Automotive

Road and Track: How We Can Kill the Crossover and Make Cars Cool Again

  • Last Updated:
  • Jul 13th, 2016 8:58 pm
Tags:
None
Deal Addict
User avatar
Aug 10, 2015
1623 posts
468 upvotes
Elgin, ON
mr_raider wrote: Think Trax/Encore:

This thing has a smaller trunk than a Cruze. If I needed to carry a stroller, a diaper bag and a playard, it would not be my first choice.

For carrying crap, nothing beats a mid sized sedan. I've rented Malibus and Fusions, and they are ideal for hauling the family to the airport.
The Trax will get you to your day job relatively efficiently, and slide nicely into tight parking spots. But I would not suggest a Trax for much more than an in town commuter vehicle.

The front passenger does not even get a centre arm rest, so road trips with your significant other would be no fun. Also, the vehicle is woefully underpowered, so forget about acceleration. Since it is so compact, it's not a great baby and stroller hauler.
Deal Addict
Feb 9, 2008
2363 posts
173 upvotes
tebore wrote: You've owned some really sad cars...
LOL. I think the Italians who made them would disagree.
Deal Guru
Feb 9, 2006
11658 posts
6222 upvotes
Brampton
movieman wrote: LOL. I think the Italians who made them would disagree.
Not if they're slower than your Subbie...
Deal Guru
User avatar
Mar 31, 2008
11449 posts
2021 upvotes
Toronto
Cars lost their coolness when this happened:

The Banlgle Butt!
Image

Seriously, after this, all cars started looking the same. Today, they are 97% the same.
Deal Expert
Feb 29, 2008
25184 posts
3098 upvotes
Montreal
rkjredflag wrote: The Trax will get you to your day job relatively efficiently, and slide nicely into tight parking spots. But I would not suggest a Trax for much more than an in town commuter vehicle.

The front passenger does not even get a centre arm rest, so road trips with your significant other would be no fun. Also, the vehicle is woefully underpowered, so forget about acceleration. Since it is so compact, it's not a great baby and stroller hauler.
What can a Trax do that a Cruze can't? Or better yet a Sonic since its built on gamma II also?
Deal Addict
Jan 8, 2007
2642 posts
1148 upvotes
Calgary
tebore wrote: Where's my hat so I can eat it.

Anyway I'm apparently am as outdated when it comes to these stupid acronyms as some of the writers for these magazines. As Some of the magazines refer to CUV as compact-SUVs.

Ok ok let me change my wording and see if you guys agree. The Compact SUV market is full of crap gutless wonders.

The Cross-over market isn't where gutless engines are a problem. Well at least for the most part as a more powerful engine is offered. However the majority of sales are for the Gutless variant, so the argument of being able to haul stuff is a joke.

I really miss the V6 Rav4.
There was a time when SUV meant the vehicle was on a frame. So Something like Toyota 4runner is a true SUV. CUVs meant crossover utility vehicle where they are build more like cars. Today majority of utility vehicles are not built on frames so people call CRVs and Rav4s along with everything else SUV because there are so few true SUVs left.
Deal Expert
User avatar
Jan 7, 2007
20679 posts
4816 upvotes
Poormond Hill
mr_raider wrote: Think Trax/Encore:

Image


This thing has a smaller trunk than a Cruze. If I needed to carry a stroller, a diaper bag and a playard, it would not be my first choice.

For carrying crap, nothing beats a mid sized sedan. I've rented Malibus and Fusions, and they are ideal for hauling the family to the airport.
Of course the Trax has a smaller trunk than a Cruze. If you haven't noticed, a Cruze is much bigger than the Trax, so this should be obvious. How much bigger? A Trax is ~168" long while a Cruze is ~184". Duh!!!!
A life spent making mistakes is not only more memorable, but more useful than a life spent doing nothing.
Deal Expert
User avatar
Jan 7, 2007
20679 posts
4816 upvotes
Poormond Hill
tebore wrote: That was in my mind for these "CUVs" but apparently I was wrong to classify them in the CUV category. But the compact and Mini Utility segment is full of crap these things. Poor Utility vs a regular compact/hatch or mid sized.
Name me a regular compact/hatch or mid sized car that has better utility than a Compact lol Utility Vehicle!
A life spent making mistakes is not only more memorable, but more useful than a life spent doing nothing.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Aug 10, 2015
1623 posts
468 upvotes
Elgin, ON
mr_raider wrote: What can a Trax do that a Cruze can't? Or better yet a Sonic since its built on gamma II also?
Drive all four wheels.

Yup, it's a short list.
Deal Guru
Feb 9, 2006
11658 posts
6222 upvotes
Brampton
sandikosh wrote: Name me a regular compact/hatch or mid sized car that has better utility than a Compact lol Utility Vehicle!
I cant tell this is a joke right to get back at my earlier statement?
Deal Expert
Feb 29, 2008
25184 posts
3098 upvotes
Montreal
rkjredflag wrote: Drive all four wheels.

Yup, it's a short list.
I would be most curious to see the fwd vs awd sales split on the encore and trax.

Asking the 1.4t to haul around an awd assembly is asking for a blown aneurysm.

And I doubt its the haldex unit found in buicks. Probably some cheap in house setup.
Deal Expert
User avatar
Feb 26, 2004
26999 posts
4308 upvotes
new_vr wrote: We have a V6 Rav4. It doesn't handle, but it's definitely fast.
And it does have a huge amount of storage in it.
0-60 in 7.x seconds is not fast.
tebore wrote: That was a great generation of Rav. It was a bit what people today would call "too utilitarian" but because of that it had great utility. Road noise was a bit on the high side but fully optioned out it was a nice ride but pricy just south of $40k
It had cheap plastics everywhere, rattled like crazy, and the transmission choices offered were both obsolete.
Blubbs wrote: Yay semantics! Now we all agree.

If the 2016 Rav4 had a V6 I would be all over that.

However, A Rav4 is still more practical for cargo space than a Corolla or Camry. Even if they are all gutless (other than the V6 Camry).
Even the Lexus NX gets a turbo 4 banger. Toyota is not going to waste its V6 by putting it into a soccer mom vehicle where no one cares about performance. The Camry is ugly.

The only decent option is the Acura RDX. But even that has an obsolete SOHC engine and obsolete 6-speed automatic.
Deal Addict
Apr 13, 2003
3276 posts
58 upvotes
DJ_Peanuts22 wrote: 0-60 in 7.x seconds is not fast.
Good thing it does it under 7 seconds then.
DJ_Peanuts22 wrote: It had cheap plastics everywhere, rattled like crazy, and the transmission choices offered were both obsolete.
Well, I had a subaru - so the Toyota interior was an upgrade, as well as the transmission

Bang for your buck, I can't think of anything I would replace that Rav4 v6 with. I am not going to compare it to the Lexus NX or the Acura RDX since they cost significantly more money.

Top