[Speckledstone]

'George' Ad:

"This is George. This is the gas that George bought for his SUV. This is the oil company executive that sold the gas that George bought for his SUV. These are the countries where the executive bought the oil, that made the gas that George bought for his SUV. And these are the terrorists who get money from those countries every time George fills up his SUV."

OIL MONEY SUPPORTS SOME TERRIBLE THINGS. WHAT KIND OF MILAGE DOES YOUR SUV GET?

What a perfect example of people taking a good idea and ing it all up with an insulting message.

Before I get started here, let me say I�m no big fan of the SUV craze. One of my biggest gripes with it all is that people who actually need these vehicles, or legitimately use them for their intended purposes, end up paying a lot more because SUVs are so popular now. Maybe I�m wrong, but it seems like the prices of SUVs have skyrocketed since the 'soccer moms' and 'suits' started driving them. Eh. Maybe my gripe is more with the laws of supply and demand. I guess I just find it pretty ridiculous when I see people using an off-road vehicle as a family car.

Anyway... Back to my point...

What a bunch of hypocrites. Singling out SUV owners as the supporters of terrorism is an asinine idea. Our buses, trucks, power plants, trains, ships, planes and cars run on oil. What the hell is the point of singling out SUV owners? On an average day, I would be willing to bet that at least 65% of my activities require some kind of oil consumption and I�m also willing to bet that that's a trait I share with an awful lot of Americans. Should we, as a society, be doing a lot more research in renewable resources? HELL YEAH, its a win-win situation, but why focus on one group of vehicles when our whole 'system of power generation' (for lack of a better term) is flawed? I really can�t see SUV owners being enlightened over this ad, I think they will mostly ponder the self-righteous attitude of it all.
After skimming through their website, Americans for Fuel Efficient Cars (the group who is funding this ad) seem to have some very good points, such as; limiting US dependancy on foreign oil and improving fuel efficiency of the vehicles we drive. Anybody else wonder why they don�t take a more constructive attitude in trying to make the changes they desire?

[daimoni]

.

[thunderous_funker]

We already had this thread and this conversation. If you're interested in what people had to say, use the search and check it out.

[Nimisys]

how do you know what % don't need one? how do you define the need for one?

personally i know theses ads are suppose to be satirical, but as jeep cherokee owenr i am still pissed by them. my vehicle averages about 10miles to the dollar spent in gas on it. which is roughly the same as the rx-7, or the caravan, and better than the ranger. until someone feels like buying me a more fuel efficent vehicle that still has all the cabilibites of the cherokee, it stays. period.

what i really donlt get is why people are so hell bent on SUVs, yet let trucks slip by. same engines, same driving and handling dynamics, same emissions requirments, but one is the owrk of the devil. ****ing hypocrits telling me how to live again. go **** yourself with your treebranch.

[daimoni]

.

[Nimisys]

no its not.

it is a legitmate question, how can you define someones need for something based soley ont he number you see ont he road each day? and then once that it is done be able to quanitify it and say X% doesn't meet the minimum need level?

its my mt money, i am well aware how it much it costs to keep it fueled up, and i fail to see how it is any of your business. for christs sake it is 15 years old at this point.

[engaged]

I've always wondered if images on TV showing half a dozen alleged terrorists bouncing around rough terrain on the back of an aged, though visibly reliable, white Toyota pick-up hasn't been a better advert for SUV's and the like than any advertising campaign that any can manufacturer has come out with...

[keekeeree]

Well, I must be doubly patriotic because I don't drive an SUV (although my '85 Buick LeSabre probably does worse on mileage) AND because I smoke Camel's. Every time I light up one of my "smooth Turkish blend" Camel Lights, I'm supporting a country that the U.S. needs as a launching pad in any war on Iraq

[suhail]

Excuse me, but oil doesn't only supply gas (petrol) for cars. Oil also does these:

-Your car's paint job
-Your car's dash-board
-your car's seat-belts
-your car's air-bags
-Your car's tires
-Your car's wire insulators
-your car's grease
-your car's glass (mixture)
-your car's wiper blades
-your car's bumper
-your car's radio
-your car's buttons and dials
-your car's door insulators
-the numbers on your car's speedometer
-the JiffyLube window sticker that tells you when you need to change your oil

you get the idea.

[daimoni]

.

[suhail]

Oh... and your car's cup-holders. Gotta have cup holders

[talisker]

I cant understand this intense hate campaign against SUVs. Yes, they do tend to have higher fuel consumption than conventional cars, but I don't see the logic in demonising the individual owners, as seems to be the current practice. I should declare that I do own a Honda CRV, which fits my needs admirably in just about every way, not that that's anyone elses business.

The environmental impact caused by an individual is dependant on many factors, not just the miles per gallon their car gets. How often do they drive it? How far? How old is it and how well maintained? Do they drive alone or with passengers? Do they drive it only when really necessary? How high is the heating set in their house? Do they travel by air regularly? How many kids do they have? etc etc...

Why do we not see the same vitriol directed towards people who drive rather than taking public transport where available, for example? The assumptions made about people's reasons for driving SUVs being based on insecurity, sexual inadequacy etc are maybe sometimes amusing, but obvious nonsense. Its just as true that someone who buys a G4 tower to mainly browse the web and catalogue their photos must be compensating for a small penis. It's amazing how much everyone knows about psychological disorders these days.

Yes, there are many downsides to SUVs, particularly their crash protection and on-road handling, and it's true that many people have bought them thoughtlessly when they are not the most suitable vehicle for them, but as far as I know people have every right to make bad buying decisions when using their own money.

I assume that the real reason for this "hate campaign" is simply that SUV-bashing is currently the fashionable thing to do. It's quite seductive in that if you don't own an SUV you can get to feel all smug and morally superior, thinking of yourself as being greener than green no matter how much environmental damage you do. At least the "SUV Owners funding terrorism" campaign should unintentionally help to defuse this, through being utterly laughable.

[Nimisys]

Originally posted by daimoni:
Okay. I'll try.

(and sorry for being so 'snippy')

I'm able to quantify it by this:

How did these people possibly survive without SUV's in the past? Hmm.. I'm pretty sure they got along just fine without them. Just like we all survived the 'custom van craze' of the '70's.

they were around then as well. blazer, suburban, wagonneer.

How many of these (mostly new over the past few years) SUV drivers actually use the unique features of a SUV?

i don't know, no one does and thats my point. every time i take the dog to the park i take him in the jeep since he can lay down in the back. when ever i goto home depot or equvalent i take it for its cargo room (over the van even) it goes to the beach since i donl;t mind getting sand in it. when i am driving in the mountains ( in the rx-7) i see many people unloading hiking gear or a bike from them. i see people pulling a boat trailer or a horce trailer all the time ona sunny weekend. yet in everyday commute you may only see them on the way to the office.

Do they really need a SUV for their point A to point B commute on a paved, high-speed freeway?

nope, not at all. but then again how many people can afford a hybird for commuting, a truck for trailer pulling, a minivan for kid carting around, and a sedan. and then finally fuel and insure all of them? mosty family will choose just one vehicle that can do a bit of all of them, instead of one that specializes in just one.

[The Jackalope]

[adamk]

one thing about these ads is that it is a parody on the anti-drug commercials that implied that drug-use was a major funnel for delivering funds to terrorist organizations. the truth of the matter is that if you are involved in legal transactions like buying gas, you are just as complicit as those who are buying illegal drugs.

the US gov't needs to be held responsible somewhat for the drug-funding terrorism problem. the biggest exporter of poppy is afghanistan which lost that title after the fall of the taleban, but quickly regained it wihtin a year. under the US's nose. and most illegal drugs are from NAmerica. i have never heard of iraqi bud, or yemeni hash, or somalian LSD. cocaine does come from colombia. the FARC (a right-wing paramilitary group) are involved with the trade and sell of cocaine in the US. they were also on the US terrorist group list. and they work hand-in-hand with the colombian gov't which receives a lot of military and economic aid from the US.

