I was going to comment on veeman's Reply about the Lexus being useless in back, because it's a 2+2 not a "four place" coupe.
Then, I started thinking of it; when was then last time you've seen a two-door "four place" coupe? They've all been sort of usurped by these new school four door coupes!
I can't think of many 2-door, 2+2s that have ever had particularly usable rear seats. 2-door sedans like the Challenger and last Accord, sure.
I think the 4 series back seat is pretty usable. I haven't been in it but it's a big car.
(http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5446/9790404724_6b6db92c7c_b.jpg)
The way I see it, if you're gonna have 4 seats you might as well have 4 doors. There is rarely a dynamic advantage, and for every coupe that makes you fawn (Q60) there are a good 5 or so that make you yawn (ATS, 4, A5) or recoil (RC= ReCoil). Only coupe I would look at is probably the Mustang once my kids can do front facing seats.... and with the G's size and weight turning me off more and more that doesn't look like an option
S class coupe
4 series is good, 2 series is reasonable. I guess the C and E class coupes are ok too. Probably the A5 as well.
Oh yea, I spent a weekend riding in the back of a 2 series. It was not bad. Not much worse than the G to be honest. BMW has been working on the four place coupe for 50 years... they have figured it out.
VW Beetle
The S class coupe has a very decent back seat for my 6'3" frame. The E cabrio isn't too shabby either. Not sure about the C though...
Quote from: Rich on November 04, 2017, 04:57:23 PM
S class coupe
That's the first one that came to mind for me also.....
Rolls Royce Wraith
Murano Crosscabriolet
Evoque Convertible
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on November 05, 2017, 06:51:26 PM
Murano Crosscabriolet
Evoque Convertible
(https://s1.postimg.org/99zf8d5nz3/23318739_10209768158747223_723666537_n.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
Yeah 2-series back seats were not too bad...main problem was crawling in back (fine for someone like me or maybe kids, but I wouldn't ask a co-worker...particularly one wearing a dress...to attempt it).
I am efinitely of the mind if you are going to have a usable back seat you may as well have 4-doors. Even though I am a single guy I get enough use out of the back seats to make it worth it to have the extra doors.
The lack of a 4 door 2er model in the face of all of BMWs other variants is really infuriating
Rear suicide doors like on the RX8 would be so easy
Quote from: r0tor on November 06, 2017, 10:25:22 AM
The lack of a 4 door 2er model in the face of all of BMWs other variants is really infuriating
Rear suicide doors like on the RX8 would be so easy
+1
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on November 04, 2017, 04:27:45 PM
The way I see it, if you're gonna have 4 seats you might as well have 4 doors.
I disagree, and the big coupe market used to be HUGE, with everything from the classic cars and musclecars to sporty luxury coupes. Chevelle SS to Mercedes SECs... My favorite category of car:
(https://13252-presscdn-0-94-pagely.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/No-Reserve-1970-Chevrolet-Chevelle-SS-396-4-Speed-for-sale-Three-Quarter.jpg)
(https://assets.hemmings.com/story_image/345251-1000-0@2x.jpg?rev=2)
(https://i1.wp.com/www.curbsideclassic.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Chevrolet-1955-Bel-Air-coupe-4524.jpg)
(http://germancarsforsaleblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/1990-Mercedes-560SEC-Wald.jpg)
(https://13252-presscdn-0-94-pagely.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/58da90b00678e_IMG_5222-940x648.jpg)
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_FoXyvaPSnVk/TPEpi_4FtmI/AAAAAAADqYw/V7U4EBLkH6o/w1200-h600-p-k-no-nu/1976-JAGUAR-XJC-RACECAR-0.jpg)
If I could I'd build a 2 door version of my E38...
I mean, the market agrees. For whatever reason- IMO likely good ones- people are not looking at cars as means of personal expression anymore. I say that's a good thing, because there are far cheaper, more creative and IMO healthier ways of achieving that end.
Healthier? Your car, home, etc. ARE personal expressions. Even when you don't want them to be. Yeah, the market agrees that boring practicality is the norm UNTIL you get to ultra expensive cars and musclecars. There used to be a plethora of 2 door cars on the market, and just about every model had a 2 door version or even a couple 2 door versions (both 2 door sedans and coupes in the same model line). And inexpensive sports cars were numerous, not just one or two models. People have just gotten boring in their car choices. Add to that the ubiquitous McMansion and HOAs that demand you be conservative and conforming and you get a dearth of individuality and creativity overall.
Quote from: ChrisV on November 29, 2017, 11:33:53 AM
Healthier? Your car, home, etc. ARE personal expressions. Even when you don't want them to be. Yeah, the market agrees that boring practicality is the norm UNTIL you get to ultra expensive cars and musclecars. There used to be a plethora of 2 door cars on the market, and just about every model had a 2 door version or even a couple 2 door versions (both 2 door sedans and coupes in the same model line). And inexpensive sports cars were numerous, not just one or two models. People have just gotten boring in their car choices. Add to that the ubiquitous McMansion and HOAs that demand you be conservative and conforming and you get a dearth of individuality and creativity overall.
Yeah but my Instagram account is full a pics of my personalized Starbucks lattes
Fuck, every time you come by, Chris, I wind up checking out E38s
I don't think I could bring myself to buy a fixed roof two door car unless I already had a fun open top car and a practical car. Like, I see that 6 series and I love it, but I'd never choose one as an only car or a second car.
Quote from: ChrisV on November 29, 2017, 11:33:53 AM
Healthier? Your car, home, etc. ARE personal expressions. Even when you don't want them to be. Yeah, the market agrees that boring practicality is the norm UNTIL you get to ultra expensive cars and musclecars. There used to be a plethora of 2 door cars on the market, and just about every model had a 2 door version or even a couple 2 door versions (both 2 door sedans and coupes in the same model line). And inexpensive sports cars were numerous, not just one or two models. People have just gotten boring in their car choices. Add to that the ubiquitous McMansion and HOAs that demand you be conservative and conforming and you get a dearth of individuality and creativity overall.
I would hardly call something like a 2 door Dodge Aries or Ford Fairmont an "expressive" car choice. LEts not get carried away here. I'm pretty sure those 2 door versions were just cheaper, and every dollar counted with interest rates were like 20%. Now people don't have to compromise.
For all of the "lame" 2-door Tercels or Tempos, there used to be a plethora of legitimately attractive, and fun-to-drive, affordable coupes based on mainstream chassis. MX-3, MX-6, Probe, Beretta, Daytona, Avenger, DSM (Laser/Eclipse/Talon), Celica, Prelude, CRX, Integra, NX...
...............all made irrelevant once it became clear an extra pair of doors did not blunt performance. The 06 GTI and Civic Si really opened the floodgates. There is good reason all those cars are gone.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on December 23, 2017, 01:39:33 PM
...............all made irrelevant once it became clear an extra pair of doors did not blunt performance. The 06 GTI and Civic Si really opened the floodgates. There is good reason all those cars are gone.
I think the SUV craze of the mid 90s killed them waaaay before those two were even introduced.
People my age used to want a cute Probe or Prelude or something.
Now people my age want an HR-V.
I feel like the debt crisis made this worse; if people are financing cars and paying high payments AND student loan payments, their car has to be more utilitarian than a two-door small coupe. An HR-V isn't very fun, but it's reasonable on gas, and seats real people at a manageable price.
Like a basic MX-3 was $16,995 in 1993. Inflation says that car would have been 27K now. 27K is a lot of car.
Quote from: 2o6 on December 23, 2017, 04:25:33 PM
People my age used to want a cute Probe or Prelude or something.
The first guy says, 'Well I''m an astronaut, so I drive a Saturn.' And the second guy says, 'Well I am a pimp so I drive a cheap Escort.' And the third guy says, 'I got you both beat. I'm a proctologist, so I drive a brown Probe.'
(https://img.cinemablend.com/filter:scale/quill/c/7/c/3/1/3/c7c3135f21f3ce71ca8cb0fd407d3de15877dbb2.jpg?mw=600)
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on December 23, 2017, 01:39:33 PM
...............all made irrelevant once it became clear an extra pair of doors did not blunt performance. The 06 GTI and Civic Si really opened the floodgates. There is good reason all those cars are gone.
Last I checked, everyone's jumping onto the tall wagon cute-ute train, which certainly do not offer the same kind of driving experience as a lower-slung coupe or even sedan.
And sporty/performance-oriented cars weren't a suddenly new thing that replaced the 2-door sport compacts. You could get the GTI with rear doors dating back to the MkIII ('91). 4-door Integras were available from the get-go ('85, '89 in the US). If having a set of rear doors and the same performance was so desirable, why were there vastly more 2-door Tegs and GTIs sold than their 4-door variants? In fact, Honda would eventually drop the 4-door Teg when the gen 4 (renamed to RSX) came out because it was unpopular.
Quote from: 2o6 on December 23, 2017, 04:25:33 PM
Like a basic MX-3 was $16,995 in 1993. Inflation says that car would have been 27K now. 27K is a lot of car.
Not quite. The basic model was like $12K in '93. The GS, which got you the V6, started at $15K. $12K in '93 would be just under $21K today. Nissan NX had nearly identical pricing.
Some further perspective, a 4-banger Mustang in '93 started at just under $11K (note this was the last year of the very old Fox body, the SN95 saw a ~$3500 price jump in '94 to $14K and change for a base model). A base V6 Camaro (1st year of the 4th gen) was just under $14K. A Civic LX was just over $12K and the EX was $15.5K. A base Corolla was $11.5K and a top of the line LE started at $15.5K. A mid-level Sentra was $11.5K with the top of the line starting at $14.5K. So, dollar-wise, something like an MX-3 or Nissan NX was priced very closely with the economy cars on which they shared platforms.
Quote from: MX793 on December 23, 2017, 04:42:32 PM
Last I checked, everyone's jumping onto the tall wagon cute-ute train, which certainly do not offer the same kind of driving experience as a lower-slung coupe or even sedan.
And sporty/performance-oriented cars weren't a suddenly new thing that replaced the 2-door sport compacts. You could get the GTI with rear doors dating back to the MkIII ('91). 4-door Integras were available from the get-go ('85, '89 in the US). If having a set of rear doors and the same performance was so desirable, why were there vastly more 2-door Tegs and GTIs sold than their 4-door variants? In fact, Honda would eventually drop the 4-door Teg when the gen 4 (renamed to RSX) came out because it was unpopular.
Won't lie I didn't read the rest of your post, but I always considered the TSX a successor to the 4 door Integra
Quote from: MX793 on December 23, 2017, 04:58:28 PM
Not quite. The basic model was like $12K in '93. The GS, which got you the V6, started at $15K. $12K in '93 would be just under $21K today. Nissan NX had nearly identical pricing.
Some further perspective, a 4-banger Mustang in '93 started at just under $11K (note this was the last year of the very old Fox body, the SN95 saw a ~$3500 price jump in '94 to $14K and change for a base model). A base V6 Camaro (1st year of the 4th gen) was just under $14K. A Civic LX was just over $12K and the EX was $15.5K. A base Corolla was $11.5K and a top of the line LE started at $15.5K. A mid-level Sentra was $11.5K with the top of the line starting at $14.5K. So, dollar-wise, something like an MX-3 or Nissan NX was priced very closely with the economy cars on which they shared platforms.
Ah ok.
Point still stands, a base HR-V is like 20K with an automatic.
Quote from: CALL_911 on December 23, 2017, 05:19:30 PM
Won't lie I didn't read the rest of your post, but I always considered the TSX a successor to the 4 door Integra
In basically was the Teg Sedan's successor as far as being the entry-level sedan in the lineup. There was a couple of years of gap between it and the last Integra sedan. It was also a fair bit more expensive. Integra sedans were priced between $20K and $23K in '01, depending on trim. I'd say the TSX was equivalent to the GS-R, and started at $26.5K in '04 (topping out at $28.5K for the model with Navi). Even accounting for inflation, that put the Teg GS-R sedan a couple of grand cheaper than the TSX, and the GS sedan was way cheaper (but also much less car).
Quote from: 2o6 on December 23, 2017, 05:27:34 PM
Ah ok.
Point still stands, a base HR-V is like 20K with an automatic.
Yes. Whereas in '93, practically every manufacturer had a either a 2-door version or a coupe derivative of their mainstream sedans, today they all offer a tall wagon/CUV version of their standard car offerings.
Quote from: MX793 on December 23, 2017, 04:42:32 PM
Last I checked, everyone's jumping onto the tall wagon cute-ute train, which certainly do not offer the same kind of driving experience as a lower-slung coupe or even sedan.
And sporty/performance-oriented cars weren't a suddenly new thing that replaced the 2-door sport compacts. You could get the GTI with rear doors dating back to the MkIII ('91). 4-door Integras were available from the get-go ('85, '89 in the US). If having a set of rear doors and the same performance was so desirable, why were there vastly more 2-door Tegs and GTIs sold than their 4-door variants? In fact, Honda would eventually drop the 4-door Teg when the gen 4 (renamed to RSX) came out because it was unpopular.
You make good points. I can't find data, but I'd wager a lot of it has to do with an increasing average age of new car buyers. A 22 year old is going to make different choices than a 32 year old, even if they both want the same thing (a fun to drive car). And we all know younger people don't have the purchasing power they used to. Let's not forget they cancelled that RSX not soon after they launched it, and in the same year made the first sedan version of the Civic Si.....................
Was it the sales that killed the RSX, or the oddity of having a cheap compact car sold by a marque with upmarket aspirations?
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on December 23, 2017, 06:24:29 PM
we all know younger people don't have the purchasing power they used to
Roads today are in worse shape and are significantly more congested than they were 20-30 years ago. Traffic tickets and insurance penalties are outrageously punitative. Driving for fun is more of a commitment than it used to be; it's no surprise to me that many people are leaving cars to find fun in other activities.
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on December 23, 2017, 06:24:29 PM
You make good points. I can't find data, but I'd wager a lot of it has to do with an increasing average age of new car buyers. A 22 year old is going to make different choices than a 32 year old, even if they both want the same thing (a fun to drive car). And we all know younger people don't have the purchasing power they used to. Let's not forget they cancelled that RSX not soon after they launched it, and in the same year made the first sedan version of the Civic Si.....................
And Nissan revived the Sentra SE-R as a 4-door back in '02. After that car fizzled, Nissan's next small and affordable performance car would be a cute 'ute. Of course, Dodge was ahead of their time by phasing out the Neon ACR coupe with the SRT-4 sedan, which was in turn replaced by the Caliber SRT-4 tall wagon (which was a lift kit away from being a bonafide CUV like its Jeep platform-mates). And now Dodge/Chrysler/Jeep doesn't offer any small (or midsize) cars. Just crossovers.
Quote from: Laconian on December 23, 2017, 06:42:46 PM
Was it the sales that killed the RSX, or the oddity of having a cheap compact car sold by a marque with upmarket aspirations?
Probably as much the former as the latter. The RSX was also 5 model years old when they finally canned it, which is roughly a standard generation for Honda.
QuoteRoads today are in worse shape and are significantly more congested than they were 20-30 years ago. Traffic tickets and insurance penalties are outrageously punitative. Driving for fun is more of a commitment than it used to be; it's no surprise to me that many people are leaving cars to find fun in other activities.
Anecdotally, roads in these parts are as bad today as they were 20 years ago. Actually, they may be slightly better today than 20 years ago. Congestion is a localized phenomenon. Some regions have seen greater congestion, particularly those that have been booming, growing. Others have actually seen a reduction in congestion. I'd say we're less congested locally, but the local population has actually been in decline over the past several decades as people move to other parts of the world/country in search of better jobs (or better weather).
Quote from: Laconian on December 23, 2017, 06:42:46 PM
Was it the sales that killed the RSX, or the oddity of having a cheap compact car sold by a marque with upmarket aspirations?
Roads today are in worse shape and are significantly more congested than they were 20-30 years ago. Traffic tickets and insurance penalties are outrageously punitative. Driving for fun is more of a commitment than it used to be; it's no surprise to me that many people are leaving cars to find fun in other activities.
I always assumed that the 06 Civic Si just kind of replaced the RSX. It was as powerful as the Type-S but with an LSD and more body styles.
Quote from: 2o6 on November 04, 2017, 03:43:21 PM
Then, I started thinking of it; when was then last time you've seen a two-door "four place" coupe? They've all been sort of usurped by these new school four door coupes!
I think this point from the very first post hit the nail on the head. In the early '90s and so on, most sedans were upright, boxy things. Most two-doors and three-doors looked very different. Compare an MX-3 to a 323 and a Probe to a Contour. And the coupes of that era that were more like two-door sedans generally either evolved into something more distinct from their four-door counterparts (Accord, Civic, Camry) or eventually died (Neon). Now, so many sedans -- both the ones that call themselves coupes and even plenty of normal ones -- already have the coupe-like silhouette. There's just not that much room left for distinction, especially with the passenger-car segment already ceding ground to crossovers.
MotorTrend posted that Ford might ditch the Fusion soon. Crossovers are killing all 3 box designs.
Quote from: CaminoRacer on December 24, 2017, 08:40:40 AM
MotorTrend posted that Ford might ditch the Fusion soon. Crossovers are killing all 3 box designs.
The rate things are going does not bode well for affordable entry into motorsports like auto-x. Already a number of newer small cars are ineligible by the SCCA because they are considered rollover risks. The non Abarth 500, non ST Fiesta are not permitted to compete unless they've been lowered or had their track widened (which puts them out of stock class). Even the NISMO version of the Juke is ineligible without modification.
Quote from: CaminoRacer on December 24, 2017, 08:40:40 AM
MotorTrend posted that Ford might ditch the Fusion soon. Crossovers are killing all 3 box designs.
I feel about this kind of the same way I felt about manuals disappearing in midsize mainstreamers. Nothing lost. Fusion is an overweight boat anyway. You go a class down, you still have (draws deep breath)
- Civic/Si/Type-R
- Golf/GTI/R
- Focus/ST/RS
- Elantra/Sport/Forte
- Mazda3
- Cruze
- Impreza/WRX/STI
- Corolla/IM
All of which are about the size midsizers were in their prime ~15-20 years ago. I do think they all could use a higher horsepower option if they don't already have one but they are all OK, all available alongside crossovers and all available with a 3rd pedal. If I'm gonna drive a near 2 ton sedan its not gonna be a damn Ford Fusion
Quote from: CALL_911 on December 23, 2017, 05:19:30 PM
Won't lie I didn't read the rest of your post, but I always considered the TSX a successor to the 4 door Integra
Wasn't the TSX the global Honda Accord?
Quote from: 565 on December 26, 2017, 03:46:20 AM
Wasn't the TSX the global Honda Accord?
Yes
Previous versions of the Euro Accord and 4dr Integra sold side by side. US Accord became the fat sister in 1998
Quote from: 12,000 RPM on December 26, 2017, 04:54:40 AM
Yes
Previous versions of the Euro Accord and 4dr Integra sold side by side. US Accord became the fat sister in 1998
The US Accord and Euro Accords have been different since 1993. '97 or '98 was the year that the US Accord became distinct from the Japanese market Accord (which was also distinct from the Euro model, meaning there were 3 different Accords for different markets).
This is correct, how could I forget the BTCC Accord
(https://racecarsdirect.com/content/UserImages/78523/444229.jpg?v=2)
The EU/JP/US Accord were all virtually the same dimensions until the 2003+ cars, where the line was separated into the JP/EU Accord (TSX), and the US Accord (Inspire).
Quote from: 2o6 on December 26, 2017, 05:00:53 PM
The EU/JP/US Accord were all virtually the same dimensions until the 2003+ cars, where the line was separated into the JP/EU Accord (TSX), and the US Accord (Inspire).
Eh, not really. Starting in '93, Honda spun off a unique Accord for the European market. This car was roughly the same length (small fractions of an inch difference in wheelbase and overall length) as the JP/NA Accord, but was 2 inches narrower and an inch lower. It was based on the previous generation Ascot (which was an Accord variant).
For the 6th generation ('97+), Japan got its own version as distinct from the EU and NA versions. The NA version was the largest, at 188.8" long by 70.3" wide by 57" tall (for the sedan). The JDM model was 182" long, 67" wide, and 56" tall (for the sedan). The EU model was 181" long by 69" wide by 55" tall. EU and JDM used the same 105" wheelbase while the longer US car was on a 106.9".
In '03, the JDM and EU Accord model lines merged into a single model (what would eventually be sold in the US as the TSX).
Well, it's not as big of a difference between the TSX and 2008+ car
I'd consider 6" in length and 3" in width pretty significant. Not as big a gap as with the 8th gen cars, but still pretty large.