
Sedans Aren’t Dead, American Sedans Are - howard941
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-11-29/chevrolet-sedans-suffer-while-toyota-and-honda-hang-on
======
njarboe
Any article on why US manufactures of vehicles focus on trucks instead of cars
and does not mention the chicken tax [1] has not really done their homework.
In 1965 a 25% tax was put on imported trucks due to a trade fight with Europe
on chicken imports. This 25% tax is still in effect today. SUVs were also put
in the truck category for some time and it is not clear which truck like
vehicles will be taxed. This is why almost all trucks and SUVs made by non-US
companies are manufactured in the US.

Profit margins on US made trucks have been much larger than autos for a long
time(mostly due to this tax) and I imagine that all the marketing of the US
auto companies over 40 years to get people to buy them instead of sedans has
had quite an effect. Once a large number of people are driving tall trucks and
SUVs, driving a car is much less comfortable, as you can't see past the truck
in front of you from a low sedan.

[1][https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_tax](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_tax)

~~~
coredog64
Most manufacturers have already figured out how to game the chicken tax. For
example, Ford installs seats that are removed and destroyed after each Transit
Connect reaches the US [0]. I've heard other stories about Subaru doing
something similar so that their CAFE metrics weren't screwed.

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Transit_Connect#Tariff_ci...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Transit_Connect#Tariff_circumvention).

~~~
SilasX
I'm more interested in learning why there's a lacking feedback mechanism for
"hey, that's not what we wanted, let's revisit the regulations for what we
were trying to achieve".

~~~
allemagne
First we need to put carseat-destroying subsidies in place so that hard-
working American carseat-destroyers aren't put out of a job.

------
cmrdporcupine
They killed the Chevy Volt, the only interesting sedan in GM's entire line-up.
Incredibly short-sighted. Love it more than any car I've ever driven, despite
it lacking in many of the 'creature comforts' of other cars. Fun to drive with
excellent acceleration, I drive it 91% electric, and when I flip over to gas
it's an excellent performing highly efficient hybrid.

Sad.

EDIT: I should add that really the Volt is not a 'sedan', but a 'liftback'.
Far more utility out of the trunk than a typical sedan. My medium sized dog
even fits back there.

~~~
lisper
Even sadder: the Bolt is the affordable electric car that the Tesla Model 3
promised to be but isn't. And yet no one is excited about the Bolt. In fact,
probably most people are not even aware that the Bolt exists. Sad indeed.

~~~
cmrdporcupine
They made odd choices on the body styling. It's a Chevy Trax but squished
horizontally. And the naming sucks. The drivetrain is amazing.

They also just don't seem to want to make enough of them or ship them to
markets where people want them. Canada was starved for inventory all last last
year. None went to Europe. Asia, where they'd make a lot of sense, got only a
smattering. And they don't seem to be improving on this.

The fate of the Volt and Bolt together makes me entirely skeptical of GM's
claims to making a transition to EV production. I used to be a big advocate of
GM's EV designs -- they're technically excellent -- but I don't think I can
get behind the company at all. I'm somewhat tempted to sell my Volt and get a
Honda Clarity PHEV.

~~~
clomond
> The fate of the Volt and Bolt together makes me entirely skeptical of GM's
> claims to making a transition to EV production

Couldn't agree more.

To add - my parents were in the market for electric cars and were evaluating
the Bolt as a serious option. GM turned them away, including refusing to take
a reservation and said "check again in 6 months when the new model year comes
out". Seems like the production was very intentionally capped, and there was
little effort to retain their business.

~~~
burfog
The cars probably lose money by themselves, only being profitable when looking
at the big picture. (due to CAFE and similar) They are costly to make and
typical car buyers are uninterested.

The cars exist because various governments have made electric/hybrid/whatever
quotas that need to be met. The minimum required number will be sold. In some
jurisdictions that number is zero. Each one of these cars is sold at a loss,
until you consider that the manufacturer is able to avoid fines or being
entirely banned from selling vehicles.

~~~
jandrese
Or GM just hates electric cars. Look at what they did with the EV-1, a vehicle
they were apparently only making under duress. They had an exit plan in place
from day 1, and it did not involve people commuting in electric cars.

------
esotericn
The car market in its' totality has always struck me as being irrational.

It takes a large amount of number crunching to determine that an old small
Japanese car has the cheapest TCO.

The same follows across the categories (e.g. the article's specific focus on
sedans).

A whole bunch of mid-market brands seemingly exist for no reason other than
for some groups of not-wealthy people to waste money in an attempt to impress
other groups of not-wealthy people.

e.g. the German cars which seem to exist as some sort of indicator that
someone can afford to burn money maintaining a depreciating asset.

It's basically the (non-smart) watch market, right. You wear a Casio-level
watch if you don't care, a Rolex-level watch if you're signalling, and other
stuff is basically an enthusiast market.

~~~
rock_hard
Well, this assumes that it’s all about TCO or status.

But have you ever driven a Mercedes, BMW, Porsche or Audi? The driving
expierence is superior to everything else! Tesla gets close...but I can’t
think of any other brand that does.

~~~
jszymborski
I think it's fair to say this falls under grandparent's "enthusiast" category.
Nothing wrong with being an enthusiast, but I think the characterization as
"irrational" is probably correct.

~~~
mikeash
Few human decisions are rational if you start taking that approach. You can
always live in a smaller dwelling, wear worse clothes, eat cheaper food, avoid
all paid entertainment, etc.

It would be better to state that the car market is not primarily based around
the simple act of transportation. Which should be pretty obvious anyway.

~~~
exergy
> You can always live in a smaller dwelling, wear worse clothes, eat cheaper
> food, avoid all paid entertainment, etc.

Indeed. And the more of these you can check, the happier and more satisfying
your life is likely to get. Why maintain an unused mansion when a small, cozy
place will do? Why follow the latest fashion trends when your four year old
OCBD is in fighting form? Why eat lobsters all the time when beans are so
nutrient-dense and cheap?! Why sit on your ass wasting away at the behest of a
mediocre film when you could read a book instead?

The other major difference, of course, is that there are few irrational
decisions quite as expensive as buying an idiot pickup truck to show off.
Maybe a boat or an aircraft, but not much more.

~~~
mikeash
Why have a small, cozy place when you could live in a van down by the river?
Why buy clothes when you can drape yourselves in discarded blankets? Why eat
beans when you can haunt the dumpsters behind the local restaurants?

~~~
exergy
Reductio ad absurdum

~~~
mikeash
Yes, exactly. Calling it "irrational" to spend resources on pleasure leads to
absurd conclusions. Reductio ad absurdum is not a fallacy.

~~~
exergy
Of course it's a fallacy. One has to draw a line at some point. To me that
line would be a way, _way_ cheaper expense than a big, polluting truck. But it
seems that to you, if I can't own a truck, I must go all the way to living in
shanties/favelas and dumpster diving.

~~~
mikeash
How do you decide where to draw the line? What’s the rational way to put some
pleasures under the “rational” category and others under the “irrational”
category?

~~~
Noumenon72
You calibrate on what people were satisfied with thirty or a hundred years
ago, eliminating modern status-seeking. You ask yourself "Would I be horrified
to live like that, or do I just think I'm too good for it?" Like there's no
way I am going to live as a boarder with another family, but I can definitely
make my own lunch.

~~~
mikeash
Why thirty or a hundred? Why not two, or ten thousand?

------
bitrrrate
A key passage from the article.

"Once Americans began driving Hondas and Toyotas, they discovered that these
cars had a lot more going for them than just gas mileage — they broke down
infrequently, could last for hundreds of thousands of miles, and were even fun
to drive."

If the US sedan makers can't compete then they should deprecate those cars.
Why make something that people aren't buying? Cars are too expensive these
days to have to pay for frequent maintenance or fit-and-finish issues. Never
mind the fact that "American" cars are not as American as they used to be and
the Camry isn't distinctively Japanese.

~~~
virmundi
The sad thing is that American automakers can't, even if that is they won't,
make good cars. I don't get it. Why can't they make a fuel pump that lasts
100k miles? It's obviously possible since Japan does it. What's holding us
back? Is the engineers? Is it the labor assembling things? Why can't we
compete? Management being stupid and chasing this quarter's numbers above all
else?

~~~
ip26
Totally speculating, but from the outside it seems like stagnation &
resistance to change. The Corvette still uses leaf springs. All three of the
Big Three hung on to SOHC & other relics for far longer than Japan. I also
remember as a shade-tree mechanic, Japanese engines were always precise,
intricate, and sharp (suggesting computer design & milling) while the Fords of
the same decade were not, and frequently the arrangements were irrational.
Rangers needed the intake manifold removed to access the spark plugs. This
always suggested to me more casting & hand drawing.

American automakers seem to make some great stuff when they are actually
pushing the envelope- the EcoBoost line I hear is very solid, and the aluminum
frame in the F150 seems to be doing great (notice: lots of FUD when it
launched, silence ever since). The Volt & Bolt have had many great things said
about them.

Whether it's conservative engineers, or tight purses, or unrealistic
schedules, or even just myopic American Exceptionalism, I do not know.

~~~
stevehawk
Corvette uses a tranverse leaf spring, which isn't the same as most people
expect. Chevy does it because it works well (it's a top handling car, held the
lap record at Nürburgring for a while) and allows for extra cargo space in the
rear.

------
bwanab
I can't help but to believe that GM and Ford are making the same mistake they
made in the early 70s and the 90s. Piling on the big cars when gas prices are
low, then watch their share of the market collapse when gas prices get higher
as they always have in the past.

To GM's credit they claim they'll be putting a lot of the short term savings
into EVs and AVs, but time will tell.

------
peferron
Japanese sedans are dead too. It'll just take a bit longer.

Sedans simply do not offer enough utility or fun per dollar to stay relevant.
In France, where I'm from, sedans have been utterly dead from as long as I can
remember. People just buy hatchbacks instead.

Sedans stayed alive in the USA thanks to wider roads, larger parking spots,
and a persistent notion that hatchbacks are tiny cheap econoboxes that you
wouldn't want to be seen in (which, to be fair, is often the case, even though
there are very good hatchbacks like the VW Golf).

CUVs and SUVs have overcome this stigma and are set to accomplish what
hatchbacks failed to do in the US market: kill sedans. I expect very few
people to go back to buying sedans after having owned CUVs or SUVs, unless
it's a somewhat niche sedan like a BMW M3, Mercedes S-Class, Tesla Model 3,
etc.

~~~
decebalus1
> Japanese sedans are dead too. It'll just take a bit longer.

> Sedans simply do not offer enough utility or fun per dollar to stay
> relevant. In France, where I'm from, sedans have been utterly dead from as
> long as I can remember. People just buy hatchbacks instead.

That's one side of the story and France is just a fraction of the market for
sedans. The road configurations, parking styles, etc.. probably favors
hatchbacks but that's not the case in Canada (for example) and that definitely
doesn't mean that sedans will be dead.

Where I'm from, it's the same as France for reasons related to utility and
fuel consumption but even so, people who wanted 'fun' went for the German
large sedan or for the Japanese small but souped-up sedan.

~~~
peferron
I agree that France is not very representative of the general automobile
market, but in Canada for example I would expect most households to start
buying a CUV or SUV as their first car (possibly with AWD).

The point is that a classic three-box four-door sedan is not super practical
as your only car, and I believe that's true for almost all markets. Americans
still bought sedans because the alternatives (wagons, minivans, hatchbacks)
were seen as uncool, but CUVs and SUVs don't have this problem at all.

So, yes, sedans will still exist but with a fraction of their previous market
share, and in this sense sedans will be "dead" (since that's how the article
uses the word).

------
mobilefriendly
My hard-working parents bought a new Ford during my childhood, in the 1970s.
The car was a lemon that broke down a lot, they hated that car. I've never
forgiven Ford either, in our extended family today there are no Ford owners
and never will be.

------
kenhwang
American sedans are dead because the Big 3 American automakers never invested
in making sedans. They always borrowed tech from other companies.

Just about every Ford sedan platform and engine was built on top of Mazda or
Volvo designs. It's not surprising that Ford lost access to those designs when
it sold off Volvo and then Mazda.

Similarly, GM designs were from Suzuki and Opel. They've been divesting from
Suzuki and Opel for a better part of a decade now. It seems like they also
reached the point where they've been cut off from platforms and engines.

Chrysler luckily still has Fiat to borrow car platforms and engines from. They
also have partnerships with Hyundai group. So I think they'll keep making
sedans, just because they still have access to that tech.

The American sedan is being killed off because they were never American in the
first place.

~~~
jddaigle
> American sedans are dead because the Big 3 American automakers never
> invested in making sedans. They always borrowed tech from other companies.

In the 80s a lot of US-Foreign partnerships sprang up as domestic
manufacturers scrambled to develop competitive products to compete against the
Japanese. But GM had an ownership stake in Opel from the 1960s IIRC (they just
recently sold it to the French PSA group) and Ford has been experimenting with
bringing over cars designed by Ford Europe since the 80s (look up Merkur).

Chrysler is really no more; the shots are called by FIAT and aside from Jeep
and Dodge trucks everything else is an import (the Jeep Renegade and the FIAT
500x are the same under the skin and are built in the same factory in Italy).

Ford made a big bet on "global cars" in the 90s, and we see the benefits of it
today. The Escape and the EcoSport were both originally designed for Europe.

GM and Ford did learn to make great cars for the US market, but too late. The
Impala & CT6, for example, are on a platform designed for the US/China market
(no way the European market would want a car that big that isn't an S-Class,
7-series, or A8). And they're great cars. But as the original article said
consumers demand for big American sedans has been in decline for almost 50
years. Ford/GM can't seem to stop skating to where the puck just was.

