24 carry-on sized bags likely won't even fit in a Suburban that has seven people in it. You know what vehicle they *would* fit in? The minivan above all minivans. ETA to add that the ultimate minivan is almost FOUR FEET shorter than the Suburban, with just as much cargo capacity (*and* gets better fuel economy. *and* has way better leg room for everyone. *and* is easier to parallel park. *and* has a sliding door so no-one has to crawl over the seat to get in the back. *and*...)
And top out at 55mph, 45 in a headwind and 35 going up a mountain pass, if at all. And need a major motor rebuild every 25k miles. And have the safety of a cardboard box due to driver placement, crumple zones and center of gravity. And get the worse MPGs than a modern Suburan to boot (not to mention actual mini vans). And be overpriced due to their cult following, *and*... ;)
I learned to drive in a Vanagon-- it was the family van for a long time when I was a kid. While I'd agree that it was underpowered, it did 70mph just fine-- my parents did road trips from WA to SoCal with our family of 9, so lots of mountain passes on those trips. It got 19-21mpg (mixed driving), which is comparable to the Suburban highway economy. If I recall correctly, it is a 1-ton rated vehicle (my Dad had to buy truck tires for it, instead of passenger-rated tires), while the Suburban is usually a 1/2 or 3/4 ton rated truck.
The head gasket issue is a definite downer, though it doesn't seem to hinder Subaru sales, lol! They ARE overpriced, though the cult following just *might* be due to the fact that there simply isn't any equivalent vehicle on the road any more; supply/demand, etc, etc.
With regard to safety, while it's "not safe" by today's standards, it's not any more dangerous than any other reasonably safe '80s vehicle without ABS/airbags/etc. The driver visibility is simply amazing due to the high seating position, the relatively narrow A/B/C pillars, and the HUGE windows all around.