aGetting into the airport on a Monday evening doesn't leave a plethora of choices at the rental car booth- even in the Emerald Aisle.
Over my better judgement (and company spending) I hopped into a 200 over a Versa.

The first thing I noticed about this abomination was it propensity to try to kill you at any chance it gets.
Upon entering and sitting down, you quickly realize that visibility is non-existent over your shoulders or though the rear view. Hell, even looking forwards is a frustrating because as soon as you're looking to where you want to go on a right hand turn, the Texas sized rear view mirror blocks any view of the road, forcing you to duck underneath it to see whats coming. The gauge cluster is just stupid looking with its bullet magazine looking fuel and coolant temp gauges and those lit up tic marks around the numbers on the gauge faces. It feels like you're at the county fair.

While accelerating onto the highway, power delivery is slow. I don't mean like short-bus slow, I mean waiting for your Easy Mac to cool off so you can eat it slow. That downshift takes forever- which is surprising because the transmission is incredibly eager to get into top gear by 15mph in the parking lot. Seriously, 3 gear changes happen one after the other before the speedometer his 10. At cruise, the car would be okay except that the chassis has 5,xxx miles on it and has a constant high pitch rattle under the dash somewhere, a consistent squeek coming from the rear deck or doors (can't tell, don't care), and the wind noise on the side view mirrors fills the cabin. When those things aren't going on, the vibration from expansion joints in the highway echo throughout the car to the point where my fiance on the blue tooth said "WHAT THE HELL IS THAT?!"

However, the worst has yet to come. That same s*** transmission that can't make up its mind is at its absolute worst while decelerating with no throttle, or when decelerating with gentle braking. You'd expect it to chill out and come to a stop light without drama, but nooooooo. The transmission decides that on each of its infinite amount of down shifts (seriously, it shifts more than a Fast and the Furious movie)that it will down shift violently, kick up the RPM's unpredictably & randomly, and launch you forwards in an aggressive fashion causing the driver a moment of brown underwear stain inducing panic and your concern for the vehicle/animal/kid who is chasing a ball into the street that you're about to hit. It isn't subtle. It isn't predictable. Its down right f*** dangerous. Like taking your hands off the wheel when you turn on the cruise control. This transmission could even suck the fun out of the convertible version of this car. When the gear selector knob (stupid) is turned into "low," the situation improves since it'll behave like a somewhat proper automatic while accelerating, but only serves to amplify the problems while it downshifts.

The only marginally redeeming factor about this car is that the stereo is alight.

Seriously, I've never hated a car more, and I think that CVT Versa would have been a hell of a better choice.
If I had bought this car, it would probably be left running in a bad part of town if it didn't crash itself into a wall downshifting or burning out the clutches in the transmission first.

I rented one of these and I think you're being too nice.

OriginalWheelman wrote:I rented one of these and I think you're being too nice.

Embrace the hate

I agree fervently. After my first and only rental experience with one, I'll argue vehemently if they try to put me in one. I'd rather step down a size (and to a different brand) if that's the only alternative. I found it to be far, far, far more horrible than I imagined any modern car could possibly be. It disappointed in every area and, even in the areas where it was TRYING to do something right, it missed so badly that it just ended up making things worse.

The transmission behavior was unbelievable. I cannot fathom producing that product, testing it, and deciding that a car that behaves that way is acceptable to sell to the public. It's simply lazy and broken. It fights itself, and the driver gets hammered around as the car shudders in the process. I don't think my LS8 has made as many gearchanges in its entire life as the 200 I rented made over 500 miles. Hell, one intersection in the 200 is probably a commute's worth of gearchanges in the LS8. That sounds like hyperbole. It's not. It's REALLY that bad. And the shifts are not smooth. Because the engine doesn't make any usable torque south of 4000rpm, every shift means a notable loss of power and then a corresponding jolt of power as the engine surges back up to the sweet spot. This happens SEVERAL TIMES per minute, at least. Leaving a red light, you shift 3-4 times before even crossing the crosswalk! Each shift felt dramatically, and each followed by another as the car wages constant war between making enough power to actually move and keeping revs as low as unreasonably possible.

In case you haven't read my lengthy, highly dissatisfied review from several months ago, here it is: 2015-chrysler-200-review-shift-incessantly-t597849.html

As bad as it is, I can't see having an Altima as an alternative making me any happier. Both are truly indefensible, horrendous, abominable excuses for automobiles, and everyone involved in both products should be fired and shot.

I was just thinking. Since the 1980's, has Chrysler made ANY compact car that was not disliked?? I'm having a difficult time coming up with one.

For example

K-Car and its many derivations? SUCK
Neon/PT Loser? (some might exclude the SRT-4, but they were built cheaply/poorly which overshadowed their performance) SUCK
Stratus/Sebring? SUCK
new Dart? MEH
200? SUCK

The lastest domestic Chrysler built compact I can think of that wasn't universally despised was the old 1960's/early 70's Dodge Darts with the slant 6 motor. They were far from beloved or respected when they were newer. But over time with as sad as Chrysler's offerings had become, those old slant 6's became less disliked to the point they were almost revered, well, assuming they didn't rot out.

Thoughts?

^ The late 80s/early 90's LeBaron was a pretty popular car. They weren't the most reliable things, but they sold a s*** ton of them. One lady I work with bought THREE. IN A ROW. I'm still amazed that the body style lasted so long.

MinisterofDOOM wrote:I agree fervently. After my first and only rental experience with one, I'll argue vehemently if they try to put me in one. I'd rather step down a size (and to a different brand) if that's the only alternative. I found it to be far, far, far more horrible than I imagined any modern car could possibly be. It disappointed in every area and, even in the areas where it was TRYING to do something right, it missed so badly that it just ended up making things worse.

The transmission behavior was unbelievable. I cannot fathom producing that product, testing it, and deciding that a car that behaves that way is acceptable to sell to the public. It's simply lazy and broken. It fights itself, and the driver gets hammered around as the car shudders in the process. I don't think my LS8 has made as many gearchanges in its entire life as the 200 I rented made over 500 miles. Hell, one intersection in the 200 is probably a commute's worth of gearchanges in the LS8. That sounds like hyperbole. It's not. It's REALLY that bad. And the shifts are not smooth. Because the engine doesn't make any usable torque south of 4000rpm, every shift means a notable loss of power and then a corresponding jolt of power as the engine surges back up to the sweet spot. This happens SEVERAL TIMES per minute, at least. Leaving a red light, you shift 3-4 times before even crossing the crosswalk! Each shift felt dramatically, and each followed by another as the car wages constant war between making enough power to actually move and keeping revs as low as unreasonably possible.

In case you haven't read my lengthy, highly dissatisfied review from several months ago, here it is: 2015-chrysler-200-review-shift-incessantly-t597849.html

As bad as it is, I can't see having an Altima as an alternative making me any happier. Both are truly indefensible, horrendous, abominable excuses for automobiles, and everyone involved in both products should be fired and shot.

Completely with you on all of that. Except the Altima. I'll take the Altima (or ANYTHING else) over the 200. How someone let that operation go and called it "operates to spec" is beyond me. I'd rather ride with a 15 year old driver with a learners permit who is also learning to drive a manual transmission that pilot this f*** thing around.

One could only hope that this many changes leaves the engagement a little softer after a couple years of regular use. Alternatively, I wouldn't be surprised if the opposite happened and they blow up their internals because they're worn down too quickly from over use.
I sincerely hope there is never, ever another transmission that is this bad. Its not even comically bad, its just flat out awful.

Bubba1 wrote:Thoughts?

You forgot the "Dodge" Colt.

The Colt was a Mitsubishi product licensed by Chrysler, and wasn't a bad vehicle at all.

Is anyone here actually surprised by this?

frapjap wrote:The late 80s/early 90's LeBaron was a pretty popular car.

I know a guy that bought one that Jon Voight used to own...or was it John Voight?

frapjap wrote:^ The late 80s/early 90's LeBaron was a pretty popular car. They weren't the most reliable things, but they sold a s*** ton of them. One lady I work with bought THREE. IN A ROW. I'm still amazed that the body style lasted so long.

Hmmm. I think you might have found a winner. I remember that generation LeBaron now, even rented a few of them. the older K car LeBarons were dreadful. But the 1987-95 LeBarons were not bad looking cars at all, especially the convertibles. They were cheap, mediocre, and not particularly reliable, but most importantly, not disliked. Well done, sir.

AZhitman wrote:The Colt was a Mitsubishi product licensed by Chrysler, and wasn't a bad vehicle at all.

I agree, not a bad subcompact car in its day. I just thought of another old bad Chrysler built small car. Remember the Dodge Omni? LOL. Though the GLH versions were kinda cool, well, until they broke.

200 has an exceedingly nice interior, decent handling, nice IP, and the world's best infotainment system. The competition doesn't come anywhere close to UConnect.

But the transmission is a god damn disappointment. Just... what the hell is up with that gearbox?

Man, I strongly disagree, Jesda (not something I'm used to saying!). I think the 200's interior is crap. I think it's contrived and chaotic with terrible ergonomics. I think the IP is the biggest disaster I've ever seen. And I think Uconnect is trash. Maybe less trash than the rest, but it's still unfathomable garbage, which is baffling to me. This is the era of iPhones and ease-of-use and yet in-car infotainment systems seem to be designed according to the rules of 1993 software design. It's a sea of obtuse, opaque menu-diving. We know better than this. Software anywhere else is decades ahead of this kind of design. It's not acceptable and it's not good.

The IP in the lower-end models is very different from that on the higher-end models, and it's HORRENDOUS. The fuel gauge is so comically horrible it wraps around the "so funny it's terrible/actually terrible and not funny" meter 6 times. It looks like this and makes me want to find a dark corner to sob in:



It is the single worst instrument panel I've ever seen. That includes 1980s Lincolns. And 2010s Lincolns, for that matter. It's overstyled, underfunctional, and unattractive.

Look at those middle gauge stack things. INDIVIDUAL LED PIPS. It's like 1986 ate a Tiger Electronics factory and then sharted all over the dashboard.

For crying out loud, they felt the need to emboss "TACHOMETER" on a chrome slab beneath the tach (same for the speedometer).

It's also ringed in the same stupid radial-faded eyebleederblue tacky crap as everyone else's horrid gauge clusters these days.

It's terrible.

MinisterofDOOM wrote:Man, I strongly disagree, Jesda (not something I'm used to saying!). I think the 200's interior is crap. I think it's contrived and chaotic with terrible ergonomics. I think the IP is the biggest disaster I've ever seen. And I think Uconnect is trash. Maybe less trash than the rest, but it's still unfathomable garbage, which is baffling to me. This is the era of iPhones and ease-of-use and yet in-car infotainment systems seem to be designed according to the rules of 1993 software design. It's a sea of obtuse, opaque menu-diving. We know better than this. Software anywhere else is decades ahead of this kind of design. It's not acceptable and it's not good.

I'm not sure what you mean.

UConnect is quick, clean, and functional. There's a reason why it's good enough for six-figure exotics. It's faster and more intuitive than iDrive, MMI, COMAND, MFT/LFT, and CUE (not that any of those are that great).

You touch the object. It does its thing. There honestly isn't much difference between the Settings menus of an iOS/Android device or the settings of the 8.4 UConnect system. It's quick because it's built on top of a QNX core. If you remember back in the 90s, QNX was the only full-featured multitasking OS with a GUI and graphical browser (and web server!) that could be booted and run off a floppy. It was possible because instead of one fat OS gorging itself on resources all at once regardless of whether the system was idle, it was designed to run as a set of servers that were deployed individually as needed, on demand, in real time.

No lag. Instant response. Some of the lower-end UC systems can be a bit cryptic, like requiring JPGs on USB devices to be at the root level of the drive in order for the system to detect them for use as background images, but that's not an issue for the full-featured systems.

It's never going to be as easy to use as the Alpine stereo in your Lincoln or the two-knob AM/FM radio in my Miata, but it does a really spectacular job of blending a mountain of useful features into a cohesive UI. And the menus and buttons are all large enough to see and use without being too distracted. I think your gripes are with infotainment systems and configurable IPs in the car in general, but they're no more challenging to use than a modern smartphone.

You'll find that the instrument panels in the S-class, Chrysler 200, Chevy Volt, and Cadillac CTS follow most of the same design principles, for better or worse. Most importantly, once you decide on what kind of information you prefer to see (I like to keep an eye on coolant temp and fuel range), you never have to touch it again. It's not something you have to fiddle with unless you want -more- than the information normally available from a traditional set of analog gauges.

The same functions were available in Cadillacs from 1986-2005 but rather than a colorful display with directional menus, GM had them buried in a single-line electrofluorescent computer display that you had to scroll through or reset. It was way ahead of everyone in the industry when it debuted but it was like programming a clock radio. You could also view and clear codes without plugging in a scanner or having to count through cryptic flashing lights.

The only concern is whether these modern displays will retain their brightness after ten years. After just three years the LCD on the factory navigation in my Lincoln Navigator started to look dim on cold days. LCD technology has come a long way in a decade but it's impossible to know how long they'll last until they start failing. Toyota's gray/beige backlit segmented displays and GM's EF displays have, thus far, lasted nearly three decades.

Ford is going in the same direction, ditching Microsoft for RIM's QNX.


Personally, all I need is a volume knob.

As for the rest of the 200's interior, the materials (in the higher trim levels) are truly superb, storage is generous, buttons and knobs work with heft and precision, and everything is easy to reach. I just wish the A-pillar wasn't so damn thick. That got on my nerves a lot.

Someone traded the tach / speedo needles for plastic picnic butter knives.

AZhitman wrote:Someone traded the tach / speedo needles for plastic picnic butter knives.

Gee, I thought those speedo/tach needles were recycled cocktail drink umbrellas with the top part discarded...

Jesda wrote:[Ford is going in the same direction, ditching Microsoft for RIM's QNX.

Yep, that reminded me of a Lincoln test drive I took awhile back (in order to get a gift certificate). The salesman bragged about the Microsoft connection. I then asked him if that meant I had to turn the car off and turn it on every time it failed. He wasn't amused.

There was another little (hidden) detail that I'm surprised they even bothered with since you can't see it without looking for it.

This thing in under the center stack int eh storage area behind the firewall.


Hard to see, don't know why they bothered.
Probably because they hid everything else from you too- that stupidly large A pillar, and the super thick B pillar- don't even get me started on that. It probably makes the car safer so the occupant can die a little more inside knowing that the car will be repairable after the crash.

I remember finding one of those in a co-workers rental car and wondering what the f*** was going on.

God I hate the 200.

Bubba1 wrote:I was just thinking. Since the 1980's, has Chrysler made ANY compact car that was not disliked??

K-Car and its many derivations? SUCK
Neon/PT Loser? (some might exclude the SRT-4, but they were built cheaply/poorly which overshadowed their performance) SUCK
Stratus/Sebring? SUCK
new Dart? MEH
200? SUCK

Thoughts?

Dodge Caliber should be on your list.
Had one as a rental a few years ago, and probably should have taken it back. Worst rental ever.
Want to drag race with it? Pack a lunch.

PapaSmurf2k3 wrote:I remember finding one of those in a co-workers rental car and wondering what the f*** was going on.

God I hate the 200.

That's a great skyline signed by one of America's greatest and most iconic engineers.

I feel like I'm reading a crappy article on TTAC where people complain just to complain, to give the impression of being insightful

They're called easter eggs. You'll find them in everything from software applications to appliances to automobiles.

Sometimes I think you people spend too much time in your beater 240s, inhaling exhaust fumes and becoming detached from reality.

http://jalopnik.com/5247553/top-ten-aut ... aster-eggs

I wouldn't want my signature involved with such a horrible piece of automobile.

PapaSmurf2k3 wrote:I wouldn't want my signature involved with such a horrible piece of automobile.

Sure, but it's pretty absurd to not know what city and whose signature that is, especially if it's in a Chrysler.

Hint: It's not Phil Collins and that isn't London.

If Nissan took the skyline of Yokohama, added Mr K's signature, and hid it in the glovebox of the Versa sedan it wouldn't make a terrible car any better or worse. It's just an easter egg. Like Walter P Chrysler, Katayama was an icon.

What's sad though are how many Mercedes-Benz owners are annoyed by Gottlieb Daimler's signature being affixed to their windshields. "Who is this guy and how do I remove this?" Typical ignorant twats. The man was a legend, along with his partner Wilhelm Maybach.

Though TTAC sucks, this is an interesting read:
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2014/0 ... the-leash/

I despise the shift "logic" but this explains why it is as terrible as it is.

AZhitman wrote:Someone traded the tach / speedo needles for plastic picnic butter knives.

See, I don't get this. White needles are used because they cast light in a certain tone. You'll find nearly identical white needles in Saabs, BMWs, and Mazdas.



There's a lot of really important stuff to hate this car for, like the base engine and the atrocious 9-speed gearbox. I don't understand why you guys are harping about needles and signatures. None of that stuff is actually bad.

Jesda wrote:

AZhitman wrote:Someone traded the tach / speedo needles for plastic picnic butter knives.

See, I don't get this. White needles are used because they cast light in a certain tone. You'll find nearly identical white needles in Saabs, BMWs, and Mazdas.



There's a lot of really important stuff to hate this car for, like the base engine and the atrocious 9-speed gearbox. I don't understand why you guys are harping about needles and signatures. None of that stuff is actually bad.

Look closely at the shape of the needles.

You're looking at the needles at an angle because the picture is taken up close, allowing you to see the sides, giving you the impression that they're flared outward. They aren't.

Almost -all- instrument gauges are shaped this way.

Here's Nissan, for example:



Come on, man. Be real.