live4speed is absolutely right when he says that it all depends on region...unfortunately, places with high concentrations of population, like New York or any other big city, are filled with people who don't need to use an SUV, but you'll find just as many SUVs there as many other places. Not to mention the fact that the US isn't the only place where SUVs are sold....
danoff
SUVs are purchased for a variety of reasons, not all of which apply to each consumer, and not all of which are valid:
Power (vs. minivans, some cars)
Seating Capacity (vs. 5 seaters)
Towing Capacity (vs. car chassis)
Ground Clearance (vs. minivans, cars)
RWD (vs. minivans, cars) Edit: 4WD option also a plus (vs. minivans, some cars)
Amenities (DVD, video games, etc) (vs. sedans)
Enclosure over the cargo capacity (vs. pickup trucks)
Safety (vs. cars)
Appearance (vs. minivans)
Gas Mileage (vs. some vans, comparable to other V6 or V8 vehicles)
Handling (vs. vans)
Ride Quality (vs. some cars, minivans, pickups)
Price (vs. some cars, vans)
Full Size Spare (vs. some cars, minivans)
Cargo Capacisty (vs. cars)
Of those, I'd say safety is the only one that isn't really a valid reason for picking an SUV, because it comes at the expense of others.
Power isn't a valid reason -- minivans and family cars have a very easy time keeping up with SUVs. The only reason SUVs are more powerful is because they're generally heavier, and someone who buys an SUV just because its HP number is higher isn't justified. (I personally think minivans, family cars, and SUVs are
all faster than they need to be, anyway)
Seating capacity isn't a valid reason for many SUV purchases because many SUVs are 5-seaters.
Towing capacity doesn't apply to those who don't tow.
Ground clearance is useless if you don't drive in serious off-roading conditions (gravel roads at campsites don't even slightly count).
4WD is overrated when it comes to ordinary consumers, because they seem to think it improves braking ability, too. Also, not every driver knows that 4WD needs to be activated -- I wouldn't put it past the ordinary driver to assume that it's on all the time. Furthermore, 4WD is completely useless if the driver lives in a non-snowy climate and never leaves paved roads.
Cargo capacity is useless if you don't use it.
Others such as amenities, enclosure over the cargo area, appearance, gas mileage, handling, ride quality, price, and a full-size spare, are valid in certain cases, but can often be easily found in either cars or minivans. Some of them are subjective, too.
danoff
If you lay a tahoe out next to a Honda odyssey, you'll see that the tahoe gets only 5mpg less than the minivan (maybe even better if you compare V6 to V6, I'm comparing V8 to V6). If you told me the two were equal at all things (which isn't true because the Tahoe can go off-road, has more power, and can tow), I'd pick the tahoe because it looks better. I'd sacrifice 5 mpg for a better looking vehicle. That doesn't mean I'd have bought the tahoe for looks. It means that of the vehicles that did what I wanted to do, it was the best looking.
True, but that doesn't mean that you
needed the Tahoe, compared to the Odyssey, unless you go off-road and tow things. Many SUV drivers don't do these things, yet have convinced themselves that the minivan wouldn't have been enough.
danoff
A lot of factors go into the purchase of a vehicle. Somehow folks have gotten it into their heads that SUVs are the bane of all existance because of their gas mileage. Minivans aren't much better but they're seen as responsible. Vans and V8 sports cars are typically as bad or worse, but somehow they don't have the evilness associated with them (no, the number of people that purchase them doesn't matter).
All of the minivans I linked to produced significantly better mileage numbers.
danoff
I'm sick of this conversation. I'm sick of listening to people who aren't listening to me. Where is your mercedes E class wagon? Where did it go? The responsible choice you guys were touting earlier!! I haven't heard a peep about it recently! Because it gets the same damn gas mileage as the SUVs you guys hate so much, but it can't do as much. That means you should hate the E wagon even more than SUVs, but I'm sure your attitude hasn't changed. Why would your attitude about a vehicle that gets SUV gas mileage but is less useful not get your attention? Because you hate SUVs irrationally. You like to hate SUVs, it makes you feel superior to others... regardless of whether it's warranted.
The Merc E-class wagon was equipped with a V8, which is an option. The 6-cylinder posts similar mileage numbers as the minivans and other wagons.
I never even brought it up more than once, because you asked for a 7-seater wagon, and I pointed you to that. No, it isn't cheap, no, it isn't very practical, and no, it isn't a very good example of a wagon. But the 6-cylinder model is still a more sensible alternative than luxury SUVs.
I don't hate SUVs because they get poor gas mileage. I don't even hate SUVs. I hate SUV drivers who are irresponsible, and who don't need their SUVs.
My point is "SUVs aren't needed by most of their drivers," not "SUVs are dumb and killing the rainforests."
danoff
Go oogle over your V10 supercars guys. Go lust after that V8 powered sports car that gets SUV gas mileage but seats two people. Blame the SUV driving idiots of the world for everything you can think of, they'll be your scapegoats.
Sure thing, and you can go ahead and continue to blame every member of GTP who is even remotely anti-SUV for
all of the complaints and protests you've ever heard made against an SUV, without even listening to anything they have to say that says otherwise. Go ahead, we'll be your scapegoats.
. I wouldn't mind a conversion figure to roughly convert our rates to US one's though, do you or anyone in here, know of any sites that do good conversions?
