Thoughts on Chrysler 200 ?

The wife has been looking at mid size cars and I told her to take a look at the 2013 Chrysler 200...It seems like a lot more car for the money than the Chevy Malibu.
Any thoughts on the 200, good or bad ?
Thanks in advance.
Reply to
S.LaRocca
I've owned my 2012 Chrysler 200 for just over a year now and I really like it (I have the two-door hardtop convertible coup). At the risk of sounding like a shill, it handles well (provided you don't take the corners too fast or too tight--the rear end tends to slide).
The car was made for both light crusing and city driving. It's definitly NOT a sports car, so don't drive it like one. You (or your wife) might find the suspension a little stiff. MPG is a concern, as I only average 17mpg in the city (I do mostly city to city driving).
General fit and finish is good, and the maintenance seems to be low (although that's to be expected with a new car). Seems solidly well built and has a good "road feel" to it. The V6 Pentastar engine (I opted for the 3.6L) delivers good power and torque. Just had the oil changed at 3,500 miles.
Overall, I recommend it, but your mileage may vary.
James Rau
Reply to
James Rau
Ashton Crusher writes:
Assuming you mean the vehicle being sold as the Dodge Dart in the US, it's a compact (based on a modified FIAT platform), and a very nice little car at that. There's a good chance Heather and I will be getting one in the near future.
Reply to
Joe Pfeiffer
wrote:
Yes, that's the one. The auto mags generally like it a lot. Of course, the sometimes like anything new a lot so buying first year is always a little risky.
Reply to
Ashton Crusher
Thanks for your feedback...I've always been a Chevy guy, just because I'm a GM retiree and supporting GM might throw a penny or two at me in my pension check, but I've always wanted a Chrysler Minivan, and went ahead and bought a 2013 Grand Caravan, and love it so far...I figured if GM was not making what I needed, why should I buy something I did not want ? Even when GM made minivans they were sub par.
I became interested in the Chrysler 200 because it really does seem like a lot of car for the money.
I was always suspect of Chrysler's build quality, but it seems to me that they have come a long way, and they do make very nice looking vehicles...I imagine it would not be hard for me to become a Chrysler guy.
Tony
Reply to
S.LaRocca
I was too but bought a 2009 PT as it was the most car for the least money and satisfied all my criteria. It easily ranks (at 40K miles so far) as good or better built than any other new car I've had. I also had a 2005 Crown Vic, which I liked a lot, but truthfully the PT actually is more comfortable and less tiring on a long trip. Only real deficiency is lack of power.
but it seems to me that
Reply to
Ashton Crusher
wrote:
I traded in my 2002 PT when I bought the 2012 200 and I can't begin to tell you HOW MUCH I MISS that great little car! It only had 46K when I traded it in. You're correct: Nice and comfy, even on long trips.
My only major complaint with the PT is the same as yours: Even with the 3.0L 4-banger it was still very underpowered, and the 5-speed stick did not help (still damn fun to drive though).
James Raui
Reply to
James Rau

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.