Well, it’s not like the Amish could honk.
See, I don’t “dislike” anyone based on what type of car they drive. It’s an adult version of “I won’t be your friend because I don’t like your shoes.”
I do take my Wrangler places non- 4WD cars can’t go; nonetheless I still don’t need it, anymore that people need boats or 150-pound mastiffs. My primary reason for buying it was that it was a convertible, and I wanted a convertible. Pure, unbridled consumer desire there.
As far as a defense: taken as a whole plenty of people who hate SUVs but keep the house at 70 in the middle of summer, have a dozen pets and two dozen pairs of shoes, eat foods flown in from foreign countries and fly themselves on vacation twice a year. Anyone can feel free to hate me and/or my “lifestyle choice;” but unless the speaker lives some sort of ecologically pristine lifestyle, I’ll just smirk at both the hypocrisy and the stupidity of fixating on one consumer good as if eliminating that will solve anything.
Ok, now that was funny!
Well said.
And just to add to that: Thinking that one can judge whether another person can possibly get value out of, say 4wd or the additional carrying space of an SUV, without knowing the exact details of the situations that person may find themself in, seems like incredibly limited thinking.
I’m still trying to figure out how someone else can tell by looking at me one day whether or not I “need” my vehicle. I guess that by seeing my face, you can tell if I raise giant breed dogs, or have a family farm, or have a horse I occasionally trailer, or have a mountain cabin, or whatever, or if I’m just a damned yuppie scum.
Wow. Can you guys see through walls, too?
:rolleyes:
Heh. I agree. We are now pushing 56" of snow here since September.
Already stuck two vehicles this year in snow :shamed: (lived through this for 15 years) But in my defense, we are talking about the shit factory tires that came on them.
But, you may see me in Denver, or in Vegas with my Wife when she does her first triathlon. The Pathfinder will do great getting us there and hopefully back home again.
My Wife’s Grand is stuck at the bottom of the drive tonight. Yokahamma Geolanders on it. Garbage. My new Pathfinder has BFG Rugged trails on it. Equally garbage.
If you see me in Denver, with a bit of an aggressive tire on a civilized looking SUV, don’t immediately think that I am trying to make some sort of statement. I may just be making sure that I can get home.
I have tried (two or three times) to post a smartass reply, but every time the server belched at me or something. Anyhow, a random thought on stuff like Porsche making an SUV:
You can buy a Lamborghini laptop now. 
It’s rather simple. Unless you have a genuine need for it, and many people don’t, owning an SUV is an act of selfishness, conspicuous consumption, and disregard for your fellow human beings and the planet.
You ever go through a drive through and then end up pitching the bag and little plastic spork? Do you have your own home that has rooms in it that you don’t use? Ever water your grass? Do you ever throw away food? Do you ever build a fire just because it’s pretty?
So, while I see your point, unless you are Amish (as another poster said), you really are a hypocrite to complain about someone’s SUV. It would be like me bitching about your fur coat as I munch on a good t-bone.
Actually, I quite disagree. TVeblen’s consumption theory is entirely inapplicable here, and I’ll say why. A car is bought for more than simply normal use. It is purchased for all possible uses. In a one car house, that one car must perform all deeds up to and possibly including moving van. In a two car household, one car still needs to be bought for all possible deeds. This is what gave rise to the minivan mom, and the successor of the SUV mom, as the dominant male of the household tended to get the more impressive, faster, or less annoying car. The female of the house wound up with the more secure and more durable vehicle, especially as the shopping tended to be her tasks.
What the SUV is, is a result of the growing disassociation of the american population. People have fewer good friends in their own neighborhood, being closer to their coworkers, who tend to live further away. Thus, it is no longer as possible to ‘borrow Pete’s truck’ as Pete no longer is next door, but the guy in the next cubicle. Therefore, the truck, which is needed in bad times and for excessive carrying capacity, has to be owned for more people.
For many people, having at least one truck-class vehicle around is a necessity, therefore. Adding bling to it, going from a Grand Cherokee to an Escalade, is a matter of social priorities, and a matter of consumption, but not a matter of conspicuous consumption by definition. The lily is gilded, but it is not a unnecessary lily to begin with.
In short, the growing number of SUVs is directly related, among other things, to the choice of Americans for cars over mass transit, and for commutes over local work.
I’d argue that the rise of the SUV is directly connected to the fall of the muscle car. When muscle cars were made extinct due to the oil embargo of the 70s and the emmissions restrictions, there was a big void in the car market for masculine vehicles. This led to the slow growth of the SUV, beginning with the Jeep Wrangler, Wagoneer, and Cherokee, and growing steadily until we have the situation we have now.
Hmmm… My first car was a boat :)…. Actually a ’62 Olds 98. I could put my ten-speed in the trunk. I once carried my Yamaha dirtbike in the trunk (had to take off the handle bars.)
My next ‘car’ was a truck.
I think that SUVs are a response to the lack of decent sized cars in the 80-90’s. I chuckle when people complain about how big SUV’s are and then think about my parents ’72 Chrysler Town and Country wagon.
I own an ’06 Pathfinder. I consider it to be at the top end (size wise) of the mid-sized class. A bit bigger than a Grand Jeep. Note that IMHO, the majority of SUV’s out there are at the lower end of the mid-sized class. Highlanders and such.
The Chrysler Wagon is 3 feet longer than My Pathfinder.
With standard equipment, the Chrysler is four pounds lighter than my Pathfinder. Yet my Pathfinder has lots and lots of extra safety equipment, not to mention that it’s a 4x4. Four pounds.
The base model Chrysler at four pounds lighter didn’t have air-conditioning, or even a clock.
The V8 in the Chrysler put out 190hp. My Pathfinder V6 puts out 270, and gets about 50% better mileage while being more environmentally friendly. Things are getting better, not worse. The Chrysler could be expected to be retired at about 100,000 miles or so (if you’re lucky). I fully expect my Pathfinder to go 200,000 miles with no major problems and still be running strong. My last one did.
What’s to complain about here?
Disagreement. A: We are currently living in horsepower heaven, and the upturn in power was concurrent with the rise of the SUV. B: The SUV replaced the Minivan, in most places, not the car. It’s a Mommobile most men can drive.
So maybe it’s a weird side effect of increasing equality between women and men in the workplace? Both a case of moms needing something big and powerful to drive around in, and dad finding themselves being the moms in terms of domestic transport duties?
I mean, that’s probably not all of it, but it’s possibly part of it.