Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Most popular vehicles
Popular New Cars
- New Acura MDX
- New Acura RDX
- New Audi Q5
- New BMW 3 Series
- New BMW X3
- New Buick Enclave
- New Cadillac Escalade
- New Chevrolet Equinox
- New Chrysler 300
- New Dodge Challenger
- New Ford Edge
- New Ford Escape
- New Ford Expedition
- New Ford Explorer
- New Ford F-150
- New Ford Focus
- New Ford Mustang
- New Honda Accord
- New Honda Civic
- New Honda CR-V
- New Honda Fit
- New Honda Odyssey
- New Honda Pilot
- New Hyundai Elantra
- New Hyundai Santa Fe
- New Hyundai Sonata
- New Hyundai Tucson
- New Jeep Compass
- New Jeep Grand Cherokee
- New Jeep Wrangler
- New Mazda 3
- New Mazda 6
- New Mazda CX-5
- New Nissan Altima
- New Nissan Maxima
- New Nissan Rogue
- New Porsche Cayenne
- New Ram 1500
- New Subaru Crosstrek
- New Subaru Forester
- New Subaru Impreza
- New Subaru Outback
- New Tesla Model S
- New Tesla Model X
- New Toyota 4Runner
- New Toyota Camry
- New Toyota Corolla
- New Toyota Highlander
- New Toyota Prius
- New Toyota RAV4
- New Toyota Sienna
- New Toyota Tacoma
- New Volkswagen Jetta
- New Volvo XC60
- New Volvo XC90
Popular Used Sedans
- Used BMW 5 Series
- Used Chevrolet Impala
- Used Chevrolet Malibu
- Used Chrysler 200
- Used Dodge Charger
- Used Ford Fusion
- Used Ford Taurus
- Used Honda Accord
- Used Honda Civic
- Used Hyundai Elantra
- Used Hyundai Sonata
- Used Tesla Model S
- Used Toyota Camry
- Used Toyota Corolla
- Used Volkswagen Jetta
Popular Used SUVs
- Used Acura MDX
- Used Acura RDX
- Used Ford Edge
- Used Ford Explorer
- Used Honda CR-V
- Used Honda Pilot
- Used Hyundai Santa Fe
- Used Jeep Compass
- Used Lincoln Navigator
- Used Mazda CX-5
- Used Nissan Rogue
- Used Subaru Crosstrek
- Used Subaru Forester
- Used Tesla Model X
- Used Volvo XC90
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Debbie
Steve, Host
My suggestion - A Honda Odyssey and buy new tires - Yokohama Geolander Tires. I put them on my Highlander because of the poor performing winter tires and what a difference! That will improve it's snow, and rain performance.
Gas mileage? Honestly, it wont be THAT MUCH different. EPA for Pilot 2wd is 18 city and 17 for the 4wd. You have to make the decision whether to get 4wd or not - you know how much you are willing to spend, and how much you CAN spend better than us.
4wd also involves a little more maintaince, but not much.
So still, I would say Odyssey.
Children in harnessed child restraints and high back boosters generally don't have the same risks as adults do in a third row. They aren't as likely to load a seat back mechanism to failure and their restraints may provide additional protection from whiplash, intrusion and ejection. Unless the Odyssey has considerably more crush space between the third row and the hatch, I can't see much difference.
Any real risk is in some of the smaller, midsize or compact SUVs that have third row seats very close to the rear hatch. A few heavy adults could load the seatback to failure in a severe rear end crash and anyone without a head restraint is even more likely to be injured. Fortunately, severe rear-end crashes are relatively uncommon compared to frontal and side impacts.
Thanks again to all who have offered opinions..I think I'm ready to make my decision and it was with your help. :shades:
Debbie
www.iihs.org
When a car isn't safe the price of insurance is higher. I feel comfortable saying that most cars under 2004 have poor side crash test performance (Excluding Mercedez-Benz, and BMW).
But anyway, Good luck!
I had transmision problems with the Odyssey. I traded it it in on a Toyota 4 Runner. The 4 Runner has a V-8, full time 4WD and vehicle skid control. It gets 1 1/2 MPG worse than the Odyssey and weighs almost the same.
The 4 Runner has much better brakes than the Odyssey.
It stops 60 -0 in 128 feet. The 4 Runner has a much better audio system than the Odyssey. (what doesn't ?)
