Saw the new '07 Sebring Thursday

Just a bit of difference from the previous Sebring, but mostly positive IMO. Chrysler can actually still do a tasteful styling job! <:)
The limited foot room for a long leg big foot front seat passenger has been corrected. It's OK for me now. Still the same small glove compartment. The large Sebring trunk may even be a bit larger with tis new model. I find the trunk space of the small SUVs too small for my use. Generally they are too narrow for my golf clubs to go across the back, with our cases towards the front. The Caliber trunk is far too small for me and the truck like Nitro I looked at is also deficient in trunk capacity, although I consider it too large for me.
The desirable 2.7L engine is the same, no variable valve timing yet. About C$27 for the 2.7L car, which has a very good level of equipment.
Unfortunately two negatives for my use have been introduced.
1. Several finger size deep channels in the hood. Bad for cleaning off dirt and will be ugly for snow and ice. Obviously designed in California and not audited by someone still left in Detroit, where the winter snow will it tell all. I can just see the snow and ice from those deep channels blowing up on the windshield. You can just see the channels in the hood picture here: http://www.chrysler.com/en/sebring/gallery /
2. A full sized spare isn't an option, so I assume it won't fit the well. The sales manager got into my discussion with the sales person over this. When I said assuming one dares a long trip on our "service free" highways without a matching spare, "where does one put the flat". His response: "put it in the trunk". Obviously not a very deep thinker. The sales person said just keep my '95 Concord then. He meant it because he already proudly pointed out the oldie Saab of his parked out front. I'm surprised they allowed that!
--
Other possibilities in the Sebring category I will look at are Camry,
Altima and Fusion.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
newsgroup with:
<snip>
and this has to do with Nissans because.....?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@home.com wrote:

The new Sebring doesn't quite meet my requirements; obvious from my two negatives. Of those other cars I mentioned (Altima is a Nissan isn't it?) a few do appear meet my requirements and I'll look closer at them. Since I keep a car for up to 10 years, I evaluate them closely.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
newsgroup with:

well..why you would even think of a domestic car if you're looking at something to last 10 years is beyond me.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@home.com wrote:

Well my mom's 1987 Chrysler 5th avenue is going on 20 years and has 135,000 miles. Really not alot of miles in the past few years but get this, it even has the original exhaust.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
this newsgroup with:

LOL...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I have a 1971 Pinto with 300K on the clock, that looks and runs like new. Nearly all original, but the exhaust was changed once. LOL
mike hunt

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 18:42:20 -0400, "Mike Hunter"

Despite their bad press over the rear end pumpkin stud/gas tank fiasco, and Ford's arrogance in taking care of the problem, Pintos weren't any worse than any other US try at a small car, and were lightyears better than GM's Vega.
In fact, the head of the NHTSB back in the '70s, during an informal exchange with then-Ford president Lee Iacocca, told him, "It's really too bad what happened with the Pinto. It's really not any worse than any other car." Iacocca had urged King Henry II to recall all Pintos for the "skid fix," and King Henry, who hated the Pinto anyway, refused.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 02:18:54 +0000, Dave wrote:

Every once in a while they screw up and make one RIGHT!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

M-bodies were THE hardy car of the late Chrysler Corporation.
I replaced my OE exhaust on my '86 5th with 2" aluminized behind the converter, which instantly caused highway fuel economy to jump up and the cats to run cooler with lower emissions. These cars weren't "pretty" like the gussied up crap from Roger Smith's GM, but they were far, far more reliable cars. Even in the darkest days and during the Iacocca-led charge toward FWD, Chrysler could still build a rugged, dependable vehicle. That's why a vast majority of municipal fleets and police fleets across the country stuck with the M-body right to the end. When the M-body was retired in '89 and they were forced to go to the "vitamin pill" Caprice from GM, maintenance expenses and failure rates skyrocketed. After one fleet, most never went back to GM for anything, and GM was excluded from many bidding competitions, leaving the Crown Vic the '90s' "cop car" by default.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The problem with the Chevy and Dodge patrol cars is the inherent handling and maintenance problems of FWD cars in general, hence the vast preference for the CV even at $2,000 more a copy. Every state and local department for whom we did service eventually went back to the CV after buying FWD patrol cars
mike hunt

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Still on the FWD hunt! Too bad you haven't owned a FWD car in significant winter weather.
The fact is police often ram into cars they are chasing and RWD is cheaper to repair. So for those who ram into other cars, RWD is obviously better.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Just Facts wrote:

I have and now will only drive RWD cars in the white stuff. Nothing eats RWD + weight in the trunk. FWD really begins to show its ugliness on hills in the snow. (when you start off, all the wight is shifting to the rear wheels.)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Hachiroku wrote:

True Believers in Japanese cars are harder to reprogram than Scientologists, and just as well-grounded in fact. :-/
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

True. Jap cars are no better than US cars now in terms of reliability. I still have a '77 Honda as a "grocery getter" and they DID build better cars than, say, GM did in the '70s and '80s, but that's changed. Later Hondas in the '90s had a whole rash of bad automatic transaxles and engine problems, none of which Honda loyalists seem to admit to existing. It's even worse with Toyota owners...they'll still claim how great their vanilla Camry is, as it's going into the shop "on the hook" yet again.
Why are Toyota buyers so "programmed?" Toyota Motor USA outspends GM AND Ford combined on extremely hyped TV and print advertising ....people just believe what they're told. However, like we're seeing with the Republipedo Party, people eventually DO get wise and look elsewhere once they've been screwed long and hard enough. Toyota's trucks are a scam, pure and simple.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I think you'll find this isn't true if you look at an unbiased source like Consumers Union. US cars simply are not as reliable as cars from the Japanese companies.
I wish that _were_ true. I live in the Rust Belt and I'd love to see those auto plants cranking full-bore.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

before I got my 89 olds Ciera (which I still use) I had a new 81 Accord, that was my only import and my only P O S. I had to junk it in 89 due to dealer service could not get the carb to not screw up and foul the plugs every month or so.
I've bought all my cars new and keep em till they're only suited for the junk yard
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Which of the big 3 do you work for?
wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 23:33:35 GMT, "Roadrunner NG"

It's not cuz I work for them, I don't work for any of them, I do many repairs myself, so I keep them in shape and maintenance costs low. The honda was turned over to the deaaler for repair after following the "fuel enrichment" service procedure many times, they could do no better, after 3 times at the dealer and the bills to prove it, the honda did not last as long as any USA made car I had.
I am an electronic tech type so the computer sensors and such controls I could deal with for the 89 olds. In reading over the shop manuals for the 05 Sebring I may be at my limit if I need a new computer, I'll need a DRB III
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Chrysler fans ripping on the reliability of Japanese cars are like Detroit Lions fans making fun of the Colts for choking every year in the playoffs.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.