The state of affairs for the convertible in America is a sad one. If you want to drop your top without buying into an expensive prestige brand, your choices are slim. Sadly, conditions don’t appear to be improving anytime soon, either. I think I know how to save convertibles, but you’re not going to like it. The next generation of convertibles should be crossovers, but they shouldn’t be half-baked like previous attempts. Instead, they should be like the Chrysler Sebring.
When I was a kid, there were countless normal cars that you could buy as convertibles. On any given day, I could spot a Geo Metro convertible, a Chevy Cavalier convertible, a Pontiac G6 convertible, a Toyota Solara, a Toyota MR2, a Chrysler PT Cruiser convertible, a Nissan 240SX, and so many more. The world of convertibles was vast, and there was something for everyone. All sorts of automakers were in on the trend, from Volkswagen and Audi to Saab and Mini. Even the modern Cadillac had a convertible! Some cars looked their best as ‘verts, like the Chrysler Crossfire.
The convertible, like the wagon and the minivan, has fallen into a niche, and that’s sad.
Two decades ago, just about every automaker had a convertible; now you have to actively seek one out. Here in America, if you want a convertible as a normal car, your only three choices are the Ford Mustang, Mini Cooper, and the Mazda Miata. Remember, some automakers don’t even want to sell cars at all, so convertibles aren’t even on the menu. Still in the normal category would be the Ford Bronco and Jeep Wrangler, but these are SUVs, not cars.
There are plenty of convertibles out there if you have a lot of dough to spend. Mercedes-Benz, Bentley, Maserati, Aston Martin, BMW, McLaren, and Porsche will be stoked to sell you a convertible for a pile of cash. GM will also let you enjoy some open-top action if you buy a Corvette or a Hummer EV. But all of these cars are a far cry from what used to be.
I bet people would be willing to buy normal cars as convertibles again, but automakers might need to get creative. I just spent a week with the Autopian’s Nissan Murano CrossCabriolet, and over 4,050 miles, I concluded that Nissan had the right idea, but the wrong execution.
I can’t believe that I’m going to say this, but I actually miss when Chrysler sold the Sebring and slapped a convertible top on it. The more I think about it, the more I think the Sebring had the right ingredients for a normal convertible. What if someone made a Sebring convertible crossover?
What Nissan Got Wrong
As the story goes, the Nissan Murano CrossCabriolet was the brainchild of the infamous Carlos Ghosn, who felt that older folks would want a crossover that was easy to get into and out of, but had a convertible top like the cars of their younger years. There’s another, sort of mythical branch of the story that suggests that Ghosn’s wife wanted a convertible SUV, so he had Nissan’s engineers make it a reality. The CrossCabriolet hit the market in 2011 as a sort of luxury halo car with standard AWD, a VQ V6, and a starting price of $47,190.
The CrossCabriolet was a dud seemingly from the start. Not even the motoring press received it well, and something like 6,000 or 6,400 examples were sold before Nissan gave up. Automobile’s Aaron Gold minced no words:
“The idea was bad, the execution was bad, and the styling, well, it was just terrible, top up or top down. Worse yet, Nissan insisted on a paint palette full of metallic pastel colors and a white interior, which makes driving a Murano CrossCabriolet feel rather like riding around in Zsa Zsa Gabor’s wardrobe.”
Now, I think Gold was being way too harsh here. I mean, we’re saying a car is bad for having pastel colors? I thought automotive journalists champion the use of real colors? Also, given how big BMW grilles have gotten, the CrossCab might be one of the least offensive designs of the recent era.
All it took me was dropping the roof just once to understand what Nissan was going for here. Crossovers ride high, are usually spacious, are usually practical, and still drive like cars. In theory, the CrossCab is that, but now with a top that opens to the world. This won’t disappear under the hood of a Super Duty like a Miata, and, in my experience, it’s a legitimately good winter car. Honestly, I adore this thing so much.
Except, the theory falls flat, somewhat. The seats are fine, and even the backseat works if you aren’t too tall. But one of the great advantages of crossovers, storage, is entirely missing.
The trunk has just enough room for two carry-on suitcases, but only if you carry nothing else in there. Should you carry something larger than a carry-on, the backseat will be your trunk. This is because the roof has to live in the trunk. In other words, it’s a convertible crossover that’s exactly as practical as a sports car. Add the fact that the CrossCab had a fuel economy rating that topped out at 22 mpg, and I’m not surprised people weren’t lining up to pay nearly 50 large for one of these. Oh yeah, that absurd price was also something else.
The folks of Land Rover improved on the CrossCabriolet concept with their Range Rover Evoque convertible. The people who thought the Nissan looked bad seemed to love the vibes of the Evoque convertible. But the Range Rover still had the same overall issues as the Nissan, as the droptop version of the Evoque was slower, heavier, and far less practical. It’s unclear how many of those were sold as JLR never released sales data, but I reckon it wasn’t particularly crazy. The Evoque convertible also had an even worse base price of $58,695, so that was hardly a “regular car,” either.
Time For A Rebirth
Here’s my proposal for a revival of the convertible. I think Nissan and Land Rover had the right idea in turning crossovers into convertibles. Crossovers are what sell. The Mustang Mach-E kicks the regular Mustang’s butt on the sales floor. A new regular car convertible should be based on what counts as a regular car for the era, and that’s the crossover.
I would start with a crossover that’s affordable. Maybe something like a Chevy Trax, Toyota Corolla Cross, Ford Bronco Sport, or a Volkswagen Taos—not a top-spec crossover.
In cutting the roof off, the automaker should maintain the base vehicle’s rear seating. Space is supposed to be one of the upsides to a crossover, so keep it! I would also keep the trunk fairly large, too. When the roof is up, the trunk should be able to be used like a normal car. This sounds silly, but the Nissan Murano CrossCabriolet doesn’t even have a normal trunk when its roof is up. It’s compromised no matter what.
I don’t think there is much that can be done about when the roof is folded back, but if this theoretical convertible crossover is based on an electric car, I could see a frunk being used to make up for the loss of rear space.
Really, what I’m thinking about here is a sort of modern Chrysler Sebring convertible. The brilliance of the Sebring convertible, I think, was that it was still just an everyday Sebring, but it happened to have a droptop. I mean, just look at the hole that Sebring convertible owners had to store stuff:
Sure, the backseat wasn’t super huge, but I was comfortable enough in the back of one in years past. I’m not at all surprised that I still see Sebring convertibles driving around here in the Midwest, decades after they were last relevant.
The Sebring was almost the perfect convertible. It didn’t ask you to make insanely huge compromises to be able to look at the sky. Four people and some of their gear could fit in it, which isn’t really a thing with the convertible crossovers of the 2010s, despite the fact that they were bigger vehicles. The Sebring ‘vert was also affordable, reliable enough, and not too flashy. It was transportation that happened to have a soft top.
Now, I’m not saying that a crossover convertible is going to sell like hotcakes. I’m sure one of the reasons why convertible cars are a niche is because of slower sales. However, I bet an automaker might be able to carve out at least some success so long as the execution is good enough.
That execution isn’t just the price, the storage, or the features, either. Power roofs are great! But they shouldn’t be so complicated that owners are afraid to open them. Volkswagen screwed that up with the Eos, Smart screwed up its roofs in the Fortwo, and Nissan absolutely missed the mark on the CrossCabriolet. Automakers keep punching out roofs that are way more complicated than they need to be. Simpler is better.
A year ago, our secret designer, the Bishop, pitched his own idea for crossover convertibles. But his piece focused on the kind of convertible top, showing off what crossovers could look like with a Jeep or Bronco-style top, a targa top, or a roof that obscures the backseat.
For me, I think the kind of roof matters a little bit less than the platform. Asking people to pay $50,000 or more to sacrifice storage for a droptop is a huge ask. But it hurts a lot less if the base vehicle is barely over $21,000.
Crossover Convertibles Can Be A Thing
I don’t think I’m entirely crazy here, either. There is evidence to suggest that some people would buy a crossover convertible if it’s done right. The Volkswagen T-Roc Cabrio was famous for outselling the Mazda Miata two-to-one in Europe, making it a popular pick with people and rental companies who want droptops. In 2023, the T-Roc sold so well that it was second only to the Mini Cooper. Granted, at least some of those T-Roc sales were fleet buyers, and sales were roughly 11,000 units a year. But it’s amazing that more T-Rocs flew off lots than BMW 4 Series convertibles. Shoot, Volkswagen sold more T-Roc Cabrios in one year than Nissan sold Murano CrossCabriolets over three years.
