If you were to stick to strict rationality when buying a car, we'd all own Priuses or minivans or the inexplicably absent Prius minivan. It would be a boring world. We don't need twin-turbo V12s, Ferrari Scuderias or leather-lined, reclining, heated, cooled and massaging rear seats with DVD entertainment systems, but darn it, we want them. Cars have always been more of an emotional purchasing decision than a rational one.
Yet, there are certain cars that utterly defy any pittance of rationality. Cars we scratch our heads at. Cars we can't fathom why any sane person with sufficient information at their disposal would buy one. Cars that are simply a poor buying decision. This week, two of our editors take a look at two cars they think meet those criteria -- and rather than defend them, they'll be prosecuting. Automotive Editor James Riswick prosecutes the BMW Active Hybrid X6, the first hybrid model to wear the label "Ultimate Driving Machine" and the first with a twin-turbo V8. Vice Admiral of Vehicle Testing Mike Magrath, goes a completely different route and prosecutes the Chrysler Sebring.
Opening Statements
James Riswick v. the BMW Active Hybrid X6
Thursday night on Project Runway, "top American designer" Michael Kors lambasted one contestant for taking everything that is tacky and sticking it onto one single dress. Ouch. I feel the same way about the BMW Active Hybrid X6. This thing (it defies any common vehicular description) features the trick Two-Mode hybrid system developed by GM, BMW and the company formerly known as DaimlerChrysler. It's a smart piece of technology, but thus far has only been installed into giant trucks. In this case, BMW has connected the Two-Mode system's mind-bogglingly complex transmission to the twin-turbo 4.4-liter V8 found in the X6 xDrive50i. With the added output from two electric motors, the combined power output is 480 horsepower and 575 pound-feet of torque, and it goes from 0-60 in a BMW-estimated 5.4 seconds. That makes it a tenth-of-a-second slower than the non-hybrid, twin-turbo X6.
But at least it's a hybrid, right? That means it gets great gas mileage. Um, no. How about 17 mpg city, 19 mpg highway and 18 mpg combined? Does 18 mpg sound fuel efficient to you? Perhaps by low-earth orbit rocket standards. By comparison, the gas-powered six- and eight-cylinder models achieve 15/21/17 mpg and 13/18/15 mpg, respectively. If you were to buy the $88,900 Active Hybrid X6 to save fuel versus the $56,500 twin-turbo V6-powered X6 xDrive35i, it would take you 350 years to pay off the price premium. To put that in Star Trek terms (and I so often do) that's only three years before Captain Picard takes command of the fifth starship Enterprise.
If that's not insane enough, BMW put its twin-turbo V8 hybrid powertrain into one of the most head-scratching models already on sale: the 5,200-pound SUV with a fastback coupe roofline that can't go off-road, can't handle as well as a sport sedan, can't carry much cargo and can't carry five people. I'm still trying to figure out a reason why someone would buy a regular X6, then BMW gives me even more reason to be completely dumbfounded. What has been put into their schnapps?
Mike Magrath v. the Chrysler Sebring
Low hanging fruit, sure, but don't lie, you Googled it just now and were shocked that they still make that thing. Priced at $20,860 there are, according to Edmunds.com. There are 46 vehicles in this car's price range (15-25K). That means in order to walk away with a 173-horsepower rattly Chrysler Sebring, buyers had to actively ignore 44 cars that are significantly better than this. Just to name a few: the Ford Fusion, Honda Accord, Mazda 3 and 6, Kia Forte, Hyundai Sonata, Chevy Malibu, Mitsubishi Galant (yeah, they still make that too) and the now-maligned Toyota Camry. Even with a wonky throttle pedal, I'd take any of these rather than a Sebring.
Few cars have ever been so poorly engineered and executed immediately out of the gate as to be uncompetitive from Day One. The engines are underpowered and inefficient. The ride and handling balance provides an advantage to neither ride comfort nor handling prowess. The brakes are weak. Stability control is optional. The base automatic has four speeds. The interior looks like a cheap homage to the Chrysler building and its overall quality seems on par with the plastic crate Audi would ship their interiors inside of and then throw away. So maybe Chrysler's recycling, or maybe they just don't care.
The Sebring sedan has been a dismal failure in terms of sales, but unfortunately, thousands of these were still willfully purchased by Americans. Even more Sebring convertibles were sold and in fact, it's routinely the best selling convertible in the United States. But convertible buyers don't matter, right Riz?
This is terrifying both from a car-reviewers POV where we think we matter, and we assume our experience and time spend driving thousands of cars means something relevant to buyers. But it's also terrifying from a human perspective -- if people aren't on the ball enough to know that a car is this wildly sub-standard, why are we letting them vote for President?
