How big is too big...
Discussion
bcr5784 said:
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.
Maybe they don't want an MPV. Your A110 seems a bit excessive too. A Caterham is much lighter, not to mention quicker and better handling...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.
Bill said:
Maybe they don't want an MPV. Your A110 seems a bit excessive too. A Caterham is much lighter, not to mention quicker and better handling...
So(?) -I've owned (and raced) a Caterham, a 981 a couple of Loti (and driven lots more) and come to a conclusion what (on balance) meets my current requirements (in combination with my OH's car) . My feeling is that many don't "do the work" when choosing a car. You can't buy a "I fancy a.." and expect it to really be your best choice without validating it with a test drive and a serious look at others with similar attributes.Edited by bcr5784 on Thursday 24th June 21:53
bcr5784 said:
So(?) -I've owned (and raced) a Caterham, a 981 a couple of Loti (and driven lots more) and come to a conclusion what (on balance) meets my current requirements (in combination with my OH's car) . My feeling is that many don't "do the work" when choosing a car. You can't buy a "I fancy a.." and expect it to really be your best choice without validating it with a test drive and a serious look at others with similar attributes.
That's a remarkably patronising perspective. Edited by bcr5784 on Thursday 24th June 21:53
. Everyone is dumb but you're a meticulous genius. People think about their car purchases. It's the second largest spend after their home. What you're ignoring is that almost everyone on the planet uses different criteria to yourself and myself. It's our criteria which are manifestly anomalous and therefore statistically incorrect.
Similar with MPVs. They have a practicality but are remarkably undesirable. It's not all about fashion but you cannot Pooh Pooh fashion either as, again, you have to be in the minority to not follow fashion in some way. Take flares and kipper ties, to choose to wear them means either a fancy dress party is going on or someone has escaped a home.
DonkeyApple said:
Similar with MPVs. They have a practicality but are remarkably undesirable. It's not all about fashion but you cannot Pooh Pooh fashion either as, again, you have to be in the minority to not follow fashion in some way. Take flares and kipper ties, to choose to wear them means either a fancy dress party is going on or someone has escaped a home.
"Remarkably undesirable!!" They are ONLY undesirable because of the FASHION. Any rational assesment would say that an MPV is just as (more ?) desirable as an SUV unless you actually need off-road ability or 4WD. Estate cars (eg Scimitar GTE) or MPVs (Espace) were once fashionable (remarkably desirable) but now aren't.The problem for me is not that others choose SUVs per se BUT it means that my choice of (for me) a more appropriate estate car or MPV is getting ever more limited. There is only one supermini estate (Fabia) and many of the others have their function corrupted as "sports tourers" with sloping backs and small tailgates (in the hope of making them fashionable). And MPVs have all but died with the rest (like the S-Max etc) are starved of development and will probably die too.
Fashion is cyclic and eventually people will recognise that the king has no clothes (or that kipper ties and flares are rather silly).
Edited by bcr5784 on Friday 25th June 08:03
Edited by bcr5784 on Friday 25th June 08:05
When driving I think that visibility is the issue rather than size. I for one find modern cars hard to see out of and they seem bigger than they actually are. It's partly the thick pillars which are no doubt there for safety reasons but also the bum in the air styling with narrow windows. Most commercial vehicle drivers seem to make a good job of driving vehicles that are often quite a bit or sometimes much bigger than the biggest cars and I think that some of that is because the vehicles are designed for practicality rather than for showrooms.
When parking in car park spaces or on streets you cant get away from the fact that smaller cars are better.
When parking in car park spaces or on streets you cant get away from the fact that smaller cars are better.
bcr5784 said:
Bill said:
Maybe they don't want an MPV. Your A110 seems a bit excessive too. A Caterham is much lighter, not to mention quicker and better handling...
So(?) -I've owned (and raced) a Caterham, a 981 a couple of Loti (and driven lots more) and come to a conclusion what (on balance) meets my current requirements (in combination with my OH's car) . My feeling is that many don't "do the work" when choosing a car. You can't buy a "I fancy a.." and expect it to really be your best choice without validating it with a test drive and a serious look at others with similar attributes.Edited by bcr5784 on Thursday 24th June 21:53
Makes sense and not patronising at all
bcr5784 said:
DonkeyApple said:
Similar with MPVs. They have a practicality but are remarkably undesirable. It's not all about fashion but you cannot Pooh Pooh fashion either as, again, you have to be in the minority to not follow fashion in some way. Take flares and kipper ties, to choose to wear them means either a fancy dress party is going on or someone has escaped a home.
"Remarkably undesirable!!" They are ONLY undesirable because of the FASHION. Any rational assesment would say that an MPV is just as (more ?) desirable as an SUV unless you actually need off-road ability or 4WD. Estate cars (eg Scimitar GTE) or MPVs (Espace) were once fashionable (remarkably desirable) but now aren't.The problem for me is not that others choose SUVs per se BUT it means that my choice of (for me) a more appropriate estate car or MPV is getting ever more limited. There is only one supermini estate (Fabia) and many of the others have their function corrupted as "sports tourers" with sloping backs and small tailgates (in the hope of making them fashionable). And MPVs have all but died with the rest (like the S-Max etc) are starved of development and will probably die too.
Fashion is cyclic and eventually people will recognise that the king has no clothes (or that kipper ties and flares are rather silly).
Edited by bcr5784 on Friday 25th June 08:03
Edited by bcr5784 on Friday 25th June 08:05
I think people are seemingly thinking MPVs are as nice a place to be as a nice luxury SUV.
TyrannosauRoss Lex said:
I have been in a few MPVs (Scenic, Voyager etc) and a few luxury SUVs. From just being a passenger I can tell you the luxury SUVs are far, far nicer car. If someone wants something big and roomy enough for their needs (or simply, you know, just want it) but doesn't want something that is less refined, has a naff interior etc then why shouldn't they be able to choose the nice SUV?
I think people are seemingly thinking MPVs are as nice a place to be as a nice luxury SUV.
I think you are missing the point. Luxury SUVs exist because SUVs are fashionable. If MPVs were fashionable then there would be luxury MPVs. As I keep saying the fashion for SUVs distorts the market to the extent that more compact, practical, better handling, lighter MPVs are almost not available any more. I think people are seemingly thinking MPVs are as nice a place to be as a nice luxury SUV.
Anyone like to defend the fashion for double cab pickups which dominate the US market?
bcr5784 said:
TyrannosauRoss Lex said:
I have been in a few MPVs (Scenic, Voyager etc) and a few luxury SUVs. From just being a passenger I can tell you the luxury SUVs are far, far nicer car. If someone wants something big and roomy enough for their needs (or simply, you know, just want it) but doesn't want something that is less refined, has a naff interior etc then why shouldn't they be able to choose the nice SUV?
I think people are seemingly thinking MPVs are as nice a place to be as a nice luxury SUV.
I think you are missing the point. Luxury SUVs exist because SUVs are fashionable. If MPVs were fashionable then there would be luxury MPVs. As I keep saying the fashion for SUVs distorts the market to the extent that more compact, practical, better handling, lighter MPVs are almost not available any more. I think people are seemingly thinking MPVs are as nice a place to be as a nice luxury SUV.
Anyone like to defend the fashion for double cab pickups which dominate the US market?
When Porsche made the Cayenne, if it had bombed, many luxury SUVs now wouldn't exist. But it went great guns, because it's what customers want.
Luxury SUVs exist because wealthy people recognise the benefits of SUVs and didn't think much of the top spec Vitara or Land Cruiser's fit and finish and refinement, so bought a Range Rover, and the other premium brands thought "we'll have a bit of that".
Forget fashion - it's not fashion. People aren't buying these because everyone else has got one. They're buying them because they like the size and road presence; they feel like they can bully smaller cars; they feel safer; they prefer having a better view of the road; they need to chuck a lot of stuff in the back; it's easier to strap the kids in; granny can get in and out without a crane. Pick some. Not all apply to every buyer. Some do. Their privilege. You don't agree. Your privilege too. Neither are wrong, unless one demeans a massive segment of the car buying public because one disagrees with the other's choices.
bcr5784 said:
DonkeyApple said:
Similar with MPVs. They have a practicality but are remarkably undesirable. It's not all about fashion but you cannot Pooh Pooh fashion either as, again, you have to be in the minority to not follow fashion in some way. Take flares and kipper ties, to choose to wear them means either a fancy dress party is going on or someone has escaped a home.
"Remarkably undesirable!!" They are ONLY undesirable because of the FASHION. Any rational assesment would say that an MPV is just as (more ?) desirable as an SUV unless you actually need off-road ability or 4WD. Estate cars (eg Scimitar GTE) or MPVs (Espace) were once fashionable (remarkably desirable) but now aren't.The problem for me is not that others choose SUVs per se BUT it means that my choice of (for me) a more appropriate estate car or MPV is getting ever more limited. There is only one supermini estate (Fabia) and many of the others have their function corrupted as "sports tourers" with sloping backs and small tailgates (in the hope of making them fashionable). And MPVs have all but died with the rest (like the S-Max etc) are starved of development and will probably die too.
Fashion is cyclic and eventually people will recognise that the king has no clothes (or that kipper ties and flares are rather silly).
Edited by bcr5784 on Friday 25th June 08:03
Edited by bcr5784 on Friday 25th June 08:05
At some point your lone voice on this matter will help you to appreciate the finer realities that no one really wanted MPVs and no one really had to resort to them for financial reasons. 'Fashion' plays a role in all purchases and trends come and go but it's infeasible to write off the SUV as existing purely because of fashion. They exist because they are more practical versions of other car types and the GDP is there to facilitate them.
The thing is SUVs come in all sorts of sizes and prices. You could just call them "cars" and close that debate. The smaller ones are actually very very close to what small MPVs once were, unsurprisingly as they are based on the same donor hatch chassis. They however retain the tacky faux by faux add-ons and I can see why that would put someone off if they are image conscious, but then say that they are essentially bought for fashion sounds very hypocritical, at best.
Personally I like them for functionality and despite their image.
Personally I like them for functionality and despite their image.
The reason I favour and MPV over an SUV as a family car is the footprint. Pushing the engine slightly further back and under the passenger compartment makes for a shorter bonnet.
I also prefer the packaging of an MPV and it's ability to carry a lot of stuff because of the large square tailgate area. With the seats folded down you pretty much have a van which is not what you can say about an SUV.
For comparison a Tiguian Allspace (7 seats) vs Touran (7 seats)
Tiguan Allspace boot space with seats down:
1775 Litres load space
4701 Length
1839 Width
1675 Height
Weight - 1,610 to 1,920 kg
Touran:
1857 Litres load space
4527 Length
1829 Width
1659 Height
Weight - 1,454 to 1,571 kg
The Touran has a much shorter length and much more load space while being over 100kg lighter.
I totally understand why people would take an SUV over and MPV as they are more stylish and comfortable but for me SUV's are not my idea of a family car. They are much too big and way too heavy.
I also prefer the packaging of an MPV and it's ability to carry a lot of stuff because of the large square tailgate area. With the seats folded down you pretty much have a van which is not what you can say about an SUV.
For comparison a Tiguian Allspace (7 seats) vs Touran (7 seats)
Tiguan Allspace boot space with seats down:
1775 Litres load space
4701 Length
1839 Width
1675 Height
Weight - 1,610 to 1,920 kg
Touran:
1857 Litres load space
4527 Length
1829 Width
1659 Height
Weight - 1,454 to 1,571 kg
The Touran has a much shorter length and much more load space while being over 100kg lighter.
I totally understand why people would take an SUV over and MPV as they are more stylish and comfortable but for me SUV's are not my idea of a family car. They are much too big and way too heavy.
nickfrog said:
SUVs are not fashionable at all, they've been around for decades, I actually think they're naff. What's fashionable is the bizarre and irrational hatred for SUVs. Just buy an estate, there are plenty of them.
Are there plenty?I'd argue there is a lot less choice for people who don't want an SUV/Crossover than there used to be.
Pappyjohn said:
The reason I favour and MPV over an SUV as a family car is the footprint. Pushing the engine slightly further back and under the passenger compartment makes for a shorter bonnet.
I also prefer the packaging of an MPV and it's ability to carry a lot of stuff because of the large square tailgate area. With the seats folded down you pretty much have a van which is not what you can say about an SUV.
For comparison a Tiguian Allspace (7 seats) vs Touran (7 seats)
Tiguan Allspace boot space with seats down:
1775 Litres load space
4701 Length
1839 Width
1675 Height
Weight - 1,610 to 1,920 kg
Touran:
1857 Litres load space
4527 Length
1829 Width
1659 Height
Weight - 1,454 to 1,571 kg
The Touran has a much shorter length and much more load space while being over 100kg lighter.
I totally understand why people would take an SUV over and MPV as they are more stylish and comfortable but for me SUV's are not my idea of a family car. They are much too big and way too heavy.
A Tiguan isn’t exactly a large suv though. It’s just a golf on stilts right? You say a much shorter length but your only talking 18cm over a 4.5m span is basically nothing. Even the weight is a ton less than the big SUV’s that this thread seems more focused on.I also prefer the packaging of an MPV and it's ability to carry a lot of stuff because of the large square tailgate area. With the seats folded down you pretty much have a van which is not what you can say about an SUV.
For comparison a Tiguian Allspace (7 seats) vs Touran (7 seats)
Tiguan Allspace boot space with seats down:
1775 Litres load space
4701 Length
1839 Width
1675 Height
Weight - 1,610 to 1,920 kg
Touran:
1857 Litres load space
4527 Length
1829 Width
1659 Height
Weight - 1,454 to 1,571 kg
The Touran has a much shorter length and much more load space while being over 100kg lighter.
I totally understand why people would take an SUV over and MPV as they are more stylish and comfortable but for me SUV's are not my idea of a family car. They are much too big and way too heavy.
Take a Range Rover with the split tailgate. Rear seats flip forward to give a flat floor too. Then if you have something long you can leave the lower tailgate up to still hold stuff in the boot while opening the top half to have whatever it is hang out. 2.7 tons of permanent 4x4 returning 35mpg on the motorway while it feels like cruising in an arm chair and just relaxes you. I’ve had S class, 7 series, 5 series, golf, focus, vans etc along with many hire cars.
Nothing comes even close to making a 700 mile drive feel utterly effortless. You can see over things to get a better view of the road (not cars in the road but hedges etc). Add in the ability to drive in snow/muddy field and tow a trailer then they make complete sense to most of the public. If everyone could afford it I think the roads would only have range rovers on them.
I don’t think style makes much difference to people. Practicality does.
Yep agree that the massive SUV is great for cruising in like any big car (I'd have an S class over an SUV for that), but the average Range Rover owner isn't doing 700 mile trips or trekking down muddy fields; they are usually clogging up the roads outside skools causing traffic carnage. Things aren't going to change but good to hear everyones arguments again.
Has anyone mentioned the safety aspect of SUV's yet
Has anyone mentioned the safety aspect of SUV's yet
Pappyjohn said:
Yep agree that the massive SUV is great for cruising in like any big car (I'd have an S class over an SUV for that), but the average Range Rover owner isn't doing 700 mile trips or trekking down muddy fields; they are usually clogging up the roads outside skools causing traffic carnage. Things aren't going to change but good to hear everyones arguments again.
Has anyone mentioned the safety aspect of SUV's yet
It doesn’t have to be a regular 700 mile trip. Once a year to visit relatives is enough to justify it. Same with the muddy field when trying to leave a wet Glastonbury or your camp site with caravan.Has anyone mentioned the safety aspect of SUV's yet
Just because you see them outside a school doesn’t mean they don’t do anything else with the car.
nickfrog said:
SUVs are not fashionable at all, they've been around for decades, I actually think they're naff. What's fashionable is the bizarre and irrational hatred for SUVs. Just buy an estate, there are plenty of them.
Someone should start a “show us your fast SUV” thread, it will turn the bizarre and irrational hatred up to 11 
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff