Commuting - idiots in SUV's

While riding my bike today at about 21 mph on a street with a speed limit of 25 mph. Some ******* with his hat turned backwards zooms the half car length available to him and stopped abruptly by the heavy traffic on the road, and yells "hey bikes should get on the side walk!" as I ride past him. A mile later when I get to my apartment and stop, get off my bike and fish out my keys for a min then he finally catches up to me and says rude things about myself and my mother.

You know he's right slow traffic should be on the side walk, too bad its not wide enough for his barge of a car.

This happens to me pretty routinely on commutes actually. One time when a guy in an Escalade rolled up on me and told me that bikes belong on sidewalks, I told him that a-holes belong on toilets not SUVs- and then I got the hell out of dodge by jumping on a bike path.

On other occasions I've actually tried telling the people that no, actually- bikes with wheels > 20" are legally required to be on the road, but they don't believe me.

Math is fun indeed. Indeed...

You should have invited him in for a cup of tea and a scone.

I think that most of the drivers described in this thread actually know the vehicle code. It's just that it does not fit into their beliefs of their entitlements while on the road..

That's why I kept my Galeforce siren on my bike and a larger Aizound bottle. As they are shouting, I am blasting them while I keep saying "What? I can't hear you! Please scream louder!"

While riding my bike today at about 21 mph on a street with a speed limit of 25 mph. Some ******* with his hat turned backwards zooms the half car length available to him and stopped abruptly by the heavy traffic on the road, and yells "hey bikes should get on the side walk!" as I ride past him. A mile later when I get to my apartment and stop, get off my bike and fish out my keys for a min then he finally catches up to me and says rude things about myself and my mother.

You know he's right slow traffic should be on the side walk, too bad its not wide enough for his barge of a car.

He was just pissed off because you got to your destination first despite paying vast sums for his over-valued colostomy bag of a vehicle.

"hey bikes should get on the side walk!"

Watch this: http://vimeo.com/2293166 (http://vimeo.com/2293166)

It might make you feel better and it's only 22 seconds long.

On other occasions I've actually tried telling the people that no, actually- bikes with wheels > 20" are legally required to be on the road, but they don't believe me.

Perhaps because this is not universally true. In my local jurisdictions, bikes ARE allowed on sidewalks in most situations, regardless of wheel size.

No, I don't think we have gotten quite all of the idiots into SUVs, but we have certainly gotten an idiot into every SUV.

Here we've got allot of cops and EMT's on bicycles now so the idiots have had to tone it down. Also with so many cams on bicycle helmets now many drivers I think are worried about getting caught doing something stupid in case it gets to there insurance companies and they're financially driven out of there vehicles..

I don't believe you. Math is not fun. Well, maybe a little.

One time when a guy in an Escalade rolled up on me and told me that bikes belong on sidewalks, I told him that a-holes belong on toilets not SUVs
:lol: :thumb:

(filing mental note)

I've never had that issue, but there is a road with a 20MPH speed limit that I ride, and once in a blue moon I'll be behind a car, we're both going over 20MPH, and someone will try to pass and get between me and the car I'm behind. It's bizarre.

I don't believe you. Math is not fun. Well, maybe a little.

Blasphemy.

He was just pissed off because you got to your destination first despite paying vast sums for his over-valued colostomy bag of a vehicle.

That's great!


Watch this: http://vimeo.com/2293166 (http://vimeo.com/2293166)

It might make you feel better and it's only 22 seconds long.

Another nice video Joey! I've got a slower connection at home, and it caused the video to play back in slow motion. The sound of you hitting the truck sounds like a bass drum, very cool!!

No, I don't think we have gotten quite all of the idiots into SUVs, but we have certainly gotten an idiot into every SUV.

Pardon me, but your narrow minded prejudice is showing.

Didja ever think that some or even many of the folks in this forum might drive SUVs and still <gasp> commute on bikes? I don't happen to own an SUV, but I might someday soon (as the available alternatives for large families keep dwindling -- RIP most minivans and station wagons). Or perhaps you're right, and if I buy one I will instantly become bike unfriendly (and suicidal?).

I know that your comment is meant to be hyperbole and somewhat tongue in cheek (right?) but I don't think it is helpful or interesting.

That said, I got yelled at by one or more teenage girls in mommy or daddy's Escalade ESV yesterday as I rode on the right hand side/shoulder of a divided 4 lane hwy. But I have experienced just as many rude events from small, economy cars. And actually, I'll put Porsche, Mercedes and BMW drivers (regardless of style or model) as top on my rude parade, far ahead of the run-of-the-mill SUV.

Same thing happened to me yesterday. I am adjusting from three years on night shift, so the daytime commute presents a brand of motorist idiocy I am not familiar with. Heading down Garden of the Gods Road yesterday; a road where I consistently hit 35 mph in traffic, I am faster than traffic at the interstate by about 5 mph. This good ol' boy in a huge white pickup/beast, speeds up only after I signal to get to the left of the right turn interstate merge, rolls down his window and mumbled something very loudly. I know, an oxymoron, and he was the latter half of that. He had to stop about ten feet in front of me, so while he was rolling up his window I flashed him the Terminator stare and asked if he was in such a hurry because he was running late for his OB/GYN appointment. Typically I don't respond to idiots, but I was feeling it yesterday. Plenty of folks around and there was no way he was exiting his vehicle at the merge of an onramp.

Smile and wave, boys. Smile and wave.

Pardon me, but your narrow minded prejudice is showing.

Didja ever think that some or even many of the folks in this forum might drive SUVs and still <gasp> commute on bikes? I don't happen to own an SUV, but I might someday soon (as the available alternatives for large families keep dwindling -- RIP most minivans and station wagons). Or perhaps you're right, and if I buy one I will instantly become bike unfriendly (and suicidal?).

I know that your comment is meant to be hyperbole and somewhat tongue in cheek (right?) but I don't think it is helpful or interesting.

That said, I got yelled at by one or more teenage girls in mommy or daddy's Escalade ESV yesterday as I rode on the right hand side/shoulder of a divided 4 lane hwy. But I have experienced just as many rude events from small, economy cars. And actually, I'll put Porsche, Mercedes and BMW drivers (regardless of style or model) as top on my rude parade, far ahead of the run-of-the-mill SUV.

Part of the problem with SUVs is not just the rudeness of the drivers (I don't think they are particularly worse than any other group of drivers for road rage), but the ridiculous lack of visibility they give to the sides and back. I think this contributes to a lot of right-hook accidents in SUVs and pickups, for example. So there may be a combination of intentional road rage and unintentional lack of visibility.

Statistically, pickup trucks are involved in more fatalities than any other vehicle type, just in absolute numbers (sports cars often have a higher fatality rate, but not nearly as many people drive them). This is in large part due to the fact that pickups and SUVs are far more likely to kill people in other vehicles than smaller cars are. Pickups, additionally, have problems with driver behavior (this is a well researched fact, not just a stereotype). People who drive pickups tend to drive more aggressively and drive drunk a lot more often (presumably in large part because the distribution of people who drive them skews towards young males).

...but the ridiculous lack of visibility they give to the sides and back. I think this contributes to a lot of right-hook accidents in SUVs and pickups, for example. So there may be a combination of intentional road rage and unintentional lack of visibility.

Statistically, pickup trucks are involved in more fatalities than any other vehicle type, just in absolute numbers (sports cars often have a higher fatality rate, but not nearly as many people drive them). ... People who drive pickups tend to drive more aggressively and drive drunk a lot more often (presumably in large part because the distribution of people who drive them skews towards young males).

No argument that visibility in many modern vehicles is a problem, though not unique by any means to SUVs (feel free to take my conventional station wagon for a spin if you want to experience REALLY poor visibility!) But you are absolutely correct regarding the height problem of SUVs contributing to them not seeing smaller vehicles (including bikes... and small cars).

I'm more than willing to believe the stats on pickup truck fatalities, though I wonder -- does this include single vehicle accidents (which, if memory serves, are disproportionaly represented in motor vehicle fatalities, esp. among those same young males)? Are they disproportionately represented in pedestrian and bicycle fatalities? perhaps they are... though I bet there's very limited reliable statistical evidence.

Regardless: pickups start with a major disadvantage in any statistical battle regarding fatalities. First off, they are extremely plentiful (two of the top 5 best selling vehicles in the US remain full size pickups... despite a sharp decline, they remain on top. The #1 ford outsold the best selling conventional passenger car by over 100,000 units, which is a decline from when they outsold the best selling car by better than two to one.) So sheer numbers would seem to make the over-involvement of pickup trucks, as a segment, a foregone conclusion -- sure, there are lots more cars, overall, but not cars falling into any one segment.

They are less safe by design (and as a result of less safety regulation in the US), often modified by folks who don't really consider the consequences of those large tires, 4 inch lifts, extraneous accessories, etc..., and as you mention driven by the worst demographic. They are also massive, and the laws of physics will not be denied. This would be pretty significant in terms of the likelihood of a fatality in a multi-vehicle crash, as well as contributing to the frequency of single vehicle crashes.

I just get annoyed when people make generalized comments about drivers based solely on their choice of vehicle. While many use these as status items, or for ridiculous reasons (4 my dog license plates make me crazy), many are driven with reasonable forethought and due cause.

Yesterday afternoon while pedaling home, I was yelled at to “GET ON THE SIDEWALK, F*GG*T”. There were no sidewalks for miles around, and I’ve never been anything but a very satisfied heterosexual, so his comment made absolutely no sense. :lol:

He was the passenger of a small econo car. I gave him no recognition of any type.

No argument that visibility in many modern vehicles is a problem, though not unique by any means to SUVs (feel free to take my conventional station wagon for a spin if you want to experience REALLY poor visibility!) But you are absolutely correct regarding the height problem of SUVs contributing to them not seeing smaller vehicles (including bikes... and small cars).


I'd personally like to see some more detailed regulation on blind spots in all vehicles. If more and more bikes and smaller electric and hybrid cars are going to be sharing the road with them, it's more vital that they have good visibility.



I'm more than willing to believe the stats on pickup truck fatalities, though I wonder -- does this include single vehicle accidents (which, if memory serves, are disproportionaly represented in motor vehicle fatalities, esp. among those same young males)? Are they disproportionately represented in pedestrian and bicycle fatalities? perhaps they are... though I bet there's very limited reliable statistical evidence.


Yes, the numbers I was reading were for ALL fatalities (including single vehicle accidents and fatalities in other vehicles involved in an accident with them). Most of the highest fatality vehicles were popular pickups (Dodge, Chevy, and Ford), so it seems that it's a consistent phenomenon. It didn't break it out as far as pedestrian and bicyclist deaths, and as you say, I would imagine that that is harder to study due to lower numbers and poorer quality government data collection than for motor vehicles.



Regardless: pickups start with a major disadvantage in any statistical battle regarding fatalities. First off, they are extremely plentiful (two of the top 5 best selling vehicles in the US remain full size pickups... despite a sharp decline, they remain on top. The #1 ford outsold the best selling conventional passenger car by over 100,000 units, which is a decline from when they outsold the best selling car by better than two to one.) So sheer numbers would seem to make the over-involvement of pickup trucks, as a segment, a foregone conclusion -- sure, there are lots more cars, overall, but not cars falling into any one segment.

They are less safe by design (and as a result of less safety regulation in the US), often modified by folks who don't really consider the consequences of those large tires, 4 inch lifts, extraneous accessories, etc..., and as you mention driven by the worst demographic. They are also massive, and the laws of physics will not be denied. This would be pretty significant in terms of the likelihood of a fatality in a multi-vehicle crash, as well as contributing to the frequency of single vehicle crashes.


Also they are driven more often in rural areas, which means they get driven for more miles and at higher speeds over roads that are often poorly maintained in comparison to urban roads (location dependent).



I just get annoyed when people make generalized comments about drivers based solely on their choice of vehicle. While many use these as status items, or for ridiculous reasons (4 my dog license plates make me crazy), many are driven with reasonable forethought and due cause.

Yes, I don't think it's reasonable to generalize about the behavior of ALL drivers of any vehicle type. But statistical information is not totally meaningless, either. It suggests that various factors are contributing to safety problems for some types of vehicles more than for others, and driver behavior is often one of those factors. Compare any pickup or SUV's total fatality rates with say, the Toyota Camry, and the Camry has a much lower rate. This isn't really because the Camry is intrinsically safer, although it certainly is less likely to kill other people should it hit them due to the construction and lower weight. It's in large part because of who drives them vs. who drives the pickups. Driver behavior is still a huge factor, and it shouldn't be if we were actually training people to drive properly and holding them accountable for their actions. For example, an SUV or pickup just inherently has worse side and rear visibility. So the driver response to that should be to be extra cautious about the possibility of people or cars being in their blind spots. If there is a difference in safety factors caused by your vehicle type, your driving behavior should compensate for that just like you wouldn't "drive" a bicycle in the same way you would drive a car.

We all get hassled by the frustrated motorists who don't believe we have a right to "their" road. I try to be completely deaf and dumb and give NO reaction, which is the only one that can minimize escalation to road rage (yes, smiling and waving can also be perceived as an escalation by some morons). But you will certainly find posts from me where I lost it, especially the one where I chased the guy down and tried to politely admonish him only to be confronted with anger and aggression.

Almost every time I've been buzzed, I will watch as that driver aggressively changes lanes and speeds off, endangering the other motorists as they disappear. The bottom line is these people are impatient, and they drive impatiently, which means they are endangering everyone.

Just try to remind yourself that for every abusive motorist out there, there were ten cars before them which passed you safely and considerately. It also helps to believe in karma: they will eventually suffer the consequences of their impatient and aggressive lifestyle. All we can do is hope we aren't the particular victim which brings that karma upon them.

Smile and wave, boys. Smile and wave.

I say "thank you" some times, and that confuses people even more.

Blind spots can practically be eliminated by properly adjusting (and using!) the side view mirrors. Most drivers have them set them too far in. If the driver can see the side of their own vehicle, they have them set improperly for minimizing blind spots.

CLICK HERE (http://www.smartmotorist.com/car-accessories-fuel-and-maintenance/adjusting-your-mirrors-correctly.html) and watch the graphics toggle between too narrow, too wide, and correct. Notice the coverage properly adjusted mirrors can provide.

By the time a vehicle is out of a properly set side mirrors view, the driver should be able to see it out the side window.

Pardon me, but your narrow minded prejudice is showing.

Didja ever think that some or even many of the folks in this forum might drive SUVs and still <gasp> commute on bikes? I don't happen to own an SUV, but I might someday soon (as the available alternatives for large families keep dwindling -- RIP most minivans and station wagons). Or perhaps you're right, and if I buy one I will instantly become bike unfriendly (and suicidal?).

We're all prejudiced in some ways, and for most of us it comes from the experiences we have in life. There are enough people driving big boxy vehicles designed to haul kids around that can be labeled however you want in ways that have created the stereotype you disagree with for a large percent of the population - how did that happen?

Stereotypes exist for a reason, and I wouldn't recommend wondering why when you're between an elementary school and a parent dropping off their kids in the morning.

Blind spots can practically be eliminated by properly adjusting (and using!) the side view mirrors. Most drivers have them set them too far in. If the driver can see the side of their own vehicle, they have them set improperly for minimizing blind spots.

CLICK HERE (http://www.smartmotorist.com/car-accessories-fuel-and-maintenance/adjusting-your-mirrors-correctly.html) and watch the graphics toggle between too narrow, too wide, and correct. Notice the coverage properly adjusted mirrors can provide.

By the time a vehicle is out of a properly set side mirrors view, the driver should be able to see it out the side window.

I've adjusted mine like that for years, and it works great.

Smile and wave, boys. Smile and wave.

+2

I think anyone who has commuted for any length of time has at least once, been admonished to find their rightful place on the sidewalk. lol
You could try to explain it to them, which is like teaching calculus to your dog.
Or you can think of it as a right of passage.

BTW... math IS fun.....

I've adjusted mine like that for years, and it works great.

The biggest problem I've had with mirrors in a car is that SUVs behind me have their headlights so high up that they shine right into my rear view mirror when I have it adjusted properly. Is there some reason why they aren't required to have their lights mounted low on their vehicles, or aimed down more, for that reason?

Part of the problem with SUVs is not just the rudeness of the drivers (I don't think they are particularly worse than any other group of drivers for road rage), but the ridiculous lack of visibility they give to the sides and back. I think this contributes to a lot of right-hook accidents in SUVs and pickups, for example. So there may be a combination of intentional road rage and unintentional lack of visibility.

Part of the problem with SUVs is that you're about 40 times more likely to be killed if you're hit by one of them, than if you're hit by most other vehicle types you're likely to see on the road. They're also top heavy, and crash because of it more often than cars. And they're heavier, in general, taking longer to stop. Et cetera et cetera. To me, it's the first point that's the most egregious: "I don't mind risking your life to make myself feel safer."

Part of the problem with SUVs is that you're about 40 times more likely to be killed if you're hit by one of them, than if you're hit by most other vehicle types you're likely to see on the road. They're also top heavy, and crash because of it more often than cars. And they're heavier, in general, taking longer to stop. Et cetera et cetera. To me, it's the first point that's the most egregious: "I don't mind risking your life to make myself feel safer."

Yes, they have definitely been marketed based on flawed and skewed safety perceptions that a lot of people have about how they and their family will always be safer in a bigger vehicle. The statistics prove incontrovertibly that this isn't true in the real world, but it resonates with many people's irrational lizard brain perceptions. They narrowly focus on a statistic (survivability in a crash for the vehicle occupants) that is only marginally better in some SUVs and ignore all of the other factors that contribute to safety, such as maneuverability, driver behavior/caution, center of gravity, visibility, and so on. It's the same reasons that riding a bike isn't massively more dangerous than riding in an SUV or pickup, despite the fact that you're far less physically protected: you're also less likely to get in a wreck, and it's likely to be less violent if you do due to the lower weight and speed (especially if it's a single-rider/vehicle accident). But I agree with you: I don't at all understand why the government regulations of vehicle safety don't seem to do much to consider the drivers of OTHER vehicles. Why on earth would they care only about the safety of the vehicle occupants rather than others?

Of course, we also share the road with 18-wheelers that can and do crush almost any other vehicle on the road if they are involved in a crash with them. But I would say that there is a big difference between commercial vehicles that are generally driven by professional drivers with CDLs and a job to worry about keeping and SUVs that are marketed as family vehicles. Same goes for pickups that are actually used for work or farm purposes vs. just because the driver likes the feeling of driving one. SUVs and pickups are being marketed as "lifestyle choices" rather than for a use for which they are appropriate. And that has led to their over-proliferation in places where we don't need so many amateurs driving big trucks around, such as crowded city streets. There's a difference from a big vehicle that exists for necessity and a big vehicle that is purchased because of irrational "safety" concerns.

one word

"u-lock justice"

or is that two words..umm.. or three??? now i am confused

stick it to the man..ya..thats right

Watch this: http://vimeo.com/2293166 (http://vimeo.com/2293166)

It might make you feel better and it's only 22 seconds long.

I remember when you first did that. I was shocked. Shocked, I tell you.

Amen to that mirror comment. I would venture to say the over 90% of drivers do not have their mirrors adjusted properly.

Yesterday afternoon while pedaling home, I was yelled at to “GET ON THE SIDEWALK, F*GG*T”. There were no sidewalks for miles around, and I’ve never been anything but a very satisfied heterosexual, so his comment made absolutely no sense. :lol:

He was the passenger of a small econo car. I gave him no recognition of any type.

I got one better than that: Someone yelled something similar to me.... from a Miata. :rolleyes:

I got one better than that: Someone yelled something similar to me.... from a Miata. :rolleyes:

Heh, they need to not throw stones while driving that much of a chick car.

The biggest problem I've had with mirrors in a car is that SUVs behind me have their headlights so high up that they shine right into my rear view mirror when I have it adjusted properly. Is there some reason why they aren't required to have their lights mounted low on their vehicles, or aimed down more, for that reason?

I'm sure there is some law about how their headlights are supposed to be aimed, you may just have found a large group of people who decided to ignore the law because it makes them feel safer. I don't have that happen to me very often, and that's probably due to not driving much, and being a little taller than most people.

Isn't there a new SUV commercial that touts alerting its owner when they don't pay attention. "I was drifting into the other lane when my car alerted me". "I took my eyes off the road for only a minute and would have crashed if not for my vehicle".

I'm all for increased safety, but shouldn't they be paying attention to the road while they are driving?

Heh, they need to not throw stones while driving that much of a chick car.

Exactly.

CLICK HERE (http://www.smartmotorist.com/car-accessories-fuel-and-maintenance/adjusting-your-mirrors-correctly.html) and watch the graphics toggle between too narrow, too wide, and correct. Notice the coverage properly adjusted mirrors can provide.

I had to laugh at the plug for the Muth signal mirrors (flashing arrows on side mirrors) on the linked page. Here in Knoxville maybe 10% of cars bother with signals at all.

I had to laugh at the plug for the Muth signal mirrors (flashing arrows on side mirrors) on the linked page. Here in Knoxville maybe 10% of cars bother with signals at all.

Agreed on the lack of signaling by many drivers. Still, I think the mirror signal feature would occassionally be helpful for those who do actually signal, especially for lane changes. If a driver in the lane you want to merge into is too far forward to see your tail light signal, they may still be able to see the mirror signal. Most drivers seeing this will either speed up or slow down, not wanting to hang next to someone they know is planning on merging over. Mirror signals could even come in handy for alerting cyclists who like to split lanes or pass on the right at intersections.

Pardon me, but your narrow minded prejudice is showing.

Didja ever think that some or even many of the folks in this forum might drive SUVs and still <gasp> commute on bikes? I don't happen to own an SUV, but I might someday soon (as the available alternatives for large families keep dwindling -- RIP most minivans and station wagons). Or perhaps you're right, and if I buy one I will instantly become bike unfriendly (and suicidal?).

I know that your comment is meant to be hyperbole and somewhat tongue in cheek (right?) but I don't think it is helpful or interesting.

That said, I got yelled at by one or more teenage girls in mommy or daddy's Escalade ESV yesterday as I rode on the right hand side/shoulder of a divided 4 lane hwy. But I have experienced just as many rude events from small, economy cars. And actually, I'll put Porsche, Mercedes and BMW drivers (regardless of style or model) as top on my rude parade, far ahead of the run-of-the-mill SUV.

Of course it was humor by hyperbole. While I have experienced the occasional courteous light truck driver, thus further admitting that my prior joke was false, by and large the most aggressive, unsafe, dangerous and self-centered motorists that I have encountered are driving some sort of light truck (pick-up or SUV). When I am told to, "Get the (expletive deleted) off the road!" it is almost always yelled from a light truck. I have also observed, with some sadness, that motor vehicles with bikes attached to them or "share the road" license plates or stickers tend to also be driven with a fair measure of idiocy. That said, I think any fair assessment of cyclists would determine that most of us break the law on a regular basis as well, we just don't have the kinetic energy to do much killing. By the way, I'll grant you the BMW (or, as my wife calls them, bum w's) drivers are among the worst, but I have not had much problem with the Mercedes or Porsche drivers.

Before you buy that SUV please consider what the U.S. military said in a report they put out this May (echoed by the German military a few months later). They predict the end of cheap oil sometime between 2012 and 2015. When oil is $500/barrel and rising, maybe we will truly have an idiot in every SUV. Hopefully you will find this info both more helpful and more interesting than my prior comment.

Didja ever think that some or even many of the folks in this forum might drive SUVs and still <gasp> commute on bikes?

Guilty as charged. Here is my 2005 ZR2 Chevy Blazer.

http://i586.photobucket.com/albums/ss306/mlskol/ZR-2rightrear.jpg


I bought this vehicle new nearly 6 years ago. Since I like to pedal to work, it only has 19,XXX miles on it. I chose this because I really like the look of the 2 door body, with 4 wheel drive for our Illinois winters, and enough space in the enclosed back for our dog, carrying stuff, or even to sleep.

I always practice safe driving techniques and follow all traffic laws, including the speed limit. It has been almost 30 years since I've been involved in a crash or received a citation of any sort while driving. I have nothing but patience and courtesy for even the most scofflaw and/or ninja of cyclists when behind the wheel.

As a cyclist and motorist, I am still unable to determine a specific group of vehicle operators as being worse than any other. I encounter good and bad in every vehicle type, even bikes. Non-idiot SUV driver checking out.

"Or you can think of it as a right of passage."

Your "right" is WRONG. You mean, of course "rite" of passage. Sorry, couldn't resist a bad pun.

RANT within a RANT!


"Non-idiot SUV driver checking out. "


I won't say that such a person DOESN'T exist, but they're RARE. SUV's are heavier than station wagons and thus do more damage to the roads. They waste precious gallons of
unrenewable petroleum.( How many times have I seen a 9-seat behemoth chugging down the road to take Joe Pussgut [alone] over to the liquor store.) SUVS are supposed to be "safe". But ONLY to those inside. To regular-sized vehicles they pose a danger. SUVers glory in the view of the road they have from their high perch. Which is gained at the expense of normal height vehicles which can't see over or around them. SUV's are NOT cars. They are TRUCKS which have been given car style comfort (A/C, Power Steering/powerbrakes, carpeting ect) in order to get around CAFE* fuel economy figures which are considerably relaxed on trucks. Many folks buy them for that "Century Blizard" that never happens. I went thru a century Blizzard in '96. I couldn't drive for 24 hrs! END OF THE WORLD!!!( I starved to death and froze to death too. Also, the 4 wheel drive is NO aid to stoping on ice. It merely makes many SUV owners overconfidant in the ability of the vehicle to counter the negative effects of the weather. (Often resulting in rolling the thing over due to its top heaviness!)

Unless you have a specific reason for owning an SUV: hauling a trailer/boat, drive on a beach, or live in the boonies far from paved roads, the SUV is NOT a smart choice. For the environment, the road or YOUR POCKETBOOK!



* CAFE Corperate Average Fuel Economy. Which allows detroit to inflate the gas mileage by classing the SUVs as trucks, not cars, which must get better mileage.

Driving eventually turns most people into self-centered idiots. SUVs do this plus add less visibility, increased chance of rollover, less ability to stop quickly, more isolation from the world, and they increase the chances of killing someone in another vehicle in an accident by many times. In short, unless you have a specific need for an SUV, buying one generally shows that you really don't give a s*** for anyone but yourself and your image.

Driving eventually turns most people into self-centered idiots.

Conveniently, so does cycling.

Before you buy that SUV please consider what the U.S. military said in a report they put out this May (echoed by the German military a few months later). They predict the end of cheap oil sometime between 2012 and 2015. When oil is $500/barrel and rising, maybe we will truly have an idiot in every SUV. Hopefully you will find this info both more helpful and more interesting than my prior comment.

I do, of course. :-)

I hope to be able to find a reasonable vehicle when it comes time to replace our current hauler - an 8 passenger, AWD van which averages about 15 MPG... so not exactly a winner based on the standards of the day. The issue is the need to, on a regular basis, transport 7 or more people, plus their stuff, and the desire to be able to do so through snow, sand and other less-than-ideal surfaces. The bulk of the 7 passenger and larger vehicles are SUVs, and only one non-SUV option is presently available with 4WD or AWD (the Toyota Sienna). Of course, minivans share most of the same problems as the SUVs which began this rant -- esp. now that most SUVs are based on minivan chassis. I was impressed this weekend, though, at the mileage achieved by the rented Dodge Grand Caravan I drove -- 21.3MPG overall for 750-800 miles, and I achieved over 25 from the final fill up to the airport to turn it in (about 7 miles). We will definitely be looking for economical options when the time comes, but for the most part we will expect to offset our expensive hauler with the Prius we own, and my bike :-)

Driving eventually turns most people into self-centered idiots.
Conveniently, so does cycling.

Actually, we'll all self-centered idiots inherently. It just tends to manifest itself most profoundly when our perceived rights are infringed upon (deliberately or not) by someone else.

Guilty as charged. Here is my 2005 ZR2 Chevy Blazer.

<your picture here>

I bought this vehicle new nearly 6 years ago. Since I like to pedal to work, it only has 19,XXX miles on it. I chose this because I really like the look of the 2 door body, with 4 wheel drive for our Illinois winters, and enough space in the enclosed back for our dog, carrying stuff, or even to sleep.

I always practice safe driving techniques and follow all traffic laws, including the speed limit. It has been almost 30 years since I've been involved in a crash or received a citation of any sort while driving. I have nothing but patience and courtesy for even the most scofflaw and/or ninja of cyclists when behind the wheel.

As a cyclist and motorist, I am still unable to determine a specific group of vehicle operators as being worse than any other. I encounter good and bad in every vehicle type, even bikes. Non-idiot SUV driver checking out.

I too am guilty as charged. Except my SUV is a tad larger overall.

http://lh3.ggpht.com/_-LMhKLdJ-qQ/Rqc9boe52EI/AAAAAAAABMw/56QN-HeYsaU/s800/03Yukon-2.jpg

I tow trailers. A lot. I put 30k miles on the Yukon last year alone with about 75% of those having another vehicle in tow behind it on an open trailer (Boat or another car). Of those trips with the trailer I can only think of a handful that I made without at least one other person, and often with 3 or more additional people in the car with me. There are VERY few vehicles that can safely carry more than 5 people, and tow over 5,000 lbs at the same time. So, please don't lump me in with the "lifestyle" SUV driver. Some of us actually use the vehicle for it's intended purpose.

With that said, I think AlmostTrick hit the nail on the head. You can't assume all drivers of one particular vehicle are idiots. Furthermore whomever made the comment that every SUV has an idiot in it is simply showing his ignorance. There are a lot of us that need/want the utility that these vehicles provide, yet are not completely brain dead behind the wheel.