Who likes Skoda’s new trunk/hatch thing?

May 6th, 2008 · 29 Comments

Trollhattan Saab has changed!
The site you're viewing now is the original Trollhattan Saab weblog, though it's now an archive only and no new material is posted here. As of February 2009, all new material is posted at our new site - Saabs United.
Please join us at Saabs United and get your daily Saab fix from Saab sources all around the world.

I’ve had a couple of emails about this in the last few months so I thought I might open it up for discussion here. I haven’t covered it in great detail as it wasn’t Saab-specific, but I can see where the interest in it comes from, as it’s kind of Saab-ish in concept.

What I’m talking about here is the hatch type contraption that Skoda have built into the trunk of their new sedan, which is called the Superb (I couldn’t just call it the Superb sedan, now, could I?).

As you can see, below, stage one of opening the trunk/boot of the Skoda Superb seems just like opening the trunk on any other sedan. Click to enlarge.

That’s all well and good. Nice and familiar.

Then we get to step two. As you can see, below, there’s more. The rear window also lifts in traditional hatchback style and all of a sudden you’ve got a rather Saab-ish style hatch from what appeared to be a sedan body.

——

What’s the consensus here?

The first impressions I read were all quite positive, but I’ve got to say I wasn’t a fan when I first saw it and am yet to be convinced.

For starters, it doesn’t have the space of a real hatch. It’s nice that the window pops up and gives you huge access to the rear, but the rear itself appears to be just a little bigger than a regular sedan. And the trade-off continues with the car most likely lacking the structural rigidity of a sedan due to the gaping hole in the back.

So you get a funky design and good access but lose out on actual useable space and rigidity. It qualifies as interesting in my book, but I’m not sure it qualifies as impressive.

——

Thanks to ctm for the inspiration. More to come!

Tags: Non-Saab Specific

29 responses so far ↓

1 ctm // May 6, 2008 at 4:36 am

Me like. I do not have the need for all the space of a combi, but would like to be able to transport something bigger. Problem is, it’s impossible to get something bigger through the rear door or a sedan trunk. That is why I love me OG9-3.
2 robin m // May 6, 2008 at 4:45 am

I think it is a great idea, I managed to get a patio set into the 9-3 SS when I had it because the seats fold flat but this would have aided getting it in via the rear.
3 Dan // May 6, 2008 at 4:54 am

I was thinking yesterday, as I was taking things out of the trunk of my 9-5…if the 9-5 would have been a hatchback….it could possibly have been the greatest saab of all time. Great size, extremely comfortable, reliable, speedy, full of space… (ducks from c900 owners now).
4 PGAero // May 6, 2008 at 5:03 am

Well, Swade, I’m with you. The first comments here seem to sing the praises of hatches. What do you expect from a Saab website?

The deal with this Skoda, however, was pointed out quite plainly in the article.

Here you have a sedan-looking ride that is more complex and heavier than a hatch and more flexible than a sedan. That seems like two faults, while the only benefit is that the cabin is (somewhat) isolated from the trunk if you don’t open it all the way up. Just take out that gimmicky intermediate hinge and make it a hatch. Problem(s) solved.

Also, do we have pictures of how the seats fold and how the “rear-deck” gets removed. If that’s not removable, then a “real” hatch is certainly more useful, having more open space available.

Cheers,
~Peter

**** leaves to load his 9000 Aero full of more stuff than anyone (outside of the Saab circle) gives it credit for ****
5 ctm // May 6, 2008 at 5:17 am

There are two other things I forgot to mention.

1) Lots of people think a whole hatch is heave and cumbersome to open every time. I think so too, and often just put my bag of groceries on the back seat instead. I know older people think the old 900/OG9-3 hatch is just to heavy to open – they think it is even more difficult than a normal combi.

2) I automatically get half a liter of water or snow over my stuff in the trunk every time I open up the hatch after it has rained or snowed. It sucks! I would gladly have the Skoda solution and being able to just open the lower part when I don’t need the full hatch.
6 Andy Rupert // May 6, 2008 at 5:18 am

I liked it the first time I saw it. I thought it would satisfy both the trunk and hatchback crowd. But apparently that’s not the case.

I assume the hinge locks in place when both are raised.
7 bizhaoqi // May 6, 2008 at 6:12 am

My previous car was a Mazda 6 hatch (which they term the 5-door) which actually looked slightly better than the sedan (although anyone not familiar with the model would think it was a sedan) and was incredibly versatile. It was great to have a sporty sedan but be able to fit so much cargo without being impeded by the upper rear deck (with or without the hatch open). It could swallow a fairly good-sized couch, and one time I even fit everything I needed to put up vinyl fence around the perimeter of my back yard. I have some crazy pictures of it packed full of the fence, but wow, what utility! I didn’t have any trouble with water draining off it properly when opening it, either.

I actually mentioned the Mazda 6 5-door to Anthony Lo in the GM chat a month or two ago, but he simply said it was a good idea and that they couldn’t reveal any future plans in this regard.
8 NineTwoX // May 6, 2008 at 6:39 am

I know I have run into issues before trying to fit boxes into my trunk (on previous cars) and the Skoda trunk would have made it possible. I like the idea of that trunk but I don’t know if I would like it more than a wagon.
9 eggsngrits // May 6, 2008 at 6:50 am

Seems to be a little more complex than necessary. If you want to disguise the hatch, just do it with contours.
10 jc_atl // May 6, 2008 at 7:17 am

Looks like a great idea that will rattle like crazy after about 2 years on bad roads.
11 Ken H // May 6, 2008 at 7:24 am

“Looks like a great idea that will rattle like crazy after about 2 years on bad roads.”

Not necessarily, it’s not going to be built in Trolhättan, see…
12 ehall1 // May 6, 2008 at 7:35 am

Ken H
If it is going to be driven on US roads it doesn’t matter where it is built it is going to rattle after two years. We need a hatchback in all lines of cars.
13 Edonis // May 6, 2008 at 7:50 am

I don’t really know what to think of this. On one side, it doesn’t have the full practicality of a hatch in terms of space, but on the other hand, this “trunk/hatch” thing makes it much easier to put large objects in the boot (with the rear seats down, of course. When I worked at a sporting goods store, people often had problems getting treadmills into their sedans, because the box would simply not fit through the boot-opening.
14 Edonis // May 6, 2008 at 7:56 am

Having seen the new Jag XF, I think Saab should make the 9-5 a hatch. I can’t help it, but I really, really like the new XF, especially from this angle: http://www.motorauthority.com/wp-content/uploads/Jaguar/XF/Jaguar_XF_h.jpg

I know the XF isn’t a hatch, but from the looks of it, it might as well have been.
15 Frank A // May 6, 2008 at 10:43 am

I like it, I think it is a clever way to get a hatch while maintaining the profile of a sedan. For the USA, this would work we generally prefer sedans. I’m one of the folks who sent this along.
16 SaabKen // May 6, 2008 at 10:48 am

Hmm, Skoda must have stole my idea ! [grin]

Even back in university (20 yrs ago …) I dreamt up a hatch/trunk concept whereby a smaller door built into a conventional larger hatchback can be opened independently. SAAB should have conceived this in the early 90s when the OG9000 was restyled to the CS-body style and got rid of the hatch side windows and raised the hatch waistline higher to give it a more conventional “sedan/trunk” look.

I feel SAAB should adopt this idea for all their future sedans/hatches in addition to having separate combi’s. It would be a drop in the bucket to to design, engineer and manufacture this hybrid sedan/hatchback than to produce two completely different body styles.
17 Markac // May 6, 2008 at 10:49 am

It’s a bit of a compromise, but if it’s the only way Saab could have a hatch on the next 9-3, I’m for it. Personally I prefer the Mazda 6 arrangement. That’s the way Saab should go, and don’t forget the 3 door coupe!
18 Alex // May 6, 2008 at 11:28 am

I like it, and that “awkward roofline” looks just like the C-pillar of a 9-5 sedan so watch what you say Swade…

If I somehow strike it big someday, I’m going to have to find a custom shop that will use that hardware to convert my 9-5 to a hatchback. That would be beyond awesome.
19 Kevin // May 6, 2008 at 11:35 am

They should keep the design simple. Like E&G said do it with the contours. Like the Chrysler Lebaron GTS / Dodge Lancer where the rear of the car looks like a sedan but is actually a hatch back.
http://www.allpar.com/model/lancer.html
20 Dan S. // May 6, 2008 at 12:27 pm

I like it!! It would be superior idea as long as chassis rigidity & weight gain is nominal. I think this 2 for 1 execution is a great idea.
21 Kraig // May 6, 2008 at 12:29 pm

I think that the 9000CS/CSE had a very well disguised hatch and could swallow a whale, if the occasion arose.
22 brianl // May 6, 2008 at 1:33 pm

I like the idea, but not everyone is tall enough to reach up and close that in hatch position. Did anyone notice how high that is? I think the height would have issues in a garage as well.
23 Ebbot // May 6, 2008 at 5:24 pm

If it is combined with a good way to drive with it open and no tresh hold then it is great.

It is flexible and useful, this is really a thin Saab should have come up with… has Skoda snatch a Saab-goof?
24 eriknystrom // May 6, 2008 at 5:54 pm

I think this type of hatch is very useful for loading a baby pram that would not go in the small sedan type of opening (yes, i’m in that age…)
25 BaRa // May 6, 2008 at 7:24 pm

I wouldn’t buy it. Difficult construction, not enough resulting space. I prefer a real hatch. Let Saab make a sedan for the States, we’ll buy the hatch in Europe.
26 TrakDah // May 6, 2008 at 10:50 pm

I think what’s important to Skoda here isn’t the functionality in itself, as defined by the answer to the question “does it provide more space and useability”. Rather, I believe what is important to Skoda is the novelty – here is something new, something worth a few extra characters of text in the reviews, something to show in ads and something every single car reviewer out there will be commenting. That in itself is what will sell the car.

My point is this: this is something Skoda implemented not to make the car better, but to get more notice, which they’re succeeding in rather well I think, or why else would a Skoda show up on a Saab blog?
27 Jeff // May 7, 2008 at 12:46 pm

I mentioned this in my long rant about the 9-1 a ways back, and I think that this new Skoda innovation is still not fully understood.

So I did some research about it and found information about the semi-circular latch assembly and steel cross bar that forms the joint between the hatch and trunk. Suffice it to say, those VW designers are some clever clever folk, and actually found a way to INCREASE the lateral rigidity of the trunk area.

And as far as real practical storage is concerned, if you really look at the difference between a concave and convex rear window/trunk arrangement, you’re not getting that big of a difference volumetrically. So, drawbacks? None. Seriously, what is wrong with this? I have this feeling that if Saab were the ones who invented it, we’d all be shouting from the rooftops about unconventional Swedish functionalist design and how the world needs catching up. When some Eastern Bloc country comes out with it first, we cry foul. Come on.
28 TrakDah // May 7, 2008 at 8:39 pm

Jeff, (extremely) well said!
29 Kaylan Marie // May 9, 2008 at 10:46 am

oh no. future 9k project?

lol. kidding.

Subscribe

Authors