How do You Feel About Performance SUVs and Crossovers?

Fast and fun, or largely pointless?

1y ago

20.2K

I've been having trouble with this one. On the one hand, a good SUV or crossover serves a purpose. On the other hand, the height and weight does not lend naturally to sporty credentials. On the other hand, why shouldn't your luxury barge or super-useful grocery getter and kid transporter not be fun to kick around when nobody is watching?

Something like the Range Rover Sport SVR packs a 518 horsepower supercharged 5.0-liter V-8 and adjustable four-wheel-drive system which puts you in mind of the space, grace, and pace Jaguar provided of old. Jaguar's own F-Pace houses a supercharged V6 and doesn't slouch around jumping into traffic or playing on a twisty road.

The Jeep Trackhawk is a 6.2-liter V8, 707 horsepower monster that out-muscles muscle cars. Then you have things like the BMW X5 that sets the bar in its class, and Alfa Romeo's Stelvio which isn't a sugar substitute.

The question is... are automakers building genuinely fun, sporty, high-riding vehicles or should we just plain ignore them as exercises in futility? Let us know in the comments.

Join In

Comments (40)

  • I think they’re great. Are they ideal? Heck no. Would I rather a performance wagon? You bet. But since we (in North America) are forced into SUVs if we want something more practical than a sedan, then we might as well have them handle and go.

      1 year ago
  • As long as it can do SUV stuff still (off road, carry loads of crap well and tower over lesser vehicles)

    Some sporty SUVs are fine, like the Range Rover sport SVR and the Porsche Cayenne, because they are still practical. A dumb sporty SUV basically tries to be a sports car, sacrificing practicality and comfort and off road prowess for basically being a large car that isn’t really good at anything anymore.

      1 year ago
  • I'm torn on this one, I like my sports cars to be sports cars, and my SUV's to be proper off road mud pluggers where you can just hit the dirt and be up to your axles in mud. But, the part that throws me is that I absolutely adore the Jaguar F Pace lol.

      1 year ago
  • In my opinion, which you have the right to disagree with, the super sporty SUVs are not a good idea.

    An SUV has to be an off roader for adventure.

    A sportscar has to be a proper grunt machine.

    If you try both, you end up with something in the middle, which can do neither of those things well.

      1 year ago
    • Incorrect. MX-5 runs a 2.0 liter 4-cylinder NA engine with 151 lb-ft of torque and 181 horsepower and considered one of the best sports cars on the road.

      An off roader always benefits from grunt.

      SUVs aren’t always pure off roaders....

      Read more
        1 year ago
    • Very fair. Respect your opinion.

        1 year ago
  • I miss "long roofs", or whatever you want to call them. We had some stylish looking models. (Some didn't even have fake wood on the sides!)

    But, SUV's and CUV's don't quite make sense to me. Most of them are just tall, long roof, sedans with a bit more ground clearance. The AWD factor isn't exclusive to SUV's and CUV's. Some AWD is an option.

    When I was car shopping recently I looked at a Honda Fit and an H-RV. Except for the body, AWD option, a little extra ride height, and a few other details, they're the same car. I went with the Fit. Technically, they're both "compact utility vehicles".

      1 year ago
    • I don’t understand the existence of the HRV beyond it being good for people with knee or back issues or older people with mobility issues due to stepping in rather than climbing in.

      I drive a CRV regularly, which is great. And HRV is...

      Read more
        1 year ago
    • My brother has a 2015 CRV. It's quite nice. You're right about the HRV.

      The overall problem is defining what exactly is a SUV (sport utility vehicle) and a CUV (compact utility vehicle). Strangely, there's no CSUV. Thankfully, they...

      Read more
        1 year ago
Loading...
Loading...
40