[Mike V.]

They have always been that similar Norm, ever since the refresh to both...

Oh come on Mike... I sit in both almost every day, and outside of some little detailing and or more chrome, they are VERY similar...sure there are different part numbers, but they are VERY similar.

Of course they are inherently similar, and I am not denying that... they are siblings.

What I am saying is they have distinct styling difference and, other than switchgear, the outer panels of the dashboard and center IP bezels are not directly interchangeable.

Funny, LH cars had far more interchangeable dash components between them and no one seemed to complain.

Mike

 

[bumonbox]

Of course they are inherently similar, and I am not denying that... they are siblings.

What I am saying is they have distinct styling difference and, other than switchgear, the outer panels of the dashboard and center IP bezels are not directly interchangeable.

Funny, LH cars had far more interchangeable dash components between them and no one seemed to complain.

Mike

IIRC, From 1998-2001, and for the most part until 2004 the Intrepid and Concorde shared far more similar interiors, the Intrepid had more of a "hood" over the gauges, but that was about it.
The LHS and 300m interiors were completely identical, then when they dropped the LHS name for 2002, the Concorde name took on the LHS appearance for the exterior, kept it's interior, except for upper trims where I believe it matched the 300m / outgoing LHS.
In either case, the IP of the 300m / LHS was definitely different than the Intrepid / Concorde. but the 2 were pretty similar otherwise. The rest of the interiors were darned near identical too, sharing the basic door handle, differing only by whether they were chrome covered, or just plastic.

The Avenger and 200 actually do have differences behind the IP. The door handles are a bit different, and there are several other differences. But they could still use some more distinction.

Personally, I don't care about the Barracuda. If they plan to keep the Challenger, great, please do it, but I see no reason for a second niche vehicle when they could invest it into an RWD midsized sedan for Dodge, which would have assuredly higher yield, and would be a legitimately distinctive vehicle. The midsized market is huge, Chrysler really ought to have 2 players in it.
And no, the Dart doesn't REALLY count. not like they have a V6 option (or comparable, IE Hyundai Sonata)

 

[MoparNorm]

They have always been that similar Norm, ever since the refresh to both...
.

They were refreshed a year apart, not being a car guy, I haven't looked at Avenger to see how similar they made it.
Same exact shifter as well.
I'd prefer similarities were under the skin, but I realize they need to conserve cash, by large scale sharing.

 

[UN4GTBL]

They were refreshed a year apart, not being a car guy, I haven't looked at Avenger to see how similar they made it.
Same exact shifter as well.
I'd prefer similarities were under the skin, but I realize they need to conserve cash, by large scale sharing.

They were both refreshed for MY 2011 (Avenger & 200)

 

[Stratuscaster]

Based upon the original designs and all, I think they've done the best they could with what they had to work with on the Sebring/200/Avenger in regards to the interior similarities.

Take a look at a JA or JR - those were even MORE similar to each other than the JS. Differences were limited to IP lighting and face color and center stack/shifter surrounds.

 

[MoparNorm]

They were both refreshed for MY 2011 (Avenger & 200)

Then I guess I was a victim of Auto Show marketing.
The 200 was refreshed and Avenger wasn't, at LA that year.

 

[bumonbox]

Then I guess I was a victim of Auto Show marketing.
The 200 was refreshed and Avenger wasn't, at LA that year.

They seemed to have wanted much more emphasis on the 200 than the Avenger. Obviously they wanted their money to pay off. but ironically, I think I recall many critics actually being warmer to the Avenger, probably because they were having such a hard time forgiving the 200 for being the successor to the Sebring. Regardless, the marketing, and real money was behind the 200. The Avenger has sort of been along for the ride. And they are clearly ready to drop it. (There was only 1 at the last auto show I went to, and at least 3 200s.

No doubt, the show you went to was similar, they wanted to really showcase the 200, but the Avenger, meh, they figured it didn't look much different on the outside, so why bother.

 

[Moparian]

They seemed to have wanted much more emphasis on the 200 than the Avenger. Obviously they wanted their money to pay off. but ironically, I think I recall many critics actually being warmer to the Avenger, probably because they were having such a hard time forgiving the 200 for being the successor to the Sebring. Regardless, the marketing, and real money was behind the 200. The Avenger has sort of been along for the ride. And they are clearly ready to drop it. (There was only 1 at the last auto show I went to, and at least 3 200s.

No doubt, the show you went to was similar, they wanted to really showcase the 200, but the Avenger, meh, they figured it didn't look much different on the outside, so why bother.

? The 2011 avenger had a brand new front and rear facia, headlights and taillights and looked 100x better than the 2010. To be honest I like the rear of the Avenger more than that of the 200. If the Avenger would have offered the projector headlamps I would have gotten the R/T over the 200S.

 

[JRS200x]

IIRC, From 1998-2001, and for the most part until 2004 the Intrepid and Concorde shared far more similar interiors, the Intrepid had more of a "hood" over the gauges, but that was about it.
The LHS and 300m interiors were completely identical, then when they dropped the LHS name for 2002, the Concorde name took on the LHS appearance for the exterior, kept it's interior, except for upper trims where I believe it matched the 300m / outgoing LHS.
In either case, the IP of the 300m / LHS was definitely different than the Intrepid / Concorde. but the 2 were pretty similar otherwise. The rest of the interiors were darned near identical too, sharing the basic door handle, differing only by whether they were chrome covered, or just plastic.

The Avenger and 200 actually do have differences behind the IP. The door handles are a bit different, and there are several other differences. But they could still use some more distinction.

Personally, I don't care about the Barracuda. If they plan to keep the Challenger, great, please do it, but I see no reason for a second niche vehicle when they could invest it into an RWD midsized sedan for Dodge, which would have assuredly higher yield, and would be a legitimately distinctive vehicle. The midsized market is huge, Chrysler really ought to have 2 players in it.
And no, the Dart doesn't REALLY count. not like they have a V6 option (or comparable, IE Hyundai Sonata)

The Intrepid etc were far better cars overall than the Avenger/200.. imo.

Don't even get me started on the convertible... what a ghastly car.

 

[SouthPawXJ]

IIRC, From 1998-2001, and for the most part until 2004 the Intrepid and Concorde shared far more similar interiors, the Intrepid had more of a "hood" over the gauges, but that was about it.
The LHS and 300m interiors were completely identical, then when they dropped the LHS name for 2002, the Concorde name took on the LHS appearance for the exterior, kept it's interior, except for upper trims where I believe it matched the 300m / outgoing LHS.
In either case, the IP of the 300m / LHS was definitely different than the Intrepid / Concorde. but the 2 were pretty similar otherwise. The rest of the interiors were darned near identical too, sharing the basic door handle, differing only by whether they were chrome covered, or just plastic.

The Avenger and 200 actually do have differences behind the IP. The door handles are a bit different, and there are several other differences. But they could still use some more distinction.

Personally, I don't care about the Barracuda. If they plan to keep the Challenger, great, please do it, but I see no reason for a second niche vehicle when they could invest it into an RWD midsized sedan for Dodge, which would have assuredly higher yield, and would be a legitimately distinctive vehicle. The midsized market is huge, Chrysler really ought to have 2 players in it.
And no, the Dart doesn't REALLY count. not like they have a V6 option (or comparable, IE Hyundai Sonata)

Technically, doesn't the Dart qualify as a midsize car according to the EPA? I know it is barely a midsize, but it is a tweener, which would give it a chance to compete both with the compacts and the midsize vehicles (possibly, I have no sales experience to know if people compare the Dart with the likes of the Camry and such)...
Ford Fusion - no V6
Hyundai Sonata - no V6
Kia Optima - no V6
Chevy Malibu - no V6
Mazda 6 - no V6, TDI coming
Dodge Dart - no V6


Toyota Camry - has V6
Honda Accord - has V6
Volkswagen Passat - has V6 and TDI
Subaru Legacy - has V6
Chrysler 200 - V6
Dodge Avenger - V6

It wouldn't be unheard of if the next generation mid-size from CGLLC didn't have a V6 option. I find it unlikely though. I wonder if the 3.2L Pentastar could fit legally in a Dart down the road?

 

[Mike V.]

IIRC, From 1998-2001, and for the most part until 2004 the Intrepid and Concorde shared far more similar interiors, the Intrepid had more of a "hood" over the gauges, but that was about it.
The LHS and 300m interiors were completely identical, then when they dropped the LHS name for 2002, the Concorde name took on the LHS appearance for the exterior, kept it's interior, except for upper trims where I believe it matched the 300m / outgoing LHS.
In either case, the IP of the 300m / LHS was definitely different than the Intrepid / Concorde. but the 2 were pretty similar otherwise. The rest of the interiors were darned near identical too, sharing the basic door handle, differing only by whether they were chrome covered, or just plastic.

The Avenger and 200 actually do have differences behind the IP. The door handles are a bit different, and there are several other differences. But they could still use some more distinction.

Personally, I don't care about the Barracuda. If they plan to keep the Challenger, great, please do it, but I see no reason for a second niche vehicle when they could invest it into an RWD midsized sedan for Dodge, which would have assuredly higher yield, and would be a legitimately distinctive vehicle. The midsized market is huge, Chrysler really ought to have 2 players in it.
And no, the Dart doesn't REALLY count. not like they have a V6 option (or comparable, IE Hyundai Sonata)

You actually proved my point, thank you. If it was good enough for the critically acclaimed LH cars, then it should be good enough for the 200/Avenger.

