SUV drivers

On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 10:38:58 -0500, "Snow" >
wrote:

>
>"Harry K" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>> Everytime this subject comes up you can bet that someone will bring up
>> this old saw. SUV's were never designed as SW replacement. SW were a
>> very minor portion of the market even in their heyday.
>
>As suvee's are today. They did replace the SW, the suvees came out of the
>minivan market. Only the true 4x4's that have been around for 30 plus years
>are anything different.
>
> > you didn't add in the other old saw of needing a SUV because SW aren't
>> available as a tow vehicle. That is also false as even in the heyday
>> of SW, ones used to tow were a very small percentage of all SW which
>> were a very small percentage of all passenger vehicles.
>
>So no one who owns a suvee these days use it as a tow vehicle?? bull****!!!
>60% of all suvees sold will tow something.


60%?


Are you out of your mind?

I'd guess the actual figure is closer to 5%.

> And they make great tow vehicles,
>providing they aren't over loaded, but this applies to even a Golf.


If you can tow it with a Golf, why do you need an SUV?

>
> >They were crude with most of them only part time 4x
>> (total lockup between axles in 4x).
>
>The real ones still have this, though limited to only a few makes and
>models.

The "real" ones?

They're all "real" - Stupid Useless Vehicles.

>
>>The current crop is an abortion.
>> Lousy handling on the road, not really capable of off-road.
>
>Well they are ugly and lack styling and have real ****ty off road
>capabilities but not all of them have lousy handling, even the worse ones
>are still better then some makes of cars.


better than *some*???

>
>Snow...
>

job

On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 16:27:45 GMT, "Skip Elliott Bowman"
> wrote:

>"Harry K" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
>SUV's were never designed as SW replacement. SW were a
>> very minor portion of the market even in their heyday. I'm surprised
>> you didn't add in the other old saw of needing a SUV because SW aren't
>> available as a tow vehicle. That is also false as even in the heyday
>> of SW, ones used to tow were a very small percentage of all SW which
>> were a very small percentage of all passenger vehicles.
>>
>> SUV (original) were aimed at the fun market but soon came to be seen as
>> a "macho" thing. They were crude with most of them only part time 4x
>> (total lockup between axles in 4x). The current crop is an abortion.
>> Lousy handling on the road, not really capable of off-road.
>
>I can't speak for anyone else's reasons for buying an SUV. But I bought
>mine to carry my musical gear including basses, PA, amps, keyboards, etc.
>And I have to make it to the gig in any weather, anywhere. Many's the time
>I've gotten a call from another musician (or distressed parent) to give them
>a ride because they can't even get their car out of their own driveway.
>
>And I'm not about to even consider throwing my 155 year-old Tyrolean bass
>fiddle (cost me a year's pay) in the back of a pickup truck. It needs a
>secure, climate-controlled environment. If someone with a pathological
>hatred of SUVs doesn't like it, they can call someone else.
>
>I've driven it along unpaved mountain roads, along cliff's, across sand
>dunes, through mountains on packed snow atop ice, and flash-flooded fields,
>all on the way to the gig. Never an accident, never a ticket. If I get
>even a fender-bender I'm not going to blame my Explorer.
>

So what you're saying is that you're in the 5% of people who actually
have a need for the SUV you drive.

Great - you won't be the idiot pulling out across 2 lanes of 45 mph
traffic at 3 mph because you're scared that if you go any faster,
you'll roll over because you spent more on tires and a lift job than
you paid for the truck in the first place.

"Cartlon Shew" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 16:27:45 GMT, "Skip Elliott Bowman"
> > wrote:
>
>>"Harry K" > wrote in message
roups.com...
>>
>>SUV's were never designed as SW replacement. SW were a
>>> very minor portion of the market even in their heyday. I'm surprised
>>> you didn't add in the other old saw of needing a SUV because SW aren't
>>> available as a tow vehicle. That is also false as even in the heyday
>>> of SW, ones used to tow were a very small percentage of all SW which
>>> were a very small percentage of all passenger vehicles.
>>>
>>> SUV (original) were aimed at the fun market but soon came to be seen as
>>> a "macho" thing. They were crude with most of them only part time 4x
>>> (total lockup between axles in 4x). The current crop is an abortion.
>>> Lousy handling on the road, not really capable of off-road.
>>
>>I can't speak for anyone else's reasons for buying an SUV. But I bought
>>mine to carry my musical gear including basses, PA, amps, keyboards, etc.
>>And I have to make it to the gig in any weather, anywhere. Many's the
>>time
>>I've gotten a call from another musician (or distressed parent) to give
>>them
>>a ride because they can't even get their car out of their own driveway.
>>
>>And I'm not about to even consider throwing my 155 year-old Tyrolean bass
>>fiddle (cost me a year's pay) in the back of a pickup truck. It needs a
>>secure, climate-controlled environment. If someone with a pathological
>>hatred of SUVs doesn't like it, they can call someone else.
>>
>>I've driven it along unpaved mountain roads, along cliff's, across sand
>>dunes, through mountains on packed snow atop ice, and flash-flooded
>>fields,
>>all on the way to the gig. Never an accident, never a ticket. If I get
>>even a fender-bender I'm not going to blame my Explorer.
>>
>
> So what you're saying is that you're in the 5% of people who actually
> have a need for the SUV you drive.

I don't know the actual percentages, but I'm stuck with SUVs for the rest of
my driving days--or until I can afford a roadie

> Great - you won't be the idiot pulling out across 2 lanes of 45 mph
> traffic at 3 mph because you're scared that if you go any faster,
> you'll roll over because you spent more on tires and a lift job than
> you paid for the truck in the first place.

LOL! Not likely, Carton!

Did I mention I use it to go camping? Real, deep woods camping, not car
camping at a state park. Chuck a pair of backpacks in the back, stop at the
trailhead, and I'm good to go.

On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 19:42:01 GMT, "Skip Elliott Bowman"
> wrote:

>> So what you're saying is that you're in the 5% of people who actually
>> have a need for the SUV you drive.
>
>I don't know the actual percentages, but I'm stuck with SUVs for the rest of
>my driving days--or until I can afford a roadie

Travis W. Redfish is available, I think.


"Everything works if you let it"

In article >, Cartlon Shew wrote:

> For example, the oversized SUV with lift job who CANNOT turn out of a
> parking lot at more than 3 mph and CANNOT do so without using at least
> 2 lanes.

This is the most annoying thing about so many large, non-manuverable
vehicles on the road. Sloth.

In article >, Cartlon Shew wrote:

> How is that different from the wagons of the '70s?

What I predicted years ago is marching forward. SUVs are evolving into
the station wagons of the 70s. The station wagon comeback is already
going at a good clip. They just aren't called that anymore.

> I can't remember my parents ever using their wagons for hauling wood
> although I'm sure they must have once or twice.

My parents, my sister, my friends have all borrowed my wagon to haul wood,
drywall, new doors and windows, even small furniture at times, I use the
truck to haul the bigger stuff.
>
> What I do remember is a family of 5 comfortably seated with plenty of
> room, even when fully loaded for a cross-country vacation

This was done in a sw?? perhaps the kind that were 20ft plus in length?

> I drive a coupe and I rarely need as much cargo space as I have.

For how many people is this truck used for? even for hockey gear in a
modern car you have to fold the rear seat down.

> How is that different from the wagons of the '70s?

They were bigger and could handle more tasks.

Snow..

In article >, Cartlon Shew wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 16:27:45 GMT, "Skip Elliott Bowman"

>>I've driven it along unpaved mountain roads, along cliff's, across sand
>>dunes, through mountains on packed snow atop ice, and flash-flooded fields,
>>all on the way to the gig. Never an accident, never a ticket. If I get
>>even a fender-bender I'm not going to blame my Explorer.

> So what you're saying is that you're in the 5% of people who actually
> have a need for the SUV you drive.

I estimate that the 'need a truck or SUV' percentage of the market to be
at 15% of new vehicles. This is what it was before it became trendy and
the station wagon covered the needs of most people.

Your probably one of these drivers who would rather sit beside a transport
truck in the rain due fear of passing then to pass and get into cleaner air.

Fear is something made up be those who do not understand.

Snow..

"Cartlon Shew" > wrote in message
...
> 60%?

On the roads around here, every weekend you see highways full of suvee's
pulling trailers of all types and sizes.

> If you can tow it with a Golf, why do you need an SUV?

Can a golf tow my 18 bowrider boat? or haul two snowmobiles 400 km's ??

> The "real" ones?

Ever hear of Jeep and Land Rover or Land cruiser? they are the 3 real 4x4's
out there.

> They're all "real" - Stupid Useless Vehicles.

Nice opinion, I have the same for all eurotrash and ricecrap,

Snow...