How pointless the SUVs / SAVs are?

[YoungWarrior]

Re: New X5 E70 spy pictures (and videos) - part 3

Yes, almost all SUVs are pointless, but they're making money.
But why did you had to pick on the X5, to upset BMW fans ?!

Premium brands are pointless.
Coupes, roadesters and cabrios are even more pointless that SUVs.

Since most of us should just drive something like modern equivalent of the Ford model T/ Bettle/Isetta, almost all cars out there today are pointless.

So now you've just woke up and got this great existential discovery that SUVs are pointless ?!

I picked on the X5 because it wa the most popular of the crap SUV's. The thing cant even go offroad so how stupid is that?

Premium brands are pointless in a way, but if you want luxury etc they arent.

The whole purpose of the SUV is to go offroad. But the X5 is so poor at that, and it offers less performance, economy, space and towing capacity of estates making the X5 the most pointless premium car ever. Its not that BMW designed it badly, they fully well knew it would be crap off road, but good onroad for a SUV, which defeats the whole purpose as it cant do what SUV's are meant to do. Clever marketing, stupid customers.

In no way can you compare coupes and roadsters to SUV's like the X5 though, because they do what they were designed for.

 

[warot]

Re: New X5 E70 spy pictures (and videos) - part 3

I picked on the X5 because it wa the most popular of the crap SUV's. The thing cant even go offroad so how stupid is that?

Premium brands are pointless in a way, but if you want luxury etc they arent.

The whole purpose of the SUV is to go offroad. But the X5 is so poor at that, and it offers less performance, economy, space and towing capacity of estates making the X5 the most pointless premium car ever. Its not that BMW designed it badly, they fully well knew it would be crap off road, but good onroad for a SUV, which defeats the whole purpose as it cant do what SUV's are meant to do. Clever marketing, stupid customers.

In no way can you compare coupes and roadsters to SUV's like the X5 though, because they do what they were designed for.

How did you figure out that a wagon has more towing capacity than an SUV??
Maybe some people want that extra bit of clearance that the wagons don't have, but don't want to take it off road. Example... try living in Russia. Not that we needed an SUV, but it would have been nice.

 

[SDNR]

Re: New X5 E70 spy pictures (and videos) - part 3

You know that carmakers don't give a SHIT what average Brit says, right?

LOL ....that's true ........but the Queen and Duke both have SUVs ...a Range Rover and LR Discovery respectively

 

[Centurion]

Some of the SUv other there are very versetile. Take the RR as an example.
It has:
the storage capacity of a station wagon.
the coolness and good looks of a sedan.
the luxury of a large sedan like the 7er.
last but least the ability to be driven thorugh djungle, water or snow.


Now how can you not want to own a Range rover?

 

[Osnabrueck]

I'm on Young Warrior's side, more or less.

In the case of vehicles like the X5, or Mercedes ML, there's no inherent benefit to the SUV platform. It's just a case of lost energy with the only upside being increased ride height and "bigness."

These and other SUVs were developed with full knowledge that people buy these things for esoteric benefit and nothing more. There's nothing an X5 or ML can do that couldn't just as well be accomplished by an Allroad or Subaru Outback. Come think, the latter mentioned could probably do far better.

Now it can be argued that the Cayanne and Touareg are not pointless vehicles, because they have completely legitimate offroad credentials. You can tow crap, ford rivers and all that other stuff - the legitimate delivery of "have your cake and eat it too." However, we also gotta accept that these vehicles came about as an evolution of "soft roaders", so their existance isn't pointless, but it is borne of consumer excess.

There's a jilion SUVs on the market now because (mostly American) consumers get off on the novelty of driving something big and tall that makes them feel like a bad-ass.

I like the X5, but I'm full willing to accept that it's an absolutely pointless vehicle.

 

[Beemer B773ER]

Hey Young Warrior.. have you ever driven an SUV by any chance? I'm guessing ur a little young for driving yet, so in that case, have you been the front passenger in an SUV?

Well, currently I drive a normal car, but my dad drives an SUV, and I can tell you that I much prefer the SUV simply because of the high driving position. Yes I understand your point that the X5 (and other SUV's) are not very capable off-road vehicles, but that definition of a rugged, go anywhere vehicle like a Jeep is obselete now.

You make cars that the market want, not make a car and try to tell it to the market. If people want a vehicle which has the same capabilities as a wagon/estate but would prefer a higher driving position, then so be it.
A decade or so ago you had cars for the road, and SUVs/4WD's for off-roading,... but things have changed.

Also, people perceive SUVs to have better safety than a wagon because it is so much bigger than a low-sitting, road hugging wagon or sedan.

Also, you make it sound like modern day SUV's are absolutely incapable of going off road. That's just not true at all. Ofcourse they can go offroad. Maybe they are unable to conquer really rough terrain like true 4WD's can (eg: Toyota Land Cruiser) but they can tackle rough terrain.

I can understand you saying they are pointless when putting in the context of a true off-roader, but the definition of an SUV/4WD has changed now.

 

[PanterroR]

You make cars that the market want, not make a car and try to tell it to the market.

Damn right! And that's why, in my book, they aren't pointless at all!

 

[888]

X5 is one bad ass car

 

[PanterroR]

X5 is one bad ass car

Abso-f'n-lutely!

 

[modena_360stradale]

:/ As I recall the first motorcars were toys for the rich, they had no practical purpose, broke down every mile, got a flat every five feet and had 4hp engines.. Cars were never meant to be practical. Hence the perennial existence of supercars and sports cars

 

[Imhotep Evil]

:/ As I recall the first motorcars were toys for the rich, they had no practical purpose, broke down every mile, got a flat every five feet and had 4hp engines.. Cars were never meant to be practical. Hence the perennial existence of supercars and sports cars

Yes, and you usually had a real horse or two, tied to the back of the car, in case that something broke down and needed old fashion horse power to tract you.

 

[YoungWarrior]

Hey Young Warrior.. have you ever driven an SUV by any chance? I'm guessing ur a little young for driving yet, so in that case, have you been the front passenger in an SUV?

I drive a volvo S40 and soon a corsa.

[/quote]
Well, currently I drive a normal car, but my dad drives an SUV, and I can tell you that I much prefer the SUV simply because of the high driving position. Yes I understand your point that the X5 (and other SUV's) are not very capable off-road vehicles, but that definition of a rugged, go anywhere vehicle like a Jeep is obselete now.[/quote]

I agree the higher driving position can be nice, but it gives a false sense of security, and with all these SUV's around which are hard to look around it might force other people to then get a SUV too.

You make cars that the market want, not make a car and try to tell it to the market. If people want a vehicle which has the same capabilities as a wagon/estate but would prefer a higher driving position, then so be it.
A decade or so ago you had cars for the road, and SUVs/4WD's for off-roading,... but things have changed.

If I was BMW I would have made an X5 too, just because it makes alot of money.

Also, people perceive SUVs to have better safety than a wagon because it is so much bigger than a low-sitting, road hugging wagon or sedan.

A modern myth.

Also, you make it sound like modern day SUV's are absolutely incapable of going off road. That's just not true at all. Ofcourse they can go offroad. Maybe they are unable to conquer really rough terrain like true 4WD's can (eg: Toyota Land Cruiser) but they can tackle rough terrain.

You would get further in a audi A3 with places of bad traction than a X5. The X5 has the ground clearance, but not the traction.

I can understand you saying they are pointless when putting in the context of a true off-roader, but the definition of an SUV/4WD has changed now.

Fully agree, a land cruiser and X5 shouldnt both be called or considered a SUV.

 

[YoungWarrior]

X5 is one bad ass car

My whole point, peoiple dont even consider it as a offroader, its a crappeir version of the 5er on stilts.

 

[dOmInIX]

Let's ask Artist on this one: is Zonda built to be practical and to have a specific point, or is it built because of passion and love??? It's like art! Let's compare this now with SUV's, for example X5: we all pretty much agree it's a good looking vehicle, it can go offroad (I know it because a 15 year old Lada or Yugo can go offroad; but this depends on what you think by offroad) and people buy and like the car! Isn't that the main point of big companies??!

Should we all drive the identical little cars, with big trunk and small consumption?? Ofcourse not, that's why things like coupes, cabrios, Suvs are made! This is again the discussion about style and taste!!

 

[Imhotep Evil]

Re: New X5 E70 spy pictures (and videos) - part 3

I picked on the X5 because it wa the most popular of the crap SUV's. The thing cant even go offroad so how stupid is that?

Premium brands are pointless in a way, but if you want luxury etc they arent.

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.

Or the CLS, is from this point of view even more poiontless than a X5.

The whole purpose of the SUV is to go offroad. But the X5 is so poor at that, and it offers less performance, economy, space and towing capacity of estates making the X5 the most pointless premium car ever. Its not that BMW designed it badly, they fully well knew it would be crap off road, but good onroad for a SUV, which defeats the whole purpose as it cant do what SUV's are meant to do. Clever marketing, stupid customers.

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.

The Range Rover was build for farmers, but people bought it as an alternative to big sedans.

So it should have been killed imediatly, cause it wasn't fulfilling its purpose.
But it wasn't

In no way can you compare coupes and roadsters to SUV's like the X5 though, because they do what they were designed for.

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.

 

[Zonda]

Let's ask Artist on this one: is Zonda built to be practical and to have a specific point, or is it built because of passion and love??? It's like art! Let's compare this now with SUV's, for example X5: we all pretty much agree it's a good looking vehicle, it can go offroad (I know it because a 15 year old Lada or Yugo can go offroad; but this depends on what you think by offroad) and people buy and like the car! Isn't that the main point of big companies??!

Should we all drive the identical little cars, with big trunk and small consumption?? Ofcourse not, that's why things like coupes, cabrios, Suvs are made! This is again the discussion about style and taste!!

Your making a very strong point there.

 

[Imhotep Evil]

Let's ask Artist on this one: is Zonda built to be practical and to have a specific point, or is it built because of passion and love??? It's like art! Let's compare this now with SUV's, for example X5: we all pretty much agree it's a good looking vehicle, it can go offroad (I know it because a 15 year old Lada or Yugo can go offroad; but this depends on what you think by offroad) and people buy and like the car! Isn't that the main point of big companies??!

Should we all drive the identical little cars, with big trunk and small consumption?? Ofcourse not, that's why things like coupes, cabrios, Suvs are made! This is again the discussion about style and taste!!

Agreed.

 

[Beemer B773ER]

Imhotep Evil brings a good point about the CLS.

Is the CLS not just as pointless ?

I mean, they can call it a coupe, but the extra doors mean it's sedan with a coupe-like body. The purpose of a sedan is to offer rear passengers with adequate leg and head room. The CLS fails on both counts when compared to the E-class/5er/A6.

Yes the X5 is not a true off-roader, but honestly speaking, how many true off-roaders are there left in the world ? They're slowly getting killed off because manufacturers realise that there just isn't a sufficient market for true off-road-going vehicles. It's now about combining city driving with the option of a weekend getaway. But just how many people use that option? I'd say a very small proportion.

Also, you have to consider just what an SUV is. It's a Sports Utility Vehicle. See the word 'Sport'. Instantly that goes against the true meaning of an off-roading going vehicle. If you want a name for an off-road going vehicle, I'd use 4WD. So the term SUV was conjured up because manufacturers knew that their vehicles were not true off-roaders. So in essence, the definition of an 'SUV' does not entail 'the ability to go off-road' like say a Land Cruiser is capable of.

-

You would get further in a audi A3 with places of bad traction than a X5. The X5 has the ground clearance, but not the traction.

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 ?

 

[Merc1]

Oh goodness.

M

 

[PanterroR]

Oh goodness.

M

Why?