The death of the sedan?

KEW

KEW

Audioholic Warlord
Ratings
5,099 22 9
#1
I recently have read about GM closing plants. They are primarily getting rid of several sedans that are not as profitable as their trucks and SUV's.
Then, today, I was reading that Ford is getting rid of everything on the sedan side of a the crossover!

Is this just that Ford and GM are known as better at trucks, or is it a global (or national?) trend towards SUV/Trucks?
 
Steve81

Steve81

Audioholics Five-0
Ratings
3,001 18 1
#3
Is this just that Ford and GM are known as better at trucks, or is it a global (or national?) trend towards SUV/Trucks?
Not sure if its a global trend, but SUVs and trucks are certainly popular here in the States:
https://www.businessinsider.com/bes...rica-in-2018-2018-8#3-ram-pickup-233539-67-18

The first sedan on the list (the Camry) ranks in at #7, behind the Honda CR-V, Toyota RAV-4, Nissan Rogue, Ram Pickup, Chevy Silverado, and Ford F-Series. Rewind the clock 10 years, and the Camry was in the #3 spot, Accord #4, Corolla #5, etc.
 
BoredSysAdmin

BoredSysAdmin

Audioholic Overlord
Ratings
5,823 22 38
#4
As 2018 accord owner, I must say that sedans demise is largely exaggerated. Before I never knew how much fun and yet practical large sedan could be.
 
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Spartan
Ratings
4,952 11 6
#6
Is this just that Ford and GM are known as better at trucks, or is it a global (or national?) trend towards SUV/Trucks?
Ford, GM, and probably Fiat/Chrysler would all rather sell only SUV/Trucks. Their profit margin is much higher than for sedans. Among people in the US who would rather buy sedans, few would consider buying Ford, GM or F/C sedans anyway. That is probably the main reason why Ford and GM have abandoned making sedans.

This says nothing about global trends or what might be better for the world in terms of fuel consumption and air pollution.
 
KEW

KEW

Audioholic Warlord
Ratings
5,099 22 9
#7
From my perspective, the main advantage of a SUV is the higher vantage point to read traffic from (which is a big advantage).
The advantage (for me) or a sedan (or coupe) is better handling and better gas mileage (better aerodynamics).

Interestingly, the gas mileage advantage of a sedan seems to be dropping. Witness the Chevy Equinox (SUV) at 26 city/32 Hwy. (compared to the Chevy Cruze at 28 City/38 Hwy); I'm not sure how they are doing it, but that is not near so large a difference as was 10 years ago.

Also the cost benefit of MPG is not linear. In other words, going from 10 to 20MPG saves much more than going from 20 to 30MPG.

For example, given:
15,000 miles driven per year

MPG = 10 yields 1500 gallons of gas required
MPG = 20 yields 750 gallons of gas required (750 gallons savings as compared to 10 MPG)
MPG - 30 yields 500 gallons of gas required (250 gallons savings as compared to 20 MPG)
MPG = 40 yields 375 gallons of gas required (125 gallons savings as compared to 30 MPG)

So maybe the economic advantage of a sedan is being lessened?

An aside: With all-electric SUV/crossovers like the Hyundai Kona having a 300 mile range priced less than the Tesla 3, I can see the model 3 dying. I hope Tesla has a SUV on its way!
 
CB22

CB22

Full Audioholic
Ratings
256 1 1
#8
trend towards SUV/Trucks?
At least here in Louisiana it sure does seem like more than 60% / 70% of the vehicles are trucks/ SUVs. May it has to do something with the south. I own a 04 Avalanche. Terrible gas mileage but it can pull a 18ft trailer with ease. However, I have have already eyed out my new car a 2017 Passat for 15k with 40k miles. Sporty, cheap, and great gas mileage. Won’t do well for my fishing trips though lol
 
Steve81

Steve81

Audioholics Five-0
Ratings
3,001 18 1
#9
Interestingly, the gas mileage advantage of a sedan seems to be dropping.
Indeed. My old Mazda 3 in fact had worse rated (and delivered) mpg than my current CR-V. That was the more efficient 2.0 liter crapbox edition of the Mazda 3 at that! The CR-V is also substantially roomier (passenger & cargo volume) while having roughly the same footprint, which is also nice.
 
Irvrobinson

Irvrobinson

Audioholic Spartan
Ratings
2,805 8 10
#10
I don't get this trend towards gas guzzler trucks & SUV's, isn't the planet running out of oil? :rolleyes:
No. So-called "Peak Oil", as hypothesized by M. K. Hubbert, was an invalid theory that did not account for advancing technologies in drilling (like fracking, horizontal drilling) and supercomputing for more efficient discovery. That's *not* to say that fuel inefficient vehicles are a good idea, they're not good for the environment, but running out of oil is not a compelling argument against them.
 
BoredSysAdmin

BoredSysAdmin

Audioholic Overlord
Ratings
5,823 22 38
#11
Indeed. My old Mazda 3 in fact had worse rated (and delivered) mpg than my current CR-V. That was the more efficient 2.0 liter crapbox edition of the Mazda 3 at that! The CR-V is also substantially roomier (passenger & cargo volume) while having roughly the same footprint, which is also nice.
Sorry, are you saying that newer engines (Honda in particularly) are more efficient than older ones?
Failing to see how's that applies to sedans (typically lighter than crossovers and SUVs) having so-called "worse" fuel efficiency.
A prime example is my ancient Corolla '99 1.8L 4 cylinder engine and my 2018 Accord 2.0L 4 banger engine could not possibly any further apart despite apparent similarities in cylinder count and total engine volume. Old corolla box delivered 112hp and new accord is about 260hp.
Old Corolla (despite being much lighter) did 0-60 in a couple of hours, while accord much heavier does in 5.5seconds.
Oh and Did I mentioned that these engines share a similar fuel efficiency?
Corolla: MPG: 23 city / 30 highway
Accord: MPG: 22 city / 32 highway
 
Steve81

Steve81

Audioholics Five-0
Ratings
3,001 18 1
#12
Sorry, are you saying that newer engines (Honda in particularly) are more efficient than older ones?
Failing to see how's that applies to sedans (typically lighter than crossovers and SUVs) having so-called "worse" fuel efficiency.
I'm not saying that sedans have worse fuel efficiency, just that todays crossovers seem to show a great deal of progress in terms of efficiency vs the SUVs of yore. That my CR-V can exceed the mileage of an econobox less than 10 years it junior, (in spite of being heavier, faster, less aerodynamic, etc) isn't a small achievement in my book.
 
gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator
Ratings
4,636 24 9
#13
F*ck-em all, I bought a BMW M240i coupe that has about 400HP (with Burger tune) and averages 28mpg. I love having a car that I rarely see on the road :)

m240i.jpg
 
P

pewternhrata

Senior Audioholic
Ratings
175 2
#14
From my perspective, the main advantage of a SUV is the higher vantage point to read traffic from (which is a big advantage).
The advantage (for me) or a sedan (or coupe) is better handling and better gas mileage (better aerodynamics).

Interestingly, the gas mileage advantage of a sedan seems to be dropping. Witness the Chevy Equinox (SUV) at 26 city/32 Hwy. (compared to the Chevy Cruze at 28 City/38 Hwy); I'm not sure how they are doing it, but that is not near so large a difference as was 10 years ago.

Also the cost benefit of MPG is not linear. In other words, going from 10 to 20MPG saves much more than going from 20 to 30MPG.

For example, given:
15,000 miles driven per year

MPG = 10 yields 1500 gallons of gas required
MPG = 20 yields 750 gallons of gas required (750 gallons savings as compared to 10 MPG)
MPG - 30 yields 500 gallons of gas required (250 gallons savings as compared to 20 MPG)
MPG = 40 yields 375 gallons of gas required (125 gallons savings as compared to 30 MPG)

So maybe the economic advantage of a sedan is being lessened?

An aside: With all-electric SUV/crossovers like the Hyundai Kona having a 300 mile range priced less than the Tesla 3, I can see the model 3 dying. I hope Tesla has a SUV on its way!
For me, it's also the added space, cargo and legroom. Bring up higher is definitely a huge win as well.Now with a 2yr old it's a whole lot easier to get him in and out and more room for shopping trips, vacations. I net around 25mpg city, upwards of 40mpg highway, 12' 2.4l terrain.
 
