I don't understand the hate for the 200

"mkbruin, Atlas VP" (mkbruin) 12/13/2013 at 14:00 • Filed to: None

0

20

Another Chrysler that stayed mostly true to concept...

HammerheadFistpunch > mkbruin, Atlas VP 12/13/2013 at 14:01

4

I think most of it is because its a truly awful car.

Tom McParland > mkbruin, Atlas VP 12/13/2013 at 14:04

2

The old 2oo was a pretty bad car...not even close to being competitive with other mid-sizers. This new one however, could be very nice. Sure the style hints at other things, but practically every popular mid-size sedan has style cues from other popular mid-size sedans.

Forgetful > mkbruin, Atlas VP 12/13/2013 at 14:12

0

You do know what the bloodline is, right?

200 > Sebring > Cirrus > K-Car

themanwithsauce - has as many vehicles as job titles > mkbruin, Atlas VP 12/13/2013 at 14:12

1

I was hoping when I clicked "expand" to show the picture, it would just be a pile of dung.

CalzoneGolem > mkbruin, Atlas VP 12/13/2013 at 14:27

0

I've noticed a deeply rooted hatred for all thing Mopar. Don't let it bring you down.

AMC/Renauledge > mkbruin, Atlas VP 12/13/2013 at 14:56

1

The current 200 is the 200C Concept's nose tacked to the front of a retrimmed 2007 Sebring. The doors, roof, pillars, rear fenders, and DLO do not match the concept. They're exactly the same as they were on the Sebring.

The new 200 looks pretty sharp, I think. But even then, the roof and tail are completely different than the 200C Concept.

thebigbossyboss > mkbruin, Atlas VP 12/13/2013 at 15:27

0

I agree, I have always liked the look of it also. I liked the old 300's too! Great looking car.

Victorious Secret > mkbruin, Atlas VP 12/13/2013 at 15:30

1

It isn't hate, it is just bitching for the sake of bitching.

It looks handsome and mature, something I think will come across to shoppers nicely.

How it drives? I can't comment. None of us can. I will say that the current 200 is all kinds of meh, but I shall give the new one every chance it deserves. Who knows, it might be brilliant or it might suck some more.

The American brand hate especially off FP is getting tiresome to deal with these days. Scratch that, the general hate of anything that any brand does gets hard to digest.

SLR999 > AMC/Renauledge 12/13/2013 at 16:08

0

Look at these. How do their greenhouses compare one iota?

Nothing about the body of the new 200 is similar to its predecessor, except general wheelbase and 4-door configuration. The new one proudly wears a Fusion-esque fastback profile, where the old one had a well-defined three-box shape. There are also no mouldings or angular creases along the side, giving it a streamlined look.

The Sebring/200 mk. 1 made use of gawky plastic cheater panels to extend the DLO beyond the rear door, but in reality there was no window there. This new one incorporates an actual quarter-window ahead of the c pillar, a boon to both aesthetics and visibility.

Stef Schrader > mkbruin, Atlas VP 12/13/2013 at 16:09

1

I got stuck with a current one as a rental. It had the most hateful automatic transmission I've ever experienced—perpetually confused, and constantly whirring what little power it had up to oblivion for the slightest hills.

That sucks, because otherwise, it wasn't too terrible. The steering wasn't numb—it had some of the better steering feel out of the rentals I got stuck with. But getting it to go anywhere? That's a miserable exercise in futility.

I took it back the next day and demanded something else. It was that bad.

It's a car that doesn't look bad on the outside, or even inside. It's just absolutely miserable to drive one.

If they're making it better, great. It's sorely needed. If the choice was between keep selling the 200 as-is and leaving that segment, I'd vote to leave. It's a miserable, uncompetitive piece of kit that's long overdue for a complete replacement.

AMC/Renauledge > SLR999 12/13/2013 at 16:26

1

I think you misread what I wrote, since you wrote a reworded version of exactly what I did, except you think you disagree with me.

Milky > mkbruin, Atlas VP 12/13/2013 at 16:50

0

Sometimes the comments around here are such BS, some guy even said it looks just like a solar and used this photo, wtf?

SLR999 > AMC/Renauledge 12/13/2013 at 17:03

1

My mistake! I mistook your complaints for the current one as complaints of the upcoming one. Need to go back to elementary reading.

Yeah, the changes from the concept to the mk. II 200 only distance it further from the POS Sebring. If they made it closer to the concept, people would mistake it for the current one. It's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. Glad someone agrees.

BTW, my mistake doesn't mean I have any hate for the 1992 Skylark. In fact, quite the opposite.

AMC/Renauledge > SLR999 12/13/2013 at 17:12

1

This is the current Chrysler 200:

This is the 2007 Sebring.

This is the 200C Concept:

Chrysler took the basic nose of the 200C Concept, grafted it as best they could on the 2007-10 Sebring, and sold it as the 2011-current 200. That's what I said.

And I said that neither the current 200 nor the upcoming one - the one in the spy photos - has the profile, roof, DLO, or tail design of the 200C Concept, which was the topic of the OP.

AMC/Renauledge > SLR999 12/13/2013 at 17:15

1

It's okay, man. Happens to the best of us. And I'm glad none of this reflects poorly on the '92 Skylark, either.

SLR999 > AMC/Renauledge 12/13/2013 at 17:19

1

Yup!

Typed up a response, read your reply again and... damn.

But to be fair a lot of the 200 concept design seemed to have been conceived with the express intent of porting it over to the Sebring. That sloping character line from the front arch to the taillights and rear (faux) quarter window design was identical on both!

SLR999 > AMC/Renauledge 12/13/2013 at 17:27

1

Thanks. I too have a soft spot for 90's domestics, although more of the Auburn Hills persuasion:

AMC/Renauledge > SLR999 12/13/2013 at 17:37

1

Me, too. I can't help but love the 1993-95 LeBaron coupes and convertibles, the 1992-93 Daytonas, and of course the original Neons, cloud cars, and LH cars. Especially the Eagle Vision.

Too bad their survival rates are incredibly low. Except for those late K-based models. They seem to keep holding up.

SLR999 > AMC/Renauledge 12/13/2013 at 18:01

1

There are a grand total of 6 first-gen LH cars on sale on AutoTrader Canada, its birthplace. Sadly they're all Concordes or LHSs, the ugliest of the family. Neons are falling off the planet similarly fast.

I guess Daytona is the way to go. Of course, with the Daytona you do get that most wonderful/awkward feature of the K generation:

Evan, Pope Of Jalopnik by Self-Appointment > mkbruin, Atlas VP 12/14/2013 at 13:04

0

Because its bland, boring, handles like ass, and isn't much faster than one.