Bring on the Battle Van!!!

[Tave]

Uh, no. SUV gives up practicality vs a minivan if you need a third row, but for 4 adults vs a sedan or wagon no way unless we're talking A8/S/7 range.

Badge whoring much? You don't need to spend $100,000.00 to buy a full size car. 

A Camcord/Impala/Taurus/etc...will be infinitely more comfortable for your rear seat passengers, drive and ride better, be more fuel efficient, has plenty of cargo space, and costs far less.

[Tave]

Yeah, give me a big SUV for a four adult road trip vehicle. 4Runner is a much better long distance vehicle than the Genesis was.

Shocking you preferred the vehicle in good working order compared to the one with a damaged and malfunctioning rear end. 

[Lebowski]

Badge whoring much?

Not in the least.  What I was doing was granting your absurd argument every possible benefit.

A Camcord/Impala/Taurus/etc...will be infinitely more comfortable for your rear seat passengers

Aside from fuel efficiency, that's just not true.  SUV/CUVs are comfortable and practical, that's why people buy them. Unless you're comparing them to a minivan (which is sorta the point of this thread), they generally win on practicality.

[Raza]

Shocking you preferred the vehicle in good working order compared to the one with a damaged and malfunctioning rear end. 

[Raza]

Not in the least.



Aside from fuel efficiency, that's just not true.  SUV/CUVs are comfortable and practical, that's why people buy them. Unless you're comparing them to a minivan (which is sorta the point of this thread), they generally win on practicality.

Small CUVs often make you choose between passenger space and cargo space, though. When you get to midsize and large, that's when they start to give you both. But I think larger ones do trade off some "comfort" in the form of road manners, being more susceptible to that high up floaty feeling and being tossed around a bit by high winds. 90% of the time, SUVs are very comfortable, at least the ones I've been in, but I don't think I'd choose one for a long highway trip if a sedan would suit my space needs.

[giant_mtb]

I'd rather sit in the back of a Tahoe for hours as opposed to an Impala.

[Lebowski]

Small CUVs often make you choose between passenger space and cargo space, though. When you get to midsize and large, that's when they start to give you both. But I think larger ones do trade off some "comfort" in the form of road manners, being more susceptible to that high up floaty feeling and being tossed around a bit by high winds. 90% of the time, SUVs are very comfortable, at least the ones I've been in, but I don't think I'd choose one for a long highway trip if a sedan would suit my space needs.

Like most other classes, small CUVs have gotten larger of late. CRV has plenty of back seat space for two ~6' adults, and decent cargo space.

CRV, Highlander, Pilot, 4Runner, Tahoe etc I'd take about any of them for a highway cruiser w/ 4 adults + luggage over a comparable sedan unless gas mileage was the primary concern.

[MrH]

Shocking you preferred the vehicle in good working order compared to the one with a damaged and malfunctioning rear end. 

Lol, fair point.

Ultimately, the issues with the rear end were fixed and it still sucked. I was talking more just about rear seat space and ride quality though.

[Tave]

Not in the least.  What I was doing was granting your absurd argument every possible benefit.



Aside from fuel efficiency, that's just not true.  SUV/CUVs are comfortable and practical, that's why people buy them. Unless you're comparing them to a minivan (which is sorta the point of this thread), they generally win on practicality.

People buy SUVs because they make them feel safer and more visible on the road, because they think they need AWD/4WD, because they think they look tough, etc...

Anyone who buys one thinking they're getting a vehicle with great rear legroom is delusional. While not quite the penalty boxes of yore, they have only recently progressed to merely adequate, and they can't touch a full size sedan. Case in point, the new 4 runner has 6 inches less on the second row than the Camry.

Hell, I just got done taking a road trip in your generation 4Runner and it had less useable legroom than my late Jetta!

Are you really arguing that a full size SUV is both cheaper and rides/handles better on the highway than the equivalent sedan???

[Tave]

I'd rather sit in the back of a Tahoe for hours as opposed to an Impala.

How tall are you?

[Tave]

Lol, fair point.

Ultimately, the issues with the rear end were fixed and it still sucked. I was talking more just about rear seat space and ride quality though.

Having ridden in the back of both your gen Toyota as well as the Genesis, I don't have any clue how you've reached that conclusion. The 4Runner is one of my favorite vehicles, not just on sale now, but ever; spacious it is not.

[giant_mtb]

How tall are you?

5'10"

Have you ever been in the back seat of an Impala?  They're not as spacious as I think you're imagining. lol





Put me down for the captain's chair with arm rests and reclining. 

[Tave]

5'10"

Exactly

Have you ever been in the back seat of an Impala?  They're not as spacious as I think you're imagining. lol

Yes, both new an old, I don't have to imagine anything. 

It wouldn't be my first choice in the segment either—I was just listing full size main streamers off the cuff.   

As someone who is 6'4" and painfully cognizant of available legroom, I can assure you—unreservedly, unabashedly, and unequivocally—SUVs generally aren't all that when it comes to rear seat legroom. I wish that wasn't the case, as it would make my life a lot more pleasant if it was, but thems the breaks. 

[giant_mtb]

I don't see how you being taller than me makes it impossible for me to realize when one vehicle is more spacious than another. That's like saying I don't know how high a 10' basketball hoop is because I'm not as tall as you. 

But still, my point stands...

Put me down for the captain's chair with arm rests and reclining. 

As somebody that tall, I'd expect you to prefer an SUV...more headroom, more shoulder room. I'm confused. Do you sell sedans for a living?

[MrH]

Having ridden in the back of both your gen Toyota as well as the Genesis, I don't have any clue how you've reached that conclusion. The 4Runner is one of my favorite vehicles, not just on sale now, but ever; spacious it is not.

Seating height is higher and reclining seat back. There's more legroom in the Genesis, but I usually find the back seats of sedans to be too low.

[Tave]

I don't see how you being taller than me makes it impossible for me to realize when one vehicle is more spacious than another. That's like saying I don't know how high a 10' basketball hoop is because I'm not as tall as you. 

But still, my point stands...

As somebody that tall, I'd expect you to prefer an SUV...more headroom, more shoulder room. I'm confused. Do you sell sedans for a living?

I doubt you spend all your seat time in the second row imagining and empathizing what it must be like to be half a foot taller. No one does that, me included. If some guy who's 7'0" comes up to me and starts talking about which kind of vehicles are uncomfortable for seven-footers, I'm not going to sit there and argue, "Hey man I can dunk a basketball too! What makes you such an expert on legroom?"

[AutobahnSHO]

People buy SUVs because they make them feel safer and more visible on the road, because they think they need AWD/4WD, because they think they look tough, etc...

The #1 reason people buy SUVs though is that they aren't minivans.

[Lebowski]

People buy SUVs because they make them feel safer and more visible on the road, because they think they need AWD/4WD, because they think they look tough, etc...

Top selling SUV/CUVs (2016) are CRV, RAV4, Rogue, Escape, Equinox. You think people buy a CRV or a RAV4 because they "look tough"?  Come on, they're colloquially referred to as cute utes.

I think you can argue there's an image component of people not buying minivans, I think that assumption falls flat in comparing CUVs to sedans. The "looks tough" thing was/is a big contributing factor to popularity of say the H2, fortunately that fad has long passed, or full sized trucks etc.

Anyone who buys one thinking they're getting a vehicle with great rear legroom is delusional. While not quite the penalty boxes of yore, they have only recently progressed to merely adequate, and they can't touch a full size sedan. Case in point, the new 4 runner has 6 inches less on the second row than the Camry.

Seating position is very different, measurement specs don't always tell the whole story wrt comfort. A CRV, 4Runner, or second row of any of those SUVs mentioned in my last post (highlander, pilot etc) is perfectly comfortable for a ~6 footer. 

Are you really arguing that a full size SUV is both cheaper and rides/handles better on the highway than the equivalent sedan???

This is now the second time you've changed the parameters of your argument, which was:

pretty much every SUV is impractical and uncomfortable for that kind of action compared to a full size sedan, station wagon, or minivan.

My argument is with the exception of minivans the above statement is largely wrong.  You've since added fuel economy and now "cheaper".  If the criteria is purely efficiency, sure the sedan will usually win. The criteria was practicality and comfort, and on that the SUV generally beats the sedan. Even adding in value, a CRV, Highlander, Pilot etc offer pretty good value IMO.  The Tahoe was the one SUV example I threw out there where the value is questionable IMO.

[FoMoJo]

Now I'm going to have to sit in the back seat of my SUV/CUV to see how comfortable/uncomfortable it is.  The front/driver's seat is great, imo.  Lots of headroom, easy to get in and out of.  Very comfortable on a 4 hour drive as well.  Stupid cars make it too awkward to get into and out of; usually because of the low door top opening clearance.

[AutobahnSHO]

What I can't understand is why don't SUVs offer so much more room than sedans. Are the CUVs shorter in length than sedans? They're so much taller!

[Tave]

Top selling SUV/CUVs (2016) are CRV, RAV4, Rogue, Escape, Equinox. You think people buy a CRV or a RAV4 because they "look tough"?  Come on, they're colloquially referred to as cute utes.

I think you can argue there's an image component of people not buying minivans, I think that assumption falls flat in comparing CUVs to sedans. The "looks tough" thing was/is a big contributing factor to popularity of say the H2, fortunately that fad has long passed, or full sized trucks etc.

They look more tough and capable than the civics and corollas they're based off. The toughness thing was just one factor though, I think the vast majority of SUV buyers want the raised seating position and perceived safety benefits.

Seating position is very different, measurement specs don't always tell the whole story wrt comfort. A CRV, 4Runner, or second row of any of those SUVs mentioned in my last post (highlander, pilot etc) is perfectly comfortable for a ~6 footer. 

Yes, ergos matter a ton. In the case of SUVs, their ergos tend to be very upright, which exacerbates any legroom issues and cuts down on headroom. Sedans tend to have low sling seats that are canted back, which adds useful inches to the stated measurements. Obviously there are exceptions, but by and large you're getting more legroom out of a full size sedan.

This is now the second time you've changed the parameters of your argument, which was:

My original argument was that sedans are more comfortable AND practical for highway roadtrips. I would assume things like price, efficiency, and useful handling characteristics factor into practicality. I would also assume, since you said "Everything except the fuel efficiency argument is factually wrong," that you were addressing the non-dimension points I made regarding price and handling. I don't think I'm the one moving the goalposts here.

My argument is with the exception of minivans the above statement is largely wrong.  You've since added fuel economy and now "cheaper".  If the criteria is purely efficiency, sure the sedan will usually win. The criteria was practicality and comfort, and on that the SUV generally beats the sedan. Even adding in value, a CRV, Highlander, Pilot etc offer pretty good value IMO.  The Tahoe was the one SUV example I threw out there where the value is questionable IMO.

When something costs more, gets worse mileage, handles worse, has less passenger space, and only wins on ground clearance and slightly more cargo space, it's not the more practical choice unless you are absolutely stuffing it full to the gills all the time or taking it off-road. Using colossal, cramped, brick like SUVs to drive down a flat highway is not something that arises out of practical concerns. It's the definition of overkill.

[Lebowski]

They look more tough and capable than the civics and corollas they're based off. The toughness thing was just one factor though, I think the vast majority of SUV buyers want the raised seating position and perceived safety benefits.

Yes, ergos matter a ton. In the case of SUVs, their ergos tend to be very upright, which exacerbates any legroom issues and cuts down on headroom. Sedans tend to have low sling seats that are canted back, which adds useful inches to the stated measurements. Obviously there are exceptions, but by and large you're getting more legroom out of a full size sedan.


My original argument was that sedans are more comfortable AND practical for highway roadtrips. I would assume things like price, efficiency, and useful handling characteristics factor into practicality. I would also assume, since you said "Everything except the fuel efficiency argument is factually wrong," that you were addressing the non-dimension points I made regarding price and handling. I don't think I'm the one moving the goalposts here.

When something costs more, gets worse mileage, handles worse, has less passenger space, and only wins on ground clearance and slightly more cargo space, it's not the more practical choice unless you are absolutely stuffing it full to the gills all the time or taking it off-road. Using colossal, cramped, brick like SUVs to drive down a flat highway is not something that arises out of practical concerns. It's the definition of overkill.

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.

Based 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 ..."

[veeman]

It's very SUV specific (ride comfort) and handling is kind of moot when we're talking about US spec wide highways, relatively straight roads, and speeds around 70-75 mph.

The CRV and Camry are both going to be comfortable but neither as good as the Lexus RX which isn't going to be as good as the Lexus LS.

[Morris Minor]

I think this would sell to small businesses that need something reasonable as a daily driver & has a slight cool factor, but can also move light-but-bulky stuff: florists etc. I still see a few Honda Elements around in that kind of role.

[ifcar]

What I can't understand is why don't SUVs offer so much more room than sedans. Are the CUVs shorter in length than sedans? They're so much taller!

Part of it is that the small SUVs are generally compared to midsize sedans because they're priced more similarly, and then the larger SUVs have to juggle legroom around to fit a third row.

But just like sedans, there are super-spacious crossovers and SUVs and some that are not. It varies by model.

[AutobahnSHO]

I was horribly unimpressed with SUVs when I went to Carmax in 2015 shopping for a 3 row vehicle. The Flex, CX-7, Explorer, etc... just didn't have the interior room minivans have. This little vehicle seems to overcome those space issues because it's not seeking to look like it has ground clearance like SUVs shoot for.

Wife was totally reluctant to get a minivan but if I'm home and she wants to head to the store, she chooses Odyssey. She liked it on our cross-country trip, we hauled 4 people, luggage, and all of her boxes of stuff that were stored at her parents with no issues and quite comfortably.

[CaminoRacer]

I've honestly enjoyed every minivan I've driven. Zero pretense suburban utility is a respectable goal.

[CALL_911]

Your Odyssey is also pretty fun to drive for a van. I've driven one a good amount and liked it a lot

[Soup DeVille]

Your Odyssey is also pretty fun to drive for a van. I've driven one a good amount and liked it a lot

Definitely the best driving minivan I've driven.

[AutobahnSHO]

I think for road feel it's not that far behind my NA. Sure it's big and doesn't accelerate as fast as newer ones, but honestly it's not terrible for a huge car.