After the lame updates of the Chicago auto show, I think I can legitimately say I like this design.


Sadly, not headed to the USA.

Unless Europe measures cargo capacity differently than we do, it's barely better than a hatchback. The Jetta and Elantra Touring have 12+ cubic feet more; the sloped rear windshield can't be doing it any favors. Why GM would want a five-door hatchback alongside a wagon that looks like a five-door hatchback and has little more space is beyond me.

Quote from: ifcar on February 09, 2012, 12:57:48 PM
Unless Europe measures cargo capacity differently than we do, it's barely better than a hatchback. The Jetta and Elantra Touring have 12+ cubic feet more; the sloped rear windshield can't be doing it any favors. Why GM would want a five-door hatchback alongside a wagon that looks like a five-door hatchback and has little more space is beyond me.

It's still bigger than the hatchback.



A boxy rear end on the Cruze would look pretty bad, IMO.

Quote from: 2o6 on February 09, 2012, 12:59:27 PM
It's still bigger than the hatchback.

But smaller than plenty of hatchbacks on the market, including the Impreza, SX4, Fit, Soul, and probably any number of Euro-only models. I like wagons (duh) but the point of a wagon is you accept a bigger car to have more space. I won't complain about GM keeping this one elsewhere.

Quote

A boxy rear end on the Cruze would look pretty bad, IMO.

If you want curves over space, GM already has a model in the Cruze line.

SX4, Fit and Soul are of a different class, (Tall B-segment) and will likely not be considered in context with this model. You'd have to consider it with other C-segment wagons; Golf Variant, Astra Caravan, Skoda Superb Combi, Hyundai i30 SW, Kia Cee'd SW, ect. Yeah, it does look a bit compromised, but it's cheap and a wagon, which is GM's end goal.

Quote from: ifcar on February 09, 2012, 12:57:48 PM
Unless Europe measures cargo capacity differently than we do

They do...

I'm pretty sure EPA volume for a hatchback is calculated all the way to the headliner, whereas the European volume(s) is calculated to the bottom of the rear window.

E.g. the Golf's EPA volume (with seats up) is about 425 L, whereas the European volume is 350 L.

Needless to say the Cruze wagon has substantially more cargo room than the sedan (and the hatchback). 450 L vs. ~1500 L with the seats down and measured to the headliner.

Quote from: 93JC on February 09, 2012, 01:50:11 PM
They do...

I'm pretty sure EPA volume for a hatchback is calculated all the way to the headliner, whereas the European volume(s) is calculated to the bottom of the rear window.

E.g. the Golf's EPA volume (with seats up) is about 425 L, whereas the European volume is 350 L.

The GM press release uses measurements up to the windowline behind the rear seat, but for the maximum volume measurement they go up to the ceiling. The question would be whether they measure nooks and crannies differently in Europe, which I'm sure adds up.

Quote from: 93JC on February 09, 2012, 01:50:11 PM

I'm pretty sure EPA volume for a hatchback is calculated all the way to the headliner, whereas the European volume(s) is calculated to the bottom of the rear window.

Correct

How big do you think the Cruze hatchback is, Koko?

Cargo capacity (L; seats up/down)

Hyundai i30 Estate - 415/1395 (noted 'SAE')
VW Golf hatch - 350/1305 ("method using 200x100x50 mm blocks")
VW Golf Wagon - 505/1495
Chevrolet Cruze sedan - 450/-
Chevrolet Cruze hatchback - 413/883
Chevrolet Cruze wagon - 500 ("up to the window line in the rear")/~1500 ("up to the roof top with the rear seats folded down")

sources:
http://www.hyundai.co.uk
http://www.volkswagen.co.uk
http://www.chevrolet.co.uk
GM press release re. Cruze wagon


So I don't know where your concerns about cargo capacity come from. Much ado about nothing, IMO.

Quote from: ifcar on February 09, 2012, 01:54:17 PM
The GM press release uses measurements up to the windowline behind the rear seat, but for the maximum volume measurement they go up to the ceiling. The question would be whether they measure nooks and crannies differently in Europe, which I'm sure adds up.

The Cruze wagon has 500L when loaded up to the window line, and 1500L when loaded to the roof, with the seats folded.

93JC beat me by a minute.

So the methodology is different -- the Jetta wagon in the U.S. is rated at 67 cubic feet instead of 53 by the European method. That's good. Now I can go back to hoping GM brings it to the U.S.

Looks pretty nice. Doubt it would sell here.

Quote from: 2o6 on February 09, 2012, 12:54:00 PM
Sadly, not headed to the USA.

Don't despair. You're going to get the Cruze SUV. 

Wagons are for pussies. Real men drive SUVs, even if they don't need them!

GM should bring it here and call it the Vista Cruze.

Looks like the new VW wagon that I LIKE.
Still looks small for a wagon though. Almost Outback 2007ish small.

Quote from: AutobahnSHO on February 10, 2012, 07:36:31 AM
Looks like the new VW wagon that I LIKE.
Still looks small for a wagon though. Almost Outback 2007ish small.

Well, it is a compact.

Americans don't buy wagons, I don't get the rally call for them. Nobody would buy these, they would lose $$$ on the few that sold.

Quote from: Rockraven on February 10, 2012, 06:18:28 AM
GM should bring it here and call it the Vista Cruze.

And resurrect Oldsmobile while they're at it!

i really like. i do think GM would sell plenty of this wagons. it should be a chevy only and not be shared with the likes of buick, cadillac here in NA.

It's quite comely. Shame on them for not offering it here.

Quote from: sportyaccordy on February 10, 2012, 09:14:27 AM
Americans don't buy wagons, I don't get the rally call for them. Nobody would buy these, they would lose $$$ on the few that sold.

Wagons are inherently, logically awesome. The arguments against are all based on their aesthetics. Spock would rock a wagon.

Quote from: Laconian on February 10, 2012, 02:47:24 PM
Wagons are inherently, logically awesome. The arguments against are all based on their aesthetics. Spock would rock a wagon.

My argument in favor of wagons is based on their aesthetics.

I like the look of them too. TSX wagon >> TSX sedan.

Not everyone wagon is created equal. I only endorse the good looking ones. Europe can keep all the boring or ugly looking ones.

Quote from: Laconian on February 10, 2012, 02:47:24 PM
Wagons are inherently, logically awesome. The arguments against are all based on their aesthetics. Spock would rock a wagon.

I think they are great too. I like to say I would buy one too. But IDK that I would actually push that button.

Once you go wagon, you never... uhh.. something that rhymes with wagon and means "go back"

(I'm coming down with a fever and my brain isn't at 100% today, OK?)

Once you go wagon you never go shaggin'?

You don't even know what shaggin' means, do you?

If he does, it was a pretty good ifcar funny.

...but totally untrue! Stop the stereotypes! Save the wagons!