you won't be able to generate anywhere near the lateral G necessary to flip a SUV on an icy road,
I saw flipped SUVs on a semi-regular basis in the winter when I used to commute on the Taconic, so it's most certainly possible.
Were they on the road or off? I had an SUV sliding completely sideways on an icy road, with lots of fish tailing before it got that far. I didn't flip, it just slid. Now if you slid off the icy road and catch a tire in a ditch, then yes, it's easier to flip, but I doubt a lotus would be a lot better off in this situation.
Scott, if you have a boat, that you for some bizarre reason need to tow a lot, you buy a car with a diesel engine. Our Volkswagen Golf (4 doors hatchback) could, with extreme ease and still great fuel economy, tow our caravan. Our 4 person house on wheels. Your "You need an SUV for frequent towing" is bullshit. Just get a car with a diesel engine in it.
What cars do they still sell in the US that have diesel engines that aren't trucks or SUVs? I know diesel is available as an option elsewhere around the world, but in the US diesel is only in large vehicles.
Just a note, No mass consumer vehicle is great on ice by itself. The problem that people in SUV's have is they think they will perform better on ice then other vehicles, which is not true. Snow and rain are other problems though and different vehicles will perform differently in these conditions, but all mass consumer vehicles SUCK at ice.
Remember, the number one factor in dealing with snow and ice is tires. Any car, even an SUV, only touches the ground in four places. Your brakes might be able to stop the tires from turning, but the only thing that matters in actually stopping is the friction between the tire and the surface below it. The actual surface area of tire that makes contact with the ground is incredibly small. The other modifiers to the friction are the amount of force pushing down on the tire, and the coefficient of friction of the tire. Unless you strap on the chains, and it's legal to do so where you live, there isn't a significant difference between four wheeled consumer vehicles. If you've got front, four, or all wheel drive and some snow tires, you're the best it's going to get. An SUV is just going to cost a lot more money for an insignificant change in dealing with snow/ice and an very significant increased chance of tipping over.
Who would need such a thing? A person who needs a truck doesn't need a whole bunch of seats. The only possible practical use of such a vehicle is if you want to haul something, but also want lots of passengers. For example, a family that owns a boat.
A family of people who live in a place where it snows semi-often and have kids.
Why should they buy a truck AND a car/van when they can have one vehicle that does both? The idea isn't to HAUL things. It's to be able to get around in many different conditions (like snow). If the payments on a car+truck were lower than one payment on the SUV, then I could see them buying both. However, that is extremely unlikely.
When my mom was working in the hospital/had cancer treatments, we lived at the bottom of a hill. If it snowed, she had to call someone with an SUV to come get her and take her to work/treatment. Her minivan couldn't make it up the hill. Not everyone can put snow tires/chains on their car. My mom isn't even supposed to lift grocery bags. How is she going to change 4 tires herself if it snows and she has to get somewhere if she lives by herself, the husband isn't home, or is only with kids?
Also, I would posit that if you don't drive your SUV like an idiot, it's probably not going to flip. Don't go too fast around curves for your vehicle.
Then explain the massively higher tip rates of SUVs compared to other cars. ;^)
I did not say it's impossible to tip over a SUV. The center of gravity for an SUV is indeed higher than a normal car. However, that is no reason for tipping rates to be massively higher. To tip over a car, even an SUV, you need to be doing it a) on purpose, or b) wrong, very, very wrong. To tip over a car, you need to stop the forward going side with force. Also, you live in the United States of America, it doesn't surprise me that you often saw tipped over cars. The only time a car tips over here is when the football hooligans go crazy.
What cars do they still sell in the US that have diesel engines that aren't trucks or SUVs? I know diesel is available as an option elsewhere around the world, but in the US diesel is only in large vehicles.
It's not my fault that the US ignored choice in engines. Big? BIG! Import a proper car, or ask at your car dealership. It must certainly be possible to just get a diesel engine in the US without crazy trouble.
Remember, the number one factor in dealing with snow and ice is tires. Any car, even an SUV, only touches the ground in four places. Your brakes might be able to stop the tires from turning, but the only thing that matters in actually stopping is the friction between the tire and the surface below it. The actual surface area of tire that makes contact with the ground is incredibly small. The other modifiers to the friction are the amount of force pushing down on the tire, and the coefficient of friction of the tire.
This is true. You still think those low profile tires on a Lotus Elise are a better idea than the Explorer after saying that?
RWD, on the other hand, is more problematic, but again snow tires still do the job.
The problem with RWD is that there is less weight on the drive wheels if you have a front engine. A rear engine eliminates this problem. The other problem is that even with a rear engine, rear wheel drive configuration, you still steer with the front wheels. Unless you have four, or rear, wheel steering there's nothing you can do about it. The result is that you might end up going straight forward or backward, regardless of steering.
RWD, on the other hand, is more problematic, but again snow tires still do the job.
The problem with RWD is that there is less weight on the drive wheels if you have a front engine. A rear engine eliminates this problem. The other problem is that even with a rear engine, rear wheel drive configuration, you still steer with the front wheels. Unless you have four, or rear, wheel steering there's nothing you can do about it. The result is that you might end up going straight forward or backward, regardless of steering.
I find the propensity of RWD vehicles to spin out a bigger problem than the slight decrease in traction (45% of the weight over the drive wheels, rather than 55%). Mid engine cars are the worst for snow for two reasons, 1) they have a rear weight bias making them tail happy, and 2) weight is concentrated in the center of the car giving it a lower moment of inertia. So they spin out more easily, and when the do let go, they let go FAST! Throw in a short wheel base and you'll be hitting trees going backwards.
Eliot Spitzer may bee a Filanderer, but he still knows what he's talking about. And apparently, that's how he's going to be making his money these days. Check it out.
For the record the Subaru Forester is an SUV according to the automotive press.
Rear wheel drive cars do suck in the snow. We used to put four or five cinder blocks in the trunk to try and offset this.
Every vehicle can be driven safely in the snow as long as the driver of the vehicle understands how to drive it in snow. Too many people think 4WD means you can drive like the roads are clear even in 6+ inches of snow.
Not every vehicle can be driven in the snow, the more clearance you have underneath your vehicle the deeper the snow you can drive through. Because SUV vehicles tend to have more clearance under them they are better for driving in the snow. Do you think you would be better off driving a Ford Explorer or a Lamborghini in a snowstorm?
Some vehicles are better at handling adverse weather conditions than others but the competency of the driver is the most important factor in driving safety.
Having a monstrous SUV provides almost no advantage in snow versus a non-SUV.
SUVs will destroy the smaller cars.
My two seat car could split two SUV's in two.
Market for SUV's? My country, land of the pot holes, bad roads, rain and bad city planning. You need something that can take a beating like a pickup (also popular even in the city) from the shitty roads and still be able to load people in it comfortably.
Both my wife and I drive2001 Subaru Foresters. . . . According to Edmunds they are listed as wagons rather than SUVs.
For the record the Subaru Forester is an SUV according to the automotive press.
Because SUV vehicles tend to have more clearance under them they are better for driving in the snow.
Having a monstrous SUV provides almost no advantage in snow versus a non-SUV. The only time the SUV would win out is if the snow is so high up that the car would crash into it, but the suv would drive through it. Most SUVs are maybe a foot higher up than normal cars. The circumstances in which the snow will be at the exact height where this is an issue are few and far between.
Exactly, you're awesome enough to realize it was in jest. The word alone, 'depression', is already extremely negative sounding. It's not good in anyway. Ah well, I should've expected spoiled teens without expenses to not understand these things.
Comments
Remember, the number one factor in dealing with snow and ice is tires. Any car, even an SUV, only touches the ground in four places. Your brakes might be able to stop the tires from turning, but the only thing that matters in actually stopping is the friction between the tire and the surface below it. The actual surface area of tire that makes contact with the ground is incredibly small. The other modifiers to the friction are the amount of force pushing down on the tire, and the coefficient of friction of the tire. Unless you strap on the chains, and it's legal to do so where you live, there isn't a significant difference between four wheeled consumer vehicles. If you've got front, four, or all wheel drive and some snow tires, you're the best it's going to get. An SUV is just going to cost a lot more money for an insignificant change in dealing with snow/ice and an very significant increased chance of tipping over.
Why should they buy a truck AND a car/van when they can have one vehicle that does both? The idea isn't to HAUL things. It's to be able to get around in many different conditions (like snow). If the payments on a car+truck were lower than one payment on the SUV, then I could see them buying both. However, that is extremely unlikely.
When my mom was working in the hospital/had cancer treatments, we lived at the bottom of a hill. If it snowed, she had to call someone with an SUV to come get her and take her to work/treatment. Her minivan couldn't make it up the hill. Not everyone can put snow tires/chains on their car. My mom isn't even supposed to lift grocery bags. How is she going to change 4 tires herself if it snows and she has to get somewhere if she lives by herself, the husband isn't home, or is only with kids?
Also, I would posit that if you don't drive your SUV like an idiot, it's probably not going to flip. Don't go too fast around curves for your vehicle.
Rear wheel drive cars do suck in the snow. We used to put four or five cinder blocks in the trunk to try and offset this.
Every vehicle can be driven safely in the snow as long as the driver of the vehicle understands how to drive it in snow. Too many people think 4WD means you can drive like the roads are clear even in 6+ inches of snow.
Not every vehicle can be driven in the snow, the more clearance you have underneath your vehicle the deeper the snow you can drive through. Because SUV vehicles tend to have more clearance under them they are better for driving in the snow. Do you think you would be better off driving a Ford Explorer or a Lamborghini in a snowstorm?
Some vehicles are better at handling adverse weather conditions than others but the competency of the driver is the most important factor in driving safety.
Market for SUV's? My country, land of the pot holes, bad roads, rain and bad city planning. You need something that can take a beating like a pickup (also popular even in the city) from the shitty roads and still be able to load people in it comfortably.
Most, if not all of those were meant as jokes, including the homeopathy reference.
Sail took the homeopathy reference seriously, so it seemed necessary to point it out, though it was stating the obvious.
In the mean time you'll just have to live with my posts. As I/we all have to live with posts from steve.