Neat...kind of a budget Evoque cabriolet.     Not sure how big the market for a crossover cabrio is... but, I like seeing offbeat stuff like this. 

I don't hate it... but why so weak on the power? The thing has got to be heavy for its size.

Cute cuv for small people who want a small auto. Have to agree with @Drew Dowdell as the power seems anemic for the auto.

Sorta kinda a replacement for the late Beetle and Eos cabriolets.   Those were neat cars...I can see the appeal of such a convertible...not a performance car, but a cruiser..saw a brown Eos on the ferry out to Kelleys Island last Saturday..on a sunny, 75 degree summer day it could be fun.   

21 minutes ago, Robert Hall said:

Sorta kinda a replacement for the late Beetle and Eos cabriolets.   Those were neat cars...I can see the appeal of such a convertible...not a performance car, but a cruiser..saw a brown Eos on the ferry out to Kelleys Island last Saturday..on a sunny, 75 degree summer day it could be fun.   

As one that has lived in the sun but after skin cancer and a rebuild of my nose, now uses hats heavily and prefers to stay out of the sun. Pass on this convertible.

No. Just no. 

“Convertible SUV” is an automotive oxymoron. 

I predict 1,000,000 sales year 1, because Crossover Convertible!

1 hour ago, surreal1272 said:

No. Just no. 

 

“Convertible SUV” is an automotive oxymoron. 

The Wrangler does well in this niche.  But I like the idea of a convertible SUV w/ a power top.   A 2dr Grand Cherokee cabrio would be sweet...

25 minutes ago, Robert Hall said:

The Wrangler does well in this niche.  But I like the idea of a convertible SUV w/ a power top.   A 2dr Grand Cherokee cabrio would be sweet...

The Wrangler is an exception to the rule. It was built as a convertible from day one as a two door. Crap like the Murano, the Evoque, and now this hideous thing look absolutely hideous. It adds unnecessary weight to already underpowered CUVs/SUVs and reduces the biggest selling point of them, cargo room. Convertibles belong on two door cars and two door cars alone (Wrangler not withstanding).

2 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

No. Just no. 

 

“Convertible SUV” is an automotive oxymoron. 

What was that about a moron? 

The T-Roc cabrio HAD to be built.  From the original Beetle, up through the Rabbit and Golf cabrios... this is the quintessential "college girl" car.  I can see a lot of upper middle class moms reliving their yutes and getting one for themselves and their daughters.

30 minutes ago, ocnblu said:

What was that about a moron? 

 

The T-Roc cabrio HAD to be built.  From the original Beetle, up through the Rabbit and Golf cabrios... this is the quintessential "college girl" car.  I can see a lot of upper middle class moms reliving their yutes and getting one for themselves and their daughters.

Big damn deal blu. Again, exception to the rule and quite honestly, that K-5 doesn’t pull it off that well either but at least the top doesn’t eat the cargo space, which if you actually READ my follow up post, you’d see why I think the crap made in the last decade or so are perfect examples of absolute waste. The tops retract into the back of these things thus killing the otherwise open and taller entry for cargo. Add in the extra weight and puny engines carrying them, and you have the perfect recipe of waste. That’s my point since you didn’t bother to read or understand my other posts regarding these monstrosities. 

Oh and those old K-5 drop tops might have been the thing back then but when people realized they liked being dry with the top up in the rain, they fell by the wayside. An old friend of mine had one years ago and it was a leak monster. 

Who’s the moron now 😎?

I think the T-Roc looks good, I don't know how a convertible will sell, but why not, no one else makes cheap convertibles anymore, other than a Miata, maybe those Mustang and Camaro in there, but that is about it for convertibles under $40k.

34 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

I think the T-Roc looks good, I don't know how a convertible will sell, but why not, no one else makes cheap convertibles anymore, other than a Miata, maybe those Mustang and Camaro in there, but that is about it for convertibles under $40k.

Convertibles have had a hard time selling in the USA for the better part of a decade.  One more will not move the sales needle anytime soon.

1 hour ago, riviera74 said:

Convertibles have had a hard time selling in the USA for the better part of a decade.  One more will not move the sales needle anytime soon.

Maybe because those convertibles weren't crossovers.  People want crossovers.

3 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Maybe because those convertibles weren't crossovers.  People want crossovers.

Want Crossovers yes, convertible on top of the crossover, I doubt it.

Wait... whaaaat???

5 hours ago, ocnblu said:

Wait... whaaaat???

Wow! You only had to go back more than fifty years to show the last time trucks had drop tops. How many years did those last and why did they stop selling them? Oh that’s right. I already answered that smart ass. 

See the difference in what I’m talking and whatever point you’re trying to make? Do I need to get some crayons and draw it out for you? 

3 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

Wow! You only had to go back more than fifty years to show the last time trucks had drop tops. How many years did those last and why did they stop selling them? Oh that’s right. I already answered that smart ass. 

And the Broncos, Scouts, Ramchargers, Blazers and Jimmies didn't even have normal convertible tops but primitive tops that snapped on and had to be manually removed.    Very different from a proper power folding top like the Murano CC, Evoque, or T-Roc have...

13 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Maybe because those convertibles weren't crossovers.  People want crossovers.

No one bought the Murano or the Evoque and with good reason. They are useless in convertible form. 

Just now, Robert Hall said:

And the Broncos, Scouts, Ramchargers, Blazers and Jimmies didn't even have normal convertible tops but primitive tops that snapped on and had to be manually removed.    Very different from a proper power folding top like the Murano CC, Evoque, or T-Roc have...

Exactly. In this day and age of “safety first”, those things wouldn’t even be allowed on the road today as new models. There was also the issue of what to do with certain tops and if you had the hard vinyl tops (that were on the old 80s model K5s and Broncos), then there was the issue of leaving them at home if you want to drive topless and praying to god that it didn’t rain on you while you were out and about or in a store. It’s simple logic why those failed and it’s even simpler logic why they don’t work in their current form today but some oxymorons have to troll just for the sake of trolling I guess. 

3 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

  There was also the issue of what to do with certain tops and if you had the hard vinyl tops (that were on the old 80s model K5s and Broncos), then there was the issue of leaving them at home if you want to drive topless and praying to god that it didn’t rain on you while you were out and about or in a store.  

Yet somehow the Wrangler continues to succeed with the primitive approach and removable tops.  Sounds like the new Bronco may have a version with such a configuration.  Will be interesting to see if it works for them. 

Just now, Robert Hall said:

Yet somehow the Wrangler continues to succeed with the primitive approach and removable tops.  Sounds like the new Bronco may have a version with such a configuration.  Will be interesting to see if it works for them. 

Like I said yesterday though, the Wrangler was a top optional truck from the start and actually ended up with better rollover protection than those rolling death traps of the sixties. Everyone else has tried to copy it and failed miserably. 

5 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

Wow! You only had to go back more than fifty years to show the last time trucks had drop tops. How many years did those last and why did they stop selling them? Oh that’s right. I already answered that smart ass. 

 

See the difference in what I’m talking and whatever point you’re trying to make? Do I need to get some crayons and draw it out for you? 

 

🤮 for those autos

These newer convertibles are CUV, not SUV surreal.  Get your nomenclature straight.  Do I have to quote you again in crayon?

1 hour ago, dfelt said:

🤮 for those autos

You and me both brother. Burn both with a fire, preferably thermonuclear 

5 minutes ago, ocnblu said:

These newer convertibles are CUV, not SUV surreal.  Get your nomenclature straight.  Do I have to quote you again in crayon?

I love it when you talk rough....

12 hours ago, ocnblu said:

Wait... whaaaat???

Even as a Ford hater, comparing this Volkswagen pig to a nice vintage Ford is a form of blasphemy. 

23 hours ago, ocnblu said:

What was that about a moron? 

 

The T-Roc cabrio HAD to be built.  From the original Beetle, up through the Rabbit and Golf cabrios... this is the quintessential "college girl" car.  I can see a lot of upper middle class moms reliving their yutes and getting one for themselves and their daughters.

Lard butted women with a lard butted car....women with over-sized glutes celebrating their yutes....has a nice ring to it. 

2 hours ago, ocnblu said:

These newer convertibles are CUV, not SUV surreal.  Get your nomenclature straight.  Do I have to quote you again in crayon?

Good grief. You seriously have a reading comprehension problem. It is a problem whether it is a CUV or an SUV so get your nomenclature straight before trolling as usual. The same issues exist (where do you stash removal top, what happens to cargo room when it’s just a retractable top, etc) so quit trying to split hairs where there aren’t any and actually read and properly comprehend what I’m saying before pulling your little troll act again. 

The key part of all this blu is that I am merely stating my opinion that overall, convertible SUVs and CUVs are pretty damn pointless, Jeep Wrangler not withstanding.