Station wagons. Coming back or still bad memories?

[fdcg27]

There is nothing more practical in cars than the two box shape.
You can end up with plenty of interior space in a small and easily loaded package.
The most practical small vehicles we've had were a couple of mid eighties Civic Wagons.
Plenty of room for a family of four and their gear as well as a functional roof rack.
I for one would be happy to see more wagons and fewer pseudo SUVs on the market.
The manufacturers make what people want to buy, though, hence the large number pseudo SUV models and the dearth of wagons.
You could carve corners and have fun driving a Civic Wagon and that ain't happening with any pseudo SUV.

 

[dishdude]

Originally Posted By: Nick1994
Station wagons are lower and have lower roof lines inside for fitting bulky things compared to a crossover like a CRV or a RAV4, so what purpose do they serve?


None, that's why they've vanished from the roads.

 

[Nick1994]

Originally Posted By: Zen_
, and an Accord wagon he bought to drive while the Audi's were in the shop

I laughed a little harder than I should have

 

[aquariuscsm]

 

[slacktide_bitog]

Originally Posted By: EdwardC
I like to think of a station wagon as a sedan with extra trunk space instead of a shorter crossover. Plus, being lower, you can get a very sporty vehicle while still being useful.

 

[aquariuscsm]

My best friend in high school had one of these:

 

[Dyusik]

I personally would rather drive a station wagon than a sedan.

BUT
this is where I draw the line.

 

[Joenpb]

Station Wagons never left imo, they just call them SUVs now. If its a 2 wheel drive SUV, its a station wagon with a lift.

 

[DerbyDave]

I think the trend in vehicles goes in cycles by generation. The minivan generation bought minivans because wagons were their parents cars and became uncool. The SUV generation is buying SUVs because their parents minivans were uncool. Will the next generation want something else because SUVs will be their parents uncool cars?

 

[SumpChump]

Took my driver's test in a '78 Chevy Malibu Station Wagon. Failed the paralell parking test. LOL It had a V6 that fouled plugs but we could haul anything in it. And it had peppy shift points.

 

[WishIhadatruck]

Originally Posted By: Nick1994
Station wagons are lower and have lower roof lines inside for fitting bulky things compared to a crossover like a CRV or a RAV4, so what purpose do they serve?


Other than for large bulky items, I'd rather have a wider longer load floor of a wagon. More surface area and less stacking stuff on top of other things. Depends on the CUV and the wagon however. Better handling, better fuel economy, etc. Check this out.


2017 Mercedes-AMG GLE43 vs. 2017 Mercedes-Benz E400 Wagon

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: PimTac

I think the v8 is headed for the history books. Today’s V6 is pretty much capable of anything the v8 could do except the gas mileage.


I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion? Two more cylinders in an otherwise identical engine will result in more power. I don't recall the last time anybody mass-produced a 475HP naturally aspirated V6, do you?

What we are seeing is a trend of forced induction reduced-displacement engines, which means smaller 4's taking the place of conventional deep-breathing V6's, and smaller V6's doing the same with V8's. That doesn't make them more capable than a similarly equipped V8, it just makes them more practical in the game of fuel economy, which is an important factor. My big 6.4L, even with MDS, will not yield the same gas mileage as an Ecoboost under typical driving conditions, but they will both swill fuel like a raging drunk when you put down the pedal.

The other side of that is that the scaling of things starts to get silly. When your staple commodity V6 is 3.6L and produces 300HP (83HP/L), a similarly setup 5.7L V8 would produce ~475HP. That's serious overkill in most applications. Ford has done a very good job demonstrating that sort of density and beyond in their latest mills with the latest 5.0L in the Mustang laying down 460HP and its flat-plane 5.2L sibling an incredible 526HP, putting it at 101HP/L.

Engine technology has improved significantly and far greater density is becoming the norm. With the addition of more capable forced-induction small displacement mills, the pool of applications where a similarly evolved high-powered V8 makes sense has shrunk. There is no replacement for displacement, all else being equal, but then how fast do you need to go and how much power can your average driver really handle? The 707HP 6.1 has a hard time finding traction even with AWD. The limit is really where the rubber meets the road and what's between the seat and the wheel.

