And I hate their blue-rich eye searing headlights to.
Within the “truck” class of vehicles, EPA fuel efficiency standards are based on weight. It’s easier to build heavy trucks and SUVs that meet those standards, than light trucks.
Effectively, the US government legislated heavier trucks and SUVs.
Removed by mod
Probably Bush more likely. Oil 🛢 fanatics
Probably? You know you could actually look it up, it’s well documented. Obama’s EPA rules are responsible for this. They’re well intentioned but poorly designed
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
Lolol bruh i could care less about unenforced EPA “regulations”. I said “probably… more likely” as a counterpoint and a joke really. Why don’t you research the personal conflicts of interest for my point first that I was talking about before you go all “dO yOuR rEsEaRcH”?
Ya’know what ill help you out since you didnt provide any burden of proof like an arguer SHOULD do.
Bush administration unveiled a controversial National Energy Plan, which consisted chiefly of $33 billion in public subsidies and tax cuts for the oil, coal, and nuclear power industries, as well as provisions to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for industrial oil drilling.
Ofc they’re both guilty, they are the establishment and two sides of the same coin. Doesn’t mean one can’t have more vested interest potentially. Also lol what EPA rules did Bush even try to pass tho? Besides opening the Arctic for drilling primarily.
I think this is USA only. Maybe mention that in the title. They don’t sell half of those cars here.
I wish. More shitty American pickups in the Netherlands each year, further encouraged by a tax loophole.
I hope the gas prices bleed these fuckers dry…
It’s the same in Australia. Tax incentives given to businesses during the pandemic mixed with a large influx of yank tanks available on the market means that there are heaps of these monster trucks getting around. I honestly don’t know how they cope, the roads and parking around here aren’t designed for such large vehicles and this is out in the countryside; I can’t see them fitting in narrow city streets.
yank tanks
I love it. I’d use it here in the U.S. but no one calls each other Yanks internally.
I’m gonna start using it regardless.
I think we need something else. What about Patriot Panzers?
Haha, that’s also a good one!
Yank here. I use canyonero or monster truck depending on the type of vehicle.
I bet some people here would drive literal tanks if they could.
Yeah I’ve seen Trucks more often in Sweden as well as other SUVs. The most common car used to be a station wagon of some sort but it seems to be more compact suvs now too
I’m even noticing more trucks and SUVs in Japan now. There are very few of the super doody retard mobiles that seem very common in the US, but I have seen them, and there are plenty of people driving chunky Jeep and Mercedes trucks which still look too large for the streets here. I really hope there is not a trend, but SUVs definitely seem to be increasing in number.
Thankfully very small kei cars are still popular.
We just had a laugh about this this week at work - it’s just such a ridiculous size compared to European cars.
Even our cars are getting noticeably bigger. It’s a stark difference if you see old refurbished cars from the 80s compared to their contemporary counterparts.
But in part that’s because modern cars are so much safer.
Safer for those driving, less safe for everyone else.
This is fine to a degree, but it’s really sad that even 2000s cars are small compared to modern cars, which are basically all turning into SUVs and becoming increasingly unsafe for other road users. The Porsche SUV is the most ridiculous looking vehicle I’ve seen showing this trend, whereas the Mini > New Mini seemed like it was more about safety and practicality if you ever rode in an original Mini.
That’s just false when a fucking smartcar can pass NTSB crash test ratings.
We got here because fuel economy requirements are tied to the size and type of vehicle, and so it’s easier to make and sell larger, less efficient vehicles.
https://afdc.energy.gov/data/mobile/10562
Why make a smaller vehicle with a smaller margin that requires more engineering time to reach fuel economy standards when you can sell a larger, often more expensive vehicle that has the same fuel economy as last year’s model?
Consequently they have become best selling vehicles because there are increasingly fewer small vehicles on dealer lots to purchase.
That explains why manufacturers focus on making these vehicles, but not why people aren’t buying cars. There are many cars available to buy, less so than before, but still plenty.
My guess is it’s that people are too susceptible to marketing. Some people see huge vehicles as a status symbol, and parents see them as safer.
A long time ago, I saw a documentary about how marketing changed. Vehicles (and everything else) used to be marketed in a matter-of-fact manner listing off capabilities, features, and specs. Now, marketing is mostly about emotions and convincing people to buy products to “express themselves.” That’s how they got the “anti-establishment” hippies to start spending money on colorful vehicles, new fashion items, etc.
I’m sure marketing has a significant impact, but let’s also look at Ford as an example. They are ending production of all passenger cars except the Mustang, and will now only produce trucks, SUVs and other larger vehicles. I’m sure other manufacturers will follow along, reinforcing the trend of buying larger vehicles by limiting choice.
I just traded my 7 year old corolla for a suv (mainly because of awd for winter driving) This much larger vehicle has better fuel economy than that little car.
We should make a distinction between full sized SUVs and small to medium that are more like tall cars
I upgraded from an older Civic to a Subaru Forester and improved my gas mileage! I also got all wheel drive, lots of modern technology and a vehicle more suited for poorly maintained roads. Most importantly, as a larger guy with bad knees, it’s a world of difference in head and leg room. As a guy with two teenagers, it’s an actual four-seater car. I never want to go back to cars where I need to contort myself to get in and out, and worry about how uncomfortably cramped the back seat is for my passengers …. Tesla, I’m talking to you too.
So, I also upgraded to a larger vehicle, but I’m hoping this article focuses more on excessively large vehicles
Wow, what great consumer choice! The capitolists are only making the goods consumers want and cutting out the fat. Theres literally no strings attached! What an amazing system we have. /s
Stop buying bigger and bigger cars.
