5 Reasons Not To Buy a SUV

[shyvas]

There seem to be more and more of them on our roads. Not only are they not echo friendly but lots of
people just drive them to the shops or local schools.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/cars/article-7870199/Five-reasons-SHOULDNT-buy-SUV.html

 

[Val]

There seem to be more and more of them on our roads. Not only are they not echo friendly but lots of
people just drive them to the shops or local schools.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/cars/article-7870199/Five-reasons-SHOULDNT-buy-SUV.html

Damn it, you're right! They devour enormous quantities of petrol and make emissions go through the roof. Moreover, they create jams in the crowded city center, and they occupy a lot of space on small suburban parking lots.

 

[Andy_T]

True, but IMO they are still not as impractical as pickup trucks ....

 

[Val]

True, but IMO they are still not as impractical as pickup trucks ....

They are very practical... especially in rural locations. I wish you could observe how Armenians and Abkhazians ride them in Caucasus mountains.

 

[shyvas]

True, but IMO they are still not as impractical as pickup trucks ....

I was comparing an SUV to a standard car and not a pick up.

I really don't see the point of an average person owning one. They consume so much petrol and space for no valid reason. Moreover, many SUV drivers think that they own the roads and tailgate.

 

[shyvas]

With their hulking weight and high driving position, SUVs exude a feeling of safety for those behind the wheel, but it can sometimes be an illusion. In 2003, traffic data from the US government
found that people driving or riding in an SUV were 11 per cent more likely to die in an accident than people in cars – thanks to their high centre of gravity and tendency to roll over in crashes.

They’re even worse news for pedestrians: SUVs are around twice as likely as cars to kill pedestrians they hit. With their high bumpers, SUVs tend to hit pedestrians in the chest and knock them to the ground, rather than flipping them onto the relatively soft bonnet, as is the case in passenger cars.
Despite being less fuel efficient, more polluting and sometimes more dangerous than passenger cars, the SUV isn’t going anywhere. Growing sales in Africa and the rest of the developing world suggest that when car drivers become more affluent, they start thinking about upgrading to larger vehicles. But if we can’t kick our attachment to SUVs, how else can we get out of the environmental cul-de-sac we’re driving down?


SUVs are way worse for the planet than anyone previously thought

 

[Val]

Moreover, many SUV drivers think that they own the roads and tailgate.

Vot-vot...

 

[PTree15]

I was comparing an SUV to a standard car and not a pick up.

I really don't see the point of an average person owning one. They consume so much petrol and space for no valid reason. Moreover, many SUV drivers think that they own the roads and tailgate.

This is true about their thinking they own the road. I had an SUV for a while, but I swear, I wasn't like that. It came in handy when I moved, though, for hauling a lot of stuff. I now have a smaller car that gets much better mileage.

 

[shyvas]

This is true about their thinking they own the road. I had an SUV for a while, but I swear, I wasn't like that. It came in handy when I moved, though, for hauling a lot of stuff. I now have a smaller car that gets much better mileage.

I'm sure that you weren't a tailgater. Some people, mainly men feel so superior on the roads when they have huge cars.

 

[PTree15]

I'm sure that you weren't a tailgater. Some people, mainly men feel so superior on the roads when they have huge cars.

Exactly. Their driving behavior is atrocious. They routinely cut people off without using directionals and are just aggressive in general. They are particularly awful in the winter when it snows. They drive as if there were no snow on the ground, forgetting that you still need distance to stop in time to avoid crashes. Four-wheel drive is great, but it doesn't mean you have a license to drive like a maniac in bad weather.

 

[Lou]

A LOT of my friends and family, when their kids grew up, they traded their minivans in for SUVs. But it's dumb. most of their miles are done with one or two people in the car. But they need the security that they can go on family vacations without renting a car. Which is dumb. I bet renting a bigger car once or twice a year would be cheaper. Also, why are there so many driveways with 2 SUVs?

Well, at least my sis was a little responsible. She got the cute little all eclectic BWM mini-SUV.

Interestingly just yesterday I was tooling down the freeway (in my 20-year-old coupe) and i noticed that there were absolutely no SUVs near me. So it got me to thinking that maybe people are moving away from them. But then I looked at the opposite side of the freeway and it looked like about 80% SUVs.

BTW, at my last count, there are about six different models of full-size SUVs that are all-electric.

 

[David3]

Some hybrid cars now cost the same as their petrol-only counterparts, in terms of 5-year cost of ownership (purchase price + financing + depreciation + fuel cost + maintenance costs).

