mmarshall

You can get models, though, with a V6 and AWD in the high 20s. IMO, that is a bargain....especially compared to the 40K you typically pay for a Buick LaCrosse V6 AWD....and you can't get a V6 or AWD at all in the Verano/Regal. Even the 200 convertible (still on the old platform, though) starts at only 28K. And that brings up an interesting question....why no new convertible? The old one was quite popular, and sold well. It is absurd, IMO, to drop it.

I do agree, though, that the Verano/Regal (primarily of Opel design) seem to be built a little more solidly than even the new 200. Nice as it is, the new 200 has some loose edges.

TangoRed

Other dealers seem to be reporting expected sales on allpar. What is particularly interesting is how slow Chrysler is going to be getting the true volume trims out. They said expected full production isn't supposed to be up to speed until July. Even more interesting is ads for the 200 just now started airing all of 1-2 weeks ago.

As far as the convertible is concerned, sounds like the expected sales vs. profit didn't shake out. Or the CUSW platform couldn't be engineered to be a convertible without massive modification. Either way, Chrysler is making a concerted effort to keep fleet sales less than GM and Ford.

Tantrix

I think chrysler was expecting a higher demand for this new model. I don't think it's doing as good as expected.

I'm not sure. I'm sure the corporate guys are closely watching the numbers. I really feel the front end is very lacking. people like striking jaw lines for their front end. look at the success of fusion, optima, accord etc. I hope they sell well since i like to cheer for the underdog but it's going to be a uphill battle. Revising the look will be close to impossible now.

look at how fast camry had to revamp their camry. it was a mistake that should have been caught early

the competition is so stiff and unlike any other time in the car industry. Even the jeep cherokee segment with rav4, rogue, crv, cx5, santa fe, sportage etc is ultra competitive. great for consumers since there's so much to pick from now.

Tantrix

this is no surprise. there's a few locally here and it appears like it's not even there. nobody seems to be excited about it.

chrysler seems to have issues with small cars. I think they need to do the korean thing and hire the designers at mercedes or audi. the guys at the top deciding the design language are not helping at all.

mmarshall

Probably has to do with the expense of the added bracing required on a convertible. Given the sales and popularity of previous 200/Sebring/LeBaron convertibles, which still made money for the company despite the added engineering expense, it is still an exceedingly strange decision, IMO, not to continue the convertible line.

pbm317

Yes the Sebring once enjoyed robust convertible sales, but that was way back in the early 2000's. Sales for the Sebring/200 convertible have fallen sharply, from over 50,000 in 2001 to just over 6,000 units in 2013. Like most convertibles, they sold mostly to rental companies, which these days tend to favor the Mustang and Camaro.

So it doesn't look like people were really looking for a 200/Sebring convertible anymore. Not all that strange of a decision to abandon the vehicle, which would require significant engineering expense and investment. I think they properly decided to look at their engineering resources available, and chose to invest as much as possible in developing a solid sedan, and not worry about splitting some budget for a low volume coupe and/or convertible for the near term.

Hoovey689

iTrader: (16)

The sad thing is this latest 200 is shaping up to be a decent vehicle, so it's a shame we had to endure those past convertibles and not get one that would likely surpass those. If Buick gets their version of an Opel Cascada, Chrysler may rethink a 200 convertible provided there's a market for it.

mmarshall

The main problem, though with Mustang/Camaro convertibles, (and I mentioned this in my recent 200C review) is the overly-narrow, Munchkin-sized rear seat. The Sebring convertible had a reputation for not only being affordable by convertible standards but also having a rear seat that was adequate for reasonably-sized adults. It tended to suffer somewhat in build quality, though, and, even with convertible frame-reinforcements, the average owner could expect rattles/squeaks and some shimmies/vibrations.

pbm317

But this 'main problem' you pose doesn't seems to drive enough people to want a full sized back seat in a convertible. You can't seem to admit that the demand and potential success for a Sebring/200 convertible just isn't what the market 15 years ago was. By your logic the Murano CrossCabriolet should have found a fair share of owners instead of being discontinued already. It had a full size back seat, and (something you tend attribute to guaranteed success) all-wheel drive, no zig-zag shifter, hood struts, but i don't know if it had a full size spare, and no door moldings..

mmarshall

Well, I'll admit that it probably would't be first on my shopping list, as convertibles usually aren't my bag...I prefer something with a little more security and isolation. But even if the market isn't quite what it used to be for that car, I don't agree that it's because of the back seat.There are still some convertible buyers that want and need some room in back, although I wouldn't characterize that seat in the same "full-sized" term that you do. By convertible standards, It is just somewhat larger than usual for an American-market convertible, and doesn't force as many people in back to sit while bent like a pretzel.

The problem with the Murano Cabriolet was that a lot of potential buyers either found it ugly, a joke, or both. We had some threads (and discussion) here on CAR CHAT about that vehicle. It wasn't quite as ugly (IMO) as the Pontiac Aztek or Nissan Juke, but I, among many others, still would not have bought one.

Hoovey brought up a good point, though, in my Chrysler 200 review. If Buick introduces the Opel Cascada-derived convertible here in the U.S., although that vehicle is a little smaller than the 200, you can bet the folks at Chrysler will be watching intently to see how it does, and if a 200 convertible could be a potential competitor (again).

bagwell

CR and Motorweek reviews.....

mmarshall

Thanks, bagwell. I know Motorweek's John Davis......a really nice guy. (though he is not a close friend of mine). As you can see, he's recently lost some weight.

Toys4RJill

[Convetim317;8594602]But this 'main problem' you pose doesn't seems to drive enough people to want a full sized back seat in a convertible. You can't seem to admit that the demand and potential success for a Sebring/200 convertible just isn't what the market 15 years ago was. By your logic the Murano CrossCabriolet should have found a fair share of owners instead of being discontinued already. It had a full size back seat, and (something you tend attribute to guaranteed success) all-wheel drive, no zig-zag shifter, hood struts, but i don't know if it had a full size spare, and no door moldings..[/QUOTE]

Convertibles in the family segment have been played out and are done. Cheaper premium is what is the trend right now.

All the silly stuff like full size spares, door molding, zig zag shifters (totally played out) and hood struts really make no difference to family segment of car buyers.

Infotainment and connectivity is so much more important than hood struts or molding.

What matters right now are good interiors, excellent fuel economy, and keeping the price to purchase reasonable.

Toys4RJill

Thank goodness both CR (terrible publication) and Motor week got the comparisons cars correct. Fusion, Accord, Camry and Malibu.

mmarshall

We'll see. Hoovey brought up a good point....if Buick succeeds with the Cascada convertible, Chrysler may be pressured to bring its own convertible back, though the Cascada is a little smaller. than the 200.

If they are totally played out, then why are we starting to see them again? A lot of customers complained......and the manufacturers are now, albeit slowly, starting to respond again, but still keeping them an option so they can make more money on them.


Actually, too many of these electronic distractions in modern cars is what is causing accidents. That is not an opinion, but a fact.

And the new 200 seems to be delivering that, though reliability is a question mark.