I like it, but as was pointed out in the comments of that article, using the max dimensions rather than the minimum dimensions is a miss.
Door width is the other big one. It isn’t useful to have space for something if you can’t get it in. This has become more of an issue as designers taper the rear of vans/suvs for aerodynamics and style. I looked at a new Sienna to potentially replace my Transit Connect and while in theory there was more volume inside (as its a longer vehicle), it appeared way less usable given the rear hatch shape and irregular dimensions. I’m now somewhat interested in the upcoming Santa Fe, basically just because how much the designers talked about maximizing rear opening size.
The kicker for rear entry taper is the need to have the taillights visible at all times (per regulations). Thus the rear door tends to be shrunk to accommodate, rather than the classic clamshell design (IIRC Buick got around this by adding a second set of smaller tail lights in the body separate from the tail lights in the rear hatch on some models, like the Cascada).
I love my 2000 V70 for this reason, even more so than my mk4 vw wagon. The opening is a giant square that’s pretty much the width and height of the cargo area. I know it’s more a function of it being an older car with thinner pillars and lighting elements, but things are so raked it definitely makes it difficult when the opening is substantially smaller than the actual cargo area. Maybe that’s why I’m so drawn to Transit Connects, it’s a box.
I like it, but as was pointed out in the comments of that article, using the max dimensions rather than the minimum dimensions is a miss.
Door width is the other big one. It isn’t useful to have space for something if you can’t get it in. This has become more of an issue as designers taper the rear of vans/suvs for aerodynamics and style. I looked at a new Sienna to potentially replace my Transit Connect and while in theory there was more volume inside (as its a longer vehicle), it appeared way less usable given the rear hatch shape and irregular dimensions. I’m now somewhat interested in the upcoming Santa Fe, basically just because how much the designers talked about maximizing rear opening size.
The kicker for rear entry taper is the need to have the taillights visible at all times (per regulations). Thus the rear door tends to be shrunk to accommodate, rather than the classic clamshell design (IIRC Buick got around this by adding a second set of smaller tail lights in the body separate from the tail lights in the rear hatch on some models, like the Cascada).
I love my 2000 V70 for this reason, even more so than my mk4 vw wagon. The opening is a giant square that’s pretty much the width and height of the cargo area. I know it’s more a function of it being an older car with thinner pillars and lighting elements, but things are so raked it definitely makes it difficult when the opening is substantially smaller than the actual cargo area. Maybe that’s why I’m so drawn to Transit Connects, it’s a box.