Rebuttals:
Riswick:
Hmm. Am I now supposed to argue that the Chrysler Sebring isn't a terrible automotive choice? I can't do that. It's like encouraging people to watch Keeping Up The Kardashians. However, I will say that there are three possible reasons someone bought a Sebring. 1) They live next door to a Chrysler dealership and the next closest dealership is in rural Wisconsin. 2) It was the cheapest, yet still big new car they could find. 3) That's what their company/Dollar-Rent-A-Car gave them.
The BMW Active Hybrid X6? You paid almost $90,000 for that thing, which means you passed over just about every car sold -- including any number of other silly hybrid models. Either you did absolutely no research, or you actively decided to make an absolutely imbecilic buying decision.
Magrath:
X6 Active Hybrid? A loser? We live in the same neighborhood, how are we so far apart on this particular car?
You and I live in an area where your green status sells and by that, of course, I mean both ecological awareness (or visualization thereof) and your bank account. If I were a single guy and had the bankroll, I would, in a heartbeat, own and flaunt this nearly-$100K, completely un-utilitarian SUV with no shame.
"Yeah I drive a BMW. Hybrid, ya know. Gotta really think about those things these days ... yeah, got nav, too. And 20s. And hybrid stickers. You wanna see it? And my house? Great." It would be that easy. This city is that easy.
Sure I'd park it when I had to take more than one person out, or had to go to the store, or to well, anywhere. But on Wednesday-to-Sunday nights on Restaurant Row? This car represents a pretty epic win. The Chrysler is never win.
So which car wins? So which car loses less?
By pushrod
on February 8, 2010
05:17 AM
The Sebring is ultimately only bad in one dimension: its a crappy car. But at least its still utilitarian as a car, and its really cheap (especially since you won't have to pay anywhere near MSRP to get one). Ultimately, the Sebring does what it sets out to do: seats 4 people (5 in a pinch) and offers a trunk for your cargo.
The X6 hybrid is a bad SUV, a bad sport wagon, a bad coupe, a bad sedan and a bad hybrid. And its expensive for what you get. So, unlike the Sebring, this X6 is bad along 7 different dimensions (perhaps threatening to tear a hole in the space/time continuum). It can't decide what it wants to be, tries to be everything, and succeeds at nothing.
If I had to choose between the 2 of them, I think I would rather have unidimensionally bad and a lot of money in my pocket than have 7 dimensions of bad and threaten the stability of the universe.
By ahightower
on February 8, 2010
06:14 AM
I'll vote Sebring. The X6 is certainly stupid, as are so many other ugly, impractical, gas-guzzling, over-priced, "segment busting" things you can buy these days. But at least it's nice inside and goes fast. The Sebring is just junk and has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.
If you're accepting write-in ballots, I'll vote Jeep Compass. It's every bit as crappy as the Sebring, but it also does irreparable damage to the one brand in the Chrysler group that still has any equity.
By dougtheeng
on February 8, 2010
06:22 AM
I vote for the X6 Hybrid - what a mess of a vehicle. If BMW was a Japanese company, I would suggest that their management do the honorable thing and fillet themselves. Since its a German company, maybe they can just lock themselves in a bunker and...well, you know how the story goes.
By ergsum
on February 8, 2010
07:50 AM
I vote Sebring/Avenger. BMW's survival and image with the buying public will not be determined by the fringe sales of the Active Hybrid X6. Chrysler on the other hand will continue to lose market share and consumer consideration if they can not produce a competent and pleasant midsize sedan, let alone the great one that they really need. For a “meat and potatoes” type vehicle, they try to feed us Gristle Casserole and it’s too tough to swallow!
By 1487
on February 8, 2010
10:03 AM
x6 loses hands down.
The sebring is cheap and its handling is no worse than the #1 selling camry. Saying it doesnt handle well is kind of stupid when Camry has proven most buyers could care less. As for it being underpowered- it has 170hp standard which is more than Malibu and CAmry have standard. The tranny is outdated but the engine is a joint Hyundai/Chrysler/Mitsu design. 170hp is about average for the family sedan class. I can definitely see why someone would buy a Sebring with discounts. cant see any reason anyone would buy the x6 hybrid under any circumstances.
By greenpony
on February 8, 2010
10:43 AM
If I had $90k to blow, would I rather buy one BMW X6 hybrid, or four-and-a-half 4-cylinder Sebrings?
Either option is a "lose", but 4.5 crappy interiors are still just 4.5 crappy interiors, and it should be easier to sell the X6 when I'm done with it. I'd pass over the Sebrings and go BMW.
By sabastian
on February 8, 2010
12:13 PM
Here's the way I see it. The Sebring has absolutely zero redeeming features. The interior is garbage. The engine is garbage. It looks like garbage. Yeah, the X6 is a huge waste of money, but at least the interior is a nice place to sit.
Sebring sucks more.
By guy1974
on February 8, 2010
12:29 PM
I vote Sebring. The X6 is a niche car and if people want to spend $90K of their own money then fine by me, more profit for BMW to make truly great cars like the 3 and 5 series.
The Sebring is a core, mass market car and Chrysler screwed up. Imagine if Honda, Chevy, Ford or Toyota had screwed up their mass market, mid sized sedan - you can`t.
Chrysler deserve the shame.
By 00s10
on February 8, 2010
12:42 PM
Two words: BMW X6
By subytrojan
on February 8, 2010
12:49 PM
Dodge Caliber!
I guess I'll vote for the Chrysler Sebring/Dodge Avenger here.
By fldavid
on February 8, 2010
01:19 PM
If I could just rip out the good technological bits from the BMW and have them in my garage, that would be about $20k right?
If I had $90 grand to spend, I would by the 4 Sebrings and use the left over $10k and have some good 'ol Clarkson-like fun with them.
Any suggestions?
By jederino
on February 8, 2010
02:11 PM
@fldavid, I agree. Buy the 4 sebrings, and invite your friends to compete on the track head-to-head. No worries - modern safety and low performance means you can rub fenders without terrible consequences.
By estreka
on February 8, 2010
02:12 PM
Riz wins purely because of his LEO satellite reference. Hooray space surveillance!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thule_Air_Base
By mnorm1
on February 8, 2010
03:02 PM
Flawed execution meets flawed concept.
Flawed concept is worse - BMW X6 gets my vote.
By jriz
on February 8, 2010
03:22 PM
estreka: I wasn't aware I did that. Glad you enjoyed it, though.
By misterfusion
on February 9, 2010
05:17 PM
At least with the Sebring you won't pay anything close to sticker, even for a loaded model. I'd take one of those and never worry about door dings and gravel trucks, because hey -- it's just a Sebring.
On the other hand, I'd have to treat the $90k BMW with kid gloves -- insult to injury.
BMW loses this one.
By technetium99
on February 9, 2010
07:06 PM
"That means in order to walk away with a 173-horsepower rattly Chrysler Sebring, buyers had to actively ignore 44 cars that are significantly better than this."
Not to mention any number of better equipped and outfitted used cars that would last longer and have higher resale, if that is important to the buyer.
The Bimmer is clearly the better car, but a bargain it is not.
By ne1butu2
on February 9, 2010
09:40 PM
Honestly, I don't even notice many Sebrings on the road. They don't sell, so who cares? The ones that sell don't last very long. And anyone who buys one is buying it because it's cheap and that's what they can afford. I'm not making excuses for why it is such a nasty shape, I'm just saying that it's a disposable car for people who don't/can't expect much. The BMW, on the other hand, is an abomination. I've watched closely to all ten that I've ever seen. It looks like a smoothed-over Aztek and is therefore the stupidest looking car on the road today. It has huge gaps between the wheels and the fender arches are very un-German and more Toyota pickup. The uber fat wheels makes this look like a fat kid on roller skates from behind. It's a 5 series that was raised under power lines. For this price, there is no excuse for this type of design deprived sloppiness.
By crowb
on February 11, 2010
01:48 PM
Two of my favorite Edmunds writers going head to head. Good stuff, guys. Very entertaining.
I give the win to Magrath, or rather, the loss to the Sebring. Or the win to the BMW, meaning the Sebring is worse, meaning Magrath won.
Hell, you know what I mean.
Anyway, Magrath won me over with his last sentence. The BMW is ridiculous, but the Sebring is just shameful.
By jeannot23
on February 12, 2010
02:42 PM
I don't know about the sedan, since I've never been in one, but I can say that the 2004 Sebring convertible I own is my favorite of the 20-some used cars I've owned. I bought it last year with 73,000 miles on it, and it looked and drove like new. Still does.
What I have is the Limited, with 2.7L V-6. The car has too many amenities to list, and for me, has plenty of power and handles well.
If you were expecting a sport car, you'd be disappointed. What it is is about the biggest convertible and the most practical.
By jerrymax
on June 20, 2010
02:24 PM
Okay, an interesting conundrum here: how to determine which is the less horrible buying decision between two completely bad choices in the automotive world? Given the 2 options I'd have to buy the Sebring. Why? Main reason: It's sticker price. C'mon, it's a no-brainer. Isn't it better to pay 20k for a car that at least looks like an identifiable entity from the automotive lexicon than to pay 90k for something that, as Mr.Riswick pointed out, literally defies any logical description? Plus the Chrysler Sebring does offer a convertible top and, clunker that it is, when it's running you might actually have some fun driving it in good weather. And I could have a lot of fun with the 70k I saved by not buying that BMW hybrid-crossover-suv-wagon-thing, whatever it is.