Yes. Just look at the appalling forward blind spot on a lot of trucks and SUVs. Or the way cars have become taller at the expense of aerodynamics.
It might also be safer to be in a higher up car in the event of a collision.
Pretty much all the families I know with young kids and toddlers has a full size SUV. Every time I ask why they did not get a minivan such as Odyssey or Sienna, every response is they like SUVs and do not want to sit lower in the minivan. Even though the minivan has better fuel economy, seats more people with more legroom, and has more cargo space, the answer is still SUV is cooler than minivans.
I even see families who live with elderly parents prefer to drive two SUVs (or 1 SUV and 1 pickup truck) somewhere with 3 to 4 people in each, rather than have one minivan to be able to transport all 7 or 8 at the same time. And these same families growing up went everywhere in minivans because it was the most economic way, but now that they can afford SUVs, that is what they choose to use.
It started out as a joke back in 2010, partially inspired by "A Nice Morning Drive" (http://www.2112.net/powerwindows/transcripts/19731100roadand...) from the 1972s. It is no longer very funny -- Ford killing its sedans a couple years back was a sad wakeupcall.
Car manufacturers are not shaping people’s desires, they are simply delivering them what they want.
A Corolla/civic continues to be available for purchase. Yet people want to sit higher up, so you see the vast increase in sales for RAV4/CRV.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/276506/change-in-us-car-...
That planning horizon differential alone is enough to explain why car manufacturers would be greater incentivized to iterate on SUVs faster than sedans and include more features. Iteration and feature differentials will contribute as much to sales choices as "sit higher up" will, acting as a reinforcement in the cycle/spiral towards larger vehicles.
Car manufacturers aren't incentivized enough to lengthen their own planning horizons or otherwise better accommodate "sensible" sedan drivers, and it becomes very easy to pretend they don't exist and chase the short-term profits of the faster cycle time (especially when pushed by quarterly-earnings focused shareholders).
On road trips, my wife and I would fold down the rear seats and sleep in the back. I'm 183cm (6ft) and there is plenty of space. You can fit 2.4m lengths of wood if you need trips to the hardware store. I guess full plywood sheets would need the hatch open, but there wouldn't be much overhang.
A year or so ago I tried a RAV4 and it felt much smaller inside. In the rear seats I felt much more squashed.
Granted I'm not able to go grocery shopping at the same time..
Most of my driving is on country roads in a mountainous area, with some very tight turns.
I'm going to rent out an SUV soon and see what it's like taking sharp turns with a high vehicle. I suspect it sucks but who knows.
Here in NZ we have the Camary, Mazda 6, Lexus IS etc but none of them are available in AWD. Only crossovers, SUVs and Utes (small pick up trucks).
I've actually been toying with the idea of getting a Subaru WRX. I'm not a a boyracer or anything, but it's about the only japanese, AWD sedan available here. Feels like a weirdly practical choice (good cornering, better handling in ice/heavy rain/gravel).
EDIT: wow even modern Rav4s fail the moose test - a car which I'd call pretty mild for an SUV, even wagon like.
The Sienna is great for kids and I've managed to fit 4x8 sheets in it.
As with any blind spot, one just has to move their head...
- https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/new-study-suggests-todays-s...