Forum menu
OK call me obtuse but I really don't get it. I don't get why people are driving around towns and cities in 2 tonne vehicles. I feel like 1/3 vehicles are 4x4s now and for someone who is really worried about the environment, air pollution, climate change and how we define urban space, I just can't fathom them. I rarely see them driven by more than a single person - do they make drivers feel important, safe, powerful? What's the reason behind their popularity?
Image but some are actually very roomy too.
I doubt they're much worse than my Mondeo for the environment, but somehow a Mondeo doesn't matter? Is an SUV worse than a T5 ? Or a Transit Connect?
Apart from saying "less people should drive cars" I'm not really getting your point?
It's entirely fashion. People keep buying then so car manufacturers keep making them.
Unless you live up a track or on a farm, need one for work or tow big stuff you don't need one. The most popular ones, the Nissan Qashqais and VW Tiguans, are about the same size inside as a Golf but use more metal to make, more fuel to go and take up more space just so people can sit 3" higher. And they drive worse than the equivalent hatch.
The fact that most people would be better off with an hatchback, or an estate if you really must carry lots of things or have too many children, seems to be totally lost on them.
I have a similar ire for people who seem to think they need to drive a van doing 32mpg around everywhere, all the time, because once a week they like to put their bike in the back instead of on the roof of a hatchback that'd do the job of being a car a million percent better the rest of the time.
Although you could extend your argument to "why are cars so popular when there's a climate emergency". And you'd be right to do so.
they make drivers feel important, safe, powerful? What’s the reason behind their popularity?
I doubt they’re much worse than my Mondeo for the environment,
They can be a fair bit worse yes. 30-40% more CO2 emissions. Ok so it's not going to solve the problem overnight if everyone stopped buying them, but nothing is - we just need to be efficiency minded <i>all the time</i>.
If you can convince yourself that buying an SUV doesn't matter, then you probably won't give a crap about any of the rest of it, so your carbon footprint is going to be big. If you run a company, your company's carbon footprint is going to be big, and it'll demonstrate to all the people who work for it and its customers that it's all bullshit and none of it matters.
Big buildings are made of small bricks.
Although you could extend your argument to “why are cars so popular when there’s a climate emergency”. And you’d be right to do so.
Moving your life to one without cars is going to be pretty difficult for most people. The point about SUVs is that it's utterly needless - for most people, a large vehicle offers absolutely nothing whatsoever other than vanity. A small hybrid would do the exact same job for half the fuel. That's why it's so egregious; it would be the easiest thing in the world to save a chunk of emissions, but it matters so little to them they can't even choose a more aerodynamic car of equal comfort and quality for no real loss.
Hmm, maybe it's just a question of ignorance then? The science says that SUV's are the second leading rise in emissions and have totally negated all emissions saved from EV's, which is pretty incredible in my opinion. Apparently, if SUV's were a nation, they'd rank of the seventh most polluting in the world. As a sidenote, you're also twice as likely to die if you're hit by one - but then as a society I guess we're not basing our consumer habits on rationality?
Im convinced it’s because love being able to see further / over other cars etc due to the higher seating position. Maybe a feeling of safety coming from that?
This is further backed up by the popularity of cross overs which are essentially jacked up hatch backs.
Probably because the majority of the population aren't falling for this 'climate change emergency' scaremongering.
I suspect it has a lot to do with being bigger than the average car and a perception of coming out better in a motor vehicle collision.
And being able to run over cyclists and claim you didn't feel a thing. 😉
Image, thats it,.... and most people won't accept theres a climate emergency.
Try spending a week in the US, your brain would melt at the sheer madness of their denial, which they express in 4 tonne pick ups. Actually I drive a T6 (carefully) for work, but when I'm not working, its the bike for me with panniers for the shopping, and my wife drives a SUV, a Skoda Karoq, 1.0ltr petrol, admittedly the classic Octavia Est would have been a better choice.
Probably because the majority of the population aren’t falling for this ‘climate change emergency’ scaremongering.
Yeah they’re fed up with ‘experts’ making them feel bad about themselves...
We are all active participants in the Ecocide.
Mrs Dubs has limited flexion in her left knee. Getting into a "normal" car is an issue so we have a cross over (Kuga).
That wasn't a reason to buy it 8 years ago, but it is a reason to keep it. The 4WD also helps getting out of a muddy field the few times we need to, but it's increasingly becoming less of a use case for us. The higher position used to be helpful, not so much now that everybody is driving something similar.
As the Kuga car becomes more expensive to run*, we'll start looking at hybrid or EV options, or potentially an electric scooter / minicar option for local journeys and hiring when we need a big car (or we buy a Kombi van and leave it in the street 300 days of the year).
*We'll be in the low emissions zone in a couple of years time.
Why is my SUV that does 50mpg worse environmentally than a performance hot hatch doing 25? UK SUVs are far more economical than the US/Gulf state monsters.
Every car above the cheapest 4 seater is just vanity, but the haterz will hate.
Probably because the majority of the population aren’t falling for this ‘climate change emergency’ scaremongering.
I agree, this is exactly the cause - many people are, in fact, blithering idiots.
Alot of vehicles people think of as as SUVs are nothing of the sort, they are slightly raised and have a different body shell, usually making them bigger inside. Most aren't 4wd. Fuel economy / emissions are the important bit not what it looks like. We have a Touran, it's a people carrier rather than an SUV, can easily get 60mpg indicated out of it, it's boring as hell but very practical, not really much difference from an SUV.
Hybrids should be banned in my opinion, lots more resources to make and the environmental gains are marginal at best with the way many people use them. We need full EV combined with renewable electricity production, even coal fired electricity generation is probably cleaner than an ICE engine.
It's just fashionable to bash people who own SUV shaped vehicles.
We have a Touran. They are just what estate cars mutated into. I don’t think they are what anyone refers to as an SUV (although they are still heavy polluters).
Probably because the majority of the population aren’t falling for this ‘climate change emergency’ scaremongering.
Hybrids should be banned in my opinion, lots more resources to make and the environmental gains are marginal at best with the way many people use them
I wouldn't say banned, I know a guy with a plug in hybrid says he got a message on his dash warning him his petrol might go off (normal day to day all on electric) I would ban the ridiculous plug ins that have a ridiculously low range they must just be a tax dodge. But I would reckon a decent estate has as much room as an SUV plus probably gives a few more MPG due to wind resistance.
Wife is getting well into the 40mpg's in her X3 and it's full. on Euro 6 ad blue ram packed with complex exhaust scrubbing technology that will actually shorten the life span of the car when the fancy tech ages and starts to go wrong and the car becomes uneconomical to repair and be scrapped long before it's time. There will be no future bangernomics coming from today's super efficient cars. Their lifespans will be cut way shorter than previous gen cars and replaced with 'more efficient' and un-recyclable carbon fibre battery packed EV's. But for now at least her X3 is more fuel efficient than my old T5 (now gone but was getting mid 30's at best), better than the SMax before than (38ish mpg) and my petrol Golf before that, so as a family our carbon footprint is coming down.
As to it being a fashion item...well yes I suppose it is, but so what. She could have gone for any number of vehicles that were not SUV's and similarly as efficient and also fit the brief of being economical, practical and large enough, but then you've also got to like it too and it's what she liked.
In any case MPG is irrelevant unless you consider it in conjunction with the number of miles you drive. People love to waffle on about how un-environmentally friendly supercars are when they account for about 6% of all driving miles done so have absolutely sweet FA impact on the environment. People love to look at private jets and point their gnarly fingers when they account for a similarly pathetic share of flying hours flown and contribute similarly sweet FA to CO2 emissions. The combination of the wife's X3 actually being a very fuel efficient car and the fact she is not a high mileage driver means the CO2 output is negligible and way down on the list of things we do that impact the environment the most. And certainly better than that high mileage driver in a slightly more fuel efficient hybrid vehicle virtue singling when they actually emit more CO2 than most people.
We all need to do our bit for the environment, but whipping up a sense of panic will only cause bad emotionally driven choices to be made that will hamper any serious efforts to reduce CO2 emissions. Like switching to electricity suppliers that are 'sustainable' but actually contribute sweet FA to the R&D into the new renewable technologies that will actually save the planet unlike the big energy giants that each invest hundreds of millions or billions of pounds every year in development of new sustainable tech and will make all the difference. Better to buy your energy form the big corporations and support the R&D into the new technologies.
Why is my SUV that does 50mpg worse environmentally than a performance hot hatch doing 25?
Because when you bought it, there was a perfectly acceptable alternative that gave you the same performance, same engine and same space that was a few inches lower, used less of the world's resources to make and fuel and would have saved you money. You should have bought whatever hatchback or estate was built by the manufacturer of your SUV on the same platform.
The equivalent argument would apply to anyone who bought an Audi SQ3 fast SUV instead of a Golf GTI in your hot hatch example. While hot hatches aren't great for the world the SUV version of them is always worse for the planet. And anyway, a lot of hot hatchbacks are now going hybrid or full electric (the new Octavia VRS and Peugeot 208 GTI as an example of each).
Because other than virtue signalling most people don't care. I haven't noticed any reduction in demand for long haul holidays for example.
In the news this morning. SNP govt set target in 2010 for cycle journeys to increase from 3% to 10% of all journeys by 2020. Result? Up to 4%.
Worldwide energy use, mostly non renewable, continues to climb every year. I don't think anyone is letting any emergency get in the way of their lifestyle.
Hybrids should be banned in my opinion, lots more resources to make and the environmental gains are marginal at best with the way many people use them
My current long term average MPG is just below 80mpg the equivalent diesel I had was 56mpg long term. I’d say that’s a big more than a little gain.
But then it’s edgy to knock EVs and Hybrids.
OK call me obtuse but I really don’t get it. I don’t get why people are driving around towns and cities in 2 tonne vehicles. I feel like 1/3 vehicles are 4x4s now and for someone who is really worried about the environment, air pollution, climate change and how we define urban space, I just can’t fathom them. I rarely see them driven by more than a single person – do they make drivers feel important, safe, powerful? What’s the reason behind their popularity?
I reckon you're just seeing what you want to see. As said above, pretty sure no SUV's are fulltime 4WD, most vehicles that you label as SUV's nowadays will be 2WD only. Fairly close to being as efficient as an equivalent hatchback.
Very few people will own an SUV because it makes them feel important or powerful. There's far better candidates for that.
I'm not sure what they've got ot do with how we define urban space either- unless you're referring to single occupant vehicles? I may be wrong, but I don't think that single occupancy is confined to SUV's.
I do get where you're coming from, but I think your targetting is off.
for someone who is really worried about... ... how we define urban space
What does this mean?
Need the ground clearance, have you seen the state on the entrance to the Peaslake car park?
The equivalent argument would apply to anyone who bought an Audi SQ3 fast SUV instead of a Golf GTI in your hot hatch example. While hot hatches aren’t great for the world the SUV version of them is always worse for the planet. And anyway, a lot of hot hatchbacks are now going hybrid or full electric (the new Octavia VRS and Peugeot 208 GTI as an example of each).
And this is another ill thought out statement. If you're going to profess environmental concerns there's no need for a "hot hatch" of any flavour- whichever way you cut it, they'll always be more detrimental to the environment than more utilitarian vehicles. It's hyprocritical to defend ownership of the vehicles you like while sniping at other peoples fancies.
Why is my SUV that does 50mpg worse environmentally than a performance hot hatch doing 25?
Because, take the same engine and technology from that SUV and put it into a smaller lighter more aerodynamic package and it will do 60mpg. Collectively this makes a huge difference to overall emissions, and would likely work out much more affordable to the consumer than an oversize chintz wagon.
And anyway, you can get modern hot hatches, think Fiesta ST, that will give high 40's if unprovoked - and most SUV's on the road do nothing close to 50mpg in reality, more like 30MPG.
In my opinion car manufacturers need strict legislation to bring SUV numbers down and invest in the most environmental options possible, the public have more than shown they're incapable of making responsible decisions themselves...by all means get an SUV the size of a bus if you're a farmer or need it for work, but make it so you need a special license for your planet killer, school run moms do not need them.
Because they are unwilling to make the required change in their lifestyles, which is to drive less and either a)travel less or b)use public transport or bike or walk.
The fact they are in an SUV is not that relevant - it will be no better for the planet if everybody switched to an EV, but people don’t seem to get that yet!
And anyway, you can get modern hot hatches, think Fiesta ST, that will give high 40’s if unprovoked – and most SUV’s on the road do nothing close to 50mpg in reality, more like 30MPG.
Real mpg for the ST suggests high 30's.
There's no justification for the ST to exist though, is there- just the same as the SUV, it's a waste of resources, and should be limited to the 1.0 or whatever the entry level engine is.
I bought my SUV primarily to annoy strangers on the internet.
I’m calling that a success.
The issue is that 'SUV's' are tall slab fronted vehicles compared to a hatchback or estate. As a result they are always going to be less economical due to this reduced efficiency and their increased weight.
Average CO2 emissions are now rising because even though cars are more efficient than they were, the increase in the number of SUVs has led to an overall increase in emissions.
The fact the manufacturers keep on making more and more SUV models shows how they really couldn't give a toss about the environment.
Why do people buy fat bikes ?
Why do people have more that one bike ?
Why change your bike every couple of years?
It’s all fashion - and we all consume either as urban groovers or neo-hippies.
In any case MPG is irrelevant unless you consider it in conjunction with the number of miles you drive.
Not really, the two things are independent. No matter how few miles you drive, you'd still use less fuel in a more efficient car. SUVs are just a waste, end of.
, school run moms do not need them.
Ridiculous statement. How else would they clog up the areas around school, half parked or fully parked on the pavement. Or leave them sticking out so you can’t get through the gap, or indeed refusing to drive through the gap that the T6 has just driven through as they think their vehicle is too wide *
* true story bro
Funny that.
There was a thread on here a few weeks back, a well known poster who is generally ridiculed tbh, was asking about buying a Porsche.
No one bothered about climate change.
Now that IS a pointless car.
I have a similar ire for people who seem to think they need to drive a van doing 32mpg around everywhere, all the time, because once a week they like to put their bike in the back instead of on the roof of a hatchback that’d do the job of being a car a million percent better the rest of the time.
This.
Don't get me wrong, my "daily" is an MPV but only gets used for occasional load lugging. If cheap van hire existed locally I'd be shot of it tomorrow. Don't get me started on vanlife.
I think if you compare a few SUV's against say a saloon car, you'll find they are the same weight, slightly shorter and use about the same fuel (or better). My wife's Qashqai is lighter and shorter than my saloon, and better on fuel (as it's alot newer). It not a monster Q7 or anything like that.
It’s not up to me to fix the climate! I’ve got children to drop off at school and a meeting at 8:30!
Probably because the majority of the population aren’t falling for this ‘climate change emergency’ scaremongering.
Username checks out.
They are easier to get in and out of and they are easier to get a child in a child seat. I’m not suggesting that these things are more important than reducing emissions.
as an aside, the move to turbo engines to reduce emissions is insane. I had a v6 engine in a car the was more economical around than the 4 cylinder turbo that I have now.
I think if you compare a few SUV’s against say a saloon car, you’ll find they are the same weight, slightly shorter and use about the same fuel (or better)
No. Every study I've seen shows that the above is not true, often 20% more harmful is realistic....and the Qashqai...wasn't this the one that when tested produced 17 times the NOX emissions.
Sadly it's complicated as this shows...it's not going in the right direction for most cars...
https://www.driving.co.uk/news/modern-engines-worse-planet-better-lungs-says-study/
It’s hyprocritical to defend ownership of the vehicles you like while sniping at other peoples fancies.
Steady now- I'll admit I have owned and thoroughly enjoyed hot hatches (although they were superminis that did 40mpg rather than bigger full fat 300bhp things) but I sold the last one. We decided to make the right choice for the world in light of the emerging immediacy of the climate crisis and go down to one car, and the hot hatch was the one that was worse for the environment so it went. We've made the effort to cut down our mileage by cycling and using public transport and so we do 3,000 miles a year in our 1.0l (non turbo so it actually gets the claimed mpg), 60mpg, 1,000kg supermini. I did more miles on my bike last year. If we didn't already own it then we'd probably go for a car share scheme. I'd have another hot hatch but only if it's full electric like the new 208, but I intend to keep the current car until it's dead, because building a brand new car is inherently worse for the environment than keeping one that already exists going. So I practice what I preach.
To be honest, I've always thought anyone driving anything bigger than a Golf has made the wrong choice, in terms of vehicle and/or their lifestyle. And all SUVs fall into that category.
My wife’s Qashqai is lighter and shorter than my saloon, and better on fuel (as it’s alot newer).
That's because it's built on a Renault Mégane platform, and it's 125kg heavier than one of them, longer, wider, taller and does 6mpg less than the Megane. You've got to compare apples with apples, comparing it with a saloon isn't equal, and just because it's better than a big old car you already have doesn't make it the best choice available now. She should have a Mégane.
Compare SUV to the equivalent non SUV version. Let's say q5 Vs A4 or Q3 and A3 and it is clear that the equivalent impact is about 10-20% more weight and about 10-15% increase in co2 kg/km. Yes they have a bit more head room and marginally bigger boots. But they are just bigger for the same car. If you go for the more powerful engine it looks like the difference is smaller.
There was a thread on here a few weeks back, a well known poster who is generally ridiculed tbh, was asking about buying a Porsche.
No one bothered about climate change.
Now that IS a pointless car.
Or an adult can make their own decision about what they do with their own life?
@fossy what saloon are you comparing against?
If it's not like for like then there is no comparison.
If you were comparing something based on the same platform then that's a valid comparison however you would be proven wrong on all counts were that the case. You cannot build something with a higher drag coefficient using more materials and end up with something lighter and more efficient.
Or an adult can make their own decision about what they do with their own life?
they have in the past...but will they continue to be able to do so in order to battle climate catastrophe? This is a loaded question.
The peeps who purchase SUV's are offered very attractive finance packages to do so.
It's not all bad news. With global warming it will be too expensive to sit inside an SUV with the air-con at max, thus encouraging their owners to commute by e-bike.
Comparing it against the car it replaced - the Qashqai replaced the Primera - we've got both. Both are petrol as well, mine 1.8 118 PS, Qashqai 1.6. - same PS although less torque. It's lighter than my car, but has similar dimensions. The diesel in Nissans are quite dirty.
Where my saloon is far better on the motorway and A roads for handling, the Qashqai handles the pot hole strewn roads in town far more comfortably - the suspension is noticably beefier than my car despite the similar weights.
As others have said, there are other advantages - two trail bikes go in the back with front wheel off (lay down), easy to get in and out (I've got a bad back) can chuck a kingsize divan in the back.
Plenty of folk rattle round in vans and pickups, who definately don't need one.
Capitalism, Consumerism, Convenience.
People want to make money, spend money & display money.
Until there's a significant change in the above nowt's gonna get better.
It's ironic that peoples aversion to change will ultimately end up in the sort of drastic change that they wished they had done something to avoid.
Quite simply, status and ignorance.
You can't drive your 5 bed detached house around town so how else can you let people know your stretched to the hilt financially? Well drive a big 4x4 on PCP of course.
To be honest my 12-14mpg petrol coupe that I drive at weekends probably kills more baby robins than the 25mpg diesel Discovery that I drive for the rest of the week, dunno
To be fair, what we drive makes not a fig of difference if we're all going to hell in a handcart.
Hmm, maybe it’s just a question of ignorance then?
Or not giving a toss?
To be honest my 12-14mpg petrol coupe that I drive at weekends probably kills more baby robins than the 25mpg diesel Discovery that I drive for the rest of the week, dunno
See, I know you use your Discovery on some absolute quagmires for work, so that's legitimate.
Your Audi, though, is an environmentally unfriendly (and very dull) folly. But at least you don't use it every day like SUV owners. It's an occasional treat, and in moderation I can see how people justify that sort of thing. Like how I justify the fact that I still eat meat- I don't do it often so I'm not a complete environmental disaster.
Because we are past the point of no return and us driving around in mildly more uneconomical SUV's is not going too make a jot of difference.
Banning the biggest greenhouse emitters* would be the best course of action if you think you're going to stop things getting worse.
*that'll be children.
Or an adult can make their own decision about what they do with their own life?
I was merely pointing out that folk jump on SUV owners, and say **** all about a pointless indulgence. At least you get 5 folk in a SUV.
Ya tit.
See, I know you use your Discovery on some absolute quagmires for work, so that’s legitimate.
Your Audi, though, is an environmentally unfriendly (and very dull) folly.
I've not actually used the Discovery as it should be used, but it may end up on some solar farms this year - it's good for towing a 2 tonne caravan around though!
The Audi - I'd be interested to be able to calculate how much environmental damage it's done over the 7 years of it's life actually, as it's only done 20k - ok, that 20k could have been done in a more environmentally friendly car, but....
And dull? You'll have to come for a spin in it next time you're back in Derbyshire, if your morality will allow you to 😉 It's certainly not dull - have you ever been in one?
I bought my SUV primarily to annoy strangers on the internet.
I’m calling that a success.
Further success would be some sort of ‘climate denial’ & active enjoyment of owning said SUV instead of being wracked with regret
Maybe the question for STW is why so many people own works vans to support a hobby?
At least you get 5 folk in a SUV.
7. Or more specifically in my case, 6 and the dog.
Further success would be some sort of ‘climate denial’ & active enjoyment of owning said SUV instead of being wracked with regret
I fully believe in Climate change but simultaneously enjoy my SUV. It’s red.
Chris Harris has this covered.. 2.25 onwards.
I'm surprised people are defending them as environmentally sound when all the research says that they're responsible for negating any gains made from more efficient engines, EV's and hybrids etc. How can heavier, larger and less aerodynamic vehicles cause less emissions than their opposites? I don't know much about cars but googling 'fuel efficient cars' it's hard to notice not one is an SUV (nor the 'mini' SUV's).
Like I said, which no one has addressed, they're also more dangerous - a) because people take more risks in them because they perceive themselves as being safer (even though SUV's have higher kill rates because the higher center of gravity and b) because of the 'slab' fronts hits children in the face and adults in the upper body instead of lower body/legs. It's interesting to note that fatalities for pedestrians were in decline but this was reversed just around the same time SUV's became popular. I often wonder if SUV drivers had the choice to get hit by a car, they'd still go for an SUV.
I guess there's some just something always appealing to humans about "Bigger and Faster" despite the externalised costs to other road users, the environment, etc. It's interesting to me because I genuinely can't understand people's motivations at times, although I do suspect deep down that it relates to basic human psychology that is manipulated by the big budgetless car makers to sell products - status anxiety, women's fears of protecting their children, etc. I'd honestly see SUV's as the last thing in terms of practicality for our roads but I guess I was wrong lol.
I guess the image of a half a mile of these massive cars, each with one person behind the wheel, which have totally destroyed the verge, all idling away in a cloud of noxious diesel smoke that I see day in day out on my commute is just so ****ing depressing, so it made me curious. Thanks for the input!
There’s no justification for the ST to exist though, is there- just the same as the SUV, it’s a waste of resources
What isn’t a waste? Pretty much every bike owned on here is a waste of resources. Of course, we like them, so they are okay. These threads only ever push the problem to somebody else’s back yard.
Because when you bought it, there was a perfectly acceptable alternative that gave you the same performance, same engine and same space that was a few inches lower, used less of the world’s resources to make and fuel and would have saved you money. You should have bought whatever hatchback or estate was built by the manufacturer of your SUV on the same platform.
Thanks for the finger-wagging lecture, I’ll take it on advisement.
In fact I’ll completely ignore it, and go ahead and replace my ageing Octavia with a crossover SUV.
There is so much bollocks being talked about SUV’s as if every one is a two-three tonne barge with a big V8 doing 16 to the gallon. The vast majority of the SUV’s driven are no different to most saloon/hatchbacks, other than often being significantly shorter, and easier to park, but the most important feature is the higher seating position, which for an increasingly large portion of the population makes a huge difference to getting in and out of a car; it certainly does for me! I’m moving as many as forty to fifty cars a day, and at 65 a lot of the regular cars I really struggle to get in and out of easily, whereas something like a Qashqai, Mokka, Kuga, Sportage I can easily slide into without difficulty. Handling-wise, of course they’re different to a lower hatchback, but so chuffing what, nobody buys one to go tearing around like a bloody boy racer!
My likely replacement for my Octavia is probably going to be a Ford Ecosport, a Fiesta-based crossover, which is perfect for my needs, it’s much shorter than the Octy, a bit taller, likely a fair bit lighter, and with either a 1.0 petrol or 1.5 diesel, which is what I’ll go for - better CO2, innit. Which is another thing, the rising of CO2 levels being blamed an SUV’s - that, I think, is just scapegoating, the real issue is diesel sales have plummeted due to the VW NO emissions cockup in the States, and a rise in the sale of petrol cars, which has meant CO2 levels have gone up, there’s a direct correlation. We get a lot of SUV/crossovers at work, but we get a lot of bigger vehicles, van-derivatives and MPV’s, often seven-seaters, which are significantly bigger than any of the SUV’s we get in, and considering how many on here have big vans as daily transport, bitching about something smaller than my hatchback seems borderline hypocritical. I think the biggest SUV’s we’ve had recently are some Jag F-Pace from Enterprise, which are all 2 litre diesels, hardly planet destroyers.
My mate has just got an X5M.. thick end of 600bhp.. says he's getting about 14mpg but he wanted something "practical" for his son (who is 2) and his pram etc.. It is without doubt the stupidest car I have ever been in. Mind bogglingly fast for a big old lump mind! He should have got the M5.. saved £20k and a been whole 3 mpg better off.. not to mention a much cooler car.
Another pal has just got an X5 as well - the one with the massive grille because he likes big cars and lad at work is wanting to trade his 4 series in for a RR Sport because he likes being high up. It's madness. As Chris Harris says in the vid "they cost so much and offer nothing in return".
Can you tell I'm not a fan..?
Oh my god CountZero. Have you not read anything anyone cmhas written? Like that bit about the Qashqai being bigger and 6mpg worse than the car it's based on? Of course the EcoSport is better than your Octavia, but it's still worse than the Fiesta it's based on.
It's 200kg heavier than a Fiesta. That 200kg doesn't come for free--it's extra steel to smelt and iron to mine, extra oil to drill for to make the extra plastic. That 200kg takes more fuel to move it. The 1.0l 100hp engined version does 12mpg less than the same engined Fiesta. Unless Ford have found a way to beat physics it HAS to be worse for the environment than a Fiesta. And it's longer than a fiesta, so all that stuff you spouted about them being shorter and easier to park is nonsense.
To say that an SUV is no different to a hatchback is a complete fallacy, and to willingly buy one because you like sitting up high at the expense of the environment is selfish. What did 65 year olds with gippy backs drive twenty years ago? Oh, yeah, normal cars.
I have an 18 year old estate car with a powerful petrol engine that does about 27mpg
I drive it approximately once per week for about 40 miles return trip, but get the train locally once a week, cycle about 60 miles a week - all leisure/pleasure as I work from home - and get the train when I travel for work and go on a couple of short haul flights a year.
I enjoy driving my car because it's really fast and it helps me get to where I can go mountain biking on my eBike.
Am I awful?
Define SUV? Are all SUVs the same? What about someone who does high miles in an hatch v someone who does low miles in an SUV?
What about people like me who have no children who don't contribue an extra 58 tonnes of CO2 per year?
Ridiculous to pick on one facet of someone's choices without seeing the big picture.
I will wager an average of 5 tonnes of CO2 for the average vehicle versus someone with 3 kids lecturing someone else on CO2.
My karoq is also 1L with a boot size of 580L v a Golf of 380L. Also I don't have to sit on the sodding floor.
And I prefer driving it to any low riding hatch.
I was merely pointing out that folk jump on SUV owners, and say **** all about a pointless indulgence. At least you get 5 folk in a SUV.
Ya tit.
Calm down mate. I don't intend to let others tell me how to live my life, but if you want to you crack on and be miserable.
I literally wouldn't even look at the emissions if I was buying a new car. Deprivation seems to be very in fashion this week, a drop in the ocean would be an overstatement.
I've only had one child, ergo I can spunk my co2 quota on cars
The science says that SUV’s are the second leading rise in emissions and have totally negated all emissions saved from EV’s
What if you drive an EV SUV?
A lot of the arguments are based around jealousy... sort of “whaaaawhaaa, luk wot dey got, wy ant I got wun”
And the answers evident.
Where do 1/3 vehicles being 4 x 4 come in BIDMAS rules?
#year6parent
No matter what the fuel source is - driving a two tonne vehicle is always going to be more inefficient, more dangerous and will take up more and more space, leaving less for other road users. Personally, I couldn't drive something like that because I worry a lot about externalising costs and I think the last thing the world needs is another SUV/car on the road. But hey, looks like we're in the minority =)
Not jealousy, taste.
SUV's in an urban setting are crass.
A lot of the arguments are based around jealousy…
Aye, so they are.
Keep telling yourself that.
Not jealousy, taste.
But who defines taste? Half of the watches in the watch thread look like something your weird uncle would wear with his brown Farah's in the '70's, yet stw thinks they are cool
and most SUV’s on the road do nothing close to 50mpg in reality, more like 30MPG.
Our previous generation XC60 gets about 38mpg (average over 24,000 miles) and that’s almost entirely commuter driving. On longer runs it gets almost 50mpg. I am pretty sure the current one will be much more efficient too.
They arent for me.
Fair enough if you live up a farm track and/or need one for work.
I for one just dont get the whole faux 4x4 in a suburban setting thing.
My mother has one. My father has one. Numerous friends have them. All use them for commuting A roads.
But hey that's my opinion right?
As for practicality you are doing it wrong. A berlingo is where it's at 👍
I’m confused as I thought STW shunned modern, economical cars in favour of old, polluting shitboxes?
Anyway, my wife likes her Land Rover because it is very comfortable, easy to get the kids in and out of and is generally a very pleasant place to be. 7 seats is a bonus too.
My car is a 15 year old hot-ish hatch that cost buttons but isn’t that kind to the environment.
Saying that, I’ve got a full electric car on order and the Discovery Sport will probably be replaced in a couple of years by the hybrid or electric equivalent so does that make us goodies or baddies?