To me, at least, after living with one of these rides, the problem seems to be that, in the past, automakers asked you to pay a ton of money for a crossover whose best attribute was its roof. Otherwise, you paid more for a crossover that drove slower and had less space. I’d love to see a convertible crossover that is both a competent daily driver and a convertible. Ford and Jeep have it more or less figured out with their convertible SUVs, but I bet there’s a market of people who like the idea of a Jeep or Bronco’s roof, but have exactly zero interest in owning an off-road vehicle.
Or, perhaps I have fallen off my rocker in the blind love that I have for the Nissan Murano CrossCabriolet. But I swear I see something in the CrossCabriolet. I see what Nissan was trying to do, and I love the idea. But the execution doesn’t live up to the idea. Maybe, one day, we’ll see something as silly as the crossover convertible again, and that time, maybe it’ll stick.
Top graphic image: Nissan and Chrysler
I think you’re onto something great here. I suspect safety ratings and shareholder-friendly margins are the biggest issues… Dare I say the hotter summers and more extreme winters of our climate-changed world make convertible life less appealing, too?
But let’s ignore those and also pair this idea neatly with The Autopian’s recent sub-$25k car article. Where is the Corolla ‘vert? It would be about Solara-dimensions, just sliced from a Corolla instead of a Camry. Has Hyundai even made a convertible before? The new Elantra would also look great with the roof down. Almost 90s Camaro vibes. Not as cheap, but is the Nissan Z available as a convertible anymore? Those always seemed to make sense. And what about the old Honda Del Sol? Can the new Prelude make the folding-roof case?
Chevy Trax, honor your elders of the Chevy Tracker ‘vert variety. Granted, a lot of cheap and not-too-expensive cars now have panoramic sunroofs, so when you have all the glass open, it’s pretty vert-adjacent. But that’s not the same.
While we’re dreaming, how about a Ford Maverick convertible? Or, because California, a Prius or Tesla convertible.
My grandfather has an Eos, and yes, he’s always nervous to drop the top. Shame it’s so heavy and complex, because that’s an otherwise fantastic car.
There’s not a huge market for a modern Sebring kind of a convertible, but there is definitely a market for it.
If you live in Socal, and a car person, owning a convertible at least once in your life should be a thing.
Driving with the top down from LA to the Bay on PCH\Hwy 1 and through Yosemite is something I’ll never forget.
Totally agree. California and Florida alone should validate the market capacity for some cheap/rental-spec convertibles beyond Mustangs and Wranglers. Where’s the modern Cavalier and Solara ‘verts!?
Buick Cascada was probably the most recent attempt at this, and it did ok on sales, but yeah the market just isn’t there for the most part. I would love to buy one for my mom, not that I’m in any position to be buying a car for anyone, but she would enjoy it. Solara was nice too while it lasted.
lolwut? Mercedes, tell me you’ve never actually driven a Sebring convertible without telling me. This article is on-point, but for the love of all that is holy, find a better exemplar than a dang Sebring.
I had an ’04 Sebring GT ‘vert with the V6 for a while, and that is singularly the worst, unreliablest, and most joyless crapmobile I have ever driven. Literally its only saving grace was that the top went down. (And, for the record, if it was over 50F and not actively precipitating, that top was down.)
That thing had the driving dynamics of a moist piece of balsa wood. It would randomly stall. It wouldn’t shift out of park sometimes. It had an acceleration rivaled only by Nordic glaciers.
I could tell many stories, but I will leave with this one. I took it through an automated car wash once, and in the middle of the high-pressure soap, it dropped the driver’s window. Have you ever tasted car wash soap? Well I have, thanks to my Sebring convertible.
I was thinking this, too. They were horrible to drive any way but slow an straight. They had horrible Dodge-level plastic interiors, shitty transmissions, bad gas mileage, and below-average reliability overall. The Solara would have been a better example, but I don’t think those sold as well.
The next-gen Sebring vert was even worse, I believe, because the interiors got even shittier.
I think you are spot in here, Mercedes. My friend’s family had one when I was in high school and on nice days everyone wanted to bum rides from him. It was comfy, had adequate power and *looked* nice. Did it jiggle over bumps? Yes. No one really cared when the top was down and you were taking in the gorgeous weather on your way to Friendly’s.
I spent a fair amount of time in many, many, MANY Sebrings just like the one in the top photo. Shortly after getting my license, I started working for a Thrifty Rent-A-Car as a service agent. That job had it’s ups and downs, but toodling around in a Sebring with the roof folded back was a true privilege.
All of the Sebrings Thrifty procured were LXi models with leather and the V6. They were reasonably quick and I remember the Infinity-branded stereos being rather powerful.
It also had the Chrysler AutoStick (TM), which, I assure you, was put to many downshifting tests. Of course, the power roof (put down even in inclement weather; don’t be gentle, it’s a rental) was very much the #1 aspect to the 18-year-old me.
However, even in my automotive knowledge infancy, I knew that the A-pillar was NOT supposed to shake like that. I honestly wondered how the windshields stayed intact. WHY DOES IT SHAKE SO MUCH?!?
One of my neighbors has a ’12 200 (nee Sebring) convertible, and that is quite literally the most convertible he could buy for a 2nd car. But for him, it IS perfection.
I went to the auto show and sat in convertiables for years and years and top of my head was above the top of the front window frame and the frame was eye height. no thanks.
Mitsubishi Mirage convertible, amirite?
I remember many small cars with convertible option in the 90s and 2000s, lovely cars.
Just don’t get in a wreck. The Cavalier from the 90s-00s had a 2 star crash rating on the coupe, I can’t imagine how bad the convertible would have done.
I see where Mercedes is going with this. Unfortunately my free Sebring convertible was a total dud. I couldn’t leave it outside due to the leaky top and it was taking up valuable barn space inside. I’m sure someone like SWG could have sorted through the electrical problems but I had 3 young kids and little time to mess with a “fun” car those days. It was liberating driving it to the junkyard, after blowing my last spare fuse trying to start it.
I appreciate the kind words of support, Frank. Thank you.
It’s funny that you should say the above, since I’m currently fixing a non-operable top on a ’94 LeBaron (same supplier and setup as the Sebring). It’s way easier than you’d think!
Better Idea: Ford Maverick Convertible
Aren’t all the two door crossovers, or SUVs for that matter, sold in the USA, available as convertibles?
The LR Defender isn’t
Despite growing up in convertible country California, I never liked or wanted a convertible. I have rented a couple in Hawaii, and both reminded me of why I don’t like them. And I wasn’t even thinking of someone knifing it. Cough, cowl shake, reduced luggage capacity.
A moon roof is enough sun, light and open air for me. And sometimes too much sun. They have a sliding shade for that.
I grew up in California and had a few convertibles, but it wasn’t until I moved to New York that I really appreciated them. When I want to college in the winter it was “why are there so many people driving convertibles?” Come spring, it was obvious why there were so many convertibles, the question was why anyone was wearing clothes. California mostly sucks for convertibles. Driving across Kansas in June in a light rain on the interstate with the top down in a full size 1969 Chevy convertible is one the best things I ever did.
The Sebring may have been crap, but it did look pretty sharp. My neighbor upstairs had one for a few years, and not once did I see it with the top down. Just… why?
Motor probably busted
Mercedes got me over here feeling like Methuselah. a little after I was a kid we had Toyota Paseos, Celicas, MR2s, Honda Del Sol, Mazda RX7, Dodge Shadow, Chrysler Lebaron, Chevrolet Cavalier, Pontiac Sunbird, Sunfire, Firebird, Geo Metro, VW Cabriolet, Oldsmobile Cutlass, Saab 900, Mitsubishi Eclipse, 3000GT, and that’s not an exhaustive list, not even including Isuzu Amigos and Geo Trackers and Suzuki X90s and Daihatsu Rockys….
Blame safety and cost, used to be you could cut the roof off a cheap coupe, add a smidge of extra bracing, and call it good. Now they actually crash test them, and if a sharp corner can cause body flex, an offset test probably isn’t going to look too pretty.
So I have 2 comments on this. First of all, back in the old days in 1999 when my wife and I first got to together, a 1998 Sebring convertible was our first together car. It was one of the biggest pieces of crap I have ever driven. I don’t need to get into every problem we had, but I will say the transmission was always having issues and it had the worst brakes of any car before or since. So I take issue with it being even somewhat reliable. It was also horrible to drive and rattled and squeaked like mad. If you are trying to MCGA (Make convertibles great again) I would shoot for the exact opposite of that car!
