Talk:SUV/Archive 2

Images of "favorite" models
There has been an ongoing churn in the images to "illustrate" various SUVs. They are not necessary and only slow down the loading of this page. Moreover, there are many more examples provided by the links in each of those sections. See; :Examples:. Cheers - CZmarlin (talk) 16:57, 28 October 2020 (UTC)


 * I earnestly believe what I’m doing is right. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:210:1450:4007:bb69:baf5:5bf0 (talk • contribs)

I said we need fewer American vehicles and equivalents to EXL SUVs. Please look at my reasons before reverting. Think it through. In the galleries, we need a balance of Japanese, American, British, etc. not just American. 2007DodgeRam (talk) 17:46, 20 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Do not make even one more image change without specifically discussing it here first. I noticed that you've been disrupting other articles as well lately (e.g. Henry VIII) so a trip to AN/I probably won't end well for you.The XJ Jeep Cherokee is the only specific model named in the article's lead so it's only logical that a photo of it is included there. Beyond that I haven't thought about what would best illustrate each section, but changing most of the images every month based on whatever happens to tickle your fancy at the time (which also goes for that now-rangeblocked Texas IP editor), is disruptive. You've been reverted enough times by enough different editors that you really ought to have figured out on your own that you should have stopped. If there's uncertainty over what images will most suitably illustrate the article, that needs to be discussed here rather than pushed around with a slow-running edit war. --Sable232 (talk) 22:07, 21 June 2021 (UTC)


 * WDYM by a trip to AN/I 2007DodgeRam (talk) 22:12, 21 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Also I am gonna make a change to the photo in the Compact SUV section due to it being a duplicate photo 2007DodgeRam (talk) 22:14, 21 June 2021 (UTC)


 * AN/I is Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. --Sable232 (talk) 22:15, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Would I get put in Wikipedia jail (blocking) 2007DodgeRam (talk) 22:16, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

I am also gonna add new sections such as body style. What do u think? 2007DodgeRam (talk) 22:28, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Please don't, this article is waaayyy too picture heavy without inventing new sections for people to add more photos to. Relax, pull back, leave it alone. Add content rather than just adding pictures. You can make all the galleries you want here if you like.  Mr.choppers &#124;   ✎  00:26, 22 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Ok thanks 2007DodgeRam (talk) 00:36, 22 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Agreed with Mr.choppers. The article is already flush with images, adding more sections to serve mostly as galleries wouldn't improve it. --Sable232 (talk) 21:12, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

SUV craze beyond the United States
The current version of the article doesn't appear to explain the rising SUV production in Europe, where gas prices are dominated by taxes and not crude oil and there are no legal loopholes. I wish we could provide at least some reasons in the historical section of the article to the reader, or maybe even make a separate section on the trend. Ain92 (talk) 14:36, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I suspect an article about the shift from cars to crossover SUVs in Europe and the US could be found. I'm sure the US CAFE rules have a lot to do with the US preference for crossover SUVs but it's also possible that buyers are finding crossovers end up being a sweat spot between the attributes of traditional cars and traditional SUVs.  Springee (talk) 14:57, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
 * 80% of new car sales are made with some female input. One of the things women like is a high driving position. To be honest the whole thing is a great example of Jevons paradox that the more efficient you make something, the more it gets used. In this case, engines and fuel consumption. Greglocock (talk) 22:31, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Merger proposal
I propose merging J-segment into Sport utility vehicle, as the former can be explained in one short section of the latter article. Common usage of the former term is also very limited compared to the latter. This proposal also includes a complete removal of the "European sales figures" section after merging due to WP:NOTSTATS concerns as it provides little context or benefit to the article. Andra Febrian (talk) 07:21, 18 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Support. Agreed. Leave J-segment as a redirect to here.  Stepho  talk 09:50, 18 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Support. There is very little in the J-segment article beyond the unencyclopedic sales figures, so there is no need for a separate article. --Sable232 (talk) 22:54, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Criteria for selection of photos
Recent edits have emphasized the arbitrary nature of the selection of photos, of which there are too many. So, rather than editors plugging their favorites we need some criteria. "First ofs" are obviously a good idea, even if the actual crown is contentious. But all these me too pictures of generic ugly vehicles add nothing. So, I'm going to delete every image for which I can see no justification compared with its competitors. Any readditions have to have a solid reason for doing so. Greglocock (talk) 02:27, 7 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Sounds good. There's not much difference between the SUV's that have taken over today's roads.  Stepho  talk 10:52, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Jeep Grand Cherokee Image
Ok, so here is what I personally believe based on looks and sources:

1. The first Jeep GC was a replacement for the original GW 2. In 2011, it became a Crossover, as it shows more crossover-like features starting then 3. Since 2021, the L is a Full-size Crossover SUV, while the regular goes back to being a regular SUV

In the article, there is a photo of the WK2 (why did they call it that anyway?), when the WK2 features a more crossover look, and based on Autoblog, it is a crossover. I think we should replace the photo with a photo of the WL or before

--2007DodgeRam (talk) 20:25, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
 * The term SUV is very broad and not strictly defined. The GC of all generations is certainly an SUV.  That one source called it a crossover doesn't mean it isn't reasonably classified as an SUV.  Can you tell me which features make the 2011 GC a crossover while the 2010 was still an SUV?  Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against the WJ but it's quite old compared to the WK2.  Springee (talk) 20:53, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Well, it competes with the Ford Edge, Chevrolet Blazer, Honda Passport, Etc. SInce they are CUVs, it only makes this a CUV. The other generations seemingly compete with the Trailblazer, Explorer, ETC. --2007DodgeRam (talk) 21:59, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
 * All of those fall into the broad category SUV. The market segment occupied by GC didn't change when they went from WK to WK2.  Additionally, the WK2 article calls the thing an SUV.  In construction it seems a simple evolution from the unibody, truck like power train of the WJ to the WK (similar but IFS vs beam axle).  The WK2 replaces the rear beam axle with an IRS but otherwise the longitudinal, truck like powertrains are retained as well as the unibody structure (a design trait dating back to the ZJ model.  Springee (talk) 22:51, 24 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Unibody is often a characteristic of a CUV, and body-on-frame is often a characteristic of a full SUV - not a perfect distinction but often useful. CUVs also tend to be less rugged than full SUVs, and have softer, comfort tuned suspension.  Stepho  talk 23:19, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I do agree though I, and this article, treat CUV/crossovers as a subset of SUVs. Consider that the Cherokee XJ was a unibody despite the truck based powertrain and clear off-road abilities. Thus one of the quintessential SUVs is not body on frame.  Conversely, the Ford Explorer, another of the quintessential SUVs was clearly truck based, body of frame and all, yet was one of the first SUVs that was clearly targeting suburban family hauling, the exact market now dominated by crossovers, including the recently replaced D5 based model which traces it's chassis back to Volvo.  While I understand and agree with the generalization, I wouldn't adhere to strictly to it. Springee (talk) 00:07, 25 April 2022 (UTC)