5 ms·

90% of the people I know with big cars use them because they have jobs, hobbies, or interests that require the transportation of materials and equipment that wo

by wyager 5y ago

90% of the people I know with big cars use them because they have jobs, hobbies, or interests that require the transportation of materials and equipment that would be difficult or impossible to transport in a small car, or because they live somewhere that requires a vehicle robust against difficult driving conditions. I don’t think “big=safe” is a super popular reason to get a big car, especially given the cost difference vs a commuter car or whatever.

gorbachev 5y ago
You should come and see my kid's school during drop off and pick up. The number of soccer moms driving Escalades and other oversized SUVs in their high heels would heal your misconceptions about large car ownership in the US.
handrous 5y ago
> I don’t think “big=safe” is a super popular reason to get a big car, especially given the cost difference vs a commuter car or whatever. Counter-anecdote: that's exactly the reason given by a lot of people I know who like SUVs, especially. Maybe alongside "it can carry lots of stuff", but sometimes all on its own.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  Is it their reason or is it their way of telling you to screw off because it's their money and they do what they want with it? "hurr durr muh safety" is one of the easiest ways to shut down discussion these days.
  - handrous 5y ago
    Nah, they mean it. FWIW (maybe nothing?) I'm pretty sure it's only ever been women who've told me this—but then, men I know all drive trucks if they are into that kind of thing, and I've never heard one name safety as what sold them on trucks. Maybe if I knew men who drove SUVs they'd say the same thing.
WorldMaker 5y ago
Anecdata for anecdata, I've never seen 90% of big cars on the roads around ever regularly carry more than one passenger at a time to/from a desk job (or a meal commute) that doesn't need any large hauling ever. "Big=safe" may not be smart reason to get a big car, but it's absolutely a common ("popular") one in the US today. Just looking at how cars are advertised, there's basically two main marketing pushes "just look how safe it keeps your family" and "just look at the hobbies it could let you do that you probably won't actually do but think you will", and yes that second one is a pretty equally common reason people buy them, but both messages get about equal air time in the US and seem common in reasons people buy them. I realize I'm very dismissive of people buying them for "hobbies/interests", but over-buying capacity based on "perceived need that doesn't actually exist" is a trap that also makes the roads less safe and should be regulated.
- AlgorithmicTime 5y ago
  You buy for the times you will need the capacity? Am I hauling crap from Home Depot every day? No. But two or three times a month I need to move a bunch of stuff, be it lumber, mulch, or doors. So I have a vehicle that can do that, because not having that capability would cost more per month in rental or delivery fees than having that capability costs me.
  - WorldMaker 5y ago
    If more people had to rely on rentals for those types of projects the demand would be higher and the rental costs/delivery fees cheaper. It's a different but related tragedy of the commons that many "common services" such as delivery services from hardware stores got worse as more people did it themselves. Obviously everyone's needs are different and everyone thinks their own needs are special, so there's not an easy immediate fix and it would need to be a culture change.
- wyager 5y ago
  > but over-buying capacity based on "perceived need that doesn't actually exist" is a trap that also makes the roads less safe and should be regulated This kind of thinking (all expenditures to account for tail-risk demand scenarios is an evil source of inefficiency that must be eliminated) is making society perilously fragile. Buying optionality is a great idea and people don’t do it enough.
adventured 5y ago
I've lived in areas with serious snowfall and icy road conditions that you have to deal with 4-5 months out of the year, most of my life. These small, lightweight, weak EVs are a bad joke in that context, they'd be useless. NYC, Chicago, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Salt Lake City, Denver, Detroit, etc. have some terrible Winter weather for example. You can't safely, effectively navigate Winter weather in NYC in a vehicle like the Chery QQ Ice Cream. At best it'd be good ~2/3 of the year.
- com2kid 5y ago
  From what I understand, upgrading a 2 wheel drive EV to a 4 wheel EV isn't a horribly hard thing to do. Driving on snow/iced doesn't require power, it requires good tires and an understanding of how to drive on snow and ice. I do wonder if the engine in it could get up Seattle hills though, my family's old Geo Metro had problems, so something with a fraction of the power could prove problematic.
- murderfs 5y ago
  > These small, lightweight, weak EVs are a bad joke in that context, they'd be useless. [citation needed] Power is not the limiting factor in icy road conditions, traction is. While a heavier car is easier to get moving due to increased normal force, it's equally harder to stop. The actual difference makers are snow tires so you have more traction, and electronic stability control/antilock brakes so you never lose traction.
- autoliteInline 5y ago
  You do have to wonder how people drove around when scarcely any vehicle was AWD/4WD. Having said that, good snow tires are magic.
  - germ 5y ago
    This. Regulating seasonal snow tire/chain usage in areas with lots of snow/ice is imperative to reducing collisions and improving safety. That and decent infrastructure for clearing snow in a fairly timely manner. All seasons can't and _wont_ cut it in some areas, and having tires that only work 3/4s of the year for traction is dicey at best. Source: I drive a Miata in winter up in Saskatchewan
lallysingh 5y ago
It's not big as much as tall. Going from my truck to a rental car is a vulnerable change! My truck is inefficient and big, but we keep it because it can carry both our kids and our dog.
autoliteInline 5y ago
It would be interesting to know just how many cars ever have their back seats used. You can argue that the average car should either be a 2wd Tacoma or a Miata.
- aidenn0 5y ago
  Even with back-seats being used, bring back the station-wagon: The 90s Buick Estate (a behemoth of a wagon) was 9 inches shorter than the Kia Telluride (one of the smaller 3-row vehicles in the US) and seated 8 (though it would be 7 today because front-row bench seats appear to be disallowed except in pickups). The Estate's contemporary Ford Taurus Wagon could also seat 7 (though two adults in the 3rd row is not comfortable, it worked for short drives in a pinch) was almost 20 inches!! shorter than a Suburban/Escalade.
  - autoliteInline 5y ago
    Ooh. Maybe a sedan delivery wagon (two door, front seat only). I think there may have been some Chevelles like that.
anigbrowl 5y ago
Maybe rent a big vehicle when you need it and use a regular size on when you don't. I'm tired of being menaced by extremely clean and pristine pickups that never seem to be loaded with anything more challenging than laundry or groceries. Now and again I spot an old style pickup (when they were a similar height to a sedan) and they're conspicuous by how petite they look relative to the current offerings (while still having abundant bed space).
- wyager 5y ago
  > Maybe rent a big vehicle when you need it and use a regular size on when you don't. I buy things specifically so I don’t have to compete with other people during times of scarcity, such as the last 18 months that just happened. Renting sucks if you do anything regularly or like to put work into improving anything (like your car or house). I don’t want to live a life of peonage where I don’t own anything and am at the mercy of other people’s resource allocation decisions whenever I want to do anything.
  - anigbrowl 5y ago
    You're taking this weirdly personally, and ignoring the contextual point about large numbers of pickups that are never used for any kind of work, as well as the other point about older pickups having equivalent amounts of bed space without being so massive.
    - wyager 5y ago
      I’m speaking from the first person, not taking it personally. I’m just explaining why ownership is often superior to rentership. Otoh, your comment seemed very personal and emotive: > Maybe rent a big vehicle when you need it and use a regular size on when you don't. I'm tired of being menaced by extremely clean and pristine pickups This sounds like you feel persecuted by truck drivers. I’m not sure the observation about bed space is really true, except maybe insofar as modern safety regulations require more empty crumple space in the front of the car.
      - 5y ago

by wyager 5y ago

gorbachev 5y ago

You should come and see my kid's school during drop off and pick up. The number of soccer moms driving Escalades and other oversized SUVs in their high heels would heal your misconceptions about large car ownership in the US.

handrous 5y ago

> I don’t think “big=safe” is a super popular reason to get a big car, especially given the cost difference vs a commuter car or whatever. Counter-anecdote: that's exactly the reason given by a lot of people I know who like SUVs, especially. Maybe alongside "it can carry lots of stuff", but sometimes all on its own.

throwaway0a5e 5y ago
Is it their reason or is it their way of telling you to screw off because it's their money and they do what they want with it? "hurr durr muh safety" is one of the easiest ways to shut down discussion these days.
- handrous 5y ago
  Nah, they mean it. FWIW (maybe nothing?) I'm pretty sure it's only ever been women who've told me this—but then, men I know all drive trucks if they are into that kind of thing, and I've never heard one name safety as what sold them on trucks. Maybe if I knew men who drove SUVs they'd say the same thing.

WorldMaker 5y ago

Anecdata for anecdata, I've never seen 90% of big cars on the roads around ever regularly carry more than one passenger at a time to/from a desk job (or a meal commute) that doesn't need any large hauling ever. "Big=safe" may not be smart reason to get a big car, but it's absolutely a common ("popular") one in the US today. Just looking at how cars are advertised, there's basically two main marketing pushes "just look how safe it keeps your family" and "just look at the hobbies it could let you do that you probably won't actually do but think you will", and yes that second one is a pretty equally common reason people buy them, but both messages get about equal air time in the US and seem common in reasons people buy them. I realize I'm very dismissive of people buying them for "hobbies/interests", but over-buying capacity based on "perceived need that doesn't actually exist" is a trap that also makes the roads less safe and should be regulated.

AlgorithmicTime 5y ago
You buy for the times you will need the capacity? Am I hauling crap from Home Depot every day? No. But two or three times a month I need to move a bunch of stuff, be it lumber, mulch, or doors. So I have a vehicle that can do that, because not having that capability would cost more per month in rental or delivery fees than having that capability costs me.
- WorldMaker 5y ago
  If more people had to rely on rentals for those types of projects the demand would be higher and the rental costs/delivery fees cheaper. It's a different but related tragedy of the commons that many "common services" such as delivery services from hardware stores got worse as more people did it themselves. Obviously everyone's needs are different and everyone thinks their own needs are special, so there's not an easy immediate fix and it would need to be a culture change.
wyager 5y ago
> but over-buying capacity based on "perceived need that doesn't actually exist" is a trap that also makes the roads less safe and should be regulated This kind of thinking (all expenditures to account for tail-risk demand scenarios is an evil source of inefficiency that must be eliminated) is making society perilously fragile. Buying optionality is a great idea and people don’t do it enough.

adventured 5y ago

I've lived in areas with serious snowfall and icy road conditions that you have to deal with 4-5 months out of the year, most of my life. These small, lightweight, weak EVs are a bad joke in that context, they'd be useless. NYC, Chicago, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Salt Lake City, Denver, Detroit, etc. have some terrible Winter weather for example. You can't safely, effectively navigate Winter weather in NYC in a vehicle like the Chery QQ Ice Cream. At best it'd be good ~2/3 of the year.

com2kid 5y ago
From what I understand, upgrading a 2 wheel drive EV to a 4 wheel EV isn't a horribly hard thing to do. Driving on snow/iced doesn't require power, it requires good tires and an understanding of how to drive on snow and ice. I do wonder if the engine in it could get up Seattle hills though, my family's old Geo Metro had problems, so something with a fraction of the power could prove problematic.
murderfs 5y ago
> These small, lightweight, weak EVs are a bad joke in that context, they'd be useless. [citation needed] Power is not the limiting factor in icy road conditions, traction is. While a heavier car is easier to get moving due to increased normal force, it's equally harder to stop. The actual difference makers are snow tires so you have more traction, and electronic stability control/antilock brakes so you never lose traction.
autoliteInline 5y ago
You do have to wonder how people drove around when scarcely any vehicle was AWD/4WD. Having said that, good snow tires are magic.
- germ 5y ago
  This. Regulating seasonal snow tire/chain usage in areas with lots of snow/ice is imperative to reducing collisions and improving safety. That and decent infrastructure for clearing snow in a fairly timely manner. All seasons can't and _wont_ cut it in some areas, and having tires that only work 3/4s of the year for traction is dicey at best. Source: I drive a Miata in winter up in Saskatchewan

lallysingh 5y ago

It's not big as much as tall. Going from my truck to a rental car is a vulnerable change! My truck is inefficient and big, but we keep it because it can carry both our kids and our dog.

autoliteInline 5y ago

It would be interesting to know just how many cars ever have their back seats used. You can argue that the average car should either be a 2wd Tacoma or a Miata.

aidenn0 5y ago
Even with back-seats being used, bring back the station-wagon: The 90s Buick Estate (a behemoth of a wagon) was 9 inches shorter than the Kia Telluride (one of the smaller 3-row vehicles in the US) and seated 8 (though it would be 7 today because front-row bench seats appear to be disallowed except in pickups). The Estate's contemporary Ford Taurus Wagon could also seat 7 (though two adults in the 3rd row is not comfortable, it worked for short drives in a pinch) was almost 20 inches!! shorter than a Suburban/Escalade.
- autoliteInline 5y ago
  Ooh. Maybe a sedan delivery wagon (two door, front seat only). I think there may have been some Chevelles like that.

anigbrowl 5y ago

Maybe rent a big vehicle when you need it and use a regular size on when you don't. I'm tired of being menaced by extremely clean and pristine pickups that never seem to be loaded with anything more challenging than laundry or groceries. Now and again I spot an old style pickup (when they were a similar height to a sedan) and they're conspicuous by how petite they look relative to the current offerings (while still having abundant bed space).

wyager 5y ago
> Maybe rent a big vehicle when you need it and use a regular size on when you don't. I buy things specifically so I don’t have to compete with other people during times of scarcity, such as the last 18 months that just happened. Renting sucks if you do anything regularly or like to put work into improving anything (like your car or house). I don’t want to live a life of peonage where I don’t own anything and am at the mercy of other people’s resource allocation decisions whenever I want to do anything.
- anigbrowl 5y ago
  You're taking this weirdly personally, and ignoring the contextual point about large numbers of pickups that are never used for any kind of work, as well as the other point about older pickups having equivalent amounts of bed space without being so massive.
  - wyager 5y ago
    I’m speaking from the first person, not taking it personally. I’m just explaining why ownership is often superior to rentership. Otoh, your comment seemed very personal and emotive: > Maybe rent a big vehicle when you need it and use a regular size on when you don't. I'm tired of being menaced by extremely clean and pristine pickups This sounds like you feel persecuted by truck drivers. I’m not sure the observation about bed space is really true, except maybe insofar as modern safety regulations require more empty crumple space in the front of the car.
    - 5y ago