I’m currently driving around Iceland. I have seen a Renault Megane, a plethora of newer Yaris’, one Yaris Cross (I lost my damned mind) and a crap ton of Suzuki Jimnys. Now, I’ve driven in some awful conditions in the states. Blizzards in Montana, Tornadoes in Texas, hail storms in the South and ridiculous wind in Arizona. I have driven in all of that in this tiny country, all in a short wheel base Kia Sportage. I was also outpaced by a fucking Yaris today, absolutely bombing down the mountain in 1c weather. Mind you, it was not a GR so AWD was out of the question.
I am so impressed by this Kia and all of the insanely capable Jimnys I am seeing coming off of F-roads.
If a harsh place like Iceland can coexist with RAM 2500s and modern Yaris’, why can’t we?
Oh, and when I say around I don’t mean poking around Reykjavik, I am literally driving the Ring Road around an entire country. Coolest experience ever.
True
Wtf does that even mean? Bigger cars are usually more durable in general.
Mate youre talking about tiny cheap cars, they dont handle well, theyve never handled well.
Cars and trucks have been the same max size for decades. Hell, have you seen the land barges from the 70s? The '74 Caddilac El Dorado was 21 feet long! The ford trucks maxes out at 20 1/2 feet with a crew cab and long bed. Cars are smaller these days. Not by much, but smaller.
Modern safety rating make that point moot. And pedastrations, if you get hit by car, youre going to die no matter if its a Kona or a Silverado.
Wear and tear on roads and bridges themselves. Heavier vehicles cause dramatically more damage to pavement.
SUVs and trucks turn and stop like total crap compared to smaller vehicles. Longer braking distance, wider turn radius, harder to park, and far more likely to turn over in a collision or when driven poorly.
And yes, I actually had a 76 Lincoln 4 door. Perhaps you noticed that trend reversed in the 80s and 90s.
One of the reasons some drivers cite for buying SUVs and trucks is it makes them feel safer in an accident. They are, it’s true, while people in smaller vehicles are much more likely to be killed or seriously injured in a collision with these larger vehicles. As for your next claim, of course getting hit by a 7,000 lb truck is worse than a 3500 lb passenger car. It’s also more likely since many trucks and SUVs are too tall to see say, a 4 foot kid in front of the vehicle. Also, taller vehicles hit pedestrians in the chest which is likely to cause more serious injuries, as bad as it is to be struck in the legs.
You are so spot on with all of this!! Very intelligent responses. Better with the words than I am.
tldr: selfishness
The degree to which you’re wrong is truly astonishing.
You’re a wise man, mister Rogers.
Thanks neighbor! I hope you have a wonderful day.
Modern safety advances don’t make pedestrian impacts moot. I’m over 6 feet tall. If I got run over in my car, a small hatchback, the car would hit my legs below the knee, and I’d be tossed onto the hood and windshield. This will increase the impact time, reduce the acceleration my body experiences, and decrease my injuries.
Meanwhile, a modern stock full sized pickup truck will hit me square in the chest. I’d basically be dead. I’m lucky enough to be tall enough that my head appears over the hood, so the driver would have a chance to see me. Shorter adults and children have much worse odds at being seen.
For giggles, I stood next to a coworker’s Kona. If it hit me, I’d be hit in my mid to upper thigh.
Modern safety advances are only so good. If my small car is hit by a stock pickup truck, their bumper is going to miss my bumpers at best. At worst it’ll go through my windows.
There is a place for large vehicles, but honestly most people don’t need them. And those that do would be better served with a safer designed vehicle (like a minivan).
I’ve managed to fit 4 college aged men in an early 2000s Honda Civic, along with a month’s worth of Costco purchases for them without much difficulty. I’ve never thought, “I want a bigger vehicle.” If I do need a bigger vehicle, I can rent it.
What do you mean small cars have never handled well? Honda built their entire brand on small, affordable, reliable, well handling cars. Small cars have less mass to get in the way of good handling. What mass small cars do have is lower to the ground, which improves handling. Unlike large American vehicles, small cars have innovative features, like independent suspension. That improves handling. The only poorly handling small car I’ve ever driven was a Smart car, and that was only because I got seasick from the short wheelbase and soft suspension rocking me back and forth.
I’ve driven a variety pickups, jeeps, large SUVs. All felt as sure footed as a toddler learning to walk. They flobber about. 600 year old buildings lean less than them in corners. Steering inputs are suggestions. Empty truck beds lead to poor traction. The brakes leave a lot to be desired.
I agree with most of your points except this.
Innovative features like independent suspension? Almost every single sedan or crossover since the 90s has been equipped with fully independent suspension. This isn’t the least bit unique to small cars or foreign vehicles. Even many large American SUVs like the Expedition and Tahoe have IRS these days. The one common exception, besides pickups and off road focused SUVs that need solid axles for practical reasons, is small cars. Many small economy cars have torsion beam rear suspension which is generally bad for ride and handling but lightweight and cheap.
You are right that it’s easier to make smaller and lighter cars handle well, most of my vehicles have been light sports cars like the Miata. However, damper design, suspension geometry, weight distribution and chassis design are every bit as important. Cheap econoboxes often suffer in this regard.
You can make a tall and heavy vehicle handle remarkably well. See sporty SUVs like the Porsche Macan. The Honda Performance Development team has road raced minivans and mid size SUVs, and they are quite quick.
On the other hand, you can make a small vehicle handle like absolute garbage. The issue with very small family cars is they often tend to be cheap and sacrifices must be made to hit a price point. Many of the lightweight econo cars I have driven have handling as bad as my lifted, solid axle, 5000 lb Land Cruiser. This includes the base Toyota Yaris, Fiat Aygo, Suzuki Jimny, and Dacia Duster to name a few.
I will also point out that larger vehicles that fill up the road width more are more prone to causing wrecks in the event of a distracted driver, as it gives less “wiggle room” for the lane, and less time before you enter into the other lane. Given the prevalence of distracted driving these days, that does not strike me as a good thing.
Larger vehicles are also more difficult to see out of properly, by comparison, especially if you are a shorter person. Not to mention the headlights sitting up higher and often times being blindingly bright at night to other drivers.
Additionally, small vehicles have a tendency to be lower cost, which means you get vehicles for much less, not only in the car cost itself, but in fuel costs, oil changes, transmission fluids, tires, and are pretty much guaranteed to be able to be fixed for much less in the event of a non-totaled accident, at equivalent severities.
I personally don’t get motion sickness nearly as bad in cars as in SUVs or trucks, which is a nice bonus for many.
I won’t say big vehicles don’t have their uses, but it astounds me just how much “I want to drive a big car because it feels good” outweighs so many objective benefits there are to smaller, lighter vehicles.
This is pretty much what I expected from someone who likes large cars. The idea that their car does damage to the road doesn’t even enter their mind. Note the immediate jump to “my property is more durable, fuck your/public property”.
bigger cars have bigger blind spots