How pointless the SUVs / SAVs are?

[Merc1]

Just my reaction to reading through all the responses in this thread. I can't find the interest to even join this debate.

M

 

[PanterroR]

Weird, if there's anyone i thought will join this debate, that was you.

 

[Beemer B773ER]

Then don't. .. Simple.

 

[Merc1]

Weird, if there's anyone i thought will join this debate, that was you.

Nah. I don't like SUVs in general either, but this is sort of rediculous.

M

 

[Merc1]

Then don't. .. Simple.

Simple enough of a debate too, and I won't.

M

 

[PanterroR]

Nah. I don't like SUVs in general either, but this is sort of rediculous.

M

I don't find anything rediculous here except few posts of YW.

 

[Merc1]

I don't find anything rediculous here except few posts of YW.

ok

M

 

[SDNR]

You can tow crap, ford rivers and all that other stuff .....

LOL, very succinct Osna .....and poetic too.

You can add me to the list of people who don't like SUVs particularly ...except the Land Rover Defender, Toyota Land Cruiser, Nissan Patrol, Mercedes G class, and Jeep Wrangler -- they are REAL 4X4s

BOY O BOY, a real life TONKA TOY

GET OUTA MY WAY BITCH!!

 

[YoungWarrior]

Are you sure about that. I've read and watched (on tv) that X-Drive is pretty good. Ofcourse not up to the standard of Range/Land Rover, but I'm sure BMW learnt some useful things when they had the Rover brand under their umbrella.

Another question. Is the Buggati Veyron pointless ?

Ive seen the X5 attempt to go offroad and it kept getting stuck, and a Range rover had to tow it. Also audi quattros, (excluding A3 and TT) could go up a snowy mountain, which a X5 didnt manage and did very poorly on, and also the A6 when up huge sandunes in the middle east.

Bugatti isnt pointless because of the new manufacturing skills, technology and know-how gained from that car will benefit all other VAG cars, and eventually cars all around the world.

You can add me to the list of people who don't like SUVs particularly ...except the Land Rover Defender, Toyota Land Cruiser, Nissan Patrol, Mercedes G class, and Jeep Wrangler -- they are REAL 4X4s

BOY O BOY, a real life TONKA TOY

This is my stance also.

Ferrari is premium, but it's not luxury.

If you want luxury, you can add extras such as leather, wood, etc. to average cars.

If you want performance you can just mod a car like shit, and give it over 1000 HP.

So premium brands are pointless.

And you could have just easily picked a SLK, Z4, Boxter/Cayman as infinitely more pointless than the X5.

Ferrari isnt premium. Its above premium.

Adding luxury items to a car without them in the first place is expensive, as you would have to rework the whole car, so you might aswell brought something good in the first place.

Modding a car to 1000hp does give performance but reliability will be tosh, and its very expensive.

No premium brands arent pointless. But its premium brands that make SUV's like the X5 pointless.

Z4 etc is aesthetically pleasing to the eye, and gives its driver pleasure. The purpose to look good and go fast, so it does what its name suggests unlike SUV's.

Actually most people don't use SUVs to go off road, just a small minority does that

The hole purpose of a premium SUVs is to look cool, fashionable even bling-bling-ish.

They think they look good in theyre pointless SUV's but real car people will know that theyre just.....

As you say people only buy suv's for a higher driving position, false sense of security, and because celebrities like them, and they think they will look cool.

Ever so pointless. The 5er>>>X5 therefore making the X5 pointless.

 

[YoungWarrior]

Oh, please, don't give me this crap.

They were build for the adrenaline, racing needs and homologation of rich people like the "Bentley Boys".

But since now racing car are almost completly diferent from stock cars, and we have high performance sedans, hatchback and wagons, there's no need for such cars.

The cabrio was always seen by the enthusiats like the car build for the poseur.

cabrio's = sexy, fun
coupe = sexy, fun
SUV = Towing, carrying, offroading. X5 does none of those things better than a 5er hence its pointless. Hell you'd probably get stuck on the bech in a X5 thats how poor they are at offroading.

 

[EnI]

X5 is one of BMW "mobile communication statements".

It's a lifestyle car, not an off-roader, not a towing machine, not a ski jump ramp climber, not a people carrier (mini van/bus), not a transporter.

A lifestyle car. A statement. A SAV. Sport Activity Vehicle. Not SUV, so no utility.

 

[Osnabrueck]

Again, I'm going to back Young Warrior.

His point was that people, by and large, buy SUVs because they think they're neat status symbols - not becasue of any practical benefit. A 5er touring can do everything an X5 does, with better handling and efficiency. The real hutzpah is the constant intimation that these vehicles actually are good for doing things you couldn't achieve in a normal vehicle.

Softroader SUVs are unique vehicles in the sense that their design is intrinsicly inefficient. There isn't a quantifiable upside to their various handicaps aside from the fun of riding up high.

Cars like the Zonda or Maybach aren't models of efficinecy, but their configuration is purpose-built, and performance backs that up. The Zonda and Maybach are shaped the way they are to achieve a result while softroader SUVs are the exact oppisite - shaping themsleves to give off an impression of capabilies they, in fact, do not have.

To summarize: SUVs are everywhere because they're status symbols for people who feel bad-ass when they're riding high in something really big.

 

[Imhotep Evil]

cabrio's = sexy, fun
coupe = sexy, fun
SUV = Towing, carrying, offroading. X5 does none of those things better than a 5er hence its pointless. Hell you'd probably get stuck on the bech in a X5 thats how poor they are at offroading.

OMG, now you're giving me this non-sense.

Look, just because you woke up and had this divine inspiration from watching Top Gear, doesn't mean you have shave down our troats too.

 

[modena_360stradale]

Perhaps the reason most of us think the X5 or any such similiar SUV is pointless is due to the fact that it's abilities belie it's name. If it is in fact not an actual off-road car it's meant as either a status symbol or an image enhancer. Like someone said above: its function is to give the impression of ability.

 

[YoungWarrior]

Again, I'm going to back Young Warrior.

His point was that people, by and large, buy SUVs because they think they're neat status symbols - not becasue of any practical benefit. A 5er touring can do everything an X5 does, with better handling and efficiency. The real hutzpah is the constant intimation that these vehicles actually are good for doing things you couldn't achieve in a normal vehicle.

Softroader SUVs are unique vehicles in the sense that their design is intrinsicly inefficient. There isn't a quantifiable upside to their various handicaps aside from the fun of riding up high.

Cars like the Zonda or Maybach aren't models of efficinecy, but their configuration is purpose-built, and performance backs that up. The Zonda and Maybach are shaped the way they are to achieve a result while softroader SUVs are the exact oppisite - shaping themsleves to give off an impression of capabilies they, in fact, do not have.

To summarize: SUVs are everywhere because they're status symbols for people who feel bad-ass when they're riding high in something really big.

Yep I agree with this fully.

 

[martinbo]

Oh gee, I've been so busy trying to get the business off the ground that I've really not had the opportunity to put my two cents in much these days...

But this debate is just terrific.

Great arguments both sides, and a natural, healthy spread of diverse opinion. In my opinion, it's an impossible task to determine whether SUV's are pointless or not. They've obviously found a niche and have proven to be particularly popular. BUT, that's not to say that they're not flawed. As on-road, urban commuters, typical SUV's are about as practical as a tennis racquet at a lacrosse game.

Many of these SUV's (and seeing that the X5 is a worthy example) are engineered to be tall, heavy, capacious, large and so on without having other remarkable attributes such as performance, fuel economy, ruggedness, ground clearance and so on. So, suffice to say, most of them in my opinion are purely image cars that sell under the emotional promise of status. Own an SUV and the whole world thinks you've made it.

I like SUVs, make no mistake, but I know for a fact that they're intrinsically flawed.