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

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

Comments

  • +16

    Head-to-Head Crash Statistics

    In head-on crashes between passenger cars (sedans) and SUVs, odds of death for the sedan driver are 7.6 times higher than for the SUV driver.
    

    When the SUV has a higher safety rating than the sedan, sedan occupants are nearly 10 times more likely to die than the SUV occupants (odds ratio 9.8).

    Even if the sedan is heavier than the SUV, the sedan’s occupants are still more likely to die (40.1% mortality rate in the sedan vs. 24.4% in the SUV).

    Overall, the chance of death to the sedan driver in a collision with an SUV is 66%, compared to just 14% for the SUV driver in the same scenario (based on a dataset of over 1,200 paired crashes).

    Perplexity

    • -1

      Wow, I didn't know this. Another reason why Sedans have become less popular.

    • +13

      So it's just a dumb arms race. Once "everyone" has an SUV we'll need to go to tanks. Humans are dumb

      • -2

        Disarmed, driving around in your ford focus, sipping an oat milk, slavery free chia latte. Humans are indeed dumb.

    • Do you have a link / source for those stats? Not challenging you; I'd like to read more.

    • +2

      This raises a few questions from me:

      1. What percentage of crashes are head-on collisions?
      2. What percentage of crashes involve rollovers, and what's the predominant type of vehicle in these accidents? (I think we all know the answer to this)
      3. When does the arms race stop? When every small family owns a Scania?
  • +5

    My understanding (so could well be wrong), but they proliferated while there was an instant tax writeoff (was it $50K or $60K?) from about 2017-18 for small businesses. Hence a lot of tradies driving them, but just about any family with a small business could avail. Can't say I blame them, but I do find that the vehicle size seems to impart a false sense of security (and hence increased risk) when driving. I find it interesting that a legislative change like that would flow on to things in future like having to redraw parking lot sizes, for example.

  • +11

    I don't like them anyway.

    But what makes me sad is the decrease in driving ability and awareness of people in general. This leads to a proliferation of these vehicles because people feel safer in them. But having these people in these vehicles makes them even more of a hazard to other people on the road, especially cyclists like me.

    Not to mention that they are bog ugly and all look the same

  • -6

    I couldn't give a fat rats clacker what other people decide to spend their money on.

    • +22

      I'd agree except in this case it affects other people too because we all share the road.

      • Makes it more dangerous to drive a smaller car.
      • Harder to get into carparks squished between 2 giant SUVs.
      • Harder to get out the door of your car once you're in your parking spot.
      • Harder to see traffic in front of you.

      The list probably goes on.

      • +14

        This is by far the absolute worst.

        "Harder to see traffic in front of you"

        I drive in a relatively low car, at night, lights are beaming through from the really tall utes

        And during the day, I can't see anything beyond the massive SUV / Ute in front of me. Best part, all 2-3 or 4 lanes are filled with SUVs driving under the speed limit, Hahahahahaha.

        Fml, this shit hs become a phenomenon without it ever needing to be.

        • +13

          Or when you're turning at a stop/give way and someone pulls up beside you in an SUV/ute, completely blocking your visibility of oncoming traffic. All you can see is the side of their car door. So you have to wait until all the giant cars have gone or someone is kind enough to stay back a bit further so you can see past their bonnet.
          All while someone in a Ranger is sitting up your ass honking because he has a clear view of the entire suburb and can't understand why you don't want to pull blindly into traffic.

        • +1

          You got to love when a ute tailgates you on the motorway, with pimped up headlights that are brighter than the sun and for some reason they emit light straight rather than at an angle down the road. Why coppers are not getting these out of the traffic is beyond me. Guess there is no mandatory TUV rating here

      • +2

        No doubt they drive a Ram.

      • Makes it more dangerous to drive a smaller car.

        It's like you're trying to convince me to buy a suv or ute.

        • +1

          ^^^ This is a big part of it.
          In order to get visibility and to not die in crashes - now everyone needs to get a bigger vehicle.

  • +1

    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 don't mind SUVs because they tend to be safer in a crash, and you get a nice perspective sitting higher. Plus they're great for picking up 2nd hand furniture. You can get small/medium SUVs that aren't really much bigger/heavier than a normal car.

    I just don't understand why so many bogans drive black ones. Not only is black a fairly ugly colour for an SUV (although this is subjective), but black cars get up to 15 degrees hotter in the sun.

    Say your air conditioning dies when you're out at Mt Isa on a summer afternoon, looking for a river to drive through to test your pointless snorkel that you've had sitting on the side of your windscreen for 4 years without using it once. You will probably die of heatstroke before you even find that river.

    • +5

      I don't mind SUVs because they tend to be safer in a crash, and you get a nice perspective sitting higher.

      Except for everyone around them. It significantly increase the risk of fatalities for pedestrians, cyclists, and anyone driving smaller vehicles.

      The number of SUV's on the road scales with the level of selfishness in society.

      -Millennial sedan driver.

      • It significantly increase the risk of fatalities for pedestrians, cyclists, and anyone driving smaller vehicles.

        Maybe the much heavier SUVs. There are small SUVs that aren't significantly heavier than a typical car.

        Also, I reckon that conclusion is based on crash data, and not on crash frequency data. In other words, it probably doesn't factor in the fact that SUVs often have better visibility than other cars (e.g. more upright windscreen providing a more panoramic view, and sometimes larger windows at the back), which can reduce the possibility of a crash happening in the first place.

        • A lot of the problem is height, which significantly increases pedestrian fatalities on its own. Going over a car is less deadly than going under it or having your head hit by the bonnet.

          The height also often makes it harder for the driver to see shorter obstacles like children. This can be designed around but a lot of brands, especially US ones, don't bother.

          Also an SUV parking on a corner ruins visibility for everyone at the intersection that isn't also in an SUV, because you can't see over it (and they always seem to have dimmed windows and tall seats so you can't see through either).

  • +5

    Will get worse as we go forward.

    With the new emission rules NVES. You are penalised for driving a smaller lighter car because the emission class between a 1000kg car is the same as a 1500kg.

    In otherwords manufacturers want to sell you a bigger and heavier SUV because they can charge more and make more money without being penalised. That is why you see so much price increases and reduction in choice for small cars, they are herding you towards the next model up.

    All the SUV and Ute drivers are free riding off someone driving a small and efficient Corolla. Naturally people don't want to be left a fool, fairly predictable what they'll upgrade next.

  • -3

    After haven driven a Holden Barina hatchback, Holden Commodore ute, and a Toyota Camry sedan…. the only car I will ever buy going forward is an SUV or something alike in ground clearance. I'm tired of scratching and scraping the front bumper everytime I exit a driveway or go over a hump.

    I've currently got a Subaru XV, full time AWD… and that shit charges over road bumps and ditches. If I scrape the car, it simply means I have crashed and that is it

    • +2

      That's a very depressing history of car ownership / driving experiences :/

  • I could care less, but I can't see past the SUV's in my Toyota sedan.

  • +3

    Pushing the tax rate higher and higher on tobacco products has had the opposite effect, the much lower price of illicit tobacco has increased the profit on it and the market for it, actually decreasing the amount of money the government gets from tobacco taxes. And it has created a lot of crime related to illegal tobacco, like smoke shops being burned down.

    And something similar happened with car safety. They pushed safety requirements up and up, with the same requirements applying to small and light cars, until it simply wasn't economic to build and sell small light cheap cars. You couldn't put all the crash safety and safety equipment in a small light economical car and sell it at a low price. It simply became more profitable to pull out of that market segment and sell SUVs.

    Even some of something is good, like getting people to stop smoking or making sure their new car is safe, more and more sometimes results in unexpected perverse outcomes.

    • It will be interesting to see what happens when the increasing size of cars collides with the move to increase the density of our cities to provide housing for the big immigration driven increase in population. Where will people put their SUVs?

      • what happens when the increasing size of cars collides with the move to increase the density of our cities

        The Future of Urban Consumption in a 1.5°C World published by C40 Cities (of which Melbourne and Sydney are members and Parramatta is applying for membership) aim to have private vehicle ownership somewhere between their progressive target of 1 in every 6 people and their ambitious target of 0 people. No, that's not a typo. Their ambition is 0 people owning private vehicles.

      • Just don't live in our cities - especially New Mumbai and New Shanghai (previously called Sydney and Melbourne) - both massive shitholes anyway.

        • They may not be the perfect cities but at least they have plenty of jobs for immigrants as opposed to other cities.

          • -1

            @beesider: Which is why our country is getting itself in such a mess - an attractive place to live with a virtually open border policy.

            It's all going to end in tears.

  • +8

    It's a bad thing for everyone tbh. I understand some use cases - higher entry points are nicer for older/less mobile people - thats fine, get a cx-5 or smaller similar vehicle. You don't need a CX-9 for grandma.

    And there's WAY too many utes… For people who definitely don't use it for UTILITY. Half of dashcams Aus now involves bloody utes. I don't know what it is about them that makes people get rage induced or think they command the road but damn..

    Also yes visibility can be rough if everyones got a giant car.

    Also for those who do want a smaller car - they're inherently less safe now just due to how large other cars are, even if they're 5 star ancap, a kia picanto (i don't know its rating) is going to get demolished by a 2.5tonne ute/SUV. This also plays into the visibility issue as well.

    My last car was a sedan, my current is a civic hatch hybrid. My next car will be something smaller, ideally sub 4.3m in length or so.

    I don't think front bumper scrapping is a valid reason to buy an SUV - i only scrape if I'm being an idiot/take speedbumps/entry ramps etc too quickly.

  • +2

    Utes are considered work vehicles and receive some benefits which make them a popular choice for business owners who use them for "work purposes".

    That is the simple way of looking at it.

    Like those who buy it for the partner to run their kids to school.

    A $35k Corolla hybrid vs a $50k ute. You could buy the Corolla after tax and still claim logbook / cents per kilometre method which ever works best. Then you look at the fuel savings of a Corolla vs a ute. Theory is it is a tax deduction but don't forget you get like 30c back when you spend $1. Something like 4L/100km vs 8L/100km.

    Unfortunately most accountants won't do the calculation for you unless you pay them then they need to know the maths to put together a model (I've seen a few and they are mediocre at best) then explain to the client how it work and under which conditions it works.

    A lot of tradies would be better served with a van because the storage area is bigger and have protection for their tools / equipment.

    SUVs is the theory that if you hit a SUV with a SUV you are more likely to survive until everyone starts driving trucks. Some people argue it is purely due to mass. Funny enough the Camry is 1.6T (kerb) and 2.1T (gross). RAV4 is 1.7T (kerb) and 2.2T (gross). Only way you might get a definitive result is if you hit a 20yo Nissan Micra in a RAV4 at the right angle and speed.

    About half of road accident deaths involve vehicles hitting stationary objects and unless it is low speed it is unlikely you'd survive simply due to the try or concrete barriers always win!

  • +6

    I hate the fact I cannot easily see the cars in front of an SUV on freeways/highways, especially when driving closer to 100km/h. I like to be able to see how far ahead the car in front of the SUV is and if there is a sudden stop coming from a build-up of traffic. Sometimes people break a bit too hard at the last moment instead of gradually slowing down when there is a build-up of cars and it just means I can't anticipate this in advance.

    • -2

      What are they breaking? I'm confused.

      • Typo, *brake - you know what I mean.

        • Valvoline.

    • +4

      What you said is a good indication that you do not keep a proper distance from the car in front. If you kept a proper distance, you would not have to anticipate by looking 5 cars in front. I am probably going to get a lot of downvotes because almost nobody keeps a proper distance.

      • I see where you're coming from, but I just like to be aware of my surroundings all the time. Similar concept to driving behind a truck that is driving 20km/h under the limit on a freeway. You can't see in front of it and think there is traffic in front causing the truck to drive slow but you finally change lanes and realise there was no traffic, but you just couldn't see ahead before. Or another scenario when there is a crash or something hindering a lane up ahead but you can't see it.

        • Do you think it will be substantially different if all the tradies switch to vans and the families switch to people movers?
          I was working at a site last Friday where the majority of the vehicles were tradie vans and the visibility around the area was much worse than when I am at sites full of utes and 4x4s. At least with the later they have side windows you can see through instead of solid slabs of sheet metal like commercial vans.

  • +3

    Even the name SUV is a joke. Sports Utility Vehicle? Great marketing to inspire people to buy big tanks (and don't get me started on the Tank 500, that really is taking the piss….).

  • It’s an effect of overpopulation and the fact that Australia is so vast geographically. People want to escape the cities and the crowds and go hiking and camping to feel in touch with nature and its positive effects. Many national parks, even those close to cities like Brisbane and Sydney, have roads that are only accessible by 4x4 vehicles. It’s the sole reason I bought a 4x4 – I want to be able to access more places to go hiking and overnight camping, away from crowds – places which I’m unable to get to in a regular 2WD low-clearance vehicle. If the roads were improved (e.g. sealed), or there was adequate public transport to take me, then I’d have no need for a 4x4.

    • +7

      People want to escape the cities and the crowds and go hiking and camping to feel in touch with nature and its positive effects.

      This would genuinely be fine - if this was true. MOST people with big f off cars never take em offroading. Or might once on a whim and be like 'yeah so good' and tell their friends they did it, post on social media once, and never again.

      It'd be cheaper to buy a cheaper/smaller car for runabout, and the one weekend you need to use a 4wd, rent one!

      I get what you're trying to say, but I just don't think that's the primary factor. It definitely contributes to a lower EV uptake though - those longer drives between cities (even Canberra/Sydney) can be a bit more of a hassle with an ev.

      I may be bias owning one but I think Hybrids are a good way to go for Aussies. Specifically non-plugin. Plugin hybrids feel like the worst of both worlds. Heavy car, EV to charge, petrol still - sometimes not used often so it just sits there - more complex systems I spose.

      Australia is definitely geographically challenged.. If only we had a high speed rail zzz

    • +3

      It’s an effect of overpopulation and the fact that Australia is so vast geographically. People want to escape the cities and the crowds and go hiking and camping to feel in touch with nature and its positive effects. Many national parks, even those close to cities like Brisbane and Sydney, have roads that are only accessible by 4x4 vehicles.

      Nah this is not why most people buy SUVs nowadays.

      Plus, I have been driving around the countryside for 20 years (mainly NSW and QLD), and the overwhelming majority of popular places in national parks and rural areas do not require a 4x4.

  • -2

    I wish our roads were filled with cars like in Japan

    so you think everyone should be driving a cube?

    • +2

      As a weeb I love Japanese cubes.

      • +3

        Kei cars lets goooo.

        Shame they're inherently much less safe - especially on our roads and with all these extra utes/SUVs out there

  • +1

    I'm sad I can't get a decent station wagon anymore. I've gone with a Kia Carnival. Yes the space does get used. No not all the time. No renting for those occasions is not an option.

    • I'm sad I can't get a decent station wagon anymore

      Mazda 6 wagon - a fantastic car

      • +1

        We'll probably keep ours forever - and in 2042 we can put it on club plates.

  • -1

    Im going to keep the same energy i have to cyclist as i do with over-sized car users

    Cyclist SHOULD be paying some kind of rego if they 'expect' bike lanes

    Larger/Heavier Vehicles SHOULD pay a higher rego due to extra pressure on the roads we use

    Otherwise i couldnt care what other people drive everyone has different preferences and needs within their own life let people drive what works for them and what they can afford

    ill stick to me 10 or so year old Honda Civic till she dies

    • +2

      if i walk to work and never drive on the road do i get a tax rebate on the portion of my tax which got used to pay for roads? Or if i use it less, prorata rebate?

      so you want cyclists to have compulsary third party insurance (rego) in order to pay for the bike lanes to be built? sounds a bit silly….

      • -1

        Different arguement the rego one pays is for 'roads' if cycles want roads to be built for them they should pay for it

        As for 'walking to work' people that live in that council pay rates which services the upkeep of said foot paths you walk on

        my question to you is why do cyclist get roads that motorist have to pay for? or footpaths home rate payers pay for?

        You dont get a 'rebate' because it built into the cost of own a car - but there is a fair argument some cars do more damage to the roads then others and thus that level of upkeep should be factored into rego

        • my question to you is why do cyclist get roads that motorist have to pay for? or footpaths home rate payers pay for?

          Tell us how you feel about out of town people walking on the footpaths in your area?

          • -1

            @tenpercent: no issue it is no different when i am 'out of my town' walking my other peoples paths in the end we all pay for it to some extent - my issue with bike lanes isnt they exist it is they are funded by $ that is paid for roads for motorist but do not benefit motorist

            if cyclist want their own lanes they should be paying a form a rego, tax or toll for using them

    • +3

      I cycle and I pay rego for my car.

      By your "logic" each time I use my bike I should get a refund on my rego as I am not using my car, therefore reducing congestion and putting less load on the road

      • no you should be 'paying more' rego as bike lanes are being paid for by car rego lol

        by my logic you are getting a free ride

        • +1

          On yer bike

        • -1

          as bike lanes are being paid for by car rego lol

          Nope. Try again.

          • -2

            @nandystam: Tell me you didnt real the article without tell me -

            " While it’s true you don’t have to pay rego to ride a bike, car registrations pay for third-party insurance and administration costs, not directly for roads. Roads are funded by many sources, including general taxes like income tax, GST, and the fuel excise, so we all pay for them regardless of whether we drive."

            perhaps learn to read or just delete your comment above, because it is embarressing, ill note the article deflects from cyclist not paying rego/fuel tax etc but never refutes the fact that rego/fuel tax etc pay for said lanes

            Im actually embarressed for you for posting this as a reponse

            • +1

              @Checkmate3023: I'm not, because most people know the costs involved in road projects comes from consolidated revenue:

              "general taxes like income tax, GST, and the fuel excise." <- consolidated revenue. This also includes, but not limited to car registration.

              Implying that car registration alone funds the cost for bike lanes is completely wrong.

              • -1

                @nandystam: Lmao outside of GST which one of those do cyclist pay?

                Also your article doesnt refute the fact rego is used to pay for roads

                My God people you can be this straight up dumb

                There is also no sources to back up any claim made ot is a insurance website you muppet not a reliable source ….did you not pass year 10?

                Please dont repond I cbf with someone so clueless

                Have a good life

                • -1

                  @Checkmate3023:

                  Lmao outside of GST which one of those do cyclist pay?

                  Income tax? Other general taxes?

                  I don't see anyone rushing in to back up your bizarre claim, but you do you.

                  • -1

                    @nandystam: becuz you dont have a source you have an advertisement lol

                    I cant be bothered with you anymore if you think RACV insurance is a good source then you are not a very bright individual and lifes told me not to waste time arguing with idiots esp on Ozbargain or online on general

                    Additional funding for roads come from other sources of course that arguement strengthens the fact cyclies should pay a rego but youre to dumb to realise that.

                    Good night

                    • @Checkmate3023:

                      Additional funding for road come from other sources of course that arguement strengthens the fact cyclies should pay a rego but youre to dumb to realise that.

                      So now you're agreeing that bike lanes, like roads, are sourced from consolidated revenue?

                      Well, I guess that's progress.

                      • -1

                        @nandystam: Lol fuel excise and rego get put into consolidate revenue OMG dont tell me you dont know that…im done with this you gotta he a Vic ALP voter to be thist lost have a good day

                        • @Checkmate3023:

                          Lol fuel excise and rego get put into consolidate revenue OMG dont tell me you dont know that

                          Clearly you did not.

                          as bike lanes are being paid for by car rego lol

                          No mention of consolidated revenue here.

                          my question to you is why do cyclist get roads that motorist have to pay for?

                          Or here

                          Cyclist SHOULD be paying some kind of rego if they 'expect' bike lanes

                          Nope, not mentioned here either.

  • +1

    I do get sad but only when I can't see if any cars are coming because there's an oversized ute or an SUV blocking my view (I don't have anything against the drivers, just the cars themselves) unless of course it's a crazy Ranger Danger going nuts because I can't / won't go over speedhumps as fast as they can. :D

  • the more dangerous they are to other cars around them

    The more safer they are
    It is only natural selection if survival instincts kick in

    Your counter argument for this should be that it is more likely that an obese person would own an SUV here/America, so where is the survival instincts in that?

  • +2

    don't care at all about the car anyone chooses.
    Only problem is that car parking spaces are not made for the bigger ones and that's a bit of an issue.
    And with new houses being built without proper off street parking in some areas, the roads are not wide enough when they are parked on the side.

    not really a ute problem, more of a greedy developer and property manager issue.

  • -1

    I love the fact so many people get triggered over other peoples choices

    • +6

      i think youll find its how others choices are affecting them.

      e.g. would you get 'triggered' if your old man neighbour chooses to sunbake naked all day infront of your kitchen window, or if your neighbour in an apartment complex chooses to smoke all day and it blows into your house, or if someone near you chooses to buy a loud dog that barks all day……etc.

      You really cant see how, in a society, other peoples choices can sometimes affect more people than themselves?

    • Love is love.

    • Welcome to post 2020 Australia.

      I never got a Covid vaccination.

    • Only when the choice doesn't affect you.

      Pretty immature to think that otherwise…

  • +9

    I am indifferent, but this is an interesting read….

    https://www.news.com.au/technology/motoring/ev-cuts-loom-whi…

    particularly:
    "Under Australia’s tax system, commercial vehicles, such as dual-cab utes, can claim a Fringe Benefit Tax exemption, provided they’re used “primarily” for work.
    But the rules are so vague, that many use utes for personal reasons, which is allowed as long as it’s “minor, infrequent, and irregular”.
    In reality, many of these utes aren’t ferrying tradies and tools. They’re doing school drop-off, towing jet skis, and sitting in suburban streets."

  • Nah I like my SUV and I use it for it's intended purpose.

  • ive put more in my station wagon then i have in a ute

  • +3

    CLIMATE CRISIS?
    so most people buy excessively large cars and manufacturers indulge their customers

  • +4

    The sad bit is that carparks are getting smaller. Apartment buildings, shopping centres. But people are buying larger cars.

    Visit any newly built apartment building carpark and feel sorry for those with a space next to a large dual cab. The car pretty much takes up the entire width of the car space.

  • -2

    As much as you’re a car enthusiast, remember there are SUV and ute enthusiasts too.

  • +6

    Is anyone else sad that you have to pay for extra carry-on luggage, meanwhile the fatty in the next row paid the same price for their ticket as you?

    • +3

      Now that you mention it… I've long thought that it should be a combined weight of passenger and luggage.

    • Makes me very sad. Healthy sized people are subsidizing unhealthy fatties in almost every corner of life.

  • +1

    Small penises, insecurity and big egos. What more is there to say. Neg if any of this applies to you, it's anonymous which suits you passive aggressive types.

    • I negged three times because all three apply to me. I think you made excellent points in a way that was easy for me to accept your point of view.

  • please go to reddit to vent do not use ozbargain..leave it out of these politics … genuinely … can we have a place where no such things are discussed other than everyday bargains… we got to have something in common, no? You wanna vent, go to other social media , how hard is it?

  • I don't care what anyone else wants to drive - it's the reduction in choice that makes me sad. For those of us who don't want an SUV / Ute the choices are reducing all the time. Before buying my current car I made a spreadsheet for the cars I was choosing between. When I go to replace this car I could probably write my shortlist inside a matchbox with a texta.

  • So much more weight to haul around.

  • +1

    Yes, it's good to see more super high end cars on the road compared to some years ago, but those cool attainable cars (Evo's, STIs, AMG wagons, S2000s) or equivalents don't really exist new anymore in Australia. There are pockets, but the SUV and electric movement have really dulled the car market.

  • +1

    No. I have seen two raptors (RAMs too) clipping their mirrors driving in parrallel.

    I usually don't avoid big SUV/UTE by swaying to one side of the lane like many drivers would and stay centre to my own lane.

    More than once that SUV/UTE can't even figure out their car width and sway to the other side of their lane, that also happens to be a similar size vehicle.

    Just have a laugh when looking through your rear mirror and able to only see half of the UTE/SUV drivers head. It's a funny view.

  • +2

    and the more dangerous they are to other cars around them

    which also means they are safer from the cars around them, just completing your point :)

  • +2

    Big and bloated people now have big and bloated vehicles!
    Most people want a vehicle on the road slightly bigger than the average hence vehicle size has got ridiculous.
    It is about time to have a levy to register a larger sized vehicle!
    Don't start me off with large SUV/ Ute drivers leaving their towbar fitted all the time.

    • Up at Mareeba, I parked our rental Kia Carnival 8-seater, itself a huge 5.5m long, and long enough for a 1.8m adult to sleep lengthways in the back section alone, behind a new Ford F150 ute (aka 'truck' in the US)

      And I got out to survey THAT size - I paced out 6m long

      You could crush pedestrians all day long in that baby …

    • +1

      Aww you offended some people.

      You should say big penises big vagina people now have big penis big vagina vehicles, which is the proper terminology.

  • If you call an MG a SUV!

    It is really a compact suv

  • Personally, I don’t have an issue with either.SUV’s are very good for egress & ingress as you get older,no stooping down to enter a vehicles. I have owned close on 70 vehicles in my lifetime.These are a very practical vehicle whatever people think about them.At least there is choice, & an extremely wide choice,sure they are not for everyone(perhaps they are though?) As sales support this.The OP mentioned that he wished we had cars like Japan? Well, yes & no, Kei cars are city runabouts, they are useless going vast distances( yes I have owned a couple)so that argument doesn’t stack up.

  • +5

    The only issue I have is subsidising recreational 4wd utes through tax breaks. Apart from that, buy and drive whatever you like.

Login or Join to leave a comment