'07 Sebring UNVEILED

[VenSeattle]

THAT'S what the dash reminds me of!

So the Sebring interior is a "simulation" of an upscale interior? Wow... finally an acceptable example… but I wouldn’t call it “first-rate” by any stretch of the term.

Where’s Patrick Bedard from Car and Driver? We need another article.

[sciguy_0504]

I've again made with the sloppy Photoshop skills and made this:

Modifications:

1. Increased the rear overhang without making it look...ass-heavy.

2. Screwed around with the tail lamps.

3. Removed the rub strip.

4. Threw away that nasty black corner on the C-pillar.

That looks better but there is still the droopy front to deal with.

I like the chrome and wood accents in the interior.

[Turbojett]

ew. looks like the illegitimate love child of a menage et trois between an Ion, a Corolla and a Crossfire.

I'll be harsh and stamp this with an immediate 4F.

[SoCalCTS]

This just in from Reuters:

New Chrysler Sebring for UK

Fri 23 Jun, 2006, 16:50

Chrysler will unveil the new Sebring at the London Motor Show in July.

It will go on sale in mid 2007, as a rival for the Ford Mondeo and Vauxhall Vectra. Chrysler promises, "interior craftsmanship, high levels of safety and reliability, great performance and excellent fuel efficiency" - decent interior plastics from a mainstream American car would certainly be news.

Also appearing at the London show is the new Dodge Nitro, which will be added to the UK range next year. It is the Dodge brand's first mid-size five-seater SUV, and is designed to attract customers seeking a vehicle with, "distinctive styling, sporty performance, a very flexible interior and all at a very affordable price."

Why on Earth did they debut this thing in England?

[Jazzhead]

Why does the 3.5L V6 get detuned from the 250 HP in the LX cars to the 232 HP in the Sebring? I would have thought Chrysler would want to at least match the Duratec 35 going into Ford's CD3 cars.

Probably so it will run best on regular fuel. The 3.5 in my wife's Pacifica indeed is rated at 250 HP, but midgrade fuel is recommended. That costs us about ten cents a gallon - for a car of the Sebring's size and weight, 232 HP on regular fuel will be fine and dandy.

As for the Sebring's looks, it's fine but Chrysler did a better job with the 300. I prefer the Ford Fusion as far as looks go.

[X2222]

Im always very bullish of chrysler designs and they never photograph too well. Wait to see the real thing, i have a feeling this will be another hit for them, theyve been workign on it for a long time. Just think of the 300 and how soo many people critized it at first...

[sciguy_0504]

If spyshots are anything, I have a feeling the Avenger will be much better.

[BuddyP]

The '07 Sebring is on Chrystlers website.

http://www.chrysler.com/en/sebring/index.html

BTW, I'm in AZ right now driving a '06 sebring for a rental. It has the 2.4l 4 cyl.... Wow, what a friggen Turd!!!! The car itself is ok but the motor has no go for 150hp. If feels more like 110.

[Cadavillac]

Other car manufacturers use the same trick Chrysler did with the black panel behind the rear door to change the perceived shape of the greenhouse glass. For example, the Lincoln Zephyr uses one to differentiate it from the Milan/Fusion.

[Guest YellowJacket894]

Just think of the 300 and how soo many people critized it at first...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's true. I did think "K-Car" for some reason when I first saw the concept version (which was nothing but the production car with some added fluff).

EDIT: I said "show" instead of "production" where I shouldn't have. D'oh.

Edited June 24, 2006 by YellowJacket894

[sciguy_0504]

I just discovered the shape of the front reminds me of the 9-5.

[FAPTurbo]

Chances of a coupe are rather slim, although a convertible is almost a guaranteed given.  The rumor is that it's going to be a hardtop 'vert like the G6.

Uh oh... Chrysler and complex moving parts never seemed to mix well together...

[Jazzhead]

Other car manufacturers use the same trick Chrysler did with the black panel behind the rear door to change the perceived shape of the greenhouse glass.    For example, the Lincoln Zephyr uses one to differentiate it from the Milan/Fusion.

That's true, and evidence that the Dodge version will have a C-piller more like the Nissan Maxima. It won't have the slatted hood either, so it will look significantly different.

