Advocacy & Safety - I can't wait until SUVs go out of style.

I'm assuming they're talking about high-speed accidents, but still... a 21-23% chance of rolling over is still unacceptable.

http://www.theiowachannel.com/automotive/3632241/detail.html

In a way, I really wish you hadn't started this thread, because it forces me to come out of the closet for what I really am, a sworn enemy of SUV's.

There are things that make America great, but SUV's are not one of them.

Let's start with the idea that because they're larger, they're somehow safer. Last year, only two categories of motor vehicles showed increases in vehicular deaths (according to NHTSA statistics). As your post noted, SUV's are prone to rollover. And last year, the death rate for this type of vehicle increased about 10% as a result of more people dying in rollover accidents. The other category of vehicle where the death rate increased was motorcycles, possibly as the result of too many middle-aged riders living a latent "Easy Rider" fantasy without the requisite skills needed to operate a piece of machinery that inflicts very serious road rash if not handled with care. Or perhaps, there were a number of collisions with SUV's...

But I digress...other than the increased ability to rollover, SUV's generally don't stop as well as most cars,
and of course, there's the less than admirable gas mileage as well as the diminished pollution requirements these vehicles are required to meet since they are classified as a truck. And upon buying one, you'll be paying increased insurance rates due to your ability to inflict more damage upon whatever unfortunate vehicle and its occupants you happen to collide with.

I do not have qualms about someone owning one of these vehicles who actually needs the size and off-road capabilities that these vehicles have. But, why does the average housewife need something the size of a small schoolbus to ferry back and forth a few bags of groceries and several small children? Interestingly enough, many of these suburban survival kits sport accoutrements like heavy duty mesh guards for the head and tailights as if wife and hubby might encounter some unpenetrable wilderness on their way to the sports bar. The TV and magazine ads present a fantasy of Joe Couch Potato being able to navigate the wilderness while still keeping his generally wide posterior planted in the lap of luxury. Yes, the American dream, Marlboro man re-dux without the cigarette riding the range, climbing impossible gradients without even breaking a sweat. Hey guys, think about getting a road or mountain bike and doing your waistline some good while communing with mother nature! For most of these people, that's simply too much effort. Much better to let 300 horses under the hood do it for you, regardless of the cost to the planet.

And then there's the Hummer. The avatar of SUV's, the creme de la creme of conspicuous consumption with a designed disregard for anything but whatever pathetic image the driver is attempting to project.

For what could be more machismo than driving a vehicle whose lineage was ordained by war. Around my area, a number of these humorless machines are driven by techie types who cruise around the Costco parking lot several times looking for the proper parking space to display their rig and to keep the driver from walking more than 10 feet to the door. When these pilots finally emerge from their command posts, they generally sport the physique of someone who would wheeze after pulling the trash to the curb on Sunday.


Thankfully, there is brewing a backlash to all of this nonsense. Increasingly, these behemouths are sitting on the lots....at least until their next incarnation as hybrids. I'm hopeful that many of us will have learned something before that happens, knowing that there will always be the obnoxious few that will want to display their greed for the whole world to see....because they can.

Like I said...I'm almost sorry you started this thread...but I admit..I'm glad you did..

Thank you Tom!

The safety arguement really bothers me - I've even/often seen it repeated in the news with no research done (which would have shown the opposite) for example: "SUV sales are up in spite of gas prices, driven by the need for safer cars" or some such nonsense.

I do own a 4WD 2-dr Ford Explorer, (by todays standards a 'small' SUV). I do use it regulary (about 1/mo. or more) for driving on official 4WD access to hiking trailheads, etc. (But not off-road, I never want to damage untouched land). I need 4WD about 1 in 10 times for steep loose sections or river crossings.

Folks buy these a lot out here (news article a few weeks ago was that sales are up in AZ vs. rest of country, in spite of gas prices). There is a lot in regard to image, then folks think they need to prove the image and go tearing around off road, once.

Before I stopped driving agressively I got 18mph average in city. Now I drive it gently and don't speed, I get 22mph average.

It is not a safe car for handling/accident avoidance. Two times I've needed emergency stop/maneuver and control was lost very readliy vs. a nice sedan. Very scary.

My next car (already on order/waitlist) is a Toyota Prius. I'll keep the Explorer for when I need to pick up large goods or drive on rough dirt roads.

Al

I was raised on British sports cars. Low = good, light = good, roll-up windows = bad, syncromesh 1st = bad.

I'm not really anti-SUV, but the whole thing just seems very alien.

Paul

Every few weeks, we have a return of one of these threads. I should just gather up all the links to my previous posts and just post a list of links. :)

At anyrate, let's address some points here...


Rollovers - Yes SUVs are more prone to rollovers due to their higher CG. This needs to be taken into account by the driver. The majority of rollover accidents are due to the driver outdriving the limitations of the vehicles. So now I can see the next argument: "SUVs have low safety limits." This is simply untrue. SUVs are designed with a margin of safety far exceeding recommended general safe driving conditions as are other automobiles. If an SUV "departs from controlled flight" it is typically because the driver pushed the vehicle beyond its performance envelope. Maybe it's because of my pilotting background but I believe that the only real safety device is the operator. Know your skills, know your limits, know your environmental conditions and know your vehicle. Driver education is the primary problem here. Most people don't know how to drive an SUV. It's like sticking a newbie rider onto a racing bike set up with a 6" saddle to bar drop and telling them to go out for back to back centuries that including having to take on high speed mountain descents at 50+ MPH.

Size - SUVs come in all sizes. A Jeep TJ (Wrangler for those in the US and/or are Jeep-term challenged) has around a 94" wheelbase. The overall length is around 155" and overall width is 67". In comparison, a Honda Civic Coupe has a 103" wheelbase with an overall length and width of 175" and 67" respectively. By all rights, a TJ is a subcompact. My Jeep ZJ (1998 model year Grand Cherokee) has a wheelbase of 106" with an overall length of 177" and 71" respectively. The Honda Accord Sedan has a wheelbase of 108" and an overall length and width of 190" and 72" respectively. Looks can be deceiving and not all SUVs are huge behemoths people try to make them out to be.

Usage - We can't and usually don't monitor our fellow humans on a daily basis. The guy in the 3-piece Armani climbing out of the Hummer H1 today might be locking differentials and rock crawling the same rig in shorts and a lumberjack shirt on the weekends. Let's not presume to know what people actually use their vehicles for and let's be more careful not to cast judgement based on incomplete knowledge. Yes, it's a good bet that the spotless Chevy Suburban with the running boards that wouldn't last 5 minutes on a class 2 ORV trail cruising through the Target parking lot replete with "Go Skyline Soccer!" scrawled all over in wash-away window chalk doesn't see any offroad unless the owner forget to sweep some beauty bark, that the kids tracked onto the driveway, back along the edge of the lawn but can you say for certain that the family doesn't spend its weekends camping up in the Snoqualmie-Baker National Forest and wants to get to spots only accessable via 4WD?

Image - Yes, there's an image problem. BTW, those who do use their SUVs offroad do tend to look down with a certain degree of contempt on those that purchase SUVs just for the image. However, I think that this holds true for any enthusiast group. Hype and image is what promotes and gives rise to poseurs and elitists. But just as in cycling, there are many who just couldn't care less what others own.


My pet-peeve with all this vehicle-type hate is that it detracts from the real problem: poor driver education and standards.

1. The environment is city streets and highway driving with the majority of folks speeding ~10mph over limit. There are safer vehicles than SUVs for this environment. Driving training is severely lacking for all types of vehicles. Accident rates could go down significantly if standards for learning safe driving were higher.

2. I don't think anyone considers wrangler an SUV. Its the large and super large new (and old like suburban) SUVs that cause most concern. My Explorer (a true SUV) has a tighter turning radius than an Accord and is quite narrow also. But its not the wheelbase, turning radius, etc. - its the gross weight, bulk, poor handling and low MPG that are the issue.

3/4. This is a personal judgement, but I would give far more respect to a person doing rock crawling with a 'hand crafted' (meaning learning the mechanics, selecting components, etc.) Chevy Bronco than an H1. An as to image, why does the rock crawler need to wear shorts and a lumberjack shirt? Except for getting out of the vehicle to check the trail ahead where one may get dirty, one can rock crawl in a suit. OK, more seriously, I very very rarely see Hummers out on 4WD roads and my friends 4WD club has no Hummers in it. Sure some folks use them as intended, but lets face it that the vast majority are driven as city vehicles, as are most SUVs.

Please, this is not arguement, just comment that it is more complex issue:
SUVs have not made cities and highways safer
SUVs have not helped reduce oil consumption
SUVs have helped the auto industry
SUVs do provide a hobby for enthusiasts
SUVs are purchased for greedy reasons and image
SUVs are purchased for the utility they provide
etc.

Al

Actually, I just hate the advertisements for them. One more ad with some model fool tearing up nature in a car designed largely to ferry kids to and from private school and I think I'm going to drive a stake thru the TV screen. Good God, these suburban kid-haulers are advertised as some sort of cure for impotence or something. Look, you're probably not impotent if you have kids, so what do you need an SUV for your machismo? I half expect to see Bob Dole endorsing them soon.

I always hear whining and moaning (not trolling but take it as you may) about SUVs and pickups in this forum but what about vans? There must be the same complaint about them.
I've seen Hummer clubs and they take them on some pretty sick terrain.

I do not have qualms about someone owning one of these vehicles who actually needs the size and off-road capabilities that these vehicles have.

As I said in the above quote from my post there are legitimate uses for SUV's, but the large majority of these cars are being used exclusively on marble smooth macadam. Several manufacturers have recognized this and have designed vehicles such as the Nissan Murano with a lower center of gravity since it is recognized that the average suburbanite does not need road to chassis clearances that will clear stumps or small logs.

Although I failed to define SUV precisely in my post, I think from my rant you can see that I'm talking about the "living large" species of vehicle that is overkill unless you need a regular land schooner to transport the cub den to Mount Baker. I would not classify the Jeep Wrangler as a SUV. It is perhaps SUV larva, an immature and undersized form of the final metamorphosis. In this vein, you have perhaps noticed that no matter what you do, more metal hangars accumulate in your closet. This mystery was solved when years ago one of my earliest cycling buddies explained to me that metal hangars are actually bicycle larvae.

But to get back to business...given the pristine condition of Hummers in the area where I live and the drivers who populate them, I doubt very much that we are looking at closet Sierra Club members who magically transform themselves into high country backpackers on the weekend. Not unless there's a big screen and plenty of beer and buffalo wings waiting at the summit. While we're at it, I mentioned in my last post that many Hummers are often owned by "techies" in the area I live in (Microsoftie land). I am in no way impugning "techies" on the whole, it just so happens that many individuals who enjoy a surplus of discretionary income where I live work for a technology company. I would hazard to guess that given enough money to squander, a mixed cross section of Americana would be able to effectively gross out many of us with the types of primitive spending habits I've seen so far in the Seattle area.

And finally, although there may have been beaucoup posts in the past on the SUV topic, I certainly never had my god-given opportunity to adequately vent my spleen on the subject, being relatively new to this forum...just don't get me started on why Paris Hilton is famous for being able to dress her dog well or why you need a 50 caliber machine gun for plinking targets in the woods...

I do not have qualms about someone owning one of these vehicles who actually needs the size and off-road capabilities that these vehicles have.

As I said in the above quote from my post there are legitimate uses for SUV's, but the large majority of these cars are being used exclusively on marble smooth macadam. Several manufacturers have recognized this and have designed vehicles such as the Nissan Murano with a lower center of gravity since it is recognized that the average suburbanite does not need road to chassis clearances that will clear stumps or small logs.

Although I failed to define SUV precisely in my post, I think from my rant you can see that I'm talking about the "living large" species of vehicle that is overkill unless you need a regular land schooner to transport the cub den to Mount Baker. I would not classify the Jeep Wrangler as a SUV. It is perhaps SUV larva, an immature and undersized form of the final metamorphosis. In this vein, you have perhaps noticed that no matter what you do, more metal hangars accumulate in your closet. This mystery was solved when years ago one of my earliest cycling buddies explained to me that metal hangars are actually bicycle larvae.

But to get back to business...given the pristine condition of Hummers in the area where I live and the drivers who populate them, I doubt very much that we are looking at closet Sierra Club members who magically transform themselves into high country backpackers on the weekend. Not unless there's a big screen and plenty of beer and buffalo wings waiting at the summit. While we're at it, I mentioned in my last post that many Hummers are often owned by "techies" in the area I live in (Microsoftie land). I am in no way impugning "techies" on the whole, it just so happens that many individuals who enjoy a surplus of discretionary income where I live work for a technology company. I would hazard to guess that given enough money to squander, a mixed cross section of Americana would be able to effectively gross out many of us with the types of primitive spending habits I've seen so far in the Seattle area.

