SmallTown
Well-known member
Yeah it's that impression that leads people to get stuck! I guess they equate big cars with land rovers and the like.
Can anyone explain the logic of SUV vehicles?
- Thread starter JustTheGent
- Start date
No, you didn't read it correctly. I told you that there is no evidence that SUVs are having more collisions so whatever dynamic flaws you are assuming are not contributing to more collisions. SUVs are in as many collisions as saloons and it is safer to be in an SUV than a saloon when those accidents occur.
This entire point is what I assume the below is getting at. You are assuming you can avoid collisions with your superior car and driving skills. You aren't a formula 1 driver weaving in and out of cars in a race. Being able to manoeuvre away from potential incidents is an extremely minimal way of increasing safety and I'd guess that the superior dynamics of a saloon contribute to more accidents than they avoid because of people driving them like a race car instead of driving them safely.
4x4 means there are 4 wheels and 4 wheels are powered. a front wheel drive car would be 4x2 because it has 4 wheels but only 2 are powered.
NYboro
Well-known member
How many 3 wheel cars, or, for that matter, 6 wheel cars are around these days?
SmallTown
Well-known member
It's not assumptions though, it's simple physics isn't it? Any object with more weight and a higher centre of gravity is inherently less stable. The fact they then need extra safety systems, bigger tyres etc on SUVs make them heavier still. Adding to the poor economy.
I would disagree that improved braking and ability to avoid collisions is "minimal" with regards to safety. I'm not assuming any driving skill other than you are awake and alert enough to see the hazard which should be a minimum.
SmallTown
Well-known member
probably just this one
The Mercedes-Benz G63 AMG 6x6: The declaration of independence
The G 63 AMG 6X6 embodies a perfect synthesis of uncompromising extravagance and technical perfection.
www.mercedes-benz.com
Rofesleg
Well-known member
I suppose it gets the message across in a way people recognise. If it was just expressed as '4' it wouldn't be as obvious what it referred to.
Although some cars use 4WD instead I suppose. And then there is AWD, but that is a different beast.
Glover_elbow
Well-known member
Why do people buy sports cars and not use them exclusively to race. Come to think of it why do stupid middle age blokes dress like tour de france competitors in lycra when cycling to work.
The_Lizards_Jumpers
Well-known member
Because it's more comfrtable and practical than cycling in your work clothes in many cases. Plenty of people also dont do that.
Lots of bigger vehicles like buses, pickups, large vans have 3 (or more axles). It's actually to do with the number of axle points rather than wheels and a lorry with double wheels at the rear (1 axle front with 1 wheel each, 2 axles at the back with 2 wheels each but only power at the front could be a 6x2 even if it has 10 wheels.
We're talking about safety, not economy. It doesn't matter whether you disagree or not. The stats show that the number of collisions involving SUVs or Saloons is about the same and if you have a collision it is safer to be in an SUV than it is a saloon so your whole argument about perceived safety is incorrect because SUVs are safer than saloons. You can move on and start defending some other position on why SUVs are dreadful but you have already lost out on driving position and safety.
They aren't as fun to drive, they don't look as good and they are less economical. You can have those but practicality, safety and driving position go to SUVs and so I think that is enough for people being able to justify making the decision to buy an SUV over a saloon if that is the choice they have decided to make.
Colgates_shaving_foam
Well-known member
tripleheader
Well-known member
Well I drive a Honda CRV, it's probably the most comfortable car I have owned. It's easy to get in and out of, lots of boot space and reasonably economical. It's a hybrid so less poluting in some urban situations. It pulls away in 4WD and when road conditions require it to, it will remain in 4WD. It has very good ground clearance and rates highly in reliability and for customer satisfaction. In my pleasure time I need a vehicle which offers what this car does and takes me to those places I need to be. So I can justify why I have a car like this on my drive If I ever had to.
hobblewobble
Active member
So long as the eco warriors don't target it!
JustTheGent
Well-known member
I'll just come back in here, gents.
We know that a very small % of people might need a vehicle with off road capability, but that really isn't the issue is it. We're talking about approx 50% of new vehicles sold been of the SUV inclination. Why is this?
Of course, we know that SUVs on average are less aerodynamic, heavier, less fuel efficient and present a greater danger on the roads. People might say they need more space, but there's no evidence for this. Families are getting smaller and vehicles have long been making good use of boot and rear space, they provide enough space for most people.
I think the worst culprits are people who have vehicles such Range Rover, Volvo XC90, BMW X5 and so on. These are almost never used for off-road capability and are idiotically used on suburban roads, often for doing the school run and driving to the shops. I think some jail time would do some of these imbeciles good.
Some of the smaller crossover offerings aren't quite so bad, but they still don't make sense. Apart from I'd say when something with greater ground clearance might improve access to the vehicle. But if this was the case you'd be much better off going for something in a minivan format or similar to a Golf SV. The Skoda Yeti was also a vehicle that made sense - compact but designed to be very useful.
In terms of Wagatha Christie, Rooney's wife was posting out her info to 300 people and then said it was getting leaked. That didn't make sense at the time and still doesn't.
We know that a very small % of people might need a vehicle with off road capability, but that really isn't the issue is it. We're talking about approx 50% of new vehicles sold been of the SUV inclination. Why is this?
Of course, we know that SUVs on average are less aerodynamic, heavier, less fuel efficient and present a greater danger on the roads. People might say they need more space, but there's no evidence for this. Families are getting smaller and vehicles have long been making good use of boot and rear space, they provide enough space for most people.
I think the worst culprits are people who have vehicles such Range Rover, Volvo XC90, BMW X5 and so on. These are almost never used for off-road capability and are idiotically used on suburban roads, often for doing the school run and driving to the shops. I think some jail time would do some of these imbeciles good.
Some of the smaller crossover offerings aren't quite so bad, but they still don't make sense. Apart from I'd say when something with greater ground clearance might improve access to the vehicle. But if this was the case you'd be much better off going for something in a minivan format or similar to a Golf SV. The Skoda Yeti was also a vehicle that made sense - compact but designed to be very useful.
To be fair, the RAV4 is a brilliant vehicle. You've got to be a bit more forgiving to Toyota and Honda owners.
In terms of Wagatha Christie, Rooney's wife was posting out her info to 300 people and then said it was getting leaked. That didn't make sense at the time and still doesn't.
atypical_boro
Well-known member
In fairness, shorts are no good in winter, and baggy trousers keep getting in the chain so you need something a little tighter/warmer, at least on your bottom half.
SmallTown
Well-known member
I actually like shorts in the winter. As long as your core is warm you can cycle in shorts all year round
MolteniArcore
Well-known member
The argument that you can see over hedges in SUV’s is a great one. You can. But then you need that ability because if another car is coming you have to slow right down, or even stop as your big SUV takes up too much road space.
Two saloon cars don’t need to do this as much.
I get this every day driving on the country roads near me. As soon as you come across an SUV you both have to slow to a near stop to get past each other. And none of these go off road, they are far too clean!!!
Two saloon cars don’t need to do this as much.
I get this every day driving on the country roads near me. As soon as you come across an SUV you both have to slow to a near stop to get past each other. And none of these go off road, they are far too clean!!!
Why stop at saloon cars?
Two small hatchback cars would possibly take up even less space than two saloons, much like two smart cars would take up less room than the two hatchbacks.
People have a habit of drawing the line of what’s considered reasonable right at the position they’re currently in.
The Ruthsayer
Well-known member
You might do Dahn Sarf ST. It gets a bit nippy across the Moors in winter, even when you’re working hard.