21st Jan 2007, 16:17

Personally, I don't think you owe anybody an explanation as to what kind of vehicle you are driving. Some of these people assume that everybody commutes to an office building on 4-lane highways, and that if everyone were as "educated on the issues" as them, we would all be driving what they want us to drive. Some people think they can make all kinds of stereotypical assumptions just by seeing you sitting in a certain car, whether it is a Prius, BMW, or SUV.

In support, though, I'll say that I use my full size SUV in pretty rugged conditions that no sedan could match. As a mining engineer, I spend the entire summer out in remote areas where the only roads are logging roads or hundred-year-old mining roads, which are usually deeply rutted and have big rocks and fallen trees--Jeep trails are what I'm talking about. My truck has only one passenger 100% of the time, but I have to carry enough food and camping gear to stay out a month at a time before coming back to town for more. I'm also carrying around hundreds of pounds of rock samples and equipment the whole time, and if the weather is bad, I still need room to sleep in the back seat. Anybody would be crazy to suggest that a Prius, or any other commuting sedan would serve my needs. That car would be trashed in about two hours. I just wish that some of those bashing SUV's could accept that: 1) some of us really need and use a full-sized 4x4, and; 2) we really don't owe them any explanation for driving one.

21st Jan 2007, 18:15

No SUV driver should have to make apologies to anyone regardless of HOW their vehicle is used. My wife's SUV has probably carried only one passenger (her) for at least 99% of it's use. It is never off paved roads and is used primarily in town. She drives it because she is in the medical profession, and she and I have both seen entirely too many drivers and occupants of smaller vehicles that were killed or maimed for life after being in crashes involving larger vehicles. We've never even HEARD of a driver or occupant of an SUV being hurt or killed who was wearing a seat belt. These are some of the safest vehicles in the world. I love my wife and want her to be safe. That means she will continue to drive a large, rigid-frame, truck-based SUV.

The much ballyhooed crash tests the import fans rant about involve crashing vehicles into steel reinforced concrete walls. That is NOT real world relevant. In real world driving, cars hit cars, not steel reinforced walls.

22nd Jan 2007, 04:43


I tend to lock threads when they get entirely off topic or degenerate into name calling.

Things have gone pretty off topic, but not enough that I feel I should lock the thread.

22nd Jan 2007, 05:34

8:16...you owe it to yourself to read the Acura TL forum on Honda transmissions... we switched to 2 new GMs. Last night I switched my new Trailblazer into the Auto mode smooth as silk and drove home in bad snow and ice. And on dry pavement it is very fast and handles great. I liked Acura 260HP, but the trans were absolutely terrible...

22nd Jan 2007, 08:31

Once again, please show me statistics where 60% of the buying public are mining engineers.

Your argument could be made for any vehicle, from a Sherman Tank to a 100 ton mining truck. Doesn't mean 9 million new vehicles should be those cars.

22nd Jan 2007, 08:33

Sorry, this ENTIRE thread is based on people's PERCEPTIONS versus reality. SUV drivers, especially American ones, are clearly mislead when it comes to the facts about their vehicles and American quality in general.

22nd Jan 2007, 08:54

I've owned three Civics and never been able to do that.

24th Jan 2007, 13:43

Are you kidding?? Just leaning against a Civic or Corolla will cave in the sheet metal.

27th Jan 2007, 15:01

I don't lean on my cars, I get in them and drive them, but I guess if you own a Ford or Chevy car, then you would spend a lot of time leaning on it scratching your head and wondering why it didn't start again. With a Civic or a Corolla, you actually can get in and drive them, repeatedly, without leaning on them. Just another foolish, silly attempt to discredit 2 of the 3 best cars on the road today (3rd being the Camry).

27th Jan 2007, 21:33

Yeah, Just watch out for the oil sludge problems!!

28th Jan 2007, 15:21

How come that "3rd best car on the road" (Camry) is statistically 50% more likely to kill its occupants in a crash than a typical domestic car??

29th Jan 2007, 13:37

To 15:21; Simple, your data is a bunch of crap. What is your source? What do you mean by typical domestic car? Which car? Please explain to how you came up with the idea the the Camry is 50% more like to "kill it's occupants" than some other unspecified American made car.

29th Jan 2007, 16:44

iihs.org data CLEARLY indicates that you are TWICE as likely to be killed in a Toyota Camry as in a Buick. Those are plain and simple FACTS. LOOK IT UP.

29th Jan 2007, 17:12

What the hell does that prove? Most Buicks weigh 1500 pounds more that a Camry, and have a hood 2 feet longer! Not to mention, Camry's, until recently, have been pretty small. Why don't you try comparing apples to apples, for instance a Toyota Solara against any midsize Buick? I'm sure you're also a lot more likely to be killed in a Ford Focus, Aspire, or Escort, as well as a Geo Metro, Chevette, Dodge Neon, or any number of SMALLER cars. What's your point? I'm sure you're also 5000 times more likely to be killed in a Buick than a Sherman tank, so go ahead and buy one if you'll feel safer.

29th Jan 2007, 17:33

To 8:31: "Doesn't mean 9 million new vehicles should be those cars."

Guess what? If you drive a motor vehicle, you are also guilty. Don't attempt to duck your own contribution to environmental degradation and road safety by trying to find other people who might be more responsible.