A source of constant debate is whether hatchbacks are seen as declassé on this side of the Atlantic or not. Let’s set that question aside for a moment, though, and just pretend that we all agree that they’re both classy and visually appealing. In this make-believe space of universal acceptance, how do you like your hatchback? As a kammback? A fastback? With three doors, or five?
I personally don’t buy the line that hatchbacks fail to convey wealth and prestige. It’s more likely that U.S. consumers simply failed to buy large hatchbacks like the Renault 16 (pictured at the top) for reasons that had nothing to do with their body style, and never got such other efforts as the Citroën BX.
We never got the VW Polo either, but that doesn’t mean we can’t admire and evaluate its crisp design.
However, if the trope that Americans don’t like hatchbacks contains any truth, then cars like the Gremlin, which sold in large enough numbers to leave their mark on a generation of consumers, can’t avoid scrutiny.
That still doesn’t fully account for why cars like this Mazda 626 failed to sell; however, when you look at its dull lines you’ll find an explanation that has nothing to do with that fifth door. Ultimately, though, we don’t have to ponder why the hatchback is unpopular in the U.S. to discuss our favorite designs, do we?
I always thought the Volvo 1800ES looked ultra modern in the car magazines, back in the 70s. Unfortunately, never saw one up close, at the time.
Which is ironic given how much of it is carried over directly from the original car, designed in the late ’50s. (I’m not disagreeing with you — they really did manage to make it look fresher than it was, but when you see the vestigial fins in the rear fenders and stuff like that, it becomes clear that they kept an awful lot.)
That frameless backlight is stunning!
The recently discontinued Volvo C30 is an update of the 1800ES, right to the frameless glass hatch.
I looked at the C30 at the auto show every year. I like to haul stuff. A hatchback’s ability to carry bulky stuff is directly related to how large the opening is. The C30 failed. That retro glass hatch opening was tiny.
Inbetween the 1800ES and C30 there was this 480.
In a neighborhood where I once lived, someone owned one of those. From the outside, it seemed to be in ok condition. But one day, a flatbed truck with a crane pulled up, and without much ado, lifted up that poor 480 for its final trip. Once on the flatbed, the truck driver pushed the crane down on the roof of the car as a convenient means to secure it to the truck (obviously, holding straps would have been too much hassle for a trip to the junkyard) – which of course crushed that magnificent backlight. What a pitiful sight.
Anyway, that’s one of my favourite hatchbacks; along with the Citroen CX and the Renault 30. Oh, and the 1970s Audi 100 Coupé S, if that counts.
The 480 is a popular youngtimer in my country, since it was designed (by Robert Koch) and built here. Maybe a future classic/collectible.
Volvo 480 ES Turbo
It’s unforgivable that the Volvo 480 was never sold here in the USA. I remember reading somewhere that it was built for the North American market.
I’ve read two reasons:
-It’s a hatchback.
-unfavourable currency exchange rates.
I think it tries too hard to look different and doesn’t pull it off well. Being a Volvo gave it more panache than it deserves.
I had a Plymouth Sundance, which looks like a 3-box but is actually a hatchback, and that’s a solution that should be ideal for the US market. That hatchback really did improve the practicality of that car, especially since it was so small inside. I have not had that car for 13 years, but I loved it.
The Sundance/Shadow hatch was a nice design, that allowed complete privacy for whatever was stored in the ‘trunk’. Very similar to the design used on the earlier 1985 Dodge Lancer/Chrysler LeBaron GTS.
My first new car was a 1989 Plymouth Sundance “Highline” 5 door hatchback. It was in aqua-blue-green metallic, with white wall tires and a chrome trunk rack. It was a real looker. I drove it for 9 years. It was a fun, pleasant car to drive. I was particularly fond of the “hidden hatchback” design, as it did not look like a hatch (not that it mattered to me).
I owned a 84 and an 85 Citation hatchback. I could put a washing machine in the hatch laying on the back close it up and drive it away. BI bought the 84 new and put 225 k on it in nine years. About ten months before I sold it I was hit in a snow storm . Then I bought the 85 from a guy at work at 169 k and drove it for six years to around 255 k . In 02 I traded it in on a 99 Saturn SW1 that I still drive every day at 265k. All were 4 cylinder manuals, the Citations 4 speed and the SW1 5. Now I can’t find anything that could replace it. Chevy sells a Cruz wagon in Europe but not here in the us.
Not sure if it has quite the utility of some of the others, but it is sure cool – the Kaiser Traveler!
Very good choice!
There is a modern recreation of this body style – the Skoda Superb Twin-Door; that would be my favorite styling-wise (looks like a sedan – but practical as a hatchback), despite the fact that aerodynamically two-box “kammback” styling is more efficient than “three-box” sedan-like shape; this Kaiser seems to be a lot more practical than the Twin-Door Skoda, actually – almost like a pick-up truck, but with a more civilian look; I wonder why this desing didn’t take root back in the 50s ?
I think the problem was that in the U.S., steel-bodied station wagon/estate cars were really taking off in the ’50s. (Earlier wood-bodied wagons were seen mostly as light commercial vehicles.) As useful as something like the Kaiser hatch was, a proper station wagon was more so and really not that much more expensive. The Kaiser ended up more as an extension of the old “business coupe” bodies, which were aimed mainly at small businesses and traveling salesmen who needed to carry samples, but didn’t want to look like they were driving a truck. Since the Kaiser was rather pricey, it didn’t really catch on with business buyers either and ended up mostly a curiosity.
Richard Langworth writed an article about the Kaiser Traveler in Collectible Automobile and concluded than if it was a Buick, it would had been more sucesseful.
And just imagine what if Chevrolet and Plymouth used the Traveler concept for their early 1950s fastbacks models?
If Chevrolet, Plymouth or Ford had offered something similar for cheaper, it might have had some moderate success, but I can’t really see it being a big hit for the reasons I mentioned. The price was probably a handicap, though. By 1951, the cheapest Kaiser Special Traveler was around $2,300, which was the price of a two-door Buick Super.
If we are being more practical, I will confess a longtime attraction to the prior generation Mazda3 hatch. Unfortunately, when I was ready to buy, the rear seat headroom was not what I needed it to be for my tall sons.
However, I have been quite enthusiastic over my second choice.
This time, with picture.
I don’t get it. That isn’t special. Your choice of the Traveler was spot on – and this one is – uh, not.
+1. Same colour as mine, too!
I have a sedan of the generation before the awful rictus-grin grille, which I think is a very handsome car, but I haaaate the hatchback versions of both generations, which seem very fussy to me. I’ve never tried to analyze exactly what they did with the five-door’s nose/grille, but I wish they hadn’t.
In any case, I thought it was a step back from the earlier Protegé5 and notably uglier than the five-door Mazda2, which is also a more practical car. (The Mazda2 five-door’s rear doors don’t get weirdly narrow at the base as the 3’s do, which makes entry and exit much, much easier especially for people who aren’t that limber or have bad knees.)
I’ve never tried to analyze exactly what they did with the five-door’s nose/grille, but I wish they hadn’t.
The grill was too buzy, too many horizontal bars. They did a facelift in 07 and cleaned up the grill. I still didn’t like the insturment cluster tho.
I find the Protege5 handsome but tiny. The 2 may have a better back door, but I sat behind the wheel and felt a little cramped. At 6′ 3″ I find the 3 fits me quite well, though I’d like a little more left leg room.
The back seat? Meh, my kids are still smaller than JPC’s, for now. 🙂
When my middle song graduated 8th grade, he wore one of my suits. He is now in college and 6’6″.
I would take a Protege5 over any variation of the Mazda3. imho, Mazda hit it out of the park with the P5. My 98 Civic hatchback was really far too new to demote to second car/beater status when the P5 was discontinued in 03….but I finally succumbed to lust in Feb 04, when there were still a few around. I had my Ford vendor Z plan discount in hand, plus a $500 off coupon from the Mazda stand at the Detroit auto show and headed to South Bend, where there were still 2 black on black, manual trans P5s in stock….they both had moonroofs…there was a rail for the moonroof that projected down from the headliner, to within a fraction of an inch of my head……pass
After 12 years and 158,000 miles I love my P5 more than ever! I call its color “Probable Cause Red”.
Attractive car!
Actually, this was the real first production hatchback, later Citroën came with the Traction with “steel door” as they call it in the Dordogne
In my opinion – the pioneer in hatches in the US.
Thanks to those men who thought outside the GM/Ford/Chrysler box!
A ’74 Nova hatchback could be turned into a camper: http://oldcarbrochures.com/static/NA/Chevrolet/1974_Chevrolet/1974_Chevrolet_Nova_Brochure/1974%20Chevrolet%20Nova-12.html
That reminds me of the tent that I had for the back of my ’76 Vega. I forgot they also made them for the Nova.
I bought a new 1975 Nova hatchback, with the 262 SB and 3 on-the-floor. No 4-speed was available that year, but at least the 3-speed was all-synchro. Kept it for about 5 years and 80K miles and found it to be an extremely useful body style. As I remember the gas struts gave up early on that big, heavy hatch and had to be replaced.
I had one of those (well, the “Pontiac Ventura” version), and always meant to get the camper-tent attachment. The car never let me down, but I remember it as quick to rust, and that the gaskets on the hatch leaked in the rain (hence drip pans in the “trunk.” Ah, memories!
Ford Sierra,only hatchback I owned.Very practical and reliable,a 2 litre Pinto engine,most were driven into the ground,you’ve more chance of seeing a Cossie than the cooking version these days
Old Cap’ns don’t let their ships rust away. They just get a little dinghy during the winter.
In my favorite color, too. 🙂
I agree, Mazda Copper Red Mica is a really sharp colour.
In the salty climate I live in these things have rust even after six months. Heck we have scrapped these as new as 05 that the rockers and fenders where non existent. But new these are an entertaining drive.
Huh. Mine’s an ’06, bought used in Mass., and I’ve yet to see any rot. Maybe someone sprung for the tru-coat.
Time to vote for my daughters’ cars! My 2nd daughter has a Mazda 6, now 10 years old, bought in Danvers, MA at 4 years, and brought to Freeport, ME for the last 6. Rust? What rust? I don’t know what you are talking about. It has 115k miles, lives outdoors on the edge of the Atlantic ocean, in road salt country, and looks excellent. It is, in my opinion, the highly desirable combination of 5-door, 4 cylinder, 5-speed manual – that’s why we went to Danvers to buy it. Love that the rear seat can be lowered from the cargo area.
Elder daughter has a 2000 SAAB 9-3 in similarly gorgeous condition, and it lives outdoors, here, too. Turbo, 5-speed stick, heated seats.
Both are sharp-handling, super-roomy cars. What’s to not like? Either could hold most of Rhode Island if they had to.
Growing up in the UK, the majority of cars seemed to be the small/mid size that lends itself very well to hatchbacks. Endless Fiestas and Escorts were the norm, and even though the Ford Orion was a very popular “Escort with a boot”, it never looked quite right to my eyes.
I always liked the look of the Fuego https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/cohort-classic-renault-fuego-invites-you-to-enter-the-turbo-zone/, although the car itself was not necessarily the best.
Sometimes it’s hard to differentiate the subtle differences between a liftback (Toyota Corolla GT-S), a hatchback (Golf/Polo) and an estate (Reliant Scimitar or Volvo 1800ES). Have to say I like all of these.
As an aside, the worst car I ever owned was a hatchback – a Volvo 343 with DAF CVT. Hard to imagine a car that would be less satisfying to drive, whilst giving such poor fuel consumption.
Had an 83 Accord fastback and thought it was great. Unfortunately it must not have loved me the way it treated me. Very practical for a newly single teacher but I dumped it because I needed a car that would run more than a week w/o breaking.
The Saturn Vue was a hatchback and I don’t care if everyone else thinks it an SUV. Again repair bills kept me poor the last 50k mi of it’s miserable life.
The 4runner I bought has a tailgate so it’s not exactly a hatchback but the attributes are the same. Easier to carry oversized stuff than with a lifting hatch. I’ve already driven it further than the miserable cretinous Olds Bravada that preceded it and have been paying for it with the money the used car dealer has refunded. Inconvenient but working out ok. I find myself becoming attached and am cautiously optimistic.
I used to think I needed a trunk and maybe I do but all these cars were improvements over the open bed of the truck I had. I don’t know why we don’t use them. Maybe because energy is still relatively cheap so trucks do for us what hatches do for other countries. I like them.
The fastback of the Honda was the least functional of the group but it was still very good. If I could design a perfect vehicle it would have attributes of all and a two way door that could open to the side or work as a tailgate would be on the list. My 77 Impala Wagon had one. Why can’t we now?
Gotta be the AMC Hornet hatchback with optional tent for me…
GM offered also an optionnal tent for the X-body Nova for 1973-74. I don’t know if the B-O-P counterparts also got one. http://blog.hemmings.com/index.php/2011/03/01/ad-of-the-week-the-versatile-nova/
This posting cries out for the sheer beauty of this hatchback!
Mine was equally beautiful in silver with black X stripes.
Sometimes, when it’s very quiet, I can still hear the lock and latch actuator rods rattling inside the doors.
01-05 Pontiac Aztek. Assuming your difinition of hatch doesn’t mean one piece liftgate. The lift gate is at an angle and more than 75% of the total rear opening area. If not my second choice would be the first generation Datsun Z-Car. I drove a 71 240Z in my senior year of HS.
Indded.
My fav is the 4th gen F-body GM ponycars…
Yes, much Aztek love here! Plus my Malibu Maxx and my Dodge Lancer Turbo…
Some hatchbacks are able to convey wealth and prestige, though I wouldn’t call this ill-proportioned thing one of my favorites.
What the hell is this thing?
Panamera. I don’t know why everyone hates these so much. They look great in traffic and make things like 750is look like tanks. Clearly a car that looks better in person than in photos.
Your mileage may vary. I find them eye-poppingly ugly in person, more than the photos had suggested. If Porsche were going to build a four-door sedan, I wish they would have resurrected the 989, which was very attractive.
Eye-poppingly ugly is being too kind. Panameras were almost common in Reston, VA. This is not a shape that improves with age.
At first, I wasn’t impressed with the Panamera, but I like its shape. I only wish it had more variety of engines and transmission.
While the interiors were always too cheap for me, I really liked the exterior and general promise of the 1980 Citation four door hatch – the car that mainstreamed and killed the hatch in America in 1 model year. Quite a feat.
I absolutely agree!
Thank you for remembering a brilliant and beautiful design.
Too bad it was such a complete POS.
I’ve always admired the Alfa Romeo GT Junior Zagato. A vehicle very ahead of its time in 1970, it reminds me a lot of the later Honda CRX.
A Jensen Interceptor is my favourite hatchback but way out of my price range
I’m afraid I don’t have a particular favourite among the hatchback cars. I believe it’s a matter of functionality and practicality. I do, however, prefer station wagons and vans. What I’ve never been a fan of were front-wheel drive. I’d prefer rear-wheel drive or all-wheel drive.
One of the most stylish ever…..compare this with the eyesore that is the current Honda Crosstour
Dad says Hi:
Rover 3500, a gorgeous car. Too bad on reliability, tho…
Beautiful looking car.
another view
Hi Martin,
search CC for the Rover 3500 SD1 for more shots too!
I’ve never been a fan of the Honda Crosstour.
The Mini just because.
The original Mini wasn’t a hatchback. The Nuova Innocenti Mini by Bertone of 1974, however, was:
Those Innocentis are a really clean design job.
Golf Mk1. Love cjiguy’s zagato too.
Citroen XM, not that I’m brave enough to take one on. Just to narrow the field further, not the Australian Morris Nomad. Repeat, not.
I prefer the old-school Minis over the new Minis we’ve seen in the past several years.
Gosh there are so many with the Mk1 Scirocco and Alfetta GT coming to mind the quickest. The previously mentioned Volvo 1800ES and Jensen Interceptor are also great choices and I’ve always loved the Capri.
1989 Honda crx with 310 k miles on stock motor!i love it&i love the 40 mpg.
The Vega Kammback always looked right smart to me:
But then (surprisingly), I also found my New Beetle capable of swallowing up unlikely loads, too:
+1 for the irony.
Looks more like a Shooting Brake than a Hatchback.
Pretty much, but that term never made it to the US.
My parents had that exact car until a) it was ready for a third engine and b) I got too big for the back seat.
+1
Im one of the Americans that hates hatchbacks but the Vega is cool. You would need the extra room and big door to carry a spare engine around.
The looks hooked me from day one. If its durability had matched its beauty, GM would never have gone bankrupt.
I used to know someone who had a Vega hatchback.
I vote Vega too, our 74 hatchback carried our giant rabbit cage home, sticking out the back.
(The cage was giant, not the rabbit)
Vega would have been a great car if most of them weren’t so terrible..
That darned Vega………what if!
The thing about the Vega is even if it had a decent drivetrain , the floor of the trunk was so high (for the rear axle) that the trunk was very shallow. Most cargo was brought home “sticking out the back”.
I learned how to drive a stick in a Vega hatchback! 🙂
There that’s better!
The other photo is a wagon.
Present-day is definitely the Tesla Model-S. As for “classics”, I’d go with either the Saab 9000 or 900. The 9000 for pure aesthetics, and the 900 for attractive uniqueness .
Tesla is a great choice for present day. Another nice one is the new Mazda 3.
WRT Mazda, I like the previous generation 6 hatchbacks. Another hatch that looked like the sedan but made it more practical. Too bad they killed the hatch along with the wagon.
Actually, I think the 6 hatch looks better than the sedan.
I’m with Brendan on the Tesla. I’ll also give a shout-out to the current Ford Fiesta for being the biggest improvement over its’ sedan counterpart.
Biggest missed opportunity – BMW 02 Touring. For my money it should’ve replaced the sedan model (whose ’60 Falcon-ish greenhouse was looking really dated) and served as the basis for the E21/E30 3-series whose (non)styling could’ve only been improved by a hatch.
I can’t really agree on the 02 touring, but certainly on the E21 – that could’ve been improved by ANYTHING – and partly on the E30. I think the sedans were simple, but still somewhat handsome; however, the best E30 by far was the (Europe only) touring model, which of course had a hatch! I had that car until it became too small for our family, and I miss it to this day. A hoot to drive, but practical, too.
Sorry, no.
That is not an attractive hatch at all.
A great car, but not an attractive hatch.
The entire back end is too heavy looking and ugly.
The back windows are too long, forcing the C pillar too far back to work with the design.
A great car, though!
Love these things, wish we had gotten them in the US! Personally, I think they’re even better looking than the 02 sedan body.
I’m very into this type of design in general – longish roof, not too fast, with a very short decklid or vestigal decklid shapes at the back which form a curvy optical illusion where the two lines meet. This has more or less become the go-to style for sedans over the last few years as well, just with taller decklids and slicker roofs. I’m really hoping that the success of the Tesla Model S jumpstarts a big, 4-door hatch trend. I think that would work great on the current Lincoln MKZ.
I think it would come as no surprise that my favorite would be the mk1 Rabbit/Golf.
AE86 corolla is what comes to my mind. I’m sure there are a few others but my head is into fuselage mode and I can’t make it go away.
A late 1980s Saab 900 is a swell looking Hatchback and my family used/uses them like pickup trucks.
For a young married couple our 1978 Rabbit (Golf to you heathens) was the perfect long distance camping machine. Yank out the back seat, install the Naugahyde tarp that I designed and my wife sewed, and we were literally good to go for thousands of miles. What the Rab didn’t have was A/C, auto trans, power steering, power brakes, or power anything else. Didn’t know we were supposed to have that stuff. We made one Wash DC to San Fran round trip, and one three-week Wash DC to Calgary to Ontario to Rochester and back to DC trip among our other jaunts. All with a 1456 cc mini motor. My latest hatch, a 2012 Impreza 5-door, has power everything, is a great long distance cruiser, and only weighs about 1300 pounds more than the Rab. I guess that’s the price of progress. The photo shown is when I made a solo dash to San Fran. I spent the night camping in the Sand Dunes area of Nebraska. In case you were wondering, the Cibie Super Oscars will blow the living shit out of a Rabbit alternator with only minimal use.
In order of increasing affordability:
Citroen CX 6
Audi A3
My paid-off red Protege5
Just found out the new Audi A3 comes only as a sedan in the US; no manual either. Lowest-common-denominator spec, made to be leased. Sucks if you want the old one because this makes it more valuable/more likely current owners will keep theirs.
The Citroën C6 (the model in the picture) is a sedan. The XM was a hatchback.
Mea maxima culpa. As they say, looks can be deceiving.
I wished the C6 was a hatch too until I saw the crazy-interesting rear window shape and bootlid. NZ only got 5 C6s new, I’ve seen 2 (1 black, 1 bronze) in person, and another 2 black ones are currently for sale on trademe. I’m assuming the 5th one’s black too! Regardless of looking like a hatch and being a sedan, they look absolutely amazing!
Before I was old enough to drive, I was in love with small cars, especially foreign hatchbacks, because they were so different than North American cars. I loved the “5-door” version of the AMC (Renault) Le Car (the “5” in Europe). It was real funky, especially with the huge folding fabric sunroof!
The R5 is one of my favorite cars.
Had a LeCar, with the giant sunroof.
