Hooniverse Asks: What Car With Either Two or Four Doors Do You Prefer With the Four Doors?

Ferrari has never had a production four-door in its lineup. If you in fact want something that approximates the experience of a four door with a Ferrari motor, the closest you are likely to get is with the current Maserati Quattroporte, a car with a Ferrari-designed V8 and that is literally named “Four-Door.”
At one time it was expected that car makers would provide their mass-market nameplates in a multitude of body styles: four-door, two-door, wagon, two-door wagon, convertible, etc. Today, few follow that tradition, but there are some car makers still holding to the tradition. That’s what brings us to today’s question, which is, of those cars available in both two- and four-door styles, which ones do you more prefer in the more-door form?
Image: Bimmerpost

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 64 MB. You can upload: image, audio, video. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop files here

44 responses to “Hooniverse Asks: What Car With Either Two or Four Doors Do You Prefer With the Four Doors?”

  1. 0A5599 Avatar

    Anybody who doesn’t like suicide rear doors on 60’s Continentals should kill themselves now.

    1. engineerd Avatar

      I see what you did there…

    2. tonyola Avatar

      I do like suicide-door Lincolns but that coupe is really elegant looking.

      1. 0A5599 Avatar

        Hardtop. I don’t think they made a B pillar version of that generation.

          1. 0A5599 Avatar

            I didn’t realize manufacturers engaged in such stupidity that long ago. Calling it a coupe doesn’t make it one. Right, Mercedes?
            At least the ad called it a two door hardtop, even with the name implying something else.

    3. Alff Avatar

      On the other hand, this suicide-doored Thunderbird is the answer to the opposite of today’s question. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/77cfc2c2a67904786de0473fdb1237a8d69c5293390e0ab26f7d9779253c12b5.jpg

          1. outback_ute Avatar

            Yes, the beak is particularly horrible.

          2. Maymar Avatar

            Isn’t the snout just a function of the year? Mind you, the rear pillar on the coupe works a little better, but I still kind of like the ’67 sedan.

      1. JayP Avatar

        Doing research on 4 door coupes, I think the P5 pre-dated the 5th Gen TBird.
        May have to get a ruling as to who to blame for the whole “4 door coupe” thing.

  2. nanoop Avatar

    Most of the tiny hatchbacks: I see the benefit of going from a 4.5m sedan down to a 3.5m car, but even if the 3-door hatch was another 10cm shorter (this isn’t always the case) the benefit is marginal, and both practicality and resale value suffer more than the reduced original purchase price justifies.

    1. outback_ute Avatar

      I was starting to write a reply about why the hatches are shorter than the sedans (eg Golf vs Jetta), but that is usually not related to the number of doors!
      5-door hatches are pushing out 3-door versions in a lot of cases. Even ignoring easier rear seat access, the shorter front doors are less of a hassle in tight parking situations.

  3. engineerd Avatar

    I’m starting to think about replacing the XJ Cherokee as it is becoming a bit unreliable and not getting used nearly enough to make me happy. One of the contenders is a JK Wrangler (or the JL with a diesel engine…). For serious offroading, the shorter wheelbase of the 2-door is preferred. However, for highway comfort and ease of ingress/egress for the kids the 4-door Unlimited versions are what I’ll be looking at. I have never been in a situation in the type of offroading that I do where the longer wheelbase of the XJ has been a liability compared to my friend’s JK 2-door.

      1. Vairship Avatar

        There are even easier ways to load/unload those kids: http://www.kisselsandclassiccars.com/uploads/2/9/4/0/2940355/4234724_orig.jpg

  4. P161911 Avatar

    The two door versions of the late 80s/early 90s FWD Caddies looked…unfortunate.
    The four doors were typical GM of the time.

    1. ptschett Avatar

      I thought those Coupe de Villes looked OK if they didn’t have the padded vinyl roof that so many had. (That ’90-’93 Coupe with the continental kit, longer bodywork, and lower body cladding is particularly unfortunate vs. the ’88 pictured below.)

      1. P161911 Avatar

        That rear window still just looks wrong.

        1. ptschett Avatar

          It doesn’t bother me, but my grandparents have had a blue ’88 like that silver one since 1990 so I’ve had 26 years to get used to it.

      2. outback_ute Avatar

        Still looks weird. I think it is because the top of the window is longer than the A pillar side, it looks like it has been photoshopped longer.
        But that is looking at it with an Australian perspective, where large 2-door sedans basically disappeared in the mid-50’s

    2. salguod Avatar

      That 2 door is a DeVille, the 4 door is a Seville.
      It’s a testimony of the similarity of their styling that no one else pointed it out yet.
      Here’s a 4 door DeVille:

    1. JayP Avatar

      Wouldn’t that be a Falcon?

      1. Alff Avatar

        Mechanically, but not stylistically.

      1. neight428 Avatar

        The proportions of the 4-door Falcon just look cleaner. The one I have built in my imagination has a set of wider tires on 15″ Torq Thrust wheels.

  5. Peter Tanshanomi Avatar

    Not exactly the same model, but I always liked the Isuzu Stylus over the Impulse.

  6. Sjalabais Avatar

    Ages ago, in school, I had to get used to being the odd one out for almost always preferring four over two doors. Or, rather, five. Practicality over style every day!

    1. wunno sev Avatar
      wunno sev

      with you! i can’t understand why one would want a less-practical car with giant doors and big-ass rear fenders that look wrong every time.
      the only car i consider better-looking as a coupe than a sedan is the 98-02 Accord.

  7. Jofes2 Avatar

    I think the Saab 900 looks a lot more complete with the rear doors. Especially the sedan version.

    1. Fresh-Outta-Nissans Avatar

      True enough, a sedan without rear doors isn’t very complete.

  8. Peter Tanshanomi Avatar

    I prefer the lines of the XJ Series II sedan to the XJ Coupe. If I wanted a 2-door Jag, it’d be an XJ-S.

    1. JayP Avatar

      Ummm… The XJ Coupe has to be one of my favs ever.
      (I know this is a Daimler – just looked too good not to share)

      1. Peter Tanshanomi Avatar

        To me the proportions always make it look as though something is missing, which makes sense since it was designed as a sedan first. It doesn’t look too bad in your photo, but it’s especially apparent with all the windows down. Maybe it should have been a pillared coupe instead of a hardtop. In any case, something about it pets my fur backward. Where as, with the Sedan I look at it and think, “just about perfect.”

        1. outback_ute Avatar

          Possibly because there is a lot of visual bulk in the lower body, and the pillarless roof is so slender by comparison?

  9. mdharrell Avatar

    There’s nothing wrong with the two-door version of the Velorex 16/350 but I’d prefer the Longrex:

    1. ptschett Avatar

      I like the 2-door better there (because it is so wacky.)

    2. 0A5599 Avatar


  10. salguod Avatar

    I read someone in C&D say if they are giving up the utility of 4 doors they better get something substantial back in return like much better aesthetics or increased performance. Usually I find that the 2 door does return superior aesthetics. The Continental and Wrangler Unlimited mentioned here are notable exceptions.
    I did drive a Celebrity 2 door for a short time and there was no point in removing those doors, it still looked like the box it came in.

%d bloggers like this: