SUV Owners Shouldn't Read This

newspaper syndication ^ | March 22, 2003 | Donald "Lefty" Kaul

[newgeezer]

There are few things more misleadingly named than the Sports Utility Vehicle, which is neither sporty nor particularly utilitarian.

Oh, it's advertised as useful, I'll grant you that. And maybe it is, if you live in a remote mountain village where you occasionally have to drive over a rock-strewn field in bad weather to get where you're going. But most of the people who do things like that wouldn't be caught sober in one of the modern, fancy-schmansy SUVs, with the soft ride and the leather seats and cup-holders. (Real mountain people drive pickup trucks with a gun-rack in back of their heads.)

No, SUVs are bought, for the most part, by city folk, many of them suburban mothers who use them to cart kids around, with side trips to the supermarket. They claim that they buy them because they are:

1. Roomy (for the kids, you know)
2. Safe (don't want to be out there in a tin can)
3. Able to travel in inclement weather (because of the four-wheel drive so many of them have)

Which would be fine, except that none of those things is true. By the numbers:

1. Even the biggest SUVs (and there are some monsters) don't have any more passenger room than, say, a full-sized minivan, which costs thousands of dollars less and is easier to park.
2. SUVs have the distinction of being both more dangerous to themselves and more dangerous to other cars than other vehicles. Because of their high center of gravity, they have a distressing tendency to roll over and their fatality rates are higher than traditional vehicles (6 percent higher on the average; 8 percent in the bigger models). However, because of their huge size, in a collision with a normal-sized car, they are more apt to kill the occupants of the other vehicle. A Chevy Tahoe, for example, kills 122 people for every 1 million models on the road, while a Honda Accord kills only 21. This what's known as a lose/lose situation.
3. Inclement weather? Don't make me laugh. People with SUVs think inclement weather is when you can't play golf. For the occasional snowy day in most areas there are better ways to get around. SUVs are not the only four-wheel drive vehicles around anymore, after all. There are cars with all- and four-wheel drive that are superior in every way to your average SUV.

Every way except one. You can't bully other vehicles with a car the way you can with an SUV. And that's what the extraordinary popularity of the SUV is about---bullying.

Keith Bradsher, a New York Times reporter who been waging a crusade against SUVs for years now, has just published a book, High and Mighty, which documents the case against the vehicle. In it he quotes market researchers who have found that the SUV craze is "about not letting anything get in your way and at the extreme, about intimidating others to get out of your way."

SUV buyers, the researchers say, tend to be "insecure and vain, often lack confidence in their driving skills [and] are apt to be self-centered and self-absorbed, with little interest in neighbors and communities."

Does that sound familiar or what? Picture the typical SUV driver---the beady, close-set eyes of a serial killer set above a snarl that could curdle a latte. And that's just the women. The men are worse. Think of Hitler's Panzer divisions invading Poland.

On top of every else, these behemoths handle badly, get lousy gas mileage, are exempt from the safety standards that regular cars have to meet and don't have to pay the luxury tax that similarly priced cars have to pay. (It's called campaign contributions.)

Let's face it, they are an unmitigated disaster; assault rifles with power steering. If a terrorist country was trying to do to us what the SUV is doing, we'd be bombing it by now.

Yet the SUV has become the backbone of the American auto industry, and, as such, is with us forever or until the gasoline runs out, whichever comes first.

[Roughneck]

"They guzzle gas, putting money into the pockets of our enemies at inordinate rates"

I beg to differ. It is environmentalists that are putting money in the pockets of our enemies by disallowing domestic production of oil. Just like a liberal to then try to blame their bad decisions on SUV's.

[newgeezer]

That is if Walmart, K-mart and Target are department stores.

Sure, if Velveeta is cheese. ;-)

[Old Professer]

One of these days, I'll read to the end of the thread before jumping in.

[al_c]

There are few things more misleadingly named than the Sports Utility Vehicle

In some case, I'll agree with this statement. Especially the "luxury" suv. How can you put the words "luxury" and "utility" in one phrase describing a vehicle? Seems silly to me.

How's it going, geeze?

[nina0113]

You can still have a full-size wagon - there's plenty of used ones out there. We just put a new trans in mine ($1200) so I expect to drive it at least 5 more years, when I will buy another old full-size wagon.

[cardinal4]

Just like a liberal to then try to blame their bad decisions on SUV's.

You are correct. ANWR drilling is a must. But since they revere the caribou more than their own country, we are dependant on the likes of the Saudis for gas for our SUVs. Im not going to drive a GEO because some liberal respects a moose more than his own country.

[newgeezer]

How's it going, geeze?

Just great, Al. Thought I'd give the pot a stir and see what's cooking. :-)

[Old Professer]

About 10 years ago, I came upon an accident scene where a Geo Metro (new) had been hit by a 1977 Impala just past a railroad crossing; the Impala had been apparently somewhat airborne at the point of impact; the Metro was strewn all over the intersection with pieces in the neighboring yards. The Impala driver walked to the police car where he was placed in the back seat for a short trip to the Van Nuys station, L.A.P.D.

[newgeezer]

Im in the airline industry

In that case, we're close to having something else in common (besides the Redbirds). I'm in avionics; so's biblewonk.

Looks like they're predicting rain for Albert Pujols Bat Day.

[al_c]

LOL! You picked a good subject for stirring things.

[gridlock]

The old wagons are great. I have two and the newer one is at 192,000 miles. I intend to drive them both until they are nothing but spots of rust on my driveway. But every now and then I think it might be nice to own a new car someday.

That Dodge Magnum/Chrysler Pacifica looks like an interesting car, but I would wager it would not pass the 4x8 test...

[cardinal4]

My vacation time I requested begins that day. Tix are very scarce though. And yes, they are looking for tstorms on Sunday.

[Charles Martel]

Corvette owners do not buy 6000lb 4 wheel drive SUV's to drive to soccer practice. They buy cars that are used for their intended purpose.

I love Corvettes, I really do. I had a '73 with a Lingenfelter 373. I no longer own one, but have several friends who do. Most Corvette owners never use more than a fraction of the car's performance potential. That's not a whole lot different than SUV owners who never drive off-road. Further, the Corvette is far from the darling of the fuel-efficiency crowd. Sure, the new fuel-injected, computer-controlled V-8 can be amazingly efficient (relatively speaking), but the car has only two seats. If "inefficent" SUVs are eliminated, guess whose ox is likely to get gored next?

[RightOnline]

"Even the biggest SUVs (and there are some monsters) don't have any more passenger room than, say, a full-sized minivan,..."

What a maroon.

Let this drooler convince me that a Chrysler minivan has the passenger room of my Suburban. Bulls**t.

Let's not even go into "cargo space".

BTW, I have seven children. What minivan will haul my crew?

Dumbass.

[RightOnline]

"God article. He nailed SUV owners for what they are...Pousers!'

At least the majority of us can spell, idiot.

[MileHi]

They claim that they buy them because they are:

1.Roomy (for the kids, you know)
2.Safe (don't want to be out there in a tin can)
3.Able to travel in inclement weather (because of the four-wheel drive so many of them have)

4.Because they damn well WANT to, you limp-wristed f#@%ing maggot.

[biblewonk]

It's easy to get burned by that. Trouble is, the leftist crowd loves to cry "censorship" and "first amendment" when people disagree with them. Some folks seem to think that freedom of speech means a) you're guaranteed a platform from which to speak and b) noone may disagree with you. Try objecting to the homos and the abortionists for an example. See how long it takes for them to start ranting "anti-choice homophobe" at you...

I was thinking about where the first amendment meets with aiding and comforting the enemy. That line is certainly not a fixed point and it moves quite a bit during war time. It's also not a line but a fuzzy gray area. Sure you can compliment the wrong raghead or criticizae the wrong war plan and get fired from NBC but you are still a free man. But what would constitute giving comfort to the enemy and get you in real trouble right now?.

BTW sorry about the confusion earlier. I know that as a freeper you'd fight for my right to hate suv's and me for your right to love them. We all know what opinions are like.

[Elric@Melnibone]

But I do have an old Dodge D-100 too.

I can dig on Dodges, especially Power Wagons, WC57, etc.: heavy duty, go anywhere, do anything rigs.

But I knew about the F-100 as I drive an '81 F-100 Custom (last year for them; in '82 they become the F-100 Ranger and in '83 [I think] they were downsized and became just the Ranger and that ended the F-100 line).

[seams2me]

That's why I've always preferred a fullsize truck or van, not one of those "mini" vans or "light" trucks.

Remember, the biggest car always wins.

[BCR #226]

Too bad for them, I like my "SUV"... even though it is really a CUCV. hehehe...

Mike