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.
