Maybe there's a bit of circular reasoning going on here where people bought giant vehicles because they liked the aesthetics and internal roominess, and then the prevalence of giant vehicles opened up the market for larger and heavier towables— rigid body RVs, seadoos, a trailer full of gas dirt bikes, whatever it is.
I also feel like in past times, it was much more common to see a two car household with two very different cars, with one being a hatchback or sedan for getting the family around down and doing grocery runs, and the other a truck or van for those occasional "hauling" requirements. Nowadays I feel like many times it's two big SUVs, just tuned to his and her brand tastes rather than two shared vehicles for different usages. I'd be interested to know if the stats on multi-car households would bear this out.
Because the trend in TFA only happened in the US, and only after 2009.
Obviously not for a hitch-based bicycle carrier - I think most people can manage to use those reasonably safely.
People seem to like towing stuff with their Vanagons, but I hope that doesn't involve hills. :P
How is a tall hood increasing your family comfort? It only increases your ego.
How much leg room does the third row have in that F150? I don't think the seats for the sixth and seventh passengers are quite comfortable.
How are the footrests on the second row? Are those Captains chairs on the second row or a rigid bench with no reclining at all? When you talk about how comfortable it is, are you saying that as all the passengers (all 6-7) or just you as the driver?
Are you comfortable letting a three year old operate the doors without damaging other cars around them and climb in and out of that F-150 on their own? My young kids manage the sliding doors just fine, their ability to largely do it on their own and the ease of access of the sliding door makes it a lot more comfortable getting them in and out. In fact, I can open the doors safely before they even reach the car. That's pretty dang comfortable.
> Not to mention the ability to tow.
The thing everyone imagines they'll do all the time but in practice practically never do.
Sure enough, the XC60 crossover has a trunk space of 22.4 cubic feet.
It's the same trunk, just higher off the ground, which to me makes it less useful to me: more lifting to get stuff in, harder to rummage through items (eg camping pantry), much more difficult to access my roof box.
They all have sloping hoods. A sloping hood increases visibility and reduces air resistance.
Why does a Kenworth have a sloping hood but F-150's and SUV's don't?
Can you please explain to me again why you need a lincoln navigator or the like?
Based on whose opinion?
> Plenty of families have the need for third-row seating
A 1993 Buick Roadmaster Station wagon has a comfortable third row while being shorter than the top of the steering wheel on a 2025 GMC Yukon Denali.
Even the Dutch had to fight tooth and nail for it. I've lived in Germany for a while and there are cities here where even I would be snubbing taking kids to school with a bakfiets, because the biking infra is not good enough, or in other words the mingling I'd have to do with other traffic would be too out of my comfort zone.
Urban planning should prioritize walking and biking very first, and cars and other utilitarian-but-dangerous/harmful transport methods should be integrated in a way that's not engulfing the more human-scale side of things. But I think the costs (both monetary and in terms of "cognitive shift") are so high that I don't think I'll see this change in my lifetime. And that's before accounting for the power of corporate interest
They will complain endlessly about having nowhere to park, traffic, and dangerous driving but would never consider having their child walk. It is too dangerous.
A 47” high hood line does not provide any utility to transporting children. Children are not stored under the hood.
Oh now you tell me!
