Will the four-door sedan go the way of the dinosaur?

[Madman]

The four-door sedan.  For generations it has been the default choice of millions of Americans regardless of age or socioeconomic status.  But a seismic shift is happening in today's car industry.  Sedan sales are falling and are being usurped by compact CUVs.  And the trend shows no signs of abating.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-12-03/toyota-says-rav4-small-suv-will-dethrone-camry-as-its-top-seller

http://jalopnik.com/top-toyota-sales-exec-says-the-sedans-days-are-numbered-1746059219

While I don't believe the sedan will ever completely go away, I can see a future where this configuration is relegated to a much smaller segment of the market.

[SVT666]

No. Trends come and go.

[12,000 RPM]

I don't think sedans will disappear completely, but what is going on is far from a come and go trend, and more like a permanent shift in the US similar to

- the death of 2 door sedans like the Solara, Sebring etc
- the death of the station wagon
- the marginalization of the BOF/truck based SUV

I do think midsize and large sedans will quietly fade out to become a permanent niche market. Large sedans are way down across the board, mainstream and luxury. Midsize luxury cars are down, and I think for the first time ever midsize mainstreamers are down in a growing market with a bunch of new models. Only growing sedan segment is the "compacts". Why? Midsizers and large cars got too big and don't really deliver anything the market wants that small cars don't have. Plus all segments have grown a ton.... my Civic is within an inch of my old Accord in all interior dimensions, while being just as fast and much more fuel efficient for less money. I think it has more headroom in the back than midsizers like the 200, Fusion etc. So car makers have bloated the non compacts beyond what people want, and compacts have struck the sweet spot WRT size.

CUVs beating out sedans is happening for obvious reasons. Biggest being high hip point. Baby boomers don't want a car that's hard to get into... CUVs are easy. Like sitting on a bar stool vs a bean bag. Baby haulers don't want a car that's hard to load their little boogerheads into. And anybody who uses their trunk a lot values the singificantly bigger and easier to load cargo space. CUVs are also making huge strides in fuel economy- I think the Accord and CR-V have just about reached parity there and on price. Nobody knows or cares that a CR-V is based on the "lower" Civic- it's just as roomy as an Accord and has the same engine. Etc. So this is a sea change, not a trend. Trends are like the little retro craze we had in the early 00s with all those silly ugly retro cars or the colors people choose for their exteriors. There is no logic behind a trend. CUV's rise is based on pure practicality concerns.

Does it bum me out? Not really. Everyone says this is dying, that is dying.... I think everything is just getting more focused. Less cars are available with stickshifts, but the ones that are left are damn good. I don't think we have ever had a better selection of stickshift cars. Nobody misses stickshift Camrys and RAV-4s. Likewise I think the decline in sedans will make the few left better. But we will see. Either way I agree with the article. It's clear things are shifting in a major way and it's obvious why.

[Rupert]

I miss stick shift Camrys and RAV4s.

[GoCougs]

Not sure what the article is blathering about - Rav4, CR-V, Escape do not outsell the Accord and Camry and in sum total, sedans outsell CUVs by about 3:1. On a purely value (cost vs. feature/function) POV, CUVs are sorta sucky when compared to a Camry or Accord (akin to large SUVs. vs. minivans, though not quite so dramatic) - they cost the same or more yet offer less of what really counts. Like in all boom times people tend to buy more of what is sorta sucky (happened with large SUVs in the '90s too).

[ifcar]

Not sure what the article is blathering about - Rav4, CR-V, Escape do not outsell the Accord and Camry and in sum total, sedans outsell CUVs by about 3:1. On a purely value (cost vs. feature/function) POV, CUVs are sorta sucky when compared to a Camry or Accord (akin to large SUVs. vs. minivans, though not quite so dramatic) - they cost the same or more yet offer less of what really counts. Like in all boom times people tend to buy more of what is sorta sucky (happened with large SUVs in the '90s too).

I generally agree. An excessive focus on whether sales are up or down, rather than high versus low, is leading people to act as though the best-selling non-pickups in the country aren't still sedans. After the F-Series and Silverado, the three best-selling cars in the U.S. this year are sedans (Camry, Corolla, Accord). There's just one other crossover in the top 10 (RAV4, No. 10), below two more sedans (Altima, Civic). People buy a shit-ton of sedans, and will continue to.

