![]() The higher than a car but lower than a truck seat height makes it easy for most to slide in or slide out. If you want the easiest vehicle to get in and out of, then a CUV is probably your best choice. If handling is important, the wagon wins that battle too, for the same reasons. They're lower, they're lighter, and so they usually use less gas. Is fuel economy your priority? Then you want the wagon. Something like the Suburban, GMC Yukon, or Ford Expedition. If you want more than that, you need an SUV. Very few crossovers and no current wagons can tow more than about 2,000 kg. Or a pickup, if you only need four or five seats. First, do you want to tow something heavy? Then you probably need a real SUV. So back to the question, which one is right for you? There are a lot of things to look at, but a few questions can really narrow it down. ![]() For a while, the CUV was completely replacing the wagon, but the wagon has made a bit of a return with more being reintroduced in the last few years. More confusing still, Volvo offers the V60 wagon, the lifted-to-look-like-a-CUV V60 Cross Country, and the even-more-lifted and actually-a-CUV XC60, all based on the same car. Similar platform, similar size, both are lifted up, but most consider the Outback a wagon and the Forester a CUV. Even then, it can be tough to define wagon or CUV. They take a platform designed for a car, they lift it up on bigger tires and wheels, add all-wheel drive, and then top it off with some more aggressive or "tough" styling. They come in sizes from the compact Nissan Juke to the Texas-sized Buick Enclave. These days almost all SUVs are actually CUVs. So what were they? They were a cross between a wagon and an SUV, which eventually lead to them being dubbed "crossover utility vehicles". But they weren't a car with a tailgate like a wagon either. The Jeeps weren't body-on-frame like an SUV, they had a unibody like a car. But those Jeeps marked a rift in the SUV definition. By the early '90s, the SUV had caught up with the rapidly disappearing wagons, with the Chevrolet Suburban, Jeep Cherokee (and Grand Cherokee) and Ford Explorer beginning a rise to sales glory. They also rode like trucks, which at the time meant they were pretty rough. That meant they could handle more weight, more stuff, and they could go off-road. ![]() Rather than being a car with a box, they were a truck with a box. The body had a seating area and covered cargo space at the back. These had a frame with a body dropped on top of it. They were body-on-frame trucks like the 1966 Ford Bronco, 1969 Chevrolet Blazer, and the 1970 Range Rover. In the late 1960s, the first popular sport utility vehicles came along. From the front they looked just like your regular sedan, but with an extra room added onto the back. ![]() By the 1950s, if you had luggage to move or kids to cart around, this is what you used. Eventually, car companies started putting a third row of seats back there so you could either take cargo or more people. This was good because you could store stuff in there, and unlike a pickup truck, it would remain dry. Instead of a sloping roofline, there was a box. The station wagon came first, by taking an existing sedan or coupe and building a longer wood-framed body on the back. So which is which, which one do you want, and which one should you buy? Let's have a look.įirst, a bit of history. They're usually both not only car-based, but frequently there is a CUV and a wagon that share the same car platform. But recently, the line between what is a sport utility vehicle, what is a crossover, and what is a station wagon has become much more blurred. There weren't many SUVs to choose from, and there weren't many on the road anyway. They were both body on frame monsters, but a wagon usually looked like a car, and an SUV looked like a truck. The line between what was a wagon and what was an SUV used to be pretty clear.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |