Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: 4 seat SUV convertibles
Dieselstation Car Forums > Parking Lot > The Car Garage
clarkma5
So first came the funky Nissan Murano Crosscabriolet, something that looked (and continues to look) like an answer to a question that nobody asked: http://www.nissanusa.com/murano/#/keyfeatu...crosscabriolet/

Now Land Rover is (potentially) joining the fray with a convertible version of the Evoque, and while one still has to wonder if there's any demand for such a thing, it's certainly prettier than the bulbous Murano: http://blogs.insideline.com/straightline/2...eneva-show.html



So, what do we think guys? Is Land Rover gonna actually build this? Will other manufacturers follow suit? I think the most likely candidate to join would be BMW with a convertible version of the X6 or X4 (let's face it, BMW jumps on strange niches more than most manufacturers). Who else do you think might join the party? Will we be seeing these things stick around for awhile or are they gonna flop and be gone within a couple years?
dukenukem
I thought Jeep and Toyota did this like 40 yrs ago?

clarkma5
Now they're BACK! And being marketed to yuppies!
shandyman5
The RR, actually looks decent. The Murano one looks like shit. All hail Jeep!
OHirtenfelder
I'll be honest. I like them.

I like cabriolets. Open top driving is one of the true motoring pleasures imo.

And the usual argument that people have is that 'it kills the dynamics of the car, scuttle shake, bad ride, bla bla bla'. Most of which I think is bullshit, for reasons I'm not going to discuss right now.

But these cars have none of those pretenses. There is no 'sportiness' to be 'ruined'. These cars suite the open top format perfectly I think. They have the added bonus of raised ride height/ground clearance, which will allow one to use them in places where one could really enjoy open top driving.

The Murano does look quite bulbous and oddly proportioned, but, hell yeah, that Evoque looks great. Now they must just keep proper legroom at the back, and they're good to go!
DB9
Probably feels like driving around in a bucket. I would never actually fork out cash for one.
clarkma5
Very well argued, OHirtenfelder. I like the idea of a new niche of 4 seat convertibles where the back seats aren't just tortuous afterthoughts, and these could be it. I do find the crossover form factor to be silly (much like I do when they have their roofs intact, we all know they're wagons on stilts, and those stilts do not appreciably add to their ability to actually perform off-road) but the reality is that it sells.

There's something about the CrossCabriolet and this Evoque Cabriolet that seems to do away with the "you always look silly in the back seat of a convertible" rule, can't quite put my finger on it.
shandyman5
QUOTE(OHirtenfelder @ Feb 25 2012, 11:27 AM) *
I'll be honest. I like them.

I like cabriolets. Open top driving is one of the true motoring pleasures imo.

And the usual argument that people have is that 'it kills the dynamics of the car, scuttle shake, bad ride, bla bla bla'. Most of which I think is bullshit, for reasons I'm not going to discuss right now.

But these cars have none of those pretenses. There is no 'sportiness' to be 'ruined'. These cars suite the open top format perfectly I think. They have the added bonus of raised ride height/ground clearance, which will allow one to use them in places where one could really enjoy open top driving.

The Murano does look quite bulbous and oddly proportioned, but, hell yeah, that Evoque looks great. Now they must just keep proper legroom at the back, and they're good to go!


There is no denying on some cars, it does indeed ruin the ride, rattle, etc. However, for as many cars that it does ruin the ride there are an equal amoutn where there is no difference. I love convertibles, but find I could never own just a convertible because I hate how 90 percent of them look with the top up.
OHirtenfelder
QUOTE
There is no denying on some cars, it does indeed ruin the ride, rattle, etc.


I'm not going to go on a huge rant, as I've done before, but I will mention why it irks me. The thing is that Joe Soap (rich Joe Soap) is willing to drop big amounts on a 430 (as an example) but then come the journos, and write their review on the 430 Spyder, bitching how Ferrari ha ruined the dynamics of the car. Problem is that the average Joe Soap is a pretty shitty driver to start with, and the average 430 Spyder will see a track day about as often as a nun sees a big, hard cock. Not very often.

But the 'forum queens' will still go on endlessly that the car is .1 of a sec slower to 100, or it's 3 seconds slower around 'the 'ring'. Things that matter fuck all. One miss shift on a 0-100 will lose you .5 of a second. It's more dick swinging than anything else. And if I had to take a car out on a breakfast run on a beautiful summer's morning, at sunrise, through an amazing piece of twisty where chances are I can't safely take a carf out beyond 100 or so miles/hour, I'd rather be in the cabriolet than the hardtop.
Bjorn
It's kinda funny how journalists and car enthusiasts can be so influential that they can get a car built that the general public won't touch with a 10 foot pole.

The Ford Thunderbird and Chevy SSR spring immediately to mind. Perhaps the Volt will be added to that list.
moe
The Murano is honestly a joke. The Range on the other hand looks quite good. Apparently the Evoque is decent enough off-road, if none of that ability is sacrificed, this could be a really fun car. I understand completely that barely any of the buyers will ever venture off-road, but I'm thinking of it as a more refined Wrangler. Yes I know, the Wrangler isn't meant to be refined, but I just feel like I'm a dishwasher every time I drive one around.
dukenukem
I would still rather have the original range rover or Willys jeep than this yuppy wagon. All of the off roading, none of the yuppy nonsense
shandyman5
QUOTE(OHirtenfelder @ Feb 25 2012, 03:39 PM) *
I'm not going to go on a huge rant, as I've done before, but I will mention why it irks me. The thing is that Joe Soap (rich Joe Soap) is willing to drop big amounts on a 430 (as an example) but then come the journos, and write their review on the 430 Spyder, bitching how Ferrari ha ruined the dynamics of the car. Problem is that the average Joe Soap is a pretty shitty driver to start with, and the average 430 Spyder will see a track day about as often as a nun sees a big, hard cock. Not very often.

But the 'forum queens' will still go on endlessly that the car is .1 of a sec slower to 100, or it's 3 seconds slower around 'the 'ring'. Things that matter fuck all. One miss shift on a 0-100 will lose you .5 of a second. It's more dick swinging than anything else. And if I had to take a car out on a breakfast run on a beautiful summer's morning, at sunrise, through an amazing piece of twisty where chances are I can't safely take a carf out beyond 100 or so miles/hour, I'd rather be in the cabriolet than the hardtop.


I completely agree with you 100%.... For those that do track cars though it is definitely noticed on some cars, and even then some cars handle just as good... There are exceptions for sure however, that even on a normal drive can you feel the added floppiness of a convertible.
green73ta
Jeepin'. Anything else is just a pretender to the throne.

This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2017 Invision Power Services, Inc.