Reply #31: SUVs were not forced, they were the cool thing to have

[krispos42]

SUVs were not "forced" upon America. Look at the Big Three sales numbers... even with great financing and 'employee pricing' offers, they are still losing out to foreign companies.

They were advertised because they were popular. The question to ask is "why were they popular"?

Because the '70s and '80s were crappy times for car makers. The oil embargo killed the cool cars and turned American automakers to a crash-course in economy car building. This was when the Japanese and European cars became more prominent, for they had already been working on the problem for decades.

I mean, think about it... the most exciting car in the 80's was the 1st-generation Ford Taurus with the radical 'jellybean' styling. I drive an '89 Olds... while mechanically sound, it's hardly exciting or innovatinve. The 70's and 80's were littered with cars that failed to excite consumer passion, at least positive consumer passion. I'm sure lots of people were passionate about their Chevette, but in the aluminum-baseball-bat way, not the waxed-once-a-week way. :-) How about the Pontiac Le Car?

They had Broncos and Blazers and Suburbans and Cherokees for decades before the SUV boom. At some point, the buying public decided that the SUV was the next cool thing, especially for families. The public wanted something tha when they spent their hard-earned dollars they feel some pride of ownership. I don't feel much pride in my battered Olds, except the fact that people in new cars don't mess with my beater and cops don't seem to notice that I speed. :-) But I bought it from a family member for a buck, so I'm definately getting as much pride as I paid for.

I mean, think about it. The same logic that says "minivan" also works for the SUV. Ample room for 5 or six, plenty of luggage space, roof rack. Can tow a boat or camper, and has 4wd for snow and mud. Very useful stuff here, much more flexable than a regular car. If it wasn't for the fuel-consumption issue, nobody would be complaining about the SUV at all.

The SUVs were in such demand that Ford made a PROFIT of 8-10 thousand dollars on every Explorer sold during the 90's. Eco-friendly cars such as the Escort were sold at cost or not much above. And Ford sold many more Explorers than Escorts.

Many people that I knew owned an SUV or a minivan and a regular car. The family stuff was done in the SUV and the car was for commuting and such. It's a pretty practical solution to a transportation problem, albeit not the most eco-friendly one.

that's why they sold well.

It was not about slapping around the poor and unfortunate either. This country is awash in used cars. The poor have cars. The working classes have cars. They're not late-model SUVS, but they're servicable middle-aged cars and SUVs and minivans. Think aout it... who's going to buy all those used SUVs that the upper-classes are getting rid of to buy those chic hybrids? Middle and lower-class America, that's who.

On the plus side, the trucks made at the beginning of the SUV boom are staring to reach the ends of their services lives. Broken, batters, and worn-out, with fuel prices on the rise, they are being scrapped. The '92 Explorers and Suburbans are off to the recyclers.

And that's why they sold well.