text: I asked the dealer 2 questions- he responded only to one which was not helpful at all. I won't bother him again.
  I wrote an email bit never heard back. I drove up to the car dealership to only find the car had been sold. However it was still on the car gurus Web site. Not a satisfying experience.
  They were very helpful friendly and approachable. They gave me a great deal. I dealt with Lennie. Purchased the vehicle and pick it up 2 days later.
  I am not ready at this time to purchase a truck. They contacted me and provided me with the information that I needed.
  They were extremely pushy and the car wasnt even in proper viewing state upon my arrival even after booking an appointment 1 week prior
  Typically, the presence of a convertible top makes any car incrementally more fun, and when the car in question is a Chrysler 200, the value-add of a drop-top is almost a necessity.
  Considering that this is a 7-year old car (if you count its Sebring predecessor as the same car, which you should), the 200 looks quite sharp. In 2010, Chrysler “replaced” the Sebring with the 200. In effect, it was a mild update that happened to have a totally new name. The changes were thoughtful and well placed. The angles and character lines were smoothed out. Thankfully, the strake-lines that previously graced the hood were eviscerated.
  The 200 looks right for a contemporary sedan and convertible. Headlights feature an LED accent strip, while the lower front fascia (aerodynamic bodywork below the front bumper) is elegant and sporting.
  Trims for the 200 include the base LX, Touring and Limited. Our test model was a 200 S Convertible Limited (there is no LX drop-top). The S line trim is available with either the Touring or Limited. It adds a blacked-out grille, 17- or 18-inch wheels, and special S badging inside and out. It is an up-rated option, but does well to give the 200 a more aggressive appearance.
  Overall, the 200 sedan looks well put together, but the area around the rear door and rear window fit into the trunk panel in a very awkward manner. Chrysler has done the best it can to breathe life into the old Sebring, but it could not get around this bit of the architecture. On the convertible, the ghosts of the old platform are seen in the poor spacing between the convertible cover/trunklid and the rest of the body.
  The cabin of the 200 looks fresh at first glance, but closer inspection reveals poor fit and finish as well. This is to be expected, given how long the vehicle has been around, but there are little touches that signify its age. The turn signal stem (on the side of the steering column) always feels like breaking a chicken bone when turning directionals on and off. There is no other way to describe it.
  There's an old saying around muscle-car and NASCAR circles that, “There’s no replacement for displacement.” The same can be said about the engine offerings within the 200 lineup. We’ll start with the good: Chrysler’s 3.6-liter Pentastar V6 makes 283 horsepower and should be the engine to get. It is a robust yet efficient engine that has won awards and is quite capable of raising your heart rate.
  This is not the case with the standard 2.4-liter inline 4-cylinder. Producing only 173 horsepower (to move a car that weighs 3,400 pounds, or 3,800 pounds in the case of the convertible), it is far from what one would consider performance machinery. It would be enough if this was just about sluggish acceleration, but there's more to it. The lackluster four-pot is so underpowered and has to work so hard to get the 200 anywhere that you'll barely gain any fuel economy by opting for it instead of the V6.
  The 2.4-liter achieves fuel economy of 20 mpg city and 31 highway in the sedan when equipped with the 6-speed automatic. The base 4-cylinder-powered LX returns only 21 city and 29 highway (sedan) or 18/27 (convertible). Chrysler likes to boast about the 20/31 fuel economy, but that requires opting for a Touring or Limited trim. It is a lot of small print, when all you had to do was opt for the V6, which returns 19 city and 20 highway. Sure, you can trust the numbers and go for the 2.4-liter, but to get anywhere this century, you will be laying into the throttle so much that you will not return the advertised fuel economy.
  The 200 certainly experiences body roll in corners, but not to the extent that it is unsafe. You will get used to its wallowy suspension, as it reminds one of the driving manners in a '90s coupe like a Chevrolet Monte Carlo. Owners won’t be taking the 200 to a track day anytime soon (we really hope not), so its lack of stiffness should not be a major issue.
  An added benefit of this older suspension is that it absolutely sops up imperfections in the road. Many of the latest midsize cars have very stiff suspensions, which are meant to provide a “sporty” ride. This might appease the Car and Truck of the Year voter, but the average driver could care less if a midsize sedan can maintain composure on a downhill stretch of road with a decreasing radius turn. The average driver would prefer not to have several fillings shaken loose by an impossibly hard ride, and the 200’s squishy suspension is never in jeopardy of doing that.
  This happens to be another area where the 200 benefits from being a little long in the tooth. Many of the 200’s contemporaries (which include the Lincoln MKZ and Buick Regal) are hellbent on stuffing every last feature into the center stack, which can overwhelm the driver. More is not always better, and this is especially the case when you enter your vehicle in the dark and cold and need to know exactly where a select few controls are to get going.
  The 200 celebrates a traditional layout, with the logical placement of simple climate and audio controls. Simplicity is key with in-vehicle controls, and while the 200 achieves this because it has relatively few features, it is easy to use, nonetheless.
  The convertible is available in hard- and soft-top versions—each presents a unique set of pros and cons. The hard-top offers more secure year-round protection from the elements and is becoming a more desirable option in the drop-top market segment. Unfortunately, this folding hard-top is an early design compared to its late-model rivals. The top takes a long time to deploy, and when it does, it makes for a rather awkward side profile and overall design.
  The soft-top is far more visually pleasing, but also takes some time to deploy. The trunk that doubles as the convertible cover suffers from uneven spacing between panels. This makes for a low-quality appearance, and the top itself suffers from an awful lot of road noise.