A Highlander is 10" shorter and 3" narrower than my T&C. Also better mileage, even with the 6-cyl. Same applies to the sienna (8" and 2", respectively; surprisingly, Sienna has slightly worse mileage than a FWD 6-cyl Highlander). So some arguments still hold water. No doubt my T&C (and likely the Sienna) would be more comfortable for 7 people, though. But, the point is, if someone said “I got the SUV because it is a bit smaller and gets better mileage while giving me the easy ingress/egress,” it is tough to argue these days. Aside from those ridiculous SUV beasts, of course. Only reason I could see for getting one of those is if you need to carry 6-7 adults, plus gear, plus tow a significant trailer/boat/camper.
We have 2 suvs in the family because they’re comfortable to drive, spacious, my wife likes sitting up higher, and they’re just all around useful vehicles. Would we be fine in a sedan, minivan, or wagon? Absolutely. Was there a compelling reason, given american roads and gas prices to not get an suv? Not really.
They sell well because they work well. In other markets, the requirement set is different so they aren’t as practical. No surprise, they don’t sell as well there.
This doesn’t matter to everyone, but most of them handle like a coffin filled with snot.
Body of frame, sure but there aren’t that many of those anymore.
Most are unibody and only factor is center of gravity with increased body roll. Unless suspension is geared toward comfort when compared to their sedan counterparts.
There are sporty SUV / CUV / Crossovers, there are comfort people hauler SUVs and there are utility SUVs … just like sedans / wagons / hatchbacks
Recent samplings have included a new Toyota RAV4 (one of the worst modern vehicles I’ve ever driven), Lexus GX, Jeep Grand Cherokee and our 1971 Lexus RX. Not an exhilarating drive in the bunch.
You must not have driven a Versa yet.
4 Likes
That sounds like a dare. 
1 Like
If that’s part of your requirement set, yes, most SUVs aren’t for you.
1 Like
Now this, this I’d like to see!
2 Likes
That’s why I qualified my initial statement. 
Ok, maybe it just feels that old…
It is a Toyota product… that’s their m.o.
The current RAV4 is clearly a tribute to the Tomos moped.
Could be a Tundra that’s only gotten a mid-cycle refresh since Bush was president.
Tell the whole story: which Bush? 
TBF he did say modern.
2 Likes
I really like the current RX so I decided to test drive one and during the test drive I literally told the sales guy that I’d total this thing withing a week by falling asleep behind the wheel.
GX is a body on frame dinosaur, it looks so narrow to me that it makes me think it would flip on hard turns.
Great cars, but not for everyone.
I was having a discussion with my brother the other day, trying to determine what new vehicle for sale in the US from a mainstream manufacturer is the oldest. Tundra was my guess, but it turns out that the Nissan Frontier even has it beat by a few years.
Dodge Journey has Frontier (by body style) beat.
The Q50 is riding on the FM platform…which dates back to 2001.