What a load. Maybe this is true in the city but we use our trucks.

When my Dad first got a Range Rover - my Mother would not drive "that truck". Now every sweet 16 wants a Escalade.. Women have been known to change their minds - we shall see..:rolleyes:

I just saw that Honda's minivan won Car and Driver's (or was it Road & Track, can't keep the two straight) 5 best truck category for minivan. It gets 18 miles to the gallon. I was under the impression that their mileage was considerably better.

Matt, what about a new Mazda CX-9? I've been looking at those for exactly the reasons you state. More expensive, but 2 wheel drives are being advertised in Minnesota for the low $20s. More room than a Honda Pilot, smaller footprint than a Ford Explorer.

MRM, I'm a big fan of Mazda, and the CX-9. It's just not big enough. The two caveats are the room behind the 3rd row, and the width. With the SRX and Pilot, without the 3rd row folded flat there is zero room. We can't even fit a stroller behind the 3rd row seat in the SRX. CX-9 is bigger, but not much. Also, for the AWD version I would want, it's just too much money.

As for the width, the test for my wife is space between two carseats. With my 3-year old's booster and 10-mo old's rear-facing baby seat, she needs to be able to sit between them. Anyone with kids will understand why. Right now she can't (no she's not that big;)). CX-9, and crossover SUVs in general, tend to be narrower so they're easier to park and drive. But, it kills the interior width.

It takes 8 people to go grocery shopping. You Midwestern folk are a little bit crazy, eh? ;)

Maybe you are one of the 10%. And in the gritty frontier of West Michigan that may go to 35%..

All the rest are parked in malls, at the grocery store and in front of office parks.SmileWavy

Absolutely! I ran my farm with small Toyota trucks and utility trailers for over ten years...it was only when we got into the horse business that I bought an F150.

I am constantly amazed at the number of F250 and above trucks on the road...there just aren't that many farmers and ranchers:)

Big trucks are like fighter pilot watches...:cool:

I don't mean to sound callous here, but didn't you think of this before having six kids (I'm assuming that's where the "seating for eight" thing originates)?

You don't have to justify your decision to me or anyone else, but at some point practicality has to enter into the equation, no?

At the moment Jeff, I only have two kids. Trust me, choice of vehicle is the last thing I consider when it comes to how many kids I have. However, we often have the need to carry more people.

Groceries was more a metaphor for stuff. Kids require stuff. Right now we can haul people or stuff, not both.

Ok, makes sense I guess, but I have to ask if it's REALLY necessary to buy a particular vehicle to meet "needs" that will occur <1% of the time. I used to have a large truck too, but I reached a point where I realized it was utterly stupid and senseless to try and support/upkeep/maintain/park a big vehicle that I only REALLY used to capacity about once every five years. Far more easy to rent for such situations than to carry the liability and cost of preparing for the "five year" or "ten year" event.

In the last five years, the largest-capacity vehicle I've owned is a 944. I haven't suffered a bit. In the rare case I have to haul something, I take my wife's Toyota. When people come into town, we take the Toyota (seats four comfortably, five if you squoosh).

I ask myself (and my wife) the question sometimes: "if you feel that we constantly need more space (bigger place to live, storage unit, bigger vehicle), isn't it possible that you simply have too much crap? Or that your expectations for toting it around are a bit unreasonable?

I used to overpack for flights. Then I "realized" one day that I could go virtually anywhere in the country for a 3-4 day trip with little more than I could fit in a backpack. It's a question of necessities.

All I'm saying is you might benefit here from possibly re-analyzing the problem and re-defining the parameters if appropriate. One of the reasons I so intensely dislike SUVs is because they're NOT necessary. They represent for too many people the epitome of rationalization. They want one, so they "create" a problem to justify having one. It's pretty silly.

Jeff, we've progressively moved to bigger vehicles. Started out with a 4Runner, moved up to the SRX, and are now finding that it is too small. Kids = lots of stuff, and more kids lead to an exponential increase in stuff. Prior to having kids, I never would have imagined just how much. Try as I might to stay small, we're finding it to be a serious inconvenience. In this case, "getting rid of the crap" means getting rid of the kids, not part of the plan.;)

Considering the options, I have trouble understanding why SUVs get such a bad rap. The common alternative to the SUV is the mini-van. But mini-vans are smaller, with slightly better MPG. What do I gain?

Sounds like the George Carlin skit.... "when you get too much stuff, you need a bigger place. when you get a bigger place, you need even MORE stuff to fill it up"

Makes me wonder how my parents ever managed with just a Mercury 4-door for so many years. . .

They seemed to manage okay though.

double post

Problem with picking up an Armada is that most buyers are upside down.

Don't laugh but look at the Chrysler Pacifica....yeah yeah yeah I know...its a chrysler. But I had a loaner for a month when my wife's car was in the shop for an extended period of time. It was the mid-level touring model. A 2007 with 25K on the clock. I could have bought it for c. $16.5K with a 100K warranty. It truly impressed me. Very roomy for even 6...middle seat room HUGE...a little cramped for adults all the way to the rear seats. Handled well...ran 80-90 mph on a trip and got 27-28 mpg. Pretty peppy...handled suprisingly well. Supposedly a lot of MB engineering went into it for whatever that's worth.

But like all chryslers you probably have to drive it into the ground to get your money out of it.

I was impressed for what it was.

The Pacifica is good but suffers MASSIVE blindspots. Try one first.

Yeah I noticed that...suprisingly from ther A-pillar

Had a trade offer for my SRX, 2007 Pacifica. Problem is, they're pretty much the exact same size. My Cadillac experience has again left me with a bad taste regarding domestic cars, and I've always had a bad opinion of Chrysler products. Many bad family experiences.......

Jeff, how many kids rode in that Mercury? All in childseats, right?;) Things are a bit different today. I remember growing up in the '80s, when everyone had the huge family truckster wagons. My good friend's parent's had one, they used to lay down all the seats when we'd go places. It also had the sweet rear-facing 3rd row seat. I think that would probably land you in jail in this day and age.

Matt, Porsche o Phile makes some good points. You don't really need the giant SUV you just want one. We have one 7 year old and I just sold my Grand Cherokee with a hemi for a BMW 325i. Biggest reason was the BMW is just more fun to drive. If we travel somewhere we will only take what will fit. And that trunk fits alot. If you can't haul everything 4 people need for a week trip in a mid size SUV or a sedan you need to really think about what you need for travelling. Now if the real reason you are getting a bigger SUV is a wife that says that is what she wants, then that is a whole nother matter. Keeping wife happy is always important.

I saw the data a couple of weeks ago. Big SUVs have come down in sales. Compact SUVs are still doing OK.
Forget about the Cayenne, by the way. Porsche owners will put gold in their cars to run them, if they have to. And the way things are going, they may have to.