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.
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.