huge SUVs, trucks, and crossovers

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by bestclimb

Hows the mileage on a suburban once you figure in the load? Yes for a person commuting the fuel per mile per pound of payload moved is way better in a metro but load a suburban down with 9 people and 800+ pounds of stuff and the thing comes into it's own.

Sure, if you spend most of your time hauling around 8 other people and a pile of stuff, but most people don't. Extend that logic of fuel economy per passenger mile out a bit, and you find youself taxiing your 747 down to the convenience store - hey, it gets great fuel economy on long trips with a full load, doesn't it?

[bestclimb]

Why the straw man with a 747? You seem to miss the line in there about where I stated that a metro is better for a light load.

How about we run those numbers with two people rather than a full load

180x2 at 45mpg 16,200 pounds per mile per gallon for a metro
180x2 at 15mpg 5,400 pounds per mile per gallon for the suburban, ouch pretty much why I don't drive one. If I had a bunch of people and gear to haul from time to time I would consider keeping one around (though for most a van may be an even better option). Seems to me if the mission is two people on clear, good roads a FE car is the way to go (throw in some snow and poor traction and AWD could make some sense). If the mission includes moving a fair bit of weight a larger rig may be worth looking into. A utility trailer is an excellent idea for most. In the next few months I will be hauling my own trash, and a fully enclosed utility trailer I can pull with the civic will be very high on the list.

The rule of thumb for aircraft tends to be get enough plane for 80% of your mission, rent the last 20% I would think that getting enough car to be useful 90% of the time then rent or keep parked a vehicle that can handle the last 10% would be effective for most people, but I sure would not dictate that logic to anyone else. About the most I could do is look at someone wasting their buck on too much ride and shake my head.

[jamesqf]

Hardly a strawman, just an honest bit of (intended as, anyway) humor on the logic involved. We do hear that "more economical with a full load" argument a lot, and of course it's not really wrong. It's more in the "not even wrong" class, because when we look at actual vehicle use, we see that 90% of the time they're carrying one person, 9% just two, 0.9% three...