General Downsides of a convertible?

Currently reading:
General Downsides of a convertible?

Is the lack of visibility out of the back when the hood is down an issue? I think I might find it a little disconcerting!
 
As far as rear visability is concerned, it isn't an issue for me but the only way you'll know is if you try one. You tend to use the door mirrors more is all I've found, bit like driving a van I suppose (only much, much shorter ;)).
 
I don't find the wind noise intrusive at all on the motorway , infact no worse than any car I've been in . As for the rear visibility you will become accustomed to it , not to mention the mirrors are quite sizeable and there's parking sensors too . I have drove vans and its not a real issue , go and get it while the weathers still nice you won't regret it .

Mark
 
I test drove a used 1.2 C before I tried a TA hatch. I bought a new TA hatch because the 1.2 wasn't quick enough for me, but I liked the C a lot - couldn't stretch to the TA version though. There was a bit more noise on the motorway in the C but not too bad. Regarding rear viz, with the roof fully folded there is a pile of cloth in the way. Reversing sensors are standard though and if you have the roof fully back, but not down, you still get the normal view through the window. As someone else has said, the biggest issue is probably spray on the wiperless rear window when it rains.
 
Is the lack of visibility out of the back when the hood is down an issue? I
think I might find it a little disconcerting!

I'm only 5'1" and can't see a thing out of the back when the roof is fully down, but after a couple of glances through the rear mirror, you get used to using the side mirrors.

But - you still get all the sunlight even if you only take the roof back to the first setting which is what I normally do round town. I only put the roof fully back if I'm going over 40mph. I can't remember what the handbook says about driving with it half way back over 40 but you get a wind buffeting noise.

As Mark said, get one before the summer finishes, you won't regret it. Just remember to keep a small bottle of sunscreen in the car, I ended up with a nice white stripe across my chest from the seat belt once!
 
Is the lack of visibility out of the back when the hood is down an issue? I think I might find it a little disconcerting!

Personally, I do find it quite annoying as I like to check my rear mirror all the time. So I'm extra careful when driving with the top all the way down.

Also, another downside is the very small rear window on the 500C. I find this makes it a lot harder to rapidly reverse park, but YMMV. The rear parking sensors help, but it's still no substitute for good rear vision. It's like having extremely thick rear side pillars.

I find myself mostly driving straight in to parking bays rather than reverse parking.
 
I find myself mostly driving straight in to parking bays rather than reverse parking.

I don't think it will be an issue for my wife. She has never reverse parked in her life. If the only option was to reverse park into a space at Sainsbury, she would drive three miles down the road to Tesco where she could drive straight in.
 
BTW I just realised my terminology may be confusing -- by reverse parking, I mean reversing into a parking bay in a shopping centre car park etc. Not parallel parking on a street. Not sure if people usually interpret reverse parking to be the same thing as parallel parking?

The 500C is very easy to parallel park thanks to its tiny size and the reverse sensors :D The small rear window isn't an issue for me in this situation.
 
Last edited:
I have driven Ford Transits for over 20 years. We started out with windows in the rear doors, then they installed a bulkhead in the next version, no rear vision. Then the windows were removed for security reasons. So driving now we have the luxury of rear sensors. I can now park the transit using wing mirrors and sensors, so to sum up...you will get used to it ! :)
 
We have both a Glass roof Lounge and a CC in the family.

The CC is a bit noisy with the roof up but not to the point where you could not hold a conversation.
The speakers can't cope with the roof down - Now blown.
The head lining gets grubby inside (They all do that sir)
Our Pop came with air con but this is hardly ever used?
Top down motoring only in town. To noisy and blustery / tiresome on long motorway journeys.

It's not a real convertable and out of the two cars I think the Lounge is the better all round package as the glass roof lets the light in all year round.

If you can find it, go for the Lounge with with the dule logic. This is what my daughter drives and would never look back.

Even my wife who loves her CC said that she would change to a Lounge in the future, but that's only because she has had a CC and 'got it out of her system'.
 
