KIA's classification in the VIN number (6th digit) is a wagon 4x2 Class B.
It's taller than those cars, but not really "larger" in any other meaningful sense (except back seat space
). It's a far cry from a SUV. Low ground clearance, a tiny cargo hold, no available 4WD/AWD, etc. ad nauseum.For many people, what they want is the "look", the semiotics, of an SUV. Functionality doesn't matter. I was shocked once when I rented a Rav4 in CA (expecting snow on Siskiyou Pass) and found after I was on the road that it wasn't the 4wd version. Naive me thought 4wd was what defined an SUV! RickB is their customer, someone who believes the look of their car is an extension of themselves. This is the reason wagons are basically unavailable in the US despite their practicality, along with minivans they're perceived to declare domestication rather than cool, machismo or independence. I've lived in the city my whole adult life, and usually had used, practical, beater, "city" cars. My identity is defined in many ways, but MY CAR IS NOT ME!It's taller than those cars, but not really "larger" in any other meaningful sense (except back seat space
I can't really argue with you as I don't have all my ducks in a row but I do disagree, other than 4wd/awd, what else constitutes a Sport Utility vehicle?
Well, the lack of AWD availability is definitely a strong hint that this car is no SUV. Add in its underpinnings, suspension, size, ground clearance, payload capacity, "no towing recommended", etc., etc., etc. and you have yourself a vehicle that is decidedly not a CUV or SUV.
I still call it a hatch, but it fits the bill of a small wagon much more than a sport utility. Kia.com calls it a car in one place, an urban crossover in another and a multipurpose vehicle in yet another place. So even they're confused, LOL.
I don't think KIA is confused at all, it's them trying to attract confused customers who can't come to terms with what they want vs what they need, and look at labels rather than what the vehicle can do for them. There was a review of a large SUV in the NY Times recently that said basically that the whole point of this vehicle was to be a 3 rows minivan without actually "being" a minivan, and it failed at being a very effective vehicle in either identity. But they know their customers.
Yes and you would have what Toyota did with the Scion XB and it would end up like the XB in oblivion. If you like that style perhaps you could find a Chrysler Pacifica.
No, I think you have EXACTLY the definition of most SUV buyers, basing it on looks almost entirely. I don't know what "sportiness potential is". I once spent 3 weeks camping & whitewater kayaking in Idaho with a roof rack full of boats on a beat up 87 Maxima, many hours of travel on dirt roads and all. Sporty? I've seen Jetta's with 2 canoes on top spread far wider than the car. As Forrest Gump would say: sporty is as sporty does. I laugh at the folks who view a roof rack as a fashion accessory rather than a necessity.
