13th Jul 2010, 10:18
Actually I have an SUV, but only because I have a boat to haul around. If and when the boat goes, I will trade the SUV in immediately for a safer, easier to control car.
You are right about one and only one point: SUV's are bigger and heavier. This means they take more time to stop, and are top heavy, which makes them really hard to control over ANY car. You can't argue with the laws of physics. SUV's with their oversized tires are more likely to hydroplane than just about any car.
Try putting a Subaru against any SUV in all weather conditions, and the Subie will run circles around it. I know because I have owned both, and the Subies were far superior in all ways to any of the SUV's I have had. And before you go on about driving in 2 feet of snow... well people shouldn't don't do that anyhow, as it is not safe for ANY vehicle to be out in that kind of snow. That is why I see so many large SUV's in the ditch during the winter. FALSE sense of security.
If you haven't ever heard of a large SUV causing an accident, which I find hard to believe, then you must live in the middle of nowhere in the south where it never snows. Around here people drive Escalades, Tahoe's, Grand Cherokees, etc. solo at 85 to 90 mph weaving in and out of traffic like they are in the Indy 500. They have caused so many pileups around here it is astounding. If you think every rollover victim walks away with no injuries, think again. A 4 Runner flipped here and the child in the back, who was completely strapped in, died because the roof caved on them against a tree. The other passengers were seriously hurt as well. A car would have likely not flipped at all, but surely wouldn't have careened into the trees 100 feet off the road as it would be lighter. Yep, laws of physics! GM SUV's are even more likely to kill you when they flip on top of you. I would rather not drive a vehicle with a rollover rating on it at all for daily commuting. And just because people drive smaller better handling cars, doesn't mean they are the ones causing accidents. I am not sure why you would even think this is true, but whatever.
And bigger and heavier does NOT mean safer... period! Stop listening to the hype and marketing ploys that tell you this is true. Research the safety ratings of SUV's. Why are they so expensive to insure if they are so darn safe? Hmmmmm Rollover factor? Gee that's safe. Until you roll your SUV at 80 mph and walk away unscathed, stop insisting that rolling vehicles over is safe! I hardly ever hear about people not using safety belts since it is law, so not sure why your area has so many people not using them. Plus cars AND SUV's all have belts, so using them or not using them doesn't really make a good argument for or against any specific vehicle.
Look up handling specs on ANY SUV, and compare them to ANY car, and the car will win every time. Cars stop quicker and handle way better than any SUV, shy of the Jeep SRT8 or Trailblazer SS... and how many of those do you see running around. Of course you seem to think all cars are so poorly built. Truth is the cars have the same or better quality specs as any SUV. SUV's actually have the highest profit margin, as they can charge too much for them, because people once again have the false notion that they are so much better built. This is why the car companies pushed them so hard. They are the cash cow for every car company, and that is fact!
And driving through flooded areas safe?? Ha ha ha... Flooded roads are NEVER safe unless you have a boat! Never would I buy an SUV so I could drive through floods. That is a death wish and definitely a false sense of security. I have seen countless videos of SUV's being swept away in floods just like cars.
So, like I said the ONLY point you make accurately is the weight and size thing. I guess as long as you can continue to plow through smaller cars you will feel like you are safe. Hmmmmm.... I guess.
13th Jul 2010, 10:34
This is all fine... for you. Quality of life to me involves my work environment too, as I am there for so much of the time. So I am to take a job just to be closer to home? Like I said, my wife and I are 40 miles apart, so one of us has to commute. Not sure where you live, but there isn't the choice to just pick a job at will around here, even in good economic times.
Oh, and in 11 years I have NEVER called in for a flat tire or other car problem. Traffic is always an issue here, but salaried jobs are flexible and I don't punch a clock. I usually am there after 5 anyhow, so it is understood that I am not taking advantage if I come in late. I get raises and bonuses just like everyone who has a 5 minute ride in, because I do my job the best I can and am successful. And when it snows, we close, so I stay home and do what I can from there.
Sounds like you have made many concessions just to be close to work. I applaud you for that, and believe me I would do the same if it were feasible. I would also ride a bike to work or a scooter at the most if I were 3 miles from work to save even more money. To own a high depreciation SUV and pay for any extra gas when you don't need to doesn't make sense to me. We all have our own opinions, but the truth is you have to go by where you live and the dynamics of it. Around here most of my friends have 50 minute to an hour commute to get to work. Yes, it isn't great, and someday I hope to be somewhere better. I know of a lot of metro areas that are the same though, so I know I am not out of the norm.
13th Jul 2010, 20:36
"They sit higher, making driving through flooded areas much safer and easier."
Hey guess what? Your false sense of security is showing! It doesn't matter what you drive, you shouldn't be driving through flooded areas!
13th Jul 2010, 20:44
Once again, I'm the original commenter who stated they have a 100 mile commute everyday.
You know, it's kind of getting pretty funny. For some reason you think your situation applies to everyone. Moving closer to my job is not an option. Getting a job closer to home is not an option. Believe me, I've tried. No business or company ANYWHERE even remotely close to where I live will pay me what I am currently making.
And unlike you, I don't have a spouse to make up the difference in pay. Perhaps that's enough of an "excuse" for you? Although I'd say it's more of a REASON.