SUV's are obsolete

[Danoff]

I don't see why anyone gets upset about the biggest SUVs. The ones that don't make sense are the smaller ones - like that small lexus one. They're bigger and actually LESS practical than a sedan. The only advantage they have over sedans is ground clearance - not much of an advantage when you consider that some of these people will never take them off-road.

But suburbans, excursions, etc. all have good purposes. I used to own an explorer and I used it to haul stuff all the time - stuff that I needed to leave overnight and couldn't leave in the bed of a pickup truck.

A van would have gotten me worse gas milage, and wouldn't have done as well off-road (which I used to have to do quite often).

A lot of judgement gets passed against SUV owners, like there are plenty of alternatives if only they'd consider them. It isn't true. Yes some SUV owners don't use their vehicles. But some sports car owners don't use those either (and they get crap gas mileage too). Some people own vans and don't use them. Lots of people don't use their pickup trucks.

...and the "you don't need more power than a minivan" argument is sad considering that almost everyone on GTPlanet agrees that more power = more better.

I guess the bottom line is, when you see someone driving alone in their SUV, don't assume they don't use it.

 

[YSSMAN]

Well, look at the demographics of the US. Most vehicle owners spend more time traveling alone because they have to go to seperate places in seperate vehicles. Unlike Europe or Asia, in America people belive that it is their right to own a vehicle, and that they MUST by age 16... Not the case outside North America... Hence, the traveling alone in the three-ton Porsche Cayannes and Cadillac Escalades...

 

[Jim Prower]

Like I said, this comes form the gas crunch of the '70s, when our cars became the targets of Insurance adjusters and California pollution activists. Carmakers built the same large cars, (in most cases, making them LARGER,) but they didn't have the balls they uesd to. On the other hand, there were some fantastic small cars, but americans like large expanses of sheetmetal. thus, in the late '70s, as the big cars began to downsize for fuel economy's sake, we began to turn to trucks for our sheetmetal thirst, and suprisingly, thanks to less stirct emissions, more power.

Soon, we began to prefer trucks. It was at this time that Monster Trucks became popular. However, we seem to also have gotten married at this time, and we wanted big families. So we got a Chrylser Minivan. But now everyone else had one, and watching singles zip by in their lifted 4x4s made us want to have all that power back.

So someone came up with the idea of making the Sport Utility Vehicle, then nothing more than a Jeep, into a larger, more comfortable vehicle suitable for hauling a family around. And that big V8 up front, driving the rear wheels, that was just what we needed.

Come to today. Now the big, fast cars we've wanted are back. funny thing, though, G.M. and Ford don't build them. so, the G.M. and Ford faithful still drive SUVs. Same time, Chrylser 300Cs and Dodge Chargers are selling like hotcakes, better than Pacificas or Durangoes.

What does that tell you?

 

[95GTIVR6]

Once we learn the art of teleportation everything will be a mess!

 

[SagarisGTB]

A luxury sedan can have all the torque in the world, but dont mention towing with it. Youd screw up the chassis and frame if you did it alot, it isnt biult like a truck or SUV.

 

[iceburns288]

Again, it's not the SUV, it's what people use them for. I am among the people that use their trucks (I have a Yukon XL) for what it's designed for. However, I still hate SUVs because of what they have become... it's like an iPod. iPods are great for listening to and holding lots of music, but the thing is people buy them just to have an iPod even when they don't have enough music to necessitate owning one. I have an iPod too.

I just hate it when people buy them with really absolutely no reason. You want something safe? Buy an S80, it's one of the best cars out there for what it is. If you can't afford it, go for an S60. Both will be less than an Escalade or Yukon or whatever, be much more practical AND safer. The big problem with people buying SUVs to be safe is that they're safe for you, but you need to have no consideration for who you hit to do that. People have bought so many SUVs that it sometimes seems that driving anything else actually will be unsafe, because if you get hit by one you might get completely knackered.

 

[Danoff]

Again, it's not the SUV, it's what people use them for. I am among the people that use their trucks (I have a Yukon XL) for what it's designed for.

How do you know what people use them for? There are lots of people that look at you when you're driving down the street and hate you because they think you're one of the people that doesn't use their SUV.

 

[Jim Prower]

A luxury sedan can have all the torque in the world, but dont mention towing with it. Youd screw up the chassis and frame if you did it alot, it isnt biult like a truck or SUV.

No, it isn't, and I don't care if you use your SUV to tow stuff. There are people who use their SUVs like they should use cars, and use it for that almost exclusively. What's worse, is that these people tend to drive a top-heavy vehicle with poor dynamics just like the 16 year old kid whose Z28 was tailgating me this morning.

Niether was particularly right in the way they drove, but at least a Camaro's less likely to roll over when one clips the front bumper of another car, attempting to cut them off.

now, I'm not saying that the people who own SUVs around here drive them like Mom on the warpath. But I have observed that people drive these things in the same ingorant fashion they drive their cars, and are endangering themselves and others even moreso by doing it in an SUV.

I have issues with other drivers.

 

[iceburns288]

How do you know what people use them for? There are lots of people that look at you when you're driving down the street and hate you because they think you're one of the people that doesn't use their SUV.

Because I'm not an idiot. It doesn't take much to see what people are using their SUVs for, man.

 

[Danoff]

Because I'm not an idiot. It doesn't take much to see what people are using their SUVs for, man.

How does one do that? I guess I'm an idiot because I can't figure it out.

 

[JCE]

Niether was particularly right in the way they drove, but at least a Camaro's less likely to roll over when one clips the front bumper of another car, attempting to cut them off.

My co-worker and I witnessed this actually happening. We saw a GMC Yukon or Chevy Tahoe clip the rear quarter on an older Mazda saloon (626 me thinks) and witnessed it swerve and then proceed to perform a barrel-roll 1.5 times and ending up spinning on it's roof. Most SUV drivers DO have a feeling of invincibility--which is undeserved. You can die just as easily in an SUV crash vs anything else.

 

[Driftster]

American's want to feel safe in their gignatic earth shakers they call SUV's....
they don't care if their ugly impractical and make it unsafe for the rest of the "normal people"...

 

[Omnis]

You can't put a dresser in the trunk of your S-class.

 

[GT4_Rule]

I dont have problems for those using trucks or SUVs in a legitimate manner, such as towing, hauling loads, or off-roading (although I have different opinions on off-roading; killer for the environmetns!! ) But I hate it when I see just one person inside a huge Expedition, and the driver veers as if he/she does not know how to control the thing. That upsets me. It was designed to haul people or cargo, not to haul some lazyass's body to work alone. Get a frekkin Volvo then.

 

[JohnBM01]

Now, what if this was like an S-Class Luxury WAGON instead of a luxury sedan? Would there be better capabilities with a wagon than a sedan? Would it be any better than your average SUV?

 

[GT4_Rule]

First, a super-luxury wagon? Not fitting for its image, I think.
Second, even if it did, it will not match SUVs road presence, which some people buy them for.
Third, are you about to pay over $100k to get a wagon?

 

[niky]

If it's got Mercedes luxury, AWD and does quarter miles like a rocket? Maybe.

If it's got Mercedes electronic niggles... nah.

I don't know why people always say minivans are out of the question... Last I looked, the latest Honda Odyssey drove like a sedan, was quite peppy, and didn't drink gas like doomsday. Oh, and it's safe, too... and low enough so that Grandma didn't need three people to help her into the back seat.

Obviously, we own a car. I do ferry duty for a lot of old relations because it's hard for them to step up into an SUV.

For people hauling, though, nothing can beat a full-sized van. I've always liked the Ford E-150s better than the Expedition, because you can seat a hell of a lot of people in there and in better comfort (legroom and headroom wise). It can haul so many bodies that it actually makes sense, gas-wise. Plus the lower center of gravity and ride height makes it feel much more secure on the road.

 

[GT4_Rule]

But Odyssey looks god-awful!

 

[niky]

Yeah... but that's because you mainlanders are getting the wrong one:

you should be getting this one:

Oh well, even if it ain't butch, it's interestingly tough... in a "Tron" sort of way...

 

[GT4_Rule]

Nono

This one Im talking about

That Japanese one is really cool!

 

[Sniffs]

minivans are getting the same reputation as Wagons/Estates in the US...hick-mobiles for dirt poor famailies with half a dozen kids, all of which are in diapers.

FULL size vans are considered to be for blue collar joes that clean out your furnace...or chimney. there also considered excessivly danerous cause they get blown over.

BTW, niky...how do you slog anything with only a few inches of ground clearance through what turns out to be hub deep mud that drowns your tailpipe, and contains boulders the size of your ENGINE?

i know, sounds like I'm defending the gas hogs...but when it comes to america's vehicles, it's a no win situation.

 

[niky]

Too bad... minivans and estates are starting to become the "in" thing in Europe and Asia. What else is the Merc R-Class if not a minivan?

Given the size and weight of most full-sized vans, any wind strong enough to bowl them over would pick up quite a few SUVs, too.

Hmmm.... I've been in four inches of mud, but that isn't exactly hub deep... for that mud, I do it WRC style.

But hub deep mud? Hey, I live in a third world country, but not in the heart of the Amazon!

For hub deep mud, you can buy a diesel powered (yes, pitiful, smoky diesel... but now Euro II-IV compliant, in most cases) pickup with maybe eight to ten inches (honestly, I'm not an expert on this) ground clearance and 4x4... oh, of course, these are 2.5- 3.0 liter turobdiesel engines, so they're pitifully slow on the highway, but they can pull humongous trailers. Not that you're pulling anything heavier than two tons in hub deep mud, mind you.

And these babies cost just as much as cars. But since typhoon level floods will kill anything less than 5 years old (including pickups) because the ECUs aren't mounted in waterproof hardpoints in the ceiling (or at least glovebox level... Toyota, hello? when did you last see a pickup with a floor mounted ECU!?!), I prefer not to void my warranty by going out in inimical weather.

But a lot of people buy them here, for practical reasons (a lot of people who travel hundreds of k's and who own farms or businesses out in the boondocks), and for not-so-practical reasons... (still cracks me up every time I see someone struggling to crawl up a parking ramp because their knobbly tires and rear-wheel drive pickup can't make the grade).

But yeah, without the two strangely contradictory situations of strict diesel emissions requirements and poor quality diesel, the US would probably be awash with small-engined diesel SUVs.

See, it's not the utility per se... it's just that people seem to need huge engines for the most trivial of reasons. A working SUV or pickup really doesn't need more than 100 hp... give it maybe 200-300 ft-lbs of torque and it'll be okay. The extra hp in most US-spec SUVs is there because people still want to be able to lug it at 90-100 mph on the freeway on the way to work.

It truly is a no-win situation if you're buying in the US I guess. Most working class vehicles there get huge engines (whether you need them or not), and you can take it or leave it, I guess... ...Maybe we should blame this one on the soccer-moms.

 

[GT4_Rule]

The R-class is a "Grand Sports Tourer" or GST in M-B speak like, as if no one knows that its a minivan. So much for their efforts, but Im wondering who will spend upwards of $50,000 CAD to get a minivan? Im sure some with disposable money will, but really, its pointless. Another niche vehicle, I guess.

Niky, did you see the picture of a US Odyssey? Ugly, isnt it? I just with we have the one you have.

 

[JohnBM01]

Actually, I like both the American and Japanese variants of the Honda Odyssey. I already have a Japanese Odyssey in GT4, and it was quite fun turning a "soccer mom" van into a nice racer. But anytime I think of an Odyssey being made into something sporty, I usually hark back to a tuned red and black Honda Odyssey with Yokohama livery. The thing about the Japanese Odyssey is that it looks more like a big station wagon/estate car than a "van." It almost kind of reminds me of the Honda Accord or Prelude wagons/estates from the past decade.

I also think the R-Class is pretty nice. I got into one at the 2006 Houston Auto Show. I consider Mercedes-Benz as my favorite German manufacturer. It wasn't until recently when I began to admire modern Mercedes-Benz automobiles. I love the latest SLK convertible roadsters. This is also a company that's been around for a LONG while, even making the first modern-type automobile. To think that since 1886, they've made exceptional automobiles as well as certain innovations along the way. I liked the R-Class vehicle a lot to be honest.

With what this S-Class can do, do you all see other car companies perhaps coming up with their own luxury sedans that can be capable of many SUV disciplines (except seating for seven or folding third row seats)? Who would make a nice vehicle to rival this S-Class?

 

[Sniffs]

Niky: the Phillipines has a rep for slop...or did. remember, the last time americans were around was 60 years ago. anyhoo...

we got huge distances to go just to get to the nearest grocery store....usually uphill
I think the huge engines were originally for hauling around many kilos of chrome...nowadays, it'd for hauling around half a ton of required by the safety goros equipment...not just accessories.


and we're awash in HUGE deisels...all of which are bigger than probably the the Mitsu Fuso cabs over there. we're talking1000 cubes or 20-30 some liters...and thousand liter fuel tanks.

 

[niky]

Well, to steal a page from Poverty's book... Audi is already making extremely capable and powerful full-sized saloons with AWD.

I wonder how much of the R-Class was developed before Mercedes let Mitsubishi go... as Mitsu has released its own "not-a-minivan" with the Grandis (Galant-Eclipse platform, five-seven seater).

True that about old Filipino roads... but the Seabees did a lot of good work putting the asphalt down.

That's the whole point, though... the US has huge diesels, maybe three times as powerful as in the full-sized trucks we've got here. And as far as I've seen, these underpowered diesels have enough grunt to get a couple of tons of load up to 80 mph... more than fast enough for that much weight.

Sad thing about those safety regulations adding weight... even our cars are getting pretty porky. Sad when a brand new "compact" weighs about as much as an old "midsize" car.

And that means bigger engines to cope with the weight... ahhhhh.... progress...

 

[Jim Prower]

Sniffs, I know you're an off road enthusiast, but when was the last time you tried to take a Cadillac Escalade through hub-deep mud?

Motor Trend tried it in sand. know what it did?

Stabilitrak cut off all power to the wheels.

It's stupid that there are these huge, pickup-based vehicles that have 4WD and can't do a damn thing off road. Even Jeep has succumbed, though the Grand Cherokee SRT-8 is a hell of a sport truck.

The Commander, on the other hand, might be "Trial Rated," but I'd choose a more nimble Wrangler for Rubicon duty. I doubt the larger Jeep would even fit on the Rubicon.

and there's the fact that suburbanites never take their trucks (and car-based trucks...someone care to explain that one?) off road. ever. nor do they ever tow anything substancial, thanks to that nice car unibody the majority of SUVs have now.

That's right, the Body-On-Frame truck is dying. Just look at the Ridgeline.

 

[MustangSVT]

I don't have a problem with SUVs or trucks, it's the people that drive them that I have a problem with.

All of my dad's friends which have a truck or SUV don't use them for anything except like 1 guy. There's one guy with a 4runner which tows his Sea-Doo every summer, and he does go off-roading with it as well.. and I've been with him offroading in his 4runner and it's pretty awesome.

Other than that one guy though, the people I know with a Suburban, or an Expedition, they don't even have a big family or anything, they don't tow anything, and they don't haul big stuff either.

I just think it's pointless and ignorant of people to buy SUVs or Trucks like Escalade, Hummer, Expedition, Avalanche, F150, etc. with no point to it. The guy I know with a F-150, he uses his to drive to the c-train station. Great. And then they complain about prices of gas.

I think people without a real need for SUVs or Trucks (people who just want something BIG cause apparently it's "safer") should not be allowed to buy these cars and make gas cheaper for the rest of us and not just waste away the resources.

So far in trying to get people not to buy SUVs, I've only convinced one. My dad. Right now we have a Ford Escape, which is a mini-suv. We do carry quite a lot of stuff when we go on vacation, but not that much that it wouldn't fit in a decent sedan. He and my mom wanted to get an Explorer next year, but I've convinced them that it's pointless and we're probably gonna get a new VW Passat or Subaru Impreza or Mazda 6.

 

[Danoff]

I think people without a real need for SUVs or Trucks (people who just want something BIG cause apparently it's "safer") should not be allowed to buy these cars and make gas cheaper for the rest of us and not just waste away the resources.

Ah yes, let's make it illegal to purchase a vehicle unless you can prove that you need it just so you can save a buck. Great.

Why not make them give us the money they were going to spend? That'll learn 'em.

Oh I know! We should put them in stocks in the town square so we can throw rotten food at their heads.

 

[Poverty]

Damn I didnt want to start a S-class VS suv debate, its just that when I saw the pics I was amazed that the mercedes could handle those conditions when so many suv's cant.