[12,000 RPM]

On a purely value (cost vs. feature/function) POV, CUVs are sorta sucky when compared to a Camry or Accord (akin to large SUVs. vs. minivans, though not quite so dramatic) - they cost the same or more yet offer less of what really counts.

CUVs are easier to get in and out of/load children into, have more and better cargo space, and are pretty much even in content/$. The fuel economy penalty continues to disappear as well. CUVs also depreciate less, so that initial small price penalty ($1000-1500 when equally equipped) is irrelevant. So what exactly are sedans offering more of that really counts for this market? What does a new mom or aging boomer get from a sedan that they don't from an equally equipped CUV?

[veeman]

All things being equal, I'd prefer a sedan over an SUV for a work commuter car.  You can drive more aggressively with greater stability in a vehicle with a lower center of gravity.  I subconsciously naturally drive faster, especially on highway onramps/offramps and turns, when I'm in a sedan vs an SUV. 

[GoCougs]

CUVs are easier to get in and out of/load children into, have more and better cargo space, and are pretty much even in content/$. The fuel economy penalty continues to disappear as well. CUVs also depreciate less, so that initial small price penalty ($1000-1500 when equally equipped) is irrelevant. So what exactly are sedans offering more of that really counts for this market? What does a new mom or aging boomer get from a sedan that they don't from an equally equipped CUV?

None of that is true, esp. against the mid-size sedan segment (the best/highest value segment there is).

Sedans get better MPG, are easier to get in/out of (esp. back seat), handle/brake/ride better, are more refined and cost less. The $$$ spent on AWD and more sheet metal is $$$ not spent on the aforementioned list of Things That Matter.

[12,000 RPM]

None of that is true, esp. against the mid-size sedan segment (the best/highest value segment there is).

A bold claim to make and follow up with lies and exaggerations.

Sedans get better MPG,

<10%. Irrelevant.

are easier to get in/out of (esp. back seat),

How is a sedan easier to get into than a CUV?

handle/brake/ride better,  are more refined

All CUVs are more than "good enough" in this regard. If Americans really cared about this, cars like the Focus, Golf and Mazda3 would be top sellers, rather than the cheesy/cheap Corolla & Camry and the noisy Accord/Civic. And something like an Accord is no more or less refined than an equally expensive CR-V. Lies lies lies.

and cost less.

Not by much.

The $$$ spent on AWD and more sheet metal is $$$ not spent on the aforementioned list of Things That Matter.

All top selling CUVs come in FWD only. And you are having problems with separating what matters to you with what matters to the market at large. As the population ages, making for millenials moving into parenthood and boomers moving into old age, the high hip point will continue to push the CUV to the top. Think what you want but these are unarguable facts.

[giant_mtb]

Back seat of a sedan is easier to get into than the backseat of a CRV?  I must be doing it wrong.

Unless we're talking third rows...which aren't comparable in that sense.

[ifcar]

All top selling CUVs come in FWD only.

No, none does.....

[12,000 RPM]

No, none does.....

CR-V, RAV4, Escape etc are all available in FWD. Thats what I meant.

And AWD or not the higher ground clearance is a boon in the snow belt.

[Rupert]

But sedans still far outsell CUVs, do they not? One thing becoming slightly more popular does not a sea change make.

[GoCougs]

A bold claim to make and follow up with lies and exaggerations.
<10%. Irrelevant.How is a sedan easier to get into than a CUV?
All CUVs are more than "good enough" in this regard. If Americans really cared about this, cars like the Focus, Golf and Mazda3 would be top sellers, rather than the cheesy/cheap Corolla & Camry and the noisy Accord/Civic. And something like an Accord is no more or less refined than an equally expensive CR-V. Lies lies lies.

Not by much.All top selling CUVs come in FWD only. And you are having problems with separating what matters to you with what matters to the market at large. As the population ages, making for millenials moving into parenthood and boomers moving into old age, the high hip point will continue to push the CUV to the top. Think what you want but these are unarguable facts.

Jesus.

Sedans way outsell CUVs because sedans better vehicles for the market at large - better MPG, better price, better driving, better refinement.

[ifcar]

But sedans still far outsell CUVs, do they not? One thing becoming slightly more popular does not a sea change make.

This.

[Soup DeVille]

Back seat of a sedan is easier to get into than the backseat of a CRV?  I must be doing it wrong.

Unless we're talking third rows...which aren't comparable in that sense.

For children it's true. For adults; who cares? Who has a problem with either?

[Raza]

For children it's true. For adults; who cares? Who has a problem with either?

The elderly. Higher seats can be harder to get into, if they have to climb, and low seats are very difficult for them to get out of.

[Lebowski]

The elderly. Higher seats can be harder to get into, if they have to climb, and low seats are very difficult for them to get out of.

It seems the Lexus RX, the old lady vehicle of choice, is about ideal height for an older person to get in and out of.

[Rupert]

The elderly. Higher seats can be harder to get into, if they have to climb, and low seats are very difficult for them to get out of.

Sucks to be old (right, Dave?).

[GoCougs]

For a given class size, the equivalent CUV will have heavier doors - not a big deal on cute 'utes but once things get midsize IMO it's noticeable. Also, in the rear, one has to lift up an over the front portion of the rear wheel well.

[giant_mtb]

Also, in the rear, one has to lift up an over the front portion of the rear wheel well.

What??  Do you get into vehicles in the most difficult way you possibly can or something?  You don't have to lift yourself up and over anything.  The opening is just slightly smaller.  It's more like you just sorta go around the bend of the wheelwell because it happens to be there.

[Soup DeVille]

The elderly. Higher seats can be harder to get into, if they have to climb, and low seats are very difficult for them to get out of.

This is true; but the elderly are not buying enough cars to make for large change in car buying habits.

[280Z Turbo]

This is true; but the elderly are not buying enough cars to make for large change in car buying habits.

And the boomers refuse to believe they're getting old because they said never trust anyone over 30.

[Byteme]

It seems the Lexus RX, the old lady vehicle of choice, is about ideal height for an older person to get in and out of.

Yup, appliance white. 

I think the CUV buyers like the fact that they believe they have better visibility because of the higher seating position.   That and there is still the perception that bigger means better.  I still hear some folks arguing that bigger and heavier means better ride and handling (road hugging weight is good?) and of course it's safer when they step on the gas by accident and rocket though the front display window at the convenience store.

One hopeful thought, CUVs are a lot closer to the traditional station wagon than are SUVs, so maybe at least we are moving in the right direction.

[12,000 RPM]

Yup, appliance white. 

I think the CUV buyers like the fact that they believe they have better visibility because of the higher seating position.   That and there is still the perception that bigger means better.  I still hear some folks arguing that bigger and heavier means better ride and handling (road hugging weight is good?) and of course it's safer when they step on the gas by accident and rocket though the front display window at the convenience store.

One hopeful thought, CUVs are a lot closer to the traditional station wagon than are SUVs, so maybe at least we are moving in the right direction.

U don't get to decide what the right direction is

Higher seating position = better forward visibility. This is not really up for debate. Anecdotally I see this every time I hop on the motorcycle, and empirically I've seen this in headlight performance and other places. Bigger/heavier has nothing to do with it really- a FWD CR-V probably weighs the same as an Accord with the same engine and equipment. But it does have fatter tires and more suspension travel, which definitely do equate to better ride quality. Nobody buying a CUV cares about road holding or handling, that is a red herring and projection of enthusiast values onto a non-enthusiast market. Etc. etc.

If wagons were so great the US would not have moved away from them in the mainstream ~18 years ago. That is when Honda and Toyota dumped their last wagons (Accord/Camry) and came out with their CUVs.

[GoCougs]

Jesus, another L.

[2o6]

For a given class size, the equivalent CUV will have heavier doors - not a big deal on cute 'utes but once things get midsize IMO it's noticeable. Also, in the rear, one has to lift up an over the front portion of the rear wheel well.

Now you're just making shit up

[2o6]

CUV's (and I predict that European monobox MPV's may start to gain in popularity) will top in popularity, but there's some things they can't defeat. CUV's are still tall and aerodynamically compromised over a car.

[GoCougs]

Now you're just making shit up

Jesus, when is the last time you were in one. Look at how much taller the doors are, and lifting stuff into the backseat esp. the middle such as for a baby seat is more difficult (esp. for women).

Automakers are putting more $$$ into CUVs (CR-V, Escape, Rav4, etc., were once penalty boxes) but there is still a notable gap - sedans are better vehicles than CUVs in the ways consumers materially need them to be, ergo, they are still buying WAY more of them than CUVs.