Honda Motorcycles - FireBlades.org banner

1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,134 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
http://www.gladwell.com/2004/2004_01_12_a_suv.html

This was published in the New Yorker. Some funny quotes:

According to Bradsher, internal industry market research concluded that S.U.V.s tend to be bought by people who are insecure, vain, self-centered, and self-absorbed, who are frequently nervous about their marriages, and who lack confidence in their driving skills.
"The only time those S.U.V.s are going to be off-road is when they miss the driveway at 3 a.m."
:rotfl:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,271 Posts
Since it would seem you clipped this from Roque, I guess I'll paste my reply as well. (BTW, today we got around 12" of snow overnight and my SUV was one of the only vehicles besides the 4x4 pickups on the road (and not in the ditch alongside the Camrys, Accords and Jettas) before the plows made it out).

Unfortunately, the author totally disregards GMs 40 plus years of developing and manufacturing the Suburban which still sets the standard for large SUVs. If they hadn't retired the diesel option in 96, I would still be driving one, as my 2000 was possibly the best vehicle I ever owned. He is correct about Ford just placing a few more seats and a longer covered body on a truck chassis, as my Excursion drives every bit as poorly as the SD-250/350 it's made from. The Suburban on the other hand used nice bits like a cantilever frame, coil spring/shock independent suspension and much better ride, handling and turning capability. The only thing it didn't offer was 20 mpg on the freeway and 16 mpg pulling 4 tons worth of trailer (which the 6.0 diesel Explosion does).

The article definitely points out how little the author really knows about Detroit based SUVs and their actual history.
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top