We really have no business driving SUVs

[Apex]

Originally posted by: lurk3r

Originally posted by: Sluggo

Originally posted by: Apex

Originally posted by: Pariah
True, but in my experiences, at least Prius drivers have to get out of their car before you hate them. The way the other 2 drive like they own the road with complete lack of awareness or recognition of anyone else on it makes you hate them in all situations.

I wish that was the case around here. I think the most common complaint against Prius owners here is they clog up the passing lane like so much freeway constipation, refusing to move over. It's even worse with hills, plodding along in the left lane, plugging it up, matching the speed of the tractor trailer next to them, so no one can pass.

Huh, this whole time I didnt know they were matching the speed of the semi trucks, I just thought that was as fast as they could go.

The problem is quite the opposite here, Prius rips along at 90+ mph, its the minivan and SUV's that plug the left lane at 2mph under the speed limit, nearly always some chick putting on her makeup, driving a huge land barge since its "safer" and they can putt along blissfully unaware of their surroundings.

Man, if only that was the case here. Sounds like paradise.

 

[njdevilsfan87]

Originally posted by: AdamK47
I own 4 vehicles and all of them suck gas, but none of them are SUVs. I guess none of this applies to me then.

I want to buy a M3 one day. But I guess it will not apply to me either! Hooray for SUVs taking all the blame. I'm looking forward to flooring the gas pedal in it - wasting so much gas - while not even receiving a thought from another person that I'm wasting all the world's resources.

 

[mooseracing]

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: mooseracing

Originally posted by: thomsbrain
In Europe, people tow trailers with econoboxes. No, they don't go very fast, but the "need" for a giant truck to tow a trailer is a uniquely American trait.

It's called safety....any car can pull anything, that doesn't matter. What matters is being able to safley handle it and stop it. Cars can't, show me one that can handle a load a truck pulls.

.

I can show you many, if you really want

I suspect they'll probably handle, accelerate and stop quicker than most 'trucks' (which I assume is the equivalent of a 4WD ute here).

So is a towbar flat towing or is that suppose to be the same as tow rating in the US?

Not to mention when towing and the need for a truck, it's always over 2k lbs. A truck that is rated to tow more than those cars will have more than adequate brakes to slow the load down. Not to mention the truck will be heavier, which plays a huge role in bringing the weight to a stop in an emergency situation.

I haven't found a single place that actaully test the handling between these in emergency situation, not to mention the tow ratings are different between manufactures.

I would be willing to bet 60% of the vehicles on the road today tow over their ratings, but they have all been lucky enough to not be in an emergency stopping situation. I used to work for the County Road Commiss, used a half ton truck to tow a 30ft car trailer with steel cross tubes the same length. That 1/2 ton truck could barely stop that trailer empty safely let alon when I took them out to construction sites. I would doubt that trailer grossed 3k lb by itself.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Taxes aren't killing this country. Inefficient government is and idiotic Americans who think only of themselves are killing this country. We actually have one of the lowest tax rates of any modern country.

So, by your logic, since our taxes are somewhat less ridiculous than most other countries, we should raise them? Just because other countries are worse than we are in terms of taxation does not mean that our taxes are not too high.

Yes, we are relatively better off than most countries from a taxation standpoint. However, in absolute terms, our taxes are still excessive. You can't use the fact that things are worse somewhere else to justify a bad situation here.

ZV

If taxes were "killing" this country then every other country with higher taxes would have been dead long ago. It's a stupid statement and one that needed to be put into context. Whether or not those taxes are justified or appropriate is another matter.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: dug777

http://www.ford.com.au/servlet...agename=Page&c=DFYPage

To put that into perspective, the Ranger only comes the a max of a 3,000kg towbar pack here

and to put that in perspective, an F-150 tows up to 11,000 lbs, or about 5000 in french (kg). and the F-150 outsells the ranger 4 or 5 to 1.

an F-350, which a lot of the douchenozzles around here commute in, can tow up to 18,700 lbs.

 

[senseamp]

Originally posted by: hpkeeper
I have owned a pickup truck my entire life, and owned SUV's more recently. They've all sucked horribly on gas, but you don't see me going to a smaller car. The price of gas doesn't change with the vehicle.

Did I use them for their "purpose" everyday of my life? no, but then again "purpose" is subjective. If you are saying SUV's are for offroading I'd argue that there are only three vehicles I'd consider going offroading with, A Jeep Wrangler, A hummer, or a Range Rover. The rest are just posers. My purpose for driving large vehicles is 3 things.

Comfort. Safety and driving height.

"oh well safety is irrelivant based on safety ratings"...

I look at my large vehicle and the cost of the gas to fill it up as an investment. I'll take my GMC sierra over your Volkswagen Rabbit head on in an accident any day. In that regard, I believe that bigger is better. More metal to crunch means less of me crunching in my opinion. I refuse to have my tombstone read "...well at least I got 40 miles to the gallon"

I like being in a tall vehicle, I don't know how many of you drive in upstate new york winters, but even in my tall vehicle I have troubles seeing over the snowbanks... I'm not going to comprimise my vision even further by lowering myself beneath them.

and comfort. I don't know about you, but I'm over 6'0", probably close to 6'3". Maybe for some of you who are my height or even taller it's not a problem, but for me to get down into a car it's a task simply to get in and out of a car that is low to the ground. Call me lazy if you like or a typical american, but if I have the money to afford something that makes me comfortable and is affordable to me, what sweat is it off any of your backs what I drive?

It's not us SUV drivers or the pick-up truck drivers that are increasing gas prices... lay off.

Edit: It would be also practical for me at this point to say for those of you who own sport cars whether or not you race them everyday. If you do, you're using your vehicle for it's intended 'purpose'. But saying that you use the vehicle for it's intended purpose comprimises your statement for saving the worlds resources because you are not driving your car as efficiently as possible. Everyone knows driving like a maniac gets you fewer miles to the gallon. You can't have your cake and eat it too... /rant.

Bit trucks and SUVs are only safer at expense of others safety. They are not contributing to overall safety. Two Sierras colliding are not going to be safer for occupants than two Rabbits colliding, and I'd rather roll a Rabbit than have the weight of a GMC Sierra on top of me, especially since an SUV is more likely to roll in the first place.
Certainly most Americans don't care about anyone but themselves, which is why high gas prices are so precious. Economics is making people do what common sense couldn't. Sure there are still going to be people who can afford to drive trucks for daily driver, but they are going to be a minority, especially in the urban areas where I live. They are going back to the redneck vehicle status they had before the whole SUV and off roader craze. I hope you plan on keeping you SUV for a long time, or you are going to get hosed on trade in.

 

[Demon-Xanth]

Although I've posted in this thread...
http://www.no-clutter.com/gall...ge.php?album=44&pos=27

 

[SAWYER]

"an F-350, which a lot of the douchenozzles around here commute in "


BS

 

[SparkyJJO]

I guess one question is, why does the OP (and people like him) hate SUVs so much that you don't even want someone else to have one? If you don't like one you don't have to buy one, no one is making you. Same should go the other way, no one should make someone buy a small car if they don't like them (or in some people's cases, they just don't fit in them!). What's the big deal anyway that you find them so offensive to you?

 

[JeepinEd]

Originally posted by: SparkyJJO
I guess one question is, why does the OP (and people like him) hate SUVs so much that you don't even want someone else to have one? If you don't like one you don't have to buy one, no one is making you. Same should go the other way, no one should make someone buy a small car if they don't like them (or in some people's cases, they just don't fit in them!). What's the big deal anyway that you find them so offensive to you?

It's because they are the "Enlightened" ones. These people think that they are mentally superior to us and therefore have the right to dictate what we should be driving or how big our house should be. I like to call them mini dictators.

I'll still top and help them when they get stuck, whether that be on a trail in Moab, or when they blow their tires on washboard roads in Death Valley...

 

[senseamp]

Dictate, no, rejoice in the decline in SUV sales due to gas prices, yes. You are still free to drive a house around, just have to pay through the nose for the privilege. Long term it means SUV's are out, fuel efficient cars are in.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Taxes aren't killing this country. Inefficient government is and idiotic Americans who think only of themselves are killing this country. We actually have one of the lowest tax rates of any modern country.

So, by your logic, since our taxes are somewhat less ridiculous than most other countries, we should raise them? Just because other countries are worse than we are in terms of taxation does not mean that our taxes are not too high.

Yes, we are relatively better off than most countries from a taxation standpoint. However, in absolute terms, our taxes are still excessive. You can't use the fact that things are worse somewhere else to justify a bad situation here.

ZV

If taxes were "killing" this country then every other country with higher taxes would have been dead long ago. It's a stupid statement and one that needed to be put into context. Whether or not those taxes are justified or appropriate is another matter.

One could argue, and I would argue, that those countries _are_ effectively dead. Once an economic system hits socialism, it's dead. Innovation is stifled and overall progress grinds to a halt. The country, as a geopolitical entity, may linger and circle the drain for decades, even centuries, but that's just involuntary twitching.

ZV

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: dug777

http://www.ford.com.au/servlet...agename=Page&c=DFYPage

To put that into perspective, the Ranger only comes the a max of a 3,000kg towbar pack here

and to put that in perspective, an F-150 tows up to 11,000 lbs, or about 5000 in french (kg). and the F-150 outsells the ranger 4 or 5 to 1.

an F-350, which a lot of the douchenozzles around here commute in, can tow up to 18,700 lbs.

An enormous truck has a higher tow rating than a tradies ute :Q

Who'da thunk it?

I think you missed my initial point, which was that a simply that a large proportion of towing by private parties can be done just as well, if not better, in a car rather than a truck.

What proportion of loads towed by people who aren't tradies (and thus commercial use) would exceed 2,300kg? I'd suggest it's a pretty low number, based on casual observation here in Aus at least.

Anything over 750kg has to be a braked trailer here, and to be honest you don't see a huge number of those about, aside from caravans and boat trailers (and even those are quite likely to be towed by a big car like a Holden Statesman (LWB Commodore), Ford Fairlane (LWB Falcon), Commodore or Falcon rather than a 4WD).

Interestingly, even on farms here you don't see many F-150/Chevy-equivalents here, farmers usually tow more normally sized loads using stuff like Landcruiser 70s, and then really, really big loads using tractors. Landcruisers also have the advantage of being genuinely excellent off-roaders

 

[JeepinEd]

Originally posted by: senseamp
Dictate, no, rejoice in the decline in SUV sales due to gas prices, yes. You are still free to drive a house around, just have to pay through the nose for the privilege. Long term it means SUV's are out, fuel efficient cars are in.

There is nothing wrong with rejoicing in the decline of the SUV. It's your opinion and you are entitled to it. The little dictators I refer to are people, such as the OP, who demean, castigate or threaten SUV owners. These people are also often seeking ways to tax or restrict the availability of said vehicles (not to mention vandalizing them in extreme circumstances).

I own a Prius and a Jeep. Each vehicle has it's purpose and it should be MY decision as to which one will fit my needs for any given task.

 

[JeepinEd]

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: dug777

http://www.ford.com.au/servlet...agename=Page&c=DFYPage

To put that into perspective, the Ranger only comes the a max of a 3,000kg towbar pack here

and to put that in perspective, an F-150 tows up to 11,000 lbs, or about 5000 in french (kg). and the F-150 outsells the ranger 4 or 5 to 1.

an F-350, which a lot of the douchenozzles around here commute in, can tow up to 18,700 lbs.

