Spy Shots: 2009 Chrysler Sebring

[Intrepidation]

The Chrysler Sebring has been a major league disappointment since its introduction in 2007, but execs at Chrysler headquarters have promised that a new, better midsize sedan is on the way. The photo to the right is not that magical new Chrysler, but is what appears to be a warmed-over version of the Sebring we already have. The most obvious change arrives at the hood, where the Sebring's ungainly washboard ribbing is replaced by a smooth surface. There is significant camouflage covering the front bumper and lower fascia, but due to some un-kept grass, we can't see any details. The Chrysler experts over at Allpar say that the updates will mainly improve aerodynamics and reduce wind noise, which will also help improve fuel economy.

Chrysler also plans to simplify manufacturing by making many former options standard equipment, adding the Premium and Luxury group as standard on the Limited model. The Touring model a eight-way power driver seat, chrome and leather shift knob, and traction and stability control. What we don't know is whether Chrysler has updated the Sebring's interior, but the automaker has insisted that it was racing to update it quickly. The good news for interior designers is that the Sebring redo can only get better.

Source: Autoblog

[Blake Noble]

Still not what I was hoping for. The interior had better not be as disappointing as the exterior changes.

[Intrepidation]

Still not what I was hoping for. The interior had better not be as disappointing as the exterior changes.

Indeed, but I hope they do more with the back than teh front. Remember the SEMA concept? A reshaped bumper did wonders for the car.

[BrewSwillis]

Here are full pics: http://www.allpar.com/cars/chrysler/sebring.html

[Lamar]

Here are full pics: http://www.allpar.com/cars/chrysler/sebring.html

I dunno... a facelift would be more than just a hood swap.

I think it's a mule of some sort.

[HarleyEarl]

Nothing can improve this horror of a car. Simply the most ugly Chrysler ever. It tells the story of whats wrong with Chrysler these days and why it won't survive.

[cire]

I was hoping that they would be a little more extensive with the exterior makeover of the front/rear styling. If they remove the black plastic slab from the C-pillar and revise the front/rear styling to fall more in line with the 300, then I think they could have a nice formal looking midsize sedan that would be a nice alternative to the Camry/Accord segment leaders. This new exterior look would work wonders for this car along with upgrades/improvements to the interior, powertrains, handling, features, and overall refinement. If Chrysler could diligently work to turn this "sow's ear into a silk purse", it would be one of the most incredible turnaround/salvage efforts in the auto industry. If they take the "lipstick on a pig" approach that Mitsubishi took with the 2009 Galant, then the public will assume it's business as usual at the "New Chrysler".

[Satty]

[Intrepidation]

Like I said, IMO changing the front bumper makes a big difference:

[Satty]

Like I said

[Intrepidation]

Meh, there's only so much they can do. Anyway, if they make the engines more refined and the interior actually nice, that's all that really matters. You think the Camry and Accord (sedan) sell on their good looks?

Besides, it's the ass that needs the most work. We'll just have to wait and see I guess...however it's encouraging to at least see that something is being done and it's not all talk.

[cire]

Like I said, IMO changing the front bumper makes a big difference:

Actually, you're right. Just changing out the current version's awkward front bumper does a lot to improve the looks (along with removing the lines in the hood) . I still hope they remove the black plastic patch from the C-pillar. If they do this, then they need to make the little blacked out section by the rear quarter window body color. I also agree that the rear end definitely needs more work than the front. Although I still think a 300-esque front/rear makeover would work better with the tall dimensions of this vehicle, I do agree with you that some exterior revisions are better than none.

[Paolino]

Like I said, IMO changing the front bumper makes a big difference:

That looks much better IMO.

Honestly, bump the power in the V6, revamp the interior completely, and with the cool features it offers, I think they'll pick up sales.

[Oracle of Delphi]

Yuck and more Yuck!

[ocnblu]

The headlights still detract from any potential elegance in this car's design. They are just too big. Stick the concept car's headlights into the production version and you'd have something that befits a Chrysler.

[CSpec]

This car is a total mess. If it got a totally new interior it might make up for the ungainly exterior.

[C.H.U.D.]

Like Blu said, unless they change the headlights, any other modifications are all for naught.

[CMG]

You guys are too funny.

A mid size family sedan is built for WHAT?

It's built inexpensively (no luxury stuff for free?) and it's made to transport 4-5 people in modest accomodations for reasonable amounts of money, purchse price, maintenance costs etc...

It is NOT built to look good sitting next to a Ferrari, and won't.

The Sebring isn't a bad looking car now, it belnds in quite well with the other transportation cars out there. It's not an Aztec that looks like a pimple in traffic, it's "just another car", which - while not being a true styling endorsement is much more accurate than the biased rants above.

Some of you need to remove your blinders, but probably never will....

*sigh*

[CMG]

This car is a total mess. If it got a totally new interior it might make up for the ungainly exterior.

