The Nissan [Game]Cube and the Box-Car Trend

What's that in your rear view mirror? A box truck? An '80s Chevy van? A loaf of Wonderbread with 15 inch rims?

Odds are these days what you're actually witnessing is one of the multiple "box-shaped cars" Asian cars on the road today: the unsoulful Kia Soul, ruler-inspired Scion xB, oddball-yet-unique Honda Element, or the big-in-Japan Nissan Cube.



Oh wait, wrong cube. But you've got to admit the resemblance is striking.


It's...cubey.

I happened to see a Cube parked on campus today. For the first time, I was able to do a walkaround in person; I'd previously relied on other journalists' coverage via cameras to make a visual judgment on the Datsun(whoops, Freudian slip. I meant Nissan). I must say, the styling is just...odd. I understand that the car's been sold in Japan for a few years now, so perhaps, one might think, that the new lines would simply take a while to "sink in."

But hell, they said that about the new Accord sedan, too. And it still looks like an eggy mess to me.

The Cube, like all the other "box" cars, poses a simple yet crucial physics conflict: a high center of gravity means poor weight balance, and therefore sub-par handling. Which is a euphemism for "handles like a truck." Or your mother-in-law after she's had a few Buds. Add to that microscopic wheels wrapped by tiny tires (I believe 175mm wide on the base Cube), and you'd basically be driving around your Kenmore washing machine. And your appliance isn't exactly aerodynamic - 24MPG city and 29MPG highway (stats: ) are pathetic numbers for a 1.6L engine in something that weighs less than 2800lbs. I might only get 19MPG city in my '04 Malibu, but I also get 32MPG highway. In a machine that tips the scale at 3300lbs. Why? It's not the rolling equivalent of a brick. There was some attempt to help the body cleave through the air more efficiently.

And the utility isn't even good enough to overcome the Cube's massive failures. There isn't that much space in the back. Pass.


"I got soul! I'm super bad!" James Brown would turn over in his grave.

The next contender for the flyweight title, the Kia Soul.

Now, you might remember the first Kias that were exported to the US about twenty years ago - they were utter garbage, reminiscent of the Chrysler K-cars Detroit pumped out after Daimler's first bailout (though that debt was repaid, with interest - the people made money on that deal). A decade later, Kia had made some progress, but still remained a very tiny portion of the market in America, still below their Korean counterpart Hyundai. It wasn't until very recently (i.e. the past 3 years) that Kia has really stepped up their game, with models like the Forte (which cribs the look of the present-generation Civic in an overt manner), and now the Soul.

Or so the hype would have you believe.

The main problem with the Soul is the same as the Cube: high center of gravity, though at least Kia give the Soul some decent rubber. It's also, surprisingly, quite a nice place to be - unexpected for a North American market compact car (that isn't a Mk. 1 Focus). Though, like any boxy car interior, the gear lever is alllllll the way down there, which only exacerbates the feeling of truckin'(Jerry Garcia would be proud).

Kia did get something rights with the Soul, though - that slicked back loaf of bread at least also has a higher ride height than a normal compact. Where the Soul fails at physics it tries to make up for in daily-driver comfort - it's easier to climb in and out of than most compacts. Now, that might not matter so much to me, a 20 year old man (and I'm apparently part of the target demographic for the Soul, 18-24 year old single males. Much like Toyota's Scion brand). However, that characteristic can become very important to an older crowd.

My father, a man in his mid-fifties, for example, likes the Soul. And he's at the point where he doesn't give a damn about hitting apexes and running slaloms.

So, job done, Kia. Just market it to the right crowd.

It must be said, though, that if you're looking for Tonka Toys' adaptation of the four-wheeled boxcar, the land of the rising sun is where you want set your sights. Or East Liberty, Ohio, since the Element's assembled there.


Look, it's been photographed on dirt. You know that means it's "rugged."

I understand what Honda was trying to do with the Element; it's actually kind of a cool boxcar. Yes, I'm calling it a car. At best it's a small crossover, sharing a chassis with both the Civic and CR-V. While its market angle is supposed to be a "go-anywhere" mentality, the Element is no SUV, nor a decent offroader.

And I don't want to hear anything about that "Real-Time 4WD" nonsense, because it doesn't really work. Don't believe me? Watch as Honda's 4WD system, along with a few others, fails.



Want a small, chunky SUV to do some light trailblazing? Get a Forester. At least that way you'll have a serious AWD system and the ground clearance to go farther offroad than the soccer field.

The Element isn't what it wants to portray itself as, then. So is it useless? No, actually; the rubber matting Honda equipped instead of carpeting is genius - take the Element to the beach, get sand inside, take a hose and washing the floor right off. Brilliant, actually. Too bad it's mostly a soccer mom-mobile, though it's good for hauling around dirty sports equipment as well. For that reason, the Element passes - better for people to buy Elements than monstrous Suburbans or Lexus GX series. I'd still say a used Focus wagon or even Outback wagon would be money better spent, though.

That takes me to the grand daddy of this group:

Mmm, xB for eXtra Boxy. Paint it brown, and you've got a UPS truck.

The Scion xB first appeared eight or so years ago on our roads, and I'll be damned if it didn't start this whole scene. I never quite caught what was so appealing about the little bugger. Honestly, it really looks like a cardboard box with 14" wheels, and a swollen nose.

That makes sense though. I'd punch whoever styled it.

There's nothing even remotely pleasing about the car. Like going around corners? You won't in this. Far be it from me to tell anyone they bought the wrong car because it's ugly, though, so I'll use logic. (Read: this car will probably kill you in an emergency situation. Handling capabilities do not exist solely for fun.) Obviously, like the other three cars I've mentioned, the xB's designed also failed physics class.

He probably doesn't like corners, either. Both in his styling and his roads. Because the Scion Box has no curves, save for its emblem and its wheels. I'd be willing to bet that if the designer could've work out square wheels though, he'd have done it.

Maybe they should fit one with snowmobile tracks. The car might make aesthetic sense, then.

But really, why were these cars made? Simple: a boxcar is able to provide small overall size, semi-decent fuel economy (for its class), and a large amount of headroom for the occupants. I understand the theory.

Just go get an Impreza hatchback or Focus hatchback. You'll get 90% of the utility with comparable or better fuel economy and three times the driving fun.

Drop off the kids at the mall, then SPEEDSHIFT on the way home.