Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Four-Wheel-Drive Fantasies - A defense of the SUV
Reasononline ^ | 7/02 | Hans Eisenbeis

Posted on 07/26/2002 10:53:57 AM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection

...Go Tell It on the Mountain

What do sport utility vehicles say about us? First, they say we’re herd animals. The latest numbers from the auto industry say that every other new car driven off a dealer’s lot is a "light truck," the category that includes pickup trucks, vans, and SUVs. Five million new SUVs are sold every year. And the numbers keep growing. There are now more than 70 distinct models identified as SUVs. Recently the Ford F-series became the best-selling automobile of any kind or class, finally vanquishing the Honda Accord and the Toyota Camry after their many years atop the sales charts. Of the five top-selling vehicles in the U.S., three are now light trucks or SUVs. Whatever else you want to say about the SUV, you certainly cannot call it a passing fad.

Aside from the more pragmatic reasons people like to drive them -- they’re big, they feel safe, they’re full of luxurious options -- there are lots of less rational reasons, and these are never made more explicitly clear than in SUV advertisements. A recent ad for Nissan’s Pathfinder carries the tag line "Not That You Would, But You Could." It shows a young man bouncing through ditches and racing jets down runways, a rooster’s tail of sand and mud shooting immodestly out the back of his Pathfinder. This ad is just about the purest distillation of SUV spirituality there is. Take your pick of any recent Jeep commercial -- the stereotypical Wrangler, say, perched on the edge of a precipitous canyon at sunset -- and you have a snapshot not only of modern 4X4 marketing but of the somewhat dreamy soul of an entire nation.

If we are what we drive, SUVs have some interesting things to say about us. Some things they say may be ugly: We are excessive, solipsistic, wasteful, indulgent, egotistical. Some of what they say may be noble: We are free; we are individuals; we want access to wilderness and new frontiers; we are self-reliant. Taken as a whole, the qualities of the SUV are quintessentially American. Although there are certainly more remote and rugged nations than the U.S. -- even in the industrialized West -- the SUV could not have originated in any other country.

Like all cars, sport utility vehicles are about the freedom of mobility. But more than that, they are about absolute mobility -- mobility that transcends pavement and even civilization itself. (Of course, airplanes do this even better, but populism and price converge on the ground: Any 16-year-old can get a license to drive dad’s Explorer.) At the same time, SUVs are ostensibly about access to wilderness and about self-reliance, although real wilderness and authentic self-reliance are shibboleths of the 19th century. Emerson and Thoreau surely would have understood the appeal of the SUV.

Back here in the 21st century, there’s growing concern that the automobile is killing the planet. Presumably, bigger, dirtier cars capable of making their own roads aren’t a part of the solution. There’s plenty of evidence that SUVs contribute to our environmental dilemma. It takes more resources to make them; they burn more gas, oil, and rubber during their useful lifetimes; and they continue to pollute disproportionately once they’ve been scrapped.

On the other hand, the difference between SUVs and other cars is one not so much of degree as of perception. Picking on SUV owners is probably as misguided as it is disingenuous. New SUVs, for example, are a far sight more responsible than the 15 million used cars that become obsolete each year. Even the greenest autos built in the 1980s, for example, are 90 percent dirtier and less efficient than new SUVs. Anyway, if I really wanted to get serious about reducing my daily contribution to the planet’s carbon dioxide, I’d be pumping two wheels instead of driving four. The anti-automobile crusade is hopeless, and singling out any particular model is an exercise in pointlessness.

The Road Less Taken

The Rubicon Trail in the Sierra Nevadas is often described as the worst 12-mile stretch of road on the planet. To call it a road is a bit wishful, since even horses and mountain bikers have been known to balk at the rock-strewn mountain pass just outside Georgetown, California. The Rubicon is both Mecca and Medina to serious off-roaders. Hundreds go there every year to test their skills and their rigs against the Rubicon. Countless groups hold 4X4 driving camps here, including the U.S. Army.

Critics are fond of pointing out that only one in 10 SUV owners actually takes his vehicle off road, and this is true. But that misses the point, as far as that 10 percent is concerned. Those who can’t tolerate the recent growth in popularity and upscaling of SUVs might be surprised to learn that people have had the sport utility impulse for a lot longer than SUVs have existed. Just 10 years after the first Jeeps were built during World War II, a chapter of civilian 4X4 enthusiasts was chartered by a Rotary Club in California. Their purpose? To coax their decommissioned Jeeps over the Rubicon. This summer, the 50th annual Jeepers Jamboree will take place there.

It is cause for concern or celebration, depending on your perspective, that just about every SUV today is built to serious off-road specifications. Except for the most recent trend toward car-SUV hybrids (such as the Toyota RAV, the Subaru Forester, and the Honda CRV -- cars that are referred to by industry folks as CUVs, "crossover utility vehicles"), these vehicles are built with special low-speed gearing and lock-out differentials, high clearance, roll bars, and all the other apparatus of genuine four-wheeling. Even the august Mercedes M Class, the ridiculous Toyota FJ80 Land Cruiser, and the odious Lexus RX 300 are as capable in the mountains as they are in the suburbs. While the interiors often are designed by people with their minds in the boardroom, the engineers who design the drive trains are thinking about high water, turning radius, and exit angle. The Rubicon is frequently occupied by major automobile manufacturers who are developing new models. It’s not uncommon to see executives and engineers helicopter prototypes down to the trail, where a test driver puts the new vehicle through its paces. Like military vehicles, SUVs not only have to look the part, they have to act the part -- a rare case, perhaps, of hyperactive truth in advertising.

In recent years, the military pedigree of the SUV has become explicit. At last year’s spring auto show in New York City, The New York Times reported, most automakers were displaying vehicles that looked less like sedans and limos, and more like tanks. Cadillac recently announced that it will be offering a fully armored model with bulletproof windows and steel plating. The privatization of the U.S. Army’s "Humvee" -- now known as the GM Hummer -- also represents a reversion to origins. And if bigger is better, then brace yourself for the best: DaimlerChrysler has announced plans to roll out the world’s largest SUV, a German military vehicle repurposed for the civilian market. The Unimog weighs five tons, stands 12 feet tall and seven feet wide, and will cost around $150,000.

There’s ample evidence that these massive trucks are a form of escapism. But what, after all, is wrong with escapism? From one point of view, all of post-industrial capitalism is a form of escapism, a bulwark against harsh realities the rest of the world still faces on a daily basis. Pre-packaged chicken, herbal shampoo, ESPN Sports Center -- our more conspicuous forms of consumerism have always been as much about putting to use the opportunities of our privileged lives as about gaining any useful leverage against true adversaries such as time, space, and the income tax. Of course, the more radical our dreams get, the more they begin to look like our nightmares. Weren’t the Taliban most easily identified from the air by their fully loaded Toyota 4Runners? In the isolated comfort of our luxury SUVs, we see the afterimage -- or perhaps the harbinger -- of war...

(Excerpt) Read more at reason.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; US: California
KEYWORDS: environmentwackos; suv
Consider this - highway spending is tied to gas tax receipts and "improving" mileage to 35MPG which would;

1-eliminate a great deal of our current vehicles
2-decrease safety
3-increase deaths
4-increase insurance costs
5-lower tickets on car sales - decrease profits
6-screw the economy
7-TAX RECEIPTS FROM GAS SALES GO INTO THE CAN - WHO FUNDS THE IMPROVEMENTS?

1 posted on 07/26/2002 10:53:57 AM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
The state of California is poised to "improve" the mileage requirements all by itself, imposing the legislature's insanity on the rest of the US. See this link: California: Davis' greenhouse folly.
2 posted on 07/26/2002 11:03:47 AM PDT by TenthAmendmentChampion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; madfly
fyi
3 posted on 07/26/2002 12:53:55 PM PDT by Free the USA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Free the USA
Thanks for the ping!
4 posted on 07/26/2002 2:34:28 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson