|
The article explains how Ford cobbled together the Explorer on a shoestring budget because "Instead of a whole new design, which would be too costly, they would simply bolt a roomy passenger cabin, stocked with leather seats and other family-friendly amenities, to the underbody of the existing Ranger pickup truck." Detroit R&D at its' finest.
It goes on how to state how "The Explorer was a marketing dream: the perfect vehicle for a Baby Boom generation that believed you could have it all. You could use it as your family car, and it had the rugged, adventurous image of a truck. The problem was, it also had the Achilles' heel of a big, tall truck: it rolled over more easily than a car would."
It then talks about the Explorer's fatal roll-over rate that "has been rising considerably". The recent and on-going Firestone related fiasco finally seemed to break the spell of the general public who were drawn to Explorers, and other SUV's, like moths to a flame with the notion that the high riding refridgerator resembling vehicles with non-functional assist steps and tacked on cheesey body cladding were somehow superior to the Town & Country LTD wagons with their simulated woodgrain panels that their parents had. Sad truth is that they're inferior in many ways due to the governmental loopholes that SUV's pass through with repect to safety testing, fuel consumption, and emissions standards.
Through the power of marketing, we went from what was formerly referred to as an "off-road vehicle" to something so appealling that every Tom, Dick and Soccer mom just had to have, the "Sports Utility Vehicle". Fueled by corporate profits ($8,000 per Explorer versus $1,000 for a car according to the article, and upwards of $13,000 for the Expedition I've seen elsewhere) the cash fat manufacturers have been dumping money on Madison Ave. to develop advertisements cramming the idea that everybody who's anybody has got to have one, and if you don't the guys in the gym will think you're a wuss (a la Montero).
Fast forward to earlier this year, when Firestone/Explorer incidents and fatalities were suddenly the headline stories on every network news program. It was like some major earthshaking fact never before known was learned, that is: if you get a blowout or experience other tire related problems, you're more likely to roll over in an SUV than in a car. Same goes for emergency manuvers of any sort. Seems to me it used to be that everyone knew "off-road vehicles" are more likely to roll over and be more unstable, can you say CJ5 or Suzuki Samarai?
Seems as though simple Newtonian physics principles have been obscured by 8-way power leather seats, king size cup holders and a cushy cabin. Through the use of better tuned suspensions, sound insulation,improved tires (with the possible exception of some Firestone products) and clever marketing, the general shortcomings of SUVs have been masked.
Unfortunately it has taken the loss of lives to re-educate the public to the fact that SUVs are not like cars. I for one can only hope that the SUV market falls quicker than the NASDAQ has since this spring, and that I don't have to sit there in traffic feeling boxed in by looming rolling refridgerators, and be dependent only upon the tail lights of the SUV ahead of me to indicate what's going on up ahead because my forward line of site is level with their tailgate.
I hope people will see the logic of something like a 3 or 5 series wagon as an alternative, and I'll once again be able to pilot the 535i in the company of vehicles conceived with a like purpose, that is to provide the individual with a machine designed engage the driver in the driving experience rather than remove them from it. The thought of it is making me giddy.
Well, that's enough for now, I've vented, time to get off my soapbox and call it a night.
© 1997 -
2009
Jump Internet Inc. All rights reserved.
