Bring on the Battle Van!!!

Started by MrH, October 24, 2017, 12:06:11 PM

Rupert

Oh I forgot the 4WD Astro vans earlier. I almost bought one of those over the Explorer, but thought it was just too big.
Novarolla-Miata-Trooper-Jeep-Volvo-Trooper-Ranger-MGB-Explorer-944-Fiat-Alfa-XTerra

13 cars, 60 cylinders, 52 manual forward gears and 9 automatic, 2 FWD, 42 doors, 1988 average year of manufacture, 3 convertibles, 22 average mpg, and no wheel covers.
PRO TENACIA NULLA VIA EST INVIA

Tave

Quote from: Lebowski on October 26, 2017, 03:11:01 PM

I think when most people think "practical", handling, fuel economy, value are separate criteria imo. Handling isn't very important to me on the highway at constant speed.

Obviously an SUV is more "practical" if you're talking about tossing $400 worth of groceries in the rear hatch, or bags of multch, etc... I've already acknowledged that SUVs are better than fullsize sedans for cargo. Over and over.

My general comments on "practicality" are entirely within the realm of ordinary usage. Which is a more practical car for mostly city driving, a Focus or an H1 Hummer? Which is more practical for highway cruising, a Passat TDI or a Jeep Wrangler?

You have to drive 3 miles by yourself to the pharmacy to pick up some cold medication--Chevy Volt or Nissan Leaf vs. fully loaded Yukon Denali XL--which is more practical?

QuoteBased on what you said, practicality and comfort, you are wrong and if you weren't wrong SUV/CUVs wouldn't be nearly as popular as they are.  Plus if you weren't wrong you wouldn't keep adding/modifying criteria, "oh I really meant fuel economy and value and handling, and by comfort I meant assuming all four passengers are 6'5" or taller ..."

That is a strange correlation to make. The original Beetle is the #1 selling car of all time, is that because it was the most comfortable highway cruiser for 4 on the market?

You are wrong, and if you weren't wrong, you would have had a better response to the actual data than "B-b-b-but maybe that foot of extra legroom in the fullsize sedan doesn't really feel like an extra foot!"

Throughout North America and Western Europe, adult males taller than 6' are extremely common. And you don't need 4 of them in a car for the tall one to be uncomfortable.
As I write, highly civilized human beings are flying overhead, trying to kill me.

Quote from: thecarnut on March 16, 2008, 10:33:43 AM
Depending on price, that could be a good deal.

Lebowski

Quote from: Tave on November 04, 2017, 06:13:56 AM

Obviously an SUV is more "practical" if you're talking about tossing $400 worth of groceries in the rear hatch, or bags of multch, etc... I've already acknowledged that SUVs are better than fullsize sedans for cargo. Over and over.

My general comments on "practicality" are entirely within the realm of ordinary usage. Which is a more practical car for mostly city driving, a Focus or an H1 Hummer? Which is more practical for highway cruising, a Passat TDI or a Jeep Wrangler?

You have to drive 3 miles by yourself to the pharmacy to pick up some cold medication--Chevy Volt or Nissan Leaf vs. fully loaded Yukon Denali XL--which is more practical?

That is a strange correlation to make. The original Beetle is the #1 selling car of all time, is that because it was the most comfortable highway cruiser for 4 on the market?

You are wrong, and if you weren't wrong, you would have had a better response to the actual data than "B-b-b-but maybe that foot of extra legroom in the fullsize sedan doesn't really feel like an extra foot!"

Throughout North America and Western Europe, adult males taller than 6' are extremely common. And you don't need 4 of them in a car for the tall one to be uncomfortable.



That you have to use an h1 and wranglers as examples is further evidence of the desperation of your position.  And then you continue to make the efficiency argument passed off as practicality.  Lol how many people in the history of the world have cross shopped a focus vs a H1, a Passat vs a wrangler, or a leaf vs a Yukon Denali XL?  You're stretching because you can't otherwise make a case.

Mainstream suv/cuvs are more practical than sedans. Carrying groceries, luggage etc are absolutely part of everyday usable practicality, though rear seat comfort is usually better too. 

AutobahnSHO

Wagons are more practical than similar-sized sedans. Legroom in a Taurus Wagon and Taurus Sedan was the same.

SUVs are just extensions of wagons. Unfortunately with some extra ground clearance which can steal from interior space. Except SUVs are taller than wagons, so that offset many times balances out. 
Will

2o6

Most CUV's are just SUV styled minivans

Tave

#65
Quote from: Lebowski on November 04, 2017, 07:36:47 AM

That you have to use an h1 and wranglers as examples is further evidence of the desperation of your position.  And then you continue to make the efficiency argument passed off as practicality.  Lol how many people in the history of the world have cross shopped a focus vs a H1, a Passat vs a wrangler, or a leaf vs a Yukon Denali XL?  You're stretching because you can't otherwise make a case.

Dude. I never said ANYONE is cross shopping those pairs, I asked which one was more practical, because you had such a hang up about the definition of that word. Incidentally, plenty of people (aside from the Hummer) DD Wranglers and Denalis.

I've already made my case on the numbers and you continually refuse to acknowledge it. Model-to-model, mainstream fullsizers are averaging 6-8" more rear seat legroom than their SUV counterparts. That is extremely significant given your hypothetical of 4 adults on a highway road trip. Assuming you don't have oversized luggage requirements, that's 3-4" extra per passenger, better ride and handling, better fuel efficiency, cheaper, et al.

QuoteMainstream suv/cuvs are more practical than sedans. Carrying groceries, luggage etc are absolutely part of everyday usable practicality, though rear seat comfort is usually better too.

But we weren't talking about groceries, strollers, Home Depot runs, or anything like that. The hypothetical, which you posited, FWIW, was 4 adults on a highway cruise. Firmly within the wheelhouse of a full-size sedan. That's its bread and butter.

I'm wondering how much of this pushback is you DD'ing a 4Runner. Look, I'm not saying anyone is "bad" or "wasteful" for driving a SUV. I love SUVs. My first car was a 4Runner, and I'd love to own another one in the future. I've had 100+ hrs seat time in almost every generation. They might be my favorite car, ever. I'm sure you've gotten plenty of utility out of yours and it's been a great car for you.

I just find it ludicrous that anyone would try to argue it's a "practical" highway vehicle. The new models are fine for that but they are still expensive, top-heavy, relatively cramped, relatively middling-powered, floating bricks.
As I write, highly civilized human beings are flying overhead, trying to kill me.

Quote from: thecarnut on March 16, 2008, 10:33:43 AM
Depending on price, that could be a good deal.

Lebowski

Quote from: Tave on November 04, 2017, 09:47:01 AM

Dude. I never said ANYONE is cross shopping those pairs,




Why were you directly comparing them?

Of course we know why - because you don't have an argument without pretending the H1 or Wrangler are the norm for SUV practicality.

Tave

Quote from: Lebowski on November 04, 2017, 09:50:59 AM

Why were you directly comparing them?

Because you engineered a bizarro-world definition of "practicality" and continually scoffed at the notion it should include any factors other than cargo volume and load floors.
As I write, highly civilized human beings are flying overhead, trying to kill me.

Quote from: thecarnut on March 16, 2008, 10:33:43 AM
Depending on price, that could be a good deal.

2o6

IDK SUV's also usually sit more upright, with H-points more akin to sitting at a desk versus sitting in a car.



But I don't know if the 4runner is the best example of that, though. The 4-runner has a high floor and low seats.

CaminoRacer

Yeah, 4-Runners and Tacomas have weird seating positions compared to most
2020 BMW 330i, 1969 El Camino, 2017 Bolt EV

Tave

#70
 :winkguy:
Quote from: 2o6 on November 04, 2017, 11:14:18 AM
IDK SUV's also usually sit more upright, with H-points more akin to sitting at a desk versus sitting in a car.



But I don't know if the 4runner is the best example of that, though. The 4-runner has a high floor and low seats.

High H-points tend to eat into available leg and knee room, all else being equal. That's part of the reason why SUVs tend to perform worse by the numbers. You're going to get the most legroom placing the seats as low and as canted backwards as you can, allowing for trunk space and passenger comfort. Ever buy yourself an extra inch in the driver's seat by raising the front of the seat cushion? Same ergo concept.

Where high H-points really shine is ease of ingress/egress, and lots of driver prefer the higher seating position. I wouldn't consider the latter a comfort issue, really, unless you're talking about motion sickness or someone who is physically hardshipped by getting in and out. Which are real issues, the second especially so for older drivers.
As I write, highly civilized human beings are flying overhead, trying to kill me.

Quote from: thecarnut on March 16, 2008, 10:33:43 AM
Depending on price, that could be a good deal.

2o6

Quote from: CaminoRacer on November 04, 2017, 11:36:00 AM
Yeah, 4-Runners and Tacomas have weird seating positions compared to most


I don't think it's weird; I think it's just truck-like. I'm pretty sure the BOF design makes the H-points the way that they are. It reminds me of riding in an old S-10 Blazer.

2o6

Quote from: Tave on November 04, 2017, 11:39:25 AM
High H-points tend to eat into available leg and knee room, all else being equal. That's part of the reason why SUVs tend to perform worse by the numbers. You're going to get the most space placing the seats as low and as canted backwards as you can, allowing for trunk space and passenger comfort. Ever buy yourself an extra inch in the driver's seat by raising the front of the seat cushion? Same ergo concept.

Where high H-points really shine is ease of ingress/egress, and some (lots?) prefer the higher seating position. I wouldn't consider the latter a comfort issue, really, unless you're talking about motion sickness or someone who is physically hardshipped by getting in and out. Which are real issues.


No, they don't. High H-points and more upright seating positions mean for more legroom, not less. The high H-point trend of 2000+ is part of the reason why small cars aren't such penalty boxes to be inside anymore. If the seat is low to the floor, a lot of times that requires more of a "knees in the air" feeling. You can get more space in a shorter wheelbase or seating area with bolt-upright seats with deep footwells, than with a low reclined seat and shallow footwells.

Honestly, I don't see what your point is, here. I don't think the 4-runner is a great freeway cruiser because of it's seating position and suspension design, but I would definitely take a small SUV over small sedan every time. Not everything is equal.

Tave

#73
Quote from: 2o6 on November 04, 2017, 11:44:59 AM

No, they don't. High H-points and more upright seating positions mean for more legroom, not less. The high H-point trend of 2000+ is part of the reason why small cars aren't such penalty boxes to be inside anymore. If the seat is low to the floor, a lot of times that requires more of a "knees in the air" feeling. You can get more space in a shorter wheelbase or seating area with bolt-upright seats with deep footwells, than with a low reclined seat and shallow footwells.

Honestly, I don't see what your point is, here. I don't think the 4-runner is a great freeway cruiser because of it's seating position and suspension design, but I would definitely take a small SUV over small sedan every time. Not everything is equal.

I didn't say anything about a small sedan. My original comment that started all this was that full size sedans are more comfortable and practical highway cruisers than SUVs. I'm downright befuddled why that would be a controversial opinion on a car forum.

SUV's have always had high H-points. It is necessitated by the taller ride height and need for a useable cargo space. The trend circa-2000 onwards was that the vehicles themselves switched to unibody and continued to grow ever larger, allowing for taller rear seats and the deeper footwells you mentioned. It helps—like I said, SUV rears aren't the complete penalty boxes they used to be—but that doesn't make high H-Points optimal from an ergonomic comfort perspective.

For a three hour drive, I'd rather sit on a couch than a stool. And I'd rather my knees be floating in the air than jammed into the seat back in front of me.
As I write, highly civilized human beings are flying overhead, trying to kill me.

Quote from: thecarnut on March 16, 2008, 10:33:43 AM
Depending on price, that could be a good deal.

2o6

Quote from: Tave on November 04, 2017, 12:03:46 PM
I didn't say anything about a small sedan. My original comment that started all this was that full size sedans are more comfortable and practical highway cruisers than SUVs. I'm downright befuddled why that would be a controversial opinion on a car forum.

But they aren't always. I'd rather have the weight and higher H-point of an SUV versus the lower one of a car. Granted, the way things are now, the difference between cars and SUV's is more related to ride height rather than H-point, but I digress.

SUV's have always had high H-points.

No, they haven't. Related to the ground? Yes, the driver may physically sit higher, but the H point was more similar to a car rather than desk.

Older cars and SUV's were more like this:



rather than the new trend of this (granted this is a Polaris ATV, but my point still stands)




It is necessitated by the taller ride height and need for a useable cargo space. The trend circa-2000 onwards was that the vehicles themselves switched to unibody and continued to grow ever larger, allowing for taller rear seats and the deeper footwells you mentioned. It helps—like I said, SUV rears aren't the complete penalty boxes they used to be—but that doesn't make high H-Points optimal from an ergonomic comfort perspective.

Says you. The trend towards more upright seating is both for comfort, and ergonomics.

For a three hour drive, I'd rather sit on a couch than a stool. And I'd rather my knees be floating in the air than jammed into the seat back in front of me.

What?

giant_mtb


Rupert

Quote from: 2o6 on November 04, 2017, 11:40:16 AM

I don't think it's weird; I think it's just truck-like. I'm pretty sure the BOF design makes the H-points the way that they are. It reminds me of riding in an old S-10 Blazer.



Toyotas have always had lower seats in their trucks and SUVs compared to other brands, both American and Japanese. It was that way in 1987, it was that way in 2014 (I think the newest Toyota truck I've been in).
Novarolla-Miata-Trooper-Jeep-Volvo-Trooper-Ranger-MGB-Explorer-944-Fiat-Alfa-XTerra

13 cars, 60 cylinders, 52 manual forward gears and 9 automatic, 2 FWD, 42 doors, 1988 average year of manufacture, 3 convertibles, 22 average mpg, and no wheel covers.
PRO TENACIA NULLA VIA EST INVIA

Rupert

Quote from: 2o6 on November 04, 2017, 12:22:55 PM


Trucks and SUVs have always had high seats (except Toyota, see above). I guess cars are getting higher? but there isn't much difference as far as I can tell between a 1977 Chevy truck and a 2017 Chevy truck in that regard.
Novarolla-Miata-Trooper-Jeep-Volvo-Trooper-Ranger-MGB-Explorer-944-Fiat-Alfa-XTerra

13 cars, 60 cylinders, 52 manual forward gears and 9 automatic, 2 FWD, 42 doors, 1988 average year of manufacture, 3 convertibles, 22 average mpg, and no wheel covers.
PRO TENACIA NULLA VIA EST INVIA

Rupert

As someone who's put tens of thousands of highway miles on trucks and SUVs, with 15 kmiles on my own in the last year, I can say that for highway driving, sedans are absolutely better and more practical. I'm skeptical that one or the other body style has more leg room on average, but I can say for sure that some SUVs don't have the leg room, either in the front or back, that you expect, and the same can be said for sedans.

CUVs, I don't know, haven't spent much time in them.
Novarolla-Miata-Trooper-Jeep-Volvo-Trooper-Ranger-MGB-Explorer-944-Fiat-Alfa-XTerra

13 cars, 60 cylinders, 52 manual forward gears and 9 automatic, 2 FWD, 42 doors, 1988 average year of manufacture, 3 convertibles, 22 average mpg, and no wheel covers.
PRO TENACIA NULLA VIA EST INVIA

Soup DeVille

If all I was doing was driving myself around, over long distances, with maybe one passenger and some luggage; I choose a sedan (or coupe) all day every day over something more trucky.

Sitting in the back, the nod might go to a SUV of some manner.
Maybe we need to start off small. I mean, they don't let you fuck the glumpers at Glumpees without a level 4 FuckPass, do they?

1975 Honda CB750, 1986 Rebel Rascal (sailing dinghy), 2015 Mini Cooper, 2020 Winnebago 31H (E450), 2021 Toyota 4Runner, 2022 Lincoln Aviator

MrH

H point on the 4Runner is low for what it is, which is awesome. I like my legs out in front of me more for driving. Anytime I drive the Tucson, I feel like I'm sitting on a bar stool.

The rear seats have a much higher H point though than the driver.
2023 Ford Lightning Lariat ER
2019 Acura RDX SH-AWD
2023 BRZ Limited

Previous: '02 Mazda Protege5, '08 Mazda Miata, '05 Toyota Tacoma, '09 Honda Element, '13 Subaru BRZ, '14 Hyundai Genesis R-Spec 5.0, '15 Toyota 4Runner SR5, '18 Honda Accord EX-L 2.0t, '01 Honda S2000, '20 Subaru Outback XT, '23 Chevy Bolt EUV

veeman

It's hard to separate seating comfort from the quality of the ride and noise insulation real world.  Seating comfort also has a lot to do with the length of the bottom seat cushion and quality of the padding and materials; not just H point angles.

All that being what it is, is a last generation Ford Crown Vic/Mercury Grand Marquis or current Ford Taurus really more comfortable in the backseat for a long trip than a current Ford Explorer? I really doubt it.

What would be better in the backseat for a long trip?  A Lexis ES or Lexus RX?  I dunno. 

I seriously doubt there is an SUV on the market today for under 100 thousand dollars that has a better backseat ride than any of the German flagship sedans, Lexus LS, Jaguar XJ, or current Lincoln Continental.

AutobahnSHO

Quote from: giant_mtb on November 04, 2017, 01:16:50 PM
Settle down.

:lol:

But seriously, over the years I've driven a few cars. I've owned 4 minivans. The 2003 Odyssey is far superior for road feel than the 2004 Sienna I owned. I've put at least 40k miles on each.

As much as I loved my Legacy, it was sloppy. Wife's Impreza is better but kinda floaty.
Will

giant_mtb

I don't think I've detailed/driven an Odyssey, which now that I think about it, is a little surprising. 

93JC

Quote from: MrH on November 05, 2017, 11:56:48 AM
H point on the 4Runner is low for what it is, which is awesome. I like my legs out in front of me more for driving. Anytime I drive the Tucson, I feel like I'm sitting on a bar stool.

Amen.

12,000 RPM

Not for me but the market is so starved for original ideas and cars with character that I will allow it.
Protecctor of the Atmospheric Engine #TheyLiedToUs