Doug Kanter wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Doug Kanter wrote

The power train design is the PRIMARY reason these vehicles get such bad
mileage.

Wrong. The real reason is the lousy power to weight ratio.

Give customers the same physical, boxy shape they want, same choice of
motors, but with front wheel drive.

You dont get the effect you are claiming with conventional
cars, with front wheel drive being a lot more fuel efficient
than with the conventional drive train systems.

The car makers can reduce the price a little, but probably make more, since
most customers have no real idea how much cheaper it is to make a 2wd
vehicle.

Retail prices for cars has very little to do with the cost of manufacture.

And the short story is that many are prepared to pay the significantly
higher price that comes with SUVs because they feel safer in them.

And, offer 4wd versions for people who explicitly ask for them. I don't
think many will.

Sure, but you wont get any real improvement in fuel efficiency your way.

I don't agree, and neither do the three mechanics at the shop I've been using
for years,

You're all completely irrelevant. Its trivial to compare the gas
milage seen with front wheel drive and conventional drive cars
otherwise the same on weight etc and see there isnt anything in it.

but it's not worth debating.

Corse it is.

It's enough to say that if you add a hundred pounds of rotating parts to a
drive train, and they do nothing most of the time, there MUST be some effect.

Nothing like as much effect as there is with the heavier
body and the lousy aerodynamics at the higher speeds.

Maybe not as large as I suspect, but greater than zero.

Swamped by the other effects tho.

Yes, it makes sense to not have the 4WD in theory, but even
that is arguable in areas that see much snow etc, particularly
for the sort of woman driver that drives so many of the SUVs.

You can make a case that they are quite a bit safer in those
in the worst driving conditions of snow and icy roads etc.

And they are basically prepared to pay for that in the substantially
higher cost of the vehicle and the cost of the fuel it wastes while
ever the cost of fuel is affordible, and it obviously still is.

The only thing that will do anything much about the consumers choosing fuel
efficient cars is to let the price of fuel increase until the cost of the
fuel has a real impact on consumer's car buying decisions.

That's the real problem, isn't it? People say "I don't mind the low gas
mileage on this thing I drive. I can afford the gas." In fact, they should be
saying "Indirectly, my son died in Iraq to protect the oil supply which we
wouldn't need (someday) if our dicks weren't so wrapped up in the kinds of
cars we drive".

Iraq wasnt about the price of oil.