And finally, although there may have been beaucoup posts in the past on the SUV topic, I certainly never had my god-given opportunity to adequately vent my spleen on the subject, being relatively new to this forum...just don't get me started on why Paris Hilton is famous for being able to dress her dog well or why you need a 50 caliber machine gun for plinking targets in the woods...

Apologize for the deja vu post...

Actually, I just hate the advertisements for them. One more ad with some model fool tearing up nature in a car designed largely to ferry kids to and from private school and I think I'm going to drive a stake thru the TV screen. Good God, these suburban kid-haulers are advertised as some sort of cure for impotence or something. Look, you're probably not impotent if you have kids, so what do you need an SUV for your machismo? I half expect to see Bob Dole endorsing them soon.


My favorite ad regarding this type of insipidness is the Hummer ad showing a group of parents and kids around a campfire toasting marshmallows & weinies under a full moon. The camera then pulls back to show a circle of Hummers parked around the fire in a sort of SUV nirvana where membership privileges for weinie roasting are only granted to worthy disciples who arrive in the proper 4-wheeled temple.

Ah yes, let's jump on the politcally correct hate the SUV bandwagon.
According to an article last year in my paper, the Insurance Institute still lists the most dangerous vehicle in single vehicle accidents as the sub-compact cars. You know, those ones that get excellent gas mileage. All the insurance agents interviewed for the article wanted to buy their children very old giant sedans for driving around.
I've noticed that people always quote the government research, and very rarely use the insurance industry's stats. I beleive the goverment test comes out the way the goverment wants it to. Could it be that they wouldn't be able to make the same point with different results?
I saw an accident where a small Honda rear ended a Chevy Suburban with a trailer hitch. No damage to the Suburban, but the Honda looked like it was totalled. Maybe the Honda driver should have learned to drive better.

Ah yes, let's jump on the politcally correct hate the SUV bandwagon.
According to an article last year in my paper, the Insurance Institute still lists the most dangerous vehicle in single vehicle accidents as the sub-compact cars. You know, those ones that get excellent gas mileage. All the insurance agents interviewed for the article wanted to buy their children very old giant sedans for driving around.
I've noticed that people always quote the government research, and very rarely use the insurance industry's stats. I beleive the goverment test comes out the way the goverment wants it to. Could it be that they wouldn't be able to make the same point with different results?
I saw an accident where a small Honda rear ended a Chevy Suburban with a trailer hitch. No damage to the Suburban, but the Honda looked like it was totalled. Maybe the Honda driver should have learned to drive better.

You are absolutely right in saying that a driver and/or passenger in a sub-compact is more likely to be injured than a driver/passenger in a larger vehicle. And it is also true that some drivers of sub-compact cars could improve their driving skills. But in any group of drivers, regardless of the size of car they drive you will find folks who could use a refresher course in driving skills.

As for the politically correct SUV bandwagon, I was on that wagon long before it was politically correct. Come to think about it, I builtthat wagon, made the wheels, painted it, put a nice top on it to keep people out of the sun, found a local grunge band to provide loud, raucous music, distributed flyers, got the permits......

I'll probably be flamed to death for this, but I personally cheer when oil and gas prices increase. The higher the better. I want it to hurt every time these SUV driving soccer moms fill up their huge, gas-guzzling monsters at the pump.

Sverre

Not gonna happen when the majority of the population can't fit into anything but SUV's...

I'll probably be flamed to death for this, but I personally cheer when oil and gas prices increase. The higher the better. I want it to hurt every time these SUV driving soccer moms fill up their huge, gas-guzzling monsters at the pump.

I've been cheering it for the last four years I've been on this forum. However, I don't realistically think it will make a lot of difference. People will moan and whinge about high fuel prices for eternity, but they'll never do anything to actually reduce their fuel consumption. I think the most likely outcome of higher fuel prices is people selling their own children into slavery to pay for them.

I'll probably be flamed to death for this, but I personally cheer when oil and gas prices increase. The higher the better. I want it to hurt every time these SUV driving soccer moms fill up their huge, gas-guzzling monsters at the pump.

Assuming two soccer moms are driving their kids around to the tune of 15,000 miles a year and the only difference is that:

Soccer Mom #1 drives a Suburban w/annual fuel cost of $1551
Soccer Mom #2 drives a Honda Odessey w/annual fuel cost of $1107

Do you really think that the extra $454 per year in gasoline costs is keeping them awake at night, even if it goes up by 50% ($225)? People with vices like smoking, drinking, doing drugs, or eating junk food piss away a heck of a lot more $$ a year than that. And, if the SUV owner or their spouse invest in the stock market (and who doesn't these days via 401K plans, Mutual Funds, or outright stock ownership), you get numb to smaller numbers as you watch $10k - $100k swings in your net worth on a daily basis when the market is as unpredictable as it has been for the past 4 years. Therefore, so long as the smaller numbers don't blow through the domestic budget (which can also be pretty big for a family these days), it's just a blip on the radar screen. Moreover, if you're smart you can pretty much break even or perhaps even come out ahead by investing in Valero or other energy stocks and then those fuel price hikes might even bring a smile to your face.... it's a sick world, but that's the way it sometimes works.

And, speaking of energy consumption what's worse? A soccer mom who uses her SUV to haul the kids around town to the tune of 10,000 miles a year OR the the little economy car driver who is so darn happy that they get such great fuel mileage that they drive 25,000+ miles a year because it's so cheap to operate? Or worse yet, how about all those folks driving around in 6 cyclinder mini-vans, mini-pick up trucks, and full-size pick-up trucks that don't actually "need" vans or pick-ups that get marginally better fuel mileage than an SUV (but without any headlines to that effect)? Where's the out cry about how much fuel is being consumed by those particular vehicles or high-mileage drivers?

SUV bashing is easy, but it's not going to solve any problems. And, yes, as a matter of fact I do own and drive a big old honkin' 4WD Suburban Z71. Of course, the only time my Suburban is out of the garage is when it's below 25 degrees or raining at 6am when I leave for work, on the weekends when we use it to haul our 8' long road or off-road tandems, or for hauling stuff that I can't haul on my primary means of transporation. Nope, as much as I wish it was a bicycle, during the week and for most errands I ride a motorcycle that gets nearly 40 mpg. So, on average, I probably consume about the same amount of fuel each year that most folks do who drive what they consider fuel efficient vehicles, if only when compared to an SUV. Of course, that doesn't spare me scorn from some when they see me driving my SUV. Funny thing though... I've never had anyone who drove a two-wheel drive into an off-road trail head or some other naturally occuring adverse obstacle and who got stuck complain about my 4WD vehicles when I hauled their butts out of a soggy field, a snow-bank, or off a sandy beach.

Bottom Line: It's not all cut and dry... and banning SUVs isn't the solution either. In fact, if you really want to slow fuel consumption stop urban sprawl. After all, when everyone lived close-in to the cities families didn't even need two cars or have to drive so friggin' far to get anywhere.

Just a different perspective to consider in this all-too-tired debate....

I always hear whining and moaning (not trolling but take it as you may) about SUVs and pickups in this forum but what about vans? There must be the same complaint about them.
I've seen Hummer clubs and they take them on some pretty sick terrain.

My minivan gets between 22 and 29 mpg and seats 8. I would like to see an SUV that can match that. Part of the reason is the 1950s technology used in the frame of the SUV which is based on a truck chassis that has changed very little over the years and is still a very heavy alternative for a vehicle that spends all it's time on the road (I am not talking about real SUV users here, merely the people who drive 2wd SUVs strictly on the pavement. Most SUV owners I know will not take their vehicles off of roads that are easily traversed by just about any car). One alarming trend is the total lack of actually useful SUVs coming to the market. It is getting harder for a person who actually wants a good machine to find one these days.

Not gonna happen when the majority of the population can't fit into anything but SUV's...


There is truth to this...when they built the new NFL stadium in Seattle, they installed seats that were much wider than those in the Kingdome to accomodate the new millenium derriere prevalent among the football faithful...

I visited the Grand Canyon for the first time last summer. I went to the north rim which has smaller crowds than the south rim, but there were still a lot of people there, and the SUVs were abundant. On my map, I found a 4x4 road that led to another spot on the rim. My Honda Civic sure couldn't get me out there, so I rode my mountain bike. Once I left the pavement, the SUVs just disappeared. In fact, everyone disappeared. It took me about 2.5 hours to ride one way, and I never saw another soul on the road. When I finally reached the overlook at the rim there were 2 SUVs there, and about 5 or 6 people. I just laughed at the notion that only 2 SUV owners took advantage of their vehicle's off-road capability to enjoy the solitude and the spectacular view from this spot (arguably the best overlook of the canyon, according to the literature). Across the canyon, there were probably hundreds of SUV owners crowded together looking at the view, while their SUVs sat in paved parking lots. Poseurs one and all.

I just laughed at the notion that only 2 SUV owners took advantage of their vehicle's off-road capability to enjoy the solitude and the spectacular view from this spot (arguably the best overlook of the canyon, according to the literature). Across the canyon, there were probably hundreds of SUV owners crowded together looking at the view, while their SUVs sat in paved parking lots. Poseurs one and all.

It's amazing what people will spend money on but never use even when the opportunity presents itself. I really enjoy many of the places my 4x4 can take me. A 4WD vehicle is more expensive mainly because of the hype but a lot of it has to do with the extra mechanical complexity too. It's sad to see so many people not utilise what's available to them and what they've so eagerly paid for.

Slickrock Trail in Northern California...

http://www.neebu.net/~khuon/images/4x4/011_14A.jpg
http://www.neebu.net/~khuon/images/4x4/015_10A.jpg
http://www.neebu.net/~khuon/images/4x4/014_11A.jpg

My minivan gets between 22 and 29 mpg and seats 8. I would like to see an SUV that can match that. Part of the reason ... snipping ...

I should have been more specific. I was referencing the full-size vans (like those seen a lot in the 70's - some of you remember) that seem to be getting popular again.

Increasing fuel cost is not the answer to the problem. It will hit ALL goods and services with higher prices, from food and heating expenses to vacuum cleaners, which in the end will only affect the little guy (low and middle income).

Since getting rid of my car over a year ago, the distinction between SUVs and ordinary automobiles is getting a bit blurred for me. While it is fun to needle SUV owners, and all cliches begin with a grain of truth, the fact is that waste is waste and cars are more similar than they are different.

Bad drivers seem to be evenly spread across the spectrum of folks in cars. As a practical matter, does it really make a difference if you are run down by a soccer mom in an SUV, a teenager in a riced-out compact, or Bubba in a pickup (I really enjoy these stereotypes, sort of like cartoons, really)

A wasteful trip in a Prius is just as much a waste as one done in an Excursion.

Dan

Tom I like your style LOL

Agreed 100% it is the way it is around here on the right coast as well. What-a-ya gonna do? Obviously higher fuel costs are not going to work. As to the original question I don't think they will go out of style until perhaps there is no more gas to put in them.

Advertisements oh god they make my stomach wretch. My 'favorite' one is when a Jeep Cherokee tromps it's way to the foot of a beautiful waterfall and it's dead silent. He opens the window and you can hear the falls, wow what a great vehicle it shuts out nature until you want it. I guess the hikers that actually enjoyed the journey to the falls were mangled and crushed in the tire ruts behind the truck.

Having said that and in full agreement as to what Tom and others have said I have friends w/ SUV who actually use them like for example when we take extensive caving trips down in Mexico. I think the SUV bashing is directed only to those people who were duped into believing they need a behemoth 'Canyonaro' vehicle by clever high priced advertising for the safety of themselves and there families as well as to the corporate fat cats that love these very people.

Me, too! I can't wait til gasoline is $5 a gallon!



I'll probably be flamed to death for this, but I personally cheer when oil and gas prices increase. The higher the better. I want it to hurt every time these SUV driving soccer moms fill up their huge, gas-guzzling monsters at the pump.

Sverre

Yay, Dan! I guess there is hope, cuz, I feel the same way!



Since getting rid of my car over a year ago, the distinction between SUVs and ordinary automobiles is getting a bit blurred for me. While it is fun to needle SUV owners, and all cliches begin with a grain of truth, the fact is that waste is waste and cars are more similar than they are different.

Bad drivers seem to be evenly spread across the spectrum of folks in cars. As a practical matter, does it really make a difference if you are run down by a soccer mom in an SUV, a teenager in a riced-out compact, or Bubba in a pickup (I really enjoy these stereotypes, sort of like cartoons, really)

A wasteful trip in a Prius is just as much a waste as one done in an Excursion.

Dan

lala Me, too! I can't wait til gasoline is $5 a gallon!

Would it matter if the people could afford 5 dollars per gallon more easily than you could affors 1.50 per gallon?

YAY..everything that arrived by Semi-Truck is getting more expensive because of fuel costs! yippee, I'm so happy now!

lala Yay, Dan! I guess there is hope, cuz, I feel the same way!


Since getting rid of my car over a year ago, the distinction between SUVs and ordinary automobiles is getting a bit blurred for me. While it is fun to needle SUV owners, and all cliches begin with a grain of truth, the fact is that waste is waste and cars are more similar than they are different.


The most dangerous driving I see are done by kids in 4-cylinder cars.

SUV's are just scapegoats. Heck a Subaru only gets in the low 20's per gallon, what's so special about that?

This guy hates them worse:

Wanna Hummer? (http://www.fuh2.com/index.php)

A wasteful trip in a Prius is just as much a waste as one done in an Excursion.

Speaking of wasteful, what about the size of houses people are building these days, that's not obscene? or how much some eats, or a 50 dollar T-shirt from Abercrombie & Fitch. Is there going to be a waste police to decide where we can spend our money, and which trips are necessary?

The point is overconsumption. Watch TV--do you see anything that is advertised that you need?
Do most north americans know the differrence between want and need? How about getting off the grid?
Smartypants.



Would it matter if the people could afford 5 dollars per gallon more easily than you could affors 1.50 per gallon?

YAY..everything that arrived by Semi-Truck is getting more expensive because of fuel costs! yippee, I'm so happy now!

lala The point is overconsumption. Watch TV--do you see anything that is advertised that you need?

Overconsumption according to who? You can't tell people how to spend their own money.
Unless you're advocating socialism.


How about getting off the grid?

Just camp out in a grass hut, that's progress? Sorry I don't know what you mean by get off the grid unless you are referring to purchasing electricity.

OH MY GOD!!! SOCIALISM???!!?


Overconsumption according to who? You can't tell people how to spend their own money.
Unless you're advocating socialism.



Just camp out in a grass hut, that's progress? Sorry I don't know what you mean by get off the grid unless you are referring to purchasing electricity.


Do some research, dood.

lala OH MY GOD!!! SOCIALISM???!!?

yep, definately the enemy of progress, which you know, since you've done your research.

Overconsumption according to who? You can't tell people how to spend their own money.
Unless you're advocating socialism.


I am not trying to tell anyone what car they should drive or what kind of house they should live in, but I do reserve the right to make them the butt of my jokes.

Most of my views on how life should be lived are minority views. I don't like shopping malls, fast food, cars, track housing, Television, or conspicuous consumption. The only thing that I would ask of my neighbors is that they try to be at least as tolerant and accomodating towards my lifestyle as I am towards their's. In other words, please don't run me over with your SUV or turn the park into a parking lot.

Dan

Being pretty ignorant of the mechanics and design issues of cars, it was an interesting surprise to me to read Keith Bradsher's "High and Mighty" last year. The funny/scary/appalling thing is how SUV's for the most part are retooled 1960's pickup truck chassis with fancy sheet metal on top, also the reason why many of them roll so easily and score so poorly on crash tests. Some are even second-generation repops like the smaller Hummer which is fancy metal atop a Chevy Tahoe frame. So, the buyers of these dinosaurs have been suckered into either false security or artificial penis extension!

The popular appeal of SUVs has diluted the breed. Screw 4 wheel independant suspension, unibodies, high reving low torque output engines, low ground clearance, AWD, usless crap. Their popularity has focused safety nazis on our beloved solid axel, leaf sprung, 11 inch off the ground 33" tire wearing V8/I6/diesel loud as hell (engine and tire noise) real 4x4s (with cast iron transfer case), H2s suck, TJs kick ass and Ford needs to fire up production on the Bronco where it left off in the late 60's. Think you need an SUV? buy an Outback.

bob dole says to drive an suv!
and bob dole says to drive it right! :D

also, i have noticed car, mini van, and dually wheeled pickup trucks with 40 foot trailers to be the most dangerous. i just wish people would buy more efficient vehicles. and why are there no suv cars? you'd think the lighter weight and off roading ability would appeal to people. also, wouldn't a wang enhancement cost less than and suv? why don't guys just get those?

Don't hold your breath, Merton.

When I was your age I was promised floating cars and an oil free society. What' I get, bigger cars and more oil.

Would it matter if the people could afford 5 dollars per gallon more easily than you could affors 1.50 per gallon?

YAY..everything that arrived by Semi-Truck is getting more expensive because of fuel costs! yippee, I'm so happy now!

Quite doubtful. There are far more efficent ways of transporting goods than using Semi-Trucks. The existing rail system for one. The only reason road transport has become so popular are the heavy government subsidies it attracts (interesting that public transport is expected to be economically sustainable and pay it's own way, while we can happily subisidise private transport to the tune of billions of dollars annually -- now whose talking about communism?).

