2023 Cadillac LYRIQ Reveal, A New Standard for the 21st Century and Beyond!

33 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

And yet a lot of Tahoe/Yukon/Suburban/Escalade, Expedition/Navigator, Telluride, Palisade, Ascent, Traverse, Enclave, XT6, Acadia, GLE, GLS, X5, X7, Q7, LX570, QX80, Sequoia, Land Cruiser, Armada, Atlas, Explorer, Model X, Range Rover, Highlander, Pilot, MDX, GLB, Sienna, Odyssey, Pacifica, Carnival, get sold every year.  And Jeep sees more room for 3-rows and has  Grand Cherokee, Wagoneer and Grand Wagoneer coming.

Seems like there is demand for 3-rows, that group must make up 2-3 million units a year and with high margins.

And 90% of those 3rd rows mentioned are less than useless for anything larger than a human skull. My Flex has better 3rd row accommodations than most of those although anyone taller than 5'7" is going to find it tight back there. I should also mention that I did not buy my Flex with the 3rd row in mind. I bought it because it has a crap ton of cargo room for its size, which is why most folks by the ones you mentioned above, more often than not. Attaching 3rd rows to these smaller CUVs like the Highlander is a pure marketing gimmick. 

It should be further noted that I scratched out the mini-vans you mentioned because A.) We are talking about CUVs/SUVs and B.) Given the mini-van market overall sales decline over the last twenty years, it pretty much kills your 3rd row demand argument where those are concerned. Now I get that slashes figures dropped because of shifting demands towards CUVs but ask anyone with those SUVs and CUVs which one is better suited to 3rd row usage. It sure as hell isn't CUVs and SUVs.

44 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Wheelbase is also not a good comparison for size as the Lyriq has a longer wheelbase than an Escalade and no one would call the Lyriq bigger than an Escalade.

Because the Slade has a boxier and taller shape for larger accommodations. CUVs with sloped roofs should not have 3rd row seats at all for reasons already mentioned. That covers more than half of the CUVs you mentioned above. Again though, marketing gimmicks sell.

1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

Wheelbase is also not a good comparison for size as the Lyriq has a longer wheelbase than an Escalade and no one would call the Lyriq bigger than an Escalade.

Overall is shorter, yes, but wheelbase addresses your worry about 3rd row seating- it's plenty long enough to carry a 3rd row between the axles.
However, note that the standard wheelbase (2-row until 2021) Escalade always outsells the 3-row Escalade ESV.
That's probably the best real world demographic snapshot. 

1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

Mercedes will have a Lyriq size competitor and something bigger.

mercedes has one- the GLS.  Are they going after the Escalade ESV then (134" WB)?

Doesn’t matter how much 3rd row seats get used, consumers demand them.  
 

Consumers don’t need 400 mile EV range which with 1 charge per day equates to 146,000 miles per year but they want it and pay for it anyway.

SOME consumers demand them, yes. OTHERS don't see the need.
Cadillac XT5 handily outsells the 3-row XT6, also. Maybe more Cadillac buyers are between 1-4 in their family.

No Range Rovers have 7-seats standard, and the largest model doesn't offer it at all, I believe. It's not that high of a demand... unless you have specific figures you want to post.

Bottom line, as stated earlier; Lyric has the chassis length to accommodate 3 rows if Cadillac decides it wants to offer it.

12 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Doesn’t matter how much 3rd row seats get used, consumers demand them.  
 

Consumers don’t need 400 mile EV range which with 1 charge per day equates to 146,000 miles per year but they want it and pay for it anyway.

BS. If they did care, they would get a mini-van since they have ACTUAL usable 3rd row seats. 3rd row seating in most CUVS is pretty marketing gimmickry for folks who are too hip for a mini-van but have zero issues with a gloried FWD station wagon. Show actual proof that 3rd rows are proof of demand in CUVs and not because of marketing gimmickry. I'll give you some evidence though. Take the RX for example. The addition of 3rd row seating has led to horrible reviews of it and the addition of it was pure gimmick since the RX has NEVER hurt for sales with just 2 rows. Lexus only added it because the only other options in their stable are the GX and LX, both of which have glorified jumper seats in the back. Had they built a true CUV or SUV made for TRUE 3rd row seating (or just rebadged the Sequoia), you would never see it added to the RX. Again, 90% of those you mentioned could have no 3rd row and still sell like hotcakes.

3 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Bottom line, as stated earlier; Lyric has the chassis length to accommodate 3 rows if Cadillac decides it wants to offer it.

With that sloped roofline, they would be foolish to do so but you are correct in saying that they could do it. I guess if you need to throw a couple of heads of cabbage back there, it would work lol.

20 minutes ago, balthazar said:

However, note that the standard wheelbase (2-row until 2021) Escalade always outsells the 3-row Escalade ESV.

Not true. 3rd row has been on standard Escalades for a while. Two different generations below and both are standard wheelbase. However, that doesn't mean they were bought for their 3rd row, like you said. 

^ I would not approve a 7-pass Lyriq were I at Cadillac; 3rd rows are superfluous and a given brand does NOT have to cater to every segment & trim & seating & power tiers.
 
- - - - -
Thanks for the correction on the Escalade - saw something that stated the IRS allowed a 3rd row in the standard E for 2021 - perhaps I misinterpreted.

14 minutes ago, balthazar said:

^ I would not approve a 7-pass Lyriq were I at Cadillac; 3rd rows are superfluous and a given brand does NOT have to cater to every segment & trim & seating & power tiers.
 
- - - - -
Thanks for the correction on the Escalade - saw something that stated the IRS allowed a 3rd row in the standard E for 2021 - perhaps I misinterpreted.

LOL! Easy mistake as it was horrible back there before switching to IRS. Again, heads of cabbage back there.

It highlights my point though about size. On something like a Highlander, the 3rd row is utterly useless (part of the 90% useless crew) while on a full size SUV like the Slade, it's far more useable. Anything smaller than full size, is pure gimmickry. 

I think they are holding out on what a V series Ultium would be.

I like the design. Hope they offer a body colour paint option for their attempt at the light up grille. Not a fan of the light up grilles I would get that part body colour.

The rear end is not the best. Reminds of a Toyota hybrid or hydrogen car, not sure which one.

Mercedes EQS is a different car for different buyer. I actually like the exterior of all these electric cars, finally they have stopped making boring compliance auto's

If there was going to be a 3-row Lyriq it would be there at launch.  I would be $1000 to a donut that a 3-row electric Cadillac will come later so they can up sell consumers to a higher price point.  
 

Until the Celestiq arrives, Cadillac had no EQS competitor, nor does Tesla and we don’t know what the Celestiq is yet.

1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

 I would be $1000 to a donut that a 3-row electric Cadillac will come later so they can up sell consumers to a higher price point.  

I would bet $1000 to a donut that Mercedes, and everyone else, have been doing the EXACT same thing.

1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

Until the Celestiq arrives, Cadillac had no EQS competitor, nor does Tesla and we don’t know what the Celestiq is yet.

Huh? The EQS has a competitor from Tesla already.

And why would Cadillac want to compete in a "dying sedan market" (your exact words in the past)? That is literally contradictory to everything you have said in the past when Cadillac comes out with new gen sedan while not having enough CUVs. Pick a stance and stick with it. I will say this though. Be careful what you wish for. If Cadillac releases an EQS competitor, it is almost guaranteed to look a thousand times better than that undercover VW CC.

2 hours ago, Suaviloquent said:

Mercedes EQS is a different car for different buyer. I actually like the exterior of all these electric cars, finally they have stopped making boring compliance auto's

The EQS would have been better off looking like a compliance auto than what it is (on the outside) right now.

3 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

Huh? The EQS has a competitor from Tesla already.

 

And why would Cadillac want to compete in a "dying sedan market" (your exact words in the past)? That is literally contradictory to everything you have said in the past when Cadillac comes out with new gen sedan while not having enough CUVs. Pick a stance and stick with it. I will say this though. Be careful what you wish for. If Cadillac releases an EQS competitor, it is almost guaranteed to look a thousand times better than that undercover VW CC.

The EQS is a foot longer than a Tesla Model S, also the interiors and luxury features aren't even close.  Price isn't that close either, EQS is probably going to be $30k-40k more base and the AMG/Maybach will probably be $40-50k more than a Model S Plaid.  The EQE will be sized and priced like a Model S. 

Cadillac may not do an electric sedan, but they said they are building the Celestiq as a full size sedan.   I don't think they really have to make a sedan, they could make Cadillac all SUVs, just like Buick is all SUVs and Chevy is on their way to being all SUVs and the Corvette.  Personally, I don't like SUVs, I would never buy an SUV, but that is all manufacturers seem to be putting out and they are killing off sedans, coupes and convertibles left and right.

mercedes problem is, people are turning away from the s-class in droves; sales are down to 50% in 2019 from just 5 years earlier, and it peaked way back in 2006. The cash cow is going to have to be put out to pasture. Unfortunately, BE's only sell at a 2% take rate, which means eqs US sales would drop to probably under 500 units/yr once the 'gotta haves' get in early.
The 'used bar of soap' look from 2000 isn't going to help at all because it looks cheap but dealers will try and gouge buyers.

2 hours ago, smk4565 said:

The EQS is a foot longer than a Tesla Model S, also the interiors and luxury features aren't even close.  Price isn't that close either, EQS is probably going to be $30k-40k more base and the AMG/Maybach will probably be $40-50k more than a Model S Plaid.  The EQE will be sized and priced like a Model S. 

 

Cadillac may not do an electric sedan, but they said they are building the Celestiq as a full size sedan.   I don't think they really have to make a sedan, they could make Cadillac all SUVs, just like Buick is all SUVs and Chevy is on their way to being all SUVs and the Corvette.  Personally, I don't like SUVs, I would never buy an SUV, but that is all manufacturers seem to be putting out and they are killing off sedans, coupes and convertibles left and right.

You know what? I am honestly done going in circles with you. I will leave you with this though. You think the EQS is not competing with the Tesla? How about you read this? Mercedes literally made the EQS to compete with the S. 

https://www.motortrend.com/news/2022-mercedes-benz-eqs-vs-tesla-model-s-specs/

Regarding the EQE, they are going the CTS route as a tweener car. And I quote,

”The German automaker is building an all-electric sedan called the EQE that will fill the space between Tesla's compact Model 3 and mid-size Model S.”

And yet another quote from a different article.

”Although the EQE will be similar in size to a C-Class”

So how in the hell is a C-Class to E-Class sized EQE supposed to be competing with a larger Tesla S (Using your size logic)?

13 hours ago, balthazar said:

mercedes problem is, people are turning away from the s-class in droves; sales are down to 50% in 2019 from just 5 years earlier, and it peaked way back in 2006. The cash cow is going to have to be put out to pasture. Unfortunately, BE's only sell at a 2% take rate, which means eqs US sales would drop to probably under 500 units/yr once the 'gotta haves' get in early.
The 'used bar of soap' look from 2000 isn't going to help at all because it looks cheap but dealers will try and gouge buyers.

Daimler just posted a $5.6 billion profit for the first quarter, profit margin is highest it has been in 14 years.   Mercedes set a record in 2020 for China market sales at 640,738 units and are on pace for 696,000 this year, 2 of their 3 all time best sales months in China happened in 2021.  The S-class isn't going anywhere, it is still a big profit source, and sedans in general are dying, and Mercedes has the G-wagen and Maybach GLS for high dollar SUV sales, they aren't losing customers, they are just changing which product they buy.  

China saved Buick, China is saving Mercedes.

As volume dwindles, profits dwindle. In another 5 years, s-class will probably be selling less than 6000 units, when it used to be around 32,000. Daimler will push for the eqs to replace the s, there's no sense in having dual lines (except the profit margin on the eqs may not be there). 
But the issue facing ALL OEMs is that consumers don't really want BE cars. There's no automatic assumption s-class buyers are all going to switch over to the eqs, not at all. Probably why Daimler has been so ass-draggingly slow to get BE's out.

12 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

You know what? I am honestly done going in circles with you. I will leave you with this though. You think the EQS is not competing with the Tesla? How about you read this? Mercedes literally made the EQS to compete with the S. 

https://www.motortrend.com/news/2022-mercedes-benz-eqs-vs-tesla-model-s-specs/

 

Regarding the EQE, they are going the CTS route as a tweener car. And I quote,

”The German automaker is building an all-electric sedan called the EQE that will fill the space between Tesla's compact Model 3 and mid-size Model S.”

 

And yet another quote from a different article.

”Although the EQE will be similar in size to a C-Class”

 

So how in the hell is a C-Class to E-Class sized EQE supposed to be competing with a larger Tesla S (Using your size logic)?

 

 

 

Calling the Model S an EQS competitor is like saying the CT5 is an S-class competitor.  Sure all of them are sedans, but the EQS is a full size class bigger than the Model S, it is bigger than a Lexus LS500, bigger than a CT6, bigger than a 7-series.  

A Model S is roughly CLS size, even the AMG GT 4-door is bigger than a Model S, a Model 3 is roughly C-class size, and you can't compare any Tesla interior to a Mercedes.  Also no one knows how long the EQE is, if it is E-class size which you'd think, and priced in the $70-130k range (roughly $10k more than an e-class) then it would line up directly in size and price against the Model S.  

Also we have seen the base EQS, (rumor that a 90 kWh battery might follow later) and suspicion is that it will be over $100k.  A base 6-cylinder rear drive S-class is $109k for 2022, hard to believe EQS is cheaper than that and the $200k AMG and Maybach are coming later.  This isn't like Lucid showing the $150k Air top of the line and then working backwards to a $80k version in 2 years, and Hummer is doing the same starting with the top model.  EQS is starting with the cheapest model and going up.  

1 minute ago, balthazar said:

China saved Buick, China is saving Mercedes.

As volume dwindles, profits dwindle. In another 5 years, s-class will probably be selling less than 6000 units, when it used to be around 32,000. Daimler will push for the eqs to replace the s, there's no sense in having dual lines (except the profit margin on the eqs may not be there). 
But the issue facing ALL OEMs is that consumers don't really want BE cars. There's no automatic assumption s-class buyers are all going to switch over to the eqs, not at all. Probably why Daimler has been so ass-draggingly slow to get BE's out.

I imagine that S-class will go all electric on the next generation in 2028 and EQS will be absorbed into it.  Daimler has said they will be carbon neutral by 2039, I can't imagine them going into the 2030s with a gas burning S-class, they will want it to be EV to be the innovation leader of the brand.  They have to build dual lines now because there are too many people that won't buy an EV, but regulations force car companies to make EV's and Mercedes wants to convert to all EV by 2039, but you can't just do it overnight, you have to go slow at it to get that EV take rate up.  

And really the car companies that will be in good shape in the 2030s are the ones that can fund the dual lines now, because if you just stick with gas now, and the market goes 50% EV in 2030, you don't have any sales.  This could really hurt companies like Mazda and Nissan for example.  Just like companies that were slow to make SUVs got hurt by the changeover from sedan to SUV and had to scramble to catch up.   And large product line has always been a Mercedes/Audi/BMW strength, by offering all that choice they don't lose customers when trends shift.

The more real scenario is going all BE by 2025 or 2030 and the BE market share is only 10% then!

So your contention is that MB develops a completely separate/new eqs, then drops it and just makes the S-class a BE? Then then lose everything they put into the marketing & image-building. Makes no sense! MB should’ve had the LAST gen s-class come out as a 700-mile BE with some expression in its design for a change.

Okay, so now that a whole page has been wasted on talking about Mercedes (because apparently they pay their fans by the word) and how they are the best there ever was, maybe we can get back to the Lyriq. 

The rear may say Cadillac, but coupe SUVs are still an awful idea, practically and otherwise.

Having said that, I can't wait to see the Lyriq in person.  I like about 90% of the vehicle (not the rear quarters, but still).  Also, is there a Buick version on the horizon.

Lyriq is sized and priced similar to an XT6, similar horsepower but pulling Escalade weight, and rear drive only for now.  So question is how well will this sell?  No 3rd row either which XT6 has and the XT6 isn’t really a hot seller.

I do like that Cadillac is starting with the base model and going up later on.  Rather than pull a Tesla and say Model 3 will start at $35k, but then only sell $60k dual motor models for 2 years before ever offering the base model they promised.

10 minutes ago, riviera74 said:

Having said that, I can't wait to see the Lyriq in person.  I like about 90% of the vehicle (not the rear quarters, but still).  Also, is there a Buick version on the horizon.

I suspect there will be a smaller SUV off same platform for Cadillac, 2 off this platform for GMC, plus the Hummer, and 2 for Chevy to go with the Bolt and perhaps 3 electric SUV for Buick due to China.   I could see GM getting 8 more SUV’s out of this platform easily.  Plus they’d be fools to not do a Cadillac version of the Hummer for like $150k starting and a $200k V-series.  

Honda and Acura are each getting SUVs based on the Lyric also.

29 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

No 3rd row either which XT6 has and the XT6 isn’t really a hot seller

How much longer are you going to beat this dead horse? Why would a sloped roof, damn near coupe style, CUV even begin to entertain the option of 3rd row seats? Again, show us actual data about this 3rd row demand. All I know is that you flat out contradicted yourself there. The XT6 isn’t a hot seller with its 3rd row yet you insist that is what folks want. Baffling the double standard and constant bar moving here. Must be exhausting. 

1 minute ago, surreal1272 said:

How much longer are you going to beat this dead horse? Why would a sloped roof, damn near coupe style, CUV even begin to entertain the option of 3rd row seats? Again, show us actual data about this 3rd row demand. 

The Lyriq should not have a 3rd row with that design, but I think Cadillac will make a 3-row electric SUV within 3 years of Lyriq going on sale.  

My data for 3rd row demand comes from the 30+ 3-row SUVs I posted earlier.  And Jeep has three 3-row SUVs going on sale within the next year.  If there was no 3rd row demand, Jeep wouldn't have invested money on 3 of them, and the XT6 wouldn't exist because it is basically a 3-row XT5, same chassis, same engine, etc.  

49 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

The Lyriq should not have a 3rd row with that design, but I think Cadillac will make a 3-row electric SUV within 3 years of Lyriq going on sale.  

My data for 3rd row demand comes from the 30+ 3-row SUVs I posted earlier.  And Jeep has three 3-row SUVs going on sale within the next year.  If there was no 3rd row demand, Jeep wouldn't have invested money on 3 of them, and the XT6 wouldn't exist because it is basically a 3-row XT5, same chassis, same engine, etc.  

So again, contradicting your earlier statements. And again, posting those doesn’t make it “data” (skipping that four of those models were MINIVANS). That is not cause and effect. Show actual data within those models that show that customers bought them for their third row and keep in mind, I own a CUV with a 3rd row and did not buy it for the 3rd row. It was not optional. See where this is going yet? 
 

25 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

So again, contradicting your earlier statements. And again, posting those doesn’t make it “data” (skipping that four of those models were MINIVANS). That is not cause and effect. Show actual data within those models that show that customers bought them for their third row and keep in mind, I own a CUV with a 3rd row and did not buy it for the 3rd row. It was not optional. See where this is going yet? 
 

 

I am not contradicting any prior statement.  Balthazar said Lyriq was full size because it had a wheelbase as big as an Escalade, and my point then was the Lyriq isn't a 3-row like the Escalade or other full size SUVs.  And then I said Cadillac will eventually make a 3-row electric SUV.  Lyriq is a mid-size SUV, a big mid-sizer but still mid-size and it doesn't need a 3rd row.  I never said it did, I just said that Cadillac will eventually make a 3-row electric SUV.

And if there was no 3rd row demand, then the VW Atlas, Subaru Ascent, Jeep Grand Cherokee XL, Wagoneer, Grand Wagoneer, Telluride and Pallisade all wouldn't exists.  Subaru, VW, Jeep, Hyundai and Kia didn't really have 3 row SUVs 5-10 years ago outside of some tiny 3rd rows put into a Santa Fe or that Kia Borrego, but clearly dealers were demanding them.  GM has sold millions of Traverse/Acadia/Enclave over the past 10 years, if there was no 3-row demand they would just have sold Equinoxes and Terrains and not needed anything else. 

Most car buyers over buy, even if they will only use that 3rd row 1 time per year when in-laws visit, people will spend the $10k extra for an Enclave over an Envision or for a Pilot over a CRV and car companies know it and will take advantage of it.

1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

Balthazar said Lyriq was full size because it had a wheelbase as big as an Escalade, and my point then was the Lyriq isn't a 3-row like the Escalade or other full size SUVs.

But the Escalade ALSO comes as a 2-row; does that mean it's not full-size???

8 hours ago, balthazar said:

But the Escalade ALSO comes as a 2-row; does that mean it's not full-size???

The Escalade comes standard w/ 3 rows, in both wheelbases.  Also, an invalid assumption; as there is no correlation between number of rows and full-size.  There are many 3 row midsize CUVs/SUVs, for example. 

10 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Most car buyers over buy, even if they will only use that 3rd row 1 time per year when in-laws visit,

This proving the gimmick side of my argument. 
 

Still awaiting that solid data that will never come. 
 

And all of those SUVs and CUVs mentioned would still sell and sell well without a third row. That is my point here. See the sales history of SUVs like the Grand Cherokee and the ancient 4-Runner and sprinkle in the Edge and the Blazer while you’re at it. 
 

Oh and you contradicted yourself on an epic scale but clearly you got me confused with Balth in your defense ,which is what happens when you move the bar so much, so we are not even going to go there at this point. 

5 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

9 hours ago, balthazar said:

But the Escalade ALSO comes as a 2-row; does that mean it's not full-size???

The Slade has never been just two row. At one time the Tahoe was though. 

12 hours ago, smk4565 said:

 No 3rd row either which XT6 has and the XT6 isn’t really a hot seller.

There is your contradiction, for the record. The “demand” aspect for 3rd row. 

@smk4565

Here’s some data for you. This is a list of the top 25 selling autos of 2020. I can count the number of 3 row SUV/CUVs on one hand with fingers to spare. Tell us more about that “demand” though.

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/g32006077/best-selling-cars-2020/

On 4/23/2021 at 11:09 PM, David said:

Ya might not like it, but in the day of no rear visibility out the corners due to roll over standard now, having those lights there make it very visible from the rear and the side. Good safety point and it is both yours and my personal preference.

Take this over the joke of a BEV EQS.

I have little interest in the EQS. I'm disappointed it isn't closer to a "conventional" sedan as its aesthetics don't do anything for me. 

On 4/24/2021 at 11:33 AM, balthazar said:

No Range Rovers have 7-seats standard, and the largest model doesn't offer it at all, I believe. It's not that high of a demand... unless you have specific figures you want to post.

The big Rover doesn't offer a 3rd row but, funny enough, the Sport has an optional 3rd row. I cannot imagine how cramped it would be back there but it is available. 

FWIW, the Discovery and Defender also offer a 3rd row. 

@balthazar, now you have be running down the Range Rover Sport rabbit hole(because I'd love one some day). I'm pricing one out, just for shts, and I know you have a huge issue with pricing on paints. Check this out. 

There's only one color that's "free", Fuji White. 

Five colors that are $710.00

One for $1550.00

Thirteen colors that are $4550.00

Most of those thirteen colors have a satin option that changes the $4550 to $7450.

One "Special" color, "Icy White", that costs $9200 that can also be made satin totaling $12,050.

How absurd are those prices?!?! 

I came across these because I was like, "Dang, British Racing Green?! YES, Please! Oh...$4550.00..."

^ Is that a $54K Discovery with those black plastic hood vent eyesores?

Guess I never realized the 3rd rows are usually/always behind the rear axle. In the Lyriq, not sure if there'd be room then, despite it having 7" more wheelbase than the Discovery.

Serious question : how do (tiny) people get into the 3rd row of these- climb over a folded 2nd row setback? I've never seen inside of a 3rd row SUV/CUV.

8 minutes ago, balthazar said:

^ Is that a $54K Discovery with those black plastic hood vent eyesores?

Guess I never realized the 3rd rows are usually/always behind the rear axle. In the Lyriq, not sure if there'd be room then, despite it having 7" more wheelbase than the Discovery.

Serious question : how do (tiny) people get into the 3rd row of these- climb over a folded 2nd row setback? I've never seen inside of a 3rd row SUV/CUV.

The Suburban and its siblings (and maybe the equivalent Fords?) may be the only SUVs w/ the 3rd row ahead of (on?) the rear axle.    I've ridden in the back of a few 3 row SUVs, often the 2nd row has bucket seats, so you can squeeze between them, or fold and slide forward the outer 2nd row seat to get in the back.   IIRC, I've ridden in the 3rd row of a ~2015 Suburban, a ~15 Escalade ESV, and about 15 years ago, a '05 Envoy XL.  

  The 3rd row of midsize CUVs/SUVs (Explorer, Highlander, Durango, RX, etc) really are intended for children, though. 

11 minutes ago, balthazar said:

^ Is that a $54K Discovery with those black plastic hood vent eyesores?

Guess I never realized the 3rd rows are usually/always behind the rear axle. In the Lyriq, not sure if there'd be room then, despite it having 7" more wheelbase than the Discovery.

Serious question : how do (tiny) people get into the 3rd row of these- climb over a folded 2nd row setback? I've never seen inside of a 3rd row SUV/CUV.

There's a simple answer for that. They don't because, like I said the other day, those type of set ups are for nothing more than heads of cabbage because no human would willingly sit back there, but hey "demand" lol.

I have the "boxiest" CUV out there and while it has far more headroom than these sloped roof models out there, the legroom is still tight. I am 5'10" and I would not want to spend more than three minutes back there. Kids would probably be fine but again, that would only be if I had more than three kids, since there is a much more spacious second row back there.

23 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

The big Rover doesn't offer a 3rd row but, funny enough, the Sport has an optional 3rd row. I cannot imagine how cramped it would be back there but it is available. 

FWIW, the Discovery and Defender also offer a 3rd row. 

 

@balthazar, now you have be running down the Range Rover Sport rabbit hole(because I'd love one some day). I'm pricing one out, just for shts, and I know you have a huge issue with pricing on paints. Check this out. 

There's only one color that's "free", Fuji White. 

Five colors that are $710.00

One for $1550.00

Thirteen colors that are $4550.00

Most of those thirteen colors have a satin option that changes the $4550 to $7450.

One "Special" color, "Icy White", that costs $9200 that can also be made satin totaling $12,050.

How absurd are those prices?!?! 

I came across these because I was like, "Dang, British Racing Green?! YES, Please! Oh...$4550.00..."

I like the RR Sport, though I like the Velar even more.  I've thought one would be a nice lease, wouldn't want one older and out of lease as RR reliability is worse than Jeep.

Below is a pic of my knees and the back of the second row. There is an inch to spare if I sit completely upright and there is about an inch of head room left before I start scraping the headliner. Now imagine that scenario in any sloping roof CUV that is smaller than mine (a new Highlander is 4" shorter than mine with the 3 row option and a 2015 Tahoe is only 3" longer than mine with that high sitting axle underneath).

Still gotta wonder- why no 3-row cars or 3-row pickups? ?

7 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Still gotta wonder- why no 3-row cars or 3-row pickups? ?

In the olden days, there were 3 row cars--they were the full size station wagons, often w/ rear facing 3rd rows.  The 3 row CUV/SUV is simply the modern equivalent (along w/ 3 row minivans). 

  A 3-row pickup would be too long to be practical (or have a really short bed).   Centurion built some 3 row (6 door) Ford F350s back in the 90s, seen a couple of them. 

18 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Still gotta wonder- why no 3-row cars or 3-row pickups? ?

I can't speak for pick ups but we did at least have three row station wagons back in the day. Equally useless jumper or short bench seats back there, but they had them lol.

Of course, if we had 3 row pick ups, then there would only be room for a four foot bed back there and we all know that we can't have that lol.

I believe the 2nd row folds down and then up also, or at least it slides forward, @balthazar

Modern crew cab trucks could almost fit a 3rd row in the same space the 2nd row is, they're massive back there. 

3 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

I believe the 2nd row folds down and then up also, or at least it slides forward, @balthazar

Modern crew cab trucks could almost fit a 3rd row in the same space the 2nd row is, they're massive back there. 

The key party of that is the word "almost" as in "almost three feet short of supporting a 3rd row" lol. As roomy as some full size trucks are back there, there is not a chance in hell of squeezing a 3rd row in that same space, not even close.

1 hour ago, Robert Hall said:

I like the RR Sport, though I like the Velar even more.  I've thought one would be a nice lease, wouldn't want one older and out of lease as RR reliability is worse than Jeep.

I love the size of the Sport. I've walked around a Velar in our work parking garage and they're like weirdly low. I don't know a good way to describe them but, I believe, I could look over the rearmost roofline onto the roof and I'm only 5'8". It just has that much of a rake and then the bottom "pinches" upward for ground clearance. It was just a little awkward on an otherwise very attractive vehicle. 

This is about the best I can quickly find for a comparison. 

7 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

I love the size of the Sport. I've walked around a Velar in our work parking garage and they're like weirdly low. I don't know a good way to describe them but, I believe, I could look over the rearmost roofline onto the roof and I'm only 5'8". It just has that much of a rake and then the bottom "pinches" upward for ground clearance. It was just a little awkward on an otherwise very attractive vehicle. 

This is about the best I can quickly find for a comparison. 

I like the dimensions of the Sport, virtually the same as my WK2 Grand Cherokee...the front end shape reminds me of the Jeep also, with the sloped back headlights and grille.

I think the Velar is RRs answer to the lower, sportier coupe style SUV...not as low or fastback-ish as the X6 or Merc GLE, but similar in the lower height.

4 hours ago, Robert Hall said:

there is no correlation between number of rows and full-size.

Precisely my point.

See surreal's earlier posts; prior generation Escalade had optional 3rd rows; same size SUV.

23 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Precisely my point.

See surreal's earlier posts; prior generation Escalade had optional 3rd rows; same size SUV.

It should be noted that the Slade has always had 3rd row but the Tahoe did not during its 1st gen run. That is what I referring to. Either way, it does mean that was the reason for those being purchased.