Aren't we obsessed with SUVs?

virhlpool on 17/06/2023 - 13:40
Last edited 17/06/2023 - 14:09

A few recent comments on OzB got me thinking about what we see on our roads lately.. Even the narrow or single lane roads are usually full of giant SUVs and a handful of hatchbacks and sedans 'hidden' amidst them. This is fast becoming more common as car companies want us to buy bigger, more expensive cars. I am not sure if anyone else feels this but in my eyes, SUVs are inherently uglier (as f***!) than sedans and hatchbacks.. too bulky and heavy for my personal liking, especially considering our roads (case of the American roads could be arguably different). No matter which brand and how expensive really, they just don't look as attractive.

Also, I never understood why small families in our country (even in major cities) opt for less cost-effective, uglier and more expensive SUVs vs much nicer looking, cheaper and more cost-effective sedans or hatchbacks. Parking lots in Australia aren't even made for SUVs at the most places - sedans barely fit there. Not that everyone goes to camping every other weekend or all SUV owners need to fit in prams either. For a couple with no kids or a family with one kid, sedans (if not hatch) are perfect and so much better looking, ay! I was in Europe in last holidays and I didn't notice that many SUVs there. Beautiful hatchbacks and sedans on the roads was quite refreshing, honestly.. compared to our increasingly congested roads where all you see around you is giant SUVs driving past, all looking quite similar. Btw, I have owned SUV in the past for extended family needs and now own a hatch which I love driving around. If I don't have more space requirement, I would prefer hatch any day even for daily commuting or even reasonably long distance driving; so much easier to deal with driving and parking in our busy urban areas.

What do you all think?

Automotive Car SUV

Comments

  • BOGOF on 17/06/2023 - 13:54
    +9

    Are we?

    • Scrooge McDuck on 18/06/2023 - 12:19
      +47

      I'd say drivers prefer them inherently more than manufacturers push them.

      People like the higher driving position and feel (incorrectly) that driving a larger vehicle is safer. So we have an arms race to be in larger and larger vehicles so as not to be dwarfed by those around.

      In reality they aren't safer overall. Their stopping distance is longer, they handle worse and they're much more likely to roll over even in a low speed accident. If their wheel hits a heavy object like a wall or just a hatchback at an unfortunate angle, they can climb up it and flip in the blink of an eye. There's no shortage of videos on YouTube of this occuring.

      • nuker on 18/06/2023 - 13:36
        -3

        People like the higher driving position and feel (incorrectly) that driving a larger vehicle is safer.

        It is safer, mass matters.

        • Leadfoot6 on 18/06/2023 - 14:33
          +34

          It is not safer for the other person that these monstrosities collide with.

            • Leadfoot6 on 18/06/2023 - 15:20
              +18

              @nuker: When the monstrosities roll over, more likely due to higher centre of gravity just like the bus that tipped over in the Hunter Valley this week killing 10, you will need all the help you can get.
              I have always been a firm believer in staying away from SUV's(but partly because of the extra expense of EVERYTHING associated with them) as I detest driving a barge.

              I have quoted from a source from the USA, as the information was easily at hand due to the larger, more representative, sample size.

              "2023 Update]: Despite continued safety efforts, SUVs, pickups and vans are most susceptible to rollover accidents due to their narrow, tall build. SUV rollover risk remains an issue because they are top-heavy and have a higher center of gravity, so their balance and stability is reduced. And, while rollover accidents make up a small percentage of overall traffic accidents, the continue to account for a high percentage of accident fatalities. In fact, the National Highway Safety Administration reports that close to 35% of passenger vehicle fatalities resulted from rollovers.

              [2022 Update]: SUV rollover risk remains relevant in 2022. A rollover occurs when a vehicle tips on to its side or roof during a traffic accident, and may result from impact with another vehicle or a stationary object. Often, the vehicle occupants are ejected from the vehicle. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety reports that 7,182 passenger vehicle occupants died in rollover accidents in 2020, showing the continued need to be aware of how to avoid such situations.
              […..]"

              https://www.avrek.com/blog/how-does-a-rollover-happen-and-wh…

                • Leadfoot6 on 18/06/2023 - 15:55
                  +9

                  @nuker: Here are some more numbers(& facts):

                  (once again USA sourced due to larger sample size - I have a working knowledge of statistics, gained as part of my Economics/Accounting degree Macquarie University graduated 1986 - sure, I am not good with numbers - sigh)

                  "What to Know about Rollover SUV Accidents

                  Posted on: April 13, 2022

                  On This Page
                  A quarter of all new vehicle sales in the U.S. each year are sport utility vehicles or SUVs, making them the most popular type of motor vehicle in America today. Appreciated for their sporty appearance and spacious interiors, SUVs are deceptively marketed as being safe, sturdy, and rugged. This image lulls consumers into a false sense of security that an SUV will protect them and their loved ones in the event of an accident.

