I am curious what my fellow anandtechies think about this subject. If you don't want to get into a flame war, please just vote on the poll.
Poll: SUV's Love 'em or hate 'em?
- Thread starter gunf1ghter
- Start date
So let me pose a question even though this topic has had the crap flogged out of it lately. I have a 1980 Jeep CJ5. Are you calling my jeep a landwhale? It has an 85" wheelbase, thats smaller than most cars......
No, but I hate a certain mentality that a portion of SUV owners have - and the way they drive the vehicles.
These are the folks that buy massive SUVs for prestige or looks only, and drive them very aggressivly versus smaller vehicles.
These are the folks that buy massive SUVs for prestige or looks only, and drive them very aggressivly versus smaller vehicles.
Actually, I consider the CJ5 to be a genuine "enthusiast vehicle" for people who need some offroad capability.... On the other hand a lot of people seem to be tooling around in SUV's that are nothing more than glorified station wagon's.... tons of Expeditions and Suburbans that have seen no off-road duty other than driving through a gravel driveway.
I wouldn't mind owning a medium-sized SUV at some point in the future, simply for utilitarian purposes. They are nice to have around if you have to transport stuff or especially for their 4 wheel drive in the winter.
OuterSquare, you pretty much hit it on the head.... why do they not have to conform to gas guzzler taxes or meet the same emissions and crash requirements as smaller vehicles?
Should really add another to the Poll, "I don't mind them, I don't love or hate them, they are like any other car. "
Actually here in southern illinois there are no emissions testings of any sort so they do indeed conform!
BigSmooth
Lifer
- Aug 18, 2000
- 10,484
- 12
- 81
I think they can definitely be useful vehicles, but I know far too many people who buy them and just use them like cars (just everyday driving like to work and what not, almost NEVER hauling people/stuff around in them).
Personally, I think the cost of buying and owning one would be too high for me.
Personally, I think the cost of buying and owning one would be too high for me.
- Oct 28, 1999
- 62,484
- 8,345
- 126
Being an SUV owner, I can say that I hate other SUV driver's more so than I hate the actual vehicle.
But then again, I don't particulary hate riced out honda civics, but I am completely and utterly annoyed by the jackass driving them at 70MPH down the interstate in snowy/icy conditions.
I don't hate semis, but I do hate it when the driver insists on taking 10 miles to pass another semi.
I don't hate motorcycles, but I hate it when the driver insists on riding in your blind spot.
I can go on and on.
But then again, I don't particulary hate riced out honda civics, but I am completely and utterly annoyed by the jackass driving them at 70MPH down the interstate in snowy/icy conditions.
I don't hate semis, but I do hate it when the driver insists on taking 10 miles to pass another semi.
I don't hate motorcycles, but I hate it when the driver insists on riding in your blind spot.
I can go on and on.
I love SUV's but my limited driving abilities would make me a hazard to everyone. So for the sake of everyone else i probably will never get an SUV for myself.
That is true.... they are often purchased for use as passenger cars and not for their "intended" use as "light duty trucks". They are relatively cheap for such big vehicles because they don't have to conform to the same standards that cars do. In addition, they don't count towards CAFE, which controls how many fuel efficient vehicles of different sizes the car companies have to sell.
Even then, a fully decked out Expedition or Yukon can easily run into the mid-high 30's.
How much more would it cost if all the emissions, crash standards, gas guzzler taxes, etc, were tacked on to the cost of up-front ownership?
Even then, a fully decked out Expedition or Yukon can easily run into the mid-high 30's.
How much more would it cost if all the emissions, crash standards, gas guzzler taxes, etc, were tacked on to the cost of up-front ownership?
Emos --- you know were' on the same page on this one *wink*
Lilly -- glad you recognize that, the overwhelming majority of people owning/operating such vehicles think that they are just "big cars" and drive them accordingly.
Lilly -- glad you recognize that, the overwhelming majority of people owning/operating such vehicles think that they are just "big cars" and drive them accordingly.
- Oct 28, 1999
- 62,484
- 8,345
- 126
bigsmooth, I actually compared my SUV to an AWD VW Passat station wagon. In the total cost area the SUV came ahead...big time.
factor 1 - My 2000 GMC Jimmy was almost $6,000 cheaper than the VW
factor 2 - My gas milage was worse, but since I don't have to pay for premium fuel, I got more miles for my money than the VW
factor 3 - The insurance on the Jimmy was nearly $600 cheaper a year than on the VW
factor 4 - best interest rate I could get on the VW was around 8.5%, I got GMAC financing on the Jimmy for around 5.9 (works out to be about $40 I save a month)
All in all, the TCO of the Jimmy is considerably cheaper.
factor 1 - My 2000 GMC Jimmy was almost $6,000 cheaper than the VW
factor 2 - My gas milage was worse, but since I don't have to pay for premium fuel, I got more miles for my money than the VW
factor 3 - The insurance on the Jimmy was nearly $600 cheaper a year than on the VW
factor 4 - best interest rate I could get on the VW was around 8.5%, I got GMAC financing on the Jimmy for around 5.9 (works out to be about $40 I save a month)
All in all, the TCO of the Jimmy is considerably cheaper.
dcdomain
Diamond Member
- Jan 30, 2000
- 5,158
- 0
- 71
I agree with Vi_Edit
Anyway, Optimus, I disagree with what you said about people driving SUV's more aggressively. In an SUV, I usually feel less stable, so I always end up driving more carefully in my SUV than I would be in my parent's cars... I take turns slower, I always end up driving slower because they are heavier and not as nimble as cars, and they are higher up. So with the added visibility and common sense, they are in fact driven less agressively and more safely than most people would drive their cars.
Anyway, Optimus, I disagree with what you said about people driving SUV's more aggressively. In an SUV, I usually feel less stable, so I always end up driving more carefully in my SUV than I would be in my parent's cars... I take turns slower, I always end up driving slower because they are heavier and not as nimble as cars, and they are higher up. So with the added visibility and common sense, they are in fact driven less agressively and more safely than most people would drive their cars.
vi_edit
actually we are in agreement as to the SUV being much cheaper to own and operate than a comparably equiped car.
the question is, why is it cheaper? it's cheaper because it ISN'T a passenger car and the manufacturer didn't have to spend the money making it as safe and fuel efficient as a passenger car.
would it make you feel good if you bought a state of the art passenger car with 30 years of crash safety engineering that could easily be negated if it was crashed into by a cheap SUV built on a ladder frame that used your car as it's crumple zone?
actually we are in agreement as to the SUV being much cheaper to own and operate than a comparably equiped car.
the question is, why is it cheaper? it's cheaper because it ISN'T a passenger car and the manufacturer didn't have to spend the money making it as safe and fuel efficient as a passenger car.
would it make you feel good if you bought a state of the art passenger car with 30 years of crash safety engineering that could easily be negated if it was crashed into by a cheap SUV built on a ladder frame that used your car as it's crumple zone?
Whose fault is it that a decent size, roomy, 4DR, V8, RWD vehicle got slapped with the moniker SUV? Does the fact that your eensie weensie go-kart has a friggen spoiler on the back make it a "sports car"?
Just because it's classified as an SUV doesn't actually make it one. Just as being classified a "sports Car" doesn't make it one either.
Why don't you morons get off it and face the fact that a LOT of people are pretty fvcken tired of Detroit's rice burner knock off, FWD, kiddie cars?
Just because it's classified as an SUV doesn't actually make it one. Just as being classified a "sports Car" doesn't make it one either.
Why don't you morons get off it and face the fact that a LOT of people are pretty fvcken tired of Detroit's rice burner knock off, FWD, kiddie cars?
- Oct 28, 1999
- 62,484
- 8,345
- 126
gunf1ghterMy insurance was cheaper BECAUSE OF SAFETY. Direct quote from my insurance rep by the way. The death tolls in that particular SUV are very, very low.
It was cheaper than the VW because the VW is a) foreign and b) german
As far as my fuel costs being cheaper...gee I dunno. The fact that my vehicles engine is 1.5 liters larger, my vehicle is nearly 600 pounds heavier, and I still manage to get more miles for my money over the VW. No, it's not efficient at all
It was cheaper than the VW because the VW is a) foreign and b) german
As far as my fuel costs being cheaper...gee I dunno. The fact that my vehicles engine is 1.5 liters larger, my vehicle is nearly 600 pounds heavier, and I still manage to get more miles for my money over the VW. No, it's not efficient at all
Actually I drive an awd no-spoiler German Sports Sedan.
Ornery, why do you think it's ok for vehicles to be out on the road that can kill or maim people who bought smaller cars that have been required to meet safety requirements not met by SUV's or light trucks?
SUV's and light trucks are only at an advantage when hitting something that can absorb their impact (such as a car). The truck uses the car as it's "crumple zone"... this is because the car was designed to conform in a crash, the SUV with it's stiffer frame does not do this.
If an SUV hit's a solid object (such as another SUV with a similar height) it can actually go quite badly for the passengers as the kinetic energy is transferred to the occupants, not to the vehicles crumple zones (since they don't have crumple zones).
Ornery, why do you think it's ok for vehicles to be out on the road that can kill or maim people who bought smaller cars that have been required to meet safety requirements not met by SUV's or light trucks?
SUV's and light trucks are only at an advantage when hitting something that can absorb their impact (such as a car). The truck uses the car as it's "crumple zone"... this is because the car was designed to conform in a crash, the SUV with it's stiffer frame does not do this.
If an SUV hit's a solid object (such as another SUV with a similar height) it can actually go quite badly for the passengers as the kinetic energy is transferred to the occupants, not to the vehicles crumple zones (since they don't have crumple zones).
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter