How big is too big...
Discussion
slowcars1 said:
Sure, but an E class estate is also just as capable at all the activities described. What is it that the GLE has that the E class doesn’t other than ride height?
To be honest with you absolutely nothing, my OH just decided she wanted a GLE (after C's and E's before), I wouldn't personally head to a dealership to buy one, however it does allow me to have a choice on what I have as it doesn't have to fulfil family duties (though it can) so none of mine have more than 2 doors. In the crazy world we currently live in the same spec GLE that we got is now being advertised at 5-7K more than we gave for 'ours', so there is a demand out there (due to the current general shortages)
But as I said in the original post I went to work in a 1980's 1.4ltr hatchback today an 850kg car with very little protection, when ever the opportunity presents itself I will take the the older car to have less 'impact'
SUV drivers in town = t
ts of the highest order. Different story if it's work vehicle. You can use any argument you want, they're not even any bigger inside then usual focus/astra type. I suppose they're only good if some drives into you, the reason bellends buy them. I think the government will target them next. st on fuel, poor road holding, pain to park, high tax, more likely to kill other vulnerable road users.. what's not to like
ts of the highest order. Different story if it's work vehicle. You can use any argument you want, they're not even any bigger inside then usual focus/astra type. I suppose they're only good if some drives into you, the reason bellends buy them. I think the government will target them next. st on fuel, poor road holding, pain to park, high tax, more likely to kill other vulnerable road users.. what's not to likemk1coopers said:
slowcars1 said:
Sure, but an E class estate is also just as capable at all the activities described. What is it that the GLE has that the E class doesn’t other than ride height?
To be honest with you absolutely nothing, my OH just decided she wanted a GLE (after C's and E's before), I wouldn't personally head to a dealership to buy one, however it does allow me to have a choice on what I have as it doesn't have to fulfil family duties (though it can) so none of mine have more than 2 doors. In the crazy world we currently live in the same spec GLE that we got is now being advertised at 5-7K more than we gave for 'ours', so there is a demand out there (due to the current general shortages)
But as I said in the original post I went to work in a 1980's 1.4ltr hatchback today an 850kg car with very little protection, when ever the opportunity presents itself I will take the the older car to have less 'impact'
The wailing about pedestrian death has been picked up for the same reason some anti EVers now go on about dying children in the Congo. They don't actually care about the people, it's merely a proxy to facilitate what they really hate but what society doesn't allow them to say anymore.
It's similar with the 'handling' arguments based around their belief that they are a real man who knows how to drive. Again, this is based on 20th century thinking. Today we have SUVs lapping the Ring faster than their comparable estates. Plus, most people aren't driving like Barry the Boy Racer to Tescos.
These people don't even care about the eco aspect, again it's just a proxy.
It's all why they don't mind saloons or estates of the same footprint and even weight nor do they mind vans. The simple truth is that their issue is with people having money and women and foreign looking types being out of their boxes.
DonkeyApple said:
What a lot of people haven't appreciated, despite rarely seeing women driving large saloons or estates, is that for the shorter member of the household the taller car on the same footprint is much easier to drive. The SUV has meant that the big family car no longer needs to be used for the commute.
The wailing about pedestrian death has been picked up for the same reason some anti EVers now go on about dying children in the Congo. They don't actually care about the people, it's merely a proxy to facilitate what they really hate but what society doesn't allow them to say anymore.
It's similar with the 'handling' arguments based around their belief that they are a real man who knows how to drive. Again, this is based on 20th century thinking. Today we have SUVs lapping the Ring faster than their comparable estates. Plus, most people aren't driving like Barry the Boy Racer to Tescos.
These people don't even care about the eco aspect, again it's just a proxy.
It's all why they don't mind saloons or estates of the same footprint and even weight nor do they mind vans. The simple truth is that their issue is with people having money and women and foreign looking types being out of their boxes.
I started this thread simply because I was suprised to see "X3" on the back of a car that passed me on the motorway, as from the shadow it cast on me I expected "X5" at least. My car is indeed not small (not showing off like). The wailing about pedestrian death has been picked up for the same reason some anti EVers now go on about dying children in the Congo. They don't actually care about the people, it's merely a proxy to facilitate what they really hate but what society doesn't allow them to say anymore.
It's similar with the 'handling' arguments based around their belief that they are a real man who knows how to drive. Again, this is based on 20th century thinking. Today we have SUVs lapping the Ring faster than their comparable estates. Plus, most people aren't driving like Barry the Boy Racer to Tescos.
These people don't even care about the eco aspect, again it's just a proxy.
It's all why they don't mind saloons or estates of the same footprint and even weight nor do they mind vans. The simple truth is that their issue is with people having money and women and foreign looking types being out of their boxes.
I hadn't considered all the finer details, as you nicely illustrate in this post and I have to say I didn't notice the ethnicity or gender of the driver, I'll play closer attention next time.
Mrtank said:
SUV drivers in town = tts of the highest order. Different story if it's work vehicle. You can use any argument you want, they're not even any bigger inside then usual focus/astra type. I suppose they're only good if some drives into you, the reason bellends buy them. I think the government will target them next. st on fuel, poor road holding, pain to park, high tax, more likely to kill other vulnerable road users.. what's not to like
You lost all credibility when you start stating things like "not even bigger inside than a focus/astra"..... Because they are. Go in a FF Range Rover and tell me it's no bigger inside than a Focus :laugh"ts of the highest order. Different story if it's work vehicle. You can use any argument you want, they're not even any bigger inside then usual focus/astra type. I suppose they're only good if some drives into you, the reason bellends buy them. I think the government will target them next. st on fuel, poor road holding, pain to park, high tax, more likely to kill other vulnerable road users.. what's not to likePoor road holding? A half decent SUV handles better than a contempary estate car of just 10 years ago, yet I'm sure it'd be acceptable to you to have that estate car
and also, I'm pretty sure 99% of people don't care it might be 20 seconds slower around the Nurburgring when it's a nicer car to live with day to day! High tax? Depends on the engine. My saloon car is the highest tax bracket, more than most SUVs.
Get over yourself. They can be very good cars.
Small cars are rubbish for 3 small kids and 2 adults, especially as all children under 11 have to be in some sort of child seat.
Gone are the days when we used to get the whole school football team in my mate's dad's Cortina estate
Saying that, when our Disco 3 broke down (again) they replaced it with a Range Rover Vogue.
Due to its heavily bolstered rear seat we couldn't get three kid seats in the back.
Gone are the days when we used to get the whole school football team in my mate's dad's Cortina estate
Saying that, when our Disco 3 broke down (again) they replaced it with a Range Rover Vogue.
Due to its heavily bolstered rear seat we couldn't get three kid seats in the back.
croyde said:
Small cars are rubbish for 3 small kids and 2 adults, especially as all children under 11 have to be in some sort of child seat.
Gone are the days when we used to get the whole school football team in my mate's dad's Cortina estate
Those were the days. I was one of four kids, so we used to have all four of us in the back of my dads Renault 25 with two of us under one seatbelt. Gone are the days when we used to get the whole school football team in my mate's dad's Cortina estate
I remember my Uncle going up to Blackpool to pick up his new TVR back in the 70s.
I'd sit next to him and my brother would somehow lie along the little parcel shelf between the seats and the rear of the convertible top.
ETA
I was laughing at the R25 story not the R5 one
Edited by croyde on Thursday 24th June 10:57
BobsPigeon said:
I started this thread simply because I was suprised to see "X3" on the back of a car that passed me on the motorway, as from the shadow it cast on me I expected "X5" at least. My car is indeed not small (not showing off like).
I hadn't considered all the finer details, as you nicely illustrate in this post and I have to say I didn't notice the ethnicity or gender of the driver, I'll play closer attention next time.
The X3, like all cars has certainly grown. Things like the X5 and 7 are built more for developing nations where new wealth drives that need for opulence from size but I've no issue with anyone driving any car so long as the individual has manners. Larger cars have a tendency to highlight poor manners and they will also scare people more. Personally, I prefer mid sized cars, a 3 series estate is large enough for me, as is an X3 and I'll hedge against the occasional need for a larger vehicle with a roof box and tow hitch. I hadn't considered all the finer details, as you nicely illustrate in this post and I have to say I didn't notice the ethnicity or gender of the driver, I'll play closer attention next time.
There's clearly a debate to be had over the excessive size of vehicles but it needs to be at an intelligent level with those who disrupt mature debate with flat roofed b
hing about women detracting from such a discussion. It's 2021 but some punters are stuck in the 70s and are just using SUVs as a proxy for their real issues. Personally, I'm of the view that taxing more overtly, directly by weight would be a very good thing. VED and the additional taxes on £40k+ cars should be supplemented with additional taxation on weight to overtly allow users to contribute further. I'd consider a gentle downsizing of the UK fleet to be a positive thing. But there is simply no room or tolerance for the low brow hate displayed by the few who repeatedly bring their irrelevant personal issues to any thread relating to SUVs.
DonkeyApple said:
Personally, I'm of the view that taxing more overtly, directly by weight would be a very good thing. VED and the additional taxes on £40k+ cars should be supplemented with additional taxation on weight to overtly allow users to contribute further. I'd consider a gentle downsizing of the UK fleet to be a positive thing. But there is simply no room or tolerance for the low brow hate displayed by the few who repeatedly bring their irrelevant personal issues to any thread relating to SUVs.
I like the idea of this, especially as it takes all the SUV-hate out of the equation; working away from a preferred standard (say, 4600mm x 1800mm x 1500kg) and penalising the consumer for selecting a larger vehicle or rewarding them for undershooting those characteristics. E.g.
Length/4600 = fL
Width/1800 = fW
Mass/1500 = fM
fM² x fW² x fM² = ‘Compound factor’
By bolting the ‘compound factor’ onto the pre-existing VED rates (so emissions would still be considered) you’d quarter the VED due on a sub-ton city car and approximately triple the VED on a (US parlance) full-sized saloon or larger SUV; those somewhere around the baseline weight and dimensions continue to pay ~ the same.
Apologies for foul language in my previous posts. For example Range rover weight is around 2.5 tone - usually moves mum and kid. Please don't tell me that you need vehicle that weighs nearly as much as ford transit for everyday use. There is no place for these monstrosities on the roads. Our local roads get blocked by these things daily during school run hours. People can't even park it properly. If there is 2 normal cars going opposite direction there is no problem passing each other. As soon as SUV turns up people have to reverse/stop to give them extra room, they're truly special.
Haltamer said:
This:- Look at Europe (Where fortunately SUVs don't seem to have proliferated to quite the same extent as yet) - Plenty more estate and saloon cars which fill the same job without being giant tanks.
Without getting onto the environmental points (Undoing any gains in efficiency by increasing size), they're more dangerous to other road users.
More mass = more energy; Much larger blind spots - Backovers and frontovers are hugely common in the US, hence the common introduction of reversing cameras to save people from crushing their own children.
The controversial audi advert that was pulled demonstrates this quite well:-
If a child is nealy concealed by the bumper height of an RS4, what chance is there with a Q7?
There's plenty of other comparisons:
I wrote off a traffic cone because of this in a petrol station when driving a Landcruiser. Forgot it was there, couldn't see it from the drivers seat and it ended up shredded in a wheelarch, I can see how it could happen to a child. Without getting onto the environmental points (Undoing any gains in efficiency by increasing size), they're more dangerous to other road users.
More mass = more energy; Much larger blind spots - Backovers and frontovers are hugely common in the US, hence the common introduction of reversing cameras to save people from crushing their own children.
The controversial audi advert that was pulled demonstrates this quite well:-
If a child is nealy concealed by the bumper height of an RS4, what chance is there with a Q7?
There's plenty of other comparisons:
As it happens I quite like 4x4s but I know they are pointless in the UK which is why I don't currently own one. The trouble with that argument is that sports cars and performance cars are equally pointless and inefficient, you are still paying a premium for a capability that cannot actually be used anywhere just to make yourself feel good. That being the case I think it's best not to worry yourself too much about what other people choose to drive, however perplexing it might seem.
Back on topic I think it depends how and where you use a car what is too big. On the motorway at speed there is no real downside to big (but not tall) cars and a great deal of upside. If you have to park on the street and drive at low speed in urban traffic or tight country lanes then the increased refinement is negated and the size becomes an issue.
Mrtank said:
Apologies for foul language in my previous posts. For example Range rover weight is around 2.5 tone - usually moves mum and kid. Please don't tell me that you need vehicle that weighs nearly as much as ford transit for everyday use. There is no place for these monstrosities on the roads. Our local roads get blocked by these things daily during school run hours. People can't even park it properly. If there is 2 normal cars going opposite direction there is no problem passing each other. As soon as SUV turns up people have to reverse/stop to give them extra room, they're truly special.
That's an issue of footprint and poor driving as opposed to the height or weight of a vehicle. If those people drove S classes you'd have the same issue. Excessively large cars are purely a function of excessively large disposable incomes. Ergo targeted taxation on all such vehicles would be pertinent.
But you're also exempting all the other users who can't drive and who have larger cars than they historically would have had by going the simple route and thinking it's all the fault of SUVs. The reality is that your modern hatchback is now the size of what was a family car and that is as much the cause of the issue.
A Golf is about 20cm wider than it used to be so that's 40 cm lost of road space.
A modern Golf is as wide as a Range Rover Classic. As is a 3 series which is also 20cm longer. The beloved people's chariot of PH that is deemed acceptable because it's cheap is pretty much the width of a typical SUV.
All our cars are larger and so all are to blame for the loss of road space. Arguably, SUVs have grown in width less than what are seemingly acceptable cars of the people.
The bulk of people's ire is simply money related and women related which is why some are obsessed with the school run and not parking spaces as the flat roofed pub.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff