Jump to content

Size Comparison With an SUV


Marc Smith
 Share

Recommended Posts

Sorry, and with the greatest respect.........the Ford C-Max is as much a compact SUV than I am a defensive midfielder for England.  The car lacks four-wheel drive.  It doesn't have a heavy-duty chassis.  etc. etc.

 

The Mercedes B200 has almost identical dimensions to the C-Max.  Ditto the Toyota Matrix.  Are they compact SUVs???

 

Many Compact SUV nowadays are not 4wd, nor do they have ladder frames, ect...  they are just front wheel drive station wagons with a bit more ground clearance and taller roof lines and maybe taller tires...

 

remember when we used to have only half a dozen types of cars Compact, Sedans, coupes, sports cars, vans and trucks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree with you both Marc & Adrian, and with the original thread intent just comparing size elements.  It is interesting to me just how the market has changed and made categorization weak at best, with driveline variations, size fluctuations, actual vehicle use, etc....  some just because none of the manufacturers wants to have a vehicle labeled a 'Wagon'.  (As we know, there are many 'wagons' out there, although I have not checked, I'm guessing few, if any, manufacturers claim that label - Subarus come to mind.)  I'm sure 'Minivan' is very stigmatized now as well.  Our VW EuroVan is an MV - I think it stood for Multi Van (guess that is an oldie now).  Now, I think the SUV label has been washed out and difficult to use accurately, or take seriously. Labeling, YIKES !  Reminds me of the PZEV label - does that mean KOSOHWC, Kind Of Sort Of Half Way Clean? ;)

 

Nick

 

PS Adrian, we seriously thought about getting a B200 before we discovered the C-Max in late 2012.  It was a good knock-off of the Euro C-Max when it came out in 2006, I believe, with great entry, utility & drivability features.  Loved them, but sure glad we held out for the hybrid C-Max.  I believe the current 2nd gen. C-Max (2010) drew upon the B200 considerably for it's upgrade.  Will be up in B200 territory over the 4th.

Edited by C-MaxSea
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, and with the greatest respect.........the Ford C-Max is as much a compact SUV than I am a defensive midfielder for England.  The car lacks four-wheel drive.  It doesn't have a heavy-duty chassis.  etc. etc.

 

The Mercedes B200 has almost identical dimensions to the C-Max.  Ditto the Toyota Matrix.  Are they compact SUVs???

 

The closest most suburban "sport utility vehicles" ever get to off-roading is accidentally driving on the lawn while backing out of the driveway.

 

(Pardon me, soccer dads, and no-offense-intended, soccer-moms, but) manufacturers and consumers have co-opted the "SUV" moniker to mean 'Soccer-mom Utility Vehicle'.

 

While SUV's originally began with truck heritage, (original International Harvester Scout 1961, Ford Bronco 1966, Chevy Blazer 1969) today there are countless all-wheel-drive vehicles dubbed "SUV's"

Then there are 4WD vehicles, primarily trucks designed for serious sustained off-road use. Even Ford's Explorer, originally of the largest-selling truck-based SUV's, has been built on a unibody chassis since 2011.

 

All-Wheel-Drive (as opposed to 4-Wheel-Drive) is marketed primarily as a desirable feature for the ability to navigate slippery snowy roads, regardless of the vehicle "type". Subaru especially excels in this market niche without any true "trucks" in the lineup.

 

No wonder Ford uses "Multi-Activity-Vehicle' to describe the C-MAX.

I'm sure the term "MAV" makes Mark Cuban proud!

 

From 2002 to 2012, the Toyota Matrix was available with All Wheel Drive, and a bit more ground clearance than front-wheel-drive versions.

 

Years ago, one of my students shared a great truth of 4-wheel-drive vehicles: "4WD doesn't keep you from getting stuck. It lets you get stuck in worse places."

Edited by kostby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Years ago, one of my students shared a great truth of 4-wheel-drive vehicles: "4WD doesn't keep you from getting stuck. It lets you get stuck in worse places."

hopefully he got an "A"...  truer words were never spoken...

 

 

Just because  you CAN go somewhere  doesn't mean you SHOULD...  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny you should mention the B200, Nick.  When our gas-gulping Audi A6 V8 developed a terminal timing chain problem, the Merc was going to be our new car.  Absolutely loved it.  Then for some reason I got obsessed with electric hybrid technology--thought we were buying a Volt until I looked inside one.  After 10 minutes driving a C-max SEL I knew it was the car for us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very similar story Adrian.  Our 'problem child' was our BMW 525, a beautiful inline 6 and not bad on gas, but did require premium, and leaking oil several drops each night.  It still is, and has had cardboard under it the last several years - know it is $$$ to repair.  'Discovered' the C-Max, sat in one and was startled, drove one and was stricken.

 

We will miss the BMW when it is retired (still smitten with it's hood closure and a couple other features), but no question which one we want to use now every chance we get - outside of our 'ditch digging' occupations - definitely the C-Max!

 

Nick

Edited by C-MaxSea
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have long puzzled over the SUV and crossover labels.  In my mind a true SUV is built on a truck chassis and a crossover has the same type body but built on an automobile chassis.  Have to admit have not seen that distinction published but is the only logical conclusion I can reach.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An SUV means two things:
  1  - ground clearance to clear any curb or parking space stopper

  2  - "wagon" style body

C-Max fails on #1 so its not an SUV.

 

Other choices from history and around the world (I'm sick of acronym soup):

  1. WAGON (or STATION WAGON).  Dated - though I still like it.  Who hauls baggage to the train station in their C-Max? (Maybe AIRPORT WAGON - oh no, an APW)
  2. ESTATE (or ESTATE CAR)  What's wrong with that?  Nice European flair.
  3. BREAK (or BREAK DE CHASSE or SHOOTING BRAKE).  Might work in Quebec - but the shooting/hunting stuff - might be a tough sell.
  4. DEPOT HACK (or more completely DEPOT HACKNEY CARRIAGE).  OK, I like trains but that era seems, sadly, gone.  But, hmmm, a DHC C-Max - no, no acronyms!)
  5. SUBURBAN.  No, someone "trademarked" that one.
  6. WODDIE.  Now we're getting somewhere!  We need a "woodie" version of the C-Max!  The new 2015 color to replace Ice Storm!
  7. CARRYALL.  Bingo!  That's it folks!  The C-Max is a "CarryAll"

"Now You All jus' pile in your CarryAll and come on by!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

#7 is so good that the name's been in use for over 70 years:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:1941_Chevrolet_Carryall_Suburban.jpg

and more recently http://www.clubcar.com/us/en/commercial/utility-4x2/carryall-500.html

 

BMW and Mercedes have often used 3-digit numbers, so why not Ford? Let's see now, 5 passengers, 5 doors, 6 years to pay, so how about the Ford 556, Powerful Integrated Transportation Answer

 

Of course owners of a troublesome model will just refer to it as a P.I.T.A.  :banghead:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...Years ago, one of my students shared a great truth of 4-wheel-drive vehicles: "4WD doesn't keep you from getting stuck. It lets you get stuck in worse places."

+2, especially in Winter.

 

As to Adrian's apparenlty august soccer career, remember that SUV's started in 1935 when GM inroduced "a pickup type front end with a station wagon type body mounted on a pickup chassis" as the "Suburban Carryall." The SUV nomenclature is just marketingspeak to convince people they need things they really don't, like high ground clearance and 4WD, which are cheap to deliver and very, very profitable. Subsequent nomenclature has evolved to fit marketings's needs... not ours.

 

HAve fun,

Frank

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I drove smaller cars for years but switched to SUV's as I developed back and knee problems making entry and exit from small cars uncomfortable.  Was very happy to find a car that was smaller but exit and entry is like an SUV's.  And now enjoying the challenges in getting better mileage.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

My last vehicle before the Cmax was an Explorer and my entire bass rig fits easily in the Cmax with the rear seats down, and is much easier to load/unload then the Explorer was.

 

That's two basses in hardshell cases, a GK amp head in a hard shell rack case, a pedal board, a 4x10" cab, bass stands, mic stands, gear bag, and crash kit (for any repair emergencies on a gig). My drummer fits her entire drum set in her Cmax with the seats down, which is was put it on my radar in the first place.

 

There is more room than many think there is in the Cmax, imho.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's two basses in hardshell cases, a GK amp head in a hard shell rack case, a pedal board, a 4x10" cab, bass stands, mic stands, gear bag, and crash kit (for any repair emergencies on a gig). My drummer fits her entire drum set in her Cmax with the seats down, which is was put it on my radar in the first place.

 

Great note to musicians Xym ! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

C'mon now Fotomoto:  your C-max is parked a good three feet closer to the lens and appears larger than the CRV due to an optical illusion.  Nevertheless the specs are pretty close:  the Honda is a good 5 inches longer and an inch higher but same ballpark.

 

 

 

The CRV was also on higher ground so it's almost a draw as to photo affects but if you don't like that reference here's another.  Throw some unnecessarily large, fuel sapping SUV style wheels on the CMax and they'd be almost impossible to tell apart.  LOL

 

20140706_092114_zpsgzuoynqf.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And they look even more similar from the side !

 

There are those Escape roof rails again.  I keep wondering whether they would install onto the C-max!

 

My old thesis was that the C-max is so similar to the new Escape that it is - essentially - a 2013-14 Escape Hybrid.

On further reflection, I still don't think they're different enough to keep the C-max from being labeled an SUV in the same sense that the Escape is so labeled.  However, I do see now that, in addition to sitting taller, the Escape has more rear cargo area, and the difference is not merely the battery space.  The Escape rear box is noticably a bit longer, more squared off and taller.

 

I remain interested to read the opinions on the overall comparison from any who have owned both the C-max and the new style Escape.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

when I had my HHR,  I installed factory roof racks...  the kit came with some sort of a "nuzert" blind nut type of thing  that expanded when you tightened it down.  no need to even remove the headliner...pretty slick, no leaksin two years gasket and a tube of silicone...

 

It looks like the ford escape has some sort of threaded hole for the rack to secure to...

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Roof-Rack-Side-Rails-for-Ford-Escape-2013-2014-/400695489646?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item5d4b4ff46e&vxp=mtr

 

 

I agree the rails look sharp....wonder what kind of MPG hit they would cause...  keep in mind that the rails are only side rails,  with no cross bars to support any thing

 

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Genuine-Ford-Grand-C-Max-Roof-Rails-1-688-531-/221368356386?pt=UK_Car_Accessories_Touring_Travel&hash=item338a950e22

 

looks like the older generations of c max's  had factory cross bar  as an option with no side rails...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I remain interested to read the opinions on the overall comparison from any who have owned both the C-max and the new style Escape.

 

I still have my 2103 Escape as the lease will end in two weeks. I bought my 2013 Cmax two weeks ago because of the deal I got or I may have waited a bit longer.

 

When comparing the two side by side the Escape is ta bit taller and a bit longer. Cabin space wise, the two are identical except for the trunk area as you noted. It is shorter and more narrow  back there. When my wife first sat in the Cmax she was impressed that it was THAT similar to the Escape. Knowing the Cmax is a bit smaller car she assumed the interior cabin area would be smaller too, not so though! The kids in the back seat have exactly the same room as in the Escape. 

 

I think if I get the chance tomorrow, I'll take some pictures of the two side by side for comparison sake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a lightning strike yesterday that fried my TV.  What does that have to do with size vs SUV you ask.  

 

So I am going to be buying a new TV in the 50-60 range.  Was wondering whether it would fit in the MAX so I took the 55 inch box from my wife's TV and it fit in my C-Max with room to spare.  In my last car, a Hyandai Sante FE her 55 was a tight squeeze including tilting it so it would get through the hatch.  Much easier in the Cmax.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't know if it's relevant so much here, but when we went looking for a new vehicle we were actually looking for a small SUV and the Ford Escape was on our short list.  Our dealer called the C-Max (wait for it) the "Escape Hybrid".  Seems like a fair description, at least a shorthand way of looking at it.

 

The C-max may not be EXACTLY a hybrid version of the new Escaspe,  But it certasinly is as close as you could get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...