Have you noticed every time a replacement model comes out its bigger than the model before, no problem there but there doesn't seem to be any more room for passengers.
Not pointing any fingers, most of the mainstream makers are the same.
Is the new mondeo any more roomy than sierra or mondeo 1?
Vectra any more so than cavalier 2?
407 over 405.
C5 over xantia.
Primera over bluebird. etc etc.
I've given the family type saloons as examples as i'm really looking at the rear leg room, the boot on many of the new vehicles is huge, and if the rear window didn't have come down at such a stylish angle, the rear seat could have gone back at least 6" on many models or even have been adjustable like some mpv's.
But the newer cars just seem so massive now with so little increase in internal space, or is it just me?
Edited by gordonbennet on 05/04/2008 at 18:14
|
|
No, it's not just you. They're bigger to provide better crash protection. Five NCAP stars are de rigeur these days.
|
They're bigger to provide better crash protection.
Yes the 407's dashboard means that you are approximately 25 feet distant from the scene of a frontal impact :-)
|
bristolmotorspeedway.{P}
I see that the new C5 Citroen did rather well in the crash tests.
|
|
|
|
See what you're saying, gb, but it doesn't quite pan out if your examine the dimensions. It's right that safety and environmental legislation has been partly responsible for growth in size (width particulalry) and weight.
But if you check the comparative dimensions of any one of the cases you advance I bet you'll find the newer model is as good if not better. I remember marvelling at the amount of space I had in the final generation Granada Scorpio. The reality is that it's no better than the current Mondeo. Probably worse, infact.
Only thing it lacks is those kinky rubber pumps my Granny had for pumping up the lumbar support...
|
MO, i know the newer car will be slightly bigger inside, but considering huge increase in outside dimensions, its not enough gain.
I can't quote you exact dimensions, but i could easily get 11 scorpio's on my truck, wouldn't have a hope in hell with the new mondeo, pity cos the mondeo could have been the class leader for rear legroom.
BMS, thats exactly what i mean, its getting to the point that the windscreen is nigh on impossible to reach.
|
|
|
|
"Is the new mondeo any more roomy than sierra or mondeo 1?"
Yes.
And the new Fiesta/Mazda2 are smaller externally than the previous models which they replace but roomy inside.
And the Fiat 500 is about as big inside as a Mini but smaller outside. And the TARDIS is quite a bit bigger inside (well it's the start of the new Dr Who series tonight).
|
Consider the burgeoning number of obese fatties around.
|
|
I clean a current model M-Class Merc and the rear seat space is really no better than a Focus although the boot is big. Ive also driven it short distances and the interior is very claustrophobic in general. For the mass of the car its very poorly packaged.
|
"the rear seat space is really no better than a Focus"
Strange, isn't it? I've long wondered why cars that are two feet longer only have a few inches of extra rear legroom. The most rear room I can remember in a normal (i.e. not a limo) car was that in the old BMC 1800 'land crab'. So much for progress...
|
the old BMC 1800 'land crab'. So much for progress...>>
We had two of these over the years - the interior space was remarkable.
However, I presume you've not been in the back of a new Mondeo yet?
The leg room is remarkable.
|
|
|
|
I clean a current model M-Class Merc and the rear seat space is really no better than a Focus .......
I'd put it the other way round ~ the rear seat space in a Focus is as good as that in an M-Class Mecedes. ;-)
|
Oh I dont know, the Focus isnt exceptional, it just makes a 2wd M-Class look stupidly expensive for the space on offer. I would risk it and say that a Focus estate with a big engine is easily a match for the M-Class ( 4wd aside )but is £20k cheaper.
Its just silly really.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And the new Fiesta/Mazda2 are smaller externally than the previous models which they replace but roomy inside.
When I look at the dimensions they seem to be the opposite, ie the newer one is bigger externally (talking about the 02 version of the Fiesta). I also think the older Fiestas felt more spacious inside.
And the Fiat 500 is about as big inside as a Mini but smaller outside. And the TARDIS is quite a bit bigger inside (well it's the start of the new Dr Who series tonight).
The 500 doesn't replace the Mini, if you compare it to the old 500 then it's MUCH bigger.
I agree with the OP. When I was looking for cars I found that some of the boots were tiny and didn't suit my needs. The exterior dimensions are also a jump up from my current car.
|
|
|
|
>>Have you noticed every time a replacement model comes out its bigger than the model before, no problem there
Well there may be. In earlier posts several people said they would be reluctant to buy the new Mondeo as a result of it?s increased size. Actually, I thought this trend might have had something to do with the American market.
