Why buy a mid-size sedan...?

[k24a4]

...over a CUV?

It seems today's CUV's are closing the gap in gas mileage, performance, handling and comfort with mid-size sedans, while offering greater utility at a similar price point.

I realize that the mpg gains of smaller cars may offset the advantages of a cuv, which is why I'm comparing them specifically to the larger mid-size sedan, for instance, Mazda 6 vs. Mazda CX-5, Honda Accord vs Crv, etc.

 

[KitaCam]

Trunk?

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: k24a4
...over a CUV?

It seems today's CUV's are closing the gap in gas mileage, performance, handling and comfort with mid-size sedans, while offering greater utility at a similar price point.

I'd pick a station wagon over a CUV. Maybe they're closing the gap, but they're not there yet. CUV will have a higher center of gravity which will negatively affect its handling. But that's just my personal approach. For others, things like higher seating position may be more important.

 

[surfstar]

Mazda6 37mpg hwy gasser or the upcoming 2.2d 45mpg? Can't get that in a CUV...yet

Once the CX5 diesel (if ever) shows up, that could make your argument...

a Mazda6 wagon or hatch would make the choice much harder, though!

 

[jrustles]

IMO sedans are generally more quiet, smoother riding and better handling. CUV/SUV have wide open trunk areas which can allow more road noise into the cabin, and the ride height is usually a bit higher with firmer dampers and higher center of gravity than a sedan. As of late, the gap between Sedan and CUV dynamics is closing up, though- not equal, but close. It then becomes more about whether one needs the utility of the CUV.

 

[RF Overlord]

^^^everything they said^^^

Plus crossovers are generally ugly.

 

[Danno]

When it comes to swapping winter tires to summer, a sedan's tires weigh so much less. Also, the price for tires is 30 - 50% less for a 16" sedan vs. the 17" plus tires on a CUV.

 

[440Magnum]

I'm just not a big fan of CUVs. Mechanically they're a reduced-size, jacked-up minivan with 4 conventional doors and sometimes AWD. Transverse engines, FWD-based. Blah blah yawn yawn.

I'd rather have a FWD or AWD midsize car which has so much better vehicle dynamics (or better yet, a rear-drive full-size or midsize like a BMW, ATS, CTS, Charger, etc.), or else a real SUV like the current Liberty (not the forthcoming replacement), the current Wrangler 4-door, etc. Not something that tries to be halfway between a car and a real offroader.

 

[RF Overlord]

440Magnum, it sounds like you and I think alike.

If you need a car, buy a car, if you need a truck buy a truck.

Something that pretends to be both is no good at either.

 

[MBS500]

want more space and 4wd -- Impreza wagon,MB E class 4matic.
Europe has so many wagon versions of most cars, why we don't get most of them here?
CUV are just new fashion, which is not really needed like SUVs decade ago, especially if you live in city and it snows twice a year, and you are driving by yourself most time.

 

[SwampSurvivor]

One nice thing about many compacts, is they're getting narrow but tall. I much prefer the upright seating position in my Focus than many mid sizes that have you laying down.

The same is true for CUVs.

 

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: k24a4
...over a CUV?


I'm with you 100%. In fact, I sold a Camry to buy a CR-V, so I did exactly that. The CR-V drives far better than the sedan it replaced, and it hauls so much more.

What I want is a station wagon. Most CUV/SUVs today are the modern equivalent to a station wagon, and fit the bill nicely. Most are based on car platforms so the chassis dynamics are similar. The benefit to most CUVs/SUVs is you get a nice upright seating position that you don't have in most sedans. The door sills are low and visibility is good. They're perfect for our needs. I may never own a 'car' again.

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: Danno
When it comes to swapping winter tires to summer, a sedan's tires weigh so much less.

I'm guessing most CUV owners don't bother with two sets of tires, at least in the US.

