Ahem… I’ll take the second-hand german sports car: I-6 or I-4 turbo, 1850 lbs, seats 2 in non-spine-wrenching seats (three in a pinch), enough horsepower, torque, handling & braking power to avoid collisions, looks even better without being too pretentious. …and at under half the cost (not only in purchase price but in fuel consumption)
…but that’s just my opinion.
So we have a solution. If you want to drive a vehicle that is twice as likely to kill the other driver in a crash, you should get a specail SUV class license.
I dunno, Darqangelle. I can’t get a second-hand BMW Z3 or Posche Boxter for what I can get a new Jeep Grand Cherokee for. Besides, that wasn’t one of the choices. And no one with a family can rationalize a two-seater as their primary vehicle.
You want an EV-1?
You want a $40,000+ car that’s as small as the old dinkball CVCC Honda Civic, can’t go 90 miles without needing a recharge, and needs its entire battery pack replaced every 2 years (at a cost of several thousand dollars a pop)?
Bah humbug. Give me a hybrid gasoline-electric any day.
Go older.
I don’t have a family 
…actually, I grew up riding in the back seat of my parent’s Camaro, then Firebird as a teenager, then a 2-door Cutlass Supreme.
Diff’rent strokes, huh?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Lawmill *
**tradesilicon said:
YES ban cars so we can have more motorcycles! then we’d have loads less accidents because of stupid SUV drivers and stuid normal drivers. and MC’s ARE practical, look at England where bikes jump right to the front of the line at lights. bikes also cost a lot less, my current bike cost 8000 and it’s just above the average price. plus the 200 for a helmet and even if you go with a good riding suit, like mine, 700, that’s less than 9000 total, no car can come close to that! plus I get 40 mpg on this bike, 50 on my other bike, which only cost 4000, and my wife’s bike gets 60 or so!
zero storage space huh? that’s why I can go away for a week and carry everything I need for me and my wife on one bike. before I used to tour on my bike I could fit anything I needed, including golf clubs, food, and clothes without washing for two weeks in my Escort SW. people tend to take too much crap when they go away for no reason.
I dont like SUVs really, I don’t see much of a point to it. except when going on vacation and stuff. the drivers, from my experience, tend to think they own the road and especially with MCs. plus I’ve been passed twice on the shoulder by a SUV, once the guy didn’t even leave the lane to go around me, if I would of had a hammer I would have broken his window. I personally don’t know one person who owns an SUV that actually takes it off road, or hell even uses it to go on vacation! a buddy of mine takes his car instead to go on vacation! so what the hell do you own it for then?
You’re right, I don’t have a Sebring. And if I did have one, I certainly wouldn’t want to drive it on your ass… 
I’m interested in the Hondas as well. The new EV-1s I think can go 150 miles, but I’m not sure. As far as battery pack replacement costs, the only thing you pay for in an EV-1 is the lease and the electricty. (And electricity is free at any charging station: located at malls, Fry’s, airports, some gas stations, etc.) Saturn pays for everything else, including tires, wiper blades, etc. Everything. Heck, they’ll even wash it for ya! No oil changes, no tune-ups, no nothing, ever. Also, you can go in the carpool lane and get free parking at the airport. Or closer parking, I forgot which. The EV-1s are way fun to drive, I had one for about a week; they let me borrow it.
I don’t know what Honda does with theirs, if it’s a lease or buy or what. The only Honda I’ve seen is the Neon Green one.
A girl
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by tracer *
**
Ah but the point is, this would be your everyday commute car. Most people don’t commute further than 60 miles/100 kms anyway. So for a daily driver, it actually makes sense. Your second car (the gas guzzler) would be used for weekend trips and long hauls.
That alone would cut down on the majority of smog generated in today’s major cities.
It’s not a Ford, it’s a GM: http://www.gm.com/environment/products/chart/index.html
[Real Life Story]
When I was stationed in Europe, back in '86-'88, our vehicles were outfitted with RAWLs (rotating amber warning lights) to enhance their visibility for German drivers. Ours were actually bright strobes in a plastic yellow housing, and could be seen in anything less than a complete white/brown-out.
One slightly foggy morning, our tank company was cruising up the autobahn at 5am, in the right-hand lane at about 30mph, when a speeding BMW cut into our 100m tactical interval between tanks, and rammed a tank from behind at about 100 mph. He hit with so much force that the vehicle stuck to the tank, and the oblivious crew dragged it, scraping and sparking, until someone behind them called them on the radio.
White 3: “Red 4, This is White 3.”
Red 4: “This is Red 4, go ahead.”
White 3: “This is White 3. You seem to have picked up a tail-gater.”
Red 4: “Say again, White 3?”
White 3: “Red 4: STOP! You have a Beemer stuck to your ass!”
Red 4: “So I have. When did that happen?”
[/Real Life Story]
Rog668:
Yes, but I can’t afford a Jeep and a car; I’m having fun saving enough for a motorcycle. And even if I could, my job would make it impractical.
So I should maybe completely forego the utility of my Jeep because in addition to its work- and recreation-related uses, it’s a bit of overkill in the parking lot of the grocery store? Aren’t I entitled to eat, too?
And when I’m driving down the highway enroute to either work or play, my Jeep, filled with either tools/parts or camping/hunting gear, that makes me a “tool”?
Just an example of why arguments in extremis are of little consequence.
ExTank
“A tank would certainly solve my parking problem.”
“If not excatly endear me to my co-workers.”
“Or my insurance adjuster.”
ExTank wrote:
I take it that a moving tank makes quite a bit of noise, and that the crew couldn’t hear the BMW impact over the din?
That, and the mass differential made the impact largely unnoticeable. The driver later confided to me that he thought that they’d hit a bump or something, even though he hadn’t seen anything on the road.
ExTank
…was talking about a Hummer, and how, when used as to take over small countries, or ramble through jungles loaded with equipment, was a tool.
But being driven down Rodeo Drive to be valeted…
…you get the point he was trying to make.
…but I’d like to say my 2cents.
First off, my husband and I use our SUV offroad frequently. We use it to haul materials, drive on our land (through sometimes muddy paths), etc. It also snows here. A shitload of snow. If we did not have a 4 wheel drive vehicle, we would not get home from work. (We tried it without, and we couldn’t get home- period). We also have a small boat and trailer that we like to haul when we go camping. We use our $30,000+++ vehicle for its intended use, and we aren’t contributing to “that wasteful cycle of greed and personal debt”. Our truck is paid for, but thanks for thinking of our personal finances. I think anyone who buys items that they can’t afford are idiots, but that’s their business.
To assume that a person driving an SUV around town is a “soccer mom” who never uses her truck for it’s intended use is extremely shallow and ignorant. Get over it, already. I don’t know anyone in my area that looks down on SUV owners, mainly because we need them here for the way we live. It’s rural, it’s snowy, it’s muddy, and we drive offroad. We also frequently fill our SUV with music gear, friends, and dogs. It’s rarely driven with just a driver in it. We take the car for those trips.
By the way, I’m not at all blind to the arguments presented. If I could find a nice, fuel efficient car to fill all of my needs, I’d drive one. So far, no luck. I do find it interesting that many people in warm climates own these to tool around town in. If those are the people you’re bitching about, try directing your ridiculous generalizations at them. Do remember, though, that many of us live in rural areas with bad weather and these SUVs are more then needed.
Don’t paint all SUV owners with the “selfish, greedy” brush. Stereotypes are a very nasty thing.
Zette
I have no problem with SUV owners who have good reason to own one (for example, my bf’s aunt who has to travers 3 miles of dirt roads to get to her house-she’d never get out in winter without one). But–living in an urban area–I have to say that I see very few SUVs being driven anywhere other than the highway, and the majority have only one person in them. But–that issue has been discussed to death here.
What I will say is that I just read a story about how the grilles on SUVs are far more dangerous to pedestrians than regular cars. (http://www.gristmagazine.com/grist/best/best082900.stm)
The other thing that I haven’t seen anyone mention here is the safety issue related to the tinted windows on SUVs. When I’m in my car I can’t see over or around SUVs because of their size. When they have tinted windows I can’t see through them either (this applies equally to many minivans). Yet virtually every SUV I see has the very dark tinted windows. So I have no way of anticiapting traffic conditions ahead of the car in front of me. Can someone explain to me why an SUV needs tinted windows to serve its purpose as an offroading/hauling/people mover?
I’d rather be behind a pick-up anyday than an SUV-sure they’re bigger but at least I can usually see through their windows.
**
ASD Says:
**
Er, possibly for the same reason that many minivans come with tinted windows? It, uh, helps keep the sun out. Lots of people get tinted windows on sedans and other cars, too. It’s the dangdest thing.
**
even sven says:
**
Unfortunately, by “letting the owners know what you think of their choice”, you’re also making a huge assumption: that you know they don’t need their SUV. I say it’s for them to decide whether they need it or not.
**
even sven says:
**
And yes, judging someone based on what kind of car they drive shouts “I am a jerk!” even more ‘loadly’.
**
bouv says:
**
Quite a blanket statement there. Prove that right, and you’re qualified to judge everyone who drives SUV’s in the city. Unfortunately, my mom is a prime example of someone who has great use for an SUV in the city. She frequently carries several people with her for business, she carts around things like plants and dogs, which don’t fare so well in the back of a pickup, and she has a boat (which she keeps at her house in the city) which occasionally needs to be towed somewhere.
**
A girl says:
**
Yeah, if you believe the Chrysler ads. Yet, still, when you drive one into a driveway or over a speedbump at an angle, you can still feel the whole car twist under the strain. Funny, that.
tracer says:
I don’t know if I’d go that far. I think that the real reason SUV’s are singled out and picked on as a group is that they’re annoying. I certainly find it annoying that most people are probably driving these behemoth things they don’t really need. But I also recognize that it’s their choice to make. You’re perfectly entitled to buy an SUV to pull your boat to the lake once a year, or even to buy an SUV because you might want to offroad someday. Maybe it’s a bad choice. Big deal.
And anti-SUV people, don’t give me any crap about how one’s choice is only one’s choice until it endangers you and your family. The mere act of buying and driving an SUV does not endanger your family. The act of driving it unsafely does, so take all your hysteria and point it at that.
For example, I’d be perfectly happy if cops were simply a little more hardnosed with people in large vehicles. Exceeding the speed limit by 5mph in an SUV or otherwise large vehicle could reasonably be considered unsafe driving in many situations, whereas it’s usually overlooked.
As far as fuel economy goes, that’s a silly argument too. A Ford Crown Victoria doesn’t get any better gas mileage than a Ford Explorer, and it weighs just as much. Don’t start calling my Grandma a jerk because she drives one of those.