An enormous truck has a higher tow rating than a tradies ute :Q

Who'da thunk it?

I think you missed my initial point, which was that a simply that a large proportion of towing by private parties can be done just as well, if not better, in a car rather than a truck.

What proportion of loads towed by people who aren't tradies (and thus commercial use) would exceed 2,300kg? I'd suggest it's a pretty low number, based on casual observation here in Aus at least.

Anything over 750kg has to be a braked trailer here, and to be honest you don't see a huge number of those about, aside from caravans and boat trailers (and even those are quite likely to be towed by a big car like a Holden Statesman (LWB Commodore), Ford Fairlane (LWB Falcon), Commodore or Falcon rather than a 4WD).

Interestingly, even on farms here you don't see many F-150/Chevy-equivalents here, farmers usually tow more normally sized loads using stuff like Landcruiser 70s, and then really, really big loads using tractors. Landcruisers also have the advantage of being genuinely excellent off-roaders

Commodore 15MPG/24MPG
Subrban 14MPG/20MPG

There doesn't seem to be much difference in gas mileage. You can certainly pack and carry a whole lot more in a Suburban than you can in a Commodore.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Taxes aren't killing this country. Inefficient government is and idiotic Americans who think only of themselves are killing this country. We actually have one of the lowest tax rates of any modern country.

So, by your logic, since our taxes are somewhat less ridiculous than most other countries, we should raise them? Just because other countries are worse than we are in terms of taxation does not mean that our taxes are not too high.

Yes, we are relatively better off than most countries from a taxation standpoint. However, in absolute terms, our taxes are still excessive. You can't use the fact that things are worse somewhere else to justify a bad situation here.

ZV

If taxes were "killing" this country then every other country with higher taxes would have been dead long ago. It's a stupid statement and one that needed to be put into context. Whether or not those taxes are justified or appropriate is another matter.

One could argue, and I would argue, that those countries _are_ effectively dead. Once an economic system hits socialism, it's dead. Innovation is stifled and overall progress grinds to a halt. The country, as a geopolitical entity, may linger and circle the drain for decades, even centuries, but that's just involuntary twitching.

ZV

LOL, yeah, the Eurozone is doing so horribly. Christ, you need to get out a little bit. There's a reason why the Euro is appreciating like crazy against the dollar and their economies are doing relatively well.

 

[Pariah]

What proportion of loads towed by people who aren't tradies (and thus commercial use) would exceed 2,300kg? I'd suggest it's a pretty low number, based on casual observation here in Aus at least.

Maybe you missed my post, but again, there are no cars in the US currently for sale that I'm aware of with a towing capacity anywhere near 5700lbs. Typical is 1000-2000lbs. So telling Americans they don't need SUV's and trucks for towing because cars in Australia have ridiculous towing capacities is completely meaningless. Maybe US manufacturers lowball the numbers to encourage people to spend more on trucks and SUV's, but I can't imagine they understate the numbers by 1/3 to 1/6 less than actual. I don't know what Australians are doing with their cars, but I can't see typical American cars having the transmission, suspension, and brakes capable of safely towing nealy 6000lbs around.

 

[Pariah]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Taxes aren't killing this country. Inefficient government is and idiotic Americans who think only of themselves are killing this country. We actually have one of the lowest tax rates of any modern country.

So, by your logic, since our taxes are somewhat less ridiculous than most other countries, we should raise them? Just because other countries are worse than we are in terms of taxation does not mean that our taxes are not too high.

Yes, we are relatively better off than most countries from a taxation standpoint. However, in absolute terms, our taxes are still excessive. You can't use the fact that things are worse somewhere else to justify a bad situation here.

ZV

If taxes were "killing" this country then every other country with higher taxes would have been dead long ago. It's a stupid statement and one that needed to be put into context. Whether or not those taxes are justified or appropriate is another matter.

One could argue, and I would argue, that those countries _are_ effectively dead. Once an economic system hits socialism, it's dead. Innovation is stifled and overall progress grinds to a halt. The country, as a geopolitical entity, may linger and circle the drain for decades, even centuries, but that's just involuntary twitching.

ZV

Exactly! You just hit the nail right on the head. That is precisely why the OP thinks Americans have no need for SUV's. Another important point to add is that...

uhh...

What were we talking about again?

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: InflatableBuddha
This. Just rent an SUV for the few times you actually NEED one.

This.

Unlike most, but probably not all of you, I drive a truck because I use it as a truck every single day. It tows 3-5 tonne trailers, it hauls oversize and overweight items, dirt, gravel, etc. It's a 4x4, and everytime it rains it *still* tries to get stuck, because it's usually trying to pull a loaded dump trailer through a mud pit at a supply yard.

It costs well over $100 to fill, and it's a bloody miracle when it gets 300 miles to a tank. And yes, when I need groceries, I take the truck, because it's the only vehicle I have.

The last few months of gas prices have made a difference though; now when I need to make a trip out of town, it only needs to be about 150 miles for me to save money renting a subcompact instead of just taking the vehicle I have.

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: JeepinEd

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: dug777

http://www.ford.com.au/servlet...agename=Page&c=DFYPage

To put that into perspective, the Ranger only comes the a max of a 3,000kg towbar pack here

and to put that in perspective, an F-150 tows up to 11,000 lbs, or about 5000 in french (kg). and the F-150 outsells the ranger 4 or 5 to 1.

an F-350, which a lot of the douchenozzles around here commute in, can tow up to 18,700 lbs.

An enormous truck has a higher tow rating than a tradies ute :Q

Who'da thunk it?

I think you missed my initial point, which was that a simply that a large proportion of towing by private parties can be done just as well, if not better, in a car rather than a truck.

What proportion of loads towed by people who aren't tradies (and thus commercial use) would exceed 2,300kg? I'd suggest it's a pretty low number, based on casual observation here in Aus at least.

Anything over 750kg has to be a braked trailer here, and to be honest you don't see a huge number of those about, aside from caravans and boat trailers (and even those are quite likely to be towed by a big car like a Holden Statesman (LWB Commodore), Ford Fairlane (LWB Falcon), Commodore or Falcon rather than a 4WD).

Interestingly, even on farms here you don't see many F-150/Chevy-equivalents here, farmers usually tow more normally sized loads using stuff like Landcruiser 70s, and then really, really big loads using tractors. Landcruisers also have the advantage of being genuinely excellent off-roaders

Commodore 15MPG/24MPG
Subrban 14MPG/20MPG

There doesn't seem to be much difference in gas mileage. You can certainly pack and carry a whole lot more in a Suburban than you can in a Commodore.

I'm assuming (since I'm otherwise engaged right now ) that those are the correctly converted figures for the top of the line LS3 equipped Commodore? It's not exactly designed with fuel economy in mind.

Earlier I linked to the Ford Falcon Wagon, which has a humble I6 and I think you'll find gets noticeably better fuel consumption, a significant amount of cargo space, and is rated for towing up to 2,300kg.

Perhaps a better comparison, and those were just the first few cars I pulled off Ford and Holden's websites, I'm sure there are smaller engined vehicles that tow plenty and are much better on fuel.

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: Pariah

What proportion of loads towed by people who aren't tradies (and thus commercial use) would exceed 2,300kg? I'd suggest it's a pretty low number, based on casual observation here in Aus at least.

Maybe you missed my post, but again, there are no cars in the US currently for sale that I'm aware of with a towing capacity anywhere near 5700lbs. Typical is 1000-2000lbs. So telling Americans they don't need SUV's and trucks for towing because cars in Australia have ridiculous towing capacities is completely meaningless. Maybe US manufacturers lowball the numbers to encourage people to spend more on trucks and SUV's, but I can't imagine they understate the numbers by 1/3 to 1/6 less than actual. I don't know what Australians are doing with their cars, but I can't see typical American cars having the transmission, suspension, and brakes capable of safely towing nealy 6000lbs around.

I don't pretend to understand how your road rules relate to towing over there, but here (as I noted in my response you've partially quoted) anything over 750kg must be a braked trailer.

Those tow bars will also specify a maximum tongue weight, so those heavier trailers will almost certainly have to be multi-axle I assume?

Out of interest, what's the Ranger rated at with the heay-duty towpack over there?

 

[BUTCH1]

Originally posted by: Pariah

What proportion of loads towed by people who aren't tradies (and thus commercial use) would exceed 2,300kg? I'd suggest it's a pretty low number, based on casual observation here in Aus at least.

Maybe you missed my post, but again, there are no cars in the US currently for sale that I'm aware of with a towing capacity anywhere near 5700lbs. Typical is 1000-2000lbs. So telling Americans they don't need SUV's and trucks for towing because cars in Australia have ridiculous towing capacities is completely meaningless. Maybe US manufacturers lowball the numbers to encourage people to spend more on trucks and SUV's, but I can't imagine they understate the numbers by 1/3 to 1/6 less than actual. I don't know what Australians are doing with their cars, but I can't see typical American cars having the transmission, suspension, and brakes capable of safely towing nealy 6000lbs around.

I think the tranny issue hits it right on the head, my car (V6 Chevy) makes 220/228,
more than enough power to tow the 1000lbs. it's rated for. The tranny in it is only
rated@ 4500lbs and the car is 3300lbs so there you go. GM is not going to waste$$
and increase the cost of the car to drop a truck tranny in it, if you need to tow anything
of size, few sedans will get it done..

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Sawyer
"an F-350, which a lot of the douchenozzles around here commute in "


BS

have you been to houston lately?

Originally posted by: dug777
An enormous truck has a higher tow rating than a tradies ute :Q

Who'da thunk it?

I think you missed my initial point, which was that a simply that a large proportion of towing by private parties can be done just as well, if not better, in a car rather than a truck.

What proportion of loads towed by people who aren't tradies (and thus commercial use) would exceed 2,300kg? I'd suggest it's a pretty low number, based on casual observation here in Aus at least.

Anything over 750kg has to be a braked trailer here, and to be honest you don't see a huge number of those about, aside from caravans and boat trailers (and even those are quite likely to be towed by a big car like a Holden Statesman (LWB Commodore), Ford Fairlane (LWB Falcon), Commodore or Falcon rather than a 4WD).

Interestingly, even on farms here you don't see many F-150/Chevy-equivalents here, farmers usually tow more normally sized loads using stuff like Landcruiser 70s, and then really, really big loads using tractors. Landcruisers also have the advantage of being genuinely excellent off-roaders

landcruisers are too expensive here for farm use. might as well buy an F-350 for the price.

edit: i think your landcruisers stopped being sold here in the 80s. seriously, yours look really old.

who aren't tradies? well i don't know. this weekend i'm sure i'll see several boats, RVs, and horse trailers being pulled by people just out to have fun.

and last i checked unibody was still bad for hauling big loads. the frame warps a little bit and the doors never quite close right again. maybe with CAD unibody has gotten better.

Originally posted by: dug777

I'm assuming (since I'm otherwise engaged right now ) that those are the correctly converted figures for the top of the line LS3 equipped Commodore? It's not exactly designed with fuel economy in mind.

Earlier I linked to the Ford Falcon Wagon, which has a humble I6 and I think you'll find gets noticeably better fuel consumption, a significant amount of cargo space, and is rated for towing up to 2,300kg.

Perhaps a better comparison, and those were just the first few cars I pulled off Ford and Holden's websites, I'm sure there are smaller engined vehicles that tow plenty and are much better on fuel.

and it's I6 probably won't pass emissions here in the US. don't forget that our emissions standards significantly worsen mileage in some perverse twist that only a bureaucrat could love.

the only gas I6 in truck usage that i'm aware of is GM's 4.2. even in a heavy SUV like the trailblazer it'll tow 6600 lbs (or 3100 kg in french).




carpoint doesn't seem to have information for the ranger. though our ranger and your ranger may not be the same. i suspect yours is the mazda designed one, whereas ours is the ford design (which has never seen a clean sheet redesign in the 30 years it's been on the market).

edit: ranger tows 6000 lbs, or 2700 kg in french

 

[SparkyJJO]

Happy independence day guys, it's a free country, go drive an SUV

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Sawyer
"an F-350, which a lot of the douchenozzles around here commute in "


BS

have you been to houston lately?

Originally posted by: dug777
An enormous truck has a higher tow rating than a tradies ute :Q

Who'da thunk it?

I think you missed my initial point, which was that a simply that a large proportion of towing by private parties can be done just as well, if not better, in a car rather than a truck.

What proportion of loads towed by people who aren't tradies (and thus commercial use) would exceed 2,300kg? I'd suggest it's a pretty low number, based on casual observation here in Aus at least.

Anything over 750kg has to be a braked trailer here, and to be honest you don't see a huge number of those about, aside from caravans and boat trailers (and even those are quite likely to be towed by a big car like a Holden Statesman (LWB Commodore), Ford Fairlane (LWB Falcon), Commodore or Falcon rather than a 4WD).

Interestingly, even on farms here you don't see many F-150/Chevy-equivalents here, farmers usually tow more normally sized loads using stuff like Landcruiser 70s, and then really, really big loads using tractors. Landcruisers also have the advantage of being genuinely excellent off-roaders

landcruisers are too expensive here for farm use. might as well buy an F-350 for the price.

edit: i think your landcruisers stopped being sold here in the 80s. seriously, yours look really old.

who aren't tradies? well i don't know. this weekend i'm sure i'll see several boats, RVs, and horse trailers being pulled by people just out to have fun.

and last i checked unibody was still bad for hauling big loads. the frame warps a little bit and the doors never quite close right again. maybe with CAD unibody has gotten better.

Originally posted by: dug777

I'm assuming (since I'm otherwise engaged right now ) that those are the correctly converted figures for the top of the line LS3 equipped Commodore? It's not exactly designed with fuel economy in mind.

Earlier I linked to the Ford Falcon Wagon, which has a humble I6 and I think you'll find gets noticeably better fuel consumption, a significant amount of cargo space, and is rated for towing up to 2,300kg.

Perhaps a better comparison, and those were just the first few cars I pulled off Ford and Holden's websites, I'm sure there are smaller engined vehicles that tow plenty and are much better on fuel.

and it's I6 probably won't pass emissions here in the US. don't forget that our emissions standards significantly worsen mileage in some perverse twist that only a bureaucrat could love.

the only gas I6 in truck usage that i'm aware of is GM's 4.2. even in a heavy SUV like the trailblazer it'll tow 6600 lbs (or 3100 kg in french).




carpoint doesn't seem to have information for the ranger. though our ranger and your ranger may not be the same. i suspect yours is the mazda designed one, whereas ours is the ford design (which has never seen a clean sheet redesign in the 30 years it's been on the market).

edit: ranger tows 6000 lbs, or 2700 kg in french

While I agree that Landcruiser 70s don't look particularly modern, it doesn't bother me, or the target market in the slightest. They're honest workhorses, and Landcruiser 70s certainly aren't designed, or bought, for their looks.

They're bought because they're tough as, they'll go anywhere and put up with just about anything. They'll get dingled and dented by cattle and sheep, people will accidentally back other pieces of farm equipment into them, they'll never get cleaned, so soothing modern curves would be rather wasted

The Landcruiser 200s are the shiny, gleaming and 'up-to-date' ones, although they retain the go anywhere aspect, they just do it in luxury