What's behind SUV bashing?
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,490
Likes: 0
From: Santa Clarita, CA
Tanqueray, many newer SUVs are using a lower bumper design more in-line with the height of cars. The Acura MDX is one such example. Also, to Jason's point on pollution, the MDX meets ULEV requirements.
[Edited by ScottB on 03-28-2001 at 02:16 PM]
[Edited by ScottB on 03-28-2001 at 02:16 PM]
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 3,615
Likes: 0
From: Melbourne!
Guys, once again I am coming in late on a topic. I'll have to scrap all these HSCC (Honda Sports Car Club) meetings which are obviously diverting me from my prime purpose in life, which is to contribute to this forum. 
On the subject of off road vehicles I am concerned primarily about size and driver availability. I hate to think of the potential force (F=MA) if one of those things hits me. More important though is the issue of driver ability.
A number of years ago SUVs used to be called Four Wheel Drives (FWDs). In my mind this acronym also stood for F..k Wit Drivers
, which I think sums up my thoughts neatly.
No offense intended - I admit to having owned an FWD - in this instance a Suzuki Sierra (Samurai in North America). Why did I buy it?
It was small (but surprising uneconomical for a 1 litre vehicle with a top speed of 105kmh (65mph));
it was cheap;
and most importantly IT WAS A CONVERTIBLE (just like my Stook). I LOVE convetibles!!
I did actually take it on some SERIOUS off road driving during my 3 years of ownership and it performed very well (because that is what it was designed for) - on the road though it was seriously dangerous.
The combination of off road tyres, high centre of gravity and no impact protection meant I was always scared of flipping it and came close on many occasions.
As for the arguments put forward by others about using an SUV to cart around camping gear, bicycles and dogs - I'm sorry but I can't buy that argument. A station wagon will do this just as well and be a far safer vehicle not only for the driver and passengers but also for other road users. It will also cost less, use less fuel and not block my view of the road in front. I wonder how many accidents are caused by frustrated road users stuck behind an SUV they can't see past??
I also wonder how many serious injuries are caused by SUVs (with their higher ride height) hitting other vehicles above the level of the bumper?
Sondra, you made the point about being hit from behind and then nose diving into an SUV in front. Your comment was that if you had driving your Prelude you would have been badly hurt. More to the point, if the vehicle in front had not been an SUV then you wouldn't have run underneath it.
At the end of the day this whole argument is similar to the one used by the NRA. I'm with AUSs2000 on this one - it should not be your inalienable right to buy a dangerous weapon (whether it be a gun or an SUV) just because the next guy may already have one. We have to get out of this vicious cycle somehow not keep on justifying being part of the problem.
A final point - those who argue that you need an SUV if you want to drive off road are wanking yourselves.
I have ridden a motorcycle across the Sahara desert, through the jungles of Africa and around most of the rest of the world, without problems. Not a custom built off road bike but a 2 stroke 350cc Yamaha RD350 road bike (a bike I used to road race previously incidentally)!! On my travels through the Sahara I saw hardly any SUVs - but lots of VW vans, Citroen 2CVs, Renault R4s and Peugeots. If these vehicles can handle these conditions without problem I rest my case.
On the subject of off road vehicles I am concerned primarily about size and driver availability. I hate to think of the potential force (F=MA) if one of those things hits me. More important though is the issue of driver ability.
A number of years ago SUVs used to be called Four Wheel Drives (FWDs). In my mind this acronym also stood for F..k Wit Drivers
, which I think sums up my thoughts neatly. No offense intended - I admit to having owned an FWD - in this instance a Suzuki Sierra (Samurai in North America). Why did I buy it?
It was small (but surprising uneconomical for a 1 litre vehicle with a top speed of 105kmh (65mph));
it was cheap;
and most importantly IT WAS A CONVERTIBLE (just like my Stook). I LOVE convetibles!!
I did actually take it on some SERIOUS off road driving during my 3 years of ownership and it performed very well (because that is what it was designed for) - on the road though it was seriously dangerous.
The combination of off road tyres, high centre of gravity and no impact protection meant I was always scared of flipping it and came close on many occasions.
As for the arguments put forward by others about using an SUV to cart around camping gear, bicycles and dogs - I'm sorry but I can't buy that argument. A station wagon will do this just as well and be a far safer vehicle not only for the driver and passengers but also for other road users. It will also cost less, use less fuel and not block my view of the road in front. I wonder how many accidents are caused by frustrated road users stuck behind an SUV they can't see past??
I also wonder how many serious injuries are caused by SUVs (with their higher ride height) hitting other vehicles above the level of the bumper?
Sondra, you made the point about being hit from behind and then nose diving into an SUV in front. Your comment was that if you had driving your Prelude you would have been badly hurt. More to the point, if the vehicle in front had not been an SUV then you wouldn't have run underneath it.
At the end of the day this whole argument is similar to the one used by the NRA. I'm with AUSs2000 on this one - it should not be your inalienable right to buy a dangerous weapon (whether it be a gun or an SUV) just because the next guy may already have one. We have to get out of this vicious cycle somehow not keep on justifying being part of the problem.
A final point - those who argue that you need an SUV if you want to drive off road are wanking yourselves.
I have ridden a motorcycle across the Sahara desert, through the jungles of Africa and around most of the rest of the world, without problems. Not a custom built off road bike but a 2 stroke 350cc Yamaha RD350 road bike (a bike I used to road race previously incidentally)!! On my travels through the Sahara I saw hardly any SUVs - but lots of VW vans, Citroen 2CVs, Renault R4s and Peugeots. If these vehicles can handle these conditions without problem I rest my case.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 2,895
Likes: 1
From: You wish
Darn, I wish I hadn't ignored this thread earlier, it has gotten interesting.
Couple of comments on the many points made:
1. Vehicle strength - with the same materials and construction techniques, as you increase size, strength does not increase as rapidly. This is one reason why many large SUV's are not good in U.S. crash tests which simulate a collision with a similar vehicle - their increase in mass (and therefore crash energy) over a "normal" car is not matched by a commensurate increase in body integrity. It can be, but it takes some hard work (I believe the Acura MDX and Mercedes M class have both done well and weigh over 4000 lbs each).
2. Driving skill requirements - I've been a proponent of improved driver education/testing in the U.S. for years, regardless of vehicle. And different classes of vehicle require different skill sets/levels. One could argue that sports car drivers and large SUV/truck drivers both need additional training (I love BMW's approach). But here is the difference - while a sports car may have the potential to get you into trouble (serious acceleration, potential for oversteer), it also comes with the tools to get you out (responsive handling, good brakes, etc.). Many large SUV/truck drivers are indeed coming from smaller vehicles and proceed to drive their SUVs as such. In fact, modern SUVs often have more acceleration potential than economy cars (7-8 secs 0-60 is not uncommon now). But most, including the small SUVs, don't have the braking or handling prowess to match that acceleration. That's why SUV drivers have to be extra careful. If you have the skill and/or are aware of the limitations of your vehicle, no problem (I once put a supercharged 4wd Forerunner through a beautiful four wheel, power on drift running it in 4H - some of the most fun I've ever had on pavement).
3. Consumer needs vs. wants - You can't really harp on people for buying status symbols because everyone does it. I do think that if SUVs/Trucks were regulated similarly to cars that they'd be less popular though thanks to higher prices and more compromises(and regs are changing). However, the number of people who truly need SUVs, particularly large ones, is quite small. For example, I had a friend who purchased a V8 Grand Cherokee, a mid-sized SUV. He could only afford one car and he needed something to commute in, entertain friends/associates, and still be able to tow his boat to the lake on weekends (which he did 20-30 times/year). At about $28-29k, the GC was unbeatable. Yes, he could have bought a used pickup and a Honda Accord, but that means more insurance, more parking space and he couldn't take 4 friends with him to the lake.
But, we also had a co-worker. A married woman with one child, who also bought a GC. Hers was the I6 model, but actually cost more because she optioned it up with leather and all the amenities. She bought it because she liked the way it looked and how she got to see better. She didn't need the extra cargo space over a sedan and in AZ you don't need AWD. Its these people, especially the Explorer crowd, who never tow, never haul large loads, etc. that get on people's nerves. There are numerous sport wagon's out there from Audi, VW, Subaru, Volvo, etc. that carry as much cargo as an Explorer, seat as many people (and in more comfort), have better performance in every way and are generally safer. Heck, a Honda Odyssey will outperform your basic Explorer too. The only thing the others don't do well is tow.
Personally, if I was in the market for a small to medium SUV type vehicle that wouldn't be used for towing or off-road duty, I'd think seriously about a good sportwagon, whether it be 2wd or AWD. Cargo capacity is similar, as is price, and performance is generally better. They just aren't as cool, although Audi and Subaru are doing their best to change it. I must admit though, I took a long look at an MDX :-)
In the end, people buy what they want if it is available. I'm actually more concerned with people using cell phones on the road. But that's another topic...
UL
Couple of comments on the many points made:
1. Vehicle strength - with the same materials and construction techniques, as you increase size, strength does not increase as rapidly. This is one reason why many large SUV's are not good in U.S. crash tests which simulate a collision with a similar vehicle - their increase in mass (and therefore crash energy) over a "normal" car is not matched by a commensurate increase in body integrity. It can be, but it takes some hard work (I believe the Acura MDX and Mercedes M class have both done well and weigh over 4000 lbs each).
2. Driving skill requirements - I've been a proponent of improved driver education/testing in the U.S. for years, regardless of vehicle. And different classes of vehicle require different skill sets/levels. One could argue that sports car drivers and large SUV/truck drivers both need additional training (I love BMW's approach). But here is the difference - while a sports car may have the potential to get you into trouble (serious acceleration, potential for oversteer), it also comes with the tools to get you out (responsive handling, good brakes, etc.). Many large SUV/truck drivers are indeed coming from smaller vehicles and proceed to drive their SUVs as such. In fact, modern SUVs often have more acceleration potential than economy cars (7-8 secs 0-60 is not uncommon now). But most, including the small SUVs, don't have the braking or handling prowess to match that acceleration. That's why SUV drivers have to be extra careful. If you have the skill and/or are aware of the limitations of your vehicle, no problem (I once put a supercharged 4wd Forerunner through a beautiful four wheel, power on drift running it in 4H - some of the most fun I've ever had on pavement).
3. Consumer needs vs. wants - You can't really harp on people for buying status symbols because everyone does it. I do think that if SUVs/Trucks were regulated similarly to cars that they'd be less popular though thanks to higher prices and more compromises(and regs are changing). However, the number of people who truly need SUVs, particularly large ones, is quite small. For example, I had a friend who purchased a V8 Grand Cherokee, a mid-sized SUV. He could only afford one car and he needed something to commute in, entertain friends/associates, and still be able to tow his boat to the lake on weekends (which he did 20-30 times/year). At about $28-29k, the GC was unbeatable. Yes, he could have bought a used pickup and a Honda Accord, but that means more insurance, more parking space and he couldn't take 4 friends with him to the lake.
But, we also had a co-worker. A married woman with one child, who also bought a GC. Hers was the I6 model, but actually cost more because she optioned it up with leather and all the amenities. She bought it because she liked the way it looked and how she got to see better. She didn't need the extra cargo space over a sedan and in AZ you don't need AWD. Its these people, especially the Explorer crowd, who never tow, never haul large loads, etc. that get on people's nerves. There are numerous sport wagon's out there from Audi, VW, Subaru, Volvo, etc. that carry as much cargo as an Explorer, seat as many people (and in more comfort), have better performance in every way and are generally safer. Heck, a Honda Odyssey will outperform your basic Explorer too. The only thing the others don't do well is tow.
Personally, if I was in the market for a small to medium SUV type vehicle that wouldn't be used for towing or off-road duty, I'd think seriously about a good sportwagon, whether it be 2wd or AWD. Cargo capacity is similar, as is price, and performance is generally better. They just aren't as cool, although Audi and Subaru are doing their best to change it. I must admit though, I took a long look at an MDX :-)
In the end, people buy what they want if it is available. I'm actually more concerned with people using cell phones on the road. But that's another topic...
UL
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
From: Lynchburg
Okay I have to throw in my 2 cents here cause I got trashed on this subject last month. I would want to take a poll on how old the ones who hate the SUV's actually are. My guess is that there early twenties and probably don't have kids. The ones who drive my crazy are the guys (and girls) in the little zippy cars who pass you when there's only 100yards of passing lane, just so they can be in front of you, then they usually slow down. THATS WHY WE'RE SO CLOSE, sorry about yelling there, got a little excited.
It really comes down to the type of driver the person is, the car is irrelivant. It's not the gun, but the one holding the gun. And then there's the saying "have you ever realized that everyone who is going slower than you is a moron and everyone who passes you is an idiot". Soooo we all need to leave a little earlier and have a little patience.
It really comes down to the type of driver the person is, the car is irrelivant. It's not the gun, but the one holding the gun. And then there's the saying "have you ever realized that everyone who is going slower than you is a moron and everyone who passes you is an idiot". Soooo we all need to leave a little earlier and have a little patience.
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,263
Likes: 1
From: On the lakefront...
Thank UL and Nick. I wish you guys had gotten in earlier on the conversation. It was an interesting mix of psychology and physics and economics.
UL, my friend Nick told me who you are really are and kudos to you. I always find your posts to be informative and obviously from a perspective of solid knowledge. I make sure to read your threads. Glad you decided to stop 'lurking' and join us here...thanks.
Yes, that was my thing about this whole thread. It all comes back to driving. People drive like shit in this country (and the world, no doubt) and it's not the cars that kill people, it's the drivers that kill people! (to borrow a phrase). I was talking with Jason today and he said a good point...that yea, people DO drive like crap, but innattentive driving in one of those massive SUV's has even graver consequences. And that is most certainly true. But the fact is that people drive poorly and that is regardless of vehicle.
Anyway, thanks for checking things out here. It was a thread I almost closed once or twice, especially after being called 'selfish' for driving an SUV (...
...) but decided to stick it out and see where it would go.
Next time don't ignore threads by me!
UL, my friend Nick told me who you are really are and kudos to you. I always find your posts to be informative and obviously from a perspective of solid knowledge. I make sure to read your threads. Glad you decided to stop 'lurking' and join us here...thanks.
Yes, that was my thing about this whole thread. It all comes back to driving. People drive like shit in this country (and the world, no doubt) and it's not the cars that kill people, it's the drivers that kill people! (to borrow a phrase). I was talking with Jason today and he said a good point...that yea, people DO drive like crap, but innattentive driving in one of those massive SUV's has even graver consequences. And that is most certainly true. But the fact is that people drive poorly and that is regardless of vehicle.
Anyway, thanks for checking things out here. It was a thread I almost closed once or twice, especially after being called 'selfish' for driving an SUV (...
...) but decided to stick it out and see where it would go. Next time don't ignore threads by me!
Former Sponsor
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 9,081
Likes: 0
Interestingly enough a year or so back they did safety tests on 4WD vehicles here in Oz and they turned out to have an appalling level of safety with many of them literally breaking in half during crash tests.I gotta admit I wouldn't mind a nice black Jeep Grand Cherokee though. Just don't know what I'd do with it
[Edited by Muz on 03-29-2001 at 09:56 PM]
[Edited by Muz on 03-29-2001 at 09:56 PM]
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,263
Likes: 1
From: On the lakefront...
Strike, I haven't taken any of this personally. It did go in directions that I didn't expect and frankly, didn't really care for. And when I said 'close' I should have said 'deleted' which anyone who starts a thread can do if they delete the very first post. There was no violation of policy here and I wouldn't abuse my "power" (if you can call it power! don't make me laugh ) by closing a thread that I didn't like. Seriously, do you really think I would do that!? (Yes, that's rhetorical)
Well, I'm certainly relieved to know that you don't have a problem with my 4Runner, that sure takes a load of MY mind...please! I'll make sure to consult you before I buy another vehicle...not.
Of course, I was referring to your post about the whole notion of selfishness. Listen, SUV's, if they are on the road today, have passed DOT certification, and all the ridiculous bureaucratic bullshit that the gov't puts products though. They are legal to drive in the USA and given that I, for one, since I am a big proponent of the free market, like choices. And these choices are made in the marketplace...if I choose to buy an Escalade or a Yugo, is an individual choice. I think it's insulting to call people selfish because they choose to drive whatever they drive. I'm a laissez-faire kind of guy and I think people are best left to make their OWN choices free from criticism from those on high, where it relates to vehicles, houses or a Slinky, for that matter. And your comment about people being selfish was just that. It was also thinly veiled to indicate that it was I to whom you were referring. Don't try to convince otherwise...
I don't care that you were, just don't try to say that you weren't.
People make choices about the things they buy according to how those things fit into their lives. And choosing to buy and SUV or not buy an SUV, IMO, should be free from the idle criticism of people whose lives an SUV (insert product here) does not fit...
over and out...
Well, I'm certainly relieved to know that you don't have a problem with my 4Runner, that sure takes a load of MY mind...please! I'll make sure to consult you before I buy another vehicle...not.
Of course, I was referring to your post about the whole notion of selfishness. Listen, SUV's, if they are on the road today, have passed DOT certification, and all the ridiculous bureaucratic bullshit that the gov't puts products though. They are legal to drive in the USA and given that I, for one, since I am a big proponent of the free market, like choices. And these choices are made in the marketplace...if I choose to buy an Escalade or a Yugo, is an individual choice. I think it's insulting to call people selfish because they choose to drive whatever they drive. I'm a laissez-faire kind of guy and I think people are best left to make their OWN choices free from criticism from those on high, where it relates to vehicles, houses or a Slinky, for that matter. And your comment about people being selfish was just that. It was also thinly veiled to indicate that it was I to whom you were referring. Don't try to convince otherwise...
I don't care that you were, just don't try to say that you weren't.
People make choices about the things they buy according to how those things fit into their lives. And choosing to buy and SUV or not buy an SUV, IMO, should be free from the idle criticism of people whose lives an SUV (insert product here) does not fit...
over and out...