Say goodbye to the Dodge Dart and Chrysler 200

[FordCosworth]

Fiat-Chrysler CEO Sergio Marchionne outlined an update to the company's five-year business plan Wednesday, and among the changes, the Dodge Dart and Chrysler 200 sedans will soon be phased out. The company's presentation to investors states that the "market shift from cars to trucks and UVs [utility vehicles is] now seen as permanent shift in demand," and FCA wants to respond as quickly as possible.

 

Killing the 200 and Dart will allow FCA to build more Jeep and Ram models at the Sterling Heights, MI, and Belvidere, IL, plants where the sedans were produced. We already knew FCA was planning to shift 200 and Dart production to Mexico, to free up the Sterling Heights facility for Ram 1500 production, and the Belivdere site for Jeep Cherokee output. The Cherokee will move from its current home in Toledo, OH, to allow for increased Wrangler production.

 

It's no shock that FCA wants to shift its focus to crossovers and trucks. In December 2015, for example, combined sales of the Dodge Dart and Chrysler 200 were 15,310. The Jeep Cherokee, which uses the same platform as the Dart and 200, outsold both models combined, with 24,049 sales.

 

Both the Dart and 200 had troubles from the beginning. Marchionne recently blamed designers for the 200 not receiving a Consumer Reports 'recommended' rating, and the Dart was one of the lowest-scoring cars in a CR reliability study.

 

 

http://www.autoblog.com/2016/01/27/dodge-dart-chrysler-200-dead-confirmed/

[Drew Dowdell]

The Dart I can see... but the 200 has been doing well.

 

Sergio is FCA's biggest enemy... not the designers. 

[smk4565]

Sergio is probably the worst automotive CEO there is.  Do they plan to have Chrysler sell only the Pacifica and 300?  And for Dodge to sell a retro looking sedan on a 2005 retro platform?  Consumers aren't flocking to full size sedans either, that market is striking faster than the segments the Dart and 200 reside in.  Why even have Dodge or Chrysler anymore, just build Ram and Jeep.  

[Drew Dowdell]

Sergio is probably the worst automotive CEO there is.  Do they plan to have Chrysler sell only the Pacifica and 300?  And for Dodge to sell a retro looking sedan on a 2005 retro platform?  Consumers aren't flocking to full size sedans either, that market is striking faster than the segments the Dart and 200 reside in.  Why even have Dodge or Chrysler anymore, just build Ram and Jeep.  

 

There is an Encore sized/type Chrysler crossover coming I believe. 

[FordCosworth]

With killing the Dart and 200, its looking like FCA will still be the big purchaser of Carbon Credits for the foreseeable future.

[FordCosworth]

I think its safe to say ( from looking at FCA 2015 Financials ) there will be NO  'Cuda, new Challenger/Charger now too 

Edited January 27, 2016 by FordCosworth

[Cmicasa the Great]

Wow.. I remember getting into a battle with a guy over at GMI named 69gtDart over the 200 vs the Malibu a year or so ago.. Now.. its about to go kaput. Oh well.. I would have never bought one anyway

[Drew Dowdell]

I think its safe to say ( from looking at FCA 2015 Financials ) there will be NO  'Cuda, new Challenger/Charger now too 

 

That would seal the fate of Alfa too though... the way they pay for that new platform is by sharing it with Dodge and Chrysler to get as much volume out of it as possible.  

 

Basically, that would be Serg throwing the baby out with the bathwater if he killed the Charger.  (not that that scenarios is impossible in Serg's world)

[Suaviloquent]

It's a poor fate for the Dart.

 

But I feel the 200 at least is a nice car. It's product cycle has just rapidly decayed in the market, and it just is add odds with the company is all about. 

 

The problem with Chrysler, is that's there's still a lot of stigma against the brand's reliability and overall reputation. And then to have an Italian parent which is one of the smallest car companies in the world - it's just sad.

 

I shook my head when I saw him being given MT's auto exec of the year twice in a row.

 

Because the cash inflows all came from its most oldest products, it had no clear strategy to stump the competition, and quite frankly, you know things are going wrong when you have to stop development of arguably important product, and still delay the launch of its best seller replacements.

[regfootball]

The Dart I can see... but the 200 has been doing well.

 

Sergio is FCA's biggest enemy... not the designers. 

^^^^^^^

 

FCA and Serge want to decimate Dodge entirely, so the Dart itself is no surprise. 

 

What car, exactly will Chrysler have to offer for cheap price, good mpg, compact class?

 

Oh, i suppose this is where Fiat comes in?

[ccap41]

So..Tesla and Chrysler will produce the same number of vehicles..2. How weird does that sound?

[ocnblu]

Here's a thought:  Bring back a tall 4 door hatchback a la Caliber, only MUCH BETTER executed, as a replacement for the Dart.

[G. David Felt]

Sergio is going to really F up FCA and leave it a mess before the board finally realized that he needs to go. Fiat will not fill in the lose of 180,000 dart/200 sales. This guy is a moron.

[FordCosworth]

 

I think its safe to say ( from looking at FCA 2015 Financials ) there will be NO  'Cuda, new Challenger/Charger now too 

 

That would seal the fate of Alfa too though... the way they pay for that new platform is by sharing it with Dodge and Chrysler to get as much volume out of it as possible.  

 

Basically, that would be Serg throwing the baby out with the bathwater if he killed the Charger.  (not that that scenarios is impossible in Serg's world)

 

 

 

How many times was the launch of the Giulia pushed back? Alfa won't complete the debut of its new lineup until the middle of the next decade, and that FCA will be scaling back the brand's research and development, manufacturing, and product investments through 2018.

 

" This new product strategy differs from the original Marchionne strategy in a few key ways. First, all of these vehicles were supposed to have been launched between May 2014 and sometime in 2018. Since it's 2016 and we can't even buy a Giulia yet, it's pretty clear that plan isn't going to happen. Instead, the six vehicles that will follow the Giulia and midsize CUV won't start arriving until 2017, with debuts continuing until at least 2020. "

 

http://www.autoblog.com/2016/01/27/alfa-romeo-realigns-product-onslaught-again/

[Drew Dowdell]

 

 

I think its safe to say ( from looking at FCA 2015 Financials ) there will be NO  'Cuda, new Challenger/Charger now too 

 

That would seal the fate of Alfa too though... the way they pay for that new platform is by sharing it with Dodge and Chrysler to get as much volume out of it as possible.  

 

Basically, that would be Serg throwing the baby out with the bathwater if he killed the Charger.  (not that that scenarios is impossible in Serg's world)

 

 

 

How many times was the launch of the Giulia pushed back? Alfa won't complete the debut of its new lineup until the middle of the next decade, and that FCA will be scaling back the brand's research and development, manufacturing, and product investments through 2018.

 

" This new product strategy differs from the original Marchionne strategy in a few key ways. First, all of these vehicles were supposed to have been launched between May 2014 and sometime in 2018. Since it's 2016 and we can't even buy a Giulia yet, it's pretty clear that plan isn't going to happen. Instead, the six vehicles that will follow the Giulia and midsize CUV won't start arriving until 2017, with debuts continuing until at least 2020. "

 

http://www.autoblog.com/2016/01/27/alfa-romeo-realigns-product-onslaught-again/

 

 

Well that's just Alfa.  The Giulia is supposed to be platform sharing with the replacements for the LX cars. 

[Frisky Dingo]

And nothing of value was lost.....

[caddycruiser]

This was a weird mix of articles to come out...

 

Everyone loves the look and layout of the 200, for the most part. It's a great package. Ingress/egress to the rear is NOT a no sale issue. Powertrain issues with the 9-speed and driving dynamics they didn't finish tuning properly are the issues most people have.

 

If it were just more polished driving wise, it would do even better.

 

I'll chalk this one up to just being internet blabber. The Dart no one cares about or even knows exists for the most part at this point, but even it's a decent small car and looks good. It's more comfortable with a nicer interior than many imports, just like the 200, needs more driving and powertrain polish.

 

Sergio is a big mouth but the car changeover and remakes are enough to keep other manufacturers awake as to how not to sit on laurels. Just make sure, unlike Chrysler, you spend extra time polishing the drive...

[Drew Dowdell]

And nothing of value was lost.....

 

the 200 is a pretty decent car, it's one of my favorites in the segment.  People like Reg don't like it because they are shopping for the most cubic feet of interior room per dollar. If you just need a sedan to get you to work and back with little concern for the back seat passengers, there are definitely worse choices out there. The 200 is also unique in that it is the only V6 with AWD mid-size family car that I can think of outside of a top end Subaru Legacy.   I also happen to like the interior better than most of its direct competition. 

[FordCosworth]

 

And nothing of value was lost.....

 

the 200 is a pretty decent car, it's one of my favorites in the segment.  People like Reg don't like it because they are shopping for the most cubic feet of interior room per dollar. If you just need a sedan to get you to work and back with little concern for the back seat passengers, there are definitely worse choices out there. The 200 is also unique in that it is the only V6 with AWD mid-size family car that I can think of outside of a top end Subaru Legacy.   I also happen to like the interior better than most of its direct competition. 

 

 

 

Actually, the Fusion Sport is AWD and V-6... a Twin Turbo Gas Direct Injection V-6 

Edited January 28, 2016 by FordCosworth

[Drew Dowdell]

 

 

And nothing of value was lost.....

 

the 200 is a pretty decent car, it's one of my favorites in the segment.  People like Reg don't like it because they are shopping for the most cubic feet of interior room per dollar. If you just need a sedan to get you to work and back with little concern for the back seat passengers, there are definitely worse choices out there. The 200 is also unique in that it is the only V6 with AWD mid-size family car that I can think of outside of a top end Subaru Legacy.   I also happen to like the interior better than most of its direct competition. 

 

 

 

Actually, the Fusion Sport is AWD and V-6... a Twin turbo V-6 

 

 

Not currently on sale...  and when it does transition from future product to current product, it will be $5k more expensive v. a 200S AWD.  I don't deny that the Fusion Sport is a compelling package to us enthusiasts, but for a mainstream buyer just looking for an AWD sedan with something more than a 4-cylinder, it may be a bit over the top.  As the Fusion Sport's interior is not significantly changed over the current model, I can still safely say that I like the 200S/C interior better. 

[surreal1272]

Here's a thought:  Bring back a tall 4 door hatchback a la Caliber, only MUCH BETTER executed, as a replacement for the Dart.

Just make it look ten thousand times better than the hideous Caliber and you'd have a winner.

[FAPTurbo]

For years ChryCo was chastised for not having competitive compact and midsize vehicles.

 

So they're throwing out their competitive compact and midsize vehicles. 

 

MAKES SENSE TO ME. 

[G. David Felt]

 

Here's a thought:  Bring back a tall 4 door hatchback a la Caliber, only MUCH BETTER executed, as a replacement for the Dart.

Just make it look ten thousand times better than the hideous Caliber and you'd have a winner.

 

Guess they can always go back to the Neon, that was a huge hit for them.

[surreal1272]

 

 

Here's a thought:  Bring back a tall 4 door hatchback a la Caliber, only MUCH BETTER executed, as a replacement for the Dart.

Just make it look ten thousand times better than the hideous Caliber and you'd have a winner.

 

Guess they can always go back to the Neon, that was a huge hit for them.

 

The versatility of the Caliber was much better but yes, the Neon did much better for them. Personally, I'd take a hatch over a sedan any day and everyday. 

[regfootball]

 

 

I think its safe to say ( from looking at FCA 2015 Financials ) there will be NO  'Cuda, new Challenger/Charger now too 

 

That would seal the fate of Alfa too though... the way they pay for that new platform is by sharing it with Dodge and Chrysler to get as much volume out of it as possible.  

 

Basically, that would be Serg throwing the baby out with the bathwater if he killed the Charger.  (not that that scenarios is impossible in Serg's world)

 

 

 

How many times was the launch of the Giulia pushed back? Alfa won't complete the debut of its new lineup until the middle of the next decade, and that FCA will be scaling back the brand's research and development, manufacturing, and product investments through 2018.

 

" This new product strategy differs from the original Marchionne strategy in a few key ways. First, all of these vehicles were supposed to have been launched between May 2014 and sometime in 2018. Since it's 2016 and we can't even buy a Giulia yet, it's pretty clear that plan isn't going to happen. Instead, the six vehicles that will follow the Giulia and midsize CUV won't start arriving until 2017, with debuts continuing until at least 2020. "

 

http://www.autoblog.com/2016/01/27/alfa-romeo-realigns-product-onslaught-again/

 

the 200 was never relied upon as a huge family hauler.  So the rear door issue isn't a big deal.  There is no precedent for the 200 to need to be cavernous.

 

a car like the malibu, however, deserves to get lambasted if it has a useless rear seat and you can't get in the door.  That's why they fixed it for 2016.

[regfootball]

 

And nothing of value was lost.....

 

the 200 is a pretty decent car, it's one of my favorites in the segment.  People like Reg don't like it because they are shopping for the most cubic feet of interior room per dollar. If you just need a sedan to get you to work and back with little concern for the back seat passengers, there are definitely worse choices out there. The 200 is also unique in that it is the only V6 with AWD mid-size family car that I can think of outside of a top end Subaru Legacy.   I also happen to like the interior better than most of its direct competition. 

 

don't put words in my mouth, i like the 200.  the v6 AWD is a great option in the class.  I think of the 200 more as a personal sedan rather than a family sedan, and the 200 / Sebring was never a big car either.  The Intrepid was always Chryslers room and space car.

Edited January 29, 2016 by regfootball

[daves87rs]

And we wonder why GM just laughed when he said we should join together...

 

 

But with all these DA moves..makes you wonder if he's prepping FCA to sell to GM? Makes you wonder....

 

 

Like most said-these cars just needed tweaks and a nice long warranty to inspire....

[frogger]

I think the 200 is appealing as well.  Not sure I would buy one to own, but on a clearance lease deal for the AWD less than $300 a month, (similar to how Caddy cleared out a glut of ATS and Acura did the same for the TLX SH AWD last fall in Canada, under both under $400 a month with 0 down), why not..

Edited January 29, 2016 by frogger

[Cmicasa the Great]

to the 200 and Dart... 

 

[G. David Felt]

^ I get what they are trying to be funny, but I just do not see him as funny to me.

 

This is a good Bye Bye Video and it is a Chrysler!

 

[Guest VenSeattle]

I never saw the 200 as anything special. It's not an appropriate sibling to the 300. They look like they're built by two completely different manufacturers and for the price, you can get a well equipped 300 for the price of a well equipped 200. The lower trim levels of the 200 have this dull charcoal colored interior and matte finished plastic where the wood would be surrounding the instrument pod on the upper trim levels. It just looked low rent. I saw several 200s at AVIS, Hertz, and Enterprise. I can believe the dealers' argument that FCA were inflating sales numbers. For comparison, the current Regal is nicer than the 200 and it's about to be replaced.

[VenSeattle]

I never saw the 200 as anything special. It's not an appropriate sibling to the 300. They look like they're built by two completely different manufacturers. One is a generic jelly bean and the other is a brick. And for the price, you can get a well equipped 300 for the price of a well equipped 200. The lower trim levels of the 200 have this dull charcoal colored interior and matte finished plastic where the wood would be surrounding the instrument pod on the upper trim levels. It just looked low rent. I saw several 200s at AVIS, Hertz, and Enterprise. I can believe the dealers' argument that FCA were inflating sales numbers. For comparison, the current Regal is nicer than the 200 and it's about to be replaced.

[ehaase]

I rented a 300 last April and a 200 last August.  The 300 was wonderful in every way, and the 200, even with 4 cylinder, had good power, but poor visibility and an unsettled transmission. 

[Robert Hall]

 

 

 

don't put words in my mouth, i like the 200.  the v6 AWD is a great option in the class.  I think of the 200 more as a personal sedan rather than a family sedan, and the 200 / Sebring was never a big car either.  The Intrepid was always Chryslers room and space car.

 

Uh, the Intrepid has been gone for over decade...the 300 and Charger have been their big cars since the mid 00s...

[Drew Dowdell]

I never saw the 200 as anything special. It's not an appropriate sibling to the 300. They look like they're built by two completely different manufacturers. One is a generic jelly bean and the other is a brick. And for the price, you can get a well equipped 300 for the price of a well equipped 200. The lower trim levels of the 200 have this dull charcoal colored interior and matte finished plastic where the wood would be surrounding the instrument pod on the upper trim levels. It just looked low rent. I saw several 200s at AVIS, Hertz, and Enterprise. I can believe the dealers' argument that FCA were inflating sales numbers. For comparison, the current Regal is nicer than the 200 and it's about to be replaced.

 

yeah, I've driven the rental grade 200, and it's nothing special... but neither is the rental grade anything from any brand.  The 200 does do better in S or C trims, and particularly with the 3.6 V6.  It's like a whole different car. 

