Because they're worse than wagons in some respects (handling) and have pretty much killed everything else in the market. Given that VW is very much a platform company where the Golf wagon shares a lot of parts with the other Golf models it seems like supporting them should be possible. Who wants an automotive monoculture?
If all you can buy is golf pants but you want tough jeans, would you go bottomless or buy the golf pants?
Cars I would buy instantly:
* a car with an electric engine that goes no faster than 80mph while retaining dynamics and that does not come with a million gadgets (as in "electric engine, all else analog"). Please, also in a variant with enough space to fit me, my wife, the kid and the dog. Still, no mandatory audio-visual indoor entertainment for the dog, please.
* a car optimized for DIY repairs (I live in southern Morocco, getting an OBD2-scan at my authorized Nissan dealer was $30 - or 300 small bread or 75kg of flour or 3 days of work for a cop who just started work. A friend's Porsche Cayenne needs to be towed 12h northwards just for the inspection by an authorized dealer).
I am not debating the "I wish there were more options than SUVs/CUVs" point, as I ultimately _feel_ similar to you - I dislike the current market and I too wish we had more choice.
We don't, though, because people are buying SUVs/CUVs.
VW sold the Golf Sportwagen under the Jetta name for some time in the US. They eventually changed the name to match the ROW designation before discontinuing the line in 2019.
No Passat wagon in the US. You can't even get the normal-sized Passat - since 2011 US and Chinese markets share the NMS Passat, a downscale but dramatically larger design.
The Golf Sportwagen (formerly sold as the Jetta Sportwagen) was available until 2019, but is no longer.
They only have the RS6 Avant and the A4 and A4 All-Road in NA, and getting them is easier said then done. They also have their e-tron which is wagonish.
I drove one of the e-tron’s as a loaner while my car was being serviced. It felt heavy, and slow, but didn’t offer anything like the amount of space I’d expect from a wagon. More like a hatchback.
Mercedes too, although the E Class wagon seems to be slowly morphing into an Audi Allroad. BMW killed the 5 Touring after the E60 generation, but you can still get a 3
Once in a blue moon I see a Jaguar wagon stateside, although that may be because 'estates' are still quite popular in the UK
Station Wagons are great but sadly unpopular, which makes them harder to buy than they should be. Everyone wants the exact same mid-sized crossover which seems to be the only thing every car manufacturer cares about except Ford, who now only makes 8' tall F-150s. But if you dig around you can still find great station wagons out there with good performance, good handling and a lot of cargo space.
Yeah, and the "midsize" trucks from 15 or 20 years ago are the same size as the full size trucks were 15 or 20 years ago. Everything is getting way bigger and harder to drive. I'd much rather have a Toyota Tacoma or Ford Ranger from 20 years ago on a forest service road than an F-150 built now.
> The general derision roomy vehicles sometimes receive from car enthusiasts or urbanists is silly, and can evince a cluelessness about the needs of families.
This derision ended up with vehicles getting various bad reputations. This caused people to avoid the vehicle that was best for them so they went to the least bad option that didn't have a bad reputation: SUVs.
I think a lot of people would be better served by a station wagon or minivan.
They are as long and frustrating to parallel park as a minivan, but with half of the useful space. It was one thing when minivans were still built on truck platforms, these sedan platform wagons were more efficient and a better drive, but these days, a minivan is basically what a station wagon was, efficient as a sedan but more useful.
There's one important difference: you can look over a station wagon as a motorcyclist, but you can't look over a minivan. Combine that with the antisocial dark tinted windows, and you've got a deathtrap on wheels.
Yes, I understand that people might wish to transport a fridge or sofa. No, you don't need a minivan to do that.
Motorcyclists also can't look over a pickup with a cap, a van, a truck... and if they are crouched over a rocket, they might not be able to look over a Miata with the top up.
Minivans are tremendously practical and useful. And to be quite honest as someone that owns a minivan but doesn't use it as a daily driver, the impact to other drivers on the road is way down the list of considerations when purchasing.
As a frequent motorcyclist, being able to see over a station wagon doesn't matter when most vehicles on the road (in my area) are SUVs and pickup trucks.
When I'm not on 2 wheels, I'm most often in a minivan, too.
Minivans have the weakest bodyshells of all vehicles, they are like egg boxes.
https://wtop.com/dc-transit/2018/08/is-it-safe-mixed-results...
Station wagons were usually 4 door, the strongest body type, and when they were popular in the 60's and 70s had very strong construction, not least because they were family oriented.
I saw the four-door (sub)compact hatchback ala Honda Fit to be in a similar niche to station wagon -- although smaller and without a third row of seats.
But there aren't hardly even any more of those in the US market anymore. Honda Fit is no longer produced for US market, along with many of it's peers.
Ironically while domestic companies pushed to classify their SUVs as trucks, Subaru sought to classify their Subaru Brat pickup truck as a car by putting seats in the bed to avoid the chicken tax imposed on imported trucks.
What I find amusing is the average modern crossover has no more off-road, towing, etc... capability than a station wagon with similar size and features. They're just wagons with artificially high seating positions and more truck-like styling.
Efforts to market wagons to customers in the US over the past couple decades suggest that even when they're available, people don't buy them unless they're styled and marketed as crossovers.
US consumers are well-known for wanting cars that are extremely oversized. Most American nameplates don't even make sedans anymore. Entry level is SUVs.
It's not just a size thing. To give an example, the Mazda 6 and Mazda CX5 are similar in size, weight, price, and manufacturer, but the wagon version of the Mazda 6 sold so poorly in the US that it's no longer offered, and the crossover sells an order of magnitude more units than the sedan.
My best guess is the motivation is largely social, driven by a perception of what kind of person drives each style of vehicle.
It's being discontinued for the moment. It's expected to be reintroduced in a couple years on their new RWD platform that's in development, to compete with slightly more upmarket RWD sedans from other marques.
> US consumers are well-known for wanting cars that are extremely oversized.
Partially because or our fuel efficiency standards that are based on footprint and our preference for (often excessive) engine power. Can't get a big engine in a small car because it won't hit the efficiency numbers, so better get a bigger car.
> The lowering and elongation of crossovers back to a classic wagon form would bring back a nostalgic piece of American motoring. It would be a mostly cosmetic change for drivers and families, still giving them everything they need in a spacious vehicle. And it could make all the difference for everyone else.
Wait, who is the "everyone else", what's the "all the difference"? I am not understanding what the author is saying is preferable about station wagons to anyone (instead of just being cosmetically different but about equivalent to an SUV), am I missing it in the article?
The main problem with SUVs is that they're designed to look big, but aren't actually big cars. They sacrifice a huge amount of space to raised suspension, big wheels, and bulky looking exteriors.
Station wagons are still heavy cars, but designed to actually be roomy, not just take up space. We had a small station wagon when I was a kid (Skoda Favorit) and it could fit a whole bicycle in its trunk.
Other than the really big SUVs (Escalade size), I've yet to find an SUV that will take a bike in its trunk.
> The station wagon, with its roomy trunk, wide interior, and seating, as in the now-collectible Buick Roadmaster Estate, for up to eight people (or fewer people plus equipment, bikes, or pets) clearly answered this demand. These vehicles boasted powerful engines and could weigh well into the 4,000-pound range.
> The main benefit of an SUV in a crash is its heavy weight, which as mentioned above, many station wagons had too.
I don't think the author is thinking lighter weight when it comes to station wagons.
The station wagon is better off dead. As our world starts to look towards more efficient, smaller vehicles, the last thing we need is to resurrect the icon of urbane middle-class affluence.
It's sad, the station wagon has gone out of favour in the US, and the minivan has gone out of favour in Europe, all that's left in both cases are stupid crossovers and SUVs. As a European I get envious when I read about all of the available minivan models in the US, and even European brands which build family cars, but only for the US or Asian markets. I honestly think that the lack of availability of family cars is having a measurable influence on family planning in Europe.
Minivans still exist but have largely gone out of favor in the US as well. And, in many cases, yes they've been replaced by larger SUVs/crossovers, which are actually not as good for transporting a lot of people.
Minivans are still hugely popular for families with more than 2 kids. They're cheap, reliable, and spacious. While you can fit 3+ car seats in a crossover/SUV, it's much easier to load/unload them in a minivan as an adult can easily maneuver around the interior of the vehicle and strap kids in quickly without contorting their body.
Price is also a huge factor. Minivans max out around $50-60k with all the bells and whistles. It's not uncommon for a smaller SUV or crossover to reach that amount, and larger SUVs can easily approach $70-80k, with luxury brands even crossing into six figure territory. I just went to Honda's website, and a 2022 Odyssey with all of the extra features is $50k. A Toyota SEQUOIA starts at $50,400. For comparison within the same brand, Toyota's minivan maxes out around $53k with Honda providing much more similarly priced Crossovers/SUVs at around $50k as well. The SEQUOIA SUV maxes out right at $70k.
Underrated feature of minivans that are standard there but occur on very few other vehicles: sliding rear doors. Your kids can't hit the car next to you in the parking lot, with a sliding door, but can still get out on their own.
Minivans may be largely out of favor in the US, but they're still readily available. Chrysler, Honda, Toyota, and KIA sell minivans, Ford also sells whatever a transit express is (feels not as long as a minivan, but also more comercial); and then you've got the larger vans (transit, sprinter) but I think those are originally designed and available in Europe.
They're available in luxury models or economy models, and lots of stuff in between, so a pretty wide variety to chose from, even if many people don't.
For a passenger, the minivan is great. Whenever I get an Uber with a minivan I’m thrilled. They are also super functional - if you want to carry something you can often remove the rear seats completely and have as much room as a pickup bed.
A number of my whitewater paddling friends really like minivans. They can carry a lot of gear and you can squeeze people in for a car shuttle. It does seem in many cases, that people have traded a minivan for a 3-row SUV which aren't as good for carrying a bunch of people--or, in many cases, a lot of gear.
Minivans are ridiculously practical and I love it. I think a better article would be "bring back the mini van." They are inexpensive (especially used), they comfortably fit lots of people, they are fun to drive, and if you take the seats out and they are incredible stuff haulers.
All of that said, I've never been able to fully convince my wife that we should get a minivan, due to all of the negative stereotypes. All I get is "No. I'm not a soccer mom."
I'm not a fan of the driver assist nonsense. That stuff is dangerous. It actually yanks on the steering wheel, but of course it has no clue about the real world (no strong AI here) and obviously impedes safe control of the vehicle. Fortunately there is a way to turn that nonsense off. It probably still phones home with photos, GPS, and more.
It does have decent performance, particularly on slippery surfaces. To beat the Ascent you'd probably have to pay more or give up that 8th seat.
As an American I absolutely hate the van-formatted filth your godforsaken continent has vomited upon our automotive market.
The Transit is practically made out of cardboard compared to the E-series it's replacing.
The Fiat Ducato is a POS in every way but it's too cheap for fleets who only loot at initial buy-in to pass up.
The Sprinter is a nightmare in terms of TCO. I didn't think anything could be worse than the Ram van it replaced but it's trying very hard.
Then there's the Transit connect. Those twats bent over backward to re-use a bunch of Focus parts bin stuff and neutered a perfectly good vehicle. There's plenty of room for a real van-worthy suspension and live axle under there but nope, you're stuck with <1000lb cargo because Focus.
And the City Promaster and NV200 are the same damn story with their respective brand's own drivetrain issues.
> As an American I absolutely hate the van-formatted filth your godforsaken continent has vomited upon our automotive market.
Yet the Mercedes Benz Metris is the only properly-sized minivan available in the US. Unfortunately it is targeted for commercial use like airport taxis, so they sell it as RWD-only and with a plastic commercial-grade interior so it is overpriced for what you get.
