The average minivan gets about 1 mile per-gallon better then my Pathfinder.
Which is a moot point anyway. A minivan won’t do what I need it too.
Hmmm…I had to go back to the first page to figure out what we were talking about. You originally said your plant was at the end of a “terrible” road. I had assumed you meant the road was rutted and required a vehicle with high ground clearance. But if I’m understanding you now, it’s snow that’s the issue. The thing is, cars are available with 4WD, and in the snow, the high center of gravity of an SUV is actually a hindrance, because you can flip those things. But I see your point that some people might need 4WD for snow, AND need a larger vehicle to haul stuff or people. (I don’t even know if they make 4WD minivans; if they do, that would be a better choice). And BTW, many SUVs don’t even come with 4WD.
But the point is, MOST people who buy SUVs do not need them. This comes from the auto-makers OWN marketing research. Their own surveys tell them that most people who buy SUVs are buying them for an image, not for any practical reason that wouldn’t be better accomplished by another type of vehicle. That also jibes with my own personal experience. I live in the Los Angeles area, and SUVs are extremely common here. And we don’t get a lot of snow.
If you are one of the few people who actually NEED an SUV, then please don’t take offense; I’m not talking about you.
If I may ask, what are those uses you refer to for which you need an SUV? The reason I ask is this: The only thing that truly differentiates SUVs from cars and minivans is high ground clearance. High ground clearance is useful for off-road driving, but is actually a safety liability for normal driving. So the only 2 reasons I can think of that one would need an SUV would be for off-road driving, or if they need the combination of 4WD for snow AND more cargo room (although many SUVs don’t even have that much cargo room anyway).
Well, you may not know anyone who buys based on image, but the fact is that most people do exactly that. Again, this is based on car companies’ OWN research.
Some people flat-out admit they are buying for image. One of my friends bought a 4-Runner. She said she got it because it looks good. Others are less honest with themselves. Another friend wants to get a Nissan X-Terra (they already have a Honda CRV). I asked him how many times they have driven the Honda off-road. He admitted that he has never done any off-road driving in the Honda, but wants the X-Terra because he would like to do off-road driving. I didn’t press the point with him, but it doesn’t make a lot of sense to me that a family needs TWO SUVs just in case they ever want to drive off-road.
Thanks for the ‘numbers’. In passing, I would say that we need to be very careful in interpreting second-hand statistics from a book which appears to have a specifically anti-SUV viewpoint! I would much prefer to see the actual stats from source, but I can’t see myself buying an anti-SUV book for fun, so I guess I shouldn’t complain too much, eh?
You say ‘The few types of accidents where SUVs do fare better statistically than cars are negated by the SUVs higher likelihood of rolling over’. Again, we need to be careful here, especially regarding the word ‘negated’.
Anyway, for the moment I’ll accept that SUVs probably do tip over more often the standard cars in ‘usual’ driving. Whether this is ‘significant’ or not, well…
Quite. However, ISTM that it’s harder to drive an SUV than a car, at least under some circumstances.
TBH, I’m not sure that a Jeep is really a cliche’d SUV, well mebbe a Grand Cherokee might warranty the moniker. …
That’s not a ‘dirt road’ - it’s a dirty road! You don’t need an SUV to drive on dirty roads (hell, I’ve ridden a motorbike over more than my share of crud-crusted roads thru’ UK farming country, and I’m not dead yet. Probably). In muddy, cruddy conditions, a Scooby Forester or somesuch would arguably be a ‘better’ choice, in the sense that it’d be more likely to stay on the road if the going got fast.
But anyway … if an SUV is driven competently, then that takes care of most of the ‘issues’, surely? Well, apart from the fact that they’re big hulking mostrosities which are very difficult to see around / over / through, which is an irritation, but hardly a cause for extreme hate…
YMMV, within a 5 - 50 mpg range.
Wow, I thought this topic would die considering that I didn’t even state the debate in my opening post and this topic is barely on the par of "witnessing"in the Great Debate scheme of things (man, I just slogged my way through that one. A great read!). I’m glad that a lot of people feel strongly about this topic. Reading through all the responses, it seems like there are some themes cropping up. Need versus want ,stereotyping and “Don’t you tell me what to drive.”. If someone wants to start up another topic based on “Keeping up with the Joneses” go ahead.
The only problem I see in the need versus want back and forth is that who am I to tell someone what they need and don’t need? Yes, a blind person needs a cane/seeing eye dog but a mom might need an SUV for her six kids to get them to soccer practice. Marketing companies have spent years trying to figure out why we buy certain things. Yes, sometimes its image. Sometimes its affordability. Sometimes its opportunity. Or addiction, like cigarettes. Also, I’m assuming men, women, Asians, African Americans, Caucasians, "Other"s, Northerners, Southerners, Europeans, Jews, Christians and Muslims all post here. I don’t think any group drives better than the other or worse than the other.
Here’s some interesting info on the SUV tax loophole:
http://www.ase.org/media/newsrel/SUV_tax.htm
Also, the source of the title of this debate:
http://www.whatwouldjesusdrive.org/
JsGoddess- like I said- why do you “NEED” 4WD? Why not AWD for snow & such? They make vehicles with large capacity and AWD. A pickup can be bought with 4WD and more capcity that an SUV, although I admit that makes the point moot, as PU’s are about as bad as SUV’s.
They make other vehicles with bigger engines than SUV’s. Lumber is much better hauled in a truck. Sure- you don’t have to take out the 3rd row of seats on a SUV- becasue they don’t have that option in the first place. If you never use that 3rd row, get one without it, or remove & store.
So far, you haven’t convinced me.
Wait, you are telling me what kinds of roads I live on, WITHOUT knowing where I live, WITHOUT ever having driven on them, and, in fact, without knowing anything at all about my situation besides what I told you (which is that the roads are dirt)? Who the hell are you, Sylvia Brown? Yes, the roads near me are unpaved. NOT PAVED. MADE OF DIRT. DIRT ROADS.
So I didn’t say I needed 4wd for dirt and snow the first time I posted. That’s because I figured you can get pickup trucks with 4wd too, so that doesn’t factor in to why I chose not to buy an F150.
And I still cry bullshit on the “you should get a minivan” faction. Even my own mother, who loves her minivans and dislikes most SUVs, admits that minivans are less maneuverable and harder to see out of than my truck.
And finally, yes, I will admit that if all else was equal and there were no other objections whatsoever to me getting a minivan - if the mileage was the same, if the maneuverability and visibility weren’t worse, and if I didn’t need to have grip - I still wouldn’t choose one because I’m a 20-year-old female and therefore don’t need the extra seating or the image a minivan provides. But don’t turn around and say image is the only reason, either.
I haven’t convinced you because you are determined not to be convinced. It’s really pretty simple. AWD is fine, and I haven’t spoken against it. 2wd isn’t fine for some uses. Name the non-SUV that has AWD or 4wd that can haul the same amount as an SUV while being safer and more fuel efficient. You are the one insisting that SUVs are never the best choice, so it’s time for you to provide specific single vehicles that do all of the things SUVs do while improving on SUVs in safety and mileage.
Reminder: I don’t have an SUV. I have a Ford Contour.
Julie
Heavens! I think you need to check your radiator hoses. I think you are overheating.
I read this…
‘I live in a rural area, and it rains once in a while, believe it or not, and rain + dirt = mud’
… and assumed that you were referring to rain and dirt upon a conventional road surface. A reasonable assumption, Moriarty, albeit wrong in this case, 'twould seem - dammit!
There are cars with 4WD, too. Of course, you don’t need 4WD for dirt and snow (well, apart from in extremis), although it’s certainly a Good Thing To Have.
Image can be the only reason, although it isn’t necessarily. From my PoV, a minivan is somewhat like an SUV, but with pretty much all the good stuff removed.
But, a question: Why choose an SUV over a Scooby Forester or equivalent? If I was in the market for a 4WD, go anywhere, good luggage capacity sorta thing, I’d leap on the Scooby. OK, it looks very dull, but apart from that…
Geez, I KNEW you were gonna say that. Yes, my complaint with the book is that the author gets preachy at times. But the numbers are purely statistical. What exactly is it that we have to be “careful” of? Are you really suggesting that you weren’t aware that SUVs have a propensity towards rolling over? I can’t imagine anyone not hearing about that, unless they lived on the moon for the last 15 years.
Well, the book’s on sale at Amazon.com.
The only thing we have to be “careful” of is blithely dismissing facts of which one is ignorant. The book is over 400 pages, so I’m afraid I can’t exactly quote you the entire book. It seems to me that since you are the one suggesting that SUVs are safer, it should be contingent on YOU to provide the evidence. Otherwise, how is the assumption that SUVs are safer at all warranted?
But they AREN’T being driven competently. People in fact drive them the same way they drive cars, often oblivious to the relative handling deficiencies. In fact, many people are under the mistaken impression that 4WD is some sort of “magic bullet” that will keep them from losing control of the vehicle no matter what. And BTW, the book also addresses your argument. Many SUV buyers feel that they are bucking the trend, because they are better drivers than the people who roll them. But when you consider that approx. 80% of all drivers consider themselves “better than average drivers” (do the math), that argument kind of falls flat.
The fact is, the thing SUVs are best at is annihilating the other car in an accident. But as far as protecting it’s own occupants, a minivan is much better. The reason is that minivans employ unibody construction, so the frame tends to crumple in a major collision, absorbing the force of impact. SUVs are built on an extremely rigid truck frame, with the body bolted to the frame. The rigid frame tends to transfer the force of impact to the occupants. So while by its sheer weight, an SUV may “win” in certain types of accidents, it’s still more dangerous than a minivan or a large sedan. And all that is ignoring the possibility that a more agile car might avoid the accident in the first place.
[FWIW, I believe Jeep does employ unibody construction.]
blowero, I agree with you that many people don’t know how drive their SUVs properly, and it bothers me. However, this is a problem with the people, not the trucks.
And yeah, I’m pretty sure Jeeps are unibody, too. I’ll go look under mine and get back to you.
Actually, I was going to intone ‘mababababababa’, but that made no sense at all. Anyway:
We need to be careful of how we interpret stats, especially the interpretation of stats presented by someone who may have vested interest in a PoV supported (or not) by the stats. Or, the stats don’t lie in themselves, but they can be presented in misleading ways…
Or in the UK!
But I’m not suggesting that - in extremis - an SUV is unlikely to topple. I was initially wondering whether this tendency is an actual important factor, out there in The Real World (wherever that is).
And I just noticed that it’s only $8-. Maybe I will buy the bleedin’ thing after all!
Please point out where I have stated that SUVs are safer (than other vehicles).
If true, this is suprising to me. In my recent - and only - experience driving an SUV, I found it to handle in a distant and scary manner. So I drove it relatively slowly, for fear of turning it into a field ornament. Do people really hammer these behemoths into the bends apace? Do they not feel the bizarre body roll and diconcerting remoteness? Maybe they do, and just have faith in the engineering?
Which argument?
Again, we really need some idea of what proportion of accidents a ‘more agile’ car would avoid.
Hm, looks like I need to order that damn book…
But it’s a problem that is exacerbated by the marketing departments of the auto makers. As I mentioned earlier, the loophole that allows SUVs to be marketed as cars, yet regulated as trucks actually encourages automakers to sell more SUVs. Don’t you think it would be better if they weren’t actually encouraged to market SUVs as replacements for cars?
Aha! Now I understand where you are coming from. You obviously haven’t experienced U.S. drivers of SUVs. Many zip in and out of traffic like they were in a Lamborghini Countach. The problem is, they DO have faith in the engineering, but it is a misplaced faith. Auto makers have engaged in a little deception - SUV advertising tends to imply that they are safer than cars. For example, a t.v. ad that ran a lot a few years ago showed computer-enhanced images of an SUV heading home while avoiding obstacles like falling rocks, logs falling off a truck, etc. The thing is, that’s the exact type of maneuver that SUVs are the worst at. Sudden swerves tend to make them tip over; cars are much, much better at avoiding obstacles. So they don’t outright lie; they just imply that SUVs are safer than cars. This tends to give consumers a false sense of security when they drive their SUVs. I guess they get used to that squirrely handling you’re talking about and start to ignore it.
This is purely anecdotal, of course, but my friend was on his way home from a skiing trip when he had to stop and help a woman who had crashed her SUV in the snow down an embankment. Thankfully she wasn’t hurt, but my friend said she seemed genuinely surprised that she had wrecked. Her comment: “But I had it in 4-wheel drive”.:rolleyes:
Come over and drive on our freeways for a day and you’ll know exactly what I’m talking about.
Like what? What car will hold more people than my Tahoe. What car will tow my 30ft Checkmate boat? What car, with your precious AWD can drive through the 16 inches of snow in one day we got last year, while carrying 6 people COMFORTABLY, and towing my boat? (We were going south for vacation)
Not people capacity
In a Viper? How about a Corvette? They both have bigger engines, but they cant haul for crap.
Care to add a cite for that one? My buddy can hold almost as much lumber in his Suburban as in his 1500 Silverado pickup. The wood stays dry in the suburban if it rains though…
American way baby! If I want a third seat, by god I am going to buy one whether I ever use it or not.
Once again, I look to the American way. Buy what you want, I’m sure it suits your needs just fine. Do not assume that you have any notion of what type of vehicle other people need/want. You certainly haven’t changed my mind to get rid of the SUV and buy an AWD speck.
For myself (once again), pretty much in order of importance, but first four are simply non-negotiable.
Deep snow. This is where ground clearance is also very important.
Towing.
Hauling/Cargo
Low-range.
Works well for my dog.
Easy to get in and out of (I’m tall)
A rare jeep trip now and then.
Can carry 4 passengers.
Their are two types of vehicles that can do that. Trucks and SUV’s (Except for the truck/dog, truck/4 passengers).
A van has carrying capacity but is mostly set up for passengers. I just don’t like the way they are set up. Again, a moot point because it can’t do the 3 of the first four things.
Well, I would disagree. You won’t find a car or mini-van with the towing capacity. And no car will have the cargo capacity. Neither are available with low-range.
And I’m not taking offence. It just seems to me that many people have deceided most SUV’s aren’t needed because they don’t need one themselves. Or they see them comuting to work or whatever. I live in an extreme montain enviornment, but you may also see me when I drive it down to Denver for a little shopping.
My brother drives an SUV, a Tahoe. Uses it to pull his boat (and visit me in the winter ;)). He has thought about getting another car for driving to work, but the numbers just don’t work.
I guess my point is, while I’m sure some people don’t need an SUV, many others do use them. I just don’t think there is any way to seperate the people that use them rarely to the people that use them all the time. And frankly, I don’t think it’s any of my business.
First let me say that I don’t buy a larger vehicle because it can crush a smaller one. Or because it’s safer.
Many people claim that an SUV is more dangerous because a vehicle with a higher center of gravity is more likely to roll. This is one factor that does make an SUV more dangerous for the occupants.
From http://www.dot.gov/affairs/nhtsa201.htm
SUV’s are more prone to roll. So this makes sense.
And this from the same site.
Bolding mine.
Doesn’t change the overall percentage between SUV’s and cars. We already know that SUV’s roll easier than cars. It addresses single vehicle accidents. And lack of seat belt use. Suggests to me that people that are rolling vehicles are driving to fast, and not wearing their seat belts. I didn’t see any stats on multi-vehicle rollovers.
Are most rollovers single vehicle?
Now, from this site -
(sorry .pdf)
hmmmm… Auto industry ties.
Hans Joksch from U of Mich replies -
No surprise there. This is a good example of how people try to twist the statistics. This does not mean trucks are more dangerous than cars.
More from Anderson
Both the NHTSA and the Anderson report speak to the Single-vehicle roll over accident. And the NHTSA report states that 80% of these single car accidents, people where not wearing a seatbelt.
Hmmmmmm….
So, they are safer in a two vehicle crash, but idiots still put them in the ditch.
Sort of looks like most SUV fatalities come from single vehicle rollovers. That suggests to me that their are a lot of idiots that don’t know how to drive them . Are people really this stupid? People can’t take the time to put on their seat belt? Reckless.
It also suggests that a larger car is safer in a two car accident. Nothing new there.
So we have people doing damage because they aren’t’ good drivers. Are they buying bigger cars because they are afraid? Maybe so. Bad idea.
So. What do we do?
You don’t need to teach people how to drive SUVs. It’s no big deal if you know how to drive.
But.
If you get in an accident, in any car. Your next two weekends are spent in driving school. And you pay dearly for it. No insurance coverage, no taxes to support it.
Great, so now I have to get into a 4-wheel arms race with people like you? Didn’t we learn our lesson with the USSR? Everyone busts their ass getting the biggest bomb/suv and the only thing that happens is that we all end up broke and a lot less safe than when we started.
Yeah, but they are professional drivers, you aren’t. The chances that a professional truck driver will knowingly or unknowingly break any traffic law is much smaller than your average soccer mom or micro-penis executive. Their entire livelihood depends on not running that stoplight.
Nice logic, by the way. 5% of the vehicles on the road are big trucks, so it won’t matter if 50% of vehicles are big too, since there were already big trucks out there.:rolleyes:
It’s a statistical fact that the vast majority of SUV owners do not need to have SUVs for the purpose for which they use them. This is not some sort of mass delusion by SUV haters, it’s something that the companies that make SUVs have discovered from their own research. You are an exception to the rule, which is fine.
I don’t think it’s accurate to apply statistics from certain kinds of accidents to say SUVs are safer, then to turn around and ignore statistics from other kinds of accidents under the reasoning that the people who got in those accidents were “stupid”. I’m going to go ahead and quote the part of the book that addresses the issue:
Is this the statistic that many people don’t take them off road?
Again, in your eyes, how often must someone use an SUV to justify it?
If they use it to tow a boat 4 times a year, is that enough?
And in Single accident rollover deaths, 80% of the people were not wearing a seat belt. This speaks volumes. I just don’t feel much sympathy for someone that reckless.