                  In reality, SUVs have historically had the highest rollover accident involvement rate of any vehicle type. Rollover accidents are among the most dangerous and deadly type of motor vehicle accident, second only to head on collisions according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). An SUV’s size, shape, and weight distribution make them particularly susceptible to rollovers.

                  The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reports that 58,000 people are injured in SUV rollover accidents each year, with 4,500 of those resulting in a fatality. Rollover SUV accidents occur when a vehicle turns onto its side or roof, causing the roof to collapse into the cabin and crush drivers and passengers. Such trauma frequently causes grave head and neck injuries, as well as puncture wounds from broken metal and glass.
                  […..]
                  What Makes SUVs Susceptible to Rollover Accidents?
                  In the United States, passenger cars and other vehicles that weigh less than 6,000 pounds are required by federal law to have roofs that can withstand one and a half times their weight. This is not the case with SUVs.

                  As a result, a rollover accident that occurs in an SUV increases the likelihood of serious injuries by more than 36 percent. While SUV accidents only account for approximately three percent of serious motor vehicle crashes, they are involved in 30 percent of accidents in which a person is killed while riding in a passenger vehicle.

                  Most SUVs also lack another crucial safety feature called a roll bar. Typically found in automobile suspension systems to help reduce the body roll of a vehicle during fast cornering or on rough, bumpy roads, the lack of a roll bar in SUVs is a manufacturing defect.

                  Due to the fact that roll bars are costly to install, and since there is no federal requirement to include them in SUVs, many manufacturers still don’t bother to factor them in to SUV design models. This oversight is shocking, considering that 50 percent of all single-vehicle accident fatalities are the result of a rollover crash, with 63 percent of those involving an SUV.

                  Other SUV manufacturer design flaws that increase the likelihood of serious injuries or fatalities include seatbelts that unlatch and fail to protect drivers and passengers during a crash, airbags that don’t deploy, and doors that open and eject a vehicle’s occupants during a rollover accident."

                  https://jsberrylaw.com/blog/what-to-know-about-rollover-suv-…

                    • Leadfoot6 on 18/06/2023 - 20:19
                      +3

                      @nuker: If an M1A1 Abrams battle tank was street legal the crew would be almost perfectly safe to almost all eventualities(except when targeted by shaped charge munitions/DU penetrators/land mines).

                      The passengers in a large SUV might be better off in certain circumstances, by no means anywhere near all, but surrounding motorists in smaller cars and/or pedestrians are mincemeat when confronted by a battering ram - hence my reference to the M1A1 above.

                      I have quoted statistics from the USA in other posts in this thread.

                      Here is another study from the USA(admittedly with a smaller than optimal sample size:

                      "New study suggests today’s SUVs are more lethal to pedestrians than cars
                      June 16, 2020

                      Though their designs have changed considerably over the past two decades, late-model SUVs still appear to be more likely to kill pedestrians than cars, a new study from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety found.

                      Thanks to advances in safety, the number of people killed in motor vehicle crashes in the U.S. has fallen from more than 50,000 in 1980 to 36,560 in 2018. Over the past decade, however, the number of pedestrians killed on American roads has ticked steadily upward.

                      “The proportion of SUVs in the U.S. fleet has grown dramatically, so it’s discouraging that they still seem to be more deadly to pedestrians than cars are,” says IIHS Statistician Sam Monfort, lead author of the study.

                      Analyzing a sample of 79 crashes from three urban areas in Michigan, the researchers found greater risk to pedestrians from SUVs. Because the sample size is small and limited to one geographic region, more research will be required to see whether all of the findings hold up in a larger study.
                      […..]

                      https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/new-study-suggests-todays-s…

                      Here is another study, from which an emerging pattern may be discerned:

                      "The New York Times recently highlighted the “exceptionally American” problem of rising road deaths. Roadways are becoming safer in virtually every developed country across the world, except for the United States. Even during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, when there were far fewer cars on the road, traffic deaths continued to increase.

                      American roadways are particularly dangerous for pedestrians. A March 2022 study from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) found that pedestrian deaths have increased by 59% since 2009, and 20% of all motor vehicle deaths were pedestrians in 2020. Several factors contribute to these grim statistics, but a big one (pun intended) is the size of vehicles on the road.

                      Large SUVs and pickup trucks are, unsurprisingly, more likely than smaller cars to injure or kill pedestrians due to their greater weight and taller front ends. And, as you’ve undoubtedly noticed if you live in the US, Americans love big vehicles. Some reports show that now over 80% of new car sales in the US are SUVs or pickups. That’s bad news for pedestrians. And soon we’ll have preposterously heavy EVs to worry about, too.

                      But can we really take those pedestrian safety statistics at face value? I decided to analyze the data for myself to see if large vehicles are actually causing a significant increase in pedestrian injuries and deaths (spoiler alert: they are).
                      […..]

                      https://towardsdatascience.com/suvs-are-killing-people-de6ce…

                      The last article also makes an interesting, and prophetic, comment about the impact that "heavier" EV's will have on pedestrian safety.

                      The news is not good.

          • CurlCurl on 18/06/2023 - 19:48

            @Leadfoot6:

            Any vehicle is not safe for a motor bike.

            • Leadfoot6 on 18/06/2023 - 20:20

              @CurlCurl: Yes, agreed.

              • Scrooge McDuck on 18/06/2023 - 23:11
                +10

                @Leadfoot6: Driving off a cliff, into a cliff or into a ditch at speed is not safe for any vehicle including main battle tanks.

                Different vehicles are suited to different use cases.

                Transporting few passengers and small items — hatchback.

                Transporting few passengers and medium items — station wagon.

                Transporting few passengers and large items — utility.

                Transporting many passengers or large items — van.

                Performance driving — sports car.

                Driving off-road — a real off-road vehicle.

                Towing a large trailer — truck.

                The majority of SUVs on our roads are fake off-road vehicles. Many don't have 4WD nor rugged suspension. Few have locking differentials or winches. Most have street tyres and will never wear anything else; which is good because they perform much better than off-road tyres on the street. In reality these SUVs are low performance, less economical, less safe vehicles. Driving an SUV on the street is like wearing platform shoes — they make you taller but perform worse and increase your risk of falling over.

                Most drivers would be best served by a hatchback. Most SUVs never go off-road nor tow a trailer. The few drivers who need a larger vehicle than a hatchback would be best served by a van.

                • Calvin27 on 20/06/2023 - 10:44
                  +2

                  @Scrooge McDuck: I'm as anti-SUV as they come but you are missing a few points:

                  Lifting kids into their seats - SUV

                  Just need ground clearance - SUV

                  Need awd but not going to go all out 4wd rock crawling - SUV

                  • Scrooge McDuck on 20/06/2023 - 14:59
                    +2

                    @Calvin27:

                    Lifting kids into their seats

                    Van

                    Just need ground clearance

                    What would be a case of this? A huge hump in your driveway? That'd be very rare.

                    Need awd but not going to go all out 4wd rock crawling

                    Subaru/Audi/Other AWD option

                    • Calvin27 on 22/06/2023 - 15:14

                      @Scrooge McDuck: vans cost more than SUV

                      Ground clearance could be anything, driveways, those kerb stopper things that get ever larger, just general soft roading on campsites etc.

                      Subarus are pretty much suv these days. Even their marketing says so.

          • Optimusprimetime on 21/06/2023 - 23:29

            @Leadfoot6: I thought the point of the OP’s comment was that the driver feels safer themselves, rather than the collider. Also, if it’s not safer for the collider in a head on collision, then logically it will be safer for the SUV driver from a conservation of energy perspective as they will take on less force. This is leaving aside the small proportion of occurrences when the vehicle rolls over, as you all put it.

        • Scrooge McDuck on 18/06/2023 - 15:43
          +17

          It is safer, mass matters.

          If a vehicle pulls out in front of you and you need to pull up quickly, mass matters.

          If you need to swerve around an obstacle, mass matters.

          If you have a puncture and are heading for a tree, mass matters.

          But thanks for proving my point.

          • nuker on 19/06/2023 - 14:02
            -7

            @Scrooge McDuck: Here is what chatGpt says, I got bored.

            Statistically speaking, there is evidence to suggest that heavier vehicles tend to have lower fatality rates in accidents compared to lighter vehicles. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) have conducted studies that show a correlation between vehicle weight and crash outcomes.

            For example, in a study conducted by the IIHS, it was found that larger, heavier cars generally had lower driver death rates compared to smaller, lighter cars. The study analyzed crash data from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) and accounted for factors such as driver age, gender, and alcohol use.

        • ssfps on 19/06/2023 - 01:33

          2WD SUVs are not safer than sedans or hatchbacks. If you're talking about large 4WDs then yes, they more often are safer for the occupants.
          Centre of gravity is higher on an SUV, and they are not significantly more massive.

      • giventofly on 19/06/2023 - 11:02
        +1

        It’s a bit of both, mostly manufactures. It’s a race to the bottom. People feel unsafe in smaller cars and there are more margins and less regulation globally on how SUVs are made.

      • supersabroso on 19/06/2023 - 21:04
        -1

        I don't care about the higher vehicle but the smaller ones simply aren't practical for families with prams. It's gotta be an SUV.

      • nikey2k27 on 20/06/2023 - 18:52

        that why I drive a tank ex us army tank easy parking over top off SUV.

    • GodsSon23 on 19/06/2023 - 18:01
      +1

      Useless post once again.

    • virhlpool on 17/06/2023 - 13:58
      +29

      I was expecting this from someone. "If ya down't lyke it heeya, gow back." Someone had to say it. Cheers, mate. Just FYI though - cars alone don't decide which country you choose to live in. In case you didn't know that. :)

  • sumyungguy on 17/06/2023 - 14:00
    +8

    I concur - and thrive on being a member of an inconsequential minority. But if I had a steep driveway…

    • R4 on 20/06/2023 - 09:17
      +1

      I have a steep driveway - always ensure the handbrake is on and your vehicle is in park or in gear.

      I know this from bitter experience……

  • bobbified on 17/06/2023 - 14:03
    +25

    I am not sure if anyone else feels this but in my eyes, SUVs are inherently uglier (as f***!) than sedans and hatchbacks

    The SUV drivers might feel that your hatchback is uglier than their SUV.

    We all have choices, right? What makes your choices more right than their's?

    • virhlpool on 17/06/2023 - 14:04
      +1

      Fair point.. I agree. Attractiveness is very subjective.

      • juki on 18/06/2023 - 08:16
        +3

        why do you think style and design count so much, i couldnt care less.

        • smartazz104 on 18/06/2023 - 14:57
          +1

          That's why people like SUVs.

          • juki on 18/06/2023 - 18:55

            @smartazz104: I'd say more those giant utes are more about prestige than some SUVs but ey to each their own

      • IpGem on 18/06/2023 - 11:22
        -2

        I agree. Attractiveness is very subjective

        End of thread

    • Save 50 Cent on 18/06/2023 - 07:03
      +2

      All cars are beautiful in my eyes. Some are just built different. So don’t insult them like that!

      • cktftw on 18/06/2023 - 10:17
        +4

        Feels like OP is fat shaming SUVs!
        Body positivity!

      • buckster on 21/06/2023 - 07:18

        Even the Nissan Juke with it's cancerous front lights?

  • Ghost47 on 17/06/2023 - 14:04
    +56

    Are you me? I agree with everything you've said.

    Nuclear families in this country got by fine with sedans back in the 90s and 2000s, but somehow heaps of people need an SUV now to get them and their family around, especially when households have actually decreased in size over the past few decades? If they're taking road trips every single weekend somewhere three to four hours away then maybe it's justifiable, because they need to fill their boot up with all the junk they own, but I doubt that's the case.

    People are buying SUVs because they are now used to abundance, they think they're "trendy" and because they like the ride height which ultimately only benefits themselves and is a detriment to everyone else on the road who drives a sedan or hatchback. SUVs have worse fuel economy and are vulnerable to flipping over when they get hit in the rear as well. The worst part is when people can't even park them properly and take ages to back up into a spot, or just give up and drive off lol. Frankly all the cons of owning an SUV heavily outweigh the pros.

    IMO they are the ultimate "f you got mine" vehicle because of all the issues they present not only to others on the road but also the environment. I don't think it needs to be said that people who drive SUVs must also love the oversized Ram trucks on the road, because it'd be a bit silly to buy an SUV and then complain about large trucks (I for one also think those Ram trucks are dumb af).

    • Switchblade88 on 17/06/2023 - 17:13
      +36

      Nuclear families in this country got by fine with sedans Station wagons

      FTFY

      The SUV is the closest we can get to a car with enough seats and space to fit any form of growing family.

      Ever tried to squeeze three car seats and a pram into a hatchback?

      • FlyingMiffy on 17/06/2023 - 21:10
        +20

        I was going to say @Ghost47 clearly dont have kids or is never the one to get them ready to go anywhere.

        • Ghost47 on 17/06/2023 - 21:20
          +4

          is never the one to get them ready to go anywhere.

          Not sure what point you're making here or how it relates. I don't have kids, but I'm sure I'd do fine with one baby seat in the back seat. Two on either side would probably work as well.

          My parents had two kids and drove sedans, never needed a larger car.

          • FlyingMiffy on 17/06/2023 - 21:24
            +1

            @Ghost47: Yeah why not ask them how they felt getting you in and out of the car.

            • Ghost47 on 17/06/2023 - 21:25
              +11

              @FlyingMiffy: Just did, no complaints.

                • Ghost47 on 17/06/2023 - 21:40
                  +7

                  @FlyingMiffy: "Get out more"… says the person on OzBargain getting mad at other people's comments on a Saturday night. I'm past the partying phase, done plenty of that but if you like to party then good for you. Doesn't make what I said about SUVs wrong.

          • Extreme on 18/06/2023 - 08:41
            +9

            @Ghost47: What you fail to understand is how much vehicle safety standards and child seat safety has changed over the years.

            It shows you don’t have kids. You don’t understand how much room a rear facing child seat actually takes up.

            The front passenger seat on my old Mazda 3 wasn’t able to be used, as to fit the 1 rear facing child seat, the front seat had to be all the way forward and the back rear had to be angled forward, just to fit the child seat in the car.

            Whilst you might think SUV’s are ugly, it shows the majority of the population feel they are more practical than a hatchback/sedan.

            • oranglama on 18/06/2023 - 09:33
              +6

              @Extreme: Mazda 3 sedan owner with 1 kid here, not sure how big you are but it's perfectly fine for me, plenty of room.

              • Extreme on 18/06/2023 - 12:28
                -1

                @oranglama: Nothing to do with how big or small I am. With me in the drivers seat and the child seat behind the passenger seat, it was about passenger comfort.

                With the required 40mm space between a rearward facing seat and the front seat, the front seats needed to be all the way forward and tilted forward towards the dash a bit just to fit the britax graphene car seat in the rearward facing position.

                My partner who weighs less than 50kg couldn’t even fit into the front seat with the angle the backrest had to be on comfortably.

                This was a Mazda 3 BK hatch.

                • oranglama on 18/06/2023 - 14:14
                  +3

                  @Extreme: Ok fair enough i'm just offering different opinion, i have no problem whatsoever. And i'm definitely heavier than 50kg 😁

            • BartholemewH on 20/06/2023 - 09:05
              +4

              @Extreme: A Holden Commodore or Skoda Superb wagon (as examples) have miles more rear seat room than nearly any SUV, including large ones.

              • Extreme on 20/06/2023 - 11:39

                @BartholemewH: Compared the safety rating of a commodore against that of a mid size suv?

                Compared the maintenance costs of say a Hyundai Tucson or Kia Sportage to the skoda?

                Our AWD Diesel Tucson has honestly been the best car we’ve ever owned. It’s also got a bigger towing capacity compared to the Skoda Octavia Wagon also.

                • BartholemewH on 20/06/2023 - 16:06
                  +2

                  @Extreme: The Commodore was 5 star ANCAP well before most SUV models.

                  Couldn't comment regarding the Hyundai/Kia, never owned either.

                  I didn't mention the Octavia. The Commodore and Superb both tow more than the Tucson, if that is the measuring stick.

                  Glad you are happy with the Tucson, I chose the Superb at the time over the updated 'roomy' CX9.

                  • Extreme on 20/06/2023 - 22:40
                    +1

                    @BartholemewH: Ancap rating criteria changes and evolves when newer safety features come to market.

                    To compare a vehicle which is no longer in production to one that’s still in production is like comparing chalk and cheese.

                    They aren’t the same thing.

                    Commodores were popular because they were cheap. They were cheap, because the Australian Government subsidised their manufacturing.

                    I’ve owned commodores, falcons, Camrys & SUV’s, hot hatches, sedans and utes. The best vehicle we’ve ever owned is the Tucson by far. The others don’t even come close.

                    The commodore is also an older vehicle which can’t be bought new. It doesn’t compare. The Skoda Superb is a >$50k vehicle. The Tucson is not. Again, not a fair comparison. It’s good you can dump that much on a car. Not everyone can justify it. The difference between a base model Tucson to a base model Superb is almost $20k.

                    • BartholemewH on 21/06/2023 - 11:34

                      @Extreme: I think we're focussing on specific vehicles and missing the point about the broader market. It's the SUV being a 'requirement' to have a family that I feel is misrepresented. You can swap the Tucson out for a dearer SUV in the comparison, a good wagon will still more than give it a run for the money.

                      • Extreme on 21/06/2023 - 16:38

                        @BartholemewH: I’m not missing the point at all.

                        The reality is, SUV’s are popular because they fit a large number of different buyers.

                        Manufacturers and building and selling them for a reason. Hatches/sedans/wagons make up such a small part of the car market these days.

                        If more people bought hatches/sedans/wagons, you’d see manufacturers producing more of them and more of them on the road.

                        • BartholemewH on 22/06/2023 - 18:52

                          @Extreme: Are you going to neg all my replies like a child?

                          • Extreme on 22/06/2023 - 22:48
                            +1

                            @BartholemewH: If you’re gonna accuse someone, get ya facts straight first.

                            I haven’t neg’d you at all.

      • Saver Scott on 17/06/2023 - 21:31
        +9

        You’ve obviously never been in a Jazz.

        • fantombloo on 18/06/2023 - 00:51
          +15

          I regularly lug 3, sometimes 4, kids of various size, each with their bag and extras, plus often my own crap, in a jazz. Yeah it's a little slow off the mark but by the time we get to the 90 zone we're generally pushing past the right lane huggers. At other times I've folded down the seats and fit in everything from a dishwasher to who knows what. Great little car - heaps of room.

          • juki on 18/06/2023 - 08:31
            +2

            @fantombloo: thats cheating - we all know how great the jazz is, but i need to lug my parents and kids around

      • DingoBilly on 18/06/2023 - 07:06
        +3

        We'd get 3 kids and parehts into a hatchback in my family growing up.

        It is more confortable in a bigger car, but ultimately it can be done if money is an issue.

        • Antikythera on 19/06/2023 - 17:19
          +2

          my parents fit 8 kids under 15 in the back seat (one forward, one back) and a baby bassinette on the bench front seat between parents in a 1957 Chev sedan.

          SUVs are for fat families.

          SUVs are because in the USA they did not have to meet new (in the 90s?) emission standards because they qualified as "light trucks".

      • RefusdClassification on 18/06/2023 - 10:52
        +11

        Nobody has children anymore. The Australian birthrate has fallen to 1.6 children per women. It is ridiculous seeing a single adult driving a "monster truck".

        Middle class people are such hypocrites. They all virtue signal about how they are going out of their way to "save the planet", yet they all drive around in oversized automobiles. If you are serious about your eco-fundamentalism, sell the SUV and ride a bicycle instead.

        Personally, I believe SUV, larger utes and American style pick up trucks should be slapped with a 25% luxury goods tax (on top of GST and importation duties). The middle class can afford to pay. We should penalize the sociopaths who are polluting our roads with unnecessarily large machines simply for an ego boost (bigger means "I am superior").

        • SBOB on 18/06/2023 - 12:47
          +5

          It is ridiculous seeing a single adult driving a "monster truck".

          What if that adult had just dropped a load of kids off at school for example?

          • Nedward on 19/06/2023 - 12:10
            +1

            @SBOB: I think "Single adult" refutes that point…

            • SBOB on 19/06/2023 - 18:52

              @Nedward:

              I think "Single adult" refutes that point…

              Wait, you can tell the relationship status of drivers just by driving past them?
              Thats some impressive super powers.

          • Antikythera on 19/06/2023 - 17:26
            +1

            @SBOB: back in my day kids walked to school.

        • BobCobb on 19/06/2023 - 15:12
          -2

          Strange way of thinking, champ.

      • unwashed00 on 19/06/2023 - 08:44
        +1

        I've tried and it's that big of a problem. 5 people in a Yaris, one in a child seat, pram in the boot. Granted, it wasn't too comfy, but again that's a Yaris

      • ChatCPT on 19/06/2023 - 18:36

        3 car seats? at the same time? sounds like a different issue needs addressing 8X

    • Ricktheroller on 17/06/2023 - 21:42
      +12

      Oddly the worst parking problems I have in the CBD car park I use are the smallest cars, maybe people parking SUV's are more aware of their vehicle size in a multistorey car park. How the f people driving a Toyota Yaris manage to get their car over the line on both sides of a park thus blocking multiple parks is beyond me.

      • Ghost47 on 17/06/2023 - 21:59
        +2

        How the f people driving a Toyota Yaris manage to get their car over the line on both sides of a park thus blocking multiple parks is beyond me.

        Yeah that kind of thing is mind boggling. I had the same issue tonight in a car park trying to park in a spot which ended up being too tight because the Polo on the left of me parked right on the line. Don't understand why people can't take another 10-20 seconds to fix their parking, it's extremely inconsiderate.

        • Dslrfirst on 18/06/2023 - 10:22
          +8

          It could have been another vehicle parked the Polo's space earlier.

          • StephBlanks on 18/06/2023 - 11:20
            -1

            @Dslrfirst: what does this mean? another vehicle parked on the line? then the Polo did the same?
            i would go to find another parking space.

            • Ghost47 on 18/06/2023 - 17:37
              +6

              @StephBlanks: I think it's called pig parking.

              So when the Polo parked a car was in the space next to it, but parked very poorly (e.g. on the line) so the Polo needed to move over to have enough space to open the door. Then the car that was there left and the Polo looked like it parked poorly.

              I ended up finding another space after backing in and seeing that it was just way too cramped on both sides.

      • juki on 18/06/2023 - 08:29

        original people neighbouring that car werent in their own boxes, they dont want someone to scratch their car or they are just fat and need room to get out. When i lived in a large european city, we'd just push other cars and go with it fits i sitz approach to parking.

    • juki on 18/06/2023 - 08:26
      +4

      wow are you an expert sociologist to interpret the "real" reasons people get SUVs, your comment makes you either somewhat envious or just plain of sour.
      i dont even understand why we need to care why other people are doing it but here is my interpretation of transitioning

      I have a sedan/hatchback-y thing but i'm thinking of getting an SUV like thing because my back is ruined and i noticed i twist my knee getting in and out of hatchbacks. If i could get away with it i'd love to drive the old mini again but not sure my family would fit.
      The hatchback aslo rubs a lot out of driveways, is lower behind other other vehicles, not really that more economical, some of them cant carry a spare pair of shoes.
      Yes the hatchback can drift around the busy roundabout, squeeze through traffic lanes, you can park like an ar*se but thats not always my top priority these days.

      If i won loto i'd get an old mini and a porsche 914, but the realities of life are probably going to push me into something higher, larger and not too expensive

      (a dodge ram? - no i dont understand why you would want the hassle, i see so many school mums struggling with one)

      • resisting the urge on 18/06/2023 - 09:42
        +7

        Why care?

        1. SUVs get in the way of lower vehicles at junctions and when in front. Like 4WDs and trucks, they are hard to see around, and worse, are commonly oblivious of what is going on behind or beside them (many cars have terrible rear visibility thee days).

        2. Because they are so much less well-behaved when they get out of shape, especially at speed or when encountering objects like gutters or the sides of other vehicles, Increased numbers of roll-overs which are a leading cause of severe injury and fatality, putting up CTP and other insurances for those of us who prefer not to take the physical risks that cars with high centre of gravity and poor handling pose. And no, I don't care what mandatory driving aids they may have, they are designed to beat specific testing requirements, not the wide and varied crash scenarios we face everyday.

        3. Carbon impact: every person who buys a new car instead of maintaining an existing one creates a massive impact. And encourages the market to produce a new segment and reduce the value of existing fleet segments, for less safe, less relibale models.

        4. Longevity: From BMW Xx to Captiva, SUVs incorporate so much of what is bad about modern ICE and wider auto manufacturing, such that few last anywhere near as long.

        5. Getting in an out- a higher than hatchback seating position is better for those that have trouble getting in and out. As the population fossilises (gets fatter and older) the same reasoning could result in some driving massive eggs with wheels before too long.

        6. Hatchbacks and driveways: Manufacturers choose the height and overhang they design into each vehicle. Many are building designs that are far too much propensity to contact static objects and surfaces used in when constructing roads as badly as we do. Change the driveway if it happens, write to council, because there will be many having this trouble with it after you impact it, and it isn't good enough to just leave poor work in place.

        7. Because most SUVs are so built to a price that they are butt-f-ugly!

        • juki on 18/06/2023 - 10:23
          +1
          1. in that case just ban vehicles bigger than pushbikes and paint them all hi vis? on the road you just have to compose with other users and adapt
          2. wasnt this old news? wouldnt idiotic driving be more at fault than vehicle form itself, it seems very model specific also
          3. this is about new car not specific to SUV, if you jump into an old car from the 80-90s you will feel a lot less safer than if you jumped into a modern equivalent, its pretty nuts what we soon take for granted. attending to a few crashes, modern tech does save lifes and make huge differences, no matter how sturdy the old car was.
          4. thats consumerism, why limit it to suv/sedan debate, making the focus just on SUVs limits the debate and has bystanders miss any other possible point you are making by saying big car is bad
            5 yeah i love the design of the microlino modern day isetta car or the ami8 - not sure they are coming to Aus any time soon or that having an auxilary extra car for everyday use is the solution. you dont need to be old to have a bad back or limbs - and why not cater to the fossilised and fatties, they might be your parents
            6 have you tried contacting the council about road stuff ?! i also dont think Aus is particularly present in any manufacturers mind when manufacturing cars
            7 my semi fossilised mind cant find arguments against that, but ey if i need a bigger car to chuck people in i'll get one, cosmetic design is pretty low on my list (even if the new BMws catch my attention for being so hilariously hideous)

          8 i just dont understand why SUVs have to embody genuine concerns and changes that should be made, its not an umbrella group (if we all changed to hatchbacks tomorrow and kept our current lifestyle would there be much of a change, hardly i believe) - it makes those voicing those concerns sound bitter and overcritical (since usually the focus of the criticism is they are butt-f-ugly)

          • GodsSon23 on 19/06/2023 - 18:03
            +1

            @juki:

            1. "just ban vehicles bigger than pushbikes" What a stupid argument. No need to read further than that BS.
            • juki on 19/06/2023 - 19:04
              +1

              @GodsSon23: @GodsSon23 yeah by the looks of it not sure you can read further than that if you wanted to…

              once you learn to read you'll figure out its a reply to the dude above arguing that suvs are too big ect

        • CurlCurl on 18/06/2023 - 20:11

          Longevity: From BMW Xx to Captiva, SUVs incorporate so much of what is bad about modern ICE and wider auto manufacturing, such that few last anywhere near as long.

          I see you have no idea what you are talking about. I could pick apart all your points but picked number 4.

          My 4X4 has 355,000 on it. It has cost me around $4,000 in basic repairs in 16 years, bearing in mind it is used as intended I know of 4WDs with 400.000k, 600,000k. 900,000k and one with 1,000,000,000k.

          Have you ever owned a SUV or 4X4? My guess is NO.

          • resisting the urge on 19/06/2023 - 08:36
            +2

            @CurlCurl: In my book a 4x4 is not an SUV. But people's understandings and perceptions vary.

            And of course there are 4x4s that are similar to SUVs (feel free to demonstrate your superior talking points and tell us what is actually an SUV, a cross-over, vs an SUV (but please o please, don't include anything 'RV' as our marketings does not follow US fashion alone).

            And there are even reliable SUVs, but on the whole, the SUV segment is a quagmire of poor design outcomes. Mostly down to the continued application of cheap engineering attempting to satisfy market research driven development, vs good old physics.

            "If you ask people what they want, they'll want a faster horse" (or a larger SUV, or an SUV with more cup-holders, more comforts, a turbo, 4WD, Diesel Hybrid, and of course, more ground clearance).

    • od810 on 18/06/2023 - 09:47

      Your parents didn't need ozbargain to raise you up so what's your point? I am sure if your parents had a choice of having SUV back in the day, they would consider it.

      • Ghost47 on 18/06/2023 - 17:42
        +2

        Clearly my point was that SUVs are crappy, did you read my comment?

        Watch the video on the second page of these comments, SUVs are objectively bad vehicles.

    • drprox on 18/06/2023 - 18:33
      +2

      I agree. They're just not as nice to drive as a wagon so hoping a few manufacturers hang on for a few more years!

    • ColtNoir on 18/06/2023 - 18:41
      +3

      SUV by itself isn’t specific enough as there’s such a range now. Are we talking

      Small suv eg CX-3
      Mid size eg cx-5
      Large eg cx-7
      (profanity) off big cx-9/landcruiser

      There’s a long way in size between all of these models

    • juki on 18/06/2023 - 18:58

      They didn't have the option in the 90s that's why. I remember the Chrysler voyager being a big hit and in Europe the Renault Espace sent people mental (granted it's a monospace and not an SUV but neither is it a sedan)

    • The GM on 19/06/2023 - 09:18
      +4

      Frankly all the cons of owning an SUV heavily outweigh the pros.

      Um, what? I own a Rav4 Hybrid, have a 1 year old and soon to have another one on the way. I average 5.5L/100km, can fit the pram and any shopping in the car comfortably, don't have to break my back bending down to get my daughter in/ out of the car. We can comfortably carry 4 adult passengers when needed. The car is simply the perfect appliance to us. I've added roof racks and can easily load a 10 person tent + all the camping gear for a long weekend away without any issues.

      A Carolla, or Camry would not be fit for our needs. There was nothing 'abundant' about a Rav4. The BMW X7s, Merc GLEs, Porsche Cayenne's fall into that category - however, if someone has the cash to splash, that is their prerogative.

      • SBOB on 19/06/2023 - 18:54
        +2

        I've added roof racks

        To a RAV4? Thats peak ozbargain right there :)

        • The GM on 22/06/2023 - 10:43
          +1

          I left it in there for the OzB OG's

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join