Why are SUV's so popular ??

Ford Falcon XR6 · 01-09-2011, 10:20 PM

As the subject states why has the new car market all become about SUV's ??
No offence to people who own them but they don't really work off road and aren't the best thing to drive in the city. Are they really good for all that much or have we just been told by the media to like them ?? Again no offence to SUV owners it's just my opinion.

Cheers Lorenz

FPVF6X201 · 01-09-2011, 11:02 PM

Have you driven any modern SUV's? Sure they are probably not "needed", but as i always tell the wife, i dont NEED anything, but i WANT everything lol.

Higher driving position equals perceived safety. Some, like Territories, drive like a car. Some have excellent space/seating options that you simply cant get in a sedan.

I'm sure there are other reasons.

Ford Falcon XR6 · 02-09-2011, 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FPVwannabe

Have you driven any modern SUV's? Sure they are probably not "needed", but as i always tell the wife, i dont NEED anything, but i WANT everything lol.

Higher driving position equals perceived safety. Some, like Territories, drive like a car. Some have excellent space/seating options that you simply cant get in a sedan.

I'm sure there are other reasons.

I've driven a fair few SUV's mainly mazda's (as i work for them) and i just can't get to like them even the AWD turbo models still have the feeling of being to bulky. I guess it all just comes down to personal choice and you like what you like.

Cheers Lorenz

vanman_75 · 01-09-2011, 11:04 PM

Load height , access. Vision , and in the small to medium class = easy car to own . I love my falcons and own 1 but myprado is a better drive by far , even the Santa Fe we just sold is a very user friendly . As much as I want to replace my falcon with the new gt , as o have said before I am quite sure it will be replaced with a territory ...handles as good as I need and I'm not a burnout king , if I want speed I get on my bike ! Seriously don't have a reason to buy a low to the ground vehicle with all the available suvs / high ride cars we have today .

jpd80 · 01-09-2011, 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ford Falcon XR6

As the subject states why has the new car market all become about SUV's ??
No offence to people who own them but they don't really work off road and aren't the best thing to drive in the city. Are they really good for all that much or have we just been told by the media to like them ?? Again no offence to SUV owners it's just my opinion.

Cheers Lorenz

Sedans and station wagons don't work for people who want a vehicle with more versatility.
With a higher seating a lot of drivers including women, are less intimidated by arrogant drivers
in Falcadores trying to push them out of the way. My wife has a RAV4 and it is quite easy to
park because it has an excellent turning circle and tight steering lock.

Price for price, a small SUV = a mid sized sedan, a midsized SUV = a Large sedan,
so no wonder they are more popular than either of those segments...

Ford is missing out by not having an up to date small SUV in the market place,
the next Escape/Kuga cannot come quickly enough for Ford and those of us who want one.

gtxb67 · 01-09-2011, 11:11 PM

our rav4 is much more comfortable than anything honda offers. it feels smaller than a yaris and corolla and it can carry more than most vehicles while being easier to load and unload than a boot

why not an suv

Carby · 02-09-2011, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gtxb67

our rav4 is much more comfortable than anything honda offers. it feels smaller than a yaris and corolla and it can carry more than most vehicles while being easier to load and unload than a boot

why not an suv

"More comfortable than anything Honda offers" Wow those Accords must be rubbish!

I've news for you, the RAV 4 isn't smaller than a Yaris or Corolla, Is heavier, would use more fuel, have less tyre life, is more prone to rollover than a sedan - ohh but it does carry more!

gtxb67 · 02-09-2011, 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carby

"More comfortable than anything Honda offers" Wow those Accords must be rubbish!

I've news for you, the RAV 4 isn't smaller than a Yaris or Corolla, Is heavier, would use more fuel, have less tyre life, is more prone to rollover than a sedan - ohh but it does carry more!

yes, they were rubbish in my opinion. we wanted a honda, until we drove one - the civic, the accord, the accord euro and the crv

i have news for you. you sit higher in a rav4, so visibility is much better than a yaris or corolla. when sitting lower in a car, they feel bigger. you also seem to sit much further back (maybe an illusion with the sloping window), so the dashboard layout makes it feel smaller. a rav4 is heaps easier to get around town and a car park. much better visibility (the front of the vehicle is much easier to judge). have you actually driven all three of them

the rav4 does not have blind spots from my experience. if you cannot see a car beside you or behind you, it is not there. a reverse camera goes a long way to seeing what is directly behind you

and no, they do not sound like an old truck - the 4 cylinder is a fairly smooth motor that is not that bad on fuel

Carby · 02-09-2011, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gtxb67

yes, they were rubbish in my opinion. we wanted a honda, until we drove one - the civic, the accord, the accord euro and the crv

i have news for you. you sit higher in a rav4, so visibility is much better than a yaris or corolla. when sitting lower in a car, they feel bigger. you also seem to sit much further back (maybe an illusion with the sloping window), so the dashboard layout makes it feel smaller. a rav4 is heaps easier to get around town and a car park. much better visibility (the front of the vehicle is much easier to judge). have you actually driven all three of them

the rav4 does not have blind spots from my experience. if you cannot see a car beside you or behind you, it is not there. a reverse camera goes a long way to seeing what is directly behind you

and no, they do not sound like an old truck - the 4 cylinder is a fairly smooth motor that is not that bad on fuel

I've driven the Accord & Civic and been in the RAV 4. I'm surprised you find the Rav 4 more comfortable but I suppose it's personal choice. Just like when I drive either of my brothers 4WD's (Pajero and Jeep Grand Cherokee) I hate being so high I feel they'll tip over at the next roundabout and I'm conscience how fast I go around corners............

gtxb67 · 02-09-2011, 07:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carby

I've driven the Accord & Civic and been in the RAV 4. I'm surprised you find the Rav 4 more comfortable but I suppose it's personal choice. Just like when I drive either of my brothers 4WD's (Pajero and Jeep Grand Cherokee) I hate being so high I feel they'll tip over at the next roundabout and I'm conscience how fast I go around corners............

of course it is all personal choice and fit - the euro was a nice car, but still didn't grab us entirely. the accord to me had an uncomfortable seating position. the civic was ok for a $22,000 car, but to me it cannot compete with the rav4 cruiser l. when suggesting comfort, i am talking the whole driving experience for me. the seating in the rav4 is good. the visibility. the position of the steering wheel, guages, and gear stick is all good. the fact we have a manual probably helps with smoothness (as opposed to it kicking down whenever it wants <like the civic we drove>). of course others will drive a rav4 and find it different, because they are taller or shorter than me. they will be heavier or lighter etc. but to me the rav4 and cx7 (especially) feel like a car, more than a 4wd. i have not had any problems with cornering - it seems to sit very well for me. it is not a performance vehicle, but it does not feel unstable or cumbersome

either way, after driving a rav4 and cx7, i was pleasantly surprised at how well they drove and sat on the road - not what i expected. i expected them to be more like the crv was (which was a bus)

**cs123** · 01-09-2011, 11:20 PM

Seapking of SUVs. I think I may get one of these when they arrive. Was looking at a Freelander but have fallen for this little guy. It's for the Mrs though;)

http://www.landrover.com/au/en/rr/ra...FWdKpgodfgl81A

FERG_51 · 01-09-2011, 11:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cs123

Seapking of SUVs. I think I may get one of these when they arrive. Was looking at a Freelander but have fallen for this little guy. It's for the Mrs though;)

http://www.landrover.com/au/en/rr/ra...FWdKpgodfgl81A

I think this new Rover comes with the Ford ecoboost motor as well.

IDT · 02-09-2011, 12:18 AM

repeated post

IDT · 02-09-2011, 12:19 AM

My experience
Pro's- If you have kids of Car seat age they are a hell of a lot easier to strap in to their hanesses, the kids can see more as a result of ride height so are less bothersome to parents. The back of the wagon is a better height to work off, especially if your youngins are nappy age.

Cons- I don't think they handle well if comparing like with like. The teri doesn't handle as well as the same year make falcon in my opinion.
Terrible blind spots. I know this will get a lot of people disagree but to prove my point next time you see an SUV or 4x4 parked nose 1st against a wall see how far back it is. Infront of the vehicle and behind it are huge blind spots. If your thinking reverse camera. Do they have peripheral vision? 80% of people run over in driveways are hit by SUV and 4x4 drivers. So they are a huge danger to kids. Especially if the driver is a short person.

Body roll is an obvious problem. I also have to respectfully disagree with Van Man 75. I don't think Prado is a match for same age same k falcon on tarmac.

From other road user perspective they are a hinderence as they block visibility for other drivers. Many drivers get cocky beyond their ability just because they are in a percieved bigger vehicle.

**Dave R** · 02-09-2011, 12:29 AM

SUVs save the family man from buying a Tarago/minivan and all of the depressive thoughts that follow soon after. It's the big suckers like Land Cruisers and Pajeros that I see as pointless in the city. Having previously had a Territory, I think SUVs are great, they are so comfortable, roomy, practical, easy on the eye, commanding driving position, etc etc, that's why they are popular.

**TUF_302** · 03-09-2011, 06:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adrenaline

SUVs save the family man from buying a Tarago/minivan and all of the depressive thoughts that follow soon after. It's the big suckers like Land Cruisers and Pajeros that I see as pointless in the city. Having previously had a Territory, I think SUVs are great, they are so comfortable, roomy, practical, easy on the eye, commanding driving position, etc etc, that's why they are popular.

You make a good point about Landcrusiers and the like being pointless in the city, I do drive my Patrol in the city if need be, but it's always fun trying to squeeze past buses and people who don't like there own lane very much, then parking it can be an issue, not that im bad at parking but trying to fit nearly 3 ton of steel in-between others who are not always parked strait is hard again, when I can i take the lancer, it's just so much easier, as something like a Territory would be

**DJR-351** · 03-09-2011, 10:12 AM

Unless it's breaking the law, it's no one else's buissiness what others drive, some people really do need to get a hobby....

I drive a Landcruiser as a daily and i vote....

SWMBO drives a Hilux as a daily and she votes....

We go bush a lot...

Brent · 03-09-2011, 10:54 AM

Good Lord! We've uncovered a few chips on shoulders here haven't we? As an owner of one of these "useless" SUVs I'm happy to offer up some casual observations. Our household (my wife & I) has 2 cars. If I could do the unfashionable sexist thing and break it down into 'his & hers', mine is a BF GT and hers is a Subaru Forester turbo.

So, let's get a few things out in the open. The GT is faster than the Subaru (although not by heaps

). It out corners the Subie easily. It kills it under brakes. However, the relevance of this is zero. They are two different cars, and personally, I use them for two different purposes.

If I'm going for a Sunday cruise, I'll grab the GT, no doubt. If its a bit of a weekend away where all the roads are sealed, then the GT looks the goods as well. However, the Subie tends to trump the GT in multiple other real world aspects. Going fishing and want to throw the rods, chairs, eskies etc in, then the Subaru is great. Going to the snow, a no-brainer. Camping, a no-brainer as well. Bit of a weekend away where there's the odd gravel road, the Subie gets the nod. I can chuck a big Coleman esky in the back of the Subaru and still have tonnes of space. The same esky won't even fit in the Falcon's shallow boot. In fact, I almost feel sorry for how much my beloved GT gets left behind, given the choice between the two vehicles.

I drive within the car's limits. On a sweeping bend that I'd do 100kph in the GT I might do 90kph in the Subaru. If I was towing a trailer, I'd do 80. Big deal. I know its offroad limitations well, so whilst I use its additional ground clearance and suspension compliance occasionally, I don't go banging it over creek crossings or jumping it over sand dunes like some fool. I can't understand why people don't get this?

Aside from the practical aspects, my wife loves her Forester. She's not the tallest girl in the world and she loves the extra ride height and the visibility afforded by the large glass area. She's not a car person at all, but she loves the Subie. She doesn't barrel it around corners or push its design envelope. Ultimately, its a comfortable, very practical car that ultimately does many things better than the GT. That's life. Whether its the very best possible vehicle on road or off road really isn't the point.

MAGPIE · 03-09-2011, 04:37 PM

Why are SUV's so popular...

In my case because said SUV (MY09 Forester XT) will

Climb a snowy mountain road to the skifield (without chains)

Traverse an alpine pass in the worst winter weather (without chains)

Cross a river bed (with water flowing through it)

Drive along a beach to go surfing

Negotiate a wet, muddy paddock

Tackle a gravel road like a rally car

and I can put my kids in their car seat without having to be a contornsionist

Nothing I could do with my XR8

Sure the XR8 was great for long intercity road trips but SUV's are so versatile. Some SUV's are junk though and I wouldn't touch them but Subaru's AWD is really unbeatable in an affordable vehicle.

Ben73 · 02-09-2011, 12:42 AM

Turning in an out of driveways without riping off your front or rear bumper is something I have liked about owning my SUV over my previous sedan.

Easier access for tall people like me.

AWD is helpful on the few dirt trails I drive on.

Seeing over traffic and other obstacles helps. Especially in car parks with walls and parked cars blocking your view at the end of every row.

Don't buy an SUV if you are trying to out steer a sedan over a mountain pass. When you own one, you are not going to be worrying about the handling too much because you clearly didn't buy it for that reason.
So yeah my SUV is probably a worse handler then a sedan, but that has never caused me any problems driving it. I just drive at a reasonable speed and take corners conservatively.

And if you do want a SUV that handles great, I hear the Mazda CX7/9 and BMW x5 are great handling SUVs.

BrisVegas · 02-09-2011, 11:42 AM

Strange as this may sound, we downsized to one car, the Pajero for all our needs. We go camping in the bush and on the beach and often take extra kids or family with us in the extra seats. I ride a bike or catch the bus to work and my wife drives the economical turbo diesel on the highway if she gets work relieving as a school teacher. We used to have two small cars, a Focus & Fiesta. Good cars, but they both had issues with front spoilers scraping and fragile alloy wheels. Neither was practical for us to go travelling in with our camping gear. Rego, insurance and depreciation on two cars, no matter how economical, still adds up.

I don't worry about curbs and potholes any more with the Pajero. The kids love being up higher so they can see what's happening and it's a much nicer height to step in to for me as I'm tall. I drive the Pajero much more sedately than a fwd hatchback and always drive in 4WD mode in the wet.

Most of our friends with multiple kids have SUVs and 4WDs for the versatility reasons.

Chopped · 02-09-2011, 12:03 PM

I reckon they are a stupid vehicle.

They are nothing more than a hatchback with big suspension and wheels. They are just high enough that you can't see past them in traffic which is annoying.
They DO NOT handle like a sedan (unless it's a Cayenne or similar). A sedan will still go most places that an SUV will. How many SUVs do you see exploring in the bush ?!!

The "extra space" (perceived) is more vertical than useful. They cost more to run, harder on tyres, harder on brakes etc etc.

They are a "lifestyle" statement vehicle, people get them cause their neighbor has one etc. Marketing people made them "cooler".

How did we all survive the first hundred years of motoring with sedans, wagons and vans before SUVs came out ?!!

Smoke Pursuit · 02-09-2011, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ford Falcon XR6

As the subject states why has the new car market all become about SUV's ??
No offence to people who own them but they don't really work off road and aren't the best thing to drive in the city. Are they really good for all that much or have we just been told by the media to like them ?? Again no offence to SUV owners it's just my opinion.

Cheers Lorenz

They are way better then a Falcon to live with... If they still made a High output model I would have one again, I miss my Territory Ghia.

Road_Warrior · 02-09-2011, 12:05 PM

One thing I'm finding is that getting the little man out of his car seat in my BA sedan is a pain in the ****. And the neck. Literally.

An SUV with nice big, wide opening doors and no plunging roofline makes it much, much easier. Your back will thank you for it in later life. Being higher up makes it much easier as well and they have all the usual features you can get in other cars as well as cram more stuff in the back (ever tried fitting a decent sized pram, bassinet and all the shopping in the boot of a Falcon? That too is a pain in the ****). Wifey says she can manage for the time being, but if Ford don't get a move on with getting the Kuga here, then we'll be looking elsewhere as much as I hate to say it.

RAPID_BA · 02-09-2011, 12:35 PM

This topic really makes my blood boil. Most suv drivers NEVER take them off road. When comparing a fairmont to a territory of the same year, they are about the same price new, the territory offers the same seats, dash and motor but is heavier, slower and thirstier to the fairmont sedan counterpart and offer no real extra space.

Then as a used car people pay $5k more (at least) for a territory with double the km too?? Insane. The fairmont does everything better. People are fooled into thinking a suv is better.

Come on is a rav4 or those little suvs a real suv? Those little motors can't make it up a hill let alone offroad duties. Have you driven a rav4, they sound like an old truck.

A territory is a slow falcon and wobbly around corners

GTP owner · 02-09-2011, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HULK_BA

This topic really makes my blood boil. Most suv drivers NEVER take them off road. When comparing a fairmont to a territory of the same year, they are about the same price new, the territory offers the same seats, dash and motor but is heavier, slower and thirstier to the fairmont sedan counterpart and offer no real extra space.

Then as a used car people pay $5k more (at least) for a territory with double the km too?? Insane. The fairmont does everything better. People are fooled into thinking a suv is better.

Come on is a rav4 or those little suvs a real suv? Those little motors can't make it up a hill let alone offroad duties. Have you driven a rav4, they sound like an old truck.

A territory is a slow falcon and wobbly around corners

So what if they never take them offroad? Most FPVs are never taken onto the track, and are grossly overpriced (heavier, thirstier, slower) compared to an xr6t. People still buy them though - must be something about choice.

Why do people buy cars? Because it suits their priorities and tastes. I have different needs depending on what i am doing, so i choose accordingly. If I have got the cash, why can't i choose an suv?

flappist · 02-09-2011, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HULK_BA

This topic really makes my blood boil. Most suv drivers NEVER take them off road. When comparing a fairmont to a territory of the same year, they are about the same price new, the territory offers the same seats, dash and motor but is heavier, slower and thirstier to the fairmont sedan counterpart and offer no real extra space.

Then as a used car people pay $5k more (at least) for a territory with double the km too?? Insane. The fairmont does everything better. People are fooled into thinking a suv is better.

Come on is a rav4 or those little suvs a real suv? Those little motors can't make it up a hill let alone offroad duties. Have you driven a rav4, they sound like an old truck.

A territory is a slow falcon and wobbly around corners

You mean like most performance car drivers never take them to a track, never travel long distances at high speed and just wander about in the suburbs wasting fuel when a hyundai or kia would do everything they do far more efficiently?

Of course the almost cliche reply is:

a) try and put 5 people/800kgs of gear in a hyundai
b) try and tow a trailer/caravan/whatever in a hyundai
c) some other fantasy

So saying that a person buying a SUV and then hardly ever going off road is no different from someone buying a V8 falcon and hardly ever carying 5 people while pulling a caravan on a long high speed trip to spend the weekend driving on a race track.

Of course everyone on here does those things don't they.........

jimmyxr6t04 · 02-09-2011, 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HULK_BA

This topic really makes my blood boil. Most suv drivers NEVER take them off road. When comparing a fairmont to a territory of the same year, they are about the same price new, the territory offers the same seats, dash and motor but is heavier, slower and thirstier to the fairmont sedan counterpart and offer no real extra space.

Then as a used car people pay $5k more (at least) for a territory with double the km too?? Insane. The fairmont does everything better. People are fooled into thinking a suv is better.

Come on is a rav4 or those little suvs a real suv? Those little motors can't make it up a hill let alone offroad duties. Have you driven a rav4, they sound like an old truck.

A territory is a slow falcon and wobbly around corners

Our territory can fit 2 baby seats in the rear, plus fit a large adult in the middle or side. Our BA falcon can't.... Our territory can fit prams, shopping, big esky etc all in one go, the falcon can't or at least not without a lot of planning in the packing...

As for being a slow falcon, my TT might be a tad slower around corners (nothing a few suspension mods won't fix)... But geez it's good fun, especially on the straights!

Matty4 · 02-09-2011, 01:36 PM

Because the practicalities of them far outweigh the negatives.
As others have said, yes they don't handle as well as a sedan, but who drives their sedan at 10/10ths with the wife and kids in the car? I can pretty much guarantee that a sedan and an SUV driven over the same stretch of road fully laden with wife and 3 kids won't get there any later than the XR with the same load in it. The front seat passenger would see to that pretty quickly...hehe.

I have 3 kids and we regularly transport their friends around and as you can see in my sig, I have 2

When I bought my first Terri we had a list of requirements. It had to be capable of towing my 2200kg caravan, carry 7 and be reasonably economical to run and own. The Terri ticked all those boxes.

As an aside, the Volvo beats the Terri for day to day practicalities in every respect too.

We will always have at least one from now on.

To the OP, wait until you become a family man and have needs other than cruising from a car, priorities change.

2011G6E · 02-09-2011, 01:47 PM

"Percieved safety" is a very telling statement. People buy them with the false idea that they are now "safer" than the plebs in ordinary cars around them, and unfortunately many SUV and fourbie drivers act exactly like the stereotypical idea of someone who believes they don't have to follow the same road rules as the rest of us...ignoring the annoying fact of higher roll-over risk and other very different dynamic properties to a "real car".

I remember a telling comment one time some years back on a radio talkback show on four wheel driving where someone rang up saying they were going on "the big lap" around Australia, and wanted to know what sort of four wheel drive they should buy to tow thier van. When asked how big their van was, it turned out to only be a little 14 footer for two people. Then they were asked how much off roading they would be doing, and they said "Oh none...we won't be going off bitumen".
The advice was to forget a four wheel drive and buy a Commodore or Falcon wagon and tow it with that...they'd get better fuel economy, cheaper tyres, easier to drive, and you can carry just as much gear inside the wagon.

I wonder how many people buy an SUV instead of looking at wagons or people movers for their real needs?

We traded in our 100 series Toyota Landcruiser because we realised that we just weren't doing enough off roading to justify the costs of running it...the huge cost of tyres, the staggering costs of servicing the big turbo diesel, and just general running costs. The G6E we own makes much more sense, and if we need to go to a rough area, the old WB V8 ute we just bought can be pressed into service for that.

I also think there is a big difference between a car-like Territory and a "genuine" four wheel drive. The problem starts when people see them as a "get out of my damn way" symbol...