Why SUVs??

And, as a side note for those of you who find that SUV's are not really BIG ENOUGH,

1st place
This year's runaway winner was Mr. Merv Grazinski of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Mr. Grazinski purchased a brand new Winnebago Motor Home. On his trip home from an OU football game, having driven onto the freeway, he set the cruise control at 70 mph and calmly left the drivers seat to go
into the back and make himself a cup of coffee. Not surprisingly, the RV left the freeway, crashed & then overturned. Mr Grazinski sued Winnebago for not advising him, by reading the owner's manual, that he actually could not do this. The jury awarded him $1,750,000 plus a new Winnebago Motor
Home. The company actually changed their manuals on the basis of this suit just in case there were any other complete morons buying their recreation vehicles

Oh, and jimpo, not to inflame things further, buy what you want, but i've heard this rationalization many times:

"My wife isn't the best driver in the world, she bumps into things. I want her and my kids SAFE."
Why on earth give somebody who is not a good driver something even bigger and more unwieldy to drive? Sorry, i just don't get it either. (No malice intended).

 

http://www.snopes.com/autos/techno/cruise.asp




.

 

I knew I wasn't the only FChatter that hated those ugly things. And, my wife is an independant women and can buy whatever she wants regardless of my wants...and vice versa. And you guys that claim you need all that room, how do you suppose people with families got by before the SUV craze started in the 1980s? They ate food, owned pets and played sports then too! By the way, I don't let my children eat in the car anyway, whether it is my Boxer, M5 or my wife's H2...its a little thing called discipline. IMHO, their limited usefulness for some of the time is FAR outweighed by their ugliness, poor handling, poor economy,danger to others in crashes and ugliness! By the way, according to the Insurance Institute, they are not that safe either when compared to quality sedans and in some cases much more dangerous. So, you are not doing your wife and kids a favor by buying them one anyway. Also, for those of us who were adults in the late 70s, we know that the only reason they things were first hawked by the Big Three was because they lacked the technology at the time to get their full size sedans to meet the then new EPA and DOT standards. They now continue to hawk them as they represent the highest profit margin out of all vehicles they sell. They still fail to meet the EPA and DOT standards that regular passenger cars do. So if you own one, you have been duped IMHO as has my wife with her box car like H2!

 

I figured with your edumacatoin you would love SUV's for your earning potential.

Please, Let me address again...

How many station wagons had 4 wheel drive and could tow 6000lbs?

If we followed your flawed thinking we would still travel the earth via boat and goat only. No need for planes right?

What does this have to do with anything? I suppose you are against Vacuum cleaners too.

First off, your opinions are far from humble. I don’t believe anyone said they bought it for safety. Your wife being duped is her and your issue, after all, you married her. We bought the car based on what we wanted, not what the big 3 said.

Since you are an all knowing ambulance chaser, what car would you recommend since you are so anti-SUV?

It needs to carry 6 or more passengers, have 4 wheel drive, tow 6000lbs.

Until then STFU

 

looking at your websites and profile, I'd say you are the master of double standards.

You hate SUV's yet you own a H2, and you have oldsmobile as a client.

Like a true Personal Injury attorney, stand firm in your beliefs, until you get paid to look the other way.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Can we get that image as Franks avitar or better yet next time someone gets the roaming title lets give it to Frank

 

LMAO!

 

lmao!!!!!

 

First I'd like to say that this is the ugliest thread I've seen on F-Chat in a long while. Some of you need to chill out and stick to the topic.

My issue with SUVs is the current glut of them. Doubtless that some people need them, while others may not require them, but still use them to their full potential. I have no problem with this.

What I do have a problem with is that many are bought these days as fashion accessories. Just using the parking lot at my office as an example, 80% of the SUVs are daily driven commuter vehicles used by one person (usually a woman). Perhaps they are taking these trucks on the Yubacon over the weekend, but they must be hitting the car wash on the way home cause from the looks of it, the farthest any of these ever make it off road is a poorly executed 3 point turn. As for towing, again based on my daily observations, 2 kids and a few bags of groceries doesn't require an SUV.

 

Koby,

Had Frank voiced his points like you, there would not have been blow up. I posted in another thread about the car my wife got. Nothing more, nothing less. Frank started this whole mess. She NEEDS an SUV. I agree about the fashion accessories and about use them daily for one person.

 

Matt, thanks for the reply. I actually edited my own response to tone down the langauge, but you quoted before I did, just wanted to note that.

I agree with Wax, this debate does get very heated on both sides.

 

I did notice that. I did not take what you said poorly.

I can see the arguement against them. I really can. We have one out of need, not accessory. I would rather own a car but she has this trailer that would be useless if she can't tow it.

 

I have no problem with SUVs, we have a Pathfinder and the room it provides is great, as well as for towing our boat.

A problem I have is as Koby and matto said, buying them as fashion statements and for use by only one person.

Another thing that really bothers me is the people that drive these large SUVs are talking on their phones, not paying attention and tailgating like crazy. They do not realize that they are driving a vehicle that might weigh close to 3 tons, and that it takes much further to stop compared to a car.

Parking these large SUVs can presents a problem. I was in a parking lot yesterday and a woman in a Ford Expedition pulled into one of those spots labeled 'compact' and the poor woman that had parked a few seconds before her could not get out of her door. She had to roll down her window and ask the woman to move.

 

I don't need an SUV - I want one. Freedom rocks.

 

Rock On!
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

The arguments posted in this thread about why we don't need SUV's could easily be turned around and applied to Ferrari's other exotics and actually any sports car. They are fashion statements, How many buy one and use it to it's full extent? hopefully not many as speed limit is 65, so I guess you could say why does anyone need a car that goes faster than that. Most only hold two people and like my Spyder which averages under 9 MPG, they get far worse mileage than all SUV's

 

Granted, but there is a key difference: scale. For every Ferrari made, there are thousands of SUVs made. For every mile a Ferrari drives, SUVs go 10's of thousands. Again, it is the glut of SUVs that bothers me. On my way home last night, at one point while in dense traffic, I couldn't see a single other car.

 

Doesn't take a SUV to people drive like crazy, talk on the cellphones, or tailgate.

Sadly, I think its more about Bad drivers then the SUV.

 

Lets see:

3 Car seats, their friends too
2 Huskies in their crates
Ski trips=snow (4X4)
Bikes easier to throw in the back
My other toys fit easier in the back
and
I LIKE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

It could be that CA is its own nebulous stardust cluster of weird, but the SUV stupidity is at a critical mass on my end of the weird ways Universe.
My problem with SUVs is 1, their size 2, their suffocation of the sport and sport compact market share 3, they're land whales that occlude my forward, rearward and peripheral vision while driving and 4, they're a troubling waste of resources (metal, plastic, gas and oil).
Socially, and perhaps it's an issue of morality, ethics and simple common sense (which CA residents ardently defy) it's that for every 25 SUVs seen on the road nary one is carrying more than ONE person and for every 100 or more there's only one that's actually towing, hauling or loaded with more than a purse, a soy non-fat chai latte and a hundred and forty six cell phones all being talked into at once.
The thing is most SUV owners don't need an SUV - they bought one for the same reason lemmings follow their jaded leaders off cliffs. I ride a motorcycle and I have a small car - it doesn't take Professor Hawking to do the math should one of these prehistoric land behemoths come careening into me - in, or on, either vehicle (I sometime surf on the roofrack.)
Frankly, I wish they'd ban vehicles over 6000lbs on residential streets or limit their thoroughfare - why? Because then every stooge with 4 SUVs per household would come face to face with the absolutely absurd diorama of transportation he's built.
PS: A friend of a friend's GF just bought an H2 Hummer aka Tahoe with a Bodykit and has found it to be an absoloute nightmare to own; can't find parking; can't fit it into spots; manuvering it is the equivelant of dodging an iceberg onboard the Titanic; and it swigs gas like your drunk uncle. Nice work.

 

Without reading all these post's I'll just respond to the original statement. I agree completely, the big clumsy things are worthless, and only serve as an I'm bigger than you are statement. Frankly looking at an occupancy of ONE person sitting in traffic for an hour is quite nauseating.

 

As much as I personally hate SUVs, I don't think they should be banned.

However, considering that they have some unique properties (high mass, high roll center, increased stopping distances, etc.), I would like to see some mandated extra training and a special SUV endorsement requirement. Considering how pathetic driver education is in the US already, I don't think it's too much to ask that someone driving a vehicle that requires above average attention to drive be asked to take an extra test or two.

We already require a separate test for motorcycles (which are alot less likely to kill people other than the rider in a car accident). Considering that the sizeable mass of most SUVs will result in greater force being transmitted to another vehicle(s) in the event of an accident, this seems fair.

 

I'd settle for getting the drivers OFF THE CELL PHONE.

 

Same here. Is it just me, or do people who just SUV drivers are the only bad drivers in the world?