Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Are you happy you didn't sell your SUV?

135

Comments

  • larsblarsb Posts: 8,204
    Gary says, "There are just some people like myself that really like driving a PU truck or an SUV"

    Which profile fits you Gary?

    1. According to Bradsher, internal industry market research concluded that S.U.V.s tend to be bought by people who are insecure, vain, self-centered, and self-absorbed, who are frequently nervous about their marriages, and who lack confidence in their driving skills.

    2. Over the past decade, a number of major automakers in America have relied on the services of a French-born cultural anthropologist, G. Clotaire Rapaille, whose speciality is getting beyond the rational—what he calls "cortex"—impressions of consumers and tapping into their deeper, "reptilian" responses. And what Rapaille concluded from countless, intensive sessions with car buyers was that when S.U.V. buyers thought about safety they were thinking about something that reached into their deepest unconscious. "The No. 1 feeling is that everything surrounding you should be round and soft, and should give," Rapaille told me. "There should be air bags everywhere. Then there's this notion that you need to be up high. That's a contradiction, because the people who buy these S.U.V.s know at the cortex level that if you are high there is more chance of a rollover. But at the reptilian level they think that if I am bigger and taller I'm safer. You feel secure because you are higher and dominate and look down. That you can look down is psychologically a very powerful notion.

    So where do you fall Gary? Which of those categories fit you?
  • boaz47boaz47 Posts: 2,750
    Is this is almost always a one sided argument. SUV and Truck owners hardly ever even mention small cars or small car owners. Yes they mention Prius owners but mostly because they believe the Prius is one ugly car not that it shouldn't be on the road. SUV owners never start a forum on why someone shouldn't buy a small car or hybrid.

    I have had a lot of cars and trucks in all my years of driving and in my experience the larger sample of the smaller car is almost always more comfortable. I have had three compact trucks and they have done their job quite well. Still when I replaced them with a full sized truck the full sized one was simply able to do more of what the compact truck did and do it with some extra comfort.

    I am sure some of the SUVs popularity was image because Mini Vans have the image of being a woman's people hauler. I didn't say it was justified only that is the image. But image is just part of the utility of a Pick-up or SUV. They are able to take that off road trip a lot easier than a Mini Van or small Sedan. They can Tow more than their own weight. And they have room to stretch out when you are on the road. All these are reasons that people that have a Truck or SUV used to purchase their vehicles. Somehow that very line of reasoning seems to anger people who don't take off road trips or tow anything or want the security of 4WD in the snow.

    The fact that small car owners don't want to or have time to do these things doesn't anger SUV and truck owners. Why should what other people want to drive bother someone else?
  • larsblarsb Posts: 8,204
    boaz47 says, "The fact that small car owners don't want to or have time to do these things doesn't anger SUV and truck owners. Why should what other people want to drive bother someone else? "

    Is that rhetorical or do you really want an answer?
  • jimbresjimbres Posts: 2,025
    According to Bradsher, internal industry market research concluded that S.U.V.s tend to be bought by people who are insecure, vain, self-centered, and self-absorbed, who are frequently nervous about their marriages, and who lack confidence in their driving skills.

    C'mon, Larry. This stuff is fuzzy social science: interesting as far as it goes, but nothing that will stand up to close scrutiny. It's an op ed piece with a few footnotes. (If you've spent much time on the campus of a large university, you'll notice how insecure social scientists are when their work is compared to that of real scientists - like physicists or chemists.)

    Here's another perspective on Bradsher's "research":

    Is Big Bad?
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Central CTPosts: 9,972
    which of those 2 catagories describes you best(mister ex suburban owner)? :P
    i'm in #3, wanted wagon all weather/bad road capabilties/no drama.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,173
    I think in his quest to prove his theory he left out many options. Like running down a sandy wash in the desert. Or getting through an 8500 ft pass in the mountains to a cabin. Or just not having a vehicle so low to the ground that it scrapes on the bumpers in the grocery parking lot. Or like our LS400 you have to hit a driveway sideways or it will scrape the under carriage of the car. All part of the planned obsolescence of todays foo foo cars. I would imagine the difference in insurance will just about cover the difference in gas over a year. Not to mention getting in and out of todays low slung cars is probably not good for the back. Your hatred of SUVs will probably get this thread shut down long before it reaches 60,000 posts like the last one.

    Did I mention I like to sit upright when I drive. I cannot do that in many cars built today. As my head touches the headliner.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,173
    It looks like Bradher is a reporter trying to act like he knows what he is talking about. I liked this part of your post.

    Moreover, the largest SUVs, those over 5,000 pounds (e.g., Ford Expeditions, Chevy Tahoes, and Toyota Land Cruisers), had a lower rate than any other class of vehicle available: 92. The poorest-performing SUV category was the smallest: The under -3,000 pound vehicles, such as the 1997 Geo Tracker.

    The death rate for this class, 195 per million, was more than double that of the biggest SUVs. But even these models outperformed minicars, whose death rate of 249 per million was the worst of any vehicle (unlike their fuel efficiency, which is tops). The smallest SUVs have been upsized over the years, moreover, and so there are practically no new SUV models in this least-crashworthy category.

    In short, SUVs are probably as safe or safer than cars as a class. Moreover, those who choose the most despised SUV models (the largest ones) for safety reasons are not making a mistake.


    So that is another important option Bradsher left out of his analysis, Survival. I don't want to be the victim of a runaway hybrid that has short circuited and accelerates at full speed into my vehicle. :shades:
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,173
    New Report Says Ford Escape Hybrid Taxis Are Unsafe in Accidents

    Maybe little SUVs are not safe after all :sick: I think I will hail a Crown Vic thank you very much..

    The ongoing battle over the safety of hybrid taxicabs took another turn today as the Metropolitan Taxicab Board of Trade released another study, this time disparaging the safety of the Ford Escape Hybrid in accidents and especially in rollovers when fitted for taxi use. The report comes on the heels of several high-profile rollover accidents involving Ford Escape Hybrid taxicabs, which have resulted in the total loss of the taxis and the hospitalization of drivers and occupants.

    In the report, engineer and crash-reconstruction expert C. Bruce Gambardella reviewed a specific rollover crash involving an Escape Hybrid taxi and found that the side-curtain airbag failed to deploy normally because there wasn't enough room between the Taxi and Limousine Commission-mandated partition and the roof of the vehicle. The report also found the partition interfered with the seatbelt because it changed the mounting point of the seatbelt, and that the partition had come loose during the crash and could have resulted in a major head injury had there been a passenger in the front seat.

    In comparing the accident with a similar scenario involving a Ford Crown Victoria taxi, Gambardella found that "the Ford Crown Victoria, due to its wide track and very low center of gravity, would have been very unlikely to rollover." In his professional opinion, Gambardella said, "If a Ford Crown Victoria had been involved, the accident would have been a simple fender-bender."


    Don't ride in a hybrid taxi
  • andre1969andre1969 Posts: 22,150
    Not to mention getting in and out of todays low slung cars is probably not good for the back.

    Hmm, now that you mention it, maybe that's the reason I drive my '85 Silverado these days, more often than I drive my '00 Intrepid. It's just more comfy IMO. Easier to get into and out of. And sitting high up the way it does, the seat gives me good thigh support in spite of the fact that there's really not much room to stretch my legs. Something about the shape of the seat hits my back just right, too, whereas my Intrepid forces me into a bit of a slouching position. I've actually noticed that about many modern cars...very poor lower back support...unless you spring for power lumbar support, I guess.

    I have to take my 84 year old grandmother to the doctor for checkups and such on occasion, and she can actually get into the truck more easily than she can the Intrepid.

    Some of the newer trucks and SUVs might be worse than my Silverado, though. We tried to get her in my friend's '06 Xterra once, and she had trouble, mainly because of the position of the running board. And my Mom & stepdad have a 1998 Expedition that Grandmom always hated. Hard to get in and out of, plus neither of them could park it worth a damn, so if they ever went anywhere they'd park way out in the empty area of the parking lot and walk!
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Central CTPosts: 9,972
    the possible upside to that for us folks here in the northeast is that maybe more will be made available for retail sales.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,173
    It surprises me that NYC cab drivers can get up enough speed to roll one. I think a lot of it is political. The cab company is bucking Bloomberg's mandate for hybrid cabs. I just like to twist Larry's tail. He can be so anal about SUVs.
  • jimbresjimbres Posts: 2,025
    It's sort of funny that I should stick up for SUVs. I don't particularly like them - not because they're "environmentally irresponsible" (whatever that means) - but because they're just not fun to drive. My preferred poison is a fast sports sedan - preferably German & with 3 pedals on the floor - that I can push through a sharp curve at 25 mph over the posted limit. If I can't have that, I'd rather ride the train.

