The SUV is dead. Long live the SUV.

[imthebadguy]

you can half my suv when u pry it from my cold dead fingers

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: vi edit

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: TruePaige
I think what he's trying to say is that cars more often receive higher rollover ratings than SUV's.

Most cars have a 4, a good chunk of cars have a 5.

SUV's on the other hand need a bunch of anti-rollover tech to acheive a 4, and none have a 5.

DING DING DING, we have a winner!

Thank-you! :thumbsup:

Edit: Do you think Caveman can't understand this, or simply won't admit this?

Then you need to admit that technology does help out and can mitigate some elements of physics when you compare pre-stability control models to those with it. A 4 star SUV isn't the tipsy topsy floaty death machine that it's demonized as in this thread.

That's correct.

Also, the original point of this thread was to discuss how SUVs were being changed in the near future and a big part of that change involves reducing the weight. Here is to hoping that they engineer it in such a way that SUVs are able to maintain those 4 star ratings with the weight decrease. I have a feeling that they will not.

 

[rh71]

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
Since I drive less than 5k miles a year, I'll stick with my QX4.

same with my SUV.

But instead of the nouveau yuppies fueling abnormally high sales, we'll see trucks reprise their role as a niche market,

Fine by me.

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: vi edit
Then you need to admit that technology does help out and can mitigate some elements of physics when you compare pre-stability control models to those with it. A 4 star SUV isn't the tipsy topsy floaty death machine that it's demonized as in this thread.

_

Admit? This is the second straight time you have tried rhetorical misdirection as a tactic.

Please stop with the false rhetoric, it's misdirection of the most primitive order, and it should be beneath you.

Where did I ever say it didn't? Please find that quote and post it here.

What I have repeatedly and strongly spoken out against is Caveman's BS statement:

"Newer SUVs have stability control and anti-roll features that make them as difficult to rollover as a normal car."

As I said, it is simply not true.

And the FACTS bear me out.

Will you admit that?

 

[rh71]

Originally posted by: PingSpike
I thought it was funny when my friends brother insisted on buying a tahoe because he thought a minivan was to dorky for him. As if when hauling 3 kids around keeping any pretenses of being the cool smooth guy are necessary or possible. You are a dad, so what if you're driving a dad vehicle?

Drove my dad's MPV often recently and that thing is a fricken boat with crap response... no way would I ever voluntarily want to drive minivans... PERIOD. My 13-year old truck-frame SUV drives better than that thing.

 

[TruePaige]

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: vi edit
Then you need to admit that technology does help out and can mitigate some elements of physics when you compare pre-stability control models to those with it. A 4 star SUV isn't the tipsy topsy floaty death machine that it's demonized as in this thread.

_

Admit? This is the second straight time you have tried rhetorical misdirection as a tactic.

Please stop with the false rhetoric, it's misdirection of the most primitive order, and it should be beneath you.

Where did I ever say it didn't? Please find that quote and post it here.

What I have repeatedly and strongly spoken out against is Caveman's BS statement:

"Newer SUVs have stability control and anti-roll features that make them as difficult to rollover as a normal car."

As I said, it is simply not true.

And the FACTS bear me out.

Will you admit that?

I think he's just a little mad at you and won't let it go. You have been a lil' rough with your words, so he may have taken it as an insult.

You were right. Overall cars have a far less chance of rolling over than SUV's, and don't need special technology to do it.

He was right on the points he made about the technology of today, where they can produce SUV's with fairly low chances of rollover.

I hope we can all agree on these points and let it go. =)

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: TruePaige
You were right. Overall cars have a far less chance of rolling over than SUV's, and don't need special technology to do it.

He was right on the points he made about the technology of today, where they can produce SUV's with fairly low chances of rollover, but never quite as good as cars, due to the inherent laws of physics, which was my sole point.

I hope we can all agree on these points and let it go. =)

Fair enough. :thumbsup:

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: TruePaige

I think he's just a little mad at you and won't let it go. You have been a lil' rough with your words, so he may have taken it as an insult.

You were right. Overall cars have a far less chance of rolling over than SUV's, and don't need special technology to do it.

He was right on the points he made about the technology of today, where they can produce SUV's with fairly low chances of rollover.

I hope we can all agree on these points and let it go. =)

Thank you for keeping things civil. I never once took the position that SUV's were less prone to roll overs than a sedan or wagon. All I'm trying to say in a very casual manner without beating people over the head with insults is that through technology and design the rollover problems are not as bad as they used to be and the rollover ratings on recent models back that.

I'm not going to further debate this.

 

[natto fire]

Still love my station wagon. Tipping the scales at ~2600 lbs, it is extremely light and get's good mileage from it's carbed 1.8. It kind of sucks not having power windows, and other nifty features, but if I want that then I just drive my Jeep. The Jeep offroads better than any of these newer mall cruising SUVs anyways.