3 ms·

Carmakers have been tending towards SUV and crossover designs because they make more money on them. The ID.4 is a crossover, basically an SUV on a car frame ra

Carmakers have been tending towards SUV and crossover designs because they make more money on them. The ID.4 is a crossover, basically an SUV on a car frame rather than a truck frame. I too wish they made more compact cars, but it seems that they would rather produce what is more profitable for them rather than what customers want.

hedgehog 2y ago
Crossovers in that zone are a pretty reasonable compromise of cost, handling, safety, and ergonomics. They have essentially replaced station wagons and are mostly built the same way, just a little taller.
- atrettel 2y ago
  I don't disagree, but I just prefer compact cars. If I had to buy a new vehicle and there were no compacts available, I'd go for a crossover, but I won't like it.
  - hedgehog 2y ago
    I prefer to drive smaller cars but with stroller, kids' car seats, etc there are some physical constraints on getting everything to fit in a reasonable way.
- freddie_mercury 2y ago
  I agree that they have replaced station wagons but as a station wagon owner they aren't really even close to interchangeable. I don't know why they replaced them. Compare my Mazda 6 wagon to the Mazda CX-9 crossover. My wagon is almost 25% more fuel efficient (7L/100km vs 9L/100km) but also has MUCH more space. Minimum cargo space of 506L vs 230L. Maximum cargo space of 1648L vs 810L. It has a shorter wheelbase and smaller turning radius. It does have worse towing 550kg vs 750kg but I almost never see anyone towing anything.
  - hedgehog 2y ago
    Looking at the current Mazda lineup the replacement for the Mazda6 (29 mpg) is the CX-50 which adds AWD and gets 28 mpg or 38 mpg for the hybrid. I was suprised the Mazda6 would have so much more cargo area but in the spec sheet it lists 22 ft vs 31 for the CX-50. So to me the CX-50 looks like more capacity in about the same physical and carbon footprint, what am I missing here? In Toyota's lineup the RAV4 is basically a tall Camry, and in Subaru's lineup the Outback kind of just got a bit taller and reclassified as a crossover alternative to the Legacy. Of course these companies all have larger and smaller options, but in general it seems like the adoption of larger vehicles is not because smaller ones aren't available, it's because for various reasons customers want to buy them. In any case worrying about exactly what vehicle mix is selling to me feels like rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.
nativeit 2y ago
I’m not really disagreeing with your broader point, but consumer demand has been tracking toward trucks and SUVs for quite a while now. I would imagine there is a bit of a “tail wagging the dog” situation there, and it’s also probably relevant that the average age of a new car buyer has been rising as wealth distribution has skewed further upward. But that’s great news, if there’s truly a gap in the famously difficult automotive market, maybe a scrappy new player can break through with a simple, small sedan—one that can be made cheaply, and sold affordably—and then their supply chain can be forced into a series of buy outs and hostile takeovers, creating the next generation of wealthy donors to political action groups. It’s the ciiiirrcle of liiiife etc..
robotelvis 2y ago
I think part of the issue is that the people who want simple non-SUVs are the people who mostly buy used cars. The majority of people buy their cars used, but the car makers make the cars they can sell to the minority who buy new cars - and they have very different tastes. New car buyers like gadgets and they like SUVs.

hedgehog 2y ago

Crossovers in that zone are a pretty reasonable compromise of cost, handling, safety, and ergonomics. They have essentially replaced station wagons and are mostly built the same way, just a little taller.

atrettel 2y ago
I don't disagree, but I just prefer compact cars. If I had to buy a new vehicle and there were no compacts available, I'd go for a crossover, but I won't like it.
- hedgehog 2y ago
  I prefer to drive smaller cars but with stroller, kids' car seats, etc there are some physical constraints on getting everything to fit in a reasonable way.
freddie_mercury 2y ago
I agree that they have replaced station wagons but as a station wagon owner they aren't really even close to interchangeable. I don't know why they replaced them. Compare my Mazda 6 wagon to the Mazda CX-9 crossover. My wagon is almost 25% more fuel efficient (7L/100km vs 9L/100km) but also has MUCH more space. Minimum cargo space of 506L vs 230L. Maximum cargo space of 1648L vs 810L. It has a shorter wheelbase and smaller turning radius. It does have worse towing 550kg vs 750kg but I almost never see anyone towing anything.
- hedgehog 2y ago
  Looking at the current Mazda lineup the replacement for the Mazda6 (29 mpg) is the CX-50 which adds AWD and gets 28 mpg or 38 mpg for the hybrid. I was suprised the Mazda6 would have so much more cargo area but in the spec sheet it lists 22 ft vs 31 for the CX-50. So to me the CX-50 looks like more capacity in about the same physical and carbon footprint, what am I missing here? In Toyota's lineup the RAV4 is basically a tall Camry, and in Subaru's lineup the Outback kind of just got a bit taller and reclassified as a crossover alternative to the Legacy. Of course these companies all have larger and smaller options, but in general it seems like the adoption of larger vehicles is not because smaller ones aren't available, it's because for various reasons customers want to buy them. In any case worrying about exactly what vehicle mix is selling to me feels like rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

nativeit 2y ago

I’m not really disagreeing with your broader point, but consumer demand has been tracking toward trucks and SUVs for quite a while now. I would imagine there is a bit of a “tail wagging the dog” situation there, and it’s also probably relevant that the average age of a new car buyer has been rising as wealth distribution has skewed further upward. But that’s great news, if there’s truly a gap in the famously difficult automotive market, maybe a scrappy new player can break through with a simple, small sedan—one that can be made cheaply, and sold affordably—and then their supply chain can be forced into a series of buy outs and hostile takeovers, creating the next generation of wealthy donors to political action groups. It’s the ciiiirrcle of liiiife etc..

robotelvis 2y ago

I think part of the issue is that the people who want simple non-SUVs are the people who mostly buy used cars. The majority of people buy their cars used, but the car makers make the cars they can sell to the minority who buy new cars - and they have very different tastes. New car buyers like gadgets and they like SUVs.