The second comment is this. I have a 23 GR Supra. That car is build on the same platform and in the same factory as the BMW Z4 which is a convertible. That leads me to believe that if Toyota would have wanted to, of felt like there was ANY kind of a market, they could have built a Supra convertible but choose not to. I love my Supra but it is very claustrophobic for a 6′, 195lb person, I think it would have made an amazing vert, but they choose to leave it as a coupe only. I just don’t see any market for convertibles anymore.
As a convertible lover, I think you’re on the right path. However, I feel like you might be killing that path by using the Chrysler Sebring. I would have picked the Toyota Solara as my vehicle to use as a better example.
From a reliability standpoint maybe but that car was a warm stick of bland butter
…So was the Sebring ‘vert.
When my mom decided she wanted a convertible in the late ’90s, she test-drove a Sebring, before deciding that she didn’t have to be cheap after all and buying a Saab 900. The Sebring had a far roomier back seat, but the Saab was actually more comfortable, because the seat had some contouring, which the Chrysler very much did not.
Between that Saab and the BMW 328i that replaced it (6-speed E93), my mom drove convertibles for a solid 15 years. But then my brother had kids and decreed that they would never, ever ride in a convertible. Millennial parents are the worst. Not too long ago, my mom discovered that my niece (who is 11 years old) has never even been allowed to put her window down when riding in the car. WTF?? Under grandma’s supervision, illicit thrills were had—a hand may even have made its way out the window at one point.
What the shit. That’s insanely restrictive and helicoptery.
My parents drove me around in an MGTD until I was 5. No seatbelts, usually no seat if both of them were in the car and I was back with the gas tank. When I got to sit in the front they always reminded me to hold onto a handle on the dash in case the door opened. I vaguely remember remember the top being up because it had a smell, but I don’t remember ever seeing the side curtains. Then we got an MG 1100 because they wanted a car to go to Lake Tahoe and go skiing.
My mom’s first car ride was in an MGTF, so maybe that imprinted some kind of convertible thing on her? The Austin Healey roadster that her Barbie had also made a big impression, I know that.
Being a Grandparent is the BEST! I get in so much trouble for spoiling my grandson. He LOVES riding in the Mustang with the top down. He also likes to ride on the Ranger’s rear jump seats.
A Chrysler Sebring is one of the shittiest cars I’ve ever ridden in. That piece of shit had fallen apart six ways from Sunday, and it didn’t start of nice either.
If you want a cheap and cheerful convertible, do the opposite of everything a Chrysler Sebring was.
I have a Fiat 500c with the rollback roof. 4 seats, a trunk and a view of the stars.
Maybe this is a way for manufacturers to dip a toe back in? The hurdle is that there are few two-door sedans.
Baur TC4 says, “why they gotta be two-door sedans?”
Yeah it needs to be a popular mass market model you already sell a ton of and it needs to be a cheap base so the convertible conversion doesn’t make it astronomically expensive. RAV4 convertible anyone?
Heck even the 1/2 roof like was available on the first generation would be cool.
Right? I bet they’d sell plenty, I think Toyota just can’t be bothered cause they can already sell every Rav they can build anyway.
Yeah they are cranking them out as fast as they possibly can. The only way I see something like that coming off the line is if Toyota is convinced that they can sell 75-100k? per year and at Lexus level pricing, even if it still carries a Toyota badge.
A Jaaaagg XK was my co-daily driver for years, loved every minute of it. The car choice each morning was weather driven. Chance of rain or cold? Cayenne was the call (the “Porschebago” of my handle here). If conditions were nice the XK was saddled up. Utilization between the two was right at 50/50.
Never had a minute of trouble with the XK, as long as one was willing to ignore the fact that glass simply fell out of the soft top one afternoon. The glue (!!) holding it in place simply died. The specified repair was a new soft top. That was a $17K fix from the dealer, or a $1,500 fix from the local soft-top expert who only took cash. Guess which solution I chose?
Traded it in on a Mini Cooper S after six years after my doctor asked “what the fuck has happened to your forehead?”
If you were a teenager in the 2000s you absolutely had a friend with a ratty Sebring that was handed down by a grandparent who couldn’t drive anymore…and good times were had in that car.