How are people still buying giant cars?
We are in a gas crisis in all but the name, gas in my area is over $6 a gallon and even in states where it's normally "cheap" (taxpayer subsidized) it's still well over $4. Its been six years since COVID and since then we saw it peak, drop to slightly lower but still higher than ever before covid, and now this. It also appears that gas, even if it does go down, will never be "cheap" again.
and yet, even with all of that I still see new giant cars rolling off the logs. Giant Santa Fes, brand new F150s, brand new plates. People are still buying these. Not luxury "I can spend whatever I want" rich folks, everyday people buying these things.
What is going on in peoples heads? I know most never take gas into account when buying a car and then are all shocked pikachu at the pump, but seriously even now it's not an issue?
I have seen maybe, maybe one new car that was a hybrid out of my anecdotal experience. No one considering those, or an EV, or god forbid biking or taking transit. (In my area both are very viable alternatives).
I'm just so exasperated at how stupid people are being. They think 50k for a car is expensive and then never take into account what powers the damn thing.
Thanks for listening to my rant.
33 replies
There are dudes who come to work in their giant trucks and let them run idle in the parking lot for 10-15 minutes before work everyday. They don't turn off the truck and sit inside, they let it run in park. I have no idea why they don't at least turn off their trucks. Also not sure why they don't clock in early (our job allows this and I get at least 1 hour of ot each week just from clocking in a little early each day).
Im guessing people just don't think or care. They only see "I need a new car. Let me look at new cars. Only big vehicles? OK sure whatever. I just want a new one I don't care about specifics".
I remember there was a time where my car-brained friends convinced me that it takes more gas to start a car than let it idle for 5 or more minutes. Now, I'm sure that was rooted in something, but looking at it now I just don't see that as being true with start/stop engines.
I see the same thing, there's a place near me where I walk by and I see people on smoke breaks sitting in their car, turned on, smoking with the windows open. I just cannot fathom this. Gas is how much a gallon and you're just idly burning it while out there so you can listen to the radio? I don't understand sitting you car car at all, there are benches and places to go, maybe it's a no smoking thing, fine. But why turn the car on at all??
Cars have always been for the extremely privileged.
While true, I also want to reinforce that we at the same time do force our underprivileged to drive by not building out walkable cities and supplying good transit options. No one should be forced to drive at all. In the post I am talking about the privileged who are out buying new cars, but at the same time there is a whole industry who preys on poorer people convincing them to get 10 year car loans with crazy high interest and tells them it'll be good for them. So it's a complex issue, but I'm still annoyed that they are choosing large gas guzzlers in both cases.
It doesn’t matter how much gas is, there was never an excuse to waste it in the first place. People are just bad at finances and stoked about big vehicles. I think it’s not any more or less complicated than that.
People buy big SUV’s and trucks “for safety” even though they’re famously extremely likely to roll over. Everyone who does this is a fucking stupid, there’s no polite way to say it.
You probably haven't the most straightforward take here. The amount of people here trying to convince me (themselves) they bought a large car for safety...
My in-laws laughed when I got an EV. They had been led by Fox News and Facebook to believe that EV batteries only last 2-3 years and cost >$10,000 to replace. Americans (boomers especially) are so gullible that only those of us who avoid conservative news can make the occasional smart decision.
Same, my family heard I bought one and immediately told me how stupid I was. That I'd need new batteries and would be sitting on the side of the road.
When reality is that we charge at home once a week, it's $6 in electricity to do a full charge, and we're nearing 30k miles with no degradation on the battery that we can see.
My family is scared of driving a smaller car because all the other cars are bigger now. I would not be surprised if fear is the core motivating psychology.
As a Miata driver I agree. It's nerve wracking and where I live monster trucks are the norm. Some of them can't even see me.
Never understood this one. Bigger car = more likely to hit stuff.
The car sized arms race. People believe the only way to be safe on the road is by driving the biggest car, which means the next one is the largest, and the next.
Bluntly, I think it's a selfish take. "Well everyone else in the accident may die but I'll be alive"
One of my neighbors bought a new car recently. And by new I mean brand spanking new. The thing is an absolute tank, it weighs almost 2.6 tons, fucking giant ass wheels, wide and high SUV kind of thing from BMW. It's the M3 variant as well, so that means they paid double for no reason because BMW. This thing is a gas guzzler and imho way too expensive to buy and own.
The thing is, these are a couple of boomers who don't work and never go anywhere. They are oldish and can't drive or park very well. They always had issues parking their car and people in the street kept two parking spaces free for them so they could just aim for the middle and still be sort of in the space. With the new car, it's much worse.
He can't walk very well and the new car is too large for him to easily get into. He can't drive it, since it's too big. So she's the one who drives it, but since it's so big and heavy and it's all automated and stuff she's afraid of it and hardly ever drives it. Now this isn't a self driving car or anything like that, I don't think it has any automatic features at all except for the transmission. Hell if it could park itself that would actually be useful. She's talking about the combined accelerator and brake pedal. Which I was caught out on the first time I drove a car with one of those, but you get the hang of it within no time.
It's a hybrid, since they usually do short trips, for example down to the shops and back (about 500m away, I usually walk or use my bicycle). They were told hybrids are ideal since for short slow trips in town it can drive all electric which saves on gas. It's a plug in, so that's easy right and they even have solar panels. The thing is, they don't have a private drive like most houses here have, they always park on the street. So they have no way of plugging it in. I asked about it and they said it's not a problem. She just goes on a drive every now and again, give it the boot on the freeway and the car charges the battery. I just about fell over at how dumb of a statement this was. I pointed out at that point it's less efficient than just driving to the shop on gas and the electricity from the gas is so much more expensive than from the solar panels. They didn't understand.
However the real kicker is, they kept their old car. A shitty 10 year old made in Korea SUV (nothing wrong with that, I drive a 10 year old car as well). He uses it almost every day, sometimes multiple times a day to pop down to the shops. He's the one who usually does that and he can't drive the new car, so he uses the old car. I think it's his way of dealing with the fact he can't walk very well, so he does these little shopping trips, often coming back with one thing and then going again later in the day for another thing. And yes they now take up 3-4 parking spaces and see nothing wrong with this, as boomers are the most selfish people alive and are physically incapable of seeing things from any other point of view.
I think these old boomers were somehow talked into getting a 100K car which they can't really use, doesn't suit them at all and is left to just sit there. It's probably the same for many people who buy these gas guzzlers. They get talked into it because the car is shiny and flashy and has all the features. They can't think that far ahead. And realistically if you can afford to buy a brand new car, you probably have no issue paying for the gas.
I really do try to put myself into their shoes, growing up in the 60s when suburbs were brand new and cities were decaying. The reasons why are valid but to them that's when they were children and growing up, and impressionable. So these people will forever believe that the white picket fence, the mcmansion, and the big car are all the ultimate goals. Your story just reinforces that. Even when it's not practical, it's a waste of money, it's a useless thing, it's still a status icon they hold onto, clinging to the "american dream".
There aren't that many small cars being made (in the US at least). Ford stopped making anything smaller than an SUV, and Chevy just discontinued the Bolt (again! Which was a crossover this time anyway).
Then maybe throw in some fearmongering about "safety" (just escalation of who has the largest vehicle) and "I need an SUV for my children" (how much shit do your kids need to haul around on a daily basis?) or "I need to haul stuff for my house so I need a truck" (my hatchback fits A LOT of stuff. Sure it cannot fit a 4x8 sheet but neither can a modern truck with a short bed)
I had to buy a new TV a few years back and I remember I took it out to the car with the sales guy and he said "Oh I don't think it'll fit". Told him to hold on, folded the seats down and that baby fit perfectly in there. Idk if it was the size of a sheet of plywood, but it was big, the box and all. Guy was legitimately impressed. Meanwhile yep agree, people get these super duper manly family trucks and can't fit a few suitcases in there anymore. People mortified of admitting they need a van and have to feel good by driving a truck.
I was recently introduced to the detrimental affects of poorly thought out EPA regulations for vehicle mileage. It combines well with the consumer assumption that bigger cars should cost more than smaller cars. Simplified, the required MPG goes up over time. However, it goes up far less the heavier your vehicle is. So, car manufacturers making bigger, heavier vehicles (for an only slightly higher cost) means less research on efficiency and no fine for low MPG AND consumers are willing to pay more for larger vehicles. For manufacturers its a win-win to keep selling bigger, less efficient vehicles for high prices.
Fraudulently categorizing huge, lethal consumer vehicles as "light trucks" also doesn't help.
I agree that they are way too big and bloated. In some cases you can't buy small or really "the good old normal". I kinda hate giant touchscreen dashboards (sure, fewer physical buttons is cheaper, but you can't rely on just haprics and take eyes off the road). As for small, japanese kei vans caught my eye, but as far as my research goes you can't really get them in Europe yet (some claim steps are being taken towards allowing them, probably just don't want import from Asia to flood the market without EU based companies to get their share). So old Toyota Aygo it is.
You get a tax break as a business for buying a car over 6,000 gross weight. Big tax break for small business as they can expense most of it if not all of it. That’s why you see a lot of Mercedes G wagons. Husbands buying for wives for the tax break
It's the K Shaped economy
Credit cards and a desperate need to not look like the "poors". The law doesn't exist to protect "poors".
Because there is a lack of small and inexpensive options. And it's that way on purpose.
Hybrids and EVs are not hugely more expensive, especially when the F150 is the most popular vehicle in America and it is not a cheap vehicle. Factor in the fuel and it's no contest.
In South Africa, where we have an open market without government interference, a small hatchback is $15k equivalent.
And now the Chinese have come to our market and they are offering a full electric hatchback at $16k. It has 180miles range and includes a home charger in the price.
There's a pervasive idea that small cars are unsafe because of the people who drive larger cars.
Unfortunately that does indeed seem to be supported by the data. So we have this arms race of everyone wanting the larger cars for their own safety at the cost of everyone else's, especially non-drivers.
There's no talking people out of it because it does have a safety benefit. Even if someone hates giant cars, they overwhelmingly feel they have to get one because everyone else is. It's another way capitalism pits individuals against each other to the detriment of everyone involved. The best way to address it would be to ban oversized cars (or cars in general) so the safety threat is eliminated.
There is actually, it is called "crash compatibility". When everyone drives small cars or roughly the same sized cars it's considered crash-compatible, meaning the cars will crumple correctly. With everyone driving 2-ton tanks now though that's more or less gone out the window, as you driving a reasonable car compared to someone who was convinced that they needed a military vehicle to pick up groceries, theirs will win. I'm definitely not defending that though, because it did kick off this arms race, where now it's "Well I killed everyone else in this accident, but I survived" when before it was simply "Everyone (probably) survived"
Even though the rich are only a percentage of the total population, that is still a huge number of people. Many of the rich don't care.
Let's take your example of a Hyundai Santa Fe. 5 year total cost of ownership according to Kelley blue book is ~$64,00 while the plug in hybrid Hyundai tuscon is ~$54,000 and the Hyundai kona is ~$49,000. (Note I adjusted the numbers for all up to account for $6.00 gas)
If the question is about small vs big the big tuscon is about the same as the small kona since it is a hybrid. So you can have big and save at the pump. Now why would someone spend $10,000 more for a Santa fe over a tuscon? I dunno, car buying is complicated and emotions come into play quite a bit.
I suspect you wouldn't balk at someone getting a small car at an upper trim level, but that could be them spending $20k more for fancy gizmos and leather seats.
The more surprising thing is people are spending $50,000k for 5 years of transportation regardless of energy source. If you want to save money on transportation, paying cash, buying used, or keeping what you already have are much bigger savings options than how big the vehicle is.
I've seen someone trade in a big v8 SUV with horrible gas mileage for a small sporty sedan and told themselves they were saving money. But the 15% 5 year loan they picked up was telling a different story.
More than anyone likes to admit is safety features. If you want a unibody alloy vehicle with 11 airbags you’re gonna need a bigger outside profile to accommodate the same interior volume.
But the interior volume has increased too.
And the aging population experiences increased suffering stooping to get into compacts or mid size sedans.
And the aging population is driving farther into their age.
And the infinitely rising housing market is pushing everyone to live out in the sticks where you need a car that rides higher to accommodate rutted out dirt roads.
And average road life of a car has been stretching longer and longer and the way you engineer for that is by overbuilding everything that isn’t gonna get regular service and replacement like the frame and rocker panels.
And the poorer you are the older your car tends to be so the more biased you will tend to be towards what’s still rolling 20 years after manufacturing (surprise, it’s big vehicles with big engines or Hondas and Toyotas).
And even if all that didn’t matter, people might abstractly care about gas prices or getting an electric but they can’t afford to buy a car that’s good on gas because of their limited funds on hand or creditworthiness so when it comes down to spending the same amount of money on a Prius or a Silverado anyone who thinks they might want to move a couch will pick the truck.
Your comment meanders through so many propagandized items I don't know where to begin. There's like, 12 separate points you hit and none of them go together, it's just a brainddump of everything you believe to be true.
This is called the car sized arms race, the idea that bigger cars = safer. The problem is crash compatibility, which we have lost due to the larger cars. It's not that small cars are unsafe, it's that when you have an F150 smash into the front of it when it's 3x the mass and has the frontend the same shape as a brick wall, they're no longer crash-compatible. By making cars larger the manufacturers have quite literally artificially made smaller cars less safe.
The solution isn't that older folks should be more comfortable driving. The solution is that we should have cities/towns that don't force our elderly to drive. We should be pushing for transit and walkability so the elderly can move around without needing to get behind a wheel in the first place.
Agree, which is why we should stop buying places that require a car. Do the math on if you live in the sticks how much it would cost to commute into the city. Those high rents can be negated, especially with today's gas prices. I also think we as Americans demand way way way too much living space, we do not need a McMansion, but that's another conversation.
This is completely unfounded, prove to me that bigger car = longer lifespan. I still see sedans from the 70s and 80s on the road.
That's my point, that if you take into account the cost of gas even a slightly more expensive EV or Hybrid is going to save you much more down the road.
This is my #1 annoyance with truck owners. "What if you gotta move something"? Ha gotcha you idiot, I can move stuff! You know what I do? I rent a truck. It's 20 bucks at uhaul or home depot. Seriously, twenty dollars. I go, I move the couch, I drop the truck off, I return the truck. I've done the math, if you think spending 50, 60, 100 grand on a truck is worth it because you have to move a couch, you need to sit down and do the math. It is not. I've done the math, for you owning a truck to be worth it compared to renting you need to use it for hauling/towing/moving minimum twice a week. If that's what you're doing, then congrats you need a truck. If you aren't literally moving something every week or more, then it was a waste of money. "We need to haul or kids stuff". False. You need a van. "We are outdoorsy" Great, you need a van or a hatchback.
Fun fact time, auto manufacturers have a higher emission standard for smaller vehicles. This is the cafe standard, and it requires being under a certain emission amount. They lobbied successfully for the "light truck" exception, which was meant originally for Farmer Dan who has his truck who needs to haul hay around daily shouldn't have to suffer. So Congress passed it, and surprise surprise auto manufacturers suddenly start marketing more trucks, and a brand new concept called the "SUV", on - you guessed it - a light truck frame. American's haven't chosen the trucks, there's no safety reason, it was 100% marketing from auto manufacturers to convince you that you need a light truck because thanks to that exception, they are cheaper to manufacture. You do not need a truck. Auto marketing has spent billions convincing you that you do.
Car size arms race doesn’t explain everything. Basically throughout the 80s and 90s every manufacturer deployed a crazy amount of technologies to get good crash ratings. Those technologies take up space. Engineering a crumple zone into an alloy unibody design takes up space. Sticking a million airbags all over everything takes up space.
Those technologies aren’t bad things. I’m glad my cars have had them. They contribute to the size of the cars.
The Toyota Camry didn’t go from a compact to a mid size because of the ford f-150. To claim so would be to gloss over how literally every compact car since the beginning of crash testing has been declared a death trap.
You rebutted some things stated with “should” statements and then talked about McMansions. I talked about how things are in response to the ops question and rooted everything in the experience of aging, poor rural populations. We’re talking about two different things.
There are more bigger cars on the road as a percentage of sales for any given year. I see a geo metro once a month but I see about a hundred suvs and trucks from the same era during that same time. It might not even be that a large car necessitates a larger, thicker frame and bodywork that can tolerate more rust before it just breaks in half. It might be that a larger car holds value longer and stays in the “worth doing maintenance on” category longer because of that.
I can go into more detail about the engineering reasons small cars don’t make it if you want. Idk if you want that.
If people were wealthy enough to buy good quality boots they’d save a lot of money.
I lived without a car for many years and did just what you describe. Renting pickup trucks to move things. Idk what you’re talking about. It sucks to rent a pickup truck and isn’t reliable or as cheap as you say.
Because rosdtax doesn't factor in vehicle size yet?
Same for paid parking.