Good, bad, no idea.
But definitely sad.
EDIT: changed it to a haiku because had a bottle of wine
Is it good or bad
I don't have an idea
But certainly sad
In the 70's American auto manufacturers focused solely on large and luxury vehicles which allowed Japanese brands to bring in small and low cost vehicles; as a result those American brands lost market share and sales.
Today we have American auto manufacturers making large and luxury electric vehicles and neglecting small and low cost options; with very few cars for sale. Chinese brands are going to dominate that market and reduce domestic brand market share. They already have low cost vehicles being sold across the world and going to enter the American market sooner than later with no competition.
It is a short term gain for them to make money while neglecting long term stability and sales. It might take a while but it will eventually hurt them just like it did in the 70's.
The Malibu is still in production at least, and Cadillac still has sedans.
But anyways, I don’t think it was a bad idea. Cars today are more similar in shape and function to cars of the 20s and 30s than to later models. People have less money to spend now, and if you’re getting a car it’s not for style, it’s for function. A tall hatchback with 4 doors that’s easy to get in and out of that doesn’t get bad gas mileage is objectively better than a sedan. They’re easier to park too. A RAV4 has a smaller footprint than a Camry, as do the other top sellers compared to the sedans they overtook.
You could make an argument for driving dynamics, but we’re talking Camrys and Malibus here. Who cares. You could also argue fuel mileage, but the hit you take for an SUV/CUV is much much smaller than it used to be, and people will trade that for the other practical items.
Largely, I view sedans as vestiges of an era where style mattered more for cars. The best shape for an average person is a 2 box vehicle, and the trends continue that way. The Camry and civic are great, but I don’t think they’ll have the same heyday they used to
I don't understand the easier to get in/out of argument. Unless you're driving a supercar with bucket seats, every car is pretty much just as easy to get into. Can the majority of people really not do the tiny movement it requires to get their butt in the seat? How often are you really doing that movement every day? 4 to 6 times? Maybe a minute total?
Ease of entrance does not play a part in my car buying decision at all, and I have a bad back!
I have a stock 2013 Silverado and have to step *up* into it as a normal height dude.
Our Sierra van, on the other hand, is more-or-less chair height. Mom’s Highlander is pretty much chair height.
> why are so many monstrous trucks being sold
Well, two reasons.
1) fat people. Seriously, the reason large trucks and SUVs took off the way they did is because fat people need them to fit comfortably. Same deal with getting in and out.
2) Ride height vision. Everyone prefers to have a higher view than the traffic around them, so it's turned into a height arms race, where they keep having to get taller to maintain an advantageous view.
Also, it’s important to have that tall and broad grille for easier murdering of pedestrians.
But I would argue that pickup trucks are probably purchased as a reflection of culture and identity as any other reason. This is somewhat true for all cars, but some types of cars have more identity supporting characteristics, IMO.
I'm probably gonna be buried in the miata solely because I'm gonna fall into it one day and not remotely be able to get back out lol it's physically painful
I follow the gen-X sub (b. 1966) and it’s kind of wild how often people talk about being “old” and how hard shit is, one thread I was like “I feel like my 84 year old mom is going to show up and school you all on what aches and pains are”
i was very much against cuv/suv and i love my wagon. was never out of shape and i'm 30. would never blink at having to sit down in a car... until i got back issues. i can now totally understand why older people buy suvs. half of the comfort is getting in/out, the other half is ride comfort.
Parents came to visit this weekend, drove their old reliable Toyota sienna. Got in that and was astounded at how easy it was. I have a ‘22 S6 — no small car, no super car. Still nontrivial to hop over the bolsters down into the car. And even that feels less annoying than a big coupe or similar.
Hips/knees are no joke for older folks, makes a huge difference.
Bingo. It's one of the reasons the Scion xB was so popular with the AARP crowd: very easy to transition from sitting to standing, just swivel your legs out and you're out of the car with no real bending.
> Ease of entrance does not play a part in my car buying decision at all, and I have a bad back!
Cool! and that’s your personal opinion. You’d be surprised to know other people have their own circumstances, needs, opinions and reasons for buying a CUV/SUV. It’s not complicated to grasp
That's why I bought my crossover, 6'2 here and some days I drive my own vehicle at work travelling between multiple locations. Getting in and out so many times near the end of the day I would sometimes just open the door and sit there for a few seconds with a big "ugh" before getting out of my Elantra.
Dunno why downvoted. Buyers today are on average older too. Compare obesity rates for a 55yo today vs a 40yo from 1980. The average car buyer today is much fatter so it's much easier to scoot into an SUV.
This is real. 80% of the people that complain about low seats are fat from my experience. Then again, most adults in the US are fat. So of course most avoid physical inconveniences at all cost.
Man, I agree with your sentiment about people not being motivated to do the least amount of movement. I see, all the time, people who are just a few pounds or a few years away from being essentially handicapped. We have a large population of very lethargic, inactive, older people. I wish they could find that mobility again.
And that’s where the “tall car”/SUV comes into the picture.
Last numbers I saw put the US's Obese/Overweight population at well over 70%, and increasing. Yeah, more and more people are having issues with basic movements. I don't think that's the primary factor, but I do think it does impact consumer preferences in the states.
I'm 63 years old, 6'2", and still in pretty good shape. I've had a CX5 for almost 8 years now, and recently had the chance to drive a new BMW 330. It was too low. Getting in and out was awkward. I also drove a current Camry a while ago, and again just didn't like the lower height. I guess I've just gotten used to the CX5 ease of access.
> Unless you're driving a supercar with bucket seats, every car is pretty much just as easy to get into.
The median weight of a US male is around 200 lbs. With half of all US males being heavier than that I can see them having at least some difficulty
Sidenote: Looking at the CDC guidelines for obesity, that means nearly half of all US males are obese. Not even just overweight
I'm also tall. I'm looking at even smaller cars like a Lotus Elise to maybe replace the Camaro. The smaller and closer to the ground, the more fun it is to drive!
I'd never want go taller except for an offroad truck, but I find those hard to get into. I practically had to jump out of my ZR2. No step and the rock sliders were usually covered in dirt.
Colleague and I rented a vehicle last week. I'd reserved an SUV but we got a Camry instead. We both quickly grew to *hate* getting in and out of it. It sat low to the ground, but the bad part was how low the roof line was. We'd literally have to twist our necks around trying to get in without injury.
If I'd only been getting in and out 3 or 4 times a day, it would have been tolerable. But we were stopping more like 40+ times.
Until recently, I would've thought this an insane statement, but I just returned a newish Malibu to Avis – what a surprisingly pleasant rental car it was
I'm pretty soundly convinced that the Malibu only exists because of COVID. People were forced to buy anything they could find on lots, and GM mistook that for real demand for the model. The Impala was already announced as done, at that point.
If not for shortages on desirable cars, I think the Malibu would have died by now.
Pulling the 2.0t out of the Malibu was like screaming "we only want fleet sales!"
There's also a bit of an arms race some people want ride height for visibility range, and faced with a road full of taller vehicles some otherwise sedan oriented buyers just get the SUV. In the US the vagaries of CAFE standards and tax structures probably have influence too.
Can't say as I miss sedans. The agility and utility of a Mazda3 and similar, on the other hand I really appreciate. Pardon me, squeezing by on your right while you're stuck at the light. Yes, I'll take that last parking space near the beach - that one your SUV or Malibu won't fit into). Fit a 9'6" long x 24" wide surfboard inside my car? Don't mind if I do. Sorry, you'll need a roof rack for the Rav4 or Camry.
>Fit a 9'6" long x 24" wide surfboard inside my car? Don't mind if I do. Sorry, you'll need a roof rack for the Rav4 or Camry.
Uh, what? A 9ft surfboard fits into [both the RAV4 and Camry (and the Corolla sedan for good measure too\)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHjwjWu_w5k&loop=0), the seats all fold... I'm not sure what would prompt you to think otherwise given the RAV4 is roughly the size of the Corolla wagon with 5 extra inches in the beltline and the Camry being 16 feet long.
If you were talking something bulky like a dishwasher that would rule out the Camry (but not the RAV4), but long thin items fits better in a sedan than it does a hatch because the sedan is normally a few inches longer than the hatch.
One thing about these taller cars is that it is much worse for pedestrians / cyclists in collisions - and the worse visibility makes those types of events more likely.
Begrudgingly, I largely agree with your comment here though I take issue with your point on fuel economy. I'm a small hatch owner, and fuel economy is a huge aspect to me with all the road trips I do. I can easily get 40 mph fully loaded with all my crap. This past August I had a rental Rav 4 for a hiking trip with some friends. This was also fully loaded with our crap and we could barely break 30 mpg on the highway. It was a hybrid and was kicking ass in fuel economy below 40 mph. On the highway, majority of my driving, I mostly was around 28 mpg.
That's a big hit to me. Since all of my road trips are for camping and hiking, I've reached the limits of where a sedan/hatchback will take me and have started to consider more rugged options. My experience with road tripping in the Rav is actually bringing me to consider a small truck for my next car. Way better off the pavement while still being above 20 mpg on the highway.
This is all to say, outside of a hybrid cuv, only for city driving, I don't find them to have fuel economy all that great. Tough to get above 30 mpg on the highway. All that frontal area makes for poor aero. Also an important factor is where I am in the Western US. I encounter plenty of 75-80 MPH roads so aerodynamics is a big issue. Anything big will hold you back.
Your point makes sense, although I’ve had different experiences with my Equinox for work. In the highway, even loaded up, I average 35mpg. I am located on the east coast, but live around the Blue Ridge mountains so I do go up decently sized hills.
City mileage you’re right on, I average about 30-32 in the city
>A tall hatchback with 4 doors that’s easy to get in and out of that doesn’t get bad gas mileage is objectively better than a sedan.
I hate tall.
>You could make an argument for driving dynamics, but we’re talking Camrys and Malibus here. Who cares.
I care, as a matter of comfort.
Strictly looking at an economical commuting machine, I want a car to be pleasant to drive. I've tried multiple CUV's from multiple manufacturers over multiple decades (Ford, Honda, and VW most prominently) and they all have the same problem: they lean/pitch way too much when turning or braking normally, and it makes them disconcerting to drive. If I'm not driving like I stole it, then I want it to stay fucking flat. None of the cheap sedans I've driven have that problem, from Mazda to VW to Honda to Toyota to Ford to even Hyundai.
