Spun off from a derailed thread about unpopular road opinions, which was derailed by someone who would have preferred to discuss their distaste for SUVs.
The discussion will continue here.
What does "gas-prone" mean?
Quote from: kphoger on March 31, 2021, 03:31:21 PM
What does "gas-prone" mean?
Often eats beans and dairy.
Chris
Quote from: kphoger on March 31, 2021, 03:31:21 PM
What does "gas-prone" mean?
It means you have to be very picky about the fuel you give them.
I thought you meant gas guzzling when I saw the title lol
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on March 31, 2021, 03:29:54 PM
Spun off from a derailed thread about unpopular road opinions, which was derailed by someone who would have preferred to discuss their distaste for SUVs.
The discussion will continue here.
I want to point out I did not "derail" anything, the title asked for an unpopular opinion, I gave one, most subsequent posters chose to contest my point rather than add anything else to the thread. :sombrero:
Quote from: StogieGuy7 on March 31, 2021, 03:32:36 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 31, 2021, 03:31:21 PM
What does "gas-prone" mean?
It means you have to be very picky about the fuel you give them.
My Jeep doesn't require premium gas. I don't follow.
Chris
Quote from: HighwayStar on March 31, 2021, 03:34:18 PM
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on March 31, 2021, 03:29:54 PM
Spun off from a derailed thread about unpopular road opinions, which was derailed by someone who would have preferred to discuss their distaste for SUVs.
The discussion will continue here.
I want to point out I did not "derail" anything, the title asked for an unpopular opinion, I gave one, most subsequent posters chose to contest my point rather than add anything else to the thread. :sombrero:
Hey, it's a discussion board. We were discussing. :nod: I didn't have other unpopular opinions to add to the thread because my opinions are all right. :bigass:
Chris
Changed the title to avoid the snowclone from the Modern Roundabouts thread, and avoid further confusion
Quote from: HighwayStar on March 31, 2021, 03:34:18 PM
I want to point out I did not "derail" anything, the title asked for an unpopular opinion, I gave one, most subsequent posters chose to contest my point rather than add anything else to the thread.
When a general topic of conversation is almost immediately steered toward one topic, this counts as derailment. This is like if FritzOwl decided to invade one's threads with their Interstate ideas.
Quote from: Hwy 61 Revisited on March 31, 2021, 03:37:52 PM
Changed the title to avoid the snowclone from the Modern Roundabouts thread.
Quote from: HighwayStar on March 31, 2021, 03:34:18 PM
I want to point out I did not "derail" anything, the title asked for an unpopular opinion, I gave one, most subsequent posters chose to contest my point rather than add anything else to the thread.
When a general topic of conversation is almost immediately steered toward one topic, this counts as derailment. This is like if FritzOwl decided to invade one's threads with their Interstate ideas.
We might agree to disagree, but is the point of a thread just to write down some words and then have no one comment on them? That's seems incredibly boring. Again, the whole point of a
discussion board is to discuss.
Chris
If this is a thread dedicated to gas-guzzling sport utility vehicles, then it is not the same thing as the discussion on the other board. Not all SUVs are gas-guzzlers.
Quote from: kphoger on March 31, 2021, 03:41:17 PM
If this is a thread dedicated to gas-guzzling sport utility vehicles, then it is not the same thing as the discussion on the other board. Not all SUVs are gas-guzzlers.
They are all gas guzzlers
relative to an equivalent vehicle build in a sedan or station wagon configuration. Yes, you can compare some I4 SUV to a V8 Sedan and make the claim that the SUV is more fuel efficient. But if you take ANY SUV and make no changes other than dropping the ride height you reduce air resistance and end up with a more fuel efficient vehicle. You cannot cheat physics.
Quote from: HighwayStar on March 31, 2021, 03:44:33 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 31, 2021, 03:41:17 PM
If this is a thread dedicated to gas-guzzling sport utility vehicles, then it is not the same thing as the discussion on the other board. Not all SUVs are gas-guzzlers.
They are all gas guzzlers relative to an equivalent vehicle build in a sedan or station wagon configuration. Yes, you can compare some I4 SUV to a V8 Sedan and make the claim that the SUV is more fuel efficient. But if you take ANY SUV and make no changes other than dropping the ride height you reduce air resistance and end up with a more fuel efficient vehicle. You cannot cheat physics.
I'll try one more time. What is your take on the all-electric Hummer?
Chris
I never was bothered by them personally although I probably wouldn't get another unless it was strictly a recreational oriented vehicle. My wife had a Forester and we do use it for it's intended purpose...my Impreza ain't bad either off road.
Quote from: jayhawkco on March 31, 2021, 03:47:36 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on March 31, 2021, 03:44:33 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 31, 2021, 03:41:17 PM
If this is a thread dedicated to gas-guzzling sport utility vehicles, then it is not the same thing as the discussion on the other board. Not all SUVs are gas-guzzlers.
They are all gas guzzlers relative to an equivalent vehicle build in a sedan or station wagon configuration. Yes, you can compare some I4 SUV to a V8 Sedan and make the claim that the SUV is more fuel efficient. But if you take ANY SUV and make no changes other than dropping the ride height you reduce air resistance and end up with a more fuel efficient vehicle. You cannot cheat physics.
I'll try one more time. What is your take on the all-electric Hummer?
Chris
It is STILL less energy efficient than an equivalent vehicle in a Station Wagon configuration. Again you CANNOT cheat physics. And it still incurs all of the rollover, override accident, etc. issues.
Quote from: HighwayStar on March 31, 2021, 03:44:33 PM
But if you take ANY SUV and make no changes other than dropping the ride height you reduce air resistance and end up with a more fuel efficient vehicle. You cannot cheat physics.
Not true. Aerodynamics and fuel economy are more than just ride height.
Quote from: kphoger on March 31, 2021, 03:52:21 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on March 31, 2021, 03:44:33 PM
But if you take ANY SUV and make no changes other than dropping the ride height you reduce air resistance and end up with a more fuel efficient vehicle. You cannot cheat physics.
Not true. Aerodynamics and fuel economy are more than just ride height.
Again
equivalent vehicle, as in
all things remain the same except drive height. At that point it is solely ride height being the independent variable, all others are fixed.
Quote from: HighwayStar on March 31, 2021, 03:50:44 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on March 31, 2021, 03:47:36 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on March 31, 2021, 03:44:33 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 31, 2021, 03:41:17 PM
If this is a thread dedicated to gas-guzzling sport utility vehicles, then it is not the same thing as the discussion on the other board. Not all SUVs are gas-guzzlers.
They are all gas guzzlers relative to an equivalent vehicle build in a sedan or station wagon configuration. Yes, you can compare some I4 SUV to a V8 Sedan and make the claim that the SUV is more fuel efficient. But if you take ANY SUV and make no changes other than dropping the ride height you reduce air resistance and end up with a more fuel efficient vehicle. You cannot cheat physics.
I'll try one more time. What is your take on the all-electric Hummer?
Chris
It is STILL less energy efficient than an equivalent vehicle in a Station Wagon configuration. Again you CANNOT cheat physics. And it still incurs all of the rollover, override accident, etc. issues.
But it is STILL more energy efficient than a gasoline-engine sedan, something you're
not trying to ban. If you were saying all cars should have a fuel efficiency of xxx, I might disagree, but at least I'd understand your point. I'm trying to figure out exactly
which characteristic it is of SUVs that makes the ban necessary. It's clearly not fuel efficiency, as this point would eliminate. It's not safety features, as your unwillingness to apparently be concerned about older passenger cars doesn't apply. I guess it's also not ground clearance, since a Honda CR-V (SUV) has lower ground clearance than an Audi A4 Allroad. Is it just the "look"?
Chris
Quote from: HighwayStar on March 31, 2021, 03:58:58 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 31, 2021, 03:52:21 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on March 31, 2021, 03:44:33 PM
But if you take ANY SUV and make no changes other than dropping the ride height you reduce air resistance and end up with a more fuel efficient vehicle. You cannot cheat physics.
Not true. Aerodynamics and fuel economy are more than just ride height.
Again equivalent vehicle, as in all things remain the same except drive height. At that point it is solely ride height being the independent variable, all others are fixed.
If you lower the height of my SUV, then where are you taking the inches from?
Are you taking it from the ground clearance? If so, then all things are no longer equal.
Are you taking it from my headroom? If so, then all things are no longer equal.
If you reduce the height of a vehicle, then the whole shape of it will need to be redesigned. After the redesign, it may or may not be more fuel efficient.
Quote from: jayhawkco on March 31, 2021, 03:59:09 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on March 31, 2021, 03:50:44 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on March 31, 2021, 03:47:36 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on March 31, 2021, 03:44:33 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 31, 2021, 03:41:17 PM
If this is a thread dedicated to gas-guzzling sport utility vehicles, then it is not the same thing as the discussion on the other board. Not all SUVs are gas-guzzlers.
They are all gas guzzlers relative to an equivalent vehicle build in a sedan or station wagon configuration. Yes, you can compare some I4 SUV to a V8 Sedan and make the claim that the SUV is more fuel efficient. But if you take ANY SUV and make no changes other than dropping the ride height you reduce air resistance and end up with a more fuel efficient vehicle. You cannot cheat physics.
I'll try one more time. What is your take on the all-electric Hummer?
Chris
It is STILL less energy efficient than an equivalent vehicle in a Station Wagon configuration. Again you CANNOT cheat physics. And it still incurs all of the rollover, override accident, etc. issues.
But it is STILL more energy efficient than a gasoline-engine sedan, something you're not trying to ban. If you were saying all cars should have a fuel efficiency of xxx, I might disagree, but at least I'd understand your point. I'm trying to figure out exactly which characteristic it is of SUVs that makes the ban necessary. It's clearly not fuel efficiency, as this point would eliminate. It's not safety features, as your unwillingness to apparently be concerned about older passenger cars doesn't apply. I guess it's also not ground clearance, since a Honda CR-V (SUV) has lower ground clearance than an Audi A4 Allroad. Is it just the "look"?
Chris
That is NOT the relevant comparison however, the gasoline driven sedan obviously offers different utility being compatible with the existing fuel infrastructure. What I am seeking to eliminate is the Deadweight Loss due to excess ride height, which was driven by regulation in the first place. Has nothing to do with looks.
Quote from: HighwayStar on March 31, 2021, 03:44:33 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 31, 2021, 03:41:17 PM
If this is a thread dedicated to gas-guzzling sport utility vehicles, then it is not the same thing as the discussion on the other board. Not all SUVs are gas-guzzlers.
They are all gas guzzlers relative to an equivalent vehicle build in a sedan or station wagon configuration. Yes, you can compare some I4 SUV to a V8 Sedan and make the claim that the SUV is more fuel efficient. But if you take ANY SUV and make no changes other than dropping the ride height you reduce air resistance and end up with a more fuel efficient vehicle. You cannot cheat physics.
In my comparison, I showed you a seven-passenger V6 SUV that was both shorter and lighter than a seven-passenger V6 non-SUV.
Quote from: kphoger on March 31, 2021, 04:08:56 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on March 31, 2021, 03:44:33 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 31, 2021, 03:41:17 PM
If this is a thread dedicated to gas-guzzling sport utility vehicles, then it is not the same thing as the discussion on the other board. Not all SUVs are gas-guzzlers.
They are all gas guzzlers relative to an equivalent vehicle build in a sedan or station wagon configuration. Yes, you can compare some I4 SUV to a V8 Sedan and make the claim that the SUV is more fuel efficient. But if you take ANY SUV and make no changes other than dropping the ride height you reduce air resistance and end up with a more fuel efficient vehicle. You cannot cheat physics.
In my comparison, I showed you a seven-passenger V6 SUV that was both shorter and lighter than a seven-passenger V6 non-SUV.
Which is entirely irrelevant because they are NOT the same vehicle. You are comparing two different designs, so you have piles of confounding variables. Sure, it can be shorter and lighter, both of those however are other compromises. You change ONE variable at a time, not dozens.
Quote from: HighwayStar on March 31, 2021, 04:11:36 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 31, 2021, 04:08:56 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on March 31, 2021, 03:44:33 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 31, 2021, 03:41:17 PM
If this is a thread dedicated to gas-guzzling sport utility vehicles, then it is not the same thing as the discussion on the other board. Not all SUVs are gas-guzzlers.
They are all gas guzzlers relative to an equivalent vehicle build in a sedan or station wagon configuration. Yes, you can compare some I4 SUV to a V8 Sedan and make the claim that the SUV is more fuel efficient. But if you take ANY SUV and make no changes other than dropping the ride height you reduce air resistance and end up with a more fuel efficient vehicle. You cannot cheat physics.
In my comparison, I showed you a seven-passenger V6 SUV that was both shorter and lighter than a seven-passenger V6 non-SUV.
Which is entirely irrelevant because they are NOT the same vehicle. You are comparing two different designs, so you have piles of confounding variables. Sure, it can be shorter and lighter, both of those however are other compromises. You change ONE variable at a time, not dozens.
That's exactly the point all of us are trying to make.
When you compare my Nissan Pathfinder to a Toyota Camry and then decide my car should be banned from on-road use but the Camry is A-OK, you are comparing two different designs.
If you make a vehicle less tall, then it is NOT the same vehicle
either. Something has to be compromised in order to reduce the height.
Not all SUVs are gas-guzzlers. There is no such thing as "an equivalent vehicle build in a sedan or station wagon configuration". By necessity, something in those configurations is not equivalent. They don't have the same ground clearance, or they don't have the same headroom, or they don't have the same ability to tow, or they don't have the same cargo space, or they don't have the same mud and snow handling, or a whole litany of other things. I bought my SUV because it has high ground clearance and is body-on-frame construction, because I need those things for my non-commercial, non-leisure purposes. No sedan or station wagon is comparable.
Quote from: kphoger on March 31, 2021, 04:24:32 PM
That's exactly the point all of us are trying to make.
When you compare my Nissan Pathfinder to a Toyota Camry and then decide my car should be banned from on-road use but the Camry is A-OK, you are comparing two different designs.
If you make a vehicle less tall, then it is NOT the same vehicle either. Something has to be compromised in order to reduce the height.
Not all SUVs are gas-guzzlers. There is no such thing as "an equivalent vehicle build in a sedan or station wagon configuration". By necessity, something in those configurations is not equivalent. They don't have the same ground clearance, or they don't have the same headroom, or they don't have the same ability to tow, or they don't have the same cargo space, or they don't have the same mud and snow handling, or a whole litany of other things. I bought my SUV because it has high ground clearance and is body-on-frame construction, because I need those things for my non-commercial, non-leisure purposes. No sedan or station wagon is comparable.
Ding ding ding. If you want to ban something, you have to determine what it is that makes it different from the things you don't want to ban. In order to do that, you have to compare it to something different. Every time we bring up that
different thing, you (HighwayStar) call it a straw man. I'm aware a Camry and a Wrangler have a whole bunch of things not in common. What you have failed to demonstrate though, is what it is specifically about the Wrangler that is what you deem prohibitive, because each of the characteristics you've brought up, we've been able to show you an applicable example that you wouldn't ban that also has the same characteristic.
At risk of bringing up the same "straw men":
Fuel Efficiency? Wrangler better than a Lamborghini
Safety? Wrangler safer than a '57 Chevy
Ground Clearance? CR-V lower than an Audi A4 Allroad
Weight? Wrangler lighter than a Bentley
Likelihood of an accident? Wrangler better than a motorcycle
Chris
Quote from: jayhawkco on March 31, 2021, 04:36:57 PM
Fuel Efficiency? Wrangler better than a Lamborghini
Safety? Wrangler safer than a '57 Chevy
Ground Clearance? CR-V lower than an Audi A4 Allroad
Weight? Wrangler lighter than a Bentley
Likelihood of an accident? Wrangler better than a motorcycle
Height? A lot of SUVs shorter than a lot of minivans
I'd be interested to know what the stopping distance would be for a 2022 Crown Victoria nine-passenger station wagon or whatever theoretical "equivalent" is being proposed.
Dang. I just bought a 2020 Nissan Rogue. Oh well.
Oh no what a shame that you chose a ton of extra practicality over a whole 3 mpg on the highway (0 in the city) compared to its sedan counterpart.
Personally, I find more issue with massive pickup trucks than SUVs. As someone in a small compact hatchback, it's near impossible to see around normal new pickup trucks, and that becomes doubly impossible if they have any sort of lift on them. I have to put myself further in the intersection to see around them than if they were in pretty much anything smaller. Not to mention, if one of them hits me, I'm put at a massive disadvantage (3k lbs vs 5k lbs) and I'll be the one to fare worse, probably.
And don't get me started on the new Hummer EV or the "Cyber"truck...
And for the record, I'd be fine making some restrictions in aftermarket lift sizes. 3" or so, fine. People jacking them up like monster trucks seems excessive.
Chris
Quote from: jayhawkco on April 01, 2021, 09:55:27 AM
And for the record, I'd be fine making some restrictions in aftermarket lift sizes. 3" or so, fine. People jacking them up like monster trucks seems excessive.
There are unpaved roads, such as Steele Pass in Death Valley National Park, where you need some lift to not get high-centered, and my old pickup truck (no lift, stock configuration) couldn't go there on both of my visits to the area. Adding lift isn't something you can do roadside, and there aren't any shops in the area off the paved highway network. So having enough lift for Steele Pass means some travel on paved state highways to get to the pass.
I'm not crazy about monster trucks, especially the ones with bumpers way up in the air and not coming close to the typical bumper height for cars and other trucks. Just realize there's a tradeoff there.
Quote from: jayhawkco on April 01, 2021, 09:55:27 AM
And for the record, I'd be fine making some restrictions in aftermarket lift sizes. 3" or so, fine. People jacking them up like monster trucks seems excessive.
Chris
At least that concern has legitimate safety considerations.
Quote from: oscar on April 01, 2021, 10:13:55 AM
Quote from: jayhawkco on April 01, 2021, 09:55:27 AM
And for the record, I'd be fine making some restrictions in aftermarket lift sizes. 3" or so, fine. People jacking them up like monster trucks seems excessive.
There are unpaved roads, such as Steele Pass in Death Valley National Park, where you need some lift to not get high-centered, and my old pickup truck (no lift, stock configuration) couldn't go there on both of my visits to the area. Adding lift isn't something you can do roadside, and there aren't any shops in the area off the paved highway network. So having enough lift for Steele Pass means some travel on paved state highways to get to the pass.
I'm not crazy about monster trucks, especially the ones with bumpers way up in the air and not coming close to the typical bumper height for cars and other trucks. Just realize there's a tradeoff there.
And hence why I drive a Jeep Wrangler Rubicon. There are almost no roads I can't take my vehicle on. There are trails I wouldn't for fear of body damage, but I can't imagine needing to ever add a body or suspension lift to my ride.
Chris
Quote from: Zeffy on April 01, 2021, 09:20:29 AM
Not to mention, if one of them hits me, I'm put at a massive disadvantage (3k lbs vs 5k lbs) and I'll be the one to fare worse, probably.
A few years ago, I accidentally ran a red light and T-boned a 2002 Honda Accord with a 2007 Nissan Pathfinder. Yeah, guess who won that fight? Pushed the whole thing up on the sidewalk.
True, my Pathfinder was totaled out by insurance, but I was able to drive around for a few days first.
Our 2015 V-6 Explorer was sluggish and made 26 MPG. Our 2018 with the same engine is far more powerful with 22 mpg...
As to surprises.
I drove a Scion xD and it made 28 tops it moped around. I replaced it with a Ford Fusion better acceleration and handling and 31 MPG. The fusion DID cost 7K more, but the size difference was a big part of that.
Quote from: kphoger on March 31, 2021, 04:42:10 PM
I'd be interested to know what the stopping distance would be for a 2022 Crown Victoria nine-passenger station wagon or whatever theoretical "equivalent" is being proposed.
No worse than a comparable SUV, and being lower center of gravity it should be more controllable during a hard stop.