in this segment, so I am not sure how is that going to happen.
#160
Lexus Fanatic
I have to admit....that one's a puzzler No one in his or her right mind would say the Dart is not a vast improvement over the Caliber, which, despite its build-quality cheapness, DID sell. The only possible contributing reason I can think of is that the American version of the Dart lacks a rear hatch for utility, which the Cavalier had standard. Despite the statements of both the auto press and the so-called "market research" of companies, hatchbacks/wagons are more popular in America than they get credit for.
#161
Lead Lap
I have to admit....that one's a puzzler No one in his or her right mind would say the Dart is not a vast improvement over the Caliber, which, despite its build-quality cheapness, DID sell. The only possible contributing reason I can think of is that the American version of the Dart lacks a rear hatch for utility, which the Cavalier had standard. Despite the statements of both the auto press and the so-called "market research" of companies, hatchbacks/wagons are more popular in America than they get credit for.
There's a ton of great entries and mediocrity on any level isn't tolerated. Hell, the Kia Forte, which is arguably one of the best compacts, is having a hard time getting traction as well. It's right at the bottom of the sales charts with the Dart and it doesn't even have the compromises the Dart has.
#162
Lexus Fanatic
Originally Posted by TangoRed
The Dart's problem isn't its body style- hatchbacks really do sell poorly here.
you only need to look at versions of cars that have had a hatch/wagon option- like the first-gen Mazda6.
The real problem here is that the Dart's base engine/tranny combo SUCKS, and that's the only combo that allows for near-class leading economy.
Asking for premium gas isn't helping either. The Avenger up until about this month has also been taking its cut out of Dart sales. It's also in the middle of a segment that his gotten MUCH more intensely competitive in recent years.
There's a ton of great entries and mediocrity on any level isn't tolerated.
#163
Lexus Fanatic
Blame the government for at least part of that. The upcoming CAFE standards are causing more and more automakers to substitute turbo-fours for quieter, more refined V6s. Fortunately, though, the new 200 does have the 3.6L V6 option....a good move, IMO, on Chrysler's part. One of the (admittedly) few complaints I have about my Verano (and its Buick Regal/Encore brothers) is that Buick omitted a small V6 for less-desirable fours and turbo-fours.
Last edited by mmarshall; 04-08-14 at 10:57 AM.
#164
Formerly Bad Co
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,041
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fair enough. I'd like to reiterate my very last sentence in my post, something along the lines of "in my opinion". I understand and respect differences of opinion. It remains my opinion, that no matter how much better (certainly not good) the new 200 is, it will fail to compete in it's segment. Again, my opinion.
Simple, Chrysler's history tells a long tale. They've never seriously competed in this segment. They've always been squashed like a bug by the others. Why would that change? There's no arguing that the new 200 will be better than the old one. Who knows, maybe it will "somewhat" compete with it's rivals but we're still left with the inexcusable poor quality and reliability that Chrysler has been known for. It has not changed and I don't see it changing going forward. As tolerable as it might be, we are still left with what we call best of the best and the worst of the worst. In my opinion, Chrysler still ranks among the worst of the worst.
Simple, Chrysler's history tells a long tale. They've never seriously competed in this segment. They've always been squashed like a bug by the others. Why would that change? There's no arguing that the new 200 will be better than the old one. Who knows, maybe it will "somewhat" compete with it's rivals but we're still left with the inexcusable poor quality and reliability that Chrysler has been known for. It has not changed and I don't see it changing going forward. As tolerable as it might be, we are still left with what we call best of the best and the worst of the worst. In my opinion, Chrysler still ranks among the worst of the worst.
#165
Pole Position
No, my opinions are based on facts. Is it a fallacy that in the past, Chrysler has built junk cars that never competed in their segment? With that, based on the fact that Chrysler has, in the past, built junk that can't compete, my opinion stands. The 200 will be a complete failure, just like the previous one. It will end up in rental fleets because that will be the only way they'll sell. Let's just call it my prediction, just as I had predicted with the Dart.