Any carmakers that never produced a convertible–but should have?

The title of this thread is:  ...never produced... - but should have

An artists rendition:

An actual 2001 Prototype (with flip-flop paint even!) 

Driven5 said:

APEowner said:

Driven5 said:

APEowner said:

RAM is different from Dodge but I'm not sure that they should produce a convertible. 

If we're going to wade into that particular gray area, this has only been true since 2010 and that was simply a spinoff of Dodge's truck lineup. So I'd argue that any Dodge truck prior to 2010 would by today's standards be a "Ram" brand vehicle... Thus 1989-1991 Dodge (Ram) Dakota Convertible.

That's a valid argument and if one buys onto it then really all of the convertibles built by the many brands under the Chrysler Corp and Fiat Chrysler umbrellas have to be counted.

Mergers effectively the opposite scenario of how Ram was so recently (and relatively uniquely) split and rebranded. So no, the two arguments are completely independent from each other, and would each need to stand alone on their own merits. While I can see the logic in backdating the effectivity of such a direct and clearly defined split and rebranding, I have not yet seen (or come up with) a logical argument for backdating the effectivity of a merger.

I'm very confused.  Let me see if I understand this rule

Different brands under the same manufacturer count as separate manufacturers if they we're brought into the fold due to a merger or acquisition.

Does that apply if even they are or, once were, made in the same plant like Buick, Pontiac and Oldsmobile?

Saturn was created by GM not purchased by.  Does Saturn count as a separate brand than Chevrolet? 

RAM is connected to Dodge trucks but is it also connected to Dodge passenger cars?

SEADave mentioned Sterling which was a re-badged Rover.  Do they count?

In reply to John Welsh :

Did Kia ever sell the Elan in the US after they bought the rights from Lotus?

jb229 said:

In reply to John Welsh :

Did Kia ever sell the Elan in the US after they bought the rights from Lotus?

Japan and Korea only

In reply to APEowner :

There's a reason I called it  gray area. With the incestuousness of the automotive industry, there aren't always going to be hard and fast rules that can be universally applied to questions like these. There will always be multiple potential interpretations when the entire goal of the discussion is being on the hunt for fringe cases. I'm offering but one of them.

Mergers and acquisitions are unrelated. Badge engineering may be related, but since they are sold in tandem and not trasferred in their entirety from one brand to another, is it's own separate gray area and discussion that I'm actually not delving into here... See Eclipse vert vs no Talon vert, and Sterling vs Rover. What I'm talking about is more an issue of continuity.

Let me restate my argument a different way to see if that helps clarify. In 2011, Dodge did not sell the Dakota. RAM Trucks did. The Dakota as a truck was transferred in its entirety from being a Dodge to being a RAM. Thus my argument is that for the purposes of this type of discussion, the pre-RAM Dakota as a truck counts as much or more towards RAM applicability as it does Dodge.

No Dodge car was ever transferred in its entirety out of Dodge and into RAM.

No GM car was ever transferred in its entirety out of one GM brand and into Saturn.

If Corvette were to become its own separate GM Brand tomorrow, where the C8 were transferred in its entirety from Chevrolet to Corvette, and the topic becomes brands that have never offered a manual transmission but should have... I would still be able to argue Corvettes were offered with manual transmissions, since all of the pre-Corvette (brand) Corvettes (model) with manual transmissions could be counted against Corvette (brand).

But you're welcome to have an opinion that differs from one of the available interpretations I've identified. There are valid points that can be made all around.

Note: my 2010 Dodge Ram is a Dodge. The cutover must have been the 2011 model year. 

But they are clearly Dodge trucks as they didn't change anything but the badge in 2011. So I think they meet the Dodge criteria. 
 

I was going to offer up Holden, but it looks like they imported some Opels and stuck Holden badges on them after I stopped paying attention. But maybe we can say Holden never engineered a ragtop?

Oh, well yeah, Iso totally should have built a Rivolta convertible, but that didn't happen.  

Keith Tanner said:

Note: my 2010 Dodge Ram is a Dodge. The cutover must have been the 2011 model year. 

But they are clearly Dodge trucks as they didn't change anything but the badge in 2011. So I think they meet the Dodge criteria. 
 

I was going to offer up Holden, but it looks like they imported some Opels and stuck Holden badges on them after I stopped paying attention. But maybe we can say Holden never engineered a ragtop?

Holden, which is just another branch of GM has made a bunch of convertibles over the years. 

Holden was not, for the majority of its life, "just another branch of GM". Most of its cars were unique or were more likely to be exported to other markets than imported. They were far more distinct from the rest of the conglomerate than, say, Chevy and Pontiac. The brand is dead now as a entity but that's very recent.

What bunch of Holden convertibles other than the Opels over the past few years? I honestly can't think of any. 

In reply to Colin Wood :

 Trucks usually don't get convertibles but Chevy made the SSR that went over like a lead ballon.  ( am I weird because I'd like one? ). 

How about Acura? Maybe an NSX with a removable roof panel? If they made one someone will let us know.

NSX-T is the closest Acura has had. 

I always thought a Delorean would look good as a convertible. Not sure what would be done about the doors.

adam525i said:

How about Acura? Maybe an NSX with a removable roof panel? If they made one someone will let us know.

Is the s2000 badged as Acura anywhere in the world? Or is Acura mostly just a us brand?

MadScientistMatt said:

Beyond the occasional one-miss-wonders, it looks like Lamborghini built a few targa-roof cars but nothing you could completely put the top down on.

The 350 GTS should have been built:

Keith Tanner said:

Holden was not, for the majority of its life, "just another branch of GM". Most of its cars were unique or were more likely to be exported to other markets than imported. They were far more distinct from the rest of the conglomerate than, say, Chevy and Pontiac. The brand is dead now as a entity but that's very recent.

What bunch of Holden convertibles other than the Opels over the past few years? I honestly can't think of any. 

Holden was a just another branch of GM in that it was part of the international conglomeration sharing resources, parts and platforms with the other GM brands and benefiting from (or suffering from, depending on your perspective) GM's various global collaborations.  There were certainly some Holden specific models and powertrains but there was also cross breeding between other GM brands like Opel, Vauxhall and Isuzu and they even got a version of the Camry that came from the GM/Toyota New United Motor Manufacturing, Inc collaboration.

As far as Holden convertibles are concerned like the other GM brands there were convertible offerings in a bunch of their product lines. here are a few.

The FX.

The HR

The HQ Belmont.  Availible with a small block Chevy

and the more recent Cascada

The Cascadia is the Opel I was referring to. The others are the ones I was curious about. I'm pretty sure they were all unique models to Holden, too.

And no Australian would call that a small block Chevy :)

Anyhow, take Holden off the list. 

Keith Tanner said:

The Cascadia is the Opel I was referring to. The others are the ones I was curious about. I'm pretty sure they were all unique models to Holden, too.

And no Australian would call that a small block Chevy :)

Anyhow, take Holden off the list. 

I think those are all unique to Holden although there's obviously some GM A Body genetics in the HQ Belmont which makes me think that it might have been penned by the same stylist.  If not they were obviously talking to each other.

That Aussies probably call it a GM corporate 5.7L V8

How a bout Bricklin?  I don't believe they ever made a convertible. 

I was gonna say Yugo, but then I looked it up and it turns out they did make a convertible version of those. So, that's cool.

In reply to APEowner :

They call it a Holden V8 :)

Bricklin was a one-model manufacturer like Delorean. Given the emphasis on safety, I'd be surprised if they even considered a ragtop. Not that they had time! But yes, they'd be on the list. 

This is a fun game. 

Sebring-Vanguard Citicar?

Tucker!

If you go to specific models, I would say that a 928 drop-top would have been killer. There were 8 made by a tuner, but none were factory. If you subscribe to the idea that they were only successful as boulevard cruisers (which I don't) then a convertible version would have made sense. I mean, the 911 had many soft-tops.

Here's another one, why did the 300ZX convertible only come in NA and not Turbo form?  Why would Nissan stop short on that one?

SEADave said:

The whole retractable hardtop convertible fad of the early 2000's got a lot of traditional non-convertible maker making convertibles.   Did Lexus ever have a convertible before the SC430?    

2000's?   What about Fords 1957 retractable hardtop the Sunliner?