While Chrysler hasn't officially announced fuel economy figures for its new 200 sedan, the information for one model has just leaked out thanks to the US Department of Energy's FuelEconomy.gov website. It certified the 200 with the 295-horsepower and 262-pound-feet 3.6-liter Pentastar V6, nine-speed automatic and all-wheel drive as getting 18-miles-per-gallon city, 29-mpg highway and 22-mpg combined.

Last year's front-wheel drive 200 with a less-powerful version of the Pentastar was rated at 19-mpg city, 29-mpg highway and 22-mpg combined. That means that buyers are getting more power and all-wheel drive traction at almost no loss in economy. However, compared to current, all-wheel drive sedan competitors, the Chrysler comes in the middle. The Ford Fusion with all-wheel drive with the 2.0-liter EcoBoost four-cylinder has 240 hp and 270 lb-ft of torque is somewhat down on power but bests it in economy at 22-mpg city, 31-mpg highway and 25-mpg combined. The current Subaru Legacy 3.6R loses in both metrics with 256 hp and 247 lb-ft and a rating of 18-mpg city, 25-mpg highway and 20-mpg combined. However, Subaru claims the next generation with the same engine will boast 20-mpg city, 28-mpg highway and 23-mpg combined. But these numbers are just estimates from the automaker at the moment, and they haven't yet been certified by the EPA yet.

The numbers for the four-cylinder and front-wheel drive 200 drivetrains are not yet available, but Chrysler has been promising the sedan gets an estimated 35-mpg highway with the 184-hp and 173-lb-ft Tigershark 2.4-liter four-cylinder engine. We won't know for sure until it's certified, but we'll keep you posted.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 101 Comments
      Karfreek
      • 9 Months Ago
      http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2015-chrysler-200-sedan-first-drive-review Its not looking good...
      scott3
      • 9 Months Ago
      My 5 year old Malibu V6 does better than this city and highway. Hell my 4000 pound GMC V6 Terrain does the same city to put this into perspective. This not a good thing for Chrysler unless they can pump up the city MPG.
        yonomo200
        • 9 Months Ago
        @scott3
        Your five year old Malibu doesn't have nearly 300 hp or AWD. And just try to win on a track against this with your Terrain. Not happening.
        cadetgray
        • 9 Months Ago
        @scott3
        I seriously doubt one should be comparing a 200c or 200s with AWD and 295 hp with your 252 hp FWD Malibu. To think that a 200c with a 4 door coupe profile and a GMC Terrain is targeting the same customer is equally questionable that is why Jeep exists. Besides most customers who have mileage as a TOP priority won't be shopping a Pentastar 6 with AWD anyway. They will look at the Tigershark 4 with FWD.
          Tom
          • 9 Months Ago
          @cadetgray
          Stop trying to use logic on someone who drives a 2009 Malibu!
        DK
        • 9 Months Ago
        @scott3
        Regardless of whether or not those vehicles compete in sales, midsize CUVs are getting similar city mileage or better with V6 and AWD. I thought cars were supposed to be better for MPGs.
      • 9 Months Ago
      [blocked]
        Jmaister
        • 9 Months Ago
        I completely agree with you. I think its quite competitive figure considering the HP it makes, AWD, 87 Octane gas only
        normc32
        • 9 Months Ago
        No Honda or Toyota is doing that!
      Jesus!
      • 9 Months Ago
      18 in the city? AWD or not that's terrible.
        Mat Ford Rayman
        • 9 Months Ago
        @Jesus!
        Have you ever driven an AWD car in the city? They get bad gas mileage -- it's a fact of life.
      Dick Burn
      • 9 Months Ago
      My F150 gets that kind of gas mileage. Oh ya I forgot ti's a Chryco gas guzzler. I know I did my duty with Chrycos.
        Tom
        • 9 Months Ago
        @Dick Burn
        Not a single F150 is EPA rated even close to that MPG. And if you think you get "That kind of mileage" you need to go back to school to learn how to divide.
