Jump to content
Create New...

VW News: Forbidden Fruit: Volkswagen T-Roc Cabriolet


Recommended Posts

Volkswagen has taken the wraps off the 2020 T-Roc Cabriolet ahead of the Frankfurt International Auto Show in September. Volkswagen says the T-Roc Cabriolet offers just the right combination of SUV flexibility and the open air experience of a convertible. The soft top opens in just 9 seconds, can open or close while the car is in motion up to 18.6 mph (30 km/h), and locks or unlocks electrically. 

On the safety front, the T-Roc Cabrio has roll-over protection. The system can detect a roll-over and the system springs upwards just behind the rear headrests. The windshield frame is also reinforced.

It comes with an optional digital cockpit that has an "Always-On" connectivity to the internet and Volkswagen services.

Two engines are available, a 1.0 three-cylinder engine with 113 horsepower or a 148 horsepower 1.5 liter four-cylinder. A 6-speed manual is standard on both engines while the more powerful engine also has a 7-speed DCT available as an option. 

Launching in Spring of 2020, the T-Roc Cabriolet remains Forbidden Fruit in the U.S. like its hard top brother. Volkswagen calls the vehicle in the pictures a "near-production" concept car, so expect some changes between now and launch. 

 



Related:
Volkswagen: No T-Roc For America, But We're Working On Something


View full article

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.   

Edited by Robert Hall
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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).

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

No. Just no. 

 

“Convertible SUV” is an automotive oxymoron. 

What was that about a moron?  :smilewide:

 

06-28-2006 10;13;18PM.jpg

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, ocnblu said:

What was that about a moron?  :smilewide:

 

06-28-2006 10;13;18PM.jpg

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 😎?

Edited by surreal1272
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, ocnblu said:

Wait... whaaaat???

c7386f62220c081780915e2ecebd20ac.jpg

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? 

 

07AD0884-624B-4AB8-A724-5829423A6CEF.jpeg

CCBDCFB4-3AB7-4067-9DCE-F01ECC9B8278.jpeg

Edited by surreal1272
  • Thanks 1
  • Agree 1
  • Disagree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...

  • Agree 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 

  • Agree 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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. 

  • Agree 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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? 

 

07AD0884-624B-4AB8-A724-5829423A6CEF.jpeg

CCBDCFB4-3AB7-4067-9DCE-F01ECC9B8278.jpeg

🤮 for those autos

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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???

c7386f62220c081780915e2ecebd20ac.jpg

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?  :smilewide:

 

06-28-2006 10;13;18PM.jpg

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. 

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Edited by surreal1272
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

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.

I used to think it was cool but the more I look at the Dakota Convertible Pickup truck that Dodge made in limited production, the more I realized what a waste of resources they spent.

I bet most of those trucks had to be sold at a loss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, dfelt said:

I used to think it was cool but the more I look at the Dakota Convertible Pickup truck that Dodge made in limited production, the more I realized what a waste of resources they spent.

I bet most of those trucks had to be sold at a loss.

We get it.  You hate convertibles, or any open top vehicle.  Because "the sun".  But there are others who enjoy them.  The Dakota convertible was built during a time when Chrysler Corporation spearheaded an industry-wide convertible renaissance.  And they sold a lot of them, company-wide, for many years.  They burst the convertible market wide open and let some fresh air in.

Surreal, a convertible has ALWAYS been a trade-off.  They are for people who willingly take the trade in practicality for the freedom of open-air driving.  This T-Roc continues a very long Volkswagen tradition of catering to these individuals... who are willing to sacrifice ultimate practicality for enjoyable motoring.

  • Disagree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ocnblu said:

  This T-Roc continues a very long Volkswagen tradition of catering to these individuals... who are willing to sacrifice ultimate practicality for enjoyable motoring.

Except... not in the U.S. 

  • Sad 1
  • Agree 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, ocnblu said:

We get it.  You hate convertibles, or any open top vehicle.  Because "the sun".  But there are others who enjoy them.  The Dakota convertible was built during a time when Chrysler Corporation spearheaded an industry-wide convertible renaissance.  And they sold a lot of them, company-wide, for many years.  They burst the convertible market wide open and let some fresh air in.

Surreal, a convertible has ALWAYS been a trade-off.  They are for people who willingly take the trade in practicality for the freedom of open-air driving.  This T-Roc continues a very long Volkswagen tradition of catering to these individuals... who are willing to sacrifice ultimate practicality for enjoyable motoring.

When you have actually read what I said and why I said it, then we can talk. Until then, like Drew said, this isn’t even for the US so you’re just spouting off about nothing as usual. 

 

For the record, this is a proper convertible and this is what you trade practicality for.

 

 

678EBCA3-104C-4430-BC7B-E73F77382CB6.jpeg

Edited by surreal1272
  • Agree 3
  • Disagree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, ocnblu said:

We get it.  You hate convertibles, or any open top vehicle.  Because "the sun".  But there are others who enjoy them.  The Dakota convertible was built during a time when Chrysler Corporation spearheaded an industry-wide convertible renaissance.  And they sold a lot of them, company-wide, for many years.  They burst the convertible market wide open and let some fresh air in.

Surreal, a convertible has ALWAYS been a trade-off.  They are for people who willingly take the trade in practicality for the freedom of open-air driving.  This T-Roc continues a very long Volkswagen tradition of catering to these individuals... who are willing to sacrifice ultimate practicality for enjoyable motoring.

Assumption is what you made and the first 3 letters is what a person is when they make those Assumption's about a person.

I DO NOT hate convertibles or any open top auto and just because I have a Silicon nose bridge and my cheeks from my face now cover my nose due to cancer, I still do not hate them or being out in the sun. 

I am more cautous about being in the sun, but there is really only ever been a real convertible and that was built in the early years when size did not matter and you could have a real convertible and @balthazar has shown us many lovely REAL convertibles.

The only one I really love and was driven by the one man I have always drawn inspiration from Arnold Schwarzenegger is this:

1957 Cadillac Convertible that he has owned since he bought it.

Original image_ 1920x1297.jpg

Second most lovely convertible is the Cadillac Convertible Eldorado he drove in his 1985 movie Commando:

1976 Cadillac Eldorado

Even though it was FWD.

Course I have always had a soft spot for this lovely Cadillac Convertible:

62 series Cadillac Eldorado Convertible.

image.png

In regards to the Dakota pickup truck convertible, it was a cool concept poorly executed and they could have done much better if they wanted.

  • Thanks 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, dfelt said:

Assumption is what you made and the first 3 letters is what a person is when they make those Assumption's about a person.

I DO NOT hate convertibles or any open top auto and just because I have a Silicon nose bridge and my cheeks from my face now cover my nose due to cancer, I still do not hate them or being out in the sun. 

I am more cautous about being in the sun, but there is really only ever been a real convertible and that was built in the early years when size did not matter and you could have a real convertible and @balthazar has shown us many lovely REAL convertibles.

The only one I really love and was driven by the one man I have always drawn inspiration from Arnold Schwarzenegger is this:

1957 Cadillac Convertible that he has owned since he bought it.

Original image_ 1920x1297.jpg

Second most lovely convertible is the Cadillac Convertible Eldorado he drove in his 1985 movie Commando:

1976 Cadillac Eldorado

Even though it was FWD.

Course I have always had a soft spot for this lovely Cadillac Convertible:

62 series Cadillac Eldorado Convertible.

image.png

In regards to the Dakota pickup truck convertible, it was a cool concept poorly executed and they could have done much better if they wanted.

Exactly my point. Not every damn thing out there needs a drop top and sure as hell not a CUV. 

 

Oh and that last pic is the convertible I would have only in black with a white ragtop and red leather interior. ‘59 please. 

5 hours ago, ocnblu said:

We get it.  You hate convertibles, or any open top vehicle.  Because "the sun".  But there are others who enjoy them.  The Dakota convertible was built during a time when Chrysler Corporation spearheaded an industry-wide convertible renaissance.  And they sold a lot of them, company-wide, for many years.  They burst the convertible market wide open and let some fresh air in.

Surreal, a convertible has ALWAYS been a trade-off.  They are for people who willingly take the trade in practicality for the freedom of open-air driving.  This T-Roc continues a very long Volkswagen tradition of catering to these individuals... who are willing to sacrifice ultimate practicality for enjoyable motoring.

Wildly popular? I know you are not talking about the Dakota Convertible. From an article that took all of eight seconds to find. 

“A scant 2842 adventurous souls took Dodge up on its top-down Dakota offer that year. For 1990, even with the addition of four-cylinder trucks and the color blue to the paint options, sales fell to just 909.”

 

Source (and proving how not everything needs or should have a drop top). 

https://www.hagerty.com/articles-videos/articles/2018/06/27/1989-91-dodge-dakota-sport-convertible

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

When you have actually read what I said and why I said it, then we can talk. Until then, like Drew said, this isn’t even for the US so you’re just spouting off about nothing as usual. 

 

For the record, this is a proper convertible and this is what you trade practicality for.

 

 

678EBCA3-104C-4430-BC7B-E73F77382CB6.jpeg

I am so thinking of getting another Miata. 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, ocnblu said:

they sold a lot of them, company-wide

 

8 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

Wildly popular? I know you are not talking about the Dakota Convertible

And you talk about others' READING COMPREHENSION?  :roflmao:

8 hours ago, dfelt said:

he has owned since he bought it

Makes perfect sense

  • Disagree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, ocnblu said:

 

And you talk about others' READING COMPREHENSION?  :roflmao:

Makes perfect sense

So no real response? You brought up the Dakota like it was somehow popular because Chrysler had other popular convertibles (outside of the LeBaron, you are shooting blanks there too). You pretty much proved my point about convertible as it applies to SUVs and apparently pick up trucks. Whatever success they may have had with convertibles did not carry over to the Dakota because there was NO DEMAND FOR IT. Get it now? No lack of comprehension at all because it was you who failed to read what I saying in the first damn place. Stop deflecting and stop acting you don’t know what I was saying. 

Edited by surreal1272
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ocnblu said:

If you don't stop downvoting me you will receive a wet willy, and it won't be too pleasant.

Wet willy yourself junior. Say something worth upvoting next time instead of your normal trolling nonsense and that might change. 

 

And thanks for proving me right about convertibles and where they belong and don’t belong. 

Edited by surreal1272
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ocnblu said:

Logical progression.  Case closed.  Call the Ministry Of Silly Walks, we are done!  😛

978596aecdcb4f27e4d87524243600ef.jpg

001.jpg

2002-volkswagen-golf-conv-5.jpg

2015-volkswagen-beetle-convertible-10.jpg

DB2019AU01008_full.jpg

I have never seen a Beetle convertible in Denim blue, and i own a denim blue Beetle R. Neat pic!

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, A Horse With No Name said:

I have never seen a Beetle convertible in Denim blue, and i own a denim blue Beetle R. Neat pic!

 

4 hours ago, ocnblu said:

Logical progression.  Case closed.  Call the Ministry Of Silly Walks, we are done!  😛

978596aecdcb4f27e4d87524243600ef.jpg

001.jpg

2002-volkswagen-golf-conv-5.jpg

2015-volkswagen-beetle-convertible-10.jpg

DB2019AU01008_full.jpg

Better open that case back up because the three CARS above were a two doors while the T-Roc is a four door CUV that gets its cargo space and doors cut in half. Are you paying attention yet or do you still want to make up irrelevant arguments and comparisons to satisfy you urge to troll?

 Again, feel free to reference the “success” of similar attempts at chopping up a CUV. I’m sure Nissan and Land Rover have some words about that. 

 

Seriously, next time pay attention to what was said from the beginning and you can avoid the embarrassment of being wrong  

64F6642A-088C-44F7-AF00-6068429242CF.jpeg

F36FC1E1-C4DF-4B03-A576-A737E41F3CA1.jpeg

1074D883-87C2-4984-AF13-7A357B1A6ECA.jpeg

Edited by surreal1272
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search

Change privacy settings