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

[Byteme]

Which is silly because most cars can open the trunk from a button in the cabin. Besides being able to climb over the seats without getting out of the car, wagon is no worse- most come with or have cheap covers available.

I'm not aware of how common this is but our Mazda 6 has the rear seatback release mechanism in the trunk, where it ought to be for security purposes.

Trunks are better for cabin noise as well.

Not to mention if you are in a collision with a rollover the rear seatbacks help to keep you from getting beaten by whatever cargo you have in the trunk.

[giant_mtb]

I'm not aware of how common this is but our Mazda 6 has the rear seatback release mechanism in the trunk, where it ought to be for security purposes.

As a detailer, I find it annoying when the seat release mechs are trunk-only.

A4 had releases inside the cab.  With locks.  That's the way to go, IMO.

[MX793]

I'm not aware of how common this is but our Mazda 6 has the rear seatback release mechanism in the trunk, where it ought to be for security purposes.

I think his point was, it's just as easy to smash the driver's door window and reach in and hit the "trunk open" button on the dash or console as it is to smash the rear hatch glass on a wagon/hatchback to get at stuff in the cargo area.

[ifcar]

I'm not aware of how common this is but our Mazda 6 has the rear seatback release mechanism in the trunk, where it ought to be for security purposes.

But you can still open the trunk without folding the seats, using the little dashboard button by your left knee.

[Byteme]

One thing that a lot of people don't realize is that station wagons were always a bit of a hodgepodge arrangement; a way to squeeze more seating and cargo space out of a standard sedan chassis. As the industry moved away from BOF passenger cars, and went to more flexible manufacturing systems, it became more feasible and made more sense to have the family people mover vehicles on their own platform.

The first real minivans were yet another variation of the Chrysler Corp. K-car platform.  And if you see one on the road today the first thing that may strike you is how small they are today compared to, say, a Honda Oddity or Nissan Quest.

The mileage on the early minivans (which were really what killed he wagons) was also significantly better; but, it's my opinion that style was more of a driver than anything else. The station wagon was more or less just the despised family car, much the same way the minivan is thought of today.

For the cubic feet of interior space, yes they were more or less fuel efficient.  They also couldn't get out of their own way with 97 HP trying to push a box through the air.  See below for power and reference specs.   For reference the EPA MPG for a 1986 Ford LTD Country Squire LX Wagon was 18/26.

Chrysler inivan engines, 1986
Compression:  9.5
Horsepower:  97 @ 5,200 RPM  (thrashing speed  )
Torque lb-ft:  122 @ 3,200 RPM
Manual mpg:  21/27
Auto mpg:  20/23
21/27

That being said, wagons do provide some distinct advantages.

Agree, back when I bought my 2001 Ford Escape I compared it to the 1997 Ford Escort Wagon we previously had.   The Escape had:

1" more leg room in front and 2" more in the rear.  1.7 inches more headroom in front and .1" less in the rear.  The Escape was 1 or two inches wider in hiproom and shoulder room.  Cargo volume for the Escape was 33.6/64.8 vs.  30.5 and 67 for the escort wagon.  Mileage with the Escort was 8-10 MPG better for both city and highway.

[Byteme]

I think his point was, it's just as easy to smash the driver's door window and reach in and hit the "trunk open" button on the dash or console as it is to smash the rear hatch glass on a wagon/hatchback to get at stuff in the cargo area.

But you can still open the trunk without folding the seats, using the little dashboard button by your left knee.

Yeah, you are both correct.

[Soup DeVille]

I think his point was, it's just as easy to smash the driver's door window and reach in and hit the "trunk open" button on the dash or console as it is to smash the rear hatch glass on a wagon/hatchback to get at stuff in the cargo area.

I don't think it will work without at least power to the ignition.

However; a covered area in a wagon or minivan says "something's in here"'while a trunk is an unknown- more so at least.

And whether or not it makes sense, the law for gun transport often is worded explicitly as "trunk or a locked case," which makes a trunk clearly OK, but a covered area in he back questionable for legal transport in some places.

[Soup DeVille]

The first real minivans were yet another variation of the Chrysler Corp. K-car platform.  And if you see one on the road today the first thing that may strike you is how small they are today compared to, say, a Honda Oddity or Nissan Quest.


For the cubic feet of interior space, yes they were more or less fuel efficient.  They also couldn't get out of their own way with 97 HP trying to push a box through the air.  See below for power and reference specs.   For reference the EPA MPG for a 1986 Ford LTD Country Squire LX Wagon was 18/26.

Chrysler inivan engines, 1986
Compression:  9.5
Horsepower:  97 @ 5,200 RPM  (thrashing speed  )
Torque lb-ft:  122 @ 3,200 RPM
Manual mpg:  21/27
Auto mpg:  20/23
21/27

Agree, back when I bought my 2001 Ford Escape I compared it to the 1997 Ford Escort Wagon we previously had.   The Escape had:

1" more leg room in front and 2" more in the rear.  1.7 inches more headroom in front and .1" less in the rear.  The Escape was 1 or two inches wider in hiproom and shoulder room.  Cargo volume for the Escape was 33.6/64.8 vs.  30.5 and 67 for the escort wagon.  Mileage with the Escort was 8-10 MPG better for both city and highway.

Quite aware of all this. The K-platform is the exact example; and often thought of as the beginning of the modern multi-use platform (Renault and VW may have some issue with this).

And those EPA figures for the LTD are outright lies.

[giant_mtb]

Trunk buttons work without the keys or ignition, IME.

[Soup DeVille]

Trunk buttons work without the keys or ignition, IME.

Earlier ones yes: it doesn't on my in-laws' Buick though, so I'm not entirely sure that's still true for new cars.

[giant_mtb]

Earlier ones yes: it doesn't on my in-laws' Buick though, so I'm not entirely sure that's still true for new cars.

Weird. I think I've yet to run into a vehicle where the button requires ignition on.

[MX793]

I don't think it will work without at least power to the ignition.

However; a covered area in a wagon or minivan says "something's in here"'while a trunk is an unknown- more so at least.

And whether or not it makes sense, the law for gun transport often is worded explicitly as "trunk or a locked case," which makes a trunk clearly OK, but a covered area in he back questionable for legal transport in some places.

Many gun transport laws are, in part, based around limiting an occupant's access to an operational firearm, which is why many also include provisions that weapons be unloaded in transit.  In NY, the weapon needs to be unloaded and in a trunk that is separated from the passenger compartment.  If the vehicle does not have a trunk that is separate from the passenger compartment (e.g. an SUV, hatchback, or wagon), then the weapon must be in a locked case instead.

[Soup DeVille]

Many gun transport laws are, in part, based around limiting an occupant's access to an operational firearm, which is why many also include provisions that weapons be unloaded in transit.  In NY, the weapon needs to be unloaded and in a trunk that is separated from the passenger compartment.  If the vehicle does not have a trunk that is separate from the passenger compartment (e.g. an SUV, hatchback, or wagon), then the weapon must be in a locked case instead.

Which is what I said, no?

[MX793]

Re:  Needing key in ignition

Just tried my Jetta and it opened from inside.  Granted, the car was unlocked.  Not sure if the car were locked and I left a window rolled down if it would still work.  Obviously, someone could also break the window and hit the unlock button on the door.  The Jetta also has a key lock on the trunk release switch so that if someone breaks in, I can lock out the interior trunk switch.

Also tried my Mustang without the fob on my person (keyless ignition).  Car was, again, unlocked.  Not sure if it would still open if the car were locked.

My '04 Mazda didn't require it, but the latch on that car was completely mechanical (keyless entry did not open the trunk), so there wouldn't be a lockout there anyway. 

My last Mustang didn't need the key in the ignition.

[Soup DeVille]

Might be just a GM thing then. Most GM vehicles I come across are SUVs these days anyways...

[Byteme]

I don't think it will work without at least power to the ignition.


And whether or not it makes sense, the law for gun transport often is worded explicitly as "trunk or a locked case," which makes a trunk clearly OK, but a covered area in he back questionable for legal transport in some places.

Mine works as long as there is battery power, the key is unnecessary.

Given road rage not having the firearm in the passenger compartment is probably good sense.

[Byteme]

And those EPA figures for the LTD are outright lies.

No, those are the EPA test numbers.     Regardless, those are the figures and the Chrysler minivans went through exactly the same testing procedure. 

[Byteme]

Re:  Needing key in ignition

Just tried my Jetta and it opened from inside.  Granted, the car was unlocked.  Not sure if the car were locked and I left a window rolled down if it would still work.  Obviously, someone could also break the window and hit the unlock button on the door.  The Jetta also has a key lock on the trunk release switch so that if someone breaks in, I can lock out the interior trunk switch.

Also tried my Mustang without the fob on my person (keyless ignition).  Car was, again, unlocked.  Not sure if it would still open if the car were locked.

My '04 Mazda didn't require it, but the latch on that car was completely mechanical (keyless entry did not open the trunk), so there wouldn't be a lockout there anyway. 

My last Mustang didn't need the key in the ignition.

Easy enough to check.  Sit in the driver's seat, lock the car with the key fob and see if the button works.  In case there is some magic seat sensor that knows your butt is in the car, which I doubt, sit in the back seat and reach around (if you can) and push the button. 

[MX793]

Easy enough to check.  Sit in the driver's seat, lock the car with the key fob and see if the button works.  In case there is some magic seat sensor that knows your butt is in the car, which I doubt, sit in the back seat and reach around (if you can) and push the button. 

With the proximity key for the Mustang, having the key in the car is as good as having it in the ignition.  Probably easier to roll the window down, lock the car, put the key out of range, and then see if I can reach in through the open window and pop the trunk.  Could do the same with the Jetta.

[Byteme]

With the proximity key for the Mustang, having the key in the car is as good as having it in the ignition.  Probably easier to roll the window down, lock the car, put the key out of range, and then see if I can reach in through the open window and pop the trunk.  Could do the same with the Jetta.

Ah, I wasn't aware you were talking about cars with those kinds of keys.  Got a friend who can lock you in the car and then retire to a safe distance with the keys?

[AutobahnSHO]

Lol at car geeks.