As much as I would like to replace my existing Mazda6 with the new model, I may decide on something a little smaller.
Driving it would no problem. Garaging might be a bit tight, though.
Clk Sec
|
That's a good point about the garage. I'm the process of selling/moving at the moment (real fun, but that's another subject!) and went to look at what was supposedly a select new development in a small village a couple of weeks ago.
House good, gardent great, garage & parking...hopeless. Our smaller car is a Civic and it would have squeezed in only with the mirrors folded. But even if I did that, I would have had to squeeze ludicrously close to one of the walls to have a chance of getting out of the driver's side! In other words, I had two choices: sell the Civic for something much smaller or go down to one car, which would always be on the drive.
Which planet do housebuilders live on these days?
|
The oft quoted example is that of the latest VW Polo being bigger than the Mark 1 VW Golf. Whats's in a name? If you want a VW the size of the original Golf, buy a Polo.
If you want a VW the size of the original Polo, buy a Fox!
|
|
...and if you want a VW with the quality of the original Golf, buy a Skoda!
|
I have a friend who has one of the Civic models before the current range.
Although he loves the latest body styling, he won't change his current car because the new one has much less interior space.
|
The Civic's a strange example, though - same name applied to a bewildering variety of shapes and sizes in the last 15 years. It started small, then got bigger and really quite big and tall (the 2001 model) and now seems to be getting smaller again.
The example that's struck me recently is the Passat. The 1997-2005 model was huge inside - I'm 6'5" and had plenty of space in the back, of the estate especially. The current model is comparatively tiny - and if you want a cramped medium-size VAG car, there's already the Audi A4. Not sure what's going on there.
|
|
|
|
"Which planet do housebuilders live on these days?"
The same usually applies to house interiors, too. Whoever designs these things (architects, presumably, who should know better) clearly never actually try living in the completed version. If that were a requirement, things would be very different!
How does the estate agent explain it, or did he just describe the parking as 'ample'?
Warming to the theme, I think the same should apply to car designers, who should be made to service their creations (and change the lightbulbs!) before unleashing them on an unsuspecting public.
|
|
|
|
|
>>House good, gardent great, garage & parking...hopeless. Our smaller car is a Civic and it would have squeezed in only with the mirrors folded. But even if I did that, I would have had to squeeze ludicrously close to one of the walls to have a chance of getting out of the driver's side!
Ridiculous. What on earth is the point of that? It shouldn?t be described as a garage.
Clk Sec
|
I've always thought the safety and environmental concerns were mutually exclusive. Go back 20 years and a Mondeo class car weighed about 1100-1200kg depending on spec. Now you're typically looking at 1500-1700kg. How can lugging all that lard around be environmentally friendly?
More power and more fuel burned to achieve the same result, and at best completely offsetting any advantages gained through new engine technology.
I'm not denying the benefits of crashworthiness, but it has come at a cost, and one of the most direct being the environment that's claimed to be so important. Can you imagine what performance, mpg and emissions we'd be getting from say the current Vectra engine range in a car of the mk2 Cavalier's weight?
Cheers
DP
|
The other day I was behind a V reg Maxi and it looked so so tiny. Now I assume the Maxi was probably a family car in its day - Escort rival or was it Cortina?
Either way in comparison today it just looked so small and flimsy. One of the noticeable things was that the glass was at the edge of the bodywork - so many modern cars have the glass protected with flared bodywork underneath (to make space for impact bars etc).
|
The other day I was behind a V reg Maxi and it looked so so tiny. Now I assume the Maxi was probably a family car in its day - Escort rival or was it Cortina?
SNIPQUOTE
But I bet you'd be struggling to get more interior space than the Maxi / Austin 1800 - even the Austin 1100 - masses of rear legroom to which every BMW owner can only aspire.
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 08/04/2008 at 11:19
|
|
|
|
"Now you're typically looking at 1500-1700kg"
Indeed. IIRC, the old Lotus Cortina, which weighed under a ton, had a similar power-to-weight ratio to the 170hp Focus Sti, and was a lot more nimble as a result. Noisier and less civilised, of course, and a lot worse in a crash, but personally I'd rather have a vehicle that was good at avoiding trouble than one designed to have nice safe accidents in...
Edited by J Bonington Jagworth on 07/04/2008 at 22:27
|
|
|
|
|