I drive a station wagon because I need to fit two dogs in the booth plus and entire family in the same car. But this is a transitory need. At some point I’ll either get a small van, for carrying the dogs, or a small hatchback and have the backseats always folded down.
You should buy according to your true needs not market pressure.
Removed by mod
The key words here are “matters” and “need”.
I bought the car I have today because driving my small 4 door hatchback was no longer a feaseable endeavour when wanting to move the entire family all at once. It was an objective need, not something it mattered.
You can reply I didn’t need to get a family or the dogs. You’re right. But that actually mattered to me, regardless if it was an objective need.
Removed by mod
I don’t even consider a station wagon a big car anymore. And I bet the vast majority of station wagon owners actually need the space. No shot the average SUV owner needs the weight for anything other than to feel “safe” in their tank.
I think shifting baselines is a real issue with car bloat. It should be going the other way where a Focus is seen as a mid-size and the like of the Fiesta a compact rather then sub-compact.
Or buy whatever the fuck you want, because why not make one part of your miserable life slightly more pleasurable by driving something that makes you smile. In the US, 99% of us need a vehicle to commute because we don’t have access to decent public transportation, so why not drive something you enjoy? Do I need a 500hp Mustang to get me to work and back? Hell no, but it sure does turn that commute into a few precious moments of happiness before I start the 9-5 grind.
You could also change your life in a way that sitting in traffic is not your day’s highlight, but you do you
That’s a very privileged take.
Yeah because moving is so viable and affordable for everyone these days. It’s not like there’s a housing crisis with massive inflation.
Oh I forgot I’m in fuckcars, aka one of the most delusional places on the internet.
Those who want, find ways. Those who don’t want, find reasons. Why is it, that most poor people live in cities and not in suburbia, when it’s so impossible expensive to live in the city?
That’s a very privileged take.
If you could truly enjoy it. Stuck in traffic, a Mustang is little more than eye candy and ego soothing.
Does it actually add that much to your life?
There’s a big external cost, but if you spend your weekend taking it to car shows or working on it, then I get it - some people play MMO games just for the fishing minigame. If having a mustang is a big part of your reason for being, fine. Mine is to build things for the sake of learning how to build them… Does the world need an AI agent specifically made to be have a strong personality? Not really, most people aren’t even ready for that so I’m not planning on releasing it publicly. But I’m burning the time and resources to make her, because the act of creation brings me joy
If it’s for your quality of life… Say, your job is to drive around all day, and mustangs strangely have seats that keep you from having back pain… Fine, that job shouldn’t exist but we have the system we have, and I can’t blame someone for minimizing their suffering
But really ask yourself - is this actually something that makes your life better? Or does it just fit the idea you have of success created from a lifetime of exposure to marketing?
If that’s the case, I’m sure you felt joy in buying it, and you feel like it’s a sign of social status… But that attitude is poison. It’s like burning a forest because causing destruction helps soothe the anger you have at a world that sucks because of the lack of green spaces… Sure it might soothe your suffering a bit, but it’s ultimately hurting humanity in aggregate far more than it helps you. And what’s worse, is it feeds the system that caused the suffering you seek to soothe
There are like 2 station wagons on the US market. I’d love one, but I’m not into VWs and the Volvo PHEV wagon is only available as a $75,000 performance wagon and no one makes an EV wagon.
You don’t have access to Stellantis FIAT line? The Doblo and Scudo (short chassis model) are pretty affordable and decently compact.
Nope
I hate to break it to you, but small to medium SUVs replaced station wagons, just taller. According to my insurance company, my “SUV” is a station wagon
The Audi A6, Mercedes E class and VW Passat are available I believe. I have seen A6es and E classes in the USA.
The Passat is discontinued in the US and I don’t think they ever had a wagon version of it here. Not recently at least.
The newest Passats I’ve seen in Canada are mk5s I think (2005-2010 or something like that). Most common is the previous gens, which is not common at all.
It’s much, much easier to find and afford a small SUV/crossover than a station wagon body style in North America.
As someone with one forward facing and two rear facing kids right now - this is so frustrating. I feel like there are so few vehicles that can hold them without busting at the seams and even our minivan makes it hard with getting kids hooked in if they are in the very back.
I can’t wait until they are all forward facing and I can open up what cars we can have.
I am the world’s last sedan enjoyer.
Unless you work in construction, or have a similar need for a pickup, fuck you for buying one.
Here’s a fun anecdote: I live in California, where these vehicles are (mostly) limited to those who need them. In 2018, I visited family in the midwest. We played a game of counting the pickups while walking a short trip from a hotel to a chain outlet. We hit 99 pickups by the time we got to the doors. I was irritated that we got to 99 and not 100 cause that would have been so awesome, but seriously. 99?! In just several minutes. People drive them for fashion, not for practical need.
Every pickup driver that doesn’t “need” a pickup is my enemy.
My brother had a huge truck for a while. Strangely, this size actually affected his driving. All the sudden he felt justified cutting the half-mile long line to get onto the highway and cut in at the last second. “Might is right” he said. “They always let me in because they are scared of this truck.”
Ugh. I hope this isn’t typical but I feel like it is. I told him that was awful and he just shrugged.
A bunch of people started buying larger vehicles for “safety” reasons, believing that if they were in a larger vehicle, they’d fair better in an accident. I’ve heard people say their spouse isn’t a great driver, so they wanted to get them something bigger that they’d be safer in. Which only makes the rest of us more unsafe. My personal wish is that we would require a separate license for today’s bigger trucks and large SUVs similar to what we have for motorcycles, but require an annual test to keep the license. Make it just enough hassle to keep the license, so people without a real need start to question if it’s worth the effort.
I would heartily embrace tiered licensing for vehicle weight or general size.
