Hacker News Reader

Comment by dplgk | Hacker News Reader

That's not why they're popular. They're popular because the average American thinks bigger is better and they also want a bigger car for when they have an accident, they can kill the other person instead of themselves.

View on HN

Though I see a slight grayish tint to your comment indicating some down votes, you're spot on. Does anyone really think someone's automotive buying decision goes something like, "yeah, it's hard to park and the mileage sucks, but at least I don't have to take 30 minutes out of my day once every few years to go get emissions tested. That'll make the rough ride and the hundreds of extra dollars in fuel expenses worth it."? No, no one has ever thought that when buying a car.

There was a subsidy relating to "business" vehicles weighing over 3 tons. It was supposed to target commercial equipment but lots of small business owners just started buying huge SUVs. http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2008/07/high... It's been toned down a bit recently. http://www.section179.org/section_179_deduction.html

Consumer demands are a big part of it. I doubt they would have too many issues meeting emission specs if passenger cars were limited to the 40-50kW they realistically need.

Big cars were always popular in the US. Until the mid 1970s when fuel economy standards and an oil crisis or two changed the market. The oil crisis passed, but the economy standards did not.

Trucks weren't held to the same standards as cars, so manufacturers started making more carlike trucks to meet consumer demand for larger vehicles. The improved visibility and image of toughness and independence also helps drive truck and SUV sales.

The visibility is modified, not improved. Far away objects are more visible and very nearby objects (like curbs or children) are less visible.

Bad drivers driving huge cars through dense places are scary...

Consumers with this preference perceive that their visibility is better. Don't confuse them with facts.

I think it's mostly related to the percentage of other vehicles that they can see over.

It's more that their different classification makes them cheaper. If SUVs had to play by the same fuel economy standards as cars, they'd be a lot more expensive than they are. I don't know if they actually have different emissions standards, but if they did then the same thing would apply there.

Have you ever driven in a snowstorm? They're popular in areas with snow because the drivetrain handles better in the snow, and the higher ground clearance means that they can handle unplowed roads.

An awd sedan works great on the unplowed roads in Colorado.

May have been a bad decision, but I drove a Toyota Solara (2-door Camry) through years of winters in (properly) upstate NY. Knowing when/how to drive in snow goes a long way further than AWD or ground clearance.

All you really need is FWD and snow tires. Sure AWD and extra height will save you some shoveling that one time you will park a little too far in a snow bank, but it's not worth the extra cost and weight.

The only thing you absolutely don't want in snow is RWD.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com