I’m planning a road trip to see Yosemite with two other people, and the idea is to fly to SFO and to rent a convertible for about five days.
I know the standard wisdom is “ignore the rear seat as a passenger option”, but I definitely have seen people riding on the road back there in both cars, and the person in question is not large (about 5 foot 3). And she can rotate with another person for the front passenger seat who is also small (5-5, I’m guessing?)
Assuming the latest generation of both makes, who has the first hand knowledge to make a call as to which of the two would be better for a small adult person to ride in the back seat of a convertible for an extended period of time - a Mustang or a Beetle? Those are my two options from Sixt.
Or should I keep looking elsewhere for a specific car you’d recommend, from another agency?
I’m 5’ 11" and I can confidently tell you that despite having never been in either, I would happily spend about 10 times longer in the back of a Mustang than a Beetle, even if the Beetle were significantly more roomy. But then, I like cars and driving fast. Sorry I can’t provide the information you seek but I mention it because it is a possible factor. It might be that the person in question owned a Beetle in the 70s and would love to experience the latest version from the back seat, regardless of comfort (i.e. the opposite view to my own).
I think the Mustang would be a better car for the drive. The Beetle has no power to speak of, and you’ll be doing mountain roads. It’s also a bigger car, so the person in the back should be able to wiggle around a bit to get comfortable. I’d pick the Mustang.
I can’t speak to the roominess (or lack thereof) of a current Mustang convertible, but I took a road trip with friends a couple of years ago, which entailed me riding in the back seat of a '98 Mustang convertible for five hours, each way.
I’m 5’10", but with relatively short legs for my height. It wasn’t roomy, but it wasn’t horrible, either. The biggest issue for me was that the lower part of the back seat was somewhat flat, and short, and it felt like I wasn’t getting much support for my thighs.
LOL, I’ve had a 2013 Mustang convertible since it was new. My 70 pound dog fills up one of the seats. No way 2 people would like sitting in that seat for more than 10-15 minutes. Don’t know about the VW.
Don’t get hung up on the convertible thing. It’s fine at 60 to 85 degrees. Outside of that envelope it’s not. Sunburn, wear a hat and sun screen. Noise, quite tiring actually, especially passing trucks. Rain, put the roof up. Snow, see rain.
Those possible rear leg room measurements are with the front seats moved all the way forward. Are you going to be comfortable driving in that position?? Few people would.
No adult human being will be comfortable sitting in the back seat of either car, unless they have detachable legs.
I’ve got a 2006 Mustang and if the seat is pushed up it isn’t too bad for legroom. The wind is what I’d get tired of back there. The wind goes up over the windshield and basically comes down right in the face of the person in the back. If you’re cruising through the woods at a fairly slow to medium pace it wouldn’t be horrible, but if you are at highway speeds it won’t be comfortable probably in either.
The ones I knew and drove were the vintage Beetles and Stangs but for ride I would take the Beetle; it just always felt more comfortable to my body. For hauling crap or getting lucky, the Mustang all the way; the space just seemed more usable in more ways than one.
Agree. I will just add that if the OP is planning on driving from SFO to Yosemite, depending on the time of year and time of day, it will be close to 100 degrees as you drive thru the Central Valley. Besides the noise and wind and lack of leg room, it will be extremely uncomfortable with the top down on that section of the drive.