Article bashing SUV driving and drivers

[RedRoseSAI]

Originally posted by ktsnake


Honestly it's safer for me to be able to see what's going on.

(snip)

I just feel better having a 2 thousand pound advantage over the other vehicle involved.

And woe is the rest of us in our regular sized cars, even if the accident isn't our fault...

[33girl]

If you are actually going to use your SPORT utility vehicle for SPORTS, I say go ahead and get one. But if you're Muffy Suburban Princess and you only got one to be chic, boo, boo, boo on you.

[Optimist Prime]

Originally posted by Angelic



Even if everyone drove better gas mileage cars we would still be drilling for oil in Alaska and importing crude from eastern countries. There is not that much oil in the US.

If people are worried about America being self supporting (which is a totally differenct topic) we need to look into other ways to fuel cars like natural gas, electric, and hydrogen fuel cell.

Off topic I know...

My S10 can run on ethanol!! WE already have the technology. Just sue Texaco and Shell out of existence for crimes against humanity and nature.

[Dionysus]

Come on man, what about those big a$$ family vans which are the size of a shuttle bus? Those can be very dangerous too. Also, if the weight isn't distributed right, and can tip over easily.

[ZTAngel]

Originally posted by PM_Mama00
[color=deeppink]I think it's hilarious how people are
ZTA, I'm sorry that one of your sisters died from being hit by an SUV, but saying that if she had been hit by a Taurus is ridiculous. I know plenty of people who have gotten their cars totaled by other "cars".
[color]

I'm sorry but I don't think you know the details of the accident so for you to make a generalization is quote on quote "ridiculous". The reports that came back that said the force of the truck is what killed her. If it had been a small car, she would have lived.

[Angelic]

Originally posted by Optimist Prime


My S10 can run on ethanol!! WE already have the technology. Just sue Texaco and Shell out of existence for crimes against humanity and nature.

It's funny that you mention ethanol. Actually the US only produces enough crops to run 25% of the US populations cars on ethanol. And it only comes close to being economical for the mid-western states that have the farming capabilities. But this is the exact technology I am talking about. Although there are more environmentally conscious alternatives out there. You might feel more environmentally conscious choosing the civic over an explorer, but if you really had the environment in mind you'd get a ethanol or natural gas driven car.

But to defend the oil industry, oil companies are under some of the strictest regulations for diesel and gasoline production. Especially in California. The industry has come leaps and bounds since the beginning of crude oil usage for gasoline. Oil and Gas companies are very environmentally conscious.

[chopper816]

Originally posted by Cloud9


Um actually, THEY won't get it, the family in the other car will. That's the most annoying thing about these stupid huge ass cars, it would be one thing if they were like alchohol - only affecting the person who uses it. Sure, go ahead, risk your own life if you want to...but these beasts end up killing innocent people at a much greater rate than other cars, which to me is just unacceptable. And I agree with whoever made the comment about SUVs in the city, I live in NYC, and those motorized locusts of the road are all over the place. Really, in a city of millions of people you really shouldn't be driving off road. Even in other less populated parts of the country, I want to know how many people need to travel across "wild" terrain on a daily basis? People, stop letting these companies reel you in and take your money! ....and that concludes my lecture, hahaha...

its not about going over wild terrain, try going through a nebraska winter with a mustang and a firebird, i did both, and youre not going to get anywhere. even when its snowing really hard my parents front wheel drive cars had trouble, so a 4 wheel drive option is important, so even though most dont do "off roading" in it, sometimes a truck or suv is a necessity in the city.

[Optimist Prime]

Originally posted by Angelic


It's funny that you mention ethanol. Actually the US only produces enough crops to run 25% of the US populations cars on ethanol. And it only comes close to being economical for the mid-western states that have the farming capabilities. But this is the exact technology I am talking about. Although there are more environmentally conscious alternatives out there. You might feel more environmentally conscious choosing the civic over an explorer, but if you really had the environment in mind you'd get a ethanol or natural gas driven car.

But to defend the oil industry, oil companies are under some of the strictest regulations for diesel and gasoline production. Especially in California. The industry has come leaps and bounds since the beginning of crude oil usage for gasoline. Oil and Gas companies are very environmentally conscious.

So what they are still bad.

[cuaphi]

Originally posted by chopper816


its not about going over wild terrain, try going through a nebraska winter with a mustang and a firebird, i did both, and youre not going to get anywhere. even when its snowing really hard my parents front wheel drive cars had trouble, so a 4 wheel drive option is important, so even though most dont do "off roading" in it, sometimes a truck or suv is a necessity in the city.

That may be true, my little two door coupe sucks in the snow, in fact I've almost gotten stuck a couple of times. On the other hand, I drove an Accord for almost four years that was GREAT in the snow. My passengers would often comment on how well it was handling and I rarely had traction problems. I lost control once and that was at 2a.m on a patch of black ice and I'm pretty sure I would have spun out in any vehicle. The issue isn't four wheel drive. Any decent weight and wheel base width and you're fine.

[chopper816]

Originally posted by cuaphi


That may be true, my little two door coupe sucks in the snow, in fact I've almost gotten stuck a couple of times. On the other hand, I drove an Accord for almost four years that was GREAT in the snow. My passengers would often comment on how well it was handling and I rarely had traction problems. I lost control once and that was at 2a.m on a patch of black ice and I'm pretty sure I would have spun out in any vehicle. The issue isn't four wheel drive. Any decent weight and wheel base width and you're fine.

not necessarily, my firebird was 3400 pounds without gas and was wider than my moms buick, and it sucked in snow. and speaking of my moms buick, that was front wheel drive and was wide, but it still wouldnt do that well when it snowed bad. 4 wheel drive can be a requirement here sometimes. for instance, last year i left a hockey game downtown, and i was on the interstate going 35 b/c if i went any faster the rear end wouldnt be stable. even sedans had problems, the only vehicles that were able to handle well were trucks and suvs with 4 wheel drive.

[Kevin]

Originally posted by chopper816


not necessarily, my firebird was 3400 pounds without gas and was wider than my moms buick, and it sucked in snow. and speaking of my moms buick, that was front wheel drive and was wide, but it still wouldnt do that well when it snowed bad. 4 wheel drive can be a requirement here sometimes. for instance, last year i left a hockey game downtown, and i was on the interstate going 35 b/c if i went any faster the rear end wouldnt be stable. even sedans had problems, the only vehicles that were able to handle well were trucks and suvs with 4 wheel drive.

Trucks are about the worst possible thing on the ice... You need to load down the bed. Then they'll be okay. Go buy some sandbags at Home Depot. Trucks are about the worst really.. rear wheel drive and loaded on the front.

[poodleNtraining]

According to market research conducted by the country's leading automakers, Bradsher reports, SUV buyers tend to be "insecure and vain. They are frequently nervous about their marriages and uncomfortable about parenthood. They often lack confidence in their driving skills. Above all, they are apt to be self-centered and self-absorbed, with little interest in their neighbors and communities. They are more restless, more sybaritic, and less social than most Americans are. They tend to like fine restaurants a lot more than off-road driving, seldom go to church and have limited interest in doing volunteer work to help others."

He says, too, that SUV drivers generally don't care about anyone else's kids but their own, are very concerned with how other people see them rather than with what's practical, and they tend to want to control or have control over the people around them. David Bostwick, Chrysler's market research director, tells Bradsher, "If you have a sport utility, you can have the smoked windows, put the children in the back and pretend you're still single."

WTH is this crap??? I'd like to have a SUV, and I'm a VERY good driver, no tickets, no accidents, I let people in, the works. But here in the DC area, ALOT of the drivers suck, car, SUV, van, whatever. If I could I'd get a Lexus RX300 (no its not a sissyUV-LOL) or a Suburban. And I'd do it because I like the truck and the amount of room I can have, instead of getting a van.

[allsmiles_22]

I agree with PM_Mama00 and ktsnake. Some of the replies are just hilarious.

I find that a lot of petite women buy these things and then drive them like they are invincible …Their line of sight sucks… and couldn't see me over their car's big ass!"

As a petite woman who drives an SUV, I don't drive like I'm invincible. Why? Because metal is metal whether it's on a SUV, compact car, or 18-wheeler and if I get in an accident it's going to hurt. Therefore, I'm just as much a cautious driver if I were driving something else.

Neither my line nor the line of other SUV drivers of sight sucks. That statement applies to any driver who only uses their mirrors to change lanes. I clearly recall there being a blind spot for ANY VEHICLE, so therefore all drivers should turn their head to see if there is a car in the next lane before changing. I've never had a problem seeing anyone over the "big ass" of my SUV because my REAR view mirror works fine in seeing cars BEHIND ME and if I'm SWITCHING LANES the car should be BESIDE ME for which I would use my SIDE mirrors and turn my head to look for any cars.

They usually hog 2 spaces because they don't want their precious baby scratched or simply because it doesn't fit in a normal space."

Funny, I've seen luxury vehicles or cars with too much going on doing the same thing and people still scratching their car-which could be out of jealousy or spite. I've never had a problem fitting my SUV in a parking space and it's pretty big. If a car/SUV is taking up two spaces, why try to fit in between? I'm not going to be stupid enough to do so. I might say "darn it", but I'll just move along and find somewhere else to park even if I have to park far.

To those with the "if you aren't driving off road or for sports, why do you need an SUV" comments. Well why drive an Accord or Taurus when you can drive a Civic or Neon? There are plenty of girls driving a Jetta, Passat or Acura trying to be "chic" when they can get to where they are going just fine in a Sentra.

Maybe if people drove smaller cars that get better mileage we wouldn't have to be worried about foreign oil and possibly drilling in Alaska."

So the only cars that should be made are the Focus or Prism? Let's all be part of the solution, not just SUV drivers. To take it further, why don't the people who can't drive utilize public transportation? Then, there would be fewer cars on the road and this would cure the issue people have with foreign oil and drilling in Alaska.

Yesterday it snowed here in the DC area, and most of the people you saw on the side of the road or in a ditch were driving SUV's! It goes to show that many (not all) people who drive them don't know HOW to drive them."

Could that have been what YOU saw. Driving from MD to VA, I saw nothing but compact cars stalled on the side. I recall seeing an Audi, Firebird and Impala flying past me on the Beltway. The driver's of these cars- which are extremely fast during normal weather conditions- thought they were invincible during the bad weather. Maybe the Firebird and the Impala made it safely to work, but that wasn't the case for the Audi who didn't handle a curve very well and ended up in the guardrail. Based on location one can come to a different conclusion about what cars faired safer during our bad weather. Either way, it has nothing to do with the car, but the person behind the wheel.

You know why people can’t see in front of SUV? Because they are so far up on the bumper if they get any closer they'd end up in the back of one or underneath it. A problem with drivers of ALL VEHICLES is they drive to close to the car in front of them. I'm always looking in my rear view mirror at some car whose headlights I can't see because they are so close.

There have been plenty of times when the thought “move out the way” crossed my mind, but that would have happened if I was in my SUV or a Camry. Why? Because no one should be going 55mph in the fast lane. There have been times when I was going fast in the fast lane, but moved over because there was a vehicle going faster. Impeding traffic annoys all drivers, therefore put your pride aside and move your car along with it to the next lane.

Since this thread contains nothing but generalizations, I might as well state one more. If people have all these problems with SUVs then maybe they are the true problem and need to learn how to drive better. Stop thinking you can compete with the "big beasts" of the road.

[Kevin]

Originally posted by RedRoseSAI



And woe is the rest of us in our regular sized cars, even if the accident isn't our fault...

As long as the choice is mine I'll choose the bigger vehicle EVERY time. Woe to those who make bad decisions