BoredSysAdmin

BoredSysAdmin

Audioholic Overlord
Ratings
5,823 22 38
#15
I'm not saying that sedans have worse fuel efficiency, just that todays crossovers seem to show a great deal of progress in terms of efficiency vs the SUVs of yore. That my CR-V can exceed the mileage of an econobox less than 10 years it junior, (in spite of being heavier, faster, less aerodynamic, etc) isn't a small achievement in my book.
So in other words, some newer engines are more efficient, significantly so.
Accord also comes as 1.5t block which has very impressive fuel mileage, despite bigger and heavier than my almost 20 years old banger
 
Steve81

Steve81

Audioholics Five-0
Ratings
3,001 18 1
#16
So in other words, some newer engines are more efficient, significantly so.
Accord also comes as 1.5t block which has very impressive fuel mileage, despite bigger and heavier than my almost 20 years old banger
Improved power trains are definitely a part of it, but I'm also considering things like significantly improved aerodynamics (that much more of a consideration for a taller vehicle),and the market shift from truck-based SUVs to car-based crossovers.
 
KenM10759

KenM10759

Audioholic Samurai
Ratings
867 8 1
#17
I recently turned in my company leased car, a 2017 Chevy Malibu. It averaged over 38mpg out of the turbocharged 1.5L 4-cyl motor. The normally aspirated 2.5L 4-cyl motor of the previous 2015 Ford Fusion SE got 33mpg.

I for one do not want the higher C.O.G. of an SUV. I much prefer being able to throw a car into a curve without that tippy feeling. The BMW's I've owned in the past were best at that, though I won't own one that isn't fully covered by warranty now.

Current cars are my previous lease car, a 2013 Ford Fusion SE and a 2014 Ford Focus. Both are good, paid for, and fair with gas.
 
TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Audioholic Slumlord
Ratings
7,535 17 25
#18
I recently have read about GM closing plants. They are primarily getting rid of several sedans that are not as profitable as their trucks and SUV's.
Then, today, I was reading that Ford is getting rid of everything on the sedan side of a the crossover!

Is this just that Ford and GM are known as better at trucks, or is it a global (or national?) trend towards SUV/Trucks?
I think the trend is weather related more than anything else. I think weather is getting worse, certainly up here, with more dangerous conditions leading to icing and not just snow. We now have freezing fogs. It is getting to the point were a two wheel drive vehicle is becoming pretty much useless.

One of our vehicles is an AWD SUV the other a Toyota Camry. For a lot of the year the Camry is pretty much useless now.

Next change and both vehicles will be AWD, I'm done with two wheel drive like most people here. Not only is there a traction advantage but there is a huge visibility advantage.

Sedans are declining rapidly here and elsewhere were more areas of the US are getting more unusual winter weather events.

I just got back from a quick trip to the UK and the vast majority of vehicles are sedans. But many winters go by with zero winter weather driving issues.
 
KenM10759

KenM10759

Audioholic Samurai
Ratings
867 8 1
#19
My first BMW was an '88 535i with limited slip differential. When I put 4 Nokian Hakkapillitta 2's on, there was no stopping that car from moving through any snow or slippery condition! And I long lost count of how many "all wheel drive" vehicles I went around, all stuck trying to go up the steep hill near my home. Even my '04 Pontiac GTO (also rear wheel drive with LSD) was great even though I'd bought the BMW as a winter beater to keep the GTO parked.

All wheel drive comes in different forms, and the most common ones are no better than front wheel drive. Especially true when no one bothers to switch to true snow tires on all 4 corners.
 
BoredSysAdmin

BoredSysAdmin

Audioholic Overlord
Ratings
5,823 22 38
#20
Improved power trains are definitely a part of it, but I'm also considering things like significantly improved aerodynamics (that much more of a consideration for a taller vehicle),and the market shift from truck-based SUVs to car-based crossovers.
Sorry, but numbers don't stack up here per your theory. Drag Coefficient of 2007 Mazda 3 is 0.31 while 2017 CR-V is 0.33 which is actually (and predictably) worse. Improved efficiency comes from improvements of the engine, ECU, transmission, weight reduction, and much later from improved aerodynamics
Sources:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile_drag_coefficient
https://www.automobile-catalog.com/car/2017/2511665/honda_cr-v_ex-l_awd.html
 

Latest posts


newsletter
  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis