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.
One day when your knees/hips/back reach their expiration date, try getting in and out of a low slung car and you will understand.
This x1000. Every time I walk past a sports car, where my hips are above the window, I groan at the thought of having to lift myself up out of it. I did see an informercial for this thing called the "Car cane" which looked interesting in that regard, but still a royal pain compared to stepping up onto a running board or sideways into a minivan.
Yeah that's why the Kia Soul, Scion Xb, and other such compacts that ride higher and have a more upright seating position that you can step into are popular among the senior set.
Not saying that. But it should be reflected in liability insurance rates.
It is not the big vehicles that are the problem. It is those little bug size cars. Big cars suffer little damage, but the little ones suffer considerable damage. The ones that are suffering the most damage (those little bug sized cars) should have a big surcharge for insurance due to them being the ones that cost the most to put back on the road.
Quote:
If practicality is the priority, go all the way. The only logical reason for large truck-ish SUVs (as in something like a Tahoe) instead of a minivan is if you really do go off-roading.
I have driven large SUVs starting with a Suburban in mid 70s. There is a log bigger reason than off-roading, Snow, Ice, Mud and other bad situations on freeways and on smaller roads. I always carry a tow strap, and when areas with no cell coverage I often pull those little cars like you advocate back onto the road as I just cannot leave them there until someone rescues them.
Quote:
If practicality is the priority, go all the way. The only logical reason for large truck-ish SUVs (as in something like a Tahoe) instead of a minivan is if you really do go off-roading.
That's why I always thought, unless you're doing hard-core towing or going off-road, what's the use in an SUV instead of a minivan, especially when the SUV often costs more owing to its perceived "coolness?" Nothing beats a minivan in how they can hold lots of people or cargo due to the way the seats can be removed altogether vs just folded down, the way sliding doors make it easier to deal with in a crowded parking lot and the way (compared to a largeish SUV vs the "crossover" ones) they're easier to get into and out of since they're not jacked up as high.
Minivans are city cars, with good weather driving conditions. When you get out into the real world as we do in our area, we thought the Minivan had gone he way of the dodo bird, as we have no use for them. We want high clearance SUVs, with 4 wheel drive in the winter. Most of us do not take them off pavement or gravel roads. We drive them for safe motoring.
Quote:
To some of us a vehicle is more than an appliance and more of an extension of ones personality. For me, when I purchase a vehicle it has to look good before I start checking of my must have list.
And a lot of people buy for utility, more than how beautiful it is. Beauty does not get you through a foot of snow, and ice.
Yes the SUV will survive and be popular. Now that even Ford does not build a ca big enough for police officers to carry all their equipment and room for holding suspects, they are turning to the Ford Explorer police model for their patrol duties all over the country. Already taking over half the new buys over the past 4 years. I have had the police tell me they are the best patrol car ever. They especially like the way they sit higher, so it is easier to watch the highway, or around town. And the bigger/taller officers, say they are so much easier to get in or out of when they are in a hurry.
{snip} And a lot of people buy for utility, more than how beautiful it is. Beauty does not get you through a foot of snow, and ice.
On that I completely agree. Most of the remarks are, I think, geared towards people who buy SUVs and never take them off-road, wanting to keep them all pretty when they're basically tractors that can go 70 mph. Moreover, mine are geared just to the general silliness of caring so much what a vehicle LOOKS like. For it to be a FACTOR, sure, but for it to be THAT important--sorry, I don't care if I'm the "outlier" or whatever, frankly I think the practical view makes more sense even if 10 trillion people say otherwise. We're talking about something that uses nasty oil and smelly gas and is meant to haul people to where they're going, not a painting or a sculpture.
As I mentioned, looks in and of itself is fine, it's when looks override function that I think people are being silly. For a long time, it was all you could do to buy a small car in hatchback or wagon style because they seemed to all come in the sedan style with trunks. The hatchbacks may have been "boxy" perhaps but they held more cargo room. The market spoke, though--looks are more important. I'm sorry, but sometimes "the market" makes no sense, you wonder what Fruit Loops it's made of sometimes. Thankfully, again, I've noticed a trend of the hatchback style coming back in new cars, witness models like the Honda Fit and Nissan Versa.
It is not the big vehicles that are the problem. It is those little bug size cars. Big cars suffer little damage, but the little ones suffer considerable damage. The ones that are suffering the most damage (those little bug sized cars) should have a big surcharge for insurance due to them being the ones that cost the most to put back on the road.
And I suppose pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorcyclists and hell just public infrastructure property like dividing walls should just be banned from roadways too? Big vehicles are the ones introducing the risk.
And I suppose pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorcyclists and hell just public infrastructure property like dividing walls should just be banned from roadways too? Big vehicles are the ones introducing the risk.
Big vehicles have been around as long as any of us can remember. Not the other way around. To try and imply that they should be "taxed" for driving on the same road as a matchbox car is silly. Big vehicles have not introduced any new risk to the roads. These matchbox cars have if anything. Now on top of having to watch for pedestrians, cyclists, and all the other hazards that could be out there we have to watch for the car that we can't see between two cars up ahead to dart over in front of us with little warning.
As long as people walk on sidewalks, or cross intersections when they are supposed to and cyclists follow the rules of the road there is no more risk for them than if they were next to a Nissan Versa or a Toyota Prius.
The SUV is safer, allows us to carry more, is more comfortable, and is versatile. You expect folks to give that up for one of these cars? Please..........
If people want to drive them, by all means I say go for it. But don't expect the general population to pay for your decision to drive a SMART car or some other small car.
And I suppose pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorcyclists and hell just public infrastructure property like dividing walls should just be banned from roadways too? Big vehicles are the ones introducing the risk.
Wrong: It is the small vehicle like bicycles, and small cars that are introducing the risk to themselves. The big vehicles were here first, and it is only recent that they started to make these midget cars putting them in the mix. In fact, bicycles etc., are banned from many major highways as they are just too dangerous to be on those roads.
It is nuts, to think the big vehicle driver should be punished and pay more because someone else wants to drive midget cars. Here in our area as I said before, way over half of all cars in a parking lot will be SUVs and full size Pickups. The super tiny small cars are rarely seen, and the only Electric Cars I have seen are a couple of Prius that were driven by tourists who complained they were having serious trouble finding places to recharge. Not one Tesla registered in the state, according to the Motor Vehicles Division. There is only one Smart Car in our area. Electric cars are never be a big thing here like in the west coast cities as an example for a few reasons.
1: In the winter, the range drops by about 60% due to cold weather.
3: In the mountains, range drops rapidly, and when cold weather is here it really drops.
4: Out cities are not just next door. If we want to buy anything other than some basic groceries, a small hardware, a building supply, and an animal feed store we have to go from 50 miles (a 100 mile plus round trip) one way or about 90 the other way ending up 200 miles. An electric car would not make the trip in the winter.
If we go shopping we need something big enough to bring it home. People will make it a car pool day, and you need room for passengers.
As I have said, why should us driving regular size vehicles which are the best for our altitude and weather conditions, have to pay extra because some people want to drive motorized roller skate size cars.
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.
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.