 

[d00df00d]

All else equal, a CUV will never offer the same combination of ride, handling, and cost (to buy and own) as a sedan. It can't. It's just physics. They're taller, heavier, and less aerodynamic -- by definition. No matter what technology a CUV might have to improve its dynamics, a car with the same features would get better results.

It's certainly true that CUVs are good enough for 99% of drivers and situations. I just can't imagine buying a vehicle that intentionally sacrifices its ability to stop or swerve just to provide a high seating position or a certain image.


If I need to haul around 4 people and a little cargo, I'm getting a sedan.

If I need to haul around 4 people and a lot of cargo, I'm getting a wagon.

If I need to haul around 6 people and any amount of cargo, I'm getting a minivan.

If I need to haul around people and cargo while towing something significant, I'm getting a real SUV.

I see no point to a CUV.

 

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: d00df00d
I see no point to a CUV.

The "C" in CUV stands for cute. That's their appeal.

 

[supton]

How many wagons really do exist in the US? I don't keep up with them all, but I'm 99% sure you can't get a Toyota/Honda/GM wagon of any sort. Ford I think has some, but not Dodge. Otherwise you are looking at VW and other European imports, which some won't touch, either for price/durability reasons.

A CUV might do nothing well, but it probably 90% of what its owners need, 90% of the time. Probably a decent compromise if you can't own two+ vehicles.

 

[surfstar]

For the occasional dirt road, I don't need AWD or crazy ground clearance, but the little extra vs a Civic, and a CUV fits the bill.
Once they can get 40mpg, then I won't have to have two vehicles.

 

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: d00df00d
I just can't imagine buying a vehicle that intentionally sacrifices its ability to stop or swerve just to provide a high seating position or a certain image.


You can't imagine it, but I wager you did. Your BMW M3 intentionally sacrifices its ability to stop or swerve just to provide a climate-controlled cabin and a radio...compared with a race car. It's all relative.

*Every* vehicle is an attempt to balance engineering compromises in a way that will appeal to certain buyers. For us, sedans don't offer enough utility and "real" SUVs are too large and inefficient. Unibody SUVs offer a good the types of compromises that work for our family.

We are blessed to have the choice in vehicles that we do have in this country.

 

[BobsArmory]

What about the Cadillac CTS wagon?


Originally Posted By: supton
How many wagons really do exist in the US? I don't keep up with them all, but I'm 99% sure you can't get a Toyota/Honda/GM wagon of any sort. Ford I think has some, but not Dodge. Otherwise you are looking at VW and other European imports, which some won't touch, either for price/durability reasons.

A CUV might do nothing well, but it probably 90% of what its owners need, 90% of the time. Probably a decent compromise if you can't own two+ vehicles.

 

[eljefino]

Traded my 91 volvo 940 turbo wagon for an 07 Chevy HHR. The Volvo did so much better in making its space available. The luggage compartment was easily 2x the size of the one in the HHR. Visibility was way better, with thin A-pillars and a large rear window. I have a 40x48" trailer that disappears behind the HHR-- murder to back up. It worked great behind the volvo.

Both have inline 4 engines, a pleasure to work on. The HHR gets 10 MPG better.

When putting a trailer hitch on the HHR I noticed how much dead space there is in making it look cute. There's a foot of space between the inner trunk wall and the outer rear fenders. It has a removeable trunk pan on top of another trunk pan on top of the spare tire and battery. My olds silhouette van also had dead space under the 2nd seat, real high floorboards and just a void underneath the vehicle. An escaping prisoner could probably ride up there, hidden by the rocker panels.

The HHR is set up for a numb but comfortable driving experience. The volvo had stiff struts, handled great, but was not the comfy luxury cruiser a typical American tuned car of that size would be.

Loading my kids into the rear car seats was a hassle, it was hard to not bonk their heads on the roof while I stooped over. I threw my back out once loading my 3 year old. One can get into a CUV easily for this. Remember many states make it illegal to ride up front until you're 12!!!

I'd buy another RWD volvo 940/740 wagon in an instant, if they still made them.