implemented long ago, it's called the "hatchback".
Before somebody parrots something "obvious" about the Pinto, Ford made over 2 million Pintos of which twenty seven were recorded by the NHTSA as actually causing a fiery death. This is statistically similar/unremarkable to any other car of that era.
According to a study performed for the Rutgers Law Review, intended to study tort cases ( meaning, it was not affiliated with Ford itself and took place in 1991, over a decade after the last Pinto was made) "the car was no more fire-prone than other cars of the time, that its fatality rates were lower than comparably sized imported automobiles
, and that the supposed "smoking gun" document that plaintiffs said demonstrated Ford's callousness in designing the Pinto was actually a document based on National Highway Traffic Safety Administration regulations about the value of a human life — rather than a document containing an assessment of Ford's potential tort liability" and additionally "The Pinto's fuel tank location behind the axle was "commonplace at the time in American cars" "
I'm not saying any of this because I care about Pintos, they're just some little econo car made 30+ years ago. What I care about is people forming opinions based on actual reality instead of on popular 'shock' bull*. When we believe the hype, we end up making decisions based on bad data, and that leads us to bad results. THAT is more dangerous than the back seat of a Pinto.
Small cars with cavernous, slanted
hatchbacks are inherently awesome for utility with aerodynamics, I'd love to see one built to haul - perhaps when fully electric cars are ready for prime time we'll see one again, no danger of exhaust entering the rear of the cabin!