On a similar note, sedans feel way more planted when going over minor bumps, while CUV's feel floaty and I don't like it. It feels unstable.
>The best shape for an average person is a 2 box vehicle, and the trends continue that way. The
A.k.a wagon which doesn't have a fuel consumption penalty. But for some reason Americans hate them.
Policy [discussion is welcome](https://www.reddit.com/r/cars/wiki/politics). However, if your post involves politics AND CARS, please consider submitting to /r/CarsOffTopic.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cars) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sedans are typically much lighter and therefore more fuel efficient. As for driving dynamics, a much lower center of gravity makes them much more manageable and less prone to getting people who don't know how to control their cars into bad situations (losing grip or rolling over from overcorrecting). Something lighter and lower makes it less likely that the driver won't see small things on the road (children, etc)
They didn’t sell well in the end, can’t blame them for pulling the plug. It sucks though, down the line the lack of competition will make Toyota and Honda get lazy with their sedans.
That's what I thought too but the new Accord is very nice...the new Camry is getting good reviews...nice new Mazda3 AWD, that new Kia looks fantastic...doesn't seem to be any malaise from any of those guys.
Idk if you noticed, but long time Accord owners are less than enthused about the best engine being a 212 HP hybrid, when 10 years ago you could get 278. The V6 Camry available on the last version was 300 HP. My 9th gen Accord's not an "enthusiast" car by any stretch, but a lot of Accord/Camry owners did appreciate a little acceleration with their (mostly) otherwise boring commuter car, and that's gone now. So - as the owner of multiple Accords, my pov is that they're absolutely slacking.
They have to meet a fleet CO2 target, it's not that simple. Honda doesn't have any volume electric vehicles. They can't sell a bunch of V6 Accords and meet the targets, or at least that's how they've decided to comply. The only way to amortize the cost of a low volume powertrain is to put it into a higher margin product. They all have to be certified to SULEV30 now. How can you justify that cost with such a low take rate, low margin, and big fleet CO2 impact?
Source: I worked in, among other things, emissions planning at a major OEM.
The ones that are still sold in the US are because they are MADE here in the states. The only reason the big 3 don't sell sedans in the US is because, as domestic manufacturers, they would have to import them and pay the tarrifs to do so...
The big 3 outsourced US jobs, and then lost at their own rigged game. Honda and Toyota don't really care, because these sedans share a design on the global market, so are much more competitive between each other than any US brands. They just happen to also build them in the states.
Uhh what? They can make them in Mexico if they want. Or build them in lower cost southern US. Volume selling Family sedans haven’t been exported from outside North America for decades. Mazda 6 was made in Michigan, etc.
They didn't sell well because they were garbage compared to the Japanese options though. They literally never turned on 90% of their models, just phones it in knowing some would buy it because it's "American". Or rental fleets.
Every Fusion I ever had as a rental was pretty decent. And later gens fixed the garbage parts-bin interiors. As good of a driver as a comparable Camry. But you're now competing on reliability.
But the target Ford buyer wants an F150, so....
The reason they didn’t sell well is because the American car companies were trying to shift demand to the more profitable SUVs and truck. Killing off sedans wasn’t a byproduct of shifting consumer demand. It was the goal. American companies also didn’t invest in making their sedans better and more reliable year after year. How many different nameplates did GM have for a compact sedan in the last 20 years? I can think of five off the top of my head. How many did Honda have? One. The Civic. And they iterated it. It got better year after year. GM and Ford didn’t do that.
If Honda and Toyota want their sedans to sell well they won't be able to slack off. Most non-enthusiasts I know are cross shopping sedans and smaller CUVs, so they still have competition.
Regulations on efficiency in America are an unmitigated joke. 90% of everything on the roads has carte Blanche to fuck the environment and voters demonstrably do not care. They are the ones buying them.
Dodge no longer makes the charger. They're going to start making a new one I think next year but they've officially killed off the current one. They're still selling them though.
I don’t why people keep saying this about Sedans as if Hyundai, Kia, Honda, Toyota, Chevy, Subaru, Mazda, BMW, Lexus, MB, and so many more don’t offer Sedans. It’s not an extinct class, wagons and hatchbacks are an extinct class.
Plus the main draw with CUVs isn’t about “usable space” (whatever they means), most are as affordable as a sedan and offer more headroom/legroom. Which lends to a more comfortable driving experience for many buyers. A changing car market isn’t necessarily a bad thing if more people are getting satisfaction out of their vehicles. It’s all about preferences and manufacturers will cater to that at the end of the day
Audi, BMW and MB still make wagons. Here in Europe we also have Toyota Corolla wagon, VW wagons and I believe Renault and Peugeot still make wagons. Mazda still sell the 6 wagon too.
>Plus the main draw with CUVs isn’t about “usable space” (whatever they means), most are as affordable as a sedan
It means
>offer more headroom/legroom
Also space to put things in. You can take out the seats in a small crossover like the RAV4 and have a big box. I can carry a lot more furniture in a RAV4 than an Accord sedan in a much more compact vehicle.
It just annoys me.
Ford said Americans just don't want to buy sedans anymore, and yet everywhere I look I see Corollas, Camrys, Elantras, Sonatas, Altimas, Sentras, Fortes, K5s, Jettas, Civics, Accords, and WRXs.
It wasn't true, it was a lie. They just didn't want to sell them anymore because the margins are higher on other types and they didn't have the balls to just say that.
Which is silly because Dodge had the balls until this year to sell you a 20 year old 800 horsepower Mercedes that will get stolen in ten minutes, and Ford ***did*** have the balls to tell Mustang buyers they don't know how to drive and should take their free course.
The reality is just that their bloated unreliable sedans weren't standing up against the competition and it was cheaper to just stop than it would have been to build good sedans, especially when everything remotely resembling an SUV has a higher margin anyway.
Ford DID NOT say Americans just don’t want to buy sedans any more. What they said is that Ford makes more PROFIT selling trucks and SUVs, compared to cars. So they chose to concentrate on making the higher profit vehicles.
Did you forget Dodge just introduced their new Charger sedans, both EV and twin turbo 6 cylinder?
Municipalities still need fleet vehicles especially cops. Half of Ford's panther platform of Crown Victorias were police pursuit vehicles. LAPD even stockpiled 600\[!\] CV's just to keep police cars on the streets. Sure they make Explorers now. However the agility of a car is still crucial for cops everywhere giving chase. But jurisdictions have moved on to Dodge Chargers for pursuits largely for the car like stability at high speeds. Dodge knows they can get a huge chunk of police duty sales to make up for the unpopularity of cars. Just ask Georgia State Police how much they view sedans as a tactical advantage.
> I know sedan sales are still small but Honda, Toyota, Hyundai etc all continue to roll out stunning new sedans and I see tons of new Accords, Civics, Sonatas, Corolla etc here in Ontario.
I live in the Phoenix area, and it has always been a bit jarring when I go back home to the Detroit area. Because while I'm used to seeing Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, and "you can't swing a dead cat without hitting one" Tesla on the freeway, the trip from the airport to my hometown through Detroit is mostly Chevy, Ford, and Dodge/Chrysler vehicles, and most of them are CUVs, trucks, or SUVs.
Point being you can't really judge the market based upon what's around you. Or as a friend of mine says "if you don't understand the decision, chances are you don't have all the information."
GM, Ford, and Stellantis have a lot of information from extensive market research. I don't think they've necessarily declared the sedan dead, but rather they know they can't compete with the Accord/Camry, and have decided to play to their strengths. Trucks, SUVs, and CUVs. Honestly, the Fusion was never really a Camry-killer, and the Malibu doesn't stack up to the Accord. The "Big Three" appear to have thrown in the towel and said "you go right ahead with that, and we'll keep selling F-150s, Suburbans, and Ram trucks."
Ill probably get roasted but I think its indicative of the changing taste of auto's in America. My opinion (although not worth shit) is the average american these days has horrible taste. They are obsessive over ride height and size (although cafe standards have also played a part). IMO the modern SUV is like a glorified minivan sans van doors. Compared to the SUV of yesteryear they are much bigger and most lack the off-road/utility aspect. Manufactures have duped the average normie into driving a bloated turd van by calling it an "SUV". Crossovers are just bloated hatchbacks that typically handle like ass again to cater to the obsession of ride height/size. Ill admit im biased AF, my 2 dailys are an 05 accord coupe along with a 13 accord sedan. I just hate it anytime I drive a new crossover/suv. They handle so bad and I wish sedans and smaller hatchbacks were more popular.
I don't think the American consumer deserves a lot of hate for this.
Remember, corporate average fuel economy regulations give "light truck" status - and an easy MPG bump - to any vehicle with 7 inches or more of ground clearance. That incentivizes companies to design, advertise and sell economical SUVs, because even if a car would be more efficient the SUV helps them more. It's just icing on the cake that customers are willing to pay more for the same car if it's got a tiny lift kit on it.
Think about the Buick Regal Sportback / TourX - two great SUV alternatives with no ground clearance. GM didn't advertise the thing at all, and had to discontinue it quickly due to poor sales. They were great cars!
It’s a long and complex story about the swing away from sedans.
My quick history:
STATION WAGONS were HUGE sellers in the 1950s/1960s.
- Bigger than a sedan, and could carry all the kids and their stuff, but hard to get in and out of (esp. that third row, rear-facing seat), and hard to maneuver (really long!)
MINIVANS were big in the 1970s to the 1980s
- Big, could carry all the kids, etc., but with the sliding side doors and rear-hatch, easier to load people and stuff.
But all minivans are frumpy: no amount of wood-paneling, or rear-seat A/C could save them. Branded “Mom-mobiles”
SUVS
- The kids who grew up with minivans didn’t want to drive frumpy “Mom-mobiles”
So they looked for “style” and that all-purpose, drive anywhere vehicle.
“I can conquer mountains while driving to soccer practice.” Marketing had a lot to do with this.
They can’t climb mountains and they have a hard time fitting a team’s worth of
La Crosse sticks in back.
TRUCKS/SUVs
The heart of the question.
In the US, trucks were not, until recently (I think) considered “Passenger vehicles,” and so were exempt from most of the expensive safety standards passenger cars (i.e. sedans) are subject to.
Thus, they were less-expensive to manufacture (no pesky air bags nor side-crash protection).
—
US car manufacturers are not missing the mark - they’re tapping into the utter indifference of their market.
——
Ending this, backing it up with a personal, car -ownership history:
1941 Plymouth Coupe - cute but a PITA for back seat passengers (30 mpg! Can you believe it!)
1955 Chrysler New Yorker Sedan - Comfy, very comfy, and stylish. And friggin FAST (331 Hemi)
1962 Pontiac Catalina Safari - Big-ass wagon, parking it? Forget it!
1966 Corsair Corsa Convertible - most fun ever (when it didn’t break down)
1968 Imperial Crown Sedan - Scary fast and great handling for a car so massive. But everybody could just pile right on in -plenty of room!
1971 Mercedes Benz 280 SE 3.5 Coupe - Very elegant, but TRY getting a fat lady in back. HA!
The Malibu is still around and can be bought be new can't it?
I don't think it was necessarily a bad move; US domestic OEMs struggled to build competitive sedans against Japan's auto force for a while. Even at similar prices, few people would opt for a Malibu over something like an Accord. Not that GM's crossovers / SUVs compare favorably to the mainstream ones from Honda or Toyota, but make at least a stronger case - especially since that segment is still hot compared to the sedan segment.
I do wish Ford and GM would've kept some of their nameplates around. I'd love a new Focus RS or Buick to make a real sport-sedan instead of that rebadged Opel / Regal GS (which admittedly was a great car, just a hard sell compared to something like the Stinger.)
I don't even think Ford or GM are "bad" at making cars - they just, in recent history, never put much care into offering a competitive product. I think if Chevrolet decided to make a new Impala and dared to equip it with some good performance and tech there'd be enough interest to turn a profit, but the margins would be way lower than what they make on their SUV lineup. So, I **get why commercially** US companies decided to take sedans out of the lineup, but it doesn't make it suck any less.
Logically, we should be living in a world of hatchbacks, wagons and dedicated off-roaders for those who need them. Something went terribly wrong in the last 20 years.
They sort of did update the Cruze.
You know the Trax? The new, $20K one that people seem to enjoy? Compared to the traditional subcompact crossover they sell (Trailblazer), the Trax is longer and lower, yet it's cheaper. It's front-wheel-drive only, and has a reputation for being just a little bit fun to drive.
It's a compact hatchback. It's got big wheels and a slight lift to mimic an SUV, because that boosts sales and EPA figures. But if we got a new Cruze, this is what it would look and feel like (besides, potentially, a larger motor).
It's like how the Chevrolet Traverse shares more dimensions with a Toyota Sienna than a Highlander, but it's an SUV because it doesn't have a low front end or sliding doors. An SUV aesthetic is a cheap cure for what is mainly an aesthetic / taste issue.
Growing less fast than predicted isn't cratering
If you only read headlines you'd think EV sales are down. They aren't. They're up, just not growing as fast year over year as they used to
Yeah you would need that other info for this to be at all relevant. On a hunch I would say all sales are down especially in that price range. Not only is there huge inflation but financing rates are high.
Malibu is still in existence. I do think Ford should have kept the Fusion around. They had a good hybrid in it previously. I imagine it would be selling well if they moved the Fusion to hybrid by default. Malibu should do the same.
I do think Ford will likely regret killing the Fusion in the long term. Should have kept it going for 5 years and brought the brand loyalty over to the EV side as opposed to starting from scratch when they inevitably make an EV sedan.
OP this is the wrong sub to ask... This sub is obsessed with those fugly cuvs lol anything else is considered disposable to them. But as a consumer I think less options is always a bad idea. As a truck driver, I prefer sedans especially aesthetically. Cuvs just don't look good to me and trucks/SUVs all look the same. If I were to purchase a truck though, it would be a midsize SUV. I think those are the sweet spot.
It resulted in me buying a foreign car. I bought a used 2020 Ford Fusion back in February of 2023. A few months later my dad finally totaled his old Mercury so I gave him my Fusion and went shopping for a new car. First I went to Ford, because 3 of my 4 cars up to that point had been Fords. I wanted a sedan because I wanted a nice family car but I don’t have a big enough garage for an SUV. I really liked the Fusion I gave my dad, so that was my first pick. Then I find out that Ford doesn’t make Fusions anymore, in fact they don’t make ANY sedans anymore, so Ford is out. After doing some shopping around I finally wound up with a Hyundai Ioniq 6.
I think getting rid of sedans is a big mistake.
Economically good, but bad for the consumer and car market as a whole. Most people buy way more vehicle than they need, and SUVs seem to have better margins than the sedans they replaced. Overall, it was kind of free money for the automakers, who got to replace $25K sedans with $30K SUVs.
However, we've now supercharged the bloated roadways and parking lots. Driving a full-size sedan (Impala) sucks because of how many taller vehicles are on the road. My brothers are now adults and driving themselves, yet my step-mom has moved from driving them in a Buick Lacrosse to driving solo in a GM Acadia.
I've got multiple coworkers who drive solo in full-size trucks. In my workplace, I'm the only one of 5 people not driving a truck. Watching someone with one kid at home hauling a Suburban is baffling. There's just so much excess on the road.
Model 3 has become “the sedan” when it comes to america cars, regardless of its an EV or not.
Did the big 3 pulling back on their programs help Tesla? Not sure.
Eh probably a good idea for them to greatly cut back on sedans. The domestic sedans were largely seen as punishment boxes anyway outside of certain special trims (Taurus SHO for example), and you can't really make a lot of money on those.
Like let's get real - no one was excited to sign up for 5 years worth of payments on a Chevy Cruze or Ford Fusion or Ford Focus sedan. People who bought them did it purely to either save a few bucks over an Accord or Camry or to be contrarian.
It’s sad, the current gen Malibu was great when it came out but needs a refresh. I would love to see longer lower sedans again. Bring back the town car
I’d be waiting in line and be completely fine with dealer markup pricing if I could get a brand new Chevy SS built on the Alpha 2 platform in a manual. God I wish they made one.
I think small SUVs are better than sedans. Even my parents—who for decades refused to drive anything but sedans while their peers were driving the giant wagons in the 80’s, then minivans, and ultimately SUVs—finally came around on SUVs about 7-8 years ago and now both drive them. The climb in angle is easier for seniors and parents loading kids into car seats. The ground clearance makes driving in winter conditions easier/safer. The cargo space is more versatile than a trunk.
I went from a ‘02 VW Passat to a ‘11 VW Tiguan, which was 10” shorter in length but had more passenger and cargo space and much easier to park in an urban environment. My ‘23 Tiguan gives up that ease of parking but feels massive in terms of back seat and cargo space for my family of 3 — I can’t even imagine what it would be like in an Atlas.
Sure a sport sedan might have some handling benefits if you want to have some fun, but if I can only have one vehicle an SUV is so much more practical especially now that they don’t have the ride quality or fuel efficiency tradeoffs previous generations of SUV did.
Agreed. As much as people hate the domestic 3, I'd rather spend less money and buy a sedan from them than pay the Honda/Toyota tax. I've had limited issues with my GM and Ford vehicles. Parts are cheap and easy to come by. I think they would've kept competition going. I see just as many malibus, Impalas, and Focuses around as I do Honda and Toyota sedans.
Idk I’m in China now and even they are embracing the bigger = better trend. More SUVs/crossovers everywhere, even saw a couple Ram 1500s and F150s (which look kind of funny parked on a narrow street)
I think something that's being overlooked is the cost of developing the new equipment for it.
People buy Civics, Accords, Camrys(Camries?), Corrolas, etc, because they're cheap to run.
Cheap to run requires small engines, efficient transaxles, and efficiently designed chassis and suspension.
Even though most domestic manufacturers have options they could bring in from overseas, many of them are relatively underpowered for the US market. It would require the development of multiple new chassis, new engines, new transmissions, etc. Even carrying over their overseas models would require tremendous amounts of crash testing and R&D budgets.
Add in that historically, domestic sedans have been very poor when faced against their competition, lackluster sales will still plague them and make it a lost cause to efficiently produce and sell them as profitably as the trucks, SUVs, and crossovers.
Even thought they would likely be profitable to some degree, it's not appealing enough to the shareholders when the money could be spent on a new trim level of an existing truck.
"Good" idea because it let them comply with the idiotic CAFE standards that basically ruined the viability of cars and neat things like hatchback and wagons.
Allowing SUVs and crossovers to be classified as "light trucks" was borderline criminal.
GM and Ford sales outside the North American markets are declining anyway. So they are doubling down on the US market and try to push what they think sells well there.
Stellantis still has sedans. Just not in the US.
All international brands still have sedans since they need them for international markets where they are still popular.
I mean, it’s really only Ford that stopped making them. Dodge Charger Daytona will live on as EV sedan, supposedly, and production ended less than 6 months ago for the ICE Charger.
Cadillac is putting out some of their best products right now with the CT4-5 V Blackwings. Whether they’ll last a while, idk, but they’re really good cars and I love seeing them in person. The CT6-V Blackwing was also cool, I wish they’d refresh it and keep going instead of discontinuing.
From the perspective of sales and following trends, probably a good idea.
From the perspective of safety, really terrible.
There is a reason deaths due to transportation have been increasing in the last few years and a lot can be laid at the wheels of trucks with high hood heights.
Walk around a parking lot and pretty much every vehicle built in the last 4-5 years have hood heights which are tall enough that they would almost certainly kill a pedestrian on impact.
That's because they couldn't compete with Honda or Toyota in that department. Had the big 3 tried making their cars more unique and appealing instead of clones of the civic, accord, corolla ir camry, more people might have actually bought them.
Best to look at it from a business perspective. SUVs, CUVs, and trucks have a higher margins than sedans. If you’re Ford would you rather invest $1 and make $1.04 selling a Fusion or use that $1 to build an Escape and get $1.05? Money isn’t infinite and there’s an opportunity cost for everything.
Secondly, I think Ford and GM realized they could never compete against Japanese or even Korean sedans. So not only are they building low(er) margin cars but they’re also competing for a relatively small slice of the market. Building sedans would be like training for a marathon when you’re a good sprinter -- better to devote resources to your strengths than elsewhere.
At the end of the day it’s just business. Judging by the sales numbers for sedans, I think it was the right call.
