[Closed] why are SUV's so much more popular than estates ?

From

"Pedestrian
Just three sites out of 18 tested on the vehicle's front gave any protection. This is dire, and Land Rover needs to
improve matters."

I run my petrol 4x4 on LPG and use waste veg oil in the diesel one 🙂
I know its have a go at 4x4 & SUV time but all the points made about size, consumption etc are equally applicable to those that choose to run around in T4s, T5s and other vans/campers so why are they not getting some of the stick?

Go faster stripes.... Any data for t4 and t5?

Meanwhile what him above says. Veg oil in my 30 year old diesel. And i use much more efficient vehicle most of the year for most of the jobs i need a car for- on top of that i cycle on a day to day basis as i hate sitting in traffic.

Men also choose to try to impress the ladies with intellectualism, aestheticism, pragmatism, neo-luddism and occasionally wilful ignorance or even basic stupidity

It's all willy-waving boys, whether you're aware of it or not

c'mon........... group hug

Err because most T4, T5 and other vans are actually used for sleeping/camping in, or to carry a whole load of work stuff. Most SUV's, especially the fashionable soft reader types, serve absolutely no practical purpose other than to allow the rest of us drivers to quickly and easily spot the self absorbed bell-ends around us on the road!

For a laugh we keep a score when driving. The humble Skoda Yeti would score low on the scale as they are not too flashy and are normally driven by well meaning old folk. Something like a white Macan or RR Sport with blacked out windows and all the chrome accessories from the options list would score a full 10 points on the cockometer. You can be sure that such a vehicle is driven by perhaps one of the most obnoxious and cretinous individuals you're ever likely to come across.

You cannot judge a persons encironmental impact or credentials based on the car they drive, they may do fewer miles (as above), drive more carefully, not keep their central heating turned up so high etc etc

Over a cars lifetime its total environmental impact has not that much to do with mpg, the manufacture and lack of recycling are more material. Personally I think it will be shown that all diesel cars are worse for the environment than their petrol equivalent anyway.

@agent why don't you start taking pictures of these white Macan's you keep seeing. All the ones I've seen (dozen plus ?) or are owned by friends are in dark metallic colours, one uses hers to tow the horse box to dressage events

see.... now there's a guy using intellectualism to assert his masculinity 🙂

oops! ninja edit: and wealth and power (by association) 😆

see.... now there's a guy using intellectualism to assert his masculinity

😆

you show 'em Jamba

I'm starting on that painting next week BTW if you're still interested..

You cannot judge a persons encironmental impact or credentials based on the car they drive, they may do fewer miles (as above), drive more carefully, not keep their central heating turned up so high etc etc

one good friend users hers to tow the horse box to dressage events

yunki - Member
Men also choose to try to impress the ladies with intellectualism, aestheticism, pragmatism, neo-luddism and occasionally wilful ignorance or even basic stupidity

It's all willy-waving boys, whether you're aware of it or not

Just wear a kilt.

No need to wave anything - in fact, inadvisable. 🙂

@agent why don't you start taking pictures of these white Macan's you keep seeing. All the ones I've seen (dozen plus ?) or are owned by friends are in dark metallic colours, one uses hers to tow the horse box to dressage events

Heaven help us all if I start taking pictures of people driving their white SUV's! Most owners already seem to think that they're more important than anyone else without me inflating their egos any further by giving them the paperazi treatment.

From how most seem to be driven, they are skill compensators

I don't feel safe in a Micra, Civic etc, so I'll get a huge 2 ton lump and then I'll be safer

I've 350bhp of two seat sports car for that

And a very nice one too.

VW T5 - [url= http://euroncap.blob.core.windows.net/media/6102/euroncap_vw_t5_2013_4stars.pdf ]Pedestrian 32%[/url]

"HEAD 9,8 pts
PELVIS pts
LEG O pts"

"Pedestrian
The bumper provided poor protection to pedestrians' legs and scored no points in this area. Most of the bonnet surface provided protection that ranged between poor and marginal though good results were recorded on the windscreen.
"

What you mean is (as per most people) you don't like the real reasons behind your purchasing choices being analysed and exposed... like most, you find it challenging to admit your need for status, which is fair enough IMO

It's a yeti, that's a Skoda. On lease.

The reason - it was cheap on lease and I do very few miles and it's a suitable vehicle for what I do.

Now would you care to forward me your receipts so I can check the credentials of your purchases (or rentals) please or did you just wake up in a forest last night?

I think there's about 20-25cm between my last estate and current SUV.

So only 20cm to join a whole all other category of dumb-ass.

Good job I didn't buy an estate and put a roof box on it? Or some bikes - I wonder if some of you estate drivers make your cars a tad more inefficient by leaving a roof rack on...

Serious bit: a few years ago a local chap was screaming towards my mum at 80mph on the wrong side of the road. Hit her head on... Now she was in a RAV4. She survived and I'm glad for that. The other driver didn't.

Sure he could've been in an SUV too that day but clearly the law abiding sensible one was driving the most suitable car that afternoon. I think she was getting around 37mpg at the time.

Err because most T4, T5 and other vans are actually used for sleeping/camping in, or to carry a whole load of work stuff.

Purchase choice shock.

I've slept in a previous CRV and carry work stuff in it. I don't know if I've made the nob category? I could've purchased a T4 ... or stayed in b&b's so I could eat properly and sleep properly.

I particularly enjoyed the comment about people with a sense of self entitlement etc. FFS...what a cock!

For the record the most popular SUV on our roads is a Nissan Qashqai 2WD with with a highly economical 1.5L Diesel engine. (Not me btw) but why the hate?

Live and let live.

I'm considering a Vitara for my next vehicle.

I'd like a tidy estate car but the roads I use are pretty rough in places, shame really as I'd really of liked a 325/330 Touring.

@ grum. Good point that, having a dog or children is way more damaging for the environment than an SUV/Veto/T5 (or similar). You should also consider that any travel abroad by plane just once a year is worse than the above. So you regular visitors to Spain with your bike, think on yo u selfish cyclists. Also shipping by sea is the dirtiest form of transport that there is, that's how almost all of your clean bike technology gets to the UK. Let's not forget that the meat production around the world is very wasteful and has a massive track record of environmental damage, just so you can have your cheap burger. Then there's those selfish veggies making sure that their need for protein is supplied by soya that's shipped in from the recently destroyed rain forests of South America. We humans are all responsible especially the middle class wingers who actually can't be a..ed to do anything but moan on forums.

Don't moan make the charges for. Sake of the environment. It'll make no difference as whatever you do will be whipped out by what happens in China, India, Australia, the USA, Russia and our own blessed country. You should do it any way.

Am off out now to collect some wood in the Landrover.

No the dirtiest form of transport their is a single occupancy car traveling 10 miles through heavy traffic to work and back daily.

In terms of tonne miles ships are actually pretty clean.

Air cargo – 1.319 kg CO2e per Ton-Mile
Truck - 0.14645 kg CO2e per Ton-Mile
Train - 0.0242 kg CO2e per Ton-Mile
Sea freight - 0.0602 kg CO2e per Ton-Mile

Those stats are pretty skewed - aircraft don't carry that much tonnage of freight - usually low density/weight but high volume stuff and I bet they're not counting passengers as cargo and that is the main reason aircraft fly as most air fright and air cargo is flown as underbelly freight on passenger aircraft. Cargo ships are usually dedicated bulk carriers and carry many thousands of times more tones of freight than an aircraft. When all is said and done aircraft only produce about 2% of total man-made CO2 emissions - far less than domestic heating and energy generation, road transport and just about any other form of mechanised fossil fuel based transportation. Airports and the transport infrastructure that gets passengers to and from the airports produce more CO2's than aircraft do.

"most air fright and air cargo is flown as underbelly freight on passenger aircraft"

depends how define most around 60% could be considered just over half

Fedex have over 400 planes, UPS over 200

All i know when we have to ship kit via antenov cargo plane its horrendously eye watteringly crippling expensive. Compared to shipping it via the sea.

( our gear is 40-60ft long and many tonnes)

Even the fattest gentleman in his vehicle driving to work - with his biggest lunch pail---- cant be returning good ton miles for his co2 emissions

This thread reminds me of Steve Peat's excellent movie 🙂

Two wrongs don't make a right!

There not two wrongs, there's lots of wrongs and nothing is making it right. We can moan on about others choices but what's important is what are we doing as individuals to change things. The staring point is perhaps to be less critical of others and look at ourselves first.

What he said

'Moaning' on the internet (ie expressing an opinion that you don't like) and 'looking at ourselves' are not mutually exclusive things, amazingly enough.

Grum I agree. Now I'll moan a bit, it bloody raining and its time go out and feed the hens.

I do look at myself- I've aleays chosen a small car, this year I've chosen a new job that is close enough for me to commute to by bike, I always walk to the local shops instead of driving a mile each way like most people. I'm not perfect but I do look at myself - as well as at others 😉

I recall a bmj article some years ago which found a correlation between driving a 4x4 and using mobile phone whilst doing so. A colleague at the time who chose to drive old defenders so he could play off road at the weekend was most defensive.

Conclusions The level of non-compliance with the law on the use of hand held mobile phones by drivers in London is high, as is non-compliance with the law on seat belts. Drivers of four wheel drive vehicles were four times more likely than drivers of other cars to be seen using hand held mobile phones and slightly more likely not to comply with the law on seat belts.

http://www.bmj.com/content/333/7558/71

The environment doesn't care if you're more or less polluting than another STW forum user. We all need to minimise where we can.

The point about SUV is that barring medical issues and off-road use, there's really no point at all. An estate would pretty much do, and be 30%-50% better on fuel. That's a lot of fuel to be wasted for vanity. And yes, there are other ways to waste fuel.

Petroleum is incredibly valuable for a whole lot of reasons, from engineering materials to drugs to industrial chemicals. There's a limited supply on this planet. Burning it is pretty wasteful. Burning more of it when there's a perfectly reasonable alternative with no real down sides is idiotic. That goes for everything, not just cars.

And pointing out where someone else is also doing wrong does not let you off the hook, so save your breath. I'm not saying this because I want to be better than anyone, or to start some kind of fight; I'm saying it because it's true. I'm probably worse than half the forum, I admit, but that still doesn't make this post wrong.

@molgrips you and the rest of us are going round in circles. There are a number of instances where on-road / soft-road the ground clearance of an SUV/proper 4x4 is useful and they are generally better for towing including being able to see out the back over the top of a normal/low trailer. If we are going to get into moralising about saving the planet there will be a whole long list of things which are more relevant than SUV vs estate-car

Anyway, back to the ranch!
SUVs or crossovers or whatever you want to call them are more than likely more popular at the moment due to advertising & marketing - when was the last time you saw an estate car being advertised on tv or elsewhere? It's all down to what the manufacturers want to sell the great unwashed - for a while they pushed MPVs, people carriers, breedwagons and to be honest the last time I remember being aware of estates being pushed was back in the Volvo 740/940 days then when Volvo used a T5 estate in the BTCC.
Personally I'm not a great fan of SUVs - yes I have a 4x4 ( or 2 🙂 ) but I have my reasons for that - but I do understand why they are popular - the one i dont get is the Nissan Juke - it must be one of the ugliest cars I have ever seen and I cant get my head around someone walking into a dealers and saying wow, I must spend a huge amount of my hard earned cash on such a fabulous vehicle.
Wouldn't be much fun if we were all the same - I just have to accept the fact that there are a lot of peasants out there with no taste 🙂

There are a number of instances where on-road / soft-road the ground clearance of an SUV/proper 4x4 is useful

YES AND I ACKNOWLEDGED THIS.

If we are going to get into moralising about saving the planet there will be a whole long list of things which are more relevant than SUV vs estate-car

I also acknowledged this. But it's one of the more vacuous, pointless and visible things. And also very specifically the subject of this thread. Hence it's discussion.

I think folk overestimate their need for a 4wd vehicle.

All you really need is a limited slip diff and slightly longer suspension for almost all conditions you'll meet on the road.

Genuine offroad* is a different story, but when I lived in Oz and had over 350 miles of dirt road to the nearest tarmac, the most favoured vehicle was a ute with the "country pack" equipped as above. It was only visiting city folk who drove the fancy 4wds.

*ie no road.

The point about SUV is that barring medical issues and off-road use, there's really no point at all. An estate would pretty much do, and be 30%-50% better on fuel.

Repeat after me. An SUV is a 25cm higher estate. 🙂

The mistake here is to deride all SUVS and champion all Estates.

Quite clearly - like the new qashqai - very economical and plenty efficient at one end just as there are fast and greedy estates at the other.

And then there's how you drive. Probably the biggest influence.

The point about SUV is that barring medical issues and off-road use, there's really no point at all. An estate would pretty much do, and be 30%-50% better on fuel. That's a lot of fuel to be wasted for vanity. And yes, there are other ways to waste fuel

Same engine as in my previous Fabia Estate as my Yeti. The Yeti is 1.2DSG, Fab 1.2 manual. There's about 10% MPG between them and the Yeti is still new.

And then there's how you drive. Probably the biggest influence.

My understanding is that manufacturers make greater profits out of SUVs so they advertise them heavily, and make them desirable. Personally I tend towards not being keen on SUVs, but then I mostly drive a LWB T5.1 lifestyle vehicle 😳
I do mostly cycle to work and to the shops though 😕

Re: safety - Yes, I know it's not an SUV, but an SUV version is available - I know which vehicle I'd rather have been in when this happened. All 4 occupants hospitalised, one seriously (coma). I went home to my Mrs and daughter straight after the event.

[img] [/img]

You are like someone eating a Quarter Pounder sneering at someone eating a Big Mac for eating unhealthily

No, cos I'm not sneering at anyone. Just pointing something out. I'm not the one going on about penis extensions, little man syndrome and the like.