Have you seen your thread on the 2011 "Cobalt replacement"?

Tell us what you think of the exterior styling....?

:AH-HA_wink:

[FAPTurbo]

But therein lies the problem. Chrysler NEEDS a car that looks good, because the brand certainly isn't going to sell on reputation, and reliability like Honda or Toyota.

This car is a disappointment, and Chrysler can definitely do better. They did make the gorgeous LH's, and headturning LX's after all...

[2chevs]

I know its somewhat irrelevant, but that color was never available on that car (and looks terrible), is that some sort of attempt at camo or a new color? I hope not.

[LosAngeles]

You guys are too funny.

A mid size family sedan is built for WHAT?

It's built inexpensively (no luxury stuff for free?) and it's made to transport 4-5 people in modest accommodations for reasonable amounts of money, purchase price, maintenance costs etc...

It is NOT built to look good sitting next to a Ferrari, and won't.

The Sebring isn't a bad looking car now, it blends in quite well with the other transportation cars out there. It's not an Aztec that looks like a pimple in traffic, it's "just another car", which - while not being a true styling endorsement is much more accurate than the biased rants above.

Some of you need to remove your blinders, but probably never will....

*sigh*

Yeah, I disagree with C&G's consensus on this car too. Sex on wheels it isn't, but I always found it worthy for something simple to drive to work and your kids' activities. Right now, the people want practical cars that won't mollywhop them at the pump in this crummy economy. Just make the inside more livable and this will be on a lot of lists.

[daves87rs]

Not sure what to make of it yet....

[CMG]

But therein lies the problem. Chrysler NEEDS a car that looks good, because the brand certainly isn't going to sell on reputation, and reliability like Honda or Toyota.

Like my sister's 10 year old Toyota Camry that needs repairs once a month and burns blue so bad it's hard to see her license plate when she drives away?

I guess I don't follow the masses, I don't believe in "import superiority" just because a magazine or two pushes them.... and I come by my opinions through alot of experience.

There are lots of reliable imports, but there are lots of reliable domestics too.

Go find as many early 1980's Hondas or Toyotas as you can for sale, and go and find as many early 80's K cars as you can. Both were basic transportation when they came out, which one do you think has PROVEN more reliable...?

:AH-HA_wink:

[Robert Hall]

Go find as many early 1980's Hondas or Toyotas as you can for sale, and go and find as many early 80's K cars as you can. Both were basic transportation when they came out, which one do you think has PROVEN more reliable...?

:AH-HA_wink:

I'm not sure how relevant cars from 25+ years ago are.... what is important is the reliability of modern cars, built in this decade...which the domestics seem to be overall pretty equal to the imports.

[enzl]

Like my sister's 10 year old Toyota Camry that needs repairs once a month and burns blue so bad it's hard to see her license plate when she drives away?

I guess I don't follow the masses, I don't believe in "import superiority" just because a magazine or two pushes them.... and I come by my opinions through alot of experience.

There are lots of reliable imports, but there are lots of reliable domestics too.

Go find as many early 1980's Hondas or Toyotas as you can for sale, and go and find as many early 80's K cars as you can. Both were basic transportation when they came out, which one do you think has PROVEN more reliable...?

:AH-HA_wink:

Umm...personal anecdotes aside...

I'd like to see the links to reputable sources (other than the "magazine or two") that you are relying on for information.

I haven't read ANYTHING that consistently declares the domestics as equals for the past 20+ years. Not ONE.

I realize this is a GM fanboard, but can we avoid straight-up falsehoods?

Please. It would make other assertions made here a little more believable if you just didn't completely fabricate this stuff.

PS- AS an important footnote...GM themselves disagree with your statement. About 2 yrs ago (IIRC) they published a Full page Ad Apologizing for their Sh!t vehicles of the past 2 decades...

Edited June 23, 2008 by enzl

[CSpec]

Reliability does not necessarily equal desirability...

[MyerShift]

Reliability does not necessarily equal desirability...

And yet the Camry and Accord continue to sell in droves. I am not saying that these are the most reliable cars, they just have the best reputations for reliability.

Statement quoted is true. I don't question that.

I usually preferred the Accord to the Camry as far as the top selling Japanese midsizers went, but then the new Accord was launched, and it is just vomit filled mess as far as the styling is concerned. Now I'd definitely consider neither one of these cars.

Now, I guess the Volskwagen Passat, Mazda6, Mercury Milan, or even the Nissan Altima would be my choice for a midsize sedan because I'd want a manual transmission. Ford is the only domestic automaker that makes a mainstream, midsize sedan available with a manual transmission.

[frogger]

I turn these down when I get offered them as rental cars. Once was enough! I'll take a Sonata or Impala instead. Its the least agreeable of the retail market "undesirables" imo.

[BrewSwillis]

I dunno... a facelift would be more than just a hood swap.

I think it's a mule of some sort.

From that picture of the front, it looks to me like the hood, fenders (upper crease line gone), and probably front lower fascia are all different. How much more can they change on just a model refresh?

[Intrepidation]

From that picture of the front, it looks to me like the hood, fenders (upper crease line gone), and probably front lower fascia are all different. How much more can they change on just a model refresh?

Depends, Subaru completely reskinned the Tribecca.

[Robert Hall]

From that picture of the front, it looks to me like the hood, fenders (upper crease line gone), and probably front lower fascia are all different. How much more can they change on just a model refresh?

Yeah, unfortunately, it would be way too expensive to change what is really bad about the car (the C-pillars and rear end).

[VenSeattle]

Depends, Subaru completely reskinned the Tribecca.

That's different. All Subaru did was use the tooling and parts from the aborted SAAB version for the reskinned Tribecca.

[Intrepidation]

That's different. All Subaru did was use the tooling and parts from the aborted SAAB version for the reskinned Tribecca.

True, although the rear window is different on the Tribeca than the 9-6x, so that still required a fair bit of retooling, since the shape of the quarter panel had to be changed.

[Blake Noble]

True, although the rear window is different on the Tribeca than the 9-6x, so that still required a fair bit of retooling, since the shape of the quarter panel had to be changed.

For the record, here are the Saab 9-6x and the MCE of the Tribeca:

[Intrepidation]

For the record, here are the Saab 9-6x and the MCE of the Tribeca:

Yeah, see the rear windows are different..although I still liked the greenhouse of the original Tribeca the most. However the cleaned up rear end and nose make it look much better if less distinctive. But yeah, the did indeed use a lot of the 9-6x for inspiration.

On another note, I wish the 9-4x looked more like this:

Edited July 3, 2008 by Dodgefan

[Robert Hall]

Yeah, see the rear windows are different..although I still liked the greenhouse of the original Tribeca the most. However the cleaned up rear end and nose make it look much better if less distinctive. But yeah, the did indeed use a lot of the 9-6x for inspiration.

That revised front end (esp. the grille) makes the new Tribeca look like a Chrysler, IMHO...

[Intrepidation]

That revised front end (esp. the grille) makes the new Tribeca look like a Chrysler, IMHO...

I agree, a bland Chrsyler...but witha nicer interior.

[CMG]

Umm...personal anecdotes aside...

I'd like to see the links to reputable sources (other than the "magazine or two") that you are relying on for information.

I haven't read ANYTHING that consistently declares the domestics as equals for the past 20+ years. Not ONE.

I realize this is a GM fanboard, but can we avoid straight-up falsehoods?

Please. It would make other assertions made here a little more believable if you just didn't completely fabricate this stuff.

PS- AS an important footnote...GM themselves disagree with your statement. About 2 yrs ago (IIRC) they published a Full page Ad Apologizing for their Sh!t vehicles of the past 2 decades...

Haha

Not sure if you don't understand what I wrote, or what...

Two magazines that "favor imports" shouldn't be hard to provide links for, just take a look at what you then posted...

I haven't read ANYTHING that consistently declares the domestics as equals for the past 20+ years. Not ONE.

Like I said, maybe you just aren't understanding what I posted.

Consumer's Reports has had different reviews of IDENTICAL vehicles that have domestic/import badges for years and years. Maybe you don't read that kind of stuff, maybe you can't search the obvious - googlesearch comparisons etc... it's been going on for three decades.

Please, let me know where a "straight up falsehood" is that I posted, SPECIFICALLY.

(Re-read that if you don't understand- post what I posted that is a "STRAIGHT UP FALSEHOOD" so we can see if YOU are posting straight up falsehoods... :AH-HA_wink: )

Please. It would make other assertions made here a little more believable if you just didn't completely fabricate this stuff.

What was fabricated that I posted?

Did you even read what I posted? Makes me wonder....

Like I have said before with the K car and Civic "reported reliability" claims of magazines in the past- I see 25 year old K cars all the time, all over, everywhere. They had a dismal "predicted reliability rating" among the media....

The Honda Civics were receiving glowing "predicted reliability ratings" among the Comsumer's Reports type magazines 25+ years ago...

WHERE ARE ALL THE late 1970's early 1980's Civics...??????????

*waits for spin that would make politicians blush*

:AH-HA_wink:

[CMG]

Here's my post enzl, please show us what is factual "FALSEHOOD"....

Like my sister's 10 year old Toyota Camry that needs repairs once a month and burns blue so bad it's hard to see her license plate when she drives away?

I guess I don't follow the masses, I don't believe in "import superiority" just because a magazine or two pushes them.... and I come by my opinions through alot of experience.

There are lots of reliable imports, but there are lots of reliable domestics too.

Go find as many early 1980's Hondas or Toyotas as you can for sale, and go and find as many early 80's K cars as you can. Both were basic transportation when they came out, which one do you think has PROVEN more reliable...?

:AH-HA_wink: