So I ask, why get an SUV?

[Pupik]

We needed more ground clearance for some of the dirt roads outside of Gainesville. The Neon and Saturn SL1 just couldn't cut it. We wanted Civic reliability and simplicity and a cut-rate price, and enough room to haul cargo without blocking our view out the car. It's basically a front-driver wagon with more ground clearance, and gets 24-27 mpg.

Guess what...there weren't any wagons available in our 20K price range, except the Saturn wagon, which had about 5 more cubic feet of space than the 4-door SL, but it also looked ugly (pregnant might be a better word), and we'd had enough major Saturn problems (alternator, valve body, transmission) in just 45,000 miles to say no for a while.

Does it tow? A 1000 pound limit, including the trailer. Do I need to tow? No. Considering there's not much Sport, just enough Utility, and it's definately a Vehicle, we just call it a wagon. Although the extra ground clearance is rarely useful anymore in South Florida. So it's our Simple Unpretentious Vehicle (wagon). Not a crossover. Not a minivan. Not an essyouvee.

Six years later, it's had exactly one failure, a front axle seal was seeping a little lubricant earlier this year...a fairly cheap fix; so I don't regret buying it new (never had a chance to use the warranty).

Nobody has challenged my use of an SUV...I am winner! You are all teh losers!

 

[Wolfe]

We needed more ground clearance for some of the dirt roads outside of Gainesville. The Neon and Saturn SL1 just couldn't cut it. We wanted Civic reliability and simplicity and a cut-rate price, and enough room to haul cargo without blocking our view out the car. It's basically a front-driver wagon with more ground clearance, and gets 24-27 mpg.

*zOMG! itz an IMG!*

Does it tow? A 1000 pounds, including the trailer. Do I need to tow? No.

👍

I can understand the need for the ground clearance in that situation, and I applaud you for buying an SUV that wasn't total overkill for your needs. I only wish all american SUV-buyers would think like you.

 

[Pupik]

I only wish all american SUV-buyers would think like you.

Thanks...can I interest you in a Lexus LX 470?

 

[1X83Z]

Read the thread title.

Read the first post.

Now tell me, where does it say this is an American only thread? It doesn't. It does only mention American SUVs/MPV but that's because the starter is American.

Yeah, but the thing is, our markets are totally different.

In America, we're sort of forced in to SUVs. As I mentioned, there are only seven minivans and just one moderately-priced wagon on our market. Do you understand that? Go up to the list of SUVs I posted - that's just the small and midsize list. It'd double if I posted premium and large SUVs as well. The thing is, the thread starter made the post to discuss the problem that the American market has with buying minivans and buying SUVs. In Europe, the problem simply does not exist.

Here are a few differences of our markets:

1. Our SUVs are about the same size as yours, but our minivans are MUCH larger than yours. Yes, we have larger SUVs too, but the Land Rover Freelander-sized SUV is an extremely popular segment here. Meanwhile, there is only one vehicle in the United States presently on sale that is the size of the Vauxhall Zafria (which is by far the most popular minivan segment in Europe), and it's called the Mazda 5 - you get it too. Otherwise, the minivans here are absolutely huge - the majority of minivans are longer than the Audi A8, and every minivan is longer than the Volvo S80. Again - ALL of our minivans are the size of the Renault Grand Espace. We haven't got any Renault Scenic or Renault Megane - we get the Grand Espace-sized vehicles. And ALL of our minivans have three rows of seats. You have to understand that, first and foremost.

So basically if you're wondering why we all don't go buy Vauxhall Zafrias, the simple answer is because we can't. You're discussing what you know about your market, but the fact is, the problem is nowhere near as rampant overseas as it is in the United States.

2. Gas prices. Someone just made the absurd statement that Scandinavians buy cars, so why do Americans have to buy SUVs. You'd buy an SUV too if you had six zillion to choose from and you were paying $3.00 a gallon for gasoline. Europeans pay double and triple that. Actually, America is getting away from its dependency from SUVs and towards all-wheel drive cars - and manufacturers are making more all-wheel drive cars, too. But for the time being, we can afford to run the SUVs we buy - so consider running costs out - another difference between European and American markets.

3. The starter of this thread is making this post assumably because he knows that in the United States, SUVs outsell minivans by some absurd factor like seven to one. I'd bet that in Europe, minivans outsell SUVs by around that. Counting up all the MPVs currently on sale in the UK, I'm getting a total of 28, or 27 if you don't count the R-class which I suppose you shouldn't since I didn't for the US but come on the damn thing is a minivan. Do note that's four times the current number of minivans on sale in America. Meanwhile counting SUVs, I'm getting 36, which includes some crazy left-field entires like the Ssangyong whatever. Meanwhile, in the US, we have 71 to 77 SUVs presently on sale (depending on what you consider an SUV, and a different model, and stuff). So to sum up:

US = 7 minivans [no twins]: 75 SUVs [includes twins]
UK = 27 minivans [no twins]: 36 SUVs [includes twins]

And to sum up my lovely arguments:

1. The vehicles aren't even close to the same
2. The gas prices aren't even close to the same
3. The vehicles aren't even close to the same

One and three seem dangerously similar. But if you read it all, it makes sense.

 

[1X83Z]

1. ALL WHEEL DRIVE
AWD is not necessary for the mere presence of snow...unless things get really deep, RWD and FWD can do just fine; SUVs and trucks aren't the only vehicles on the road with AWD, and are only necessary compared to AWD cars/wagons when the snow gets really deep; there are tons of SUVs in places that almost never see even one snowflake. Why?

Look dude - I live in a very snowy area, and I can't do it in my front-drive car. A lot of us don't consider ourselves professional drivers, as you undoubtedly do considering you have an underpowered BMW, and while it's easy to say "RWD and FWD can do just fine," try telling that to my freaking mother, and the seven zillion other mothers across the country who'd probably spin a Volvo 240 making a right-hand turn in the freaking rain. To answer your bolded question, check reasons two through six.

2. SIZE
Minivans offer just as much seating capacity, and often just as much cargo capacity. Some wagons can claim the same. There are even some SUVs that have less cargo capacity than some minivans/wagons; inflating a driver's ego and sense of security are not valid reasons to block other drivers' views of the road and risk the lives of compact-car drivers; the additional cargo and seating capacity that an SUV provides is often not being used by the typical american SUV driver, who instead uses their SUV/truck to commute to work alone. If they have to have something big to haul the family and cargo on long trips, fine, but there are other ways to get to work.

Yo dude - read what I wrote. My "size" argument was that minivans are TOO LARGE not that they haven't got enough size. I hope the rest of your post actually addresses my statements.

3. POWER
Want speed? Get a sportscar. If you have to haul a lot of stuff, fine, but you don't have to keep up with sports-sedans and entry-level sportscars while doing so. When you speed in your SUV, you just look like a douchebag, anyway.

Um. Read what I wrote again. I'm not talking about speed, I'm talking about reasonable acceleration for a modern car. Come on - your post is shaping up to be worse than the original one.

4. HANDLING
Cars/wagons handle better, and are safer for it. End of story. If you argue with this, you're an idiot.

I agree. Sadly there AREN'T viable car/wagon alternatives. How many god damn times do I have to say it?

5. TOWING
Europeans can often be found towing things with -- le gasp! -- CARS. Sure, it isn't the greatest thing you can do to a unibody, but if you don't have much to tow and don't tow very often ("hey, let's dust off that boat of ours and take it out on the lake once before summer ends!"), a big, brawny, body-on-frame SUV or truck is just overkill. And yet again, just because you need an SUV to tow something every weekend doesn't mean you have to use it to commute to work by yourself.

I don't tow and don't care to, I'm just parroting that argument cause it's used a lot. I couldn't give less of a **** about towing. My own personal theory on towing is that if you really want a minivan, buy a minivan and for the two days a year when you want to tow, rent a damn truck from U-Haul - they're like $20 a day - and quit complaining. Ya know?

6. LACK OF CHOICES
You'll only see a lack of other options if you fail to open your mind to the possibility that you don't really need all of the "advantages" that an SUV offers. The #1 wasted advantage of an SUV is its ground clearance. Go ahead and look at wagons -- there's plenty of good ones, especially if you look in the used car market.

NAME ONE VIABLE WAGON THAT IS NOT THE SUBARU OUTBACK. I DARE YOU

The post I'm quoting from is now the worst I've seen in this thread, even worse than the original.

 

[Wolfe]

Thanks...can I interest you in a Lexus LX 470?

Uh, no thanks...why do you ask?

In America, we're sort of forced in to SUVs. As I mentioned, there are only seven minivans and just one moderately-priced wagon on our market. Do you understand that?

That would be true if every SUV buyer needed the cargo/seating space that wagons/minivans/SUVs/trucks provide. Not everyone does.

I probably do just as much passenger/cargo hauling in my little BMW 318i as a typical John C. Eeyoh who commutes in downtown New York in a BMW X5. And that's not much at all.

 

[1X83Z]

That would be true if every SUV buyer needed the cargo/seating space that wagons/minivans/SUVs/trucks provide. Not everyone does.

I AGREE COMPLETELY

So why do you and the thread starter insist on putting buyers of vehicles like the Ford Escape - one of those scary SUVs that achieves 25mpg and is around the same length as a Corolla - into a behemoth like a minivan? It's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

 

[Wolfe]

Look dude - I live in a very snowy area, and I can't do it in my front-drive car. A lot of us don't consider ourselves professional drivers, as you undoubtedly do considering you have an underpowered BMW, and while it's easy to say "RWD and FWD can do just fine," try telling that to my freaking mother, and the seven zillion other mothers across the country who'd probably spin a Volvo 240 making a right-hand turn in the freaking rain. To answer your bolded question, check reasons two through six.

Wow, that says a lot about the drivers in my area, then. In case you didn't notice, I live in Wisconsin, and we get plenty of snow -- that doesn't keep "ordinary" citizens from driving around in their FWD or RWD cars. Do they sell driver's licenses at WalMart where you live, or are all of the drivers here professionals?

Yo dude - read what I wrote. My "size" argument was that minivans are TOO LARGE not that they haven't got enough size. I hope the rest of your post actually addresses my statements.

You didn't read the disclaimer at the top of my post.

Um. Read what I wrote again. I'm not talking about speed, I'm talking about reasonable acceleration for a modern car. Come on - your post is shaping up to be worse than the original one.

You didn't read the disclaimer at the top of my post.

I agree. Sadly there AREN'T viable car/wagon alternatives. How many god damn times do I have to say it?

Cars and wagons are perfect alternatives when you don't need ground clearance and a large towing capacity.

I don't tow and don't care to, I'm just parroting that argument cause it's used a lot. I couldn't give less of a **** about towing. My own personal theory on towing is that if you really want a minivan, buy a minivan and for the two days a year when you want to tow, rent a damn truck from U-Haul - they're like $20 a day - and quit complaining. Ya know?

True enough.

NAME ONE VIABLE WAGON THAT IS NOT THE SUBARU OUTBACK. I DARE YOU

The post I'm quoting from is now the worst I've seen in this thread, even worse than the original.

Any wagon is viable. It all depends on the buyer's needs. I'm not sure of the number of wagon models that have been sold in this country in the entire history of the automobile, but subtract one from that number (for the Outback), and that's the number I've just given you. Whatever it is, it's a lot more than one.

Personally, I would recommend the Subaru Forrester to anyone looking for a wagon/small SUV, but I would probably end up buying a 3- or 5-series wagon, myself. I'm just too much of a BMW nut not to.

So why do you and the thread starter insist on putting buyers of vehicles like the Ford Escape - one of those scary SUVs that achieves 25mpg and is around the same length as a Corolla - into a behemoth like a minivan? It's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

I never said the Ford Escape was an evil vehicle, or even a bad one, even though most of the people who buy it could most likely get by with something shorter...

Usually, when pro/anti-SUV debates are started, the subject is large, heavy, V8-powered, body-on-frame SUVs, and generalized comments referring to that kind of SUV are inevitable. SUVs like the Escape, CRV, RAV4, etc. are basically just tall wagons, anyway.

 

[ExigeEvan]

@M5Power- I'm not trying to compare and contrast Europe and America. I didn't even make any referal to the American market in my post I simply added the facts of my area to allow this thread to become more diverse.

The beauty of internet forums is that within one thread, under one topic, there can be more that one line of conversation without complete and utter confusion.

