U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Automotive
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-13-2014, 09:18 PM
 
3,279 posts, read 3,762,511 times
Reputation: 6149

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by SVTLightning View Post
So what is your definition on a "real" suv?

I dont have an expedition. I have a BMW X5M. It will out corner many sports cars and certainly almost every "normal" on the road today. It has 555 HP and 500lb tq. My wife has raced a MB up to 150 and yes she won. I have taken it to the 1/4 track and had a blast all day.

It seats 5, has a hatch in the back and can carry lots of luggage and dog toys.

So again, do a little research before you throw blanket statements out there.
Please. There is no way an SUV with the higher center of gravity can outcorner, say, the BMW 7-series or the like. There just isn't any way. At the risk of being blasphemous, I don't care if Jesus says it can, I just don't believe it. I can imagine it would out corner something "boxier" like an Expedition, but there's just no way it's out-cornering a four-alarm bonafied sports car like, say, a Ferrari or Corvette. There's just no way.

Now, that said, I don't doubt that it can do better than a normal car, something like that could anyway, since it's more low-slung judging from the photos. (Then again, I doubt it can off-road that much either, so why bother.) So, if one is buying something like that because they want some semblance of sportiness but yet have a vehicle that's actually practical in terms of room and the like, I could see it somewhat.

But obviously, if you want the ultimate in cornering and the like, there's no substitute for something like a Corvette or Ferrari etc. Otherwise they wouldn't still exist and be marketed towards those wanting those pursuits.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-14-2014, 02:32 AM
 
Location: Fuquay Varina
4,238 posts, read 6,196,743 times
Reputation: 10092
lol your first arguement was a Ford Taurus. Now you are throwing out corvettes and ferraris haha

I'm done with this lol
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2014, 06:36 AM
 
Location: sumter
7,230 posts, read 4,650,374 times
Reputation: 5898
Quote:
Originally Posted by SVTLightning View Post
So what is your definition on a "real" suv?

I dont have an expedition. I have a BMW X5M. It will out corner many sports cars and certainly almost every "normal" on the road today. It has 555 HP and 500lb tq. My wife has raced a MB up to 150 and yes she won. I have taken it to the 1/4 track and had a blast all day.

It seats 5, has a hatch in the back and can carry lots of luggage and dog toys.

So again, do a little research before you throw blanket statements out there.
I love the BMW X5m but it its not the norm is most places and especially in my neck of the woods. There is one in my town and I believe its at least a 2012 with a female driver. She is always driving fast on busy public streets and have blow past me several times. I would love to see how my mustang 5.0 competes on an open stretch of road, I wont engage her on busy streets.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2014, 06:38 AM
 
Location: Pikesville, MD
5,229 posts, read 11,495,564 times
Reputation: 4846
Quote:
Originally Posted by SVTLightning View Post
lol your first arguement was a Ford Taurus. Now you are throwing out corvettes and ferraris haha

I'm done with this lol
Yeah, he's obviously never driven a performance SUV and moves the goalpopsts every argument he brings up about them. I guess an SUV anally raped his grandmother or something, so that he's blinded to how capable modern ones are. They aren't the same as old International Travelalls or even original Ford Explorers anymore.

At legal speeds there are no unsafe SUVs anymore, and even at extra-legal speeds, there are a number of SUVs that are quite competent and as good or better than most sedans, thanks to proper springs, dampers and swaybars, as well as a fairly wide track and wide tires.

The point is, they don't HAVE to outcorner a Ferrari, all they have to do is be more than competent and do their job which is carrying passengers and cargo. I can compare them back to back with sedans because unlike shyguy, I'm not a closed minded idiot that has never driven them. I owned many SUVs at the same time as sports cars and sport sedans. Like when I owned this BMW 7 series and Range Rover HSE:



The Range Rover went offroad quite well, towed my smaller travel trailer, and was better than most cars at cornering and was actually very nice to drive, even on twisty backroads. And let it snow and it was a beast, unlike the 7 series.





My Suburban never sees real offroad duty, but it carries heavy loads and tows my 30 foot travel trailer with ease, thanks to it's 2500 sereis chassis and 8.1 liter V8 that has torque for days.



It won't outhandle a sports car, but at legal speeds it is more than competent in cornering, comfy and quite safe to drive.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2014, 07:49 AM
 
3,279 posts, read 3,762,511 times
Reputation: 6149
I will admit to an anti-SUV bias. I've been known to even speed up to prevent them from passing, based solely on the fact that they're SUVs, while I do no such things if it's a passenger car, and I will yell out "get out of that SUV, get into a car, if you want to drive so darned fast."

And yes, I LIKE it when, upon a person getting into an accident and hurting another, they report that the person who was driving was driving an SUV, which, to be frank, most times they are. Hardly ever do you hear that someone was driving a sports car and hit a pedestrian, 95% of the time, it's someone driving an SUV. At least that's how I've observed it over the years. Or, when you read of someone hitting a tree and not making it, and they were driving an SUV, my response is typically, "see, SUVs aren't invincible after all."

Understand, I don't like it at all that another was hurt, not at all, but when it's typically reported that the person who was driving was an SUV owner, I'm like "see, it never fails."

No, they didn't "anally molest my mother" or whatever, but I dislike them because most people I know who bought them did so versus getting a minivan, which most times is far more practical, SOLELY because they didn't like the looks of a van and didn't like the "image" of driving a "soccer mom" type of vehicle--and I've always thought that looks was the worst reason in the world to choose a vehicle. (I feel the same now with respect to smartphones, but that's another matter.) I can understand it being a FACTOR, but when a car that tests well in Consumer Reports or Motor Trend is summarily dismissed by someone I'm talking to just because it's not as pulse-inspiring as a 25 year old 5'7" 130 lbs woman in a bikini, I think it's silly.

It's also because, while there certainly have been people in cars who almost hit me on the highway from driving too aggressively, most times it's been someone in an SUV, and yes, they were doing it in one of those really large Ford Excursions--not Expedition, but Excursion--and besides the fact that I don't appreciate almost being hit, also I've typically replied "dude, if you want to break the sound barrier, you've got the wrong vehicle," because they most certainly DID have the wrong vehicle for that sort of driving.

Hey, if others have stereotyped people driving Volvo station wagons as being overly safe boring types, then I see this as no different (although it's probably immature just the same).

NOW, all of that being said, if you are telling me that these newer SUVs are different and better than their predecessors, then so be it. If you've actually driven them, you'd be in a position to know somewhat. However, at the same time, there is no way, with the higher center of gravity and the like, that even the better SUVs can match a car that's prioritiized for performance, something like a BMW 7-series or even one of the better handling mid-sized cars such as, say, a Ford Fusion or the like. There's just no way. Again, I don't care if JESUS says it, I don't believe it.

The other thing, too, is this--I've never got into choices that are about half-way doing something, sort of "straddling the fence." In other words, if performance is your priority, then get something that is excellent at that, not something that's "not so bad" at it. By the same token, if cargo room is your priority, then get something, like a minivan, that's geared towards that. I do know enough to know that, typically anyway, a minivan will have more room than an SUV, especially one that's not a large one. It's why, as a hobbyist photographer, I refuse to use a smartphone's camera, because I want to use something that is made for taking photos and ONLY taking photos. I'm so serious about it, I will refuse to take a photo of my own children, if need be, if a phone is all that I have on me at the time, the principle is THAT important to me (and yet, actually, most times I DO have a "real" camera on me, I take one practically everywhere I go).

All of that being said, I do also realize the desire for something that's sort of "all around good," in other words, a minivan or large SUV has capacity but is poor at cornering, a sports car handles well but isn't practical in terms of cargo and passenger capacity. You don't want to have to be all-in one way or the other at the total exclusion of something else. In such a case, something that's sort of a "tweener" may be the ticket, and if that's what you are saying the newer SUVs are like, then maybe it's time I refresh my ideas and notions of what SUVs are anymore.

To that end, I will say this--my mother has one of the newer Ford Escapes (I think it's a 2007) and it seems like something I'd even like--yes, me, Mr. Hates SUVs With a Passion. It seems to do the "all around" thing very well. It can accommodate 5 people easily, it has more trunk space than most sedans I've seen, and seems to handle respectably well also, I certainly imagine it would corner as well as a Taurus, or close to it anyway, certainly far better than the Expeditions of yore.

But then, if cornering at a HIGH level was my priority, and I was willing to sacrifice practical considerations to obtain it, then yes it's not going to measure up to something that's more performance-tuned, and that's typically going to be a car. There's just no escaping the laws of physics, although at times in other respects I sure wish there was.

Nice debating all of you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2014, 07:57 AM
 
Location: NY
9,004 posts, read 14,212,015 times
Reputation: 11354
Quote:
Originally Posted by shyguylh View Post
I will admit to an anti-SUV bias. I've been known to even speed up to prevent them from passing, based solely on the fact that they're SUVs, while I do no such things if it's a passenger car, and I will yell out "get out of that SUV, get into a car, if you want to drive so darned fast."

And yes, I LIKE it when, upon a person getting into an accident and hurting another, they report that the person who was driving was driving an SUV, which, to be frank, most times they are. Hardly ever do you hear that someone was driving a sports car and hit a pedestrian, 95% of the time, it's someone driving an SUV. At least that's how I've observed it over the years. Or, when you read of someone hitting a tree and not making it, and they were driving an SUV, my response is typically, "see, SUVs aren't invincible after all."

Understand, I don't like it at all that another was hurt, not at all, but when it's typically reported that the person who was driving was an SUV owner, I'm like "see, it never fails."

No, they didn't "anally molest my mother" or whatever, but I dislike them because most people I know who bought them did so versus getting a minivan, which most times is far more practical, SOLELY because they didn't like the looks of a van and didn't like the "image" of driving a "soccer mom" type of vehicle--and I've always thought that looks was the worst reason in the world to choose a vehicle. (I feel the same now with respect to smartphones, but that's another matter.) I can understand it being a FACTOR, but when a car that tests well in Consumer Reports or Motor Trend is summarily dismissed by someone I'm talking to just because it's not as pulse-inspiring as a 25 year old 5'7" 130 lbs woman in a bikini, I think it's silly.

It's also because, while there certainly have been people in cars who almost hit me on the highway from driving too aggressively, most times it's been someone in an SUV, and yes, they were doing it in one of those really large Ford Excursions--not Expedition, but Excursion--and besides the fact that I don't appreciate almost being hit, also I've typically replied "dude, if you want to break the sound barrier, you've got the wrong vehicle," because they most certainly DID have the wrong vehicle for that sort of driving.

Hey, if others have stereotyped people driving Volvo station wagons as being overly safe boring types, then I see this as no different (although it's probably immature just the same).

NOW, all of that being said, if you are telling me that these newer SUVs are different and better than their predecessors, then so be it. If you've actually driven them, you'd be in a position to know somewhat. However, at the same time, there is no way, with the higher center of gravity and the like, that even the better SUVs can match a car that's prioritiized for performance, something like a BMW 7-series or even one of the better handling mid-sized cars such as, say, a Ford Fusion or the like. There's just no way. Again, I don't care if JESUS says it, I don't believe it.

The other thing, too, is this--I've never got into choices that are about half-way doing something, sort of "straddling the fence." In other words, if performance is your priority, then get something that is excellent at that, not something that's "not so bad" at it. By the same token, if cargo room is your priority, then get something, like a minivan, that's geared towards that. I do know enough to know that, typically anyway, a minivan will have more room than an SUV, especially one that's not a large one.

All of that being said, I do also realize the desire for something that's sort of "all around good," in other words, a minivan or large SUV has capacity but is poor at cornering, a sports car handles well but isn't practical in terms of cargo and passenger capacity. You don't want to have to be all-in one way or the other at the total exclusion of something else. In such a case, something that's sort of a "tweener" may be the ticket, and if that's what you are saying the newer SUVs are like, then maybe it's time I refresh my ideas and notions of what SUVs are anymore.

To that end, I will say this--my mother has one of the newer Ford Escapes (I think it's a 2007) and it seems like something I'd even like--yes, me, Mr. Hates SUVs With a Passion. It seems to do the "all around" thing very well. It can accommodate 5 people easily, it has more trunk space than most sedans I've seen, and seems to handle respectably well also, I certainly imagine it would corner as well as a Taurus, or close to it anyway, certainly far better than the Expeditions of yore.

But then, if cornering at a HIGH level was my priority, and I was willing to sacrifice practical considerations to obtain it, then yes it's not going to measure up to something that's more performance-tuned, and that's typically going to be a car. There's just no escaping the laws of physics, although at times in other respects I sure wish there was.

Nice debating all of you.
Wow. Just wow.

The nice thing about comparing handling, cornering, vehicle dynamics, and capabilities is that we DON'T need to believe what Jesus may have said about them.

The cars exist. They can be driven, compared, tested, and experienced.

Instead of making assumptions on what this or that car can do, how well it "corners," etc, and then stereotyping all types of a particular vehicle into one box, you could always go out and drive some of these machines. Feel them. Experience them. Compare them.

You may find not everything fits so neatly into your stereotype, and you don't even have to move the goalposts up to ultra expensive cars or flagship vehicles to find this out.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2014, 08:42 AM
 
Location: Living on the Coast in Oxnard CA
15,372 posts, read 25,596,959 times
Reputation: 19649
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTOlover View Post
would you not need a commercial drivers license for the with an Airbrake ticket?
I have no idea. Doubt that it would be a problem though. If someone wants something bad enough they will do what they have to do to get what they want.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Automotive
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top