RE: Slow Ugly Vans
Friday 30th November 2001
Slow Ugly Vans
SUV's - it's all getting a bit silly now
Discussion
Anyone that has tried to negotiate double-parked London backstreets when you've got a young mum taking Johnny and Jemima to school coming the other way in what amounts to nothing short of a Juggernaut (which she cannot judge the size of) will, I think, join me in thinking these things should be banned from our cities. (woah, that was a long sentence)
My mate Dieseldrinker got sideswiped by a Volvo in our 7 rep. If he'd been hit by one of these he'd be very dead indeed. And as for wretched MPVs...
I get so peed off by the fact that UK law lets you buy a 'car' only suited to Dubai (Land Cruiser springs to mind) then fit it with bull bars and winches. Force is concentrated into an area 1/100th of the usual impact area by these contraptions, the area in question being head height of a child (or of a 7 driver for that matter)
Lorry skirts are primarily to save other drivers from themselves (when they fail to see 40 tonnes of metal in front of them.) Bull bars are primarily to protect the bodywork of SUVs from the innocent motorists _they_ drive into ! Lunacy !
I appreciate that a tiny percentage of the populace does actually need a 4x4, but the "I live at the top of a hill I need a 4x4 for winter" argument doesn't wash-a Scooby Forester would have no problems in virtually any weather experienced in the UK without turning the streets into Duel...
"Time for your medication Mr. Dokic"
Mmm, thank you nurse.
I get so peed off by the fact that UK law lets you buy a 'car' only suited to Dubai (Land Cruiser springs to mind) then fit it with bull bars and winches. Force is concentrated into an area 1/100th of the usual impact area by these contraptions, the area in question being head height of a child (or of a 7 driver for that matter)
Lorry skirts are primarily to save other drivers from themselves (when they fail to see 40 tonnes of metal in front of them.) Bull bars are primarily to protect the bodywork of SUVs from the innocent motorists _they_ drive into ! Lunacy !
I appreciate that a tiny percentage of the populace does actually need a 4x4, but the "I live at the top of a hill I need a 4x4 for winter" argument doesn't wash-a Scooby Forester would have no problems in virtually any weather experienced in the UK without turning the streets into Duel...
"Time for your medication Mr. Dokic"
Mmm, thank you nurse.
I have always had Suzuki "SUV's" with Bull Bars and when a prat in a Dustbin Truck decided to pull out on me, the BB took most of the impact.
One police officer was amazed I survived and said it was due to having a BB on the Vitara.
My latest one has one of those plastiky ones but I would prefer a metal A-Bar any day.
I don't have one to take the kids to school (I haven't got any as far as I am aware), or to block the roads, I have one because I like them.
*waits for flames*
Edited by Gaffer on Friday 30th November 12:26
One police officer was amazed I survived and said it was due to having a BB on the Vitara.
My latest one has one of those plastiky ones but I would prefer a metal A-Bar any day.
I don't have one to take the kids to school (I haven't got any as far as I am aware), or to block the roads, I have one because I like them.
*waits for flames*
Edited by Gaffer on Friday 30th November 12:26
It's not just SUVs which are getting too big. I was at a roundabout yesterday and alongside was a vehicle which towered above me blocking my view of approaching traffic, it was a new Honda Civic, I wouldn't mind but I drive a Saab 9000. (Special thanks to the BMW 5-series driver who awarded me a beep of the horn when I chose not to pull out onto the roundabout until I could actually see if anything was going to hit me...)
What is the point of SUVs?
The only reason why these dreadful vehicles sell well (I think) is that one feels very comfortable thanks to seating higher than others in the traffic (and I reckon it is also rather relaxing).
Therefore if only our governments seriously worked on reducing the volumes of traffic I think we wouldn't see so many of these Sucking Useless Vanities polluting our sights on the roads.
The only reason why these dreadful vehicles sell well (I think) is that one feels very comfortable thanks to seating higher than others in the traffic (and I reckon it is also rather relaxing).
Therefore if only our governments seriously worked on reducing the volumes of traffic I think we wouldn't see so many of these Sucking Useless Vanities polluting our sights on the roads.
Please don't interpret this as a flame Gaffer but BBs are not effective in providing passenger protection in high impact accidents. In a monocoque vehicle they transfer loads into localised areas of the vehicle rather than allowing the vehicle's crumple zones to dissipate energy. Your Suzuki's bars must have dissipated the energy into the (seperate) chassis frame, thereby indicating that the frame was strong enough to absorb the load anyway, as the bars do not provide any additional longitudinal strength.
If the bars were themselves strong enough to take the impact of an accident they would stop the vehicle virtually instantaneously, resulting in massive injury to its occupants.
Ref: "The Recovery of Post Road Traffic Accident Juveniles, A Biomechanical Approach," Jarel Dokic
Yes, I wrote my Thesis on this subject. Dull huh ?
Edited by jaydee on Friday 30th November 12:44
If the bars were themselves strong enough to take the impact of an accident they would stop the vehicle virtually instantaneously, resulting in massive injury to its occupants.
Ref: "The Recovery of Post Road Traffic Accident Juveniles, A Biomechanical Approach," Jarel Dokic
Yes, I wrote my Thesis on this subject. Dull huh ?
Edited by jaydee on Friday 30th November 12:44
Jaydee don't worry I won't.
I guess it all comes down to what we feel safe in. I feel more safe in my Suzuki than in Roops Golf GTi (unless I am driving it). I like the fact I have got "something" else there as a Just In Case measure.
I don't remember much of my accident apart from a very broken hand an a nasty snapped stearnum, in which the bone just missed piearcing my heart, they blamed the seatbelt for that.
No doubt I will feel just as safe in something else, but as I have only had SUV's, I can only relate to them.
I guess it all comes down to what we feel safe in. I feel more safe in my Suzuki than in Roops Golf GTi (unless I am driving it). I like the fact I have got "something" else there as a Just In Case measure.
I don't remember much of my accident apart from a very broken hand an a nasty snapped stearnum, in which the bone just missed piearcing my heart, they blamed the seatbelt for that.
No doubt I will feel just as safe in something else, but as I have only had SUV's, I can only relate to them.
That injury profile strongly suggests that the car was stopped very quickly by the (presumably very strong) bull bars. The seatbelt is the vector but the reason for the injury is very rapid deceleration, it takes some doing to snap your sternum !
I appreciate that some people feel safer in their SUVs, but I'd still sooner they didn't feel the need to armour them as well.
It worries me when the army of mums turns up at the school at the end of my road in their huge, and frequently battered, vehicles. I can't understand that mentality, who are they protecting ? Surely the children are in more danger from stepping out in front of one of these Leviathans below the driver's eyeline than they would ever be once inside even the smallest cars at the kind of speeds attained on suburban streets ?
I don't usually get involved in discussions of safety, because it's so subjective and feelings get hurt if you say anything negative about a particular car, so I'll leave it at that
Edited by jaydee on Friday 30th November 13:31
I appreciate that some people feel safer in their SUVs, but I'd still sooner they didn't feel the need to armour them as well.
It worries me when the army of mums turns up at the school at the end of my road in their huge, and frequently battered, vehicles. I can't understand that mentality, who are they protecting ? Surely the children are in more danger from stepping out in front of one of these Leviathans below the driver's eyeline than they would ever be once inside even the smallest cars at the kind of speeds attained on suburban streets ?
I don't usually get involved in discussions of safety, because it's so subjective and feelings get hurt if you say anything negative about a particular car, so I'll leave it at that
Edited by jaydee on Friday 30th November 13:31
Jaydee,
You are obviously more knowledgeable than me on this subject, so correct me if I am wrong, but weren't bull bars slated by several safety organisations for causing severe injury in pedestrian accidents, even at very slow speeds?
I agree that they are a menace on suburban cars. They were designed for 'utility' vehicles, where preventing bodywork damage by wildlife was important.
I hate to admit that I once owned a volvo, and the panels were really flimsy, which I found strange (at the time) because volvos were supposed to be tanks. This was when I found out about crumple zones and a real life use for all the energy transfer/absorbtion equations I came across due to an interest in physics.
Sparks
You are obviously more knowledgeable than me on this subject, so correct me if I am wrong, but weren't bull bars slated by several safety organisations for causing severe injury in pedestrian accidents, even at very slow speeds?
I agree that they are a menace on suburban cars. They were designed for 'utility' vehicles, where preventing bodywork damage by wildlife was important.
I hate to admit that I once owned a volvo, and the panels were really flimsy, which I found strange (at the time) because volvos were supposed to be tanks. This was when I found out about crumple zones and a real life use for all the energy transfer/absorbtion equations I came across due to an interest in physics.
Sparks
OK I lied, more words on the subject.
Yes Sparks they are frequently sighted (sp?) as a cause of severe injury in what would otherwise have been minor incidents. What surprises me is that they have survived the litigation culture, especially in the States, as I have come across cases of families succesfully suing after the loss of a child. I can only assume the liability is held to be personal rather than covered by the 3rd party insurance of the vehicle.
The EU will no longer type approve hard BBs on new cars from 2002 for safety reasons under the "External Projections Directive". There is an (out of date) article on this at
www.roads.dtlr.gov.uk/vehicle/vse6/bullbars/sect118.htm
In 1995 Steven Norris dodged this issue by falsely claiming in parliament that the UK government was unable to act against BBs owing to EU legislation.
Yes Sparks they are frequently sighted (sp?) as a cause of severe injury in what would otherwise have been minor incidents. What surprises me is that they have survived the litigation culture, especially in the States, as I have come across cases of families succesfully suing after the loss of a child. I can only assume the liability is held to be personal rather than covered by the 3rd party insurance of the vehicle.
The EU will no longer type approve hard BBs on new cars from 2002 for safety reasons under the "External Projections Directive". There is an (out of date) article on this at
www.roads.dtlr.gov.uk/vehicle/vse6/bullbars/sect118.htm
In 1995 Steven Norris dodged this issue by falsely claiming in parliament that the UK government was unable to act against BBs owing to EU legislation.
You Ted, and you adrianr, and you currym, and you thom and, worst of all, you too jaydee, take absolute pole position for unadulterated bigotry on this topic...shame upon the lot of you.
Lots of SUV owners NEED these devices for entirely practical reasons, and no jaydee, I see nothing in your argument to persuade me that a Subaru Forester is more suitable for our purposes than the Toyota RAV4. There is less than 4" height difference between the two of them, and the RAV 3-door wins hands down on virtually every other parameter.
You rubbish the case for these vehicles in a wintry environment. May I ask in which part of the Scottish or indeed Welsh highlands you reside?
I refer above to the original anti-SUV argument, NOT to the subsequent Bull Bar condemnation, with which I agree. We seldom see BBs fitted to 4x4s in this district.
Edited by McNab on Friday 30th November 14:20
Lots of SUV owners NEED these devices for entirely practical reasons, and no jaydee, I see nothing in your argument to persuade me that a Subaru Forester is more suitable for our purposes than the Toyota RAV4. There is less than 4" height difference between the two of them, and the RAV 3-door wins hands down on virtually every other parameter.
You rubbish the case for these vehicles in a wintry environment. May I ask in which part of the Scottish or indeed Welsh highlands you reside?
I refer above to the original anti-SUV argument, NOT to the subsequent Bull Bar condemnation, with which I agree. We seldom see BBs fitted to 4x4s in this district.
Edited by McNab on Friday 30th November 14:20
I live in Cheltenham and I do go down narrow and muddy tracks to get to the stables. I agree that 90% of the time my SUV is not doing what it was designed to do.
BUT sometimes, ie.last winter when we were stuck in the middle of the countryside, my Jeep is used to its full potential.
And besides my Mum likes it.
BUT sometimes, ie.last winter when we were stuck in the middle of the countryside, my Jeep is used to its full potential.
And besides my Mum likes it.
Wrong McNab. I didn't rubbish the case for these vehicles in a wintry environment at all.
I also seem to recall writing "I appreciate that a tiny percentage of the populace does actually need a 4x4" and you may well fall into this category (though that must make using the Porker pretty difficult for 6 months of the year)
As for living in the Scottish/Welsh highlands, no, I live in NE Derbyshire. I was brought up (and lived until April this year) on a farm, near Buxton, with a 1 mile track from the hall to the nearest road. I also drive every new year to my girlfriends family's home on the Rothiemurcas (Sp ? she'll kill me if I''ve got that wrong) estate. I borrow my father's Scooby for this very reason.
I've been around 4x4s since I was a small child and appreciate their usefulness, but also there inherent dangers.
What I do object to is, as Ted said, the inappropriate use of these vehicles. I wouldn't take one of the Landies (one of which has BBs for off-road use) to Tescos anymore than I'd use an Elise to rescue an injured animal. Horses for courses, you see ?
Not seen _many_ people in the farming community with Rav 4s, yet lots of Scoobies...
This is just the kind of argument I didn't want to get into. Particularly as I specifically avoided criticism of a particular vehicle (other than the Land Cruiser - they're just absurd) in order to try and avoid offence.
No doubt the next flame will question my qualifications by asking why I work for a dotcom when I've got a biology/medicine/whatever degree. Just to make it clear I did a MSc in Physiology and the company I work for distributes equipment enabling remote patients to be given advice by videophone.
I also seem to recall writing "I appreciate that a tiny percentage of the populace does actually need a 4x4" and you may well fall into this category (though that must make using the Porker pretty difficult for 6 months of the year)
As for living in the Scottish/Welsh highlands, no, I live in NE Derbyshire. I was brought up (and lived until April this year) on a farm, near Buxton, with a 1 mile track from the hall to the nearest road. I also drive every new year to my girlfriends family's home on the Rothiemurcas (Sp ? she'll kill me if I''ve got that wrong) estate. I borrow my father's Scooby for this very reason.
I've been around 4x4s since I was a small child and appreciate their usefulness, but also there inherent dangers.
What I do object to is, as Ted said, the inappropriate use of these vehicles. I wouldn't take one of the Landies (one of which has BBs for off-road use) to Tescos anymore than I'd use an Elise to rescue an injured animal. Horses for courses, you see ?
Not seen _many_ people in the farming community with Rav 4s, yet lots of Scoobies...
This is just the kind of argument I didn't want to get into. Particularly as I specifically avoided criticism of a particular vehicle (other than the Land Cruiser - they're just absurd) in order to try and avoid offence.
No doubt the next flame will question my qualifications by asking why I work for a dotcom when I've got a biology/medicine/whatever degree. Just to make it clear I did a MSc in Physiology and the company I work for distributes equipment enabling remote patients to be given advice by videophone.
jaydee, what you actually said was that the '4x4 argument for winter doesn't wash' and I have to disagree with that. We have two snowdrift blackspots between our house and the nearest town, and the town itself is built on the side of a dauntingly steep hill - not fun on ice! Until the advent of 4x4s tractors had to be used for shopping in really bad winters, and my wife greatly prefers a RAV4 to a tractor! The RAV is her car, and ideal for her use. My mention of it was, incidentally, down to the endless ravings of Autocar re the RAV not being a 'proper' 4x4. That magazine raises my blood pressure more and more.
You are quite right about farm vehicles, and so you should be if you are a NE Derbyshire man. We use a Discovery for farm work, and an Argocat and ATV for the rough stuff. All the same the RAV is useful for crossing fields when it has to, and its height (ground clearance) is an advantage there, and when the snow melts and the roads are flooded.
Yes, the Porsche will seldom be used for the worst four winter months, but the choice of a Carrera 4 was specifically dictated by the conditions here. I hate using good cars on salty roads, but we all suffer that particular problem. My last RWD hot-shot consumed about a dozen batteries in five years due to lack of winter use, as did most of its pedecessors, but the upside is of course the emptiness of our country roads and our ability to use performance frequently (until loss of licence!).
I see quite a number of big 4x4s in Edinburgh and agree that their presence in cities is puzzling, but then again perhaps their users have country connections. If not, you have to accept that fashion comes into the equation all too often, so your objections are probably valid in many cases.
Off to buy a Hummer, just to cheer you up!!
You are quite right about farm vehicles, and so you should be if you are a NE Derbyshire man. We use a Discovery for farm work, and an Argocat and ATV for the rough stuff. All the same the RAV is useful for crossing fields when it has to, and its height (ground clearance) is an advantage there, and when the snow melts and the roads are flooded.
Yes, the Porsche will seldom be used for the worst four winter months, but the choice of a Carrera 4 was specifically dictated by the conditions here. I hate using good cars on salty roads, but we all suffer that particular problem. My last RWD hot-shot consumed about a dozen batteries in five years due to lack of winter use, as did most of its pedecessors, but the upside is of course the emptiness of our country roads and our ability to use performance frequently (until loss of licence!).
I see quite a number of big 4x4s in Edinburgh and agree that their presence in cities is puzzling, but then again perhaps their users have country connections. If not, you have to accept that fashion comes into the equation all too often, so your objections are probably valid in many cases.
Off to buy a Hummer, just to cheer you up!!
I went to art school, me, so I have no idea what this science stuff is all about. I do, however, know how to spell 'cite', Jarel.
I also know that bull bars are the worst threat to pedestrians and motorcyclists known to civilisation (yes, I'm one of those bikers as well as having a Volvo - V70R, so not necessarily for safety reasons). Car designers spend thousands of hours ensuring both that the occupants of the vehicle and anything or anyone they might hit gets off as lightly as possible. Take off the Bull Bars. There are no bulls, kangaroos, elephants, wildebeast or rogue cariboo around school gates or even in the Scottish Highlands (even in Rothiemurchus - sorry, Jarel, the girlfiend's family is probably sharpenning their dirks as we speak!)
I also know that bull bars are the worst threat to pedestrians and motorcyclists known to civilisation (yes, I'm one of those bikers as well as having a Volvo - V70R, so not necessarily for safety reasons). Car designers spend thousands of hours ensuring both that the occupants of the vehicle and anything or anyone they might hit gets off as lightly as possible. Take off the Bull Bars. There are no bulls, kangaroos, elephants, wildebeast or rogue cariboo around school gates or even in the Scottish Highlands (even in Rothiemurchus - sorry, Jarel, the girlfiend's family is probably sharpenning their dirks as we speak!)
Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff