2005 Chrysler Sebring Convertible 2-door 2.4l**no Reasonable Offer Refused** on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Dodge to resurrect Scat Pack?

Before social media ever existed, if automotive enthusiasts wanted to be noticed or recognize other fans, they joined a car club. For Dodge muscle car lovers from 1968 through 1971, that group was known as the Scat Pack. Just like the Charger, Challenger and Dart nameplates, it looks like the Scat Pack could be getting a resurrection by Chrysler.
Automotive News is reporting that Chrysler recently renewed its trademark on the Scat Pack name, and while this is in no way a guarantee that the name will return, AN talked to Tim Kuniskis, Dodge President and CEO, who stoked the fire a little more. In the article, Kuniskis said that the name is "a very important part of our history" and added that "we like the whole idea of having a Scat Pack of cars." Scat Pack models were identified by their bumblebee stripes and helmet-wearing bumblebee logo, and the idea of a modern Scat Pack doesn't seem all that outlandish in light of recent vehicles like the Charger SRT Super Bee and the Ram 1500 Rumble Bee Concept.
What do you think, is this a cool idea, or is it just an unwelcome bit of nostalgia? Have you say in Comments.

Chrysler killing off the 200 Convertible, Dodge Avenger

When Chrysler rolled out the first-generation 200 to replace the Sebring range in 2010, it included replacements for both the sedan and the convertible. The Sebring Coupe, however, was left out of the mix. And now that the second-generation Chrysler 200 is descending upon us, Auburn Hills is paring things down even further. But this time, it's the convertible that reportedly isn't making the cut. Shame, too, since the rendering above shows what could have been quite an attractive droptop.
As our compatriots at Edmunds point out, sales of the convertible model accounted for less than five percent of overall Chrysler 200 sales, and at those numbers, the considerable cost of engineering a new drop-top couldn't be justified. With the Toyota Camry Solara and Volkswagen Eos also gone from the market (well, the VW isn't gone quite yet), the discontinuation of the Chrysler 200 Convertible leaves the affordable convertible segment largely to the sportier likes of the Ford Mustang and Chevy Camaro and smaller European offerings like the Mini Cooper and VW Beetle.
The Chrysler 200 Convertible isn't the only derivative being left behind with the new model: so too is the Dodge Avenger. That will leave a glaring hole in the Dodge lineup, with nothing to bridge the gap between the compact Dart and the larger Charger. Whether the Dodge brand has any plans to replace the Avenger with another model, not to be based on the 200, remains to be seen.

2015 Chrysler 200 gets 36 mpg with Tigershark four-cylinder

Chrysler has come out with the official fuel economy information on the new 200 following the info that was leaked from the EPA earlier this week. It turns out that our initial report of 18 miles per gallon in the city and 29 mpg on the highway for the all-wheel-drive V6 was correct.
What we didn't know at the time, though, was what sort of economy the 200's other powertrain options managed. Outfitted with the 2.4-liter four-pot, Chrysler is promising 23 mpg in the city and 36 mpg on the highway, with a combined rating of 28 mpg. Those figures are fairly impressive; besting figures of the 2.5-liter Ford Fusion and tying the 1.5-liter, EcoBoost, non-start-stop model. It's also beats the four-cylinder Toyota Camry's 35-mpg highway figure while tying its combined efficiency.
Stepping up to the 295-horsepower Pentastar V6 pushes the economy down to 19 mpg in the city, while the highway figure is a respectable 32 mpg for the front-driver. The combined rating for the FWD V6 is 23 mpg. Those figures can't quite match the 270-horsepower 2.0-liter, EcoBoost four of the Fusion, which nets 22 city and 33 highway. In fact, the V6 200 has trouble besting even the 3.5-liter V6 of the Camry, which returns 21 mpg city and 31 mpg highway. Again, though, the 200 is noticeably more powerful.