SUVs - Whats the point?
Discussion
Hungrymc said:
1) Yes, it is what your clarification suggested (he bought a car that didn't suit him because his wife wanted it - I don't see any relevance to the thread)
I do, but you don't like it because you see it as a general criticism of a car you like, Anyway thread title is quite clear.Hungrymc said:
2) If they are becoming ever more car like, they will eventually disappear as they will become cars so there is nothing to discuss?
My point was why don't people just buy a car if they're so keen on carlike abilities in an SUV.Hungrymc said:
But what you overlook is that there are some fundamental differences to cars and different buyers like different aspects. The slightly higher and more upright seating position, some prefer the general packaging, some like the ride, some like the towing ability, some do actually do off road / low grip work. For me, it was the driving position, the general NVH and that it has the loveliest interior of anything its size (in my opinion).
No, I haven't overlooked those abilities - it was never relevant to my original post. BTW I'd call a car that did "offroad / low grip work" a 4x4.Hungrymc said:
3) I've listed several times why I selected mine. And there may be plenty of cars that try to be relaxing and pleasant - but none of them do it quite as well as the one I bought (in my opinion).
I don't quite understand what you mean by confidence factor. My other vehicles are far riskier ways to travel and I drive the SUV in a much safer manner.
For many, SUVS inspire confidence due to their predictable driving characteristics, prominent driving position, and sheer bulk. As you know.I don't quite understand what you mean by confidence factor. My other vehicles are far riskier ways to travel and I drive the SUV in a much safer manner.
Hungrymc said:
I can appreciate why they don't suit everyone. But I struggle with the general lack of understanding that people have different wants and needs from different cars. And just because people don't want the same attributes that someone else values, doesn't make it right or wrong. Its evident from so many posts that people wouldn't have an SUV because they don't handle or aren't engaging. Well I'd agree that generally they aren't (but others will point out that they can be their own certain challenge). But the only element of handling that was a factor in my commute plodder was that it should be adequate and the weight of controls should be nice. Very different off course with my Evora and 100% opposite to my bike.
The same old strawman argument keeps coming back - an estate is more practical and winter tyres are more important in low grip... Neither attribute were factors in choosing mine.
What strawman argument? The comments about the estate/winter tyres are true and exactly address the OP!The same old strawman argument keeps coming back - an estate is more practical and winter tyres are more important in low grip... Neither attribute were factors in choosing mine.
Brother dropped my family off at the airport in a 2006 diesel Smax. He is a mechanic and it's a works shed.
I was in awe of how it swallowed all the luggage up, had seven seats, bit of power as it was a diesel, and looked fairly loaded in terms of tech.
They serve a purpose. Kids generate a lot of s
t which needs to be carted around at times.
I was in awe of how it swallowed all the luggage up, had seven seats, bit of power as it was a diesel, and looked fairly loaded in terms of tech.
They serve a purpose. Kids generate a lot of s
t which needs to be carted around at times. HannsG said:
Brother dropped my family off at the airport in a 2006 diesel Smax. He is a mechanic and it's a works shed.
I was in awe of how it swallowed all the luggage up, had seven seats, bit of power as it was a diesel, and looked fairly loaded in terms of tech.
They serve a purpose. Kids generate a lot of st which needs to be carted around at times.
They are great family cars, just so long as you don't buy into the motoring press hype about how well they drive. I think the biggest load of nonsense I read about these was the Honest John comment that it drives like a sports car.I was in awe of how it swallowed all the luggage up, had seven seats, bit of power as it was a diesel, and looked fairly loaded in terms of tech.
They serve a purpose. Kids generate a lot of s
t which needs to be carted around at times. It drives like a bus. I wanted to buy one last year with the 240ps petrol engine and was on the verge of ordering it, but my (now ex) wife said that the idea of driving it made her want to cry and bought an XC60 instead. Probably just about sums up the purchasing process behind 80% of crossovers.
popeyewhite said:
Hungrymc said:
2) If they are becoming ever more car like, they will eventually disappear as they will become cars so there is nothing to discuss?
My point was why don't people just buy a car if they're so keen on carlike abilities in an SUV.People have been buying ///M SLine AMG type cars with rock hard suspension and low profile tyres because they are slightly fast around the 'Ring. This makes them a bit rough on normal roads.
Then they start gravitating toward 4x4 type vehicles because they have soft suspension, but complain they are a bit boat like on the road, so start asking for lower, stiffer suspension and lower profile tyres to make them more car like. trouble is the low profile tyres and firm suspension makes them next to useless off the road, so they may as well have saved loads of money by buying a normal road car without sports suspension.
But I suspect that SUV's are all about status, nobody in their right mind would buy such a compromised vehicle for a premum when better options are available for less money.
Willy Nilly said:
But I suspect that SUV's are all about status, nobody in their right mind would buy such a compromised vehicle for a premum when better options are available for less money.
What better options, available for less money, would the right mind buy if you wanted to load your kids in at waist height, and have a larger/higher load area and wanted an elevated seating position?popeyewhite said:
Hungrymc said:
1) Yes, it is what your clarification suggested (he bought a car that didn't suit him because his wife wanted it - I don't see any relevance to the thread)
I do, but you don't like it because you see it as a general criticism of a car you like, Anyway thread title is quite clear.Hungrymc said:
2) If they are becoming ever more car like, they will eventually disappear as they will become cars so there is nothing to discuss?
My point was why don't people just buy a car if they're so keen on carlike abilities in an SUV.Hungrymc said:
But what you overlook is that there are some fundamental differences to cars and different buyers like different aspects. The slightly higher and more upright seating position, some prefer the general packaging, some like the ride, some like the towing ability, some do actually do off road / low grip work. For me, it was the driving position, the general NVH and that it has the loveliest interior of anything its size (in my opinion).
No, I haven't overlooked those abilities - it was never relevant to my original post. BTW I'd call a car that did "offroad / low grip work" a 4x4.Hungrymc said:
3) I've listed several times why I selected mine. And there may be plenty of cars that try to be relaxing and pleasant - but none of them do it quite as well as the one I bought (in my opinion).
I don't quite understand what you mean by confidence factor. My other vehicles are far riskier ways to travel and I drive the SUV in a much safer manner.
For many, SUVS inspire confidence due to their predictable driving characteristics, prominent driving position, and sheer bulk. As you know.I don't quite understand what you mean by confidence factor. My other vehicles are far riskier ways to travel and I drive the SUV in a much safer manner.
Hungrymc said:
I can appreciate why they don't suit everyone. But I struggle with the general lack of understanding that people have different wants and needs from different cars. And just because people don't want the same attributes that someone else values, doesn't make it right or wrong. Its evident from so many posts that people wouldn't have an SUV because they don't handle or aren't engaging. Well I'd agree that generally they aren't (but others will point out that they can be their own certain challenge). But the only element of handling that was a factor in my commute plodder was that it should be adequate and the weight of controls should be nice. Very different off course with my Evora and 100% opposite to my bike.
The same old strawman argument keeps coming back - an estate is more practical and winter tyres are more important in low grip... Neither attribute were factors in choosing mine.
What strawman argument? The comments about the estate/winter tyres are true and exactly address the OP!The same old strawman argument keeps coming back - an estate is more practical and winter tyres are more important in low grip... Neither attribute were factors in choosing mine.
1) I didn't say I liked SUVs. There are loads of SUVs I'd never own, including a Cayenne actually. I explained why I selected an SUV in response to SUVs, What's the point. The story about your friend and his wife is irrelevant.
2) Your point is flawed and the answer is obvious. People like certain attributes from 4x4 that are retained in SUVs, and they like other attributes from cars. They then pick the vehicle which has the best set of compromises for what they want. I didn't set out to buy an SUV, I set out to buy a car that I found pleasant to plough through the traffic, looked at loads and picked one that happened to be an SUV.
3) Maybe its daft to group all SUVs together as different ones suit different purposes. Is an FFRR a competitor with 7 series and S-Class or a NIssan Juke? But yes, some like the mass and the size, just like some like a sporty car for its appearance. Obviously not all are influenced by mass and size as things like the Captur, Juke, EcoSport, Duster and even my Evoque aren't that big or imposing - in fact, aren't most quite effeminate? You really don't bully anyone or feel like the king of the road when you drive an Evoque.
So, I'm sure you are right, that some buyers like the bulk, but I can assure you it wasn't a factor for me.
The comments about winter tyres and estates are a strawman.... I've explained why I picked an SUV. An estate offers no advantage in the attributes I wanted, and winter tyres are irrelevant as off course I can fit them if I decide to - just like anyone can.
Its clear that many have an expectation of why anyone would buy an SUV. And when someone who has one explains the reasons, and they are not in line the preconceptions - the "anti" lobby just pedal out the old arguments about the incorrect preconceptions. I'm not speaking on anyone else's behalf, some do buy SUVs for other reasons, but I don't know why its quite so hard to grasp that people have varying reasons and its simply stupid to think that the answer is the same for everyone.
Edited by Hungrymc on Thursday 22 June 14:36
Edited by Hungrymc on Thursday 22 June 14:36
HannsG said:
Brother dropped my family off at the airport in a 2006 diesel Smax. He is a mechanic and it's a works shed.
I was in awe of how it swallowed all the luggage up, had seven seats, bit of power as it was a diesel, and looked fairly loaded in terms of tech.
They serve a purpose. Kids generate a lot of st which needs to be carted around at times.
But they look sh!t. I was in awe of how it swallowed all the luggage up, had seven seats, bit of power as it was a diesel, and looked fairly loaded in terms of tech.
They serve a purpose. Kids generate a lot of s
t which needs to be carted around at times. dme123 said:
HannsG said:
Brother dropped my family off at the airport in a 2006 diesel Smax. He is a mechanic and it's a works shed.
I was in awe of how it swallowed all the luggage up, had seven seats, bit of power as it was a diesel, and looked fairly loaded in terms of tech.
They serve a purpose. Kids generate a lot of st which needs to be carted around at times.
They are great family cars, just so long as you don't buy into the motoring press hype about how well they drive. I think the biggest load of nonsense I read about these was the Honest John comment that it drives like a sports car.I was in awe of how it swallowed all the luggage up, had seven seats, bit of power as it was a diesel, and looked fairly loaded in terms of tech.
They serve a purpose. Kids generate a lot of s
t which needs to be carted around at times. It drives like a bus. I wanted to buy one last year with the 240ps petrol engine and was on the verge of ordering it, but my (now ex) wife said that the idea of driving it made her want to cry and bought an XC60 instead. Probably just about sums up the purchasing process behind 80% of crossovers.
I can see why people dislike SUVs, but anyone who actually coverts an MPV needs a trip to Dignitas.
DME123....your wife helped you dodge a bullet. You owe her forever.
Nanook said:
Ares said:
What better options, available for less money, would the right mind buy if you wanted to load your kids in at waist height, and have a larger/higher load area and wanted an elevated seating position?
He'll tell you that you need a Honda Jazz, unless you need to tow, in which case you should buy a tractor, as all 4x4's are crap at towing in his mind.I do wonder if he's ever driven anything else.
Ares said:
Nanook said:
Ares said:
What better options, available for less money, would the right mind buy if you wanted to load your kids in at waist height, and have a larger/higher load area and wanted an elevated seating position?
He'll tell you that you need a Honda Jazz, unless you need to tow, in which case you should buy a tractor, as all 4x4's are crap at towing in his mind.I do wonder if he's ever driven anything else.
For people who need to carry large loads or a growing family you've really got 4 choices
1. Large saloon - Probably the best choice in terms of driving characteristics, especially if you go for one of the sport saloons but usually compromised in terms of rear leg room, ride comfort, headroom, ease of access and sometimes even bootspace. I've tried various sports saloons and while they were good on the PH ometer they really weren't ideal in terms of compromises for my family.
2. Estate - Still drive OK and some can look very decent. The longer wheelbase can compromise ride and handling a bit. You do get loads of bootspace but headroom can again be an issue. Also while there seems to be some strange reverse snobbish attitude on PH that somehow estates are "cool", they really aren't. Baring the very odd exception like the Audi RS2 they are essentially a car type that has been carrying families, dogs and doing tip runs for decades. As schoolboys we used to take the piss out of anyone whose dad had an estate, they weren't cool then and they aren't cool now no matter how much some people on here might like to think they are.
3. MPV - What can I say they are probably the most practical of all the choices in terms of space, headroom, ease of access etc but really if you are driving an MPV you either hate cars or you've given up on life. Looks like a bus, drives like a bus
4. SUV - Pro's for full size one's are that you have the increased boot space, leg room, headroom plus ease of access. The ride comfort is usually decent too which means the family points are all ticked without having to drive an awful MPV. The bad points are of course that they are usually big and heavy plus the high CoG means they are usually compromised in terms of driving enjoyment but then they aren't really for that purpose anyway. I find the current obsession with trying to make SUV's drive like cars very strange, really why bother when that isn't their intended purpose?? Image wise some people love them and some people think they are the devils spawn.
Small SUV\Crossovers I don't really get though, most of the compromises of an SUV with none of the benefits but I guess they appeal to people who want the SUV looks in a smaller package. They are like the modern equivalent of the hatchback and seem to have become the new default choice that hatchbacks were in the 90's.
1. Large saloon - Probably the best choice in terms of driving characteristics, especially if you go for one of the sport saloons but usually compromised in terms of rear leg room, ride comfort, headroom, ease of access and sometimes even bootspace. I've tried various sports saloons and while they were good on the PH ometer they really weren't ideal in terms of compromises for my family.
2. Estate - Still drive OK and some can look very decent. The longer wheelbase can compromise ride and handling a bit. You do get loads of bootspace but headroom can again be an issue. Also while there seems to be some strange reverse snobbish attitude on PH that somehow estates are "cool", they really aren't. Baring the very odd exception like the Audi RS2 they are essentially a car type that has been carrying families, dogs and doing tip runs for decades. As schoolboys we used to take the piss out of anyone whose dad had an estate, they weren't cool then and they aren't cool now no matter how much some people on here might like to think they are.
3. MPV - What can I say they are probably the most practical of all the choices in terms of space, headroom, ease of access etc but really if you are driving an MPV you either hate cars or you've given up on life. Looks like a bus, drives like a bus
4. SUV - Pro's for full size one's are that you have the increased boot space, leg room, headroom plus ease of access. The ride comfort is usually decent too which means the family points are all ticked without having to drive an awful MPV. The bad points are of course that they are usually big and heavy plus the high CoG means they are usually compromised in terms of driving enjoyment but then they aren't really for that purpose anyway. I find the current obsession with trying to make SUV's drive like cars very strange, really why bother when that isn't their intended purpose?? Image wise some people love them and some people think they are the devils spawn.
Small SUV\Crossovers I don't really get though, most of the compromises of an SUV with none of the benefits but I guess they appeal to people who want the SUV looks in a smaller package. They are like the modern equivalent of the hatchback and seem to have become the new default choice that hatchbacks were in the 90's.
Guvernator said:
Small SUV\Crossovers I don't really get though, most of the compromises of an SUV with none of the benefits but I guess they appeal to people who want the SUV looks in a smaller package. They are like the modern equivalent of the hatchback and seem to have become the new default choice that hatchbacks were in the 90's.
You are applying your own personal set of preferences to find compromises and see no benefits. That's why these Topics keep coming up; someone looks at a type of vehicle on the road, picks a load of reasons as to why they wouldn't want one and then posts a Thread about how they do not see the point and want to see that they are not in a minority who think that way. Indeed, I wouldn't be surprised if some people post here in the belief that if like-minded folk exist on a Car Forum, then they must be 'correct' and the 'ignorant masses' are wrong.
(Not suggesting you think this way)Anyway, I see the point of small SUV's and Crossovers. I've owned several 'proper' full-size 4x4's and used them in their Natural Habitat; off-road.
But I have this month ordered an SUV/Crossover - indeed, SAV! "Sports Adventure Vehicle" if I recall the literature correctly.
Why? Well, I have had saloons, estates etc and so I know what they are like and they simply are not what I want now.
I want something with an all-wheel drive capability (not particularly very capable 4x4) and slightly more clearance than a standard car. I want these so that I can go on Trails along the Portugal coastline. You do not need a 4x4 for that and I have done many Trails in an A-Class Merc but it would be better to have the aforementioned traits on my own vehicle to avoid bashing the undercarriage on some uneven terrain.
I don't need nor want a large load space. But not tiny either. I also fancied a Hybrid this time around so I wanted a Petrol/Electric car that I can charge from my solar panels; with no commute and all beaches and shops close by, this means it can really run electric-only much of the time.
I didn't want a slow, very heavy car. So ruled out the likes of the Outlander. It had to be nippy around town and able to overtake ok on the motorway on trips to Lisbon, Seville and Granada.
None of those 'wants' concerned looks or image. Just a set of preferences. All pointed to a small SUV/Crossover and that is what I have ordered.
Guvernator said:
For people who need to carry large loads or a growing family you've really got 4 choices
2. Estate - Still drive OK and some can look very decent. The longer wheelbase can compromise ride and handling a bit. You do get loads of bootspace but headroom can again be an issue. Also while there seems to be some strange reverse snobbish attitude on PH that somehow estates are "cool", they really aren't. Baring the very odd exception like the Audi RS2 they are essentially a car type that has been carrying families, dogs and doing tip runs for decades. As schoolboys we used to take the piss out of anyone whose dad had an estate, they weren't cool then and they aren't cool now no matter how much some people on here might like to think they are.
An estates wheelbase is exactly the same as a saloon? Also as for not being cool our head teacher had a Volvo 850 T5R back in the day and not only did it look the part but everyone thought it was cool. 2. Estate - Still drive OK and some can look very decent. The longer wheelbase can compromise ride and handling a bit. You do get loads of bootspace but headroom can again be an issue. Also while there seems to be some strange reverse snobbish attitude on PH that somehow estates are "cool", they really aren't. Baring the very odd exception like the Audi RS2 they are essentially a car type that has been carrying families, dogs and doing tip runs for decades. As schoolboys we used to take the piss out of anyone whose dad had an estate, they weren't cool then and they aren't cool now no matter how much some people on here might like to think they are.
HannsG said:
Brother dropped my family off at the airport in a 2006 diesel Smax. He is a mechanic and it's a works shed.
I was in awe of how it swallowed all the luggage up, had seven seats, bit of power as it was a diesel, and looked fairly loaded in terms of tech.
They serve a purpose. Kids generate a lot of st which needs to be carted around at times.
That's an MPV ,not an SUV.....I was in awe of how it swallowed all the luggage up, had seven seats, bit of power as it was a diesel, and looked fairly loaded in terms of tech.
They serve a purpose. Kids generate a lot of s
t which needs to be carted around at times. 
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff