Why the split on SUV's?
Discussion
Each to their own. We've just got an evoque, mainly because that's what the wife wanted. We drove a 5 series which we both liked, but she has problems with her back and pelvis which make it painful for her to get in and out of a car. She doesn't struggle getting in and out of the evoque. It's a 190 auto, quick enough, relaxing, and is averaging 40mpg with only 600 miles now on the clock. The sat nav is clever, and it's a relaxing place to be. Against my initial instincts, I really like it.
Could we have spent the money on something "better"? Probably: I'd have had a 911 convertible if it was down to me. But, she wouldn't have got in and out of it, kids would have no room in the back, it would cost considerably more to run/service, and in winter I wouldn't have been certain that she could get where she wanted to safely. Plus, driving to France on holiday in it would be "interesting".
Unfortunately we all have to make some compromise when choosing a car, and for is the evoque had the least compromises.
Could we have spent the money on something "better"? Probably: I'd have had a 911 convertible if it was down to me. But, she wouldn't have got in and out of it, kids would have no room in the back, it would cost considerably more to run/service, and in winter I wouldn't have been certain that she could get where she wanted to safely. Plus, driving to France on holiday in it would be "interesting".
Unfortunately we all have to make some compromise when choosing a car, and for is the evoque had the least compromises.
vikingaero said:
You have every right to own a SUV as I have the right to dislike them.
Reasons:
(1) Often slow/inefficient - OK there are M/V8/V10/V12 models but these make up a tiny %.
(2) They take up too much road/parking space. Why should I struggle to get into my car because your behemoth has parked too close/badly parked? It's not up to smaller car owners to sacrifice space for you or for car park providers to give you extra large spaces.
(3) The drivers. Goateed Company Director or s
te school mum who can't drive or park.
(4) Majority of Cashcows etc are FWD so are more a styling exercise rather than functional.
Etc. Etc.
Not really any great deal slower or less efficient than their equivalent powered hatchback/saloon. Especially if not AWD. Reasons:
(1) Often slow/inefficient - OK there are M/V8/V10/V12 models but these make up a tiny %.
(2) They take up too much road/parking space. Why should I struggle to get into my car because your behemoth has parked too close/badly parked? It's not up to smaller car owners to sacrifice space for you or for car park providers to give you extra large spaces.
(3) The drivers. Goateed Company Director or s
te school mum who can't drive or park. (4) Majority of Cashcows etc are FWD so are more a styling exercise rather than functional.
Etc. Etc.
Things like the X5 or Sport are shorter than a 5 series and only about 7 cm wider. They are narrower than most large saloons, certainly not much wider.
Generalisations of groups. Well, it never stops with just the one group. Always makes you wonder what other 'groups' are also seen as issues.
FWD is arguably more functional as just like with a hatchback, it increases the interior space of the vehicle and also reduces weight. So not per se a styling exercise.
Boosted LS1 said:
Just out of interest can somebody explain why so many of them don't seem able to negotiate a speed hump without slowing to a crawl? I'd have expected them to drive over them with impunity at 30 mph.
Because they are road cars with road car suspension. You have a little more travel but that isn't necasarily going to mean you can hit bumps faster, generally it just allows you to get over larger ones. But the real stupidity is the silly wheel sizes that are fit to modern cars as fashion statements. It completely screws urban ability. Especially running an inch of rubber on a two tonne car!!! Bloody idiots if you ask me as it completely removes one of the great advantages and SUV should have in town.
DonkeyApple said:
But the real stupidity is the silly wheel sizes that are fit to modern cars as fashion statements. It completely screws urban ability. Especially running an inch of rubber on a two tonne car!!! Bloody idiots if you ask me as it completely removes one of the great advantages and SUV should have in town.
275/40/20 
Impasse said:
DonkeyApple said:
But the real stupidity is the silly wheel sizes that are fit to modern cars as fashion statements. It completely screws urban ability. Especially running an inch of rubber on a two tonne car!!! Bloody idiots if you ask me as it completely removes one of the great advantages and SUV should have in town.
