Wagons vs Crossovers

"Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow" (chriskf) 06/06/2016 at 12:26 • Filed to: None

5

41

They’re the same thing, you fools!

!!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! got me thinking about these two different vehicle types. So you can thank him for this rant. :)

How do we define the point at which a wagon becomes a crossover? At what ride height does this classification change occur? And is this actually even a definable difference of two different styles of vehicle, or simply a new-age marketing technique to sell a fuel efficient alternative to SUVs?

My determination, crossovers are wagons. It’s marketing BS, and you’re all buying into it! You mindless sheople, you! (Just kidding, guys. You’re alright.)

Case in point, the AMC Eagle.

Back in the 1980s this was considered a wagon. By today’s standards this would be a crossover. But over time the station wagon got burdened with a social stigma of being boring or lame, which some (especially oppos) would argue is undeserved.

That made them more difficult to sell. SUVs were killing it, and wagons become relatively unattractive to consumers in comparison. Then the market crashed and gas prices kept rising, but consumers still wanted the utility of SUVs without the in increased cost of consumables. So the marketing gurus at the OEs needed to figure out a solution. !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! indicate that the word arose around 2007-2008 as,

“a marketing term... In general, a crossover vehicle is of uni-body construction on a car-based platform, with ride, handling and performance characteristics similar to cars. They can appear either wagon- or SUV-like in appearance (though they aren’t really meant for off-road use), often have a lower roof line or step-in height compared to a traditional SUV, and in general get better gas mileage compared to most SUVs.”

The whole idea of crossovers being different than wagons is like saying that base model trucks, which have lower ride heights from the factory, are a completely different type of vehicle than higher trim models, that sit significantly further from the ground.

In summary, crossover = wagon (or hatchback depending on certain parameters, if you subscribe to !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! )

jariten1781 > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 06/06/2016 at 12:38

3

Nah. Of course you can use a broad definition to include them both (hell, with a broad enough definition MPVs and Minivans would also be wagons), and there’s certainly some vehicles that blur the line, but using Generally Accepted Car Identification Principles (GACIP) they’re usually obviously different.

You can try to fit the ‘definition’ in a box, but it’s silly...to steal from Justice Stewart “ I know it when I see it".

HammerheadFistpunch > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 06/06/2016 at 12:39

2

Yes to this...which is why I don’t feel bad for the death of the sedan. Crossovers are getting lower and more performance oriented all the time anyway...I welcome our wagon not wagon overlords

Stapleface > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 06/06/2016 at 12:40

3

I agree. But most people won't call them a wagon. When I had my Crosstrek, I considered it a lifted wagon, because that's what it was.

Nibby > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 06/06/2016 at 12:42

2

This is a Power Wagon so that’s fine.

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > jariten1781 06/06/2016 at 12:44

1

And I certainly agree with that. This piece was written with a large sense of satire.

However, being someone who worked in marketing and major in political science, I do love to thoroughly debate something to the most minute details. So I’m genuinely interested in determining what the defining characteristic of a crossover vs a wagon would be.

With the reference to Justice Stewart’s ruling, the lines between an artistic portrayal of nudity and pornography are far more blurred than the defining characteristics of precisely engineered machines.

(Can you tell that I like to argue? lol)

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > Stapleface 06/06/2016 at 12:45

1

You see the light, brother. Welcome to the resistance.

Wacko > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 06/06/2016 at 12:46

1

Crossovers, the American Wagon.

I for one consider my 2014 pathfinder a Wagon.

Would of bought a Wagon, but no 7 seater wagons in North America.

HFV has no HFV. But somehow has 2 motorcycles > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 06/06/2016 at 12:46

1

Ingest your point but I still think your wrong. I mean you wouldn’t call my Honda Fit a Crossover, it’s to low to the ground, its tires are too small, and it’s just not a crossover, how every th HRV which is built on the same plate form is taller, and is available with AWD, but you can’t really calling an SUV, it would be an insult to my Fathe in Law’s Excurssion.

