By William C Montgomery
January 4, 2007 -
Frisco is a bedroom community just north of Dallas. The Texas town is home to the Frisco Roughriders Double-A baseball team and an IKEA. If there isn’t an IKEA near you, wait ten minutes and check again. Meanwhile, in case you haven’t heard of this Swedish furnishings company, their massive stores combine excellent prices with trendy and efficient design. Need to furnish a 295 square foot living space on the cheap? IKEA is your answer. Need to survey the vehicular habits of the aspiring middle class? Their parking lot awaits.
As you might imagine, IKEA’s parking lot is filled with practical Japanese and stylish European transports. Yes, a few insensitive souls have the audacity to pick up their newly acquired furniture in an SUV or pick-up. But for the most part the Frisco IKEA parking lot is as politically correct as a Sierra Club picnic. This year’s Black Friday crowd was especially partial to Jetta TDI’s.
IKEA’s customers are the sort of trendy, informed suburban/urbanites who see SUV’s as rollover hazards and a danger to other vehicles. They believe that the bigger the vehicle, the more it embroils us in Iraq and the warmer the globe. While they appreciate the need to tow, tote and traverse the Texas outback, driving a great honking truck is not their thing. No way, no how.
Let’s motor on over to the northern fringe of Cow Town (otherwise known as Fort Worth, Texas). Here, where urban sprawl gives way to prairie grass land, you’ll find the “World’s Foremost Outfitter.” Cabela's is a gargantuan retail outlet catering to hunters, campers and anglers, selling everything from shotguns to camo socks. It’s part showroom, part aquarium and part Smithsonian Museum of Natural History.
You're less like to encounter European performance sedans in Cabela's parking lot than vegans at the Spring Creek Barbeque. Nine of ten automobiles parked thereabouts are pickups or SUV’s: Ford F150’s, Dodge Durangos, Chevy Suburbans, Jeep Wranglers, Toyota Tundras, etc. Cabela is temporary home to trucks that know the feel of dirt deep in their treads and mud over their axles; vehicles that pull horse trailers, bass boats, ATV’s and haul hay. There are acres of them.
The psyche of the average Cabela’s patron hasn’t changed since [the first] President Roosevelt took the oath of office. They love the outdoors. Although trucks have replaced equine companions of yore, their owners' passion for animals and conservation is deep and hands-on (killing critters is part of the program). City folk who hate their big rigs confuse them. Life without a truck or SUV? Well that’s just plain ridiculous. What good are cars that can’t pull a stump or haul a cord of wood? They ain’t practical.
Worlds collide in the massive suburbs that separate IKEA and Cabela's. Neighborhoods have one foot in the rugged outdoorsy Cabela’s lifestyle, and the other resting comfortably on a chic IKEA Tylösand ottoman. A Ford Fusion sits just a driveway away from a Dodge Ram MegaCab. No wonder The Big Two Point Five are busy producing “soft-roaders” like the Ford Edge, Lincoln MKX, Saturn Outlook and Vue, GMC Acadia and Buick Enclave. It's their Panglossian attempt to build the best of all possible vehicles for the “average” consumer.
Buyers on the IKEA side of the equation aren’t giving crossovers (CUV’s) a free ride. They are not impressed by the genre’s incremental improvement in gas mileage and the imperceptible decrease in dimension. As far as they're concerned, a CUV is a more defensible choice than an SUV in the same sense that a “regular” Whopper is healthier than its triple stacked iteration. They continue to deride automakers for “forcing” (seducing?) consumers into large, inefficient vehicles that are bad for the environment and, frankly, their own chances of accident survival.
On the Cabela’s side of the equation, CUV’s aren’t real trucks. End of story.
It's true; CUV’s are neither fish nor fowl. They are both inefficient AND outback aversive. So who wants something that looks and quaffs like an SUV but can't do what a proper SUV or pickup can do? The same people who own SUV’s but never tow, haul or mud-plug. They're working class people who fell in love with the SUV’s elevated seating position and the feeling of safety that comes from piloting a vehicle with a whole lot of sheet metal. They're not ready to come off their high horse– just yet.
Or are they? The last two years have shown a dramatic relationship between soaring gasoline prices and withering SUV sales. Faster than changing environmental policy or fickle suburban fashion trends, pain at the pump is driving SUV refugees straight into the arms of manufacturers who've mastered the art of building small, fuel-efficient vehicles. American consumers are moving all the way from trucks to cars. Half-measure CUV’s won't save Motown from this inexorable migration.
Subscribe to New Content Alerts
Back to Top
End of Comments
January 4th, 2007 at 9:37 am
Interesting juxtaposition. I’m pretty evenly split between being a “Cabela’s guy” (I used to read their catalogs for fun as a kid) and an “IKEA man” (but only before I took offense at the metrosexual term, and realized particleboard=crap). And contrary to you first-paragraph comment, IKEA is probably the slowest-moving retailer of their size in terms of expansion. They have been long notorious for only entering markets where it’s beyond a sure thing. But I digress.
I feel I’m an outdoorsy type, but I’m stuck doing my climbing and hiking as day trips, weekend warrior-style, due to other responsibilities. The dissonance hits me because I see so many SUVs and trucks when afield, but many of these people also claim to espouse leave-no-trace and treading lightly (as do I). But just like everyone else, they are suckers for the image in many ways. There are VERY few places you will need to go that will require anything more than a Subaru, unless you are specifically seeking out technical rock-crawling paths for fun. CUVs are just the new camel committee product, and I see them as merely a stop-gap measure for people undergoing SUV withdrawal. In 5-10 years, these same people will be back in cars again, and I can’t wait to see what additional, great market offerings we get when the populace makes that choice.
(My first climbing instructor drove a Jetta TDI wagon)
January 4th, 2007 at 9:39 am
Excellent article. Thanks.
January 4th, 2007 at 9:59 am
I agree wholeheartedly. CUV's are weak sauce.
January 4th, 2007 at 10:16 am
2006 sales numbers:
Murano: 81,362 (increase of 9.6% over 2005)
Rav4: 152,047 (increase of 116.3% over 2005)
CRV (through November): 152,679 (increase of 12% over 2005)
January 4th, 2007 at 10:20 am
It has always been my impression that the 4Runner, Grand Cherokee, Ford Explorer, Discovery sized vehicle have always been very popular with the Ladies, in some models more than men. It is my perception that many of the CUVs are targeting persons that might not need a body-on-frame vehicle with off-road capabilities but still want the higher up ride that is perceived as safer with better visibility.
January 4th, 2007 at 10:26 am
Enjoyed the two parking lots discussion, but disagree with the CUV argument. Perhaps you should have visited a third parking lot: any school during pick up and drop off. Some people need vehicles that can haul lots of kids.
Then the ideal vehicle from the standpoint of function is a minivan, but some people just don’t want a minivan. So they’ve been buying large SUVs like the Suburban. A CUV like the Saturn Outlook or Ford Freestyle potentially puts them in a more efficient vehicle than that suburban, without the stigma of the minivan.
What is lost compared to a minivan? A small amount of functionality, but fuel economy is about the same, and the driving experience is often better than in an SUV or minivan. The biggest difference is probably price: CUVs usually cost more than minivans.
You might say people who just need a CUV for the number of seats should buy a minivan. But if people only bought cars to fit their baseline needs, the market for performance cars would not be large enough to be financially viable. How many owners of these cars often drive them the way they were designed to be driven? The percentage probably isn’t far off that for SUVs that actually venture off the pavement.
Two-row CUVs I have less of a defense for.
My site’s pages for the Freestyle and Outlook, which are currently my favorite CUVs:
http://www.truedelta.com/models/Freestyle.php
http://www.truedelta.com/models/Outlook.php
January 4th, 2007 at 10:26 am
Since SUVs, CUVs and small cars only differ in degree of environmental impact, any good feelings about driving the latter are mostly dellusional and self-congratulatory. Kind of like feeling better because you smoke light cigarettes.
Anyway… this was an interesting perspective, Thanks Bill.
January 4th, 2007 at 10:33 am
Interesting idea for an article, however there are people of both my generation (whose vintage suburban modernist house is partially furnished by IKEA) and my parents’ generation that live in cities yet enjoy heading to the mountains regularly for all the hiking, skiing, fishing, you name it.
Both generations have also realized that the average small car, whether it be a SAAB hatchback style, VW, even a Saturn S-wagon, will tackle most of the gravel/dirt roads needed to get to a campsite/stream/ski slope easily, even in winter given a set of chains for the front wheels. These same small, useful cars will still return 30mpg on the way out of and back into the city.
Basically, SUV’s aren’t needed unless you own a farm or your own general contracting business.
CUV’s have even a more narrow niche - people that live in cities yet do outdoorsy things yet are too dim to realize that a cheaper, more fuel efficient hatchback or small wagon will work just as well, if not better, for their intended lifestyle.
January 4th, 2007 at 10:36 am
That’s funny, the IKEA parking lot in Houston is usually well represented with gen-u-wine pickup trucks and SUVs. But your analogy still stands. I tend to think CUV’s have a market because:
1. Over the past year, there is a push from Detroit to market these things.
2. CUV’s are the latest products coming out of the woodwork, and therefore have the nicest fit/finish for companies in full “Turnaround” mode. For now, the Edge is more appealing than a Five Hundred.
3. The next wave of improved Sedans from the big 2.5 are still 2-3 years away.
That, and they are tall enough to go most anywhere an SUV goes…just without the towing or cargo carrying skills. They have a limited market interest that will wane once better sedans reach the buying public.
January 4th, 2007 at 10:37 am
Interesting article. I go to Ikea (there are two of them within about 35 minutes of where i live), but i never wind up buying anything. I dunno why, it seems too uh - something - for me. I also go to the outfitters, LL Bean and the like, and never buy anything for the same reason.
Now admittedly, I am not much of an outdoorsman, tho I ride my bike for hours on end, often through woods and mud. And I prefer old beat up old furniture with shall we say, character. So I suppose I am not on the radar for either of these venues, or their true beleivers.
I am also a city dweller. What do i drive? A 4 door Golf, of course. The swiss army knife of cars. I got an entire dining room table in the back of it once (25 bucks at the goodwill store) , also a huge recliner (10 bucks, same place), but not at the same time. And I can carry my bike on the back on a thule, or take the front wheel off and stick it inside. Four of us and our luggage were in it for a 4 hour trip recently, no complaints. Of course, its not a DTS.
AND I get 30 mpg avg, street parking in really small spots, and can toss it around for fun. SUV, not for me. Way too big. CUV? nope. Why? Sedan? with a mail slot trunk opening? rediculous.
Neither beast or foul, i am, it seems. As is my ride.
January 4th, 2007 at 10:37 am
I think saying the 4Runner is a woman’s car is pretty off-base. I know that from my experience in the third world (Bolivia, North Africa), the 4Runner (and it’s pickup counterpart, the Hilux) were 2 of the 4 primary off-road cars used becuase of lack of developped roads (the other 2 were the Land Cruiser and the Nissan Patrol)…
What drives me crazy about all these people who own SUVs is that they don’t even know that they’re SUV’s (Suburbans, X5s, etc.) can’t even do serious off-roading. You know the BMW would have electronic problems as soon as the slightest amount of dust gets into it. But oh well, I digress
January 4th, 2007 at 11:01 am
audimination
You’re right about the 4Runner, but the way most of them are decked out in the US, they are treated as substitutes for luxury cars. I just don’t understand that, personally–they barely have any more interior room than a medium hatchback, so it’s quite a compromise for the price. I see it the same as buying a WRX for its mellow demeanor and smooth highway cruising capability. Not exactly the intended use, so why pay for all the unused capability?
I’m fundamentally with jerseydevil–most 1st-world people “need” either a hatchback or wagon/minivan. Everything else either fills a really esoteric (or rare) need or is simply a lifestyle want. I don’t have a problem with it, I would just like to see people admit it ;)
January 4th, 2007 at 11:05 am
Michael,
The things that minivans have all over CUVs is access. To date, no one has made a CUV with a third row that anyone can get back to easily. The issue with the school/soccer practice parking lot is that the kids are only in the vehicle for 10 minutes (the ride home), but it can take 10 minutes just to fold the second floor seat forward, climb in, find the seat belt, etc. If there is one thing parents hate, its delayed transitions, because kids are so slow at them to begin with.
Maybe the Outlook/Acadia fixes the access to the third row issue — I haven’t been in one yet, but I like the layout and height. But the second issue around access is doors — the sliders on a van work great and prevent denting your neighbor (something kids never remember) but look ‘mommyvanish.’
I agree with you that the Freestyle is overlooked (maybe the engine upgrade will help, although Ford may well bury this thing to keep focus on establishing the Edge) and hope the Outlook is a success.
January 4th, 2007 at 11:14 am
Popularity does not make a vehicle a “woman’s car” but the car might be skewed to attract women more than men, RX330 comes to mind. I do not believe the 4Runner is a woman’s car but included it in the list due to the similar size.
January 4th, 2007 at 11:18 am
CUVs are like buying salsa made in New York City.
January 4th, 2007 at 11:19 am
We’re not likely to resolve this debate anytime soon, but I’ll chip in with my $0.02. My Suburu is comfortable, reliable, and reasonably economical, and the all-wheel drive works like a charm on slippery surfaces. But where I live in the southwestern US, there are a LOT of interesting camping & hiking destinations that the Subaru can’t touch- and that’s when we load up our (thirsty) Jeep Cherokee. When you need it, there’s just no substitute for ground clearance and low gearing.
January 4th, 2007 at 11:20 am
I live in a ‘burb with upscale intentions/pretentions, and there’s an equal mix of minivans and SUV’s in the school parking lot. Our minivan’s power sliding door makes pickup/dropoff much easier than a swing-out door, just pull up curbside, push the button and the kids do everything else.
Our local Ikea (Woodbridge, VA) has more SUV’s last time we were there.
January 4th, 2007 at 11:24 am
Interesting and well written article. I wonder what you would say comparing the parking lots of Wal-Mart and Saks Fifth Avenue.
For me a large sedan is the perfect transportation choice. Comfort and room, decent handling, not top heavy and unstable in an emergency. And I don’t think it comes with age, I owned a 1967 Lincoln Continental when I was 25 and loved that car. I have done my part for conservation as well with a few VW Bugs, Camry, Saab 900 and currently I am driving a Honda Accord. The mini van is the best choice for a family, I have three children, but even they can be cramped with all aboard on a trip. When the children became of driving age we ended up taking the mini-van and the car on trips.
I am sorry to see the large sedan going away and I hate the way most of the mid size sedans have bucket seats. Maybe I should get one of the Lincoln Town Cars before they stop making them. Guess I wouldn’t shop IKEA or Cabellas, in fact I hate to go shopping.
January 4th, 2007 at 11:38 am
America is full of stigmas when it comes to cars. Station Wagons are 70s mommy mobiles. Hatchbacks are cheap-o econocars. Mini-Vans are the 90s mommy mobiles. Miatas are chic cars, Cargo Vans are for child molesters… the list goes on (or maybe it doesn’t - I can’t think of any others at the moment). At any rate, the point is that many times these stigmas (or fashion, if you will) will kill off vehicular segments, or at least limit their market to a large degree.
I can understand CUVs to some extent. There are people who want an SUV for the raised seating position, the style, the increased cargo capacity (over a sedan) and don’t need to go off road or tow anything. And there are people that need a mini-van, but don’t want the stigma of driving a mommy-mobile.
Make no mistake. The Ford Freestyle is a mini-van with hinged rear doors… as is the Chrysler Pacifica. I think the veil may be a little too thin on these, as they both appear to be fairly unpopular.
January 4th, 2007 at 11:39 am
Then the ideal vehicle from the standpoint of function is a minivan, but some people just don’t want a minivan. So they’ve been buying large SUVs like the Suburban. A CUV like the Saturn Outlook or Ford Freestyle potentially puts them in a more efficient vehicle than that suburban, without the stigma of the minivan.
What is lost compared to a minivan? A small amount of functionality, but fuel economy is about the same, and the driving experience is often better than in an SUV or minivan. The biggest difference is probably price: CUVs usually cost more than minivans.
Michael, that would all depend on what you mean by functionality.
While the Suburban may not seat many more people than the minivan or CUV, or have much more cargo room, it can tow much more than either while loaded down with a full set of butts in seats and gear. If it’s 4WD, it can take this whole mess into places the other vehicles cannot. Not everyone needs this functionality, but many do.
You are fairly correct about the gas milage not being much better with a minivan or CUV. Most minivans average in the high teens in everyday driving. With a full size SUV like a Tahoe, Suburban, or Expedition you only loose around 5 MPG when doing the same. Where the minivan and CUV can make up the difference is if you do a LOT of highway driving where these cars can push the mileage up into the 25-30MPG range. The full-sized SUV won’t even break 20MPG even if all that inside is the driver.
That’s funny, the IKEA parking lot in Houston is usually well represented with gen-u-wine pickup trucks and SUVs.
Sajeev, you neglected to realize that in Texas the Chevy Tahoe is the state car. :) I was down in the Dallas/Fort Worth area for a conference last summer. Never saw so many Tahoes and the like in one area before.
January 4th, 2007 at 12:04 pm
@ Gottleib
I too am lamenting the loss of the traditional full-sized American sedans as the U.S. automakers race to out-imitate the Asian sedans hoping no one will notice.
I find myself pining for a Deville or Lucerne every time I see one drive by.
January 4th, 2007 at 12:07 pm
When I lived in the Colorado Mountains duirng winter lots of people had SUVs but almost nobody needed them. My buddy’s 1980s chevy sedan with good snowtires was just as practical going over the vail pass in a blizzard as an izuzu trooper. Subaru’s or other awd wagons are the way to go for anybody that doesn’t actually drive off road or need commercial cargo capacity. and when I mean off road I mean off ANY road. gravel and dirt roads and driveways don’t count as “Off roading.” CUVs are alreday fading as people wonder why they are giving up gas milage to poor aerodynamics when they don’t even have the serious off road capability that their first generation of suvs had. My aunt is trading her lexus rx for a Volvo v70 real soon.
January 4th, 2007 at 12:08 pm
This is a good article which touches on the social commentary aspect of the current state of vehicles. But the thing it misses, as another poster pointed out, is that both IKEA and Cabela’s cater to individual lifestyle choices. They’re not family-oriented shopping places. The large parking lot of that third, family-oriented gathering place is where you’re going to see most of the CUVs collected.
Personally, I view people who prefer any of the SUV/CUV/pickup type vehicles (that is, those that don’t really need one) as the same type of people who are constantly standing up at sporting events. They want to see what’s going on at any given moment and to hell with whomever is sitting behind them. The same type of mentality goes for high center of gravity vehicles. Good view, unless you happen to be in the more efficient small sedan behind them.
And that’s what it really boils down to. Anyone with half a brain knows that SUVs/CUVs have always been nothing more than up-in-the-air station wagons (which, like minivans, no progressive individual would be caught dead in because it’s not ’sporty’).
Which brings us back to what is still arguably the best choice in terms of overall practicality - Subaru Legacy wagon. My parents bought one in 1996 and a few years ago, when it finally started nickel-and-diming them to death, made the decision to get a new car. But when they started doing the research, they couldn’t find anything that was anything even close to a substantial improvement on the Subie, so they just traded it in on a new one.
January 4th, 2007 at 12:10 pm
Maybe you should have compared the parking lot of the IKEA in Frisco (San Francisco), CA with Cabella’s parking lot. Then again, I believe Cabella’s is outlawed in this state.
January 4th, 2007 at 12:19 pm
While I consider a full-size pickup or SUV that doesn’t regularly carry or pull loads pure gluttony, I’ve always felt that the mid-sized ones were a decent compromise. Using a 2-door Explorer (160hp, mind you) and a trailer, I hauled a good portion of the building materials when I built our house. Anything too big or heavy (trusses, joists) was delivered by flatbed.
I drive a sedan now but my wife drives a newer mid-size SUV that we bought when gas was still $1.60 in our area. When we replace it, we’ll likely consider a crossover that gets better mileage and has a better ride and handling. Why not a car? Because a crossover is a reasonable step down for someone who’s used to an SUV while a small car is not. I’m sorry, but I refuse to rent a larger vehicle every time we want to take our five dogs somewhere.
As for the line about falling in love with the elevated seating position and feeling of safety? Right or wrong, there’s something to that. I know that when my wife and I went out New Year’s Eve, we intentionally took her SUV instead of my sedan just in case some drunk t-boned us. Were we statistically any safer? I don’t know but we felt better about it. And the point about the Whopper is well taken but the fact is a single Whopper IS healthier than a triple stacked one.
Also, I may be alone in this, but when I have a lot of stop and go errands to make, I prefer the SUV because of the easy ingress/egress. My 6′-3″ frame has trouble jumping in and out of my low sedan.
I think crossovers will continue to be popular because they’ll provide many people with the attributes they crave, if only a little less of them and they’ll be getting 10mpg better than their old giant SUVs. Plus, all the small car drivers will be that much safer. It’s a win win.
January 4th, 2007 at 12:19 pm
After weeks of cajoling I cave and take the missus to Ikea. She wants to be there in time for the 99 cent breakfast you know.
So we schlupp the 40 miles in torrential rain and arrive just in time to be one person behind the last breakfast served.
Never mind we started 20 minutes late because we have to just do a few little chores around the kitchen while the reluctant writer whimpers out in the car as he was told to go start the Camry. “I’m right behind you” was the tipoff he didn’t read. Duh.
Ok now the trek through the store. We have to follow the arrows lest we miss one exciting display of particle board. About half way in the walls start closing in and he wants out. But he’s trapped! How do you exit this friggin maze? Help me someone, please help me I want out now!
Of course we still haven’t made it to the pile of crap we absolutely need to make our home perfect. Seems we did pass about 45 furniture stores en route but the obviously don’t sell the good crap.
The reader starts to bleat in an attempt to embarass the shepherdess into abandoning the mission and showing him the way out.
After being told to suck it up he spots relief! An exit sign and he says he will meet madame in the Camry.
Oh no she sez I need your opinion. Madame being slow on the uptake has yet to detect his opinion.
So we find the section and she sez you like this one.
Baaa, er I mean Yes dear.
No don’t be like that do you like it?
Yes dear.
If you can’t be nice about this I will make you take me to my sister’s on the way home.
No I really, really like it and I cant wait to get it home and assemble it for you love of my life
.
So the form gets filled out with the stubby little pencil
and the journey begins to deep into the bowels of this humungeous warehouse to manhandle it onto a cart, the one with a wonky wheel of course. Now the 15 minute checkout line up and then out to the loading area where you get to play chicken with other frustrated rams. Dont even think of mishandling the pressboard and glue or it will be instantly useless.
She holds the spot at loading while you slog through the now turned sleet and snow trying to remember where the hell is that car. Oh joy! There are 3 dozen pearl mist Camry’s in the lot.
Finally to the loading area and of course the friggin piece of crap doesn’t fit in the Camry.
Not to worry we’ll just go over to my sister’s (the one with the voice that is like chalk squeaking on a blackboard) and borrow her van.
While at her sisters you notice a Sears flyer offering a smilar pile of crap for less money and free delivery.
And you have the nerve to mention the name Ikea in this forum!!!!!!!
January 4th, 2007 at 12:22 pm
Funny, I think the vehicle choices for IKEA and Cabella customers should be opposite. In a lot of cases, it takes a pickup or SUV to bring home your IKEA purchases, whereas a small car could be perfectly suited to outdoor enthusiasts… as long as the car gets you to the outdoor destination you intend to enjoy, be it a trailhead, ski mountain, river, beach, lake, campsite, whatever… and most will.
January 4th, 2007 at 12:26 pm
IKEA’s customers are the sort of trendy, informed suburban/urbanites who see SUV’s as rollover hazards and a danger to other vehicles. They believe that the bigger the vehicle, the more it embroils us in Iraq and the warmer the globe. While they appreciate the need to tow, tote and traverse the Texas outback, driving a great honking truck is not their thing. No way, no how.
They sound like Starbucks sippers, tree huggers, Bush protestors …
January 4th, 2007 at 12:37 pm
Can somebody explain me the difference between CUV’s and minivans? I see doors opening sideways, less powerful engines, and an extra .4 inches of ground clearance (on AWD models only) in Sienna/Highlander comparison, for example. That’s about it.
I don’t know what kind of desires CUV’s cater to. They don’t look manly enough for an offroader, they have engines too weak and lawnmower-sounding for a hot-rod, and they have no “Armani suit” styling to be a C300/Escalade kind of cruiser. What do they comromise a minivan for? People who buy CUV’s are probably just to lazy to sit down and figure out what they really want.
Note, want, not need. Say, I want my minivan to come with a 455ci block, dual exhaust, and a Firechicken on the hood. Funny, but doable, and for a group of people, it will be the minivan to buy, even if it is as thirsty as the Hover Dam. But who wants a minivan that doesn’t even look like an SUV?
Probably the same kind of people who fill up at the cheapest gas station, spend hours in Dollar Tree store… And then invest 25k into a car after about an hour of eyeballing a random dealer’s lot. If that.
January 4th, 2007 at 12:37 pm
Colinpolyps:
perhaps couples councelling can help. but it probably won’t. You should file for a divorce now.
January 4th, 2007 at 12:41 pm
Hutton:
Agreed, but you don’t need even that to get stuff home. Ikea will loan you a roof rack if you need it, or will deliver it for you. Home depot will loan u a truck for an hour or two, to get the lumber home.
January 4th, 2007 at 12:50 pm
My buddy was visiting from Long Island earlier this week (drives an F-150 BTW) and he wanted to check out the Cabela’s in Buda. We all hopped in the G35 and headed over after getting some of the country’s best BBQ in Lockhart. My sedan was most definitely in the minority. I had never been before so I didn’t know what to expect. Nice store.
If I still shopped at Ikea I would surely take the 6 Sport Wagon but I don’t live in a cramped NYC apt. anymore.
January 4th, 2007 at 1:04 pm
Those IKEA shoppers must not be planning to buy much. Last week I bought an artificial tree at the Home Depot (50 percent discount). It was a boxed, 7.5 feet tree, and I barely got it into the back seat of my 2003 Accord sedan. It wouldn’t fit into the trunk, even after I folded down the rear seat.
That episode - plus the realization that we will be making more large, home-related purchases in the coming years - made me realize that either a crossover or small SUV is in our future.
Either one of those two, or an old F-150.
January 4th, 2007 at 1:09 pm
The rear seat in my Passat sedan not only folds, but it can removed with a singe T-25 screw and a little quick elbow grease (this is not in the manual, for some reason). Two seatbacks and a single cushion later, you have a cavernous load area–but watch out for the exposed brackets and wiring harnesses. I have moved an entire single bed WITH boxspring in a single load, only having to move the front seats foward about an inch from “comfort”. Heck, the wagon could probably do twice that.