Kelley Blue Book (Kelley Blue Book - Wikipedia) publishes 5-year cost of ownership numbers for every recent-model car available in the United States. Their numbers show that hybrid vehicles have become nearly cost-identical to their petrol counterparts:


2020 Toyota Corolla, petrol-only, 5-year cost of ownership = $33,291
Link: https://www.kbb.com/toyota/corolla/2020/l/?vehicleid=442120&intent=buy-new

2020 Toyota Corolla, hybrid, 5-year cost of ownership = $34,123
Link: https://www.kbb.com/toyota/corolla-hybrid/2020/le/?vehicleid=442115&intent=buy-new


2020 Hyundai Sonata, petrol-only, 5-year cost of ownership = $38,126
Link: https://www.kbb.com/hyundai/sonata/2020/se/?vehicleid=446148&intent=buy-new#survey

2020 Hyundai Sonata, hybrid, 5-year cost of ownership = $39,994
Link: https://www.kbb.com/hyundai/sonata-hybrid/2019/se/?vehicleid=442263&intent=buy-new
.

 

[Blues]

I like them they are easy to get in and out.

 

[silva]

This is terribly biased ! It's like reading that oatmeal is a really bad choice because it's loaded with sugar, and most people add milk .
A lot of people own SUV's out of need. If you're a family of 5 or more, have kids in any activities that require lugging things back and forth, they're a need. They're also not the gas guzzlers of old, and come in different sizes. I had one when my sons were younger and the one ended up with it, as he was in music and a band. Yes he often drove it alone, but what would you suggest? He get a second car ?
So much to ***** about! How about pick on all the truck owners? In my experience they're the worst, and the worst for being on phones

 

[Lou]

Moms usually prefer minivans. Dads don't like being seen in minivans so they get an SUV. also, SUVs are great if you are going skiing or maybe hauling a trailer or boat. But A LOT of SUV owners just drive to work and the grocery store in them.

one thing you don't see a factor in the cost of owning a gas-powered car is the time spent at gas stations. Over the years that really adds up. There is also a lot less maintenance with electric cars. No fuel pump, no radiator, and no water pump to break down and be replaced.

 

[Jamie in Chile]

We have had an SUV for years, but I am not going to defend it. We made a selfish choice.

The SUVs have got to go (and some of the trucks, other larger vehicles).

If you have a famiy of five then it's fair enough. Maybe if you live down a dirt road.

But most of them have 1 - 3 people and are on tarmac roads.

Although hopefully the next generation of families will have more 1 and 2-child families. There are too many of us.

We can't just make so many excuses all the time. We are going to destroy the entire amazon rainforest and melt all the ice in all the glaciers and arctic and antarctic if we don't change. Billions of people may die. Rich white people will be making tropical countries unlivable for a negligible benefit. Surely this is more important that the need to carry sports equipment around and still be able to swing your legs.

Just hold your rucksack or bag of shopping on your lap and think of all the thousand of dollars you've saved on petrol, maintenance and the cost of the vehicle. SUVs just eat money. It's not a vehicle that can be considered an investment in any way.

It's not just climate change and pollution. SUVs mean that if you have an accident, you impose a greater risk of injury and death on others at negligible benefit to yourself (because of SUVs rollover risk due to high centre of gravity countering any other benefit). SUVs take up more space on the road, meaning others can't see. THey take up more space in the parking lot making it harder to park next to them and making it hard to see when backing out. They are a selfish car in every way.

SUVs have single handledly destroyed all the extra efficiency gains of cars over the years. There has been no improvement after accounting for the increasing size of cars.

SUVs are a tragedy of the commons, because, when you can't see ahead of you on the road and everyone else's kids have one of these shiny monsters with all the space inside looming over you, you have to get one just to keep up. But if they had never been invented, everyone would be happy without. I blame the early adopters of SUVs for pushing the trend. A lot of the middle class people who have bought one in the last ten years have just done it so their kids don't have to be the only ones in the class/street without one.

It's pretty clear that (so far, this is changing) it's been harder to make electric cars in SUV sizes, so SUVs have held back electric cars for a while.

It's unfair to ask some people to be altruistic though while others get to drive them.

The only fair option is massive taxes on them (perhaps around $5,000-$10,000 in addition to existing taxes and I suggest to base this on CO2 emissions for all cars including the production of the vehicle rather than targeting SUV specifically). At the moment, SUV owners force society to pay for build bigger roads, wider parking spaces, medical care for people suffering for pollution, increased costs associated with worse accidents, not to mention the cost of sea walls, desalination of sea water, and all the other horrendous costs of dealing with climate change. At the moment, us SUV owners are externalising our costs and making everyone else pay for them.

A new tax of $5,000 or $10,000 per SUV would make things quite fair because it would be simply be making us SUV owners pay for the costs we oblige the rest of society to pay for us. Then, the number of SUVs would reduce while the money in taxes could go to good causes. That would make driving an SUV guilt-free for those that really need it as well.

 

[David3]

We have had an SUV for years, but I am not going to defend it. We made a selfish choice.

The SUVs have got to go (and some of the trucks, other larger vehicles).

If you have a famiy of five then it's fair enough. Maybe if you live down a dirt road.

But most of them have 1 - 3 people and are on tarmac roads.

Although hopefully the next generation of families will have more 1 and 2-child families. There are too many of us.

We can't just make so many excuses all the time. We are going to destroy the entire amazon rainforest and melt all the ice in all the glaciers and arctic and antarctic if we don't change. Billions of people may die. Rich white people will be making tropical countries unlivable for a negligible benefit. Surely this is more important that the need to carry sports equipment around and still be able to swing your legs.

Just hold your rucksack or bag of shopping on your lap and think of all the thousand of dollars you've saved on petrol, maintenance and the cost of the vehicle. SUVs just eat money. It's not a vehicle that can be considered an investment in any way.

It's not just climate change and pollution. SUVs mean that if you have an accident, you impose a greater risk of injury and death on others at negligible benefit to yourself (because of SUVs rollover risk due to high centre of gravity countering any other benefit). SUVs take up more space on the road, meaning others can't see. THey take up more space in the parking lot making it harder to park next to them and making it hard to see when backing out. They are a selfish car in every way.

SUVs have single handledly destroyed all the extra efficiency gains of cars over the years. There has been no improvement after accounting for the increasing size of cars.

SUVs are a tragedy of the commons, because, when you can't see ahead of you on the road and everyone else's kids have one of these shiny monsters with all the space inside looming over you, you have to get one just to keep up. But if they had never been invented, everyone would be happy without. I blame the early adopters of SUVs for pushing the trend. A lot of the middle class people who have bought one in the last ten years have just done it so their kids don't have to be the only ones in the class/street without one.

It's pretty clear that (so far, this is changing) it's been harder to make electric cars in SUV sizes, so SUVs have held back electric cars for a while.

It's unfair to ask some people to be altruistic though while others get to drive them.

The only fair option is massive taxes on them (perhaps around $5,000-$10,000 in addition to existing taxes and I suggest to base this on CO2 emissions for all cars including the production of the vehicle rather than targeting SUV specifically). At the moment, SUV owners force society to pay for build bigger roads, wider parking spaces, medical care for people suffering for pollution, increased costs associated with worse accidents, not to mention the cost of sea walls, desalination of sea water, and all the other horrendous costs of dealing with climate change. At the moment, us SUV owners are externalising our costs and making everyone else pay for them.

A new tax of $5,000 or $10,000 per SUV would make things quite fair because it would be simply be making us SUV owners pay for the costs we oblige the rest of society to pay for us. Then, the number of SUVs would reduce while the money in taxes could go to good causes. That would make driving an SUV guilt-free for those that really need it as well.

There are some small crossover electric SUVs available now. The Hyundai Kona Electric, the Kia Niro EV, the Audi e-Tron, the Tesla Model X, the Tesla Model Y, and the Jaguar I-Pace. In the United States, you can browse currently-available electric vehicles at the non-profit EV advocacy website, Plug In America: Electric Vehicle Advocacy and Education - Plug In America
.

 

[Jamie in Chile]

Thought I'd get some abuse from SUV owners for that rant, but I seem to have gotten away with it. I hope no-one was offended.

Of course, depending on the composition of your electricity grid, is driving a brand new SUV electric car (with all the carbon emissions in its construction and other non-environmental negative factors I've outlined above some of which are valid even for electric SUVs) really a more ethical choice than driving around an old petrol car with good mpg carefully? - the answer is it probably depends on whether your electricity grid is more renewables or not and whether you drive it a lot.

I looked into buying a Mitsubishi Outlander SUV PHEV (so hybrid elecric and gas) because my wife and kids do like SUVs (even though I hate them) and I wanted an electric car and I hoped it would be a compromise solution. Unfortunately, the carbon footprint savings are not as good as an electric sedan (i.e. regular size car), especially if you are allowing for the manufacturer of a larger vehicle. And the electric range of the Outlander is only 25-26 miles.

The trouble with full electric SUVs is just that they are just too expensive for now. It's all very well saying - spend $20,000 on this electric car and after so many years of maintenance and petrol savings it was really like buying a $12,000 petrol car in lifetime cost. Fair enough. But when the numbers are $40,000, $60,000, $80,000 it's just out of reach for most people no matter what the relative fuel and maintenance savings compared to a petrol car. I think most of the cars you mention are in that ball park of price.

And these full electric SUVs have not been on the market long enough to reach good second-hand pricing. Here in Chile there are possibly no full electric SUVs and certainly none on the second hand market at a reasonable price (about $20,000 is probably the highest we would go). If there was I probably would have bought one despite my previous rantings about SUVs because you know...you have got to keep the wife and kids happy and not think of yourself.

In the end I bought a pure electric car this year, a second hand Ioniq EV (not an SUV), and we will use that as the main family car and my wife will probably keep an SUV for her to use without me - hence low mileage and few emissions. I found the kids quite like it so far even though it's not an SUV. It probably helps that it's a 2017 model so it has features like a rear view camera and connecting the phone to the audio that they only experienced before in rental cars, since before this we had 2005 model cars or earlier.

If I was in the UK, and if my family still prefer SUV in a few years and I can't convince them, I might be looking at the Kona in a few years when the second hand prices start to come towards our budget. But I don't think they have even started selling this car brand new yet in Chile so my daughter will have gone to University perhaps by the time we can afford it, so we won't need it any more.

 

[David3]

The new hybrid crossover SUVs get impressive fuel economy, and their 5 year cost of ownership (purchase price + financing + fuel + maintenance + depreciation + insurance) is comparable to that of their non-hybrid versions. This, of course, depends on your local petrol prices, and how many miles you drive per year.

Per Kelley Blue Book, the 5 year cost of ownership of the Toyota hybrid RAV4 is, on average, less than that of the non-hybrid RAV4:

Toyota hybrid RAV4:
MSRP: $29,470
5-year cost of ownership = $40,014
Fuel economy: 41 miles per gallon city / 38 miles per gallon highway
Link: https://www.kbb.com/toyota/rav4-hybrid/2020/le/?vehicleid=446173&intent=buy-new

Toyota non-hybrid RAV4:
MSRP: $27,070
5-year cost of ownership = $40,821
Fuel economy: 26 miles per gallon city / 35 miles per gallon highway
Link: https://www.kbb.com/toyota/rav4/2020/le/?vehicleid=445548&intent=buy-new
.

 

[David3]

Of course, depending on the composition of your electricity grid, is driving a brand new SUV electric car (with all the carbon emissions in its construction and other non-environmental negative factors I've outlined above some of which are valid even for electric SUVs) really a more ethical choice than driving around an old petrol car with good mpg carefully? - the answer is it probably depends on whether your electricity grid is more renewables or not and whether you drive it a lot.

A 2016 detailed study on the full lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions ("cradle to grave", including mining, manufacturing, and eventual disposal/recycling) of electric vehicles, vs. their liquid-fueled counterparts, was jointly authored by Chevron, Ford, General Motors, Fiat/Chrysler, the U.S. National Renewable Energy Laboratory, the U.S. Department of Energy, Argonne National Laboratory, and the U.S. Electric Power Research Institute.

Link to full report: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjO64yozYLqAhXaU80KHZUaDUcQFjAEegQIBRAB&url=https://greet.es.anl.gov/files/c2g-2016-report&usg=AOvVaw2Tv1lsai1aj-JMNoc9CSPG

The full report might be more than you ever wanted to know on the topic, but the summary graph (below) is short and very informative.

Below: Summary graph, cradle-to-grave greenhouse gas emissions, per mile driven, of different vehicle technologies (assumes year 2014 U.S. electrical power mix):



Guide to chart abbreviations:

GHG emissions = Greenhouse gas emissions (grams of carbon dioxide equivalent per mile)
Gasoline ICEV = Gasoline (petrol) internal combustion engine vehicle (standard petrol car)
Diesel ICEV = Diesel internal combustion engine vehicle (standard diesel car)
E85 FFV = 85% ethanol / 15% gasoline flexible fuel vehicle (alcohol / petrol fueled car)
Gasoline HEV = Gasoline hybrid electric vehicle (Prius etc.)
Gasoline / Electric PHEV35 = Plug-in hybrid electric vehicle, 35 mile range per battery charge (Honda Clarity plug-in hybrid etc)
Hydrogen FCEV = Hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicle (Toyota Mirai etc).
Electricity BEV210 = Pure battery electric vehicle, 210 mile range per battery charge (Chevrolet Bolt, Tesla Model 3 standard range, etc)


The reports' emissions calculations assumed the United States' 2014 electrical power mix (39% coal, 27% natural gas, 19% nuclear, and 13% renewables).

The United States' 2019 electrical power mix was significantly cleaner (23% coal, 38% natural gas, 20% nuclear, and 17% renewables).

In California (where 50% of electric cars are sold in the U.S.), the electrical power mix is even cleaner:
(Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration eia.gov: California - State Energy Profile Overview - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) )