I suppose one should always be careful about what one says. For decades I denigrated SUVs as being for urban wannabees who had delusions of being off-roaders.
Now I used to have lovely C-class car, except that it was murder to squeeze the disassembled bits of her scooter into the boot, and even then the seat had to be put on the back seat of the car, taking up about half of that space.
In effect we went from having a four-door car with a boot and 2 spare back seats to having a two-seater car.
So we bit the bullet and got (ugh!) a GLC SUV, which holds all of the scooter's bits in the cargo area and leaves us an empty back seat which we can use for passengers or luggage.
These sorts of anti-SUV articles always seem to miss that, you know, people ain't buying SUVs for shits and giggles. In my case, for example, I need a vehicle that's flexible enough to be able to handle hauling moderately-big things (or lots of smaller things) or can haul friends and family around, and I often need to be able to do that in e.g. snowy weather where a combination of all-terrain tires and 4WD/AWD is invaluable. An SUV or CUV/crossover is arguably the most affordable option at that intersection of features.
That said, if 4WD/AWD vans were easier to find, I'd probably switch over to one, since even a minivan is strictly superior on the fronts of both cargo and passenger space (especially with removable seats). Unfortunately, relatively few seem to be on the market whenever I've looked (at least at reasonable prices), and even fewer have good enough ground clearance to not effectively turn into a boat when snow driving (though I guess I could get one lifted, lol).
That depends a lot on your geography. There are a lot of parts of the US - particularly inland, and at northern latitudes - where being able to drive in the snow is absolutely necessary for much of winter and even a good chunk of spring/fall.
And even for those geographies where it's only "a couple of days a year", that's still a couple of days where if you really need to be on the road for some reason, you'll really wish you had the right vehicle for it.
I live in Canada. In southern Ontario now, but grew up in one of the snowiest parts of Canada.
Honest to god, we drove Corolla and Camry’s. FWD. it’s good.
You get slightly better traction with AWD, but when the roads are covered in black ice, it doesn’t really matter how many wheels you have that can drive the car.
The thing that you want in the snow are snow tires. They cost $500. That’s it.
Hell, sometimes we don’t even put the snow tires on. I haven’t in the past two winters.
> Honest to god, we drove Corolla and Camry’s. FWD. it’s good.
Great. Glad to hear that works well enough for y'all. Speaking from firsthand experience living in the Sierra Nevada mountains (first Truckee, now Reno), though, such cars have a much harder time here. Main thing is the not-so-flat terrain: being able to distribute horsepower across all four tires helps quite a bit in getting up hills (I've watched plenty of sedans helplessly slide back down even mild grades, tires spinning away, where proper 4WD/AWD vehicles - mine included - had no trouble at all). Even on flat ground, having all four tires producing power makes it a lot easier to get moving, and a lot easier to escape from an uncontrolled slide. FWD is certainly better than nothing, sure, but I wouldn't be picking it over 4WD any time soon.
That is:
> The thing that you want in the snow are snow tires. They cost $500. That’s it.
Snow tires and 4WD/AWD address different aspects of snow driving. Snow tires (or chains) help you stop. 4WD or AWD help you go. Both help you turn. Both are pretty important if you don't want to be stuck in some snowdrift. And all bets are off if it's ice rather than snow.
Also, in at least some parts of the US (incl., again from first-hand experience, I-80 through the Sierra Nevadas), 4WD/AWD and snow tires are mandatory if you don't want to chain up (up to the maximum chain control level, at which point chains are mandatory no matter what, but usually roads close entirely before that point). So if you expect to drive under chain control conditions, most people are gonna just opt for the 4WD rather than worry about having to chain up.
> Hell, sometimes we don’t even put the snow tires on. I haven’t in the past two winters.
It's pretty hard to not buy all-weather (i.e. marked "M+S" for mud+snow) tires nowadays (at least for SUVs and trucks; not sure about smaller vehicles), so I ain't too surprised that you'd be able to get away with this.
In London, we regard them as nuclear weapons: “My neighbour’s got one, shit, we’d better get one”
The design has shifted into ordinary cars with higher driving positions which provide better visibility for drivers, but reduce it for those around them. In a congested city, it means we need to keep more space around ourselves for the same visibility, which means everyone needs to slow down, and so 20mph speed limits are popping up everywhere.
In the advanced riding course, we are taught that safe riding involves safety for EVERYONE on the road around you, not just self-preservation, which appears to be one major factor in the purchase of SUV-style cars.
Yes I expect the primary reason for SUV's in the city and among the well to do is safety in an accident. The bigger and higher car wins almost all the time. So now it's an arms race. Maybe smaller cars need a huge air bag under the front bumper.
When the boomers were small, you could stuff three or four people on the front seat of a car, four or five in the back seat, and if it was a station wagon some in the back. Nobody said, "How many seat belts?", because seat belts weren't standard until about 1965. If I found and packed a car the way they were loaded in the 1960s, people would call Child Protection Services. So a low-slung sedan or station wagon had a lot more capacity then than now.
I dislike sports utes--which during the rush hours are mostly occupied by a driver and nobody else--but I do understand why some buy them.
14 comments
[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 50.7 ms ] threadTwelve months ago, my wife's health situation was such that she needed to get a mobility scooter, handicapped scooter, or whatever you call them where you come from: like these https://mobilitycaring.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/GOG... The advantage of this type is that they disassemble like this https://mobilitycaring.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Go-...
Now I used to have lovely C-class car, except that it was murder to squeeze the disassembled bits of her scooter into the boot, and even then the seat had to be put on the back seat of the car, taking up about half of that space.
In effect we went from having a four-door car with a boot and 2 spare back seats to having a two-seater car.
So we bit the bullet and got (ugh!) a GLC SUV, which holds all of the scooter's bits in the cargo area and leaves us an empty back seat which we can use for passengers or luggage.
But given my druthers, I'd really prefer a small zippy car like one of these https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Me...
I have a SUV and love it. I can haul lumber, small freight, large grocery trips, tow my boat, and I can drive with 4 friends somewhere.
That said, if 4WD/AWD vans were easier to find, I'd probably switch over to one, since even a minivan is strictly superior on the fronts of both cargo and passenger space (especially with removable seats). Unfortunately, relatively few seem to be on the market whenever I've looked (at least at reasonable prices), and even fewer have good enough ground clearance to not effectively turn into a boat when snow driving (though I guess I could get one lifted, lol).
How often does it snow enough for that to be a problem? It can't be more than a couple of days a year, we don't get that much snow in cities.
And even for those geographies where it's only "a couple of days a year", that's still a couple of days where if you really need to be on the road for some reason, you'll really wish you had the right vehicle for it.
Honest to god, we drove Corolla and Camry’s. FWD. it’s good.
You get slightly better traction with AWD, but when the roads are covered in black ice, it doesn’t really matter how many wheels you have that can drive the car.
The thing that you want in the snow are snow tires. They cost $500. That’s it.
Hell, sometimes we don’t even put the snow tires on. I haven’t in the past two winters.
For decades, the two scandinavian car makers Volvo and Saab didn't even offer AWD cars. And it snows a lot up there.
Great. Glad to hear that works well enough for y'all. Speaking from firsthand experience living in the Sierra Nevada mountains (first Truckee, now Reno), though, such cars have a much harder time here. Main thing is the not-so-flat terrain: being able to distribute horsepower across all four tires helps quite a bit in getting up hills (I've watched plenty of sedans helplessly slide back down even mild grades, tires spinning away, where proper 4WD/AWD vehicles - mine included - had no trouble at all). Even on flat ground, having all four tires producing power makes it a lot easier to get moving, and a lot easier to escape from an uncontrolled slide. FWD is certainly better than nothing, sure, but I wouldn't be picking it over 4WD any time soon.
That is:
> The thing that you want in the snow are snow tires. They cost $500. That’s it.
Snow tires and 4WD/AWD address different aspects of snow driving. Snow tires (or chains) help you stop. 4WD or AWD help you go. Both help you turn. Both are pretty important if you don't want to be stuck in some snowdrift. And all bets are off if it's ice rather than snow.
Also, in at least some parts of the US (incl., again from first-hand experience, I-80 through the Sierra Nevadas), 4WD/AWD and snow tires are mandatory if you don't want to chain up (up to the maximum chain control level, at which point chains are mandatory no matter what, but usually roads close entirely before that point). So if you expect to drive under chain control conditions, most people are gonna just opt for the 4WD rather than worry about having to chain up.
> Hell, sometimes we don’t even put the snow tires on. I haven’t in the past two winters.
It's pretty hard to not buy all-weather (i.e. marked "M+S" for mud+snow) tires nowadays (at least for SUVs and trucks; not sure about smaller vehicles), so I ain't too surprised that you'd be able to get away with this.
If a sedan satisfied my needs, then I'd be driving a sedan. It doesn't, and therefore I don't.
The design has shifted into ordinary cars with higher driving positions which provide better visibility for drivers, but reduce it for those around them. In a congested city, it means we need to keep more space around ourselves for the same visibility, which means everyone needs to slow down, and so 20mph speed limits are popping up everywhere.
In the advanced riding course, we are taught that safe riding involves safety for EVERYONE on the road around you, not just self-preservation, which appears to be one major factor in the purchase of SUV-style cars.
I dislike sports utes--which during the rush hours are mostly occupied by a driver and nobody else--but I do understand why some buy them.