Hatches are getting smaller and smaller...WTF??

RX Reven' wrote:

RealMiniParker wrote: Magnums are pretty spacious.

I’ll have to take your word on that…everyone I’ve tried to put on ripped apart on me.

Sonofa... I set myself up for that...

I had a 09 Fit and was amazed at what I could get in there. One year when I did all four days at the 12 hours of sebring I had a tent fail on me while installing (rod proceeding to tear through roof of tent). I simply folded the seats down in the Fit and camped out in the back of it for a few days comfortably.

On the other hand I had a 2012 WRX Hatch. A bigger car yet couldn't hold have the crap the fit could (well technically it could but...) You couldn't even get the seats to fold nice and flat. I don't think it's cars getting smaller I think it's just design laziness and cost cutting. "yea we could engineer the seats to fold flat; but, we'll lose $20 bucks on every car we sell"

Dodge minivan stow and go is pretty neat tho

This is part of the reason I think a hhr would be perfect for me, cheap, decent mpg, holds a lot. I just hated driving the one I tried too much.

For me the problem with modern hatches is the severe lack of room behind the rear seats. My wife's crosstrek for example compared to say an Impreza sedan.

For whatever reason hatches are now up to several feet shorter overall than their sedan counterparts meaning any practical storage advantage is gone. I remember that not being the case with my 2001 Accent 2dr hatch vs the 4dr sedan, and from responses in this thread with other hatches of the era.

Even owning a '12 Outback now, compared to my '14 Mazda 6, I would be willing to wager I had more usable trunk space (i.e. storage separate from the rear seats) in the Mazda just based on the stuff I've packed in both. I can fit taller items in the Subaru yes, but for all practical purposes I can't stack loose or small items any higher without it threatening to come join me in the front seats at every stoplight. And I can hear it all rattling around vs a trunk.

In reply to skierd:

Hatch and sedan having different rear overhang is nothing new. Look at the difference between a Rabbit and a Jetta in 1984.

Some of the perceived loss of space has got to be the increased "wall thickness" of current cars. I assume it's due to crash standards. I own an A2 Golf GTI and a MINI CooperS. Height and width are very close (the MINI is slightly taller and wider), but shoulder room is considerably less in the MINI, especially in the rear. The shoulder room loss is the same as interior volume loss. Combine that reduced interior width with 17" less length and the MINI is a pretty useless hauler. My sticks and hockey bag pretty much fill it. With seats down the VW must be close to double the MINI's cargo volume. As to skierd's comment on length, sedans were normally longer that hatch models, with a few exceptions. Any car that had a squarish hatch and was sedan length would be a wagon (Oh. Oh. Here we go again).

Yeah, I'd agree, a hatch is generally shorter and won't have much behind the rear seats unless it's a more sloped trunk-style hatch like a fox body or f-body. A wagon will have the longer rear section behind the seats. Don't forget, your "standard" SUV form factor (Suburban and similar) is really just a tall wagon...

rslifkin wrote: Don't forget, your "standard" SUV form factor (Suburban and similar) is really just a tall wagon...

Don't tell SWMBO that... She'll go all apeE36 M3 that's it ISN'T a wagon...

nepa03focus wrote: This is part of the reason I think a hhr would be perfect for me, cheap, decent mpg, holds a lot. I just hated driving the one I tried too much.

That could be part of my rant too. I sold my HHR to get the FoST. From a driving perspective, there's zero comparison. My HHR was a base 2.2L model w/5spd. So it was slow and handling...while good for what it was...was not sports car-esque. But as a commuter, I actually loved the car. I wish they had made the HHR SS beyond 2010 (I wanted a '12 or newer car), there would have been no debate what I would have bought. It was huge inside, and I got spoiled by it. I knew I'd be giving up room going to the Focus, and I checked the hatch out when I was looking at them. But until you actually try to stuff it full, it's hard to gauge how much it really can hold.

It all depends on what your needs are. Haul stuff or just a drivers car.

rslifkin wrote: Yeah, I'd agree, a hatch is generally shorter and won't have much behind the rear seats unless it's a more sloped trunk-style hatch like a fox body or f-body. A wagon will have the longer rear section behind the seats. Don't forget, your "standard" SUV form factor (Suburban and similar) is really just a tall wagon...

which is funny as my Disco is considered exactly that on it's paperwork... a wagon

mad_machine wrote: which is funny as my Disco is considered exactly that on it's paperwork... a wagon

Yeah, in some states my Jeep (ZJ) would be registered as a wagon too. CT calls it a "4dr SUV", while NY calls it a "Suburban"

The FoST is fun to drive, which tends to make up for the relative lack of interior room, but yeah, it's on the smaller side.

92dxman wrote: This is where the Mazda 5 shines. I've had an outdoor table, four chairs, 15 bags of groceries and about 12 cases of canned soda in the back of it with all the back seats down. (at one time) A bike with no wheels off, couple backpacks and groceries is no problem at a single time also. The Fit is a marvel with how much space it has for the size it is. I hate to say it but suv's are going to give you better space options. I'm going CX-5, HRV or maybe another Mazda 5 when this one dies.

Well, the Mazda 5 is a minivan, just with rear doors so you can claim it's not a minivan. STILL a minivan.

Ranger50 wrote:

rslifkin wrote: Don't forget, your "standard" SUV form factor (Suburban and similar) is really just a tall wagon...

Don't tell SWMBO that... She'll go all apeE36 M3 that's it ISN'T a wagon...

Minivan owners usually hate it when you call their truck a wagon.

Klayfish wrote:

nepa03focus wrote: This is part of the reason I think a hhr would be perfect for me, cheap, decent mpg, holds a lot. I just hated driving the one I tried too much.

That could be part of my rant too. I sold my HHR to get the FoST. From a driving perspective, there's zero comparison. My HHR was a base 2.2L model w/5spd. So it was slow and handling...while good for what it was...was not sports car-esque. But as a commuter, I actually loved the car. I wish they had made the HHR SS beyond 2010 (I wanted a '12 or newer car), there would have been no debate what I would have bought. It was huge inside, and I got spoiled by it. I knew I'd be giving up room going to the Focus, and I checked the hatch out when I was looking at them. But until you actually try to stuff it full, it's hard to gauge how much it really can hold.

After I smashed my old focus I test drove a base hhr with the auto, wow that was uninspiring. I think an ss would be great but everytime I do see one for sale they want at least 10k. Now I'm wondering if you could make a stick base one decent with the ss suspension.....

In reply to RealMiniParker:

no, the Fit doesn't have a flat-folding front seat.

The rear hatch space in the Fit is pretty darn big for the size of the car, even with the rear seats up. It's cavernous compared to my Leaf.

rslifkin wrote:

mad_machine wrote: which is funny as my Disco is considered exactly that on it's paperwork... a wagon

Yeah, in some states my Jeep (ZJ) would be registered as a wagon too. CT calls it a "4dr SUV", while NY calls it a "Suburban"

And Wisconsin titles a Magnum as a "utility" type vehicle. Go figure.