Do such cars exist and if not why are there not more RWD cars with some utility in mind?
Post any examples past & present.
Generally speaking Hatchback and RWD are incompatible. The point of the hatch design is for utility, but a RWD drivetrain (transmission, differential, rear suspension/axles, and the heat generated from all that) start to eat away at the available interior space in order to accommodate it.
Look underneath a GTI and check out how minimally intrusive the rear suspension is. In particular a MKIV w/ the beam axle. Then, go have a look at pretty much any RWD car and compare that; the differential housing/heat pretty much make it a non-starter for most hatch designs.
The C-coupes get ragged on primarily based on the early, supercharged cars with the muddy gearboxes. The later cars with the turbocharged or V6 engines and the new gearbox and interior are quite nice.
The 2005+ models got a newer gauge cluster with a properly sized tachometer, and a revised, much-improved transmission.
RWD makes this tough. I can only think of...
5 series GT
5 series wagon.... though not really a hatchback in the strict definition I suppose....
AWD could open it up to Audi wagons, but they aren't offered in the US anymore as I recall....
Current: 2013 Volt | 2002 S2000 (#8029) |+| 2006 Pilot
Past: 2007 Passat Wagon 2.0T 6MT | 2000 GTI VR6 | 2002 S2000 (#6343) | 1999 Miata | 1992 240SX |+| 2005 Accord | 1995 Accord | 1988 Civic
3rd generation Camaro/Firebird came in 4 seat hatchback form for about 10 years. First generation 240Z-280Z also came in 4 seat hatchback form. I'm sure there are plenty more examples. The Ford Mustang also comes to mind.
All are "semi-practical."
It generally costs more to develop a RWD platform than a FWD platform, and so by extension, all else equal, RWD cars cost more.
Hatchbacks = Econocars, at least in the United States. There ARE some exceptions (A3), but by and large, the demographics of RWD car buyers (i.e. will pay a premium for performance) is not the same as hatchback buyer demographics (i.e. don't want to pay a premium for anything).
Could you take a Quattro A3 and somehow hack it up so that it's RWD? I have no idea how Quattro works, I know you can do this with Subaru AWD.
I still love the Starlet. I miss seeing them light up the dragstrip! If they could do a economical RWD hatch back then, they can do it now. But will anyone buy it? I know I would.
After owning an E90 M3 and now owning a Mk6 GTI, I think a RWD hatch can be practical. There would be some compromises, but every sports car makes compromises. The M3 had a taller hump in the floor vs the GTI, but room was very simlar. Making the trunk a hatch would only add to the utility. I do wonder if there is a market for RWD economy cars that are practical with sporting intentions. I know there is the BRZ/FRS but I'm talking about something like a 5 door GTI/Focus. I know when I bought my last car, I needed something fuel efficient, seats 4-5, and has decent cargo area. I looked hard for rwd, but that put me back into BMW, Mercedes area. Not only are they pricey but, they aren't that fuel efficient either. I had no choice but to shop FWD. If there was a RWD choice, it most likely would've been my first option. I shopped the AWD choices, which were basically Subaru, and loved the WRX/STI performance and non FWD layout, but the gas mileage was terrible, the dealers weren't exactly trying earn my business, and the WRX is starting to become dated. 5-speed trans, dated interior(tech and switches), and silver dollar sized bluetooth buttons on the steering wheel were damn near deal breakers.
In the end I ended up with a nice GTI, but do wish for something similar in RWD. This is my first FWD in years, and still have to drive my 944 often to recover what I'm missing in the GTI.
Why does the argumentwork that there are no RWD hatches due to packaging issues fit with the handful of hot AWD hatches? They have the same packaging issues under the rear end.
Lately I have been testing "tip-in events". Just the tip-in. Just to see how it feels. Response time is typically on the order of 2-3 seconds. Sometimes the injection timing is a little off...
The E36 318ti or W203 C-class coupe is probably the closest modern thing to being both commonly available and a true four-seater. Most of the cars mentioned are 2+2s, the rear seats are for emergencies only. Though having owned both, I'll grant that the S12 Nissan 200SX was roomier than the S13 240SX and is barely usable.
The Toyota Corona was offered as a 5-door liftback in its last generation before it was finally replaced in the US market by the FWD Camry. It was roomier and bigger than a Corolla (which offered 3-door liftbacks going back to the mid-'70s). Here's a US-spec '79:
The late '70s Datsun 510 offered a 3-door.
Both of these were true midsize 4-seater cars. There were tons of compact/subcompact RWD hatches, but these two were family cars with decent back seats.
I love the assertion that RWD and a hatchback are "incompatible"; no one bats an eye at the existence of an AWD Golf or Impreza. These cars have just as much stuff in the back competing for space as they would if they were RWD. Why aren't they made in bigger numbers? Well they are (euro-spec 1 series, 5-series GT), but that aside, it costs more, most buyers don't want it or don't care.
Splinter - Team Post-Killing Ninja
I don't practice llanteria