Fuelly Forums

Fuelly Forums (https://www.fuelly.com/forums/)
-   General Discussion (Off-Topic) (https://www.fuelly.com/forums/f22/)
-   -   Now this is my idea of an SUV (https://www.fuelly.com/forums/f22/now-this-is-my-idea-of-an-suv-5752.html)

jharbert 08-12-2007 03:42 PM

Now this is my idea of an SUV
 
https://www.flickr.com/photos/reimund...ol-toolmonger/

Hauling 8ft lumber in a 5-door VW Golf. Gotta love it.:thumbup:

VetteOwner 08-12-2007 03:48 PM

haha weve done that before with oodles of cars...chevette, celebrity, reliant, aries K, caprece escort. lol always fun tryign to haul that long of boards AND 3 people...

thisisntjared 08-12-2007 03:49 PM

thats typical of most well made 5 doors. my fit holds a 9'6" surfboard and wife no problem.

suvs are just a fad.

jharbert 08-12-2007 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thisisntjared (Post 68010)
suvs are just a fad.

Let us certainly hope so.

People are so lazy these days, driving around leather-lined living rooms on wheels just in case they have to tow a boat home from the office.

VetteOwner 08-12-2007 03:55 PM

hmm well, if you look back in the oh so short of american automobile history, in the 50's and 60's station wagons were huge! now look, you barely ever see any! its all minivans and suv's...accauly minivans are going outa style and these dumb crossover things are in.so lets just hope suv's die off in a hurry

jharbert 08-12-2007 03:56 PM

Don't even get me started on @*$%*#^ crossovers. The very concept is ridiculous.

thisisntjared 08-12-2007 06:23 PM

the whole idea if a crossover is that it is not as rediculous as an suv, but not as practical as a minivan.

i dont know why it seems to be synonymous with "bi-sexual". maybe cus its only an suv(ghey) sometimes?

no offense to any suv drivers or homosexuals. i did not mean for the comparison to be derogatory or antagonistic.

cfg83 08-12-2007 06:41 PM

jharbert -

Quote:

Originally Posted by jharbert (Post 68015)
Don't even get me started on @*$%*#^ crossovers. The very concept is ridiculous.

I don't mind crossovers. They're just cars that look like SUVs, aka an "aesthetic" SUV. SUVs aren't really SUVs anyway, since I don't think half of them can withstand the off-road punishment that they claim. If someone has the ego-need to own a car that looks like an SUV but still gets midsize-normal-car MPG, that's ok with me.

I'm actually surprised they weren't done 10 years ago.

CarloSW2

Erdrick 08-12-2007 07:24 PM

Getting a bit back on topic, yeah, that would work great. Just goes to show that even average cars can do great things if the owner has half of a brain. I would much rather have a lighter weight car, with the option to fold down the back seats, than an open SUV that would rarely serve its purpose. Oh well...

Oh, and it is awesome that it was a Volkswagen! The deal would only be sweetened if it were a TDi..!

GasSavers_Ryland 08-12-2007 07:36 PM

I haul 8 foot lumber all the time, a few months back I picked up a bundle of 10 foot long steel rods, when the guy at the industrel suply store saw what kind of car I had he made some comment about how alot of people who come to pick up large items have hatchbacks and often have fewer problems loading them then with pickup trucks.

GeekGuyAndy 08-12-2007 07:40 PM

I saw someone driving down the road once with the boards coming through both rear windows, you know, perpendicular to the road. It didn't look *too* wide, but it was definately worth a giggle.

GasSavers_Ryland 08-12-2007 08:44 PM

At least in wisconsin you are only alowed cargo to stick out of your vehicle on the right hand side by 6", and not at all on the left hand side, I belive this is past the mirrors.

VetteOwner 08-12-2007 09:41 PM

yea theres somehting like that here in IL. i know anyhting over 4ft out the back has to have a red flag

Hockey4mnhs 08-12-2007 09:41 PM

we need suvs why???

VetteOwner 08-12-2007 09:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cfg83 (Post 68042)
jharbert -



I don't mind crossovers. They're just cars that look like SUVs, aka an "aesthetic" SUV. SUVs aren't really SUVs anyway, since I don't think half of them can withstand the off-road punishment that they claim. If someone has the ego-need to own a car that looks like an SUV but still gets midsize-normal-car MPG, that's ok with me.

I'm actually surprised they weren't done 10 years ago.

CarloSW2


oh it was kinda done 10 years ago, it was called a tracker:D and samuri or what is it called...they were around, just never caught:thumbdown: well besides thier ability to roll in all directions;)

MakDiesel 08-12-2007 11:16 PM

Sweet haul. My experience has been, back when I actually had a truck, that I rarely even hauled anything in it, minus a move or two. Now with the Rex, I've hauled entire engines, trannys (the mechanical kind), whole doors, compressors, and once pulled the passenger seat and crammed 2 parts cars worth of stuff until it was barely safe. Take that truck-chassised suburban pieces of fleeting vanity! See proof below as I found my old post of haulin' stuff...

Note: This is in a 22-yr old 2 door hatchback 1.5 liter 92 horse furious go-cart that was the shortest wheelbase car available in the US for that year (1985).

Trucks are overrated...Post on RPR

Mak

omgwtfbyobbq 08-12-2007 11:29 PM

Hatchbacks are awesome for sure. All I needz is a ~150lb trailer and I'll be gud2go.

brucepick 08-16-2007 09:25 AM

My SUV
 
My SUV:
https://www.gassavers.org/garage_imag...g3p8gxhegs.jpg
Lately, between 31-32 mpg!

This thing will haul a lot of stuff. I once used it to carry what was supposed to go into a full sized van that never showed up. My car was crammed to the gills.

Payload is 1200 lb. Underbody clearance is 7". I've had it off road - not so good really. Gravel roads, OK. Snow, shoot, I'll take this one with 4 snow tires over a 4wd with all seasons any day.

cfg83 08-16-2007 10:34 AM

2 Attachment(s)
Hello -

Attachment 841

I probably saw these on maybe 20-30% of the cars in Europe. Anyone can have the utility of an SUV without the SUV!

CarloSW2

GasSavers_Colin 08-16-2007 07:28 PM

I still don't understand why the european hitches look so crazy-go-nuts... but I s'pose they have one size receiver, so you don't have to buy five different balls.

Colin

VetteOwner 08-16-2007 08:49 PM

haha yea. its just that the suv drivers seem to feel the need to carry 8 people, climb up a mountian, and be able to tow a boat! suv's are more of a social status "look at my big honkin car, im better than you" idea...

GasSavers_Colin 08-17-2007 02:03 PM

That last one reminds me of last weekend's fun. We got all jihad in the Sambar. :)

This is pretty impressive, too:

https://org32.zorpia.com/0/2033/13011317.8e5746.jpg

jcp123 08-17-2007 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jharbert (Post 68015)
Don't even get me started on @*$%*#^ crossovers. The very concept is ridiculous.

Agreed. As is typical of indecision, trying to take a bunch of half measures results in something that's not all that good at anything. Crossovers can't really do truck things, and are still no good at getting car fuel economy.


Other than that, I'm impressed. Hatchbacks or wagons are the way to go if you have a small car, IMHO.

2TonJellyBean 08-21-2007 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hockey4mnhs (Post 68094)
we need suvs why???

If you're tall and want a small wagon/hatchback the choices are so limited. The Rabbit fit nicely, but no diesel and didn't have much carrying space in the back. The Matrix/Vibe were pretty loud at normal highway speeds (wind noise) and the legroom was a bit tight. The Mazda5's a joke for front space - I couldn't even fit in the front passenger seat (6'6 and not heavy). The Honda Fit was actually what I looked at first, but it's front legroom was terrible. Honda's getting bad in this regard. My '85 Civic had great legroom, our 2001 Accord isn't quite adequate for long trips and none of the new ones 'cept the Oddie have much at all.

Started looking at various makes including Hyundai and when I sat in the 2nd gen. Santa Fe, I found the legroom I needed at an affordable price. It's as quiet as church, super tight turning and could do 3 car seats/booster seats across in the rear seat.

The big downside of course is fuel efficiency. The best tanks so far have been a couple at 27 MPG (US) and the average in the first 2500 miles has been 22. The height, a 0.38 Cd and 4000 pounds combined with a very willing engine make it a challenge for driving efficiently but finally having a vehicle that fits is great. Switching from the 2.7L FWD to the 3.3L AWD for handling reasons worsened things as well, but I'm hoping my ScanGauge will more than offset the 2mpg hit there.

I'd have gladly bought the diesel version of it that gets about 50% better mileage, but they don't sell them in North America. Heck, I'd have bought a diesel Smart car if we didn't have kids.

Mentalic 08-22-2007 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hockey4mnhs (Post 68094)
we need suvs why???

Rear wheel drive, seats 4 and tows my boat. But I did get the smallest one I could find that could manage these requirments. My current tank is running 26.2mpg on the scangauge, not to bad. I'm sure I could do better with a manual but automatics are so much easer to manage at boat launches, so a slushy is what I've got.

There was a time when you did not have to have a truck to tow but the options are very slim these days. Back when full size cars were rear wheel drive they were ok for towing just had to add air shocks and a hitch. Front wheel drives do not work well for towing a boat. Actually its that part where you try to pull the boat out of the water and your front tires just spin thats the problem. Your trying to pull up hill with most of the boats weight pulling down on the hitch at a 30-40 deg angle. It just don't work on anything but a very small boat.
Every now and then at the boat launch you see someone trying to use a front wheel drive to pull there boat out. Most of the time they end up needing someone in the boat gunning the boat motor to help them out the water. Doing this really runs the risk of tearing up your boat motor or prop. Some launches are better than others though, sometimes they need a tow from a truck to get out the water.

skewbe 08-22-2007 03:25 PM

Uh, or you could hook the trailer up to the front bumper to pull it out of the water...

Mentalic 08-22-2007 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skewbe (Post 69266)
Uh, or you could hook the trailer up to the front bumper to pull it out of the water...

Lol, yea if your front bumper would not fall off.

skewbe 08-23-2007 04:18 AM

LOL, I'm assuming you know how to attach something to your car such that it won't fall off under anticipated load.

VetteOwner 08-23-2007 03:32 PM

haha yea most cars have tow hooks in the front anyways. that and reverse is so high of gear it could back up a mountain side.

if you know how to drive manual well and know several tricks on steep slopes your fine. like set the parking brake while trying to get out of the boat launch, rev the engine and slowly release the clutch till you feel it grabbing pretty hard and then release the parking brake. then drive as normally. or if your quick, let out the clutch with your other foot on the brake and then when you feel it grabbing switch to gas and release the clutch and go. if it stalls hit brakes and try again. its not that hard to do if you know how to drive stick.

Mentalic 08-23-2007 08:01 PM

Yea I've pulled boats out countless times with an old Chevy three speed on the column truck.. Sure it was doable but was tough on the clutch with such a high first gear on poor launches. Maybe with a modern 5 speed or something first would be good and low.
Most boat launches I go to have gravel pull outs. If you let the tires spin at all your going to stop.

Saw a fellow launch a boat with a motor home using the front bumper back in the 70's. Looked very silly, took way to long.

skewbe 08-23-2007 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mentalic (Post 69480)
...
Saw a fellow launch a boat with a motor home using the front bumper back in the 70's...


Was it a front wheel drive motor home?!?

I bet he did it because it was easier to back up the trailer and navigate the ramp that way.

Mentalic 08-24-2007 04:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skewbe (Post 69484)
Was it a front wheel drive motor home?!?

I bet he did it because it was easier to back up the trailer and navigate the ramp that way.

I think it was so he could see what he was doing. That was a long time before rear view cameras.

There were front wheel drive motor homes back then though. I only know because My uncle had one with the 1966-1970 Oldsmobile Toronado front wheel drive system.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:38 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.