How big is too big...
Discussion
Jules Sunley said:
Agreed on running costs. Had to replace an airbag for the rear air suspension on our X5 last year (7 seats version has this) and currently awaiting a call to pick up from the dealers having had another bag go and take the compressor with it this time. A consequence of pot holes mixed with a heavy car it seems as they get a lot of these, and yet again on the nearside which is the side that gets the most abuse due to the condition of UK roads. A painful bill but still worth it for us as the car gets lots of use and often has all seats full and the boot too.
Tangent, but x5 airbags are a cheap and easy job using high quality aftermarket parts You need to find a reliable indy
Part of the hatred towards large SUVs and bland crossovers is despite how capable and useful they are, they just seem wrong.
Luxury SUVs are all inspired by the Range Rover, which is big and has a high ground clearance to be able to drive in challenging terrain. The prestige SUV's from BMW, Audi etc. can do what the Range Rover does 99% of the time without the work horse off-road abilities. And now when companies like Aston Martin, Lamborghini, Bentley and even Ferrari have joined the game as well, it feels like they are ignoring their brand heritage and selling their soul to get a share of the market. I can't say I blame them because all companies need sales to survive, and I bet they are all nice cars, but I wonder if some brands are damaging their image by entering the SUV market.
Having being asked for car advice by my sister-in-law, I'm still convinced that many crossover buyers think the car they have is underneath more similar to a Land Rover than it is to a normal hatchback.
Luxury SUVs are all inspired by the Range Rover, which is big and has a high ground clearance to be able to drive in challenging terrain. The prestige SUV's from BMW, Audi etc. can do what the Range Rover does 99% of the time without the work horse off-road abilities. And now when companies like Aston Martin, Lamborghini, Bentley and even Ferrari have joined the game as well, it feels like they are ignoring their brand heritage and selling their soul to get a share of the market. I can't say I blame them because all companies need sales to survive, and I bet they are all nice cars, but I wonder if some brands are damaging their image by entering the SUV market.
Having being asked for car advice by my sister-in-law, I'm still convinced that many crossover buyers think the car they have is underneath more similar to a Land Rover than it is to a normal hatchback.
JmatthewB said:
Having being asked for car advice by my sister-in-law, I'm still convinced that many crossover buyers think the car they have is underneath more similar to a Land Rover than it is to a normal hatchback.
Not convinced that your average motobility punter is so confused as to think their crossover is similar to a Land Rover. They are just more practical hatchbacks, easier for elderly people to get in and out of and for you get people to lift sproggs and shopping in and out of. The uncomfortable truth is that these cars are simply more practical versions of hatchbacks and estates with no greater footprint or weight.
And large SUVs are considerably more practical than large family saloons or estates for the same footprint.
The height just confuses some people and others are confused by the concept of something costing more money. While others come across like 1970's National Front wife beaters.
JmatthewB said:
Part of the hatred towards large SUVs and bland crossovers is despite how capable and useful they are, they just seem wrong.
Luxury SUVs are all inspired by the Range Rover, which is big and has a high ground clearance to be able to drive in challenging terrain. The prestige SUV's from BMW, Audi etc. can do what the Range Rover does 99% of the time without the work horse off-road abilities. And now when companies like Aston Martin, Lamborghini, Bentley and even Ferrari have joined the game as well, it feels like they are ignoring their brand heritage and selling their soul to get a share of the market. I can't say I blame them because all companies need sales to survive, and I bet they are all nice cars, but I wonder if some brands are damaging their image by entering the SUV market.
Having being asked for car advice by my sister-in-law, I'm still convinced that many crossover buyers think the car they have is underneath more similar to a Land Rover than it is to a normal hatchback.
Whether through luck or judgement, LR have absolutely nailed their branding at the moment. Luxury SUVs are all inspired by the Range Rover, which is big and has a high ground clearance to be able to drive in challenging terrain. The prestige SUV's from BMW, Audi etc. can do what the Range Rover does 99% of the time without the work horse off-road abilities. And now when companies like Aston Martin, Lamborghini, Bentley and even Ferrari have joined the game as well, it feels like they are ignoring their brand heritage and selling their soul to get a share of the market. I can't say I blame them because all companies need sales to survive, and I bet they are all nice cars, but I wonder if some brands are damaging their image by entering the SUV market.
Having being asked for car advice by my sister-in-law, I'm still convinced that many crossover buyers think the car they have is underneath more similar to a Land Rover than it is to a normal hatchback.
