Ok, ok, from now on I will keep my Freudian interpretations to myself. 
Ok, quick question. Objectively speaking, would there be any benefit to the average vehicle weighing 6000 pounds instead of 3500 pounds?
Well, perhaps you can tell me what’s between the lines, because otherwise your suggestion that anyone wants to restrict what you can buy is a strawman.
“Disingenuous” does not mean “unclear”; it means giving a false appearance of simple frankness. For you to claim that your SUV stacks up well against a car in terms of efficiency, by comparing it to the cars of yesteryear, is disingenous. The fact is, it does not stack up well against a modern car. And the fact that SUVs are a replacement for the large cars people drove is PRECISELY the problem. By aggressively marketing SUVs as replacements for cars, but still calling them trucks, auto makers are able to get around the very regulations that were reponsible for cars being more efficient and less polluting now. They are undoing the progress that has been made. SUVs circumvent mileage and emissions regulations for cars, yet you are trying to claim those same mileage and emissions standards as an argument for your SUV. Sorry, Charlie…
I see no evidence that that is happening. What should happen, though, is not to stop making SUVs, but simply to stop convincing people that are the better choice for highway driving, because they are not.
I disagree.
The problem is that there are maybe one or two large cars to choose from. This is one of the reasons people are buying SUVs.
Some folks argue that ‘we didn’t need SUVs 30 years ago’ forget how big cars used to be. We don’t have that anymore, this is why I compared it cars of yesteryear. I thought that was pretty clear.
I haven’t seen this, are you talking about specific ads?
All laudable aims. However, attacking these problems by discouraging SUV ownership is a bit like throwing deckchairs off the Titanic. What’s needed is rather more extreme: strongly discouraging people from using motor vehicles, encouraging the use of public transport, (especially) encouraging the use of cycles (and walking, skating, pogo-sticking), discouraging people from upgrading their car every few years, eliminating all inefficient cars (that’s sports cars, ‘premium’ saloons and such as well as SUVs), changing infrastructure so that people live closer to where they work, changing attitudes.
Ah well, all for another debate, another day…
(wish I could edit)
And what I disagree on is that the comparison is disingenuous. Not whether or not I was being clear. They are both utility vehicles, the closest version of the big old wagon is an SUV, therefor I made the comparison.
Please don’t do this. You insisted that I provide a definition of “need”. Then you insisted that we only compare SUVs to your Ford Contour. I then pointed out that we should include minivans in the comparison. You then said that minivans are no better than SUVs for the majority of complaints. I then pointed out the the safety concerns are still relevant. But now you have come around full circle and said that safety is subordinate to need. Your trying to blindside me, basically like this:
You: Let’s discuss need by comparing SUVs to mid-size cars.
Me: But you need to include minivans in the comparison.
You: No we don’t, because minivans are the same as SUVs.
Me: No they’re not, they’re safer.
You: Well yeah, but I need an SUV.
This kind of bait-and-switch debating is REALLY annoying, especially since I have to go back and search out everything we said just to figure out where you blindsided me. I guess it’s kind of my fault since I went for the bait in the first place.:rolleyes:
You misunderstand. I am contending that most people don’t need their SUV for towing at all.
hmmmm.
Probably a regional thing again, but.
I tow, trailer is probably too big for my Pathfinder though.
My brother has a 26’ sailboat and a utility trailer that he tows.
All three guys I work with tow. Fishing boats, river rafts and a camper.
My best bud in the neighborhood tows, river raft and snowmobiles.
Anyway, this is just anecdotal, I know it doesn’t support the overall argument.
Many of these SUV arguments get into the ‘SUVs are bullys, have masculinity issues, can’t drive’ tone. I will fight those to the end. And it seems to me that we have weeded most of those folks out.
I’m also bugged by the argument that SUVs will squish my smaller car. This at least has some validity, It’s a big world and everyone gets to make their own choices. On the other hand, I think its shortsided if you buy and SUV for safety alone.
When talking about gas mileage, the big SUVs do get significantly worse mileage. The midsize, which seem to be the majority get a couple of miles difference. I don’t think that is enough to really make that much of a difference.
I had a debate in another board with a guy that drove an old small two stroke car, he claimed that since the engine was smaller, it did not pollute as much. Damn near burst a vein on that one.
Anyway, since I also have been speaking to the need issue, I think the reason JSGODDESS wanted to eliminate the mini-van was because the people that have vision blockage issues or gas mileage issues should also have issues with the mini.
Well that’s it for me (I hope). I know what I need and buy accordingly. Others are free to the same thing. Some may make poor choices, but I believe that most do not.
Alpine
This has to be a country vs. city thing. A SUV in the county does the same job a pickup used to. Where I grew up, everybody had at least one pickup. Almost all of them put them to good use, and generally handled them well. I’m sure many of those people are now driving Tahoes instead of 1500s, and that isn’t really a big deal. If you need a truck, and you prefer to have a cover over the back part, that’s cool.
Look at the numbers though. Based on percentage of boat owners to total population in Oregon and Florida (two coastal states) it looks like between 5% and 7% of Americans own boats. Even ignoring the fact that most of these boats trailer under 2000 pounds and would easily be towed by many cars, that’s still not that many.
Now, if you drive through an urban neighborhood counting boats, and compare that to a rural neighborhood, you will most likely find much higher per capita boat ownership in the country.
So, lets say you have a 4 to 1 country to city boat ratio. That would mean that about 1% of city dwellers have a proven trailering need. I’m ignoring snowmobiles and the like because the trailers tend to be smaller, lighter and easily pulled behind a car.
4wd. As you certainly know from living in the country, 4wd is not something you pop into anytime it starts to rain. It needs to be bad before you should ever be in 4hi or lo. Since about half the population rarely doesn’t see snow at all, and you shouldn’t really be driving in 4wd in the rain, the majority of Americans will never have a weather driven need for 4wd. Not “less than 1 per month”, never.
They might seek out “trails” to prove their capabilities, but even then, they will most likely never push their vehicles to the limits of 2wd. Would you take a $45,000 4 wheeling?
So, for about half the population, you have a 1% trailering need, no 4wd need, no ground clearance need.
What about space? Some, maybe. But when you consider the average couple has 2.2 kids, how many of them are actually using that third seat? Besides, the “crossover vehicles” don’t hold any more than wagons, so the space argument only holds for the behemoths.
So, just looking in the snowless regions of the country, how do you explain the fact that 50% of vehicles sold today are SUV’s?
If yall could just go ahead and ignore this, that would be cool :smack:
Yes, because in previous posts in this thread, you have said that because people NEED semis and vans, the safety of said semis and vans is irrelevant.
You said:
So, by saying that semis and vans are okay if they are needed, despite their size making them a danger, then if you say that the size of SUVs is relevant, you are assuming they aren’t necessary. In other words, you’re assuming the very issue this debate is about.
If safety is not an issue when the vehicles are necessary, then we can’t say that safety is an issue that can make the vehicle unnecessary.
Julie
That, and it’s a circular argument to say that SUVs are unnecessary because they’re unsafe, and they’re unsafe because they’re unnecessary.
In trying to discern the need for an SUV, we have to address all of the utility of the SUV and compare that to some sort of base model. I chose my car because no one could argue that my car is in any way special, or specialized. It’s just a sedan.
A Contour has some very dramatic advantages over non-cars. It gets good mileage, handles great, has good visibility, has enough power to merge into traffic, does not block line of sight for other drivers, etc.
My experience with minivans is that they do not handle well, do not have good visibility, do not get particularly good mileage, and block line of sight for other drivers.
The only thing that can be said in favor of minivans over SUVs is their safety (yes, there are very minor mileage advantages. Very minor, and only in some cases). But already in this debate the safety of a vehicle has been rendered irrelevant to the discussion IF the vehicle is necessary (eg semis and vans).
So, the question comes again to “Is the vehicle necessary.” Which means it comes again to “Define ‘necessary.’”
Julie
Education and humility are called for, I think.
It is nice when we have freedom of choice and lots of money so that we can choose the size and horsepower of our automobiles. I think those of us who have that freedom and that cash are extremely lucky. It would be a little harsh to take away people’s new car choices by legislating SUVs out of existence.
A better idea would be to ensure that everyone has access to an education that provides individuals with the critical thinking to judge for themselves whether they need a SUV or not.
I do not mean to imply that the better one’s education, the less likely they are to buy an SUV. (The contrary is probably true since more education often correlates to greater income and SUVs cost more than many other available automobiles). I’m only saying that when it comes to car-choosing and many, many other things, society (especially USA/“Western”) would greatly benefit from a populace that is better-versed at critical thinking and just better educated overall.
“What would Jesus drive?” The Jesus that I’ve heard about from old writings would, I believe, choose to walk.
However, the Jesus that I often hear many Americans say they worship would probably buy whatever was bigger and more expensive than his neighbor’s car.
In my opinion, it is quite sad that such a great teacher is so misunderstood by his followers.
That’s like saying acne causes puberty.
And Julie - sorry dear, but you have stopped making sense altogether.
I made no such argument. You have mixed things up so badly that I don’t even know where I would begin responding. I have already taken more of your bait than I should have, and I think we have both said what we have to say by this point. Thanks for a very enjoyable debate.
It’s funny to read these SUV debates – inevitably, lots of people who tow stuff, go to yard sales, etc. come out of the woodwork.
Possibly nobody. What annoys me about SUV’s is that, generally speaking, SUV drivers are blocking my view of the road and endangering me for no other reason than to satisfy their own vanity.
Fortunately, in New York City, where I drive, SUV drivers are penalized since it’s more difficult to park.
So, people shouldn’t want large cars either.
The best set up for towing is rear wheel drive with ladder type frame construction. Common on SUVs. Pretty much unavailable on anything else.
I prefer not to push the weight limits when I tow, that’s why I said earlier that I felt my trailer was too heavy. A bigger vehicle makes it safer.
1 in a 100 that tow? It seems to be more like 1 in 25 around here (I’m including Denver too).
Didn’t you know? Thats where we hide, I’m in your molding looking at you as you read this.
It’s even funnier when someone chimes in with irreverent, unfounded insults.
Fascinating thread - I’ll admit to being a skimmer, so I might have missed this, but where’s the posts about the morality of using up a limited resource more rapidly than necessary? I’m not thinking of people who use SUVs to help run a farm or something - I’m thinking of the huge number of SUV drivers in Chicagoland, where there is no off-road and they do an excellent job of plowing the highways in winter.
I recall this series of events from a couple of summers ago - perhaps it was just a coincidence, but… CNN did a piece on the popularity of SUVs and interviewed this guy at a gas station in California, asking him about the higher cost of driving such a fuel inefficient vehicle. And he said (apprx) “Well, we’re the wealthiest people on earth and we really like these SUVs and we’re gonna drive whatever we want. It wouldn’t matter how much the gasoline cost, we could afford it.” My jaw fell. And don’tcha know, gas prices shot up a couple of weeks later. I just couldn’t help wonder if Sheik something-or-another wasn’t tuning in on his satellite dish & happened to catch that.
As far as “need”, the Toyota Matrix holds an amazing amount of stuff. Even my little Ford Focus hatchback will carry everything I need for an art fair, from booth to walls to artwork. Interestingly enough, a motorcyclist was asking me about its mileage (30 mpg, which is not as good as I’d hoped) and remarked that it was much better than what his bike got! But the car I wish they still made is the Honda CRX; now that puppy moved & was about 45 mpg.
blowero I’m glad to see you using your powers for good 
I Love Me I like your Jesus characterizations.
All the anti-SUV people here have convinced me to go out and get the Kenworth Pilgrimage.
Thanks for helping me make my decision.
If by “irreverant” you mean disrespectful, then you’re right. I don’t have respect for most SUV owners.
“Unfounded” is incorrect though. The reality is that the vast majority of SUV owners in the US do so because of image, trendiness, etc.
I don’t see how anyone could legitimately dispute this.
Good for you! Carry that biased flag tall and proud!
I missed this comment from a previous post.
Yes, this is pretty much what I have been saying all along. I assume you do not have an SUV. I have had either a 4x4 truck, or SUV or both for 27 years. I believe this puts me in a good position to understand how useful (or not) these vehicles are. I believe that I am in a better position to understand what other people may be using these vehicles for since I have so much experience with them.
Many of the anti-SUV folks (not necessarily you BLOWERO) base their judgment of SUV need on what they see on the way to work every day. They see someone else going to work in a bigger vehicle and it pisses them off. Claim they don’t need such a big car. We don’t know what that car is used for on other days.
I’m the kinda guy that believes you shouldn’t judge anyone until you walk a mile in their shoes.