Mike

 

[Erik Latranyi]

 

[Mike V.]

Thanks Erik

 

[JRS200x]

Exactly... Pretty damn similar.

 

[Mike V.]

Exactly... Pretty damn similar.

If you say so, clearly we see things differently :lol:

Mike

 

[Stratuscaster]

Similar in that several "hard point locations" are clearly identical - effort was made to provide different shapes and colors and surrounds and trim. Far more effort than was put forth on JA and JR.

 

[bumonbox]

Technically, doesn't the Dart qualify as a midsize car according to the EPA? I know it is barely a midsize, but it is a tweener, which would give it a chance to compete both with the compacts and the midsize vehicles (possibly, I have no sales experience to know if people compare the Dart with the likes of the Camry and such)...
Ford Fusion - no V6
Hyundai Sonata - no V6
Kia Optima - no V6
Chevy Malibu - no V6
Mazda 6 - no V6, TDI coming
Dodge Dart - no V6


Toyota Camry - has V6
Honda Accord - has V6
Volkswagen Passat - has V6 and TDI
Subaru Legacy - has V6
Chrysler 200 - V6
Dodge Avenger - V6

It wouldn't be unheard of if the next generation mid-size from CGLLC didn't have a V6 option. I find it unlikely though. I wonder if the 3.2L Pentastar could fit legally in a Dart down the road?

Hence why I said "or comparable" and specifically mentioned the Sonata. A bunch of the manufacturers have developed a hard on for turbos. With that in mind, all of the Midsized vehicles you listed (sans Dart) have a more powerful super / turbo charged version of the 4 that is intended as a V6 replacement. While they could offer it in the Dart, let's be real. You can point the EPA classification, but until now, the refrain has been "Chrysler's new small car". It might be a big small car. But it's priced to compete with other small cars. It's packaged like a small car. And compared to other midsized sedans, it is still small. For the record, the Honda Accord sedan earns the classification of a fullsized, but it does not really compete with the Charger, it competes in the - you guess it, midsized sedan market.

In the market's eyes - The Dart is not a midsized sedan - period. The mags don't see it that way, the consumers don't see it that way, and that's partially because the marketing hasn't seen it that way. What we will have is a gaping hole in Dodge's lineup where a car DEFINED as a competitor in the midsized sedan market is absent. Some people will go for the Dart, sure. Some will go for the 200, sure. Others will decide they're looking at a competitor for the Ford Fusion, that the Dart is too small, that the 200 isn't their cup of tea and run along. Not the end of the world, but a lot sales are in this market.

You actually proved my point, thank you. If it was good enough for the critically acclaimed LH cars, then it should be good enough for the 200/Avenger.

Mike

lol, That was my intention.. I agree with your point. It was good enough for the LH cars, the 200 / Avenger have less shared than they did.

 

[JRS200x]

Seats? Identical except materials. Same transmission tunnel, center console, cup holders, gear shift, the cubby hole in front of the gear shift is identical, the AC controls, identical, the section for heated seat buttons etc, identical. Same radio (I'll let that one go though for obvious reasons). They separated the AC vents with a clock and put some cheap piano black plastic around it. gauge cluster has a different surround and they separate the dash into a "2 piece" design on the 200. Even the little curve in the lower edges of the dash on the Avenger is there on the 200, they just flipped it to the inner edge... How is that not remarkably similar?

 

[Erik Latranyi]

Seats? Identical except materials. Same transmission tunnel, center console, cup holders, gear shift, the cubby hole in front of the gear shift is identical, the AC controls, identical, the section for heated seat buttons etc, identical. Same radio (I'll let that one go though for obvious reasons). They separated the AC vents with a clock and put some cheap piano black plastic around it. gauge cluster has a different surround and they separate the dash into a "2 piece" design on the 200. Even the little curve in the lower edges of the dash on the Avenger is there on the 200, they just flipped it to the inner edge... How is that not remarkably similar?

Yes, they share quite a bit.

However, sharing is not bad. These two vehicles do not really compete with each other except for a select small group of people, so it is doubtful the average consumer will notice the similarities.

 

[JRS200x]

We cross shop them all the time here at my dealership. With the incentives they are both great switch cars for people with a lot of negative equity and/or bad credit. It basically comes down to the exterior and whether the person prefers the more sport appearance of the Avenger or the luxury look of the 200.

I am not sure why you don't think they compete with each other though. Price point is pretty much the same, engine options are identical, features/options are very similar, size is identical. Trust me, they compete with each other. It is basically the car version of the T&C/Grand Caravan situation... you will have those that wont' buy the Dodge cause they want "luxury" and those who won't buy the Chrysler because its something their granddad drives, most though? They will cross shop them.