Vellum Venom Vignette: Redesigned Chrysler 200?

by Sajeev Mehta

Published: November 27th, 2012

vellum venom vignette redesigned chrysler 200

TTAC commentator halftruth writes/draws:

I got taking a look at the Chrysler 200 recently and while I want to like it, I cant get past the little droop on the bottom of the tail lights. I took a couple of stabs to see what they would look like flat and perhaps they are too VW-ish, but I like them better this way..

What do you think? I did them quickly in paint but I think you get the point…thanks!

After:

Sajeev answers:

Normally I prefer less fussy tail light designs, but not when it comes to very tall and clumsy proportioned sedans. And when you think tall and clumsy sedans, the Chrysler Sebring-200 is one of the worst offenders on the planet. And not in that ironic hipster way like a Scion xD or xB or whatever…nor in that cheap and cheerful way like a penalty box Chevy Aveo or Nissan Versa. The Chrysler 200 is simply a poorly proportioned vehicle. And it needs all the help it can get.

My point is witnessed above, in the abomination that was the Chrysler Sebring. The Chrysler 200 needs those tail light flairs of modest style, it visually thins a plump sedan.

So I will disagree with you, even though I’m kicking myself for doing it! What say you, Best and Brightest???

#ChryslerSebring #Design

Sajeev Mehta

More by Sajeev Mehta

Comments

Join the conversation

2 of 22 comments

DweezilSFV on Dec 30, 2012

Late to the game, but..... The little squib of taillight in the trunk lid is the detail that bugs me.And so many cars are using this styling cliche, especially since Infiniti's M or G or whatever adopted it early last decade. It may have been a rip from Bangle BMWs. It makes no sense, follows no logical line, completes no cohesive design element. The new Camrys are the best examples of this and the worst offenders yet. Thankfully on the 200 there isn't that large an offense. The Sebring had,[in spite of the back up/turn signal busy-ness] at least a coherent tail light shape. They helped balance that big rear end as well. The 200 is a sideways "improvement".

Like Reply
Jayzwhiterabbit on Jan 20, 2013

This car and it's Dodge twin, the Avenger, are so oddly-styled that it really had me questioning if Chrysler designers were taking mescaline or something when they came up with them. I mean, really! The shapes of the Sebring/200 and Avenger are just bizarre, and do not translate well to the small size of the cars. Both are just ridiculously over-styled. I can certainly see why Chrysler needed the federal bailout. I cannot imagine anyone viewing these cars as being competitive in any way. I actually have a level of contempt for anyone that has bought the Sebring/200 or Avenger - how could anyone actually pay any hard-earned money on these embarrassments? Bizarre.

Like Reply

Recent Comments

EBFlex Garbage but for less!
FreedMike I actually had a deal in place for a PHEV - a Mazda CX-90 - but it turned out to be too big to fit comfortably in my garage, thus making too difficult to charge, so I passed. But from that, I learned the Truth About PHEVs - they're a VERY niche product, and probably always be, because their use case is rather nebulous. Yes, you can run on EV power for 25-30 miles, plug it in at home on a slow charger, and the next day, you're ready to go again. Great in theory, but in practice, a) you still need a home charger, b) you paid a LOT more for the car than you would have for a standard hybrid, and c) you discover the nasty secret of PHEVs, which is that when they're on battery power, they're absolute pigs to drive. Meanwhile, to maintain its' piglike battery-only performance, it still needs to be charged, so you're running into all the (overstated) challenges that BEV owners have, with none of the performance that BEV owners like. To quote King George in "Hamilton": " Awesome. Wow." In the Mazda's case, the PHEV tech was used as a performance enhancer - which worked VERY nicely - but it's the only performance-oriented PHEV out there that doesn't have a Mercedes-level pricetag. So who's the ideal owner here? Far as I can tell, it's someone who doesn't mind doing his 25 mile daily commute in a car that's slow as f*ck, but also wants to take the car on long road trips that would be inconvenient in a BEV. Meanwhile, the MPG Uber Alles buyers are VERY cost conscious - thus the MPG Uber Alles thing - and won't be enthusiastic about spending thousands more to get similar mileage to a standard hybrid. That's why the Volt failed. The tech is great for a narrow slice of buyers, but I think the real star of the PHEV revival show is the same tax credits that many BEVs get.
RHD The speed limit was raised from 62.1 MPH to 68.3 MPH. It's a slight difference which will, more than anything, lower the fines for the guy caught going 140 KPH.
Msquare The argument for unlimited autobahns has historically been that lane discipline is a life-or-death thing instead of a suggestion. That and marketing cars designed for autobahn speeds gives German automakers an advantage even in places where you can't hope to reach such speeds. Not just because of enforcement, but because of road conditions. An old Honda commercial voiced by Burgess Meredith had an Accord going 110 mph. Burgess said, "At 110 miles per hour, we have found the Accord to be quiet and comfortable. At half that speed, you may find it to be twice as quiet and comfortable." That has sold Mercedes, BMW's and even Volkswagens for decades. The Green Party has been pushing for decades for a 100 km/h blanket limit for environmental reasons, with zero success.
Varezhka The upcoming mild-hybrid version (aka 500 Ibrida) can't come soon enough. Since the new 500e is based on the old Alfa Mito and Opel Adam platform (now renamed STLA City) you'd have thought they've developed the gas version together.