57a7bf No.18306
I'm a bit of a newfag when it comes to cars, but I came onto this board expecting most people to hate crossovers with a burning passion, and I wasn't disappointed. I can certainly understand why. Most of them, especially the modern ones, are ugly as sin, less fuel efficient than sedans, and don't handle as well. They have a little more cargo space than a sedan but not nearly as much as a proper SUV, they have AWD/4WD as an option but generally not enough clearance to make use of it in true off-road situations. Unibody rather than body-on-frame means most don't have the durability to be true offroad vehicles, either. And on top of that, it's the quintessential normalfag body style, which means anons have a duty to hate it out of sheer contrarianism. All that being said, do you think it's possible to make a non-shit crossover, or is the whole class a failure out of the gate? If it is possible, can it be done in the current market, or would it require someone to physically remove all the EPA/NHTSA regulations shitting up the market first?
Personally, I think there's potential, but only if you change the design philosophy. Right now, crossovers are tall sedans LARPing as SUVs, making them a confused mess that doesn't do anything well. Instead, you should approach the design of a crossover as a station wagon for big guys. Focus on the added cargo space for people that need to haul more shit around but aren't construction workers, instead of pretending it's an offroad car. A higher cabin, not to clear debris and terrain, but for tall fuckers that can't sit comfortably in sedans. Maybe offer AWD or 4WD as an option, but not for anything offroad, just for people in rural and snowy areas that could benefit from the extra traction in the winter.
I think picrelated, the 3rd generation RAV4, is a decent example of a crossover done "right." It has good gas mileage for what it is, 22 city/28 highway compared to the same year Camry's 22/32. 73 cubic feet of cargo space standard, which is about as much as other crossovers have with the rear seats folded down. It's 66 inches tall, not obnoxious but enough to give taller people a bit more headroom. And yes, I know you can just bring the seat downward on sedans and the like, but there are comfort concerns on longer drives. If my knees are ever higher than my hips while sitting, I get lower back pains while driving. As a taller guy, a lot of sedans in which I've driven require me to either scrape my head on the ceiling, or lower the seat so much that it becomes uncomfortable. The 3rd-gen RAV4 seems like a big guy station wagon in all but name, but marketed as a crossover because that's a popular segment in the burger market. This making sense at all, or is it retarded rambling?
____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
f83617 No.18307
You got one thing wrong, Crossovers aren't tall sedans but rather just inflated hatchbacks.
And you gotta consider them such.
People want the "roundness" of a hatchback but bigger in size.
That way they think they're getting a good deal from it. They don't have to do any market research and consider what car would be better for them when they can just get an all-rounder+1.
And they get the added benefit of fitting in with other normalfags.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
57a7bf No.18308
>>18307
>Crossovers aren't tall sedans but rather just inflated hatchbacks.
That's fair enough. The reason I said oversized sedan was because I would imagine the average crossover buyer to be a sedan buyer if crossovers weren't available. Hatchbacks are generally compact cars, whereas a crossover buyer is probably looking for a full-size car. Thanks for the correction though, that's definitely a more accurate way of looking at it. Any thoughts to the question as presented in OP, and whether crossover SUVs have a legitimate place for non-faggot car owners?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
fcd8e2 No.18309
>>18307
This is basically the whole concept behind the crossover described to a T.
Hatchbacks are great and all, but they're too small.
Sedans are all but extinct nowadays.
Wagons are sedans with hatches, and used to be where crossovers are now in the early 80s, just as people started to buy bigger cars again.
MPVs are huge and often don't fit driveways, and you can forget about garages.
SUVs used to be where Crossovers are now 10 - 15 years ago, but the environuts successfully psy-oped their image into gas guzzlers that would kill you in a wreck.
And you don't need a 4x4 (by that I mean Landcruisers, Patrols, Land Rovers, G-Wagens etc.) anywhere a hill isn't visibly taller than your house.
So what the normalfags want:
>Something with the practicality of a hatchback
>The versatility of a wagon
>The people-carrying aspects of a minivan yet not too big to be forced outside the garage
>The image of an SUV
>And the apparent go-anywhereability of a fully-fledged 4x4
And that is what a crossover gives you. The only problem is something that doesn't specialize is something that's only average at everything. It's not very practical, given that they all have large bodies draped over small frames. Wagons are versatile mainly due to their elongated tail, but on a crossover you only get something that's marginally bigger than a large hatchback e.g. the Volvo C30. Minivans can carry 6, 7, or even 8+ people in comfort, but squishing it down into the frame of a crossover you sacrifice both the legroom and the armroom (if that's even a term) of the back row. Very uncomfortable on long drives I'd imagine. Finally normalfags want the image of an SUV which makes them look big and imposing, which is just pathetic IMHO. And they want the same thing they thought SUVs could give them, until they realized their Explorers, Blazers and Durangos would weep at the first sight of a ditch. Able to navigate the countryside without having to try.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
57a7bf No.18311
>>18309
>SUVs used to be where Crossovers are now 10 - 15 years ago, but the environuts successfully psy-oped their image into gas guzzlers that would kill you in a wreck.
>And you don't need a 4x4 (by that I mean Landcruisers, Patrols, Land Rovers, G-Wagens etc.) anywhere a hill isn't visibly taller than your house.
It's a real shame, because wagons would do exactly what normies do with their crossovers nowadays. But the only wagons still on the market are these tiny glorified hatchbacks, with nowhere near the cargo space of crossovers, especially those crossovers that bear a passing resemblance to wagons.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
99dba8 No.18312
>>18311
>But the only wagons still on the market are these tiny glorified hatchbacks, with nowhere near the cargo space of crossovers, especially those crossovers that bear a passing resemblance to wagons.
<Mercedes E-wagons looks at you
<Renault Talisman wagon looks at you
<Peugeot 508 SW looks at you
<Opel Insigna ST looks at you
<BMW 5 series wagon looks at you
<Audi A6 avant looks at you
<Subaru looks at you
<Kia Optima SW looks at you
<Ford Mondeo SW looks at you
<Volkswagen Passat SW looks at you
<Mazda 6 break looks at you
<Skoda Octavia Combi looks at you
<Volvo V90 looks at you
<Jaguar XF break looks at you
<Dacia Logan MCV looks at you
And I only went for the biggest of them. There's at least twice of that list on sale right now.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
fcd8e2 No.18315
>>18312
As a UKanon myself, I can tell you more than half of those are Euro-only, and that includes the Ford since they stopped selling the Fusion and every car that wasn't an SUV, barring of course the Mustang and GT. OP is clearly from America, so most of those aren't an option for him.
German companies have picked up a really bad rep in the US these past 10 - 20 years, so they're out of the question too.
Literally the only cars from your list he'd even be able to realistically consider are the Subaru, the Kia, the Mazda and the Volvo.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
ea694b No.18318
>>18315
German cars only have a bad rep in the US for gearheads. They still sell ok there. As for the wagons, the market clearly stopped buying them so they stopped selling them.
But there are wagons to buy, even if it's only a handful.
As for the UK, I have no idea why wagons don't make it to your island.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
57a7bf No.18319
>>18312
I looked at a couple of those models you mentioned available in the US, and I'll amend my complaint: It's not that wagons aren't available, it's that [CURRENT YEAR] wagons are nearly indistinguishable from crossovers. They're both unibody vehicles with five doors and two rows of seats. They're both supposed to be do-all "family" cars. They have very similar cargo capacities–"wagons" a little less on average and crossovers a little more on average but there's a large amount of overlap there. Same with gas mileage, modern wagons are slightly better on average, but there's so much overlap that the difference in practical terms is negligible. I would say that the only difference is that crossovers are taller and wagons longer, but that isn't even true–you have wagon-shaped crossovers such as the RAV4, and crossover-imitating wagons like the Outback. The delineated categories are all coming together into an undifferentiated, bubble-shaped, EPA-approved blob. It's like miscegenation but with cars.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
faf6fb No.18320
>>18319
>RAV4
>wagon-looking
mate what are you injecting yourself? Add batteries to your glasses, geez. The only point I agree with you is the Outback, Sportcross V90 or Allroad audis, which are looking weirdly like lowered crossovers (while being higher wagons).
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
57a7bf No.18326
>>18320
>RAV4
The 3rd-generation does, at least to me. It's got a lower profile than most crossovers and definitely looks "longer" whereas crossovers look boxy.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
341dc3 No.18328
>>18326
It's too high and round to look like a wagon to me, plus this gen was sold as a 3 door, which added to the crossover look.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
57a7bf No.18329
>>18328
>height
It's half an inch higher than the Outback of the same year.
Polite sage for 'tismal nitpicking.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
faf6fb No.18332
>>18329
So I just spent several minutes comparing the two cars side by side and I found two things that made the Outback a wagon and the RAV4 a crossover.
I believe there's two things that makes the outback a wagon and not a crossover:
<lower ground clearance
<higher wheel arches.
I can't see anything else and it's deeply disturbing me.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
57a7bf No.18333
>>18332
>I can't see anything else and it's deeply disturbing me.
So you see what I mean, right? We're moving into a world where all cars are 56% mutts, barely distinguishable from one another.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
99dba8 No.18335
>>18333
well I'm pretty sure it won't. I mean crossovers and SUVs are fairly new to the market right now and if you compare the market today with what it was 40 years ago, I think we're better off: Europe only had small shitboxes and wannabe sedans, all looking more or less the same while in the USA, you had your era where all your cars were boxy long landyacht. I can't even tell apart a Caprice from a Crown Vic of the same era if I'm not looking closely.
I believe it's a phase and having sedans, hatchbacks, crossovers/wagons, SUVs and everything else makes a pretty diverse car choice, and even if the cars all look alike, that's because of our actual taste which will evolve, like it always did.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
74897d No.18337
>>18335
Well, one thing standing in the way of that, which wasn't as big an issue in the past, is regulations. Increasingly stringent emission and crash restrictions limit the range of body shapes that can practically be made street legal. This places constant pressure on manufacturers to create very same-y designs, and those laws don't look like they're going anywhere anytime soon.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
5c93c0 No.18349
>>18337
I believe the same was said about the American bumpers regulations in the 70's but the styles still evolved. I still firmly believe it's possible to do many different shapes now, even if the thin metal cuts aren't possible anymore.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
467665 No.18350
>>18349
But were the criticisms really invalid? Even if there was still design variety afterwards, that type of design is no longer possible. There's still variety within the allowed space, but the allowed space got that much smaller. There are infinite points between 0 and 1 on a number of line, just as there are infinite points between 0 and 100. But even though the number of pointers is the same, the range from one to another is much smaller.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
faf6fb No.18352
>>18350
Yeah ok it might be true, but I believe it's more the tastes of the buyers that make the designs more than the other way round (see the new Alpine).
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
773488 No.18354
Dunno if it was mentioned but consider also the fact that it's easy to get in and out of a crossover, cause you're standing almost upright.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
faf6fb No.18357
>>18354
true point, a lot of people don't like "sitting down" in their car but would rather "climb in" their cars.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
467665 No.18358
>>18357
This is why a crossovers is my daily drive despite being aware of their problems. I'm a fairly tall guy, and even with the seat adjusted its not uncommon for my head to brush the roof.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
f42d17 No.18364
>>18358
Big sedans offer plenty of headroom too, that's a poor excuse
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
467665 No.18365
>>18364
I also frequently haul more shit around than what fits in a typical sedan. But I almost never haul around more than what fits in my crossover, nor do I off-road, so I have no need for a full size SUV.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
99dba8 No.18369
>>18365
I fit more shits in a wagon than in a crossover though
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
467665 No.18372
>>18369
Depends on the wagon, in terms of cubic feet modern wagons are neatly identical to crossovers in terms of cargo capacity. Some have slightly less, some have slightly more.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
7fe8d2 No.18374
>>18372
Well we're not talking about the same kind of crossovers: a Nissan Juke or a Renault Captur are clearly inferior to wagons.
On the other hand, a Rogue/Qashqai could be roomy enough.
Anyhow, the size of the biggest wagon (E-class) is way bigger than any crossover. If you want bigger and still be above the street, you'll need to buy a SUV.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
467665 No.18376
>>18374
The E-class has 35 cubic feet of cargo space with all the seats up. The RAV4, a typical crossover, has 37. However, unlike most crossovers it does sport a third row of seats, so if you're comparing it to two-row vehicles you could say it has a lot more space with the third row down. So I'll amend my statement, since then I was searching I saw looking at two-row wagons: two row wagons and two row crossovers are basically the same class of car, except one might be slightly taller and the other might be slightly longer. They have near-identical mileage and near-identical cargo capacity. They both might have AWD/4WD but neither is suited for off-road. Both are family haulers. Both are jacks of all trades. The difference is primarily marketing, Americans decided they didn't like wagons, so carmakers made wagons a little taller and told Americans they were crossovers.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
467665 No.18377
>>18376
>since then I was searching I saw looking at two-row wagons
<When I was searching I was looking for
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
37e000 No.18380
>>18376
The latest rav4 is gigantic man. Or at least it seems to be to my european eyes
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
89a779 No.18441
Crossovers killed cars, every car is just a fucking electric bubble fridge on wheels that feels heavy as shit and it also killed true hauling and off-roading by turning pick-ups and SUVs into luxury vehicles for fat subhumans or rich prissies like Jeep, new Ford Bronco, and Mercedes G-wagen 463. In fact this is all Mercedes' fault starting with the W163, a car that fails to be roomy and can't off-road but is an SUV.
>>18307
Effectively they are sedans.
>>18312
>modern German luxury companies
No.
>French companies
>Opel
>Ford
>Skoda
>Jaguar
>Dacia
Not available in America or have limited sales. What the fuck do western Euros outside the Alps need an off-roader for anyway unless it's a Fiat Panda or something.
>>18380
What qualifies as (sub-)compact today was C-class and E-class in the 90s and 2000s.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
fcd8e2 No.18442
>>18441
>What qualifies as (sub-)compact today was C-class and E-class in the 90s and 2000s.
Funny you should mention that, a couple months back I started working on a spreadsheet that calculated the volume/capacity of a particular car through the ages and EVERY SINGLE ONE, without fail, has ballooned to what would have been considered a "saloon" in the 80s, going by the logic that <9m cubed is a subcompact, and every successive cubed meter in terms of capacity moves the car up a division until 11m+, which is where the vehicle becomes fullsize. Even the cars that are supposed to be small.
A 1980 Ascona, which was Opel's premium four-door family car at the time, is 91% the size of a current generation Corsa, their entry level subcompact from 40 years later. The two are very nearly the same length and yet the Corsa is wider and taller by a full 100cm in both dimensions.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
57a7bf No.18443
>>18441
>>18442
Gotta love crash-test regulations.They get a little more stringent every year and cars have to get fatter to keep passing them. And at the same time, fleet average MPG restrictions mean the engines in these obese cars have to be boring and uninspired, too.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
faf6fb No.18455
>>18441
why not american luxuries? A crossover is only a big hatchaback and it fits.
Plus we never asked about off-roading capabilities since that's what SUVs are for, as opposed to crossovers.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
faf6fb No.18456
>>18455
*german luxuries fml
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
57a7bf No.18457
>>18455
Kraut cars in CY+4 have a reputation for being overcomplicated shop queens, always in need of of repair.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
faf6fb No.18458
>>18457
That's not the point of the thread
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.