The automotive kingdom certainly has its fair share of misunderstood genres. The sport utility truck, the coupe SUV, even the sedan to an extent. However, as the decades have rolled by, cabriolets became one of the most misunderstood of all vehicle subtypes. Even though they were once common fixtures of the roads, as a society, we seem to have forgotten what they’re all about. Despite the vehicles themselves being at least mildly interesting, we’ve all heard the insults that get bandied about for drivers of convertibles. Mid-life crisis. Golfist. Poser.
Oh, and it often gets worse as the cars get faster. If a performance car offers the option of a fixed roof or a removable one, the one with the fixed roof is usually more desirable and the one with the ragtop is usually treated as a second-class vehicle. Why? Convertibles often cost more than their coupe equivalents, and people have proven willing to pay up for the privilege. What do these convertible buyers know that forum elitists don’t?
The truth is, they know a few things that are more overarching than outright technical expertise. They value experiences and involvement in the same way the slicktop, three-pedal-or-die brigade does, but their means of obtaining involvement are slightly different. Every convertible is, to at least some degree, an enthusiast car, it’s just that accepting this fact can be hard for some.
Granted, the elitists’ talking points aren’t drawn from thin air. Forty years ago, the average unibody had the torsional rigidity of al dente spaghettini, and cutting the roof off was a surefire way to make the cowl shake over expansion joints like it just took a polar plunge. Automakers attempted to compensate by welding in heavy bracing, but those mostly bloated curb weights without curbing apocryphal stories of air vents violently ejecting themselves from dashboards. However, we aren’t living in 1984 anymore, and for the past 20-some-odd years, convertibles have grown substantially more rigid. Sure, they’ve also grown substantially heavier, but in the real world, how much will you notice?
You may still be able to make this argument if you do a trackday every month and have teeth the shade of a freshly built model home’s walls, but most of us don’t commute to the office through carousel turns or think too much about what we eat in the context of lap times.
In fact, most of a typical car’s life will be spent sitting, followed by the daily grind on public roads at sensible speeds, and only a handful will ever turn a wheel on track. In the real world, with congestion and potholes and speed cameras conspiring to keep average speeds low, the sensations of letting the wind and sky in are more noticeable than a little extra chassis rigidity and a few dozen fewer pounds. It helps the car become an instrument of joy, and the Chrysler Sebring Convertible is one of the more telling examples from history.
Don’t get me wrong, the first-generation Chrysler Sebring was a perfectly okay car. Sure, the Ultradrive automatic gearbox wasn’t strong, but the Mitsubishi V6 was stout enough and the styling was perfectly handsome. When the second-generation model came along, it gained the abhorrent 2.7-liter Chrysler V6, frumpier styling, and a direct sedan version just to show everyone how truly uninspired the bones of the car were.
Despite this, the convertible variant took a subpar midsize sedan, removed two doors and a roof, and turned it into a little bit of an occasion. Sure, the interior was still an uncouth mishmash of shapes and materials, and the facelifted model still had the facial expression of a particularly bewildered rodent, but with the roof down and a breeze coming in, it was hard to care too much, wasn’t it? At that point, a dashboard is just a shelf for dust, after all.
Instead, drivers of these mediocre-at-best convertibles found themselves breathing in harmony with the universe, their senses fascinated by the machinations of Mother Nature. The rustling of hedges, the weight of the wind, an unfiltered view of 100 billion stars. A convertible reminds us that on a long enough timeline, we’re all just passing through, single-cell travelers in the universe’s largest terrarium. There’s a cathartic sense of insignificance that comes with such an experience, a freeing vulnerability that transcends metal and glass and reveals certain truths about humanity. Plus, it’s theoretically at least a little bit safer than a motorcycle, and you still get to meet some interesting people in the process.
Sadly, going roof-down is something fewer and fewer people are able to experience. Drop-top choices have been steadily dwindling since the turn of the millennium, with no signs of that trend reversing. There’s no more Chrysler Sebring Convertible or Toyota Solara Convertible or Pontiac G6 Convertible. No more BMW 2 Series cabriolet, or Mercedes-Benz SLK, or Audi A3 cabriolet. Mitsubishi doesn’t offer a convertible in America anymore, nor does Alfa Romeo, Chrysler, Dodge, Fiat, Honda, Infiniti, Nissan, Toyota, Volkswagen, or Volvo. Even Jaguar’s current convertible dies this year, with no guarantee of a replacement.
If you’ve ever wanted a cabriolet, buy one, and don’t let the haters convince you otherwise. Better yet, if you’ve hated on convertibles for technical reasons in the past, I encourage you to take a step back and query whether or not the universe is about more than just objective engineering truths.
Yes, cutting the roof off a car can make it a bit heavier, a bit floppier, and a bit slower, but it can also make it better, for “better” can’t always be measured. Every incremental improvement in tin-top car rigidity will eventually become outmoded, so it’s worth approaching things with an open mind and trying to let the sun in for an experience that will always be timeless.
(Photo credits: BMW, Ford, Chrysler, Audi)
Support our mission of championing car culture by becoming an Official Autopian Member.
I’m just bitter there aren’t more pillarless hardtops, because convertibles look like ass with the top up, and I can’t deal with direct sunlight. A pleasant cruiser sounds nice, I just want my canopy to hide under.
I couldn’t agree more. The structural rigidity argument I see circulate in enthusiast circles is particularly absurd to me. You are absolutely not going to notice a difference driving on the street. At all. And if you think you do I can assure it’s placebo.
If you’re going to do serious, and I mean serious track work then a coupe is better. If you’re tearing up the HPRDRE or “member” days at your local track every weekend and legitimately looking to set the fastest time possible then yes, you will likely notice the extra weight and additional bounciness of a drop top.
But if it’s never seeing more than an occasional track attack day and/or spirited backroad drive then get the convertible, my dude. There is no substitute for open top motoring and it’s becoming rarer and rarer because enthusiasts have convinced themselves convertibles aren’t hardcore enough and normies all drive crossovers now.
I say this as somebody who has never driven a convertible.
Are you sure you couldn’t tell the difference in stiffness? At least for older convertibles, I understand the difference is pretty large, and you can absolutely feel torsional stiffness in street driving. Like I can feel how twisty my f150 is compared to my other cars.
I should’ve clarified. You won’t be able to tell in modern convertibles. Old stuff is definitely a different story, although I’ve driven an NA Miata and found the chassis to be super settled.
I could tell the difference between roof down and hard top on in my mk3 MR2, but not in my MX5 or Elise.
Although that might just have been placebo effect from the dash wobbling all over the place. No wobbles with the hard top one.
The MX5 had a cage, so that’s not really useful data.
It’s greatly overblown how much less stiff a convertible is. In average driving, I can’t tell the difference between my X3 and my 330Ci, both of the early 00s. The convertible outperforms the X3 in the twisties.
BMW would have had to do a spectacularly poor job with the conversion to make an E46 handle worse than an SUV.
An X3 is essentially a lifted e46 wagon.
And an X5 is a lifted E39. My point remains. Being a convertible would have comparably little bearing on whether an E46 with the roof cut off would handle worse than an E46 that weighs ~600 hundred pounds more and is 10 inches higher.
My point is if structural rigidity was a huge concern, it would handle worse than a lifted version of the same car.
I’m aware of what your point is. It’s just irrelevant to the standard that you were judging it by (“The convertible outperforms the X3 in the twisties”). An E46 convertible is in the same timezone of chassis stiffness as a C5 Corvette, Lotus Elise or 996 convertible. It’s a late 90s car that was always designed with a convertible version in mind, so you wouldn’t see the drop off for the convertible that was seen with older designs like an E36 or C4 Corvette or A80 Supra or NSX-T or 993. Going by what BMW forums say about it, an E46 convertible is notably less than a coupe/wagon/sedan but no so much that it drops to the level of cars designed in the 1980s. Enough that you’d be able to tell if you drove one back to back with a coupe/sedan but not enough that there would be the kind of downsides typically attributed to convertibles of the prior era (rattling/groaning interior components, lots of cowl shake, jittery suspension on rough roads, steering kickback). There are diminishing returns for cars that debuted in 1998-ish vs cars that did before then, but make no mistake: You can tell the difference. You can tell it with a 996 convertible vs a 996 coupe. You can tell it with a C5 vs a 996. You can tell with cars that started as coupes but are available as convertibles today (even ignoring infamously flabby shitboxes like the VW Eos) like the Cayman/Boxster twins.
The actual reason that your E46 convertible handles better than your E83 X3 is that the E46 convertible weighs around 600 pounds less, most likely has an even lower center of gravity than an E46 coupe, 3 less inches of wheelbase and ten less inches of height. An early M Roadster also would handle better on twisty roads than your BMW SUV, and that was rather infamously a car that had more power than the noodle chassis was entirely comfortable dealing with even before BMW put the S54 in it.
It’s just not nearly as much of an issue as it was before the late 90s. A lot of that was just cars in general being substantially stiffer than they were up through the mid-90s, since so many cars of the time transferred over to all new chassis to meet stricter crash ; and the only notable cowl shake is in comparison to the extremely stiff roofed version. Stuff slips through the cracks still that is pretty putrid in that regard (the VW Eos comes to mind), but you never generally see stuff now like you did in the 70s/80s/90s where you are chopping up something that was already by modern standards somewhat marginal as a coupe and trying to make up the difference by bolting in a ton of bracing. The noodly feel you’d get with targas in the 80s and 90s (Supra, C4, NSX) is all gone too.
Another major factor is that after the 90s nearly all convertibles were designed/produced in house on a chassis that was always planned to have an option for a convertible, rather than ASC or Karmann or someone taking a Sawzall to a coupe after it left the factory (even when it was a factory option).
There’s a particularly American thing where we just can’t do anything half way. Getting into biking? $6k carbon fiber racer and a pair of booty shorts. Jogging? Hell no, 5k or bust. Cup of coffee in the morning? I’ll raise you a Red Bull every 30 minutes. Like driving? Well then why the fuck do you have a passenger seat and air conditioning?!
The marathoner’s secret is nipple tape. It’s okay to just enjoy things.
Even when you’re way into tracking your car, you can have fun with a convertible. I was chasing lap times in my Z4 for years and never complained about its rigidity.
I couldn’t agree more. The structural rigidity argument I see circulate in enthusiast circles is particularly absurd to me. You are absolutely not going to notice a difference driving on the street. At all. And if you think you do I can assure it’s placebo.
If you’re going to do serious, and I mean serious track work then a coupe is better. If you’re tearing up the HPRDRE or “member” days at your local track every weekend and legitimately looking to set the fastest time possible then yes, you will likely notice the extra weight and additional bounciness of a drop top.
But if it’s never seeing more than an occasional track attack day and/or spirited backroad drive then get the convertible, my dude. There is no substitute for open top motoring and it’s becoming rarer and rarer because enthusiasts have convinced themselves convertibles aren’t hardcore enough and normies all drive crossovers now.
I say this as somebody who has never driven a convertible.
Are you sure you couldn’t tell the difference in stiffness? At least for older convertibles, I understand the difference is pretty large, and you can absolutely feel torsional stiffness in street driving. Like I can feel how twisty my f150 is compared to my other cars.
I should’ve clarified. You won’t be able to tell in modern convertibles. Old stuff is definitely a different story, although I’ve driven an NA Miata and found the chassis to be super settled.
I could tell the difference between roof down and hard top on in my mk3 MR2, but not in my MX5 or Elise.
Although that might just have been placebo effect from the dash wobbling all over the place. No wobbles with the hard top one.
The MX5 had a cage, so that’s not really useful data.
It’s greatly overblown how much less stiff a convertible is. In average driving, I can’t tell the difference between my X3 and my 330Ci, both of the early 00s. The convertible outperforms the X3 in the twisties.
BMW would have had to do a spectacularly poor job with the conversion to make an E46 handle worse than an SUV.
An X3 is essentially a lifted e46 wagon.
And an X5 is a lifted E39. My point remains. Being a convertible would have comparably little bearing on whether an E46 with the roof cut off would handle worse than an E46 that weighs ~600 hundred pounds more and is 10 inches higher.
My point is if structural rigidity was a huge concern, it would handle worse than a lifted version of the same car.
I’m aware of what your point is. It’s just irrelevant to the standard that you were judging it by (“The convertible outperforms the X3 in the twisties”). An E46 convertible is in the same timezone of chassis stiffness as a C5 Corvette, Lotus Elise or 996 convertible. It’s a late 90s car that was always designed with a convertible version in mind, so you wouldn’t see the drop off for the convertible that was seen with older designs like an E36 or C4 Corvette or A80 Supra or NSX-T or 993. Going by what BMW forums say about it, an E46 convertible is notably less than a coupe/wagon/sedan but no so much that it drops to the level of cars designed in the 1980s. Enough that you’d be able to tell if you drove one back to back with a coupe/sedan but not enough that there would be the kind of downsides typically attributed to convertibles of the prior era (rattling/groaning interior components, lots of cowl shake, jittery suspension on rough roads, steering kickback). There are diminishing returns for cars that debuted in 1998-ish vs cars that did before then, but make no mistake: You can tell the difference. You can tell it with a 996 convertible vs a 996 coupe. You can tell it with a C5 vs a 996. You can tell with cars that started as coupes but are available as convertibles today (even ignoring infamously flabby shitboxes like the VW Eos) like the Cayman/Boxster twins.
The actual reason that your E46 convertible handles better than your E83 X3 is that the E46 convertible weighs around 600 pounds less, most likely has an even lower center of gravity than an E46 coupe, 3 less inches of wheelbase and ten less inches of height. An early M Roadster also would handle better on twisty roads than your BMW SUV, and that was rather infamously a car that had more power than the noodle chassis was entirely comfortable dealing with even before BMW put the S54 in it.
It’s just not nearly as much of an issue as it was before the late 90s. A lot of that was just cars in general being substantially stiffer than they were up through the mid-90s, since so many cars of the time transferred over to all new chassis to meet stricter crash ; and the only notable cowl shake is in comparison to the extremely stiff roofed version. Stuff slips through the cracks still that is pretty putrid in that regard (the VW Eos comes to mind), but you never generally see stuff now like you did in the 70s/80s/90s where you are chopping up something that was already by modern standards somewhat marginal as a coupe and trying to make up the difference by bolting in a ton of bracing. The noodly feel you’d get with targas in the 80s and 90s (Supra, C4, NSX) is all gone too.
Another major factor is that after the 90s nearly all convertibles were designed/produced in house on a chassis that was always planned to have an option for a convertible, rather than ASC or Karmann or someone taking a Sawzall to a coupe after it left the factory (even when it was a factory option).
There’s a particularly American thing where we just can’t do anything half way. Getting into biking? $6k carbon fiber racer and a pair of booty shorts. Jogging? Hell no, 5k or bust. Cup of coffee in the morning? I’ll raise you a Red Bull every 30 minutes. Like driving? Well then why the fuck do you have a passenger seat and air conditioning?!
The marathoner’s secret is nipple tape. It’s okay to just enjoy things.
Even when you’re way into tracking your car, you can have fun with a convertible. I was chasing lap times in my Z4 for years and never complained about its rigidity.
You know who clowns on convertibles?
People who wish they had a convertible.
Fact.
Two of my convertibles were less than £1500. Anyone with a car could have bought one instead, so the hatred can’t be envy.
You know who clowns on convertibles?
People who wish they had a convertible.
Fact.
Two of my convertibles were less than £1500. Anyone with a car could have bought one instead, so the hatred can’t be envy.
My convertibles through the years: 1961 Buick Electra 445, 1974 Corvette, 1986 Mustang GT, 191(is Miata and now a 2012 Lexus is250c. I just enjoy open air.
1991 Miata
My convertibles through the years: 1961 Buick Electra 445, 1974 Corvette, 1986 Mustang GT, 191(is Miata and now a 2012 Lexus is250c. I just enjoy open air.
1991 Miata
I used to drive an MX-5 years ago. I ended getting rid of it due to road noise on motorways (it was my only car). When I had it though I used to drive with the top down as much as possible (e.g. 0 degrees Celsius, anorak and heater on).
I somewhat miss it. And anyway drive another noisy motorway car now…
Cold day + heated seats = bliss
I used to drive an MX-5 years ago. I ended getting rid of it due to road noise on motorways (it was my only car). When I had it though I used to drive with the top down as much as possible (e.g. 0 degrees Celsius, anorak and heater on).
I somewhat miss it. And anyway drive another noisy motorway car now…
Cold day + heated seats = bliss
You forgot about this one:
https://bringatrailer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/1991_chevrolet_geo-metro_1991_chevrolet_geo-metro_img_2038-50342.jpg
You forgot about this one:
https://bringatrailer.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/1991_chevrolet_geo-metro_1991_chevrolet_geo-metro_img_2038-50342.jpg
I am strongly convinced that anyone who clowns on convertibles hasn’t driven one, and certainly hasn’t taken one through the woods, along the coast, or anywhere scenic. Hustling an open-top car through a windy road on a nice day with a beautiful backdrop is just bliss – the wind, the sounds, the smells of nature, there’s nothing else like it. I’ve got a 3-series convertible and have had borderline religious experiences in that car. There’s faster and better-handling cars out there, but I promise you won’t give a shit once you get it moving.
Or to be slightly but complementarily contrarian, taken one on a trip to the grocery store in the evening to get something needed for dinner.
Convertibles can make the most everyday trips suddenly fun and interesting, and for many, remind them of the magic of driving as its own thing, like what it was like when they first got their license and the world was theirs.
Absolutely yes, this too. Even for short trips the top goes down. I got mine initially because I needed a car but I didn’t really like driving, and boy has it changed that.
I am strongly convinced that anyone who clowns on convertibles hasn’t driven one, and certainly hasn’t taken one through the woods, along the coast, or anywhere scenic. Hustling an open-top car through a windy road on a nice day with a beautiful backdrop is just bliss – the wind, the sounds, the smells of nature, there’s nothing else like it. I’ve got a 3-series convertible and have had borderline religious experiences in that car. There’s faster and better-handling cars out there, but I promise you won’t give a shit once you get it moving.
Or to be slightly but complementarily contrarian, taken one on a trip to the grocery store in the evening to get something needed for dinner.
Convertibles can make the most everyday trips suddenly fun and interesting, and for many, remind them of the magic of driving as its own thing, like what it was like when they first got their license and the world was theirs.
Absolutely yes, this too. Even for short trips the top goes down. I got mine initially because I needed a car but I didn’t really like driving, and boy has it changed that.
“the first-generation Chrysler Sebring was a perfectly okay car. ”
“the styling was perfectly handsome.”
Are you high right now? It’s ok, you can tell us.
Yeah, not so perfectly okay. I rented an early Sebring on a business trip once. The massive, raked A-pillars make it the only convertible I’ve ever driven (out of a lot) where the sight lines are considerably worse than in a typical hardtop. I kept having to move my head to see around them.
“the first-generation Chrysler Sebring was a perfectly okay car. ”
“the styling was perfectly handsome.”
Are you high right now? It’s ok, you can tell us.
Yeah, not so perfectly okay. I rented an early Sebring on a business trip once. The massive, raked A-pillars make it the only convertible I’ve ever driven (out of a lot) where the sight lines are considerably worse than in a typical hardtop. I kept having to move my head to see around them.
Recently purchased a 2004 Mercedes Benz CLK convertible. It’s going to be our weekend road trip vehicle. Been touring on a motorcycle for years and getting sick of rain or 95 degree direct sunlight. With the convertible, we can do top up, top down, A/C on or heat on. Covers all the bases. That and the 302 HP, 339 pounds-feet of torque V8 make the drive interesting!
We replaced our R12RT with a Boxster of the same vintage: 2005. The Boxster has two trunks! I may be done touring on motorcycles to some degree but I’m definitely done with riding when it’s not fun.
Recently purchased a 2004 Mercedes Benz CLK convertible. It’s going to be our weekend road trip vehicle. Been touring on a motorcycle for years and getting sick of rain or 95 degree direct sunlight. With the convertible, we can do top up, top down, A/C on or heat on. Covers all the bases. That and the 302 HP, 339 pounds-feet of torque V8 make the drive interesting!
We replaced our R12RT with a Boxster of the same vintage: 2005. The Boxster has two trunks! I may be done touring on motorcycles to some degree but I’m definitely done with riding when it’s not fun.
I have said it before and I’ll say it again- there’s no point in buying a Wrangler with a hard top. I don’t buy the “it’s too hot in the summer” or “it’s too cold in the winter” lines people use. Fact: Most hard top Wrangler//Gladiator owners never take the two front freedom panels out. Even fewer remove the top completely.
I have never understood this. The whole point of putting up with the on road deficiencies of these vehicles is the open air experience. I’m near Chicago and my half doors go on the Gladiator in April, come off in October (full doors/soft top mid October-mid April). The heater does a fine job in the winter even with the soft top.
Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.
My 2dr Bronco only came in a hard top. I swapped it out for an aftermarket soft top within a couple months. I may never go back.
This is the way.
No, the whole point of putting up with the on road deficiencies of a Jeep is to gain the off road strengths. A Jeep is far from the only convertible, and you can take the doors off of literally any car(at least once).
Source- I own a hardtop Jeep XJ. I also like driving with the doors off in my CJ.
No. The whole point of putting up with the on road deficiencies is so you have adequate dash space for your rubber duckies. At least that seems to be the case where I live.
I have said it before and I’ll say it again- there’s no point in buying a Wrangler with a hard top. I don’t buy the “it’s too hot in the summer” or “it’s too cold in the winter” lines people use. Fact: Most hard top Wrangler//Gladiator owners never take the two front freedom panels out. Even fewer remove the top completely.
I have never understood this. The whole point of putting up with the on road deficiencies of these vehicles is the open air experience. I’m near Chicago and my half doors go on the Gladiator in April, come off in October (full doors/soft top mid October-mid April). The heater does a fine job in the winter even with the soft top.
Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.
My 2dr Bronco only came in a hard top. I swapped it out for an aftermarket soft top within a couple months. I may never go back.
This is the way.
No, the whole point of putting up with the on road deficiencies of a Jeep is to gain the off road strengths. A Jeep is far from the only convertible, and you can take the doors off of literally any car(at least once).
Source- I own a hardtop Jeep XJ. I also like driving with the doors off in my CJ.
No. The whole point of putting up with the on road deficiencies is so you have adequate dash space for your rubber duckies. At least that seems to be the case where I live.
My ’01 Boxster is my track car. There are usually one or two of them out with me on track days. Yeah, the hard-tops are more rigid and probably better, but on the way home from the track (among other places) I get to drive top-down.
Amen.
My ’01 Boxster is my track car. There are usually one or two of them out with me on track days. Yeah, the hard-tops are more rigid and probably better, but on the way home from the track (among other places) I get to drive top-down.
Amen.
I recently sold a Lexus GX 470 so I could buy a Wrangler TJ. It’s a much more primitive (worse) vehicle in almost every way, but I can take the top off and row my own gears.
I recently sold a Lexus GX 470 so I could buy a Wrangler TJ. It’s a much more primitive (worse) vehicle in almost every way, but I can take the top off and row my own gears.
I must be out of touch; I had no idea people were cracking on convertibles so much. Is the hate just for performance cars, for sacrificing some degree of performance to have the option of dropping the top? ‘Cause there’s nothing like cruising around in an old ragtop (gas mileage and performance be damned) on a mild summer day, cranking the 8-track. I have the scruffy ’66 t-bird convertible to prove it.
I passed on a ‘62 bullet Bird and have regretted it ever since.
I still get “hairdresser car” comments on my Z4, but you don’t care when driving with the wind in your hair.
I got exactly the same comment when I had my Z4.
Except mine was the coupe.
I really miss that car.
I must be out of touch; I had no idea people were cracking on convertibles so much. Is the hate just for performance cars, for sacrificing some degree of performance to have the option of dropping the top? ‘Cause there’s nothing like cruising around in an old ragtop (gas mileage and performance be damned) on a mild summer day, cranking the 8-track. I have the scruffy ’66 t-bird convertible to prove it.
I passed on a ‘62 bullet Bird and have regretted it ever since.
I still get “hairdresser car” comments on my Z4, but you don’t care when driving with the wind in your hair.
I got exactly the same comment when I had my Z4.
Except mine was the coupe.
I really miss that car.