Does today mark the death of the SUV?

[VinnyR11]

If you could come up with that reference I would love to read it, because it sounds like just the point I've been making all along about the things. I predict in 50 years retrospect the creation of SUV will be among the top 3 or 4 most damaging things to modern mankind it had ever created. Consumption of resources, human & natural, increased pollution, increased deaths, acceleration of the decline of the petroleum based society, increased crime, and sociopathic problems, and more; have all been contributed to, to some extent, by the creation of, and lust for, the "Power-trip SUV." IMHO of course.

 

I am absolutely certain that you can't understand a person's impact on this world by the cars they drive. My sister in law drives a pretty big Range Rover. She also started and runs one of the largest food pantries on Long Island feeding the poor. She does more good for this planet than a gaggle of greenies. (Yes, "gaggle" is the correct term. I looked it up.) Oh, I'm also a "greenie" so please don't flame.

 

It takes a hell of a lot more than good gas mileage to make a better world.

[Matts_12GS]

It takes a hell of a lot more than good gas mileage to make a better world.

 

Well said.

Now if we could use a few of these soap boxes to build low income housing...

[Matts_12GS]

Your viewpoint doesn't appear to be consistent with thinking it wrong for someone else to expend fuel in an SUV while thinking it a given that it's A-OK for you to expend fuel in other recreational vehicles. That's an apple seed to orange seed argument. So, it appears to me that you are on the same side of things in practice as those you are arguing vehemently against. If that isn't so, please tell me what is your base principle here. Freedom do do as you like? Desire to expend less fuel. Or desire to have others live as you do? I honestly can't tell.

 

BTW: What's wrong with the economy driving these issues. Does it have to be a moral issue in the first place?

 

The arguemnt focused on the scale of while excess consumption is occuring... not that none should exist... and that even a large amout of recreational riding (6000mi/year) is still smaller in scale than the regular daily use of an SUV.

 

Now we're getting into the arguemnt of what type or how much recreation is acceptable and what is not. My point is that using a motorcycle for recreation is not "excessive" when compared to using an SUV as a daily ride... which is the point you appeared to be making.

 

In my personal case, I figure that I only ride 500-1000 miles of true "recreation" while the other 5000 miles are those that I would have traveled in a car anyway to that destination. I don't consider the extra 20 gallons of fuel I use riding for pleasure to be excessive.

 

I'm not saying that we need to drive the most fuel effecient vehicle possible, only that the intention of the original post, the days of EXTREME excess are over.

 

All of what you said here reminds me of a line from the movie "The Big Chill."

 

Jeff Goldblum's character, as a write for People maagazine, claims that "A good rationalization is more important to most people than sex. I mean, how many people do you know that can go a week without a rationalization...?"

 

But, as long as your definition of excess doesn't cross the "official" version you're fine.

 

Hmmm, sounds kind of like the notion of trading liberty for security.

 

Lemme know how that works out for you.

[Ken H.]

The Hummer, being the ultimate of the breed

 

 

Wikipedia - International XT Line

 

Touché

 

OK I'll give you that one! I'd forgotten about that sin.

[Ken H.]

My sister in law drives a pretty big Range Rover. She also started and runs one of the largest food pantries on Long Island feeding the poor. She does more good for this planet than a gaggle of greenies.

Wonderful!

 

But is she the exception in her use of her SUV or the rule?

[Stir]

 

I'll see your caribou seats & manatee boots, & raise you my baby seal lined gloves.

 

Drat. It appears that you got the last pair!

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25007277

 

 

 

[VinnyR11]

My sister in law drives a pretty big Range Rover. She also started and runs one of the largest food pantries on Long Island feeding the poor. She does more good for this planet than a gaggle of greenies.

Wonderful!

 

But is she the exception in her use of her SUV or the rule?

 

That's my point. I think there is zero correlation.

[Heck]

African Elephant's Tooth Toothpicks?

I have an elephant hide condor lined riding jacket...

 

 

Im all in. Spotted Owl Toilet Paper.

[Matts_12GS]

+1

[Ken H.]

My sister in law drives a pretty big Range Rover. She also started and runs one of the largest food pantries on Long Island feeding the poor. She does more good for this planet than a gaggle of greenies.

Wonderful!

 

But is she the exception in her use of her SUV or the rule?

That's my point. I think there is zero correlation.

But you missed my point - One person using/needing a SUV does not justification for the millions of others who are not, make.

 

[Quinn]

You know, I don't think I've ever seen more than two people in a Hummer. I've never seen one covered in mud or driven by someone in hunting gear. I've also never seen one pulling a trailer. Same goes for Lincoln Navigaters.

 

 

[Matts_12GS]

African Elephant's Tooth Toothpicks?

I have an elephant hide condor lined riding jacket...

 

 

Im all in. Spotted Owl Toilet Paper.

 

MMm, boy howdy, that is some soft and absorbent stuff.

As Mr. Bear said to Mr. Rabbit you have a problem w/down sticking your ...

[Ken H.]

You know, I don't think I've ever seen more than two people in a Hummer. I've never seen one covered in mud or driven by someone in hunting gear. I've also never seen one pulling a trailer. Same goes for Lincoln Navigaters.

Just to fan the fire some more -

 

Riddle - "What's the biggest thing a Hummer ever has to carry?"

 

Answer - "The owner's ego."

[Matts_12GS]

You know, I don't think I've ever seen more than two people in a Hummer. I've never seen one covered in mud or driven by someone in hunting gear. I've also never seen one pulling a trailer. Same goes for Lincoln Navigaters.

Just to fan the fire some more -

 

Riddle - "What's the biggest thing a Hummer ever has to carry?"

 

Answer - "The owner's ego."

 

 

LOL, reminds me of a joke my old partner in the bar used to tell.

 

Him: My Dr. told me to start squatting to pee.

Me: Really?

Him: Yeah, he said I was doin' too much heavy lifting!

 

 

 

SOOOOOOOOOOO, what's more selfish, Having kids or a Hummer?

[SageRider]

My sister in law drives a pretty big Range Rover. She also started and runs one of the largest food pantries on Long Island feeding the poor. She does more good for this planet than a gaggle of greenies.

Wonderful!

 

But is she the exception in her use of her SUV or the rule?

That's my point. I think there is zero correlation.

But you missed my point - One person using/needing a SUV does not justification for the millions of others who are not, make.

I sure hope when you move to Canada, you will be walking, carrying only those items with you that can be moved via a conveyance produced and powered by sustainable energy sources.

In addition, you will be wearing only items that can be produced from non-endangered, sustainable sources. Anything else would be just as wasteful as the most dastardly SUV owner.

[velomoto]

You know, I don't think I've ever seen more than two people in a Hummer. I've never seen one covered in mud or driven by someone in hunting gear. I've also never seen one pulling a trailer. Same goes for Lincoln Navigaters.

I've not tried the H2 and H3 on for size but I quite literally could not fit into my neighbors "original" Hummer. FWIW, this one was used very extensively in the mountains but my experience is that very few of the FWD vehicles every really need or use that feature. YMMV

[Husker Red]

 

Ken, here's a quote from you today in another thread.

 

The dehumanization of the enemy is a common tool in warfare. Ingrain into soldiers' minds that the enemy are something less than 'true people.' Inferior beings. So went slavery. One of my favorite sayings is, "Never underestimate the ability of the human mind to justify its own actions."

 

I say, "to a point" because I don't thing the superiority-complex of the European ancestored white males can be totally discounted, fueled by a (largely) Christian belief system enforced feeling of a preordained by "God" destiny/right/responsibility even, to re-mold the world into their own image. It goes on to this day

 

Sure sounds familiar to what I've read in this thread. I think the SUV haters like to dehumanize the people who chose to buy a SUV. You say they are ego maniacs who are contributing to "increased crime and sociopathic problems." Motoguy says people choose SUVs because they are compensating for an inferiority complex. My turn to say Puhleeze. I think many SUV owners are just people who bought a vehicle that fit their needs at the time.

 

The second paragraph of your quote could easily be edited to read "the superiority complex of the modern environmentalist...fueled by an ... ecological belief system enforced feeling of a preordained by "God" destiny/right/responsibility even, to re-mold the world into their own image. It goes on to this day." Sure does. Here it's the image of how much fuel use is wasteful. Of course, wasteful is defined as "more than I use." Like others have mentioned in this thread, I have a hard time getting past the hipocrisy of motorcyclists berating the wasteful use of fuel and resources, but "Never underestimate the ability of the human mind to justify its own actions."

 

I started this thread because I thought the plant closings marked a significant change in American culture. The "problem" of Americans driving wasteful SUV's was a self-limiting one. People who have need of the SUV's particular feature set will continue to drive them and pay extra at the pump for it. Those that bought them for style or image or whatever will move on to the next thing.

 

 

[velomoto]

You know, I don't think I've ever seen more than two people in a Hummer. I've never seen one covered in mud or driven by someone in hunting gear. I've also never seen one pulling a trailer. Same goes for Lincoln Navigaters.

I've not tried the H2 and H3 on for size but I quite literally could not fit into my neighbors "original" Hummer. FWIW, this one was used very extensively in the mountains but my experience is that very few of the FWD vehicles every really need or use that feature. YMMV

Oops, forgot to add - neighbor used the hummer for hunting so not only did it carry hunters (2 - one in each seat) and gear into the mountains, it was used to haul large game back out.

[Ken H.]

I sure hope when you move to Canada, you will be walking, carrying only those items with you that can be moved via a conveyance produced and powered by sustainable energy sources.

In addition, you will be wearing only items that can be produced from non-endangered, sustainable sources. Anything else would be just as wasteful as the most dastardly SUV owner.

A worthy goal I will unconvincingly fail at.

[velomoto]

... I think many SUV owners are just people who bought a vehicle that fit their needs at the time.

Now THAT would be the basis of an interesting survey:

1. How many people purchased their suv because they thot they needed it.

 

2. How many people actually needed the SUV (analysis of what they used the SUV for after having made the purchase).

 

I for one fell into the 1st group, but unloaded it in a few years to get a mini van which fit my "needs" much better.

 

It's been widely reported that vehicle purchases are highly emotional - not logical. Perhaps there is some need which forms the basis of a vehicle purchase, but there is a lot of underlying emotion which drives the purchase away from the basic need. Car companies fully understand this and use it in their advertising. BTW, I would bet motorcycle purchase decisions are more emotional than car/SUV/truck purchases.

 

When gas was two-something a gallon there was no driving need to get something more efficient- there was plenty of cheap gas and everyone could afford to drive whatever they wanted and go whereever they wanted. Now that the national average for regular has hit $4 today, using gas has become a hot issue. Perhaps there will be a change in perception for the economical cars from being the choice for wimps, geeks or tree-huggers to something more positive.

 

The people who truly need SUV's certainly will continue to purchase and own these vehicles, but the opinion of the general public toward SUV owners may become very negative as gas prices continue to climb.

[SageRider]

I sure hope when you move to Canada, you will be walking, carrying only those items with you that can be moved via a conveyance produced and powered by sustainable energy sources.

In addition, you will be wearing only items that can be produced from non-endangered, sustainable sources. Anything else would be just as wasteful as the most dastardly SUV owner.

A worthy goal I will unconvincingly fail at.

 

(nice reply!)

I imagine that there are also some SUV owners that could make the same statement...

[VinnyR11]

But you missed my point - One person using/needing a SUV does not justification for the millions of others who are not, make.

 

Have you ever gotten on your bike just to go for a ride? Ever take a car because the mass transit schedule wasn't convenient?

 

The "justification" you mention is simply your justification for other people, which I think is unfair. You can't know everything about that person, or how much they contribute to society or to the greening of the planet.

 

[Matts_12GS]

I sure hope when you move to Canada, you will be walking, carrying only those items with you that can be moved via a conveyance produced and powered by sustainable energy sources.

In addition, you will be wearing only items that can be produced from non-endangered, sustainable sources. Anything else would be just as wasteful as the most dastardly SUV owner.

A worthy goal I will unconvincingly fail at.

 

Well spoken by the guy who rides the "Hummer" of motorcycles. Ever been further off road than riding across front lawn Ken?

I mean after all, sounds like you'd do much much better on an Electrex scooter, maybe a Burgman.

 

Unless course you need to tote your "ego" with you.

 

 

[Huzband]

I sure hope when you move to Canada, you will be walking, carrying only those items with you that can be moved via a conveyance produced and powered by sustainable energy sources.

In addition, you will be wearing only items that can be produced from non-endangered, sustainable sources. Anything else would be just as wasteful as the most dastardly SUV owner.

A worthy goal I will unconvincingly fail at.

 

Well spoken by the guy who rides the "Hummer" of motorcycles. Ever been further off road than riding across front lawn Ken?

I mean after all, sounds like you'd do much much better on an Electrex scooter, maybe a Burgman.

 

Unless course you need to tote your "ego" with you.

 

 

Oh, that's gonna leave a mark.

[Matts_12GS]

That's a good point. Maybe the mini-van isn't over.

My crystal ball sez the "soccer mom" image is too much for people to take - it'll be a long time before mini vans could regain large volume. I'd bet on station wagons or the cross over SUV's to dominate.

 

I guess if you're buying for the image and not the actual usage of the product, that's important.

[Boffin]

Well, this one has run its course and is degenerating into personal attacks. Time to close it.