I do take the 4 Runner out on the beech on the Outer Banks.
Feeling better, i take it, since you took about a 6 month break.
i'm vacationing in the obx this summer down in hatteras again.
i came very close to geting stuck in the sand last year. can i call you if i need a tow?
for beach trips and snow trips and camping trips, we take the SUVs.....great for those trips.
for around town, or some minor sightseeing trips, we take the minivan....
Hiya Pat and explorer !!! How goes it..?
Hope all is well with you all....
h
tidester, host
HOw goes it?
....the wifey drives the minivan, though I help drive on some trips.
On skiing, snow, camping, fun drives down the coast, etc...we take either the cayenne or suburban....
I still think the cayenne is a wonderful machine that can do it all.....best of all worlds....
You may have a different opinion, eh ?
h
Hey, Porsche makes great vehicles! Cayenne's just way too big for my needs.
tidester, host
At Auto Shows, I have looked at the various SUV's and they look big on the outside but don't appear to have the interior space of the Odyssey, Sienna, or T&C and the EPA fuel ratings seemed much lower.
A Pilot was parked next to an Odyssey and the Pilot interior seemed very cramped with virtually NO cargo space behind the difficult to access 3rd row. The heating and cooling for the 2nd and 3rd row did NOT look as efficient as that of the Odyssey.
I closely compared the Toyota Highlander with the Sienna and the Highlander seemed to have much less interior space with virtually no cargo room behind 3rd row.
Do you have 3 rows of seating in the 4 Runner?
How does the interior space of your 4Runner compare to your former Odyssey?
Is it much harder to climb up into the 4WD 4Runner than it was to get into the Odyssey?
My 4 Runner is a 2003. They did not have a 3rd row seating as an option. But, what I can see from my 4 Runner, there would only be 3rd row seating for very small children.
My 4 runner came with a package dual row some such option. I took it all out and now use the whole rear area as cargo space. There is a lot less usable space in the 4 Runner than I had in the Odyssey. The rear door on the 4 Runner has no where near the clearance of the Odyssey rear doors for example. I don't think it's any more difficult getting in the 4 Runner than it was getting in the Odyssey. I'm 6-1 My 5'6" wife may disagree. She uses the runningbboard to getting in the 4 Runner. The seating level is about the same height for both vehicles. The seats in the 4 Runner are more bucket type seats. They are little more supportive than the straight up seating in the Odyssey. The 4 Runner seats are more supportive for off roading. I had / have no problems with either seat.
If you need seating for more than 5 adults, get a minivan. The 4 runner will hold 5 adults for short trips, 4 adults for any sustained trips. Hope this helps.
Pat
For example,
BOURBON PECAN PIE
Ingredients
Filling
- 3 eggs
- 1 cup light brown sugar
- 1 cup dark corn syrup
- 2 tablespoons butter melted
- 1 teaspoon vanilla extract
- 3 shots good Bourbon (I use Evan Williams 7 Year
Old Sour Mash)
- 1 teaspoon salt
- 1 small plastic cup of pecans, approximately 1/2 pound. Save 15-20 best looking halves for decoration on top of pie, use other pieces for underneath top.
Mix all ingredients, but pecans with hand mixer. Fold in all pecans, but save reserved pecans for top
Pie Crust
- Whole package of Pecan Sandies cookies, turned into
crumbs in food processor
- 2/3 stick of butter
- 2 shots Bourbon
- Spray Pam
Spray a 9 inch pie pan with Pam. Then add butter and Bourbon to Pecan Sandies crumbs, mix and form into pie crust.
Add pecan filling, then top with reserved pecans and bake at 350 degrees for 50 minutes to 1 hour. Test with a toothpick. It's done when a toothpick inserted into center comes out clean
See what I did to keep busy during retirement.
Pat
I don't have a drunken chicken recipe.
But try this.
SOUTH WEST STYLE CHICKEN WITH SALSA
Ingredients
- 4 boneless, skinless chicken breasts
- 1 package South west dry marinade - (A McCormick TM
package. Usually in with gravy and sauce mixes)
- 4 tablespoons vegetable oil
- 2 tablespoons white vinegar
- 2 teaspoons chili powder
- 1 8 oz jar mild flavor salsa
- 1 lime cut in quarters
Mix the South west marinade with the vegetable oil, vinegar, and chili powder in a large plastic bag and place chicken in the bag and seal. Let chicken marinate at least 4 hours. Overnight works best. Move chicken around in marinade 2-3 times during overnight marinade.
Remove chicken from bag and grill or broil chicken breasts.
When done, cover with salsa, and serve with a lime quarter.
Goes well with Spanish type rice
SOunds like you are making lots of progress in enjoying your retirement.
Hmm..what is the name of your cook book.? I just got into cooking...
spent 7 hours baking 8 German Fruit cakes from scratch last Friday, my former German neighbor, who was a chef, came over to teach me.....
I am interested in learning gourmet cooking....
Let me know....
Our SUv and minivans are doing fine. Just lent the suburban to our Youth pastor, who took 2 families of 4 up to ski country.... They loved it.
We are using the Odyssey minivan to go to LA for the long weekend. Time to see Mickey ( annual pass expires 2-18) and visit mom.
got any good recipes for atlantic dolphin or wahoo(?).
i still have a bunch in my freezer. brought it back to ct from the obx in my suv.
how goes it ? Hope all is well....
You know, I still hate SUVs. The ones that aren't needed, of course. Why don't you?
I'll be doing my part....my SIL finally wants to dump her RX300, tired of taking out loans to pay for gas. So I'm selling it for her.
Time for the rest of America to catch up, eh?
Other than that, hello, all!
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
Good to see you too. I survived by being worked to death
Sounds like your chomping at the bit for a good SUV discussion? Maybe brightless will return ... would be like old times.
You know I still hate SUV's. The ones that aren't needed of course.
What... the SUV's that are needed don't pollute excessively, have a tendancy to roll over... or steal the crumple zones of other vehicles in accidents?
That is very curious.
I might not fight you on your following "typo"
What... the SUV's that are needed don't pollute excessively, have a tendancy to roll over... or steal the crumple zones of other vehicles in accidents?
Ok, I'll bite
First, we'd need a definition of "pollute excessively"....does this:
pollute excessively? Does it depend on whether it's carrying 400 tons of cargo or 2 bags of groceries and a hockey stick?
Just curious
ps: I lament that "stealing crumple zones" didn't quite make the lexiconic impact of Colbert's "truthiness"....perhaps it's not too late to get him or Stewart to put it on the show. Nothing like delusions of grandeur to start the day
But, the oversized Tonker Toy is used as a necessary work related vehicle... that is it is "needed". I doubt your job as a software developer requires you to tow a boat with your Titan?
If you're sitting at at stoplight in your RSX, which would you rather be t-boned by... a Ford Expedition(that occasionally pulls a small sailboat but has no cargo)or a Expedition that has 2 bags of groceries and a hockey puck in the back? Either way you're sunk. :sick:
If you only want to use your large SUV to pull your boat, I can see your position of "SUV O.K... but only if needed". But, if you're not towing 95% of the time the vehicle is in use... no offense, but it sounds a bit hypocritical. That is, under your position, large SUV's are excessively dangerous to other drivers.
...requires you to tow a boat with your Titan?
I don't. I tow it with my BIL's PU. Not sure how this fits in anyhow....
But, the oversized Tonker Toy is used as a necessary work related vehicle...
When hauling grocery? Or when carrying 400 tons? Actually, neither case is "necessary" in an absolute sense. Only necessary to accomplish a task. Which completes this circle.
If you're sitting at at stoplight in your RSX, which would you rather be t-boned by... a Ford Expedition(that occasionally pulls a small sailboat but has no cargo)or a Expedition that has 2 bags of groceries and a hockey puck in the back?
Always prefer what presents less harm. But how is this relevant to which is "excessive"? Compare that Expedition towing a boat to the lake for a weekend of recreation to another towing 3000lbs of lead for no reason whatsoever. Now....which is "excessive"?
If you only want to use your large SUV to pull your boat, I can see your position of "SUV O.K... but only if needed".
What I do is irrelevant, really. Underscored by the fact that I do not own an SUV.
...under your position, large SUV's are excessively dangerous to other drivers.
That's not my position. My position is that "unnecessary SUVS" are excessively dangerous to other drivers/passengers.
I won't comment on circular logic but some circles are meant to be broken:
The following statement is true.
The preceding statement is false.
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
Circular logic only occurs in TH posts. Well, mostly.
After all, have you ever heard of a software bug actually existing?
Oh.
Never mind.
But, they are exactly equal in their ability to cause damage and take lives in a collision, which is my point.
Your "unnecessary SUV" are as excessively dangerous to the same extent the "necessary SUV's" are. The person getting t-boned by either is still just as dead. So, if the SUV is so excessively dangerous... it shouldn't be on the road no matter how it is used. Which completes this circle.
You say you tow your boat with you BIL's pickup? Great... your doing your part for the environment, only using excessively large vehicles when "necessary". I'm sure the ditto heads love you. But, my problem with people in the same boat as yourself(no pun),would be with those who claim
that their SUV is necessary ...and may only use said SUV for towing purposes maybe once or thrice a year. I would say to that, "No, it is not necessary", and you are presenting a excessive danger to other drivers/passengers... according to the criteria you laid out.
On another level, define what is an "unnecessary SUV". Ask 100 people you'll probably get 100 different answers. What is unnecessary for you... may be very well be necessary for someone else.
No. Their position is completely different from Li_S'. Basically, you get to drive the biggest baddest thing you can get your hands on - just because you want to - and with NO reference to necessity.
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
I think we just have different points. What's confusing is that you're responding to mine as if they were yours
Yes, they are the same in effect. The difference in the situations is that one occurs as a result of the inherent risk/benefit equation. The other occurs when one incurs risk with no related benefit. IOW, incurring the risk of the SUV unnecessarily.
Your "unnecessary SUV" are as excessively dangerous to the same extent the "necessary SUV's" are.
Without a definition of "excessive", that assessment is meaningless. I offered one, but you appear to have ignored it.
The person getting t-boned by either is still just as dead.
Two actions can have the exact same result yet have entirely different ethical implications. Accidental death vs murder is an obvious example. This is obvious, no?
my problem with people...would be with those who claim
that their SUV is necessary
I'd have problems with them, too....since (as I already noted), nothing is needed in the absolute sense. An SUV can only be "needed" to accomplish a vehicular function...as opposed to a car, for example. I offered that clarification already, too.
What is unnecessary for you... may be very well be necessary for someone else.
There are vehicular functions that require certain vehicular characteristics. I never said there were no absolutes, I just said they had to be put in context.
Try towing a 5000 lb boat/trailer with a Corolla and tell me that's not true
Sorry for the confusion, but in playing devils advocate with your position , I'm trying to show that if one is showing a linear relationship between points A and point C... then one has to go thru point B. Point A is that large SUV's are excessively (we know what excessive means) dangerous in their design. High mass, bumper height, rollover prone, pollution, poor gas mileage etc... these SUV's are dangerous and wasteful machines, whether towing a boat or not... correct? Point B is Joe Consumer in his Toyota Prius. Enter Point C(any SUV driver), that is, if you are not towing that 500lb boat/trailor when you T-Bone Point B and that Prius... there is no risk benefit equation... you could have been driving something more suitable/appropriate for the occasion. The Prius owner is dead... and there was absolutely no related benefit if nothing was being towed. This once a year SUV tower had a couple bags of groceries in the back seat.
Now, impractical you say? Well, I would say if you have the means to be pulling a 5000lb boat/trailer, then you probably have the financial means to driving something more practical when SUV is not in actual towing mode. Or, one can always do what you do...borrow an in-laws vehicle to tow.
But, say I do accept your risk/benefit equation,and say one shouldn't incur the risk of the SUV unneccesarily. How often is it acceptable to take this risk? How many times a year do I have to tow my boat, with my large SUV, to come out on the ethical side of the equation?
So, using your position, I maintain, that for you to say SUV's are ethical only when necessary is illogical. You should say SUV's are ethical only when "required"... that is, used only when towing.
Not my position, some other position. The position you cite is not mine.
...if one is showing a linear relationship between points A and point C...
I really see no "linear" relationship amongst your 3 elements.
...we know what excessive means...
We know what the word "excessive" means, but "we" don't know what "pollute excessively" means without some context.
Since there seems to be excessive confusion here, I'll try again to make my point and you can decide to engage or not:
To answer the question as to whether "SUVs pollute excessively", one must consider the use that it is employed for...exactly as one would consider whether "tractor trailers pollute excessively"...if a tractor trailer is used as a vehicle for a family of four to do no more than a sedan can do, then the answer is yes. If it's used for shipping tons of cargo, then the answer is no. Same for SUVs. If the overall use of the SUV is for vehicular tasks that a sedan can easily fulfill, then it is polluting (and consuming gas and endangering others) excessively.
You should say SUV's are ethical only when "required"... that is, used only when towing.
That's exactly my POV. IMO, SUVs should be purchased only when required, i.e., when the vehicular requirements for purchase can only be satisfied by an SUV.
And therin lies a big problem with the vast majority of SUV owners....they have zero vehicular requirements for towing, heavy hauling or off-roading, which are the only requirements that justify an SUV, IMO.
Thank goodness the relatively high cost of gas is rendering this whole argument moot. It's injecting a bit of reluctant sense into America's vehicle-buying habits and dooming the SUV to eventual return to the marginal fringe where it belongs, like the large van. Unfortunately for the US auto industry and its workers, it may bring on a culling of the herd, due to excessive self-induced myopia.
Sure it is. You wrote, "Unnecessary SUV's are excessively dangerous to other drivers/passengers"... which is what I've been quoting you on these past several posts. i.e "SUV's are excessively dangerous..."
Now you wrote they are "excessively" dangerous without explaining excessively in context, but I understand what you mean.
To answer the question of whether SUV's pollute excessively, one must consider the use that it is employed for...(tractor trailer example)
But, you don't put this in proper context... which has been the point I've been trying to get across. A tractor trailer is used for it's intended purpose 95% of the time. A SUV, according to you, is used one weekend a year(say 5% of its use is actually towing) to pull a boat to a lake, and this justifies it's ownership? To use the SUV for it's vehicular requirements, ethically wouldn't you have to use it for said requirements more than a couple times a year? This would be a high cost, with little benefit, which you have argued against. I write this as you ignored the main point of my prior post, which is how to justify the use of SUV when not actually in towing mode... which is it's sole vehicular function according to you. Would you care to quantify the requirements?
SUV's should be purchased only when required... when the vehicular requirements can only be satisfied by an SUV
But, what about the other 90-95% of the time when it is not required, when the SUV is not being used to tow? It's used to carry the kids to soccer games or bring home some groceries. You write of the "excessively dangerous" SUV, the endangering others unnecessarily, how do you square this with the fact that even people who buy SUV's out of requirement... don't use them for their intended purpose(you) 95% of the time they are being driven?
So, what I was trying to say in my prior post... if you argue for SUV's only when they are required, which you have yet to put into context, then your position should be only when required, as when actually towing. You position seems contradictory in that you say,"SUV's are o.k if used for towing... but the 95% of the time they aren't being used to tow... well that's okay... the risk/benefit equation. This doesn't quite mesh with your SUV's are "excessively dangerous" message.
the vast majority of SUV's owners have zero vehicular requirements for towing,heavy hauling, off-roading, which are the only requirements that justify an SUV, IMO.
So, that is soley what manufacturers intended for these vehicles? I think most manufacturers make these to be more of an all-purpose vehicle. You can tow a bunch of kids to the movies, haul a bunch of luggage on vacation trips, off-road when taking a bunch of scouts on a nature hike. Driven responsibly they offer the most protection for your family. A lot of good reasons to buy an SUV...other than towing. IMO
Huh? Never said anything remotely like that. I say most SUVs are not used for any towing at all. Nada. And I never suggested any criteria for justification. Bupkis.
Maybe you're crossing posts from different topics
...then your position should be only when required, as when actually towing.
Really don't know how else to put this, but that's complete nonsense. It's like saying that if you own a car that seats 5, you should only use it when you have 5 people. Most vehicles are purchased for general purpose, suited to the owner. No vehicle is used for ANY single purpose most of the time, except carrying one person, so your argument would apply to all, rendering it moot.
Put more simply, whatever the purchase requirements that a prospective SUV owner has, if they don't include tow/offroad/haul, they can just downgrade the impact of the vehicle and don't get an SUV. Simple.
I think most manufacturers make these to be more of an all-purpose vehicle.
LOL. Manufacturers make them to be sold, period, end of story. Folks mostly buy them because it makes them look like AdventureGuy or Gal, not for any practical purpose. Unless, of course, towing (or heavy-hauling or off roading) along with "family vehicle" is in the requirements.
Driven responsibly they offer the most protection for your family.
Actually, not. And on top of that, they reduce everyone else's safety significantly. Not to mention the gas waste. Not to mention the pollution.
I can't believe you actually said that!
Maybe you're crossing posts from different topics
I don't think Jipster was even here for those "different topics."
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
Actually, I think he was around at the end, don't remember if he participated. But I was talking about present topics.
Besides, haven't you purged your memory of those 60,000 posts??? I see Edmunds has!
Good thing I archived them all and now have them available on my web site.
J/K, call off the lawyers!
It's a low priority issue but they will one day be transferred from our old servers to the new ones.
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
Well, that's the problem. I've asked several times, you've chosen to ignore the question. Saying, "SUV's should be purchased when vehicular requirements for purchase can be satisfied by an SUV" does not answer my question. Simply put, if I buy an SUV to use 2 times a year, once to tow a boat down to the lake at the beginning of summer, and once to bring it back... this is satisfactory to you? Taking into account all that you have written about SUV's "I hate SUV's", "they reduce everyone else's safety significantly"(note significantely),"gas waste" "pollution"... all of this "excessive" danger and waste is acceptable for 2 days of towing?
"It's like saying if you own a car that seats 5 it should only be used when seating 5."
LOL... well that's what your position is all about isn't it?
You are talking about vehicle requirements, excess waste, risk/benefit equations. If you only need a car that seats
1 or 2...buy a motorcycle or 2 seater. Isn't a larger car that isn't needed "dangerous to other drivers/passengers", pollute more and waste more gas? "Downgrade the impact of the vehicle" is what you're all about isn't it?.
Why is it "necessary" to own a large SUV when it will only be used twice a year? Vehicle requirements? Wasn't the pick-up truck invented a few years back for such purposes?
Simply put, if SUV's are as dangerous and wasteful as you say... then the only ethical occasions they can be driven
is when actually towing or off-roading. If someone came flying past you on the highway with that souped up mammoth yellow dump truck you posted earlier. You're position wouldn't be,"Chill out...it's used to occasional haul coal for the orphanage". Your position would be,"It's excessively dangerous to other drivers/passengers... it shouldn't be on the road."
Folks mostly buy them...
Is that a fact... or have you personally spoken to most SUV owners? IMO most people buy them because of cargo space and they feel safer in a larger vehicle.
Actually not...
Well, that's a matter of opinion. I wrote "driven responsibly"... which takes the rollover out of the equation. But, SUV's are manufactured a lot safer than the ones 10 years ago... when you started this "bupkis" anti-SUV crusade. :P
But, you will say,"what if you're in an accident and hurt someone. You don't know when an accident will occur... that's why they're called accidents". You can assume I can be in an accident... but I can't assume I won't??? I know for a fact that if using your risk/benefit equation and owning a SUV... there would be no more risk to other drivers vehicles, and a benefit of increased safety for mine should someone hit me.
But, our positions are really not that far apart sailor. You think it acceptable to drive large SUV without a boat being towed for 362 days a year... and I think it acceptable to drive 364 days a year without use of tow mode.
Well, despite what one person says , it is up to the purchaser to determine which vehicle he or she wants to buy to fill his or her "" vehicular needs""
Be it for adventure image, Boyracer image , utility part time, or people carrying....
There simply is no way that we can morph one vehicle to suit each individual situation. Not unless you have the superduper batmobile.. :P
With that in mind, people should and can buy whatever they want, regardless if some other people who are not aware of this or each persons vehicular needs, say.
I see you were able to hook him, jipster ... LOL...
I will reel him in.....
I agree, people should be free to drive whatever they please without their ethics being called into question. I think the focus should be on how people drive... and how they can drive safer, instead of what people drive.
If you think a vehicle so unsafe/excessive as to be used for only certain criteria... call, write,lobby your congressman to get said vehicle off the road. :shades:
Sorely you jest steve?
We've been speaking of large SUV's... not Sherman tanks. Though sailor may think they're one in the same.
Speaking of minivans, I've often seen minivans pull everything but the biggest of boats. My brother had a Pontiac Transport with tow package. He lived in Fort Walton, Florida and used it to pull his 18 or 22 ft(can't recall)boat he used for deep sea fishing. Don't see much debate on the SUV vs Minivan as far as the towing aspect is concerned. One would think most minivans would be able to handle the small to midsize boats... cargo capacity of the big minivans much higher in volume being a big plus.