Even then, a van is often better and more convenient, depending on the trade.
How do you know what people need? Also, who are you tell people what they need? You don’t need to be in construction to get a truck. They are the best selling because they are the most versatile. You don’t need different vehicles for different situations.
How do you know what people need?
I know they don’t need a truck bed when it doesn’t have a scratch on it because they are not using it. I don’t know what they need, but a truck is clearly not fit for purpose in that case.
I judge people by how clean their truck bed is
I know plenty of people that have and use trucks that don’t have scratched beds, they take care of stuff.
Removed by mod
People think the shape of a truck somehow works better in the snow
If it’s rwd only like most used to be, it’s fucking horrible in the snow. So now they have to make most 4wd.
FWD car in the snow works perfectly well, as long as we’re not talking like a foot of fresh snow.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
I just want my wagons, specifically sport wagons back :(
My rav serves the function of a wagon.
Your rav four either serves the purpose of a small SUV or minivan depending on the year. The current one is an MPV based on a small van so it’s literally a minivan from Japan with regular doors. It does not have the cargo space of a wagon and it definitely doesn’t have the performance or handling of a sport wagon. The closest thing Toyota had in the US would be the really old Camry V6 or the matrix XRS. Maybe a Prius v if it could have had the Prius all-wheel drive prime power train.
I’m always continually shocked at how small so many SUVs feel on the inside. The centre console and area around the gear selector is such a waste of space. For what, cup holders? Bring back the gear selector on wheel
“No cargo space” and “it’s a van” are incongruent.
As for performance, it has “sport mode” but even in eco mode it can vastly exceed the performance necessary to drive within legal limits. I’m not going to race with it, I am taking my kids camping in South Dakota or shopping at Costco.
it has “sport mode” but even in eco mode it can vastly exceed the performance necessary to drive within legal limits
So my Kia crossover (needed ground clearance for rough unplowed rural roads at the time) has that, and I’ve found for most of the year it stays in Eco mode, I’ll pop it into Sport mode if I’m visiting a large city like Chicago or Milwaukee and moving through a busy highway interchange to better accelerate and decelerate as I work through crazy traffic to make my needed lane changes, then in the coldest winter days I’ll use Normal mode until it’s up to temperature because in Eco mode the engine never warms up if it’s below 0 out (I actually once watched the temperature dial go down as I went downhill into a valley once when it was around -10-15 out)
Their seating or slope roof instead of rear cargo space. The current crossover version of the outback fits way less stuff in it when you go camping then my 4th gen legacy wagon. There’s a little more room for people but even with the seats folded down my legacy wagon fits more than the crossover.
There’s so much space taken up by interior trim and sloped body areas for no reason that could be used for cargo.
Edit- On the performance front the new XT can accelerate, but it feels bad to drive, wobbles in the corners while bouncing on the road, and does not stop well. It has similar ground clearance with the same sized tires as my legacy and less than a legacy outback stock for stock. So I just don’t get why you would pick the crossover if given the choice. It is also always fun to see the new Subaru dig a rut into a hill on a dirt road if they forgot to get a running start while I can climb it with my real AWD (VTD center diff.) Even old base models with 4ACT can shift into 4x4 mode (if you shift to 1 or 2 it locks the coupling if the steering wheel is straight so you essentially have a transfer case.)
The 2.5i withe the CVT is what I do not like. The 2010-2019 outback 2.5i take over 10s for 0-60, and the rest of the lineup was similar. They re-tuned the CVT to be more aggressive off the line so it is like 7.5-8s not for most of the NA line up, but the 5-60 is still over 10s. I had a 2017 impreza long term loaner and it felt unsafe to merge onto the freeway from a metering light in the bay area. It also got worse city MPG than my tuned LGT in the hills.
Not a sports though. If I wanted just a wagon there us plenty of those. And rav 4 prime has handling and weight of a wooly Buffalo.
Altezza Gita, my beloved 😍
Partially because people are selfish narcissistic cunts, and partially because being a selfish narcissistic cunt has become normalised.
People have always been, and will always be, selfish narcissistic cunts. That’s why the concept of regulation exists.
That’s where the market led us. We have to accept some responsibility but I can’t just build my own car when I don’t find one I like.
A huge chunk of it is because the USA has a huge tax incentive for car manufacturers to make bigger cars. When fuel efficiency standards started coming in, trucks were exempted because farmers needed their trucks for farm work, it’s a loophole that encourages the manufacturers to build bigger vehicles to avoid these taxes. These massive vehicles are unusually cheap in the USA. If these loopholes regarding fuel efficiency were closed out people would be financially incentivised to buy smaller cars. Unfortunately, money talks. People aren’t all selfish, they’re just doing what makes sense for them.
Removed by mod
The headlights can be angled downwards but fuck it, it’s not themselves they’re blinding
I’ve stopped driving my wee little Subaru at night because of these asshats with 900 lights on at roughly supernova levels of brightness.
(eyes burnt to crisps) What do mean? I drive a 2012 Renault Twingo and i’m not complaining.
deleted by creator
TIL some fella with two cows didn’t get attacked by Neanderthals.
deleted by creator
That’s reddit, let them melt.
Trucks have been bestselling models for literally decades.
It’s because there’s a 25% tariff on importing trucks. It was put in place nearly 60 years ago by Lyndon B Johnson; it’s called the “chicken tax” because the excuse for passing it was as a retaliatory tariff against France and Germany taxing American factory farmed chicken.
Because of the chicken tax, fairly few foreign car companies in the US sell pickups.
And because being a “best selling” model is good marketing, truck makers generally sell very few models of truck. For example, the best selling vehicle right now is the Ford “F series”. So that’s the F150, F250, and F350, in all of their assorted trims. There’s a couple other models they sell - the Maverick and the Ranger - but most of the trucks Ford sells are F series.
So a truck driver has been much more likely to drive a F-series for decades than a car driver was to be driving a Civic.
Don’t forget the insane fuel efficiency calculation that rewards larger, less efficient trucks over the smaller more efficient ones we used to have. It’s the reason even an f150 is gargantuan compared to ones of the past.
I just don’t understand why the tariff applies to foreign cars that don’t compete directly with US cars in terms of form factor
Because it’s designed to protect Ford etc. from foreign competition.
Mind if hijack your comment to clarify a doubt I have?
In the early 2000’s I had an acquantaice move to the US, somewhere in California.
After driving a typical american car for about six months, that person came to Europe, bought a hot hatchback, bolted on it every aftermarket part available for the car, had all the mods approved by the manufacturer and imported it, which awarded them a very high power/low consumption vehicle when compared with the standard american market, and I was told all the money spent was recouped in a few years.
Would this still be valid today?
I’m going to point one that hasn’t been mentioned. Infrastructure.
Highways, roads, streets have way too many lanes that are way too wide. This encourages drivers to drive faster. Faster driving makes overall the roads and vehicles to feel more dangerous, because they are. People’s response is to want and acquire larger, heavier an faster vehicles that make them feel safer in those hostile roads.
This is what contemporary urbanism is talking about when they say that infrastructure determines behavior. You can alter people’s behavior by changing the shape of infrastructure.
The problem in most of the western world is that the answer of authorities (heavily misled by car and oil industry) has been to make more lanes that are wider. In the false belief that this would make roads safer. When in reality the result is the opposite. Other measures like police enforced fines, speed limits, etc. Are also useless to mitigate the lack of safety and carry a huge set of problems with them like systematic discrimination and endemic corruption.
The answer is to make narrower lanes, with fewer lanes in densely populated area, less parking, traffic calmed and car traffic banned zones. Protect bicicles and pedestrians with concrete traffic segregation. Impose aditional fees and taxes for vehicles above a certain weight and parking space take up. Those things will signal people that it’s fine to drive a smaller, slower vehicle, it’s fine to use public transport instead. Along with more public transport options available.
I get what you’re saying, but have you ever driven in Italy? The lanes are terrifyingly narrow compared to the UK, but the drivers are far more reckless!
They just need a “guardian angel” ford f150. /s
Most best selling cars
in the US 😒
Unfortunately SUVs are very popular here also, though they tend to be a bit smaller than in the US, and I even saw a few pickups, in a country where you definitely don’t need one…
Am I reading this wrong? By all means plenty of people who don’t need trucks buy trucks.
But the majority of this list is sedans and compact crossovers? These are barely more than hatchbacks with a different name. Obviously the top few spots are dominated by pickups that have ballooned in size. Legitimate criticisms are easily made.
But after reading the title I was pretty surprised at the list because I expected lots of large SUVs. But most large SUVs are missing from this list.
Disclaimer: I am not a car person. I do not know the difference between a hatchback and an SUV, except that SUVs are bigger.
This is entirely anecdotal so take this how you will.
Having lived in another nation for a few years, the cars you are calling “compact crossovers” are huge compared to the sort of cars sold in other nations. I don’t want to give too many details about where I used to live, but in that nation, roads that we would consider to be one-way, one lane roads were used as two-way roads. If you meet oncoming traffic, the rule is the smaller vehicle pulls aside for the larger one. This is in urban areas. There is no shoulder to pull onto, there is a building there. If everyone with a car owned a huge American-style car or SUV there, it just wouldn’t work. Many parking places just don’t accommodate for them.
Another anecdote: Despite every house on my street having a two-car garage, there are huge vehicles parked on either side of the road, making our road wide enough for one lane of traffic. These two-car garages were built in the 70s and are too small to fit two vehicles now. Either one car is in the garage and one is on the street, or both cars are now on the street and the garage is full of misc stuff. Why would a road with with two car garages for every house have such congestion problems?
IMO, More people are buying SUVs than they used to. And their “cars” are simply much larger than they used to be.
I appreciate your perspective. I’ve spent enough time in other countries now to vouch for your anecdote generally speaking. Though to be honest sizes are increasing in places outside the US as well. It’s noticeable on repeat trips over years. Still not as big on average, but it feels like the trend is upward. The gap is not what it used to be. Something like a Corolla Cross or CR-V is taller than what you see in Europe but the footprint really isn’t much larger.
Some of it I think is people being actively unreasonable, some of it is larger safety and crumple zones on newer cars, some is the simple fact that the market has shown people like bigger vehicles.
In the end though I guess my point was just that of all the vehicles on the market in the US, it looks to me like the top 25 list is dominated by those in the midrange and smaller categories relative to other vehicles on the market. Whether these are still too large objectively is a topic that can be fairly debated but the fact remains that people are buying things on the smaller end of what is available to them which runs a bit counter to the title of the post.
Only speaking to the garage thing, I think a lot of people like to think of their garages as a unfinished part of the house, rather than car storage. Same for the basement. So it’s sort of luck of the draw which one gets a TV, old refrigerator, and selection of tools and craft projects and which one is used for storage.
They bracketed it funny. I think they meant (large trucks) and SUVs.
Turns out the more efficient engines make a hatchback a little bigger, creating the “compact crossover SUV”.
Well, we needed a vehicle that could fit two children and related sports gear and, ideally, haul bikes at some point, and the had the cargo capacity for the yearly road trip vacation with the extended family. A small SUV was the winner as no car measured up and a true truck was overkill.
Shocking though it may be, for many, the use case may be valid.
Minivans can carry more passengers and cargo than SUVs.
Indeed, but still they are so gauche lmao
They can; they can’t fit in my garage.
If your oversized modern SUV can fit, any minivan can fit, and the SUV provides less interior space because they universally waste internal space, while vans maximize space, while maximizing stability and safety as much as they can, so the least safe seat is the “navigator’s seat,” or the passenger seat up front. Other than that particular potential death seat, that I sit in routinely, the rest of the van is almost as well defended as the SUV, the SUV may have better defenses against gunfire.
If your oversized modern SUV can fit, any minivan can fit
Oh? By what numbers, specifically, are you comparing?
The Chrysler Pacifica, for example, comes in at nearly two feet longer than the average mid sized SUV I ended up getting.
Length isn’t the limiting factor for most “average” SUVs in getting into a garage. Height and width are the issues. I’ve never had a garage or carport that I couldn’t park my mother’s Dodge Ram 3500 15 passenger van in, and that’s even longer than the Pacifica. Meanwhile, my friend can’t get his Explorer into his garage, cause it will hit the roof.
Length isn’t the limiting factor for most “average” SUVs in getting into a garage.
You seem to be making quite the generalization there - while not actually providing any numbers.
I’ve never had a garage or carport that I couldn’t park my mother’s Dodge Ram 3500 15 passenger van in, and that’s even longer than the Pacifica.
That’s awesome. Unfortunately, your experience doesn’t change that my garage does not allow for the length of a van.
They can carry more passengers OR cargo vs a truck. I love minivans, but the only way you’re getting anywhere near a pickup-truck sized bed space is by folding/removing all the seats and making it a two-seater.
And even then, you can’t put anything wet or messy back there.
Pickup trucks have their upsides for people who need them.
SUV’s don’t make much sense to me, other than the case where you need the people space AND you need to tow something heavy.
SUV’s don’t make much sense to me, other than the case where you need the people space AND you need to tow something heavy.
I wouldn’t say heavy, but yes, combined people + cargo + bikes space is pretty much it for us.
Minivans can tow light trailers, usually as much as a car. The big SUV’s approach 9-10K lb towing capacity.
That said, you can probably get a decent used SUV for less than a minivan.
Cars can easily tow as much as a medium sized truck. Minivans and full sized vans can tow as much or more than a full sized pickup or SUV.
Minivans are DQ’d by another constraint in that they don’t fit in my garage thus I cannot ensure full coverage insurance and can guarantee it would sustain significant damage within a few years as my state has the kind of hail-and-tornadoes weather insurance companies know and hate.
They’re otherwise amazing especially for cargo capacity. Seeing my auto shop teacher pull two transmissions out of the back of one back in my highschool days… seriously adjusted my opinion of them and their utility.
Oh dang, that’s a rough constraint. Is it a length problem? I would think the sliding door would be perfect for a tight garage.
It is a length problem, yes. My Outlander and Volt barely fit lengthwise.
Apparently Iowa home designers had much less grand expectations of garage capacity back in the '90s.
Minivans can’t keep up with a real truck, but most of the “trucks” sold today have a smaller bed than a 1982 Toyota pickup. They couldn’t even begin to compete with a Ford, Chevy, or Dodge pickup of the same era of 1982, where those American made pickups are less than 1/3 the size of the modern US made variants, and can still carry almost 4 times their modern varient.
All that was so that I could say this: modern Sprinter, Transit, and 15 passenger Vans have more passenger and cargo capabilities than any of these so called trucks that cannot carry even 50% of the exact same model trucks that existed 20 years ago, and still couldn’t carry more than a 15 passenger van in terms of passengers or cargo.
Minivans have tons of space for 4 people and related sports gear in all by the most extreme cases like 4 kayaks (2 kayaks? Put on roof)
Dirty or wet? Lay down a blanket.
When I say messy or wet I mean a half ton of dirt, a yard full of trees trimmings, a bed full of recently used septic equipment.
Not to mention chemicals you probably don’t want to share airspace with. Had a friend with a pool cleaning biz that used a ranger for this reason.
Sorry but I can only laugh. Guys was talking about “two children and related sports gear” and you’re off talking about septic equipment instead? Lol. Talk about bad faith discussion.
Yeah, I was pointing out we were talking about different things. It’s called communicating.
Good communication is talking about the topic at hand, not going on wild tangents without actually saying so and then only after the fact say you were discussing septic tanks lol. Enjoy your bad faith last word, cheers.
Frankly, I don’t see us making use of roof mounts. The older I’ve gotten, the more I value my back.
Sounds like a normal car with a hitch was the correct choice you ignored.
Not really. We already have a 4-door with about as much trunk space as one can get and it wasn’t sufficient.
As a side note, how’s the view from that high horse?
Not the poster above, but I used to haul two dirtbikes on a large trailer behind my Ford Mondeo, and I could still fit 5 adults and about a month of groceries in the car. It cost me £350, and I sold it for £200 after 3 years and 65000 miles. Zero problems cruising at 80mph full laden without the trailer or 60mph with.
The guy I sold it to stripped it and used it as a dirt track racecar and it lasted him a whole season.
I’m slightly mystified why anyone would want to throw extra money at SUVs, there’s so much more to life.
I feel like it’s worth pointing out that the car I drive is labeled as an SUV, and it’s smaller and more fuel efficient than a Mondeo.
Not every car labeled an “SUV” is huge three row beast. If your hatchback doesn’t bottom out going into a driveway now, we call that an SUV.
If you say you have a SUV in a thread about people having huge vehicles then is it surprising anyone reading that would think you meant you had a full-time one?
Anyway, to answer your question, if what is considered generally to be a small SUV is a Volvo X40, then the Mondeo was equally long but thinner, shorter, and about 2/3 the weight. I also had a 1995 Civic for a bit, which was lighter still and could carry nearly as much, though it couldn’t tow more than 500kg.
I didn’t actually ask a question or feel surprised about anything, just responding to your comment about “why would anyone buy an SUV”.
My car which is sold as an SUV is smaller and more fuel efficient than the car you lauded as an alternative.I don’t want a big car, and I didn’t get a big car. A massive Buick station wagon is a big car that isn’t an SUV, just like not every SUV is some jumbo monstrosity.
I used to haul two dirtbikes on a large trailer
I have neither the storage options for, nor the interest in owning, a large trailer. I do have the option of selecting a vehicle which best suits my needs while fitting in my garage. I suspect that, were children and sports not part of the equation, I’d be perfectly happy with my Volt.
Oh, I didn’t own or store the trailer. I rented it when I needed it and just had a little hitch rack to take one bike most of the time. If I needed to only take two dirtbikes I’d have got a folding bike trailer which takes up hardly any space.
My point was that my midsize hatchback had the same internal space for taking things around as your SUV, just with less weight and fuel consumption. Unless your kids are larger than adult sized and you have five of them?
Oh, I didn’t own or store the trailer. I rented it when I needed it and just had a little hitch rack to take one bike most of the time.
Fair enough.
My point was that my midsize hatchback had the same internal space for taking things around as your SUV, just with less weight and fuel consumption. Unless your kids are larger than adult sized and you have five of them?
I’ve yet to see this bear out. I have a midsize hatchback - a Chevy Volt - which does not have close to the same space. There is an argument to be made for fuel consumption there, though.
I don’t know how big a volt is, they’re not sold here. How about if I likenned it to a 1995 Civic 5 door? I had one of those and it could carry nearly as much.
The discussion was about large oversize cars, so that’s what I was comparing the Mondeo to.
A small or mid sized SUV usually has cargo space comparable to a hatchback, definitely less than a station wagon.
That guy correctly pointed out your logic is flawed, if you’ve been convinced by a salesman that the cargo space is something other than what it is, reflecting on that could make you a more informed consumer in the future. Getting annoyed at people commenting because you perceived them to have a ‘holier than thou’ attitude on it won’t benefit anyone.
A small or mid sized SUV usually has cargo space comparable to a hatchback, definitely less than a station wagon.
Having experience with SUVs, hatchbacks, and wagons, I’ve yet to find that to be the case.
That guy correctly pointed out your logic is flawed
They shared a faulty conclusion they’d already drawn regarding the universal supremacy of one option and universal failing of another option even before truly understanding my use case.
if you’ve been convinced by a salesman that the cargo space is something other than what it is, reflecting on that could make you a more informed consumer in the future
And if you’ve assumed I had been convinced by a salesman rather than understanding my own use-cases and requirements and selecting a vehicle which meets those needs, not only have you erred, you’ve disregarded my highlight of having done so in my initial post.
Getting annoyed at people commenting because you perceived them to have a ‘holier than thou’ attitude on it won’t benefit anyone.
My experience has been that criticizing the arrogance and assumptions of those in an ivory tower has been more enabling - indeed, more enabling of more informed discourse - than comments defending the actual arrogance and assumptions of a rando.
A small or mid sized SUV usually has cargo space comparable to a hatchback, definitely less than a station wagon.
Having experience with SUVs, hatchbacks, and wagons, I’ve yet to find that to be the case.
The problem with making claims like this, without actually having checked first, is how easily refuted they are by someone who has. A quick Google search puts cargo space in an Audi a6 wagon at 30 cubic ft. An Audi q3 (small SUV) has less than 24 and an Audi q5 has 26. This trend is typical for all full sized wagons compared to compact SUVs (many share the same platform). The compact platform is comparable to the 22 cubic ft in a vw golf (small hatchback) - this makes sense as the vw gold and q3 literally share a platform (as is common for small SUVs and hatchbacks across brands). Any claim to have experienced something else is clearly misinformed as demonstrated by a quick Google search.
That guy correctly pointed out your logic is flawed
They shared a faulty conclusion they’d already drawn regarding the universal supremacy of one option and universal failing of another option even before truly understanding my use case.
Aided by a quick Google search I’ve demonstrated that your claimed experience is flat wrong. You’ve been misled (or could be knowingly lying, but that is not very likely).
if you’ve been convinced by a salesman that the cargo space is something other than what it is, reflecting on that could make you a more informed consumer in the future
And if you’ve assumed I had been convinced by a salesman rather than understanding my own use-cases and requirements and selecting a vehicle which meets those needs, not only have you erred, you’ve disregarded my highlight of having done so in my initial post.
Yes, I’ve assumed that you’ve behaved in a way consistent with the overwhelming majority of people. Your claims about cargo space are wrong, so if that’s the basis of your use case as described in your previous post and you’re honestly representing what you think, you have been misled. With the information presented, knowledge of the vehicles described and a basic knowledge of how marketing works, this seems by a huge margin to be the most likely case.
Getting annoyed at people commenting because you perceived them to have a ‘holier than thou’ attitude on it won’t benefit anyone.
My experience has been that criticizing the arrogance and assumptions of those in an ivory tower has been more enabling - indeed, more enabling of more informed discourse - than comments defending the actual arrogance and assumptions of a rando.
Well, I’ve now given some informed examples of cargo space so perhaps now that you’ve been presented with actual numbers (which I’d invite you to check yourself if you think I’ve invented them) you can now review your assumptions and reflect on how people are manipulated into believing that small/compact SUVs offer better cargo space or are somehow superior to conventional cars, when in fact they are not. To say no car measured up either means you didn’t check or you were misled.
The problem with making claims like this is easily refuted they are.
I’m sure this will be entirely genuine.
A quick Google search puts cargo space in an Audi a6 wagon at 30 cubic ft. An Audi q3 (small SUV) has less than 24 and an Audi q5 has 26.
Ah, I see - a $68k car compares ~10% better to that same brand’s $37k and $44k small SUVs. This highlights an additional facet to the equation, that of cost-effectiveness. Are you willing to pay 83-55% more for 11-25% more cargo space?
This trend is typical for all full sized wagons compared to compact SUVs (many share the same platform).
If you artificially restrict your comparison to same-manufacturer e.g. Audi, sure, though I’m not sure why anyone would do so.
Any claim to have experienced something else is clearly misinformed as demonstrated by a quick Google search.
My Mitsubishi Outlander clocks in at 64.3ft^3 cargo space as demonstrated by a quick Google search - this seems to beat your magical A6’s 30ft^3 by double. I’m sure there are other small SUVs out there which have similar or better cargo-space. Misinformed, indeed.
Yes, I’ve assumed that you’ve behaved in a way consistent with the overwhelming majority of people.
Thank you for at least in-part owning your error.
Your claims about cargo space are wrong, so if that’s the basis of your use case as described in your previous post and you’re honestly representing what you think, you have been misled. With the information presented, knowledge of the vehicles deacribed and a basic knowledge of how marketing works, this seems by a huge margin to be the most likely case.
I’m not quite sure how you arrived at that conclusion as you’ve demonstrated here a profound myopia regarding available options and fair comparison of those options, but hey. Thanks for re-confirming your flawed assumptions.
Well, I’ve now given some informed examples of cargo space so perhaps now that you’ve been presented with actual numbers (which I’d invite you to check yourself if you think I’ve invented them) you can now review your assumptions and reflect on how people are manipulated into believing that small/compact SUVs offer better cargo space or are somehow superior to conventional cars.
Unfortunately, the errors - in assuming one’s use case, in applying flawed logic, in generalizing from artificially-narrow subsets of data, and in riding one’s high-horse - are all still yours. I look forward to your correcting yourself.
The problem with making claims like this is easily refuted they are.
I’m sure this will be entirely genuine.
A quick Google search puts cargo space in an Audi a6 wagon at 30 cubic ft. An Audi q3 (small SUV) has less than 24 and an Audi q5 has 26.
Ah, I see - a $68k car compares ~10% better to that same brand’s $37k and $44k small SUVs. This highlights an additional facet to the equation, that of cost-effectiveness. Are you willing to pay 83-55% more for 11-25% more cargo space?
Cost was not mention in your claim. You said no car could compete on cargo space. I’m not really interested engaging in a straw man about cost. There are cheaper stations wagons in production, I chose one that was easy to compare.
This trend is typical for all full sized wagons compared to compact SUVs (many share the same platform).
If you artificially restrict your comparison to same-manufacturer e.g. Audi, sure, though I’m not sure why anyone would do so.
I did that for my ease to demonstrate the point. If you want to choose to be wrong and pretend other manufacturers are radically different, by all means do so. If you think I’m wrong, you can spend your own time checking my claim that this is consistent for other manufacturers. I’m not motivated to spoon feed it to you, I think even if I did you’d invent new strawmen or move goalposts to justify your wrong claim above.
Any claim to have experienced something else is clearly misinformed as demonstrated by a quick Google search.
My Mitsubishi Outlander clocks in at 64.3ft^3 cargo space as demonstrated by a quick Google search - this seems to beat your magical A6’s 30ft^3 by double. I’m sure there are other small SUVs out there which have similar or better cargo-space. Misinformed, indeed.
Ah yes, the “small” full sized SUV (literally the largest Mitsubishi on sale in the USA) with three rows of seats. Your post claimed “small” SUV, that implies something like a crv, q3, macan etc. 64.3ft is with seats folded down, so yes a full sized SUV boot + rear seats is often bigger than a wagon boot only (you can usually fold the seats in a wagon as well). Frustratingly I was mislead by your"small SUV" comment above.
An honest comparison is the third row of seats folded down with second row up (presumably consistent with your two children being the car, no?). So 34 odd cubic feet, admittedly higher than the literal first wagon I thought of as a point of comparison for a small SUV. Compared to a full size SUV I don’t know offhand if there’s a wagon with more space, obviously if you move the goalposts that much it’s hard to present an argument.
Yes, I’ve assumed that you’ve behaved in a way consistent with the overwhelming majority of people.
I’m not quite sure how you arrived at that conclusion as you’ve demonstrated here a profound myopia regarding available options and fair comparison of those options, but hey. Thanks for re-confirming your flawed assumptions.
A Mitsubishi outlander is not a small SUV bro. If you go back and read my earlier post you should be able to follow my logic pretty easily, I thought we were talking about something similar to an Audi q3.
Unfortunately, the errors - in assuming one’s use case, in applying flawed logic, in generalizing from artificially-narrow subsets of data, and in riding one’s high-horse - are all still yours. I look forward to your correcting yourself.
Well, enjoy it. Clearly I was pointing out that a small SUV does not have more cargo space than a conventional station wagon, clearly we define small differently if you think that monster is small…
With only the third row pushed down you do have slightly more space than the audi wagon, though I am still convinced that the station wagon can accommodate kids, bikes and holiday luggage based on the many, many years I used one for exactly that. Since you’re committed to claiming that the extra 3ft of storage is make or break then I can’t objectively argue the point.
I “will get back on my high horse” and say that the original post misrepresented the vehicle you’d chosen and reaffirm that I believe your insistence that “no car or station wagon” could accommodate your needs, as described above, is based upon being influenced by others and is not based in reality. Thousands of people have used station wagons for exactly that purpose for decades.
Minivan. Or van.
But those are both bigger. Seems odd to be telling a person to get a larger vehicle when we’re complaining about vehicles being too big.
Depends on the exact size of the SUV. I think minivans are smaller than most SUVs (all except actual compact SUVs). Minivans are also better for cargo because SUVs ride higher and thus have less space. And sliding doors are better for kids and tight spaces. And better mileage. Etc
I think part of it’s that “SUV” better refers to the shape of the car than the size. Same for vans. I’ve got less experience with minivans, but I’ll assume they’re similar.
I bought my SUV because it was more fuel efficient and only slightly larger than my old hatchback. But I don’t have something like a suburban or whatever.
When I hear “van”, I think
Most minivans are roughly the same, but with windows and shorter. (Again, in my experience)
Most of the SUVs I see are what I think would be called “compact crossovers”, so that’s what I assumed was meant when OP said “kids, cargo and bike carrier”.
Suv I think they meant:
Minivan I picture:
Suv I think you picture:
CUV is not SUV.
And see title of thread, best selling is supersize SUV.
Well, tell the people who label the things that a crossover SUV isn’t an SUV, since that’s not what they’re telling people.
Title of the thread reads to me like (super size trucks) and SUVs not ( Super size (trucks and SUVs).
Beyond that, according to the actual article, the best selling SUV is a rav4, which is a compact crossover SUV.
If either would fit in my garage, yeah, they’d absolutely be valid.
the yearly road trip vacation with the extended family
For a once a year event, renting is almost certainly cheaper than using a larger vehicle you don’t need for the rest of the year. Another option is driving two vehicles during the trip.
I’m interested in your reasoning behind cheaper.
Your assumption behind don’t need the rest of the year - do you believe there are zero scenarios where the wife and I are both out and about? Perhaps… working?
You’re correct - we could double the mileage / energy consumption, wear-and-tear, cognitive load, etc. on trips - or, we could not do something so ridiculous.
Your assumption behind don’t need the rest of the year - do you believe there are zero scenarios where the wife and I are both out and about? Perhaps… working?
I don’t understand what you are trying to say here. I was explicitly addressing road trips, not daily errands. Buy a smaller vehicle for dayly stuff and for a yearly road trip you can rent a larger vehicle than the one you use for daily errands. In the end it will save you money. What is the problem?
I was explicitly addressing road trips, not daily errands.
Feel free to highlight this explicit addressing.
For a yearly road trip you can rent a larger vehicle than the one you use for daily errands, and in the end it will save you money. What is the problem?
Setting aside, for the moment, you’ve myopically focused on a single facet of my scenario - the road trips -
Do you believe there are zero scenarios where the cost of potential SUV - cost of potential car <= (cost of rental * years of ownership)? Interesting.
Even a little more restrictive - do you believe there are zero scenario where the cost of a potential SUV which meets my feature requirements - the cost of a potential car which meets my feature requirements <= (cost of a rental * years of ownership)?
I am sorry for your limited ability to consider.
Feel free to highlight this explicit addressing.
I invite you to re-read my comment. I don’t see how it could have been more explicit:
[You] the yearly road trip vacation with the extended family
[Me] For a once a year event, renting is almost certainly cheaper than using a larger vehicle you don’t need for the rest of the year.
As for the rest, I will be happy to maintain a friendly conversation only as long as you return the favor. I will not get involved in angry internet arguments.
Thank you and have a great day.
Ah, I see your error - you imply the road trip rather than explicitly highlight it.
Fair enough - I had mixed you up with another poster and you did not deserve my frustration. My apologies.
It sounds like something like a Volvo V70 would’ve been a better fit. Those beats can swallow a house, including its residents, and with a bike rack it can carry the whole neighborhoods bikes.
I don’t know where the person you’re replying to is from, but in the US Volvo’s are very expensive to buy and very expensive to maintain. They are a luxury brand through and through. They’re good cars but the average person cannot afford to purchase or maintain one.
I can’t seem to find those these days - I see Volvo V60 and V90. The Volvo V60 does have a PHEV variant which does appeal but ultimately it seems to be the same form factor and capacity as a Subaru Outback or Chevy Volt; I’ve experience with both of those and they has far less usable storage in the back than the Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV we ended up with.
As the Volt does, though, this could be a legit option for replacing that for the wife. That said, the price seems ridiculously high - over here, I’m seeing them go for ~52-58k whereas my Outlander was “only” 48.
Gross. People don’t need trucks.
What? Why’s that?
Some people do, but it’s a dead giveaway when a truck bed is so small it can’t hold a sheet of plywood, AND the truck is super clean AND it doesn’t have any dents and scratches.
At that point it’s obviously not being used for what it was originally designed for.
Because they take up too much room on the roads, make a shit ton of noise, are less safe for other users of the road, are less versatile than other vehicles. Those were the objective reasons.
Now for the subjective reasons: they’re ugly as sin, expensive as fuck, the fuel cost is too high and they suck at driving in the snow.
Not less versatile, that’s for sure. Way more versatile. I’m looking at the GMC Denali EV truck. They are pricey though
They don’t really say on their website how much less range it has once you attach a trailer to it, beware.
Also the vehicle being so high and wide means it’ll be hard to park. That alone should be a deal breaker for anyone living close to a city.
The extended cab means less room in the bed. If the goal is to carry stuff, you are losing both room and range. Your stuff also is gonna get wet unless you buy something additional to cover them.
EV large pickups seem to me like the worst of both world when I stop and think about it.
Scooters and bicycles are the personal commuter vehicles for most of the world. Otherwise, ride a train or bus!