Our Pop came with air con but this is hardly ever used?
That's very interesting. I simply couldn't imagine a car without air con. I always leave it on constantly.

Why would you NOT have it on?
 
That's very interesting. I simply couldn't imagine a car without air con. I always leave it on constantly.

Why would you NOT have it on?

Why would you leave it on?

I only use it on my car if it's

A) hot

or

B) the windows are fogging up

To use it when you don't need it is just a waste of money.
 
I have a TA lounge convertible which has climate control and I only turn it off when the roofs down. I don't think the money saved is worth the inconvenience, although everyone to their own.
 
Why would you leave it on?
It's just a much more comfortable environment in a car when AC is on. Especially in small cars. It keeps you comfortable, fresh and alert.

Why would you leave it on?
To use it when you don't need it is just a waste of money.

You mean it uses more fuel? I have tested this theory in every car I've owned over tha last 10 years or so (Rover 75, Jag XKR, Merc E class, Civic, Hinda Shuttle, VW Golf) and in not one of them have I ever detected higher fuel consumption when AC is on. Or, it is so imperceptably small as to not worry about it.
 
It's just a much more comfortable environment in a car when AC is on. Especially in small cars. It keeps you comfortable, fresh and alert.



You mean it uses more fuel? I have tested this theory in every car I've owned over tha last 10 years or so (Rover 75, Jag XKR, Merc E class, Civic, Hinda Shuttle, VW Golf) and in not one of them have I ever detected higher fuel consumption when AC is on. Or, it is so imperceptably small as to not worry about it.
Well it does use fuel, I did a 600+ mile trip on the weekend and there was a definite drop in fuel consumption when the air con was on. The energy to run the air con has to come from somewhere and it sure as hell isn't free :)
 
Problem with using aircon on the 1.2 is that anything other than the first fan speed I can feel the engine is not so eager. Putting the fan on speed 4 on a hot day and pulling away and the initial change to 2nd gear feels like someone dropped the worlds fattest man in the back of the car.

In the twin air it makes no noticeable difference.
 
IYou mean it uses more fuel? I have tested this theory in every car I've owned over tha last 10 years or so (Rover 75, Jag XKR, Merc E class, Civic, Hinda Shuttle, VW Golf) and in not one of them have I ever detected higher fuel consumption when AC is on.

Post your methodology....
 
Problem with using aircon on the 1.2 is that anything other than the first fan speed I can feel the engine is not so eager. Putting the fan on speed 4 on a hot day and pulling away and the initial change to 2nd gear feels like someone dropped the worlds fattest man in the back of the car.

In the twin air it makes no noticeable difference.

1.4 is the same.
I put this down to there being more power available down low in the TA vs 1.2 and especially the 1.4
Also i feel worn sparkplugs can have an effect.
 
I've tried to detect any difference in fuel consumption with aircon on or off on my last few cars, including our 500 TA and haven't found any. I used the trip computer doing the same journey on consecutive days, aircon on then off. I agree that the energy must come from somewhere, but I guess modern systems are so efficient that it's too small to detect. I have been told by more than one mechanic that it's best to leave it on all the time as it keeps all the seals lubricated, and stops build-up of bacteria which can cause smells. Not had an aircon issue yet, including a Clio which was family run for 8 years without a re-gas, aircon still working when we sold it last year.
 
I've tried to detect any difference in fuel consumption with aircon on or off on my last few cars, including our 500 TA and haven't found any. I used the trip computer doing the same journey on consecutive days, aircon on then off. I agree that the energy must come from somewhere, but I guess modern systems are so efficient that it's too small to detect. I have been told by more than one mechanic that it's best to leave it on all the time as it keeps all the seals lubricated, and stops build-up of bacteria which can cause smells. Not had an aircon issue yet, including a Clio which was family run for 8 years without a re-gas, aircon still working when we sold it last year.
You sure about that? My car does increase fuel usage with AC on especially in traffic! Power is noticably less so i need to rev the car higher to reach the same speed and also in gear the car slows down faster with ac on.
 
Back
Top