Allpar Forums banner
1 - 20 of 85 Posts

·
Jeepaholic
Joined
·
6,155 Posts
This is covered in a lengthy thread here:

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
105 Posts
Here's the Google translation of the original Italian, edited for greater comprehensibility. (Those who speak Italian are welcome to correct Google's or my errors).

Coming to the Pomigliano D'Arco (Naples) plant, which now produces the Fiat Panda, are the Alfa Romeo Tonale, coming to dealers on June 4, 2022, and a second new model to be produced there: the Dodge Hornet, to be produced on the Tonale line. The Hornet is based on the Tonale.

The new Dodge model will not be marketed in Europe, but is intended for the American market. At the moment it's known that the Tonale and Hornet will share the same GME 2.0 turbo gasoline engine in the US.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
38,541 Posts
remember what killed the 200..interior size.
Not as much size as poor layout, the roofline compromised entry into the front and rear seats. Once in, room wasn’t bad.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,271 Posts
IMHO, the 200 suffered from multiple issues, but got canned way too quickly, money thrown away, to make room for Ram. In hindsight, they should've moved it to Belvedere and continued building it to recoup their investment, and to buy some time to add another product at that plant. But this didn't happen for reasons that we can speculate on, but really don't know.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,520 Posts
IMHO, the 200 suffered from multiple issues, but got canned way too quickly, money thrown away, to make room for Ram. In hindsight, they should've moved it to Belvedere and continued building it to recoup their investment, and to buy some time to add another product at that plant. But this didn't happen for reasons that we can speculate on, but really don't know.
Agreed. A recent Jalopnik blog even called it one of the most underrated cars.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
96 Posts
Agreed. A recent Jalopnik blog even called it one of the most underrated cars.
I am on a couple of general auto sites that arent Mopar focused.Whenever someone dogs the 200 I always post: We have a 2013 200 with the 3.6 engine that we bought new. It has been an incredibly reliable vehicle and we plan to keep it for the foreseeable future. I just really like our 200.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,575 Posts
I am on a couple of general auto sites that arent Mopar focused.Whenever someone dogs the 200 I always post: We have a 2013 200 with the 3.6 engine that we bought new. It has been an incredibly reliable vehicle and we plan to keep it for the foreseeable future. I just really like our 200.
I'm willing to bet my bottom dollar...or €0.84...or £0.72 as the case may be...that it's the 4 cylinder version of the 200 that's being referred to. It would be hard not to argue that the 2.4 litre leaves much to be desired. But...in V6 form, the 200 all of a sudden becomes a very pleasant driving experience.

Looking back...I wonder why the 3.2 litre V6 was never offered on the 200. Since hindsight is always 20/20...I wonder if the 200 should have been offered with the 3.2 as standard equipment, and the 3.6 as the upgrade option.

As long as I'm indulging in my own personal fantasy...A turbocharged or supercharged version of the 3.6 would have been so SWEET!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,021 Posts
I'm willing to bet my bottom dollar...or €0.84...or £0.72 as the case may be...that it's the 4 cylinder version of the 200 that's being referred to. It would be hard not to argue that the 2.4 litre leaves much to be desired. But...in V6 form, the 200 all of a sudden becomes a very pleasant driving experience.

Looking back...I wonder why the 3.2 litre V6 was never offered on the 200. Since hindsight is always 20/20...I wonder if the 200 should have been offered with the 3.2 as standard equipment, and the 3.6 as the upgrade option.

As long as I'm indulging in my own personal fantasy...A turbocharged or supercharged version of the 3.6 would have been so SWEET!!!
I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case. The 2.4 is pretty underwhelming in everything it is used in. I was briefly impressed with it in the Renegade, but that was after 4 years of driving a Nissan March with a 1.0L 4 in it (no turbo).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,520 Posts
I'm willing to bet my bottom dollar...or €0.84...or £0.72 as the case may be...that it's the 4 cylinder version of the 200 that's being referred to. It would be hard not to argue that the 2.4 litre leaves much to be desired. But...in V6 form, the 200 all of a sudden becomes a very pleasant driving experience.

Looking back...I wonder why the 3.2 litre V6 was never offered on the 200. Since hindsight is always 20/20...I wonder if the 200 should have been offered with the 3.2 as standard equipment, and the 3.6 as the upgrade option.

As long as I'm indulging in my own personal fantasy...A turbocharged or supercharged version of the 3.6 would have been so SWEET!!!
People have the same complaint with the 2.5 in the outback vs the 3.6 in the outback
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,179 Posts
Charger also has a compromised rear entry, but it seems to sell very well. Profit is what killed the 200, or should I say, the opportunity cost?
This is true it was opportunity cost. However Charger has a standard for class 120" wheelbase, 200 was on a 108" wheelbase when the Ford Fusion was on a 112" wheelbase. There should have been a Dodge on a 108" wheelbase and a Chrysler on a 112" or 113" wheelbase.
 
1 - 20 of 85 Posts
Top