Wagon or Hatch?

Joel
Jan 14, 2009 at 1:56 am

I’m very surprised that anyone can call this car ‘hot’. Sure it stands out, but not to my taste. Respect for taking the risk of being different though.

jdogg
Jan 12, 2009 at 4:37 pm

def a wagon
crx is a hatchback

bosnakes
Jan 12, 2009 at 2:39 pm

its a wagon…funny thing is my insurance company calls my suv(ford explorer) a wagon..:(

SkyHawk
Jan 12, 2009 at 1:15 pm

You’re all wrong! It’s a “Sedagon”.

Because no one else said it.

bob balderston
Jan 12, 2009 at 12:43 pm

its a wagon and its hotter than hell

Derrick
Jan 12, 2009 at 5:45 am

It’s a crossover of ugly and ugly. But anyways if you believe what they say on Wikipedia it’s a station wagon.

Maffew
Jan 12, 2009 at 5:27 am

Mad wagonish…hot as hell too. She may be right about opening ratios between pillars, but anything that big aint a hatch. Period.

Bill
Jan 12, 2009 at 12:23 am

Has to be a wagon. Way too big to be a hatch. Anyways I kinda like it!

waytoofurious
Jan 12, 2009 at 12:15 am

Going by the size of the car I would have to say that it is a wagon. After all if it only had two doors it would be a hearse.

oldscoob
Jan 11, 2009 at 11:35 pm

air. it is a stretching rubbery srticky non-seperatable thickness we breathe, and cars drive thorugh it. Wagon is the winner. Hatchback is an idiot.

7ur7le
Jan 11, 2009 at 9:13 pm

stylized wagon argument over

Eric bessette
Jan 11, 2009 at 8:13 pm

wagon

GTwildfire
Jan 11, 2009 at 7:57 pm

I see what she’s talking about.If you take wagons and hatchbacks profile and compare proportions, there are two different lines that are struck (I’m talking generally). This one is called a wagon and the fact that the rear window is short in height helps make that argument. The tilt of the rear glass and the shortness of the rear portion compares to the rest of the car (think “wagon” and 1970′s land yachts with their 4-foot plus rear back windows may come to mind). This model has a diagonal slivers of rear back windows.
-
I’d say “wagon”, but it is a really loose interpretation.

James
Jan 11, 2009 at 7:08 pm

all around piece o shit

cknarf
Jan 11, 2009 at 6:56 pm

a little long for a hatch imo.

filbar
Jan 11, 2009 at 6:21 pm

wagon

JoshuaS
Jan 11, 2009 at 6:09 pm

I say hatch, only because the C to D pillars is too tight. However, the way the bumper juts out the way that it does I would say wagon. But the roofline past the C pillar curves down which is usual for a hatch.

I think Cadillac should stick with big fancy cars, and leave the sport wagons to VW.

jonathon
Jan 11, 2009 at 4:09 pm

hatches are 3 door wagons are 5 doors. The ‘trunk’ counts as a door.
Subaru calls their 08+ sti’s hatches but insurance companies call them wagons. If you car what insurance peoples think.

Eric
Jan 11, 2009 at 3:50 pm

Seriously man I cant see people spending 40,000 dollars on that. Its unamerican!

Russ
Jan 11, 2009 at 3:46 pm

Yuk! Enough said.

Chris J
Jan 11, 2009 at 3:35 pm

I always thought that Wagons were 4 door. and Hatchbacks were 2.

Eric
Jan 11, 2009 at 3:04 pm

With the American car companies in bad shape, I agreed that the government should give them the money, but not if this is what they think americans want to drive! Look how good the magnum did, Its a wanna-be SUV! keep building the escalade but we dont need immitations. or you could buld 10 different models of the CTS and bring its value down just like chrysler does!

Dhillaz
Jan 11, 2009 at 3:01 pm

When this type of confusion occurs, Audi calls it a sportback. Besides, Cadillac could never make a hatchback.

B-rad
Jan 11, 2009 at 2:46 pm

It is a Wagon