Talk:Chrysler Sebring (convertible)

Clarkson review[edit]

From his Sunday Times column, Jeremy Clarkson starts with: "Many people imagine when they rent a convertable in America that they'll be thumping down Highway 1 under a blazing sky in a throbbing Corvette of an evocative Mustang... Sadly, however, most tourists end up with a Chrysler Sebring convertable, which is almost certainly the worst car in the entire world", and it goes downhill from there eg "Sadly, there's more bad news. Turning petrol into motion , as we know, is an expensive business, but turning it into sound is even worse. We managed just 18mpg. Quite why anyone would buy this rather than, say, a Volkswagen Eos, I simply do not know. You'd have to be so window-lickingly insane that you'd be banned from handling anything other than crayons."

Perhaps there is space in this article for some of this review. Thecrystalcicero (talk) 00:39, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And another tidbit from Forbes.com: the Chrysler Sebring convertible tops their list of "Cars that Lose Value Fastest", with an MSRP of US$28,530 and an estimated 60-month resale value of 15%. Overall, the article seems to be lacking info on consumer perception aside from a dubious and unsourced "most popular convertible automobile in the world" claim in in intro. Resale value is a nice and verifiable measure of consumer perception, right? Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 03:06, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

Chrysler Sebring (convertible) → Chrysler Sebring – same car just different body style Ejfetters 04:50, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Survey[edit]

Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

Procedural Oppose - this is not a requested move, this is a MERGE request. 70.51.9.174 09:40, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - The sebring and Sebring convertible are almost completely different cars

Discussion[edit]

Add any additional comments

Support No need to have sepearate pages for all a car's different body styles. This is confusing, it would make more sense to add them all into one article and seperate entries for the different styles like in most other car pages. Ejfetters 04:50, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Oppose The Chrysler Sebring article was a giant mess flooded with infoboxes until I split them up and amde the article managible. Karrmann 12:35, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The article split the way it is now is clearer. The Sebring is an unusual case in that the body styles are not mechanically similar (the sedan is identical to the Dodge Stratus, the convertible is based on but not identical to the Stratus and has different styling (especially in thie first generation) and the coupe is a Mitsubishi Eclipse). Trying to cram all this information plus images of the different versions into one article made a muddled mess. IFCAR 00:30, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per IFCAR. --Interiot 12:29, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support The Sebring may have had seperate underpinnings from one body style to another, but as a Chrysler they were placed under the same "Sebring" model umbrella; as it stands the seperate body style pages can be confusing or at the very least difficult to navigate and should/could be organized into one page.Ghost650 (talk) 16:57, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Karmann, if your reason is cuz the article was a mess before, why don't you and I work together and rewrite the article and make it make sense? I think together we could make it all look better, cuz really I understand why you say to split them, but, the flow of all them need some work I think. What do ya say? Ejfetters 01:04, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Still EJ, it is like IFCAR said, the only thing that they share is the badge on the fender. The coupe is built by Diamond Star motors, the convertible is a lone model from Chrysler, and the sedan is a rebadged Dodge Stratus. The three models don't share any componets, hence, why they don't belong in the same article. Karrmann 12:00, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why does this article say that the Sebring convertible line is "a dying breed"? VW has just introduced the competitive hardtop convertible Eos, and Pontiac has introduced the G6 hardtop convertible, both at well below premium prices. This has forced Chrysler to introduce a hardtop model for 2008. So this statement seems entirely bogus to me, in view of the amount of competitive activity in the market sector. TomEM 16:44, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Support, because I see no point in putting information about the plant Chrysler plans to close in three different articles. I'm putting the information in one article for the Sebring and one for the Dodge Avenger. And what about links to "Chrysler Sebring" that don't specify one or the other? There's no solution to that.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 19:09, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And by actually reading the details about three, I see that there would be no confusion. I still support.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 20:33, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]