SUV's. What's the attraction?

Y'all still at it? 

Funny thing is, they be bitching about Suburban sized vehicles mostly, and those are not a SPORT utility vehicle.  They are considered a Ranch Wagon in my jurisdiction.

A CRV gets close to the same mileage as an Accord.  The roof is a bit higher, the visibility is a bit better, and it has a hatch on the back to carry junk.  I'm quite sure the people driving CRV's like them, and you really can't justify abuse of the Earths precious resources as a reason to want to kill the owners of them.

My XC90 can carry several people a thousand miles a day, it can tow my small race car, I can sleep in the back of it, and it gets better gas mileage than my 66 Delta 88 did.  I could own a commuter car, a pickup truck, and a van to do all those things, (I do own most of those things, but ignore that while I'm preaching) but the Volvo can do all of them, reasonably well.

Some of us live in a part of the country where AWD is a nice feature.  A little extra ride height helps on some January days, too.  Easier to get in an SUV.

Just to jump to the other side for a moment-  What the hell "Sport" am I supposed to do in my Volvo?  Deliver the kids to a soccer game?  Stupid name.

TL;DR Version:  Some people like other things than you, and that doesn't give you the right to hunt and kill them.

MrJoshua said:

Daylan C said:

In reply to MrJoshua :

That free market got told it wanted SUVs when the wagons got killed off.

I wish wagons or minivans towed more. I would own one again.

A Gen IV powered rear drive wagon would convince me to trade my GMT800 for one. 

Generally the only people that ask why SUVs exist are people who live in cities.

For the past 15 years I've driven a 00 explorer in some scary E36 M3, like.....feet of snow and mud many inches deep. I live 20 plus miles off a paved road that is plowed only when the school bus comes by. Station wagons are great, my dad has arguably the most truck like minivan made. Neither are making it where my SUV goes and HAS to go at times. Sure a truck is cool for adverse conditions but an SUV has the same drivetrain and can cover all your stuff.

And when moved to the city, I kept it. Guess what we drove when the city literally pulled the plows off the roads?

Daylan C said:

In reply to MrJoshua :

That free market got told it wanted SUVs when the wagons got killed off.

The free market was advertised to using the free market BY the free market.

And yet no one from the Government is holding a gun to anyone's head to force them to purchase one. Unlike it was for health insurance a few years ago. And if anyone questions the force/gun part, let me know.

I wish wagons or minivans towed more. I would own one again.

That begs a question that i'm honestly too lazy to earnestly research: Do cars use the same test regimen that trucks do to determine their tow ratings? If so, are they simply not being tested to their limits, or are manufacturers simply choosing to rate them in a very generic and imprecise manner? Like, why do full size trucks get rated to single hundreds of lbs which inch up with every generation, while pretty much all non-trucks get rated in the same tight cluster of 500-lb increments which has basically not changed in 20-30 years?   I know trucks compete on tow ratings so i only bring them up to illustrate the dichotomy, but i'm really interested in the non-truck side of that question.

Antihero said:

Generally the only people that ask why SUVs exist are people who live in cities.

I mean it's something like 85% of the US population that live in cities.

But I completely see the point of SUVs unlike others getting upset about something that doesn't impact them.

z31maniac said:

Antihero said:

Generally the only people that ask why SUVs exist are people who live in cities.

I mean it's something like 85% of the US population that live in cities.

But I completely see the point of SUVs unlike others getting upset about something that doesn't impact them.

 

My uncle was always against SUVs, kept telling me that I was killing the environment etc

When I went and saw him, first thing he did was ask me to pickup a bike for him because it didn't fit in his Camry lol

In reply to Antihero :

I love hearing people say those things! I make sure to ask them if it's ok that their (Camry in this case) is doing the same damage to the earth but just 20% slower. I like to watch THEM squirm trying to justify that. I make sure to add that if they actually cared they'd walk to work and anything less makes them a hypocrite.   

And about saving the environment, which burns less fuel on a daily commute: a Jeep Wrangler Unlimited or a Ducati 939 Hypermotard?  If you said the Ducati, you’re wrong.  The reason is because the Jeep comes directly home where as the Ducati runs an additional 45 or so miles up and over mountain passes before its pilot is finally ready for dinner and therefore points it home.

My point is that ALL unnecessary driving could be considered harmful to the environment if that’s the argument you want to try and make.  So you autocrossing your Miata are just as guilty as the guy driving the Ford Excursion when it comes to unnecessary pollution and waste.  

In reply to A 401 CJ :

Nice take!

In reply to A 401 CJ :

Excuse me, my excursion is diesel so "it's better for the environment than gas vehicles" 

In reply to ebonyandivory :

I made that argument once to him, he didn't believe my explorer was getting a little over 20mpg

Antihero said:

In reply to ebonyandivory :

I made that argument once to him, he didn't believe my explorer was getting a little over 20mpg

I had an expedition recently for a rental that was getting mid 20s.  It had the TT v6.

My SUV is old, smells funny, makes loud noises, and fits right in out here in Rural Idaho...

It also sees dirt on a weekly basis, if not more often. My wife’s Yukon is not as old or smelly or loud, but it’s great when there are two foot drifts of snow on the roads, or camping with the kids.

Daylan C said:

In reply to MrJoshua :

The SUV towing and people hauling niche definitely exists. But that doesn't explain the small ones that can't tow and why everyone suddenly decided they were cool.

Because reasons. It can tow the small utility trailer with no issues, too.

Ian F said:

In reply to Kreb :

A number of my cycling friends have Elements and love them. One friend is on her second one.

I had 2 of them, loved them. Only got rid of them so I could actually tow with my SUV. 2004 Suburban

Cotton said:

Antihero said:

In reply to ebonyandivory :

I made that argument once to him, he didn't believe my explorer was getting a little over 20mpg

I had an expedition recently for a rental that was getting mid 20s.  It had the TT v6.

I couldn't get to 20 with the one we rented this summer, even loafing it below 65 on the state roads. I suspect that was since it only had about 85 miles on it when we picked it up.

Turned it back in with about 500 miles, and sure wasn't trying to conserve fuel the last two days.

Cotton said:

Antihero said:

In reply to ebonyandivory :

I made that argument once to him, he didn't believe my explorer was getting a little over 20mpg

I had an expedition recently for a rental that was getting mid 20s.  It had the TT v6.

This is a 00 explorer so 22mpg is about the limit it can realistically get

I think being a hypocrite is part and parcel of being a "green complainer".

They seem to believe electricity comes from elves and their hybrid was grown in a terrarium from a tiny, little seed.

Even electricity from coal is cleaner than gas-fueled cars. Hybrid/electrics have bigger ramifications in terms of rare earths and recyclability than how they get their electricity.

Vigo said:

Even electricity from coal is cleaner than gas-fueled cars. 

 

I think we are in full agreement.

And that's my point exactly: that some people like to preach to others simply because they're 20% "not-as-bad".
 

Kinda like the one gang member that beat the victim 20% less than the other thugs. Congratulations, you're a true gentleman!