Fact is, goods and services of any description will only be sold at the prices people are prepared to pay. Supply and demand is the dominant factor that decides on prices firms charge in an open market. If people simply refuse to pay higher prices for other goods and services, costs will stay low, and firms will simply find more efficient means of production and transport.

Quite doubtful. There are far more efficent ways of transporting goods than using Semi-Trucks. The existing rail system for one. The only reason road transport has become so popular are the heavy government subsidies it attracts (interesting that public transport is expected to be economically sustainable and pay it's own way, while we can happily subisidise private transport to the tune of billions of dollars annually -- now whose talking about communism?).



Correct. In fact our transportation system for GOODS is already multifaceted: freight rail, long and short haul trucks, local delivery vehicles, even airplanes for high value added items like overnight mail and fresh flowers. So there will be a shift toward more efficient modes as prices change, although the way companies can hedge against oil price fluctuations (using futures, etc) you'd be amazed at how insensitive to price changes they can be for the short and intermediate term.

roughstuff

So, the buyers of these dinosaurs have been suckered into either false security or artificial penis extension!

(tongue in cheek... mostly) : I'm convinced that the popularity of SUVs among women (as well as men) is due to their desire for artificial penis extension.

but why don't they just get the extension.. well.. the dudes anyway. i haven't understood that. i think some of it may be for the cozy detachment you should have riding up high in a luxurious box.

My minivan gets between 22 and 29 mpg and seats 8. I would like to see an SUV that can match that. Part of the reason is the 1950s technology used in the frame of the SUV which is based on a truck chassis that has changed very little over the years and is still a very heavy alternative for a vehicle that spends all it's time on the road (I am not talking about real SUV users here, merely the people who drive 2wd SUVs strictly on the pavement. Most SUV owners I know will not take their vehicles off of roads that are easily traversed by just about any car). One alarming trend is the total lack of actually useful SUVs coming to the market. It is getting harder for a person who actually wants a good machine to find one these days.

Goto the local Ford dealers, and ask to see the Escape Hybrid, It is an SUV, no it doesn't seat 8 but it gets 35-30 mpg. However it can seat 6. Yes you do have a plus with the mini van, but I have a Dodge Durango, seats 8 gets 18-22 mpg, I can go off road, and I can tow a 27ft camper. I'd like to see a mini-van thats can match that.. See people need to understand that no matter what kind of car you have your gonna be sacaficing certain things, that you won't be able to do with that car. SUV's won't ever go out of style, however they will become more fuel effecient and safer.. People should not have to deal with people saying why do you have an SUV if you don't take it off road, that'd be like saying why do you have a mini van if you don't have 7 kids? Every car has a down side.

Would it matter if the people could afford 5 dollars per gallon more easily than you could affors 1.50 per gallon?

YAY..everything that arrived by Semi-Truck is getting more expensive because of fuel costs! yippee, I'm so happy now!

The high gas prices will push up the prices of goods from China, Indonesia and Mexico, so it will make locally produced stuff more competitive.

Wish Granted.

SUV's are out of style already.

The high gas prices will push up the prices of goods from China, Indonesia and Mexico, so it will make locally produced stuff more competitive.

I just back up on my chair from rolling on the floor laughing at all the cyclists hoping for $5 a gallon gasoline. Now, I'll say this slowly so most of you can understand, but listen V E R Y carefully now. What country are we living in? The United States (at least most of us here). Now, think about what so many people on the roads are like, and the general behavior of a small percentage but still large number of our citizens. When the gas prices hit $5 a gallon, my firm belief is the cyclists will be on the forum screaming about all the broken glass covering the entire right hand side of most roads, bike lanes, and bike paths. It's sad, but that's my observations in my 51 years on this earth about our country. All it will take is for the idea to spread, and we'll need solid rubber tires to ride on to prevent flats.

When the gas prices hit $5 a gallon, my firm belief is the cyclists will be on the forum screaming about all the broken glass covering the entire right hand side of most roads, bike lanes, and bike paths. It's sad, but that's my observations in my 51 years on this earth about our country. All it will take is for the idea to spread, and we'll need solid rubber tires to ride on to prevent flats.

How so? From my observations, most of the broken glass on the road is the result of car "accidents". I don't seen any correlation between these and higher fuel prices. In anycase, I religiously avoid bikepaths now due to glass covering, so there really won't be any change in that area.

Ditto on your subject title!!!!