Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / General Car Topics / January 2008
Strong SUV sales
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Nomen Nescio - 29 Dec 2007 16:20 GMT "Thought sales of big, expensive SUVs and pickups were on life support? It would seem that reports of their death have been greatly exaggerated as sales for some of the largest, thirstiest luxury models...have shown a surprising resurgence..."
Business Week article: http://easyurl.net/SUVsales
Harley - 29 Dec 2007 17:02 GMT > "Thought sales of big, expensive SUVs and pickups were on life support? > It would seem that reports of their death have been greatly exaggerated > as sales for some of the largest, thirstiest luxury models...have shown > a surprising resurgence..." > > Business Week article: http://easyurl.net/SUVsales The people who squeal, you don't NEED one of those big vehicles are the ones who want one, but cannot afford one, and are jealous of those that have them.
Harley
Trevor Wilson - 29 Dec 2007 19:18 GMT >> "Thought sales of big, expensive SUVs and pickups were on life support? >> It would seem that reports of their death have been greatly exaggerated [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > ones who want one, but cannot afford one, and are jealous of those that > have them. **Nope.
Trevor Wilson
Steve - 03 Jan 2008 17:06 GMT > "Harley" <Cool@Mont.com> wrote in message
>>The people who squeal, you don't NEED one of those big vehicles are the >>ones who want one, but cannot afford one, and are jealous of those that [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Trevor Wilson Right. They're the ones who don't need or want one and refuse to understand or accept that there are people who do need and want them. IOW, people who bleat about personal freedom a lot, so long as everyone does exactly what THEY want to do.
(PS- I don't own one)
Trevor Wilson - 03 Jan 2008 19:50 GMT >> "Harley" <Cool@Mont.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Right. They're the ones who don't need or want one and refuse to > understand or accept that there are people who do need and want them. **Nope.
> IOW, people who bleat about personal freedom a lot, so long as everyone > does exactly what THEY want to do. **Nope.
> (PS- I don't own one) **OK.
Trevor Wilson
Steve - 04 Jan 2008 16:31 GMT >>Right. They're the ones who don't need or want one and refuse to >>understand or accept that there are people who do need and want them. > > **Nope. Yep.
>>IOW, people who bleat about personal freedom a lot, so long as everyone >>does exactly what THEY want to do. > > **Nope. Yep.
David E. Powell - 29 Dec 2007 20:44 GMT > > "Thought sales of big, expensive SUVs and pickups were on life support? > > It would seem that reports of their death have been greatly exaggerated [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > who want one, but cannot afford one, and are jealous of those that have > them. Well they don't want "normal loking" cars, they want something that will stand out, a hybrid people will recognize instead of a hybridized or re-fuelled regular car model. It is fashion as well as practicality/ economy. (See the poor Hybrid Accord sales at Honda, a fine car people just didn't go with. I came close to picking one up last year but fixed my older Dodge instead.) "Fashion" seems to be the only reason it didn't do better, given fuel prce news and so forth. It was a fine car.
Also people are used to versatility, especially if they haul a lot of gear. (Many SUV/Crossover owners, especially older married ones, have a regular/compact car as their other car.) They get used to that capability, like it, and as the car passes the 3-5-7 year marks, and they go looking for another one, they go with the newer models to keep that capability. If the newer ones are more efficient, good, but they want to keep that capability.
Also the CUV/SUV market benefits at some areas from the "truck law" as well as the high position of the seat (To see around/over he other road mosnters) they are basically the new wagons in market segment, which was part of the bad news for the Dodge Magnum.
> Harley Professor1942 - 29 Dec 2007 23:43 GMT > > > "Thought sales of big, expensive SUVs and pickups were on life support? > > > It would seem that reports of their death have been greatly exaggerated > > > as sales for some of the largest, thirstiest luxury models...have shown > > > a surprising resurgence..." > > > > Business Week article:http://easyurl.net/SUVsales We came very close to buying a Toyota Highlander this week, but then we decided we could use something even bigger so we bought a Sienna.
Just Facts - 31 Dec 2007 09:20 GMT In article <a8c6a61c-c525-42e0-be0e-6a1bbe7562af@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> Well they don't want "normal loking" cars, they want something that > will stand out, a hybrid people will recognize instead of a hybridized [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > it didn't do better, given fuel prce news and so forth. It was a fine > car. Nope. I was very interested in the Accord hybrid, but realized it was set up for powerful acceleration, not economy. It had a larger than normal V6 engine, but should have had a smaller than normal engine. It made no sense technically. So I passed and was not surprised they discontinued it.
Spam away - 31 Dec 2007 09:16 GMT > The people who squeal, you don't NEED one of those big vehicles are the ones > who want one, but cannot afford one, and are jealous of those that have > them. That's what you think. Are you trying to make yourself feel good about driving a Stupid Unnecessary Vehicle?
Harley - 31 Dec 2007 12:06 GMT > Are you trying to make yourself feel good about driving a > Stupid Unnecessary Vehicle?>> You just proved my point.
Bill Putney - 31 Dec 2007 17:06 GMT >> Are you trying to make yourself feel good about driving a Stupid >> Unnecessary Vehicle?>> > > You just proved my point. zing!! LOL!
Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')
Spam away - 08 Jan 2008 05:53 GMT > > Are you trying to make yourself feel good about driving a > > Stupid Unnecessary Vehicle?>>
> You just proved my point. Your logic brain is just a bit screwed!
C. E. White - 31 Dec 2007 19:06 GMT > That's what you think. > Are you trying to make yourself feel good about driving a > Stupid Unnecessary Vehicle? The number of stupid and unnecessary vehicles is pretty large. Is anything stupider and more unnecessary than a LS460h or a Rolls Royce? Or how about 200 mph motorcycles? Could anything be stupider? For a majority of people anything larger / more powerful than a Corolla is unnecessary most of the time. Trying to draw a line between reasonable and unreasonable vehicles is a pretty hard thing to do. If your goal is to tell me what I should buy, then I think you should move to another country.
Ed
Rich - 31 Dec 2007 19:27 GMT >> That's what you think. >> Are you trying to make yourself feel good about driving a [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > anything larger / more powerful than a Corolla is unnecessary most of the > time. Ever try and move a family of 5 in a Corolla?
Methinks your vision is too limited.
Cheers,
Rich
> Trying to draw a line between reasonable and unreasonable vehicles is > a pretty hard thing to do. If your goal is to tell me what I should buy, > then I think you should move to another country. > > Ed Professor1942 - 31 Dec 2007 20:50 GMT > Ever try and move a family of 5 in a Corolla? > > Methinks your vision is too limited. Environmentalists don't have children.
Rich - 31 Dec 2007 22:09 GMT >> Ever try and move a family of 5 in a Corolla? >> >> Methinks your vision is too limited. > > Environmentalists don't have children. That would explain a lot. :-)
Cheers,
Rich
Siskuwihane - 31 Dec 2007 21:37 GMT > >> That's what you think. > >> Are you trying to make yourself feel good about driving a [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Methinks your vision is too limited. The majority of SUV's I see are moving a family of one fat-a.s.
Rich - 31 Dec 2007 22:15 GMT >>>> That's what you think. >>>> Are you trying to make yourself feel good about driving a [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > The majority of SUV's I see are moving a family of one fat-a.s. So you say. Would this be during rush hour perchance?
Cheers,
Rich
Siskuwihane - 31 Dec 2007 22:31 GMT > >>>> That's what you think. > >>>> Are you trying to make yourself feel good about driving a [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > So you say. Would this be during rush hour perchance? There is no "rush hour" where I live. Many who live within walking distance of work are driving. In such a small town you know who's driving what, where they work and how many people they have in their family. I can count on one hand the number of people who "need" such a vehicle and it isn't the bank president whose only child is grown and on her own.
Professor1942 - 31 Dec 2007 22:35 GMT > > >>>> That's what you think. > > >>>> Are you trying to make yourself feel good about driving a [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > vehicle and it isn't the bank president whose only child is grown and > on her own. Maybe the bank president has grandchildren. If so, how is he supposed to pick them all up at the airport when they come to visit? Or maybe he helps out with "Meals on wheels" on the weekend. Who are you to judge what people "need" in a vehicle? Looks more like jealousy and sour grapes to me.
Siskuwihane - 31 Dec 2007 22:56 GMT > > > >>>> That's what you think. > > > >>>> Are you trying to make yourself feel good about driving a [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > judge what people "need" in a vehicle? Looks more like jealousy and > sour grapes to me.- Hide quoted text - Just so I have this straight, I shouldn't be judging anyone but you are telling me I am jealous and suffering from sour grapes? Ok, now that the pot calling the kettle black is out of the way...
I've lived next door to him for the last 18 years so I have a very good idea of what he delivers (or rather doesn't) etc. If I can afford to live in his neighborhood then I can well afford to drive what he's driving but I do not to let my ego sway the choices I make.
Professor1942 - 31 Dec 2007 23:11 GMT > > > > >>>> That's what you think. > > > > >>>> Are you trying to make yourself feel good about driving a [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > to live in his neighborhood then I can well afford to drive what he's > driving but I do not to let my ego sway the choices I make. Alright, fair enough. Rich people tend to overdo a lot of things (fancy French meals that aren't filling, useless ornaments and fountains, etc.), but most SUV owners I know have large families so there is nothing excessive or unnecessary about it.
Siskuwihane - 31 Dec 2007 23:52 GMT > > > > > >>>> That's what you think. > > > > > >>>> Are you trying to make yourself feel good about driving a [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > fountains, etc.), but most SUV owners I know have large families so > there is nothing excessive or unnecessary about it.- Hide quoted text - Son of a gun, I never even thought that he might be having French food too. That greedy bastard. ;)
Professor1942 - 01 Jan 2008 01:37 GMT > > > > > > >>>> That's what you think. > > > > > > >>>> Are you trying to make yourself feel good about driving a [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > too. > That greedy bastard. ;) Well, every "fine dining" experience I've had recently has involved a trip to Wendy's afterwards, which causes more global warming.
Rich - 31 Dec 2007 23:12 GMT [...]
>> Maybe the bank president has grandchildren. If so, how is he supposed >> to pick them all up at the airport when they come to visit? Or maybe [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > to live in his neighborhood then I can well afford to drive what he's > driving but I do not to let my ego sway the choices I make. In what others ways is he living his life not to your satisfaction?
And how do you suggest remedying this? I suggest that the first thing you will have to do is shitcan what's left of the Constitution. Don't worry about that, Congress is almost done.
What then?
Cheers,
Rich
Peter Franks - 01 Jan 2008 02:33 GMT >>>>>> That's what you think. >>>>>> Are you trying to make yourself feel good about driving a [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > vehicle and it isn't the bank president whose only child is grown and > on her own. Is property ownership based on need?
Ed White - 31 Dec 2007 22:25 GMT >>> That's what you think. >>> Are you trying to make yourself feel good about driving a [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Methinks your vision is too limited. What part of "majority of people" and "most of the time" was unclear? Clearly people have different needs. I certainly can understand that a large family might need a larger vehicle than a Corolla. But how many families "need" a 7 or 8 passenger SUV? On the other hand, I would never think it was reasonable for me to tell you (or anyone else) what to buy. As I also said - "If your goal is to tell me what I should buy, then I think you should move to another country."
Ed
> Cheers, > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >> >> Ed Rich - 31 Dec 2007 22:49 GMT >>>> That's what you think. >>>> Are you trying to make yourself feel good about driving a [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > What part of "majority of people" and "most of the time" was unclear? I don't see how you can make an assessment like that.
Please explain how you gained this knowledge of the majority of people most of the time.
> Clearly people have different needs. And yet you've decided that a corolla would meet most people's needs.
> I certainly can understand that a large > family might need a larger vehicle than a Corolla. My Honda Accord works, but it's a bit cramped. I drive it to and from work alone however.
> But how many families "need" a 7 or 8 passenger SUV? I don't think SUVs seat that many. You need a van.
> On the other hand, I would never think it was > reasonable for me to tell you (or anyone else) what to buy. Odd, I was under the distinct impression that you already had.
> As I also said - > "If your goal is to tell me what I should buy, then I think you should move > to another country." This seemed to disagree with the rest of the post.
Cheers,
Rich
> Ed > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >>> >>> Ed Ed White - 31 Dec 2007 23:09 GMT >> What part of "majority of people" and "most of the time" was unclear? > > I don't see how you can make an assessment like that. LOL - You obviously saw how I made it....whether you agree with it or not.
> Please explain how you gained this knowledge of the majority of people > most of the time. Even you can figure this out by watching traffic. What percentage of cars do you see carrying more than 2 people? I am positive that even you would agree the number is less than 50%.
>> Clearly people have different needs. > > And yet you've decided that a corolla would meet most people's needs. You are ignoring the context of the original statement .But I think I am safe when I say that a Corolla would meet the transportation needs of most people most of the times. Now whether it would meet their other needs (ego primarily) I can't say. Clearly lots of people (including me) justify buying other vehicles. I think Corollas are ugly, slow, ride poorly, and are uncomfortable, but I am pretty sure they would get me where I need to go. Don't confuse needs with wishes, wants, and desires. I am sure that Corollas don't meet the wishes, wants, or desires of most people (even some people who buy them).
>> I certainly can understand that a large >> family might need a larger vehicle than a Corolla. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > I don't think SUVs seat that many. You need a van. Expedition, Suburban, Sequoia, Explorer, Tahoe, and many others all have seats for 7 or more.
>> On the other hand, I would never think it was >> reasonable for me to tell you (or anyone else) what to buy. > > Odd, I was under the distinct impression that you already had. I never said you should buy a Corolla, I just said "anything larger / more powerful than a Corolla is unnecessary most of the time."
>> As I also said - >> "If your goal is to tell me what I should buy, then I think you should >> move >> to another country." > > This seemed to disagree with the rest of the post. No, you didn't read the original post in context, then you started cherry picking parts of the post to nit pick, and finally you implied I said things I never said (i.e. - I never said you should buy a Corolla or any other particular vehicle). My point was (perhaps poorly made) was that it is unfair to attack SUV owners based on whether or not they actually need an SUV. Most people buy vehicles that far exceed what they actually need. If you are going to pick on SUV owners, you should also pick on most other vehicle buyers.
Ed
Professor1942 - 31 Dec 2007 23:15 GMT > I think Corollas are ugly, slow, ride poorly, and are > uncomfortable, but I am pretty sure they would get me where I need to go. > Don't confuse needs with wishes, wants, and desires. I am sure that Corollas > don't meet the wishes, wants, or desires of most people (even some people > who buy them). I own a 2003 Corolla and it's an excellent commuter car. Terrible family car though (which is why we also have something bigger).
Rich - 31 Dec 2007 23:40 GMT >>> What part of "majority of people" and "most of the time" was unclear? >> I don't see how you can make an assessment like that. > > LOL - You obviously saw how I made it....whether you agree with it or not. The number of stupid and unnecessary vehicles is pretty large. Is anything stupider and more unnecessary than a LS460h or a Rolls Royce? Or how about 200 mph motorcycles? Could anything be stupider? For a majority of people anything larger / more powerful than a Corolla is unnecessary most of the time. Trying to draw a line between reasonable and unreasonable vehicles is a pretty hard thing to do. If your goal is to tell me what I should buy, then I think you should move to another country.
I see some claims, I don't see any data or supporting evidence.
>> Please explain how you gained this knowledge of the majority of people >> most of the time. > > Even you can figure this out by watching traffic. What percentage of cars do > you see carrying more than 2 people? During rush hour, not many including myself.
> I am positive that even you would agree the number is less than 50%. I'm unclear on the validity of extrapolating my limited observations to everywhere, everybody and everwhen. My rush hour observations are denied by my driving the rest of time anyway.
>>> Clearly people have different needs. >> And yet you've decided that a corolla would meet most people's needs. > > You are ignoring the context of the original statement . It lacked any meaningful content, at least IMHO.
> But I think I am > safe when I say that a Corolla would meet the transportation needs of most > people most of the times. How many families in the US?
> Now whether it would meet their other needs (ego > primarily) I can't say. Clearly lots of people (including me) justify buying > other vehicles. You mean you don't drive a corolla? :-)
> I think Corollas are ugly, slow, ride poorly, and are > uncomfortable, but I am pretty sure they would get me where I need to go. By that metric, so would a cooper mini (which I expect would be faster).
> Don't confuse needs with wishes, wants, and desires. I am sure that Corollas > don't meet the wishes, wants, or desires of most people (even some people > who buy them). OK.
>>> I certainly can understand that a large >>> family might need a larger vehicle than a Corolla. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Expedition, Suburban, Sequoia, Explorer, Tahoe, and many others all have > seats for 7 or more. As you say, the smaller SUVs won't, but I've never shopped for one or looked closely.
>>> On the other hand, I would never think it was >>> reasonable for me to tell you (or anyone else) what to buy.
>> Odd, I was under the distinct impression that you already had. > > I never said you should buy a Corolla, I just said "anything larger / more > powerful than a Corolla is unnecessary most of the time." So it's just a utilitarian argument (the value of which is not settled)?
>>> As I also said - >>> "If your goal is to tell me what I should buy, then I think you should [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > No, you didn't read the original post in context, then you started cherry > picking parts of the post to nit pick, I responded to most of it.
> and finally you implied I said things > I never said (i.e. - I never said you should buy a Corolla or any other > particular vehicle). You mean when I said "Odd, I was under the distinct impression that you already had"? That statement was properly qualified, if you did not read it closely.
> My point was (perhaps poorly made) was that it is > unfair to attack SUV owners based on whether or not they actually need an > SUV. Most people buy vehicles that far exceed what they actually need. If > you are going to pick on SUV owners, you should also pick on most other > vehicle buyers. Hold on one minute, who's picking on SUV owners here? :-)
Cheers,
Rich
> Ed Harley - 31 Dec 2007 21:41 GMT > The number of stupid and unnecessary vehicles is pretty large. Is anything > stupider and more unnecessary than a LS460h or a Rolls Royce? Or how about [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > is a pretty hard thing to do. If your goal is to tell me what I should > buy, then I think you should move to another country.> Ed If you were really and truly serious, you could take a real step and go without a car all together. No...you don't need a car, no matter how small or how fuel efficient it is. You can use public transport or a bicycle to and from work...and to get your food, and to do your shopping. Cars, all of them, are not a need, but a luxury.
Rich - 31 Dec 2007 22:20 GMT >> The number of stupid and unnecessary vehicles is pretty large. Is >> anything [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > bicycle to and from work...and to get your food, and to do your > shopping. Cars, all of them, are not a need, but a luxury. How long is your bike ride to work?
Cheers,
Rich
Harley - 31 Dec 2007 22:49 GMT >>> The number of stupid and unnecessary vehicles is pretty large. Is >>> anything [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > How long is your bike ride to work? Cheers, Rich>> To dang far. That's why I drive my Silverado V8. ;-)
Daniel Who Wants to Know - 31 Dec 2007 23:23 GMT >>>> The number of stupid and unnecessary vehicles is pretty large. Is >>>> anything [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > To dang far. That's why I drive my Silverado V8. ;-) I am in the "walk everywhere I go unless I get a ride from someone" club currently and am trying to get a '95 Caravan so I can safely say that walking sux. In the summer it isn't so bad and can even be fun sometimes except for trying to get $50 worth of groceries home from Aldi in a double stroller. Right now I hate it because we (SE Iowa) just got another 6" of snow and I had to walk in the street to the grocery store because most sidewalks including mine aren't cleaned off. I felt like I had walked twice as far after the trip as I really did because my feet slid backwards a little with every step. Yes all cars are a luxury but they are one luxury that is starting to look mighty fine to me right now d:). BTW as I typed this a POS H2 went by.
Spam away - 08 Jan 2008 06:08 GMT > The number of stupid and unnecessary vehicles is pretty large. Is anything > stupider and more unnecessary than a LS460h or a Rolls Royce? Or how about [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > a pretty hard thing to do. If your goal is to tell me what I should buy, > then I think you should move to another country. You're an extremist, extreme right?
The Corolla is a nice car and would fill my urban driving needs, but unfortunately it needs a telescoping steering wheel for me to drive it comfortably. I've looked at it very closely. I've had large vehicles, even a full sized van when I needed it.
A truck based SUV is unnecessary for me even though I could write a cheque for the largest of them. I don't buy something just because I can easily afford it.
I really wouldn't care if people drive large SUVs, but dam it they block the view of other traffic. Plus many driving them attempt to push others off the roads, driving far too close and too fast. NOTE I SAID MANY, not all. If they continued to buy the Transam GM wouldn't have had to shut the factory.
As for the need to have an SUV, nope not the way I see it in my necj of the woods. For example neighbors across the street have 3 large SUVs and two cars. Each adult has one large SUV and one of their three unmarried children. Obviously they only need one at the most, but like many they just have to spend their high income on SUVs.
BTW I'm already in another country, thank goodness!
Bill Putney - 08 Jan 2008 08:46 GMT > BTW I'm already in another country, thank goodness! And we agree on that.
Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')
Fran - 31 Dec 2007 11:43 GMT > > "Thought sales of big, expensive SUVs and pickups were on life support? > > It would seem that reports of their death have been greatly exaggerated [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Harley I like the Simposons' rep[onse:
Can you name the truck with four wheel drive, smells like a steak and seats thirty-five..
Canyonero! Canyonero!
Well, it goes real slow with the hammer down, It's the country-fried truck endorsed by a clown!
Canyonero! (Yah!) Canyonero! [Krusty:] Hey Hey
[Voice over] The Federal Highway commission has ruled the Canyonero unsafe for highway or city driving.
Canyonero!
12 yards long, 2 lanes wide, 65 tons of American Pride!
Canyonero! Canyonero!
Top of the line in utility sports, Unexplained fires are a matter for the courts!
Canyonero! Canyonero! (Yah!)
She blinds everybody with her super high beams, She's a squirrel crushing, deer smacking, driving machine!
Canyonero!-oh woah, Canyonero! (Yah!)
Fran
steve - 31 Dec 2007 14:47 GMT > > "Nomen Nescio" <nob...@dizum.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] > > - Show quoted text - i love that episode, so i dedicate this to you and trevor http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCZjYLb7ITM
Bill Putney - 31 Dec 2007 17:03 GMT > I like the Simposons' rep[onse: > [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > > Fran Nice parody, but has nothing to do with real world vehicles other than liberal's fained (dishonest) perceptions of them. Funny that the libs are the ones driving them (when not flying in their private jets to get to meetings on how to sane the world).
Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')
Bill Putney - 31 Dec 2007 17:19 GMT > ...(when not flying in their private jets to get > to meetings on how to sane the world). Oops. "...save the world."
Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')
Fran - 31 Dec 2007 23:20 GMT > > I like the Simpsons' response: > [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > Nice parody, but has nothing to do with real world vehicles other than > liberal's fained (dishonest) [liberals'; feigned]
> perceptions of them. Funny that the libs > are the ones driving them (when not flying in their private jets to get > to meetings on how to sane the world). Personally, I believe much of the discourse around SUV use has little to do with GHG emissions.
To begin with, I'm not sure that SUVs on the whole actually emit greater quantities of GHGs than other vehicles of simlar engine capacity and functionality. In Australia, friendlier tax treatment borne of a the desire of conservative governments to keep rural constituents happy has led to widespread use of these distinctive vehicles in urban settings, which use many think inapproriate.
People use them in urban settings for a variety of reasons, at least some of which seem specious. They are widely seen as safer (at least for occupants) though the higher centres of gravity of some models and their use by relatively inexperienced drivers has led to higher insurance premiums on some models. They've been associated with reversinbg injuries -- typically toddlers and small children being run over in suburban driveways. They also tend to obstruct through vision -- trying to turn right when one is on your left or vice versa can be difficult.
Like most things, car purchase is often a lifestyle or identity statement. These vehicles are often marketed in ways that underline irresponsible or borderline taboo behaviour -- running over wildlife or cattle and tearing up the wilderness -- in one ad, someone tries to pull out a stump and inadvertently rips out a tree in Japan, neatly underlining popular perceptions -- too much power and too little responsibility. Accordingly the vehicles are seen as driven by people who are potentially irresponsible, road rage candidates or environmental vandals. And because the more expensive of the vehicles tend to be driven by upmarket buyers, the idea of these things being an extension of the rich man's castle onto the roads (his tank?) their appearance does provoke widespread animus. If you've ever tried to negotiate a busy shopping centre car park during the peak and seen how many large SUVs are parked illegally on the ends of aisles, you won't have to think too hard to work out what dozens fo frustrated drivers are saying as they squeeze past.
My own view is that people should avoid car use wherever practicable, and that adequate provision should be made to make that an easy choice to make in urban settings much of the time. One should choose cars that are modest, fuel efficient, relatively safe tfor all and serve your needs adequately and leave a small footprint. If that's an SUV- style vehicle, so be it.
Fran
Bill Putney - 01 Jan 2008 02:27 GMT >> Nice parody, but has nothing to do with real world vehicles other than >> liberal's fained (dishonest)
> [liberals'; feigned] Ahh - good catch.
> greater quantities of GHGs than other vehicles of simlar engine [similar]
> vehicles in urban settings, which use many think inapproriate. [inappropriate]
> for occupants) though the higher centres of gravity of some models and British/Aussie spelling of 'centers' - OK
> reversinbg injuries -- typically toddlers and small children being run [reversing]
> irresponsible or borderline taboo behaviour -- running over wildlife British/Aussie spelling of 'behavior' - OK
> have to think too hard to work out what dozens fo frustrated drivers [of]
> that are modest, fuel efficient, relatively safe tfor all and serve [for]
All in fun. I could say I was too lazy to look up 'feigned', but in reality I was too ignorant to realize I didn't know its proper spelling. I ain't no ignorant sombitch.
Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')
Fran - 01 Jan 2008 03:56 GMT > >> Nice parody, but has nothing to do with real world vehicles other than > >> liberal's fained (dishonest) [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my > address with the letter 'x') Not a fan of Shakepseare?
Blow, Blow, thou winter wind! Thou art not so unkind As man's ingratitude Thy tooth is not so keen Because thou art not seen. Although thy breath be rude. Heigh ho! sing, heigh ho! unto the green holly; Most friendship is feigning most loving mere folly. Then, heigh ho, the holly! This life is most jolly.
From *As You Like It*, IIRC
Fran
Fran - 01 Jan 2008 06:12 GMT > > >> Nice parody, but has nothing to do with real world vehicles other than > > >> liberal's fained (dishonest) [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > > Not a fan of Shakepseare? Ooops ...
Shakespeare ... better ...
> Blow, Blow, thou winter wind! > Thou art not so unkind [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Bill Putney - 01 Jan 2008 18:52 GMT > Not a fan of Shakepseare? > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Fran Ahh - but Shakespeare was obviously a very politically incorrect fellow. To wit: "Heigh ho!". He must now be officially purged from our literature. :)
Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')
Fran - 01 Jan 2008 22:34 GMT > > Not a fan of Shakepseare? > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > To wit: "Heigh ho!". He must now be officially purged from our > literature. :) He was very un-PC at the time he wrote, but nowadays, very mainstream -- *de rigeur* in fact. His work is compulsory in high school English.
Fran
|
|
|