Audi vs BMW - Convertibles

I prefer the Audi’s looks. And what could go wrong with this?
image
image

2 Likes

This was the only hardtop convertible that got the looks right, IMO. All the others’ proportions are off a bit:

You don’t think that the Pontiac G6 was equally beautiful? :smirk:

Nice enough, maybe a little big in the ‘hips’. But I’ll admit I’ve never seen one of those on the road. Or maybe you’re pulling my chain…

I see Pontiac G6 convertibles in my area, and on Car Talk.

I think most people would agree that the proportions were just a bit “off” with Ford’s folding hardtops.

2 Likes

Yep, a BIG trunk needed for that Ford.
Even Ferrari didn’t get it right:

Here’s a bit of trivia, regarding those Ford folding hardtops:
I’ve read several sources which stated they didn’t share any body panels with other Fords–even the soft-top convertibles. That must have made it a net negative when it came to profit, but I suspect that, at least, the hoods and front fenders were the same as on other models.

That sounds right. Compared to the BMW, Ford had to retract a much bigger structure into the trunk:

1 Like

I’m not a big MB fan, but that is a gorgeous car, nice lines and almost looks like a chopped top…

Probably just me, but I’m not understanding the desire for an AWD luxe convertible. Am I the only one who enjoys the classic, RWD, rag-top, stick road experience that I get with my MX-5.

I think Ferrari got it fairly correct. Design is a personal thing but I like that front engine Ferrari.

Those Fords always looked like they were based on the 2 door station wagon…

Generally out of proportion. I see one at every significant cruise-in or Cars and Coffee. People that own them love showing them off. But they sell for peanuts at the auctions… younger collectors don’t seem to want them.

To each his own. Most all of the hard top convertibles have either big ‘hips’ or an odd greenhouse, or both, to me. The California falls in the ‘big hips’ camp. Ugly? Not at all.

1 Like

Why do you need to understand it? People have different priorities. The OP likes them and can afford them.

2 Likes

Then, there was the Suzuki X-90, which wasn’t at all “luxe”, and wasn’t exactly a convertible. Apparently, that company thought that there was a market for a badly-proportioned AWD 2-seater with removable roof panels and a… blistering… 93 HP.

It was a resounding failure in terms of both sales and performance, and it appears on virtually every list of the Worst Cars of the 20th Century.

Yep. As a teenager I couldn’t understand why my dad’s (50+) friend traded in his 240Z for a Seville. Now, I do!

Well, try this , my neighbor can take his 3 grandkids for ice cream at the same time and the AWD lets him drive when there is snow . Also some people would have trouble with a manual such as me due to a knee replacement that did not go well.

1 Like

Minnesota winters are easier to handle with AWD, winter tires would help a lot even on a Mustang or Miata.

Some convertibles are very nicely-proportioned, even if they are just a bit… large… like the Bugatti Type 41. But, it would surely have been nice to hear that 12.7 liter engine, and to drive one.

1 Like