Damn straight. Give me a sensibly priced Hummer any day.
Yep, I got lazy, but your user name is so damn long.
But then mine is kinda stupid and hard to remember I suppose. The username “Alpine” the name of a dear departed dog was taken. So I just reversed the letters.
Not to belabor the point, but I just want to post a couple pictures, and have everyone compare them. Can anyone honestly tell me they don’t see the difference in styling, especially the grill?
I see about 30 years difference in styling. The dodge looks more aerodynamic, the Chevy is basically a brick.
The Chevy is a very plain-jane 2X4 (but I’m surprised you found any stock pictures at all) and you picked the Dodge V10 that has the hood scoop and air dam. That V10 represents what? 1% of their truck sales?
I think this would be a better representation of the majority of Dodge Trucks sold today.
I take issue with those people that believe that the majority or even many of the SUVs/Trucks sold are to people that want to “dominate” or “intimidate” other drivers.
Whatever floats your boat. I’m a person that buys what he needs, and doesn’t screw around with too much frilly stuff. Though, as I get older, the heated seats would be nice. Low range though, is a must. I’m a practical person, so I buy a practical vehicle. That’s a reflection of my personality.
I don’t really care what kind of vehicles other people own, that’s also a reflection on my personality.
Looks like the actual surface area of the grills on both vehicles are actually about the same. So I’ll retract that.
After looking at more pics, it seems to me that they are lowering the front bumper, this makes the grill and hood look bigger and higher. They have to fill the space with something. It does screw up the utility of the truck, but that’s a whole different thread.
Piffle. People are not measurable by their consumer goods. That’s as lame as astrology and divination by tossing around the innards of slaughtered sheep.
A guy in a muscular car isn’t compensating for a limp penis.
A woman in a muscular car isn’t furious over not having a penis.
SUV drivers aren’t aggressive, selfish snobs.
Teens in small fast cars aren’t aggressive, irresponsible twits.
Old folks in blah cars aren’t blind, stupid or on the verge of a stroke.
Women in minivans aren’t ditzy losers who sold out.
They’re just cars, already. Things. Side notes.
They’re just THINGS that can be used and appreciated for a dizzying range of reasons. At most, they’re conversation openers.
Ah, I’m gonna have to go ahead and disagree with you, there, TVeblen. I think people’s consumer choices do indeed say a lot about them. And I think cars say a lot about people, because they are big, expensive purchases, not on the same par with a bag of chips. In my own experience, the cars my husband and I drive are very much reflections on the things that are important to us. People who have made a decision on a vehicle and plunked down the money for it came to that decision somehow - a car didn’t just show up on their doorstep.
What’s important about your car purchase to you?
For myself, and my Wife, it’s important that we buy what we need. I don’t know, and don’t pretend to know what is best for others.
Fair enough, featherlou, and l even agree…with a huge caveat: people’s consumer choices may indicate some things about them. But those things are peripheral and subject to wildly individual quirks. I just maintain they aren’t reliable indicators of anything very basic to human kind.
A nearby geezer is 1. a farmer, 2. a multimillionaire who is notorious tightwad who wears worn coveralls 3. a leader in revolutionary ‘green’ farming practices and 4. a total nut for muscle cars. He loves the pure machinery of them. It might harken back to his tinkering with the mechancial perfection of Johnny Poppers, or his by-gone days as a hellion. He’s a coot who selects and drives muscle cars.
Okay. He’s an usual example, but is he that removed from anybody else, purely on the basis of things? I’m a middle-aged female librarian who owned 1. an IH pickup then 2. a Ford Bronco because I needed them for hauling canoes and camping gear and construction supplies. The cars were chosen tools that I needed, nothing more, no matter what conclusions onlookers reached.
Of course people buy what they’re attracted to, and much of that is based on marketing. A lot of choices are empheral. So are a lot of choices. I’m just saying they’re suggestive–intertesting–about the people using 'em, just not remotely predictative.
Veb
enipla, we also drive vehicles that suit our needs.
Veb, you’ve got me thinking now. If I were a Sociologist, I would get a government grant and study how car purchases correlate with personality traits, write a thesis on it, and go on Oprah.
Styles change. A 2004 Honda Civic looks quite a bit sleeker and sexier then a 1983 Honda Civic. My '96 Saturn looks sleeker and sexier then a 93 Saturn. Good lord, did I just use the words sleek and sexy to describe a Saturn?
Marc
I’ve always been told that I’m one of the guys… I have more ‘male’ tastes than ‘female’. Don’t get me wrong, I’m all woman, but I love sports cars and trucks, and could care less about fashion - especially shoes. As a matter of fact, I have 5 pairs of shoes: 2 sets of dress shoes (flat loafer types), a pair of walking tennies, a pair of hiking tennies, and my beloved sandals that I wear the most. They are ugly, but comfortable.
Well, you’re entitled to your opinion, but if that’s the only difference you see, I suspect you’re being willfully obtuse.
You made the comparison, not me. I was talking about Dodge’s aggressive styling, and yes, the kind of person I’m talking about, where his truck is a reflection of his personality, is more likely to buy one of those souped-up numbers. YOU are the one who tried to compare it to a '76 Chevy, so don’t blame me for the comparison being inapt. Of course it’s not a good comparison - that’s exactly my point.
Noted.
Again, I said I don’t think everyone buys gargantuan vehicles for the same reason, so I don’t understand why you’re still being so defensive. If that’s not you, then fine. Or were you responding to someone else again?
No, that’s false. It’s not a utilitarian decision. I don’t know if you read my links, but the quote “Bold, aggressive, in-your-face Dodge styling” is from Dan Knott, director of Chrysler’s Performance Vehicle Operations. In other words, a REPRESENTATIVE of the company is ADMITTING that they purposely styled the vehicle to look aggressive. It was a deliberate, conscious decision by the company.
Right, so if I said, “Saturn is designing their cars to look sexier”, you wouldn’t disagree with me, correct? Likewise, if I say Dodge is designing their trucks to look more aggressive, you have no cause to disagree.
Fair enough. But those that are trying to impress, or dominate, are a small fraction of the whole. It seems that the anti-SUV folks use this smaller group to represent the whole. I made the original comparison (about grill sizes), you brought in the pictures of a very common Chevy, against the rare V-10. I’ve never even seen one of those on the road. The people that might buy the V-10 are not necessarily aggressive or bullys (though I don’t doubt some are). They don’t represent the majority of SUV or Truck owners. So in my opinion, it’s not worth bitching about.
Thank you.
I was responding to you. I quoted you.
These SUV discussions usually start out the same. Someone makes a blanket statement about the evils of SUV’s. They get countered and back pedal a bit. Usually, it’s something like this “ I’m not talking about you, you have a reason to own an SUV. It’s all the other people that don’t need an SUV that I’m talking about.”
My posts may sound defensive because I tend to speak to personal experience. I also depend on my knowledge of those people that I know that own SUV’s/Trucks. These things I know for sure. I don’t claim to know why other people buy them. But, I can make an educated guess. They’re very practical. The utility of an SUV or Truck will not necessarily be seen when observed on your commute to work. It is a multi-purpose vehicle for some. A plain necessity for others.
Let’s put the shoe on the other foot for a second. If I said – “Most Anit-SUV/Truck people are just afraid of larger vehicles”. I’d be called on it, and rightly so. If I countered to that with “Oh, I wasn’t talking about you, it’s the other ones that are afraid”. What would you think? Do you take the pass? Is it OK now that you are forgiven and most of the other people in your group are not? How do you respond when you know the group and your experience screams that I am wrong.
After all –
Gonna, take that pass? Would my permission make it better? After all, I said it’s OK for you, just not all the others.
…… In any case IDCAYC, I see that you are a guest on the SDMB. Think about being a member. There is a lot we all can learn here. It’s a great place to come to get a reasonable, well thought out answer about anything from black holes to plumbing.
It’s also a pretty good place to bitch about stuff, but, sometimes, people bitch back at you.
Truth to be told, I have a Ferrari and a small penis.
Where are you getting “anti-SUV”? Let’s recap: I said that, IN MY OPINION, a person’s choice of vehicle is often a reflection of his personality, and that aggressive people will often buy aggressive vehicles. If I say, “Cats like to eat fish”, is that “anti-fish”?
Did I do that?
I have not backpedaled.
That’s not backpedaling. It is completely consistent with my earlier statement, as I already pointed out.
But when I say, “X is often the case”, and X doesn’t happen to be the case for you, the statement can still be true, and your personal experience does not negate it.
Consider:
“Many people like chocolate”
“Dale doesn’t like chocolate”
Do you understand that Dale’s personal experience does not negate the first statement?
Since I never declared myself to be “anti-SUV/Truck”, it wouldn’t even apply to me. And yes, if you said “Many X’s are Y” (not sure why you changed it to “most” in your example), and I were an X who was not Y, then I would not take offense.
At any rate, we obviously aren’t going to agree. I think your experience in the country is much different from how things are here in the city. I have many friends who own SUVs that have never seen a patch of dirt in their lives, and they wouldn’t know a campground from a Holiday Inn (not that you need an SUV to go camping anyway). I have my opinion, and you have yours, so we’ll have to agree to disagree.
Thanks, I’ll see how it goes. It might be bad for me if I end up wasting too much time here. 
In my experience in urban Calgary, they actually do represent the majority of large vehicle owners.
Why do you continue to argue about SUVs? Anybody who has participated in SUV threads knows full well that your situation actually requires an SUV - how many times do we have to tell you that you are not the people we are talking about? You keep on over-identifying with anti-SUV sentiment - IT’S NOT ABOUT YOU. It’s about the pinhead down my block who bought the largest vehicle he could find to drive his lone self to downtown Calgary and back every day, and all his brethren who have done the exact same thing. I don’t consider this backpedalling; some people need large vehicles, but a whole lot more don’t, and they are the ones my anti-SUV sentiments are directed against. NOT YOU. You keep taking offense where there is none available for you.
And for the record, I am afraid of larger vehicles. Have you seen the safety for other vehicle figures on them?
Just because I have your blessing does not mean that I shouldn’t voice my opinion about the subject.
It’d be irrational not to be afraid of them. If you are driving a normal sized car, and collide with an SUV, you’re gonna get creamed. The irony is, because of the frequency of SUV rollovers, driving an SUV doesn’t make you any safer, it only increases the danger for everyone else. As a matter of fact, I just saw one upside down last night.
Fair enough.