Is Anyone Else Sad That SUVs and Utes Are So Prevalent Now?

hhuy837 on 04/09/2025 - 09:52
Last edited 04/09/2025 - 10:26 by 1 other user

Unless you're living under a rock, SUVs and utes (extremely large utes for that matter) are everywhere. Car manufacturers are opting to produce only large vehicles, some cutting their small sedans and hatches.

VOX did a video on this a while back for the US and I can kind of see it being similar in Australia. It is just sad that it has become this way, not just from an environmental POV but from a normal citizen and car enthusiast's POV as well.

Utes are considered work vehicles and receive some benefits which make them a popular choice for business owners who use them for "work purposes". Similarly, everything is so expensive these days, it is understandable that families want to have the most versatile/practical vehicle if they can only have one. That is where my level of reasoning ends.

However, Australians seem to have the American ideals where bigger is better, and what is worse is that half of these SUVs (cross overs and more?) have worse space than some hatchbacks and wagons… like what is with that? The bigger and heavier they are the less fuel efficient they are, the more damage they do to the roads and the more dangerous they are to other cars around them etc.

I wish our roads were filled with cars like in Japan and we had much better public transport like most major cities but I don't think that'll happen any time soon.

Poll Options

  • 694
    Yes
  • 129
    No
  • 33
    Indifferent
Automotive Car SUV Ute

Comments

  • shxhshzhz on 04/09/2025 - 10:05
    +30

    Very sad

    • Aldonis on 04/09/2025 - 11:50
      +79

      undeniable that bad driving final boss is ford rangers though

      • D3HUN on 04/09/2025 - 18:16
        +18

        I would tend to agree, but RAM owners beg to differ… It is a tight race.

        • Clear on 05/09/2025 - 10:05
          +3

          And particularly tight in car parks.

          • serpserpserp on 05/09/2025 - 14:30
            +4

            @Clear: Not really, they just park in the middle of two car parks. Heaps of room.

        • nikey2k27 on 06/09/2025 - 08:15
          +1

          call them them War road war

      • ScroogeMcSpendthrift on 05/09/2025 - 14:11
        +3

        I hope they still teach the kids about Ranger Danger at school.

    • hhuy837 on 04/09/2025 - 11:54
      +48

      Sure the owners pay for the fuel, but we as a collective pay for the emissions, the roads and in general I like efficiency.

      Idk I see plenty of bad drivers in cars other than utes/suvs.
      I agree with that - In the areas I frequent everyone is a bad driver. However, a small car speeding is going to be doing less damage than a big car. At the end of the day, the car isn't responsible for an accident, the driver is.

        • klaw81 on 09/09/2025 - 15:21
          -1

          we should be incentivising just 10% of people in China to give up petrol vehicles

          China is adopting electric transport (not just cars, but also trains, buses, trucks, scooters, mopeds) faster than almost any other country. Chinese cities are awash with EVs these days.

          the number of people in Australia that 1. drive and 2. contribute to global emissions is a drop in the ocean

          Australians have much higher emissions per person than Chinese people do, so pretending that Australians shouldn't make any changes to their lifestyle to abate their emissions is obviously wrong.

          And as per the above, China is adopting low emissions technology, renewable energy and electrification much more quickly than Australia is.

          • [Deactivated] on 09/09/2025 - 17:42
            -1

            @klaw81: that is blatantly incorrect - If you factor the number of factories and emissions for all of china and divide that by the number of people within the country - Australians would definitely NOT contribute more emissions per person.

            "Australians have much higher emissions per person than Chinese people do"

            There is no pretence - there are facts.
            Fact We do not need to compete on reducing emissions with china, purely because Australia has 27.2 million people
            (that's 27 200 000 people potentially contributing to global carbon emissions)
            to China's 1.409 Billion people in the country
            (that's 1 409 000 000 people all contributing to global emissions)
            Even China would be unable to reduce their carbon footprint in comparison to Australia as an aggregate taking into account per capita usage levels even with their decarbonisation efforts.

            Per capita Australia would be one of the lowest emissions countries and our existing flora offsets the use of CO2 emissions from the general population.
            (This is separate to gas that is subsequently exported - if that's your issue then encourage the government to give that up).

            Yes, decarbonisation is a goal but to put China up on a pedestal does not change the fact (from what I originally said) which was that encouraging the chinese to decarbonise (and getting just 10% of their population to decarbonise) would do far more for the world's decarbonisation efforts than for Australia to.
            I'll put it simply in plain facts for you: 10% of China's population is 140 million people… which is still 5.1x more than Australia's current population of 27.4 million people and they do not have an extremely spread out land mass with unique decarbonisation issues. They also have the Uighers for free labour vs Australia with standards, compliancy and minimum wages.

            Trying to compete with a country with 1.4 billion people on: economically, manufacturing, militarily or even decarbonisation is laughable.
            But to compare 1x person of Australia's emissions vs 51x Chinese (because their country per population is 51x more populous than Australia's is even more ironic/moronic)
            Even with their decarbonisation efforts they will utilise more carbon (its simple maths) - (not to mention offensive to Australians)

            Which probably leads you down the rabbit hole of the best way to decarbonise is to wipe the world of people which achieves complete decarbonisation.
            I suggest you commence that task in communist China with how enamoured you are by their efforts - tell us how you go and if you achieved your goals in a few years!

            • klaw81 on 09/09/2025 - 20:36

              @[Deactivated]:

              that is blatantly incorrect - If you factor the number of factories and emissions for all of china and divide that by the number of people within the country - Australians would definitely NOT contribute more emissions per person.

              A simple Google search would have shown you that China's per capita emissions (~9 tonnes CO2/person/year) are consideraby lower than Australias (~14 tonnes CO2/person/year).

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_di…

              However, the gap is not as great as it used to be, as China's population is quickly becoming more wealthy and thus higher consumption / emissions.

              encouraging the chinese to decarbonise (and getting just 10% of their population to decarbonise) would do far more for the world's decarbonisation efforts than for Australia to.

              Both are happening, and both need to happen. Australia doesn't get a free ride just because we have a relatively small footprint compared to other nations. Energy efficiency and electrification are essential to the process, and all levels of government, industry and consumers can all play a small part.

              • [Deactivated] on 09/09/2025 - 20:55
                -2

                @klaw81: So 9 tonnes of c02 for 1.407 billion people vs the 14 tonnes of c02 per year for the 27.4 million people?
                I think it’s time we start enforcing basic mathematics in elementary school…
                We just discussed this, I thought it was potentially id1ot proof…

                Clearly not.

                Maybe a captcha to join ozb?
                3+3 =klaw81 is on the take by the CCP

                • klaw81 on 09/09/2025 - 21:22
                  -1

                  @[Deactivated]: Dude, you claimed Australia was (and this is a direct quote)

                  Per capita Australia would be one of the lowest emissions countries

                  Which is just plain false. Australia is in fact one of the highest per capita emitters in the world.

                  Yes, China's high population is the primary reason for their relative global ranking, and their total emissions dwarf Australia's. That much is not in dispute.

                  However, Australia has emissions that are compatively outsized for our tiny population, which is why Australia needs to do its share - and that's why efficient transport and electrification are vital.

                  • [Deactivated] on 09/09/2025 - 21:23
                    -2

                    @klaw81: As an AGGREGATE - you like to conveniently remove things when it suits you.

                    Yes and my point exactly was surrounding encouraging China to reduce theirs (“as ours is a drop in the ocean in comparison”)

                    • klaw81 on 09/09/2025 - 21:39
                      -1

                      @[Deactivated]: You didn't say "aggregate" anywhere in your posts, and you specifically said "per capita" more than once.

                      In any case, your suggested "solution" to somehow incentivise a sub-set of the population of China to decarbonise is so obviously ludicrous (and somewhat ironic considering the far more significant advances undertaken by the Chinese government) that it's rather difficult to take you seriously.

  • Jake D on 04/09/2025 - 10:05
    +24

    I agree they are a dumb choice for all the same reasons. I don't let other people making that choice affect me, though.

    Despite the trends, there are still solid hatch and sedan options from reliable manufacturers, Like Suzuki, Mazda and Toyota. I do miss station wagons, like the old commodore, falcon, camry, magna etc.

      • Gunnar on 04/09/2025 - 10:41
        +41

        Just imagine pulling up to the next Ozbargain meetup in one of those bad boys: KFC carpark on a $15 for 4 zingers kinda night, it’s winter so you’re rocking you Halo down jacket, your eneloops charging your wolfbox MF100 so you can use it to blow dry your butthole after using the bidet.

        • Jimothy Wongingtons on 04/09/2025 - 11:14
          +25

          Stop. I can only get so erect.

        • whyisave on 06/09/2025 - 09:34

          Why KFC?
          I thought we were playing Monopoly at McDs.

    • mattyman on 05/09/2025 - 14:38

      Had a VE Sportwagon and moved to a Sealion 7.

      There really isn't a lot of size difference between the two. Higher wheelbase on the SL7 and that's about it.

      Commodore is actually longer by 6.7cm but it's width is 3cm less.

      Holden VE Series II Commodore Sportwagon (“VE II Sportwagon”)
      Length: 4,897 mm
      Width: 1,899 mm
      Height: 1,470 mm
      Wheelbase: 2,915 mm

      BYD Sealion 7 (2025 model)
      Length: 4,830 mm
      Width: 1,925 mm
      Height: 1,620 mm
      Wheelbase: 2,930 mm

      • klaw81 on 09/09/2025 - 15:36
        +1

        The height is the obvious difference, and is also one of the major concerns. Adding height reduces visibility for other drivers and pedestrians nearby, while raising the vehicle's floor (and thus the overall centre of gravity) reduces overall vehicle stability and materially reduces crash performance. A higher front also makes pedestrian impacts more likely to severely injure or kill.

        A higher ride height will cause an increase in vehicle mass, increased aerodynamic drag and an overall reduction in efficiency compared to an otherwise identical traditional wagon.

        And what do we get from all these obvious negatives? A slightly more upright seating position, a false sense of safety, and (for some unfathomable reason) some people think they're some kind of fashion accessory or display of wealth. And some parents claim the higher door opening makes securing kids into the car more comfortable.

    • N1NJ4W4RR10R on 05/09/2025 - 22:02
      +2

      I've been sticking to that as well myself, but it's getting harder and harder with how much I drive at night. Road is genuinely blinding at some points thanks to how high the lights are on some of these cars.

  • jv on 04/09/2025 - 10:06
    -6

    Sad That SUVs and Utes Are So Prevalent Now?

    No

    • supersabroso on 04/09/2025 - 16:41
      -5

      Agreed! The comments made by OP is becoming less and less relevant as we become more and more electrified. There is a huge surge in hybrid SUVs that use less than half the petrol of the old Corollas from 10 years ago. With plugs ins and EVs flooding in, they are using less and less petrol. Once you couple this with the fact that 40% of Australian households already have solar panels and there's $2.3 billion of incentive for everyone to get batteries, our future is looking green indeed. However, I do agree with the utes, they should all be replaced by fuel efficient SUVs unless they are genuinely required for business/carting around goods.

      • jv on 04/09/2025 - 16:48
        -8

        Once you couple this with the fact that 40% of Australian households already have solar panels

        Doesn't help with charging your car after you return from work each day…

        • SlickMick on 05/09/2025 - 09:21
          +4

          They do, we have a clever device for storing that energy until it's needed

      • R4 on 05/09/2025 - 00:03

        If you give me $60k for my diesel 4x4 ute, I'll 'replace' it

      • Brianqpr on 05/09/2025 - 10:27
        +10

        Its not just about emissions. The sheer size of these things makes the roads more dangerous as you can't see past them.

        • SlickMick on 05/09/2025 - 15:54
          -3

          I felt that way until I decided if you can't beat them, join them. On my 3rd SUV now and won't be going back.

      • fredblogs on 05/09/2025 - 14:48
        +2

        Hybrid sedans use less petrol than hybrid SUVs no?

  • jv on 04/09/2025 - 10:09
    +9

    The bigger and heavier they are the less fuel efficient they are, the more damage they do to the roads

    A Tesla usually weighs more than a typical SUV…

    • bargaino on 04/09/2025 - 13:13
      +5

      What is an SUV these days? people call the model Y an SUV. Some "SUV" are just small cars jacked up.
      Electric adds weight. A Tesla is sim,ilar weight to the old Falcodores, but less than a territory, and much less than a twin-cab pickup truck, aka "ute".

      How about an electric "ute"? Hummer EV is over 4 tons empty.

      • jv on 04/09/2025 - 13:15
        -2

        Hummer EV is over 4 tons empty.

        25% more than the non-EV…

    • Jase83 on 05/09/2025 - 08:46
      +5

      A Model Y AWD is 1979kg. A similar spec mid size SUV like the Kia Sportage AWD (non hybrid) is 1764kg.

      Just over 12% difference. Others like the Rav4/CX5 a little lighter, but still under 15% difference.

      • Jase83 on 05/09/2025 - 13:07

        And just for comparison - a Toyota Prado Kakadu 2025 is 2595kg

    • SlickMick on 05/09/2025 - 09:28

      Interesting…

      so the emissions whingers and the road damage whingers are actually opposing teams… and a heap of OZBers are whinging for both teams.

    • surg3on on 05/09/2025 - 11:13

      Not more than a ford Ranger

  • geekcohen on 04/09/2025 - 10:14
    +3

    what is worse is that half of these SUVs (cross overs and more?) have worse space than some hatchbacks and wagons… like what is with that?

    and you wonder why people are getting Utes? More space!

    • bhubb18 on 04/09/2025 - 13:46
      +8

      Dual cab interiors are small in the rear though haha, and you get a nice small tray for your hassle.

      • Dr Prepper on 08/09/2025 - 08:17

        This is it. There is no point to the tray

    • supersabroso on 04/09/2025 - 16:43

      More cargo space, less passenger space than a medium sized SUV let alone a large 7 seater SUV/people mover that is the same or shorter in length.

      • geekcohen on 04/09/2025 - 18:45
        +1

        Pros and Cons for getting an SUV vs a Ute. More people space, less cargo for an SUV.

  • Drpepper666 on 04/09/2025 - 10:14
    +12

    Yes I'm crying like a baby at what cars people drive

  • scrimshaw on 04/09/2025 - 10:20
    +17

    I got an SUV. Reason? Old parents. SUV's are a little easier to get in and out of and they have more trunk space for wheelchairs.

    Getting old sucks.

    Also a myriad of reasons for getting one https://www.reddit.com/r/CarsAustralia/comments/14vg20l/why_… but I think the marketing has won everyone over.

    • hhuy837 on 04/09/2025 - 11:59
      +2

      For your use case 100% sounds like the right decision. I'm not saying bigger cars should not exist at all - they have a purpose for sure.

      • McFly on 04/09/2025 - 15:48
        +6

        I disagree. Wagon would possibly be more suitable, and that goes for many other SUV buyers. Car guy on radio was saying the same thing the other day to someone with a wheelchair.

    • onetwothreefour on 04/09/2025 - 12:11
      +14

      have more trunk space

      How many miles to the gallon do you get of gas?

      • scrimshaw on 04/09/2025 - 13:05
        +1

        Howdy partner. According to the dealer avg 8.4L/100km to 8.8L/100km.

        I work from home permanently so I actually do not spend that much on petrol. For most my trips I'm still using a decade old Toyota Corolla hatchback.

      • BargainMe on 04/09/2025 - 13:08
        +4

        Leave the American alone, this is the real reason they bought the big car, just being patriotic

      • dufflover on 04/09/2025 - 16:42
        +6

        I get 40 rods to the hogshead …

      • oO0Dam0Oo on 07/09/2025 - 07:47

        Boot space

    • Sammy2000 on 04/09/2025 - 12:58
      +1

      My grandmother disagrees with you, she finds it hard to step up into a SUV but if you found one that works great.

      • jv on 04/09/2025 - 13:17
        -4

        she finds it hard to step up into a SUV

        She must be very short then.

      • Guppy on 04/09/2025 - 18:31
        +1

        Could be the difference between the traditional big SUV/4WD and the "crossover SUV" types that are common these days - the crossovers tend to be a better height to just step into, as opposed to having to step up like a big SUV or lower yourself down into like a regular sedan.

    • Peza on 04/09/2025 - 18:03
      +5

      I have to agree with you.

      First hand experience with older parents who owned an SUV, purchased a new sedan a year ago and are having issues getting in and out. (Dad struggles to get out then has to go help mum out).. never had this issue with an SUV. They still have their 15yo SUV that they regularly drive over their brand new sedan that they paid over 80k for.
      They are looking to trade it in for a SUV early next year.

      I've have an midsize SUV myself and will only get something of equal or greater size next with kids/sports/travel etc. Also the view higher up is not appreciated until you drive a sedan (i.e. dad's car)
      They can go ahead and add road charges/taxes on larger cars, it wont deter me buying a larger car for at least the next 10-15 years.

      • iCandy on 05/09/2025 - 09:51
        +5

        The view ahead benefit only works if there aren’t other SUVs in front of you. And there are a lot of SUVs on the road now, so not really a benefit anymore.

        • Peza on 05/09/2025 - 18:40

          True, but its worse when you are in a sedan trying to look around taller SUV's.. at least with the SUV you are at a similar/comparable height.
          It comes down to preference. The SUV (at this stage of life) offers something that a sedan or wagon cannot. In the future when we are empty nesters, a 2 door Porsche 911 will do the trick just fine.

    • barNAn8445 on 05/09/2025 - 12:58

      Does it have Shackleton rear seats, heard they are easy to get in and out of, you know.

  • BobsYourAunty on 04/09/2025 - 10:31
    +3

    Couldn’t care less

  • Jaduqimon on 04/09/2025 - 10:33
    +14

    our public transport system is actually very good despite popular belief that it isnt… in Sydney anyway. Especially now with the metros.

    If you measure public transport system based on promptness, then yeh its not as good as some cities where the trains come to the second… but in terms of coverage, i dont think there arent many cities in the world that has it as good.

    • Gunnar on 04/09/2025 - 10:43
      +13

      My theory is Sydney people who whinge about public transport have never had to rely on public transport in other capital cities (let’s not even talk about regional locations)

      • jellykingdom on 05/09/2025 - 08:30
        +1

        Well as a Sydneysider, i know the main reason i complain about public transport is;

        a) its really only good if you can get there via train/metro. If you want to use a bus, its awful. I can get a train about 75% of the way to my work in maybe 20min. Then it takes me 1hr to get the remaining 25% of the way by bus, assuming i can even get onto the bus because they're so full

        Good luck getting North-South via public transport in sydney. For some reason there's no trains and you need to go into Central so the 30min car trip is now 1.5hrs. If you want to simply get the the CBD and back, you're golden

        b) the trains are often f**ked during rush hour. I would happily use the train to get back and forth to work but there's a maybe 10% chance that i'm going to be caught in some sort of transport nightmare scenario due to strike action, trackwork, signal failure, suicide etc

      • Brianqpr on 05/09/2025 - 10:28
        +3

        Sydney PT is absolutely dreadful compared to cities like London, New York, Paris etc. But its maybe better than Adelaide so that's cool 😂

  • Stealtho on 04/09/2025 - 10:36

    Just said to my Mrs should of kept my ute then saw this lol

  • mboy on 04/09/2025 - 10:39
    +24

    Unless you're living under a rock, SUVs and utes (extremely large utes for that matter) are everywhere.

    The biggest thing that worries me about utes getting bigger is that tradies are some of the worst drivers on the roads.

    Go to the Dash Cam Owners Australia channel on YouTube, pick any of their weekly or monthly compilation videos, and play “count the tradies”.

    • D3HUN on 04/09/2025 - 18:20
      +10

      The final boss is always a jacked up UTE with 3-4 ladders (or offroad equipment) strapped to the top, and topped off with a red P plate. Plus snorkels, and the direct venting turbo wastegate

      • lew380 on 05/09/2025 - 10:55
        -3

        The downside to having testosterone. It can make a man do some stupid stuff. But i don't think having more soy boys with the camries is any kind of solution. Just live your life and stop judging others on how they live theirs.

        • D3HUN on 05/09/2025 - 18:55

          Nothing show more testosterone than waking up the neighbourhood 5AM (or 11PM) with the gutted exhaust, hey? I am going to judge those numpties, and so does the whole neighbourhood. related

        • mboy on 06/09/2025 - 14:43
          +1

          Just live your life and stop judging others on how they live theirs.

          The point I was making was that tradies are some of the worst drivers on the road, so it's not good that they're behind the wheel of bigger and bigger cars.
          This isn't a "live and let live" situation like you're making it out to be, it's a "drive more responsibly, so you don't kill me and my family" situation.

          • lew380 on 06/09/2025 - 14:51
            -1

            @mboy: Tradies, women, Asians. Where are you going with this rant? Who's the worst, you decide? Do I get to decide? Don't get me started on uber drivers, had some country road uber trips and I'm lucky to alive, high beam on 100% of the time, I gave up trying to reason with them.

    • ytthr on 08/09/2025 - 08:58

      Hmmm, I though station wagon drivers were.

  • askbargain on 04/09/2025 - 10:41

    If you can’t beat them…

  • DingoBilly on 04/09/2025 - 10:49
    +23

    It is pretty gross. Whenever I see them I feel bad about where we've gone and the people buying these shit boxes.

    Just making transport worse and more dangerous. Australia really (profanity) up in this regard when they had a chance to be more like Japan instead of more like America.

    • smartazz104 on 04/09/2025 - 14:33
      +1

      instead of more like America

      Australia should have kept going and populated the centre of the country as well.

    • brendanm on 04/09/2025 - 17:52
      -2

      Lol, we have 20 times the area of Japan with a spread out population.

  • Duckie2hh on 04/09/2025 - 10:52

    Sad

    Sad you don't get to bully the small car drivers anymore?

  • BigTed on 04/09/2025 - 10:56
    +25

    Every day I park my car in the carpark at work and see thousands of massive utes and 4x4s sitting there all day long - just being used as commuter vehicles from home to the city and back again.
    It does feel a bit ridiculous.

    • ForkSnorter on 04/09/2025 - 13:10
      +18

      Not to mention the air quality when you have to drive anywhere through thick traffic. Try Brisbane to Gold Coast. It is insane the number of people who need to drive between these cities every day, with traffic slowing to 10-30km/h for up to 2 hours, making the trip take as long as 3 hours (compared to 1-1.5 hours via public transport).

      Australia has screwed itself in the XXX with its lack of foresight on public transport, its never-ending catering to drivers, and its never-ending catering to property investors.

      House prices and traffic congestion: the 2 easily solvable problems that Australia refuses to solve. Holy crap, and our land area to population ratio is one of the best in the world. Seriously thinking about moving to a smarter country.

      • Brianqpr on 05/09/2025 - 09:27
        +6

        Totally agree on public transport. It was pathetic to see the media gushing over the recently opened Sydney Metro which while it is great is just a tiny fraction of what other cities around the world have had for over 100 years.

        I'm originally from London and my mum never learned to drive. Because the public transport is so extensive there she didn't need to.

  • sevendollarsfifty on 04/09/2025 - 10:58
    +26

    What's annoying about this is that even though I hate SUVs and love my little 2004 Toyota Corolla, the SUVs are so prevalent on the roads that i'm worried about my children's safety because its very likely that if I do get into an accident it will be with a car twice the size of mine. So i'll probably buy an SUV as my next car… and the cycle of bigger and bigger cars continues..

    • 7ekn00 on 04/09/2025 - 11:13
      +8

      You need to one-up to feel safer than SUVs - buy a Van / Truck / Tractor !

    • hhuy837 on 04/09/2025 - 12:00
      +1

      I've had friends and family feel this way too and I don't blame them for it

    • Jake D on 04/09/2025 - 13:38
      +13

      SUVs are less safe. They are slower to stop (because they're heavier), and more likely to roll over because of their higher centre of gravity and elevated suspension.

      • ytthr on 08/09/2025 - 09:02
        -3

        I thought the 5 star safety rating was the same for SUV's?
        Brakes are sized for the weight of the car, so in many cases they stop quicker.
        Can't ever recall seeing a rolled SUV, but I have seen a few rolled commodores and falcons.

      • tonywind on 11/09/2025 - 13:42
        -2

        Incorrect.

    • CaptainJack on 04/09/2025 - 16:04
      +3

      I always laugh when I see this sort of comment. Drivers thinking they are cyclists or something.

    • brendanm on 04/09/2025 - 17:53
      +3

      Buy a Unimog.

    • JimB on 06/09/2025 - 00:46

      To be honest a 2004 Corolla isn't a safe car even without all the new SUVs.

      A current model Corolla is much safer.

      I wouldn't drive a 2004 Corolla as a daily with my kids, nor would I let my kids drive one.

    • Brick Tamland on 21/09/2025 - 18:32

      Honestly SUV's are more dangerous when it comes to small children. You are less likely to see a child in front or behind the car due to its higher height.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join