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.