YACT: How's the Chrysler Sebring?

[T2T III]

chrysler is suck

OK, so maybe Pepsi9019 didn't elaborate enough, so allow me to:

Chrysler products suck because:

1) The have appealing designs that trick you into buying their cars.

2) In my experience, their parts have a much earlier failure rate than most others. Such as:

- My 2.4L 4 cylinder had the head gasket replaced twice before the car had 37,000 miles on it.

- My Stratus had the shifter cable go out on it before the car had 20,000 miles on it.

- My Stratus had very erratic behaving power lock solenoids on the car. Sometimes, they would work normally, then the next time they would just make a bunch of lound noises and the doors wouldn't lock properly.

- Their engines are made like crap. Some noise in the head (valves? lifters?) could be heard before the car even hit 100,000 miles and I was very active with performing oil changes and maintenance on the car.

I could go on, but I think you have a good idea of the message that I am trying to convey. If you do go with a Chrysler product, ensure that you put about $1,000 in cash away because you're going to need it for those silly little repairs that will constantly pop up.

Best of luck in making your purchase decision!

 

[Scootin159]

Go with the SAAB...the quality is much better. It may look semi-equal on the surface, but when you really look into the individual parts it's a much nicer car. Chrystler is all about building cheep cars that will sell well, SAAB is all about creating the best car for the $$$.

If you take care of that SAAB it should run 300-400k miles without any major trouble (the turbo might need some help about halfway through there, but that's not too major).

I'd also like to point out that I am not a SAAB fanboy, in fact I don't really like SAAB's, but they are still solid cars. I did own a Chrystler once & the quality is better than the Chevy we owned which was better than any Ford I've seen....but it's still nothing compared to a SAAB (or BMW, MB, ect.). It's all in the simple things, SAAB uses screws & bolts, Chrystler uses metal clips, Chevy plastic clips & Ford uses Glue.

 

[Spoooon]

Originally posted by: Cyberian

Originally posted by: Jellomancer
It's not only a mini land yacht, but it's a mini land yacht with FWD. Stay away. Those cars are for middle aged men and teenage girls who think it's a sportscar because it has no roof.

What, pray tell, is a "mini land yacht"?

I thought 'mini' meant small and 'land yacht' was a large car.

A mini land yacht is a small big car. Duh!

 

[MikeO]

Thanks all for the replies. The Saab is definetly on the 1st place as of now, went to testdrive it again and came back with a big smile on my face, it's very nice car to drive. It's going to cost several thousand ? more than the Sebring, but IMO it's worth it.

Another thing I started thinking is how the Sebring is going to handle cold finnish winters, if it's build for american weather conditions. Saab is propably better suited for scandinavian weather and it has actually shined in many winter car comparisons I've read.

 

[Lvis]

My folks have owned chryslers for years. They now own a 300m, and are about to get another one. While I know nothing about the Sebring, I can tell you their other Chrysler cars have all been great. (They get a new one every 4-5 years) All have handled fine in the snow, too.

It's amazing the opinions given here, by people that have no information to go on. "It's american so it sucks". Not true. Some of you would be surprised if you were to take a few test drives.

 

[T2T III]

It's amazing the opinions given here, by people that have no information to go on. "It's american so it sucks". Not true. Some of you would be surprised if you were to take a few test drives.

I've owned a Chrysler / Dodge vehicle, so my items that I listed above are based on fact. Chrysler / Dodge ... never again. Up until the recent Mazda that we purchased, I've only owned domestic vehicles for the 22 years that I've been driving. I have nothing against domestic vehicles - it's just Chrysler / Dodge that I hate.

he Saab is definetly on the 1st place as of now, went to testdrive it again and came back with a big smile on my face, it's very nice car to drive. It's going to cost several thousand ? more than the Sebring, but IMO it's worth it.

You've heard of the term - "Pay me now, or pay me later" - correct? You'll pay a bit more for the Saab up front, but it'll take care of you. You'll pay less for the Sebring initially, but after the warranty expires, get your wallet open, because the repairs will begin - on your dime (or whatever the equivalent currecy is for you.)

Regarding Saab, I recently worked with an individual who owned an 1986 Saab (a 9000, I believe) - he had 379,000 miles on the car and it still had the original clutch in it. At the time I knew him, he had to have the power steering pump replaced because it started leaking. However, it was a very good car for hitting high mileage - and quite reliably at that.

 

[LittleWolf]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

And when did Edmunds become the holy-grail of car reviews. They are just good to look up some basic specs and prices. They reviews are quite BS...

At least according to you.

What r u talking about willis?? I was refering to Cyberian post where he mentioned that Edmunds recommended it. Believing Edmunds is like asking a BestBuy sales rep for the best audio system on the planet. U get it ?

Are you a Car afficionado or have you had any experience with Chryslers, especially the Sebring? An informed opinion would be appreciated (not that I would have one)

As a matter of fact, I am quite a Car afficionado. I might also add I am a bit more biased towards German cars, considering I have some. Anyhow, about the Sebring suffice to say, I had rented it and driven for a couple of days. That thing handles more soggier than a bunch of wet noodles over bumps, crappy steering feel, no body balance, shitty cheap plastic interior, bla.. bla bla , I could go on. I don't think I will drive one even if it were offered free (maybe on second thoughts, free might not be too bad... )
Funnily enough a few months back I had been to a Car survey by Peugeot , (since they are thinking about coming to US maybe in a couple of years) and they had this Sebring 4 door also in comparo, along with Passat, Accord, a Volvo, Lexus IS, Audi A4, Nissan Altima etc... I literally laughed seeing the Sebring in the midst. My interviewer later sheepishly admitted that they put the Sebring in the midst just for kicks and to throw people off. He admitted it is the cheaptest/crappiest car of the lot and not even close to any others.
In perspective, the Saab 9-3 and Volvo compete more with the likes of Passat, Lexus and base Audi. Not the Sebring. So in my mind, the Sebring is not even close.


mto81, if you thinking about the new 9-3, I would also recommend that you check out the new Audi A4. A bit pricier, but much better. The 9-3 is based on the new GM epsilon platform (same as the new CTS) and a couple of new Omegas and should certainly have better handling than the older quirky Saabs. Only downside, being first year of new car, it might have a few bugs...

Good luck with your decision

-j

 

[Pastore]

Originally posted by: geno

Originally posted by: Jellomancer
It's not only a mini land yacht, but it's a mini land yacht with FWD. Stay away. Those cars are for middle aged men and teenage girls who think it's a sportscar because it has no roof.

Huh, the Sebring? Trying to be sporty??? The car doesn't look the least bit sporty! You might be confused with the Mitsubishi Eclipse

shhhh..... hes a nissan driver

 

[Pastore]

Originally posted by: LittleWolf

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

And when did Edmunds become the holy-grail of car reviews. They are just good to look up some basic specs and prices. They reviews are quite BS...

At least according to you.

What r u talking about willis?? I was refering to Cyberian post where he mentioned that Edmunds recommended it. Believing Edmunds is like asking a BestBuy sales rep for the best audio system on the planet. U get it ?

Are you a Car afficionado or have you had any experience with Chryslers, especially the Sebring? An informed opinion would be appreciated (not that I would have one)

As a matter of fact, I am quite a Car afficionado. I might also add I am a bit more biased towards German cars, considering I have some. Anyhow, about the Sebring suffice to say, I had rented it and driven for a couple of days. That thing handles more soggier than a bunch of wet noodles over bumps, crappy steering feel, no body balance, shitty cheap plastic interior, bla.. bla bla , I could go on. I don't think I will drive one even if it were offered free (maybe on second thoughts, free might not be too bad... )
Funnily enough a few months back I had been to a Car survey by Peugeot , (since they are thinking about coming to US maybe in a couple of years) and they had this Sebring 4 door also in comparo, along with Passat, Accord, a Volvo, Lexus IS, Audi A4, Nissan Altima etc... I literally laughed seeing the Sebring in the midst. My interviewer later sheepishly admitted that they put the Sebring in the midst just for kicks and to throw people off. He admitted it is the cheaptest/crappiest car of the lot and not even close to any others.
In perspective, the Saab 9-3 and Volvo compete more with the likes of Passat, Lexus and base Audi. Not the Sebring. So in my mind, the Sebring is not even close.


mto81, if you thinking about the new 9-3, I would also recommend that you check out the new Audi A4. A bit pricier, but much better. The 9-3 is based on the new GM epsilon platform (same as the new CTS) and a couple of new Omegas and should certainly have better handling than the older quirky Saabs. Only downside, being first year of new car, it might have a few bugs...

Good luck with your decision

-j

Right... I am real sure that a rental car that gets the sh!t beat out of it is a real good car to make an opinion on. But, I agree, the interiors are junk. But thats America for ya, as long as it looks good on the outside, the rest doesn't mean sh!t.

 

[FrustratedUser]

I say go with the SAAB. Reliable and fun to drive.
It doesn't mean $hit that it's based on the epsilon platform. The only major thing in common is just the base. Everything else is reworked/redesigned by SAAB. So don't let that fool you. The engines are pure SAAB from bottom and up and they last forever with maintenance. The turbo technology is proven and reliable. SAAB has been producing turbos since 1977 and they get better every year.

 

[LittleWolf]

Originally posted by: FrustratedUser
I say go with the SAAB. Reliable and fun to drive.
It doesn't mean $hit that it's based on the epsilon platform. The only major thing in common is just the base. Everything else is reworked/redesigned by SAAB.

I didn't mean to crap on the Epsilon platform. On the contrary, my intention was to mention that it is a new and good platform. And BTW, the "only common thing base" is quite important for it's torsenal rigidity. Else whatever is built (which is just panel and sometimes sub-frame parts and suspensions) won't just be any good. It will still handle crappily, if the base isn't good enough.

-j

 

[FrustratedUser]

The base doesn't pass unchanged either. I would prefer GM to get the ¤%&¤ out of SAAB anyway.