My Second Rant About SUV's

[Joey D]

Alright I've about had it with these people saying that I'm the one hurting this country because I own a SUV, and how a two wheel drive, lowered, 2 door vechile can be a SUV is beyond me. I personally think that these people need to give it a break.

There is a new TV spot that pushes for 40mpg vechiles and that SUV drivers are the cause of the war in Iraq. Well lets see I can think of one car that gets at least 40mpg and that is the 1.8T Jetta which is stickered to get 49. I know stickers are never right though. Also what about us who can't shell out 30g's on a deisle powered german car? I don't tell people who drive Toyota Pirus's to go and get a better car, so why should they tell me that? I love my Blazer its the best vechile I've owned. It gets so-so mileage but I can live with it.

I also hate how somehow SUV owners are the cause over a war that had to do with removing an evil dictator. Explain that one to me and you get a cookie. FIrst I'm a terrorist now I'm a war instagator.....please spare me!

Grant it I see no point in owning a Hummer if your not going to off road it but what am I to tell the person they can't drive it. Its their money and they can do why they like with it. Also its none of my business what you own.

So ya I'm upset with this as you can tell. Don't blame me for a war that I had nothing to do with.

 

[Gil]

I'm with you all the way Joe.
Another thing you didn't mention is that even at 49 miles per gallon you'd have to drive the thing for aboout 50 years to justify the purchase price to fuel savings.
Peter Egan (my hero) of Road and Track did a "Side Glances" piece on the Oldsmobile Cutlass 4-door he owns. It's an 80's model and it gets over 30 mpg. Proof positive that I don't have to be relagated to some unattractive teeny box of a car to meet some environmentalist's idea of what is "politically and environmentally correct" at this moment. Mr. Egan's point was that if you switch vehicles to save money on gas, or just to save gas, factor in the cost of the vehicle and you have to do mental acrobatics to justify spending $30,000 on a car that will save you $2.00 a tank on gas.
If they want to be the next big thing in environmental causes. Lets ban Styrofoam cups and plates. Recycle your plastic bottles and aluminium cans, and foil.

*Edit*
Actually my math is way off. Assuming 52 fill-ups a year, that works out to $104 a year, so to extrapolate out, that 50 years is actually closer to 300.

 

[milefile]

A car of mine that died last year, a '91 Sentra, was getting the same mileage as my '98 Grand Cherokee. If I was unable to have replaced it and had to keep driving it I wonder if I'd be responsible for the war since it got such bad mileage? Then they could make an ad that says the war in Iraq was/is because ofpoor people with crappy, inefficient cars.

I hate the Escalade, Navigator, and Hummer.

I also hate all so-called SUV's made by:Mercedes Benz, Lexus, Porche, Acura, Olsmobile, Pontiac, Infiniti.

Also the new generation of slick SUV's from: Infiniti, Nissan, Isuzu.

There are just so many. But I gotta tell ya I think these Escalades with 20" rims are simply assenine. I think the new watered down Hummers are, too.

I remember when it used to be Jeep, 4Runner, Pathfinder, Blazer, Bronco, and Landrover.

I also don't think a vehicle like an Escalade should be called an SUV. There is nothing sporty or utilitarian about them.

 

[1X83Z]

I'm going to say this just once, so take note.

The only reason Americans buy SUV's is because of the common stereotype (by the SAME people who hate SUV's) against minivans and station wagons (bad drivers, soccer moms, etc.).

 

[1X83Z]

Originally posted by milefile
A car of mine that died last year, a '91 Sentra, was getting the same mileage as my '98 Grand Cherokee. If I was unable to have replaced it and had to keep driving it I wonder if I'd be responsible for the war since it got such bad mileage? Then they could make an ad that says the war in Iraq was/is because ofpoor people with crappy, inefficient cars.

I hate the Escalade, Navigator, and Hummer.

I also hate all so-called SUV's made by:Mercedes Benz, Lexus, Porche, Acura, Olsmobile, Pontiac, Infiniti.

Hopefully you're not saying these are bad vehicles, just that you don't like the terminology.

Also the new generation of slick SUV's from: Infiniti, Nissan, Isuzu.

I do believe Isuzu has been making SUV's longer than just about any manufacturer currently doing so today.

I remember when it used to be Jeep, 4Runner, Pathfinder, Blazer, Bronco, and Landrover.

I had a Land Rover, it sucked - don't blame people if they want to get rid of what is clearly dated.

 

[1X83Z]

Originally posted by streetracer780

There is a new TV spot that pushes for 40mpg vechiles and that SUV drivers are the cause of the war in Iraq. Well lets see I can think of one car that gets at least 40mpg and that is the 1.8T Jetta which is stickered to get 49. I know stickers are never right though. Also what about us who can't shell out 30g's on a deisle powered german car?

One of my girlfriend's best friends has a Jetta TDi and it gets 52 or 53 MPG regularly. It was also vaguely more than $21,000 - not exactly "30g's," but I understand your point.

 

[milefile]

Originally posted by M5Power


Hopefully you're not saying these are bad vehicles, just that you don't like the terminology.[/b]

They are superfluous vehicles. That's what I'm saying. They are poser, shabby chic vehicles.

I do believe Isuzu has been making SUV's longer than just about any manufacturer currently doing so today.

You are right. But they have a model called the Axiom that is specifically marketed to those who think they need an SUV but will never use said SUV for anything related to sport or utility. The Isuzu trucks you are talking about that one can see in safari documentaries from the seventies don't apply here because they were never sold in America to begin with. Except the Rodeo, which is junk.

I had a Land Rover, it sucked - don't blame people if they want to get rid of what is clearly dated.

Sorry your Land Rover sucked. Why did you buy it? My Grand Cherokee is great. It's my second Jeep. No it doesn't have leather, heated seats, a plethora of doo-dads on the dash to amuse and distract me from driving, obscenely large chrome rims with stupidly low profile tires that are totally useless in any situation where "sport" or "utility" would be of any value, or that weak but cool sounding "full time all wheel drive." It does have true 4WD, dual airbags, 4WABS, a motor powerful enough for anything I'll ever want to do with it, and tires and wheels that allow me to use it for what I bought it for, going where cars can't.

All in all, this rash of SUVs is pointless. It's so people who do not do something, namely, go offroading or exploring the countryside in their truck, can associate themselves with those who do. It is called buying an image and that is dispicable. Furthermore it has started a backlash that I (and others) am now unwillingly associated with.

Go offroad sometime and tell me what kinds of vehicles you see. You will see (old) 4Runners, Jeeps, and pickup trucks. I have yet to see even an original Hummer let alone a BMW or Porche.

And to bring up something about my thread regarding the Nissan Murano... It is being marketed as an ouotdoorsy type SUV with the slogan "have an out of city experience," showing the vehicle zipping through paved mountain passes. That would be more fun in an M3. No?

 

[Pupik]

I'm not anti-SUV...just anti-SUV-driver-that-thinks-they're-invincible-and-everyone-else-ought-to-move-out-of-their-way.

The terrorist nonsence is absurdity. I seriously doubt Ariana Huffington drives a Toyota Prius or Civic Hybrid.

 

[Duke]

Originally posted by M5Power
I'm going to say this just once, so take note.
The only reason Americans buy SUV's is because of the common stereotype (by the SAME people who hate SUV's) against minivans and station wagons (bad drivers, soccer moms, etc.).

Speaking as a person whose first new car was a minivan (which I still own and use on a regular basis), I disagree wholeheartedly. It's not people who hate minivans that also hate SUVs. Rather, it is people who buy SUVs that hate minivans, and are desperate to avoid that exact same stereotype... despite the fact that they themselves conform to it perfectly.

I love minivans. If you gave me an SUV I would only own it long enough to sell it and use the sucker's cash to buy another minivan, PLUS a used Miata to go race in Spec Miata. Two cars, both of which are better suited to their respective missions, for the price of one vehicle that isn't really suited for anything except to mask the "personal shortcomings" of its owner.

 

[Gil]

With few exceptions SUV's are pretty much really tall station-wagons.
It is funny to me, as one who grew up in the era when station wagons were what your mom drove to fetch kids and go to the store and ball practice.
Now the "Super-Station Wagon" has taken over that job for modern moms. The difference is that the SUV is "manly" enough for dad to drive (to church on Sunday, and for family tips) without embarassment.

I still find the really big ones to be rather a pain. Though I was almost lured into looking lustfully at a TrailBlazer the other day at the Chevy dealer.

 

[Joey D]

I raelly like the trailblazer. If I would have had 30k when I went into the dealer I would have bought that.

I dislike minivans just because I'm not a minivan type.

 

[Gil]

The one I looked at in the showroom was near $40K.
But it had leather, gps, the keys to Air force one, etc....
And it was that innocuous chalk white that I'm becoming quite fond of.
We were waiting for the Service Dept. to be done with my wife's van. I HATED the bright yellow Monte Carlo. Too much yellow paint, too much body cladding, it was just too much...
I was looking rather favorably at the Alero's too.

 

[rjensen11]

Originally posted by neon_duke
I love minivans. If you gave me an SUV I would only own it long enough to sell it and use the sucker's cash to buy another minivan, PLUS a used Miata to go race in Spec Miata. Two cars, both of which are better suited to their respective missions, for the price of one vehicle that isn't really suited for anything except to mask the "personal shortcomings" of its owner.

A Miata? For shame.... I'd rather get a used police car or state patrol car at a police auction...

But minivans are actually useful. If you take out the back seat, you have quite a bit of space, and if you take out the back seat as well as the middle seats, you have a lot of cargo space. I kind of like my family's '99 Town & Country LXI. Maybe it's just because I know I'll get stuck with the '93 Dodge Caravan with over 160k miles on it.... Who knows, maybe I'll get the '93 Intrepid instead....

 

[1X83Z]

Originally posted by milefile
They are superfluous vehicles. That's what I'm saying. They are poser, shabby chic vehicles.

Pontiac does not make any SUV's, and Oldsmobile officially no longer exists. As a heads-up. What would you prefer Lexus RX300 owners purchase?

You are right. But they have a model called the Axiom that is specifically marketed to those who think they need an SUV but will never use said SUV for anything related to sport or utility.

Where's the money in the segment, man? You can't blame GM-owned Isuzu for trying out their truck image where they can make some serious money.

Sorry your Land Rover sucked. Why did you buy it?

Bought it in 1996 when it didn't suck - sold it in 2002 when it was well behind the competition. They still haven't changed the interior since '96.

My Grand Cherokee is great. It's my second Jeep. No it doesn't have leather, heated seats, a plethora of doo-dads on the dash to amuse and distract me from driving, obscenely large chrome rims with stupidly low profile tires that are totally useless in any situation where "sport" or "utility" would be of any value, or that weak but cool sounding "full time all wheel drive." It does have true 4WD, dual airbags, 4WABS, a motor powerful enough for anything I'll ever want to do with it, and tires and wheels that allow me to use it for what I bought it for, going where cars can't.

You could have all that and style with the 1997 Grand Cherokee TSi V8 4wd... if only I could find one.

All in all, this rash of SUVs is pointless. It's so people who do not do something, namely, go offroading or exploring the countryside in their truck, can associate themselves with those who do. It is called buying an image and that is dispicable. Furthermore it has started a backlash that I (and others) am now unwillingly associated with.

Would you prefer SUV owners chose between either a Volvo V70 or a Subaru Outback? Lexus, Acura, Honda, Jeep, GM (excepting Saturn), basically everything makes no station wagons. Not that the stereotype baby boomers have behind wagons is more favourable than SUV stereotypes from "real SUV owners." Same problem for minivans.

I have yet to see even an original Hummer

Trust me - the original Hummer could best the offroad abilities of any vehicle ever sold in this country.

And to bring up something about my thread regarding the Nissan Murano... It is being marketed as an ouotdoorsy type SUV with the slogan "have an out of city experience," showing the vehicle zipping through paved mountain passes. That would be more fun in an M3. No?

Maybe in a non-existent M3 wagon...

 

[1X83Z]

Originally posted by neon_duke
Speaking as a person whose first new car was a minivan (which I still own and use on a regular basis), I disagree wholeheartedly. It's not people who hate minivans that also hate SUVs. Rather, it is people who buy SUVs that hate minivans,

You misunderstand what I'm saying.

Car owners created such an anti-minvan stereotype in the early 1990's that they had to completely re-design minivans to try to break the mold of the generalisation. People who still didn't want that stereotype got SUV's. Basically, if you want to haul a family, you're going to get a look (excepting maybe in an Outback or Forester, which are great choices) from car owners. I've heard fairly sensible car owners on this very website insult both minivans and SUV's owners and driving abilities meaning that if you want to have a family and carry it too, you're plum out of luck as far as social view is concerned. And since Lexus makes no minivan, why not try and bump up your social status as much as possible with their SUV?

On a side topic, a good friend of mine has a family of seven young children and a large German Shepard. I tried to convince them not to, but in the end they got a nearly new Ford Excursion. What else could they have done? I'd like to see a minivan seat seven plus more than a few suitcases.

I love minivans. If you gave me an SUV I would only own it long enough to sell it and use the sucker's cash to buy another minivan, PLUS a used Miata to go race in Spec Miata. Two cars, both of which are better suited to their respective missions, for the price of one vehicle that isn't really suited for anything except to mask the "personal shortcomings" of its owner.

I love minivans too - I've said before that the best-looking vehicle for sale today (by a wide margin) is the cherry red Dodge Grand Caravan Sport with alloys. Besides, since when were SUV's actually designed to go off-road? Honda's CRV hasn't got a working 4wd system, and recent offerings from Ford, Honda, Kia, Toyota, and Mitsubishi haven't got the ground clearance for actual off-roading. Perhaps SUV's were designed for the same things minivans were before people quit buying minivans.

 

[Gil]

M5,
I love my "mini-van". I rarely get to drive it as it is my wife's car.
Like your friend we have a lot of kids, (6) and we wanted a mini-van with room for all eight of us and the ability to be parked in the garage. The only vehicle that fit the bill was the Chevy Venture. And you have to order it with eight seats or be lucky enough to find one used that is so equipped.

I had poor luck with my Dodge Van, and It sits out on the street waiting its second major rebuild now. It will be for the kids to drive around town. But I've been "poisoned" to the idea of another new Mopar product in my driveway. Though I'll consider a 1970 Challenger with a 383 and a Torque-flite tranny.

 

[Duke]

Hey, Gil, what was wrong with the Mopar mini? Our '92 Caravan (which admittedly only has 80,000 miles on it) has never given us a lick of trouble, and is set to last for the rest of my natural life, considering it is garaged and only driven when needed for utilitarian purposes.

 

[Gil]

First off it's a 4-cyl. And it's been asked to carry my wife to work daily and carry all eight of us to church and family functions.
It would probably still be kicking if it were equipped with a 3.3 liter V-6.
But at that time in our lives the "Gray Beast" was at the proper price point and our kidlets were little.
But with it needing a major rebuild at 60,000 miles I soured on it then.
It has needed major engine work twice since then. AS a result, I have a low trust level for Mopar Products. But it is heartening to know that the 2.5 liter 4 cyl. No longer is offered in the mini-van.