~~~
kenhwang
The Ford Escape might be designed for Europe, but it's still designed on top
of Mazda designed platform for the Mazda6, primarily using the
Duratec/EcoBoost inline-4 engine that's based off a Mazda MZR engine design.
EcoSport uses a Ford designed engine, but it's still using the Mazda2
platform. Ford's been partnered with Mazda from 1974-2015 which predates and
outlasted Merkur.

The Imapla is on GM's Epsilon platform, which was originally designed by Opel.
CT6 is on a completely homegrown platform, which is probably why it's the last
car in GM's discontinuation lineup to be discontinued.

They may have had platforms that were designed for the US market, but they
weren't the designer.

------
chaoticmass
How is it that the cycle of cheap gas = people buy gas guzzling SUVs, gas goes
up = people go back to gas sipping cars, keeps repeating? I swear in my
lifetime I've seen this cycle repeat three times now.

------
40acres
I'm a city boy so mind the ignorance, but who is buying up all the trucks? I
get the allure of a nice SUV/crossover, my next car will probably be one since
I think the space is useful for when thinking about starting a family, but a
truck never seemed that feasible for non-commercial use.

~~~
bunderbunder
TBH, I think a lot of it is just about presenting an image.

I grew up in a rural area, and a lot of the trucks in town rarely carried
anything of note in the bed, because their owners didn't want the paint to get
scratched.

~~~
projektfu
I see lots of pickup trucks (which are common in urban Atlanta) slowing to
3mph before a speed bump that can easily be taken at 12 in a sedan. It's
obvious that the truck can handle the bump with alacrity, but the drivers are
very cautious about risking the slightest damage.

~~~
stonogo
The suspension is much stiffer in an underloaded pickup. That speed bump will
launch your head into the ceiling if you take it too fast.

~~~
projektfu
So you have to soften the suspension before taking it on a rutted road?

~~~
stonogo
No, you have to drive slower.

------
nrjames
It's odd that this article doesn't mention Tesla.

~~~
olliej
Unclear if this is a joke - tesla’s cost much more than most sedans - the
market for most us sedans is not the same.

~~~
rconti
Average Transaction Price for "light vehicles" (which seems to include luxury
sedans, luxury SUVs, pickups, etc) was was $36,270 in January 2018.[1]

It's not nothing, but a ~$46k medium range Model 3 is not so terribly far from
that, and in fact hits that on the nose if you manage to buy one in the next
14 hours in California (or a state with even better state-level incentives
like Colorado). :) (Tesla is 'promising' delivery before end of 2018 if you
order in November; I only know this because my in-laws are looking at it right
now).

[1] [https://mediaroom.kbb.com/2018-02-01-Average-New-Car-
Prices-...](https://mediaroom.kbb.com/2018-02-01-Average-New-Car-Prices-Rise-
Nearly-4-Percent-For-January-2018-On-Shifting-Sales-Mix-According-To-Kelley-
Blue-Book)

~~~
olliej
The ASP for light vehicles is 36k, when including a bunch of expensive vehicle
classes, which should indicate what the average low end sedan costs to bring
the overall ASP price down:

* ASP for pickup: 47 fullsize, 32 "mid" size

* ASP for an SUV: 60k

* ASP for luxury SUVs 44k for a compact (wtf is a compact SUV?) up to 80k.

* ASP subcompact SUV is 24k

Vs. the low-end cars:

* 15k for a Kia Rio * 19k for a Toyota Corolla * 12-17k for a Nissan Versa * Honda low end 19k, the top end plugin: 33k * Hyundai 16k-22k * Mitsubishi 14.5k * Ford Fiesta 14.2k, taurus: 27.8k * Chevy cruze: 17-24k * Buick starts at 25k

This ignores compacts/hatchbacks which seem to be on average around 5k less.

So a Tesla isn't a few grand more expensive. It's 2-2.5 _times_ more
expensive.

------
loph
I've driven a Chevy Impala. It drove OK, but it looked and felt really cheap
inside. I've owned Chrysler, Chevy, and Ford. It was the Ford product -- that
I bought new -- that drove me (in many senses) to the Honda dealer.

I've bought 7 new Hondas since. Why? Every American car I had owned got at
least one tow-truck ride to get repaired. The Ford had to be towed to the
dealer for service _three_ times.

The Hondas have never left me stranded.

------
nradov
I've purchased several sedans before but will probably never buy another one.
Sedans are really miserable for those of us who enjoy outdoor sports. Sure
it's _possible_ to use a sedan to transport equipment for scuba diving,
cycling, kayaking, skiing, etc but other vehicle styles are far more
comfortable and practical.

------
all2
[http://www.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_3022-autosales.html](http://www.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_3022-autosales.html)

The above contains relevant numbers.

I'm seeing a lot of cars on the road that fit the wheel-base of a sedan, but
are larger. Here are a few models that come to mind: Hyundai Kona [0], BMW X2
[1], Nissan LEAF (though this is an all electric offering) [2], and I'm sure
there are more.

My point is, there are vehicles that are roughly the same size that fill the
needs of people who would have purchased a sedan.

I'm guessing that if we refactored the numbers in terms of wheel-base and
interior volume we'd see people are buying similar wheel-based cars with more
interior volume.

[0]
[https://www.hyundaiusa.com/kona/index.aspx](https://www.hyundaiusa.com/kona/index.aspx)
[1] [https://www.bmwusa.com/vehicles/x-models/x2/sports-
activity-...](https://www.bmwusa.com/vehicles/x-models/x2/sports-activity-
coupe/overview.html) [2] [https://www.nissanusa.com/vehicles/electric-
cars/leaf.html](https://www.nissanusa.com/vehicles/electric-cars/leaf.html)

[edit] AND it looks like I missed a crucial piece of the title, so here are
some 'murican cars that fit the description above: Chevy Trax [3], Buick
Encore [4].

[3] [https://www.chevrolet.com/suvs/trax-compact-
suv](https://www.chevrolet.com/suvs/trax-compact-suv) [4]
[https://www.buick.com/suvs/encore-small-luxury-
suv](https://www.buick.com/suvs/encore-small-luxury-suv)

[/edit]

~~~
matthewmcg
Agreed. Another way to personalize these data is this observation: 10 years
ago, my friends and family all drove cars with separate trunks. Now none of us
do.

------
penglish1
The article says that Americans never really regained trust in American
manufactured sedans since the 60s/70s. But then doesn't explain.. who exactly
was buying all those sedans.. while not trusting them? There definitely were a
LOT of American sedan sales for a while there.

~~~
war1025
I grew up in rural Iowa, and the concept of buying something not made by the
big three was pretty exotic. The dealerships weren't around, so people didn't
even consider them as an option.

Now most of the small town dealerships have gone under as part of the
restructuring from the recession, so people are going to cities to buy cars
anyway now. When they get to the city, there are dealerships for the foreign
car makers, so I'd guess people end up more likely to buy one.

------
mikeash
I wonder when the press will realize that there are not just three American
car makers anymore.

Looking at the best selling vehicles in the US for October 2018, there’s an
American sedan in the top 20, but it’s not made by the Big Three.

------
slowmovintarget
I looked at a Fusion a few years ago before deciding to buy an Accord. There
was a $10K price differential in favor of the Honda. This was mainly because
all American sedans at the same price point had far lower reliability scores
and were much smaller cars. There were no "American" sedans other than the
Fusion worth considering for reliability and non-shoebox size. The third
factor was resale value.

I simply got more for my money buying the Honda. I wasn't the least bit
interested in an SUV or pickup truck.

------
JKCalhoun
> Meanwhile, the American automakers raced to come out with their own small,
> fuel-efficient sedans. But their products were often shoddy, poorly designed
> and technologically deficient

I wonder if this wasn't intentional. That is, were there bean counters at Ford
etc. that were worried that sales of the small sedans would cannibalize sales
of their higher-margin autos? Seems to be the way of things in the past four
decades or so....

~~~
jddaigle
It takes years to bring a new car to market. And in the early 70s the Big 3
had zero, zilch, nada in the way of platforms and powertrains suitable for
small fuel efficient cars. So the first generations were built in a hurry, and
to a price, because the economy was in the toilet. And it showed!

------
gwbas1c
It's also customer service:

I bought a Japanese vehicle that ended up being a lemon. The dealerships were
generally polite to me when I brought it in for repairs.

(Against my better judgement) I bought an American plug-in hybrid that
randomly stops charging. The dealership is flat out rude and constantly blames
my charger. (The charger worked fine for 4 years with my old Leaf)

------
mark-r
The last American sedan I owned was a 1974 Dodge Dart. Terrible car, but my
sister's 1980 Dodge Aspen was much worse.

I've looked at American cars in the intervening years but I haven't seen
anything to change my initial bad impression. They always seem like they're a
step below in both form and function.

------
ed_balls
Sedans Aren't Dead, the market has segmented into sedans and liftbacks/4-door
coupe. See BMW 3 and 4 series. It's p much the same car. People prefer for 4
because it's a bit more practical, but 3 series has large marketing so BMW
maintain 2 models.

------
favorited
> Of course it doesn’t hurt that most Japanese cars sold in the U.S. are made
> in the American South.

And it's not just Japan. My 2 most recent "foreign" sedans, one Hyundai and
another VW – were manufactured in the US.

------
ksec
What's the difference? Sedans are dead in America, else where Saloon lives on.

------
purplezooey
I still like my Ford Tempo

------
amyjess
If I ever end up in a position where being able to drive and owning a car is
feasible for me, I'm going to get a Kia Stinger GT. It tickles my fancy in a
way that no other 4/5-door car below $60k does. I can't think of a single
American car that even comes close, and good European cars are too expensive
(I mean, I wouldn't turn down an Audi S7 if someone gave one to me... but I'd
never be able to afford one either).

(of course, there is my pipe dream of importing a mid-'90s Toyota Chaser
Tourer V from Japan, but I _know_ that's a pipe dream)

SUVs are a total hard pass for me. I have a bad ankle, and when it's flaring
up, there are almost no SUVs I can climb into, not even most crossovers. I
have a friend with a 2018 Equinox, and getting into and out of his vehicle was
physically painful. The only crossover I've been able to deal with when my
ankle is acting up is my coworker's Jeep Cherokee (and from some Googling, it
appears the 2WD models of the Cherokee have the lowest ground clearance of any
crossover sold in the US).

Because I use Lyft all the time, I have something of an interesting
perspective, because I've ridden in a much wider variety of cars than someone
who just drives their own car most of the time. I've been in _a lot_ of
different sedans and SUVs, and I know what I like and what makes me extremely
uncomfortable.

I tend to cancel on pickup trucks nowadays when I get one on Lyft. Even when
my ankle isn't painfully flaring up, entering and _especially_ exiting one
makes my ankle feel like it's about to collapse. Crossovers aren't quite as
bad, so I don't cancel on them unless my ankle is flaring up, but sedans and
hatchbacks are far more comfortable.

I'm also afraid of heights, The elevated seating position in SUVs really
bothers me. It's not high enough to completely induce a panic response in me,
but it's high enough that I'm constantly on edge and nervous the entire time
I'm in the vehicle.

The upright seating position really makes me uncomfortable. This is because A)
SUV seats are elevated off the ground more than sedan seats and B) the seat
bottoms are level in SUVs but tilted back in sedans. I cannot stand sitting
upright. I am very uncomfortable sitting unless I'm tilted backwards, and I
prefer having my legs splayed forwards instead of hanging down. When I get an
SUV on Lyft, I pray it's a fully-loaded model (or a luxury brand) with a 6-way
or better 8-way power adjustable passenger seat. The first thing I do when I
get one of these is to lower the seat as much as possible and then if it's
8-way adjustable, I tilt the bottom of the seat all the way down. With an
8-way seat adjusted the way I want it to, it feels like riding in a sedan, but
SUVs with 8-way seats are extremely expensive and I only see them on Lyft very
rarely.

Also, I despise how SUVs are designed to expose valuables to thieves. Sedans
have a trunk area that's not visible through any window. If you put valuables
in the back of an SUV, they _will_ get stolen because any chucklefuck can see
what you have back there and perform a quick smash-and-grab. It's for this
reason that unlike most other SUV-haters I'm not fond of station wagons,
either. I do love me some liftbacks, though (like the aforementioned Kia
Stinger GT), as liftbacks tend to have shelves that slide into place when the
hatch is closed, and they serve to obscure the cargo from view (and it
honestly pisses me off when someone makes a liftback that doesn't come with a
shelf, because it defeats the whole point of having a liftback).

------
madeuptempacct
In defense of American cars - the Corvette can't be beat for the price,
period.

