Home » This Is One Of The Most Poorly-Defined Categories Of Cars: The Wagovan

This Is One Of The Most Poorly-Defined Categories Of Cars: The Wagovan

Wagovan Top
ADVERTISEMENT

As you may have already surmised, I enjoy taxonomies. And, sure, I only read the actual definition of “taxonomy” a few days ago and wasn’t really aware of the strong biological associations, but that won’t stop me from continuing to use the word to describe automotive categorizations. Today I want to tackle one of modern automobilia’s most blurry and contentious taxonomic problems: what is the difference between a minivan and vehicles that aren’t quite minivans, but also aren’t quite wagons? See, we don’t even really have a good name for this category! Something has to be done about this, and done now. So stop whatever you’re doing, parachute out of the plane, fling those dental tools to the ground, let that belt sander just launch itself into the shop wall, leave those customers hanging, let that baby cry, whatever it takes. Because we’re doing this now.

Fundamentally, here’s the problem, the problem that has caused long, drawn-out fistfights (and at least one mop-fight) at the last three Global Automotive Classification Summits, held every year in Zug, Switzerland: what do we call the strange and ill-defined space between station wagons/estates and minivans? Station wagons and minivans share a great many qualities: both are primarily passenger vehicles, designed to seat anywhere from four to eight or so passengers. Both can have two or three rows of seating, both are designed to hold considerable amounts of cargo, both have long been intended and used as family cars, both tend to have a generally two-box layout – they’re really doing essentially the same sort of jobs.

Vidframe Min Top
Vidframe Min Bottom

And yet, they’re quite different. A wagon is lower and has “longer” proportions, even if the actual overall length isn’t longer. Minivans tend to be taller, higher, but not necessarily any different in ride height or anything like that. A wagon tends to have a longer hood; a minivan’s hood is stubby. In character, even if they tend to be used in the same sort of roles, there are differences, and it’s possible these differences change over time and with changes in the overall culture. A minivan feels a bit more domestic and targeted at family use, where a wagon sort of retains a certain enthusiasts’ cachet.

Crownwagon1

This wasn’t always the case; wagons were firmly in the family-use category until the re-emergence of minivans in the 1980s freed them from guaranteed domesticity, and a new breed of 4×4 rugged wagons pushed the wagon into more sporting/adventurer territories.

ADVERTISEMENT

Wagon Ad 2 7 19

That’s not to say minivans couldn’t be used for many of these same sorts of activities; many could, and 4×4 minivans do exist. But conceptually, there was something of a split, where minivans took up a bit more of the practical, smart choice for a family mantle, and wagons became at least a bit more iconoclastic, if only because of the rising popularity of minivans for people who ironically sought to escape the domestic stigma of the wagons they grew up with.

Dodgecaravanhatch

Of course, the story ended up getting flipped a bit as a result. Regardless, there exists a space between the wagon and the minivan, and that’s what we’re here to talk about. Sometimes this category is called the MPV category, for “Multi-Purpose Vehicle.” Mazda even just named their almost-minivan the MPV, and it was a good example of this blurry category:

ADVERTISEMENT

Proportionally, it feels very minivan-like. But it has conventional doors and the scale is a bit closer to a wagon. Is it a minivan? If intent matters, then Mazda must have felt not, because why else would they go out of their way to call it an “MPV,” when “minivan” was right there? There was clearly a decision made.

Personally, I think this strange, transitional category may be best represented by the Honda Civic Wagon, also known, in some markets, as the Wagovan. In fact, I’d like to steal that name for this whole general category, as it explains everything right there in that portmanteau.

The little Civic Wagovan had minvan proportions, normal hinged doors, a focus on interior space, a smaller-than-a-minivan exterior, and plenty of domestic practicality but also a certain amount of defiant charm. It was the ultimate melangé of wagon and minivan, not at home in either category, exactly, but I think better at being an example of this new in-between state.

There’s many more, of course; I made a chart of some of the better-known ones to get us started thinking:

ADVERTISEMENT

 

Wagovan Chart

The Wagovans deserve their own classification, I think. I don’t feel like I’m at a point where I can make some hard-and-fast rules defining entry to this category, so I think for the moment we’re just going to have to do what Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart did with obscenity: know it when we see it. In our pants.

I’m open to some brainstorming to help define things here; remember, everyone is counting on us to get this right, so let’s do the best we can. These odd little half-van/half-wagons deserve nothing less.

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on whatsapp
WhatsApp
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on reddit
Reddit
Subscribe
Notify of
188 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Cars? I've owned a few
Cars? I've owned a few
13 days ago

In 1994 I had an ’84 Tercel 4×4 that I bought used after selling a ’90 Toyota pickup in order to scrape up enough cash to make a down payment on a house. It was so surprisingly cool and competent. And then a friend showed up in her ’86 Honda 4×4 Wagovan and I was instantly envious.

A PHEV version of either would be a no-brainer for me now, if the price was right. But it would have to be really right, because I have an ’17 Accord V6 that’s paid off, that I like driving and only has 65K on it. And I have 68 Y on my clock and it’s unlikely fuel savings would work out economically on anything newer.

Benfidar
Benfidar
1 month ago

So glad you included the Colt Vista. Great car. The back seats would fold down completely flat and make a twin sized bed. Or, you could have the seatbacks in the wayback up and stretch out your legs. Epic road trip car in the 80s. I learned to drive stick in one in East St. Louis on surface streets during rush hour. The place looked like Beirut during the civil war. I thought if I stall someone will kill us all. 20 seconds was all it took.

Cars? I've owned a few
Cars? I've owned a few
13 days ago
Reply to  Benfidar

ESL. Ooof! If you miss the last exit in Missouri on I-70, I was told to go like 10 miles before you get off and turn around.

I never made that mistake. So, I never actually saw how bad it was. Or maybe still is. 🙁

On a work project, I was staying at the Drury near the Arch in 2001 and met a guy at the lobby bar. He was with Arthur Andersen and was in St. Louis twice a month. He told me one of the funniest stories about rental cars I have ever heard. He was driving cross town to meet a friend for dinner and someone blew a stop sign and he t-boned her. The airbag went off. He called the rental company and they said it’d be a couple of hours before they could help him. He told them to pick it up at the hotel and went on to meet his friend. When he got back to the hotel, he valet parked it and I can’t imagine what it was like for the valet to get behind the wheel of a car with the deflated airbag hanging off it.

ADDvanced
ADDvanced
1 month ago

I read this article without reading who the author was, and then immediatly thought that this must be the sort of thing that Torch thinks about while laying in bed, unable to sleep.

But also Wagovans KICK ASS. All popular integra/civic upgrades bolt right onto them, with B and K series swaps almost plug and play.

Their only weakness is rust. And safety. But mainly rust, because with a chassis and suspension like that, you’ll be able to avoid most accidents in the first place.

John Patson
John Patson
1 month ago

The French invented the term “LudoSpace” for their specialist category of commercial vans fitted with seats, extra doors (often sliding) and seatbelts — a combination of Ludique (fun) and monospace (hatchback).
They are not as bad as they sound, especially as the ludospaces often have bastardised rear suspension — the Citroén Berlingo for many years had front suspension and motors from Xara salons, and rear suspension borrowed from a Peugeot 405 break (estate, station wagon etc).
In Spain some specialist shops did conversions for 2CV vans and C15 Ds…. Still see them in country areas — vans were much cheaper than cars in the old days, now they cost the same.

Dan Bee
Dan Bee
1 month ago

The Nissan Axxess has entered the chat.

Evopanop
Evopanop
1 month ago

Great, just went down a rabbit hole of looking into Nissan Stanza Wagons. Sigh. I will say, though, a manual 4WD Stanza Wagon with a CA18DET swap sounds mighty tasty.

Cars? I've owned a few
Cars? I've owned a few
13 days ago
Reply to  Evopanop

I barely remember those, but your cocktail sounds like a good time. As I recall, those were a little bigger than my Tercel 4×4 and my friend’s 4WD Honda Wagovan. And they were kind of attractive in a practical way.

The48thRonin
The48thRonin
1 month ago

“Wagovan” is a lot more interesting than the phrase toyota came up with for the bB, which they named on their archival website as a “Tall Wagon”. See for yourself!

Tim Connors
Tim Connors
1 month ago

The standard family vehicle shape seems to be disdained once the kids who grew up in them are adults. They don’t want whatever their parents drove. Not sure if this pattern exists elsewhere, but it definitely exists in the US.

The SUV, ideally a three-row crossover, is the standard family vehicle today. Wagons are really only available in vestigial form through a few companies.

It’ll be interesting to see what takes their place once Gen Z/Gen A grow up.

Tim Connors
Tim Connors
1 month ago

I think you could plausibly throw the Honda Fit into this category as well. Yes, it is firmly a hatchback, but its silhouette and stubby nose are very minivan-ish.

Harvey's PJs (Not His Real Name)
Harvey's PJs (Not His Real Name)
1 month ago

What about the t-top Nissan Pulsar EXA, with the wagon attachment? Is that a coupe wagovan?

Ford Flex?

Last edited 1 month ago by Harvey's PJs (Not His Real Name)
DONALD FOLEY
DONALD FOLEY
1 month ago

This article inspired me to travel a long way down memory lane. What first caught my eye were kids playing traditional “cowboys and Indians.” Then, as I looked for history of Toyota Crown station wagons, Curbside Classics showed me a photo from Road Test of the 1965 edition parked in front Yankee Whaler Inn. No, that’s not in New England but part of the Ports of Call shopping/entertainment complex on the Los Angeles waterfront that rose to prominence and then declined through the 1960s-80s. For me the quintessential wagon/van is the Nissan Prairie (Stanza Wagon) which was introduced in Japan August 1982. That is the same time as the Toyota Sprinter Carib (Tercel Wagon) and far before most of the other vehicles referenced here. I’d been intrigued by magazine reports in 1982-83 that highlighted the Prairie’s sliding doors and lack of a B-pillar. I was excited to see one with manufacturer’s plates near Chicago 1983-1984, so I was primed and ready to buy mine in 1986. There was nothing sporty about it, but what versatile and comfortable vehicle.

JumboG
JumboG
1 month ago

In my world the Wagovan type cars are based on a compact or subcompact, while a minivan is based on a mid-size car. So basically a Wagovan is a mini-minivan.

This would even include the Odyssey, as the first gen was based on the compact Accord, later gens were on the intermediate sized Accord.

Last edited 1 month ago by JumboG
House Atreides Combat Pug
House Atreides Combat Pug
1 month ago
Reply to  JumboG

You’re onto something.

Harvey's PJs (Not His Real Name)
Harvey's PJs (Not His Real Name)
1 month ago
Reply to  JumboG

Microvan?

DFWsCars
DFWsCars
1 month ago

Was it you who did an article on this over at the Jpick site several years back (along with a handy chart that showed it was based on how the rear roof was)?

Pen Pendleton
Pen Pendleton
1 month ago

Nissan Axxess! With dual-sliding doors! Genius.

Adam
Adam
1 month ago

Opel used the term ‘monocab’ in this context, and, in my time at General Motors, we used that term to refer to any tall 1.5-box vehicle with conventional doors; anything with a sliding rear door was labeled a van.

I would also posit that, as station wagons have traditionally been derivatives of sedans (or hatchbacks), the Tercel is just a butched-up (or Outbacked) wagon.

caranddriver.com/news/a15137296/opel-concept-m-auto-shows/

Ford_Timelord
Ford_Timelord
1 month ago
Reply to  Adam

I think the Tercel gets away with being more than just a wagon because of the raised roof on the 2wd and 4wd Tercel Wagon and the verticality of the rear window over the flat roofed Tercel hatch.

Adam
Adam
15 days ago
Reply to  Ford_Timelord

Well, if a raised roof matters, that would apply to other vehicles, like the original Vista Cruiser–which most certainly is not a wagovan. And any wagon version of a hatchback (like the Golf/Jetta) has a more vertical rear window than its hatchback sibling, so the Tercel isn’t unique in that regard.

Bennett Alston
Bennett Alston
1 month ago

Buddy of mine is trying to buy a yellow Fiat 500L 6-speed right now, and I think it falls into this category. Much confusion at the blob

188
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x