SUV Market Over Seas.....And Question

[rwieder 0]

Seems the price of fuel, and the demand for SUV's are very different than here in the states. Question: If the conditions here were the same as there, would you buy ans SUV? Or would you "Stand Pat?"

This could make for some interesting conversation! C'mon BillVon, it's your response i'm most interested in!

Check This Out!

-Richard-
"You're Holding The Rope And I'm Taking The Fall"

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

C'mon BillVon, it's your response i'm most interested in!

how about answers from someone we already don't know their position?

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rwieder 0]

Quote

how about answers from someone we already don't know their position?

More than welcome! I really don't know for sure what BillVon's response to this will be, i just know he will have a fairly intellectial answer/response as will most that will respond. With all the "HubBub" about SUV's as of late, it's generated my interest in what everyone's opinion will be on this matter if fuel were cheaper.

-Richard-
"You're Holding The Rope And I'm Taking The Fall"

[Newbie 0]

I love the look of an Escalade (you rarely see those here in London, but you will see almost every other type of SUV around a LOT), and i'm sure being all high up and whatnot is quite good fun. But you know what - given the running and outlay cost of one of those things, if i had the money to buy one, which i don't, i wouldn't. For one i do think they consume a hell of a lot of fuel and i'm one of those people who thinks a scarce resource should be consumed somewhat frugally. I'm not a tree hugger by any means, but i would consider myself a somewhat responsible citizen of this planet. If i had that sort of money to blow, i would probably get an Audi - fast, safe and they look damn nice. They also have a better fuel consumption than the average SUV and aren't as played out. So i guess fashion and features would come first to environmental concerns, but environmental concerns do form an element of the decision making process, if that makes sense.

"Skydiving is a door"
Happythoughts

[mr2mk1g 10]

No. I like cars to handle well. This means they must have tough suspension, low centre of gravity and a rigid chassis.

In the UK we have lots of bendy roads which are fun to drive along. My experience of US roads are that they are generally in much poorer condition by comparison to UK roads necessitating soft suspension (don't take that as an attack – it's only natural to have poorer condition roads given the huge number of miles they cover out there).

While in the UK softer suspension would mean shitty handling and a quick sale of my car, in the US it doesn't matter since you guys don't build bendy roads.

If the conditions were the same – ie really really cheap fuel; shitty, straight roads etc... well maybe I'd reconsider my enjoyment of sports cars and buy a rally car instead. It would have to be a Jap car though - US cars are crap.

(besides I disagree with the whole ethos of simply putting a massive lump of metal under the bonnet to get a lot of HP - we've moved on form the Model T guys... it really isn't that much to ask of a car to get more than 50 HP per liter of engine displacement).

edit: (ie: My personal dislike of SUV's is not their petrol consuption... it's because they're shit).

[rwieder 0]

Quote

it really isn't that much to ask of a car to get more than 50 HP per liter of engine displacement

The all new Chevrolet Corvette 5.7 litre puts out 70.17 HP per litre! 50 HP per cylinder, astonishing for a small block "Mouse Motor"

-Richard-
"You're Holding The Rope And I'm Taking The Fall"

[mr2mk1g 10]

Quote

The all new Chevrolet Corvette 5.7 litre puts out 70.17 HP per litre

And that's supposed to be good? If our roads were shitty I'd take a Evo or something - more than 200HP PER LITRE!

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

My experience of US roads are that they are generally in much poorer condition by comparison to UK roads necessitating soft suspension (don't take that as an attack – ....).

Not taken as an attack, but I could take the UK and:

Put it entirely into Colorado (which has great roads, bendy roads and lots of fun) or;

Put it entirely in Texas (last time I was there the roads were crappy)

So I wonder where you compare to....

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[wmw999 2,148]

I live in Texas, supposedly home of cheap gas. I've owned (well, been part owner of) one SUV. I have no interest in another.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[EricTheRed 0]

Quote

Quote

The all new Chevrolet Corvette 5.7 litre puts out 70.17 HP per litre

And that's supposed to be good? If our roads were shitty I'd take a Evo or something - more than 200HP PER LITRE!

I currently drive a turbo MX5, gotta stick to the better roads, but it has a bit above 100 Hp/liter. Not too shabby IMO, and an absolute blast to drive.

illegible usually

[nacmacfeegle 0]

"Put it entirely in Texas (last time I was there the roads were crappy)"

Trust me, the Texans wouldn't stand for such a heinous crime against their great and glorious state.

--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson

[billvon 2,434]

>C'mon BillVon, it's your response i'm most interested in!

About what? Is your question "if gas were the same price here as in the UK, would I buy an SUV?" No, but that's not a very interesting answer; I don't need one anyway. If I needed to go off-road a lot, I'd get a Subaru Outback; they're better off-road anyway. If I needed to haul a lot of stuff, I'd get a minivan or a pickup truck depending on what I was hauling.

But if I did have a need for an SUV, there are plenty of good options nowadays. Both the Toyota Highlander and the Ford Escape are available as hybrids, and get 30mpg or so.

The problem with SUV's in the US are not that people use them to carry stuff over bad roads/trails. That's what they're designed for. The problem is that people use them to haul themselves and their lunch to and from work on highways every day. Even this wouldn't be a big issue if there weren't a government-mandated loophole that exempts them from CAFE standard. It is this loophole that has caused the overall gas efficiency of vehicles to drop over the years.

That's why I often talk about SUV's in a negative light - because there is a very specific exemption applied to them that negates much of the good that the CAFE has done for US fuel efficiency. If that exemption applied only to Cadillacs, I would complain about them instead. It's the exemption, not the vehicle, that's at fault.

[kallend 1,648]

Quote

Quote

The all new Chevrolet Corvette 5.7 litre puts out 70.17 HP per litre

And that's supposed to be good? If our roads were shitty I'd take a Evo or something - more than 200HP PER LITRE!

Mini Coopers in 1962 managed better than 100bhp/l.

The engine in my wagon manages 70bhp/l. I have model airplane engines that put out 350bhp/l.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rwieder 0]

Quote

But if I did have a need for an SUV, there are plenty of good options nowadays. Both the Toyota Highlander and the Ford Escape are available as hybrids, and get 30mpg or so.

The question was, and you interpreted it correctly, would you buy an SUV if gas prices were cheaper? The gentleman in the article mentioned he had a wife and family. I can see how someone like this would be attracted to a big SUV. I generally drive a 1/2 ton chevy 4 door truck with a short wheelbase. when all 4 of my children were home i had a 1 ton crew cab dually, good for work and family. Now my wife drives a Chevy trailblazer, because all we have now is the occasional grand child to tote around. I think the Gigantic SUV's are U.G.L.Y. the H-2 comes to mind, what were they thinking? But if someone likes it...no problem! I wouldn't have one. And your right, that Subaru Outback is cool. I also like the Porsch Cayenne, but too much $$$

-Richard-
"You're Holding The Rope And I'm Taking The Fall"

[billvon 2,434]

>The question was, and you interpreted it correctly, would you buy an
>SUV if gas prices were cheaper?

Nope. Even if gas was free, inefficient vehicles put out more CO2 and other pollutants. If there was a good reason for that size vehicle (for example, I was hauling a lot of stuff) I would live with it, but since I don't need that capability I wouldn't get one.

[GTAVercetti 0]

Quote

I think the Gigantic SUV's are U.G.L.Y. the H-2 comes to mind, what were they thinking?

As Lewis black said: " I COULD spend $50,000 on an H-2 or I could use that money to just get a billboard that with my face on it that says, 'I am a dick.'"

Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

[DrewEckhardt 0]

Quote

(besides I disagree with the whole ethos of simply putting a massive lump of metal under the bonnet to get a lot of HP - we've moved on form the Model T guys... it really isn't that much to ask of a car to get more than 50 HP per liter of engine displacement).

Of course, but 60 HP per liter * 5.7 liters is a lot more interesting than 60 HP per liter * 3 liters.

I built my small block using this cam+head+intake combination plus some CNC head work, bigger valves, and higher ratio rocker arms.


http://www.compcams.com/Technical/DynoSheets/XE262H-10_001.asp?printer=1&

Should do somewhat better than the tested 348 HP @ 5300 RPM.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

As Lewis black said: " I COULD spend $50,000 on an H-2 or I could use that money to just get a billboard that with my face on it that says, 'I am a dick.'"

GET THE BILLBOARD, GET THE BILLBOARD!!!!

Billboards are fun and you can change the message to all sorts of things

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[GTAVercetti 0]

Quote

Quote

As Lewis black said: " I COULD spend $50,000 on an H-2 or I could use that money to just get a billboard that with my face on it that says, 'I am a dick.'"

GET THE BILLBOARD, GET THE BILLBOARD!!!!

Billboards are fun and you can change the message to all sorts of things

Yeah, back in college, me and my friend wanted to get a billboard on the highway: It would be bookended by our smiling faces with a thumb up from either of us. Nothing else. Just that.

There would be a series of them...for no reason at all. But I bet the whirlwind of hype would have made itself.

Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

[miked10270 0]

Quote

...Texas ... great and glorious state.

May I ask just WHAT THE HELL you are smoking!!??

Now, where was I? Oh yeah, before I jump in this, is a Landrover 110 Station Wagon a SUV? It's the "S" I'm unsure about!

In the meantime, I think it's a shame that people no longer see their cars for what they are: A tool for transportation.

A lot of the time, people (who can afford to) choose vehicles to make strange statements about themselves. I still don't understand the Range Rover Sport or the Porsche Cayenne beyond the fact that the manufacturers know that "there's one born every minute."

Mike.

Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.

Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

[psw097 0]

Its good when you consider its already getting 150 dyno HP at 2800RPM. The Evo is getting a paltry 60. HP is a useless rating system without knowing the RPM - HP per liter is ever worse. The turbo takes a lot of time to spool, and the tiny displacement doesn't produced much inherent torque - its power curve is not very realistic for normal driving conditions, that is unless you want to drop the clutch from 4K at every stoplight.

[billvon 2,434]

>HP is a useless rating system . . .

HP (or more recently KW) is a pretty good rating system. It tells you how much power you can get to the wheels; at any given speed; that determines maximum acceleration. With a 'perfect' transmission (i.e. a PSD) you get all that power to the wheels. With a less than perfect transmission you get more 'loss' since the engine is less often at its maximum power RPM.

[psw097 0]

No, HP tells you power at one particular speed. In an internal combustion engine its normally the redline RPM. I don't drive at redline. Torque is a better rating or at least the RPM where 80% of the torque is made. Internal combustion engines are not constant HP by any means. Electric motors are more suited for that job.

[shropshire 0]

I run a 4x4 (diesel Landrover) it's not just a Kensington Tractor - I do use it off-road.

I have run it at upto 80-20 bio-diesel with no adverse effects... although I'm not sure how it will react this winter (bio's become waxy at low temperatures... but can be freed up with white spirit, I have heard).... I guess that I'll find out soon enough.

.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[Stumpy 256]

HP curves can be pretty useful - but you also need to take into account the weight of the car. HP per tonne (or kilo/pound/ whatever you choose) is a useful measure too. The evo may be a peaky, revvy engine and have half the horsepower of an american gas guzzler - but the car is mostly made of carbon-fuken-fibre and pretty much floats away!

Never try to eat more than you can lift