Jump to content

Build Theme!

Photo

Debate: Hatchback or Wagon?


42 replies to this topic

#21

Drew Dowdell

    Unimatrix 01

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,614 posts

Posted 27 January 2012 - 01:11 PM

Yep, I agree. A wagon/estate has the same length as its sedan/saloon equivalent, whereas a hatchback would have a shorter rear overhang.

An A3 sedan without a longer rear overhang would look awfully truncated.


well... it'd look like a Golf.
  • 0

#22

Cubical-aka-Moltar

    American Cubicle Dweller

  • Premium Subscriber
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,380 posts

Posted 27 January 2012 - 01:24 PM

Here is the Golf/Jetta wagon....so the A3's rear overhang is between that of the 5dr Golf and this...closer to the Golf, so I'd categorize it as a hatchback. Not that it really means anything..

Posted Image
  • 0

#23

pow

    Ultra Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,363 posts

Posted 27 January 2012 - 01:31 PM


Yep, I agree. A wagon/estate has the same length as its sedan/saloon equivalent, whereas a hatchback would have a shorter rear overhang.

An A3 sedan without a longer rear overhang would look awfully truncated.


well... it'd look like a Golf.

Huh?
  • 0

#24

Cubical-aka-Moltar

    American Cubicle Dweller

  • Premium Subscriber
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,380 posts

Posted 27 January 2012 - 01:32 PM



Yep, I agree. A wagon/estate has the same length as its sedan/saloon equivalent, whereas a hatchback would have a shorter rear overhang.

An A3 sedan without a longer rear overhang would look awfully truncated.


well... it'd look like a Golf.

Huh?

I think he meant 'hatchback' instead of 'sedan'.
  • 0

#25

balthazar

    Yoda of Vintage cars

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,451 posts

Posted 27 January 2012 - 04:41 PM

Drew Dowdell - January 26, 2012 - CheersandGears.com
Yesterday on Facebook, Aaron Bragman a new friend I met at NAIAS, and I got into a friendly back and forth over whether the Audi A3 was a hatchback or a wagon. I insist that it was a wagon and Aaron insists it is a hatch. My original position is that the A3 is a wagon because of the third rear window. Aaron says no, it is an identical car to the Volkswagen GTI which couldn't be called anything but a hatch.
Now before I go on, I'm going to preempt some of the old timers here. For the sake of this argument, we are going to use body style definitions that apply to cars post.. oh... 1980 or so. That means a sedan is a 4-door and a coupe is a 2-door regardless of the existence of b-pillars or not.


Interesting discussion, but I have to ask; if we're going with the 'loosey-goosey' modern marketing terms, what's the diff? ;)

I for one would prefer to drive a "wagon" than a "hatch".
  • 0

#26

Drew Dowdell

    Unimatrix 01

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,614 posts

Posted 27 January 2012 - 08:05 PM

Because the cars that fit old-timer definitions are entirely out of production now and have been since the early '80s
  • 0

#27

balthazar

    Yoda of Vintage cars

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,451 posts

Posted 27 January 2012 - 08:20 PM

By far, the vast bulk of body styles here today is the same as it was in 2000, 1990, 1980, 1970... with the exception of the near extinction of hardtops. 2-box, 3-box, hatch, wagon, all older than your cut-off, and all still here. Just sayin.
  • 0

#28

Cubical-aka-Moltar

    American Cubicle Dweller

  • Premium Subscriber
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,380 posts

Posted 27 January 2012 - 08:32 PM

By far, the vast bulk of body styles here today is the same as it was in 2000, 1990, 1980, 1970... with the exception of the near extinction of hardtops. 2-box, 3-box, hatch, wagon, all older than your cut-off, and all still here. Just sayin.


True, but the terms really don't matter anymore..the marketing gurus will define the products however they want to....the rental car companies define them randomly also (calling a Cruze a midsize, a Malibu a full-size, etc). None of it matters...it just is what it is...
  • 0

#29

balthazar

    Yoda of Vintage cars

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,451 posts

Posted 27 January 2012 - 08:46 PM

The terms don't matter to some people... and they do to others.

Many of the users of these terms are not defining anything, they're just throwing words around indiscriminately.
The EPA, rental companies, marketers.... these are not 'definers'.

You know what; I could be on board with the shifting of some terms if all surviving examples of earlier versions were somehow (sadly) stricken from existence.
But when one looks at a 2010 Impala, points & says 'That there is a full-size car'... and a '96 Impala SS rolls by, it's all out the window for me.

IOW; I can call a minivan a "bus" until others copy me... does that change the definition somehow? If enough people are wrong about something, does it become 'right'? Look at what we call a GM 3.8L engine vs. a DOHC : "OHV". :wacko:

Edited by balthazar, 27 January 2012 - 08:48 PM.

  • 0

#30

Cubical-aka-Moltar

    American Cubicle Dweller

  • Premium Subscriber
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,380 posts

Posted 27 January 2012 - 08:57 PM

The terms don't matter to some people... and they do to others.

Many of the users of these terms are not defining anything, they're just throwing words around indiscriminately.
The EPA, rental companies, marketers.... these are not 'definers'.

You know what; I could be on board with the shifting of some terms if all surviving examples of earlier versions were somehow (sadly) stricken from existence.
But when one looks at a 2010 Impala, points & says 'That there is a full-size car'... and a '96 Impala SS rolls by, it's all out the window for me.

Ok...by that rationale, one could argue the '76 Impala was but not ones after that ... Size categories like full size grow and shrink with the times they are in...consider something as small as a '49-52 Chevy, then a '55 Chevy, a '59 Chevy, a '76 Impala, an '85 Impala, a '10 Impala...all different sizes, but all were categorized as full size (or 'standard' as it was called in olden days). Or 'compact'--with Chevy, something as big as a mid '70s Nova or as small as a Cobalt would be considered compact depending on its point in time...

Ultimately, the public doesn't know and doesn't care in general..such terminology means nothing to them--all they care about is how much per month a car is and the gas mileage and what Consumer Reports says about it....

Categorization terminology today seems to exist for car geeks like us to argue about on the internet.

Peace out...

Edited by Cubical-aka-Moltar, 27 January 2012 - 09:06 PM.

  • 0

#31

balthazar

    Yoda of Vintage cars

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,451 posts

Posted 27 January 2012 - 09:22 PM

Well, in your example the '49-52, '55 & '59 are non sequiturs, as there was no other size.
But... point made.

In parting, we're not here as 'the public'- consumer reports' message board is for them types.
Here, I would hope we aspire to be a bit better edumakated. ;)
  • 1

#32

Camino LS6

    Head Skunk of the Underground

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 28,847 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 04:37 PM

The misapplication of names comes with the simple fact of time passing to a degree - but the notion of a 4-door "coupe" is just beyond the pale.
  • 1

#33

Cubical-aka-Moltar

    American Cubicle Dweller

  • Premium Subscriber
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,380 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 05:08 PM

The misapplication of names comes with the simple fact of time passing to a degree - but the notion of a 4-door "coupe" is just beyond the pale.

Well, I understand the rationale, even if it is just marketing...'sedan' just seems so pedestrian a description for sleek 4drs, esp. those w/ frameless door glass like the CLS. Nothing to complain about, IMO.

Edited by Cubical-aka-Moltar, 28 January 2012 - 05:16 PM.

  • 0

#34

balthazar

    Yoda of Vintage cars

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,451 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 05:31 PM

It's 'everything' to complain about in mine.
Marketing wears down & dilutes almost everything, eventually.
  • 0

#35

Cubical-aka-Moltar

    American Cubicle Dweller

  • Premium Subscriber
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,380 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 06:12 PM

It's 'everything' to complain about in mine.

Why? You can't change it, so what's the point? Expend the energy of complaining on something productive...

Edited by Cubical-aka-Moltar, 28 January 2012 - 06:13 PM.

  • 0

#36

67impss

    OSV Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,302 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 06:46 PM

What like rolling over and accepting any and everything to the point that you even believe that you can't make a difference anymore. That sounds like a perfect plan for failure to me.
  • 2

#37

balthazar

    Yoda of Vintage cars

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,451 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 06:47 PM

At one point it time, it was 'pointless' for mercedees to try & convince people a 4-dr could readily be called a coupe... yet look at you. ;)

Edited by balthazar, 28 January 2012 - 06:47 PM.

  • 0

#38

Camino LS6

    Head Skunk of the Underground

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 28,847 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 08:18 PM

Call BS when you see/hear BS - and a 4-door coupe is pure BS.
  • 1

#39

SAmadei

    Denali Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,949 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 08:39 PM

I'm so sick of the bodystyle name game, that I'm just calling things whatever I feel like... 4 doors... appliance. Shorter than 180 inches... ****box. Unibody SUV... minivan. CUV... retarded wagon wannabe. ;-)
  • 0

#40

67impss

    OSV Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,302 posts

Posted 28 January 2012 - 09:32 PM

Well we've already progressed to the point that everything is just a generic CAR. Avalanche, Silhouette, CRV, 1500 Ram, all cars now a days. :rolleyes:
  • 0



Reply to this topic



  


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users