275/40/20 
235/75 15
More than enough rubber for 350+ BHP and soaks up speed bumps and holes.
vikingaero said:
I do quite like the RR as there is genuine off road ability rather than the phat tyred X5
Most RRs have the same fat, block-treaded tyres. On slimmer tyres with the right tread and compound either works fine off road. An RR might have the advantage, but an X5 works fine I don't think you know what you are talking aboutThe mindset that someone would spend a premium on a car that is designed to work off road and in the most inclement conditions, then fitting low profile, performance, road tyres to it and never taking it off the road leaves me baffled. Nobody in their right mind would fit a set of General Grabbers to a Fiesta to try to convince people they have a Paris Dakar winner.
If you take any range of cars, the go-faster models are always a little lower, a little wider, a little lighter and a little stiffer. So why do people think that buying a car with off road pretensions, that is taller, slightly narrower, heavier and softly sprung is going to make a good road car? They wouldn't need to spend a load of money of a box full of electronics in an attempt to beat the laws of physics into submission if they worked with the laws of physics in the first place and spent their money on one of the dozens of specialist, purpose built road vehicles, like a Ford Mondeo.
It always makes me laugh when people say they need an SUV because they once drove over some leafs of watched Countryfile. I was brought up on a diary farm and we never had a 4x4 and I've worked on farms for the 25 years since I left school and would rather have a hedgehog stapled to my scrotum than drive an SUV. I have worked in fields 35 miles down dirt roads in NW Kansas and I would be perfectly happy to drive my Jazz to them, so I'll probably give a Ponce Rover a miss to go to the shops in Britain.
If you take any range of cars, the go-faster models are always a little lower, a little wider, a little lighter and a little stiffer. So why do people think that buying a car with off road pretensions, that is taller, slightly narrower, heavier and softly sprung is going to make a good road car? They wouldn't need to spend a load of money of a box full of electronics in an attempt to beat the laws of physics into submission if they worked with the laws of physics in the first place and spent their money on one of the dozens of specialist, purpose built road vehicles, like a Ford Mondeo.
It always makes me laugh when people say they need an SUV because they once drove over some leafs of watched Countryfile. I was brought up on a diary farm and we never had a 4x4 and I've worked on farms for the 25 years since I left school and would rather have a hedgehog stapled to my scrotum than drive an SUV. I have worked in fields 35 miles down dirt roads in NW Kansas and I would be perfectly happy to drive my Jazz to them, so I'll probably give a Ponce Rover a miss to go to the shops in Britain.
vikingaero said:
You have every right to own a SUV as I have the right to dislike them.
Reasons:
(1) Often slow/inefficient - OK there are M/V8/V10/V12 models but these make up a tiny %.
(2) They take up too much road/parking space. Why should I struggle to get into my car because your behemoth has parked too close/badly parked? It's not up to smaller car owners to sacrifice space for you or for car park providers to give you extra large spaces.
(3) The drivers. Goateed Company Director or ste school mum who can't drive or park.
(4) Majority of Cashcows etc are FWD so are more a styling exercise rather than functional.
Etc. Etc.
(1) Our Cashcow is very efficient and not particularly slow (we don't track it). No worse than an equivalent capacity MPV or Estate.Reasons:
(1) Often slow/inefficient - OK there are M/V8/V10/V12 models but these make up a tiny %.
(2) They take up too much road/parking space. Why should I struggle to get into my car because your behemoth has parked too close/badly parked? It's not up to smaller car owners to sacrifice space for you or for car park providers to give you extra large spaces.
(3) The drivers. Goateed Company Director or s
te school mum who can't drive or park. (4) Majority of Cashcows etc are FWD so are more a styling exercise rather than functional.
Etc. Etc.
(2) Our Cashcow is quite compact. No worse than an equivalent capacity MPV or Estate.
(3) No goatee but guilty as charged for Company Director (which means absolutely f all anyway, I am also PAYE) - wife is a decent driver (and also Cy Director admittedly)
(4) Our Cashcow is 100% about function. Surprising grip, 100% reliable, cheaper / far better equipped / slower depreciator than equivalent size MPV or Estate. I find winter tyres a better solution than 4wd.
It's OK to dislike but based on flawed reasons, it doesn't make much sense.
I've just bought a new car for my Mum in Cyprus. The new Bly cars I would consider were the SUV type ones, as she's not getting any younger, so it's easier for her to get in and out of. The roads are st, compounded with an onpbsession with speed bumps that are about as easy to traverse as the North face of the Eiger.
The Qashqai turned out to be the perfect solution and I can see why that type of car makes sense over here too. The equipment levels astonished me as well.
t, compounded with an onpbsession with speed bumps that are about as easy to traverse as the North face of the Eiger. The Qashqai turned out to be the perfect solution and I can see why that type of car makes sense over here too. The equipment levels astonished me as well.