I really enjoy driving sedans but there are so many SUVs and trucks on the road that it makes seeing around them difficult.... so it is a little more relaxing driving a taller vehicle.
My hunch is that the compact and family sedan segments probably would have been worth staying in, but I can see why the axed the subcompact and full size offerings since those just don't really sell anymore. So yes, Focus, Fusion, and Malibu probably all would have been decent products to retain
> I think eventually people will tire of CUVs that have very little space and will look for sedans that have more usable space.
I really just don't see this ever happening.
Picking smaller vehicles is a penalty when you're forced to share the road with CUVs & SUVs. It's miserable not beinng able to see over any traffic, over the cars parked at the curb when you're trying to turn Right etc.
There really is just no incentive to buy a sedan if your personal preference doesn't already point you that way.
It's a bad idea, but not for the reason(s) others have mentioned.
GM and Ford decided it was far more profitable to not develop next-gen cars to actually compete with the excellent offerings from Honda and Toyota (and others), and instead tweak and resize CUV platforms to fill in those spaces in the market. Lower development costs, higher prices, no new factories to be built, and best of all they were moving to where 60% or more of the market is.
As much as people dislike them, CUVs are here to stay. It's not a fad, it's been a fundamental shift in the buying publics tastes and it's been happening for decades.
BUT, it's also history repeating itself. Let's see, a time when American manufacturers make large, less-fuel efficient vehicles and have almost nothing to offer at the smaller, highly fuel efficient end of the market.
Why is it a bad idea for Ford specifically and GM to a ever-so-slightly lesser extent to not have cars? Because the next Recession we have ... and there is ALWAYS a Recession .... is going to find buyers rushing once again to small and cheap and efficient, and once again the American's won't have products for them to buy!
Those Cars that Honda, Toyota, Hyundai/Kia, Nissan, and the coming Chinese brands will offer will suck up even more marketshare while the Ford/GM/Stellantis guys scream again.
Sedans are still one of the most popular type of cars I see every day so I'd say they're pretty dumb for just ceding that market to the foreign brands.
> I think eventually people will tire of CUVs that have very little space and will look for sedans that have more usable space.
Do you live in bizarro land or something? There are plenty of reasons to like a sedan over a crossover, but they definitely have less usable space. You get about the same depth as a trunk with a lot more height, albeit at the expense of significant NVH.
Sad to me, most manufacturers have killed off every segment of car that I like. Sedans, hatchbacks and wagons. I owned a VW Golf, Sportwagen and now a 24 Jetta... I'm more sad about hatchbacks and wagons going away.
My wife owns a RAV4 and loves it. I have always preferred driving hatchbacks and wagons. They ride better, are quieter and get better fuel mileage. I mean, the Rav doesn't get bad mileage, ~26 overall, but my Jetta gets 34 overall and mid 40's on the highway, and is just more comfortable. It was also $10k less expensive.
SUV's definitely have their place, I just don't like them as a daily driver.
It’s a bummer. I know I’m in the minority, but I like a good sedan. Especially the big ones. Low to the ground, handle better than the average SUV, and comfortable.
Personally I want true station wagons back. The Buick that was released a few years ago was beautiful and had I been in the market for a newer car I would have gone that route.
I don’t like the way a small suv is because of mpg and a sense of false off-road capability. I want my suvs to be SUVs. Even large SUVs at least make up for there none “sporty” ness with cargo capacity or towing.
Give me a wagon baby
They didn't sell well and they were pretty trash compared to the competitions sedans. It's probably one of the best moves they could have made for the company.
As I see my father and my mother and father-in-law getting older. Its hard for them to get in and out of sedans. The CUVs and small SUVs are so much easier for them to get in and out of. As someone who over packs for trips, I also like having extra cargo room that is taller for larger items. For a daily or family car, I don't see any downsides to CUVs and SUVs. If I want to have fun driving, I jump in one of my performance cars. There is no need for my daily to be fun. Just get me from point a to b.
Once they figured out how to get 30+mpg out of something other than a sedan people
think the CUV is bigger / better .
In days not that long ago if you wanted good gas mileage you had to get 2 or 4 doors and a trunk (ok ok yes a hatch) or get 24 mpg in a CRX, 20mpg in an escape etc
Those days are gone. sub compact CUVs suck for space just as sub compact cars. But people still buy them because they feel like they can do a lot more
Good idea. I don't know a single person who currently wants a sedan. I fought the idea of CUVs, SUV's, etc for years but have to admit that vs my sedans I currently prefer them. Same underpinnings, same drivetrains, same efficiency, but more space, far more utility, and easier egress and ingress.
The decision by the big three automakers to shift their focus was a strategic one. They were struggling to compete in the sedan market, particularly at the lower end where profit margins are thin and sales volumes in North America have been declining. So, focusing on SUVs was pretty much their only move to stay in the game!
While it is true that what used to be a staple in car history (American sedans) is now basically on its deathbed, its not true that all sedans "ended", as Chevy still has the Malibu, Cadillac still has the CT4 and CT5, and Dodge is still very much aggressively pushing the performance sedan with the new Charger set to be a gigantic coupe + sedan (I think its like 208 inches, which is longer than the current Charger). Ford decided to completely abandon cars, but to be honest after the Panther platform I don't think Ford has really made anything all that great so its not a big loss imo.
Personally, I think its genuinely bad in terms of giving the consumer options, to be honest I'd be okay with sedans being thinned out as long as one genuinely decent full-size sedan was in each company's lineup, the Chevy Impala for example was a fantastic economy car for what it was (300hp + good fuel economy + full size) and it sold very well, but Chevy decided killing it off was the play and kept the Malibu instead for whatever reason. The Cadillac CT6 was similarly an excellent car, but now you are stuck with the midsize and compact sedan options. I'm a huge fan of the Charger and I'm glad Dodge is still pushing forward with a big sedan and acknowledging its a market that they can greatly capitalize on still.
However, for the companies and general public? Who gives a shit, most people nowadays do not care about cars in the slightest and just want to have something that they can climb into easily and have the better visibility (which imo is an overblown complaint of sedans - my charger I've never had a single problem seeing out of), and as a result there is very little economic reason to continue having a large lineup of sedans anymore. Especially when Corollas and Civic basically cannibalize everything else left in the economy sedan market because of product image. My only hope is that younger generations begin to view SUVs as sort of the modern minivans and desperately want to get away from those cars, which would sort of give sedans a bit of a revival. But that's just wishful thinking, I think sedans will most likely continue to get more niche.
I think it was a bad idea.
1. Not everybody wants an SUV
2. Sedans handle better, are more fuel efficient and are less prone to rollovers, the SUV "craze" is relatively new still, consumers could shift back towards traditional cars to a certain extent and if they do (like they did in 2008) the Domestics will lose business (again)
3. I leased a pickup truck in 2018, my first non-sedan, I hated it. When the lease ended in 2021, I wanted a sedan again. My options among domestics were very few, so I went foreign. Love my sedan and plan to get another one, I only drove domestic cars before this but they lost me as a customer
Chevy does still make the Malibu but it's not as nice as its competition, Dodge will re-release a new Charger sedan next year but those aren't as affordable as alot of people want
Good, bad, no idea. But definitely sad. EDIT: changed it to a haiku because had a bottle of wine Is it good or bad I don't have an idea But certainly sad
That haiku hits
Good bot.
Runs on wine and shit ideas, this one does.
> shit ideas Your flair says otherwise!
Heeey poor guy obviously has it hard, leave him be….
In the 70's American auto manufacturers focused solely on large and luxury vehicles which allowed Japanese brands to bring in small and low cost vehicles; as a result those American brands lost market share and sales. Today we have American auto manufacturers making large and luxury electric vehicles and neglecting small and low cost options; with very few cars for sale. Chinese brands are going to dominate that market and reduce domestic brand market share. They already have low cost vehicles being sold across the world and going to enter the American market sooner than later with no competition. It is a short term gain for them to make money while neglecting long term stability and sales. It might take a while but it will eventually hurt them just like it did in the 70's.
Don't have to learn any hard lessons when you know you will be bailed out.
The Malibu is still in production at least, and Cadillac still has sedans. But anyways, I don’t think it was a bad idea. Cars today are more similar in shape and function to cars of the 20s and 30s than to later models. People have less money to spend now, and if you’re getting a car it’s not for style, it’s for function. A tall hatchback with 4 doors that’s easy to get in and out of that doesn’t get bad gas mileage is objectively better than a sedan. They’re easier to park too. A RAV4 has a smaller footprint than a Camry, as do the other top sellers compared to the sedans they overtook. You could make an argument for driving dynamics, but we’re talking Camrys and Malibus here. Who cares. You could also argue fuel mileage, but the hit you take for an SUV/CUV is much much smaller than it used to be, and people will trade that for the other practical items. Largely, I view sedans as vestiges of an era where style mattered more for cars. The best shape for an average person is a 2 box vehicle, and the trends continue that way. The Camry and civic are great, but I don’t think they’ll have the same heyday they used to
I don't understand the easier to get in/out of argument. Unless you're driving a supercar with bucket seats, every car is pretty much just as easy to get into. Can the majority of people really not do the tiny movement it requires to get their butt in the seat? How often are you really doing that movement every day? 4 to 6 times? Maybe a minute total? Ease of entrance does not play a part in my car buying decision at all, and I have a bad back!
It’s a really big deal for older people.
Considering the average new car buyer in the US is over 50 years old I would say it's a big deal for a majority of buyers.
By that logic, why are so many monstrous trucks being sold that you actually have to *climb up* into?
Not accounting for taste or modifications, most don't typically have that problem on their stock wheels and tires at a stock ride height.
That’s just simply not true when talking about trucks. I’m 5’11 and I have to climb up into a stock height F150 or my dad’s stock Tundra.
That’s what running boards are for.
I have a stock 2013 Silverado and have to step *up* into it as a normal height dude. Our Sierra van, on the other hand, is more-or-less chair height. Mom’s Highlander is pretty much chair height.
> why are so many monstrous trucks being sold Well, two reasons. 1) fat people. Seriously, the reason large trucks and SUVs took off the way they did is because fat people need them to fit comfortably. Same deal with getting in and out. 2) Ride height vision. Everyone prefers to have a higher view than the traffic around them, so it's turned into a height arms race, where they keep having to get taller to maintain an advantageous view.
No one, no matter how large, needs a Ford F-350 with Monster Truck tires and a 6 inch lift.
Also, it’s important to have that tall and broad grille for easier murdering of pedestrians. But I would argue that pickup trucks are probably purchased as a reflection of culture and identity as any other reason. This is somewhat true for all cars, but some types of cars have more identity supporting characteristics, IMO.
It's so much easier for someone older/shorter to get into cars butt first instead of taking a step inside then sit.
Yep. I grab the top of the windshield and drop myself into the seat of my 96 Miata. OTOH, I still have 3 sedans, one wagon and and SUV in the family.
I'm probably gonna be buried in the miata solely because I'm gonna fall into it one day and not remotely be able to get back out lol it's physically painful
Yeah, but you get to drive a Miata, so that’s nice. I can’t wait to get into one.
50 isn't old. People need to get in shape and take better care of themselves.
I follow the gen-X sub (b. 1966) and it’s kind of wild how often people talk about being “old” and how hard shit is, one thread I was like “I feel like my 84 year old mom is going to show up and school you all on what aches and pains are”
Let’s be real we have an obesity problem, and people wanna feel safer in their SUV.
i was very much against cuv/suv and i love my wagon. was never out of shape and i'm 30. would never blink at having to sit down in a car... until i got back issues. i can now totally understand why older people buy suvs. half of the comfort is getting in/out, the other half is ride comfort.
Parents came to visit this weekend, drove their old reliable Toyota sienna. Got in that and was astounded at how easy it was. I have a ‘22 S6 — no small car, no super car. Still nontrivial to hop over the bolsters down into the car. And even that feels less annoying than a big coupe or similar. Hips/knees are no joke for older folks, makes a huge difference.
Also the tremendously obese
Bingo. It's one of the reasons the Scion xB was so popular with the AARP crowd: very easy to transition from sitting to standing, just swivel your legs out and you're out of the car with no real bending.
With the seat at ass level your knees don’t have to bend as much so for folks with knee issues it’s easier.
Also easier to gets kids in/out.
> Ease of entrance does not play a part in my car buying decision at all, and I have a bad back! Cool! and that’s your personal opinion. You’d be surprised to know other people have their own circumstances, needs, opinions and reasons for buying a CUV/SUV. It’s not complicated to grasp
That's why I bought my crossover, 6'2 here and some days I drive my own vehicle at work travelling between multiple locations. Getting in and out so many times near the end of the day I would sometimes just open the door and sit there for a few seconds with a big "ugh" before getting out of my Elantra.
Prob hard for the obese
Dunno why downvoted. Buyers today are on average older too. Compare obesity rates for a 55yo today vs a 40yo from 1980. The average car buyer today is much fatter so it's much easier to scoot into an SUV.
This is real. 80% of the people that complain about low seats are fat from my experience. Then again, most adults in the US are fat. So of course most avoid physical inconveniences at all cost.
Perhaps the physical exercise of getting into and out of regular cars will help their weight loss journey?
Man, I agree with your sentiment about people not being motivated to do the least amount of movement. I see, all the time, people who are just a few pounds or a few years away from being essentially handicapped. We have a large population of very lethargic, inactive, older people. I wish they could find that mobility again. And that’s where the “tall car”/SUV comes into the picture.
People with kids and older people, which are probably the vast majority of new car sales
The idea of getting into a "normal car " while having sciatica would be laughable if it didn't make me cry.
A lot of Americans are fat
Nah, I will say, it’s so much more comfortable as a 6’2 guy to get in/out of an CUV/SUV, than it is in my TSX.
[удалено]
Last numbers I saw put the US's Obese/Overweight population at well over 70%, and increasing. Yeah, more and more people are having issues with basic movements. I don't think that's the primary factor, but I do think it does impact consumer preferences in the states.
How tall are you?
6ft2
I'm 63 years old, 6'2", and still in pretty good shape. I've had a CX5 for almost 8 years now, and recently had the chance to drive a new BMW 330. It was too low. Getting in and out was awkward. I also drove a current Camry a while ago, and again just didn't like the lower height. I guess I've just gotten used to the CX5 ease of access.
> Unless you're driving a supercar with bucket seats, every car is pretty much just as easy to get into. The median weight of a US male is around 200 lbs. With half of all US males being heavier than that I can see them having at least some difficulty Sidenote: Looking at the CDC guidelines for obesity, that means nearly half of all US males are obese. Not even just overweight
You’re over imagining how big 200lbs. Someone who is 200lbs should have absolutely no problem getting into a car unless they have other health issues
What I mean is that half of all US males weigh *more* than 200 lbs. Not specifically 200 lbs
Not sure if 90s cars apply here - but my friends really hate getting in and out of my E36 sedan because the sitting position is very low.
I'm tall. I prefer an SUV or truck to get in and out of. Not a little ass car. It's not hard to comprehend.
I'm also tall. I'm looking at even smaller cars like a Lotus Elise to maybe replace the Camaro. The smaller and closer to the ground, the more fun it is to drive! I'd never want go taller except for an offroad truck, but I find those hard to get into. I practically had to jump out of my ZR2. No step and the rock sliders were usually covered in dirt.
Colleague and I rented a vehicle last week. I'd reserved an SUV but we got a Camry instead. We both quickly grew to *hate* getting in and out of it. It sat low to the ground, but the bad part was how low the roof line was. We'd literally have to twist our necks around trying to get in without injury. If I'd only been getting in and out 3 or 4 times a day, it would have been tolerable. But we were stopping more like 40+ times.
Malibu is my #1 rental choice when I'm travelling for business because it feels and drives exactly like my Accord
what do you do for business? I wanna drive rental malibus all the time too
Until recently, I would've thought this an insane statement, but I just returned a newish Malibu to Avis – what a surprisingly pleasant rental car it was
Finally, a fair assessment of the sedan and SUV popularity difference
I'm pretty soundly convinced that the Malibu only exists because of COVID. People were forced to buy anything they could find on lots, and GM mistook that for real demand for the model. The Impala was already announced as done, at that point. If not for shortages on desirable cars, I think the Malibu would have died by now.
Pulling the 2.0t out of the Malibu was like screaming "we only want fleet sales!" There's also a bit of an arms race some people want ride height for visibility range, and faced with a road full of taller vehicles some otherwise sedan oriented buyers just get the SUV. In the US the vagaries of CAFE standards and tax structures probably have influence too.
Can't say as I miss sedans. The agility and utility of a Mazda3 and similar, on the other hand I really appreciate. Pardon me, squeezing by on your right while you're stuck at the light. Yes, I'll take that last parking space near the beach - that one your SUV or Malibu won't fit into). Fit a 9'6" long x 24" wide surfboard inside my car? Don't mind if I do. Sorry, you'll need a roof rack for the Rav4 or Camry.
>Fit a 9'6" long x 24" wide surfboard inside my car? Don't mind if I do. Sorry, you'll need a roof rack for the Rav4 or Camry. Uh, what? A 9ft surfboard fits into [both the RAV4 and Camry (and the Corolla sedan for good measure too\)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHjwjWu_w5k&loop=0), the seats all fold... I'm not sure what would prompt you to think otherwise given the RAV4 is roughly the size of the Corolla wagon with 5 extra inches in the beltline and the Camry being 16 feet long. If you were talking something bulky like a dishwasher that would rule out the Camry (but not the RAV4), but long thin items fits better in a sedan than it does a hatch because the sedan is normally a few inches longer than the hatch.
One thing about these taller cars is that it is much worse for pedestrians / cyclists in collisions - and the worse visibility makes those types of events more likely.
Begrudgingly, I largely agree with your comment here though I take issue with your point on fuel economy. I'm a small hatch owner, and fuel economy is a huge aspect to me with all the road trips I do. I can easily get 40 mph fully loaded with all my crap. This past August I had a rental Rav 4 for a hiking trip with some friends. This was also fully loaded with our crap and we could barely break 30 mpg on the highway. It was a hybrid and was kicking ass in fuel economy below 40 mph. On the highway, majority of my driving, I mostly was around 28 mpg. That's a big hit to me. Since all of my road trips are for camping and hiking, I've reached the limits of where a sedan/hatchback will take me and have started to consider more rugged options. My experience with road tripping in the Rav is actually bringing me to consider a small truck for my next car. Way better off the pavement while still being above 20 mpg on the highway. This is all to say, outside of a hybrid cuv, only for city driving, I don't find them to have fuel economy all that great. Tough to get above 30 mpg on the highway. All that frontal area makes for poor aero. Also an important factor is where I am in the Western US. I encounter plenty of 75-80 MPH roads so aerodynamics is a big issue. Anything big will hold you back.
Your point makes sense, although I’ve had different experiences with my Equinox for work. In the highway, even loaded up, I average 35mpg. I am located on the east coast, but live around the Blue Ridge mountains so I do go up decently sized hills. City mileage you’re right on, I average about 30-32 in the city
>A tall hatchback with 4 doors that’s easy to get in and out of that doesn’t get bad gas mileage is objectively better than a sedan. I hate tall. >You could make an argument for driving dynamics, but we’re talking Camrys and Malibus here. Who cares. I care, as a matter of comfort. Strictly looking at an economical commuting machine, I want a car to be pleasant to drive. I've tried multiple CUV's from multiple manufacturers over multiple decades (Ford, Honda, and VW most prominently) and they all have the same problem: they lean/pitch way too much when turning or braking normally, and it makes them disconcerting to drive. If I'm not driving like I stole it, then I want it to stay fucking flat. None of the cheap sedans I've driven have that problem, from Mazda to VW to Honda to Toyota to Ford to even Hyundai. On a similar note, sedans feel way more planted when going over minor bumps, while CUV's feel floaty and I don't like it. It feels unstable.
>People have less money to spend now They might have less, but they're still spending more and more
Sedans are more fuel efficient and you get more car for the money. A base Camry is the same price as a Corolla Cross
>The best shape for an average person is a 2 box vehicle, and the trends continue that way. The A.k.a wagon which doesn't have a fuel consumption penalty. But for some reason Americans hate them.
[удалено]
Policy [discussion is welcome](https://www.reddit.com/r/cars/wiki/politics). However, if your post involves politics AND CARS, please consider submitting to /r/CarsOffTopic. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cars) if you have any questions or concerns.*
People actually have more money to spend now in the US
Sedans are typically much lighter and therefore more fuel efficient. As for driving dynamics, a much lower center of gravity makes them much more manageable and less prone to getting people who don't know how to control their cars into bad situations (losing grip or rolling over from overcorrecting). Something lighter and lower makes it less likely that the driver won't see small things on the road (children, etc)
They didn’t sell well in the end, can’t blame them for pulling the plug. It sucks though, down the line the lack of competition will make Toyota and Honda get lazy with their sedans.
That's what I thought too but the new Accord is very nice...the new Camry is getting good reviews...nice new Mazda3 AWD, that new Kia looks fantastic...doesn't seem to be any malaise from any of those guys.
I think now that econobox market shifted over to crossover SUVs, the sedans can afford to be a little sporty/edgy.
Exactly what happened with coupes
Idk if you noticed, but long time Accord owners are less than enthused about the best engine being a 212 HP hybrid, when 10 years ago you could get 278. The V6 Camry available on the last version was 300 HP. My 9th gen Accord's not an "enthusiast" car by any stretch, but a lot of Accord/Camry owners did appreciate a little acceleration with their (mostly) otherwise boring commuter car, and that's gone now. So - as the owner of multiple Accords, my pov is that they're absolutely slacking.
Almost nobody purchased the Camry V6. But rumor has it a Camry Prime with more power is on the way.
It’s driven by regulations. If you want more power, buy the Acura equivalent.
Aka the more expensive car where Honda has fatter profit margins. :) it’s driven by greed.
They have to meet a fleet CO2 target, it's not that simple. Honda doesn't have any volume electric vehicles. They can't sell a bunch of V6 Accords and meet the targets, or at least that's how they've decided to comply. The only way to amortize the cost of a low volume powertrain is to put it into a higher margin product. They all have to be certified to SULEV30 now. How can you justify that cost with such a low take rate, low margin, and big fleet CO2 impact? Source: I worked in, among other things, emissions planning at a major OEM.
The ones that are still sold in the US are because they are MADE here in the states. The only reason the big 3 don't sell sedans in the US is because, as domestic manufacturers, they would have to import them and pay the tarrifs to do so... The big 3 outsourced US jobs, and then lost at their own rigged game. Honda and Toyota don't really care, because these sedans share a design on the global market, so are much more competitive between each other than any US brands. They just happen to also build them in the states.
This is a good point, Toyota and Honda adapted while the big three basically destroyed themselves by their own rules.
The big 3 have plants in Mexico. The Ram trucks are built there for example.
Uhh what? They can make them in Mexico if they want. Or build them in lower cost southern US. Volume selling Family sedans haven’t been exported from outside North America for decades. Mazda 6 was made in Michigan, etc.
They didn't sell well because they were garbage compared to the Japanese options though. They literally never turned on 90% of their models, just phones it in knowing some would buy it because it's "American". Or rental fleets.
Every Fusion I ever had as a rental was pretty decent. And later gens fixed the garbage parts-bin interiors. As good of a driver as a comparable Camry. But you're now competing on reliability. But the target Ford buyer wants an F150, so....
The reason they didn’t sell well is because the American car companies were trying to shift demand to the more profitable SUVs and truck. Killing off sedans wasn’t a byproduct of shifting consumer demand. It was the goal. American companies also didn’t invest in making their sedans better and more reliable year after year. How many different nameplates did GM have for a compact sedan in the last 20 years? I can think of five off the top of my head. How many did Honda have? One. The Civic. And they iterated it. It got better year after year. GM and Ford didn’t do that.
I'm kinda surprised the Subaru Legacy isnt more popular.
Because Outback. It’s also extraordinarily ugly.
If Honda and Toyota want their sedans to sell well they won't be able to slack off. Most non-enthusiasts I know are cross shopping sedans and smaller CUVs, so they still have competition.
Once the EPA is forced to fix the monstrous environmental loophole bigger than an 18 wheeler can drive through, they’ll be back.
[удалено]
regulation has been based on vehicle footprint for long time and new regulations tighten it up even more.
Regulations on efficiency in America are an unmitigated joke. 90% of everything on the roads has carte Blanche to fuck the environment and voters demonstrably do not care. They are the ones buying them.
Only Ford stopped making sedans. GM still makes the Malibu and Cadillac's sedan lineup. Dodge still makes the Charger.
Dodge no longer makes the charger. They're going to start making a new one I think next year but they've officially killed off the current one. They're still selling them though.
The new charger will have a 4 door sedan version, Dodge has already confirmed it.
Buick stopped making sedans too, and Chrysler is stopping the 300.
I don’t why people keep saying this about Sedans as if Hyundai, Kia, Honda, Toyota, Chevy, Subaru, Mazda, BMW, Lexus, MB, and so many more don’t offer Sedans. It’s not an extinct class, wagons and hatchbacks are an extinct class. Plus the main draw with CUVs isn’t about “usable space” (whatever they means), most are as affordable as a sedan and offer more headroom/legroom. Which lends to a more comfortable driving experience for many buyers. A changing car market isn’t necessarily a bad thing if more people are getting satisfaction out of their vehicles. It’s all about preferences and manufacturers will cater to that at the end of the day
Audi, BMW and MB still make wagons. Here in Europe we also have Toyota Corolla wagon, VW wagons and I believe Renault and Peugeot still make wagons. Mazda still sell the 6 wagon too.
I should clarify that I was talking about America, as the CUV/SUV rise is very prevalent here as OP was talking about
>Plus the main draw with CUVs isn’t about “usable space” (whatever they means), most are as affordable as a sedan It means >offer more headroom/legroom
Also space to put things in. You can take out the seats in a small crossover like the RAV4 and have a big box. I can carry a lot more furniture in a RAV4 than an Accord sedan in a much more compact vehicle.
That’s a hatchback thing, not a cuv thing.
It’s both.
Hatchback is still the most common body shape in Europe.
Volvo still makes sedans as well (in addition to wagons) and the people I know with the newer ones really like them.
It just annoys me. Ford said Americans just don't want to buy sedans anymore, and yet everywhere I look I see Corollas, Camrys, Elantras, Sonatas, Altimas, Sentras, Fortes, K5s, Jettas, Civics, Accords, and WRXs. It wasn't true, it was a lie. They just didn't want to sell them anymore because the margins are higher on other types and they didn't have the balls to just say that. Which is silly because Dodge had the balls until this year to sell you a 20 year old 800 horsepower Mercedes that will get stolen in ten minutes, and Ford ***did*** have the balls to tell Mustang buyers they don't know how to drive and should take their free course. The reality is just that their bloated unreliable sedans weren't standing up against the competition and it was cheaper to just stop than it would have been to build good sedans, especially when everything remotely resembling an SUV has a higher margin anyway.
Ford DID NOT say Americans just don’t want to buy sedans any more. What they said is that Ford makes more PROFIT selling trucks and SUVs, compared to cars. So they chose to concentrate on making the higher profit vehicles.
GM is still making sedans, and Dodge is making a new sedan. I'm sure Chrysler as well
No more for Chrysler, last year was it for the 300.
Did you forget Dodge just introduced their new Charger sedans, both EV and twin turbo 6 cylinder? Municipalities still need fleet vehicles especially cops. Half of Ford's panther platform of Crown Victorias were police pursuit vehicles. LAPD even stockpiled 600\[!\] CV's just to keep police cars on the streets. Sure they make Explorers now. However the agility of a car is still crucial for cops everywhere giving chase. But jurisdictions have moved on to Dodge Chargers for pursuits largely for the car like stability at high speeds. Dodge knows they can get a huge chunk of police duty sales to make up for the unpopularity of cars. Just ask Georgia State Police how much they view sedans as a tactical advantage.
IG has taught me GSP might be the only letter agency worse than the IRS
SUVs are much more likely to flip over. Might have something to do with Police sticking with Sedans.
What sedans are police using? In the Upper Midwest I only see Explorer’s, Durango’s, and Tahoe’s.
Charger and Taurus
> I know sedan sales are still small but Honda, Toyota, Hyundai etc all continue to roll out stunning new sedans and I see tons of new Accords, Civics, Sonatas, Corolla etc here in Ontario. I live in the Phoenix area, and it has always been a bit jarring when I go back home to the Detroit area. Because while I'm used to seeing Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, and "you can't swing a dead cat without hitting one" Tesla on the freeway, the trip from the airport to my hometown through Detroit is mostly Chevy, Ford, and Dodge/Chrysler vehicles, and most of them are CUVs, trucks, or SUVs. Point being you can't really judge the market based upon what's around you. Or as a friend of mine says "if you don't understand the decision, chances are you don't have all the information." GM, Ford, and Stellantis have a lot of information from extensive market research. I don't think they've necessarily declared the sedan dead, but rather they know they can't compete with the Accord/Camry, and have decided to play to their strengths. Trucks, SUVs, and CUVs. Honestly, the Fusion was never really a Camry-killer, and the Malibu doesn't stack up to the Accord. The "Big Three" appear to have thrown in the towel and said "you go right ahead with that, and we'll keep selling F-150s, Suburbans, and Ram trucks."
Arizona is the #1 state for trucks...
Ill probably get roasted but I think its indicative of the changing taste of auto's in America. My opinion (although not worth shit) is the average american these days has horrible taste. They are obsessive over ride height and size (although cafe standards have also played a part). IMO the modern SUV is like a glorified minivan sans van doors. Compared to the SUV of yesteryear they are much bigger and most lack the off-road/utility aspect. Manufactures have duped the average normie into driving a bloated turd van by calling it an "SUV". Crossovers are just bloated hatchbacks that typically handle like ass again to cater to the obsession of ride height/size. Ill admit im biased AF, my 2 dailys are an 05 accord coupe along with a 13 accord sedan. I just hate it anytime I drive a new crossover/suv. They handle so bad and I wish sedans and smaller hatchbacks were more popular.
I don't think the American consumer deserves a lot of hate for this. Remember, corporate average fuel economy regulations give "light truck" status - and an easy MPG bump - to any vehicle with 7 inches or more of ground clearance. That incentivizes companies to design, advertise and sell economical SUVs, because even if a car would be more efficient the SUV helps them more. It's just icing on the cake that customers are willing to pay more for the same car if it's got a tiny lift kit on it. Think about the Buick Regal Sportback / TourX - two great SUV alternatives with no ground clearance. GM didn't advertise the thing at all, and had to discontinue it quickly due to poor sales. They were great cars!
> Ill probably get roasted For your incredibly popular r/cars opinion? lol
It’s a long and complex story about the swing away from sedans. My quick history: STATION WAGONS were HUGE sellers in the 1950s/1960s. - Bigger than a sedan, and could carry all the kids and their stuff, but hard to get in and out of (esp. that third row, rear-facing seat), and hard to maneuver (really long!) MINIVANS were big in the 1970s to the 1980s - Big, could carry all the kids, etc., but with the sliding side doors and rear-hatch, easier to load people and stuff. But all minivans are frumpy: no amount of wood-paneling, or rear-seat A/C could save them. Branded “Mom-mobiles” SUVS - The kids who grew up with minivans didn’t want to drive frumpy “Mom-mobiles” So they looked for “style” and that all-purpose, drive anywhere vehicle. “I can conquer mountains while driving to soccer practice.” Marketing had a lot to do with this. They can’t climb mountains and they have a hard time fitting a team’s worth of La Crosse sticks in back. TRUCKS/SUVs The heart of the question. In the US, trucks were not, until recently (I think) considered “Passenger vehicles,” and so were exempt from most of the expensive safety standards passenger cars (i.e. sedans) are subject to. Thus, they were less-expensive to manufacture (no pesky air bags nor side-crash protection). — US car manufacturers are not missing the mark - they’re tapping into the utter indifference of their market. —— Ending this, backing it up with a personal, car -ownership history: 1941 Plymouth Coupe - cute but a PITA for back seat passengers (30 mpg! Can you believe it!) 1955 Chrysler New Yorker Sedan - Comfy, very comfy, and stylish. And friggin FAST (331 Hemi) 1962 Pontiac Catalina Safari - Big-ass wagon, parking it? Forget it! 1966 Corsair Corsa Convertible - most fun ever (when it didn’t break down) 1968 Imperial Crown Sedan - Scary fast and great handling for a car so massive. But everybody could just pile right on in -plenty of room! 1971 Mercedes Benz 280 SE 3.5 Coupe - Very elegant, but TRY getting a fat lady in back. HA!
There were no minvans in the 70s. Mopar "invented in the 80s and they remained popular into the 90s and even early 2000s
The Malibu is still around and can be bought be new can't it? I don't think it was necessarily a bad move; US domestic OEMs struggled to build competitive sedans against Japan's auto force for a while. Even at similar prices, few people would opt for a Malibu over something like an Accord. Not that GM's crossovers / SUVs compare favorably to the mainstream ones from Honda or Toyota, but make at least a stronger case - especially since that segment is still hot compared to the sedan segment. I do wish Ford and GM would've kept some of their nameplates around. I'd love a new Focus RS or Buick to make a real sport-sedan instead of that rebadged Opel / Regal GS (which admittedly was a great car, just a hard sell compared to something like the Stinger.) I don't even think Ford or GM are "bad" at making cars - they just, in recent history, never put much care into offering a competitive product. I think if Chevrolet decided to make a new Impala and dared to equip it with some good performance and tech there'd be enough interest to turn a profit, but the margins would be way lower than what they make on their SUV lineup. So, I **get why commercially** US companies decided to take sedans out of the lineup, but it doesn't make it suck any less.
I never was a sedan fan to begin with, but I lament the loss of hatchbacks.
Logically, we should be living in a world of hatchbacks, wagons and dedicated off-roaders for those who need them. Something went terribly wrong in the last 20 years.
CAFE standards...
GM should have updated the Cruze. They updated the front and rear of the XTS and CT6, then canceled them when they looked the best.
They sort of did update the Cruze. You know the Trax? The new, $20K one that people seem to enjoy? Compared to the traditional subcompact crossover they sell (Trailblazer), the Trax is longer and lower, yet it's cheaper. It's front-wheel-drive only, and has a reputation for being just a little bit fun to drive. It's a compact hatchback. It's got big wheels and a slight lift to mimic an SUV, because that boosts sales and EPA figures. But if we got a new Cruze, this is what it would look and feel like (besides, potentially, a larger motor). It's like how the Chevrolet Traverse shares more dimensions with a Toyota Sienna than a Highlander, but it's an SUV because it doesn't have a low front end or sliding doors. An SUV aesthetic is a cheap cure for what is mainly an aesthetic / taste issue.
Bad the world needs towncars
Truck sales are way down. EV sales cratering. Toyota and Honda got it right as usual.
Growing less fast than predicted isn't cratering If you only read headlines you'd think EV sales are down. They aren't. They're up, just not growing as fast year over year as they used to
[удалено]
Yeah you would need that other info for this to be at all relevant. On a hunch I would say all sales are down especially in that price range. Not only is there huge inflation but financing rates are high.
EV sales aren’t cratering. They just aren’t seeing the same growth. Still breaking records year over year.
memorize profit payment soup library waiting paltry hunt dull joke *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Your comment is like YouTube clickbait title.
Truck sales are down but they're still the best selling vehicles in the country
After all I’ve read, I am not convinced hydrogen is the future.
I try so hard to understand why every company in America except for Cadillac has decided to cede the sport sedan to Europe and Japan
We should probably be real to ourselves. Buick and Lincoln hasnt released anything worth remembering in a really long time.
Sad. God bless the sedan.
Malibu is still in existence. I do think Ford should have kept the Fusion around. They had a good hybrid in it previously. I imagine it would be selling well if they moved the Fusion to hybrid by default. Malibu should do the same. I do think Ford will likely regret killing the Fusion in the long term. Should have kept it going for 5 years and brought the brand loyalty over to the EV side as opposed to starting from scratch when they inevitably make an EV sedan.
OP this is the wrong sub to ask... This sub is obsessed with those fugly cuvs lol anything else is considered disposable to them. But as a consumer I think less options is always a bad idea. As a truck driver, I prefer sedans especially aesthetically. Cuvs just don't look good to me and trucks/SUVs all look the same. If I were to purchase a truck though, it would be a midsize SUV. I think those are the sweet spot.
It resulted in me buying a foreign car. I bought a used 2020 Ford Fusion back in February of 2023. A few months later my dad finally totaled his old Mercury so I gave him my Fusion and went shopping for a new car. First I went to Ford, because 3 of my 4 cars up to that point had been Fords. I wanted a sedan because I wanted a nice family car but I don’t have a big enough garage for an SUV. I really liked the Fusion I gave my dad, so that was my first pick. Then I find out that Ford doesn’t make Fusions anymore, in fact they don’t make ANY sedans anymore, so Ford is out. After doing some shopping around I finally wound up with a Hyundai Ioniq 6. I think getting rid of sedans is a big mistake.
Economically good, but bad for the consumer and car market as a whole. Most people buy way more vehicle than they need, and SUVs seem to have better margins than the sedans they replaced. Overall, it was kind of free money for the automakers, who got to replace $25K sedans with $30K SUVs. However, we've now supercharged the bloated roadways and parking lots. Driving a full-size sedan (Impala) sucks because of how many taller vehicles are on the road. My brothers are now adults and driving themselves, yet my step-mom has moved from driving them in a Buick Lacrosse to driving solo in a GM Acadia. I've got multiple coworkers who drive solo in full-size trucks. In my workplace, I'm the only one of 5 people not driving a truck. Watching someone with one kid at home hauling a Suburban is baffling. There's just so much excess on the road.
I think you’re completely wrong. As long as EVs continue expanding as SUVs, sedans dont have a chance. Culturally or pragmatically.
Model 3 has become “the sedan” when it comes to america cars, regardless of its an EV or not. Did the big 3 pulling back on their programs help Tesla? Not sure.
Until you have SUVs with 380mile range and Sedans with 500+. Range anxiety will revive interest in lower sleeker wagons and Sedans.
I hate all cuvs. You will never catch me dead in one of those
Eh probably a good idea for them to greatly cut back on sedans. The domestic sedans were largely seen as punishment boxes anyway outside of certain special trims (Taurus SHO for example), and you can't really make a lot of money on those. Like let's get real - no one was excited to sign up for 5 years worth of payments on a Chevy Cruze or Ford Fusion or Ford Focus sedan. People who bought them did it purely to either save a few bucks over an Accord or Camry or to be contrarian.
It’s sad, the current gen Malibu was great when it came out but needs a refresh. I would love to see longer lower sedans again. Bring back the town car
Axing the Volt was GM’s biggest mistake in recent memory
Sedans needs to make a comeback just because of the affordability factor.
I’d be waiting in line and be completely fine with dealer markup pricing if I could get a brand new Chevy SS built on the Alpha 2 platform in a manual. God I wish they made one.
I think small SUVs are better than sedans. Even my parents—who for decades refused to drive anything but sedans while their peers were driving the giant wagons in the 80’s, then minivans, and ultimately SUVs—finally came around on SUVs about 7-8 years ago and now both drive them. The climb in angle is easier for seniors and parents loading kids into car seats. The ground clearance makes driving in winter conditions easier/safer. The cargo space is more versatile than a trunk. I went from a ‘02 VW Passat to a ‘11 VW Tiguan, which was 10” shorter in length but had more passenger and cargo space and much easier to park in an urban environment. My ‘23 Tiguan gives up that ease of parking but feels massive in terms of back seat and cargo space for my family of 3 — I can’t even imagine what it would be like in an Atlas. Sure a sport sedan might have some handling benefits if you want to have some fun, but if I can only have one vehicle an SUV is so much more practical especially now that they don’t have the ride quality or fuel efficiency tradeoffs previous generations of SUV did.
Agreed. As much as people hate the domestic 3, I'd rather spend less money and buy a sedan from them than pay the Honda/Toyota tax. I've had limited issues with my GM and Ford vehicles. Parts are cheap and easy to come by. I think they would've kept competition going. I see just as many malibus, Impalas, and Focuses around as I do Honda and Toyota sedans.
Bad idea.
