[ambivalent_98]

As most of you have pointed out , the rear bench is for family cars. Most of the cars that came in India (here again I am saying most not all)are by multi-national manufacturers who use existing platforms to build a vehicle for India. But they forget that apart from strengthening the suspension etc for bad roads , Indian mentality is to look for a car that can put in apart from mummy , daddy , kids , grand-parents or uncles , aunts or other "adults" in the family apart from the kids. So if these multinationals make a family car they attach a boot to free up the pathetic excuse of a boot in the hatchback and create a new compartment but they don't seem to widen it and lengthen the wheelbase.
Tata is an exception. The Indica(from V2 to Vista) and its "booty"licious siblings are roomier than most of the peer autos. Totally agree on that but then they lack on other aspects.
All said and done the Indian mentality is tough to fathom and has forced many of these auto manufacturers to re-think their strategy.
Oh and one more aspect. The general tendency is that if you want a generous rear-bench its logical that the owner does not drive but has a chauffer. These cars are the highest end luxury cars , cost a great deal of dough and not for the masses.

[selfdrive]

Originally Posted by deetjohn

I love the way MSIL has liberated more leg room at the rear for the new WagonR, at the expense of the boot. The new WagonR has 60/40 split rear seats even for the lower variants. I for one, prefer more space in the cabin than the boot, as its not everyday that I run out of boot space in the car. Agreed, one would need to plan better for those days when we need more boot space. But I prefer more cabin space to boot space in a hatchback.

I agree with your opinion. In this case, I have a very basic question

For cars like the Figo for example, would it not be better to have a 60:40 split and to introduce adjustable travel on them? Most people would be glad to have the flexibility to then adjust based on their requirements. Is there a design restriction on the underbody or roof that prevents having movable rear seats? I would be interested in this option if available in the aftermarket

I understand this can only be done for certain hatchbacks where the roof design/ lack of boot allows for this flexibility.

[GTO]

Originally Posted by selfdrive

Is there a design restriction on the underbody or roof that prevents having movable rear seats?

Impossible with most modern hatchbacks & sedans. The wheel wells will obstruct (that's why a car's wheelbase is generally representative of interior space), as will the fuel tank, spare wheel & suspension / drive train components at the back.

Originally Posted by rxpaul

SO POSSIBLY THE HIGHER DASH OF THE INDICA LIBERATES MORE LEG SPACE ?

Not really. It's the size of the Indica and overall packaging that liberates so much space.

Originally Posted by deetjohn

I love the way MSIL has liberated more leg room at the rear for the new WagonR, at the expense of the boot. The new WagonR has 60/40 split rear seats even for the lower variants.

So true. What do you use more? The rear bench or the boot? I'm guessing for most people, it's the former.