Sales of Full-Size SUVs Take a Dive in February
by Michael Graham Richard, Gatineau, Canada on 03. 5.06
A couple weeks, ago Collin reported that Hybrid Sales Keep Going Up, Up, Up, which is always a good thing to hear (just wait until the Camry hybrid comes out). Another pleasant piece of news is that sales of full-size SUVs keep declining in the US: In one month, February, they dropped by 14% (from 120,376 to 103,566 units). GM says it is happy to have increased it's relative share of that declining market, but it is doubtful that GM management is really smiling much these days (see the "GM Deathwatch" series of editorials at The Truth About Cars). Ford has been hit the hardest with a 21.4% decline in sales.
Almost every time we write about SUVs, we get comments or emails about how they are needed and serve a purpose and all that. Sure, some people need to own a truck or a SUV. If you live on a farm and constantly tow things and do messy jobs. If you build houses for a living and must carry lots of equipment daily. But the problem is with people who confuse their real needs with their imaginary ones ("but what if someday I decide I want to go off-road!"), and people who do tow heavy things, but only a couple of times each year; they tow the boat to the water at the beginning of summer, and they tow it back when summer ends. That's it. It makes no sense to drive a 6000lbs monster the other 360 days of the year. They could just rent a truck when needed and it would be much more economical for their wallet and the environment.
::Sales of Full-Size SUVs Drop in February; GM Increasing its Share, ::Hybrid Sales Keep Going Up, Up, Up
Take a Look at West Philadelphia High's Hybrid
|
Guardian: Can our way of living really save the planet?
|
The news may not be all good. There's going to be a glut of SUV's on the used market, and they are going to be snatched up by the folks who couldn't previously afford them, and haven't gotten the word that big is out.
That's true but in the long run as fuel costs and social pressure increase people should make wiser choices. Fuel may have gotten a bit cheaper after the las run up but they will increase again.
Despite "fuel costs and social pressure," don't forget that there are still some people who face the challenges of transporting a large family. Show me a greener alternative for 9-passenger transportation than the new Chevy Suburban... I've outgrown my previous minivan and I'd really like to have more choices.
Oliver, it is clear that some people really need these vehicles. But they are a small minority of SUV buyers, and that's the problem.
"don't forget that there are still some people who face the challenges of transporting a large family. Show me a greener alternative for 9-passenger transportation than the new Chevy Suburban... I've outgrown my previous minivan and I'd really like to have more choices."
Around 1% of US households have more than 5 people, and the average vehicle occupancy is around 1.2-1.3.
Also, there are no SUVs that have greater passenger capacities larger than the biggest minivans (which I believe tops out at 9).
Show me a greener alternative for 9-passenger transportation than the new Chevy Suburban... I've outgrown my previous minivan and I'd really like to have more choices.
I know it's a little late for this now and I'm not suggesting euthanasia or anything but the really green option is not to have such a large family in the first place.
Keeping it at less than replacement levels mitigates the need for even owning a car, let alone a personal bus.
Yep, most SUVs have no more seats that other vehicles. Besides, how often is your vehicle actually full? Ever thought about buying nine bikes? Or, moving nearer to work, school, etc?
I do realize that some people need a large vehicle to transport a large family however many do not. Does a couple with one child need a minivan? People need to right size their vehicles.
Oliver if you need transport a large family then theirs nothing wrong with having a large vehicle.
More detailed stats (U.S.):
Number of Vans and SUVs (excluding pickups): 44,776,000
Number of households with more than 6 people: 1,846,844
Ratio of the latter to the former: 1/25
Average occupancy of SUVs: 1.74
Average occupancy of vans: 2.20
Vehicles per person, 1950: 0.28
Vehicles per person, 2002: 0.77
Vehicle miles per person, 1950: 3,017
Vehicle miles per person, 2002: 9,903
I'm quite sure I could count the number of SUV's capable of transporting 9 passengers (legally) on my right hand without dropping my bottled water. You're in passenger van territory with your clan. But then again, I still hold to the notion that everyone has the right (or should) to buy as big and obnoxious and gas guzzling a vehicle as they like. In your case, it makes sense. What gets my goat is that most of the time the people driving an SUV don't *need* an SUV. They buy it for the image. Heck, they don't even take it offroad, and truth be told most SUV's couldn't even stand up to light duty trails. (I've got a hilarious video of an H2 blowing a tie rod out on a river rock that my Eclipse could easily take. The last time I went offroading in a group that had an H2 along, the H2 snapped its axle and wound up getting towed back by a custom rig built around a 98 Saturn drive train. Did I mention my disdain for the H2?)
It is important to not under estimate the effect of emotional factors driving people's irrational poor economic decisions regarding SUV purchases. Clearly the Mr. Richard's example of people who buy an expensive SUV to use 6 days a year to off-road or haul a boat is an example of an irrational economic choice if we merely consider cost of the vehicle and cost of gas. If we take into account emotional factors behind the SUV sales, these purchasing decisions will make more sense.
I would argue that important emotional factors driving SUV sales are the "feeling that SUVs are safer in a accident," "feeling that SUVs are safer in the snow," and importantly a subconscious association of SUVs with domination i.e. SUV drivers are powerful. Studies have shown that when SUVs collide with small cars, the mortality rates for the drivers are lower and higher respectively. One could consider this last statistic as a form of class warfare.
My overall point is that while recent increases in oil prices are surely driving recent SUVs sales down, most potentional unneccesary SUV sales may not be effected by oil prices.
Regarding associations of domination with SUVs was determined by an marketing design guru seen in PBS's Frontline excellant documentary piece called "The Persuaders" which can be streamed for free on the PBS website.
I agree with Tim Russel especially his point "if you need transport a large family then theirs nothing wrong with having a large vehicle."
I also am not sure that minivans are neccesarily much more fuel efficient than SUVs. I think
I find Joseph Willemsen's statistics intriguing. For our benefit could you give a website citation or reference?
I would consider an increase in "Vehicle miles per person" directly related to the growth of post-WII suburanization in which the middle class fled American cities. Instead of walking to city bread stores, people now drive to the suburban supermarket. Short of relocating to a city or joint-commuting, there seems to be very little that the suburbanite can do to cut down on miles driven.
SUV are here to stay, and they will remain IN. All these bafoons jumping on the anti SUV bandwagon are nothing but empty headed, useless trash that see an opportunity to be vocal about an issue. Since they're too stupid to have have any valid opinion on any subject they've come across in the past, they feel bashing SUV's and large vehicles is the perfect chance for them to feel smart and like they made a difference. GUESS WHAT, you didn't.
And please, the ignorant poster who mentioned the H2 snapping an AXLE, learn your car tech and then talk. It snapped a tie-rod, the driver admits he made a mistake and only the clueless bring it up against the H2. Go online and view the hundreds of videos and pictures of the H2 doing HARDCORE wheeling, stock form. But wait, that would suck for you, since you'd have no ammo to shoot at SUV/HUMMER owners. Guess what, again, you look ignorant!
SUV's rock, a change will come in fuel tech, and all you anti SUV types will look like the hippies did in vietnam. Total losers with nothing in their heads except hate.
Have a nice life complaining about subjects you don't understand while I enjoy life in my SUV.
"SUV Owner | March 8, 2006 07:02 PM"
Gosh, you made such a convincing argument with all those gratuitous personal insults. That's a sign of an exceptionally good rhetorical position.
You've got me sold! I'm going out to get an Excursion right away!
Its probably too late for anyone to view this, but I feel I have to put in my 2 cents. I live in a ski resport in VT and I work in landscaping. First, some people do need large vehicals for work, but SUV's are completely useless. I don't know anyone who owns one because they need the room for work. If you need cargo space you get a pickup and if you need cargo space plus passenger space you get a cargo van with a few add on seats. Most people I talk to think they need the SUV for winter driving. Ignoring the fact that they are a fairly new mode of transportation and that we somehow survived up here for 70 odd years of ICE transportation without them, they just don't handle snow as well as cars. I will always have a clear mental image of myself in my front wheel drive escort passing an explorer, expedition, suburban and two supercab pickups going uphill in a snowstorm. They don't grip as well as subaru's or any front wheel car for that matter. The only possibe reason to have them for snow is the one or two days when the plow company gets to your driveway late. And I don't see the need for an extra 6000lbs of metal just for those few days.