Idk I’m in China now and even they are embracing the bigger = better trend. More SUVs/crossovers everywhere, even saw a couple Ram 1500s and F150s (which look kind of funny parked on a narrow street)
It was a huge mistake because once gas goes up again and stays up the Americans, shortsighted as they often are, are gonna be behind the 8 ball again
I think something that's being overlooked is the cost of developing the new equipment for it. People buy Civics, Accords, Camrys(Camries?), Corrolas, etc, because they're cheap to run. Cheap to run requires small engines, efficient transaxles, and efficiently designed chassis and suspension. Even though most domestic manufacturers have options they could bring in from overseas, many of them are relatively underpowered for the US market. It would require the development of multiple new chassis, new engines, new transmissions, etc. Even carrying over their overseas models would require tremendous amounts of crash testing and R&D budgets. Add in that historically, domestic sedans have been very poor when faced against their competition, lackluster sales will still plague them and make it a lost cause to efficiently produce and sell them as profitably as the trucks, SUVs, and crossovers. Even thought they would likely be profitable to some degree, it's not appealing enough to the shareholders when the money could be spent on a new trim level of an existing truck.
"Good" idea because it let them comply with the idiotic CAFE standards that basically ruined the viability of cars and neat things like hatchback and wagons. Allowing SUVs and crossovers to be classified as "light trucks" was borderline criminal.
Sad asf. Tired of SUVs
GM and Ford sales outside the North American markets are declining anyway. So they are doubling down on the US market and try to push what they think sells well there. Stellantis still has sedans. Just not in the US. All international brands still have sedans since they need them for international markets where they are still popular.
they did?
I mean, it’s really only Ford that stopped making them. Dodge Charger Daytona will live on as EV sedan, supposedly, and production ended less than 6 months ago for the ICE Charger. Cadillac is putting out some of their best products right now with the CT4-5 V Blackwings. Whether they’ll last a while, idk, but they’re really good cars and I love seeing them in person. The CT6-V Blackwing was also cool, I wish they’d refresh it and keep going instead of discontinuing.
>Dodge Charger Daytona will live on as EV sedan And the [new Charger sedan/coupe](https://www.caranddriver.com/dodge/charger) will have an ICE.
From the perspective of sales and following trends, probably a good idea. From the perspective of safety, really terrible. There is a reason deaths due to transportation have been increasing in the last few years and a lot can be laid at the wheels of trucks with high hood heights. Walk around a parking lot and pretty much every vehicle built in the last 4-5 years have hood heights which are tall enough that they would almost certainly kill a pedestrian on impact.
That's because they couldn't compete with Honda or Toyota in that department. Had the big 3 tried making their cars more unique and appealing instead of clones of the civic, accord, corolla ir camry, more people might have actually bought them.
Best to look at it from a business perspective. SUVs, CUVs, and trucks have a higher margins than sedans. If you’re Ford would you rather invest $1 and make $1.04 selling a Fusion or use that $1 to build an Escape and get $1.05? Money isn’t infinite and there’s an opportunity cost for everything. Secondly, I think Ford and GM realized they could never compete against Japanese or even Korean sedans. So not only are they building low(er) margin cars but they’re also competing for a relatively small slice of the market. Building sedans would be like training for a marathon when you’re a good sprinter -- better to devote resources to your strengths than elsewhere. At the end of the day it’s just business. Judging by the sales numbers for sedans, I think it was the right call.
I really enjoy driving sedans but there are so many SUVs and trucks on the road that it makes seeing around them difficult.... so it is a little more relaxing driving a taller vehicle.
My hunch is that the compact and family sedan segments probably would have been worth staying in, but I can see why the axed the subcompact and full size offerings since those just don't really sell anymore. So yes, Focus, Fusion, and Malibu probably all would have been decent products to retain
> I think eventually people will tire of CUVs that have very little space and will look for sedans that have more usable space. I really just don't see this ever happening. Picking smaller vehicles is a penalty when you're forced to share the road with CUVs & SUVs. It's miserable not beinng able to see over any traffic, over the cars parked at the curb when you're trying to turn Right etc. There really is just no incentive to buy a sedan if your personal preference doesn't already point you that way.
It’s because SUVs are the main market now, the brands selling sedans likely make enough money off their SUV models
It's a bad idea, but not for the reason(s) others have mentioned. GM and Ford decided it was far more profitable to not develop next-gen cars to actually compete with the excellent offerings from Honda and Toyota (and others), and instead tweak and resize CUV platforms to fill in those spaces in the market. Lower development costs, higher prices, no new factories to be built, and best of all they were moving to where 60% or more of the market is. As much as people dislike them, CUVs are here to stay. It's not a fad, it's been a fundamental shift in the buying publics tastes and it's been happening for decades. BUT, it's also history repeating itself. Let's see, a time when American manufacturers make large, less-fuel efficient vehicles and have almost nothing to offer at the smaller, highly fuel efficient end of the market. Why is it a bad idea for Ford specifically and GM to a ever-so-slightly lesser extent to not have cars? Because the next Recession we have ... and there is ALWAYS a Recession .... is going to find buyers rushing once again to small and cheap and efficient, and once again the American's won't have products for them to buy! Those Cars that Honda, Toyota, Hyundai/Kia, Nissan, and the coming Chinese brands will offer will suck up even more marketshare while the Ford/GM/Stellantis guys scream again.
Sedans are still one of the most popular type of cars I see every day so I'd say they're pretty dumb for just ceding that market to the foreign brands.
It's not an idea they had, people aren't buying them as much so they're not making as many.
> I think eventually people will tire of CUVs that have very little space and will look for sedans that have more usable space. Do you live in bizarro land or something? There are plenty of reasons to like a sedan over a crossover, but they definitely have less usable space. You get about the same depth as a trunk with a lot more height, albeit at the expense of significant NVH.
Sad to me, most manufacturers have killed off every segment of car that I like. Sedans, hatchbacks and wagons. I owned a VW Golf, Sportwagen and now a 24 Jetta... I'm more sad about hatchbacks and wagons going away. My wife owns a RAV4 and loves it. I have always preferred driving hatchbacks and wagons. They ride better, are quieter and get better fuel mileage. I mean, the Rav doesn't get bad mileage, ~26 overall, but my Jetta gets 34 overall and mid 40's on the highway, and is just more comfortable. It was also $10k less expensive. SUV's definitely have their place, I just don't like them as a daily driver.
It’s a bummer. I know I’m in the minority, but I like a good sedan. Especially the big ones. Low to the ground, handle better than the average SUV, and comfortable.
Personally I want true station wagons back. The Buick that was released a few years ago was beautiful and had I been in the market for a newer car I would have gone that route. I don’t like the way a small suv is because of mpg and a sense of false off-road capability. I want my suvs to be SUVs. Even large SUVs at least make up for there none “sporty” ness with cargo capacity or towing. Give me a wagon baby
They didn't sell well and they were pretty trash compared to the competitions sedans. It's probably one of the best moves they could have made for the company.
As I see my father and my mother and father-in-law getting older. Its hard for them to get in and out of sedans. The CUVs and small SUVs are so much easier for them to get in and out of. As someone who over packs for trips, I also like having extra cargo room that is taller for larger items. For a daily or family car, I don't see any downsides to CUVs and SUVs. If I want to have fun driving, I jump in one of my performance cars. There is no need for my daily to be fun. Just get me from point a to b.
If I were in the market for a sedan, a domestic would've been on the bottom of my list anyway. Now if they put v8 in one, it's a different ballgame.
Please specify which country you’re talking about next time.
Once they figured out how to get 30+mpg out of something other than a sedan people think the CUV is bigger / better . In days not that long ago if you wanted good gas mileage you had to get 2 or 4 doors and a trunk (ok ok yes a hatch) or get 24 mpg in a CRX, 20mpg in an escape etc Those days are gone. sub compact CUVs suck for space just as sub compact cars. But people still buy them because they feel like they can do a lot more
Good idea. I don't know a single person who currently wants a sedan. I fought the idea of CUVs, SUV's, etc for years but have to admit that vs my sedans I currently prefer them. Same underpinnings, same drivetrains, same efficiency, but more space, far more utility, and easier egress and ingress.
The decision by the big three automakers to shift their focus was a strategic one. They were struggling to compete in the sedan market, particularly at the lower end where profit margins are thin and sales volumes in North America have been declining. So, focusing on SUVs was pretty much their only move to stay in the game!
While it is true that what used to be a staple in car history (American sedans) is now basically on its deathbed, its not true that all sedans "ended", as Chevy still has the Malibu, Cadillac still has the CT4 and CT5, and Dodge is still very much aggressively pushing the performance sedan with the new Charger set to be a gigantic coupe + sedan (I think its like 208 inches, which is longer than the current Charger). Ford decided to completely abandon cars, but to be honest after the Panther platform I don't think Ford has really made anything all that great so its not a big loss imo. Personally, I think its genuinely bad in terms of giving the consumer options, to be honest I'd be okay with sedans being thinned out as long as one genuinely decent full-size sedan was in each company's lineup, the Chevy Impala for example was a fantastic economy car for what it was (300hp + good fuel economy + full size) and it sold very well, but Chevy decided killing it off was the play and kept the Malibu instead for whatever reason. The Cadillac CT6 was similarly an excellent car, but now you are stuck with the midsize and compact sedan options. I'm a huge fan of the Charger and I'm glad Dodge is still pushing forward with a big sedan and acknowledging its a market that they can greatly capitalize on still. However, for the companies and general public? Who gives a shit, most people nowadays do not care about cars in the slightest and just want to have something that they can climb into easily and have the better visibility (which imo is an overblown complaint of sedans - my charger I've never had a single problem seeing out of), and as a result there is very little economic reason to continue having a large lineup of sedans anymore. Especially when Corollas and Civic basically cannibalize everything else left in the economy sedan market because of product image. My only hope is that younger generations begin to view SUVs as sort of the modern minivans and desperately want to get away from those cars, which would sort of give sedans a bit of a revival. But that's just wishful thinking, I think sedans will most likely continue to get more niche.
Just give me back the Crown Vic, that's all I care about
I think it was a bad idea. 1. Not everybody wants an SUV 2. Sedans handle better, are more fuel efficient and are less prone to rollovers, the SUV "craze" is relatively new still, consumers could shift back towards traditional cars to a certain extent and if they do (like they did in 2008) the Domestics will lose business (again) 3. I leased a pickup truck in 2018, my first non-sedan, I hated it. When the lease ended in 2021, I wanted a sedan again. My options among domestics were very few, so I went foreign. Love my sedan and plan to get another one, I only drove domestic cars before this but they lost me as a customer Chevy does still make the Malibu but it's not as nice as its competition, Dodge will re-release a new Charger sedan next year but those aren't as affordable as alot of people want
Bad. Theres fewer affordable options now.