We have a thing for cheap 4x4s and are currently on our third.
At the moment it's a 2002 Jeep Grand Cherokee which is used for family duties; me, her indoors and two nippers (with associated prams, bikes, friends, roller skates, teddies and whatever else they want to take with them).
I paid absolutely nothing for it (circa £1500) and it looks reasonably presentable. I really couldn't care less if the little fellow throws up all over the back of the driver seat or if the little lady spills her milkshake all over the carpet. Stuff gets thrown into it like it's a skip and when it inevitably fails I will go and get another one for the same price. I genuinely don't think you can do much better for the money on a car which the Mrs doesn't mind driving (this rules out Volvo estates).
For me they offer great value as the majority suffer from huge depreciation and sooner or later get to the point where they become disposable.
At the moment it's a 2002 Jeep Grand Cherokee which is used for family duties; me, her indoors and two nippers (with associated prams, bikes, friends, roller skates, teddies and whatever else they want to take with them).
I paid absolutely nothing for it (circa £1500) and it looks reasonably presentable. I really couldn't care less if the little fellow throws up all over the back of the driver seat or if the little lady spills her milkshake all over the carpet. Stuff gets thrown into it like it's a skip and when it inevitably fails I will go and get another one for the same price. I genuinely don't think you can do much better for the money on a car which the Mrs doesn't mind driving (this rules out Volvo estates).
For me they offer great value as the majority suffer from huge depreciation and sooner or later get to the point where they become disposable.
I've owned a SUV type thing, albeit one with actual tyres etc and it's a lovely way to commute in the right circumstance, but the RR/X5/Q7 today just screams fashion accessory brand, chosen not for any intrinsic quality (although I'm not denying they may have them) but to impress others, like raybans, gucci, 50k weddings.
To a car enthusiast it's like telling a dedicated music lover you're buying the bandx record cos thats the coolest thing this week right? Or whats the right gig to be "seen at?"
It's like, if I was walking past abercrombie+fitch and saw what looked like a really, really nice shirt in the window you know you can't just put it on like any old shirt and be the same, it's a look-at-me I'm-in-the-right-brand-are-you-impressed please-like-me brand shirt, and I'm not that person.
To a car enthusiast it's like telling a dedicated music lover you're buying the bandx record cos thats the coolest thing this week right? Or whats the right gig to be "seen at?"
It's like, if I was walking past abercrombie+fitch and saw what looked like a really, really nice shirt in the window you know you can't just put it on like any old shirt and be the same, it's a look-at-me I'm-in-the-right-brand-are-you-impressed please-like-me brand shirt, and I'm not that person.
hairyben said:
I've owned a SUV type thing, albeit one with actual tyres etc and it's a lovely way to commute in the right circumstance, but the RR/X5/Q7 today just screams fashion accessory brand, chosen not for any intrinsic quality (although I'm not denying they may have them) but to impress others, like raybans, gucci, 50k weddings.
To a car enthusiast it's like telling a dedicated music lover you're buying the bandx record cos thats the coolest thing this week right? Or whats the right gig to be "seen at?"
It's like, if I was walking past abercrombie+fitch and saw what looked like a really, really nice shirt in the window you know you can't just put it on like any old shirt and be the same, it's a look-at-me I'm-in-the-right-brand-are-you-impressed please-like-me brand shirt, and I'm not that person.
You do have a Lambo in your fantasy garage though. To a car enthusiast it's like telling a dedicated music lover you're buying the bandx record cos thats the coolest thing this week right? Or whats the right gig to be "seen at?"
It's like, if I was walking past abercrombie+fitch and saw what looked like a really, really nice shirt in the window you know you can't just put it on like any old shirt and be the same, it's a look-at-me I'm-in-the-right-brand-are-you-impressed please-like-me brand shirt, and I'm not that person.
hairyben said:
I've owned a SUV type thing, albeit one with actual tyres etc and it's a lovely way to commute in the right circumstance, but the RR/X5/Q7 today just screams fashion accessory brand, chosen not for any intrinsic quality (although I'm not denying they may have them) but to impress others, like raybans, gucci, 50k weddings.
To a car enthusiast it's like telling a dedicated music lover you're buying the bandx record cos thats the coolest thing this week right? Or whats the right gig to be "seen at?"
It's like, if I was walking past abercrombie+fitch and saw what looked like a really, really nice shirt in the window you know you can't just put it on like any old shirt and be the same, it's a look-at-me I'm-in-the-right-brand-are-you-impressed please-like-me brand shirt, and I'm not that person.
The RR is just a really really nice place to be. It can hold it's own against the most luxurious cars on the planet. It also has the advantage of being easy to get into, and giving you a great view of the road ahead. An S Class is not sporty, but nobody complains about that. A RR is not sporty. One is taller than the other, that's about it. To a car enthusiast it's like telling a dedicated music lover you're buying the bandx record cos thats the coolest thing this week right? Or whats the right gig to be "seen at?"
It's like, if I was walking past abercrombie+fitch and saw what looked like a really, really nice shirt in the window you know you can't just put it on like any old shirt and be the same, it's a look-at-me I'm-in-the-right-brand-are-you-impressed please-like-me brand shirt, and I'm not that person.
I'm sure my post will be boring for some - but here's my rationale for buying an SUV.
After my son was born, we needed more space than my 997.1 TT could provide.
My requirements in a car went from c500bhp, AWD, auto and boner inducing acceleration (<5 secs) to
c500bhp, AWD, boner inducing acceleration (<5 secs) AND space for a pram, car seat and other assorted baby stuff.
The candidates ended up being
1. SUV (ML63, Cayenne Turbo and X5M)
2. RS6
3. Bentley Flying Spur.
The RS6 was getting a bit dated (more the tech inside the cabin), the Bentley Flying Spur isn't really my style, I couldn't afford a facelift Cayenne Turbo and so the purchase ended up being a toss up between an ML63 or an X5M - whichever came along first.
It happened to be the ML63 - I have enjoyed 3 years trouble free boner inducing acceleration, but will part x for an RS4 (B8) next year as I am now bored of sitting on top of the wheels (as distinct from in-between them).
It is a shame that neither the new C or E Class AMG cars have AWD and RHD otherwise my purchase dilemma would have been solved for quite some time!
After my son was born, we needed more space than my 997.1 TT could provide.
My requirements in a car went from c500bhp, AWD, auto and boner inducing acceleration (<5 secs) to
c500bhp, AWD, boner inducing acceleration (<5 secs) AND space for a pram, car seat and other assorted baby stuff.
The candidates ended up being
1. SUV (ML63, Cayenne Turbo and X5M)
2. RS6
3. Bentley Flying Spur.
The RS6 was getting a bit dated (more the tech inside the cabin), the Bentley Flying Spur isn't really my style, I couldn't afford a facelift Cayenne Turbo and so the purchase ended up being a toss up between an ML63 or an X5M - whichever came along first.
It happened to be the ML63 - I have enjoyed 3 years trouble free boner inducing acceleration, but will part x for an RS4 (B8) next year as I am now bored of sitting on top of the wheels (as distinct from in-between them).
It is a shame that neither the new C or E Class AMG cars have AWD and RHD otherwise my purchase dilemma would have been solved for quite some time!
Another reason why people buy an SUV instead of an estate car is the residuals. Nearly all SUVs are better than comparable estate cars. As an example the Volvo V70 with the D4 engine typically hold on to around 35% of its purchase price after 3 years, whereas the XC60 with the same engine would be at 50%.
I certainly don't hate them (I don't hate any car) but they're certainly my least favourite type of road vehicle - I find the head lights significantly are more likely to dazzle me because they're higher up; they block the vision of vehicles around them to an unnecessary degree; they're unnecessarily heavy so are both slower and handle less well than necessary; I don't generally like the styling; I don't like the driving position;...
If I needed the space, I'd far rather drive an MPV (which would usually be better packaged) or an estate (which would usually be better looking and drive better). The only reason I'd ever buy one would be to tow or to actually use offroad and if I needed either of those things I'd do everything I could to avoid it being my daily driver. I've no objection to others driving them as long as they don't expect me to let them out of junctions, etc.
If I needed the space, I'd far rather drive an MPV (which would usually be better packaged) or an estate (which would usually be better looking and drive better). The only reason I'd ever buy one would be to tow or to actually use offroad and if I needed either of those things I'd do everything I could to avoid it being my daily driver. I've no objection to others driving them as long as they don't expect me to let them out of junctions, etc.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff