Enterprise has plenty of rental Waggoners! I'm renting one to drive down to Williamsburg from Nova. From Williamsburg I will be taking my daughters friends to UVA for a concert then driving back to Williamsburg. A nice SUV with LED lights will make the long day much more enjoyable!

Enterprise has plenty of rental Waggoners! I'm renting one to drive down to Williamsburg from Nova. From Williamsburg I will be taking my daughters friends to UVA for a concert then driving back to Williamsburg. A nice SUV with LED lights will make the long day much more enjoyable!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

How come families of this size in the 1960s somehow survived without vehicles like these?

Because no one cared about seatbelts or car seats then.

Also, you sound like my dad who was so impressed with himself that he never needed to buy a wagon or SUV (family of five plus an 80-pound dog in various GM sedans or tiny VWs) but then borrowed mine and my sister’s frequently when he needed to haul stuff around. 🤔

RE: the Wagoneer, I have an 8-year-old Acadia and am in the market for something like this – two teens and two 80-pound dogs and also a road trip family. I didn’t love the look of this when it first came out, but one of my neighbors has one so I’ve gotten used to looking at it and it’s not so bad. Would definitely go for the lower end one because six figures for a Jeep is insanity.

Me again, checked out the Wagoneer (in the showroom) and the room inside is negligible compared to the Grand Cherokees that have the third row, while it costs 50% more. Crazy. Although it seems to have had a redesign already so it’s not quite as ugly as my neighbor’s. Also I’m 5’2” and the hood is as tall as my chin.

I don't think you did, because if you had you'd see it's not even close:

https://www.cars.com/articles/2021-jeep-grand-cherokee-l-vs-2022-wagoneer-which-has-the-better-row-setup-437923/

Anonymous wrote:The Wagoneer has the highest tow rating for SUVs. Little car people have no toys. No boat, or horses, or any other toys. Why do you care?And why do others have to justify what they drive to poor folks in a Prius?? BUY WHAT MAKES YOU HAPPY!

Because it kills everyone around you, dumbass.

Way worse for pedestrian safety. Way worse for other drivers when you hit them after you cause an accident. Maybe you should stop thinking about only yourself. But this is America, a country of 300 million asshats all with their own individual freedumbz!

Anonymous wrote:

How come families of this size in the 1960s somehow survived without vehicles like these?

Because no one cared about seatbelts or car seats then.

Also, you sound like my dad who was so impressed with himself that he never needed to buy a wagon or SUV (family of five plus an 80-pound dog in various GM sedans or tiny VWs) but then borrowed mine and my sister’s frequently when he needed to haul stuff around. 🤔

RE: the Wagoneer, I have an 8-year-old Acadia and am in the market for something like this – two teens and two 80-pound dogs and also a road trip family. I didn’t love the look of this when it first came out, but one of my neighbors has one so I’ve gotten used to looking at it and it’s not so bad. Would definitely go for the lower end one because six figures for a Jeep is insanity.

Me again, checked out the Wagoneer (in the showroom) and the room inside is negligible compared to the Grand Cherokees that have the third row, while it costs 50% more. Crazy. Although it seems to have had a redesign already so it’s not quite as ugly as my neighbor’s. Also I’m 5’2” and the hood is as tall as my chin.

The Wagoneer has the highest tow rating for SUVs. Little car people have no toys. No boat, or horses, or any other toys. Why do you care?And why do others have to justify what they drive to poor folks in a Prius?? BUY WHAT MAKES YOU HAPPY!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A minivan is more comfortable and nicer to drive, and 2/3 to 1/2 the cost. This is purely about image, not comfort.

Yup, minivans make 1000x more sense than nearly every SUV. They often have more cargo space. They're better with gas mileage. They're also much safer for pedestrians because they have as high as a bumper. They drive so much better and don't have rollover issues. SUVs are the dumbest car design of all time..

I have no interest in driving a minivan. Why should what you want be given priority over what I want? Typical urban liberal BS.

How come families of this size in the 1960s somehow survived without vehicles like these?

Because no one cared about seatbelts or car seats then.

Also, you sound like my dad who was so impressed with himself that he never needed to buy a wagon or SUV (family of five plus an 80-pound dog in various GM sedans or tiny VWs) but then borrowed mine and my sister’s frequently when he needed to haul stuff around. 🤔

RE: the Wagoneer, I have an 8-year-old Acadia and am in the market for something like this – two teens and two 80-pound dogs and also a road trip family. I didn’t love the look of this when it first came out, but one of my neighbors has one so I’ve gotten used to looking at it and it’s not so bad. Would definitely go for the lower end one because six figures for a Jeep is insanity.

I recently accidentally rented one of these for a solo car trip. I was shocked at the size. I will say it was a smooth and luxurious ride, but in my every day I drive a 10 year old SUV. When I got home I took my family for a spin before returning it and they were IN LOVE. Again -- we are a family of 4 with absolutely no use for a car like this but the amount of space was very appealing to my teenagers (we are a road trip family). So I do see the appeal!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guarantee the wagoner people and the oversized 4k sf house people are the SAME people. How else will everyone know how much money they have? That is the whole point!

Well, yeah. Americans make money to live a more comfortable lifestyle. Space is comfortable. Legroom is comfortable. Big new SUVs are comfortable. A big new house in the suburbs with a big yard and big garage is comfortable. If you want to be some pinko living in a shoe box "flat" with no AC and driving some manual tiny car go move to Europe.

Ironically, the new McMansions you loathe with all new appliances are much more efficient than the average sh**shack future tear down you seethers probably live in.

There is definitely a correlation between the supersizing of cars and homes and the supersizing of individuals.

None of the wealthy parents I know with 3 or more kids, big luxury SUVs, and living in big modern mansions around Washington are fat.

A big comfortable luxury SUV is simply a luxury. Don't overthink it. Luxury sedans are passe, so people buy luxury SUVs. Plus tax code promotes this.

old American land yachts best family car!

Meh. Houses were a LOT smaller too back then.

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I am admittedly not a car person but I do get annoyed by people who try to claim that having a giant car like this is a necessity for a three-kid family. It absolutely is not - it is a luxury, and that is fine, but don't pretend you you can't possibly have a family of five without driving a $100k vehicle to and from Costco and ballet. [/quote]

You're seething with jealous rage. A gigantic SUV is necessary with 2-3 kids because you probably also have a dog or two... and you car pool, so maybe upwards of 5-6 kids in the truck... and the kids play travel sports, so there's a lot of equipment... and you have a second home, so you want to be comfortable going to and from, maybe two grandparents or a nanny ride with you to the second home.

P.S. There is a regular Wagoneer and a GRAND Wagoneer. They look nearly the same but the less equipped regular Wagoneers can be purchased for $50s-70s. Only the GRAND Wagoneer touches $100s.[/quote]

How come families of this size in the 1960s somehow survived without vehicles like these?[/quote]


Exactly. The argument that massive SUVs, which often have even less cargo space than minivans or wagons is absolutely laughable. As if Americans before the 90s didn't have multiple kids and dog. Oh but they did, and it didn't require SUVs. Tons of other people on Earth have multiple kids and a dog and drive way smaller vehicles. That line of logic is nothing more than drinking auto industry Kool aid.

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I am admittedly not a car person but I do get annoyed by people who try to claim that having a giant car like this is a necessity for a three-kid family. It absolutely is not - it is a luxury, and that is fine, but don't pretend you you can't possibly have a family of five without driving a $100k vehicle to and from Costco and ballet. [/quote]

You're seething with jealous rage. A gigantic SUV is necessary with 2-3 kids because you probably also have a dog or two... and you car pool, so maybe upwards of 5-6 kids in the truck... and the kids play travel sports, so there's a lot of equipment... and you have a second home, so you want to be comfortable going to and from, maybe two grandparents or a nanny ride with you to the second home.

P.S. There is a regular Wagoneer and a GRAND Wagoneer. They look nearly the same but the less equipped regular Wagoneers can be purchased for $50s-70s. Only the GRAND Wagoneer touches $100s.[/quote]

How come families of this size in the 1960s somehow survived without vehicles like these?