They appeal to the Audi set (know nothing about cars but know a upmarket brand when they see one) the posh horsey types, Chelsea off-roaders and STILL somehow manage to hang on to the classic work-horse cred that they had from years ago.
DonkeyApple said:
Not convinced that your average motobility punter is so confused as to think their crossover is similar to a Land Rover. They are just more practical hatchbacks, easier for elderly people to get in and out of and for you get people to lift sproggs and shopping in and out of.
Easy to get in and out of is such depressing thing to have on your list of requirements of a car.Bill said:
But a Transit is bigger in every dimension than any SUV...
Exactly! I've driven a fairly wide 5m+ long saloon car plenty of times in London and even the Lake District. I'm surprised so many people on pistonheads struggle with this, I don't think it's that hard. I've not driven a FF Range Rover but have driven a Sport and didn't find it an issue around town. Parking was even easier than my car because it's shorter.
I guess some people can't drive big cars. I like the fact people also say "people don't NEED a big car......" well.... So? They may just WANT one. Is that an issue? Should we all live in terraced housing or high rise flats because we don't NEED a detached house?
JmatthewB said:
Easy to get in and out of is such depressing thing to have on your list of requirements of a car.
Or rather it is liberating if one is elderly and it extends your personal mobility or makes it more comfortable. 12m people over the age of 65. So about a quarter of the adult population. And as wealth comes with age and young adults are the least likely to own a car then as a percentage of drivers in the UK the percentage could even be higher than that.
Longevity means not only double the number in that bracket than 50 years ago but that more are living with mobility issues.
When viewed with logical eyes it's a cause of celebration and a long way from being remotely depressing.
What exact harm does a crossover, a jacked up hatchback do? What's the big issue with practicality? Surely more practical is better? A Boxster takes up the same road space as a typical crossover or mid sized SUV yet it can't transport a family, has extremely limited practically and tends to result in another car being needed. But people don't seem to have an issue with a Boxster taking up X amount of space yet a different shaped car, a more practical car that takes up no more space is somehow a problem.
TyrannosauRoss Lex said:
I guess some people can't drive big cars. I like the fact people also say "people don't NEED a big car......" well.... So? They may just WANT one. Is that an issue? Should we all live in terraced housing or high rise flats because we don't NEED a detached house?
there is a problem, imo, with many an suv being driven 1.5m away from the kerb. in city side streets this causes one way flow when two way flow is possible. suv drivers seem less able to judge their car's actual width.so, other people's choices are slowing my journey.
DonkeyApple said:
Or rather it is liberating if one is elderly and it extends your personal mobility or makes it more comfortable.
12m people over the age of 65. So about a quarter of the adult population. And as wealth comes with age and young adults are the least likely to own a car then as a percentage of drivers in the UK the percentage could even be higher than that.
Longevity means not only double the number in that bracket than 50 years ago but that more are living with mobility issues.
When viewed with logical eyes it's a cause of celebration and a long way from being remotely depressing.
What exact harm does a crossover, a jacked up hatchback do? What's the big issue with practicality? Surely more practical is better? A Boxster takes up the same road space as a typical crossover or mid sized SUV yet it can't transport a family, has extremely limited practically and tends to result in another car being needed. But people don't seem to have an issue with a Boxster taking up X amount of space yet a different shaped car, a more practical car that takes up no more space is somehow a problem.
You're not selling getting old to me. When I get to my 60's I'm gonna have to drive a Nissan Juke because I'm too immobile to get in and out of a Boxster.12m people over the age of 65. So about a quarter of the adult population. And as wealth comes with age and young adults are the least likely to own a car then as a percentage of drivers in the UK the percentage could even be higher than that.
Longevity means not only double the number in that bracket than 50 years ago but that more are living with mobility issues.
When viewed with logical eyes it's a cause of celebration and a long way from being remotely depressing.
What exact harm does a crossover, a jacked up hatchback do? What's the big issue with practicality? Surely more practical is better? A Boxster takes up the same road space as a typical crossover or mid sized SUV yet it can't transport a family, has extremely limited practically and tends to result in another car being needed. But people don't seem to have an issue with a Boxster taking up X amount of space yet a different shaped car, a more practical car that takes up no more space is somehow a problem.
Pappyjohn said:
MPV's make so much more sense than SUV's. An SMax or Touran just ain't kool innit but they have a smaller footprint and much more space inside.
I'd take a Touran over and X5 any day if I needed a car for a family.
Agree - and the Zafira (which in it's a last guise was a very clever and useful car) was so uncool that they discontinued it. It was remarkably light too considering it's size and seating, and more spacious than all but the biggest SUVs. C - max and B- max gone too. I'd take a Touran over and X5 any day if I needed a car for a family.
bcr5784 said:
Pappyjohn said:
MPV's make so much more sense than SUV's. An SMax or Touran just ain't kool innit but they have a smaller footprint and much more space inside.
I'd take a Touran over and X5 any day if I needed a car for a family.
Agree - and the Zafira (which in it's a last guise was a very clever and useful car) was so uncool that they discontinued it. It was remarkably light too considering it's size and seating, and more spacious than all but the biggest SUVs. C - max and B- max gone too. I'd take a Touran over and X5 any day if I needed a car for a family.
I remember when the Dodge Viper came out, it looked absolutely massive. Insanely long and wide.
It's smaller than my 2010 Camaro, and when parked next to modern cars the vipers look pretty tiny.
I think cars outgrow themselves over time.
The old Ford Granada got bigger and bigger and then was phased out due to lack of demand. The Mondeo got bigger and bigger and ultimately occupied the smaller Granada size. It's now massive... And about to be phased out due to lack of demand.
I think the X5 (as an example) will get so big that it becomes X10 size (if there was such a thing), then it'll be phased out due to "changing buyer trends". The X1 will then take up the space of the X5 due to its growth over generations, and the X0 will become the small SUV. Also why we now have a market gap which is filled with an Audi A3 saloon, whilst the A4 continues on its waistline expansion (which used to be modern A3 size).
It's smaller than my 2010 Camaro, and when parked next to modern cars the vipers look pretty tiny.
I think cars outgrow themselves over time.
The old Ford Granada got bigger and bigger and then was phased out due to lack of demand. The Mondeo got bigger and bigger and ultimately occupied the smaller Granada size. It's now massive... And about to be phased out due to lack of demand.
I think the X5 (as an example) will get so big that it becomes X10 size (if there was such a thing), then it'll be phased out due to "changing buyer trends". The X1 will then take up the space of the X5 due to its growth over generations, and the X0 will become the small SUV. Also why we now have a market gap which is filled with an Audi A3 saloon, whilst the A4 continues on its waistline expansion (which used to be modern A3 size).
Edited by Cloudy147 on Thursday 24th June 17:22
TyrannosauRoss Lex said:
Yes, but then look at the interior and the refinement levels of an X5 compared to a Zafira..... I know which I'd rather spend my time.
But compared with SUVs in the same price bracket it's much more versatile and just as well trimmed (arguably better) and vastly better looking to my eyes.JmatthewB said:
Never thought I'd see supposed car enthusiasts™ longing for the good old days of MPVs
Car enthusiasts do have kids and "stuff" too and MPVs generally do that job better than SUVs unless you actually need 4WD or go off road. Look far better too by and large to my eyes (could hardly look worse than some SUVs) . Mostly estate cars have provided a better solution for me, (even towing a caravan a 4WD estate was a better solution for me) but there have been times when I needed to carry 5/6 adults and an MPV was a better solution. Edited by bcr5784 on Thursday 24th June 19:16
Edited by bcr5784 on Thursday 24th June 19:25
bcr5784 said:
TyrannosauRoss Lex said:
Yes, but then look at the interior and the refinement levels of an X5 compared to a Zafira..... I know which I'd rather spend my time.
But compared with SUVs in the same price bracket it's much more versatile and just as well trimmed (arguably better) and vastly better looking to my eyes.TyrannosauRoss Lex said:
So then buy an MPV, but to others who prefer an SUV, let them buy one.
Of course they can - but I would argue that most(?) don't rationally consider the pros and cons, and just follow fashion. If fashion is more important to the buyer, that's OK if they are actually aware that is the choice they are making. As a car nut I take the trouble to do the work when analysing what car will suit my requirements at the time. If you are making the second most significant financially significant purchase of your life that would seem sensible to me. To buy a house on a whim would be anathema to me (and most I suspect) so surely to just buy a car on a whim (unless you are very very rich) is a bit silly.
I had an early Citroen Picasso it was great - loads of space inside yet not too much bigger than an ordinary car. Nowadays this type vehicle seem to be really massive - but with doors and seats so thick, they have less space than an ordinary car?!
Mine was unloved which was perfect as I could park it anywhere and not care about it.
Mine was unloved which was perfect as I could park it anywhere and not care about it.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff