Sign In Join 



Are you happy you didn't sell your SUV?

122 messages,  Last post on Apr 15, 2009 at 5:57 AM

You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires

What is this discussion about? Fuel Efficiency (MPG)


Messages Page 7 of 13
1
...
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
...
13
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#61 of 122
Re: Shouldn't You Ask... [nwng] by gagrice
Jan 15, 2009 (2:32 pm)
Reply

Replying to: nwng (Jan 15, 2009 12:47 pm)

Lexus does not make a Sequoia rebadge. Only the 4 runner and Land Cruiser. I can tell you after riding in both their is no comparison. The Odyssey is ok to haul kids around town in. I would not want one. I thought I did before I rode in his. To each his own. Plus the Odyssey is too low to the ground to take off the beaten path. I don't think that mini van has much more clearance than a sedan. There are just some people like myself that really like driving a PU truck or an SUV. Not going to change US. For those that feel safer in a Yugo, that is your call.
#62 of 122
Re: Shouldn't You Ask... [gagrice] by larsb
Jan 15, 2009 (2:38 pm)
Reply

Replying to: gagrice (Jan 15, 2009 2:32 pm)

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?
#63 of 122
The thing I have noticed by boaz47
Jan 15, 2009 (2:56 pm)
Reply
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?
#64 of 122
Re: The thing I have noticed [boaz47] by larsb
Jan 15, 2009 (2:57 pm)
Reply

Replying to: boaz47 (Jan 15, 2009 2:56 pm)

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?
#65 of 122
Re: Shouldn't You Ask... [larsb] by jimbres
Jan 15, 2009 (3:10 pm)
Reply

Replying to: larsb (Jan 15, 2009 2:38 pm)

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?
#66 of 122
Re: Shouldn't You Ask... [larsb] by explorerx4
Jan 15, 2009 (3:30 pm)
Reply

Replying to: larsb (Jan 15, 2009 2:38 pm)

which of those 2 catagories describes you best(mister ex suburban owner)?
i'm in #3, wanted wagon all weather/bad road capabilties/no drama.
#67 of 122
Re: Shouldn't You Ask... [larsb] by gagrice
Jan 15, 2009 (4:45 pm)
Reply

Replying to: larsb (Jan 15, 2009 2:38 pm)

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.
#68 of 122
Re: Shouldn't You Ask... [jimbres] by gagrice
Jan 15, 2009 (5:18 pm)
Reply

Replying to: jimbres (Jan 15, 2009 3:10 pm)

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.
#69 of 122
Hybrid Taxis unsafe by gagrice
Jan 15, 2009 (5:23 pm)
Reply
New Report Says Ford Escape Hybrid Taxis Are Unsafe in Accidents
 
Maybe little SUVs are not safe after all 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
#70 of 122
Re: Shouldn't You Ask... [gagrice] by andre1969
Jan 15, 2009 (5:39 pm)
Reply

Replying to: gagrice (Jan 15, 2009 4:45 pm)

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!

Messages Page 7 of 13
1
...
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
...
13
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion
To POST a message, please Sign In.

New? Join Now!

Forum Tools

Please sign in.
Email Address:

Password:

Forgot Password?

Search Forums

Enter Keyword(s)

Advanced Search

Browse by Vehicle



View All Vehicles
Advertisement
Ask the Community
See What People Are Asking

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic


View All Topics

Today's Chats

Advertisement