Animation Source Forums

cogitor you seem to have no idea what you are talking about. Plowing the roads, doesnt make them any less slippery. If you have ever noticed, there is always still a layer of snow and slush on the roadways. And how many people are going to put chains on their tires? People in Cities, and suburban areas arent going to do that. its murder on your car, it wears down the suspension, and is very stressful on the drivetrain. Also, all vehicles that have 4WD have 2WD, 4Hi, and 4Lo. even though, when you off road, you rarely need to use 4 Lo. I go off roading all the time, so im exposed to all types of off road vehicles. Escapes, Jeeps, LRs, Toyotas.
Also, SUVs are safer to be in if you are in an accident. Let me give you an example. Our Expedition was rear ended by a Civic, us stopped at a stoplight, the Civic going close to 50. Guess what? completely totalled the civic, and our expedition had a scratch on the bumper. Think about it, In an accident, which will win? The smaller car, or the huge truck? Duh. SUVs dont pollute neary as much as they are made out too. We lived in hawaii, and the emission restrictions there are EXTREMELY Tight. Guess what, passed by miles. Some families NEED the space, and towing capacity of an SUV. Oh, what about pickup trucks? they dont get great gas mileage either, and some are huge.

How does anybody deny that there is global warming? Have you never seen An Inconvenient Truth?

Here we go:
1. SUVs have become the off-roaders and are lumped together.

2. Not just boats, but you missed that before that I said trailers. And yes the area that I live in Roswell Georgia, has lakes near by that people tow boats too, we have a Ford F150 Crew Cab to pull our old Party Cruiser (all 32 feet) people around here also trailer horses and campers.

3. It's called examples. Anyway SUVs and mini vans have the advantage of having some storage in the rear, while the rest can go on the roof rack. unlike Wagons which have rear facing seats (and only 2)

4. That's not "Selfishness galore" it's pure weight and stiffness. People don't buy SUVs so that they can go out and kill people, they buy them because they are safer then cars and they make you feel safe.

Yes roll overs are the big killer with SUVs but there are ways to avoid it, like when a young driver starts driving a SUV, they don't know that sharp turns will cause the SUV to flip and they don't have the experience to drive it. Also Luxury SUVs from Land Rover, Volkswagen, and Porsche have Air suspension, so you can lower the SUV on the road and raise it up to 6 pr 8 inches off the road. That means less chance of roll over.

Also yes SUVs kill people because they are up higher then cars and can "over-ride" the car they are hitting and they are heavy so they do more damage. But it's the same thing with cars in the latter respect. The driver of the biggest car always wins. Also because some SUVs and trucks are meant for rough off-roading or to haul a heavy trailer, so their stiff frame rail can knife into a car. But then you look at Semi's which is a Losing battle, it's a killer.

5. You sound like a minimalist, you dislike most thing that are opulent or any symbol of it. Anyway yes Exotic cars get poor gas mileage some alot lower then the teens. The Bugatti Veron with it's W16 and 4 turbo charged engine will drain it's tank in 15 or so minuets at full 253 mph top speed. But it's a $1.4 million dollar car then is rarely going to be driven.

6. No front wheel drive car can pull heavy things, drive over streams, or go off road. Also this is Georgia, we have no snow chains and no snow plows so with out some of us having SUVs when we did get snow (mostly ice) we'd be stuck. Also we do not have SUVs in anticipation for snow.

What I derive from this is that you seem to think you need an SUV (for your trailers, party boats, horse trailers, or to drive 'over streams and go off road' - how adventurous!). Maybe you do, although I would still recommend a true off-roader (modified LR Defenders or the likes) for such tasks.
But be realist for a moment; the great majority of us common folk don't have to go off road, tow boats (both ownership isn't exactly that widespread), etc... If the SUV-use would be restricted to people like you, who actually seem to need it, I couldn't care less. But we both know that isn't the case; the great majority of SUV owners would be just as well of with a sedan, or a compact. As for all the talk about all the snow-trouble: people in Sweden, Austria, Switzerland,... seem to manage just fine without everyone owning a 4X4, even though the climate there can be pretty unforgiving too.
As for the safety-aspect: if people buy an SUV "[so] they are safer then cars and they make you feel safe", I can't see how that is not selfish! Why should a SUV-buyer be qualified to decide that his safety is more important than that of people in regular cars? And as for the "feeling safer": there is nothing more dangerous than feeling safer, it's when drivers feel safe that they start being dangerous, as studies have shown. If an argument for SUVs would be "MY safety, MY sense of security", I'd say that's another reason not to like them.

But, it this is a big one, SUVs can over run cars, but car makers have taken that into consideration and are planning for it in cars. So new safety cell technology is in the works. Plus cars like the new Fiat 500, which I love to death, is a super mini and like all super minis if a mid-size car hits you your done for. Also people want alot of variety so only the LR Defender is not going to be enough for some people (It's also not currently sold in the US) but we do have a SUV like that, the Mercedes G-Wagon.
But more importantly it shows that there is a number of people who want off roaders, because the G-Class is not cheap, and it's not had a face lift in a while it should be losing interest, but when Mercedes said it was going to replace it with the 7 seater GL-Class there was an outcry among enthusiasts who admired the G-Class for its tremendous off-road potential, and showed there is still a market for it. (also it's the only SUV sold in the US with 3 locking differentials)

People still need and want their SUVs, it's replaced the station wagon. Station wagons, much like diesels, in the US got a bad reputation from some of our own manufactures making shoddy cars. I.E. wood paneled station wagons, diesels that chock you on smoke.

Also with SUVs have come Crossover SUVs that are put on car platforms so they do use less gas but some of them lose a bit of off road ability.

Plus SUVs are an enormous market, so when Porsche was looking to get more money on a steady income basis it pared up with VW and boom Cayenne. And it's been a hit! It's selling great and adding lots of cash for Porsche developments.
Also the Failing Buick got the Rendezvous which sold 1/3 more than expected and raised much needed capital for the company, but now that Buick have the Enclave, they can't keep up with demand.

So they do serve a purpose, and can really help a cash deprived company.

So you're bashing SUVs, then you go out and recommend an SUV to someone? Isn't that being hypocritical, or is a Defender not an SUV, and everybody's wrong?

First of all; what in the name of Aniu does SUV's (other than their exhaust gas) and Mickey Mouse have to do with global warming?

Secondly; The evidence is right under our noses, because it's clear that it is happening. Any five year-old can notice and comprehend that our world is under the effects of Global Warming.
Ice Caps are melting, and there are several comparison pictres on the internet (not to mention I've been to many places in Norway which has melted down).
Polar bears drown. Disturbances in our magnetic forcefield, etc.

Everything is connected to Global Warming.


I'm not saying it's all our fault, but we sure are contributing to it.

Every few thousands of years the Earth's Magnetic fields switch, so North would be South and vice versa. It's normal

From this subsidiary rebuttal I take it you don't disagree with the other point made in the post, namely: Global Warming is real, and the evidence is there (IPCC and others).

Well I find it debatable. for one I do think we have an effect on our Earth, but on the other it could be do to the Sun. You see when our Sun has sun spots, it creates solar flares which help heat up our Earth. Now they already caused the "Little Ice Are" whats to say it can't heat up our earth more. Plus we do have one thing going for us, Volcanoes that erupt do help cool the earth down.

Those factors might (their effects are still less investigated, thus less certain - except for the volcanoes) influence the climate also. But allow me to use a (poor) analogy.

Think of the earth as one huge sailing ship with a comparatively small rudder (though big enough to be functional). The amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere (especially carbon dioxide) is the rudder, whilst the wind are solar spots and the currents are volcanic activity. Regardless of how strong the winds and the currents are, we still have only one way to adjust the ship's course, and that is using the rudder.

So even if we are still not entirely certain how important solar spots and the likes might be, there will always be only one factor over which we have some control, namely the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. So at any length we better make good use of that one tool which is at our disposal; it's all we've got to go by.