Chrysler ultimately played it safe - certainly safer than they did with the 300 - with this car, which should naturally be a higher volume item. The Dodge version will no doubt be edgier; I think the basic sillouette, although derivative, has potential. I like Yellowjacket's photo shop above with the slightly larger rear overhang. That proportions the car much better, IMO.

Edited June 24, 2006 by Jazzhead

[NOS2006]

It has stainless fabric in it.. that's pretty sweet.

[Guest YellowJacket894]

That's true,  and evidence that the Dodge version will have a C-piller more like the Nissan Maxima. It won't have the slatted hood either,  so it will look significantly different.

From what I've seen, the C-pillar will be more like that of the Charger.

Chrysler ultimately played it safe - certainly safer than they did with the 300 - with this car,  which should naturally be a higher volume item. The Dodge version will no doubt be edgier; I think the basic sillouette, although derivative, has potential.

For playing it safe, this car isn't totally bland. There are details on this car which you wouldn't find in a Camry, that's for sure.

I like Yellowjacket's photo shop above with the slightly larger rear overhang. That proportions the car much better, IMO.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thank you.

[NOS2006]

Other things I'm liking:

• The 3.5L V6 with 235 HP/232 lb-ft comes standard with the 6 Speed Auto.
• Curb Weights range from 3287-3499 lbs.
• Four Wheel ABS standard with optional ESP and Traction Control
• 18" rims available

I also like its style now that I look at it more from new/different angles. I think I might attempt a chop at a Dodge version of 'er.

[pow]

Wow, I really like it. It's far more original and creative than any other mainstream family sedan. Like all Chryslers, the interior is cheap looking, but at least it's well designed.

[pow]

So the Sebring interior is a "simulation" of an upscale interior? Wow... finally an acceptable example… but I wouldn’t call it “first-rate” by any stretch of the term.

Where’s Patrick Bedard from Car and Driver? We need another article.

Actually he said it had a first-rate simulation of quality materials, not interior. :AH-HA_wink:

[enzl]

I've gotta see this one live...

The Charger never made sense to me in pix. It has a presence in certain color/wheel combos that really works.

we'll see about this one...I'm not ready to write it off, yet.

[sciguy_0504]

Other things I'm liking:

• The 3.5L V6 with 235 HP/232 lb-ft comes standard with the 6 Speed Auto.

• Curb Weights range from 3287-3499 lbs.

• Four Wheel ABS standard with optional ESP and Traction Control

• 18" rims available

I also like its style now that I look at it more from new/different angles. I think I might attempt a chop at a Dodge version of 'er.

Doesn't ESP and TC come standard on every other modern midsize family sedan? I hope this has side airbags standard.

[VenSeattle]

Doesn't ESP and TC come standard on every other modern midsize family sedan?  I hope this has side airbags standard.

No...

Check the Hyundai Topic about becoming the Safety King. Sonata is currently the only one offering ESP standard. Other midsize family sedans offer it as an option or standard depending on trim levels.

[Intrepidation]

I'm not a fan of the fake window in teh C-pillar. The rest of the exterior I'm not sure I like...but like the Charger, it may grow on me, and probably looks far beter in real life than pics. More pics would be good. The interior desgn looks pretty damn good, I just wanna se it in some different colors, not gray. I'm not ready to give a verdict yet, though I think the Avenger will look cooler.

[bobo]

The car has a lot of style in the bland family segment and is much more interesting than the outgoing model. I do agree that the C-pillar is overly messy.

[sciguy_0504]

No...

Check the Hyundai Topic about becoming the Safety King. Sonata is currently the only one offering ESP standard. Other midsize family sedans offer it as an option or standard depending on trim levels.

It should be standard. Thanks for the info.

[VenSeattle]

Actually he said it had a first-rate simulation of quality materials, not interior.  :AH-HA_wink:

Yeah I know... but I think 'simulation' would be more appropriate in this situation than when he referred to the Lucerne. Based on pics alone, even you admit that the Sebring interior is cheap looking so his original use wouldn't apply here.

IMO he owns the word 'simulation' because he had to 'dig deep' to insult the Lucerne's interior quality based on appearance alone. I think He could easily use it again on the Sebring.

Sorry, I'm not a fan of the Sebring's styling... it looks like it had a 1990's Pontiac attack.

[regfootball]

KIA AMANTI!!!! this thing has all the style of a KIA AMANTI!!!!! i knew it, it was on the tip of my tongue for like 3 days!~!!!!!

[ocnblu]

I went to Chrysler's site to look at the car. Lo and behold, it looks better in their pictures than anywhere else. So I guess I'll wait to see one on the lot before saying it's ugly. After that, all bets are off.

[NeonLX]

BTW, I'm in AZ right now driving a '06 sebring for a rental. It has the 2.4l 4 cyl.... Wow, what a friggen Turd!!!! The car itself is ok but the motor has no go for 150hp. If feels more like 110.

I think the biggest problem here is that the 2.4L engine is having to twirl its power through Chrysler's mashed-potato 41TE transaxle. It's much improved over earlier versions but I still don't think it's well suited to the less powerful 4-cyl. models. My '00 Neon with the old-tech 3-speed ATX felt snappier than does my '04 with the 4-speed ATX, in spite of the "better" ratios in the 4-speed.

Our '06 Caravan w/ 3.3L V6 with the same tranny feels very peppy however. The extra torque of the larger engine must overcome the mashed potatoes in the tranny somehow.

[MyerShift]

Well, I wanted and couldn't wait to see the new Sebring.

Now that I have, I want them to put the camo back on that sucker and take it back.

The Sebring used to be good looking.

What happened?

The C-pillar is atrocious, they should have left the ION-esque panel alone, it would have been better than with that stupid extension, and the front/hoodline area just doesn't go with the rest of the car.

However, aside from the steering wheel, the interior (mostly due to the climate control location) reminds me of der neue Passat.

And one of my (current) last complaints is... WHERE IS THE MANUAL TRANNY?!

Edited June 27, 2006 by MyerShift

[Imaj]

Nobody said it, but I think it looks like the new Daewoo Tosca mated with the last generation Toyota Corolla.

[The O.C.]

I think it will be a knockout. Great interior, too.  Glad it's not another midsized lightly styled jellybean car.

I agree.....I think this car will do well.

It is truly unique looking and that interior looks to be one of Chrysler's best designs. We'll have to wait and see I guess on how the materials will be.....will they be decent (LX cars) or awful (Caliber?)

[The O.C.]

Why does the 3.5L V6 get detuned from the 250 HP in the LX cars to the 232 HP in the Sebring? I would have thought Chrysler would want to at least match the Duratec 35 going into Ford's CD3 cars.

Well maybe mounting the engine transversely put a crimp on some underhood breathing.....?

Like the same reason Pontiac de-rated the 3.9L in the G6 convertible to only 227....?

[sciguy_0504]

I really don't see what you guys are seeing. The only thing that separates this from every other FWD midsize sedan is the heated/cooled cupholders. The huge mindblowing differences end there.

[NOS2006]

[Bimmer325]

I really don't see what you guys are seeing.  The only thing that separates this from every other FWD midsize sedan is the heated/cooled cupholders.  The huge mindblowing differences end there.

I don't see a "truly unique looking" midsizer, I see a truly bland and uninspired design that designers sprinkled with ill-fitting design aspects in an attempt to liven it up.

[sciguy_0504]

I don't see a "truly unique looking" midsizer, I see a truly bland and uninspired design that designers sprinkled with ill-fitting design aspects in an attempt to liven it up.

[MyerShift]

With a few "affordable" styling tweaks, this Sebring could be more along the lines of elegantly atrractive, or some such PR prhase like that.

[Intrepidation]

I wanna see the convertible, it looks to have much better proportions.

[Sixty8panther]

Some designs get better and better the more you see them...

this is not one of them. In fact it looks more horrible than before!

[Dragon]

not bad. but not great either.

I can really see MB in the headlights

[The O.C.]