I think the trek might not be easily definable, but you know it when you see it. Although I guess the Kia Soul blurs the line, I’d call it a hatchback, but Kia wants you to call it a crossover even though it’s not AWD, and doesn’t have much more ground clearance than you average Impreza. Still I think the term has its place, mostly because I think calling the new Outbacks wagons, is insult to the new V90.

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > Wacko 06/06/2016 at 12:48

0

I’ll have to disagree on the Pathfinder part. It has the off-road capabilities and design differences that distinguish it from wagons.

RT > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 06/06/2016 at 12:49

0

Wacko > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 06/06/2016 at 12:49

0

AWD is an option.

FWD is standard.

Takuro Spirit > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 06/06/2016 at 12:54

9

I got an idea: Is there a sedan or coupe version offered? WAGON.

No sedan/coupe version? CROSSOVER.

Done.

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > HFV has no HFV. But somehow has 2 motorcycles 06/06/2016 at 12:55

0

I think that the market has started to design cars to fit the new classification, which is why you get oddities like the HRV that don’t seem to fit into one of the other groups. It’s a hatchback, but it’s far too tall to be considered just a hatchback. It also doesn’t quite have the off-road capabilities you’d expect from an SUV. However, I’d still define it as almost a sub-compact SUV. The little brother to the already diminutive CRV.

The market has given rise to this new breed of cars, but I’d say that all of them can fit, by technical standards and traditional definitions, into the classifications of wagon, hatchback, or SUV.

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > Wacko 06/06/2016 at 12:56

0

Fair enough. Then I’d argue it’s more of a minivan designed to have a more masculine appearance, in order to make it sell better to middle-aged family men.

Wacko > Nibby 06/06/2016 at 12:57

0

god i hate that Ram grill!

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > RT 06/06/2016 at 12:58

1

Nope. That’s a liftback.

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > Takuro Spirit 06/06/2016 at 12:58

0

Not a bad rule of thumb.

BigBlock440 > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 06/06/2016 at 13:00

2

Offroad capabilities? He said 2014, not 2004.

Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 06/06/2016 at 13:00

4

Crossover>Wagon. It has utility of the wagon, with more ground clearance, making it somewhat usable off the pavement and easier to get into. Also, it’s not like wagons are that sporty.

Wacko > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 06/06/2016 at 13:02

1

When I bought mine, I needed a 7 seater, but I wanted AWD.

Didn’t want a Sienna, so Crossovers where my only choice.

I also wanted a Manual, but had to cross that one out cause got no choices...

Now a year and a half later, I love My AWD CVT people mover.

still looking to replace my wifes elantra with a Manual AWD Suzuki SX4, Still miss mine. that was also a mini wagon/cute ute....crossover.

Klaus Schmoll > Takuro Spirit 06/06/2016 at 13:04

0

Ahem!

Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 06/06/2016 at 13:04

0

Depends. As I see it, there are 3 types of crossover.

1. The raised wagon. The Outback and multiple Volvo’s are examples of this type.

2. The squished SUV. That bloated monstrosity known as the Equinox falls into the category.

3. The minivan without sliding doors. I don’t care what you call it, how it lacks sliding doors or how it’s higher than you’d think a minivan would be. Things like the Traverse or Explorer are minivans.

Takuro Spirit > Klaus Schmoll 06/06/2016 at 13:09

0

Doesn’t apply to hatchbacks, i.e. roofline/hatch opening.

Chan - Mid-engine with cabin fever > HFV has no HFV. But somehow has 2 motorcycles 06/06/2016 at 13:09

1

“Tall hatchback” is a welcome new subtype. There have been examples of this for more than a decade (see original Toyota bB/Scion xB), but they have typically been labelled along with all the other hatchbacks. I like that they prioritise utility over any off-road pretense.

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > BigBlock440 06/06/2016 at 13:10

1

Yeah, that was a misidentification on my part. Forgot about the changes in the generation. He drives a minivan.

jariten1781 > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 06/06/2016 at 13:14

1

Yeah, I’ve been known to argue with people even when we’re fully aligned...or as they say “Violent Agreement”.

To me the difference is the artificiality that CUVs have. Whether it’s cladding or ride height or trivial AWD or whatever, there’s something aesthetically different that's added solely to make them 'not a wagon/hatch'. It's amorphous and differs based on model, but they all have 'it' which is why it's hard to box in but easy to see.

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > Jordan and the Slowrunner, Boomer Intensifies 06/06/2016 at 13:14

0

I’m not sure you read what I wrote above. My whole point is that they’re the same thing. Well, more so that crossovers are wagons.

Also, there are quite a few wagons that have been made which would disagree with your point about sportiness, but I’d agree that most are designed for practicality over fun.

duurtlang > Takuro Spirit 06/06/2016 at 13:15

0

That’s a rather decent rule of thumb, although it should read: is there a sedan, hatchback or coupe version offered. There a lots of wagon versions available (in Europe) of cars that also offer a hatchback but no sedan.

duurtlang > Klaus Schmoll 06/06/2016 at 13:16

0

No sedan or coupe (or hatch) version available, so the rule of thumb doesn’t apply. And rightfully so, the X6 is no wagon. Or do you offer it as the hatch/coupe version of the X5? In that case I’d disagree as well, as the X6 isn’t a coupe in any way and not really a hatchback either.

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > Wacko 06/06/2016 at 13:16

0

Solution: you should have bought a 90s Previa. AWD, mid-engined, and supercharged. Lol

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > jariten1781 06/06/2016 at 13:18

0

Yeah, I think it’s a classification that is really defined by combing aspects of several other classifications to make a “new” type of vehicle. But going back to my point about the Eagle, I think that before someone coined the term we’d just be calling all of them either wagons or SUVs.

Wacko > RT 06/06/2016 at 13:33

1

sweet 4 door mustang bro

AfromanGTO > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 06/06/2016 at 13:59

1

A crossover is just a station wagon with a lift.

Textured Soy Protein > RT 06/06/2016 at 14:15

1

The Crosstour would’ve been great if Honda lowered the suspension and got rid of the ugly wannabe-SUV grille.

But instead when they refreshed it they doubled down on the fake-trucky looking BS with a perhaps marginally better looking but still too gigantic grille and a bunch of gray plastic body cladding.

jariten1781 > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 06/06/2016 at 14:19

1

I mean...back in the day we just called them Eagles. There were jacked up coupes and verts in addition to the wagon. I almost wonder if they'd had longevity and success if the term 'Eagle' would have been genericized and stuff like the Allroad and X6 would have been talked about by the press and public as the 'Audi Eagle' and 'BMW 6 Eagle'. An interesting alternate present that no one cares about but me...heh.

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > jariten1781 06/06/2016 at 14:22

1

Klaus Schmoll > duurtlang 06/06/2016 at 14:32

0

And again we have come from trying to define what a “real” wagon is to trying to define a “real” coupe. I just posted it to prove that there is a counterpoint (or countercar?) to pretty much any rule we can come up with. I would define a wagon as something, with four doors and a hatch, a third rear window that is about as long as it is high and so on. But then it would only take seconds for someone to post this

and say “Ahem”. It’s a game you cannot win.

duurtlang > Klaus Schmoll 06/06/2016 at 15:07

0

This is true. However, when I see someone calling a hulking SUV a ‘modern wagon’ I cringe. Wagons tend to fall in the “I recognize it when I see it” category, but that’s a hard sell in a discussion.

Saracen > Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow 06/06/2016 at 15:29

0

“Crossover” is a marketing gimmick to sell wagons to SUV poseurs.

Chris_K_F drives an FR-Slow > Saracen 06/06/2016 at 15:50

1

Yep, that’s pretty much what I said above. Thanks for reading. ;)

HFV has no HFV. But somehow has 2 motorcycles > HFV has no HFV. But somehow has 2 motorcycles 06/06/2016 at 18:19

0

I like,to call the Fit a micro van, because it drives more like a van than a hatchback, but associating your car with a van is a bad marketing move in North America.