Big plusses as a hatchback:
more upright back end, so near maximum cargo height available almost to rear of car.
hatch opened all the way down to within a couple inches of the cargo floor, no panel to lift cargo over.
the privacy shelf over the cargo area was flat plywood. I could fold that panel flat against the back seat to carry tall loads. I was always frustrated with the GLC and the Civic, what to do with that dumb panel?
the back seat folded in two steps, bottom up on edge against back of front seat, then rear seatback folds flat. GLC and Civic didn’t do that. Jetta wagon does.
when I opened the hatch, a pin on the hatch strut would catch the edge of the privacy panel and pull the panel up for easy loading. the GLC used strings to do that. the Civic had nothing to lift the panel.
Had two of them from new- an ’78 and an ’82. Bright, cheery, fun car that had loads of practicality. Did I have problems? Yes. Did I mind? Sometimes. Do I want another? You bet!
A (used) 1982 Renault 5 was my first car. Bought a letter sticker sheet and pasted RECYCLED ALPINE on the hatch, in yellow letters.
Manual everything: gearbox, choke, windows, seats, sunroof, mirrors. And a flexible tube for the summer-winter position of the air intake.
Oh man, did I let that little 845 cc engine scream ! And it never failed.
It could have been a really good car, but it didn’t turn out so well for us in the States.
Americans don’t like hatchbacks? I’d say the several million 79-93 Mustang hatchbacks produced would argue otherwise.
I hate it when car guys mindlessly repeat automotive “truisms” like Americans don’t like hatchbacks or Cadillac made the wrong move with the Seville or the Mustang II sucked.
The Panamera seems to have become the latest punching bag. It’s like the first influential journalist to write about it called it ugly and now everyone has to repeat that for fear of looking stupid. The piling on effect if you will, which you see all the time on car blogs.
As for hatchbacks for heavens sake every crossover is a hatchback. Then there are all of the great mentions here, many of which were very popular in the US. And then there are the BMW Minis, Fox Mustangs, and so on and so on.
A more correct thing to say is that a 5-door hatchback sedan is hard to do which is another reason cars like the Tesla and Mazda 3 are so impressive (OK I admit it they are better looking than the Panamera).
1. This is not a truism. The Mustang II truly sucked. Tru dat.
2. Panameras? Please, we may not have the most refined tastes, but we aren’t blind and most of us don’t have more money than sense.
Really the Mustang II sucked? That’s funny because the last post I read about it here a month ago was 50% positive. Ten years ago it would have been 100% negative.
That beautiful red 928 that got 100 comments this week, nearly all of them positive? That was the 1978 Panamera.
“We” love Panameras in LA. Maybe it’s a regional thing. Maybe you need to see them in traffic, I dunno. What I do know is that I can fit in the rear seat which is not the case for many sporty sedans, including much larger ones like the Cadillac CTS. It’s a great car.
Although I’ve never owned or driven a Mustang II, I’ve always found it more attractive than the one it replaced.
It was a great looking car, especially the hatchback 🙂
I agree. Although I prefer the coupe version, the hatchback isn’t bad looking.
I’ve drven many Mustang II”s and they do suck. Mind you, they didn’t suck any worse than a Monza. Compared to a Celica, they were both totally outclassed.
Journalists don’t tell me what to like. The Panamera design is an amorphous mess. It has accomplished the almost impossible; make the Cayenne look passable.
Maybe it sells a lot of units for Porsche, maybe it drives very well, but its ugly. With a silent ‘f’.
You are absolutely right, with cars there’s often the popular narrative. Look at every Cadillac review from the past few years that says they built nothing good in the 1990s. Or critics retroactively calling Mitsubishi Galants and Endeavors crap when for several years they were competitive. The constant dumping on of the Chrysler 200 and Dodge Avenger. It’s the most frustrating thing.
Right about the 928 too. Parisians thought the Eiffel Tower was an eyesore once
Yes I’d like to hear what the geniuses who crapped all over the 90s Cadillacs have to say about 90-92 Brougham pricing these days. A quick look at sold cars on eBay will show one with 80K miles for $11,000. A lower mileage one just fell off the list that sold for $15,000. The number of bidders was crazy high.
The only early 90s S-class that comes close to fetching that kind of money is the rare 560SEC which was a $90,000 car new (three times more expensive than the Brougham). You can’t give an S-class sedan or 7-series away for free.
Since when did the Mustang II get respect?
I clearly remember them when they were new – and they sucked harder than a Category 5 hurricane.
Geez – you live long enough…
But it was an attractive hatch – I’ll give you that.
Having owned more than my fair share of Mustangs, I can say that the Mustang II was a much better car than the ’71-73 Broughamified models it replaced.
Indeed. Since we’ve been talking about it I will go ahead and post a picture of the dreaded little car to make it official. You don’t get many chances to post a Mustang II and Peugeot 205 in the same thread.
Apologies in advance to anyone offended by the image.
I was thinking more in terms of the 1992-97 Cadillac Seville STS, that critics compared favorably with its European rivals. Not so much the Brougham which, although it has its strong suits and is unrestrained in its broughmance, doesn’t jump out at me as a car that “don’t get any respect”
As for the Mustang II, it sucked if you thought of it as a pony car. As a quasi-upscale, affordable domestic compact, it wasn’t half bad and of course, it kept the Mustang name alive.
Well, there’s a big distinction between a three-door version of a sporty coupe and a five-door family hatchback. With family cars, things like rear seat room and cargo space are primary selling points — people do obviously buy them for other reasons, but not uncommonly choose one car over another based on whether there’s room for the long-legged kids in back or whether the trunk seems small.
With a sports coupe, things like a rear hatch or the back seat of a 2+2 are not so much selling points per se as ways for a potential buyer to rationalize his or her infatuation with styling or performance. It’s about giving the buyers just enough practicality to keep them from talking themselves out of a purchase. People don’t usually pick a coupe because it has the roomiest cargo area; they do say, “Well, it’s kind of small, but it’s a hatchback, so I could still fold the seats down when I go to the home supply store.”
I agree. I love that generation of Mustang.
O.K. Last entry here. You’ve all guessed that I love hatchbacks. My other fav. before I could drive was Renault’s 1984 Encore – known as the 11 in Europe. I loved the wraparound glass of the rear window. So now you know, I also adore the Renault Fuego and the GM twins; Camaro & Firebird. I also loved the AMC Pacer, but I will not post any more comments and photos, in order to give others a chance! Oh, and once last note: my First car was my Mother’s hand-me-down 1981 Pontiac Phoenix 5-door. It was ugly, but had a great 6-cylinder for power!
Has everyone forgotten one of the first, and one of the most beautiful hatchback’s ever made? The Jaguar XKE coupe. Even Enzo Ferrari reputedly called it one of the most beautiful cars in the world.
+1. That’s my uncle in the photo.
stylin
Although I am a huge fan of the generation 626 sedan shown in the post, I agree the hatchback of those years looked kind of dumpy. I do, however, daily drive and love the generation 626 hatchback after the one posted above. The one you have is a GC chassis 626 from 1983-1987. I own a GD chassis 626 sold from 1988-1992, but the hatchbacks were only offered in the United States until 1991. The GD 626 hatch’s look a lot more clean and practical compared to their predecessors. Here’s a picture! The only one I have with the hatch open is when I was doing an axel swap in the back yard, so sorry for the mess! This is and always will be my favorite hatchback.
Hatch closed.
I like hatch backs not all of them but I like the one I have now its roomy enough quiet and smooth and by hatchback meaning one lift up gate this must be an early try though its called a traveller
Is the load floor really as high as the hatch opening and spare-tire flap below it makes it look? It looks as far or farther up than a VW Type 3 Squareback’s, and that was a rear-engine car.
A staion wagon would have the gate opening level with the floor a hatchback doesn’t this is a 1958 Morris Oxford Traveller not actually called a station wagon and its a 5 door all steel one of many survivors. Ive seen several for sale on trademe over the years this one ran out of rego in 09 fresh fuel and a battery it would likely go, I didnt ask.
More pics of it on the cohort
I don’t like any of them
Love the style of the later SAAB 9000 hatch
+1
MKIII Golf
Saab 900 / 9-3
Vectra B hatch
Fiat Panda
Fiat Uno
Renault Twingo. This one is pure genius
The new one has the engine in the back.
Isn’t that the F1 version?
Well sure, all Renaults F1 had the engine in the back… And all new Twingos, a diesel included. So I’ve read.
About 10 years ago there was this very hot hatch, the Renault Clio V6. It had a 3.0 liter V6 where normally the back seats were.
The Clio V6 engine note sounded AMAZING!
Happy 250th Perry!
This Celica
Na-uh.
This Celica…
The side windows blend better and it is a smoother, less trying-too-hard design overall.
To balance out the Toyota love how about this Nissan 300ZX…
My one and only “hatchback” was a 300ZX Turbo. Dated today but a great looking car.
Yes, that 4th gen ’85-’89 Celica my favorite hatchback too, I drove one daily 11 years from new. I love how the glassed-over C-pillar lets the body color sweep up the A-pillar and just float on top.
Not coincidentally I bought a Sable the same year, which is the other car with that glassed-over C-pillar look.
When they were new, these hatchbacks outnumbered the notchbacks by at least 4-to-1 around here. But now, the rare ’85-’89 Celica on the street is inevitably a notchback. I haven’t seen a fastback in years. Towards the end of my ownership I could never get a good weatherseal on that hatchback. Rainwater would collect and slosh around in the rear fenders, even with the drains clear.
Sadly my favorite hatchback may have fallen victim to the hatchback’s greatest weakness.
And of course, my first car: the JI Isuzu Impulse
Renault Fuego
It seems that some of us like them all. Thinking about it I think I like function over looks. There are some things that hatches like wagons and SUVs do better than a car with a trunk. I seem to be in the minority on this (probably because I don’t live in a city) but I think a small trailer with a hatch just covers it all. If it can pull 1500 lbs just about anything works for me.
Like alot of people, I like something that’s pleasing to the eyes; but I also appreciate something with room in the back for several bags of luggage, seating for up to 5, maybe 7 adults.
Later model Pintos–I always thought it was neat the way Ford mounted a handle right through the glass. Little details like that always grab my attention.
This. Always liked the frameless glass Pinto Runabouts.
1979 Corona gave excellent service Can’t get photo uploaded Maybe someone else can.
Those Coronas were great cars as long as you got the Toyota engine they went well and for a long time, with Holden Starfire engine not so much either way
I can’t speak for others but the reason we didn’t buy a Mazda 626 was the obnoxious salesman not letting us actually drive the car on a test drive.Instead we bought a Ford 626, sorry Probe. A great car for us, but the high lift over on the hatch was a pain.
I ran a landscaping company out of an Elantra gt. The hatch swallowed all my tools and it’s towing capacity took care of any bulk supplies needed.
A couple days ago my wife told me when it’s time to replace our current main car (2011 Ford Fiesta hatch) she wants another. The first time she has ever expressed an interest in a car when we weren’t actually shopping. But I bet she would still go for the Volvo C30 (bright blue, White leather interior) we test drove when we bought the wagon.
SAAB Sonett, lusted after the R5 and Fuego, but was probably better off with the Accord 5door I got instead. Focus 3 door, now the Fiesta and a Focus station wagon, I guess I’ve done my part.
All in all we both love hatchbacks (although I also love wagons), and don’t understand why more people don’t get them.
I’m with you on the “salesman not letting you drive” bit. How the heck can you know what it’s like to drive if they don’t let you? Some “salesmen!” (shakes head)
Last time we went for a new car, the salesman said “I know you’re from out of town. Take it out to your place and drive it on your local roads. Don’t be afraid to get it dirty. Then bring it back and let’s hear what you think.” That’s what we needed to hear. It needed a thorough wash when it came back (red dust), but we liked it and bought.
I am quite happy with the latest Ford Focus. It looks much better than the sedan and quite practical.
I still think the original looks fresh and modern, especially in 5-door form.
I personally like them both, but I agree that the original has aged very well.
When these first came out, I preferred the sedan. Now that I’ve seen lots of both, I’m much more into the hatchback. Both are good looking cars, though. Still can’t make up my mind as to whether or not I like the Aston grille on the Focus Electric.
I love hatchbacks, and think the new Mazda3 is fantastic looking.
Agree.
MK IV VW Golf, and it’s not even close. The new MK VII is pretty good too. Distant 2nd would be ‘liftback’ sedan looking things a la Tesla Model S and first gen Mazda 6.
So what is the best designed hatch, at least in the US market, right now?
attributes:
-more vertical rear end to maximize available height for load
-hatch that opens to the bumper to minimize lift over height
-mechanism to lift privacy panel when hatch is opened to ease loading
And the winner is……VW Golf. Not a total design home run, like the LeCar was, and doesn’t have the two piece fold flat rear seat like the Jetta wagon (Golf wagon everywhere else in the world), but pretty close.
It will fold a bit more flat if you pull the headrests out.
I really like the Toyota FX16; also the Gen1 VW Scirocco and Golf (1977 models, please).
I’d say the 1984-87 Honda Civic hatch is quite appealing, too; hopefully they were better developed than the earlier Honda disasters I had.
The 2003 Toyota Matrix has been great for us; maybe a Mazda 3 will be next or a Golf.
Citroen SM because you want some practicality to go with your Maserati engine and ridiculously complex hydraulic suspension, braking and steering.
Alfa Romeo GTV6 & Alfetta GT. Of course there’s a non-removable cover that severely limits the the size of the storage compartment making it almost useless but they’re Alfas so they handle great and the GTV6 makes the sweetest engine sounds this side of a Ferrari.
Porsche 944 & 944 Turbo. Putting a real Porsche engine and bulging out the fenders did wonders for the unloved and overpriced 924 but these had a more useless cargo compartment than the Alfas.
1986-1989 Honda Accord. The last of an era for Honda, this was the ultimate interpretation of the brilliant 1976 Accord. It was handily outsold by the four door and wasn’t replaced when the next generation 1990 came out.
Renault 4. We had two and liked the first one, a ’71 in forest green, better than the second one. The cane style shifter in the ’71 allowed for really quick shifts between 2nd and 3rd gear because they were in one line. Push forward to 2nd and pull back to 3rd. In later models they went to a standard H pattern which requires a zig-zag move between 2 and 3. 80% of the shifts were between 2 and 3.
If our budget had had more circumference we may have opted for the Simca 1100 or even the R16. The styling of the R 16 is awesome.
I owned and loved the Mazda 232 hatchback.
We also had a “81 Mercury Capri. It was not so good.
Of course the minivans were hatchbacks as well.
At this time I am mulling a downsizing from the minivan and a Mazda 6 wagon made the cut for the short list.
I love hatches and I really miss having one around many times. My Fit was just so practical, with the Magic Seat system you could pile in amazing amounts. It was also a blast to dive.
My favourite, by far, was the Golf Mk1 Rabbit, from 1978-1980. The bugs had been worked out in the cars by then. Rabbits were not cheap in Canada, and VW brought in almost all the diesels as the top Rabbit L model. I had a ’78 in the same safety orange the ones in the picture have. The car had a very nice interior and even with all of 48 hp it always felt peppy and light on its feet. I remember a tank of fuel lasted three weeks and the car got over 50 mpg Imperial. These were the last of the no assist cars, they weren’t even designed for power steering and of course, it was fast. It was also heavy, especially in the cars with a/c and automatic.
I drove mine all over the place and it never missed a beat. It tracked really well and went up hills as fast as anything else at the time did. The seating position in these cars is still the best I have ever experienced. I felt more comfortable in Mk 1 Rabbit than any other car.
Man, have you been smoking that BC herb again?
1. Golf/Rabbits never had their bugs worked out. I owned my orange (Panama Brown) ’78 for 16 years so I have some idea.
2. Heavy? Maybe if you got the special Ruebenesque Avoirdupois option. But even with a full roll cage we had to ballast our Bilstein Rabbit to make sure we could make the post-race weight of 1750 pounds (794 kg). Granted, today’s Golf has a lot more “value added” crap that turns it into Chunkles the Clown. But the ’78s were positively anorexic in comparison. See my previous comment above.
I would beg to differ here, Kevin. The early Rabbits were really awful, the carbs were never set up right, even with Canadian emissions. The 1977 models were much better and the 1980 much better again.
By 1980, any Rabbit problem was well known and any owner familiar with the the car could easily fix them. The main problems were always the fuse block and the door handles. When something did break, the Bug suppliers went big into aftermarket Rabbit stuff and it was dirt cheap. The cars were very easy to work on. Of course as the cars got older, they needed more wrenching, but it as never hard to do on a Rabbit.
If you look at my post, you will note that I was referring to the steering of the Rabbit. While not bad in manual non-a/c form, in the cars with a/c and auto it was very heavy. My gf at the time had a Gen 1 Jetta so equipped and man, was it hard to steer.
In the US we didn’t have to deal with carbs after 1975. The Bosch Fuel Injection on the Rabbits was the only reliable system on the car. The engine felt like a mini-V8 compared to my 1100cc Fiat. Otherwise, you are correct, the cars were dead simple and easy to work on.
I drove a 1989 Golf in Spain for nearly 6000 miles. No power nuthin. What a great car! Steering feel and response better than my ’78.
Of all modern hatches I like the Renault Clio and Volvo V40 the most.
Renault Clio
Volvo V40
The problem I would have with the Clio, if it was available in the US, is the same probelm I have with the Hyundai hatches, and to a lesser extent with the Focus and Mazda3: very poor visibility to the rear and rear quarters.
The earlier Nissan Versa, apparently a Renault body with a Nissan drivetrain, built in Mexico, had better visibility, along with several other features I look for in a hatchback, though in terms of refinement, comes up short compared to the Golf.
Current Opel Astra does it for me.
Buick utterly ruined it when they stuck a trunk on the back.
Just revealed, fastest Opel ever, the Astra OPC Extreme.
I always thought the first generation Euro-spec Ford Fiesta was a neat design and always wanted to drive one. I was too young (in elementary school) to have a chance to drive them when they were prevalent in the early 80’s. It probably has better outward visibility than many of today’s hatchbacks.
We had two of them in the late seventies-early eighties. An 1100S and a 1300S. The latter was a lukewarm little hatch, but the 1100 had a better driveability (engine characteristics).
I learnt to drive in one like that.
Seems small and basic now!
I looked at the 1st gen Fiesta when it was new. Nice looking car, but just too small inside for my 6′ self. I at least fit in the 81 Escort, but the loose suspension, weak engine, poor pedal location and poor shifter said “no”
Used to drive US131 between Grand Rapids and Kalamazoo in the mid 80s and would pass a storage place where they were at least 10 of these Fiestas parked.
+1 my first car was a fiesta.
+2 my first new car was also a Fiesta. Here in the US I got a little tired of everyone mistaking it for a VW Rabbit (Golf), but the similarities in styling are hard to ignore. The “two box” shape was simply the most efficient at the time.
I am a tradionalist and maybe even a reactionary type of guy.
For me, for me Formidable, the R 16.
– It’s Industrial design by Philippe Charbonneaux.
– It’s totally out-of- the box concept
– It’s Yes, let us just do this car, and while we’re at it, let us build a whole new factory to produce it.
The fact that the Renault 16 is halfway Citroën’s legendary DS series, in its own innovative way; then engine lay out, the fully closed cooling system, no grease points and an electrical high speed cooling fan- The devil IS in the details !
The fact that you just bought an R16 and you bought a good and reliable car.
And the fact it just looked ‘normal’ enough to be embraced by millions.
Like Jeremy Clarkson would say : “Yes, this is the car we want, this is the car we need ! ”
And last but not least, actually built and developed by civil servants; because Renault was 100% state owned back then.
I rest my case.
R16 hatchback this, R16 hatchback that. That’s all I hear from my dad and he doesn’t even own one. It is a very handsome vehicle though. Exquisite dip in the bonnet.
And my second favorite hatch :
—-Autobianchi a 112——-
– The first hot-hatch in Abarth livery, seventy Horses ! 70HP
– Drives like a bat out of hell.
Very nice!
We don’t see these in the US of A but a Ford Festiva (Mazda 121, re-badged as Ford) would make very good Ersatz-Autobianchi.
I’ll take a Rover SD1, of course, assuming I can find one that’s been restored to the condition it should’ve left the factory in (but sadly rarely did).
Hatchbacks are the default car choice, small-to-family, everywhere in western Europe with, it seems, one exception, the Republic of Ireland, where weirdly-bodied saloon Focuses and other cobbled together bastard-offspring-of-Orions remain popular.
I’d give it a tie between Foxbody Mustangs and 73/74 Novas for me, I’d even throw in the Vega from an aesthetic standpoint. I definitely fall into the 3 door fastback camp for my hatchback love, I really don’t care for two box designs for anything other than appliance grade merits, with few exceptions of course, and I refuse to participate in recent societies shift to 4(5) doors.
The odd thing to me about the XKE was that the hatch opened from the side rather than from the roof…to me for some reason that seems to be more like a “hatch” (thinking of submarine hatch) since it looks more like a door than
the roof mounted hinge hatchbacks…are there any other side mounted hatches on a car (other than station wagons, vans, or SUVs?).
Of course I’m a big hatchback fan, having owned no other type of vehicle since 1981…all VWs (an A1 Scirocco, A2 GTi, and now A4 Golf). I think it started out oddly as appearance, as I just liked how some of them looked (my A1 Scirocco is still my favorite body style after all that time)
though I have to admit it later turned to practicality, as many people can attest, I’ve hauled all sorts of odd loads over the years which would otherwise have needed a station wagon or truck, but I get to drive a small fun sized car the rest of the time (I know they don’t build hatchbacks to carry much weight, though I’ve sometimes overloaded them, most of the stuff has been more bulky than heavy). I’ve considered owning a sedan
(in my old age) but as I only have one vehicle, and normally don’t haul many people, the hatchback has been best choice for me.
As for favorite ones, I think I have a bit of a thing for any hatchback, but my A1 Scirocco is still my favorite car (despite its flaws) but it also was a younger man’s car, pretty low seating, better for the “younger” me. I wish there were larger sized hatchbacks for the aging population , something like the 626 or even Impala sized, guess I really would have to get an older full sized wagon to be equivalent.
Interestingly, my Father has owned the predecessor to the R16 in the top picture, he had an R10 (which wasn’t a hatchback of course)…and I think has owned only one hatchback in his life (though several wagons…which was a staple vehicle in my family when I was growning up)…so far he’s owned 21 cars (I think I’m only at number 5 myself….keep my cars a lot longer than he).
Gee, if we are going with side-hinged hatches, can I change my vote to the 1941-42 Chrysler Town & Country? Not a sedan, not a wagon, so it must be a hatchback, right?
Probably not. The rear window stays closed while the back doors are open.
Re the T&C, the Ford Excursion called, it wants its side-hinged lower doors back! 😉
The side opening door is one of my favorite thing about our cube. About the only thing I like better on the cube than you would find on it’s partner in crime, the Versa. Like the old sedan delivery it opens towards the street and gives access to the curb. It has all the benefits of a hatch with a little more room.
I wonder if it opens the other way in Japan.
It does. LHD Cubes are a complete mirror-image of RHD ones.
I always found it odd that the RAV4 and CR-V had rear doors open the wrong way for LHD countries. That sort of thing one expects from the British, not the likes of Toyota and Honda.
I would choose a Citroën LNA.
It’s basically a Peugeot 104 with a flat-twin from the 2 Cv (actually, it might be a flat twin from a Dyane or an Ami 8, I am not really sure on that one…).
I would take a “Club” limited edition, painted light blue, as my grandmother’s one was.
It was the first car I’ve ever driven, at the age of 4 (well, I was only using the wheel, sitting on my uncle’s lap while he was operating the pedals).
I drove it much later , when I was of age of driving. It had a hole in the muffler so it basically made the sound of a Cessna at full throttle. But I enjoyed driving it and I would like to own one.
Since I can’t get an Aztec here, it would have to be a Rover SD1 or perhaps an Aston Martin Rapide
Eminently tossable and fun, regardless of the weather.
a beautiful hatch!
Yes, I love these as well! I think I’ve only seen one in real life; it was sold in the US for only one or two model years in the early ’90s, I believe. (The convertible version is a dime a dozen in comparison, as I think it was sold for about a decade.)
Toyota Celica and Corolla hatchbacks in the 1980s.
I scanned through these rather quickly. Did anyone nominate the MGB-GT? I loved those, especially the pre-1968 models with the clean, spare dash layout. Of course, carrying capacity was nothing like that of an SD1 or a Renault 16, but then the accent was on sport. Another poster mentioned the Volvo 1800ES, and I like that choice, too.
Holy crap – there’s a lot of posting here!
AMC Hornet hatch is a superb and beautiful, yet completely affordable, hatch when it appeared in 1974. It sold amazingly well and really introduced to the US the hatchback design. It is still stunning.
So to the guy who mentioned it – well done! Just not with the ugly tent.
Then there was the nomination of the Citation.
I completely agree!
That was a beautiful, clean and well made hatch. The designed added functionality and style to a very beautiful car. Too bad these cars were absolute trash, because it was an excellent looking car. Especially when the grille was altered into a horizontal bar style – it was so simple, so clean and so MODERN.
The SAAB 900/9000 is another outstanding design for hatches. Almost too large, but then, the entire car was such an original. The fact that the entire rear end of this car would open like a giant clam to swallow anything you put into it – and the sheer size of the car itself, is so commendable. That was a solid and heavy, but superbly engineered hatch.
Finally, I have to mention the brilliance of the Kaiser Traveler. Taking a post WWII automobile and making it hatchback friendly makes the Traveler a Hatch Hall of Famer and a real pioneer. It is an admirable and creative out-of-the-box kind of thinking that American Independents of the 1950s brought to the US.
1971-73 Vega GT Hatchback was a beautiful car. Probably best-looking small car of 1970s.
I am glad to know I am not the only one who appreciated the styling of the Vega. A terrible car that did more singlehandedly to give the Japanese a foothold in the American market, but, in my opinion, just like the 2nd generation Corvair, a car that was style as well as any others of their time.
Stretching the definition, but I think the Hillman Imp’s opening rear window was clever, allowing loading from the rear of the car and it probably had all of $17 in development costs.
Owned an 89 Mazda 626 5 door, the next generation past the pictured version and it was a decent car for it’s day. The hatch was quite handy for the strollers and other kid requirements we had back then.
For today, the Subaru Impreza outback sport wagon is a great hatch, I’m thinking…. It certainly isn’t a wagon.
Ladies & Gents: May I present MY favorite Hatchback-the 2012 Honda Fit Sport (w/ 5 Spd Manual)!!! Applause!! 🙂
Flame suit on but I like the chrome accents you’ve added, they wouldn’t work with every color but look great on deep blue.
Surprised no one mentioned this guy yet, Peugeot 205
Excellent !
This one is a 1991 205 GTi 1.9 and the current owner has it registered on his (or her) name since november 1, 2013.
88 kW-120 hp, let’s say adequate, since it only weighs 860 kg. (1,895 lbs)
The Peugeot 205 GTI gets my vote too.
not to be a curmudgeon here but are we talking hatchback or liftback. To me that represents two different styles. I am not talking as a expert designer just a car guy. Lift back I think Datsun 240, 260, 280, 300, mazda 626, Toyota corolla, celica, fuego someone mentioned, the impulse. I think hatch I think distinctly VW golf, Fiat Panda, Yugo, Fiesta, justy, Peugeot 205, opel corsa etc, etc. forgive me for throwing a dart, don’t flame me or call me a troll not my intention just curious as to the view. Lift back is a coupe wanna be with a long trunk, a hatch is an egg more or less with a hatch.
Toyota marketed its Corona hatch as a lift back very similar to the 626 in overall design.
Not much of a hatch fan but I’ve always like Pinto Runabouts from ’72 on. Why Ford put that tiny rear window in ’71 Runabouts is beyond me. Always had a thing for first gen Fiestas and Festivas too.
Yes. 72 was the best of the Pinto Runabouts.
Never have I been in a hatchback with the same ability to swallow a washing machine as a Saab 900 classic.
True enough- the 900 Classic was the seminal luxury hatchback (well, actually the 99EMS, but it wasn’t until the 900 era that they took off). Great car, as was my Rover SD1- but with too high of a liftover for serious wagon duties. My old Citroen XM was also able to swallow large appliances, and was the most practical, as the suspension could lower to the floor so you didn’t have to lift things as high. If I had to choose one to own again, I don’t know which it would be- all were very practical and all had supermely comfortable seats. The Citroen and Saab were better built than the Rover, but the Rover was the prettiest. Strangely, my Saab was the least reliable of the three, even if it did feel the most solid and indestructible. I’d have to say that as I can now weld, I’d own the Rover again now, as it was by far the easiest car to work on- it had a 2 litre engine in a bay sized for a V8 or straight six. Both the Saab and Cit had me cursing when changing parts, with the Saab water pump and harmonic balancer winning the ‘bad engineering award,’ with the Citroen’s hydraulic pipe coupling ‘spider’ and rear suspension arm bearings coming a close second.
The ’05-06 Mazda6 could be had in a hatch. Beautiful cars. They are tough to find. I had to settle for the StaWag.
Regular car, Saab 900 3 door by a mile!
For an exotic, Jensen Interceptor!
Oo, forgot about the Interceptor. It has one of the most beautiful hatches ever designed – a local car collector has a hatch (not the car, just the glass hatch) on display in his private collection, it’s like a glass sculpture.
1975-80 Chevrolet Monza/Oldsmobile Starfire/Pontiac Sunbird/Buick Skyhawk.
Early 90s Toyota Corolla LIFTback, not so much the hatchback.
Alfa Romeo 147s still look fresh and modern.
The current Fiat Bravo/Ritmo, and Lancia Delta.
1975-79 GM X-Body hatch.
Current Opel Astra and Insignia.
The post and comments have been fascinating to read. IMHO the most beautiful unobtainable classic hatch (although sideways opening) is the E-Type Jag. The most beautiful obtainable classic hatch (albeit possibly for masochists) is the facelift Rover SD1 (with flush Euro headlights). The most controversially styled (but still great looking IMHO) is the Ford Sierra XR4i (as covered in Merkur XR4Ti form here recently).
Of new cars, the current Audi A5 and A7 are stunners, the BMW hatchoid things are not, and I am deeply grateful to Honda NZ that we don’t get the hideous Crosstour that looks like a dog parking its breakfast. Honourable mention goes to the late Mazda6 hatch.
*slapping forehead* I’m getting forgetful in my old age.
1st gen Acura Integra. True, the hatch slopes, which limits load height, and doesn’t open to the bumper so liftover height is high, but so what? Just look at it. That lean and clean look that Honda did so well, before it lost it’s mojo.
Five door too. There was a CC of the 1st gen Integra a while back.
After the Renault 16, only the Citroën XM satisfies.
Profile, in repose.
This specimen was lurking at the curb in Vila Madalena, São Paulo, the weekend between Christmas and New Years.
I’m absolutely FLOORED that the hands down most attractive hatchback of all time was only mentioned by just one other astute person. Come on! It’s the Peugeot 205 GTI 1.9. The styling is the very definition of what is considered ageless. Just LOOK at its design integrity: the body detailing (the “pepper-pot” wheels, the subtle front and back slatted trim, the redline fat body side moulding, the unique “C” pillar twin-slats with the “1.9 GTI” call-outs… And all that was just Peugeot’s detail work, not Pininfarina’s, which only penned the body in broadstroke. But what a broadstroke! Consider the unmatched rearward sweep of the body flank as it swoops up around a squared, overlarge rear window forming a letter “C” which is the “C” pillar up into the roof. The car had a unique higher percentage of the window area to the lower body and this is responsible for its balance of proportions. Finally, there’s the front and back ends. The front has a traditional Peugeot feline face and the back is tasteful and muscular with it’s right sized square rear tailights, relegated to the edges. The car looked best in dark grey, dark green, dark red and dark blue, unusual and rarely used (premium) color choices for a small car.
In summary, It all adds up to one thing: Design Icon.
Not only a design icon, it also saved Peugeot from going bankrupt.
Our high school class was in France in april 1982, I was 16 back then, part of the 10 days’ trip was a visit to the Peugeot factory. What a depressing scenery it was….Shortly after the 205 would change everything.
I’ll probably need to duck and run, but I’ll nominate the only two hatchbacks I’ve ever owned…
1984 Chevy Chevette (My Energizer Bunny car)
1974 Datsun B210 (The little rust bucket that could)
Both 4 speed and power nothing.
There’s also the VW Passat. In the States they called it a Dasher.
I was always partial to the ’94-’98 Mazda Astina.
Hatchback cars I have owned:
1980, 1985 and 1986 Mercury Capri (USDM, *not* Euro market cars), with turbo and V8 power.
1983 Pontiac Trans Am WS6
1986 & 1987 Yugo
1987 Dodge Lancer Turbo ES
2001, 2003 & 2004 Pontiac Aztek
2006 Chevy Malibu Maxx (similar to Euro Opel Signum)
My favorites: In this order…
#1. Dodge Lancer Turbo. Best car for me. I’d have another one in a minute.
#2. Yugo GV. With the magic back seat, I could stuff all kinds of things into that car, that no other car I’ve ever owned could take. Stupid simple, tough as an anvil. Plus, excellent fuel mileage and an Italian high revving engine…
#3. Malibu Maxx. The hatchback for the older me, quiet, refined and more powerful. Plus a boatload of room for my stuff. I could easily haul my complete drum kit around in it. I should have kept it, not knowing there wouldn’t be another one…
forgot my photo of my #1 choice…
I have to say – the hatchback Lebaron/Lancer are sharp designs especially considering their origins in the K-Car. Why didn’t Chrysler keep going with such a hatchback design?
Has anyone mentioned the Merkur cars?
Yes, but only the XR4Ti, I forgot about the Granada/Scorpio! We got a handful new in NZ as the Ford Scorpio. Most of ours were the 2.8 V6, but a mate of a mate had an ’86 2-litre Pinto-engined Scorpio Ghia in the early 90s. Despite the lack of power, it was a very elegant design, and great to look at.
Back in the day, my Farfisa Compact, Leslie 825, Sunn Concert Lead Amp and 15″ Kustom Speaker in plywood cabinet would all fit in the back of my Rabbit (Golf). Add a few 6 packs and meet up with the other guys with their equipment in the mountains along with a generator and we had big fun annoying the campers! Wow, 250 comments is that a new record? Only once did somebody put sugar in the gas tank of the generator.
Lancia Beta HPE… ’77 thru ’79. One of the most beautiful cars of its time.
I’m surprised the Audi TT hasn’t been mentioned yet. I was behind an early one the other day and was amazed at how fresh it still looked. I know it’s not the most practical hatch design (that nomination would have to go to its sibling, the Golf), but dang…
Looks like I’m a couple days late to the party…
Which is why I’m surprised there’s no love for the Sterling 827 SLi! (Or the Rover equivalent whose precise name escapes me.)
It’s not my *favorite*–that would probably be a Citroen XM or a Jensen Interceptor–but it’s still pretty cool, and one of the very few large premium hatchbacks ever sold in the US. The Merkur and Saab 9000 are the only other similarly ambitious ones I can think of.
I forgot about the Sterling version. I remember seeing sedans, but never the hatchback, outside of ads and brochures. It was very sharp.
No one mentioned the Lancia Delta Integrale….