2015 Chrysler 200C & Jeep Cherokee Limited
How far can you stretch a platform? That is one of the questions underlying car manufacturing these days. Companies like the VW Group have become masters at sharing unseen components to create a myriad of different cars for the different companies under the corporate umbrella; others are just learning this craft. That Fiat Chrysler Automobile uses the same, European-derived platform upon which to build the seemingly quite different Chrysler 200 sedan and Jeep Cherokee crossover is amazing; one is a truly off-road capable SUV and the other a sleek sports sedan.
Each is radical looking compared to the otherwise conservatively designed vehicles that dominate sales in their respective classes; A new Cherokee (pictued below) looks nothing like a Honda CR-V or Ford Escape; likewise the 200C (pictured above) is a slippery, smooth shape compared to even the recently redone Toyota Camry or Honda Accord.
Both come in four cylinder, front wheel drive form, but we aren’t testing those; in fact, both really struggle in the Rocky Mountain region when powered by anything other than a V6. A six’s extra torque is needed to move these hefty machines, each of which weighs substantially more than the class average. FCA has offset this to some degree by fitting each with a 9-speed automatic transmission, which gets good results in the artificial world of EPA testing, but not so much where actual humans live and drive.*
My average fuel consumption, according to the Jeep’s computer, was 17.2mpg over a week’s driving in mainly urban conditions; I could briefly eek out 22-23mpg on cruise-controlled highway runs. Other independent tests show the Cherokee V6 to average under 20mpg in mixed use as well. The 200C showed 18.5mpg in similar use, though it will touch high-20s on the highway. Both have a novel all wheel drive system that can disengage the rear wheels to (theoretically) improve mileage, or quickly reengage it when conditions dictate.
The Cherokee’s DOHC, 3.2-liter Pentastar V6 is a smooth operator, with a refined engine note, though it doesn’t have the low-end or mid-range torque (271hp and 239lb-ft at a high 4400rpm) to really move the Cherokee along like one would think, based on the engine’s ratings. Blame this on the 3-400 pounds of extra mass it is carrying around at all times. However, the Jeep is now almost the only vehicle in its class, aside from the aging Chevrolet Equinox and GMC Terrain twins, to offer an optional V6; Ford, Subaru and Kia offer turbocharged four cylinders, most everyone else only non-turbo 4s. This gives the Jeep something of a USP; it will hit 60mph in under seven seconds, and can tow 4500lb loads with some verve.
The 200C uses a larger version of the same V6; its 3.5 liters give outputs of 295hp and 262lb-ft of torque, so 60mph arrives in six seconds flat; vehicles like the 500 pound lighter, V6-powered Camry XSE and XLE are slightly punchier and offer better mileage, but aren’t available with all wheel drive. The 200C’s steering is accurate and its optional lane-departure system is subtle in its intervention—no screeching noises, only a gentle nudge to return the driver to the correct path—and its handling competent. Ride quality falls between the two aforementioned Camrys; though it is a noisier machine over most pavement.
About the only vehicles that really compare right now to the AWD Chrysler are the new Subaru Legacy 3.6R, which is surprisingly similar in economy, though substantially slower thanks to its stupid, continuously variable transmission, and the Ford Fusion AWD, whose turbo makes it feel at least as quick at high altitude, though it feels cheaper inside, has an inferior infotaintment system and costs substantially more.
To that point, the Chrysler has a lovely cabin, full of interesting shapes, soft-touch surfaces, nicely finished leather (though others’ front seats are more supportive and their rear benches more accommodating) and very thoughtfully integrated infotainment systems. A gripe is that the four round knobs that control the climate control and rotary shifter are easy to confuse, yet the only interior I can think of that matches or trumps the 200C’s is that in the Mazda6, a stellar example of what careful management of mass can do for both performance and fuel economy. Though slower than the 200C it is still quick enough for most folk at 7.2 seconds to 60, returns about 30mpg in the city and 40mpg on the highway and handles and rides much better. But it doesn’t come with AWD.
The Cherokee also has a nicely designed, high-quality cockpit and the same easy-to-fathom screens (up to 7 inch between the instruments and 8.4 in the center), which are rife with useful information. Its only competitor in interior quality is the Mazda CX-5, which also just happens to be the only CUV that handles and rides as well. That the Jeep is much better off road and slightly quicker are merits to be contrasted to the Mazda’s much better real-world fuel economy.
That the 200C and Cherokee come from the same component set shows what can be done with careful planning; if they weighed less they would be clear favorites in their categories. Despite the handicap of their extra pounds, they still are compelling: interesting looking, well built of superior materials, and offering six cylinders (Cherokee) and all wheel drive (200C) where these features are less and less common. The Chrysler is also excellent value; that the Jeep sits at the expensive end of its competitive set doesn’t seem to have hurt its sales one iota.
EPA ratings:
2015 Chrysler 200C AWD: 18/29mpg; 22mpg combined
2015 Jeep Cherokee V6 Limited: 20/28mpg; 23mpg combined
Price as tested:
2015 Chrysler 200C AWD: $35,900
2015 Jeep Cherokee V6 Limited: $39,505
Here is what Chrysler has to say about the 200C.
Here is what Jeep has to say about the Cherokee.
*The main issue seems to be that the top three gear ratios are all overdrives, so in the real world they rarely get used. A better solution would seem to be to either tighten the gap between ratios or to fit a shorter final-drive ratio, so all of the gears get exploited more of the time. But that would probably work against Chrysler and Jeep in EPA testing, and the ability to crow about great city and highway numbers is what helps move the metal. At least FCA has made significant progress on the programming of this gearbox; upon its release it was blighted by really abrupt gear changes and odd ratio selections; now it operates almost as well as some class-leading ‘boxes, such as the 6-speed Skyactiv unit Mazda uses and the 8-speed one built by ZF that resides in most European cars these days.
Colorado AvidGolfer is the state’s leading resource for golf and the lifestyle that surrounds it. It publishes eight issues annually and proudly delivers daily content via www.coloradoavidgolfer.com.