I have also done 400-500 lbs of pavers in the trunk, despite the protest of my Eibachs’ bumpstops, AND a 24′ extension ladder at the same time, though with the trunk bungeed down. I get strange looks from my fellow Lowe’s shoppers, but maybe I’m proving something to them as they load their 6 bags of mulch in the back of their Expeditions. ;)
All hail the Weathertech trunk liner!
January 4th, 2007 at 1:12 pm
BartMack: “get a rope!” heh.
I fit in neither demographic so maybe I’m that elusive “crossover” customer? I live in the boonies, 80 miles from the nearest Ikea, 10 miles away from my home is a National Wilderness Area. I have two kids to shuttle around on occasion. What do I drive?
A 2002 VW Jetta TDI. Why?
I’m CHEAP!
The damn thing cost me $17k new! I’ll drive the wheels off it, but that should take a quarter million miles to accomplish, and it’ll get me 50 MPG while at it.
So much for demographics.
–chuck
January 4th, 2007 at 1:18 pm
My wife and I have been considering a Murano for a couple of years now, but having looked at the Murano, RDX and CX-7, and researching real-world mpg reports, I honestly can’t see why we need one; we only go into the snow maybe 2-3 times a year, and when we camp, it is “drive-up” style. Moreover, as the trendiest vehicle style right now, CUVs will be so ubiquitous in a couple of years that they will no longer have the “oooh, what is that?” allure they had in 2003-2004, when my wife first spotted them. Unfortunately, she loves the style/lines of the Murano. She also completely fits the “I am NOT driving a minivan, and SUVs are totally horrible even though I kind of like the RX330 and the MDX is growing on me” mindset.
So now, I am trying to convince her that seeing as we only have one child, a fully loaded Subaru Outback would be more suitable over the long term.
a) it won’t be seen as “past trendy” in two years.
b) it gets better mileage than a CUV.
c) they are fun to drive, and the turbocharged versions are just as powerful as the Murano.
Stumbling Points
a) along with her negative impressions of SUVs and MiniVans, she feels that stations wagons are 70’s mom mobiles. I have to hype the “fun to drive” factor.
b) she comes from Tahoe, and perceives the Subaru to be a utilitarian, but not necessarily posh enough ride; she likes luxury, having driven an E430 and an Infiniti as her last two cars. I have to show her the improved interior of the high-end Subie.
Oh, and we don’t shop at Cabelas or IKEA. In fact, I hate shopping.
I agree that the CUV is the nicotine patch of people coming off SUVs and possibly back to wagons.
January 4th, 2007 at 1:21 pm
ash78: I’m not taking out the back seat every time I carry something bulky.
Plus, I don’t like to carry anything that might permanently scratch or dirty the interior…which is why I’m leaning toward the old F-150 right now.
No need to worry about door dings or scratches with that one, either.
January 4th, 2007 at 1:30 pm
jd arms,
Considering your wife is used to driving cars with very nice interiors and wants something stylish, you are in for a very tough sell, and rightly so. If you can reasonably afford it (and the Lexus & Infiniti say you can) there’s not really a good reason for you wife to turn down the car that would make her happy.
Try convincing your wife that she should get a flannel shirt over a shirt from Express. “It will last longer, doesn’t need to be dry cleaned, will keep you warmer…”
By the way, my wife owns a Murano. :) She loves it, and despite my initial objections, I like it too.
January 4th, 2007 at 1:36 pm
geeber
I hear you, I wish more cars were made with more utilitarian interiors, especially in the cargo areas. I can accept a nice interior for the passengers, but why that extends to the cargo area is a little confusing. Especially those cars with the tan carpet on the load floor. Huh?
btw, I was saying I can fold my seats down, OR if the job is extraordinarily large, I have the option to stow the seats at home–definitely not a regular or convenient occurrence, but the versatility is there. I can’t believe some new sedans don’t even have folding seats.
January 4th, 2007 at 1:36 pm
ash78:
I get strange looks from my fellow Lowe’s shoppers, but maybe I’m proving something to them as they load their 6 bags of mulch in the back of their Expeditions. ;)
Probably the same looks I get from people when I’m loading lumber and drywall into my A4 :)
chuckgoolsbee:
I’ll drive the wheels off it, but that should take a quarter million miles to accomplish
Must be your first VW if you believe that ;)
January 4th, 2007 at 1:49 pm
CUV’s have their place and while they are a compromise they do fulfill a distinct need. Say what you want about the practicality of a hatch or a wagon they just do not offer the room of a mid-size or large CUV. In my family I have owned hatches, a Subie Outback and a Nissan Murano. With seats folded I could always fit more in the Murano than in the Outback. With seats up the capacity was similar to the Outback but the Murano had much more room for rear occupants.
One of the problems with Minivans are that many are not offered with AWD (and an AWD Sienna with the good stuff is 40k) and while you can get around great with snow tires and FWD or RWD its still added cost and hassle compared to AWD and all-seasons. I still believe that if you need to haul kids and stuff you need a good mini-van (Before we bought my wife one I would not have said that, I’m a convert) but not everyone wants one. If I had to have the daily kid hauler in the family (thankfully I don’t) it wouldn’t be a minivan. Driving means too much to me to be subjected to their driving dynamics and styling.
I will be interested in how well GM’s Lambda vehicles fair. They offer the size of a large mini-van, reasonably low floor with 3rd row access and space of a mini-van but don’t look mini-vanish.
The best vehicle IMO combines the capacity or almost capacity of a wagon with the performance of a sportscar (at least in one trim). It’s a four-door fastback. Low like coupe, not as blockish as a hatchback and not as short but with a length and with of A4 or Mazda 6 wagon.. Something like the Chrysler Nassau concept but better looking. Perhaps similar to Audi’s Shooting Brake concept but a bit larger and 4 doors.
January 4th, 2007 at 1:55 pm
Steve_S
Subaru Forester? If I could ever get past the styling, it’s probably the most practical car available. The 2.5XT does 0-60 in under 6 seconds, too. I never knew until yesterday (Jalopnik link to fastest cars $25k-$30k).
January 4th, 2007 at 2:11 pm
I’m an environmentalist who, after months of research and painful soul-searching, purchased an ‘07 Silverado Classic crew cab last week. For personal use. With no regrets.
Personally, I was looking for a vehicle with a high seating position and ample legroom (for a bad back), that would seat four comfortably and easily carry home materials from Home Depot and places like the aforementioned IKEA. The only vehicles that met these criteria were crew cab pickups, SUV’s, CUV’s, and minivans.
First, I won’t drive a minivan. I think even Ed Begley will back me up on that one.
That left pickups, SUV’s, and CUV’s. In comparing them with the other options, it became clear that GM pickups really get respectable mileage numbers . At 17/21, my Silverado is more fuel efficient than a crew cab Frontier.
The message I learned? You have to pay to play: the laws of physics dictate that comfortable vehicles with high passenger and cargo capacity will require more fuel. In town, minivans and CUV’s don’t get mileage that’s appreciably better than a full-size pickup or SUV (excluding monstrosities like the H2 and Excursion). The GM trucks with the 5.3 get relatively decent mileage, and they can run on E85, so after the revolution I can build a still in the back yard and run mine off of corn liquor.
BTW, I live in McKinney, a few miles from the IKEA mentioned in the article. I’d have to say that far more SUV’s and trucks can be found in that parking lot than the author indicates.
–michael
January 4th, 2007 at 2:22 pm
Michael R.:
well OK, u have a bad back, but then u buy a truck? huh? how many trips could one possiby make to the store where you purchase truck loads at a time? Twice a week? three times? are u building a house? Not with a bad back u arent.
You say you are an environmentalist? where? mars?
January 4th, 2007 at 2:22 pm
geeber, you say:
“Those IKEA shoppers must not be planning to buy much. Last week I bought an artificial tree at the Home Depot (50 percent discount). It was a boxed, 7.5 feet tree, and I barely got it into the back seat of my 2003 Accord sedan. It wouldn’t fit into the trunk, even after I folded down the rear seat.
That episode - plus the realization that we will be making more large, home-related purchases in the coming years - made me realize that either a crossover or small SUV is in our future. ”
To me this is example of American vehicle over kill. If you want to haul a light weight slightly bulky item you need to buy an expensive, massive everyday vehicle. This is like buying a dump truck to move a bag of potting soil.
No, I’m not suggesting you rent a truck once a month to move these items. Buy a hatchback or station wagon or minivan, they’ll easily haul this junk.
In US efficient utilitarian vehicle designs are often stigmatized, and automakers cater to fashion not function. Why doesn’t Honda sell a hatchback Civic?! Civic with trunk can haul about nothing, with pass-though some minor items, with hatch back it would be much more useful.
Why doesn’t Honda still offer an Accord wagon?!
January 4th, 2007 at 2:23 pm
Colinpolyps:
Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha
We must have married sisters, but come to think of it I didn’t see you at the last family dinner.
January 4th, 2007 at 2:32 pm
Since I just moved a few weeks ago, I can say this: if I can move my entire basement cell in one run in an MR2, you can definetely transport elephant-sized cargo in a hatchback.
I swear, it seems like my sister’s MkIV Golf can take in more stuff than my boss’ ML320.
And if you have a couch to move, no SUV will take that in anyway. Don’t be cheap and cough up the 50 bucks for a moving truck like everyone else.
A combination of a used, old, rusty full-size pickup truck and a sedan/coupe/hatchback is the cheapest, most comfortable, and most versatile one, in my opinion.
Insurance on a second car costs pennies, especially for you family people.
Maintenance for an old chevy truck is changing oil and driving it till it breaks; then cough up another grand or two for another one (unless you’re a mechanical type). New pickups are for contractors and poseurs.
And in the end, you have the comfort, economy, and safety of a normal car, plus the versatility of a REAL pickup that you aren’t afraid to ding or scratch.
By the way, VW Golf is the ultimate crossover. Spacious, efficient, stylish, high seating position and all the other goodies.
January 4th, 2007 at 2:40 pm
Hmmmm, I’m not sure how “informed,” sophisticated and presumably upscale these young people are if they’re in a warehouse store buying particleboard laminated furniture and $15 lighting fixtures. Once these youngsters grow up, earn a few bucks, have a kid or two and move out of their 300sq/ft pseudo-industrial garden apartment and into a house, they’ll see the practical benefits of the larger vehicles they scorn today. Once they can afford Baker furniture, they’ll realize that it doesn’t come un-assembled and fit in the trunk of their Jetta TDI like IKEA furniture does.
January 4th, 2007 at 2:42 pm
IKEA does sell junk. They are good for knick knacks like cheap wine glasses and candles.
January 4th, 2007 at 2:47 pm
Being a first time homeowner for the past 1.5 yrs. there has been nothing that I have had to pick up from Depot, Pottery Barn, Crate and Barrel etc that won’t fit in my station wagon. Coffee tables, BBQ grill, sinks/toilets if it doesn’t fit it gets delivered. I don’t really care if the interior (or body, for that matter) gets scratched. I’ll be hauling the Christmas tree to the recycling yard this weekend. I got sap all over the seatback on the way home. Oh well, wipe it down with a damp cloth. The car only cost 19k. Having said all of that, I see a small SUV/crossover in my future. My wife can’t drive the Mazda as it is a manual. Personally, I would like a bit more luxury. I’m thinking about an XC90. The Mazda isn’t all that great on gas to begin with so it won’t be a great penalty if we go that route.
I would love an old truck but I wouldn’t use it enough to justify the cost/insurance. I’d rather have a weekend car.
January 4th, 2007 at 2:57 pm
Every time I see a crossover I can’t help but think of the Celine Dion commercials for the Pacifica very early in the CUV era. If anything doomed the CUV to mommy-mobile status, it was this.
January 4th, 2007 at 3:04 pm
From jerseydevil:
I am also a city dweller. What do i drive? A 4 door Golf, of course. The swiss army knife of cars.
Memo to the devil and all other VW lovers on this board: Your car company of choice is irrelevant in N. America. VW had a 1.4% market share, with a whopping 235K vehicles sold in 2006.
The fact that so many people on this and other enthusiast boards love VW, compared with VW’s niche/rounding error market presence in North America shows how out of touch most posters and writers at TTAC truly are.
Barring $5 plus gasoline, the CUV segment will continue to grow quickly for the foreseeable future. If I didn’t get a company car free, I know my next everyday car would be a CUV. Actually, I just ordered a Pacifica CUV as my next company car, because the other limited DCX choices we were given were either RWD or a Sebring.
Just because you can figure out how to cram your skis, bicycles, camping gear, etc. into a midsize sedan or hatchback, doesn’t mean you really want to when larger vehicles with far more space for all of my junk are available.
PS: I hate roof racks. They are noisy and my gear gets dirty. It’s very nice to fit all of my gear EASILY inside a vehicle.
January 4th, 2007 at 3:08 pm
We had a 4Runner which we loved and other than oil changes and brakes never spent any money on. A great car, which we traded-in on a 2004 Passat. Last July we purchased a chair which we barely fit into the trunk of our Volvo sedan. That night we went out looking for a new car so we didn’t have to resort to renting the Home Depot truck to mover furniture (you have to purchase something to rent it and I usually rent it to take home some electrical tape or something as an excuse $17.00 is worth it!) or calling friends with SUVs or wagons.
We got a used V70 AWD which has a ton of room (baby, luggage, outlet store purchases, two labs and two crates), gets fairly decent mileage. The SUV and CUV are over-rated - seriously a Subaru Legacy or similar (my next car) has everything you need. Oh how I dream of that European Accord Wagon with a diesel engine.
K.
January 4th, 2007 at 3:10 pm
airglow:
what everyone else drives is irrelevant to me.
Pacifica. eeeek. Can’t get that dirty, No no.
Perhaps you need a few fewer “things”.
January 4th, 2007 at 3:12 pm
Station wagons are hands-down the most useful vehicles for those who sometimes have to haul large / bulky stuff around. CUVs are a silly attempt to repackage them as something new and cool for more money. If we had more and better wagon choices (decent ground clearance, fold-flat seats, AWD and a stick shift, please), there would be no reason for CUVs to exist.
January 4th, 2007 at 3:20 pm
If you small car enthusiasts want to lure people out of their big SUVs, the crossovers can do it - your car won’t. A crossover will always be more attractive to those folks than any station wagon or hatch back. They won’t want to sit on the ground after riding high even if it saves them 2 or 3mpg. Getting mid 20s on the highway will be plenty good enough for them after feeding their old gas hog. I don’t think that many car drivers will sacrifice gas mileage and handling to upsize to a CUV. Crossovers are likely the result of people downsizing. Be happy.
January 4th, 2007 at 3:22 pm
finger: “IKEA does sell junk. They are good for knick knacks like cheap wine glasses and candles.”
I must admit that the place seemed like the Swedish version of K-Mart, to me.
January 4th, 2007 at 3:29 pm
From airglow:
Memo to the devil and all other VW lovers on this board: Your car company of choice is irrelevant in N. America. VW had a 1.4% market share, with a whopping 235K vehicles sold in 2006.
True. Smart people are few and far between.
The entire country just drove huge SUV’s for no real reason for 20 years - obviously everyone thought it was the right thing to do. Heck, you guys used to burn people for witchcraft not so long ago, and everyone was happy about it.
Just because the wrong decision was made by the majority, doesn’t make it a right one all of a sudden.
Of course, I’m not saying VW Rabbit is the ultimate car, but at the moment a “compact” hatchback is the best all-around car out there.
January 4th, 2007 at 3:31 pm
airglow: If I didn’t get a company car free, I know my next everyday car would be a CUV. Actually, I just ordered a Pacifica CUV as my next company car…
Let’s be real here. Regardless of what the auto companies call them, in my mind the Pacifica, as well as the Ford Freestyle and various Subaru’s, fit my mental construct of what constitutes a station wagon. To me, CUV’s feign SUV off-road styling (e.g. faux engine skid plate, decorative rock rails, heavy duty looking bumpers, etc.) and typically are taller in proportion to their overall length. The dedicated on-road styling and longer (vertically) and shorter (horizontal) proportions of the Pacifica, Freestyle and Subaru’s say “station wagon” to me. I have no quarrel with a well-executed station wagon.
January 4th, 2007 at 3:43 pm
William C Montgomery:Let’s be real here. Regardless of what the auto companies call them, in my mind the Pacifica, as well as the Ford Freestyle and various Subaru’s, fit my mental construct of what constitutes a station wagon. To me, CUV’s feign SUV off-road styling (e.g. faux engine skid plate, decorative rock rails, heavy duty looking bumpers, etc.) and typically are taller in proportion to their overall length. The dedicated on-road styling and longer (vertically) and shorter (horizontal) proportions of the Pacifica, Freestyle and Subaru’s say “station wagon” to me. I have no quarrel with a well-executed station wagon.
I agree with you characterization of the Pacifica as a tall wagon. My choices were:
•Charger or Magnum: RWD, base (190 HP) V-6 only.
•RWD Liberty. I have zero idea who would buy a RWD Liberty.
•Sebring: mid-level V-6, I considered, but too small and ugly.
•Pacifica: slow with base engine, but very big and supposed to handle well for such a heavy wagon. Can fit my wife’s bicycle inside with mine!
January 4th, 2007 at 3:44 pm
Cowbell:
I understand what you are saying about getting her what she wants, but the more I think about it, the more I don’t see the need for a CUV; I think a well-constructed, reliable, AWD wagon meets our needs just as well, and the fact that the Subies are looking plush on the inside helps.
I admit, I think the Murano has cool styling, and I like the fact that it is fast, rides higher so my wife can see over traffic, has all wheel drive. Additionally, we have had 3 Nissan products and all have served us well. But like many people on these boards I think the CUV is nothing more than a withdrawal stage from a full sized SUV (although, having driven a truck for a long time, I can’t argue with the higher seating position argument).
As to cost, well, it might seem that we can afford anything, but I only buy used, 2-4 years old.
January 4th, 2007 at 3:46 pm
VW has made a lot of business mistakes in the US, especially at the dealer level, resulting in abysmal market share. But their owners, by and large, are a solid proxy for people who want a lot out of a car. The fahrvergnugen/drivers wanted campaigns did not come out of thin air.
In fact, before Honda hit the drawing board with the current Accord, their primary focus group was…wait for it…Passat owners. They found that NO other midsize sedan had such a rabid following, so they wanted to emulate whatever it was that VW did right. The cars often have spotty reliability (mine is still great after 101k), but they are the best driving experience at their price points. I’ve driven a lot of cars, and the only other midsize I’ve seriously considered was a 5-series…at twice the price, though.
btw, looks like the golf-based Tiguan “crossover” is coming this way soon. A little late, but hey.
January 4th, 2007 at 3:47 pm
Airglow,
Some people on TTAC like VWs. Also, VW’s US market share is 1.4%. Therefore, most of us our out of touch. Is that really what you’re saying?
Dude, you drive a Pacifica!
January 4th, 2007 at 3:49 pm
“well OK, u have a bad back, but then u buy a truck? huh? how many trips could one possiby make to the store where you purchase truck loads at a time? Twice a week? three times? are u building a house? Not with a bad back u arent.
You say you are an environmentalist? where? mars?”
Prince:
My vehicle has waist-height seating for 5 people, an attribute that it shares with only minivans and larger CUV’s. My enjoyment in driving a truck - and the fact that I can throw as much crap in the back as I want, when I am able to - come at a 10-15% price in fuel economy. I’m comfortable with that tradeoff.
Since when do I need to make excuses for buying more vehicle than I technically need, anyway? This is a blog for automotive enthusiasts, correct?
January 4th, 2007 at 3:50 pm
Michael R.: BTW, I live in McKinney, a few miles from the IKEA mentioned in the article. I’d have to say that far more SUV’s and trucks can be found in that parking lot than the author indicates.
Hey, this is Texas. Even Sierra Club picnics here attract pickups like fire ants. But you have to admit that there is a substantial difference between the IKEA and Cabela’s shoppers (generally speaking) and that profoundldy more light trucks darken Cabela’s blacktop.
January 4th, 2007 at 3:54 pm
“Hey, this is Texas. Even Sierra Club picnics here attract pickups like fire ants. But you have to admit that there is a substantial difference between the IKEA and Cabela’s shoppers and that profoundldy more light trucks darken Cabela’s blacktop.”
I’ll take your word for it on that one. I rarely make it out to Cowtown. Lots of redneck Dodge Ram drivers in those parts :)
January 4th, 2007 at 3:55 pm
Monty is right and deserves credit for an interesting editorial.
Profoundiddly deserves credit.
January 4th, 2007 at 3:56 pm
Gee, 57 comments by lunchtime…
Geeber - and others, you can buy a car for the worst-case scenario or you can save a lot of money (and reduce sponsorship of terrorism, reduce CO2 load, reduce our trade deficit, etc, etc, yeah yeah, yeah, I know, some of you have heard it all before and really don’t give a rat’s ass: in which case, focus on the money savings) by buying what meets your needs 95% of the time and improvising or being a bit inconvenienced the rest of the time.
Are none of you familiar with the concepts of free delivery? Or the folding utility trailer?
Someone else mentioned AWD minivans, with the AWD option being a more convenient and less expensive alternative to snow tires. That’s a good one. The AWD feature on a Sienna is something like $4K. A set of premium snow tires will run you something like $600. If you don’t want to go back to the tire store in a few months to have them removed, remounted, etc, consider a set of steel wheels for a few hundred extra.
As for Ikea, it’s not Thomasville furniture but it’s usually solid (inspect, carefully, anything you plan to buy and make sure the design seems sound), it’s always inexpensive and it’s usually packaged so that it’s extremely easy to get it home. Much of it is imaginative and unique.
As for the parking lot at Cabela’s, it could be that the Cabela’s customers who drive the econo-cars are shopping Cabela’s via the web.
Those of you who mentioned the classic wagon - I’m with you. Car-like ride, car-like handling, car-like comfort, car-like fuel economy and an extra scoop of utility. What’s not to love? We’ve had several, starting with an ‘82 Cavalier wagon (good for up to 5 vacationers)
When we needed bigger (and we did get 6 people, into a Volvo 240 equipped with 3rd-row seating with luggage for one 4-day trip before we decided to go bigger), we went to a minivan. Car-like ride, not such great handling, two extra scoops of utility and adequate gas mileage. Some of the kids have now left home and we no longer need seats for 6 plus luggage. If the Accord or Camry wagons were still on the market, I’d sell the minivan in a heartbeat.
All those vehicles had one thing in common: at least once a year, each one of them wasn’t big enough for something. So we improvised, took two cars, rented, borrowed, tied things on the roof, arranged delivery, got a trailer or something. We didn’t move up until we just plain outgrew whatever we were driving.
January 4th, 2007 at 3:57 pm
SherbornSean:
January 4th, 2007 at 3:47 pm
Airglow,
Some people on TTAC like VWs. Also, VW’s US market share is 1.4%. Therefore, most of us our out of touch. Is that really what you’re saying?
Dude, you drive a Pacifica!
Yes, see my post above at the “choices” I had. The Pacifica seemed like the best of the admittedly less than outstanding choices I had. I don’t have the Pacifica yet, probably February. Keep in mind I live in Maine, have to drive in the snow, and the company won’t pay for winter tires.
I never said VW’s were bad cars. I only said that the US general public doesn’t seem to be too interested in them.
January 4th, 2007 at 4:00 pm
The CUV’s niche is also a “Station wagon for yuppies who’s parents drove station wagons, but we don’t want to be like their parents”
Things like the CR-V, Pilot, etc etc etc are station wagons on stilts, able to carry like a station wagon without looking like one, more so than raised-floor minivans.
I suspect that, in europe, where “Estates” are very common, that a CUV won’t do nearly as well, as that tall-box shape imparts a lot of drag without improving the cargo room.
January 4th, 2007 at 4:00 pm
Much of it is imaginative and unique.
That’s like saying a girl has a great personality.
January 4th, 2007 at 4:08 pm
By the way, I don’t know about the IKEA $.99 breakfast, but if I’m in the neighborhood, I sometimes stop in just to have lunch. The food is good, the salmon is the right price and you can get lingonberry juice, too.
January 4th, 2007 at 4:12 pm
My wife and I found out we were ‘expecting’ in June of ‘05. Being that she always liked the looks and features of the MDX (and have had a great experience with our ‘04 TL-6spd), we knew exactly what second vehicle we were going to buy for our expanding family, and were satisfied with its real-world 20 mpg/hwy. Until we found out a month later that we were having twins…
So much for the couple that swore they’d never own a minivan. Today is our EX-L Odyssey’s first birthday, and we truly LOVE it — almost as much as the boys and the dog.
What do we love about it the most?
1. Superb Fit & Finish?
2. Awesome engine — both powerful and efficient with Variable Cylinder Management (22-25 mpg/hwy)?
3. Utilitiy to transport anything and everything, from Drywall to pallets of Diapers?
4. Comfort, Comfort, Comfort. ??? 4 killer captains chairs (how many SUV’s can say that? 2?), relatively roomy third-row bench (again, 2 SUV’s?), fully independent suspension, quiet, PLUS room for highchairs and stroller. We’ve had 4 adults and 4 carseats in it before for a day trip — and not one complaint. How many SUV’s have EIGHT seatbelts?
Sure, we’re aware of the stigma. Our friends have Tahoes, Explorers, 4Runners, Denali XL’s and Land Cruisers. Do they look ‘cooler’ than we do? Of course they do. But for reasons of actual ‘utility’, fuel efficiency and comfort, I wouldn’t trade my Odyssey for any one of those SUV’s. Furthermore, the best part is when friends go somewhere with — they’re first comment is “Wow”.
Screw the minivan haters! You’re just jealous! :-)
(We drive back and forth between Boston and Ann Arbor a few times a year — so a wagon wouldn’t quite do it for us, but I hear what your saying — great utility)
Full disclosure: Can an Odyssey pick up chicks on Fri/Sat nights? Absolutely not. That’s the one thing it can’t do. (but we’ve all been out of that game for a while now, haven’t we?)
And if you’ve got a boat to tow or some off-roading to do, God Bless ya. Filling up your boat’s gas tank has to be much more painful than getting 12mpg on land.
LONG LIVE THE MINIVAN !!!
January 4th, 2007 at 4:15 pm
thx_zetec: To me this is example of American vehicle over kill. If you want to haul a light weight slightly bulky item you need to buy an expensive, massive everyday vehicle. This is like buying a dump truck to move a bag of potting soil.
No, I’m not suggesting you rent a truck once a month to move these items. Buy a hatchback or station wagon or minivan, they’ll easily haul this junk.
Except that most hatchbacks are too small. If Ford or Honda made a wagon version of the Fusion (Fusion Country Sedan?) or Accord, we would definitely be checking them out for the next vehicle.
We spent a long weekend in the Charlottesville, Va., area before Thanksgiving. There were three of us in the Accord - my wife, my mother-in-law and myself. Three adults is okay, but four adults in that car is pushing it…especially when luggage is added to the equation. We don’t even have children yet.
And, yes, some of us do still take trips in our vehicle, as opposed to flying.
We like added comfort, increased silence (more sound deadening material) and stretch-out room.
And a minvan? Well, the wife hates them, there isn’t much that is much “mini” about them anyway (have you seen how BIG a Honda Odyssey is?!), and the true minivans (for example, the Opel/Vauxhall Meriva - I’ve rode in one extensively in Europe) are too small.
thx_zetec: In US efficient utilitarian vehicle designs are often stigmatized, and automakers cater to fashion not function. Why doesn’t Honda sell a hatchback Civic?! Civic with trunk can haul about nothing, with pass-though some minor items, with hatch back it would be much more useful.
Why doesn’t Honda still offer an Accord wagon?!
Automobiles have always been about fashion to some extent, and always will be about fashion. A new vehicle will be our second-biggest purchase (after our home), so our mainstream vehicle had better look stylish (to our eyes, at least) in addition to being reliable.
At least the beat-up pickup allows us to keep the main vehicle nice.
As someone who looks through vehicles with “American” eyes, sedans and coupes are more attractive to me than hatchbacks.
As I said, my wife hates minivans.
A well-done wagon can be quite attractive (VW Passat, first-generation Taurus; both Accord wagons), which is why I would like to see a wagon version of the Fusion or new Accord.
Alex Rashev: True. Smart people are few and far between.
I’d say that a core of VW owners are quite loyal and willing to put up with problems for the style and driving experience, but bad word-of-mouth regarding reliability and terrible dealer service are really hampering VW’s sales to the mainstream buyer right now.
Our local VW dealer has had a very bad reputation for service after the sale.
January 4th, 2007 at 4:20 pm
Buried the Ronal R9s on my 5-speed manual 300E Benz in the mud trying to pull a tractor. The Benz and a utility trailer met my needs 95% of the time but predicting that other 5% was a tough one.
January 4th, 2007 at 4:22 pm
KixStart: Geeber - and others, you can buy a car for the worst-case scenario or you can save a lot of money (and reduce sponsorship of terrorism, reduce CO2 load, reduce our trade deficit, etc, etc, yeah yeah, yeah, I know, some of you have heard it all before and really don’t give a rat’s ass: in which case, focus on the money savings) by buying what meets your needs 95% of the time and improvising‘
Or I can buy something that meets my needs 100 percent of the time, and waste less time improvising.
And, as I mentioned above, there are also comfort and room considerations when buying a new vehicle.
And don’t say that small vehicles are just as comfortable as big ones. This summer I spent a week motoring around Bavaria in a VW Polo sedan with two other people (and their luggage). Sorry, but I won’t be trading for something that size anytime soon, even for the daily commute to work.
January 4th, 2007 at 4:27 pm
KixStart: “By the way, I don’t know about the IKEA $.99 breakfast, but if I’m in the neighborhood, I sometimes stop in just to have lunch. The food is good, the salmon is the right price and you can get lingonberry juice, too.”
I’ll have to admit that the chow is different and intriguing but, here again, I suspect that real Europeans regard the à la cart line at IKEA with the same disdain Americans have for the hot dogs at any convenience store.
If only IKEA’s furniture was a little cheaper with a little better quality…
January 4th, 2007 at 4:27 pm
Ford does build a wagon version of the Fusion. It’s called the Mazda 6, built in Flat Rock, MI and comes with a manual trans as standard equipment.
January 4th, 2007 at 4:30 pm
jd arms,
Just be sure you’re not getting a Forester or Outback. In my opinion, they are CUVs. They are both closer (Forester 65″, Outback 63.2″) in height to the Murano (66.5″) than they are to the impreza wagon.
And once you put the fun engine in the Forester or Outback, you’re paying about the same for the Murano. And I haven’t spent a lot of time in the Subarus, but the Murano’s interior is very nice.
I swear I’m not a Nissan salesman.
But to get on the topic of this article, I’ve been more than pleasantly surpised with my wife’s CUV, and I don’t think Subaru should get a blanket pass. They make CUVs, even if they don’t call them that.
January 4th, 2007 at 4:39 pm
I’ve never understood why people spend so much time complaining about what other people drive.
That said, I can certainly see the appeal of CUVs - lots of space, AWD, and decent mileage. Take one of the most popular CUVs right now, the RAV4 - with the V6 it can haul 7 people, has AWD, tows 3500 pounds, and is rated 28mpg on the highway. How many other vehicles can do that? That’s right, none - most minivans don’t have AWD anymore (and get worse mileage), cars can’t tow 3500 pounds, and SUVs get 10mpg lower. I guess the closest competition would be something like a Subaru Outback or Forester, but they don’t tow or haul nearly as much. Plus, with the 269-hp V6 the RAV4 is actually quick enough to be interesting.
And, that’s why the same dealers that are selling the Prius, FJ, and new Camry at discounts are getting full MSRP on the RAV4…if you can even find one in stock. While I don’t own one, I can certainly understand the appeal.
Right now I have a disposable econo-car and an old pickup, as one other poster mentioned…but the problem with this combination is that older pickups don’t have the emissions controls of the newer ones, so even if I only drive my pickup once a week I end up polluting more than if I got rid of my car and bought a new pickup instead. If you buy a newer “old” truck that pollutes less, then you pay a lot more and it doesn’t make sense from a financial standpoint.
Now, I’ll admit that my vehicular requirements are different than most people - I keep horses as a hobby, and on winter mornings the nearest plowed road is nearly two miles from my house (the others eventually get plowed, but not until late afternoon). So, AWD and towing capacity are fairly important. There are those who will say that FWD is good enough in the winter, and it probably is for most folks…but even with decent winter tires (Michelin X-Ice) my FWD commuter won’t go through half the snow my pickup will, and without the pickup there are several times I would have been snowed-in. I have too many responsibilities at work, so taking a “snow day” is not an option.
So, something like the RAV4 has potential - the only main concern is the tow rating, though it would probably be high enough to tow a small side-by-side horse trailer (maybe). The Forester with the turbo is another option, but it simply doesn’t tow enough (and gets worse mileage).
Oh, and for those who talk about moving furniture in a small hatchback…while it’s possible and I did it with my college furniture, now that I have my own house and real furniture (made of actual wood) there is no way in heck I would risk damaging it by trying to stuff it into the back of a car. A couple years back I bought a 16 foot enclosed trailer, and that has been one of the best purchases I ever made. While it’d be too heavy to tow with most cars (about 1,500 pounds empty), most CUVs could tow it…and double their usefulness. I used it last time I moved, though it still took 6 separate trips with the 16-foot trailer and a pickup.
January 4th, 2007 at 4:49 pm
While the Forester being a shorter, wider, taller version of the Legacy/Outback puts it into the same CUV category as the Mirano, the longer, lower, narrower Legacy/Outback is a station wagon.
It’s a fine line, to be sure, but it’s defnitely there, made more succinct by the fact that the Legacy is also available as a legitimate sedan. Is there such a thing as a CUV sedan?
January 4th, 2007 at 4:53 pm
the last time i moved, i hired a moving company. It cost 300 bucks, and in about five hours i was popping the cork on the bordeaux.
i cannot tell you how glad i am that i dont need a car to haul stuff around. I can buy a fun car, instead of one i have move myself with (u-haul?? duhhhhh).
Or take everything I own along with me.
Or bring all my friends AND kids AND all their stuff.
Perhaps I should get one of those bus sized motor homes, just in case a few of my passangers feel tired or a little peckish! OH MY GOD - YOU DONT HAVE A KITCHEN IN YOUR CUV! !! I’m NEVER letting you drive me around ANY MORE!!!
my friend just got a cr-v, so tippy feeling. but big - i guess thats the trade off.
these vehicles just no fun to drive. I still like my golf best. Its fun. Remember fun?
January 4th, 2007 at 4:55 pm
First of all, congrats to mgoBLUE on the twins – must have been a hell of a first year!
I’d like to address the debate over how big a vehicle to get – should someone get a car that meets their needs 90% of the time or something much larger for just in case they are taking the inlaws to the shore when there is a big sale at Sam’s Club and they need to haul their neighbors horses all at the same time.
In an earlier editorial on TTAC, I read that the average car on the road is 8.6 years old. Which means that aside from a few clunkers (Aveo, Compass, Freeloader) you can reasonably expect a new car to last 20 years. But most people trade in a new car after 4 years, probably due to the thought that it won’t last much longer, which it clearly will.
Rather than lease for 3 years, people can make the same car payments for 7 years, and then own the vehicle outright. At which point, they can pick up an old pickup truck or SUV for their occasional needs.
Most families I see in the suburbs have a commuter sedan and an SUV/minivan, each of which they trade in every 3-5 years, more out of boredom than anything else. Within the same budget, the alternative would be to keep them both for 15-20 years, and supplement them with a used Miata for weekend fun and a used F-150 for big jobs.
Doesn’t work in the city, where the Golf, WRX or Rav4 sound like good compromises.
January 4th, 2007 at 4:59 pm
Teds:
January 4th, 2007 at 12:07 pm
……. CUVs are alreday fading as people wonder why they are giving up gas milage to poor aerodynamics when they don’t even have the serious off road capability that their first generation of suvs had. ….. .
Name a CUV that is fading? Every CUV I can think of is doing well; even the old ones that are far past their fresh date are doing OK.
January 4th, 2007 at 5:04 pm
Here is a tip that will save you time and money.
Stop trying to do everything yourself and have the big stuff delivered by the store truck.
For about $50 they’ll bring it to your door, install your new item, and even take out the old one it’s replacing!
That’s the smart American’s way of doing business and you can drive the car you want to.
January 4th, 2007 at 5:14 pm
jerseydevil -
I’m not sure where you found a mover for $300 - the bill for the last person I know who hired a mover was over $5,000 (their company relocated them, and paid the bill). Since I have a tough time paying someone that much, I just have a bunch of friends help and move myself. As far as U-haul, their equipment is poorly-maintained and will probably leave you (or your belongings) stranded on the side of the road (been there, done that). Keep in mind that when I’m talking about moving, I’m talking about moving 500 miles - not moving across town.
I’m not sure if your post is referring to me or not, but I never said I owned a CUV - I have a car for my daily driver, and my next car will probably be a Mazdaspeed 6 (especially now that I discovered that the rear seat *does* fold down). I’m just saying that I can understand why someone would buy a CUV, and that if I was in the market for an SUV-type vehicle a CUV would probably be a good choice. I would think that environmentalists would be pleased if people sell their SUVs to buy CUVs, but life has taught me that some people are never happy.
January 4th, 2007 at 5:14 pm
I noticed some people want AWD because they don’t want to deal with the hassle of snow tires. DON’T DO IT. Being stuck in a hole a couple times a year is much better than sliding off the road every time there’s ice. Winter tires are a must, AWD or not.
I found out the importance of snow tires when I drove through a stretch of icy concrete on a highway, going about 65mph. I only realized what I was on when some poor sod doing 40mph lost traction and slid across right in front of me. There were crashed cars on both sides. I pulled over to see what was going on, and had no trouble stopping or steering. That’s in a lowly Sentra, with snow tires over 14″ steel wheels on all four corners.
January 4th, 2007 at 5:16 pm
Rather than lease for 3 years, people can make the same car payments for 7 years, and then own the vehicle outright.
Right. Make 3 years of lease payment at $300, then roll into new lease. get another new vehicle, always under warranty with no other expennse other than maintenance. And peace of mind. Or 7 years at $300. Spend another $14,400 and have a high mileage due for motor or trans soon car.
January 4th, 2007 at 5:25 pm
finder,
Financially, it always makes sense to keep your car till things start falling off. No modern car needs any serious work for the first 200+k miles if you keep it well-maintained.
Unfortunately, I personally know people who managed to get their car to die after 3 years of driving it. I guess if one never brushes the back of their teeth, leasing is the way to go for them.
January 4th, 2007 at 5:31 pm
Does it appear every VW owner in the USA posts here?
January 4th, 2007 at 5:32 pm
Or 7 years at $300. Spend another $14,400 and have a high mileage due for motor or trans soon car.
7 years and due for motor or trans? Well, what if it’s not a GM product?
January 4th, 2007 at 5:40 pm
7 years and due for motor or trans? Well, what if it’s not a GM product?
Well, let’s assume that you are driving 15,000 miles per year. That would put your odometer at approx 105,000. Statistically, I don’t care what you drive. Chances are increased that a major repair is more likely to occur when the odometer registers 6 figures. Of course unless you have a Honda automatic trans. You probably have a new (ish) transmission already at 100K.
January 4th, 2007 at 5:48 pm
Having grown up in Dallas, I still make the drive up from Austin about once a year, and am quite familiar with Frisco.
That said, I am amazed that your visit to IKEA was not accompanied by visions of SUVs and CUVs. After all, Frisco is immediately north of Plano, which, based on years of observation, may have the highest ratio of SUVs to people in the lower 48 states. It is practically the suburb that invented the McMansion, for crying out loud.
I am also amazed at your classification of these IKEA patrons as some sort of modern sophisticates. Umm, this isn’t the West Village. It is Frisco, land of casual dining establishments and sprawling strip malls (the one immediately north of the mall probably covers more area than ancient Rome).
Cabela’s, on the other hand, surprises me not a bit. Not that there’s anything wrong with that…only that the day you see a Civic Si or somesuch in the parking lot is the day there’s probably some sort of protest going on.
January 4th, 2007 at 5:52 pm
LK:
yes, a local move was 300 bucks. I used to do it myself, but now i have the money. When i was doing it myself with friends, i used u-haul, i never had a problem with equipment. Even then, i’d rather just get it over with -the moving, i mean - and then start having fun ASAP.
And if ur gonna move 500 miles, u are not gonna do it by multiple trips in your cuv or suv anyway. Might as well buy the sports car you really want in the first place. Drive there in comfort, wait for the movers to do everything.
It cost my folks 5000 to move too, but they moved a six bedroom house into a three bedroom condo - didnt get rid of anything, but thats another story.
I really dont have alot of stuff, anyway.
I do have a nice car, tho.
January 4th, 2007 at 5:56 pm
LK, where I come from, we compensate friends who help move us with pizza and beer.
How do you “pay” friends who help you move 500 miles? Do you give them a Domino’s franchise and a small liquor store to share?
January 4th, 2007 at 5:59 pm
Finger,
I hear you. For me, it’s just a case of sour grapes for an S-10 Blazer I had with 60,000 miles that used at least a quart of oil with every tank of gas. On the other hand, the old Explorer I pulled a trailer with never uses a drop of oil and shifts as well as when we bought it and is approaching 150,000 miles. Of course I know there’s someone out there with the exact opposite story. To each his own. I heard that with some older Chryslers you would get a new transmission with every oil change:)
January 4th, 2007 at 6:01 pm
Jersey…
I’m moving three rooms of stuff next week two avenues within Manhattan. It’s $2-3k depending on how much they need to pack. It seems to be the norm, more or less. The building where I’m moving into doesn’t allow people to move in or out on weekends, otherwise I’d just rent a Uhaul and do it myself.
Did these $300 guys get to keep some of your stuff?
January 4th, 2007 at 6:07 pm
Finger, are you being deliberately obtuse?
First, it’s 7 years of payments at the 3-year lease rate and then you own the car, there’s no $14,400 to buy out the car at the end. Actually, I figure the break-even time for loan vs lease is more like 5 years but this will depend on the car involved, loan rates, givebacks, etc.
Second, if you keep a car, the taxes and insurance drop over time. Depending on where you live, this is probably substantial additional savings.
Third, apply the probability of catastrophic failure to the cost of the catastrophic failure to get your expected value cost. Most people I know with higher-mileage cars didn’t need an engine at 105,000 miles. The probability of needing a $3000 engine at 105,000 miles could be said to be something like .1. The probabiility of needing a $1500 transmisssion at 105,000 miles could also be assigned a value of .1. That makes your expected cost .1*3000+.1*1500 = $450.
If you want to mitigate that risk, get an extended warranty. It’s probably an extra 3 months of payments.
Or buy a Toyota.
January 4th, 2007 at 6:13 pm
pb35: Ford does build a wagon version of the Fusion. It’s called the Mazda 6, built in Flat Rock, MI and comes with a manual trans as standard equipment.
I prefer the styling of the Fusion, and the wife doesn’t want a manual transmission, so it’s availability is irrelevant.
I think people on this site forget that most of us have to choose vehicles with family members in mind, and most family members don’t place race-car handling as their number-one priority, and don’t like manual transmissions. They want room, what they perceive to be style, and comfort, combined with reasonable fuel economy.
mbz16v: Here is a tip that will save you time and money.
Stop trying to do everything yourself and have the big stuff delivered by the store truck.
Except that you will have to make sure that you are there when the delivery truck arrives, and it often will only arrive during the work day, and most of us not only work, but have spouses that work.
January 4th, 2007 at 6:17 pm
Moving rates differ wildly around the country. For a cross-town move in Cleveland (3 bedroom house) it was $400.00. A $40 dollar tip and a box of donuts. The same guys charged my mom $600 for a 4 bedroom house move consisting mainly of enormous, unweildy Civil-War era furniture.
Everything arrived safe and secure both times.
K.
January 4th, 2007 at 6:24 pm
Great article, except 2 points:
IKEA makes the absolute POS furniture. Only college students on a budget would buy them over used furniture. Trendy maybe, but its reliability is as good as VW made in Brazil.
For every 1 SUV or truck buyer that really need to tow or haul, there are 6 more who buy them for the bling, interior space, or the false sense of safety.
January 4th, 2007 at 6:28 pm
Here in the Silicon Valley, California area the parking lots are chock full of CUVs. Many, if not m