 

[Ramblejam]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
The 707HP 6.1 has a hard time finding traction even with AWD. The limit is really where the rubber meets the road and what's between the seat and the wheel.

"The 707-hp Grand Cherokee is so easy to launch, your street-racing grandmother could do it."

http://www.thedrive.com/video/17561/how-...ly?iid=sr-link4

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: Ramblejam
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
The 707HP 6.1 has a hard time finding traction even with AWD. The limit is really where the rubber meets the road and what's between the seat and the wheel.

"The 707-hp Grand Cherokee is so easy to launch, your street-racing grandmother could do it."

http://www.thedrive.com/video/17561/how-...ly?iid=sr-link4


I've lit up the tires on mine, using the launch control isn't quite the same thing as pinning it while in "sport"

Mind you, the beginning of their video aptly demonstrates it blowing the tires off. And of course this is on a dry, sunny day, not a wet cold day in Canada, LOL

I really like the demo on the dirt though, that was funny! Thanks for the share.

 

[Ramblejam]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
I really like the demo on the dirt though, that was funny! Thanks for the share.


Amazing how quick it moved out on that surface; you're welcome!

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: Ramblejam
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
I really like the demo on the dirt though, that was funny! Thanks for the share.


Amazing how quick it moved out on that surface; you're welcome!


Yup, the launch control works REALLY well

 

[PimTac]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: PimTac

I think the v8 is headed for the history books. Today’s V6 is pretty much capable of anything the v8 could do except the gas mileage.


I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion? Two more cylinders in an otherwise identical engine will result in more power. I don't recall the last time anybody mass-produced a 475HP naturally aspirated V6, do you?

What we are seeing is a trend of forced induction reduced-displacement engines, which means smaller 4's taking the place of conventional deep-breathing V6's, and smaller V6's doing the same with V8's. That doesn't make them more capable than a similarly equipped V8, it just makes them more practical in the game of fuel economy, which is an important factor. My big 6.4L, even with MDS, will not yield the same gas mileage as an Ecoboost under typical driving conditions, but they will both swill fuel like a raging drunk when you put down the pedal.

The other side of that is that the scaling of things starts to get silly. When your staple commodity V6 is 3.6L and produces 300HP (83HP/L), a similarly setup 5.7L V8 would produce ~475HP. That's serious overkill in most applications. Ford has done a very good job demonstrating that sort of density and beyond in their latest mills with the latest 5.0L in the Mustang laying down 460HP and its flat-plane 5.2L sibling an incredible 526HP, putting it at 101HP/L.

Engine technology has improved significantly and far greater density is becoming the norm. With the addition of more capable forced-induction small displacement mills, the pool of applications where a similarly evolved high-powered V8 makes sense has shrunk. There is no replacement for displacement, all else being equal, but then how fast do you need to go and how much power can your average driver really handle? The 707HP 6.1 has a hard time finding traction even with AWD. The limit is really where the rubber meets the road and what's between the seat and the wheel.





I had a feeling you would respond to that statement.

 

[PimTac]

Originally Posted By: Dyusik
I personally would rather drive a station wagon than a sedan.

BUT
this is where I draw the line.

I would too. That second one is an abomination.

 

[pharden]

I've had two wagons a Volvo V-70R and a Saab 9-3 aero. Both great cars and i've often thought about buying another wagon such as a Subaru Outback or any Audi A-4. I also like the looks of the new Volvo V-90 wagon.

I doubt though wagons will make much of a comeback since people have come to like crossover vehicles due to their higher ride height which allows for easier loading, easier entry and exit and better visiblity

 

[PeterPolyol]

Wagons are sweet, even if the car model is junk, the wagon version always seems to be acceptable. Was just fondly watching a video of a fella that swapped a newer 3500 into his old A-body Century Wagon. Then there's always the guys running 8s in sleeper wagons. Too bad that if you wanted a wagon in North America today, you'd have to buy a "CUV" and lower it...