In my book there are only a handful of vehicle configurations: truck,
van, station wagon, sedan, hatchback, coupe and sports car. There is
no such thing as SUV, crossover, whatever. The mini-cooper is a
station wagon, so are all the SUVs. So are the so-called crossovers
(how I hate that term, uttering it means "I'm so stupid that I bought
into the marketing BS created to turn me away from what the car
companies and magazines taught me were the best, safest cars in the
world but since I can't afford them now I have to be told to like
something else."

At least with a vanagon, you know what it was, and what it is. It's a
van. There is no subspecies called "minivan" outside of Chrysler's
marketing BS.

Jim

On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 7:00 PM, Andrew Grebneff <goose1047@gmail.com> wrote:
> Er... the excerpt here wasn't mine... but I'll add my cent's worth here.
>
> "SUV" is a gross misnomer. The vast majority of these vehicles are the
> antithesis of sportiness.
>
> Unfortunately I don't think an alternative term has been introduced
> anywhere. Calling them 4WDs isn't it... not only are there lots of other
> 4WDs around of completely different type (vans, coupes, sedans, dumptrucks),
> but some "SUVs" are 2WD (Frod's Explorer and Territory are examples). "4WD
> wagon with offroad capability" is much closer to accuracy, but again is
> ambiguous and has lots of exceptions.
>
> How about a vanagon.com competition to come up with a logical name (or
> acronym) for "SUVs"?
>
> The same goes for what those in the US call "minivans". The rest of the
> world calle them MPVs (unfortunately Mazda grabbed this acronym as the name
> for its own MPV, which hardly invalidates the term. A real minivan is a true
> van of diminutive proportions eg Daihatsu Hijet, Mitsubishi L100, Suzuki
> Carry. So-called US "minivans" are not vans at all (with the exception of
> the van-type body of Toyota's van (not Camry, despite what Wikipedia
> claims)-based Estima/Previa/Tarago 1990-2000 and the Estima/Previa/Tarago of
> 2000-present. The others are all really just stationwagons of over 5-seat
> capacity (most with zero luggage space when all seats are in use as seats).
> No neede for a competition here, as the suitable name MPV already exists.
>
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 12:30 PM, Aristotle Sagan
> <killer.jupiter@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Andrew...
>>
>> Just because they didn't call it a SUV doesn't mean they didn't exist.
>> The Ford Brono goes back to about 1964, The Chevy K5 Blazer, about
>> 1970. I learned to drive on an 1968 International Travellall,
>> certainly well within the specs for a modern SUV (without the safety
>> stuff). The little brother to the Travellall was the International
>> Scout. Now Jeeps.. well Jeeps have been making SUVs since the Willy's
>> Wagons of the late forties as well as Cherokees from the early 60's..
>> The list goes on, the Dodge Power Wagon, there is Studebaker wagon for
>> sale here in San Jose that looks for all the world the prototype for
>> an SUV. And they went out of business in 1964.
>>
>> Perhaps envision isn't the word you wanted....
>>
>> tim in san jose
>>
> Hmm... the Toyota LandCruiser Wagon goes a way back too. I guess you could
> call the even older regular LandCruiser (which is also technically a wagon,
> except for the cab/chassis versions!) could be called a bare-bones "SUV'.
>
> Jeez, the VW T1 could be too...
>