Wagons back from the dead: Sportwagon still outselling every SUV - Drive Comparo

[Brazen]

Interesting to see the comparison between Mondeo and Territory, also between Captiva and Commodore.

http://news.drive.com.au/drive/motor...924-15pnc.html

The wagon is staging a revival. The Drive team looks at how it stacks up against the SUV invasion.


A staple of Australian family life for decades, the humble station wagon has appeared to be in terminal decline in recent years.

Buyers have flocked to sports utility vehicles in record numbers and family wagons have felt the brunt of the change in buyer habits.

Toyota's Camry wagon disappeared from showrooms in 2002, the Mitsubishi Magna wagon followed suit in 2005 and Ford's Falcon wagon was discontinued in March this year.

And it's not just the load-lugging variants of large cars that have disappeared. Wagons based on small cars - Toyota's Corolla, Holden's Astra and Mitsubishi's Lancer - have been withdrawn from sale in the past three years.

At the same time, soft-roader sales have boomed. In 2000, they made up about one in eight new-vehicle sales; now they are edging close to one in four sales.

This year, compact soft-roaders are on track to outsell large cars for the first time, while mid-size soft-roaders such as the Toyota Kluger and Holden Captiva have overtaken mid-size cars in the sales race.

So, is the family wagon doomed? Not by a long stretch, if you ask Holden. The brand's Commodore-based Sportwagon is one of the big success stories in recent automotive history. Holden took a gamble with its latest-model family wagon, sacrificing load-carrying ability and practicality for a sleeker, sportier profile and car-like driving manners.

The gamble paid off handsomely, with the once-maligned fleet "tool-of-trade" special becoming a serious rival for the ever-popular soft-roader.

Last year, the svelte Sportwagon outsold every soft-roader in the country. This year, wagon sales make up more than a third of total Commodore sales.

And other wagons continue to carve out a healthy niche for themselves; 40 per cent of Subaru Liberty buyers opt for the wagon version, while Mazda's 6 wagon accounts for a quarter of the model's sales.

Small wagons are also making a comeback. Both Hyundai and Volkswagen have had success with recent load-carrying versions of their respective i30 and Golf wagons. Hyundai says one in four i30 buyers opts for the wagon, with people trading up from city runabouts and small cars.

Drive selected a range of wagons and pitted them against the country's most popular soft-roaders to see which best fits the bill for family transport. In most cases, unless you want to go off-road, the traditional choice makes more sense.

Subaru Liberty Wagon v Outback

What do you get?

They're essentially the same vehicle, with similar trim levels, but the entry-level 2.5i Liberty starts at $35,490 (plus onroad and dealer costs) while the 2.5i Outback is priced from $38,990 (plus costs).

Both offer AWD but the Outback's beefed-up suspension makes it sit noticeably higher than the Liberty. Bulkier, hard exterior plastics and body cladding give the Outback a more rugged look.

The same seven airbags and stability control are offered on both.

What's inside?

Both vehicles offer identical load space and leg/headroom, with a roomy rear seat that offers plenty of space for youngsters and perhaps even the occasional smaller adult. Cargo space is a handy 490 litres with the seats up — folded down, that jumps to a double mattress-friendly 1690 litres.

Under the bonnet

Both come with the same 2.5-litre four-cylinder engine but the Liberty misses out on Subaru's new 2.0-litre manual-only diesel engine (priced from $40,490 in the Outback).

The Liberty's range-topping GT Premium model borrows its 2.5-litre turbocharged 195kW engine from the WRX. The top-end Outback offering is the six-cylinder 3.6R Premium model.

On the road

Because the Outback sits eight centimetres higher, it tends to feel less stable than the Liberty when pushed hard and exhibits more body roll around tight bends. The Outback's ability to handle serious terrain is commendable and, despite being heavier than the Liberty, it shares the same thirst. Both can tow up to 1800 kilograms (braked).

The Liberty offers a more willing (and able) drive on sealed sections, with AWD traction giving it that "glued to road" feeling, even in the wet. The Liberty is probably the more convincing car to drive but if you're someone who enjoys a dirty weekend away, the Outback will offer more.

Hyundai i30cw v ix35

What do you get?

The i30cw starts at a budget-friendly $21,890 (plus costs) in petrol guise and $24,390 as a diesel, while the front-drive ix35 starts from $26,990 and costs $34,990 for an all-wheel-drive diesel.

The base-model ix35 gets more goodies than the i30, including a better stereo system, steering wheel-mounted audio controls, cruise control and a trip computer.

Both cars come with six airbags and stability control as standard equipment, while the ix35 also gets downhill brake control and hill-start assist for slippery surfaces.

What's inside?

The ix35 is wider and taller, with an imposing front end that promises off-road adventure, but the i30 is longer, with more head and legroom in the front seats. In the rear the tables are turned, with the ix35 offering more legroom and headroom.

With the rear seats in place, the ix35 has 40 per cent more cargo space, thanks to its higher roof line, but when the seats are folded, the space advantage is negligible.

Under the bonnet

Front-drive versions of the ix35 weigh more than the i30 but get a 2.0-litre petrol engine that is about 15 per cent more powerful. AWD versions have a 2.4-litre four-cylinder engine, while there is also a 135kW diesel AWD version that comfortably shades the i30's 1.6-litre, 85kW unit, although the AWD ix35 weighs 250 kilograms more. That translates into a bigger thirst: the diesel i30 sips 4.9 litres per 100 kilometres but the ix35 diesel uses 7.5L/100km.

On the road

Despite its off-road pretensions, the ix35 sits just 20 millimetres higher than the i30. Its taller, heavier body means it leans a little more through corners, while the i30 also has its measure for steering feel. Both cars have a slightly bumpy, harsh ride but the i30 feels more composed. The ix35 has a higher braked towing capacity, 1600 kilograms to 1200 kilograms.

Volkswagen Golf Wagon v Tiguan

What do you get?

The entry-level Golf Wagon starts from $26,990 (plus costs), while the Tiguan's $7000 premium for the entry-level model, at $33,990 (plus costs), gets you a four-wheel-drive system and a choice of some bigger engines.

Both share the Golf's underpinnings and, as with the Golf hatch, the base models run a bit short on equipment against their competitors. They do get six airbags and stability control as standard.

What's inside?

Both have quality finishes and a similar cabin layout, with comfortable, supportive seats and plenty of storage. Both have good rear-seat room but fitting three adults across the back bench will be a struggle.

Where the Tiguan falls short is in boot space, with the Golf Wagon's 505 litres of luggage room shading the 395 litres in the Tiguan.

Under the bonnet

Both the Golf Wagon and the Tiguan offer a choice of petrol and diesel engines, though the Golf offers several smaller, more efficient petrol engine options, including two 1.4-litre powerplants (the turbocharged 90TSI and the turbo and supercharged 118TSI).

The Tiguan has two more-powerful 2.0-litre turbocharged units (125TSI and 147TSI). Both the Tiguan and the Golf Wagon share an optional 2.0-litre diesel engine but the Golf also has a smaller, less-powerful 1.6-litre diesel.

On the road

The Tiguan handles surprisingly well for a soft-roader. There's only a hint of body roll and it sticks to the road well in tight bends. No matter which engine you choose, there's enough oomph to satisfy.

The Golf Wagon feels sportier on the road, with a planted feel inspiring confidence. Even considering its smaller engines, it feels spritely. The lower ride-height could cause problems on rougher country tracks, though.

If you've got children or dogs, the Golf Wagon offers a more practical choice but don't try taking it down that rocky back road — you may not make it out again.

Mazda6 Wagon v CX-7

What do you get?

The most basic CX-7 is the Classic model (starting from $33,990 plus costs). The front-wheel-drive-only model is the highest seller, claiming 41 per cent of CX-7 sales. It's cheaper than the more family-focused Mazda6 wagon (starting at $35,050). AWD CX-7s start from $38,990.

All Mazda6 and CX-7 models come with six airbags and stability control. CX-7s also get a reversing camera but miss out on Bluetooth in the base models (it's standard for all Mazda6 wagons).

What's inside?

The 6 wagon is longer than the CX-7. Boot space drops from 519 litres in the Mazda6 to just 400 litres in the soft-roader and with the rear seats down, the 6 still has the advantage.

The CX-7 may look the bigger vehicle but feels considerably smaller inside and that swooping roofline impedes rear headroom. Legroom is also tight.

The 6 wagon is roomy in the front and rear but storage falls a bit short in the back. Comfort, though, is excellent.

Under the bonnet

Entry-level models of both share the 2.5-litre four-cylinder but due to the soft-roader's bigger, heavier body, it tends to drink slightly more across all models.

Both offer a diesel engine version but the CX-7's weight offsets the fuel savings of the oil-burner compared with the 6 wagon (7.6L/100km against 5.9L/100km).

There are two turbocharged CX-7 petrol models and both have received red marks for thirst but big ticks for fun.

On the road

Both are above par on the road when stacked up against their competitors, though both do suffer from road noise. The CX-7 feels sporty enough to handle curves and climbs without hassle, though its weight can hinder progress. The 6 drives much the same but with enough vigour to please the more enthusiastic driver.

The CX-7 is (and looks) more adventure friendly . But the roomy 6 wagon, even if a bit conservative in its appearance, does hold it over its soft-roader sibling when it comes to utility value.

Ford Mondeo Wagon v Territory

What do you get?

The cheapest Mondeo wagon gets a four-cylinder petrol engine that's no match for the Territory's more powerful six-cylinder. A better comparison is between the TX Territory rear-wheel-drive, priced from $39,890 plus costs, and the $40,740 diesel Zetec Mondeo.

The Territory lags behind on safety equipment, with four airbags (no side bags) to Mondeo's seven.

The Mondeo also gets dual-zone climate control, a leather-wrapped steering wheel and gear knob, front and rear fog lights, rain-sensing wipers and heated side mirrors.

What's inside?

The Territory is bigger all round, with more front head, shoulder and rear leg room.

The locally made soft-roader also has about 15 per cent more luggage space with the second-row seats upright. With the seats folded, the Territory remains in front, although the Mondeo's 2163 litres with the seats down is generous.

The Territory also has an optional third-row seat, a clever wet storage area under the load floor and a full-size spare to the Mondeo's space-saver.

Under the bonnet

The Territory wins the power war, with 190kW to the Mondeo's 120kW, as well as an advantage in torque, or pulling power. It needs it, though, because it weighs 400 kilograms more than the Mondeo.

Buyers pay for that power and weight at the pump, with the Territory almost twice as thirsty as the Mondeo (11.6 litres per 100 kilometres to 6.2L/100km). The Territory also makes do with a four-speed auto, while the Mondeo has a six-speed, dual-clutch transmission.

On the road

The Territory is one of the more driver-friendly soft-roaders, balancing confidence-inspiring road-holding with a comfortable ride.

But, ultimately, there's no hiding the extra kerb weight and taller body through sharper corners, where the Territory leans more noticeably than the Mondeo. The Territory is more suited to towing, with a 2300-kilogram maximum to the Mondeo's 1600-kilogram limit.

Holden Sportwagon v Captiva

What do you get?

The Captiva offers a significantly lower entry price than the Commodore, with a two-wheel-drive, four-cylinder manual version available for just $27,990 plus costs. But the V6 Captiva range starts at $38,490 compared with $41,990 for the Commodore Omega (a diesel 2WD Captiva starts at $35,490).

Both cars get six airbags and stability control, while the Captiva gets the added safety net of AWD. But the Captiva only gets four stars in crash tests, compared with the Commodore's five.

The Captiva gets bigger wheels and a spare tyre, while Commodore wagons come standard with a puncture repair kit.

Sportwagon gets more creature comforts, with Bluetooth, iPod integration, a colour screen read-out on the dash, trip computer, climate control and rear parking sensors.

What's inside?

The biggest difference between the two is a third-row seat in the Captiva that can split-fold.

With the second- and third-row seats folded, though, the Commodore has more than twice the cargo volume.

The Sportwagon also shades the Captiva for front and rear leg, hip and shoulder room, while it has more headroom in the front seats but less in the second row.

Under the bonnet

The Sportwagon's V6 is superior in every way to the Captiva's. It uses about 20 per cent less fuel, despite producing more power and similar levels of torque. It's also quieter and smoother and is matched to a slicker six-speed automatic transmission. The Captiva's 2.0-litre diesel is a more sensible choice than the V6, producing more torque and using more than three litres of fuel less per 100 kilometres.

On the road

The Sportwagon also wins this battle convincingly. The Commodore interior lets in less road and wind noise, while the suspension offers both better road-holding and comfort. Steering is also more direct and accurate, while the turning circle is tighter, for better manoeuvrability around town. The Sportwagon also has a slightly higher towing capacity.

The Captiva fights back with better driver visibility and off-road ability.

BMW 3 Series Touring v X3

What do you get?

BMW's 3 Series Touring is $100 more expensive than the AWD X3, with prices starting from $62,300 for the 2.0-litre diesel model.

Apart from the Touring receiving the newer-generation diesel engine (a new X3 is due next year), the equipment differences between the pair are subtle.

What's inside?

The X3 is wider than the Touring, with more shoulder and elbow room, but the biggest difference is an extra 20 millimetres of headroom in the front.

Luggage capacity with the second-row seats in place is line-ball but the higher roofline of the X3 pays dividends when the seats are folded, liberating about 10 per cent more space than the Touring.

Under the bonnet

The Touring has already received the new 2.0-litre diesel that will find its way into the next-generation X3 next year.

That engine, combined with a 230-kilogram weight advantage over the heavier soft-roader, makes the Touring a clear-cut winner.

The Touring engine has slightly more power and torque, uses about 20 per cent less fuel and accelerates faster, taking 1.3 seconds off the 0-100km/h sprint.

On the road

The X3 remains one of the best-handling soft-roaders on the road. It remains flat through corners, without the usual body roll you get from soft-roaders and, as with all BMWs, the steering is direct and communicative. The Touring is no slouch on the road, either, although it gets BMW's controversial run-flat tyres, which means a less comfortable ride at low speeds and a bumpier ride on patchy country roads.