Thread replies: 11
Thread images: 2
Thread images: 2
Anonymous
SUVs, Crossovers and similar shit 2017-08-06 05:09:07 Post No. 17673234
[Report] Image search: [Google]
SUVs, Crossovers and similar shit 2017-08-06 05:09:07 Post No. 17673234
[Report] Image search: [Google]
File: Consider-the-Crossover-Now-Please-Stop-It-Crossovers-placement-626x381.jpg (100KB, 626x381px) Image search:
[Google]
100KB, 626x381px
Anyone else tired of seeing these fucking monstrosities all the time? I remember 10 or 15 years ago when this trend came over from across the pond, everyone made fun of it. But then we ate that shit up and suddenly it's the new norm.
Most of these things don't even have AWD (sometimes not even as an option) or high ground clearance anymore. It's just a heavy car with a high center of gravity and therefore slow and bad at handling. And because they are inherently more expensive than normal cars but even poor people still want them, they buy the cheapest versions. Bland, uninspired, ugly cars with stupid names like Nissan Qashqai, Dacia Duster or Opel Mokka.
Seriously, most of the "normal" cars you still see on the road are over ten years old. Former German sedan drivers have big SUVs by the same brands as they are the new status symbols. Former station wagon drivers have SUVs "for the space" (even though they don't offer any more). And former small hatchback drivers now drive those aforementioned ghastly small crossovers.
I don't think the average car on the road was ever more ugly and miserable than now.
>>
wow a great all around car that can d just about anything youd ever need
why would someone want that
>>
>>17673250
Great at what exactly?
>>
>>17673254
theyre practical and efficient like I said they do anything youd need out of a car
cargo space
seating
fuel efficiency
and despite /o/s opinions people like how they look
crossovers are literally the best a-b car
>>
>>17673281
>cargo space
Worse than a wagon of equal size
>seating
Might be an argument if you're 80 years old and weak, pathetic for a young person to use this as an argument though.
>fuel efficiency
Now you're just making shit up. They have bad fuel economy due to their weight and wind resistance.
>and despite /o/s opinions people like how they look
People are wrong.
>>
>>17673300
crossovers are wagons
wagons with better ground clearance
umm I mean as in they can hold your family
umm no most of them get around 30 mpg
you are wrong
>>
>>17673338
30 mpg is shit. You're an idiot.
>>
>>17673347
lol youre so butthurt
thats about the same mpg as wagons anyway and 30 is higher than average
>>
>>17673358
An SUV will always have worse fuel economy than a car of equivalent size. More weight, big tires, high roofline = higher wind resistance = worse fuel economy. That's just fucking physics, you dunce.
It's also the reason those things are slow as fuck especially in terms of top speed and highway acceleration.
>>
>>17673387
im sorry I look at the facts and not what I want to believe in
>>
File: 1500577844237.png (216KB, 481x284px) Image search:
[Google]
216KB, 481x284px
>>17673399
>bigger is cheaper just look at the facts haha prove me wrong
Thread posts: 11
Thread images: 2
Thread images: 2