    But I can't sit still when someone claims that everyone who buys an SUV is an unhappily married bad driver. There's about as much real science behind that claim as there is behind the horoscope column in your local weekly classified ad throwaway. That's the kind of thinking that I'd expect from evolution-denying religious nuts.

    If you ask 25 people why they bought a particular car or truck, you'll probably get at least 20 different answers. People are complicated.
  • dave8697dave8697 Posts: 1,498
    I took a friends advice and got my younger son a Sonoma. The reason was only one other teen could also be in the car, lowering peer pressure to show off by doing something foolish. The egging on is greatly reduced and they can haul their stuff off to college later on. With his misbehaving, though, he can't have it for almost another year. I use it to commute. It has the 4.3, ext cab, and auto but manages very close to 24 mpg. Kids don't take care of their cars anyway. My older son was given a Mustang at 16 and he washed it once a year and waxed it only once in almost 4 years. He comes back from college with 3 month old bird crap on the front hood.

    The oldest was getting a break on insurance when he didn't have his car at college. This year he has it there and insurance almost tripled. I now pay $545 a year for liability only on a '99 for him. When he first got his liscence, I found out that a 16 yr old on any car with full coverage was $2400 a year, so the kids don't get newer cars that need full coverage. Especially if they don't take care of them.
  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,695
    everybody is hapy they kept their SUV, eh?! Big shocker there. :-P

    Surely we are not going to reopen the vitriolic IDLSWDY thread here under a new name?

    My fill-ups are back over $20 in my car, but not by much. Even the big-truck people are only spending $40-50 each time, they have to be pretty content.

    2013 Civic SI, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (stick)

  • steverstever Viva Las CrucesPosts: 41,963
    Surely we are not going to reopen the vitriolic IDLSWDY thread here under a new name?

    Bite your tongue. :P

    Moderator
    Minivan fan. Feel free to message or email me - stever@edmunds.com.

  • boaz47boaz47 Posts: 2,750
    "Is that rhetorical or do you really want an answer? "

    Because I have both types of vehicles I would like to know. It has never concerned me one bit what others drive or what people in other countries drive. I am secure in my choices. Oh I have fallen into trends now and then and at one time even bought designer jeans. But if my neighbor bought a Ford and I had a Chrysler I never had a second thought as to what was better for me. I have never understood the red cape syndrome of small car owners and tree huggers when it comes to SUVs.

    When I had my sail boat I understood the ribbing stink potters, power boaters, had for rag baggers. But that wasn't borderline pathological like the dislike some have for SUVs and Pick-ups.

    So what is it that makes small car people dislike what someone else buys? I for one don't care what someone else drives, what size house they live in or how many ATVs they own. If they worked for the money and can afford a Peterbuilt to drive to work, more power to them.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,173
    He comes back from college with 3 month old bird crap on the front hood.

    I think you are seeing a common trait with those that get a vehicle for nothing. My son was the same with the two different vehicles I bought him. Until someone works to buy their own they will not appreciate it. Even then many don't care. If they got easy money working in the family business etc. I like the idea of a small PU. I bought my son a 1994 Toyota PU and he pretty well trashed it in 5 years.
  • larsblarsb Posts: 8,204
    If you want a small car with a high clearance, buy a Subaru PZEV Outback.

    If you want a hybrid with a high clearance, buy an FEH.

    And any car can be slightly lifted for usually less than $1500.

    There are cars which solve those problems.
  • larsblarsb Posts: 8,204
    Ford could solve that problem by making a hybrid Crown Vic.

    Now that they have the FEH and the FFH, the technology is "in house."
  • hpmctorquehpmctorque Posts: 4,332
    "Ford could solve that problem by making a hybrid Crown Vic."

    Maybe hybrid or diesel Crown Vics, or, even better, diesel hybrib Crown Vics, would be the way to go for big city cabs. And a Lincoln Town car counterpart might make a good limo.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,173
    If you want a small car with a high clearance, buy a Subaru PZEV Outback.

    I actually like the looks of that vehicle. However it only gets 17 MPG in the city. To give up the comfort and room of the Sequoia for 2 MPG makes very little sense. When they bring in the diesel Outback I will take another look if I have not bought my final vehicle by then. I just do not like the Escape and you already know they are horribly over priced. I don't like getting screwed buying a vehicle.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,173
    So far no one has built a large vehicle with hybrid that is worth looking at. I don't see 3-4 MPG improvement worth $10k or more. That is strictly for eco weinies wanting people to believe they are environmentally astute.
  • nippononlynippononly SF Bay AreaPosts: 12,695
    However it only gets 17 MPG in the city

    Actually, it's 20. 18 for the turbo.

    http://www.subaru.com/

    2013 Civic SI, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (stick)

  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,173
    My only interest was in the Outback wagon with the 6 cylinder. It requires Premium which is another black mark against it. Cannot imagine a vehicle that big and heavy with a screaming 4 cylinder. Not my idea of a pleasant cruise down the highway listening to Rachmaninov. 2009 Outback has a worse pollution score than my 07 Sequoia. I see nothing convincing me to give up my SUV. That outback getting 40 MPG out on the highway is possible. The race is on and I am getting more in the mood to buy a diesel SUV. Now just waiting till Spring when VW brings a diesel SUV to our shores.
  • steverstever Viva Las CrucesPosts: 41,963
    Heh, I don't feel like I'm in all that big and heavy of a vehicle when I'm cruising around in my Outback with all the horse trailer towing rigs around here.

    Moderator
    Minivan fan. Feel free to message or email me - stever@edmunds.com.

  • boaz47boaz47 Posts: 2,750
    well I believe the Forester would be a better choice even though it is only 10 inches shorter than a 4runner. But you have obviously never tried to get the parts to lift a IFS vehicle. In all the years I have been exploring old ghost towns and silver mines in the So Cal high and low desert I can't ever remember seeing a outback on the roads we travel. some of them are class three jeep trails I admit but not all. Then again how easy would it be to get a low range in an outback? I don't think the recommend towing with one either. And the outback is about the same size as a Camry. No longer considered a small car. A camry looks like a Crown Vic next to my old Pontiac 4 banger. By the way an outback is only .2 inches shorter than a 4Runner.
  • oldfarmer50oldfarmer50 Posts: 6,812
    "...It surprises me that NYC cab drivers can get up enough speed to roll one..."

    You've got to be kidding, right? Those guys are insane. Driving through Manhattan is like a drag-race combined with a demo-derby.

    2009 PT Cruiser, 2008 Eclipse, 1995 Mark VIII, 1988 GMC Van

  • tankbeanstankbeans Posts: 585
    Hello all.

    First let me say that I don't care what anybody drives or how much they choose to spend on it. It isn't my business. I don't hate SUVs, I don't like SUVs. I don't need one so I don't care. One thing that bothers me is when I am at an intersection, no semiphore, and I'm trying to turn and a person in an SUV decides they can't see and they inch forward so I have to inch forward more to see around them, and they keep inching like they need the extra space to see oncoming traffic. Not meaning this as an attack to anyone just an observation. I don't like being behind them on the freeway because again I can't see, so I pass them and hope not to offend them.

    Let it be known that a couple of years ago, I've been driving less than 5, I was considering a Blazer to replace my Aerostar. My Aerostar was porcine and it was overly thirsty. 10 mpg only, I thought the Blazer might be good for 20mpg, but I never got it so I can't say. I instead got a 91 LeSabre with the 3.8 and loved it.

    Which leads me to something else. Somebody inquired about insurance for teens. I'm 20 and I've had my license since I turned 16. I had to pay me own insurance and that was $195 for the van per month with a crappy company. Then when I got my LeSabre it went to $105 per month with AmFam. After my LeSabre I got a 95 Accord, which needed full coverage as I was making payments and that was $145 per month. Now I have an 03, full coverage, and before my mom and I changed our policy cost $160 per month, full coverage $500 deductibles.

    If I'm confusing I apologize, but I wanted to chime in.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Central CTPosts: 9,972
    can you see anything when you are driving behind a minivan?
  • tankbeanstankbeans Posts: 585
    No. I may have been too general about SUVs. I don't like being behind big vehicles, but I'm not going to condemn them or buy one myself for the sole purpose of being able to see around as I wouldn't need it for any other reason. I grew up with the attitude don't buy more than you need.

    That being said if I was ever faced with the decision mini-van or SUV as my only options the SUV would win hands down. After driving a van I don't want to do it again. They're ugly, mostly bought by families with one child, another observation, and they're difficult to feed. SUVs are thirsty too, but at least they aren't uglier than sin, in my opinion. I kind of like Exploders myself, but don't need one so don't care.
This discussion has been closed.