or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › You know you have it bad when you buy a SUV just for skiing...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

You know you have it bad when you buy a SUV just for skiing... - Page 2

post #31 of 97
Here's my designated ski mobile on summer duty. Ski's go in the back. She runs on grainola...
525x525px-LL-vbattach966.jpg
post #32 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amish View Post
... In the end I was just happy and wanted to share....
Good for you. It isn't popular, but I love my Suburban. I don't drive it very often, but when I need it, it's great. I drive a Beetle for most of my trips -- it gets decent gas mileage, nothing spectacular. We only use the Subdivision to go skiing or camping or haul or tow something. Or when the weather is bad. Or I loan it to friends when they are moving or need to haul/tow something. It's truly a utility vehicle at this point -- not a trimmed-out carpool-mobile.

It would be great to be able to fit my husband and me and our two (rapidly approaching adult size) kids and their two friends and our 90-lb dog AND everyone's gear into one Subaru. But we can't; we'd need to take TWO cars -- and I-70 can't handle that.

When we bought the Suburban, about 6 years ago, there weren't too many smaller options with third seats in them. Now they are many more, but I might still buy it again. If you're going big, might as well go big. I'm not sure a Tahoe gets any better mileage, and anything smaller is useless for the utility aspects.
post #33 of 97
Thread Starter 
I own a motorcycle as well. Thats what i drive when I want to save money on gas.
post #34 of 97
I dunno. I hate the thought of having to buy a car. I will be forced to buy one when I move to Utah.

City life has me used to being able to walk everywhere.
post #35 of 97
My other car is a Suburban. Nothing beats it out west with a family. It's the Utah state vehicle because, seating nine, you can put most of the kids on board. If I was buying a new skimobile, this would be it:http://www.toyota.com/fjcruiser/inde...GM_TN_FJ_INDEX

In the end, getting there is the thing. Everybody vote today!
post #36 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirquerider View Post
Since you don't drive in California, your sentiments are understandable. If you lived where chain controls are posted at the first snowflake you might feel differently. I'm serious. California will post chain controls where you must drive over wet pavement with no snowcover. It is used to slow traffic flow. If you don't have 4WD or AWD, you will either pay someone to put on chains for you, or you will get under the car and do it yourself. Either way, you will bumb and clunk along the highway doing your part to slow down the SUVs that didn't have to post up chains. You have to experience a Sierra storm to appreciate when chain conrtols are really needed. We frequently experience accumualations in one month that are greater than the entire season in Colorado. (You'd never know it today).

Amish bought a 2 to 3 model year old car, as his ski vehicle. It makes all the sense in the world to me.
i understand what you're saying, but you've ignored the fact that there are MANY many cars these days with AWD. given equivalent tires, an AWD car will outhandle, outaccelerate and outbrake just about any SUV in the snow, all while using FAR less gas. if you need the extra space to haul a bunch of kids, buy an AWD minivan...unless you're just too cool to buy a minivan, which, sadly, is the reason most american parents buy SUVs.

i drive an AWD car myself and i have no problems whatsoever getting to ski resorts.
post #37 of 97
Two years ago I bought a little SUV especially for skiing, since the car I was driving at the time was useless in the snow, and more to the point wasn't mine and the owners didn't want me driving it isn the snow!
Now it seems as though my life revolves around my SUV - I'm trying hard not to move so that I don't have to sell it!?
post #38 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Powdr View Post
Well, at least my new purchase will offset your largess:

Jetti TDI - gets 45+ mpg running biodeisel with enough torque to toast all those big fat SUVs & pickups going over Parleys.

Shame on you.
Glad to see another diesel driver... I'm considering running biodiesel in my 97 Jetta TD but might wait until next summer so that I don't have to trouble shoot in a cold garage. I've got a few other friends interested in doing the same. I'm consistently getting 32-35 mpg with lots of hard city driving. I think averaging 65mph gan easily get that up to 40 mpg with the right tire pressures. However I'm eagerly waiting for the new 2.0l turbo diesel that's supposedly rated at 140hp and 240 lb-ft of torque (in a compact car)
post #39 of 97
I did not ignore AWDs, I own one with all the bells and whistles and stability control.
Still, Amish bought a 2004 Buick Rainier CXL. Yeah its a SUV but thinking this through a bit, I bet he got a great price on that vehicle in today's market compared to most forign luxury AWD crossovers. It would take a lot of gasoline and political incorrectness to offset those savings.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Madison View Post
i understand what you're saying, but you've ignored the fact that there are MANY many cars these days with AWD. given equivalent tires, an AWD car will outhandle, outaccelerate and outbrake just about any SUV in the snow, all while using FAR less gas. if you need the extra space to haul a bunch of kids, buy an AWD minivan...unless you're just too cool to buy a minivan, which, sadly, is the reason most american parents buy SUVs.

i drive an AWD car myself and i have no problems whatsoever getting to ski resorts.
post #40 of 97
Count me as another Subaru fanatic. My sedan is great in the winter, AWD gets me safely to and from the mountains with great mileage and my center pass through is perfect for skies. No self-respecting skier exposes their skis to road salt!
post #41 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy vw View Post
... I'm considering running biodiesel in my 97 Jetta TD but might wait until next summer so that I don't have to trouble shoot in a cold garage.
I run B20 all winter here in Utah @ 7,000'. Never had a problem starting up. It does spend the night in the garage, however. I run up to B100 in the summer.

Powdr
post #42 of 97
/\ Not a question whether it works in the car at those temps. I'm referring to homebrew stuff - don't want to be troubleshooting the 'brewing' process at -20F. Plus I have to start building the tank, work on the Porsche project car AND go skiing.

As far as the ideal ski hauler, either a Subaru, Passat Syncro, or Audi w/Quattro would do just fine. I actually wish we had the euro versions... Passat V6 TDI w/4Motion and 6-sp manual. For the longest time I was considering converting a Passat Syncro wagon to turbo diesel motivation. Although I prefer to support local economies, I have seen a GM engine R&D shop and was NOT impressed with design, finish and quality. The same applies for the rest of the vehicle design, except for maybe the Corvette.
post #43 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amish View Post
1) All vehicles in the state of California have to meet the SMOG standards. It doesn't matter if I drive a Honda Civic or a Ford F-150.

If the vehicle doesn't pass smog then I can't drive it.

2) With todays emission standards I don't think this SUV is any worse than any other gas powered car around.

3) You want to bitch about poluters then go preach to all those people running cars from the 70's and earlier that don't have any emission controls on them at all. All the muscle cars and crap. Hell some states don't even have SMOG.

4) I'm not a tree hugger either. /rant
I understand that you made a big purchase and are happy and wanted to share. On one hand I'm happy for you. Seriously.
On the other hand, there's the reality of excess pollution caused by unnecessarily large and heavy vehicles. Unfortunately, it's a reality that gets worse one SUV purchase at a time, so you have to expect some criticism, especially on an outdoor sports forum.
So, take this with a grain of salt. But a small grain...

1) Uh...what? Of course it matters! I think you're totally misunderstanding the whole concept of emissions and pollution and standards to regulate them, and all that.

2) OK...are you trying to be funny? Are you seriously suggesting an SUV is no worse for the environment (not to mention your lungs) than a Prius? Or a Honda Fit? Etc?

3) Good points, both. I support you 100% here.

4) You don't say!

No offense meant, btw.
post #44 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheena_queen_of_the_slope View Post
I dunno. I hate the thought of having to buy a car. I will be forced to buy one when I move to Utah.

City life has me used to being able to walk everywhere.
Resist as long as you can, Sheena.

My wife and I bought a car a few months ago. It was a first for both of us, and we've both been driving for about 2 decades each.

We'd both lived centrally in big cities, mostly in Canada, but in Europe, too. A move to Texas made it necessary to buy a car, sadly.

It really changes (ruins) your perception of the city. Neighbourhoods don't exist the same way at all, for example.

I used to love public transit and especially walking and walking in Montreal, London, Vancouver, etc. Now, I'm in a city where it isn't even safe to walk for blocks, let alone hours.

Once back in Vancouver the car will be garage-bound, and we'll be on foot again.
post #45 of 97
I'm in the midst of buying a new vehicle. The only considerations I have is how is it going to be at 3 AM with a 4 hour drive ahead in blizzard whiteout, worst winter driving imaginable.

I have driven a few vehicles in my day and.... my 1/2 tonne GMC 4 X 4 with P275 Bridgestone Duellers is the best damn thing since sliced bread. sure the milleage isn't the best ever (90 liters + 600 ish highway KM) but I always get there, I have never hit the ditch, has gone through snow it probably shouldn't have and has lots of room for skis and a great built in seat to BBQ on (tailgate)

No matter how snowy the roads it has enough weight to just plow through and hold the road.

something to be said for size when choosing a vehicle, besides that have you seen the damn Moose, Elk, Mountain Goats, Sheep in Alberta. Damn monsters.

But... I just test drove the 2007 Toyota FJ cruiser full load. Truck man I am, but I damn near signed the papers right there. That FJ is great. but skis would only just fit in the back and I just don't think I could live not having a pick up for dirt bikes, lawn mowers, dump runs, etc....

I think I will stick with what works. Another GMC full size truck only this one is gonna be loaded. Mmmm 6 L 400 HP gas guzzling performance packaged pig, with big nasty tires and mmm mmm heated leather seats.

That way on a powder day I can drive right over all those euro dinky cars to get the goods.
post #46 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marmot mb View Post

something to be said for size when choosing a vehicle, besides that have you seen the damn Moose, Elk, Mountain Goats, Sheep in Alberta. Damn monsters.


That way on a powder day I can drive right over all those euro dinky cars to get the goods.
Two delusions/misconceptions in one post. Nice.

And I don't mean the size of the animals in Alberta - they are monsters!
post #47 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldSchool View Post
Two delusions/misconceptions in one post. Nice.

And I don't mean the size of the animals in Alberta - they are monsters!
Firstly 100% to each his own in what they drive. I am just a tad passionate about a big truck for getting there safely.

Granted there are some great cars out there with AWD that certainly very handsomely handle their own but I have seen far too many spin off the road, get knocked around in snow drifts and go carreening into the ditch.

Personally I like having a huge vehicle between me, the elements, ditches, other out of control vehicles.

Besides I live in Alberta if you don't drive a huge truck you're likely to get whacked by the Red Necks.

Perhaps a misconception but 19 years of driving Alberta winters and middle of the night pow hunts has taught me well. go big or get seconds.
post #48 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marmot mb View Post
Firstly 100% to each his own in what they drive. I am just a tad passionate about a big truck for getting there safely.

Granted there are some great cars out there with AWD that certainly very handsomely handle their own but I have seen far too many spin off the road, get knocked around in snow drifts and go carreening into the ditch.

Personally I like having a huge vehicle between me, the elements, ditches, other out of control vehicles.

Besides I live in Alberta if you don't drive a huge truck you're likely to get whacked by the Red Necks.

Perhaps a misconception but 19 years of driving Alberta winters and middle of the night pow hunts has taught me well. go big or get seconds.
Good one about the Alberta boys.

I'd say to each his own - except that the extra pollution from big vehicles affects everyone.

I see what you're saying about crashes, I thought bigger was better, too - until I heard a show about the results of crash tests. I can't remember the stats now, but the upshoot was check the data: safer to be in a Benz or Volvo than a big SUV.

Not everyone can afford those, naturally, but the point is the info is out there and when you're putting down $ and your safety it's better to have the facts, asopposed to the "feeling" of safety.

Going through Roger's Pass in a storm at night...I shudder to think what it could be like in so many vehicles.

Unrelated Note: Weird thing about living in the US: you see SO many vehicles abandoned/left at the roadside. It is crazy. You just don't see that at all in Canada, but you get into the US and car after car in the middle of nowhere, or under an overpass, or wherever.
I don't get it.
post #49 of 97
I work right beside the yard where all the wrecked cars get taken to and then auctioned off. I go through there sort of often to look for bikes to salvage.

I see the trucks and the cars. Cars often I just shudder at the thought of their legs, so often the cab space is crushed in and deformed.

The trucks the upper part of the cab certainly shows some weakness but very often there is not lower cab deformation as there is with the cars.

It just comes down to how much metal there is. A big V8 vs a tiny 4 cyl or small v6 block. Granted the BMW, Volvo, WV, Audi etc are great in crash tests, but if one can afford to buy those they could also afford a truck so to me the money is a mute point.

I agree the polution effects everyone, that I can't agrue and I know someday I am going to have to change my gas guzzling ways.

Until then it's monster truck Madness.
post #50 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by mckay View Post
I skied in Canada last year up at Le Massif and long before I got to the slopes I noticed something interesting. Nobody in Canada drives a full size anything. I honestly don't believe I saw a single solitary full size SUV or pick-up truck the whole time I was there. Even at Le Massif, which has an absolutely horrendous and long access road, the parking lot almost entirely cars and minivans. My Honda CR-V was one of the baddest things there.

As soon as we crossed back into Vermont on our way home we pulled into some small town to get something to eat. What was the first thing I noticed in this little town? A Cadillac Escalade.
That's Quebec for ya. Go to Toronto and see a lot of full size anything
As to Quebec my impression was as i was getting futher and futher east and cars are getting smaller In mountains on the shore of St Lawrense the most popular car seemed to be Toyota Echo. And trust me they know how to pass you in that thing on a winding mountain road

btw, why would one need a 4wd suv for skiing ? where do you guys go ??? my Pontiac Vibe hauls our stuff (2 people) with room to spare, plus i am yet to encouner roads so bad i would need 4wd (I am a resort skier however up to this point)

and measuring a car with skies....it seems to me that pretty much any compact with rear seat down will take 180-190 long skis. My 170s feel very confortable
post #51 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by andy vw View Post
/\ Not a question whether it works in the car at those temps. I'm referring to homebrew stuff - don't want to be troubleshooting the 'brewing' process at -20F. .
I am talking about home brew. I've got a small LLC formed that has been making biodiesel for 2 years now. Once you get the process down, you produce as good/pure stuff as the biggies. After producing about 150 gal per week for the last two years, I can honestly say that we have never gummed up or caused any harm to the 10+ vehicles we power.

http://www.ascentrafuels.com/

Powdr
post #52 of 97
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldSchool View Post
I understand that you made a big purchase and are happy and wanted to share. On one hand I'm happy for you. Seriously.
On the other hand, there's the reality of excess pollution caused by unnecessarily large and heavy vehicles. Unfortunately, it's a reality that gets worse one SUV purchase at a time, so you have to expect some criticism, especially on an outdoor sports forum.
So, take this with a grain of salt. But a small grain...

1) Uh...what? Of course it matters! I think you're totally misunderstanding the whole concept of emissions and pollution and standards to regulate them, and all that.

2) OK...are you trying to be funny? Are you seriously suggesting an SUV is no worse for the environment (not to mention your lungs) than a Prius? Or a Honda Fit? Etc?

3) Good points, both. I support you 100% here.

4) You don't say!

No offense meant, btw.
2. Thats exactly what I'm suggesting. If those cars are gas only cars then yes. The SMOG inspection required here in California requires all cars and trucks to meet the same standards.

On another note my Buick isn't even that big. Its a mid-size SUV. There are plenty of cars that put out more power than my SUV including a Subaru awd WRX. I highly doubt my SUV is worse on the environment than that car. I guess to each their own but I just don't get it. All the cars and trucks polute. Atleast here in california they have strict restrictions on emmissions.
post #53 of 97
isn't the Rainier the same as a Pontiac Aztek? does that even qualify as an SUV? maybe a SUC, sport utility car...
as far as carrying your skis inside, of course you tie them to the floor or something, right? because if you don't and the worst case happens you've got a bunch of heavy ginsu knives flying around inside with you....
post #54 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amish View Post
2. Thats exactly what I'm suggesting. If those cars are gas only cars then yes. The SMOG inspection required here in California requires all cars and trucks to meet the same standards.

On another note my Buick isn't even that big. Its a mid-size SUV. There are plenty of cars that put out more power than my SUV including a Subaru awd WRX. I highly doubt my SUV is worse on the environment than that car. I guess to each their own but I just don't get it. All the cars and trucks polute. Atleast here in california they have strict restrictions on emmissions.
c'mon. compare the gas mileage of an SUV and a small car. higher amount of pollision will come out of your truck than from say a civic, both done to the same standart. you easily will burn 1.5-2 times more fuel (unless it's a hybrid truck of course or maybe non 4wd wheel 4 cyl truck)
post #55 of 97
Thread Starter 
sure it uses more gas. I agree its a guzzler. But as for polution i don't agree that its any worse. As long as my vehicle meets smog standards and the same standards set for any other car then IMO it is no worse. I do not agree that my SUV has a higher amount of polution coming out of it. I think it has the same amount as any vehicle that meets emission standards in the state of california. I guess what doesn't make sense to me is this: If all vehilces have to meet the same exact standards and pass the same exact SMOG tests then how could a SUV put out more polution? If it did then it wouldn't pass the smog tests. Now if you mean to say the SUV puts out a greater amount of accepted polution then I will agree. Thats not what I've been arguing against. I'm just saying a SUV does not put out any more non accepted polution than another vehicle.

and Waxman,

No it doesn't share anything with the Aztek by Pontiac. It does share the same platform as the Chevy Trailblazer and GMC Envoy.

Here's a couple pics of my Buick at home:

post #56 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amish View Post
sure it uses more gas. I agree its a guzzler. But as for polution i don't agree that its any worse. As long as my vehicle meets smog standards and the same standards set for any other car then IMO it is no worse. I do not agree that my SUV has a higher amount of polution coming out of it. I think it has the same amount as any vehicle that meets emission standards in the state of california. I guess what doesn't make sense to me is this: If all vehilces have to meet the same exact standards and pass the same exact SMOG tests then how could a SUV put out more polution? If it did then it wouldn't pass the smog tests. Now if you mean to say the SUV puts out a greater amount of accepted polution then I will agree. Thats not what I've been arguing against. I'm just saying a SUV does not put out any more non accepted polution than another vehicle.

and Waxman,

No it doesn't share anything with the Aztek by Pontiac. It does share the same platform as the Chevy Trailblazer and GMC Envoy.

Here's a couple pics of my Buick at home:

as far as i understand the amount of carbon monoxide coming out ir your car is proportinal to the number of galons you burn, so a guzzler polutes inherently more compared to a small car. if you claim it's not so i will be very interested in how you would support that.
post #57 of 97
Thread Starter 
Are we talking accepted polution or non-accepted polution? If accepted then I'm not arguing that point and agree with you. So then we can move on. If we are talking about non accepted polution then we can keep arguing but I'm afraid it will get us no where. I will not concede and I doubt you will either. My SUV can not put out more NON-accepted polution because the emissions are in place to keep the polution levels at a certain level. The very same level any other gas powered car must meet. In california anyway. I can't comment on other states or countries.
post #58 of 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amish View Post
Are we talking accepted polution or non-accepted polution? If accepted then I'm not arguing that point and agree with you. So then we can move on. If we are talking about non accepted polution then we can keep arguing but I'm afraid it will get us no where. I will not concede and I doubt you will either. My SUV can not put out more NON-accepted polution because the emissions are in place to keep the polution levels at a certain level. The very same level any other gas powered car must meet. In california anyway. I can't comment on other states or countries.
when you talk about either kind of pollusion you have to clarify - is it limited per gallon of fuel burnt or not. i'm pretty sure that such major pollutan as carbom monoxude (i gues it is accepted) is per gallon.

my point i simple actually. you burn more you harm the environment more compared to more economical engine. ok, in the breakdown, i dont know, maybe different parts may play out differently but carbon monoxide is a big enough problem on it own, so reducing other parts will not make a large vehicle cleaner on a large scale.

in other word's, California stantards or not, the big truck still hurts the environment more than a small one.
unless you compare it to a run down vehicle on the streets of a 3rd world country with no or very little control.

i am not n enviromentalist, it's just a picture i have based on what i hear from regualr media.
post #59 of 97
On the pollution issue, there are a lot of misconceptions expressed above.

Amish, it's not just a function of whether you meet the smog requirements. Some do better than others. My 17-year-old Saab 900 Turbo was only emitting 10% of permitted pollutants when I put it out to pasture. Yet some cars fail and/or come close. You can do the math on that.

Yury and the Prius crew, it's not just a function of how many gallons you burn. That doesn't even determine the inputs into the exhaust aftertreatment system, because the air/fuel mix and other variables vary among engines. Regardless, not all aftertreatment systems are equal. In recent years, they have been engineered far more intelligently, including moving the catalytic converter closer to the engine because it does little until it warms up.
post #60 of 97
Thread Starter 
Well we can look at it this way:

All vehicles polute. Some more than others. The problem isn't that people buy large cars and trucks. The problem is we are not being provided with a good enough alternative. I mean if the manufacturers decided today that all vehicles being produced from this point on would use an alternative fuel source then I for one wouldn't complain. As long as the alternative meant a variety of choices in size and capability with the performance that I want and others expect in a particular vehicle then everyone would be happy. Most everyone anyway. I could care less if my SUV is gas powered or solar powered as long as it gets the job done, looks good to me and has the features and performance I want. Hey I'm all for it.

As it stands though the majority of vehicles are still gas powered and if you want any kind of variety at all you will buy a gas powered car. You can buy that Toyota Echo but in the end its still producing polution. Maybe less polution but polution all the same.

Its going to take the Govt. and manufactures to make the change for all of us if we want to have an alternative fueled vehicle. IMO thats where the problem is. Its not the consumers. We buy what is available and what is marketed. Out of the say 200 different car models here in the states (I made up that number) there might be a handful of alternatives. Thats just not enough IMO. To make a change they will have to make the change to the whole thing and not just a small part of it.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › General Skiing Discussion › You know you have it bad when you buy a SUV just for skiing...