Do you hate SUVs because they guzzle gas or do you hate the haters?
The days of the SUV carnivals are over. The motor press in the UK is engaged in a debate on the social acceptability of SUVs. Which? Car recently posted a story asking if it was time to ditch the 4x4 (the UK term for SUVs. The Association of British Drivers wasn't about to stand for that and fired back with a press release (pasted after the jump) that said that Which? Car's claim that gas-guzzling SUVs "are becoming socially unacceptable - unless you are a farmer" was an "insensitive and unjustified comment" that was in appropriate given the economic downturn (seriously). The ABD continues defending SUVs by saying they can be used for many tasks and says that the anti-SUV rhetoric is based on "left-wing envy of anyone who has the ability to choose to run a relatively expensive car, and generally they object to any car that saves people from having to use public transport." Read the whole thing after the jump, and remember, the Association of British Drivers pretty much called Al Gore a Nazi.
[Source: Which? Car, Association of British Drivers]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 6)
jpm 8:38PM (2/23/2009)
Weddings are wasteful and expensive to begin with.... now let's get a stretch SUV! Idiots.
SUV drivers = wasteful morons. Yes it should be unacceptable.
Unless you meet all of these:
1. you live on a dirt road
2. it snows a lot
3. you carry 3-4 people and/or car a lot
Reply
jake 8:47PM (2/23/2009)
Yep you hit the major points.
They are arguing that people hate SUVs because of class.
However, you don't see people hating on luxury sedans or exotic sports cars, and besides, SUVs don't exactly exude class. And after the whole gas price explosion last year, used SUVs have gotten to the level of dirt cheap and new SUVs have huge discounts.
Besides with the versatile 5 door hatchbacks today, we don't really need SUVs except for a few exceptions.
Tim 9:04AM (2/24/2009)
Prejudice is bad unless you’re a liberal/progressive and it’s YOU that hates…
Then it just “feels” too good to resist so I guess that's "progress".
Personal responsibility is just that …. PERSONAL. So stop being hypocrites and stop being prejudiced.
It’s their money so let them piss it away if they want. I could NOT care less as long as they can’t come to the gov’t for a taxpayer funded “bailout” later. Rewarding bad behavior guarantees more of the same.
oldraven 10:34AM (2/24/2009)
"Unless you meet all of these:
1. you live on a dirt road
2. it snows a lot
3. you carry 3-4 people and/or car a lot"
Being a rural Canadian with a growing family, I can tell you there are a lot of these people out there.
But no matter your opinion on what is acceptable for someone else to drive, as long as it meets government mandates for emissions, you can kindly go drive whatever it is you want to, leaving others to do the same. I'll soon be upgrading to a larger SUV than the one I've got, a Saturn Vue CUV. If it's on the market and I decide it's what I want, not even what I need, then you can go pound sand with your thoughts on what you think is best for my life. Wearing socks and sandals is socially unacceptable, but people still do it, and no one will or should be able to ban the attire. The same goes with a person's choice in transportation.
Banning a product because some groups THINK society frowns on it is a slippery slope. It's like the CFL vs. Incandescent bulb issue in Canada. There was nothing illegal about the production, sale, or use of incandescents, but the Government stepped in and put a ban on them, forcing the end of their production. That's not even remotely close to free market tactics. If CFLs were the better product then you let the consumer decide its fate, not 'society'. If you want to promote the use of CFLs then do so. Make some customer service ads or take the other popular false market action and subsidise the CFLs to be more affordable so people will chose them over IBs. Banning a product line just kills a business that has been following the law and market demand. Myself, I don't like CFLs. They don't give off much light, take too much time to 'light up', and despite not creating enough heat to contribute to home heating, they are a frequent fire hazard. The majority of the Nation also has no way to recycle CFLs. Now it turns out they put people at risk of cancer? This isn't a superior product. It's a lesser one that uses less energy, and Government mandates have forced a poor product on us in an attempt to look 'green', when they really don't have the stomach to take on the real pollution issues they are responsible for.
The fact is these kind of mandates don't reflect society, because if society really didn't think SUVs were acceptable transportation then the people would stop buying and driving them.
jpm 1:41PM (2/24/2009)
Hell yes gov't should put a ban on incandescents. They are incredibly wasteful. Do you have any idea? 90% of the energy into that light bulb leaves as heat. Worse than an ICE. Do you like wasting energy??
oldraven 2:18PM (2/24/2009)
Way to completely ignore my point.
Noz 6:46PM (2/24/2009)
JPM:
It depends. If you are using clean electrical energy (i.e. not from fossil fuel sources) and also require heating, it can be done by using incandescents. After all, 100 W bulb produces a 100 W of heat eventually. So if you have to burn a furnace using coal or other fossil fuels to heat an area, it may be more effective to do it through lighting.
jpm 8:34PM (2/24/2009)
Well of course. But it obviously's not a good heating source. When I lived in PA a few years ago the track light never warmed my room up! There were what amounted to 200W worth of light bulbs on the ceiling, which might be 180W of heat. And last time I checked warm air rises..... so that's pretty useless.
dm789 2:21AM (2/25/2009)
I agree with the 1st comment. If you don't need it do not buy it its proven its not good on pocket unless you use it for work. And if you only drive 1-2 people please do not get these vehicles but if you already did well now we know who is the idiot. And yes most of the SUV owners are not that smart to begin with either they drive too slow and cause traffic jam or they drive too fast and cause accidents.
Bob 8:52PM (2/23/2009)
Ah, the quinceañera...the vehicle for transforming girls to moms.
Reply
Greg 9:07PM (2/23/2009)
No I just think they are silly for not admitting that a 7 -passenger minivan is both more efficient and more practical than a comparably priced 7-passenger SUV.
I also don't like knowing that 17 year olds with lead feet are driving old Ford Explorers with little regard for any traffic laws. When they do hit someone - and it will happen eventually - they will do a lot more damage and have a lot higher probability of killing the driver of a passenger car than if they had been driving, for example Toyota Camry.
It is also a bit ironic that people bought Hummers b/c they exuded a military persona when in fact the act of buying a Hummer vs. a more efficient vehicle necessitated the military use of non-civilian Hummers.
Reply
dwarg 5:21PM (2/25/2009)
I used to find the popularity of SUVs odd since there is really small difference between an SUV and a minivan. Now I think the hatred for SUVs is equally strange. It's just a body type. Depending on the size they are pretty comparable in terms of mileage so I just bought an SUV that's rated at 38 MPG because I couldn't find a minivan that offered anything better. It's too bad Ford didn't see fit to offer the S-Max in the states but I don't want to deal with diesels cold weather problems here in Minnesota anyway.
Any vehicle you buy that's bigger and heavier than you need is a stupid waste, but a small SUV is going to be better than a monstrous luxury sedan.
Don't worry about the body type and focus on overall efficiency.
dwarg 5:32PM (2/25/2009)
Typo. I meant 28 MPG not 38 but I actually get a little over 30 MPG with some minor hypermiling techniques.
gsolman6 10:26PM (2/25/2009)
Dwarg: What SUV do you speak of? Is it a 7 passenger like the default minivans from Chrysler? If it is merely a Honda CRV or similar I would say a hatchback would do the same job and seat the same number of people and get better mpg.
Noz 11:25PM (2/25/2009)
Well...at least we know that the level of intelligence of Hummer owners is low....their main complaints in a JD Powers poll regarding their cars was fuel mileage.
I'll leave that an open judgment on these types of people. By and large though, IMO, SUVs attract idiots.
jharlan 9:31PM (2/23/2009)
It's still supposed to be a free country here. The reason to own an SUV is if you want one. Why is owning an SUV worse than a couple owning a 4000 sq ft house? If you want an SUV, can afford an Suv, and don't mind paying for the fuel, get yourself one and tell the PC jackasses to go to hell!
Reply
jpm 10:35PM (2/23/2009)
Yeah right on. Buy an SUV if you can afford one. No big deal sending more money to those middle east countries.
真相創傷 4:26AM (2/24/2009)
".. you want one.. "
Is that an argument ?
I thought people with that level of intelligence were accomodated in special care-giving institutions.
Sir, you really should try to educate yourself !
Here's one really hard-to-spell word to start with:
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y
- yes, 14 letters, and they're all different to the next one - but you can learn it if you really try !
>>> I doubt you'll ever learn the meaning of it , though...............................................
harlanx6 12:12PM (2/24/2009)
In the end for most people, what is attractive to them personally is a key motivator in selecting a vehicle. If you really want to know about me personally, I don't consider an SUV for my next vehicle. I am shopping for a vehicle that has the following characteristics, high fuel efficiency, comfort, affordability and dependability. American made is also high on my list if they can deliver on the above attributes. You notice it has nothing to do with saving the planet. It has everything to do with getting value for my dollar.
I will, however, defend anyone's right to own whatever they would like to own, without you socialist PC police telling them otherwise. You folks would really like to be able to dictate what everyone should own, wouldn't you? Gimme a break already!
Mike 4:41PM (2/24/2009)
Yes, if you want to own an SUV, then fine, own one. Yes, you are within your legal right to do so. That doesn't mean that other people aren't entitled to their opinion of SUV owners. Including me, and my opinion is that, unless you have a genuine need for one, you're an a** for owning one. You folks block other drivers' view of the road, creating a safety hazard, you pollute the atmosphere (that's *my* atmosphere, too) unnecessarily, most of you (in my experience) aren't trained or qualified to drive such behemoths, and I suspect you're compensating for, um... something, with your ostentatious, egomaniacal display of wealth and bling, with your ridiculous spinning 22-inch plastic wheels and extra gold trim packages.