Love that term “Chelsea Tractor”

Forum here: http://www.mazdas247.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=194

Yup, that SUV/CUV segment can only shrink. It does leave a void..For instance, where can one get a fuel-efficient hatchback with a high roofline that doesn’t look like a minivan? Perhaps something like the Audi Allroad but with a 3rd row, improved fuel economy and, at a much lower price.

Mazda5, anybody? Sales up 43.7% YTD. A group of us have one in our pool of rental cars at the moment and I’ve been favorably impressed.

We’ll see how the big CUV’s are holding up later in the year, after the end of leasing. Frankly, I’m surprised how the smallest, most efficient CUV’s are taking double-digit percentage hits.

I’d like that too, but I don’t think we’ll ever see it. A true wagon wouldn’t count as a “light truck” under CAFE, like a CUV does. If they made one, it would be like the PT Cruiser or HHR, jacked up to make it CAFE-friendly.

I think Detroit may have seen the writing on the wall for the true SUV, but thought it would be a slow transition brought on by changing styles and somewhat higher gas prices. CUV’s would’ve been good for that scenario, and for some people they work. For others, they’ll only consider something that gets 40 mpg, which means a Prius or a bike.

The point about CUV’s city mileage numbers is valid as well. Most CUV’s get city mileage comparable to an SUV so what’s the point?

What would be nice at this point is an actual wagon version of the Malibu, Fusion, Camry, Accord, Sonata, Optima, etc. Hey, lets make a wagon version of the Impala and give it a third row too!

From what I’ve read, their sales are holding up better than the market as a whole, so CUVs have actually increased their market share.

Richard Chen: BTW, the brand new Ford Flex barely edged its outgoing platform-mate Taurus X, 2,204 vs. 2,034.

Considering that the Flexes I’ve seen at the dealer are considerably more expensive than the Taurus X, and I have yet to see an ad for the Flex, I’d say that those figures don’t necessarily reflect poorly on the Flex.

Runfromcheney: If you ask me, these CUVs are just more proof of the big three’s (mostly GM’s) reluctance to give up SUVs. When SUVs started to go out of style in late 2005/early 2006, they just decided that they can spur more sales by simply cramming the SUVs even harder down our throats.

The first CUVs were actually Japanese – the RAV4, the CR-V and the Highlander. The domestic versions were introduced in response to those Japanese entries.

I hardly see CUVs as a domestic invention, or proof of their reluctance to give up SUVs. If anything, the market had been swinging away from SUVs to CUVs long before the recent runup in gas prices, and the domestics responded. Now with gas prices rising faster than anyone – including the Japanese – expected, and the economy in the dumps, their sales are down, too.

Can’t the big three just end all of this SUV shit? Just give up the SUVs and go back to building cars like the old days. And maybe if they actually devote more than just a day of planning their cars, maybe they can figure out how to make a profit on them.

Each brand new CUV has to compete with the heavily discounted SUV and minivan market.

Ouch that’s going ot hurt, especially since the thing is fugly. They are going to get rid of the Acadia for that ugly mug.