The best station wagon of the last 40 years was the P3 Volvo, which you should still be able to find used at reasonable prices and with reasonable mileage. The exterior design was excellent and it keeps looking better and better with age, but the real brilliance was the interior. The driver and front passenger got the absolute best seats Volvo has ever made, and the rear seat was a 40/20/40 split with the seat belts integrated - you could fold seats down for cargo purposes and you never had to deal with belts getting in the way of anything. Combined with extremely durable carpet that looked nice enough, you got a car that could take all the abuse a station wagon should be able to take, yet look and feel pretty nice (it was definitely NOT a luxury interior though).
> What I find odd is there's essentially zero collector interest in station wagons
There's a very strong interest in a few, but they have to be special: older Benzes, early BMW 3-series Touring, Roadmasters, Cadillac CTS-Vs with the manual transmission, AMG wagons, early woodies.
> meaning they have utterly vanished.
Most were used for their purpose - they weren't treasured the way sports cars were, nor were they weekend cars. As a result, it's hard (read: expensive) to find a collector-quality wagon. Prices on BringATrailer and CarsAndBids reflect that.
When I bought my wagon 5 years ago it was impossible to find a wagon for less than a few thousand over KBB, and they're mostly sold around the 70k miles mark because maintenance tends to shoot up. I was specifically looking for manual AWD wagons, which it seems people cherish and run into the ground like I will mine.
They have these, they are called Subaru Outbacks. There is no shortage of them in the Northwest, SV, Boulder, Maine, etc.
Fits 5, not 8, but today's families are smaller than 1960.
It has been essentially the same car for 20 years. A 2020 Outback looks not that much different than a 2000 Outback.
Always surprised Toyota just doesn't copy it. But maybe the thinking is, a "Toyota Outback" would take away from Toyota SUV sales more than from Subaru.
a 2020 outback is considerably larger in every dimension than a 2000 outback and rides quite a bit higher. it's no more a station wagon than any other crossover.
Seems 1.4 inches higher for ground clearance between 2000 and 2019 models.
I guess eye of the beholder.
https://groundclearances.com/subaru-outback-ground-clearance...
2020 is 6 inches longer, and 4 inches wider.
8 inches higher overall. So yes bigger.
A 2000 outback is a (I'm going to stop just short of saying literally but I really want to) 1989 Legacy with redesigned cosmetic body panels, interior and some extra supported welded into places you can't see.
You'd be hard pressed to tell the difference between the stripped shells without looking at the head/tail light opening shaped. The pile of drive-train parts is more or less identical save a 5-gal bucket of minor stuff
I strongly disagree; somewhere around 2010 the outback was redone to embrace the crossover trend and IMO has not been a wagon since. It's been a slightly less ugly Crosstrek for the last decade. They also killed the manual option.
Agreed. Up until last year, I owned both (pre- and post-redesign models). They drove differently. The 2004 was clearly station-wagon-like, and the 2010 was not.
I liked driving the 2004 version more. It just felt faster, likely because it was lower to the ground. But the 2010 looks much more attractive, and the extra vertical space makes it much easier to transport large things. For example, we once fit a full-size washing machine and a full-size dryer in the back of the 2010 after we came across them at a yard sale on a day trip. They would never have fit in the 2004.
All of that said, the 2004 was unlike a station wagon in that there was no third-row seating option. It maxed out at 5 people.
Yep - own a 2020 Outback - it's great! But definitely larger than the Station Wagons of yore.
Pretty good mileage (over 30mpg highway) and very spacious for weekend trips or longer commutes (5 adults sit comfortably).
It's fairly capable towing - can easily pull a pair of SeaDoos or a small utility trailer and has all the "smart" bells and whistles as standard equipment vs. the Audi Allroad we were comparing it against where the lane-keeping/blind spot detection was only available on the +$15k trim.
> But definitely larger than the Station Wagons of yore.
Hehe,
2020 Outback
Wheelbase 2,750 mm (108.3 in)[3]
Length 4,840 mm (190.6 in)[3]
Width 1,840 mm (72.4 in)[3]
Height 1,500 mm (59.1 in)[3]
Roadmaster Wagon (the one mentioned in the article article)
Wheelbase 115.9 in (2,944 mm)
Length 217.7 in (5,530 mm)
Width 79.9 in (2,029 mm)
Height 60.3 in (1,532 mm)
As you can see, Grandpa's old station wagon was a fucking beast compared to a modern Subaru. Two feet longer, half a foot wider, 1000lbs heavier and taller to boot.
People forget just how big old station wagons were. I used to roll in a B body, so it amuses me when people talk about how much bigger cars are today. Like, yeah, a Civic of today is the size of an Accord of the 90s, but those old full-sized GM cars were gigantic land yachts.
For old wagons the front 2 rows of seats were always the same dimensions as the car they were based off. The differences were always purely in the very back section of the car behind the back seats onwards. In fact if you looked carefully you could pretty much always see the seem in these cars from where the top of the rear window would have been around to the floor as they were created by welding an extra section on the rear.
So basically think of the largest old sedan you've ever been in. It's that much room.
About the same weight (4k per Google) and the road-master is shorter.
Hell, an Altima is pushing into 80s base trim half-ton curb weight territory.
>People forget just how big old station wagons were. I used to roll in a B body, so it amuses me when people talk about how much bigger cars are today.
Because the overwhelming majority of people who are saying these things were born to well enough to do families that they never got to live first hand the experience of the Country Squire that had to do it all. There was the minivan for kid hauling and the Accord (or whatever) for commuting.
You know how people today judge a Dodge Journey or used Chevy Tahoe. That's what station wagons were back then.
I actually went from an old ugly station wagon (a Falcon EA Wagon) to an Outback. The Outback is not very large compared to traditional wagons and much higher off the ground. A few thoughts on a 1999 Outback vs a 1988 EA Falcon Station wagon:
The rear of the Falcon was so wide it could take a full (Australian standard) pallet in the trunk with the back seats folded down. I assume it was designed with this in mind and I was called on to move pallets at my work a lot in my younger days thanks to this car. The Outback could not do this. There's far far less space and the wheel wells on the Subaru are huge.
The Subaru Outback also objectively had less power than the older EA falcon (165hp vs 186hp) was higher off the ground and had AWD. This meant the Subaru was better off-road but worse everywhere else, in particular for freeway driving. I never went off road despite living in rural Australia.
I miss the old Falcon station wagons. They were essentially a car designed for regional Australia in every way. They don't make the Falcons in Australia anymore though. Ford insists that a Ford Fusion is the equivalent and imports those instead rather than continuing the Australian production lines.
I heard a rumour that Ford AU designed the Falcon wagon load area to a certain dimension because Telstra promised they would buy a lot of them if they did. Helped explained the somewhat more bulbous look of the Falcon's rear end compared to its Commodore competitor.
I spent some time living in Queensland and picked up a used Falcon off some German backpackers. That car cost $2000 and never really had anything wrong with it. I drove it up and down the coast and into the hinterland, mostly sleeping in a blow up mattress in the back with our surf boards. I even towed a trailer to help a friend move home with it.
The Outback was conceived as a lifted Legacy wagon. Now the Legacy is no longer sold as a wagon in the US.
It appears platform consolidation means that the latest generation of Legacy and Outback don't differ as significantly as one or two generations earlier, but you can't get the wagon without the lifted suspension.
The Outback is no comparison. Yes, it's better than a Honda Fit, but nothing like a station wagon. Wagons are popular in Europe - not sure why people prefer SUVs here. I've always disliked SUVs for having a higher center of gravity and being less stable on turns. Minivans are too bulky.
Sure, AWD is great for some conditions. It’s not necessary for most, and with good tires a FWD can be just as safe. The problem is that full time AWD is less fuel efficient.
A FWD wagon will practically get stuck on wet grass if there's even a slight incline. AWD is a ton better. And I say this as someone who has FWD and AWD variants of the same station wagon in my garage right now.
And the XC series are crossovers, not wagons. Their cheapest US wagon is the V60, which starts at $40k (okay, I was wrong) without options, still well over the price of a typical middle-class car-buyer.
I've owned an Outback and an XC70. I vastly preferred the latter, despite the cost. It could hold an amazing amount of stuff (partially due to the more boxy rear with fewer protrusions), far more than the Outback.
The XC70 was also amazing to own in the city. It was like driving a mountain goat. There were many times where I was able to parallel park in an uncleared spot in the winter.
Yes, the crossover is simply a station wagon that attempts to attach itself to the decades of sport utility vehicle advertising about tromping through parks and being "sporty".
It's almost to the point that a minivan is actually a nonconformist choice.
I had seen them on the street, but always said v6 on them, and I don't care about power, would rather have better gas millage.
Looking it up, they do have 4 cylinder versions. I think the other problem is the sight lines don't look great but admittedly I have not been in a Vernza. I see the 2021 version is now a basically a SUV and not a wagon.
Huh, as far as I know station wagons are very common in Europe.
Do you know what I want? A mixture between a station wagon and a Pick up Truck. I love Pick up trucks but I don't find them well suited for transporting dogs.
As pryelluw said (without explanation), you seem to be describing the Chevrolet Avalanche (with an added bed topper like you linked), a truck with a large midgate allowing opening the interior to the truck bed area.
Finding a wagon is hard enough; try finding a manual transmission AWD wagon in the states! I overpaid for my 2006 audi a4 in 2016 and continue to pour money into it (as one does with a German car over 70k miles) because 6-speed turbo all-wheel wagons are only getting rarer. VW makes a manual sportwagen that is similar but uglier.
I would prefer a more full-size wagon (think Volvo XC70/V90) with a higher clearance (like an Outback), but it seems I'd have to give up the third pedal.
The upside is this might push me to be yet another van-converting yuppie for my camping/snowboarding needs and replace the wagon with a tiny electric commuter when it finally dies.
Why do you want manual transmission? Every time I get the nostalgia for driving a stick shift I rent or borrow one for a weekend and rediscover that it's a huge pain in the ass and generally not worth it.
Part of it is surely nostalgia, but I honestly think it's more fun, it makes driving more engaging. I don't have to spend much time in stop-and-go traffic so it's rarely a pain, and I really love engine braking, especially in the snow which is what much of my driving centers around.
It's also good theft deterrent! A previous manual of mine was broken into and they didn't even bother to take the iPod in plain view or anything else; I think they wanted the car and didn't realize they couldn't drive it till they popped the window.
Seriously, dealing with all those auto-shifting is like knowing what you need and then a hard work to find how to make this stupid automatic to perform what you want as no one of them works as good as you wish. And why to have this extra troulble if you can do all you need with manual stick easily?
Also automatic is extremelly boring. I was thinking like you once but once I 'eaten enough' of this 'automatic' transmission I came to a conclusion that it never works and never will. At least not the way I want it.
Also real control with manual vs 'who knows what it will do' with automatic.
Its a personal preference thing for sure. For me theres no comparison in feeling control between downshifting into a turn on a manual vs flicking steering wheel shift paddles.
Manuals are longer lasting than automatics in my application. I tow with a '98 Dodge Ram with manual 5-speed. Even on newer models, auto transmissions are prone to hunt under certain circumstances (which causes heavy internal wear) and wear out much faster than a comparable 5- or 6-speed. You can install various lockout switches (i.e., lockout overdrive), but at that point my muscle memory with the manual is less effort.
On the road, the manual needs no attention other than to keep it in a gear that doesn't lug the engine. Being in too high a gear is the only thing that causes excess heat. In the automatic, despite two coolers in my model (air to air and air to coolant, lots of lines and aluminum to fill and have fail), keeping an eye on the trans temp is a necessity.
Service is also simpler. Manual gets oil topped off at normal oil change intervals (seldom needs it), and a change when I do clutches (every 100k-200k miles, depending on load.) Automatics require the same level of fluid top-off, but also require fluid flushes every 60-80k miles (requiring a machine I don't have.) Though it's never been necessary, I can rebuild a manual transmission in my shop fairly easily, where an automatic takes much more specialist knowledge and has many more moving parts. In this application, it's likely you need an automatic transmission rebuild every 200-250k miles (way more expensive than two good clutches.)
This all aside, where in the US can you rent a manual for the weekend? Even the luxury car segment has transitioned to paddle shifting everywhere I've asked (which is everywhere I've rented.)
>Finding a wagon is hard enough; try finding a manual transmission AWD wagon in the states!
That would be why I bought a used 2010 Volvo V50—a wagon with AWD, 6-speed, and a turbo. Volvo sold so few of that model in the US I felt lucky to find it.
Station wagons may be a good equivalent of modern CUVs, but I have my doubts about their ability to functionally compete with minivans (at least in the "target" minivan market of moderate to large families). We no longer live in an era where you can just hold infants on your lap while you drive and let your toddlers roam around on the floor. I can't imagine it would be fun for a parent to have to crawl into the backseat of a wagon every time they needed to buckle their child's car seat. (And, of course, if you have more than 2 kids the third row seat is essential since it is basically impossible to fit three car seats next to each other even in a larger vehicle.) Statistically, families have gotten smaller, but car seat regulations have gotten bigger...
This is not even mentioning the superiority of sliding doors when it comes to loading/unloading in parking lots, etc.
It amuses me so much that so many people claim that crossovers are not station wagons. Sans some stylistic differences, they are functionally the same thing. All modern vehicles are taller and have huge wheels & tires compared to older ones.
Even something like an Odyssey or a Civic is about five or six inches taller than they was in the 90s. If Chevy added six inches of height to a Buick Roadmaster, they'd end up with a vehicle as tall as a Chevy Blazer (a crossover), but over two feet (!!!!) longer!!!
Which brings me to another point people seem to forget about classic station wagons: they were fucking massive. A Buick Roadmaster could haul kids, furniture, Labradors, and ass because it was roughly the foot print of a modern Escalade. Not everyone wants to drive around a 18 foot beast of a vehicle, so station wagons became smaller and we called them crossovers.
So yeah, a modern Rav4 is going to feel smaller than a Grampa's Olds Cruiser, because it is a lot smaller.
We had a Ford LTD Country Squire as a kid with the full V8. It could have survived Hiroshima (it did survive hitting a deer near Lake Tahoe) and idled at 25mph without breaking a sweat. Learning to drive on a tank like that was an experience. My folks bought it with the new fangled centre dash vehicle information system that never showed more than 10mpg at any given time. It seated the entire family and then some with the rear seats up, which always made me motion sick because they faced backwards. It towed and carried anything. And hey, it was the Reagan years. Gas was cheap.
There is no wagon or indeed crossover anymore like those antediluvian beasts.
I've been low-key searching for a country squire for a couple years now. If it's not in good condition, I'll put in a 3.5 Ecoboost, fully modern suspension, and a trailer hitch. Just a perfect vehicle.
"Sans some stylistic differences, they are functionally the same thing."
You can't raise the whole vehicle several inches (although crossovers have weirdly low ground clearance) without affecting the handling. Modern wagons corner like modern cars, not like minivans.
Modern vehicles of similar weight to an old wagon have better suspension components, wider wheels and tires, and most importantly better tires. A modern refresh will have an old wagon cornering just as well, if not better than a "crossover".
The modern crossover/compact SUV trend is worthy of nothing kinder than active contempt.
It's interesting the emphasis of the CAFE standards. Of course what a dumb way of dealing with fuel economy.
As CEO of Ford, Alan Mulally went to congress and argued that CAFE was expensive to follow and ultimately counter-productive to environmental ends, proposing instead a one-size fits all carbon tax.
It was obviously a fraught endeavor, while CAFE creates misery for consumers and producers alike, it's at least obfuscated away from the public eye, unlike a carbon tax which would be political suicide.
A dollar a gallon carbon recapture tax would be enough to make ICE cars carbon negative.
Math: Burning a gallon of gas produces 20lbs of CO2. A ton is 2000 pounds. The one dollar tax provides $100/ton to capture carbon from the atmosphere. Multiple ramping/experimental atmospheric carbon capture technologies are targeting $20-75/ton.
If we can pay an extra dollar per gallon because of Russian hackers, or because of questionable wars in the middle east, we can certainly do it to save the planet!
For those who aren't aware with the issue around CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) standards:
There are separate standards for "cars" and "light trucks" -- a difference of about 10mpg. When the standards were created in the '70s, "light trucks" were expected to be, well, trucks: body-on-frame pickups and SUVs with real utility. Nowadays, all these crossovers are considered "light trucks" as well, while a wagon or hatchback is a "car". In essence, the automakers get a 10 mpg relaxation in standards (worth, at current rates, $550 in EPA fines alone per vehicle sold) for taking the same wagon, jacking up the suspension a couple inches (thereby bungling the handling and pedestrian safety), and adding some "rugged" plastic cladding.
I just experienced this when looking for a car. It seems that the wagon (or estate car in the UK and EU) has become primarily a luxury offering in the US.
The only semi-modern options wagon I could find were Volvo, Mercedes, BMW, Audi and Acura. With essentially all being performance oriented. VW was the exception, with their smaller sport wagon.
I’m hopeful that the crossover trend will fade back into wagons. Heck, a lot of crossovers these days are essentially a wagon on a raised suspension with a big engine and AWD.
I have similar feelings about MT cars. Give me a middle of the road modern, reliable, fuel efficient MT wagon and I’ll be really happy!
162 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 61.9 ms ] threadI drove an older Volvo station wagon once. A repair shop had one as a loaner. On any big bump, my head would hit the roof.
[1] https://www.caranddriver.com/features/g26961972/best-station...
https://newsroom.vw.com/vehicles/the-golf-sportwagen-and-all...
The entire market has been heading towards SUVs/crossovers for some time; the same thing that happened to wagons is happening to sedans now.
>Who wants an automotive monoculture?
Clearly, the market.
And to be clear here, I outright hate SUVs/CUVs and live the sedan life.
> Clearly, the market.
If all you can buy is golf pants but you want tough jeans, would you go bottomless or buy the golf pants?
Cars I would buy instantly:
* a car with an electric engine that goes no faster than 80mph while retaining dynamics and that does not come with a million gadgets (as in "electric engine, all else analog"). Please, also in a variant with enough space to fit me, my wife, the kid and the dog. Still, no mandatory audio-visual indoor entertainment for the dog, please.
* a car optimized for DIY repairs (I live in southern Morocco, getting an OBD2-scan at my authorized Nissan dealer was $30 - or 300 small bread or 75kg of flour or 3 days of work for a cop who just started work. A friend's Porsche Cayenne needs to be towed 12h northwards just for the inspection by an authorized dealer).
I don't see them on the market.
We don't, though, because people are buying SUVs/CUVs.
The Golf Sportwagen (formerly sold as the Jetta Sportwagen) was available until 2019, but is no longer.
Once in a blue moon I see a Jaguar wagon stateside, although that may be because 'estates' are still quite popular in the UK
Body positivity. Big is beautiful.
> The general derision roomy vehicles sometimes receive from car enthusiasts or urbanists is silly, and can evince a cluelessness about the needs of families.
This derision ended up with vehicles getting various bad reputations. This caused people to avoid the vehicle that was best for them so they went to the least bad option that didn't have a bad reputation: SUVs.
I think a lot of people would be better served by a station wagon or minivan.
"consumers pick up on thing people in the know were saying for 10yr straight 10yr ago but recently stopped saying and run with it for 10yr"
Yes, I understand that people might wish to transport a fridge or sofa. No, you don't need a minivan to do that.
That's why this area of car and truck design needs regulation.
Minivan is great for refrigerators. Wagon roof wins for anything more than 7ft long or that comes in sheets.
When I'm not on 2 wheels, I'm most often in a minivan, too.
That’s called a motorcycle
But there aren't hardly even any more of those in the US market anymore. Honda Fit is no longer produced for US market, along with many of it's peers.
Efforts to market wagons to customers in the US over the past couple decades suggest that even when they're available, people don't buy them unless they're styled and marketed as crossovers.
My best guess is the motivation is largely social, driven by a perception of what kind of person drives each style of vehicle.
Partially because or our fuel efficiency standards that are based on footprint and our preference for (often excessive) engine power. Can't get a big engine in a small car because it won't hit the efficiency numbers, so better get a bigger car.
Wait, who is the "everyone else", what's the "all the difference"? I am not understanding what the author is saying is preferable about station wagons to anyone (instead of just being cosmetically different but about equivalent to an SUV), am I missing it in the article?
Station wagons are still heavy cars, but designed to actually be roomy, not just take up space. We had a small station wagon when I was a kid (Skoda Favorit) and it could fit a whole bicycle in its trunk.
Other than the really big SUVs (Escalade size), I've yet to find an SUV that will take a bike in its trunk.
Additionally, drivers of smaller cars due to weight arms race for increased safety.
> The station wagon, with its roomy trunk, wide interior, and seating, as in the now-collectible Buick Roadmaster Estate, for up to eight people (or fewer people plus equipment, bikes, or pets) clearly answered this demand. These vehicles boasted powerful engines and could weigh well into the 4,000-pound range.
> The main benefit of an SUV in a crash is its heavy weight, which as mentioned above, many station wagons had too.
I don't think the author is thinking lighter weight when it comes to station wagons.
Price is also a huge factor. Minivans max out around $50-60k with all the bells and whistles. It's not uncommon for a smaller SUV or crossover to reach that amount, and larger SUVs can easily approach $70-80k, with luxury brands even crossing into six figure territory. I just went to Honda's website, and a 2022 Odyssey with all of the extra features is $50k. A Toyota SEQUOIA starts at $50,400. For comparison within the same brand, Toyota's minivan maxes out around $53k with Honda providing much more similarly priced Crossovers/SUVs at around $50k as well. The SEQUOIA SUV maxes out right at $70k.
They're available in luxury models or economy models, and lots of stuff in between, so a pretty wide variety to chose from, even if many people don't.
All of that said, I've never been able to fully convince my wife that we should get a minivan, due to all of the negative stereotypes. All I get is "No. I'm not a soccer mom."
And then we buy a ridiculous $50k Ascent...
I'm not a fan of the driver assist nonsense. That stuff is dangerous. It actually yanks on the steering wheel, but of course it has no clue about the real world (no strong AI here) and obviously impedes safe control of the vehicle. Fortunately there is a way to turn that nonsense off. It probably still phones home with photos, GPS, and more.
It does have decent performance, particularly on slippery surfaces. To beat the Ascent you'd probably have to pay more or give up that 8th seat.
The Transit is practically made out of cardboard compared to the E-series it's replacing.
The Fiat Ducato is a POS in every way but it's too cheap for fleets who only loot at initial buy-in to pass up.
The Sprinter is a nightmare in terms of TCO. I didn't think anything could be worse than the Ram van it replaced but it's trying very hard.
Then there's the Transit connect. Those twats bent over backward to re-use a bunch of Focus parts bin stuff and neutered a perfectly good vehicle. There's plenty of room for a real van-worthy suspension and live axle under there but nope, you're stuck with <1000lb cargo because Focus.
And the City Promaster and NV200 are the same damn story with their respective brand's own drivetrain issues.
Give me back my motherf*king Astro and Aerostar.
GMC Savana, still a real van?
Yet the Mercedes Benz Metris is the only properly-sized minivan available in the US. Unfortunately it is targeted for commercial use like airport taxis, so they sell it as RWD-only and with a plastic commercial-grade interior so it is overpriced for what you get.
The best station wagon of the last 40 years was the P3 Volvo, which you should still be able to find used at reasonable prices and with reasonable mileage. The exterior design was excellent and it keeps looking better and better with age, but the real brilliance was the interior. The driver and front passenger got the absolute best seats Volvo has ever made, and the rear seat was a 40/20/40 split with the seat belts integrated - you could fold seats down for cargo purposes and you never had to deal with belts getting in the way of anything. Combined with extremely durable carpet that looked nice enough, you got a car that could take all the abuse a station wagon should be able to take, yet look and feel pretty nice (it was definitely NOT a luxury interior though).
There's a very strong interest in a few, but they have to be special: older Benzes, early BMW 3-series Touring, Roadmasters, Cadillac CTS-Vs with the manual transmission, AMG wagons, early woodies.
> meaning they have utterly vanished.
Most were used for their purpose - they weren't treasured the way sports cars were, nor were they weekend cars. As a result, it's hard (read: expensive) to find a collector-quality wagon. Prices on BringATrailer and CarsAndBids reflect that.
They used to be ubiquitous, suburban moms all drove them, and today it's like they never existed.
Fits 5, not 8, but today's families are smaller than 1960.
It has been essentially the same car for 20 years. A 2020 Outback looks not that much different than a 2000 Outback.
Always surprised Toyota just doesn't copy it. But maybe the thinking is, a "Toyota Outback" would take away from Toyota SUV sales more than from Subaru.
You'd be hard pressed to tell the difference between the stripped shells without looking at the head/tail light opening shaped. The pile of drive-train parts is more or less identical save a 5-gal bucket of minor stuff
I guess they try to sell what folks want to buy - at least the WRX and STI still exist (parallels to the Porsche SUVs keeping the 911 alive)
I liked driving the 2004 version more. It just felt faster, likely because it was lower to the ground. But the 2010 looks much more attractive, and the extra vertical space makes it much easier to transport large things. For example, we once fit a full-size washing machine and a full-size dryer in the back of the 2010 after we came across them at a yard sale on a day trip. They would never have fit in the 2004.
All of that said, the 2004 was unlike a station wagon in that there was no third-row seating option. It maxed out at 5 people.
Pretty good mileage (over 30mpg highway) and very spacious for weekend trips or longer commutes (5 adults sit comfortably).
It's fairly capable towing - can easily pull a pair of SeaDoos or a small utility trailer and has all the "smart" bells and whistles as standard equipment vs. the Audi Allroad we were comparing it against where the lane-keeping/blind spot detection was only available on the +$15k trim.
Hehe,
2020 Outback
Roadmaster Wagon (the one mentioned in the article article) As you can see, Grandpa's old station wagon was a fucking beast compared to a modern Subaru. Two feet longer, half a foot wider, 1000lbs heavier and taller to boot.People forget just how big old station wagons were. I used to roll in a B body, so it amuses me when people talk about how much bigger cars are today. Like, yeah, a Civic of today is the size of an Accord of the 90s, but those old full-sized GM cars were gigantic land yachts.
So basically think of the largest old sedan you've ever been in. It's that much room.
Now I drive a Ford E350 that is 236.7 in (6,012 mm). It's 3.45 feet longer than your Outback. I think it's the smallest car that will hold my family. It looks like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ford_E-Series_wagon.jpg
About the same weight (4k per Google) and the road-master is shorter.
Hell, an Altima is pushing into 80s base trim half-ton curb weight territory.
>People forget just how big old station wagons were. I used to roll in a B body, so it amuses me when people talk about how much bigger cars are today.
Because the overwhelming majority of people who are saying these things were born to well enough to do families that they never got to live first hand the experience of the Country Squire that had to do it all. There was the minivan for kid hauling and the Accord (or whatever) for commuting.
You know how people today judge a Dodge Journey or used Chevy Tahoe. That's what station wagons were back then.
Not sure your sources, but a 94s Roadmaster weighed about 4572lbs according to the Owners Manual. Perhaps you were looking the sedan weight?
The Outback is 3753 in base or 3917 in turbo guise. So maybe not 1000lbs, but not far off.
The rear of the Falcon was so wide it could take a full (Australian standard) pallet in the trunk with the back seats folded down. I assume it was designed with this in mind and I was called on to move pallets at my work a lot in my younger days thanks to this car. The Outback could not do this. There's far far less space and the wheel wells on the Subaru are huge.
The Subaru Outback also objectively had less power than the older EA falcon (165hp vs 186hp) was higher off the ground and had AWD. This meant the Subaru was better off-road but worse everywhere else, in particular for freeway driving. I never went off road despite living in rural Australia.
I miss the old Falcon station wagons. They were essentially a car designed for regional Australia in every way. They don't make the Falcons in Australia anymore though. Ford insists that a Ford Fusion is the equivalent and imports those instead rather than continuing the Australian production lines.
Good memories!
It appears platform consolidation means that the latest generation of Legacy and Outback don't differ as significantly as one or two generations earlier, but you can't get the wagon without the lifted suspension.
A FWD wagon will practically get stuck on wet grass if there's even a slight incline. AWD is a ton better. And I say this as someone who has FWD and AWD variants of the same station wagon in my garage right now.
To add to the Outbacks are Volvos, maybe not as omnipresent in the US recently, but in my mind Volvo is hardwired to stationwagon form.
Another rather recent urban sighting is VW wagons, kinda odd to spot these among the sea of their SUVs.
https://www.volvocars.com/au/about/australia/i-roll-enewslet...
Volvos are great, but they're an upmarket marque. IIRC the cheapest wagon they offer stateside starts aroumd $50k.
The XC70 was also amazing to own in the city. It was like driving a mountain goat. There were many times where I was able to parallel park in an uncleared spot in the winter.
It's almost to the point that a minivan is actually a nonconformist choice.
Looking it up, they do have 4 cylinder versions. I think the other problem is the sight lines don't look great but admittedly I have not been in a Vernza. I see the 2021 version is now a basically a SUV and not a wagon.
Do you know what I want? A mixture between a station wagon and a Pick up Truck. I love Pick up trucks but I don't find them well suited for transporting dogs.
[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subaru_Baja
I guess the next best thing would be a Land Rover Defender.
This car looks intriguing but comes with a huge price tag https://ineosgrenadier.com/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_El_Camino
But the back space connected/open with the main cabin.
I would prefer a more full-size wagon (think Volvo XC70/V90) with a higher clearance (like an Outback), but it seems I'd have to give up the third pedal.
The upside is this might push me to be yet another van-converting yuppie for my camping/snowboarding needs and replace the wagon with a tiny electric commuter when it finally dies.
It's also good theft deterrent! A previous manual of mine was broken into and they didn't even bother to take the iPod in plain view or anything else; I think they wanted the car and didn't realize they couldn't drive it till they popped the window.
Less bugs!
Seriously, dealing with all those auto-shifting is like knowing what you need and then a hard work to find how to make this stupid automatic to perform what you want as no one of them works as good as you wish. And why to have this extra troulble if you can do all you need with manual stick easily?
Also automatic is extremelly boring. I was thinking like you once but once I 'eaten enough' of this 'automatic' transmission I came to a conclusion that it never works and never will. At least not the way I want it.
Also real control with manual vs 'who knows what it will do' with automatic.
On the road, the manual needs no attention other than to keep it in a gear that doesn't lug the engine. Being in too high a gear is the only thing that causes excess heat. In the automatic, despite two coolers in my model (air to air and air to coolant, lots of lines and aluminum to fill and have fail), keeping an eye on the trans temp is a necessity.
Service is also simpler. Manual gets oil topped off at normal oil change intervals (seldom needs it), and a change when I do clutches (every 100k-200k miles, depending on load.) Automatics require the same level of fluid top-off, but also require fluid flushes every 60-80k miles (requiring a machine I don't have.) Though it's never been necessary, I can rebuild a manual transmission in my shop fairly easily, where an automatic takes much more specialist knowledge and has many more moving parts. In this application, it's likely you need an automatic transmission rebuild every 200-250k miles (way more expensive than two good clutches.)
This all aside, where in the US can you rent a manual for the weekend? Even the luxury car segment has transitioned to paddle shifting everywhere I've asked (which is everywhere I've rented.)
That would be why I bought a used 2010 Volvo V50—a wagon with AWD, 6-speed, and a turbo. Volvo sold so few of that model in the US I felt lucky to find it.
This is not even mentioning the superiority of sliding doors when it comes to loading/unloading in parking lots, etc.
Even something like an Odyssey or a Civic is about five or six inches taller than they was in the 90s. If Chevy added six inches of height to a Buick Roadmaster, they'd end up with a vehicle as tall as a Chevy Blazer (a crossover), but over two feet (!!!!) longer!!!
Which brings me to another point people seem to forget about classic station wagons: they were fucking massive. A Buick Roadmaster could haul kids, furniture, Labradors, and ass because it was roughly the foot print of a modern Escalade. Not everyone wants to drive around a 18 foot beast of a vehicle, so station wagons became smaller and we called them crossovers.
So yeah, a modern Rav4 is going to feel smaller than a Grampa's Olds Cruiser, because it is a lot smaller.
There is no wagon or indeed crossover anymore like those antediluvian beasts.
You can't raise the whole vehicle several inches (although crossovers have weirdly low ground clearance) without affecting the handling. Modern wagons corner like modern cars, not like minivans.
The modern crossover/compact SUV trend is worthy of nothing kinder than active contempt.
https://www.hemmings.com/stories/article/we-call-the-back-ba...
https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-model-s-child-seats-false-ki...
As CEO of Ford, Alan Mulally went to congress and argued that CAFE was expensive to follow and ultimately counter-productive to environmental ends, proposing instead a one-size fits all carbon tax.
It was obviously a fraught endeavor, while CAFE creates misery for consumers and producers alike, it's at least obfuscated away from the public eye, unlike a carbon tax which would be political suicide.
Math: Burning a gallon of gas produces 20lbs of CO2. A ton is 2000 pounds. The one dollar tax provides $100/ton to capture carbon from the atmosphere. Multiple ramping/experimental atmospheric carbon capture technologies are targeting $20-75/ton.
If we can pay an extra dollar per gallon because of Russian hackers, or because of questionable wars in the middle east, we can certainly do it to save the planet!
There are separate standards for "cars" and "light trucks" -- a difference of about 10mpg. When the standards were created in the '70s, "light trucks" were expected to be, well, trucks: body-on-frame pickups and SUVs with real utility. Nowadays, all these crossovers are considered "light trucks" as well, while a wagon or hatchback is a "car". In essence, the automakers get a 10 mpg relaxation in standards (worth, at current rates, $550 in EPA fines alone per vehicle sold) for taking the same wagon, jacking up the suspension a couple inches (thereby bungling the handling and pedestrian safety), and adding some "rugged" plastic cladding.
The only semi-modern options wagon I could find were Volvo, Mercedes, BMW, Audi and Acura. With essentially all being performance oriented. VW was the exception, with their smaller sport wagon.
I’m hopeful that the crossover trend will fade back into wagons. Heck, a lot of crossovers these days are essentially a wagon on a raised suspension with a big engine and AWD.
I have similar feelings about MT cars. Give me a middle of the road modern, reliable, fuel efficient MT wagon and I’ll be really happy!