[downinflames68]

And I shall laugh as you spin out while driving onto an onramp. High performance wagons should have AWD and boost.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

If I have a gaggle of children (and money) one day, I'm buying an E63 estate.

You're still an American, no matter how much Top Gear you watch. Please call it a wagon.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by downinflames68 

Yeah, you need the ability to think instead of boiling things down.

You need experience instead of blindly quoting government shite.

Originally Posted by downinflames68 

SUVs are unsafe in ANY accident where there is a large force involved, such as hitting a tree, or something of equal or larger mass. They also have poor response, handling, and braking, which makes an accident more likely since it's harder to avoid them.

Complete bollocks. My Jeeps will stay with BMWs around corners.

Originally Posted by downinflames68 

If you do get into an accident, and you slide off the road, it is VERY likely that the SUV will roll. Since roof strength standards haven't increased for SUVs/Trucks since 1972, it is likely the roof will collapse and someone will be injured or killed. This is why the deathrate of SUVs is so much higher than passenger cars.

Actually, here in the UK, SUVs have the lowest accident rate of any vehicles.

Originally Posted by downinflames68 

If you hit another car with an SUV, since SUVs do not have the same bumper height, they can intrude into the passenger compartment of SMALL, LOW cars. This is absolutely horrible, because you can be responsible for KILLING people that would otherwise be alive/fine if you had been driving a regular car.

Yeah. It's a good idea not to crash into people in the first place.

Originally Posted by downinflames68 

SUVs are basically for self-centered assholes that just think "bigger= safer", watch NFL, and drink shitty beer, while living in their beige house in the suburbs, having sexual fantasies about their wife's friends, and driving around in their SUV pretending they're single. It's pretty sad. Just admit you need a minivan, or be an actual COOL dad and buy a high performance wagon or something.

1) I don't have kids.
2) I'm not married.
3) My friend's wives have fantasies about me.
4) NFL sucks since Emmitt Smith retired.
5) I like shitty beer.
6) I live on moorland.
7) You're still talking Amerika-centric bollocks.

[imitchellg5]

Originally Posted by downinflames68 

And I shall laugh as you spin out while driving onto an onramp. High performance wagons should have AWD and boost.

LOL well in a world where I can afford an E63, I will be living somewhere tropical

[imitchellg5]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

You're still talking Amerika-centric bollocks.

Dude. America is at the center of the world.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by downinflames68 

And I shall laugh as you spin out while driving onto an onramp.

Why, is he a crap driver who doesn't understand handling too?

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

Dude. America is at the center of the world.

Hell no. We invented time itself.

[imitchellg5]

Well. Well. We invented the chicken sandwich!!!11!

[downinflames68]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Complete bollocks. My Jeeps will stay with BMWs around corners.

No it won't.

Actually, here in the UK, SUVs have the lowest accident rate of any vehicles.

Because nobody owns them due to the gas taxes and prices.

Yeah. It's a good idea not to crash into people in the first place.

Yeah, and what's easier to avoid doing that with? A vehicle with tall CG and lots of travel in the suspension that has tires with huge sidewalls and poor brakes? Or a low car with stiff suspension, low profile tires, and huge brakes?

7) You're still talking Amerika-centric bollocks.

Because we are talking about SUVs, which are most popular in America.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by downinflames68 

No it won't.

Yes, they will. Unless you've driven said Jeeps, you won't know, will you?

Originally Posted by downinflames68 

Because nobody owns them due to the gas taxes and prices.

Anyone from the UK want to set Rob right about SUV ownership here?

Originally Posted by downinflames68 

Yeah, and what's easier to avoid doing that with?

A brain.

[imitchellg5]

There are quite a few SUVs in the UK. They make a certain amount of sense there if you live outside a city, like most of the UK population does.

[downinflames68]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Yes, they will. Unless you've driven said Jeeps, you won't know, will you?

The Grand Comparo! Jeep Grand Cherokee vs Honda Odyssey vs Audi A4 vs Pontiac Aztek

Jeep Slalom: 61mph.
Audi A4: 63mph.

2008 BMW 328i Road Test Review on Edmunds.com

BMW 328i: 68mph.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by downinflames68 

The Grand Comparo! Jeep Grand Cherokee vs Honda Odyssey vs Audi A4 vs Pontiac Aztek

Jeep Slalom: 61mph.
Audi A4: 63mph.

2008 BMW 328i Road Test Review on Edmunds.com

BMW 328i: 68mph.

My Grand's an Overland, not a Limited, with 35 more horses, 35 more torques, a different suspension setup, wider tyres, a different transfer case and LSDs front and rear.

Funny how even that puny GC is the fastest of the bunch from 0-60 and from 60-0, ain't it? Funny how it's better on the skidpad and slalom than these minivans you keep ranting about too. I thought SUVs handled badly and we all had to start driving better handling minivans!

Plus, I know you don't have corners over there in Amerika so you have to go by the slalom numbers, but slalom doesn't mirror real world cornering in any way, shape or form.

[downinflames68]

Right right. I wish you lived closer, I'd so race you in the S6.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by downinflames68 

Right right. I wish you lived closer, I'd so race you in the S6.

Right. Meet you at the bottom of these rocks...
YouTube - Jeep WJ on rocks
...last one up's a complete pussy.

Or if we're sticking to road cars, I'll be bringing an 800 horse Skyline.

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by downinflames68 

Yeah, you need the ability to think instead of boiling things down.

SUVs are unsafe in ANY accident where there is a large force involved, such as hitting a tree, or something of equal or larger mass. They also have poor response, handling, and braking, which makes an accident more likely since it's harder to avoid them.

I'd suggest that you qualify your very general statement with what you consider an SUV.

The reason we don't have our CR-V anymore is that it was car #3 in a 5-car chain reaction. A large truck, driven by someone who appeared to be intoxicated and was taken away in a police car, plowed into car #4 at considerable speed. #4 mashed our CR-V into #2, which impacted #1 and pushed it from the stop line into the intersection (#1-#4 were at a complete stop at a light) ONLY the CR-V was drivable after the accident, and my son drove it 130+ miles home. It was only when he got home and we unloaded his camping stuff from the back that we found out something disturbing: the interior well that held the spare tire had been ripped open by the impact.

Honda's "real time" 4-wheel drive and anti-lock brakes were one reason we felt comfortable for our son to drive the CR-V out of town. It's relatively high visibility and good ground clearance were tempered by a fairly low center of gravity. It rated fairly high (3 of 5) on rollover worthiness in 2001, the first year this test was published, as compared to 2 of 5 for the Ford Explorer of the same year. Further, our son was well trained, and sufficiently aware of the laws of physics to manage the vehicle actively, rather than simply pointing it the way most motor vehicle operators direct their cars. In short, it was a good, safe fit for our well trained and safe driving son.

Any vehicle can roll over. I saw a HMMV (the GI vehicle, not the stupid knock-off) rolled once and that thing is built with a very low CG and is extremely wide on the road. But a good driver who knows how to handle his/her vehicle can manage even a top-heavy vehicle, while a poor driver could easily get into trouble with the most stable of vehicles. To state that SUVs as a group (and not a well defined group) are all unsafe is to ignore far too many factors.

My scariest image on the road is a tiny woman propelling a Yukon or Escalade (the same vehicle but with different badges) down the highway while ignoring all rules of driving and laws of physics because she's been sold on her vehicle "because big is safe." But while I've seen that, I've also seen a very skilled motorcyclist stand up on the bike's seat in rush hour freeway traffic. It does not take poor skills to be unsafe. But poor skills with a vehicle that is more challenging to manage is a bad mix.

[imitchellg5]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

My scariest image on the road is a tiny woman propelling a Yukon or Escalade (the same vehicle but with different badges) down the highway while ignoring all rules of driving and laws of physics because she's been sold on her vehicle "because big is safe."

While talking on the phone, putting on makeup, and reading a book.

[Hawkeye_a]

A couple of you mentioned that Audi's were of "bad" quality from the mid-'90s to mid-'00s.

Like ive said i got a 2003 A4. seems fine(had it for 6 months)...what 'issues' are you referring to ? I like the car, but my heart is set of the A5(non-sportsback).

Cheers

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

Any vehicle can roll over.

But greatly reduced with ESC.

Which, of course, you'll have a harder time finding with crappy US cars.

It's really a great technology. Watch this animation video to see how it works. Most of the unintended roll-overs will never get as critical with ESC.

-t

[imitchellg5]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

A couple of you mentioned that Audi's were of "bad" quality from the mid-'90s to mid-'00s.

Like ive said i got a 2003 A4. seems fine(had it for 6 months)...what 'issues' are you referring to ? I like the car, but my heart is set of the A5(non-sportsback).

Cheers

I have a friend with a 2003 A4 1.8T who's spent over $10k on parts (NOT labor) over just the last three years. Seems like the turbo motors are pretty unreliable especially. I remember seeing one in the Audi dealer that had, within two months, blown the turbo, transmission, and started burning oil.

[imitchellg5]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

But greatly reduced with ESC.

Which, of course, you'll have a harder time finding with crappy US cars.

It's really a great technology. Watch this animation video to see how it works. Most of the unintended roll-overs will never get as critical with ESC.

-t

Actually ESC is federally-mandated to be standard on all cars sold in the US beginning in 2012. For some reason. If you're at the point where you need ESC to prevent a rollover in a small car, then I don't think a little bit of electronic wizardry can save you.

[Andy8]

The S5 coupe would be my 2nd choice after the R8.

[downinflames68]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

I'd suggest that you qualify your very general statement with what you consider an SUV.

The reason we don't have our CR-V anymore is that it was car #3 in a 5-car chain reaction. A large truck, driven by someone who appeared to be intoxicated and was taken away in a police car, plowed into car #4 at considerable speed. #4 mashed our CR-V into #2, which impacted #1 and pushed it from the stop line into the intersection (#1-#4 were at a complete stop at a light) ONLY the CR-V was drivable after the accident, and my son drove it 130+ miles home. It was only when he got home and we unloaded his camping stuff from the back that we found out something disturbing: the interior well that held the spare tire had been ripped open by the impact.

That's because the CRV was higher, so it's bumpers did not interact with other cars bumpers, and instead hit into the soft sheet metal above the other cars bumpers. It also has less crumple zones than the cars.

But a good driver who knows how to handle his/her vehicle can manage even a top-heavy vehicle, while a poor driver could easily get into trouble with the most stable of vehicles. To state that SUVs as a group (and not a well defined group) are all unsafe is to ignore far too many factors.

Bzzt. No. A good driver can try to compensate, but a good driver in a more capable vehicle is STILL EVEN SAFER. That's like saying a good driver can drive with a box of grenades next to propane tanks without harm, but it's still safer to drive without either. SUVS have poor response due to tall sidewalls and long travel suspension. They have a lot of mass, and generally handle/respond/brake like total shit.

[downinflames68]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

A couple of you mentioned that Audi's were of "bad" quality from the mid-'90s to mid-'00s.

Like ive said i got a 2003 A4. seems fine(had it for 6 months)...what 'issues' are you referring to ? I like the car, but my heart is set of the A5(non-sportsback).

Cheers

Ignition problems, window regulator problems, transmission problems, and turbo problems. The 1.8T engine is pretty decent, but if you drive it improperly it can still fail (allow turbo to cool before shutting down, etc)

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by downinflames68 

SUVS have poor response due to tall sidewalls and long travel suspension. They have a lot of mass, and generally handle/respond/brake like total shit.

I refer the gentleman to his own link earlier in the page, where an SUV out-accelerated and out-braked all competing vehicle types and came second in slalom and lateral grip tests.

Give it up Rob, you've been owned. By your own link.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

A couple of you mentioned that Audi's were of "bad" quality from the mid-'90s to mid-'00s.

Like ive said i got a 2003 A4. seems fine(had it for 6 months)...what 'issues' are you referring to ? I like the car, but my heart is set of the A5(non-sportsback).

Cheers

You recognize the insignificance of a sample size of one?

[Laminar]

Oh, and just so we're clear, everyone has by now realized that Rob is the same old Rob he's always been, and whatever "meekness" was observed earlier was simply mood swings?

[Hawkeye_a]

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

I have a friend with a 2003 A4 1.8T who's spent over $10k on parts (NOT labor) over just the last three years. Seems like the turbo motors are pretty unreliable especially. I remember seeing one in the Audi dealer that had, within two months, blown the turbo, transmission, and started burning oil.

That is really bad. The one i have isnt a turbo...luckily(*knock-on-wood*). As for the trans, don't the CVTs come with a lifetime guarantee or something ? I hadnt heard of these issues with the early 00s models, but yeah.... keep listing em, ill know what to look out for.

Originally Posted by Laminar 

You recognize the insignificance of a sample size of one?

Yup, im not surveying the issue. And in the end, to me, the sample size of 1(ie me) is the most important anyway.

Cheers

[downinflames68]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

Oh, and just so we're clear, everyone has by now realized that Rob is the same old Rob he's always been, and whatever "meekness" was observed earlier was simply mood swings?

Me being nicer will never affect my stance on SUVs. It just means I'm not going to wish death/harm and call people stupid pieces of crap that should have been swallowed at birth.

[imitchellg5]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

That is really bad. The one i have isnt a turbo...luckily(*knock-on-wood*). As for the trans, don't the CVTs come with a lifetime guarantee or something ? I hadnt heard of these issues with the early 00s models, but yeah.... keep listing em, ill know what to look out for.

Is yours a 3.0L with CVT? Audi is known to have the best CVTs in the market... I wouldn't be as worried then. The 3.0 is a fairly good motor.

[Hawkeye_a]

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

is yours a 3.0l with cvt? Audi is known to have the best cvts in the market... I wouldn't be as worried then. The 3.0 is a fairly good motor.

2.4l cvt

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

While talking on the phone, putting on makeup, and reading a book.

These people read?!?!

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by downinflames68 

That's because the CRV was higher, so it's bumpers did not interact with other cars bumpers, and instead hit into the soft sheet metal above the other cars bumpers. It also has less crumple zones than the cars.

Nope. The CR-V's bumpers DID interact with the front bumper on #4 and the rear bumper on #2-the CR-V's rear bumper cover was covered with the ABS from #4's front bumper cover, and the CR-V's front bumper squished #2's rear bumper cover. The CR-V is not that much taller, and its bumpers are lower than almost any other faux SUV's.

Originally Posted by downinflames68 

Bzzt. No. A good driver can try to compensate, but a good driver in a more capable vehicle is STILL EVEN SAFER. That's like saying a good driver can drive with a box of grenades next to propane tanks without harm, but it's still safer to drive without either. SUVS have poor response due to tall sidewalls and long travel suspension. They have a lot of mass, and generally handle/respond/brake like total shit.

I never said a less capable car was as safe as a more capable car. Only that the CR-V is quite atypical. It also is not terribly heavy-around 3000 pounds, roughly the same as one of the fairly large cars around, like an Oldsmobile. Plus the CR-V in question, having both 4-wheel drive and ABS, handled quite nimbly in all sorts of situations. I learned what ABS feels like on that vehicle; it works. Great stopping distances and good handling were one selling point of the thing.

Again, let's define what's really an SUV and what's just a "tall station wagon." The CR-V was and still is in the latter category as far as I'm concerned.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

Again, let's define what's really an SUV and what's just a "tall station wagon."

So how do we do that?

The wiki page about SUVs defines them as "A sport utility vehicle (SUV) is a generic marketing term for a vehicle similar to a station wagon, but built on a light-truck chassis"...

...But then pictures a Jeep XJ and says "According to the transportation curator at the Henry Ford Museum, Robert Casey, the Cherokee was the first true sport utility vehicle in the modern understanding of the term"...
Which is obviously incorrect since (1) the Range Rover was the first modern "SUV" and (2) XJs aren't built on a light-truck chassis (they're monocoques) thus don't fall within the definition of the term "SUV".

So, what's an "SUV"? How do we define it? We can't. It's a generic term used by ignorant 4x4 haters.

[Doofy]

And looking at the bottom of the wiki page about SUVs, we have a fine example of the haters' hyperbole.

Originally Posted by Futher Reading

Keith Bradsher. High and Mighty: SUVs—The World's Most Dangerous Vehicles and How They Got That Way. Published by PublicAffairs.

Really? A Suburban is more dangerous than a T-90 or an MAZ-7917?

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by downinflames68 

Me being nicer will never affect my stance on SUVs. It just means I'm not going to wish death/harm and call people stupid pieces of crap that should have been swallowed at birth.

Like I said. Same Rob.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Really? A Suburban is more dangerous than a T-90 or an MAZ-7917?

Ya think he might be referring to vehicles that regular people drive, genius?

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Ya think he might be referring to vehicles that regular people drive, genius?

He should have called his book "SUVs - World's Most Dangerous Vehicles Which Regular People Drive and How They Got That Way" then, shouldn't he?

It's not my fault that everyone in the anti-SUV camp are talentless commie turds who can't title their books correctly, is it?

[The Final Dakar]

Because, really, when you ask anyone to make a list of vehicles, they never forget to include tanks.

It's hard to take any of your arguments seriously when you're willing to resort to temporary stupidity to obfuscate what is an obvious distinction.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Because, really, when you ask anyone to make a list of vehicles, they never forget to include tanks.

You're missing the "in the world" part. Kind of modifies the whole thought process.

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

It's hard to take any of your arguments seriously

I don't care. You can take my arguments seriously or you can be wrong. It's your dime.

[The Final Dakar]

DURR HURR HURR

**** no caps

[Doofy]

There ya go - now you're getting it.

[The Final Dakar]

What, an aneurysm? SMILEY FACE

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Because, really, when you ask anyone to make a list of vehicles, they never forget to include tanks.

It's hard to take any of your arguments seriously when you're willing to resort to temporary stupidity to obfuscate what is an obvious distinction.

Dakar: Did you know that it's obvious that humans weren't meant to eat meat because we can't eat raw meat?

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

Dakar: Did you know that it's obvious that humans weren't meant to eat meat because we can't eat raw meat?

And because we can't open our mouths wide enough to chop down on anything, like every other omnivore/carnivore can. Unless you're Julia Roberts.

But that's going a little off-topic, ain't it Brian? You wouldn't be the type of guy who goes off topic just to score points, would you?

[The Final Dakar]

Brian? Burn!

[Laminar]

Also, I enjoyed this dialog:

Doofy: My Jeep can outhandle BMWs in the corners.
Rob: I wish I could race you in my Audi.
Doofy: Yes, we should race up a pile of rocks.

[The Final Dakar]

Well, it's fun to watch two extremes argue against each other. At least when its not in the PL.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

Also, I enjoyed this dialog:

Doofy: My Jeep can outhandle BMWs in the corners.

I believe the phrase I used was "stay with".

Originally Posted by Laminar 

Rob: I wish I could race you in my Audi.
Doofy: Yes, we should race up a pile of rocks.

I forget that some of you people are so wrapped up in enjoying your freedoms that you don't get anything subtler than a Corvette with flames up its bonnet hood. The hint being that I can live with BMWs on the road and get up those rocks (so let's see your S6 do that, foo!).

[sek929]

I'll race you Doofy, except this time I'll be in a F450 with an 8x12 dump bed, first one to the finish line with 4 tons of crushed stone wins.