I mean this clearly shows how rectangular cars were back then, which is not great for collisions. They should at least stay round.
Also i read a discussion recently about how EVs are heavier due to their battery (and that’s supposedly bad for pedestrians when they get into a crash with the car), and i immediately had to think of how enormously overweight SUV vehicles are today, and people don’t complain enough about how enormously overweight SUVs are. In fact some people praise it and say that the heavy mass is good for the car-driver of the SUV because when they get into a crash, they’ll take less damage (while everyone around them takes more, btw).
Really shows how arguments are twisted and turned around when it’s the oil lobby that stands to profit from it.
Imagine if speed limits were variable based on a car’s weight and lethality. Only small cars are allowed to go fast.
Meanwhile me back in University:
It is so hard to tell how big those american cars are, because all the other cars around them are huge too, so everything is in proportion.
This really puts in perspective though. Seriously WTF
I used to drive an early 90s Nissan Sentra. Great small car. Recently had a rental for a few days that’s was a new Nissan Sentra. The new one is absolutely huge compared the old car.
Ya full family. Still not cool.
As a person who lives in upstate New York / the rust belt, this would be catastrophic for traffic in the winter. And actually the CUVs on each side are more fuel efficient, have less emissions, and are significantly safer than the 90s car. Looks can be deceiving.
Good thing OP is talking about SUVs and not crossovers (CUVs). Crossovers are really just cars anyway.
Who cares about safety, and things like that. They want smaller cars! Also I had a couple large cars in the 90s. Including 2 massive suburbans. So there’s are only certain cars that are small. This is the same things about older appliances apparently working forever, which they did not, bias by a few is all. I would never give up a modern car for anything from the 90s. Most of those cars just sucked
A lot of that is just 30-40 years of progress. A car built to be a similar size and performance as that 90’s car using the current state of the art would be significantly more fuel efficient, have less emissions, and would be just as safe as those SUVs.
Please make minivans cool again so I can be cool.
It’s cool if you have a large family & own a minivan. If you’re single with no kids/gf & own a minivan, you’re a problem to the environment.
I’d be pretty good with a smaller minivan. Something like a Mazda 5 would be nice.
Ya full family. Still not cool.
tbf all cars are bad for the environment. And minivans can carry way more stuff like a 4x4 truck but while still being enclosed if you fold the 2nd and 3rd rows making them very versatile even if you’re single
I enjoy my small shitbox (2007 KIA Rio5 hatchback) and wish I had a smaller shitbox to commute in
One of the biggest perks is the fact that my little shitbox is FIXABLE by sane people with standard tools! No special tools, parts are literally everywhere, and all the parts are DIRT CHEAP. The engine is in Hyundais and KIAs from 1989 to 2011. If it’s a 1.6L 4 cylinder made by those 2 companies it’s the same engine between ALL OF THEM.
EDIT: The biggest difference is the exhaust routing. The midpipe on the Hyundais is straight, the KIAs it’s got a bump.
In a surprising reversal, the meme got it right (SUVs, 90s) and the title did not (SUV’s).
Even when dealing with acronyms and numbers, " 's " indicates possession.
I don’t see SUV’s much, but I frequently see 90’s (or other decades).
I wish!!!
You’ll never convince me that SUVs don’t exist solely to sell what is effectively a minivan to deeply insecure men.
AFAIK, they only sell full-size minivans in the US. I don’t think I’ve seen any smaller ones since the Mazda 5 was discontinued.
The availability of crossovers in every size category means you can get the size you want.
Deeply insecure men buy pickup trucks with hoods I can barely see over. SUVs and their perception of “safety”, storage space, and ride height are why women are the primary purchasers.
Oh, that Ford Escort model was truly Fix Or Repair Daily.
God, how bad it was. The shittiest and most unreliable car I ever had.
My grandad had one, a 1.4 “Eclipse”. Granted he was a mechanic and very handy at fixing his own cars but that thing was super reliable. Now the Orion he got it to replace was another story, utterly useless hunk of crap. Technically the same car but still…
My contribution - 1990 Volkswagen Vanagon. It is pretty large, but hilariously it’s still smaller than a Chevy Tahoe lol.
And it probably fits more stuff!
Hi, it’s me your long lost cousin!
I mean, it might be small but it got worse gas mileage, was heavier and would kill you in a fender Bender.
Turning a corner was like opening a submarine hatch. The brakes locked up causing more accidents and deaths. The suspension allowed the cars to roll easier. And if you were hit by one of them, you had a much higher chance of severe injury or death due to the lack of crumple zone.
People really need to stop looking for solutions to modern problems by looking to the past at the things that were the reason we ended up with the modern problems.
Wrong. 2005 was peak for cars.
you’re thinking 60s maybe, 90s cars had servos, crumple zones, even abs and tcs. maybe not the bottom tier ones, but it was def available
i was skimming the wiki page for crumple zone and they had simulations for the '86 vw polo
you’re prolly right on the fuel efficiency thoughAre you trying to say:
My humble contribution