      S40Powered
      • 9 Months Ago
      This is insane. Even my '06 330ci gets better mileage.
        cadetgray
        • 9 Months Ago
        @S40Powered
        That's interesting because with an auto, the EPA estimate for your car is 17/20/24 which is decidedly lower. This is why one can't compare personally achieved mileage to the EPA. I know someone with a 2011 200 with the 283 hp 3.6 Pentastar who reports avg hwy mileage of 31 mpg vs. the EPA estimate of 29 mpg for that year. Also your 6 can only muster 235 hp vs the Chrysler's 295 hp. Just saying one needs to make equivalent comparisons for things to be fair.
          omgcool
          • 9 Months Ago
          @cadetgray
          I can confirm this. 2011 200 Limited V6; If I reset the computer on the highway, it'll average about 34mpg. Stop and go brings it down rather quickly, but it's somewhat of a sleeper, so I'm okay with that. V6s typically aren't great for city mileage anyways.
        Mondrell
        • 9 Months Ago
        @S40Powered
        My '03 CL-S does, too. But like your car, it's lighter, less powerful, doesn't have the added weight or parasitic loss of AWD, and requires premium to hit its projected figures.
      JSH
      • 9 Months Ago
      Wow, that is bad!
        omgcool
        • 9 Months Ago
        @JSH
        Almost 300hp, AWD, and a large, plush interior. All things considered, the mileage is quite good. Half a decade ago, you were lucky to get this mileage with 50 less hp and FWD.
          Andrew Ramos
          • 9 Months Ago
          @omgcool
          Half a decade ago you could get an S4 than runs 13.0 at 110 mph and is rated at 28 mpg highway with a 7-speed dct.
      shaggy
      • 9 Months Ago
      The 200 is nothing but a dodge fart, sooooo does the car market really need 2 of the same cars with shoddy build quality and a transmission that gets all janky at 60k miles???? Wish they would have killed Chrysler a long time ago.
        Tom
        • 9 Months Ago
        @shaggy
        And this is why journalists need to stop confusing idiot American car buyers by saying things like "The Dart, Cherokee, and 200 all use the same platform" - the only thing platform means in this is the dimensions. The suspension on all 3 is different, as is pretty much everything else. The 200 shares no transmission with the Dart, and the only common engine is the 2.4 multiair 4-cyl, which was not even used in Dart until the 2014 model year (except maybe 2013 GTs, if made?)
        Turbo_S60
        • 9 Months Ago
        @shaggy
        The 200 is not a Dart. They share some design elements and its based of an enlarged Dart chassis. Also when did you get to experience the new 9-speed @60000 miles?
        moparelvis
        • 9 Months Ago
        @shaggy
        Do you own either car? I'm guessing no. And who have you talked with that has a dart with 60k? You bring nothing to this topic. Go away.
      Street King
      • 9 Months Ago
      LOL how does the larger Chrysler 300 get 31 MPG highway with the same engine and this (with 1 more gear = 9) only hits 29? (with fully disconnecting AWD) Someone ****ed up.
      Jayson
      • 9 Months Ago
      WTF? Some Hemi Charger owners are getting 30mpg hwy. Back to the drawing board.
        b.rn
        • 9 Months Ago
        @Jayson
        Some owners are getting? That's not apples to apples. No Hemi Charger is EPA rated at 30mpg.
      egcm2
      • 9 Months Ago
      I feel like this is not progress. What's the point of the fancy 9-speed if we still can't break 20 city/30 hwy with a powerful engine. You either get the nice mid-30s mpg with a weak 4-cyl or a V6 but with yesterday's fuel economy. I think about 250 hp and 25/35 mpg would be real progress.
        Alex Ellsworth
        • 9 Months Ago
        @egcm2
        Does the average family sedan driver really need over 200 horsepower? I mean, jeez, we had a '96 Saab 9000 CS light pressure turbo with 170 hp that was a hoot to drive. My last car was a '97 BMW 323 with 168 horsepower that was fantastic, though admittedly smaller and lighter than the Saab or a midsize car of today. My current car is a '96 Audi A6 with 150 hp, which is a big car that is admittedly underpowered, but it goes fine if you push it, handles and cruises well. 20-30 more horsepower would be ideal. Anyway, I don't see most midsize sedan drivers using even a fraction of their cars' performance potential, so maybe we could just get used to a little less power and gain some fuel economy.
          Patrick
          • 9 Months Ago
          @Alex Ellsworth
          There are options of midsize sedans with smaller motors that get better mileage. None are AWD however.
      johnnythemoney
      • 9 Months Ago
      Stop posting what your car or friends' cars achieve VS their EPA figures! This is the EPA rating, not real life driving. Wait for reviews from journos and owners and THEN you can compare their figures with yours. Basic reading.
    • Load More Comments