Leaderboard

Let's not underestimate sedan trunks. One of my friend's brothers would borrow his parents' full-size Pontiac, stuff a few people in the trunk, and drive up to and through the box office booths at the drive-in. Just one person. In a big Pontiac. And, once this big Pontiac was parked, he opened the trunk and let his friends out. It's not too smart to begin with. But wouldn't it also look weird to nearby parked cars that the trunk of this big car pops open and teenagers start climbing out of it?

CUVs and SUVs sell at a higher MSRP than their sedan counterparts because THAT is what the market dictates and hence why the higher profit margins. But when sedans all go away, and there is nothing left BUT CUVs and SUVs, and there is a market adjustment in pricing for AFFORDABLE CUVs and SUVs, there WILL be CHEAPER priced CUV offerings. These cheaper CUV offerings will NOW take the place of the Corolla scenario... And if sedans DO make a comeback, they will probably command a higher price tag than their CUV counterpart reversing the scenario we have now... *SIGH* There is nothing new about all this. Its automotive business 101. What I dont understand is (aside from the downsizing of sedans) is how we got a whole phoquing continent to stop buying cars in favor of a lesser, unsafer, shyttier riding, less capable in hauling shyte CUVs... Less capable in hauling... YES!!! Less capable in hauling. Aside from the hatchback style opening, the back end does NOT fit MORE cargo. It fits maybe TALLER stuff, but NOT more stuff. Equinox back end Seats up...NOT down. What good does it make it for the seats to be down? Going on a trip with the family, where will the phoquing kids sit if the seats are down? Previous gen Malibu This gen Malibu A sedan based station wagon was even BETTER in hauling crap in the back... And this is true for ALL sedans versus their EQUIVALENT CUV counterparts. I owned a 2007 Ford Edge and a 2005 Impala SS. I moved from one house that I owned and sold to a new and current house I own now with these two cars. I fit more boxes in the Impala, seats down, than with the Edge, with the seats down. I put the TALLER boxes in the Edge, duh, but I fit more boxes in the Impala. And the Edge was a wider CUV than most in its class. The Edge was probably shorter than the Impala. Shorter wheelbase too. But it was a taller vehicle. It might have even been wider too. The rear cargo was humongous. Cavernous. But the Impala actually had a bigger...trunk. And THAT phenom is actually true across the board with the sedans versus their CUV counterparts. But...sedans have become too sporty and that the profile is more coupe like killing the benefits of hauling stuff with a sedan. But that is an attempt to spruce up the sedan sales. THAT didnt work, duh, as sedans are supposed to haul families, sealing the sedans fate faster to die. But I wanna know: When in the hell did people get soooooo stupid and bamboozled by this crap narrative that CUVs haul more stuff? Taller stuff, yes. NOT more stuff...

COINCIDENTAL. I was with my wife in our TourX and we spotted a red one in this very color making a turn at our intersection. To see two TourX in the wild in the same spot at the same time, quite rare. That's 'Roja Red'. At the time I got mine, I wasn't jamming on this color but now I like it more. Maybe because it was too close to the maroon on my Malibu I was getting out of at the time.

Of course, there was also a time when sedans had truly cavernous trunks. My 81 Toronado trunk was considered “personal” (read: small) back when it was new, but I can fit two adult bicycles back there when I take the front tires off and still close it. It would be larger if not for the funky way the spare is mounted. My 85 Continental was double the size and my 83 Caprice was larger still. I moved in and out of my dorm in the Caprice and Continental. Oddly, they just announced a refresh for it and it’s finally getting an appropriate engine with 300hp.

I suspect the Arteon will be gone soon also..I read they only sold 47 or so in the first quarter of 2022 in the US.

I wish I had taken pictures of all the times I hauled just a pure ton of crap in my old Magnum for eight years. Now, to be fair, there were times where the height of certain loads were an issue and made the Magnum useless but the other 98% if the time, it could haul plenty of stuff plus seat five (although four more comfortably). At the time of purchase, back in 2008, the dealership was trying to get me into a 2005 Tahoe for not much more money but with gas being outrageous at the time ($4.49 a gallon in Prescott, AZ at the time, deja vu) and me driving 50 miles round trip to work daily, that was not going to be a good plan for me and I am glad I bought the Magnum instead. It did most of what I needed, day in and day out, without killing me at the pump and was also just a cooler looking ride, in my "not so biased" opinion lol. Wagons have taken $h! rap in this country, all the while folks are just driving tall wagons while thumbing their noses at the mere mention of the word "wagon". It's right up there with "van" for most folks these days and that has never made any sense to me. Alas, yet another car fad.

Im gonna continue to bash California. Why is it that I equate most "beautiful" residents of California as narcissistic, selfish, shytty people? Why is it that I think that most of these California peeps are like Amber Turd? Im gonna stop the bashing and Im gonna post songs that made me dream about California in a good way.

I get the feeling that Sheryl Crow's "All I wanna do is have some fun" song is a song denouncing California. Its kinda saying that the people she is interacting with are fake. She truly is the only one wanting to have real fun. I still dont like the song. Even though I learnt that what she may be saying is what I have learnt about California over the years and have fallen out of love with California myself and THAT is what she is trying to convey to us. That California is FAKE. (Never been there, mind you) I just dont like the song. I dont like ANY of Sheryl Crow's songs. I dont know why. I just dont like her songs. Something about her voice kills me. Id rather listen to Katy Perry and her rip off of the Beach Boys song of California Girls than listen to Sheryl Crow. Phoqued up.... I know!!!

meh... I never did like that "All I wanna do is have some fun on the Santa Monica Boulevard" song. "This is L.A.!!!" To which I say: BIIIIIG phoquing deal!!! I once dreamt about California and what it be like to live there. But slowly slowly, the mystical attraction, daze and hypnotic trance Los Angeles and Hollywood and Beverley Hills and Malibu Beach and San Francisco and all things California has vanished for me. Id like to visit, but I no longer have this yearn as Seinfeld's Kramer character put it, to live in California. From a song stand point, Id rather a late '70s and mid '80s Pink Cadillac vibe. The song projects more "fun" than what Mizz Crow suggests with her California song. Spending all our money on a Saturday night and having a party in the backseat of a Cadillac. Talking about cars, the Cadillac is bigger than a Honda and a Subaru too. The later, '80s pop version The earlier, bluesy original version I also prefer Mr. Petty's California mentioning songs more than Mizz Crow's Free Fallin' is more chill, I find

I call this the "Santa Monica Blvd. song" and it seems to be the song most readily attributed to Sheryl Crow. At about :55, she mentions DATSUNS and Buicks, so this is a little dated! At least she doesn't want to eat Subarus, as per the lyrics from some other song of about that time.

That’s because, after you take away shared components, it costs just as much to engineer and design a Corolla as it does a RAV-4, but the RAV-4 sells for twice as much, so Toyota has to build many more Corollas to make the same profit.

Absolutely. Whatever you said is so right. But a Camry is quite comfortable as well. Maybe not for David. Its too small for him. But what makes a Camry a Lemming (for him) and NOT a Tahoe, Grand Cherokee, GMT 360 Trailblazer (non SS model) as such? Especially with the amount of sales CUVs and SUVs are getting from North Americans the last decade. Sheeple are following other sheeple and buying CUV/SUVs because these sheeple think CUV/SUVs are safer, more bigger to haul stuff, more comfortable yada yada yada. All not true when compared to their sedan equivalent counterparts. A Camry was NEVER an exciting vehicle in its entire existence. What family hauling sedan is? Was a family hauling sedan ever an exciting vehicle? The point is, CUV/SUVs dont do well in potholes either. They break just like sedans do in potholes. Point is, a Camry hauls just as much stuff as its CUV counterpart. I believe its the Highlander. The only thing the Highlander does better than the Camry is that hatch. It opens up big and tall as compared to the Camry's trunk. But as far as passengers go, same. The Highlander makes it easier to for people to get in and out of as compared to the Camry, but the Camry has a waaaaay lower risk of a roll over. Roll overs are lethal for the passengers inside. Potholes were I come from are brutal too. It dont matter if a car has airshocks, the kinds of potholes we have to deal with makes airshocks a moot point. Unless these airshocks are of the intelligent kind where a camera and a sensor see a pothole before the tires hit it and adjust the suspension travel while passing over the pothole. Point is, to counter what Dave said, people wont buy a CUV/SUV over a sedan because potholes are brutal. Potholes are brutal equally for sedans as for CUV/SUVs. Exciting cars do have stiffer suspensions, and when not equipped by magnetic shocks, do have an uncomfortable ride. Problem is, throughout North America's history of the automobile and hauling families, exciting cars have NEVER had a prominent sales advantage over the mundane. That is true for any decade and its true for any type of vehicle, sedan, CUV or otherwise. Average Joe dad and mom simply dont buy exciting vehicles to haul their families around. In fact, average joe moms and dads buy lemming vehicles because average joe moms and dads are lemmings themselves... Dave does own a GMT360 V8 powered rocket SUV. But he also owns a very comfortable Escalade. The Escalade is not a lemming vehicle and the Trailblazer SS is not either. However, the Escalade's cousin, the Tahoe and the SS's brother, the lesser Trailblazer, these are vehicles that are as boring as they can get. A V6 Camry could actually be funner to drive... The Tahoe might perform better in potholes, as the Escalade as far as comfort goes, but BOTH Trailblazers will punish its occupants, ESPECIALLY the SS, and both Trailblazer trims WILL break suspension parts if the pothole is not avoided or hit in a specific way especially at a higher speed if the driver is not vigilant. And a sudden evasive movement and especially the GMT360, non SS, and it WILL roll over... This is all Im saying. My disdain for CUVs and SUVs goes beyond the realm of excitement... My disdain for these vehicles also include the false narrative of CUVs that CUVs are more comfortable than sedans, safer, yada yada yada. The fact that CUVs also restrict and discourage enthusiastic driving by means of higher center of gravity, unnecessary heft and weight and crappy weight distribution also contributes to this. A Camry may wallow, but you could still toss it around. It will squeal, and complain, but it will do it. It will have heavy understeer. But it will do it. A CUV WILL topple over... Again, not including the performance oriented CUVs that rely on electronic technological wizardry to keep that top heavy $h! box from toppling over.

There is really another big issue here. Most of us here have advanced critical thinking skills and a critical eye when it comes to automobiles. (It's almost to an OCD level, if not already there!) There's a fairly big difference with what can be done stylistically with 3 volumes than with 2 volumes. It's a little harder to adhere to corporate branding and make SUVs/CUVs that are easier to differentiate from each other. That said, automotive designers have quite a bit more stylistic leverage with sedans and coupes. One only needs to think about some of the sedans and coupes that C&Gers love so much.

It isn't about excitement. Nearly none of the crossovers or SUVs within the spending range we're talking about here are exciting. Friend of mine just got an X3... is it luxurious? sure. Is it comfortable? absolutely. But every slightly well-to-do 30-something has one or something like it. It's not exciting. I didn't buy my Avalanche to be exciting either. I bought it for comfort and to be able to haul the bike. 0-60 is measured as "sufficient". It's got air shocks. It wallows around corners (so much so that I've thought about a stiffer sway bar). BUT... I can put 8-10 hours behind the wheel in it with ease. I'm not sure what it's like near you, but in my region, the roads and highways are horrible. I'd never want to daily an "exciting" car for that reason. Heck on the bike I have to constantly scan the road for monster potholes and bob and weave around them. I know where all the frost heaves on the the way to work are so I can raise my ass up before I hit them. It's really bad here.

Happy Memorial Day Weekend Everyone. Have a great one, relax, eat yummy food and enjoy your family and friends. Wishing everyone the best.

I wanna know when in the hell did people get bamboozled in thinking that CUVs are safer? Light tap from the back sends this CUV rolling over Sedan loses controll, hits barriers, still upright. Hits crossover pickup truck from Honda, sedan still upright, crossover pick up truck...rolls over... Slow speed, hits a car....rolls over