[regfootball]

 

 

 

 

don't put words in my mouth, i like the 200.  the v6 AWD is a great option in the class.  I think of the 200 more as a personal sedan rather than a family sedan, and the 200 / Sebring was never a big car either.  The Intrepid was always Chryslers room and space car.

 

Uh, the Intrepid has been gone for over decade...the 300 and Charger have been their big cars since the mid 00s...

 

 

oh i know that, but the 300 and Charger are not mid size segment cars.  The Intrepid and Concorde set the bar with the cab forward styling and packaging that wrote the book on how sedans should be packaged for mass market.  The 300 and Charger were a step into the RWD foray, and their packaging, while large, is inefficient, regressive and not of the mainstream FWD chassis ilk.  

Aside from being a Chrysler, the Intrepid had the chance to set the benchmark for family sedans.  Dubious Chrysler engineering and quality was their setback.  The styling and packaging made all the sense.  The GM cars of the same time period were embarrassing  from a packaging standpoint in comparison.

Edited January 30, 2016 by regfootball

[Robert Hall]

 

 

 

 

 

don't put words in my mouth, i like the 200.  the v6 AWD is a great option in the class.  I think of the 200 more as a personal sedan rather than a family sedan, and the 200 / Sebring was never a big car either.  The Intrepid was always Chryslers room and space car.

 

Uh, the Intrepid has been gone for over decade...the 300 and Charger have been their big cars since the mid 00s...

 

 

oh i know that, but the 300 and Charger are not mid size segment cars.  The Intrepid and Concorde set the bar with the cab forward styling and packaging that wrote the book on how sedans should be packaged for mass market.  The 300 and Charger were a step into the RWD foray, and their packaging, while large, is inefficient, regressive and not of the mainstream FWD chassis ilk.  

Aside from being a Chrysler, the Intrepid had the chance to set the benchmark for family sedans.  Dubious Chrysler engineering and quality was their setback.  The styling and packaging made all the sense.  The GM cars of the same time period were embarrassing  from a packaging standpoint in comparison.

 

I didn't say the 300/Charger were midsize...the Concorde and Intrepid were the full size segment cars, the Sebring/Stratus were the mid size cars..over 10 years ago.  Not sure what you are going on about...you seem to be confusing midsize and fullsize segments.

 

The 300 and Charger being RWD is a distinction amongst mainstream full size cars today, which are otherwise FWD  (Impala, Taurus, Avalon, Maxima, etc)

Edited January 30, 2016 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[regfootball]

the sebring and stratus were tweeners.  

 

at least as far as markets, the intrepid still tried to cover the mainstream price segment.  actually, the strategy chrysler had was to cover it with the two cars.

 

Nowadays, you pretty much have to nail the size of the car right on to be in the mainstream volume sedan segment.  That is what chevy finally figured out with the new malibu.

 

Note how Nissan (is a good example).  You can cover the volume segment with the Altima but be damn sure its the right size.  The new Maxima is actually quite small, but then it becomes the luxury model.

 

I think the 200 sort of tries to catch some folks that may be looking at a Regal, a CC, or a Maxima.  Since Chrysler and Dodge don't have any other cars in the mainstream segment, then, the 200 sort of is Chryslers defacto, even if by covering it its more of a tweener......its good for the Chrysler brand.  But if this were a Dodge branded car it would need to match Accord / Altima / Passat size.

 

Passat is a great example of how size matters.  A better price plus a better size and it sold way more than it did when it was small back in 2009-2010 whatever.

Edited January 30, 2016 by regfootball

[Drew Dowdell]

I can't quite follow or agree with you on most of that Reg.  The Intrepid and Concord were packaged great yes. Mechanically, they were fine as long as you didn't get the 2.7 V6.   The Sebring and Stratus weren't tweeners in size, they were cheap, but they were right there in size with the Camry/Accord of the day. The Malibu was the tweener at the time, being 4 inches shorter than the Stratus.  (2006 stats used)

 

As for the GM cars, the H-Body and G-Body cars that stacked up against the LH cars (except the LHS which got a trunk extension but is otherwise identical inside to the Intrepid) almost exactly.  No interior dimension is off by more than an inch except hip-room where the GM cars are a little over an inch wider.   If you're thinking W-body Impala/Lumina maybe... but back when the LH cars were first out, their main competition via price was the Bonneville, Eighty-Eight, LeSabre and Park Ave.  While some low-end Dodge Intrepids were sold as loss leaders, the Concord, Vision, Bonneville, and 88 were less than $150 difference in price.  New Yorker, Park Ave, and Ninety-Eight were all about $27k. 

[regfootball]

the 2.7 was a terrible motor.  when i was doing my selling gig, those cars with that motor were either traded in when they were about to blow up, or they blew up right after they got sold.  the book value of the sebring and stratus in particular were abysmal.  if you had to get someone approved for a sale who had bad credit, a lot of times one of the few choices you had were to find a sebring or stratus that was newer and low miles because the loan to value was always a problem.  It was mostly due to the 2.7 being a steaming pile of turd.  The used Intrepids were boomerangs too if they had the 2.7.

Edited February 1, 2016 by regfootball

[Suaviloquent]

I can see get getting rid of the Dart... It probably would have been better as a Chrysler to begin with..

 

but the 200 is little bit of a head scratcher.

 

And for some reason their sales of the 200 were good in the last couple months, and then they recently tanked, especially for the 4th quarter?

 

I'm sure it was mentioned before, but why?

[Drew Dowdell]

I can see get getting rid of the Dart... It probably would have been better as a Chrysler to begin with..

 

but the 200 is little bit of a head scratcher.

 

And for some reason their sales of the 200 were good in the last couple months, and then they recently tanked, especially for the 4th quarter?

 

I'm sure it was mentioned before, but why?

 

It wasn't that they tanked... it was that December the year prior was abnormally high. 

[Suaviloquent]

Ahh, tanked relative to the year prior.

 

That's not good.

 

The hallmarks of resurgent sales are continued growth year-over-year.

 

But it petering out means there's a real issue.

 

Chrysler has always been a brand about its sedans and minivans.

 

To only have that number to dwindle to two is worrisome.

[Drew Dowdell]

Ahh, tanked relative to the year prior.

 

That's not good.

 

The hallmarks of resurgent sales are continued growth year-over-year.

 

But it petering out means there's a real issue.

 

Chrysler has always been a brand about its sedans and minivans.

 

To only have that number to dwindle to two is worrisome.

 

... no.. again, Dec '14 was an unusually large sales gain for the 200. They basically ran a sale and moved a whole bunch of extra metal (and probably dumped the previous bodystyle into fleets).  Dec '15 was a return to norm.  It looks like a big drop, but it is really just a return to normal.  For the entire year, the 200 was up 52%. http://www.cheersandgears.com/topic/86233-december-2015-fca-us-llc/

 

December '13 - 5,652

December '14 - 16,229  (fleeting and big discounts on old model)

December '15 - 8,759 (and up 52% for the year)

[FordCosworth]

 

Ahh, tanked relative to the year prior.

 

That's not good.

 

The hallmarks of resurgent sales are continued growth year-over-year.

 

But it petering out means there's a real issue.

 

Chrysler has always been a brand about its sedans and minivans.

 

To only have that number to dwindle to two is worrisome.

 

... no.. again, Dec '14 was an unusually large sales gain for the 200. They basically ran a sale and moved a whole bunch of extra metal (and probably dumped the previous bodystyle into fleets).  Dec '15 was a return to norm.  It looks like a big drop, but it is really just a return to normal.  For the entire year, the 200 was up 52%. http://www.cheersandgears.com/topic/86233-december-2015-fca-us-llc/

 

December '13 - 5,652

December '14 - 16,229  (fleeting and big discounts on old model)

December '15 - 8,759 (and up 52% for the year)

 

 

 

Jan 2016 - 5200 units

[Suaviloquent]

Oh sorry Drew, I thought the last year the sales mix was heavily the new gen, I didn't realize they cleared out a lot of glut of the old 200.

 

 

Well, if this is the normal sales level... I don't know why they went into this new generation, only to see it gone within the product cycle. I mean, I think it's a solid product...

 

But I'm not sure if it has the substance if you don't go for the higher trims. I would go towards Chevy or Hyundai Sonata Eco or Accord Sport if I wanted an excellent mid-size sedan that is more affordable.

 

The top-end is where the 200 was really supposed to shine, and it does... but I just can't get how the selling point was the really well done interior. You lost some interior space, and now with the refreshed entries, you don't have to compromise...