SUVs should Get Tobacco-Style Warnings

[Earendil]

The straight up problem is fuel efficient engines. You *must* have power in order to pull something. If you add weight to a smaller engine, it is going to not only struggle to pull it, but it's own fuel efficiency is going to drop way down, below what an efficient diesel or gas truck pulling the same weight. (as an aside, I have mentioned that those that don't actually use trucks/SUVs for their intended purpose should be shot).

Smaller engines with less power are not what we need. What we needed are engines of the same power and size, and yet consume less fuel and produce less pollution.

 

[ddtlm]

takao:

Those are some neat vehicles, from a purely utilitarian viewpoint. Over here in the USofA, it seems every auto company is racing to see who can elliminate utilitarian SUVs/trucklets first. Everyone buys "big softie" pickups for anything work-related, damn things ride like a boat.

Earendil:

I have mentioned that those that don't actually use trucks/SUVs for their intended purpose should be shot.

People using SUVs as symbols do not deserve punishment of any sort. What do you intend to gain by taking such a bizzare and reactionary stance? The very concept of determining what constitutes sufficient "use" for an "intended purpose" clogs my mind.

You *must* have power in order to pull something. ... Smaller engines with less power are not what we need.

I get a sweaty brow thinking about all that good TV comercial material.

People got around and towed fine with engines nowhere near these 300HP+ pickup motors we've got now. These days its all about acceleration and overkill. Truck motors have names and marketing campaigns.

 

[takao]

those "pritschenwagen" are available in very different sizes
the first mercedes for example is perhaps the biggest available and can haul 4,5 tons and has diesel engines with 136 to 177 hp ,520 bis 675 nm torque and are available with 4WD

for companies there are different laws concerning the weight of vehicles you are allowed to drive up to 7,5 tons if it's a commercial transport vehicle
private vehicles are limited to 3,5 tons

but i'm not so sure about the whole thing because i've never driven them by myself

(most of them who are driving around are smaller ones who can haul up to 2,5 tons etc. like second i posted )

side note: during my austrian army service we used them (much older ones of course) off road through mud etc. sure no pleasure ...we preferred the bigger Steyr 12M (5 tons empty) or the smaller Pinzgauer (the offroad god) ..but for basic offroad needs the "synchros" were good enough...

 

[Earendil]

takao:
People using SUVs as symbols do not deserve punishment of any sort. What do you intend to gain by taking such a bizzare and reactionary stance? The very concept of determining what constitutes sufficient "use" for an "intended purpose" clogs my mind.

Yes they do, they deserve to be hunted down and shot, which is an obvious extreme action and not one I would seriously suggest anyone take. Sorry if you took me seriously, I hope you haven't shot anyone on my behalf yet ;-)

takao:I get a sweaty brow thinking about all that good TV comercial material.

People got around and towed fine with engines nowhere near these 300HP+ pickup motors we've got now. These days its all about acceleration and overkill. Truck motors have names and marketing campaigns.

It sounds as if you are arguing with me, but I don't think you are. I mentioned that "Power" is what is needed to tow, and what you said there doesn't argue against my point. You do on the other hand argue as if I mentioned HorsePower(which I did not). Since HP isn't what tows vehicles, and Torque is, I'd say you just agreed with me.

Our Chevy Suburban has about 145hp I think... Doesn't mean it's a small engine, or that it doesn't have towing capacity beyond that of a 400hp BMW.

None the less, my statement stands. The more powerful the engine, the less it will be effected my additional weight.

Tyler Z.

 

[apple2991]

So, I think we all agree: SUVs should be illegal.

 

[kylos]

So, I think we all agree: SUVs should be illegal.

Not quite.

 

[takao]

Not quite.

ditto the only thing i have with most suv is that they are huge,heavy and using lots of gasoline....where most people who buy them don't use them they were intended anyways(only 1 of 5 go offroad at least from what i've heard)

where are the smaller SUVs ?

 

[mactastic]

Heavier vehicles certainly do more damage to the roads, and as such should pay a higher VLF fee. They cause more damage in accidents so they should have higher insurance rates. And the government should stop subsidizing gas and let people pay for the actual costs. The tax breaks on H2s need to stop.

Those that need SUV's can and should have them, same as any specialty vehicle. The rest should make a more informed decision, but I'm not going to make it for them.

 

[Earendil]

Heavier vehicles certainly do more damage to the roads, and as such should pay a higher VLF fee. They cause more damage in accidents so they should have higher insurance rates. And the government should stop subsidizing gas and let people pay for the actual costs. The tax breaks on H2s need to stop.

Those that need SUV's can and should have them, same as any specialty vehicle. The rest should make a more informed decision, but I'm not going to make it for them.

Thanks for summing up my points in two quick and neat paragraphs

Tyler Z.

 

[hulugu]

The thing of it is, SUVs are not inherently bad. The catagory has been around since the first CJ and was especially established by the first Jeep Wagoneers, everything else follows this line. For people who need the capabilities that an SUV offers: high ground clearance, rugged construction, towing ability, and four-wheel drive, these vehicles are very well designed. But, the SUV was never[I/] intended to be a family commuter vehicle, hence the Ford Explorer crashes, which were blamed on Firestone, but were—at least in part—caused by overloaded Explorers driven by people who did not understand the top-heavy characteristics of their vehicle. The Explorer, for example, is overloaded if all the seats are filled. So is the Nissan Xterra. The vehicles become unstable when used for a family.
Furthemore, their gross weight and slab-sided designs make them use fuel at a much higher weight.
I would argue that most SUVs make terrible cars and their distinct advantages are outweighed by their distinct disadvantages. The idea that SUVs are safer is outweighed by the shear evidence of data suggesting that they are more[I/] likely to be involved in a fatal accident in which the driver[I/] or passengers are injured, not to mention the likelihood of fatalities in the other car.
The whole Tahoe platform (including the H2) is a design disaster.
And lastly, doesn't the above advantages seem counter to a Luxury SUV? I think that the whole Luxury SUV catagory is an excess, the Lexus RX seems like a bloated tick compared to the rest of the line.

 

[ddtlm]

Earendil:

which is an obvious extreme action and not one I would seriously suggest anyone take

Yeah, but its still a bizzarre thing to say, and I don't see that any punishment is in order.

I mentioned that "Power" is what is needed to tow ... as if I mentioned HorsePower(which I did not).

A horsepower is a unit of power, a foot-pound is a unit of torque. "Powerful" engines have a lot of horsepower, engines with a lot of foot-pounds are "torquey" engines.

We've got way more than enough power these days, and an ample supply of torque to back it up. Your 'burb almost certainly has less than 350 ft-lb of torque (or less if its gas), compared to some new pickups which exceed 600 ft-lb. I think thats a bit over-the-top.

hulugu:

but were - at least in part - caused by overloaded Explorers driven by people who did not understand the top-heavy characteristics of their vehicle

But note that full-size vans are built on solid rear axles with body-on-frame contruction just like "true" SUV's. They are very tall, very heavy, and carry a lot of wieght at highway speeds. Where is the rollover problem with them?

Having owned an Explorer (1993 model) I can tell you that it didn't control side-to-side motions very well. Since that time I've ridden in a lot of SUV's and pickups that handled their center of gravity much better. I'd have to place the blame not on the size, shape or wieght of SUV's but on the soft (or poorly designed) suspention a lot of them ride on.

The Explorer, for example, is overloaded if all the seats are filled.

That's silly.

The whole Tahoe platform (including the H2) is a design disaster.

Since when?