When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
No, you cannot compare the trunk space of most of today's sedans with that of equivalent-size crossovers/SUVs. That is one reason (among several) why so many buyers have ditched sedans for crossovers. And that is at least (partly) because they have ruined the space-efficiency (and trunk-lid-size) of today's sedans by making the rooflines look like coupes, thereby making the trunk-lids very small.
Now, the big full-size sedans that I grew up with back in the 1960s and 70s....those were some REAL trunks.
I know there's more cargo room in an SUV than a modern day sedan, but what I'm saying is I feel most people would be just fine with a sedan because do they really pack that much stuff to warrant driving around in an SUV?
I know there's more cargo room in an SUV than a modern day sedan, but what I'm saying is I feel most people would be just fine with a sedan because do they really pack that much stuff to warrant driving around in an SUV?
The point is that most of today's smaller sedans won't let you make a major purchase at Home Depot or at a place selling furniture and/or bulky items.
That's one of the most remarkable things that the Buick Encore GX, a subcompact-sized crossover, can do. The right front seat folds down flat enough with the seats in back so that you can carry long narrow items up to 8 feet long....in a vehicle that is itself only 14 feet long.
Also, cars in the 60's and 70's sat higher than today's sedans. Since then sedans seem to keep getting lower. Back in 2018 took my parents to look at a new Accord. They had an older Accord but the new one sat lower and had a wider stepover to the seat. They ended up with a CR-V.
Also, cars in the 60's and 70's sat higher than today's sedans. Since then sedans seem to keep getting lower. Back in 2018 took my parents to look at a new Accord. They had an older Accord but the new one sat lower and had a wider stepover to the seat. They ended up with a CR-V.
There's an old saying........."If you've passed up an Accord, you've done your Civic duty" (just kidding)
One reason (although it is one of many) that today's sedans sit lower are the rubber band, low-profile tires. On the cars I learned to drive on in the late 60s, you had bias-ply tires that were the equivalent 70, 80 or even higher-series profiles. Compare that to today's typical 45 and 55-series radials...even lower for some sport-oriented vehicles.
Sorry for double post, I'm on my phone and can't make copy and paste work most of the time.
What color is your dash?
Mine is black with a light texture so I don't get much glare but I get the shine and that's what it's all about.
.
Mine is also black with light texture. I only use Adam’s Interior Detailer on it. My AE86 has a dark gray dash with very little texture and that dash really reflects right in line of sight if you use shiny stuff on it.
One reason (although it is one of many) that today's sedans sit lower are the rubber band, low-profile tires. On the cars I learned to drive on in the late 60s, you had bias-ply tires that were the equivalent 70, 80 or even higher-series profiles. Compare that to today's typical 45 and 55-series radials...even lower for some sport-oriented vehicles.
that isn't true. while the profile of modern car tires may be lower, the wheels are much bigger. but not much point in comparing modern cars to those of over half a century ago.
that isn't true. while the profile of modern car tires may be lower, the wheels are much bigger. but not much point in comparing modern cars to those of over half a century ago.
Well, that is why I included a number of reasons in my statement...it is not just a function of today's tire profiles. Today's sedan-rooflines are much lower, the hood-lines/trunk-lids are lower, the windshields and rear-windows are much more raked, and the body-styling much more streamlined and wind-resistant. But, even over and above all of that (at least for the relatively few sedans still in production in the U.S. market) is the current obsession of trying to make sedans look like coupes.....a styling-fad that was started by the former Mercedes CLS and Volkswagen CC.
Originally Posted by mmarshall
One reason (although it is one of many) that today's sedans sit lower are the rubber band, low-profile tires
Last edited by mmarshall; Jun 26, 2023 at 07:05 AM.
Just got back from WV, after 800 miles behind the wheel of the Pacifica including offroading to get back to the cemeteries we leave flowers at every year, I sure do want that GLS lol. Drug the front of it at one point, damage isn't visible unless you crouch down. It is a pretty comfortable vehicle on the highway but back country roads its really a handful...especially loaded with people. I'd go into a turn and go "not the Mercedes..." lol. The transmission is so lazy too, and at one point I had a really hard 1-2 shift that almost felt like a slip, and my wife says "it does that all the time"
Its so filthy inside and out I'm actually going to pay someone to detail one of my cars this week for the first time in my life.
Pretty good gas mileage though doing 80 in the mountains with 4 people and gear:
ClubLexus Stories
Celebrating Lexus & Toyota from Around the Globe
10 Lexus Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine
Verdad Gallardo
8 Tips for Improving Your Hybrid or Plug-in Hybrid's Efficiency!
Michael S. Palmer
10 Best Lexus Models No One Remembers
Joe Kucinski
TRD Off-Road Premium: Best 2026 4Runner, Except This One Thing
Michael S. Palmer
Top 10 Lexus & Toyotas to Drive Before You Die!
Joe Kucinski
Top 10 Lexus/Toyotas With The LEAST 5-Year Depreciation
Joe Kucinski
Lexus LC500 Convertible Auction: A Preview of Rising Values?
Brett Foote
GX 550 vs TX 550: Best 3-Row Luxury Lexus Family Hauler
Michael S. Palmer
9 Best Lexus Models You Can Buy for Half Price (And 1 You Shouldn't!)
Well, that is why I included a number of reasons in my statement...it is not just a function of today's tire profiles. Today's sedan-rooflines are much lower, the hood-lines/trunk-lids are lower, the windshields and rear-windows are much more raked, and the body-styling much more streamlined and wind-resistant. But, even over and above all of that (at least for the relatively few sedans still in production in the U.S. market) is the current obsession of trying to make sedans look like coupes.....a styling-fad that was started by the former Mercedes CLS and Volkswagen CC.
I actually feel hood and trunklines are way HIGHER than they used to be...
I actually feel hood and trunklines are way HIGHER than they used to be...
You are correct, at least about the new GM trucks. The hoods are up to my nipples too as you put it, lol. I'll see them sometimes and still chuckle to myself over that.
Well, that is why I included a number of reasons in my statement...it is not just a function of today's tire profiles.
Bit's point is that it's not a function of sidewall profile AT ALL. As in zero, nada, none. For the Accord example listed upthread where the newer car was uncomfortably low, there wasn't a year provided for the car they were coming from, so I chose 1990. Stock tire size for a 1990 Accord EX was 195/60R15, which is 24.2" tall. Stock tire size for a 2018 Accord EX was 225/50R17, which is 25.9" tall. The newer car has tires that are 1.7" taller than the old ones. Which means if you put the 2018s tires on the 1990, it would sit 0.8" HIGHER.
For another example, the 1990 M3's stock tires were 205/55R15. My 2023's are 285/30R20. These tires are a full THREE INCHES larger, despite the dramatically lower aspect ratio. So my car should sit 1.5" higher. But it's actually 0.2" lower (4.7" vs. 4.9"), stock for stock.
So not only are larger wheels with lower-profile tires being used on newer cars not a factor in cars sitting lower, they actively work against it.
Bit's point is that it's not a function of sidewall profile AT ALL. As in zero, nada, none. For the Accord example listed upthread where the newer car was uncomfortably low, there wasn't a year provided for the car they were coming from, so I chose 1990. Stock tire size for a 1990 Accord EX was 195/60R15, which is 24.2" tall. Stock tire size for a 2018 Accord EX was 225/50R17, which is 25.9" tall. The newer car has tires that are 1.7" taller than the old ones. Which means if you put the 2018s tires on the 1990, it would sit 0.8" HIGHER.
For another example, the 1990 M3's stock tires were 205/55R15. My 2023's are 285/30R20. These tires are a full THREE INCHES larger, despite the dramatically lower aspect ratio.
So not only are lower-profile tires not a factor in cars sitting lower, they actively work against it.
Agreed lower profile tires have nothing to do with a car sitting lower, wheel/tire combos are larger today than they ever have been. Sidewalls are lower profile, but the overall wheel/tire combination is obviously taller.
I actually feel hood and trunklines are way HIGHER than they used to be...
Oh, definitely on the full-size trucks, particularly the Silverado/Sierra...to the point of being borderline-absurd. But we were not discussing trucks....we were discussing sedans.
Oh, definitely on the full-size trucks, particularly the Silverado/Sierra...to the point of being borderline-absurd. But we were not discussing trucks....we were discussing sedans.
which was untrue.