 

[Poverty]

Yeah the RAV4 thing is not what I consider a SUV, but some people do. In one of our national papers, there was a article about a RAV4 owner who was ranting about the possibility of having to pay more congestion charge than a car because its a 4x4. She argued that "how dare the government tax me for the choice of my vehicle" argument, and said she chose the RAV for its space and saftey

Space and saftey my ass in a RAV4. If I was to be in a head on crash, and I had the choice of being in a ford mondeo or RAV4 it would be trhe mondeo straight away. Also the RAV4 sucks with storage space. Clever marketing has obviously gotten to her head as buying a RAV4 is the stupidest thing you can do when living in the city. Its just a uglier corolla on stilts, and it gives her a false sense of security.

 

[TB]

We purchased a Honda Pilot almost a year ago after my wife had problems getting our one year old in and out of our Gran Prix. We researched every type of vehicle and I went so far as to even drive a few minivans. Our biggest criteria was that the new vehicle had to fit a car seat and an infant carrier with enough room for all of the other baby crap. I was planning on getting a Ridgeline, but the back seat was too small for the carrier. We looked at an Oddesey, but that was the same story. We even went over to the Chevy dealer, told him that it didn't fit in the Ridgeline, he made some smart ass comment about it being a midsize pickup (like I didn't know that) and that it would defineetley fit in the Silverado. Wrong. Scratch another one off of the list.

All told, the only vehicle we liked that fit our needs, had good reliability and gas mileage was the Pilot. We picked up ours with a 7 CD changer, DVD, leather and sunroof. It seats up to 8, and has had seven in it a few times. The last time we were that loaded down we drove an hour to a zoo with the air on and got 24.5 mpg. I'll take that any day.

 

[Onikaze]

I AGREE COMPLETELY

So why do you and the thread starter insist on putting buyers of vehicles like the Ford Escape - one of those scary SUVs that achieves 25mpg and is around the same length as a Corolla - into a behemoth like a minivan? It's the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

I must have missed where I compared Ford Escapes (It's a smaller, slightly less useful Minivan, btw, it's just cool because it's not called a Minivan) to Ford Freestars in the original post.

I was talking about the preponderance (nice word huh?) of massive body on frame, wagon bodied full size pickup trucks.

H2's, Escalades, and Excursions, oh my!

I hear, all too often, the argument that they need the space, from people who have pristine cargo areas, and seat backs which have probably never been folded down.

I hear that it's too hard to fit into a small car...I know Americans are fat, I live here, but you can buy a larger car, or you could get a pickup truck and get better mileage.

If you really need room, the usual argument, get a minivan.

If you don't want a minivan, get a smaller minivan...I'm sorry, I mean crossover, I don't really have the slightest problem with them, and I do believe I said, in this thread even, that I consider CUV's a god send, for getting people out of the massive, DANGEROUS TO EVERYONE AROUND THEM, Zaibatsu Monstrousity type SUV's.

The new Chevy full size SUV's just got larger, and STILL have less room than a Minivan.

Chevy Tahoe: 202 Inches long, 39 Foot Turning Radius
Chevy Uplander: 191 Regular, 204 Extended, 39/41 Foot Turning Radius

Dodge Grand Caravan: 189 Inches long, 37.6 Foot Turning Radius
Dodge Durango: 200 Inches long, 37.5 foot Turning Radius

Ford Freestar: 201 Inches Long, can't find Turning Radius
Ford Explorer: 193 Inches Long, no info
Ford Expedition: 205.8 Inches Long, no info

Man, that blows the whole "size and handling" argument to hell, doesn't it?

"Oh, it was all sound and fury, signifying nothing." ~The Monarch, among others.

 

[Duke]

Why does everyone seem to like the FX? Am I the only one that hates its styling or what?

Nope. Not the only one at all. If I won it as a prize I would own it precisely as long as it took me to Ebay it or trade it in.

*gasp* Blasphemy! What about it do you not like?

Let me count the ways:

• the overall shape
• the proportions
• the weight
• the squinty eyes
• the tiny windows
• the interior design
• the massive exterior size for the mediocre interior room
• the "it's NOT a station wagon" farce
• the price

That's a bit just for a start.

And Doug, it snows in Pennsylvania and Delaware - occasionally. Perhaps 3 or 4 times a year. I have never, ever, not ONCE needed AWD or 4WD, or even just snow tires, in 25 years of driving in the Midatlantic area, from New York city to Washington DC. Please explain why it's worth buying a system that adds several thousand dollars and several hundred pounds to a vehicle for someone in this vicinity.

Oh, wait, I forgot: you always take the highly-specific idiosyncracies of your existance and apply them as if they wqere universal truths. I withdraw the question.

The millions of people in this extended metro area will have need for AWD capability perhaps 15 days out of 365. And most of those millions will use it to get a totally false sense of security, because they'll forget that AWD helps you accelerate in snow but does absolutely nothing for stopping or turning... and that's assuming that they even remember how to turn it on.

Sounds like a bargain, eh?

 

[Onikaze]

Did I forget to point out that you can get a Minivan with AWD?

*checks back*

Nope, covered that point, not to mention, a Minivan will be lighter, and at least as nimble, but with a lower center of gravity than an SUV, making it easier to turn/stop in snowy/icy situations.

SUV's having 4X4 capabilities only matters if you regularly, or at least actively take if offroad, like, if you live off a main road, and drive down a dirt road on a regular basis, and simply prefer the wagon body to the pickup one, then yeah, an SUV is great for you. People in big cities though?

 

[xXSilencerXx]

Now, I know I'm going to get ripped up here. Oh well.

I present to this thread:
The Chevy Astro.

It is a little down on power, at 190hp/250 lb-ft of torque. It's outdated. It's no longer in production. But it can do the job of any SUV without issues.

It's rated to tow some 5000 pounds, which I can fully verify. My dad's pulled our 5000 pound boat plus a carfull of stuff through the Rockies in the summer, and sleds in the winter (Back when we lived in Alberta). Hell, our van (2wd, may I add), has probably been further offroad than 75% of the SUV's on the road today. It's fast enough to keep up with traffic, and it handles like a truck, thanks to it's body-on-frame construction. But hey, so do SUV's (weird coincidence, eh?). It's cheap to buy, and in my eyes is the second most attractive minivan out there (second to the Odyssey). Parts are a dime a dozen, because the van is a dime a dozen. Plus, it's the only rear-drive minivan I can think of, which some SUV's can't even claim. With the seats out, it's got cargo room out the wazoo. The seats are comfortable for long hauls (Again, as with any car, the back seat less so, but it's nothing to complain about).

Now, it's just a lowly Astro van, but for pure function, it can match a lot of SUV's.

Edit - That said, I wouldn't be caught dead in a Sienna, Caravan, Quest, or anything other than an Astro or an Odyssey.

That's not a mini van. It's a mid sized van built on a truck frame. So it could possibly be called an suv too.

 

[FoolKiller]

Found online:

I then went for the unnecessary drive in my Cadillac SUV dragging behind me a trailer with a huge boat, which I did not need, but it looked impressive. I drove for about 200 miles in the second gear, just wasting gas. When I pulled up to the gas station, I spilled at least a pint of gas on the ground. They say it buggers up the ozone layer. I like that! You didn’t pay for it, so don’t tell me what to do with it! To cause further damage to the atmosphere, I had a lunch of beans.

That, my friend, is why an SUV. Because we can. If we can afford it and think it makes us look good or makes up for our lack of...um...pride, yeah pride, then we we will buy it.

 

[Duke]

Let's discuss medium-priced SUVs in the US and medium-priced "estates". I'll make it simple. Here's a list of both:

Medium-priced SUVs

[list of 10 bazillion SUVs]

Medium-priced Wagons

[list of 2 Subarus, totally ignoring a number of other perfectly capable and relevant cars]

In America, we're sort of forced in to SUVs. As I mentioned, there are only seven minivans and just one moderately-priced wagon on our market. Do you understand that?

Sadly there AREN'T viable car/wagon alternatives. How many god damn times do I have to say it?

It doesn't matter how many god damn times you say it, it's partly wrong, and it's totally based on a mistaken premise.

NAME ONE VIABLE WAGON THAT IS NOT THE SUBARU OUTBACK. I DARE YOU

Dodge Magnum. I don't care how much you hate the advertising, it's a reasonably priced, roomy, comfortable, great-handling (for its size) car, and it can be had with plenty of acceleration. I know you wish it didn't exist. That doesn't make it disappear.

Your mistaken premise is this: you keep insisting, at great length and with great repetition, that Americans buy SUVs because there are no wagons to choose. But you're utterly failing to grasp that this is the EFFECT, not the CAUSE.

THERE ARE NO WAGONS BECAUSE AMERICANS QUIT BUYING THEM WHEN MINIVANS APPEARED, THEN THEY QUIT BUYING MINIVANS BECAUSE THEY WANTED THE 'TOUGH' IMAGE THAT AN SUV OFFERED.

The original Dodge Caravan/GC killed the American RWD station wagon outright within 3 years of its introduction. Period. It was simply too comprehensively useful; too much more space-efficient; too much more economical than the typical late-'70s-derived station wagon. People flocked to the Caravan and the Ford/GM wannabees. There were a bazillion minivans on the road because they made so damn much sense for how people actually use their cars when they have a family.

When the SUV explosion first began, back in the late '80s, there were precisely TWO choices: the Jeep Cherokee and the Isuzu Trooper II. Suburbans were too big - the only people who bought Suburbans back then were the people who were actually using them for their intended purposes. NOTE that I am leaving people who actually USE a big SUV's capabilities entirely out of this argument. Ford didn't have anything to bring to the party until the Explorer debuted, but they nailed the market segment when they did.

The Cherokee and the Trooper were perceived as the hip alternative to the "Daddy & Mommy" sameness of the minivan. The trucks made it easy to maintain your desperately youthful self-image and they didn't come with a pre-installed "Baby On Board!" sticker. If you were starting your midlife crisis a bit early, particularly in the image-driven late '80s/early '90s, you could assert your rugged individuality by buying the tall 4WD truck instead of the low FWD grocery hauler.

That is what has driven the slow decline of the minivan. Note that it hasn't died the immediate and permanent death that the large RWD wagon did - it's just too sensible a concept. It's fighting a rearguard action, and it's retreating, but it's not out of the fight.

Car companies have made a huge amount of money selling SUVs not because they are particularly good in themselves, but because they are good enough to fill a minvan's role while not marking their owners with the minvan's stigma. Image sells - duh. So its very easy to rationalize that you "need" a big SUV when in truth what you need is a minivan.

 

[the Interceptor]

The post I'm quoting from is now the worst I've seen in this thread, even worse than the original.

To judge that is not only on you, and regarding your posts here, I must say the worst come from you. Not only that they are harsh and with no respect for other opinions, they also twist and turn facts. On top of that, you insisted on a US-only discussion, which was never officially announced by the thread starter.

Question: why enter a discussion, if you're opinion is set in stone already?

Regards
the Interceptor

 

[Onikaze]

I didn't announce that it was America only, though we are the biggest fan of the full size SUV, and arguably the most guilty about cruising around getting 10 mpg with the AC on in a 100 Cubic Foot capacity vehicle, by ourselves.

As was pointed out, because it makes us feel cool. Nevermind getting a Mustang and a Minivan for the same money.

 

[Wolfe]

I agree with everything Duke and Onikaze have said since my last post. 👍 👍 to them.

The beauty of internet forums is that within one thread, under one topic, there can be more that one line of conversation without complete and utter confusion.

👍

...All told, the only vehicle we liked that fit our needs, had good reliability and gas mileage was the Pilot. We picked up ours with a 7 CD changer, DVD, leather and sunroof. It seats up to 8, and has had seven in it a few times. The last time we were that loaded down we drove an hour to a zoo with the air on and got 24.5 mpg. I'll take that any day.

I'm glad to hear that you chose it for what you needed and actually take advantage of those needs. 👍

Because we can. If we can afford it and think it makes us look good or makes up for our lack of...um...pride, yeah pride, then we we will buy it.

Right, and when we all agree that doing so is illogical, and that cars/wagons/minivans are often better choices for buyers' needs, we can be done with this debate. 👍

 

[Kylehnat]

Look dude - I live in a very snowy area, and I can't do it in my front-drive car.

As a 16 year-old, I drove the 7 miles to high school on a sheet of ice in my FWD Mazda with Goodyear Aquatreads. It came home with nary a scratch. If anything, the presence of 4WD SUVs makes people WORSE at driving in snow, because it goes to their head. "I've got 4WD!! Eat it, nature!" Too bad they don't realize that the problem with ice and snow is not starting; it's stopping and turning, two things which 4WD does nothing to improve.

 

[Jondot]

5. TOWING
Europeans can often be found towing things with -- le gasp! -- CARS.

I'm sorry, but:

 

[Wolfe]

I'm sorry, but:

*zOMG! itz U toob!*

Yep, I've seen that. I never said you had to use a little hatchback.

 

[Famine]

As a 16 year-old, I drove the 7 miles to high school on a sheet of ice in my FWD Mazda with Goodyear Aquatreads. It came home with nary a scratch.

My FWD Mazda leaves SUVs standing, even on Toyo Proxes T1-Rs, which are essentially a summer tyre. In fact it leaves ME standing, or, more accurately, sprawled on the floor. I drove to work in 8 inches of packed snow (which, given my ground clearance, was really rather amusing) without an incident of any kind, then fell over when I got out of the car.

The trick to driving in snow and ice isn't necessarily about the car - though a high-powered RWD automatic isn't a good starting point - but about knowing HOW to drive in snow and ice (or HOW to drive, since it starts on similar base principles). American/Canadian owners of my car will say how crappy it is in snow, but I love it - best snow car I've ever driven, including the Ford Explorer which I also, inexplicably, love.


Out of interest, does the US get the Jaguar X-Type 4WD Estate (Wagon)?

 

[///M-Spec]

Right, and when we all agree that doing so is illogical, and that cars/wagons/minivans are often better choices for buyers' needs, we can be done with this debate. 👍

Who said every car purchase needs to be illogical?

Tell me how a 500hp sedan with a 7 speed transmission and a top speed of over 200mph is remotely logical?

What car would you be driving right now if you could afford any? Would it be a minivan?


M

 

[Sage]

Out of interest, does the US get the Jaguar X-Type 4WD Estate (Wagon)?

Yeah, but nobody here buys them.

To put it into perspective:

BMWs are massively popular around here. Yet, I’ve seen more Ferraris in my life than I’ve seen BMW wagons.

The X-Type is massively unpopular in the States. Thus, finding an X-Type wagon – I would bet you a lot of money that I’ll never see one on the road, ever.

I got really excited last week, because I saw my first current-gen 3-series wagon. Oh sure, it’s an ugly thing, but it’s rare here.

 

[Poverty]

I'm sorry, but:

lol renault 5 1.2

 

[Dave A]

My cars both pull loads a lot better than that, including my little hatchback .

 

[Poverty]

yehat that renault 5 probably weighs in at about 600kg with 40hp. Not good for towing at all

as you undoubtedly do considering you have an underpowered BMW, and while it's easy to say "RWD and FWD can do just fine,

Maybe underpowerd in the US, but for european standards its output would be considered average, as in its hayday it was above average,

 

[Carl.]

Look dude - I live in a very snowy area, and I can't do it in my front-drive car. A lot of us don't consider ourselves professional drivers, as you undoubtedly do considering you have an underpowered BMW, and while it's easy to say "RWD and FWD can do just fine," try telling that to my freaking mother, and the seven zillion other mothers across the country who'd probably spin a Volvo 240 making a right-hand turn in the freaking rain. To answer your bolded question, check reasons two through six.

Doug, if you can't make it in the snow in a Volvo 850, you either:

- Don't have winter tires. (in that case, duh!)
- Don't know how to drive.

Seriously. RWD is a different story, but fwd cars? Puh-lease...

I've driven quite a lot of cars in the worst possible winter weather, often on long trips, and I never felt unsecure in a fwd car with a proper suspension and winter tires. The only advantage you'll get with awd is faster acceleration and a minor handling advantage in tricky situations. That's assuming you're really able to take advantage of your AWD drivetrain (and in the case of an SUV, deal with the higher center of gravity and added weight).

Last winter, during a snow storm I was driving a Hyundai Accent through a 5 lane bridge. An idiot driving his small SUV in the opposing lanes completely lost it while trying to slow down in a straight line, while I had absolutely no trouble swerving three lanes to avoid a frontal collision with him, and we were going roughly at the same speed. Too many people get a false sense of security while driving their SUVs on snow.