Don't forget about the Sequoia... they don't sell many of those, either.
Really, a capable SUV is a sort of niche product anymore (with the exception of a few vehicles). We have to define capable of course, and what constitutes an SUV. I chose BOF SUVs for the comparision below. If I missed one, let me know.
My only quibble with the above is the word "anymore." In reality, off-road capable vehicles have
always been a niche market, for good reason: Most people simply don't need them.
Here's a personal recollection of mine: I grew up in a quiet cul-de-sac suburban neighborhood Southwest of Denver (Columbine Hills for those familiar with the area.) We bought our house new and moved in early in 1973 when I was 11 years old. Our neighborhood was, I thought, a fairly typical representation of a middle-class suburban neighborhood in the 70's. And keep in mind this is in Colorado, where we do get some decent snow and winter weather.
So in that block of about 20 houses, how many had a 4wd vehicle in the 70's? The answer is ONE. Our neighbor across the street had a Wagoneer. That's it. The next 4x4 to be purchased on that block was the 1957 International Travelall that I bought in late 1979 as my first vehicle. There were no CJ's, Broncos, Suburbans, Blazers, Ramchargers, Commandos or Rovers anywhere on my block. The standard vehicles were American-made sedans and wagons (we had a Chevy wagon, then a VW bus, then a Ford Torino wagon, then another Chevy wagon.)
Oh, they were around, but they weren't common.
One other thing: Number of pickup trucks on our block?
ZERO. Back then trucks were typically purchased by people who needed them for work.
For a brief window in the 1980s-90's, when the SUV craze hit, manufacturers 'assumed' that if people wanted SUVs, they wanted rugged, off-road capable vehicles. It took them a few years but they finally realized that there were millions of Cherokees, 4runners, Broncos and Explorers that went their entire lives without ever once being put into low range (in some cases without ever once being put into 4wd.) And yet these vehicles carried that capability around with them despite the fact that it was never actually needed.
It was then that the manufacturers realized most people didn't want a rugged, capable off-road vehicle, they wanted a
station wagon that
looked like a rugged, capable off-road vehicle and so in the mid-90's the CUV was born (some of them - Honda CR-V and Toyota RAV-4 came complete with SUV-like styling cues like the door-mounted spare tire!)
It shouldn't suprise anyone that the rugged SUVs we love would start to move upmarket, honestly.
Another reason for moving up-market is the fact that vehicles have been getting better and lasting longer. This means that new vehicles are competing in the same market as late-model used vehicles that cost less.
Think of it this way: Assuming that Toyota could make, say, a "poverty package" 4runner with rubber floor mats, no AC, an AM radio, vinyl seats and hand crank windows. Let's say they could sell this for $26,000 where a new one runs in the $36k range (not sure if those numbers are realistic, but use them for arguments sake.)
The problem for Toyota is that this hypothetical $26k stripper would be competing against a 4 year old loaded-up Limited that has 60k on the clock and probably sells for the same price. Kind of a no-brainer here, almost anybody would buy the 4 year old one simply because it has more to offer for the same cost and the one thing that the stripper offers - the fact that it is new - is of diminished value in an era when a 10 year old vehicle with 100k on it is just about as reliable and long-lasting as a brand new one.
So, to keep people buying new, they have to offer more and more, which costs more and more, thus the upward movement of these vehicles.
