To: The Uninitated, Re: Wagons, Subj: A Video Essay

"Drew" (midnightdori) 03/01/2015 at 02:05 • Filed to: None

4

14

Dearest reader,

I have frequently come across the argument, among my years of automotive enthusiasm, as to why certain amongst our ilk find preference with the shooting brakes, the 5-doors, and the wagons. I read articles like Mr. Demuro's this week, which I think make the issue more complex than it really is. While I will take a local example from my little corner of the earth here in Texas, I do believe that you might take the lessons herein and apply them to your own locale however possible. Let us begin.

Some of us who enjoy running here, at MSR Cresson's fine road course:

Also enjoy running here, at River Legacy Park's EKG trail:

The wonderful world of wagons means I could carry my 29er elsewhere in this delightful metroplex and, with the complete security of an enclosed unibody, not concern myself when I stop for a pre-ride breakfast or post-ride lunch. Additionally, when the time strikes, I might indulge my right foot or hoontuitary glands in a bit of late-onset teenage stupidity or trackrat shenanigans. That's all there is to it.

Yours truly,

Drew, in the market for a wagon

Axial > Drew 03/01/2015 at 02:20

0

Barring the CTS, because that car has some of the greatest variations in dimensions and utility for different trim options I have ever seen, there's very little you gain with a wagon. Ditto hatchbacks.

Sure, you get some extra vertical space. Vertical space, though, generally goes unused. And the bicycle? Awful example. If I can comfortably fit my 26" Raleigh mountain bicycle in the back of a 2002 Jetta GLS, you don't need a friggin' wagon.

Also, wagons and hatches look like small minivans, and minivans are not pretty. Sedans, on the other hand, are typically sleek resemble fastbacks. Fastbacks are pretty.

Drew > Axial 03/01/2015 at 02:32

0

I suppose in brevity, I left out my dog, college football tailgates, and constant need to haul around Miata and Corvette parts. I've got an '05 CTS-V currently that'll take my 29' Giant full-squish without too much complaint, but if I want to bring any more gear (cooler, tools, camelback, helmet, pump, workstand, etc.) or another rider, I'm out of luck. Similarly, I can fit just about any component of a Miata into the Cadillac, but for the blown motor? I've got to find a truck to get it to and from the builder.

My commute isn't too bad - and there are some fun bits - so I wouldn't like to completely neuter the fun or chance to row it through the gears after a rough day at the office. But I'd like to retain all the practicality I can. Hence why the wagon seems like the reasonable alternative to the Suburbans I've been begrudgingly looking at (although, for expeditions with a group of guys to the trails we have in-state and around the southwest, I might have to go that route).

Axial > Drew 03/01/2015 at 02:58

1

Like I said, barring the CTS. The trunk space on the CTS varies wildly with selected trim level.

But against something like an Impala? Avalon? Those have some pretty large boots. Fold the seats down, and you can carry the exhaust system from a Miata if you need to (though even with a wagon, I'd recommend a truck instead). Why are you constantly hauling around Miata and Corvette parts? And, constantly hauling around such stuff, why are you not using a pickup truck? Trucks are tons of fun, so long as you avoid those gutless Rangers, Frontiers, and Tacomas.

I really, really just don't understand the obsession with wagons and the disdain for the notchback/three-box. I mean, seriously, the extra utility is marginal and highly situational. It's one of those vehicle classes, like CUVs and SUVs, that has no indispensable function unique to it. You sacrifice aerodynamics for very little.

SmoresTM Has No Chill (O==[][]==O) > Axial 03/01/2015 at 03:08

1

Drew has a CTS-V

Axial recommends a truck because they're fun

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Also, as to why he's not using a truck:

...with the complete security of an enclosed unibody, not concern myself when I stop for a pre-ride breakfast or post-ride lunch. Additionally, when the time strikes, I might indulge my right foot or hoontuitary glands in a bit of late-onset teenage stupidity or trackrat shenanigans. That's all there is to it.

Drew > Axial 03/01/2015 at 03:12

2

I've gone down the truck route, and there's a solid chance I'll end up with one still, but the prospect of one as a daily? I'm trying to find an alternative. Old Vista Cruiser with a 4-speed, IS300 wagon, etc. And for someone who has to commute into and out of a major urban area and park in a reasonably confined parking garage?

Really, I've done the college tailgate and road trip thing with a wagon/hatchback. The extra space makes a lot of sense. Plus - I've driven trucks, they're numb. My commute is generally my catharsis for the day. I'd like something more entertaining than something that's got the input feedback of the Lusitania. Anything in any automaker's 60+ AARP crowd demographic portfolio like the Avalon and Impala falls right in that category.

Wagons are easy to use, simple, and offer the right physics and space that I'll get the usage out of. For folks that like cars that drive well and also like doing things outside of the car hobby (and hauling parts), a wagon does 97% of what I'd ask it to.

I guess I don't understand why they're not the better option than their sedan counterparts. They offer the same dynamics, frequently better aerodynamic capabilities, and more practical interior usage (generally the same if not better than CUVs). And this is coming from someone who owns a sedan. The prototypical sedan model that was coined back in the 20's doesn't make much sense compared to a 5-door liftback.

victor > Drew 03/01/2015 at 04:23

2

I find wagon roofs are typically longer (good for skis, boards, bikes), lower ( good for lifting stuff up and off), and has a lower and longer load floor ( roll my bike in w/o taking off my front wheel). Being able to securely store my bike inside away from prying eyes (limo tint w/ 3% light transmission). The handlebar on a bike is 500 dollars, the stem another 300 dollar, the fork is 500 dollars. Not cheap parts I want to replace as it hits the top of the trunk interior as I try to Tetris it in and out of the car. Also, the wheels are 4000 dollars for a set. In a q5/x3/glk, I still have to take those wheels off and on just to put it in the car. The wheels just can't stay on the bike just to fit it in the more squat load area.

More enthusiastic cyclists will always appreciate a wagon over a sedan or suv.

Axial > SmoresTM Has No Chill (O==[][]==O) 03/01/2015 at 04:58

0

You say that as if:

A.) There is no such thing as a bed cover

B.) There is no such thing as a manual or fast truck

C.) To say finding the limit of the vehicle is not what makes driving fun,

D.) That the limit can't be found for anything not a performance car (fun fact: the Miata is not a performance car)

E.) To say off-roading isn't fun, even though it's something a wagon cannot do

F.) To imply I haven't driven performance cars (I DD a Corvette) and trucks (got access to one of those, too) and can't possibly know what I'm talking about.

I also did say barring the CTS.

deekster_caddy > Axial 03/01/2015 at 07:33

0

We use the vertical space in our wagon surprisingly often. Usually bringing our 8 foot table someplace but still having some passenger room for the kids. When it comes to maxing out the cargo room, you are right we don't go floor to ceiling - at that point we usually put the roof box on. Is that wasted space? Definitely not.

deekster_caddy > Drew 03/01/2015 at 07:39

0

I have always had trucks which met the 'all needs' category. My last one was my DD, an '05 GMC Yukon XL 2500 8.1. Gobs of power, lots of gas. Fully loaded, leather heated everything, great tow rig, you can go anywhere and do it all in this truck. I called it the king of the road, just keep in mind that he eats like a king and you need to feed him often.

Before that I had a '96 1 ton chevy van, not a DD, used it sometimes only once a month, sometimes as a backup car, sometimes for long trips. It was great, very useful, not good on gas and not very comfortable. Back one more I had an '86 3/4 ton suburban. Again, king of the road (for 80's tech), unstoppable and ran it as an alternative driver until 340,000 miles ate the floors out of it.

Before that a dodge ramcharger... my primary goal here was that I always wanted to have something that could tow my car trailer and keep my '73 Buick out of the snow. For 25 years that was my backup plan. A few years ago I got the '73 running right again, so that tows my trailer and is my alternate vehicle. Since it's a great tow vehicle, I sold my Yukon and went to a Chevy Volt for my DD. No looking back, it's awesome. But when we pack the whole family for a trip... it's my wife's Passat Wagon we look to not the Volt.

Drew > victor 03/01/2015 at 10:07

0

This guy gets it.

Drew > Axial 03/01/2015 at 10:27

0

Ah, you should have said so. I've got a C6 that's been conscripted into DD duty, although given the hours I keep, my neighbors have to hate it since it's awesomely loud. I was tempted to take these points one at a time, but that seems a bit passive aggressive, and I do appreciate your feedback since I'm kinda having a crisis of automobiles. My CTS-V is showing signs of age and a prior owner that didn't love it like I do. Hence, I'm on the market and trying to figure out what suits me.

The basic issues for me are as such:
1. It's time to change cars, and I've got a hobby that currently fills the existing space in my car completely. I can get my bike and some gear to and from the trails, but I'd certainly like more room so I'm not playing Tetris (victor nailed it) with the bike. Besides, after 15 miles of some of the more technical stuff around here, I really don't want to dismantle my bike while I'm generally exhausted and more often than not bleeding. And if I want to go with anyone else, we're taking separate cars. The Miata I'm putting together as my first project car. Already have it up and running, but hauling parts around with the CTS was a pain in the ass and generally required asking for someone's truck, which is a cardinal sin 'round these parts.

