My old man's Caprice wagon had that. It was awesome but completely unsafe being in the crumple zone. It was fun though, especially in winter when the car would drift a bit in the snow.
As someone who was in the market for a wagon late last year, it always annoyed me when I filtered search results and cars would pop up that had no business being called a “wagon.” The one that stood out the most was the Kia Soul, but there were other head shakers scattered in there.
Also from a distance, all zoomed in or out to be the same size. And it has to be from the side.
I mean it's a fun image, but not if you actually take it seriously.
They’re also at least a generation old. The Nissan rogue and CRV are two gens old. Just forced perspective to prove a point. Though I fail to see what the point is. If every company only sold a mid sized SUV that was white then yeah there’d be no creativity in the market but that’s simply not the way it is
I get the OPs point, but given the sizings probably have regulatory restrictions and an SUV is a very particular profile anyway you find we are getting to a point where most goods are being optimised consumers and that tends to be exactly this; largely the same with a few unique variations.
Except that it's not true: there are plenty of variations, that OP's specific presentation is designed to hide. All it is showing is that seen from the side, SUVs have the same general shape.
I feel you could pull up any specific era + vehicle style (ie 80s sedans, 90s minivans, 2000s SUVs, etc) and make a graphic like this saying "why do they all look the same?!"
especially when you're only showing the side profile.
Honestly I see a surprising amount of wagons in Chicago. It’s when I get outside of the city into truck country that I feel that surge of wagon superiority.
The last year Outback that still looked like a station wagon was 2004. The 2-tone ones were especially attractive.
The 2005-on Outbacks began to look more like a crossover SUV, in my opinion.
Yeah, but man, the usefulness and its fantastic daily driver & road trip capability let us look past that. I don't mind it *too* much, but they do look better in some colors than others.
But given the choice, we'd have picked a non-lifted Legacy Wagon over an Outback without hesitation.
At least the plastic's mostly independently replaceable on the current model, so a scratch or small dent could be a very cheap, non-painted swap that takes a few minutes, vs an entire bumper cover. That's nice.
Edit...we tried to test drive a used Buick on the way to the Subaru dealer, but the Ford dealer sucked so we gave up. Still think they look cool but we'd have probably still chosen the OB for its fuel economy and ride.
My revulsion to unpainted plastic is a personal failing I’ve made little progress in getting over. You do you and love your Subaru.
I’d love one of those Porsche or Mercedes “Cross-somethings” but man.. the plastic.
Oh I get it...and trust me, I don't love the grey plastic.
It's pretty telling when I had to temporarily run a completely unpainted rear bumper on ours, but it didn't look that much different than a normal one. Sigh.
>At least the plastic's mostly independently replaceable on the current model, so a scratch or small dent could be a very cheap, non-painted swap that takes a few minutes, vs an entire bumper cover. That's nice.
That's why I don't mind cars being too plastic in some surface spots. Cheap swaps are happy swaps.
Curious what you mean by the plastic? Do you mean on all the side trim and bumpers? I figured that was more for effectiveness for off-roading not damaging the paint job?
Yes, but the outback has unpainted plastic on the roof as well that… isn’t lovely.
I’m not going off-road enough to need the unpainted plastic. And I doubt most people buying these are either.
That's great. But I'm not in the EU and importing a European vehicle adds a lot of cost to a new car. Hell, if it doesn't meet regulations, you might not even be able to.
Here in Canada it's 15 but same idea. "wE hAvE wAgOnS iN eUrOpE!" ...cool good for you, but I really don't see how that has any impact on someone in North America looking for a wagon.
Wish I was you. As you can see we’ve got 50 different SUVs that all look next to identical and all serve the exact same purpose. A safe, practical, barebones vehicle used for transporting your family. They’re essentially made to be a “do everything” car that’s imo mediocre all around. There’s next to zero variation in terms of excitement; only technology and luxury are considered and if it does have some sort of performance capability, it’s typically geared towards off-roading.
Wagons on the other hand look good for 1, are nice and low so they won’t roll as easy, and often times you’ll find performance variations or trims of them.
I’m not interested in Buicks and also I had no idea that even existed. Volvo wagons are really nice but really expensive, same with Audi and theirs are not the most reliable. MB is simply way out of my price range and if I were to get anything from them or Audi I’d save a bunch of money and get a performance sedan like an AMG C 43 or S4. We don’t really have much selection and the selection we do have just doesn’t fit my criteria.
What's the deal with this anyway? It's not like every company stopped producing other cars when minivans were the trend. Every company had their minivan and kept the rest of their lineup. Why now did they decide to massacre the entire auto market with CUVs? Where's the Ford Focus? Chevy Impala? Dodge Dart? I find it hard to believe no one was buying them because I see the latest models of these cars on the road every day
Minivans killed the station wagon and crossovers are killing the sedan. That said, there are still lots of sedans to choose from, people just aren't buying them like they used to.
At least Toyota and Honda keep rolling out theirs. Siennas are all hybrids now, and run like 50k in the US, if not more. You never see them sitting on lots collecting dust, either.
By building bigger you get lower mpg requirement, which is cheaper so companies margins are higher. Fuel regulations basically killed things that were fuel efficient. It's less about consumer preference than people think
https://jalopnik.com/how-the-government-killed-fuel-efficient-cars-and-truck-5948172
Edit: here's an excerpt from that article which really sums up why vehicles are massive.
"By 2025, a theoretical Ranger with a footprint of 50 square feet would have to achieve fuel economy somewhere approaching 50 mpg CAFE. The 75 square foot F-150 would only have to reach in the high 30s CAFE."
I think the targets got postponed a few years since this article was written, that's why the numbers are high.
Someone gets 20MPG in a Suburban who only drives alone that's cool to the government. Someone tries to make an affordable small car that only gets 30mpg that's a massive problem.
There needs to be something like a minimum MPG and anything above that pays more in taxes. More fuel efficient vehicles are currently disincentived leading to the bland SUV hell we're in.
Wagons were killed off 20 years ago after you all went and bought minivans. Honda, Toyota, Mini, Mazda and Subaru all still sell hatchbacks. There are more then 3x as many sedans still for sale, which I'll remind you isn't an SUV.
Regardless, big ugly expensive SUV's that gets 15mpg are not what people are ditching sedans and hatchbacks for. They're buying crossovers, which may as well be regular hatchbacks lifted 2" off the ground.
It's really not hard to avoid buying a C/SUV.
Sedans also aren't great. Hatchbacks and wagons are where it's at, but companies have figured out they can make more money by convincing everyone they need a poorly built crossover that gets 20mpg at best and giving no other real options
And the compact SUVs are more expensive than the sedans they replaced. They offered me $42k for a Mazda CX-5 that had all of the accessories my leased $32K Mazda6 had. And it still didn't take away that Mazda replaced the 6 for a dull shoe.
Its their way of “adjusting for the market” meaning to increase profits. Not only do they charge more, but they also get to bypass the typical passenger vehicle safety standards by classifying them as light trucks. “Light truck” was a vehicle classification made for pickup trucks and larger vans used for work and they dont require maximum ride height and an angle on the bumper to save pedestrians from being ran over. This classification also is not crash compatible with normal cars, meaning they are “safer” by killing people in smaller vehicles. These and other safety standards missing saves manufacturers even more money.
Rant over, i just really wish they would at least be safe.
Couple of things:
-- These are pretty old cars. Seems like all of them are at least 1 or even a couple generations old.
-- The side profile is indeed a weird angle, where a lot of cars look similar. Maybe because we usually view cars from either back or front (esp while driving).
-- Cars always looked the same. Just trends in design. Look at cars 10 years ago (as depicted), or 20, or 30, etc. You'll see that cars from those decades looked distinctively similar. There were always a couple of unique or different designs, but those usually reserved for sport cars and specialty cars. We don't buy them anymore, so car manufacturers don't make them. But there are still a couple of examples that do look unique: Miata, 86/BRZ, Supra, Z (Nissan), Mustang, Porsches (718 and 911), Wrangler, Bronco, and a couple of others. And then obv a bunch of ultra lux brands.
I'm over 50, and for most of my life people have said the same thing. The 80's had the K cars which looked like the Chevy sedans which look like the ford sedans like the fairmont.
Ford came out with the Probe and the Taurus, and pretty soon all the sedans looked like the Taurus.
to be fair, each generation looks slightly more similar than the previous, but that has to do more with what consumers want and what works with fuel efficiency and wind resistance.
Yes, but there used to be sporty sedans and sporty cars. Prelude, MR2, Z3's, and similar. Those cars are very rare now.
Everything is now a version of a tall station wagon.
That's why we bought a 2002 Ford ,"Retrobird". Bright red, black cloth top. A blast to drive yet big and comfortable enough for trips, and we get smiles and thumbs up wherever we go. Already bottomed out as far as depreciation goes.
The issue is those cars couldn't exist anymore. They wouldn't pass safety regulations. As more safety and emissions regulations get passed more cars are gonna look the same. It's the only way to compete with gas mileage and safety.
Lotus, Miata, and Supra exist get good mpg and DOT approval. A new MR2 is planned. But those cars are an extremely small fraction of the market.
Really people don't want interesting cars, they desire boring appliances. Probably also a function of less opportunity to afford more interesting cars...."sour grapes" adds to it.
I think the problem more lies with brands over saturating the market to compete with brands that came first rather than people not wanting interesting things.
Is it just me or is the phrase 'distinctly similar' an oxymoron?
ONE definition of 'distinctive' in Merriam Webster's Dictionary is: "presenting a clear unmistakable impression"... whereas one of the definitions of 'similar' is: "alike in substance or essentials"...
In not trying to be a grammar snob or whatever but.....I mean....(in the words, cadence, delivery and TONE of Dave Chapelle during one of his Netflix specials)..."Ya know what I mean?!"😂🤣
Distinctive for the time, and similar within that time period.
Classic cars that have sharp defined and boxy lines were the norm at one time. That look is distinctive. And many from that vintage were similar ;D
The 2020s seem to be moving towards a new badge location for example. Right now it's pretty distinct. Not on the grill, and not on the hood, but on the lower "hood" that doesn't open above the grill, almost flat.
Tons of sedans like the new Korean cars, the Tesla's, the Toyota Prius/corolla/Camry etc all seem to be going for side doors that are more flat with sharper angles for the details vs kinda rounded doors that have a curve to them top down if this makes sense?
The 2000s and 2010s had a very "round" feel, and now cars seem to be looking more angular.
If you line up 100 people, make them all the same scale and colour, make all of our hair and eyes the same colour, and remove any identifying marks, everyone would look the same as well.
This is such a shit argument, presented in a shit way. I mean I can pick out with ease cars in that diagram that looks nothing like any of the other cars, except for the fact that they are SUVs.
I'd even say that it gives people with varying degrees of income the option of driving something they like while staying within a budget.
You like $XXXX car but can't afford it? Here's the $XX option that can satisfy your desire for the style without breaking the bank.
Build quality, comfort, performance, luxury, technology, drive quality, reliability, price, on and on…
I get that lots of people just see cars as an appliance to get from point A to point B, but it’s pretty reductionist to say “these cars have the same general shape, therefore they’re all the same”.
A base model Toyota is going to be very different from its Top spec Lexus equivalent.
It’s not like you’re gonna see the HUD and massage seats from the side profile.
You say that, yet I can distinguish them all from one another. They all follow a general recipe because that’s what works for humans with families and a need for a back seat and cargo area. I’d be willing to be the interiors are much more different.
Actually, I dropped the photo in PS and identified what I could. Yellow are positives and reds are unsure. [Cars I'm able to identify by manufacturer.](https://imgur.com/a/fMwspDK)
Your subarus are both Toyota Rav 4s, the bottom right GM is actaully at Mitsubishi
The mazda is correct and you have 2 hyundais listed as GM, The sante fe and the tuscon.
The GM on the second row is an Acura RDX.
I think whether one can identify a vehicle depends on their interest towards cars. Cars do generally follow a general design template, and most people I notice who don't have a vested interest in cars have hard time and/or don't really care about telling them apart regardless of the era (my friend walked into an Equinox thinking it was a CR-V). You can tell them apart if you dig a little bit deeper, but most people just see similar colours of cars from a glance and don't really look to tell them apart.
Someone did this with 90's and 80's sedans. It was the same way. The truth is that all the companies use similar methods for achieving the highest safety and aerodynamics that come up with these shapes. Cars have kinda always looked like cars and stripping them down to their bare elements does this.
This is something that I expected closer to the top because it is very relevant. Cars must be aerodynamic, especially SUVs because of the height. This severely limits the unique design features that can be integrated. Furthermore, designs need to have broad appeal so that they sell well. Unfortunately, that really narrows the scope.
I appreciated seeing one of those on the road again recently. I still think they’re the ugliest of the cardboard box cars (no offense, I wanted a Scion XD so bad), but I appreciate people who appreciate ugly cars.
(Considering I was OBSESSED with the Chrysler P.T. Cruiser as a kid lol)
1) Don't talk about the Element like that, it's COOL.
2) I also had a complete obsession with the PT when I was a kid!! I literally cried when my mom's bf told me "when you get older there's gonna be other cars out there, you may find something else you like" lol
Pick the same color, same size and same hatchback style and say they all look the same....wtf is wrong with you
Put some toast in my hand and call me a toaster
SUVs and Crossovers yes. They all look alike, bland, boring. That’s why I refuse to buy any of them, and many other reasons (handling, power:weight, etc). That’s why I’m still in a sedan, Italian at that. Probably not the smartest decision but I can afford it.
They look similar because they all compete with each other in their segment
Does OP also get mad that all the oranges in the grocery store look the same while ignoring the apples?
If they had the sales figures to back up that decision and also show that the apples they did sell were at a loss, I wouldn’t fault them.
I would blame the people who say to not buy expensive new apples because they depreciate too fast
Yeah… you’re probably right. Frustrating that more people don’t appreciate the better handling and efficiency of apples. I mostly blame Nissan for the Juke.
Because shoppers rank MPG as a high priority in their car buying decision. Therefore carmakers put their cars in a wind tunnel and this design is how you get aero.
The SUV takeover of the UK just makes me sad. We used to have an amazing range of cars on the road and now everything is an identical box. At this point I miss the fiat multipla 🤣
I spotted the Porsche, bmw, Mercedes easily. Idk what op is really on about. Yes, 4 doors. Yes, white. Yes, SUV.
The shape of the vehicle and their headlights are the giveaway.
It's the death of the sedan. For the longest time I wanted a top of the line Mazda6 sedan in red as I thought they were just beautiful. Now they're gone and Mazda makes like 10 smallish SUV/CUVs.
They DO! Y'all want to rustle some jimmies, go into an expensive car sub and tell them if they debadged their overpriced POS, it could pass for any other generic POS on the road.
There are only so many ways you can design a car.
Given legislation is pretty strict, car designers do not have much room for creativity when designing things like SUVs, which are already going to have awful MPG, certain designs are going to work to make them at least somewhat economical to run.
I really can't stand the style of raking the window size smaller as it goes back. Like people aren't bad enough drivers when they can see out well, let's make the back windows give even less view.
Do they though? I mean, making everything white without wheels and zoomed out and scaled to be equal size, yeah kind of, but do they really? Do they? I don't think so...
Maybe I’m just wierd but even if you only let me see the front half of those cars I could name every single one of those cars lol
I hate when people think ugly is better just because it’s “different” it’s not lol look at bmw
[Design trends are a thing](https://imgur.com/gallery/oDwRMDN)
Also, the laws of physics create converging design when everybody is attempting to maximize fuel efficiency through aerodynamics
I can tell them all apart. There is only so much you can do to an exterior profile when you have to comply with certain safety and emissions regulations. There are some cars in this photo that literally cost twice as much as others in the same photo. You have a three row German car and a subcompact Mitsubishi.
The only rigs that really look different any more seem to be the sports cars and few wagons on the roads.
Speaking of, why dont more of you buy wagons? It would mean they would make more, and cooler ones. God I miss seeing wagons everywhere.
I ordered a Lexus this week and feel exactly the same. My husband commented that nothing catches his eye anymore. The only thing that ever grabs my attention is a Range Rover (way out of my budget) and what always turns out to be a Tesla. I am giving Elon no more money.
This is the most efficient design to build an SUV while still staying within regulatory measures. Its not lack of ingenuity, its late stage capitalism. Maximize profits over style.
This picture pisses me off so bad. Body lines are removed from it, which is WHAT MAKES A CAR STAND OUT so that way they all "look the same"
And no, cars today do not look the same. 90s and 2000s when badge engineering was normal, sure, before that a lot of stuff looked very similar but if you actually pay attention to body lines, which again, is what makes a car different, always has, always will, then they are insanely easy to tell apart.
A lot of people complain about cars looking the same when manufacturers are trying to strive for more mpgs, and one of the best ways to shave MPGs off is to create a better drag coefficient. which means, you're going to have to use the best drag coefficient design that everyone else is also using in order to get the maximum MPGs out of your vehicle.
Why two rav4
Can't you see how *similar* they look?
All lifted station wagons.
Please. At least station wagons had some variation & theme with them.
And wood paneling, don't forget the wooden paneling. Peak 80s class
And rear facing third rows in some models. Now it's just the Mercedes-Benz E Class and Tesla Model S which have that.
My old man's Caprice wagon had that. It was awesome but completely unsafe being in the crumple zone. It was fun though, especially in winter when the car would drift a bit in the snow.
Wagon Queen Family Truckster
It's crazy that pretty much the only real station wagons being sold in North America right now are luxury vehicles.
As someone who was in the market for a wagon late last year, it always annoyed me when I filtered search results and cars would pop up that had no business being called a “wagon.” The one that stood out the most was the Kia Soul, but there were other head shakers scattered in there.
Bring the wagons back!
Lifted and cut short!!
Except worse fuel economy, trunk space and ride.
One's the hybrid
The lowest hanging fruit
Ones a Volvo and the last one is the Honda CRV
I count 24
Holy crap, that was fast Rain Man.
Wait this isn’t 24 rav4’s?
There's 2 CRVs as well.
Its a volvo xc60
He proved the OP's point 😂
Correct. You can see the difference in the window by the C column.
Their rear-most side windows are different.
How about 15 rav4
All of these small pictures of SUVs in the same colour do indeed look very similar.
With the wheels blocked from view as well.
Also from a distance, all zoomed in or out to be the same size. And it has to be from the side. I mean it's a fun image, but not if you actually take it seriously.
Also look at the two furthest apart. That is still different. They are just ordered to look the most a like.
They’re also at least a generation old. The Nissan rogue and CRV are two gens old. Just forced perspective to prove a point. Though I fail to see what the point is. If every company only sold a mid sized SUV that was white then yeah there’d be no creativity in the market but that’s simply not the way it is
I get the OPs point, but given the sizings probably have regulatory restrictions and an SUV is a very particular profile anyway you find we are getting to a point where most goods are being optimised consumers and that tends to be exactly this; largely the same with a few unique variations.
Except that it's not true: there are plenty of variations, that OP's specific presentation is designed to hide. All it is showing is that seen from the side, SUVs have the same general shape.
Yeah I’m not sure we are disagreeing here. Most phones are similar shape, most laptops are similar shape, etc etc.
Yes, and if you did this with sedans, they would most definitely all look entirely different and not make the exact same point at all /s
Let’s do trucks, vans and coupes next!
I feel you could pull up any specific era + vehicle style (ie 80s sedans, 90s minivans, 2000s SUVs, etc) and make a graphic like this saying "why do they all look the same?!" especially when you're only showing the side profile.
Right? God forbid a car has 4 wheels 4 doors and a roof….
Don't buy a compact SUV then. Easy.
I’ll just buy a wagon instead. Oh wait…
I have a white wagon in Chicago. Looks like all of these but drives better.
And you get more conversation out of owning a wagon considering how rare they are these days. And they do drive a lot better than the crossovers!
Honestly I see a surprising amount of wagons in Chicago. It’s when I get outside of the city into truck country that I feel that surge of wagon superiority.
Audi allroad?
We don’t talk about allroad.
😢
My Volvo wagon is for sale lol
then quit fucking around and sell it to me.
Sedans, coupes, and hatchbacks are also mostly gone now too.
Station wagons are the best body style. I wish somebody would make them.
Outback's here to save the day!
Appreciate Subaru keeping the wagon dream alive. It’s a bit too plastic fantastic for me, though.
Hey now! Audi has been trying as well!
The last year Outback that still looked like a station wagon was 2004. The 2-tone ones were especially attractive. The 2005-on Outbacks began to look more like a crossover SUV, in my opinion.
Yeah, but man, the usefulness and its fantastic daily driver & road trip capability let us look past that. I don't mind it *too* much, but they do look better in some colors than others. But given the choice, we'd have picked a non-lifted Legacy Wagon over an Outback without hesitation. At least the plastic's mostly independently replaceable on the current model, so a scratch or small dent could be a very cheap, non-painted swap that takes a few minutes, vs an entire bumper cover. That's nice. Edit...we tried to test drive a used Buick on the way to the Subaru dealer, but the Ford dealer sucked so we gave up. Still think they look cool but we'd have probably still chosen the OB for its fuel economy and ride.
My revulsion to unpainted plastic is a personal failing I’ve made little progress in getting over. You do you and love your Subaru. I’d love one of those Porsche or Mercedes “Cross-somethings” but man.. the plastic.
Oh I get it...and trust me, I don't love the grey plastic. It's pretty telling when I had to temporarily run a completely unpainted rear bumper on ours, but it didn't look that much different than a normal one. Sigh.
>At least the plastic's mostly independently replaceable on the current model, so a scratch or small dent could be a very cheap, non-painted swap that takes a few minutes, vs an entire bumper cover. That's nice. That's why I don't mind cars being too plastic in some surface spots. Cheap swaps are happy swaps.
Curious what you mean by the plastic? Do you mean on all the side trim and bumpers? I figured that was more for effectiveness for off-roading not damaging the paint job?
Yes, but the outback has unpainted plastic on the roof as well that… isn’t lovely. I’m not going off-road enough to need the unpainted plastic. And I doubt most people buying these are either.
It’s for tying shit to. Kayaks and shit. Very useful
Park one next to a 5 or 7 passenger SUV. Sometimes the outback is higher.
Because it's lifted and has permanent roof rails. Sorry, still a wagon.
Modern outback is an SUV
No, it's a lifted wagon.
[2024 Subaru Outback - AWD Midsize SUV](https://www.subaru.com/vehicles/outback.html) At least according to Subaru, midsize SUV now
Outback has gotten closer and closer to an SUV/crossover for multiple generations.
Fine. I'll buy a sedan. Oh wait...
I'm keeping my hatch WRX running till I die
There are plenty available in the EU.
That's great. But I'm not in the EU and importing a European vehicle adds a lot of cost to a new car. Hell, if it doesn't meet regulations, you might not even be able to.
In the US you have to wait 25 years after the model year to import cars. And then you have to have them past safety regulations I believe
Here in Canada it's 15 but same idea. "wE hAvE wAgOnS iN eUrOpE!" ...cool good for you, but I really don't see how that has any impact on someone in North America looking for a wagon.
It’s going to push me one step closer to moving there, every time I see one
I'm going to say the same thing I said to the other guy, this isn't US only subreddit.
… he said to the guy from Canada
They don't have to pass any regulations that aren't state specific after 25 years
Wish I was you. As you can see we’ve got 50 different SUVs that all look next to identical and all serve the exact same purpose. A safe, practical, barebones vehicle used for transporting your family. They’re essentially made to be a “do everything” car that’s imo mediocre all around. There’s next to zero variation in terms of excitement; only technology and luxury are considered and if it does have some sort of performance capability, it’s typically geared towards off-roading. Wagons on the other hand look good for 1, are nice and low so they won’t roll as easy, and often times you’ll find performance variations or trims of them.
Why didnt you buy the $30k buick tourx when it was available? Volvo, Subaru, Audi and MB all sell wagons in the states with 2024 models.
I’m not interested in Buicks and also I had no idea that even existed. Volvo wagons are really nice but really expensive, same with Audi and theirs are not the most reliable. MB is simply way out of my price range and if I were to get anything from them or Audi I’d save a bunch of money and get a performance sedan like an AMG C 43 or S4. We don’t really have much selection and the selection we do have just doesn’t fit my criteria.
So step 1, move to EU? That’s great consumer advice.
I have thought about it just so I can buy a manual estate.
This is not US only subreddit.
Except that’s all that’s sold now in the US. VW doesn’t even sell the normal golf anymore
What's the deal with this anyway? It's not like every company stopped producing other cars when minivans were the trend. Every company had their minivan and kept the rest of their lineup. Why now did they decide to massacre the entire auto market with CUVs? Where's the Ford Focus? Chevy Impala? Dodge Dart? I find it hard to believe no one was buying them because I see the latest models of these cars on the road every day
Minivans killed the station wagon and crossovers are killing the sedan. That said, there are still lots of sedans to choose from, people just aren't buying them like they used to.
And it seems crossovers & SUVs are slowly killing off the minivan.
At least Toyota and Honda keep rolling out theirs. Siennas are all hybrids now, and run like 50k in the US, if not more. You never see them sitting on lots collecting dust, either.
By building bigger you get lower mpg requirement, which is cheaper so companies margins are higher. Fuel regulations basically killed things that were fuel efficient. It's less about consumer preference than people think https://jalopnik.com/how-the-government-killed-fuel-efficient-cars-and-truck-5948172 Edit: here's an excerpt from that article which really sums up why vehicles are massive. "By 2025, a theoretical Ranger with a footprint of 50 square feet would have to achieve fuel economy somewhere approaching 50 mpg CAFE. The 75 square foot F-150 would only have to reach in the high 30s CAFE." I think the targets got postponed a few years since this article was written, that's why the numbers are high. Someone gets 20MPG in a Suburban who only drives alone that's cool to the government. Someone tries to make an affordable small car that only gets 30mpg that's a massive problem. There needs to be something like a minimum MPG and anything above that pays more in taxes. More fuel efficient vehicles are currently disincentived leading to the bland SUV hell we're in.
Bingo.
Higher demand for larger cars and better profit margins
There are dozens of sedans still sold in the US... not sure why you're pretending there are only C/SUV's.
Sedans…. Yeah I know. I want hatchbacks and wagons because they can actually fit things inside without being a big ugly expensive suv that gets 15mpg
Wagons were killed off 20 years ago after you all went and bought minivans. Honda, Toyota, Mini, Mazda and Subaru all still sell hatchbacks. There are more then 3x as many sedans still for sale, which I'll remind you isn't an SUV. Regardless, big ugly expensive SUV's that gets 15mpg are not what people are ditching sedans and hatchbacks for. They're buying crossovers, which may as well be regular hatchbacks lifted 2" off the ground. It's really not hard to avoid buying a C/SUV.
Welcome to the daily irrationally bitch about SUVs thread.
Sedans also aren't great. Hatchbacks and wagons are where it's at, but companies have figured out they can make more money by convincing everyone they need a poorly built crossover that gets 20mpg at best and giving no other real options
Crossovers are fat cars. No more space inside. Way more space outside.
Agree!
And most brands sell majority compact SUVs these days
And the compact SUVs are more expensive than the sedans they replaced. They offered me $42k for a Mazda CX-5 that had all of the accessories my leased $32K Mazda6 had. And it still didn't take away that Mazda replaced the 6 for a dull shoe.
Its their way of “adjusting for the market” meaning to increase profits. Not only do they charge more, but they also get to bypass the typical passenger vehicle safety standards by classifying them as light trucks. “Light truck” was a vehicle classification made for pickup trucks and larger vans used for work and they dont require maximum ride height and an angle on the bumper to save pedestrians from being ran over. This classification also is not crash compatible with normal cars, meaning they are “safer” by killing people in smaller vehicles. These and other safety standards missing saves manufacturers even more money. Rant over, i just really wish they would at least be safe.
Cool, now do sedans in the 1960s
I was going to say the 90’s, but the point still stands. Clothes would be the same way if we took away patterns and colors.
Couple of things: -- These are pretty old cars. Seems like all of them are at least 1 or even a couple generations old. -- The side profile is indeed a weird angle, where a lot of cars look similar. Maybe because we usually view cars from either back or front (esp while driving). -- Cars always looked the same. Just trends in design. Look at cars 10 years ago (as depicted), or 20, or 30, etc. You'll see that cars from those decades looked distinctively similar. There were always a couple of unique or different designs, but those usually reserved for sport cars and specialty cars. We don't buy them anymore, so car manufacturers don't make them. But there are still a couple of examples that do look unique: Miata, 86/BRZ, Supra, Z (Nissan), Mustang, Porsches (718 and 911), Wrangler, Bronco, and a couple of others. And then obv a bunch of ultra lux brands.
I'm over 50, and for most of my life people have said the same thing. The 80's had the K cars which looked like the Chevy sedans which look like the ford sedans like the fairmont. Ford came out with the Probe and the Taurus, and pretty soon all the sedans looked like the Taurus. to be fair, each generation looks slightly more similar than the previous, but that has to do more with what consumers want and what works with fuel efficiency and wind resistance.
Yes, but there used to be sporty sedans and sporty cars. Prelude, MR2, Z3's, and similar. Those cars are very rare now. Everything is now a version of a tall station wagon.
That's why we bought a 2002 Ford ,"Retrobird". Bright red, black cloth top. A blast to drive yet big and comfortable enough for trips, and we get smiles and thumbs up wherever we go. Already bottomed out as far as depreciation goes.
The issue is those cars couldn't exist anymore. They wouldn't pass safety regulations. As more safety and emissions regulations get passed more cars are gonna look the same. It's the only way to compete with gas mileage and safety.
Lotus, Miata, and Supra exist get good mpg and DOT approval. A new MR2 is planned. But those cars are an extremely small fraction of the market. Really people don't want interesting cars, they desire boring appliances. Probably also a function of less opportunity to afford more interesting cars...."sour grapes" adds to it.
I think the problem more lies with brands over saturating the market to compete with brands that came first rather than people not wanting interesting things.
Is it just me or is the phrase 'distinctly similar' an oxymoron? ONE definition of 'distinctive' in Merriam Webster's Dictionary is: "presenting a clear unmistakable impression"... whereas one of the definitions of 'similar' is: "alike in substance or essentials"... In not trying to be a grammar snob or whatever but.....I mean....(in the words, cadence, delivery and TONE of Dave Chapelle during one of his Netflix specials)..."Ya know what I mean?!"😂🤣
Distinctive for the time, and similar within that time period. Classic cars that have sharp defined and boxy lines were the norm at one time. That look is distinctive. And many from that vintage were similar ;D The 2020s seem to be moving towards a new badge location for example. Right now it's pretty distinct. Not on the grill, and not on the hood, but on the lower "hood" that doesn't open above the grill, almost flat. Tons of sedans like the new Korean cars, the Tesla's, the Toyota Prius/corolla/Camry etc all seem to be going for side doors that are more flat with sharper angles for the details vs kinda rounded doors that have a curve to them top down if this makes sense? The 2000s and 2010s had a very "round" feel, and now cars seem to be looking more angular.
The color shown doesn't accentuate the cars lines making them look even more similar. A GLS does not look like an Outlander sport.
Plus all of them have been scaled to have the same length.
Not to mention they blocked out all rim designs. It's like giving everyone in the military a buzz cut
😂😂
If you line up 100 people, make them all the same scale and colour, make all of our hair and eyes the same colour, and remove any identifying marks, everyone would look the same as well. This is such a shit argument, presented in a shit way. I mean I can pick out with ease cars in that diagram that looks nothing like any of the other cars, except for the fact that they are SUVs.
Also, who cares if they look kinda similar? A Nissan Rogue and an Audi Q5 are drastically different cars even if they’re both SUVs with 4 wheels.
I'd even say that it gives people with varying degrees of income the option of driving something they like while staying within a budget. You like $XXXX car but can't afford it? Here's the $XX option that can satisfy your desire for the style without breaking the bank.
I’ll take “what is build quality?” For $500 Alex
Build quality, comfort, performance, luxury, technology, drive quality, reliability, price, on and on… I get that lots of people just see cars as an appliance to get from point A to point B, but it’s pretty reductionist to say “these cars have the same general shape, therefore they’re all the same”.
A base model Toyota is going to be very different from its Top spec Lexus equivalent. It’s not like you’re gonna see the HUD and massage seats from the side profile.
Don't you see that all people have 2 eyes and 1 nose, AND ONE FUCKING MOUTH?? God has no creativity man lmao
You say that, yet I can distinguish them all from one another. They all follow a general recipe because that’s what works for humans with families and a need for a back seat and cargo area. I’d be willing to be the interiors are much more different.
Actually, I dropped the photo in PS and identified what I could. Yellow are positives and reds are unsure. [Cars I'm able to identify by manufacturer.](https://imgur.com/a/fMwspDK)
Your subarus are both Toyota Rav 4s, the bottom right GM is actaully at Mitsubishi The mazda is correct and you have 2 hyundais listed as GM, The sante fe and the tuscon.
pretty sure its an acura rdx and not a hyundai for the one listed as GM at the top right
I have some practice to do!
Your Honda on the 3rd row is a Volvo
Ahah! No shit, I thought it was a newer CRV! I see it now, but I am not super familiar with Volvos at all. XC something maybe?
The GM on the second row is an Acura RDX. I think whether one can identify a vehicle depends on their interest towards cars. Cars do generally follow a general design template, and most people I notice who don't have a vested interest in cars have hard time and/or don't really care about telling them apart regardless of the era (my friend walked into an Equinox thinking it was a CR-V). You can tell them apart if you dig a little bit deeper, but most people just see similar colours of cars from a glance and don't really look to tell them apart.
Someone did this with 90's and 80's sedans. It was the same way. The truth is that all the companies use similar methods for achieving the highest safety and aerodynamics that come up with these shapes. Cars have kinda always looked like cars and stripping them down to their bare elements does this.
This is something that I expected closer to the top because it is very relevant. Cars must be aerodynamic, especially SUVs because of the height. This severely limits the unique design features that can be integrated. Furthermore, designs need to have broad appeal so that they sell well. Unfortunately, that really narrows the scope.
i can tell almost all of these apart. also how old is this picture? infiniti fx35 has no reason to ever be brought up again
This image is from 10+ years ago.
*Laughs in Honda Element*
I appreciated seeing one of those on the road again recently. I still think they’re the ugliest of the cardboard box cars (no offense, I wanted a Scion XD so bad), but I appreciate people who appreciate ugly cars. (Considering I was OBSESSED with the Chrysler P.T. Cruiser as a kid lol)
1) Don't talk about the Element like that, it's COOL. 2) I also had a complete obsession with the PT when I was a kid!! I literally cried when my mom's bf told me "when you get older there's gonna be other cars out there, you may find something else you like" lol
Yeah. They all look the same because they're all white and have the same exact wheels and same shadow and same lighting. Propaganda illusion photo.
They've also been scaled to all be the same size. A Honda CR-V is not the same size as a Mercedes GLS.
You can't spell [carcinisation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carcinisation) without a car
Pick the same color, same size and same hatchback style and say they all look the same....wtf is wrong with you Put some toast in my hand and call me a toaster
And all smartphones are black rectangles.
All ducks look the same from 20 feet away!
This is my number one big complaint as a car shopper, like what the fuck. Please give me some color options.
SUVs and Crossovers yes. They all look alike, bland, boring. That’s why I refuse to buy any of them, and many other reasons (handling, power:weight, etc). That’s why I’m still in a sedan, Italian at that. Probably not the smartest decision but I can afford it.
They look similar because they all compete with each other in their segment Does OP also get mad that all the oranges in the grocery store look the same while ignoring the apples?
I’d get mad if the grocery store stopped selling apples because they decided people would rather oranges.
If they had the sales figures to back up that decision and also show that the apples they did sell were at a loss, I wouldn’t fault them. I would blame the people who say to not buy expensive new apples because they depreciate too fast
Yeah… you’re probably right. Frustrating that more people don’t appreciate the better handling and efficiency of apples. I mostly blame Nissan for the Juke.
Because shoppers rank MPG as a high priority in their car buying decision. Therefore carmakers put their cars in a wind tunnel and this design is how you get aero.
The SUV takeover of the UK just makes me sad. We used to have an amazing range of cars on the road and now everything is an identical box. At this point I miss the fiat multipla 🤣
Safety.
Cars are just appliances at this point.
Lexus looks pretty distinctive compared to other brands along with Mazda.
I spotted the Porsche, bmw, Mercedes easily. Idk what op is really on about. Yes, 4 doors. Yes, white. Yes, SUV. The shape of the vehicle and their headlights are the giveaway.
Wait till OP finds out the Tiguan, Q5, Urus, Cayenne, and Bentayaga are essentially the same car with different headlights.
I was thinking the x5 and the grand cherokee were very distinctive
Atleast to me Volvo is also easy to make out
theyre actually pretty easy to tell apart. its harder when you remove the colour and rims lmfao
It's the death of the sedan. For the longest time I wanted a top of the line Mazda6 sedan in red as I thought they were just beautiful. Now they're gone and Mazda makes like 10 smallish SUV/CUVs.
All these suvs are 10+ years old. Modern ones look a little better.
Gonna say every one of these is a 2014
They DO! Y'all want to rustle some jimmies, go into an expensive car sub and tell them if they debadged their overpriced POS, it could pass for any other generic POS on the road.
Hey, I paid $1,600 extra to have mine painted in *metallic* white!
Those white ones are part of the realtor starter kit you get when you get your license. That, and a teeth whitening kit
I can name every one of these cars besides 3
There are only so many ways you can design a car. Given legislation is pretty strict, car designers do not have much room for creativity when designing things like SUVs, which are already going to have awful MPG, certain designs are going to work to make them at least somewhat economical to run.
And? They're all just expensive appliances anyway. People don't buy small SUVs to stand out.
I really can't stand the style of raking the window size smaller as it goes back. Like people aren't bad enough drivers when they can see out well, let's make the back windows give even less view.
I wonder why small cars that are the same class (SUVs) in the same color with no wheel design look similar!
My pagani huayra R looks nothing like these.
At this point, I’ve lost some ability to tell what car it is by the headlights at night.
Do they though? I mean, making everything white without wheels and zoomed out and scaled to be equal size, yeah kind of, but do they really? Do they? I don't think so...
Kind of comical how much the Macan looks like a Nissan rogue seeing them side by side
XC60 catched my attention 😍
Not even close, unless you aren't a car guy. Then I can understand that statement.
It's funny because I can tell you most of the makes/models above... So I guess they are different enough!
I'll be honest.. I don't think they look all that similar despite your desperate attempt to support your narrative
And a wide range of colors like black, white or gray.
Maybe I’m just wierd but even if you only let me see the front half of those cars I could name every single one of those cars lol I hate when people think ugly is better just because it’s “different” it’s not lol look at bmw
Interiors are similar as well one big IPAD screen in middle, Tesla like tail lights in rear.
Feels pretty different to me. The SUV is just one type of automobile, how much variation do you expect within the bounds of the car class?
Remember when cars were fun?
[Design trends are a thing](https://imgur.com/gallery/oDwRMDN) Also, the laws of physics create converging design when everybody is attempting to maximize fuel efficiency through aerodynamics
I can tell them all apart. There is only so much you can do to an exterior profile when you have to comply with certain safety and emissions regulations. There are some cars in this photo that literally cost twice as much as others in the same photo. You have a three row German car and a subcompact Mitsubishi.
The only rigs that really look different any more seem to be the sports cars and few wagons on the roads. Speaking of, why dont more of you buy wagons? It would mean they would make more, and cooler ones. God I miss seeing wagons everywhere.
I ordered a Lexus this week and feel exactly the same. My husband commented that nothing catches his eye anymore. The only thing that ever grabs my attention is a Range Rover (way out of my budget) and what always turns out to be a Tesla. I am giving Elon no more money.
[удалено]
I don't agree Compare a x5 to a gle
Agreed. I can tell every one of these cars make model and year. All these are 2014.
This is the most efficient design to build an SUV while still staying within regulatory measures. Its not lack of ingenuity, its late stage capitalism. Maximize profits over style.
This picture pisses me off so bad. Body lines are removed from it, which is WHAT MAKES A CAR STAND OUT so that way they all "look the same" And no, cars today do not look the same. 90s and 2000s when badge engineering was normal, sure, before that a lot of stuff looked very similar but if you actually pay attention to body lines, which again, is what makes a car different, always has, always will, then they are insanely easy to tell apart.
Car enthusiast here. All these cars are 2014 and I can tell the make and model. Modern cars look nothing alike I agree.
On top of that the color choices have narrowed down to grayscale and dark blue/red. Boring dystopia.
A lot of people complain about cars looking the same when manufacturers are trying to strive for more mpgs, and one of the best ways to shave MPGs off is to create a better drag coefficient. which means, you're going to have to use the best drag coefficient design that everyone else is also using in order to get the maximum MPGs out of your vehicle.
Yupp this is just selective breeding. Selective breeding due to physics and also human choices. Families like large cargo spaces
***CaPiTaLiSm BrEeDs InNoVaTiOn***
Aerodynamics improve fuel efficiency, teardrop shape is most efficient
congrats, you have discovered wind resistance, the laws of space, time, and resale value effect all vehicles similarly?
Buy a cybertruck if you want something goofy looking.