Buick Enclave info

[titan]

I'm not saying that Buick shouldn't have a van because it's ugly. If the Lambdas wind up being the class leaders in minivans, Buick shouldn't have one. It doesn't fit the image of what they're trying to be. Plus, every division doesn't need a minivan for the sake of having one. Buick wants to be lux maker. So leave the minivan to the other divisions. Chevy for everyone; Pontiac, a sporty one (one is all that's need in the BPG grouop). The Relay can be the premium version. I think three differently branded minivans is plenty.

[VenSeattle]

  Plus, every division doesn't need a minivan for the sake of having one.  Buick wants to be lux maker.  So leave the minivan to the other divisions.  Chevy for everyone;  Pontiac, a sporty one (one is all that's need in the BPG grouop).  The Relay can be the premium version.  I think three differently branded minivans is plenty.

[post="59848"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

But Titan... Pontiac's minivan is dead. The Montana SV6 will not be replaced on Lambda. As others have stated, Saturn's version is also in serious jeopardy or DOA.

GMC or Buick should get one. I vote Buick.

That leaves only two minivans for all of GM: a mainstream minivan for Chevrolet & a luxury minivan for GMC or (preferably) Buick.

[4gm]

Giving Chevy and Buick a minivan makes a lot more sense to me than giving one to both Chevy and Saturn. Chevy could cover the lower end of the market and Buick could cover the higher end. Chevy and Saturn minivans would have too much market overlap. Buick would need to make their minivan look upscale both inside and out. A badge job wouldn't suffice. The new minivan from Mercedes shows how the minivan can be reinvented for the upscale crowd.

[Croc]

The new minivan from Mercedes shows how the minivan can be reinvented for the upscale crowd.

[post="60041"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

The R-Class isn't a minivan. It is a crossover like the Pacifica. I believe it is on the same platform as the M-Class and upcoming GL-Class, but is tuned more for boulevard cruising (read: softer) than for sporty ride and handling like M-Class and GL-Class.

[Paolino]

The R-Class isn't a minivan.  It is a crossover like the Pacifica.  I believe it is on the same platform as the M-Class and upcoming GL-Class, but is tuned more for boulevard cruising (read: softer) than for sporty ride and handling like M-Class and GL-Class.

[post="60042"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

It has what seems to be the #1 characteristic of a minivan: it's ugly. :lol:

[Croc]

Well for that matter, I guess the Malibu is a minivan!

[4gm]

The R-Class isn't a minivan.  It is a crossover like the Pacifica. 

[post="60042"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

It looks minivan-ish to me. My point is that a minivan doesn't have to look as boring as they all are. There's a market for something upscale and different.

[The O.C.]

Now that I think about the 3 models, Acadia, Outlook and Enclave, the Acadia should be quickly rebadged as a Chevy.  It seems really really stupid to have two SUVs in the same dealership that are very similiar and the Acadia and Enclave will end up being side by side.

[post="57840"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

That's a REALLY good point.....

If GM's strategy is to merge all Buick, Pontiac, AND GMC dealers together....it makes NO sense to have both an Acadia AND an Enclave in the same showroom.

[The O.C.]

I agree the idea of a Buick minivan is terrible, and doesn't fit thier image at all. Enclave will bring in five hundred thousand more prospective buyers than Terraza or Rendevous anyways.

I agree with Northie, Saturn is the brand with the best chance of stealing consumers from Honda and toyota, so they should have a minivan. I just don't see the necessity for GMC and Buick or Pontiac to have a minivan, when (1) it doesn't reflect thier core images and  (2) two crossover/minivan vehicles are enough for that lineup. Saturn and Chevy should be the only divisions to have it.

[post="59327"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Yeah....if Buick is supposed to be GM's version of Lexus, then there is absolutely no place for a minivan in its lineup.....

And Velite better get here sooner instead of later....

[bobo]

I see Buick being more the equivalent of Chrysler than Lexus, and Chrysler of course does quite well with the Town and Country. GM needs two minivans, one for everyman (Chevy), and one upscale (Buick).

[Croc]

Enclave isn't a minivan, though. It is a crossover. There is a place for it in the Buick lineup just like Lexus has its RX330.

[Mule Bakersdozen LS]

Personally, I think the Buick minivan is a terrible idea.

[post="58941"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Really? I don't-do you have any idea how popular the Chrysler Town & Country has gotten? I really think a GMC car-based minivan is a notoriously bad idea. I've never ever understood the point of the Relay (though I like it stylistically better than the others, but that really says nothing since I hate them all), and if Saturn were to continue with a Relay, then it should be a North American version of the Zafira, complete with the Flex7 seating system. What I'd support for the Lambda minivans are a standard 3.6-liter DOHC High Feature 255hp V-6 engine with 6-speed OD electronic automatic transmission (all models-minivan buyers don't need a V-8 and they probably don't want one either-I'd say keep the Saturn Outlook V-6 only too), and offer Chevrolet Kingswood and Kingswood EXT 8-passenger vans, Buick Rialto 5-door 7-8-passenger luxury extended-length minivan (see old drawing of Ted's for styling), and finally, a sporty-performance Pontiac Montana 7-passenger 5-door regular-length minivan. Don't add a regular for Rialto; do not add an extended for Montana, and do not add any others beyond these three. The Montana GT/Thunder would have a RAM AIR 270hp 3.6 V-6 with TAPShift II. Those Outlook and Acadia spy shots looked very similar-how true would this be? And for Enclave trim levels, I'd recommend Reserve and Super, starting at $27,000 for an Enclave Reserve V-6 FWD, to about $36,000 for an Enclave Super AWD with the $800, package-less 4.4-liter DOHC 300hp V-8 (optional Super; V-6 standard both).

[Mule Bakersdozen LS]

BTW, Enclave=Pacifica=Magellan (aka Mercury Freestyle).

[titan]

But Titan... Pontiac's minivan is dead. The Montana SV6 will not be replaced on Lambda. As others have stated, Saturn's version is also in serious jeopardy or DOA.

GMC or Buick should get one. I vote Buick.

That leaves only two minivans for all of GM: a mainstream minivan for Chevrolet & a luxury minivan for GMC or (preferably) Buick.

[post="59915"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Well, we both agree about GM only needing two minivans, but I thnk the other one should go to Saturn. GMC doesn't need one (for sure) and Buick doesn't need one (if they want to be a lux brand). I just think since Saturn will be premium, it should go to that division.

[titan]

I see Buick being more the equivalent of Chrysler than Lexus, and Chrysler of course does quite well with the Town and Country.  GM needs two minivans, one for everyman (Chevy), and one upscale (Buick).

[post="60093"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

It all boils down to the fact that GM still doesn't have a clear brand direction for Buick. Obviously we on these forums are confused. Many here see Buick as more a Chrysler rival than a Lexus, and vice versa. We need clearer indications from GM. I think, if it'll be Lexus, then they don't need a minivan. It seems to me GM stated they wanted to chase Lexus, while Saturn would be elevated to competing with premium makes like Chrysler/VW/Honda/etc. So, which is it? GM should give the van to Saturn. Buick should be a value to alternative to Lexus (as GM has publicly stated), and have a full lineup that closely mirrors their's (with three sedans, two crossovers,and the Velite, at the very least). That's what I'd like to see for Buick.

[titan]

Really? I don't-do you have any idea how popular the Chrysler Town & Country has gotten? I really think a GMC car-based minivan is a notoriously bad idea. I've never ever understood the point of the Relay (though I like it stylistically better than the others, but that really says nothing since I hate them all), and if Saturn were to continue with a Relay, then it should be a North American version of the Zafira, complete with the Flex7 seating system. What I'd support for the Lambda minivans are a standard 3.6-liter DOHC High Feature 255hp V-6 engine with 6-speed OD electronic automatic transmission (all models-minivan buyers don't need a V-8 and they probably don't want one either-I'd say keep the Saturn Outlook V-6 only too), and offer Chevrolet Kingswood and Kingswood EXT 8-passenger vans, Buick Rialto 5-door 7-8-passenger luxury extended-length minivan (see old drawing of Ted's for styling), and finally, a sporty-performance Pontiac Montana 7-passenger 5-door regular-length minivan. Don't add a regular for Rialto; do not add an extended for Montana, and do not add any others beyond these three. The Montana GT/Thunder would have a RAM AIR 270hp 3.6 V-6 with TAPShift II. Those Outlook and Acadia spy shots looked very similar-how true would this be? And for Enclave trim levels, I'd recommend Reserve and Super, starting at $27,000 for an Enclave Reserve V-6 FWD, to about $36,000 for an Enclave Super AWD with the $800, package-less 4.4-liter DOHC 300hp V-8 (optional Super; V-6 standard both).

