2015 Chrysler 200

[silvrsvt]

http://www.autoblog.com/2013/09/17/chrysler-200-prototype-spy-shots/

 

I'm getting a Dodge dart vibe from it...not sure if thats a good thing or not. yeah I know you can't see the details, but it look pretty generic..

[akirby]

http://www.autoblog.com/2013/09/17/chrysler-200-prototype-spy-shots/

 

I'm getting a Dodge dart vibe from it...not sure if thats a good thing or not. yeah I know you can't see the details, but it look pretty generic..

 

Exactly. Not sure if you really need two.

[Hugh]

The Return of the Concorde.

[2b2]

The SON of Concorde.

 

TY ^

& FIFY

[atomcat68]

Hope it doesn't turn into another Italian institution, Costa CONCORDia

 

http://cryptome.org/2012-info/costa-concordia/0041.htm

[grbeck]

Not bad, but I'm not seeing anything earth-shattering.

[V8-X]

Need to see more. While like stated above me, nothing earth-shattering, from what I can tell the overall shape looks fairly nice and cohesive. Will wait to see more without the camo before deciding though.

[97svtgoin05gt]

It has to be better than it was. They could take a dog turd bolt wheels on it and be better than what it was.

[EBFlex]

Need to see more.... Will wait to see more without the camo before deciding though.

 

Yeah, see, you're not following the rules. You are able to make judgements on vehicles completely covered in camo if they are not Fords. If they are Fords, then even a 2" x 2" piece of electrical tape covering the trunk key hole is enough to say that we need to wait until it's fully uncovered before we male any sort of statement.

 

That being said, I'm looking forward to the new 200. The last one was a very solid car and a major improvement over the Sebring. This one will likely continue Chrysler amazing transformation from cheap vehicles to very high quality and stylish vehicles people actually want.

[jpd80]

That being said, I'm looking forward to the new 200. The last one was a very solid car and a major improvement over the Sebring. This one will likely continue Chrysler amazing transformation from cheap vehicles to very high quality and stylish vehicles people actually want.

On this point I agree with you.

Rather than pushing Fiat's barrow in North America, Sergio should be doing everything possible to fortify Chrysler and Dodge's product line up,

the latest 200 was a breath of fresh air and both brands could a lot worse than vehicle sharing that delivers great products that buyers are screaming for.

 

Careful selection of cars and Utilities could see Chrysler group catapult in sales and make the most on the back of the recovery..

Edited October 14, 2013 by jpd80

[papilgee4evaeva]

My biggest with the current 200? It kept the 4AT FOREVER. You can't position and market a car as more upscale while keeping a transmission not even found in subcompacts anymore...

 

For differentiation's sake, I would have preferred that Chrysler put the next car on a shortened LX platform, but hey... Fiat's calling the shots now. I'll wait to see what's said about it.

[156n3rd]

I am sorry to participate in this topic so long after it was started. But I suggest that Chrysler is wasting it's time in building this car. Chrysler should stop building the 200 and the Avenger and they didn't have to create the Dart. They could have done something that would have benefitted FIAT in Italy and bring new models to market here. They could have done a GM. They could have brought over Lancias and Fiats and re-badged them as Chrysler's and Dodges to have an immediate impact on both markets.Could those cars be crap? Could they be worse than the crap they currently build? I don't think so. The idea is to sell cars. IF those cars they brought over were good, they could have built them here. As it stands right now, this company may still go belly up. Chrysler could have built trucks and Jeeps and floated cars over by boat and had a good supply of running. working sell-able cars to fill their market. The Avenger is an all-out insult to Dodges and passenegr cars everywhere. The Dart is something that looks like a used car, even though it's new. The 200 should have been aborted. That c-pillar looks like the Cruze (or vice-versa) but it is still ugly. It is a cheesy POS. People buying it have fallen for pricing. They say that's what sells the Avenger over the Dart. That only proves they still have no idea how to sell cars. They could have done it differently, but Macrhionne is feeding his ego and that may be a fatal error of judgement.

[NickF1011]

I am sorry to participate in this topic so long after it was started. But I suggest that Chrysler is wasting it's time in building this car. Chrysler should stop building the 200 and the Avenger and they didn't have to create the Dart. They could have done something that would have benefitted FIAT in Italy and bring new models to market here. They could have done a GM. They could have brought over Lancias and Fiats and re-badged them as Chrysler's and Dodges to have an immediate impact on both markets.Could those cars be crap? Could they be worse than the crap they currently build? I don't think so. The idea is to sell cars. IF those cars they brought over were good, they could have built them here. As it stands right now, this company may still go belly up. Chrysler could have built trucks and Jeeps and floated cars over by boat and had a good supply of running. working sell-able cars to fill their market. The Avenger is an all-out insult to Dodges and passenegr cars everywhere. The Dart is something that looks like a used car, even though it's new. The 200 should have been aborted. That c-pillar looks like the Cruze (or vice-versa) but it is still ugly. It is a cheesy POS. People buying it have fallen for pricing. They say that's what sells the Avenger over the Dart. That only proves they still have no idea how to sell cars. They could have done it differently, but Macrhionne is feeding his ego and that may be a fatal error of judgement.

 

The risk there is that Chrysler would be depending on entirely untested models in our market to fill out the bottom of their lineup in quantities large enough to offset CAFE impacts of their larger vehicles. Certainly, down the road platform sharing and rebadging as you suggest would become more commonplace across the brands, but I don't think they are ready for it yet.

[630land]

Importing Italian made versus building at ready plants in Michigan would not have worked, for one thing prices would have been too high.

[NickF1011]

Importing Italian made versus building at ready plants in Michigan would not have worked, for one thing prices would have been too high.

I think by "bring over" he just meant using the existing designs and assembling them here, but I still don't think they were ready to go that route as the designs would all likely need to be tweaked considerably to 1) meet US regs and 2) be compatible with existing assembly procedures on this side of the pond.

[156n3rd]

Nick, you hit the nail on the head. And, those models have been proven all over Europe, not just in Italy.Meeting U.S. regs has already been done with the engines in the Fiat 500. mercedes and Cerberus (whatever than name is) ruined Chrysler further than what it was before Fiat took over. But Marchioone thought he could use domestic money to shore up the Italian operation. That might have worked with less stupid Jeep models and the caliber, OMG, what a POS! I test drove one before I bought my PT and found it to feel like a Russian taxi cab. Poorly laid out. You can't hope to sell junk. There are several Lancia models that do just fine in Europe and the UK whcih could have been badged. The same can be said for Fiat. But I know how bad their rep is and it's just too bad that Chrylser is what it is. Trucks and Jeeps are one thing. The 300 and the Charger/Challenger are not enough. bring back the Magnum, even the Neon would have been welcomed. Just like the PT, they cut the Neon while it was still viable. But all companies do the same thing. Shucks!

[NickF1011]

Nick, you hit the nail on the head. And, those models have been proven all over Europe, not just in Italy.Meeting U.S. regs has already been done with the engines in the Fiat 500. mercedes and Cerberus (whatever than name is) ruined Chrysler further than what it was before Fiat took over. But Marchioone thought he could use domestic money to shore up the Italian operation. That might have worked with less stupid Jeep models and the caliber, OMG, what a POS! I test drove one before I bought my PT and found it to feel like a Russian taxi cab. Poorly laid out. You can't hope to sell junk. There are several Lancia models that do just fine in Europe and the UK whcih could have been badged. The same can be said for Fiat. But I know how bad their rep is and it's just too bad that Chrylser is what it is. Trucks and Jeeps are one thing. The 300 and the Charger/Challenger are not enough. bring back the Magnum, even the Neon would have been welcomed. Just like the PT, they cut the Neon while it was still viable. But all companies do the same thing. Shucks!

It seems likely that Chrysler will eventually go the route you suggest, but much of that timetable is also dependent upon refresh cycles and what not (similar to the roll-out schedule predicament for new Lincolns). For example, it would be a poor management decision to produce extra tooling to build a rebadged Fiat or Lancia here if that model is being redesigned in a year or two.

 

Some of the other suggestions are a bit questionable though. The Magnum sold relatively poorly, so the decision to axe it was pretty justified. Neon came to have a pretty horrid reputation, but really, the Dart is the new Neon in all respects except in the (damaged) name anyway, so that mistake has already been remedied about as well as it currently can be. PT Cruiser was questionable. Its sales were bottoming out, but that could easily be attributable to its poor-to-nonexistent refresh schedule.

[156n3rd]

PT sales dropped as a result of the unwillingness of engineering's desire to stop improving. Of course they will stop building. The Magnum, yeah, you're right. But, Chrysler still needs car of all sizes. What damaged the Neon name? It was just pulled by people who decided to replace it with a model that was DOA. When I say re-bagde I mean just that. Tooling? What tooling? Badges!

[akirby]

PT sales dropped as a result of the unwillingness of engineering's desire to stop improving. Of course they will stop building. The Magnum, yeah, you're right. But, Chrysler still needs car of all sizes. What damaged the Neon name? It was just pulled by people who decided to replace it with a model that was DOA. When I say re-bagde I mean just that. Tooling? What tooling? Badges!

 

Or maybe PT sales dropped because it only appealed to a small percentage of buyers who bought it as a novelty and didn't want a second one. Just like the HHR and SSR.

[grbeck]

Go to Europe and talk to real, live car buyers and drivers...Fiats and Lancias do not have a great reputation for quality or durability. And this is from the continent that thinks VWs are reliable!

 

Bringing these designs over without any revisions to suit American tastes or improve reliability would be disastrous.

Edited November 27, 2013 by grbeck

[NickF1011]

What damaged the Neon name?

Its horrendous reliability compared to other compacts on the market.

[92LX302]

PT sales dropped as a result of the unwillingness of engineering's desire to stop improving. Of course they will stop building. The Magnum, yeah, you're right. But, Chrysler still needs car of all sizes. What damaged the Neon name? It was just pulled by people who decided to replace it with a model that was DOA. When I say re-bagde I mean just that. Tooling? What tooling? Badges!

 

 

Those hubcaps.

[Fgts]

Its horrendous reliability compared to other compacts on the market.

To add to that the 1-2 punch of Chrysler's CEO putting sub-standard head-gaskets against the engineers wishes and of course the nickel-and-Daimler era.

[156n3rd]

I have read the publications from the UK that do not say they are junk. But in any business, OPINIONS sell. I have been told that Fiats are scrap in Italy, but certain models sold in the UK are rated highly. One example is the Fiat Panda. I use the UK as a comparison point because I will be living there in the future. By revision, if you mean content, I doubt their models have any less than American cars. They could have sold them as Lancias, Alphas and Fiats and eliminated the lower model and middle junk they have been selling. BUT, when it comes to the PT, I do not agree with anything said about the SSR and HHR. Pt's were de-contented and cheapend in 2005 which was done to save money and get higher profit per unit. This process was the impetus for their lagging sales. With all the ownership switiching, upgrades were swept away. HHR is still with us, it still sells and was designed by the same guy who did the PT. If Chrysler would have improved the fuel consumption and put back things that were removed. I know of many, many people who would have continued to buy them. I am on my 2nd and many others own multiple units and are looking for more. They are represented in clubs around the world for good reason. They are sturdy and fun to own. You can knock them all you like. If you never owned one, then you just plain may not appreciate it.

[Anthony]

HHR is still with us, it still sells and was designed by the same guy who did the PT. If Chrysler would have improved the fuel consumption and put back things that were removed. I know of many, many people who would have continued to buy them.

HHR was cancelled 2 years ago.