the use of the SUV was used because of two reasons, most people have them so the impact of the statement will affect more people (more so than a ford fiesta owner) and secondly, they are less efficient than other automobiles and i know suv commuters spend lots of money at the pump.

the suv mentality is similiar to the MAD mentality. a suv will be responsible for 5 deaths for each life that is saved by it's protection. there is a massive build-up going on and it is among neighbors and US citizens. better you than me.

to suhail, oil is used for many things that are necessary and used in everyday life. does that mean that we can't cut back usage a little? there are other ways than just stopping driving. think about the amount of plastic cups thrown out each day at mcdonalds that is not recycled, the amount of plastic in landfills that is not recycled, the amount of computers that are not being recycled (and which, on a side note, contain really bad stuff for humans).
i maybe "extreme" but i don't eat fast food, and try to eat at restaurants that use silver and real cups, because they can be, and are reusable. and a dish washer is thankful for having a job (or at least is getting paid whereas he might not have a job).

i ride a bike everyday, because i chose to live close to where i need to be during the day. it's more expensive but it ends up being the same in the end, cause i only drop $20 every month or two and not every 4th day. and the kicker, i am home in 15 minutes and have one extra hour that i would be otherwise forced to sit in traffic during.

[talisker]

Just thought I'd do a little research to see how even more ludicrous this argument may be. All this is from a Canadian giude to fuel consumption: Fuel Consumption

Some miles per gallon figures for various vehicles (first figure is urban, second is open road)

Honda CRV 26 34
Buick Century 25 37
Chrysler 300M 22 35
Mustang 3.8 23 35
Mercedes c240 23 32
Cadillac CTS 22 34

Not a big difference. Yes they all have higher consumption than say a Honda Civic, but then I don't see much hate directed towards MB c240 or Mustang drivers. You only get a big gap when you go to massive high performance SUVs like the MB ML500 (17 22) or the BMW X5IS (16 23), but due to their outragous cost there's not many of them about.

[maxelson]

How 'bout this. In this day and age, we have the ability to create cars that get 50+ miles to the gallon. Where are they? What. We got two cars on the market that get that?
Pertol based cars pollute. Some pollute more than others.
The more that is burned, the more pollution it puts out.
The American attitude of "consume, consume, consume" needs no bolstering.
SUVs are also dangerous and RUDE for other drivers NOT driving them.

With all we know about the dwindling supplies, with the question of greenhouse effect, with all of the risks... why?
there are only two reasons I can think of that someone would want one.
1- They need it for offroad or big ass loads to carry regularly.
2- They are self obsessed, ostentatious and selfish image hounds.

This snitty "I have one because it is America and I CAN" attitude is selfish and DEEPLY offensive.

No one lives in a bubble.

[Timo]

Originally posted by maxelson:

there are only two reasons I can think of that someone would want one.
1- They need it for offroad or big ass loads to carry regularly.
2- They are self obsessed, ostentatious and selfish image hounds.

Um, I'm gonna go with choice #2. It's a funny fact that, e.g., the Ford Expedition and the Ford Taurus had the same maximum load rating, not that you would find that information easily on the Expedition. People who loaded up their SUVs to actually use them took their lives into their own hands (especially when paired with those mimimum-requirement Firestone tires).

[Nimisys]

Originally posted by maxelson:

SUVs are also dangerous and RUDE for other drivers NOT driving them.

in comparison to the flity little cars that are constantly riding in your blind spot, speeding around you on the right, always htting the brakes late and hard, and constantly tailgating you?

cars aren't rude, drivers are.

[tie]

Originally posted by talisker:
Honda CRV 26 34
Buick Century 25 37
Chrysler 300M 22 35
Mustang 3.8 23 35
Mercedes c240 23 32
Cadillac CTS 22 34
[/B]

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/findacar.htm has different numbers. Many SUVs get much worse mileage than the ones you've listed. So do just a few cars.

[Nimisys]

those look high for many of those vehciles, are you sure those aren't KM per Gallon?

[imaxxedout]

Those aren't SUVs. The only one remotely close to an SUV is the CRV, which really isn't an SUV. Its basically a car. Real SUVs, durangos, explorers, navigators, escalades, expeditions, excursions, tacomas, fourrunners, blazers, etc etc etc get real shitty mileage.

Course, I guess I shouldn't talk seeing as how my SVX gets about 16-18 in the city, and 21-25 on the highway. Premium too. My poor wallet.

Ack.

- Ca$h

[Speckledstone]

Americans for Fuel Efficient Cars:

"Our goal is to mount a citizens' ad campaign aimed at getting people to stop driving SUVs and other gas-guzzling vehicles -- and jolting our leaders into taking action. Currently we are producing ads parodying the drugs-equal-terror ads the Bush administration is running..."

"To get these ads on the air we have established a nonprofit fund for the sole purpose of creating them..."

Food for thought:
(Ok, maybe just a snack)

I think we should learn a lesson from the corporations who benefit from their campaign contributions. Don�t waste time and money by 'investing' in anti-SUV ads. Fill the politician's pockets so they pass legislation that will encourage research in renewable resources. Anybody want to start a collection?

[talisker]

Originally posted by imaxxedout:
Those aren't SUVs. The only one remotely close to an SUV is the CRV, which really isn't an SUV. Its basically a car. Real SUVs, durangos, explorers, navigators, escalades, expeditions, excursions, tacomas, fourrunners, blazers, etc etc etc get real shitty mileage.

Course, I guess I shouldn't talk seeing as how my SVX gets about 16-18 in the city, and 21-25 on the highway. Premium too. My poor wallet.

Ack.

- Ca$h

True, actually the Explorer didnt come out too badly on the site I saw, but I get your point, the CRV is fairly small.

But my point is that if people hate SUVs so much based on their fuel efficiency, why arent they shouting and screaming about your SVX?

[Mediaman_12]

Originally posted by Nimisys:
in comparison to the flity little cars that are constantly riding in your blind spot, speeding around you on the right, always htting the brakes late and hard, and constantly tailgating you?

cars aren't rude, drivers are.

What if evrybody on the road had a SUV sized car.
Because of the SUV and Minivan/peoplemover craze the sleek cool looking "cars of tommorow" arn't being created by designers anymore. Lot's of concepts around at the moment are ether 1 of 3 styles, Riced out sports (huge wings & shiny wheels etc.), some sort of retro thing going on (all Chryslers, Ford GT40, etc.) or gigantic SUV things with more electroic gizmos than the Space Shuttle.
If all this went in to producing Quality, efficient cars, that where More NORMAL we would have the super efficient cars that we where promised, but no we have Trucks and SUV's taking over.

[superlarry]

then i guess our government funds terrorism!
if you're gonna make this so abstract, you've gotta mention that the U.S. government taxed the hell out of the railroad system to finance their interstate system. now we all *have* to have cars to get around instead of riding the train (granted, there are diesel trains, but i hear they're way more efficient than, say, big-rigs).
everyone gets cars to go long distances on the new interstates, then everybody has cars and there's no room for the electric trolleys anymore..
whatever, stuff that makes mad like this just makes me babble.

[ThinkInsane]

Originally posted by daimoni:
Do they really need a SUV for their point A to point B commute on a paved, high-speed freeway?

Well, yeah, actually. Try living in Upstate New York, in the lake effect snow capital of the world (like I do). Then ad in a 40 mile commute to Syracuse (that's 40 miles each way)every day (like I have), through the middle of one of the most persistent snow belts in the state (which also puts it up there for the country), where the rate of snow fall can often be measured in feet per hour, and then you can start telling us the difference between what we need and what we want. And before SUV's? 4X4 pick-up trucks. Now which is better if you have a couple of kids?

Why must everyone be so freakin' condescending on here lately?

[PowerMatt]

Originally posted by maxelson:

SUVs are also dangerous and RUDE for other drivers NOT driving them.

Attributing personified characteristics to inanimate objects is almost as bad as saying that SUVs fund terrorism.

[l008com]

These anti-SUV threads really blow my mind. Do you really have nothing better to do than sit around whining and complaining about why you should be able to make personal decisions for other people? And what is the deal. If the problem is gas milage, then why aren't people complaining about ALL big motored vehicles? Pickup trucks and sports cars. Lets talk sports car, I bet the number of people who 'use sports cars to thier max' is smaller than the number of SUV owners who use thier off road capable SUVs to thier max! And lots of SUVs nowadays are essantially minivans anyway, like that buick rendezvous! Saturn vue is the same Platform and Drive Train as the Cadillac CTS. Band the SUV's but not the mid-sized sedans. You people (only yelling at the anti-suv idiots) are nuts. People that are against SUVs are just selfish �ssholes. Thier too tall, too big, use too much gas. But you don't complain about that walmart 18-wheeler that jsut drove past you did you? Oh hell no, because you need to go to walmart later and buy the new backstreet boys CD!

"SUVs should be banned becuase I don't like them."

You know most SUV's only have V6's in them.

And lets ignore snow, ice, and the ability to carry 7 passengers comfortably and pull a trailer. Ignore all that, because you could be doing all that at the same time, but if you aren't driving up the side of a mountain in your SUV, then you aren't even using its full ability and you should have to drive a ford focus instead becuase i have no money and thats what I have to drive.

All you Anti-SUV people, are you the same �ssholes that like to get mountain bikes banned from stats forests "to save the forest" yet you wonder through the woods breaking every other posted rule except biking? And you don't complain when they bulldoze a few acres of the woods to build a new walmart, because you can go buy your ****ing backstreet boys CDs at an even closer location, even though I can't bike in the woods becuase "bikes destroy the woods".

To all the anti-bikers and anti-hikers, and to everyone else that tries to impose your own personal likes and dislikes on others becuase you for some reason think that what you think, is not opinion but somehow the way things should really be...

F�ck Y��.
Not just a quick one like you say to your friends either, that a real one, one that comes stright from the heart.

[Face Ache]

Originally posted by daimoni:
Because 99.99% of SUV drivers don't need one... except to inflate their fragile self image.

I read an article the other day where they were interviewing the market researchers for SUV makers.

Their findings aren't terribly complimentary to SUV owners. They are insecure, unsure about parenthood (?), bad drivers and have no sense of community.

That's not the anti-SUV brigade talking. It's the people who need to find out what motivates SUV drivers.

[Face Ache]

Originally posted by l008com:
F�ck Y��.
Not just a quick one like you say to your friends either, that a real one, one that comes stright from the heart.

See? No sense of community.

[l008com]

My sense of community went out the window when my community decided that they wanna make decisions for me, when they wanted to take away my right to choose what kind of vehicle i can drive, not because of any facts whatsoever, but merely because they don't think I "need" it.

[Face Ache]

What if these became trendy?



If you were sitting in your SUV at the traffic lights surrounded by these would you be annoyed?

[l008com]

Originally posted by Face Ache:
What if these became trendy?



If you were sitting in your SUV at the traffic lights surrounded by these would you be annoyed?

So thats it? You don't like them, they annoy you therefore we shouldn't drive them?

[Nimisys]

Originally posted by Mediaman_12:
What if evrybody on the road had a SUV sized car.

then you wouldn't be complaining about them you would be complaingin about big rigs then.

Because of the SUV and Minivan/peoplemover craze the sleek cool looking "cars of tommorow" arn't being created by designers anymore. Lot's of concepts around at the moment are ether 1 of 3 styles, Riced out sports (huge wings & shiny wheels etc.), some sort of retro thing going on (all Chryslers, Ford GT40, etc.) or gigantic SUV things with more electroic gizmos than the Space Shuttle.
If all this went in to producing Quality, efficient cars, that where More NORMAL we would have the super efficient cars that we where promised, but no we have Trucks and SUV's taking over.

what is normal? vehcilce design follows a basic 5-7 year cycle of edgy vs bubblely and then every 10 years or so hits a retro period. personaly i like it. nothing wrong with more electronics and such.

the problem with super efficent vehicles right now is cost and technology. the civic hybird,insight and prius only work right now because they are in such a light vehicle that doesn;t need any power wahts so ever. they are sub to low 100 hp cars. you could not take that tech and make iot work on a truck van or suv. Jeep has been working on a fuel cell, electric motor driven vehicle for the last 5-7 years. it still has too short of a range and still costs too much. you want the latest and greatest in vehicles go buy an exotic, since that is the only place where it is economical to provide the newest tech to. otherwise wait for the technology to mature to the point that it is economical to include them in todays cars. GM will have a real hybrid truck out next year, you get 5-10mpg better and pay 8 grand for it. might sell since it keeps its power (285hp) and can supply power via 4 110 outlets at 20amps each.

also since SUVs have the highest profit margin, the more bought means mre money into R&D for more effiecent vehicles.

[Face Ache]

Originally posted by l008com:
So thats it? You don't like them, they annoy you therefore we shouldn't drive them?

No. They annoy EVERYONE that doesn't drive one. That is my point.

Please answer: Would you be annoyed if you were surrounded by APCs on your way to work? I mean, you could carry a lot of kids in an APC and I'm sure the MPG isn't that bad...

I think SUV drivers expect/demand instant respect just because of sheer size. They sure get pissed when we don't respect them on a forum.

[bewebste]

Originally posted by suhail:
Oh... and your car's cup-holders. Gotta have cup holders

Take away our cup-holders and the terrorists have won!

[Nimisys]

Originally posted by Face Ache:
No. They annoy EVERYONE that doesn't drive one. That is my point.

and by everyone you mean yourself

cause somehow i doubt you have talked with maybe a half of half of half of the percentage of the worlds drivers

most suvs aren;t obtrusive, no more than the really small cars (miatas, neons, crx's, etc) which i find more dangerous since you can't see them. at least you can see the large SUV. they aren;t hiding in blindspots.

[dillerX]

I want one of these.

[l008com]

Originally posted by dillerX:
I want one of these.

My boss has a truck nearly identical to that, but the front is a little bigger and the back a little smaller, he hauls his race cars with it. Anyway...

Originally posted by Face Ache:
No. They annoy EVERYONE that doesn't drive one. That is my point.

Please answer: Would you be annoyed if you were surrounded by APCs on your way to work? I mean, you could carry a lot of kids in an APC and I'm sure the MPG isn't that bad...

I think SUV drivers expect/demand instant respect just because of sheer size. They sure get pissed when we don't respect them on a forum.

What is an APC?

My mom drives a Subaru Legacy and my Dad drives a compact pickup (which by the way has the same drivetrain and platform as my SUV) and neither of them are annoyed by SUVs. In fact, I don't know anyone that is. Do you remember earlier when I was talking about people who preach thier opinions becuase they think thier opinion is actually better than an opinion, they think it is fact. That is exactly what you are doing.

[Face Ache]

Originally posted by Nimisys:
at least you can see the large SUV. they aren;t hiding in blindspots.

But you can't see AROUND the fuckers can you?

SUV drivers must know that regular car drivers hate them. So what do they think as they commandeer the road?

I'm guessing it's "Fuck You".

Answer please: Would you like to be surrounded by APCs in peak hour?

(is it a difficult question?)

[dillerX]

Originally posted by l008com:
My boss has a truck nearly identical to that, but the front is a little bigger and the back a little smaller, he hauls his race cars with it. Anyway...

Exactly. We have three this year. Two cars and a show car.

[l008com]

Originally posted by Face Ache:
But you can't see AROUND the fuckers can you?

SUV drivers must know that regular car drivers hate them. So what do they think as they commandeer the road?

I'm guessing it's "Fuck You".

Answer please: Would you like to be surrounded by APCs in peak hour?

(is it a difficult question?)

I don't know ANYONE that hates SUVs. Infact everyone that has driven my truck that has only owned cars, has actually liked driving the truck.

And what the hell is an APC?

[Face Ache]

Originally posted by l008com:
I don't know ANYONE that hates SUVs. Infact everyone that has driven my truck that has only owned cars, has actually liked driving the truck.

And what the hell is an APC?

Armoured Personnel Carrier (a bit like an SUV).

Of COURSE everyone likes driving SUVs. You're the King of the Frikkin' Road! Pushing your way into lanes, checking out the ladies in the sedans (eh? ), seeing for miles ahead...

Of course the regular car beside you at the intersection can't see the oncoming traffic. And the car behind you can't see the traffic jam you are about to slam your brakes on for. And the car parked next to you can't reverse out without...

Well I could go on.

We hate you. Honest. All of us.

[Nimisys]

Originally posted by Face Ache:
But you can't see AROUND the fuckers can you?

SUV drivers must know that regular car drivers hate them. So what do they think as they commandeer the road?

I'm guessing it's "Fuck You".

Answer please: Would you like to be surrounded by APCs in peak hour?

(is it a difficult question?)

first off its called move into a different lane or stay far enough back that you can see through the windows. you act as if it is a giant ****ing brickwall. any vehicle will block your forward vision when your behind it, regardless of size.

i donlt see suv drivers trying to commandeer the road, i see them behaving the same as everyone else. which conicedently is like an *******.

and no i donlt mind being surround by APC's every rush hour as i all ready am, seeing how i drive a small low slung sports car as my daily driver, every other car on the road is bigger than me. plus it mnakes it nice and predicatble seeing how an apc is slow to acclerate and brake it easy to be able to tell when and where they will be.

[l008com]

Originally posted by Face Ache:
Armoured Personnel Carrier (a bit like an SUV).

Of COURSE everyone likes driving SUVs. You're the King of the Frikkin' Road! Pushing your way into lanes, checking out the ladies in the sedans (eh? ), seeing for miles ahead...

Of course the regular car beside you at the intersection can't see the oncoming traffic. And the car behind you can't see the traffic jam you are about to slam your brakes on for. And the car parked next to you can't reverse out without...

Well I could go on.

We hate you. Honest. All of us.

You talk about SUV drivers like thier some kind of gang. SUV drivers are everyone. Every type of person. And a certain percent of every type of person drives like an �ss. The types of things you describe SUV drivers doing, are imaginary! And someone driving like an ass is going to cause just as many problems weather hes in a car or an suv. And the APC annolgy is WAY off. ARMORED Personell Carrier!! Tank Treads. Slow Acceration, Slow top speed, slow braking, and skid-steering. Last time I checked, none of those thing were my blazer. If an APC could keep up with traffic and stay in its lane, like normal vehicles do, who cares? Its no different then having any other industrial truck next to you.

[Sealobo]

~ SUV exist because there exist a demand for such product.

~ Such demand is partially created by the marketing effort of various automakers.

~ Average consumers think that the SUV is safer when a traffic accident occur, which is not true.

~ SUV has a much high profit margin. That's why Porsche is doing what it's doing.

~ I wanted an SUV when i was in Toronto, in the winter it would be nice.

~ I always laugh at people who got an SUV (M-class, X5 whatever) here in Hong Kong. Cuz you have no where to get off-road here. Those who got the Range Rover HSE are particularly stupid.

[Mac Zealot]

I find it funny because I see SUVs that are shiny and always like new, and these people do nothing but city/highway driving on them.

What's the point? They have less room than cars, and etc.

[Nimisys]

Originally posted by Mac Zealot:
I find it funny because I see SUVs that are shiny and always like new, and these people do nothing but city/highway driving on them.

What's the point? They have less room than cars, and etc.

no they have more interior room than cars. an explorer has more room than accord, camry, passat in every catagory

[l008com]

I find it funny that people think SUV = Off Road and if your not using it off road, you're not using it "right". The M class, the X5, and even teh Escalade were not meant to go offroad. Dirt roads and the like are OK but nothing extreme. But thats not ALL an SUV is for. Cargo capacity, 4WD/AWD, hauling a trailer. Seating 7. Just becuase you don't do these things EVERY day doesn't meen an SUV isn't for you. People act like, if your daily commute isn't through the forest every day, than you are wasting your SUV's abilities.