You know, driving to work one day there was an El Camino racing a little Honda (dunno which model, but it was one of the ‘ricerocket’ type models). They cut me off, and were driving terribly unsafe speeds, and caused an accident a few streets up the road.
El Caminos don’t get all that good of gas mileage (especially if they don’t have stock engines). That Honda was horribly wrecked (luckily the driver managed to live).
From this I can deduce that people who drive El Caminos and ricerocket Hondas are inconsiderate, unsafe assholes. Also, since El Caminos don’t get great gas mileage, we should ban them, and make generalizing insults against people who own them.
But you did ask why some people are hostile towards SUV drivers, so I obliged with an answer. I used “you” as a representative for All SUV Drivers, and “me” as a representative for All SUV-Annoyed Motorists, but somehow you keep thinking it’s a personal insult or something.
Ah, just forget it, you’ll feel better.
And Binarydrone has hit the nail on the head, methinks – it’s not that the anti-SUV people are jealous of SUV owners, or anything as petty as that. It’s because the SUV owners are, in various ways, making the overall driving experience worse with their oversized, gas-guzzling, overpolluting, sedan-endangering Suburban Behemoths.
At least when an 18-wheeler is haulin’ down the highway spewing diesel smoke everywhere, it’s doing its job. Too many SUVs are driven by folks who merely use them as a Super Sized (and super-inefficient) version of a Honda Civic.
Let’s suppose I modified my car to include long metal spikes that would do additional damage to other cars in the event of a collision and cause injury to others. This would make me safer, since other cars would steer clear of me. But it also makes things more dangerous for others. Indeed, if everyone did this, we’d all be worse off.
In many ways, such a modification is analogous to the SUV. You are marginally increasing your safety (?) and substantially increasing your visibility at the expense of that of other people. If everyone did the same, we’d all be worse off.
The main objection I see to my analogy is that the “spikes” clearly serve no legitimate purpose. But the thing is, most SUV drivers have absolutely no legitimate need for SUV features which would not be served by a mini-van.
If somebody actually had “spikes” installed in his car, I would think he or she was being a bit of a selfish jerk. So I’m not surprised that SUV drivers are seen in a similar light.
I have an SUV, and I am an only driver. Suck mah ass!
“Yea, you can justify owning a truck. But most folks driving 'em can’t tell a farm from a campsite.”
I can’t justify owning a truck, except that I couldn’t afford any car that was big enough inside for me to be comfortable and that also had four-wheel drive. I like 4-wheel drive because I like being able to ignore weather conditions when I drive, and I don’t like minivans because their “short noses” lack front-impact protection that I think I’m worth. And I would point out that you are whining not that you didn’t get the same choice, but that other people had the same choice as you and made a different decision. I pay more for my vehicle in gasoline costs, payments and insurance. Those insurance payments constitute the average cost of increased damage vehicles like mine do in accidents. So in other words, if you drive a subcompact car, I have paid for the priveledge of being an increased risk to your life.
I am a single-owner, and bought an SUV because I couldn’t afford any car that was large enough to be comfortable to me and that had 4-wheel drive available. I want 4-wheel drive so that I can ignore weather conditions while driving (and I’m willing to pay extra for it), and I don’t want a minivan because their “short-nose” designs lack the safety margin that a conventional truck does. ~ I had one once that actually did have giant tires on it, I got to see all the roofs of the other SUV’s and small/low cars could almost see underneath it, though I don’t bother with all that anymore.
Also note that there are many people who would argue that any personally-owned vehicle is “gross excess”.
As for being “an increased safety risk to other vehicles”, it’s relative comparison, and that cost is included in the increased insurance premiums SUV owners pay, so if you drive a dinky car, I have actually paid for the priveledge of being an increased safety risk to you! It’s official, ask your insurance company.
See you later! } - DougC
Having worked for a year in the auto insurance industry (and having sat through more than my fair share of boring rate-assessment meetings), I can say that this is not a universal constant.
Some insurers will charge more to cover an SUV because of the increased risk of an accident (rollover, handling), along with the greater damage an SUV can cause when it hits another vehicle.
On the other hand, some other insurers will charge less to cover an SUV, on the grounds that the drivers and passengers in an SUV will probably suffer less damage in an accident. I’m not sure how they handle the risk of greater damage to the passengers in the other vehicle, but hey.
In any event, I should point out that your higher insurance premiums aren’t going towards repairing the extra damage or the extra pollutants from your SUV, so the only thing you’re paying for is your inability to find an insurer with lower rates.
I heard it was called “liability”. On my insurace policy, liability constitutes 39.8% of the charges. “Collision” and “Comprehensive” total 51.1%. And I can’t figure out what the difference is between the last two; I am sitting here actually reading the policy statement, and both seem to say pretty much the same things. I see that my vehicle is not covered for “damage caused by missiles” so I guess I won’t be doing that motor tour of Israel this year. -Neither Collision or Comprehensive covers medical coverage for occupants, because that’s listed elsewhere, and is about 4.5%. This is for an SUV mind you, maybe somebody with a Geo Metro can post a comparison.
~
—But yea, I’ve heard of that. The more expensive and larger a vehicle is, the less it costs to insure it. That’s why Ferrari drivers and 18-wheelers get insurance for free. If you could buy a 747, I bet the insurance company would have to send monthly payments to you. - DougC
- DougC