Chrysler 200 vs Malibu LTZ vs Fusion SE 2.0EB vs Camry SE V6

[cp-the-nerd]

Last year, I won a weekend trip out to California to take part in a test drive event sponsored by Motor Trend (and probably Chrysler). 5 auto enthusiasts were chosen from video auditions, and we drove the piss out of the 2014 Malibu LTZ Turbo, Fusion SE 2.0EB, Camry SE V6 (*not the brand new one*), and the then-new 2015 Chrysler 200S V6.

 

I'll break down the individual tests with scoring out of 5 stars. I hope you guys enjoy the long read.

 

Acceleration:

 

Chrysler 200S - * * * * *

Toyota Camry - * * * *

Chevy Malibu - * * *

Ford Fusion - * * *

 

*Note: we were required to use sport mode and paddle shifters.

 

First things first: the 2.0T engines are outclassed by the V6s. To be fair, we were at the El Toro Air Base in 100 degree heat and we weren't allowed to brake-torque which diminished their power. Regardless, V6s feel better and more natural.

The Pentastar V6 in the Chrysler 200S had a TON of personality with a sweet exhaust note. Every time it launched, people turned and looked. The Camry's 3.5L V6 is smooth and strong, but lacked the low end punch of the 200S and frankly sounded boring.

Speaking of personality, the 2.0T engines had NONE. Way too much effort was spent removing all the fun turbo noises. Manufacturers must be afraid average folks buying midsizers wont like the blow off sound or think something's broken. Anyway, they feel like N/A 2.0L engines off the line, and torque management reduces the fun significantly.

 

As far as manual shifting goes, a lot of them were wonky and flawed (except the 200S). The Malibu uses that garbage rocker button on top of the shifter, which is just asinine in practice causing you to contort your wrist. Now in the Fusion--try to follow me here--the car decides it's going to upshift for you by around 5500-6000 rpm... but doesn't ACTUALLY shift until redline. If you try to use the paddle above that point, you are greeted with a clumsy double upshift. This happened to every driver. The Camry has a nonsensical range select when you're sitting still that reads like you can upshift all the way to 6th while parked.

 

Braking:

 

Ford Fusion - * * * * *

Chrysler 200 - * * * *

Chevy Malibu - * * * *

Toyota Camry - *

 

We performed a test where we accelerated to 40-50 mph and made a full brake panic stop with a hard left avoidance maneuver to assess the ABS and ability to maintain control.

 

The Fusion hands down has the best brake pedal. Feels like a performance car, easy to modulate, great delivery and feedback. The 200 and Malibu had equal braking capability, but the 200's pedal felt hard and the Malibu's had a spongy sensation. All three cars stopped very impressively and maintained steering control.

 

The Toyota Camry absolutely failed this test. Slamming on the mushy brake pedal and steering hard resulted in a 4-wheel slide with minimal intervention. You lose all sensation and feedback from the driver's seat and pray it does what you need. For one driver, it actually slid through the cones off the course, forcing an instructor to leap out of the way and probably piss his pants.

 

Handling:

 

Chevy Malibu - * * * * *

Ford Fusion - * * * * *

Chrysler 200 - * * * *

Toyota Camry - * *

 

We ran both a high-speed slalom test, and an emergency lane change at 60 mph.

 

I think the big shocker for everyone was the Chevy Malibu. Everyone--including myself--expected a flaccid driving car based on the reviews of the '13. If the difference is simply the refresh, then they did an exceptional job. The Fusion and Malibu tied for perfectly tuned steering and great chassic control. I have no idea how either company did that with an EPS rack in a FWD midsizer.

 

The 200 was no slouch, but you could feel the heft just a bit more in the slalom and the steering was good, but not great. No complaints.

 

The Camry had the numbest steering of the bunch, and you could feel hints of slip in the slalom, which gave a sense of foreboding in the emergency lane change test that followed.

 

I'm proud to say I got all 4 cars sideways like a friggin' action film, and then reigned them in through the finish line. Driving instructor told us to go balls out, and I took him literally. I had a blast and I still never hit a cone!

 

With that said, 3 of the cars kept me 100% in control under Die Hard conditions. The Camry did not. As soon as the tires broke free, the steering wheel was just for show. It becomes a game of point and pray.

 

Interior:

 

Chrysler 200 - * * * * *

Chevy Malibu - * * * *

Ford Fusion - * * *

Toyota Camry - * *

 

The Chrysler 200 had the best interior of the bunch. Design wise it was a clear step above the rest. The gauge cluster is gorgeous, the paddle shifters are metal, the seats are exceptional. Only issue is with the complexity of the center stack and certain touch-screen controlled features.

 

The Malibu had the most functional interior. Design wise, it's kind of weird looking, but MyLink is straight forward and everything is backed up with clear manual controls that keep your concentration on driving. Another bonus was best in test quiet tuning and road isolation.

 

The Fusion's let down was the big bland matte-gray slab center stack known as MyFordTouch. The whole thing is a smooth touch panel with nothing to tell your hand where it is without taking your eyes off the road. It also looks cheap, which begs the question: what the hell were they thinking during R&D? The rest of the interior is high quality and attractive, moreso than the Malibu.

 

The Toyota Camry once again showed signs of Toyota phoning in the car in a segment they own. The shifter knob was loose, able to twist back and forth, which brought additional attention to the nonsensical zig-zag pattern of the shift gates. The gauge cluster was by far the most low tech and unappealing. The infotainment screen was small and low resolution, and the door panels had poor fit and finish with a bland design.

 

Conclusion:

 

There are 3 great cars here but the one that would get my money (and 4/5 drivers overall) is the Chrysler 200S V6. At the end of the day, the dealbreaker was the engine. I'd happily give the 2.0T engines another try in less extreme conditions with some brake torquing to see if the playing field levels out, but they still don't have the sound and response of a big V6.

 

With that said, if you're shopping for a midsize car, you'd be doing yourself a disservice not to test drive a bunch of them. The class is VERY competitive, and different personal preferences could tip the scale in any direction. Just don't buy a freakin' Camry.

Edited May 23, 2015 by cp-the-nerd

[SalesmanSean]

That sounds like it would have been a lot of fun.  I wouldn't ever go 200 myself just because I dislike the looks, but if i were shopping in that segment I'd definitely give both the Malibu and Fusion a test drive based on this info.

[G. David Felt]

Sounds like a fun drive day.

[Frisky Dingo]

Sounds like you were unduly harsh on the Camry and generous to the 200, to be honest.

 

That said, the Malibu is a better car than people give it credit for.

[Suaviloquent]

The looks alone though, keep the 200 and Fusion at the top of my list. Honestly, the Mazda 6, Fusion and 200 as well as the soon to come Malibu look to be the best looking midsize cars.

 

For so long it seems, that we've went away from looks to just focus on the hard numbers and objective measures of performance. But can't we all say unanimously that these 4 along with kudos to the Accord Sport and Optima SX are the outright best looking midsizers?

[SalesmanSean]

I like the new look of the Malibu that is coming, love the looks of the Mazda 6, don't really care for the looks of anything under the Chrysler brand name, 200 included, I don't hate the Fusion, it's just a bit meh, same with the Optima, though I prefer the Ford looks to the Kia just a little bit, I don't see a lot of Accords, so I couldn't really pick one out of a crowd, and I'm going to completely out my poor taste by saying I actually kind of like the looks of the new Camry in XSE form.  I hate the bars across the grill in LE/XLE form, but I like the simplicity of the hex grill on the SE/XSE, add in the body side molding and the rear spoiler and it gives it a little bit of character.  Although I wouldn't say they look anything alike, the way they redesigned the hood reminds of the way that Chevy redesigned the Impala hood to give it some character.  I'm not saying it's my favorite, at best it comes in just above the Ford to me, but I know there is much hatred for the Camry so rather than wait to be called out I figured I would give my justifications right out of the gate.

[cp-the-nerd]

Sounds like you were unduly harsh on the Camry and generous to the 200, to be honest.

 

That said, the Malibu is a better car than people give it credit for.

 

 I have a few points in response to that. 

 

As far as the Camry is concerned, based on my experience driving the car at its limits, I'm not surprised that the unintended acceleration issue blew up the way it did. The car is not in the same league of driver control and safety as the other cars I drove that day. When the wheels broke free, the car went totally numb. This happened in the panic brake and the emergency lane change, two very real driving scenarios. The poor steering and brake pedal feel exacerbate the problem. Up to 7/10, the car is just dull as dishwater and is the poster child of how not to tune electronic assist. Beyond that, it's legitimately problematic.

 

An important note about the 200S: we drove the base models in a road loop (with the exception of the Camry, for some reason) and the 4-cylinder/9-speed powertrain was a deal breaker. The transmission programming was a total mess that never stopped shifting. The V6 simply elevates the car dramatically. In that guise, it drives quite well and it got 4 out of 5 enthusiast votes.

[regfootball]

great writeup, thanks!

 

I drove a turbo Malibu once, and it handled well, the turbo four had torque steer but had some nuts.  Our van has the Chrysler Pentastar that is the same in the 200 and it is a good motor although it could use more torque.  No wonder the 200 seemed to fun to drive.

 

I wonder if over time we might see v6's come back for some folks.  The mfrs have done as much as they can to make the 4 poppers smooth, but a v6 still ends up being smoother most of the time.

Edited May 24, 2015 by regfootball

[Suaviloquent]

Part of the turbo movement is because of taxes in markets other than the U.S. that are based on displacement. Displacement is a stupid measure of efficiency, cars should be taxed on what mileage they are rated at, not the technology under the hood if you ask me. But BMW and some Ford and GM efforts have proven that engines can be turbo charged the right way and the wrong way, so it's not an entirely lost cause. It's no secret that even Honda, Toyota and now FCA will ditch midrange V6s in favour of turbo I4s for their mass-market applications.

 

And, as long as BRIC nations (except tanking Russia) continue their spectacular growth in auto sales, they're going to dictate the future trends we see in automobile design and manufacturing. Part of One Ford can basically be attributed to the pressures of having to build vehicles compliant with China and at the same time for the rest of the world; and it's the same reason why the 1.5L EcoBoost exists.