2. I need more space, but not necessarily a lot. Jumping all the way into a Silverado or even a Tacoma from what I've got now means I'm sacrificing a really great platform (which I do love) for something completely different. It satisfies the space requirement, sure. And I don't mean to knock trucks (that was the stout talking). I do enjoy them thoroughly, but it's a totally different thing to enjoy. Certainly not something I can get the fullest out of on my way to work. That said, my shortlist on trucks is topped by a GMT800 Suburban/Yukon XL 2500, but only one with Quadrasteer. There's a very good chance I'll end up with one, but I'd like to explore my options completely.

3. I love to drive cars - the CTS-V is my first four door car, everything else has been 2-door and, with one exception, manual, low-slung, long hood, and quick. Okay, the '88 Camaro was slow as sorghum in winter, but still, something that I don't need to explore the limits to have fun. My philosophy isn't that I need the Toybaru twins approach to a DD - I don't need to get the car at it's knife point 10/10ths to have fun. Enough capability to explore when I've got the chance to stretch its legs but practical enough to enjoy.

I'm certain off-roading is a blast, and I'm sure that from your perspective, you've got what you need. But between preping and tracking the cars I've got and my mountain biking, my hobby list is pretty full for the time being.

victor > Drew 03/01/2015 at 11:17

0

Wow, i wrote this when I was tired and only half lucid. I'm surprised I made any sense.

Axial > Drew 03/01/2015 at 15:50

0

Well, those points were leveled at the other person commenting. I had no idea what you needed when I made that post, I was just trying to make some generalist points in support of the truck idea.

I'd like to start by replying to your other comment (and avoid 50 threads with the same person): you drive an exceptional wagon in the CTS-V. It's not representative of most wagons, which are inexpensive econotubs with appreciable body roll and engines that cap out in the 2 litre, 160 HP area. It's one thing to praise the CTS-V Wagon, which is a phenomenal car by all counts, but it's another thing to use the CTS-V Wagon to praise wagons in general. With that in mind, CUVs and SUVs (which are also classes I'm not too fond of) do everything a normal wagon does...only better and more comfortably. That's why they kicked the wagon out of the US market in the first place.

As for exploring the truck idea, you did just say that the CTS-V isn't hacking it in hauling things. It sounds like you need something like a CUV/SUV/truck based on point 1, but are hesitant to part with the performance car characteristics of the -V based on points 2 and 3. If that's the case, it sounds like you probably won't be happy with anything but another -V (or -V-like alternative, perhaps from Mercedes). Anything that can carry more is also going to be bigger, slower (barring maybe a Cayenne or Macan Turbo S), and more numb. I know I like to drive race-like cars the most. If I had the time for it, I'd build up, strip-out, and race-prep a C4 to minimally road legal standards and I'd commute in that when the weather is good, partly because I think it's cool and partly because it would make people around me on the road and in town giggle, and I love making people smile with my cars as much as I love driving them. I would never be happy even in something as capable as the aforementioned Macan Turbo S, and even the CTS-V is on the edge (it's too civilized...my ZR-1 and LT4 cars are not so civilized). So I guess, you just really need to decide what you value more: stuff-carrying and the flexibility associated with that or driving qualities and the pleasure associated with them. Maybe splitting the CTS-V into two cars is the answer? Maybe keeping the CTS-V is the answer? Maybe something like an SRX? I don't know, only you can know.

You mentioned dismantling the bike, so I think I should clarify that when I mentioned stuffing mine in a Jetta, I meant stuffing it in there with no extra work. Lower the seats, pop the trunk, stuff it in. No disassembly. Easy. I was looking around at newer cars last night (i.e. Focus Sedan vs. Focus Wagon), and it seems that manufacturers these days put this ridiculous divide inside the trunks of sedans with a tiny cut-out to expand from if you lower the seats. That's silly and takes up a lot of space, and I can see why the wagon would be better (the new Impala, though, has positively massive amounts of room...SS not too shabby, either...also the 300/Charger). That 2002 Jetta? The back wall of the boot was the back of the seats, so when you lowered the seats it was like having a wagon without the vertical excess. It was quite cavernous. It is in that context where I make the statement that the wagon and hatchback form-factors don't provide much extra benefit in exchange for extra weight, a huge rear area for increased vacuum drag, and looking brickish.

Evan_Ben > Drew 03/02/2015 at 14:19

0

Sorry, a bit late to comment on this one - but I also have an appreciation for wagons and felt compelled to respond.

I don't think there is any question that the cargo space in a wagon or hatchback is more usable and accessable (and typically materially larger) than that of a similar sized sedan - and unlike a truck, van or SUV, you give up very little (or maybe nothing) in terms of driving feel. Looks are subjective, but I think the subtle aggressiveness of a sporty wagon (like your CTS-V) is fantastic - and the fact that a material proportion of the population doesn't give them a second look makes me like them even more.

What about looking for a 2nd generation CTS-V wagon?

I did a similar search last year and ended up with a lightly used E63 wagon (replacing an SUV). Couldn't be happier.