Oh...estate cars. 2.4 children, plenty of room for shopping, the dog or a family holiday but you don't want to drive a chunky great people carrier.
Okay so what is the deal with Hatchbacks?
- Thread starter Lil devils x_v1legacy
- Start date
That's what we would call an estate. Pretty similar to the hatchback but with a longer boot and flatter boot door. More practical than a hatchback, generally a bit more expensive too.
You do have little hatchbacks in the States - I drove a Nissan Versa while I was there. Or it might have been a Note.
You do have little hatchbacks in the States - I drove a Nissan Versa while I was there. Or it might have been a Note.
I live in Texas, you see very very few small cars that are not sports cars on the road here. Huge cars/ vans/ SUVs/ trucks everywhere though.Baffle2 said:
Hatchbacks were all the rage like 10 years ago, hardly ever see any now though. But to answer the thread. Small, practical, fuel efficient. Can look a lot better than sedans with a sports package. Some of the higher end hatchbacks look like rally cars.
To put it in perspective, im 34 and still on my first car, a 2001 ford focus hatchback, which ive owned since 2003. In 5 more years, I will own one car for half of my life. They just look sporty than your average car, without having to spend 200+k.
http://www.evo.co.uk/ford/focus-rs/20116/ford-focus-rs-mountune-m400-review-can-the-rs-cope-with-nearly-400bhp
I will say that i dont think the cars you are linking are hatchbacks, they are a bit big. They seem to be more in the station wagon or crossover region.
EDIT: if i can figure out how to post pictures i would, but my link for
To put it in perspective, im 34 and still on my first car, a 2001 ford focus hatchback, which ive owned since 2003. In 5 more years, I will own one car for half of my life. They just look sporty than your average car, without having to spend 200+k.
http://www.evo.co.uk/ford/focus-rs/20116/ford-focus-rs-mountune-m400-review-can-the-rs-cope-with-nearly-400bhp
I will say that i dont think the cars you are linking are hatchbacks, they are a bit big. They seem to be more in the station wagon or crossover region.
EDIT: if i can figure out how to post pictures i would, but my link for
- Feb 7, 2011
- 7,931
- 2,296
- 118
- Country
- 'Merica
- Gender
- 3 children in a trench coat
The same way you do in a van or suv.Lil devils x said:
A hatchback is literally just an suv but smaller. They get a lot of use in Europe because SUVs just don't really fit in a lot of European cities (try to parallel park something bigger than a bread box in Madrid), and they're more economical then an SUV.
Seriously, I was in Spain recently and saw a Jeep Wrangler driving around and it looked like a massive monster in comparison to everything else while in the US it's a small SUV.
As for them not being sporty enough for you, my dad has a mini and I love driving it, very snappy and responsive. There's a reason pretty much all rally cars are souped up hatchbacks.
Hah. Claiming that SUVs offer more space than a hatchback. Most SUVs have the same space or less, just higher up, these days.
Hatchbacks are cheaper, more manoeuvrable (particularly on confined roads like you get a lot in the UK), easier to park, still fit in plenty of stuff, and go at speeds where the aerodynamic impact of a bit of turbulence is next to nothing. Even at 70 they are generally more efficient than larger vehicles due to engine size and cross-sectional area.
But if performance is your issue, the Honda Civic Type R begs to differ. Just saying.
More to the point, in a world where we are driving towards greater efficiency, we should be cutting down on pointlessly unwieldy large vehicles and moving towards lighter ones.
Hatchbacks are cheaper, more manoeuvrable (particularly on confined roads like you get a lot in the UK), easier to park, still fit in plenty of stuff, and go at speeds where the aerodynamic impact of a bit of turbulence is next to nothing. Even at 70 they are generally more efficient than larger vehicles due to engine size and cross-sectional area.
But if performance is your issue, the Honda Civic Type R begs to differ. Just saying.
More to the point, in a world where we are driving towards greater efficiency, we should be cutting down on pointlessly unwieldy large vehicles and moving towards lighter ones.
I would say that the cab in an SUV offers much more space than in a hatchback - certainly I find it a more comfortable drive. Quite a few SUVs have crappy boot space, but the back seats are much more roomy than a hatchback, so when you put them down you get a lot of extra space.Catnip1024 said:
Much of the space gain I find having an SUV comes from the shape of the boot rather than the overall size - same as with an estate - the boot is square so you can fit more long things in (that is, you can stack them higher than you can in a hatchback). I transport a lot of wood.
Yea the idea of needing smaller vehicles is why I was wondering why anyone would get what I was referring to a hatchback here, I think they call an "estate car" there.(The car in the photo in post 20 above is what I am referring to), not a compact European car. The ones I have seen in this area are quite long, not small or as easy to maneuver, some of them stick out of their parking spaces and are quite annoying to have to avoid.Catnip1024 said:
I feel like the pushback you're getting here is that a hatchback clearly refers to a type of car, popular in most of the world. And you're looking at a stationwagon, or an estate car with a hatchback-like design and saying "Well that's a hatchback!".
I also cant say I've ever seen a car of that design which is any longer that a standard 4 door sedan or SUV, so I cant get behind the complaints its longer than 'regular cars'. Its longer than smaller cars, but....they're small.
I also cant say I've ever seen a car of that design which is any longer that a standard 4 door sedan or SUV, so I cant get behind the complaints its longer than 'regular cars'. Its longer than smaller cars, but....they're small.
Ohhhhhh... So that's what you meant by hatchbacks. For this entire thread, up to this post, i thought you were talking about these:Lil devils x said:I am not talking about those, I am not even sure if they sell those in the US since I have never seen one here. I am talking about the "US hatchbacks" or aka Station wagons. They are not small, these are what I am talking about:
Damn... this is about Estates!? Now your argument makes more sense! I based my entire post on hatchbacks!
Yeah... fuck estates. Ugly bastards them... I guess they are good if you have large dogs though. The extra length in the back gives dogs more room and you can easily fit a cage at the top of the seats. Most estates I tend to see have the dog cage installed.
Yeah... fuck estates. Ugly bastards them... I guess they are good if you have large dogs though. The extra length in the back gives dogs more room and you can easily fit a cage at the top of the seats. Most estates I tend to see have the dog cage installed.
I actually quite like estates, but I really do like the higher seat in taller vehicles. Also, I'm getting older; getting in and out of a car where the seat is at my standing hip height is much easier than one where it's around my knee or so. (I'm not ancient, but know when you've been sitting in a Tiburon for six hours.)
Aaaahhhhh...Lil devils x said:
You mean estates. Or saloons... Very different things.
They have their limited niche. People who engage in long hobbies - canoeing, surfing, cycling. And they are pretty much the same as an SUV only not as high - easier to clean, better for small people (seriously, little is as terrifying as a tiny old lady behind the wheel of a huge 4x4).
Station wagons have as much room as an SUV but retain the driving experience of the sedans they?re typically based on. Hell, Holden Australia sells wagons with the same V8 as a Camaro and they're popular as hell. That sais creating a good looking station wagon is a fine art and basically no one other than Holden has made one here in like 10 years.Lil devils x said:I am not talking about those, I am not even sure if they sell those in the US since I have never seen one here. I am talking about the "US hatchbacks" or aka Station wagons. They are not small, these are what I am talking about:dscross said:
I am not talking about the small, European cars, this is what I am starting to see pop up and am curious why someone would choose that over the many other options. I am seeing this trend end with these things eventually being crushed as I cannot see this trend lasting that long.
Would be great except there is no subway, public transportation, or even sidewalks or bike lanes here. They would have to scrap the current cities here and redesign them entirely to be walker and bike rider friendly as if you do not die from the heat from attempting to walk the long distances to everything here, you will be run over since there is no walkable terrain outside of the 80mph highway, including on the bridges. In many stretches of highway here there is no service road, no shoulder to pull over on and the sides of the road are all tore up.Souplex said:
Like Texas would fund any sort of public anything.... would be easier to colonize mars than it would be to get Texas to use Taxes to actually help the public.
*In a major city that actually used planning and taxes to assist the public* We also have major cities that are terribly planned and do not provide much support at all.Elijin said:
Hatchbacks are things like the Mazda 3, Hyundai Accent, Honda Accord, or the Subaru Impreza (which doesn't even come in a sedan form at all anymore, and is only a Hatchback, while the others are also available as sedans). The BMW pictured, or the Cadillac CTS-V Wagon, or a Dodge Magnum are still called station wagons in the US, which have a hatch back, but aren't considered hatchbacks.
That said, my wife hates Station Wagons even though my only goal has been to run a 9 second 1/4 mile in one since I was 10 or so, and I even test drove a 1992 Oldsmobile Custom Cruiser with the 350 LT1 a few years back. My choices then became "How do I get as much leg room for my three kids in the back seat as my Cadillac Deville without actually owning a 25 year old Cadillac Deville?" I looked at a few different cars, but the Charger was outside my price range and much too small, and the other cars in my price range tended to be too small or FWD, which I can't stand driving in the snow during the winter. I started looking at SUVs, especially with 4x4, and found the TrailBlazer to be the only reasonable one for me. More cargo space than the Tahoe, but less seating capacity, with just as much foot and head room. Safety is right up there, if not better since the Tahoes I looked at were all older than my TrailBlazer.
Hatchbacks or station wagons are great for people who want lots of storage space and need to seat a lot of people, but don't need the ground clearance people like myself do in the winter. Hatchbacks are great for gas mileage and daily driving when you expect to do transporting stuff on your off days or not every time you go somewhere, and Station Wagons give you that same usefulness with much more capacity over all when you need it.
What it comes down to is personal preference and need. My wife hates it when I run errands (Like when I go to the three nearest towns: Newton, Ames, and Marshalltown, all in one day) and need to spend $15 on a 1/4 tank of gas because it added up to over 130 miles of travel (I live out in the middle of fucking nowhere, Iowa). She still would rather feed my 4.2 liter straight 6 than have a station wagon, and while I would be just fine with a rear drive car in the snow, the 4x4 and extra clearance is certainly more useful in the snow, though it undoubtedly gets worse gas mileage than the V8 would.
That said, my wife hates Station Wagons even though my only goal has been to run a 9 second 1/4 mile in one since I was 10 or so, and I even test drove a 1992 Oldsmobile Custom Cruiser with the 350 LT1 a few years back. My choices then became "How do I get as much leg room for my three kids in the back seat as my Cadillac Deville without actually owning a 25 year old Cadillac Deville?" I looked at a few different cars, but the Charger was outside my price range and much too small, and the other cars in my price range tended to be too small or FWD, which I can't stand driving in the snow during the winter. I started looking at SUVs, especially with 4x4, and found the TrailBlazer to be the only reasonable one for me. More cargo space than the Tahoe, but less seating capacity, with just as much foot and head room. Safety is right up there, if not better since the Tahoes I looked at were all older than my TrailBlazer.
Hatchbacks or station wagons are great for people who want lots of storage space and need to seat a lot of people, but don't need the ground clearance people like myself do in the winter. Hatchbacks are great for gas mileage and daily driving when you expect to do transporting stuff on your off days or not every time you go somewhere, and Station Wagons give you that same usefulness with much more capacity over all when you need it.
What it comes down to is personal preference and need. My wife hates it when I run errands (Like when I go to the three nearest towns: Newton, Ames, and Marshalltown, all in one day) and need to spend $15 on a 1/4 tank of gas because it added up to over 130 miles of travel (I live out in the middle of fucking nowhere, Iowa). She still would rather feed my 4.2 liter straight 6 than have a station wagon, and while I would be just fine with a rear drive car in the snow, the 4x4 and extra clearance is certainly more useful in the snow, though it undoubtedly gets worse gas mileage than the V8 would.