[is not]

For me is the Hummer , can't find any good pictures of it but this is close:





Second is the veyron.

[d4nth3m4n]

Benz R63. 500+hp MINIVAN.

[Laminar]

ANY SUV LOLOLOLOL allcaps

[turtle777]

GM and Chrysler.

-t

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by d4nth3m4n 

Benz R63. 500+hp MINIVAN.

Somebody enlighten me: That looks like a station wagon to me.

What makes it a "MINIVAN"?

[The Final Dakar]

Any of the non-sporty Jaguars, particularly in the 70s-80s.

[bstone]

The most pointful car is the Subaru Legacy Outback. 4 cylinder, nearly 30mpg, AWD and lots of cargo space.

I hope I get mine back from the police today.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Somebody enlighten me: That looks like a station wagon to me.

What makes it a "MINIVAN"?

I assume a minivan has sliding rear doors. This is either a station wagon or a crossover SUV.

[Spheric Harlot]

There's nothing "SUV" about the R63.

Mercedes bills it as a luxury station wagon (well, a "royal family car") on their German site.

I see the AMG version as a family car for affluent dads who want to take it out for a spin, as well.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

There's nothing "SUV" about the R63.

The line between crossover SUV and station wagon is pretty blurry.

[d4nth3m4n]

Whatever, it's still a large family car.

[imitchellg5]

Any petrol-powered SUV (why don't all of these things have diesels?), the Honda Insight (the Fit has more interior room and gets better combined gas mileage), the entire Mercury brand, and most of Lincoln as well.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

the entire Mercury brand

Good call.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Good call.

If I worked for Mercury I'd be sending out résumés. No Sable, Mountaineer, no small car. For 2011 it looks like they have the Milan, Mariner, and Grand Marquis. They need to go the way of Saturn and Pontiac.

[The Final Dakar]

I thought they were officially cancelled? Swear I read that somewhere.

[Phileas]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

There's nothing "SUV" about the R63.
Mercedes bills it as a luxury station wagon (well, a "royal family car") on their German site.

It's classified as a SUV or Crossover over here. Some people cal it a minivan. I'd refer to it as an SUV in casual conversation. It's a huge honking car.

[cjrivera]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

They need to go the way of Saturn and Pontiac.

Officially Official: Ford kills Mercury to expand Lincoln lineup — Autoblog

[turtle777]

Yeah. Laminar is behind the curve. Mercury was killed 3 months ago.

-t

[sek929]

Any European luxury SUV. Like the BMW X5, Mercedes M class, Porsche Cayenne, etc. If I'm going to buy a luxury BMW, why in the name of hell would I pick the SUV? If I wanted an SUV I'd buy a GMC.

[angelmb]

Toyota iQ

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by cjrivera 

Officially Official: Ford kills Mercury to expand Lincoln lineup — Autoblog

Hadn't seen that. It's been a long time coming.

[olePigeon]

Knight XV by Conquest Vehicles.

[Spheric Harlot]

I just saw an iQ today, in a quarter notorious for lack of parking space.

Why pointless IYO, angel?

Seems like a similar concept to the smart.

[cjrivera]

Originally Posted by sek929 

Any European luxury SUV. Like the BMW X5, Mercedes M class, Porsche Cayenne, etc. If I'm going to buy a luxury BMW, why in the name of hell would I pick the SUV? If I wanted an SUV I'd buy a GMC.

Well you could look at it another way...

If I were going to buy an SUV, and I've had good experiences with brands like MB, BMW, Porsche, etc., why is it wrong to consider an SUV from that maker?

[sek929]

It isn't wrong, I just consider it pointless. Buy a BMW or Porsche for the thrill of driving a fine-tuned Euro sports car, buying a Porsche SUV is like buying a Ducati Pickup truck.

[Phileas]

The Porsche SUVs are nothing like a GMC. I know which one I'd rather drive, assuming I'd drive SUVs. Which I don't.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by sek929 

It isn't wrong, I just consider it pointless. Buy a BMW or Porsche for the thrill of driving a fine-tuned Euro sports car, buying a Porsche SUV is like buying a Ducati Pickup truck.

I believe the word you're looking for is functionality.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

I believe the word you're looking for is functionality.

You can get both luxury and functionality out of a Land Rover.

[The Final Dakar]

He didn't mention Land Rovers.

[Laminar]

I thought Land Rovers were the Harleys of the 4x4 world.

[The Final Dakar]

I didn't know Land Rover drivers were considered fags.

[imitchellg5]

Originally Posted by angelmb 

Toyota iQ

What? It's tiny, has four seats, a good manual gearbox, and unlike the Smart, a real powertrain.

[imitchellg5]

Originally Posted by sek929 

It isn't wrong, I just consider it pointless. Buy a BMW or Porsche for the thrill of driving a fine-tuned Euro sports car, buying a Porsche SUV is like buying a Ducati Pickup truck.

Well, it's Porsche's best-selling model, so it works for them. I'd much rather have a Ranger Rover TDV8 though.

[Railroader]

Chevrolet HHR

[is not]

The iQ is not a revolutionary product. In fact, it’s rather conservative today compared with a 10-year-old Smart.

[Spheric Harlot]

So?

That makes it pointless?

Because it's utilitarian rather than revolutionary?

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by Railroader 

Chevrolet HHR

Not nearly as bad as the SSR. If ever there was a vehicle that didn't have a purpose...

[is not]

Being a city car it is much bigger that the Smart, it looks macho in comparison, is a 2+2 seater with no room on any seats in comparison to the Smart, it has a laughable boot of only 32 liters, its engines are crap, the 68hp lacks power and the 98hp is rubbish and not much faster than the 68hp, struggles with head wind, the gearbox has 5 gears where only 1 2 and 3 are useful, is very wide for town use, .. and it is pricey. There are more affordable aygos and yarises if you want a tiny toyota.

[angelmb]

Why pointless IYO, angel?

Seems like a similar concept to the smart.

What is not has said is word by word accurate.

The iQ is a wrongly perceived illusion of efficacy. Can't seat four folks. Has no leg room inside, front and back. The trunk can't accommodate anything bigger than a tiny messenger bag (not even your average MacBook bag); otherwise you should remove its 'supposedly' best selling point, the rear seats. Engines doesn't accelerate at all, well, they do it in such a grandfather manner than your best choice is the three cylinder engine.

…and unlike the Smart, a real powertrain.

If you find the fortwo so lacking… just go for the Brabus model.

[scottiB]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

Not nearly as bad as the SSR. If ever there was a vehicle that didn't have a purpose...

Agree. SSR was the most pointless of the 2000s.
1990s: Honda Del Sol/Suzuki X-90
1980s: Cadillac Cimarron/Pontiac Fiero (1st Gen)
1970s: Lincoln Versailles

[iMOTOR]

Originally Posted by sek929 

Any European luxury SUV.

A European luxury SUV is really for someone who wants a car with decent ground clearance and not fu•king ugly like a GMC.

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

Not nearly as bad as the SSR. If ever there was a vehicle that didn't have a purpose...

OK, let's agree on this: Chevy **R

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by scottiB 

1980s: Cadillac Cimarron/Pontiac Fiero (1st Gen)

The Fiero was pretty cool, albeit a safety hazard. I had a few friends who had them in the '80s. My grandmother worked at the Fiero plant.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by Railroader 

OK, let's agree on this: Chevy **R

I'm trying to figure out which cuss word that is.

[ort888]

I've always found it weird that there are so many different cars out there. I mean, if I wanted a car, how many choices would I have? (not counting customs and exotics and what not) Hundreds and hundreds.

How many cars can the world possibly need? Even if I wanted to narrow it down to something like an SUV... I would still have like 75+ choices. How many SUV models does the world actually need? Every single car manufacturer seems to make 2 or 3 different models. Why does every car company feel the need to compete in every space or fill every possible need?

I'm not really complaining. I've just always thought it was odd.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

I'm trying to figure out which cuss word that is.

Car.

Used in conjunction with Chevy, it must be a swear word.

E.g.

"That's not a vehicle. F*ck, it's almost as bad as a Chevy car."

-t

[OldManMac]

Originally Posted by sek929 

It isn't wrong, I just consider it pointless. Buy a BMW or Porsche for the thrill of driving a fine-tuned Euro sports car, buying a Porsche SUV is like buying a Ducati Pickup truck.

You've obviously never read the reviews on the Cayenne.

[Eug]

Lamborghini - I used to live beside a Lamborghini dealership. The only time I'd ever see them driven is when the owners drove them to the dealer to get their regular 6-month maintenance. It's not as if they drove them at any other time. Well, maybe a bit in the summer, but risky in the city, and utterly useless in the winter (ice and snow) and spring (major potholes).

I hate Hummers too, and would get annoyed at the Hummer that would take up two parking spaces in our condo's visitor parking, but at least the thing could carry a lot of stuff and was drivable all year round.

[sek929]

Originally Posted by iMOTOR 

A European luxury SUV is really for someone who wants a car with decent ground clearance and not fu•king ugly like a GMC.

I know the Porsche minivan is the epitome if sexy and all, but I'd rather have a GMC.

[sek929]

Originally Posted by OldManMac 

You've obviously never read the reviews on the Cayenne.

You know what they say about assuming?

Sure, they made an SUV with a ridiculous engine that handles really good for an SUV, I'd still rather buy a 911 if I was going to drop money on a Porsche. Why the hell would I want an ugly truck Porsche, what's the point?