I think the biggest problem here is that the 2.4L engine is having to twirl its power through Chrysler's mashed-potato 41TE transaxle.  It's much improved over earlier versions but I still don't think it's well suited to the less powerful 4-cyl. models.  My '00 Neon with the old-tech 3-speed ATX felt snappier than does my '04 with the 4-speed ATX, in spite of the "better" ratios in the 4-speed.

Our '06 Caravan w/ 3.3L V6 with the same tranny feels very peppy however.  The extra torque of the larger engine must overcome the mashed potatoes in the tranny somehow.

158042[/snapback]

I had a Sebring as a rental in Cabo last year and you know, I actually thought the 2.4L was a nice package......

It wasn't that quick, but it was a relatively smooth and refined driver.....it wasn't slow, but performance was okay......

The car was alot nicer than it's rental-queen status makes it out to be.

[The O.C.]

I think the biggest problem here is that the 2.4L engine is having to twirl its power through Chrysler's mashed-potato 41TE transaxle.  It's much improved over earlier versions but I still don't think it's well suited to the less powerful 4-cyl. models.  My '00 Neon with the old-tech 3-speed ATX felt snappier than does my '04 with the 4-speed ATX, in spite of the "better" ratios in the 4-speed.

Our '06 Caravan w/ 3.3L V6 with the same tranny feels very peppy however.  The extra torque of the larger engine must overcome the mashed potatoes in the tranny somehow.

158042[/snapback]

You know.....I had a Sebring as a rental in Cabo last year, and I thought it was a decent package with the 2.4L.

It wasn't quick, but performance was more than acceptable and what I was surprised about is how smooth and relatively refined the 2.4L was.

The car was certainly alot nicer than the rental-queen status leads you to believe...

[OshKoshBerJosh]

You know.....I had a Sebring as a rental in Cabo last year, and I thought it was a decent package with the 2.4L.

It wasn't quick, but performance was more than acceptable and what I was surprised about is how smooth and relatively refined the 2.4L was.

The car was certainly alot nicer than the rental-queen status leads you to believe...

163785[/snapback]

I rented a 2002 dodge stratus a couple of years ago and a 2005 chrysler sebring last summer. The engines in both were less refined than the 2.5L in my '05 Nissan Altima. The cabin materials were of lesser quality as well. Infact, when these cars were redesigned in 2001, they had padded dashtops, but the mateiral was replaced with hard plastic in my sebring rental.

[The O.C.]

I rented a 2002 dodge stratus a couple of years ago and a 2005 chrysler sebring last summer.  The engines in both were less refined than the 2.5L in my '05 Nissan Altima.  The cabin materials were of lesser quality as well.  Infact, when these cars were redesigned in 2001, they had padded dashtops, but the mateiral was replaced with hard plastic in my sebring rental.

164240[/snapback]

Ahhh....I'm not saying I'd run out and buy one.....just that I was surprised that it wasn't that bad of a car.....

I'd take an Altima any day over the (old) Sebring.....

[Flybrian]

Ahhh....I'm not saying I'd run out and buy one.....just that I was surprised that it wasn't that bad of a car.....

I'd take an Altima any day over the (old) Sebring.....

164534[/snapback]

Yes, but would you take a 2001 Altima over the old Sebring?

Oooooooh!

[The O.C.]

Yes, but would you take a 2001 Altima over the old Sebring?

Oooooooh!

164548[/snapback]

I'd most likely take the Chrysler......

[MyerShift]

I rented a 2002 dodge stratus a couple of years ago and a 2005 chrysler sebring last summer.  The engines in both were less refined than the 2.5L in my '05 Nissan Altima.  The cabin materials were of lesser quality as well.  Infact, when these cars were redesigned in 2001, they had padded dashtops, but the mateiral was replaced with hard plastic in my sebring rental.

164240[/snapback]

I noticed this too.

I drove a burgundy 2001 Stratus SE for a day while my Breeze was in for maintenance, and the dash had the padded material.

However, the 2006 models on the lot had all hard interior plastics.

Strange.

If I had a car, and were updating it, I'd try to keep improving it as time went on.

[HarleyEarl]

Edited July 18, 2006 by HarleyEarl

[Croc]

That's hot.

[Guest YellowJacket894]

That's hot.

168368[/snapback]

Thank you for the weather report Paris Hilton.