[post="60113"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Right, that all sounds good, but it doesn't change my arguement. You make a provision for a Pontiac sporty minivan. That's fine. There definitely should not be two minivans in BPG. As far as the Buick minivan, put a Saturn badge on it and there you go. Just because the Relay hasn't done well in the past doesn't mean all potential is lost for the future. Satrun will be getting alot of traffice with the Aura, Sky, next gen Vue (Opel Antera) and Ion (great looking sketches shown); a premium minivan would fit perfectly in it's lineup. I doesn't fit into Buicks at all if they want to be a real lux maker. Your pricing and trim leves for the Enclave look find to me, but Buick has Reserve and Super trim levels for the Enclave, they should be for the whole lineup. I like it alot better than CX,CXL,CXS. Edited December 17, 2005 by titan

[titan]

BTW, Enclave=Pacifica=Magellan (aka Mercury Freestyle).

[post="60114"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Oh really? BTW, Enclave =RX,MDX,SRX
Acadia =Pacifica,Magellan

Right now, it's all a matter of opinion. I'm basing mine off of GM's statement that it wants Buick to compete with Lexus. Edited December 17, 2005 by titan

[Croc]

It all boils down to the fact that GM still doesn't have a clear brand direction for Buick.  Obviously we on these forums are confused.  Many here see Buick as more a Chrysler rival than a Lexus, and vice versa.  We need clearer indications from GM.  I think, if it'll be Lexus, then they don't need a minivan. It seems to me GM stated they wanted to chase Lexus, while Saturn would be elevated to competing with premium makes like Chrysler/VW/Honda/etc.  So, which is it?  GM should give the van to Saturn.  Buick should be a value to alternative to Lexus (as GM has publicly stated), and have a full lineup that closely mirrors their's (with three sedans, two crossovers,and the Velite, at the very least). That's what I'd like to see for Buick.

[post="60120"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

OK wait I am very confused here. Are you talking about a minivan in ADDITION to Enclave? Because Enclave is NOT a minivan. It is a Centieme-like crossover, which CLEARLY means it isn't a minivan. Edited December 17, 2005 by Croc

[Croc]

Oh really?  BTW, Enclave =RX,MDX,SRX
    Acadia =Pacifica,Magellan 

Right now, it's all a matter of opinion.  I'm basing mine off of GM's statement that it wants Buick to compete with Lexus.

[post="60125"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

His post was referring more to type of vehicle than direct competitors. I still think the Buick would compete with the Mercury though.

[Croc]

BTW--Is Magellan the final name for the Mercury? Cuz I think it's a terrible name! Makes me think of the big, wallowy and clumsy dragon from Eureka's Castle. Edited December 17, 2005 by Croc

[titan]

OK wait I am very confused here.  Are you talking about a minivan in ADDITION to Enclave?  Because Enclave is NOT a minivan.  It is a Centieme-like crossover, which CLEARLY means it isn't a minivan.

[post="60126"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Croc, read Mule Bakersdozen LS's statement that I was responding too. He made reference to both a lux Buick minivan and then the Enclave's pricing, etc. I was making the same point you are making. My argument was that the Buick minivan he described would do better as a Saturn, and then I agreed with this Enclave statement. Edited December 17, 2005 by titan

[titan]

His post was referring more to type of vehicle than direct competitors.  I still think the Buick would compete with the Mercury though.

[post="60127"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Oh, I gotcha.

[Croc]

OK so do we know when Enclave pics are to be released to the media? Midnight on which day? Edited December 17, 2005 by Croc

[thegriffon]

Since someone has already mentioned it I will gaine invoke the R-Class, which is in design and dimension a fullsize MPV, not a crossover. After three months on the market it's already as popular as the S-Class and CLK-Class, Mercedes 4th, best-selling model in November. Why shouldn't there be a luxury minivan? Everything that makes a minivan popular (room, versatility, seat height etc.) fits the requirements of the luxury segment perfectly. I thought of the idea 15 years ago for Cadillac and it still works today. For BMW, okay a minivan is not the ultimate drivers' car, but for Lexus, Mercedes (well they've done it already) Cadillac and even Audi a luxury MPV may be an even better idea than a humungous SUV like the Q7 (just as big but without the room). As for Saturn there is always the rumored Epsilon-based Opel MPV said to be similar to the (swb) R-Class.

[Croc]

Sorry, Griff, but the R-Class is a tall wagon/crossover like the Pacifica, not a minivan. If you consider the Pacifica to be a minivan, then I guess we are just using different terminologies, but the shape of the R-Class isn't that of a minivan. Even the most avant-garde minivan, the Quest, looks like a minivan in shape, while the R-Class doesn't; it looks more like a tall wagon.

Compare:







I really think the R-Class has more in common with the tall wagon "Sports Tourer" crossover like the Pacifica than with the minivans. Also, from the pictures it looks like the minivans are taller as they seem to have massively high beltlines as well as large greenhouses. The Pacifica and R-Class have high beltlines but relatively smaller greenhouses.

Edited December 17, 2005 by Croc

[thegriffon]

I'm thinking in terms of MPV's like the Toyota Wish, Honda Odyssey (Japanese/international market), Honda Stream etc.. Note that the US MPVS listed are all two-box like the R-Class. While lower and with a more European style with conventional doors, it is also lower than the Pacifica, which is more a large crossover like the Freestyle and Audi Q7. Compare also the position of the front wheel in relation to the doors on the R-class with conventional wagons like the Pacifica and MPVs like the ones pictured—the R-Class matches the latter with it's cab-forward design to maximise space. Height, wheelbase to overall-length ratios, and seating arrangments all put the R-Class in the MPV segment. More MPVs similar in size to the swb model match the R-class better than the taller American-style models you have there.

[thegriffon]

We know the Enclave is not a minivan, this is one of those digressions that tends to happen in long threads, a result of a debate over the merits of a luxury minivan now that Buick will have the Enclave.

[titan]

Sorry, Griff, but the R-Class is a tall wagon/crossover like the Pacifica, not a minivan.  If you consider the Pacifica to be a minivan, then I guess we are just using different terminologies, but the shape of the R-Class isn't that of a minivan.  Even the most avant-garde minivan, the Quest, looks like a minivan in shape, while the R-Class doesn't; it looks more like a tall wagon.

Compare:







I really think the R-Class has more in common with the tall wagon "Sports Tourer" crossover like the Pacifica than with the minivans.  Also, from the pictures it looks like the minivans are taller as they seem to have massively high beltlines as well as large greenhouses.  The Pacifica and R-Class have high beltlines but relatively smaller greenhouses.

[post="60138"][/post]

Agreed. The R-Class is really a tall wagon "Sports Tourer." If Buick had a vehicle similar in size and spec to the R-Class to be postioned above the Enclave, I wouldn't have a problem with that. Buick would essentially have a three SUV lineup if it had that, with the Enclave and the small one coming up. Plus, it's a very different vehicle from the Escalade, so Buick would have something just for them. It could share the platform with it's phantom RWD flagship. Again, just my wish list.

[Croc]

the R-Class matches the latter with it's cab-forward design to maximise space. Height, wheelbase to overall-length ratios, and seating arrangments all put the R-Class in the MPV segment. More MPVs similar in size to the swb model match the R-class better than the taller American-style models you have there.

[post="60164"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

But the minivans all end their A-pillars over the front wheel well. Pacifica and R-Class end the A-pillar before the wheel well, and the front doors seem to be in the same place, though the R-Class' wheel well flares might be throwing you off slightly?

I just don't see the cab forward like I do in the minivans. R-Class also seats 6, not 7 like most minivans.

But you're right, this is a digression and not really important.

[Paolino]

Honestly, I feel there is a fine line between the difference of a station wagon and one of these crossovers. I see the difference, but since they are relatively similar, it is why I tend to not like crossovers much. I HATE minivans, and like SUVs. The less like an SUV the crossover looks, the less I tend to like it.

[Croc]

I, too, prefer SUVs, but the only thing I have against wagons is the low ground clearance. So I have no problem with tall wagons. Minivan is just a dirty word that shall not be spoken.

[pow]

And speaking of premium minivans, Odyssey Tourings and Sienna XLE Limited AWDs seem to be doing well. Many affluent families need the seating and room of a large vehicle, but are turned away by the bulk and vulgarity of a full-size SUV. Buick has the right idea (sort of...) with the Terraza but executed it poorly. Many minivans dwarf the CSVs in luxury and engineering, with engines that offer 50+ more horsepower and features like laser-guided cruise control, sat nav, cooled seats, parking cameras, and PAX runflats.

[Paolino]

And speaking of premium minivans, Odyssey Tourings and Sienna XLE Limited AWDs seem to be doing well. Many affluent families need the seating and room of a large vehicle, but are turned away by the bulk and vulgarity of a full-size SUV. Buick has the right idea (sort of...) with the Terraza but executed it poorly. Many minivans dwarf the CSVs in luxury and engineering, with engines that offer 50+ more horsepower and features like laser-guided cruise control, sat nav, cooled seats, parking cameras, and PAX runflats.

[post="60227"][/post]

Well, as I said in a previous post, how about something as simple as auto climate control!? C'mon... you get get that in a Civic now. Nav?

Can I just say that for the like 10th time I passed a Sienna at night, and thought the gauges would be a very nice update for Buicks? They're electroluminescent, but have a blue ring around them with a bright white needle and I believe white digits. It would be nice to see something like this introduced into Buicks--maybe keep the traditional bluish-green color, but make it bright with LED or the like, and some white needles--give the car a more upscale-look. (the white circles glow blue at night)

Edited December 18, 2005 by Paolino

[thegriffon]

But the minivans all end their A-pillars over the front wheel well.  Pacifica and R-Class end the A-pillar before the wheel well, and the front doors seem to be in the same place, though the R-Class' wheel well flares might be throwing you off slightly?

I just don't see the cab forward like I do in the minivans.  R-Class also seats 6, not 7 like most minivans.

But you're right, this is a digression and not really important.

[post="60177"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

The Sienna's A-pillar is no further forward than the R-Class, and the Quest has just as large wheel-arches. Note that the R-class is rwd and the others fwd, so the proximity oif the wheelarch to the door is more significant than the others. There is no longer a gulf between station wagons and MPVs, and between MPVs and crossovers. In many segments there is a continuum and where you draw the line is somewhat arbitrary. I class the R-Class as an MPV, AH-HA classes it as a station wagon. You'd be hard-pressed to rank it with the crossover SUVs however.

[titan]

And speaking of premium minivans, Odyssey Tourings and Sienna XLE Limited AWDs seem to be doing well. Many affluent families need the seating and room of a large vehicle, but are turned away by the bulk and vulgarity of a full-size SUV. Buick has the right idea (sort of...) with the Terraza but executed it poorly. Many minivans dwarf the CSVs in luxury and engineering, with engines that offer 50+ more horsepower and features like laser-guided cruise control, sat nav, cooled seats, parking cameras, and PAX runflats.

[post="60227"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

You're talking about Honda's Odyssey and Toyota's Sienna? Buick's brand is supposed to be luxury, right? If that's the case, give the upscale minivan to GM's up and coming upscale brand; Saturn. That's all I'm saying. If I'm wrong about Buick being a luxury make, then that's different.

[Croc]

You'd be hard-pressed to rank it with the crossover SUVs however.

[post="60298"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Don't know why; its main competitors are crossovers. It's taller than a wagon, is on a unibody SUV platform shared with two other SUVs...not to be argumentative, but all of that sounds like "crossover" to me. Edited December 21, 2005 by Croc

[sciguy_0504]

It's a shame the Quest doesn't sell as well as the other popular minivans. I guess we can blame it on not up-to-par quality that minivan families demand. I think it looks the best and has an awesome interior design, though I know a lot of people disagree with me on that.

[pow]

Don't know why; its main competitors are crossovers.  It's taller than a wagon, is on a unibody SUV platform shared with two other SUVs...not to be argumentative, but all of that sounds like "crossover" to me.

[post="61558"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

AFAIK, it's not a "crossover" by the traditional "crossover SUV" definition -- Pilot, Highlander, Murano, etc. But I suppose by its most literal sense, it can be a crossover... in the same way the Vibe, Outback, Ridgeline, and HHR are "crossovers."

[pow]

It's a shame the Quest doesn't sell as well as the other popular minivans.  I guess we can blame it on not up-to-par quality that minivan families demand.  I think it looks the best and has an awesome interior design, though I know a lot of people disagree with me on that.

[post="61712"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Agreed. The Quest has a very progressive design. Its interior wouldn't be out of place inside the MoMA in NY. Too bad the quality is poor, and I'm disappointed the red leather option is no longer available.

[Flybrian]

You transplant that Quest-style interior into somthing smaller, cheaper, and hipper along the lines of a Mazda5 and you would've probably seen a very different reaction to it in the marketplace. Minivans are largely dowdy and value function and ease of use over any style. From the pictures and sitting in a few, the Quest doesn't seem to be that user-friendly, especially the garbage can center stack. That and poor quality, IMO, hurt it more than its outside looks.

[pow]

You transplant that Quest-style interior into somthing smaller, cheaper, and hipper along the lines of a Mazda5 and you would've probably seen a very different reaction to it in the marketplace.

[post="61735"][/post]

And Nissan needs that. All their current small cars, the new _____ included (it's so forgettable and generic that I forgot its name... starts with a V), are rather dreary.

This, on the other hand...

[Flybrian]

[post="61739"][/post]

Chisel that up a bit, ditch the thrift store plastic, and trim the Andy Rooney eyelashes, and that will be something I wouldn't buy in a million years, meaning someone certainly will. Moreso than the whatever you mentioned Nissan intends to sell here.

[Croc]

AFAIK, it's not a "crossover" by the traditional "crossover SUV" definition -- Pilot, Highlander, Murano, etc. But I suppose by its most literal sense, it can be a crossover... in the same way the Vibe, Outback, Ridgeline, and HHR are "crossovers."

[post="61728"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I don't believe I ever applied the phrase "crossover SUV" to the R-Class, but simply "crossover." I think it kind of HAS to be some kind of crossover since there is no concensus on here about what segment it properly is...

[pow]

I don't believe I ever applied the phrase "crossover SUV" to the R-Class, but simply "crossover."  I think it kind of HAS to be some kind of crossover since there is no concensus on here about what segment it properly is...

[post="61755"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I know what you mean, but the first recent automotive use of "crossover" was used to define unibody, car-based SUVs.

[Croc]

Well, the first was used in 1998 with the Lexus, BMW and MB SUVs. Then the Pacifica was a crossover, and that's minivan-based. Then the CSVs adopted the "crossover" phrase very loosely.

[91z4me]

Would not the Aztek and Rendevous be defined as crossovers?

[Croc]

Would not the Aztek and Rendevous be defined as crossovers?

[post="61868"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I've always called them such...they really aren't minivans what with their limited seating and lack of sliding doors...

[Mike The Canadian]

Remember, if you like this:



You'll like the Enclave. Just add some side sweep spearsand portholes with a Velite grille and more vertical headlamps.  :AH-HA_wink:

[post="66079"][/post]

:o Excellent, nothing like having confirmation from AH-HA :CG_all: :lol:

[The O.C.]

Two dirty little words... station wagon.

ssssssssshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh :AH-HA_wink:

[post="60198"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

My "easy" way of defining what is a "station wagon" is any car that replaces its trunk with a extended rear end ("wagon.)

Such as......

BMW 325i.......BMW 325i Touring
Buick Roadmaster sedan......Buick Roadmaster Wagon
Ford Taurus sedan......Ford Taurus wagon
Suzuki Forenza sedan.....Suzuki Forenza wagon
Audi A4 sedan......Audi A4 Avant
M-Benz E500 sedan......M-Benz E500 wagon

What's not a "station wagon?" (based upon their "doner" platforms...)

Ford 500.......Ford Freestyle
M-Benz ML500.......M-Benz R500
Chrysler T&C......Chrysler Pacifica
Subaru Impreza......Subaru Forester

What do you guys think of my rationale?

[Flybrian]

What's not a "station wagon?" (based upon their "doner" platforms...)

Ford 500.......Ford Freestyle
M-Benz ML500.......M-Benz R500
Chrysler T&C......Chrysler Pacifica
Subaru Impreza......Subaru Forester

What do you guys think of my rationale?

[post="66136"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I think you've been out on the euphamism coast too long, O.C. ;)

Seriously, you do have to admit these 'crossovers' are really wagons in the practical and marketing sense if not in their actual chassies source.