SUV’s – Yay or Nay

Remove all ads!

WHy drive an SUV when yo can drive a monster truck?

 

@ Spellbound

I'm sorry Spellbound, but you can't call yourself a realist and harbor under a false impression at the same time. The two are unfortunately mutally exclusive.

As I pointed out, which you've apparantly chosen to ignore because you think I'm a raving jerk now, the idea that SUV's are super-duper safe is simply false. Doing a simple google search on "SUV+safety+myth+study" brings up a whole slew of information disproving your number one reason. Even the safest SUV on the road, the mammoth Chevy Suburban, is statistically LESS safe than the friggin' Honda Civic. Believing hype because it suits you without doing any research does not equal realism.

Sorry, I just thought I'd point that out for a second time, which will probably be ignored by you a second time.

And saying that newer SUV's don't pollute at all is just flat out nonsense. If you can post a link that backs it up, I'd love to see it. Otherwise, I compliment your car dealer on his uncanny salesmanship skills.

edit - I'll give you the benefit of the doubt if you're referring to Washington's emission standard laws, but even if you are this is faulty logic because very few states have as tough of emission laws as the west coast states. SUV's are still heavily pollutant straight out of the factory, and states with lax emission laws - like Texas - have no protection against these beasts.

@ Manus

Since this is never going to happen outside of La-La land, it might be a good idea to consider a more sensible solution to the problems automobiles create. Though I appluad your passion, soapboxing for the abolition of all cars is just silly and unrealistic.

[ January 12, 2004, 17:40: Message edited by: Death Rabbit ]

 

Silly ey? Why I outta!

No, I was in fact merely saying that to refute Spellbounds comment that SUV's were being targeted, and not other similar vehicles. Like trucks. I think I have said enough about trucks.

For your information, I do live in La-La land, it is a very nice plae, though lonely at times. Perhaps in a few hundred years the rest of you will see fit to join me, until then, I wish you adieu. Please close the door behind you as you leave.

The thing is, I'm not soapboxing for the abolution of all cars, not realisticly with any belief it will work in any case. As much as I may see it as an easy, or necessary, thing to do without, I am aware that many do not feel the same way, and that for them it would be too hard a thing to do, being so dependant on that single form of travel they have built their societies around it. I say their because I, as we have established, live in La-La land, of which I am quite proud, and it is something I work on consistently. I will continue to disconnect from this corrupt society until it deems itself ready to come around to my way of life. So, funeral in La-La land it is then.

But I do try to take a 'more realistic' approach often, such as endorsing cars more efficient, or more sensible. That's what this thread was about I think, I only voiced my inclusion of all cars to a lesser extent so as to show I was being even-handed, and it is the truth about the way I consider them ( I have actually heard of many viable alternate automibiles, but, like that infamous water-powered car, they were usually purchased then hidden. Most often have more power as well as using next to no fuel, but it seems there are other powers that do not wish for their arrival, not while they still make a profit with these anyway). The fact is, anything short of total is not far enough to me, and we are still left with the same problems. All cars cause the same problems as SUV's, just to a lesser extent. Many people accept this cost for their ease, all I'm saying is, again, that there is a better way. On a metaphysical basis it is bad to have a machine doing your work for you in any case. You should have seen the funny looks I got in high-school when I asked how to do the work without a calculator.

Don't get me wrong DR, I'm just trying to rub your fur the wrong way is all

You guys can keep your cars, just don't try to fool yourself that there's not anything wrong with it.

Ok, the lecture is over. Perhaps you could answer me one thing though. Why are you so attatched?

Edit: ...waiting for someone to mention me using a computer. Don't worry, I've played knifey-spooney before.

[ January 12, 2004, 17:37: Message edited by: Manus ]

 

I've already told you my reasons for purchasing an SUV (visibility, safety and luxury)ad nauseum -- but it seems to be falling on deaf ears. But aside from that, trends occur for a reason -- a new product is introduced and is either accepted by the populace or goes the way of the Edsel (as an example). I would bet the people that chose to purchase these vehicles have very real and valid reasons for doing so. Good products sell -- and, incredibly, trends are made.

It wasn't easy for me to write that, but it's the facts. You're the one who first set up the accident as an "either/or", "me or them" situation. And if it has to be that way -- my answer still stands. Reprehensible and disgusting?? -- Ok then...can you honestly say that the concern for your own life is secondary to the concerns of the those lives in that other vehicle?? (I think not.) Again....I purchased the SUV for MY safety -- that's the only thing I can control. It doesn't mean that I'm out on the roads driving irresponsibly with the intent of mowing down innocent people, for god's sake. Oh...and if YOU ever purchase a vehicle for the main purpose of MY safety, then I would be truly honored.

Oh....and that article comes from a real unbiased source

InquisitorX -- It's getting increasingly difficult to answer your posts -- I think they're written with a very demeaning and hostile tone that makes any civil response from me next to impossible. We clearly don't agree on this, but I don't appreciate you painting SUV drivers as irresponsible murderers on wheels -- which is precisely what you're doing. It might benefit us all if you lighten it up a bit.

Death Rabbit -- What is real is HOW I FEEL when driving a larger vehicle. I've read the reports, long before they've been posted here. I would STILL rather be in a larger vehicle when it comes to an accident any day of the week.

A little history -- I bought my Expedition the very same day I was almost killed driving a Mustang in a bad rainstorm out on I-5. I spun out and did 2 360s -- the traffic was light and I wasn't hit thankfully (the guy in front of me wasn't so lucky) -- but I was so terrified it took me hours to stop shaking. Some guy a few cars ahead had stalled. I literally went from that highway to the Ford dealer and walked out driving a new vehicle. In my mind, I feel safer if I can see way ahead down the road -- and now I can. There's more than one measure of safety -- and visibility is critical for me -- that's my reality.

Um... Florida has emission laws too as I'm sure quite a few other states do as well. And I always thought it was the age of the car that is more of an indicator of exhaust problems than size.

[ January 12, 2004, 17:55: Message edited by: Spellbound ]

 

@ Manus

To cars? Well, I enjoy driving - I won't lie. I enjoy it less and less every day because I have an 80 mile commute every day. Cars are unfortunately a necessary evil until hovercraft mas-transit and particle-beam relocation pods are the standard sometime in the next hundred years. Which probably won't happen if current trends are followed. Since seemingly undeterrable trends, like SUV poplularity, seem to be growing despite delusions about safety and apathy about environmental impact, IMO the answer is simply building a better car. The technology is available to make cars more efficient, it just isn't utilized for two big reasons.

One, car companies won't justify the added production cost of making their product more efficient and environmentally sound.

Two, even if they did, the oil companies that depend on gas-guzzling cars to move demand for their product would be less than happy with that. It would hurt their profits, which they will stop at nothing to protect. They'll even go as far to put one of their CEO's in the white house to pressure the EPA into rolling back their standards, giving them a clearer path to higher profits with less responsibility. But that's another topic...

Oh yeah, Manus...send me postcard from La-La land.

[ January 12, 2004, 17:46: Message edited by: Death Rabbit ]

 

Sorry friend, no can do. No cutting down of trees you see.

Aye, I have to agree with you on what you've said, it isn't likely to happen in the near future, and the lesser of two evils? I've been there as well. The truth is I haven't found a way of life yet that I don't think is immoral, but I'm working on it.

But why not live closer to where you work? Maybe not necessarily moving, just changing jobs? Don't worry I know the answers, and I know it just isn't viable. It's ingrained within the hegemony we live in. It's a shame, but I guess it's all we have right now.

 

I have an SUV. I love it! It is the most comfortable car I've ever owned. I am a pretty big guy, so I needed the head/shoulder/length that a normal car just doesn't provide, let alone those European Smart cars.

They are heavier on consuming fuel, but all the personal positives outweighed the ecological/conservationist arguments I've heard.

I even have my little American Flag sticker in my window...Yeeehawl!!!

 

Well it seems that the added visability was a factor, but the added safety features weren't for this woman.

Spellbound, do you seriously go on the road in your SUV with a, "me vs them" mentality? Do you think its prevelent in most SUV drivers?

I'm not trying to flame, just curious.

 

@ Spellbound

Well, I'm sorry about your near accident. Nice to hear you came out ok. But I hope you realize that were you in the same near accident in your current Expidition, you would almost certainly be dead right now. There's no way a vehicle that large, that heavy, traveling at that speed on roads slick enough to do 2 360's would not cause a rollover (in fact, the fact that you were driving a Mustang, a car with a very low center of gravity, probably saved your life). I hope the perceived safety is enough for you, but that's not what I would call realistic. And yes, visibility is nice, but if you're in a vehicle that's poorly equipped to handle intense situations and unexpected corrections - like swerving to miss a stalled car on a wet highway - all the visibility in the world won't make your car any safer.

I still love you though.

True in many cases, but when you compare a vehicle that gets 30 mpg to a car that gets 14 mpg, which do you think pumps more exhaust into the air? And I never said the west coast states were the only ones with emission standards. Most states have them, but many are very lax and damn near futile.

[ January 12, 2004, 18:17: Message edited by: Death Rabbit ]

 

DR -- You just don't get it....the 360 spins would HAVE NEVER HAPPENED, if I had been driving the Expedition. I would have SEEN IT, in plenty of time. In my book, I think avoiding an accident should be top on the list.

Artechoke -- *SIGH* NO...NO....NO. The "me vs. them" scenario was eluded to by InquisitorX when he suggested that SUVs put others at risk. I embellished upon that. I DO NOT have that mentality when driving, for god's sake. What I said was IF there's an accident, IF it comes down to them or me, I vote for me -- me being human with a strong sense of survival. Period.

 

Spelly...you don't get it. What you don't get is that you can't always see what's happening on the road, regardless of how high up you are. You rarely have the luxury of SEEING IT, even in a gigantic SUV. And even if you can see it, you can't always avoid it. Visibility won't save you from the driver directly in front of you slamming into the guy in front of him and about to cause a pile-up. If I had a choice between swerving to miss that in a Mustang or an Expidition, I choose the Mustang, period.

Do you really think that if everyone could see accidents, there wouldn't be any? Not in this age of high speed limits, cell-phone drivers, drunks, motorcycles, speed demons, faulty firestone tires, freeways in disrepair, disoriented little old men, wet streets, parents distracted by obnoxious kids and your average plain-old sh*tty drivers.

Speaking of visibilty, large vehicles, like the Expidition, compromise the visibility of your fellow drivers. But you already stated you don't care about them.

Part of "avoiding" an accident means maneuverability around that which surprises you.

But I can see this is going nowhere, so enjoy your new car, and tell yourself whatever you need to to feel safer.

[ January 12, 2004, 18:52: Message edited by: Death Rabbit ]

 

Ugh SUVs ... due to their high center of gravity proner to accidents limousines would avoid. Nobody needs such a beast. A city driver doesn't need the nice weather cross country mobility, the rural driver doesn't need the on road capabilities. Either get a true cross country vehicle or a limousine.

They are the high cost and high end counterpart to the bonanza bikes of my early childhood.

And, SUVs are gas guzzling behemoths, utterly inefficient, but as long as gas is cheap ... and available ... go on and waste. The greenhouse effect is a fairy tale, and right, it's about god given rights. Boo-Yah! And if you don't like it, go to France.

 

Personally, I do think that SUV's are emblematic of the complete lack of social responsibility that underpins the American automotive industry. That said, is it the fault of the automakers for providing the things or the fault of the consumers for demanding them. A vicious cycle, indeed.

But as long as they're available, everyone has the right to drive one or not, as they so choose. Personally, we chose not to. We drive a station wagon as the proper compromise between people- and cargo capacity, and because it's almost impossible for a short guy to load a tandem bicycle on top of an SUV.

 

I do agree with most of the arguements against SUV's, but it really comes down to personal choice here folks. I'm the last person out there who thinks SUV's should be taken off the road, even though I have never owned one, and probably never will. I have owned two cars in my life, a Toyota Corolla, and my newly purchased Honda Accord (great car by the way). Regardless of what statistics show, if people FEEL safer driving an SUV, then that is what is important to them.

@ Manus

Why so down on cars? I mean, I can't picture how I could get to work daily without one. You see, I work for the federal government, so there are (theoretically) many places around the country I could work. Furthermore, I could (theoretically) live within a couple of miles of where I work, and walk every day. The only problem with that theory is that I'm married, and my wife is also employed. She however, does not work for the federal government - she's an elementary school teacher. Unfortunately, I do not know of any military installations that have elementary schools located by them. As a result, it is impossible for both of us to live within walking distance of where we work. Honestly, it is very difficult for anyone to live within walking distance of where they work. Walking speed is 3 mph, so you're pretty much limited to a 3 mile radius from where you work. Combine that with the fact that the average person changes jobs 3-5 times over the course of their career, and what are the odds of finding another job, different from what you have, in that same three mile radius?

I understand that you are striving for a utopian society, and I don't think you're being unrealistic. However, maybe you should go for baby-steps at first, rather than a huge leap from where we are now. Maybe pushing for tougher gas mileage on vehicles is something you can do where you might actually have some success.

Oh, and just to back up some other comments, I live in Maryland, and we do have tough emissions standards - they aren't isolated to the west coast.

EDIT: Sorry for restating a lot of what Rallymama said. She posted while I was writing this.

 

LOL -- I know -- let's round up all the SUV drivers and put them in a pen with a sign above it saying "Socially Irresponsible". Then everyone can point a finger, throw rotten fruit or what have you. We'd be less of a danger to society that way.

 

One more thing. I think one of the reasons that DR and Spell are in disagreement is that both of them can theoretically be right.

Situation #1: Spell sees impending danger a second or two ahead of time, reacts properly, and avoids a near-death experience.

Situation #2: Spell sees impending danger, but increased stopping distance are poorer handling in the SUV causes her to go into a 360 anyway, the SUV flips, and a near-death experience becomes a death experience.

And no amount of arguing can prove which of the above situations would have occurred with difinity.

 

The odd thing for me about this whole discussion on SUVs is that there are other types of cars that have all the same alleged faults as SUVs, but no one would really care. My dream car would be a Viper. Everytime I see one it makes me think about reforming and becoming a capitalist businessman (for about 10 seconds). But if I did own one would I be subjected to the same thing as Spellbound?

Are they safe? no. Wasteful? yes. horrible gas millage? what would one expect from about 350HP? Expensive? Ostentagious? Well, yes, but in a different way. But nevertheless they are. Are they socially responsible? I wouldn't think so, and I consider myself a "green" - EJ would say a "treehugger." Does anyone really need that much speed? Well, of course!!!

It may be that there is more at work than just the practicalities that everyone has been arguing over. I think Rally said it: they are emblematic. SUVs have become symbolic of a certain attitude on the part of some Americans. I'm not saying all the people who drive them have that attitude, but the SUV itself has become a stereotypical symbol of that nevertherless. My point in all this is that it is unlikey anyone would ask: "Would Jesus own a Viper?"

DR - You must live in Houston and drive I-45 North.

Edit: Sorry, Manus. I did not credit you for making the point about other cars as well.

[ January 12, 2004, 23:24: Message edited by: Chandos the Red ]

 

I think it also depends on what type of SUV a person is driving, as to handling. I've ridden in some taller, narrower types that seem very tippy when just driving on normal curves. Mine is pretty broad based, corners well and, quite frankly, turns on a dime. It took me awhile to adjust to the sensitive steering though -- it takes a very gentle hand.

What's nice about driving in the rain, I have found, is that due to the height, there is virtually no road spray or truck back-wash that I have to deal with. The wipers can just deal with the rain....which in Seattle can be more than enough to handle.

 

What do you define as an SUV? The poor handling, poor ride do not apply to all of them (My parents just got a fully loaded 2004 Subaru Forester. I'm willing to bet it's more comfortable than any competing car under $50k.)

The aforementioned Subaru gets 25/30.

I've got a '04 WRX STi. 300 HP, better gas mileage than any SUV and almost any car.

As far as handling, both the SUV and Sports Car are almost identical whenever I drive them. My car corners better, but then it's lower to the ground and designed to handle sharp turns at 75 mph. I'll still match the SUV up against any family sedan.

The visibility thing is definitely a problem. I can't remember the last time I was able to see anything if an SUV was nearby. That's a real problem on some of the onramps around here as I can't see to turn.

I've been rear-ended once and very nearly a second time. Both times it was an SUV right on top of me. Many of the drivers do seem to drive aggressively, but I'd blame that more on the gender and temperament of the driver than on the car.

Anyone else know that more than 3/4s of the oil consumed in the US comes from places other than the Middle East? Stop with the terrorism references already.

Now, if we're talking about the more traditional SUVs, then statistically they are the most dangerous vehicles on the road. (Tractor-trailors are the safest statistically. I have yet to meet a driver that is unsafe. Box trucks are a different story...)

If we can make 4-cylinder engines with horsepower ratings in the 300s, we should be able to make SUVs less gas-extensive. That isn't likely to happen though.