Find Reviews by Make:
The folks at Allpar have discovered an undisguised Chrysler 200 driving around sans camo. Looking like a cross between a Dart and a Chevrolet Impala, the 200 will use the same CUSW architecture as the Dart and Jeep Cherokee, along with the 2.4L 4-cylinder and Pentastar V6 engines.
114 Comments on “2015 Chrysler 200 Revealed...”
Read all comments
Not bad, reminds me of Kia/VW.
Though when I first read the title I read 300 and was a little shocked at first, at least til I reread.
I have a feeling this isn’t going to be similarly priced to the current gen. XXX, actually on second look it is kinda big.
I really like te rear end, not fat and overbearing like every other car today, think maxima, vette, focus, everything…
If it wants to compete, it will be priced exactly the same. With KIA and the rest of them in the same market, it is going to be a tough sell for GM and their mid-sized offerings. This looks very competitive with the Fusion and the rest. I am not a MOPAR guy, always have been GM, but this is looks like a car I would buy.
Nice, but generic…
Then again, that’s what the market seems to want these days.
I’ll happily take generic rather than awful the next time I get downgraded at the rental counter.
Wow – how do you get downgraded? I keep reserving compacts and keep getting “upgraded” to a white Impala. Last time, I reserved a B car (Versa) and they ran out of B and C cars and upgraded me to another white Impala. Should I ask for a white Impala so I can get downgraded?
With nearly a dozen different brands peddling new midsize sheetmetal every 5 or 6 years, I don’t even know how to define “generic” or “distinctive” anymore. Is there anything that hasn’t yet been done or seen many times already?
+1.
All midsize sedans look the same now. I was thinking “Altima” when I saw these photos.
Still, what a huge improvement over the current car, and it sounds like you can still get it with the Pentastar hot rod motor. I dig it just based on principle.
I wonder what shape will replace the Mercedes CLS/BMW6 silhouette?
Hopefully something with actual headroom in the back seat.
@krhodes1: That’s so crazy, it just might work! A tall greenhouse (and more vertical rear window) is the last retro feature that hasn’t made a comeback yet.
Looks halfway between the current Maxima and the 2nd generation Dodge Intrepid. (I really liked the looks of the Intrepid.)
Exactly.
I like to think I see the evolution of the 300M in there somehow too.
Yep. I see the 300M as well. That car has built up a cult following since it was discontinued.
I’m liking the 300M influences!! I’ve always liked those cars but the 4 speed autotragic transmissions always scare me away, especially behind the 250HP 3.5L.
I see that too. in the front light, grill chrome and foglight.
It’s a very large headlight for this squinty age.
Looks a lot like a smaller version of the Chrysler Concord. And a lil dash of Ford Focus.
Chrysler Cirrus / Dodge Stratus / Plymouth Breeze, too. I had a 95 Stratus ES and loved the shape.
http://trialx.com/curetalk/wp-content/blogs.dir/7/files/2011/06/cars/1995_Chrysler_Cirrus-2.jpg
Hard to believe 20 years will have passed since the 95 Cirrus/Stratus/Breeze triplets, and now a similar shape returns.
Three differences: the rear window is more raked (making the trunk opening smaller), the fuel door is on the passenger side (lockable, I hope), and the wheels are much bigger (with expensive-to-replace rubber band tires). I guess you could call those “modern touches”.
Exactly, it looks old already. It has the same face as a 2006 Town&Country.
I LOVE IT. “Generic” is OK if the price is right.
Through out the years, there has always been a “generic” styling paradigm that car makers strive to adhere to. Fins in the late 50’s. “coke bottle” sides in the 60’s, rolling Gothic castle with opera windows in the 70’s etc.
Car makers don’t want to stray too far from the mainstream.
It appears currently that the “generic” is trending back towards the jelly bean rather than the box, and signature LED DRLs.
There also is a general repeating cycle from boxy & angular, to curvy jelly bean.
Sheet metal is fashion.
All of that said, The 200 is a rather attractive jelly bean.
I’ve always said that I’d love to see someone take a mid-’80s GM G-Body sedan (Cutlass, Regal) and “project” it to today, inside (with airbags, etc.) and outside, and yet make its roots recognizable, via the magic of Photochop.
(At least you could see out of those, unlike most of today’s cars with shoulder-high beltlines and gun-slit windows.)
That feeling when the GM 3.6 V6 makes more than twice as much horsepower as the Olds 307.
Is the giant plastic c-pillar triangle that was stamped with a fake chrome “200” gone? Let us rejoice.
Looks kinda nice. Reminds me of LH Mopars.
But, didn’t they talk about 200 getting the RWD platform? This obviously isn’t the case..
I think billfrombuckhead was talking about either the next Dart or 200 going RWD. However, he is a Mopar propagandist. Derek compared him to Baghdad Bob, the Iraqi Information Minister during Operation Iraqi Freedom.
He was talking about the next Avenger, not the 200.
We already knew the 200 was going to be FWD.
The Avenger replacement is going to be rear wheel drive based on the updated Alfa Romeo Guilia platform. This new 200 is based on the front wheel drive based Guilia that was rejected.
Look for the 200 to be the best launch in Mopar history with the Pentastar V6 9 speed breaking JapanInc appliance fanboi hearts from coast to coast.
Assuming there actually are some new Alfa Romeo models some day.
Yeah okay, if it’s anything else like the previous103338935848344 times Chrysler has tried to build a car that didn’t suck at everything, the only hearts that will be broken will be those foolish enough to buy one and legions of unsuspecting familes on their annual trip to Disney World.
Oh, I didn’t realize they’re going to separate the two… although it makes sense, with Avenger purported to be “sportier” model.
Is that amber signals in the rear? If so HECK yeah!
Chrysler has been lazy with amber signals as of late. Like the Grand Cherokee, 200, 300, avenger.
I don’t think it’s lazy, more consumer demand, orange plastic on a pretty black SRT8 charger would look especially tacky.
Fortunately automakers have long come up with ways to have amber turn signals without orange plastic.
They are not doing it because they are lazy though, they are not doing it because they are cheap.
Cheap too. They really are inter related.
Chrysler has been both lazy and cheap as of late specifically. They used to design really good dual standards tail lights (ece and dot) even when they had cheap interiors. Even the caliber had them!
It takes a little more work to do so but, its better. In cases like the Grand Cherokee i just don’t understand why they did what they did when all previous versions generations did the same.
Instead they made separate dot / ece taillights and the dot has two reverse lights on each lamp since having 1 of the 2 reverse lights be a turn signal was way too difficult even though that’s how it is outside of the US.
Don’t even get me started with gm where they love to have separate bulbs but they make the lens red. Great job saving 2 cents after spending dollars and only 90% completing the job.
Honestly gm, BMW, and Audi are probably the worst red turn signal offenders next to pickup trucks.
Ford seems to change every decade.
Chrysler used to be big on amber.
Foreign brand cars that aren’t German nearly always use amber too.
I’m so glad so many of you have noticed this. It irritates me to no end seeing cars that use the brake lights as turn signals. They’re almost always American cars. Instead of mandating 19 airbags in a car, NHTSA needs to make this illegal.
I think this thread is quite ridiculous. For one thing, the CHMSL is the only real indicator that someone has stopped, since the illuminated-at-night taillamps have to grow brighter to indicate braking, and the person behind you may not be able to differentiate the brighter illumination from the dim one. So it won’t confuse someone if you use the brake lights for turn-signal duty. The bottom line is that it would take a real dunderhead not to determine that a blinking light, be it red or amber, is a clear indication of someone using his/her turn signal. Often times, red turn signals are more noticeable because they are bigger and offer an immediate interruption to the light that was previously there, rather than being an additional amber light source that gets lost in the red of the tail-lamp. Chrysler is particularly good at making its tail-lamps easy to interpret, IMO.
Lens color is not based on whether it goes well with each color, it should be based on what it tells the drivers around that car, and amber is almost universal in indicating that this car is about to change direction, and as a driver in another car, I want that information. That’s why I don’t want lamps for direction indicators lumped in with tail and stop lamps, any more than I want cars with smoked/dimmed lamps.
I will agree that I liked the tail light scheme on my 2006 SRT over my 2012.
Actually, it doesn’t matter, since most people don’t use turn signals until they’re already turning, and not at all when changing lanes. I always do the latter, but have been cut off a lot. It seems that signaling your intentions is treated by other motorists like a yellow light.
It’s not “cheap” to decline to do something that’s not required and nobody is asking for.
and yes, a handful of whiners on car blogs who watch too much Top Gear counts as “nobody.”
Is orange plastic any less or more obnoxious than red?
Are the somehow acceptable on the front of the vehicle, but not the rear?
Red turn signals reek of 60s and 70s cheap American crap when 2 light bulb elements did the work of 3 functions (driving, turn, brake). Proper cars have separate elements for each with amber turn signals.
Yes, because we know how much money GM sunk into those U-Body minivans.
Hypnotoad
Driver of the worst used car you can buy today as my weatherbeater, apparently has “proper” separate elements for brake and turn signal – rear, and different elements for driving, turn/DRL up front.
Well, it’s about time! That appears to be one fine-looking car, one I’d like to drive. Perhaps one will be at our upcoming auto show in February. I hope so! After all, anything aside from the current 200 is an improvement, strictly speaking about styling.
Chrysler is slowly coming back on my radar, again.
Hey Zackman! My thoughts exactly. When I first saw the photo, even before I read the headline, I thought: That’s really nice. Who cleaned up the styling of the Honda Accord?
Funny how we all see so many different cars in this one. I wonder what that says about us as a group?
Like you, Mopar is coming back on my radar again, too.
Looks like a bigger Dart.
I see more “Fusart” (Dartion?), anyway, Fusion/Dart. Much better then the current model (what wouldn’t be), but it hardly justifies all the “world class”, “standing ovation” and “game changing” rhetoric that has been spouted about it.
Wait, the current model is actually available for personal sale? I thought it was for rental agencies only. (Amazing joke. Good job self).
My first thought was that it appeared similar in side profile to a Sonata, maybe a little VW CC. Not a bad looking car at all, but not a sexy beast either. Regardless of what details eventually come out, at least they appear to finally have a competitive “looking” midsize offering. Hopefully they dont cheap out on interior. This looks to be top trim.
It looks like a VW Bora with Saab 9-3’s nose and a kit of LED taillights. Inoffensive and bland, but manages to avoid the bloated frog aesthetic common in today’s vehicles, and possibly even has decent visibility to the rear.
Looks good, but quality had better be a damn sight better than Fiasler has managed with this platform so far. No reason to be optimistic there.
It’s also a crying shame (and yet another sign, at least to me, of halfhearted effort) that Fiasler couldn’t manage to figure out how to integrate the DLO without sticking that plastic tack-on to the A-pillar.
I really like it. Good choice of drivetrains, too. Maybe it will be the win that the Dart isn’t, although they’d better improve upon the terrible gauges.
While I love the look of the Dart, it was a disappointment when driven, and long-term reviews have been middling at best. I hope this new 200 won’t deceive me in the same way.
C&D had a few more photos, and it looks like the awful gauge trend at Mopar continues in this new 200 – except this one has blue highlights instead of red.
Awful compared to what?
The center screen provides a ton of information, and is easy to read. Gauges are simple but have a very easy to read font.
The Dart’s gauges are coarse and Tron-like. It wouldn’t be so hard to make them elegant like the Volvo S60.
http://www.automotiveaddicts.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/2013-dodge-dart-limited-gauge-cluster.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/170/487083573_834ef9d47f.jpg
More Altima than Fusion, but with a strange Civic like front end.
I dont care for it.. just make it a hatch already if you are going to make the deck lid 6 inches deep. The 200 concept from 10 or so years ago on allpar is nice looking. I would like to see that one realized.
Looks like a big Dart. I’m looking forward to driving it with a V6.
Not a bad looking car…guessing they’re giving this one the 3.2 Pentastar and saving the 3.6 for the bigger cars and the trucks, but what do I know.
That makes sense; I was wondering about that. Could be a very nice-driving car.
Having the 3.2 version be just for the Cherokee seems rather silly, but the 200 would be a great fit and the slightly smaller Pentastar in a small-ish car would likely turn in pretty good MPG numbers.
I was wondering about that myself. I don’t understand the rationale of downsizing the 3.6 to 3.2 displacement when the 3.6 is a pretty darn good little engine, and production is humming.
We own a 3.6 in my wife’s 2012 Grand Cherokee and it will easily cruise at 105mph on US80 on that long stretch adjacent to the Great Salt Lake.
The Garmin confirmed that the speedo was accurate.
I don’t get it either, the Cherokee could fit the 3.6 if it can fit a 3.2, I doubt the 3.2 is much smaller of an engine in terms of dimensions.
It’s just like the old Chrysler 3.2 based off the 3.5 V6. Kind of unnecessary.
The 3.2, while dimensionally similar/identical to the 3.6, might exist for fuel economy reasons.
Being a midsize car, Chrysler probably figures they don’t need the extra 20 HP, and a 10% reduction in displacement will help with CAFE.
Ah, CAFE. The ruiner of all dreams.
You’re probably right. But it seems an added expense in a time when minimizing expenses and maximizing profits is the rule.
It seems easier and less expense to detune an engine for horsepower and then use the on-board engine management system to tune for maximizing fuel economy.
Drifters and racers have been doing this electronically for many years, although in reverse, i.e tuning engines for max crankshaft hp without regard to fuel economy.
Rumor has it that the 200 will use the 3.6L Pentastar 9 speed just to humiliate the JapanInc and crosstown competition. All wheel drive is also on the way.
Next question is when does the diesel variant come out?
bill, you’re a riot. I’d be proud of this car as well, but I think I’d keep myself a bit more modest lest someone point out: “It took Chrysler how many f-ing years to create a competitive midsizer?”
I tend to like sedans with some angles and creases, but this looks rather nice. With Chrysler’s recent push towards higher quality interiors, this could be a very attractive car.
Hooray for sticking with larger displacement NA engines instead of turbos, although they probably forfeited any chance of winning Ward’s Top 10 Randomly Selected Engines award. Given the Dart’s performance with the 1.4t, they were probably wise to use the Tigershark instead.
Agreed on the engine thing. Even the Dart has dropped the miserable 1.4T in all but the Aero model for 2014.
Knockout. Nice to see GM and Chrysler still have talented designers.
If not engineers.
Nice. The A7 reminded me of an old Charger. This is good.
Not bad. But just about anything would be an improvement.
It looks better than the current 200 – but Chrysler is still a sub brand that slots below Cadillac.
You do realize that Chrysler is somewhere between lowly Lincoln and Buick. Cadillac is in a whole other class of luxury.
I’d check your tobacco there slim, Cadillac *thinks* it is.
That site doesn’t need to make a huge advertisement across the picture. Just make the picture public domain and give it to everyone.
I see the last generation Mazda 6 in the greenhouse and the rear. Not a bad looking car though.
IS this a rebadged Dart? Looks good.
A rebadged Dart, that’s exactly what it is… not that there’s anything wrong with that, but that’s what it is
Couldn’t be more wrong.
Unless of course, I was you
“Based on the same base platform and architecture as the Dodge Dart” – according to Chrysler unofficial sources
“Couldn’t be more wrong” – Z71_Silvy
“Isn’t it ironic?” – Alanis Morissette
That’s really not exactly what it is, though. Rebadging means only the badges are different. In this case, while it will share some componentry and design with the Dart, it’s dimenstionally different, doesn’t have the same powertrains, or even one square inch of exterior sheet metal.
Although other powertrains will be available the Dart and the 200 will share the 2.4L 4
Yes, they’ll share an engine, but not transmissions. So the powertrains are different.
Yes, I agree. I would assume they’ll have different wheelbases and dimensions inside, too. The cars having the same architecture doesn’t mean it’s just a “rebadge”. All manufacturers have consolidated their platforms lately–they’re rarely engineering an entire new platform for every new car they build–that is, if they need a competitive midsize car immediately, they could do a lot worse than to use the architecture from the well-reviewed car that sits below it. I believe the Dart is already considered to be a midsize car itself.
The thing is if it’s so different then the Dart, why make it look so similar. Since the Dart has not been a rip-roaring success why emulate it?
A bit bland, but at least pulled together, unlike the current car. I see Dart obviously, but a bit of MKS(MKZ?) in the roofline. Audi in the tail. Given the strides Chrysler has made post-Fiat, I’d actually consider one if I’d ever shop for a midsize sedan again. But I’d rather go with the 300 if I’m shopping Chrysler, going with a gently used one over one of these.
The 300 in any variation or edition is a real nice ride. Still, the 200 could be a competitor in this space but it all depends on price point.
More than likely the Camry will continue as best seller in both the primary and secondary markets simply because of the value it represents for the bucks.
Although I am not interested in midsize sedans, if Fiatsler could offer the 200 with the same standard equipment as the Camry LE and a 295-305hp Pentastar V6 for around $25K, I bet there would be a lot of takers.
That certainly would fit what I would look for were I to buy a midsize sedan.
This new Mopar punches the Camry appliance square in it’s beige face. They are basically giving the public a Lexus ES competitor for a Camry price. That’s why the 3.6L will be the star. Hooking the well liked Pentastar up with the most advanced transmission on the planet (count on this car getting every bit of use out of the ZF 9 speed) on top the Alfa intended suspension will make this car the enthusiasts darling in this class.
Since enthusiasts don’t make up the bulk of the midsize sedan market, being the “darling” isn’t going to help it post competitive sales. It needs to do all that other boring crap that family sedans are expected to do. For instance, if it is built off the Dart platform, it had better have a larger backseat than the Dart or it is going be one of those awkward “in-between” sizes. Sales numbers and enthusiast appeal are two different things in this segment.
Can’t “boring family sedan” be accomplished without being, um, boring? I mean, Ford Fusion
Lie2me,
Sure, that would be ideal. I’m not arguing that they can’t be both interesting and useful, I’m arguing that in a conservative segment like this, “interesting” isn’t enough to sell them if they don’t do the useful bit as well. Bill’s excited about the powertrain, but that won’t be enough to sell this car in volume if it doesn’t nail the core midsize attributes. Which tend to be boring.
billy boy, you are absolutely, utterly, hopelessly delusional if you think a UAW-assembled, Dart-based Fiat mongrel could hope to compete with even a Camry, let alone the Lexus variant.
I think they can give Camry a run for their money if they offer all the same equipment as the Camry LE, put a V6 in it and price it around $25K.
When Hyundai did that with their Sonata a few years back, people were willing to spring for it. In fact, sales were hot until CAFE forced Hyundai to go with a GDI and TGDI four-bangers instead of that V6.
I’m not a fan of a midsize sedan with anything smaller that a V6 in it. I know that is the trend these days but if I were to ever buy a midsize sedan, a V6 would be my choice. And AWD.
In a large sedan and truck, a V8 is the way to go IMO. And AWD.
If I were to buy a manly SUV, Suburban, Sequoia and Armada would be my choice, with a V8. And AWD.
Everything else is just girlie, no matter what it’s got under the hood.
I see a bit of M37 in the profile (or Q29 or whatever the hell they are calling it these days). As the owner of a 2012 Charger I would consider one of these if I was in the market for a small car with a big engine.
Nice looking car. Get it on the dealer lots with a Pentastar for ~$25K and it’ll sell like hotcakes. Glad to hear Mopar is still churning out cars with naturally aspirated V6’s over buzzy turbo four-cylinders (I’ll admit I’m spoiled by roaring pushrod V6’s and V8’s).
It’s a bit bland and generic looking. The real test will be how it’s priced and how it drives. An improved interior would sure help. The V-6 engine in this class is refreshing, unique and should be a strong selling point.
I just wonder how they will price it. Traditionally Chryslers have been marketed as being a step above the usual medium-priced cars, although that sure was not the case the previous 200. Do they see it as a Camry/Accord/Altima/Fusion/Malibu competitor?
Or are they going to try to go further upscale and price it along the lines of the Buick Regal or Lincoln MKZ?
I see the profile of a B-17 Stratofortress, with hints of a ’93 F-150 in the rear while the front evokes the 1931 Cord.
hey, it’s no worse than the rest of the crazy stuff people are saying in this thread…
B-17? Ha, it screams Space Shuttle
Well your jokes a bit more imaginitive, I can’t help but wonder if people want cars to look alike if “It looks like a mix of car a and b” is the most common comment.
Oh yea, then we have the typical “Its not a rebadge, its…”, wheres the V6 Mustang post?
Nope, doesn’t look at all like a V6 Mustang, unless of course, you add two doors and…
Most cars these days look like a cross between a Radio Flyer and a Concorde, just to varying degrees…
Nice to see the Chrysler 400 make a comeback, take a subpar model, change a few styling cues, and suddenly its a whole new car!
Not bad. I see a lot of Mazda 6 in it. Hopefully it will be as fun and sporting to drive with less beige-ness than a Camry or Altima. At least they will have something competitive in the mid-sized family car class.
Just like the previous model, this one is also based off a smaller platform and once again it won’t be as good as the competition which is NOT based on any compact architecture. This is a very important segment to come up short against the competition.
As GM has discovered – and seemingly anyone outside of the RenCen could have told them – with the Malibu.
I see a lot of Freightliner M2 106 in it.
The odds of me buying a FWD midsizer are near zero, but for what this is, I think it looks great! Clearly an evolution of the last cloud cars, which IMHO were beautifully done, especially the last intrepid. I hope it does well in the market, gotta keep turning out high volume vehicles to keep making the lower volume ones like the charger.
Seems like the outgoing Sebring/200 have been around since K cars! Never thought I’d live long enough to see new generation, just joking!