SUV Hatred

[Donbot]

Lots of narrow roads and on street parking where I live so the size of some of them just seems totally inappropriate for their use, and can be a pain in the ass to get past.

I wouldn't go as far as saying I hate them though.

[Fady]

Julian Scott said:

Krikkit said:

LimaDelta said:

Good choice BTW, the hatred is mostly jealousy.

Not necessarily.

SUVs tend to be worse-handling, less economical, pointlessly massive examples of otherwise good cars.

As a good example, the OP's incoming car - the F-pace SVR is a very cool machine, but it'd be even cooler if they just made an estate with the same dimensions internally etc.

The worst part about SUVs isn't the "premium" end, but the move to make every new car a crossover/4x4/SUV or whatever they should be called... Build a car that's objectively worse to follow fashion and keeping-up-with-the-Joneses. See also, massive alloys and stiff suspension.

I guess this is what I mean. Surely the same dimensions would just be an SUV? I'd need an e-class estate to get the same boot space and that would have a far bigger footprint?

Not sure the 'pointlessly massive' fits with the 'objectivity' either?

Don't know that the E-Class does have a bigger footprint. Maybe longer but not as wide and likely not as heavy. It's about choices and just sounds like you are trying to satisfy your own conscience!

[Brave Fart]

I've encountered two types of SUV-hater, although I'm sure there are more 'types'.

Type 1 is the engineering nerd, who chunters on about a high centre of gravity and excessive weight compared to an estate car. Said nerd also likes to criticise SUVs' handling, but the owners of these cars couldn't care less about any of these things, I have found.

Type 2 is the eco-loon, who singles out the SUV as the chief cause of climate catastrophe. But this loon wants us to live in a dark, cold shed, surviving on thin gruel whilst helping to re-wild the local park. Nutter, and best ignored if possible.

Meanwhile, consumers vote with their wallet and choose the car they feel best suits their needs, and why shouldn't they?

OP, enjoy your new car - there's a F-Pace SVR near me that drives past every so often, and sounds glorious.

[JD82]

BoRED S2upid said:

QJumper said:

Julian Scott said:

vikingaero said:

Do you live anywhere where the Tyre Extinguishers have form for operating?

Tyre Extinguishers?

Eco warriors who go around letting the air out tyres on SUV's.

With a screwdriver.

Tyres tend to be expensive for SUVs.

It also makes no sense at all. Why not target vehicles of all descriptions with high CO2 or NOx figures? Or new cars that need precious metals? Or people who drive the most miles? Or all diesels? Or aggressive driving styles? Targeting 'SUVs' actually makes no sense if you care about the environment. Many in that category are less damaging than many 'normal' cars these days.

[Krikkit]

Julian Scott said:

I guess this is what I mean. Surely the same dimensions would just be an SUV? I'd need an e-class estate to get the same boot space and that would have a far bigger footprint?

Not sure the 'pointlessly massive' fits with the 'objectivity' either?

An estate with the same internal cargo volume would be shorter (vertically), probably a touch narrower (although again SVR = wide arches etc no doubt).

It would also be much easier for other road users to see around etc, which is a bit of a pain at the moment with cars gradually increasing in size.

Edited by Krikkit on Friday 23 September 14:41

[kambites]

Such cars don't appeal to me in the slightest but if you like it, good luck to you.

Just be sure to think about your following distances until you get used to it, because if you're sitting high enough up to see over the car in front it's very easier to drift closer to them than you intend to.

Edited by kambites on Friday 23 September 14:42

[Bennet]

Julian Scott said:

Despite the car’s 5l supercharged V8, 542bhp and British credentials, am I set for a barrage of hatred and criticism?

From whom?

Not unless you specifically go around inviting it. In my private opinion, it's probably a bit of a tw@tty car to drive, but I would never say that to you, unless you started a conversation about people's opinions on your car.

[LuS1fer]

I don't get why people say SUVs have a good driving position because every one I've tried, I don't like.

I also don't like a high C of G that generates roll or big tyres that numb and slow the steering. It seems like the suspension is going to be fighting all that weight, constantly.

But if you enjoy it, go for it. I'd take an XFR/XJR or F-Type R myself.

The fact you posted suggests you worry what other people might think. Can't say I ever have.

[BoRED S2upid]

JD82 said:

It also makes no sense at all. Why not target vehicles of all descriptions with high CO2 or NOx figures? Or new cars that need precious metals? Or people who drive the most miles? Or all diesels? Or aggressive driving styles? Targeting 'SUVs' actually makes no sense if you care about the environment. Many in that category are less damaging than many 'normal' cars these days.

Don’t give nutters ideas I’d rather not have the tyres slashed on my dirty diesel estate.

[anonymous-user]

It's like people who buy staffies and big dogs to intimidate other people. A large percentage of people who drive (usually German) SUVs drive like absolute idiots.

1)Driving six inches from your bumper in an attempt to make you drive faster
2)When a road merges, driving in the outside lane and then forcing their way in at the last second. The same if there is a queue to pull off onto the motorway.
3)Pull out in front of you at roundabouts and junctions forcing you to slow down
4)If their lane is blocked by parked cars or a bus, just pulling out into your lane, forcing you to stop.

I was at the Airport yesterday, it is actually quite scary how large the percentage of cars in the car park were SUVs. It's like a massive arms race, because people have them everyone else feels they need to get one too to be "safe"

I have never driven one and I live in Greater London with no driveway. Isn't it a constant pain in the arse owning one, trying to find somewhere to park it and driving down congested narrow roads?

Edited by anonymous-user on Friday 23 September 14:59

[Julian Scott]

Fady said:

Don't know that the E-Class does have a bigger footprint. Maybe longer but not as wide and likely not as heavy. It's about choices and just sounds like you are trying to satisfy your own conscience!

True. E-class is 5cm narrower, 20cm longer and 100kg lighter; like for like, it's also £30,000 more expensive!

[nickfrog]

Krikkit said:

LimaDelta said:

Good choice BTW, the hatred is mostly jealousy.

Not necessarily.

SUVs tend to be worse-handling, less economical, pointlessly massive examples of otherwise good cars.

As a good example, the OP's incoming car - the F-pace SVR is a very cool machine, but it'd be even cooler if they just made an estate with the same dimensions internally etc.

The worst part about SUVs isn't the "premium" end, but the move to make every new car a crossover/4x4/SUV or whatever they should be called... Build a car that's objectively worse to follow fashion and keeping-up-with-the-Joneses. See also, massive alloys and stiff suspension.

There are some downsides indeed. All cars are compromised. I find the compromises of estates worse than the compromises of SUVs for my needs, particularly in terms of length.

If I wanted handling for family transport I wouldn't want an estate either. Something like a RS6 is very heavy too. Its handling vs the Urus was awful in the Topgear piece around the track.

I don't think SUV are fashionable either, they are everywhere and have been around for decades. I am sure some buy them for image but that shouldn't worry you if image is not important to you.

[MustangGT]

Joey Deacon said:

2)When a road merges, driving in the outside lane and then forcing their way in at the last second. The same if there is a queue to pull off onto the motorway.

You do realise that 'merge in turn' is the recommended way of doing this? See section 134 of the Highway Code.

[nickfrog]

Joey Deacon said:

It's like people who buy staffies and big dogs to intimidate other people. A large percentage of people who drive (usually German) SUVs drive like absolute idiots.

1)Driving six inches from your bumper in an attempt to make you drive faster
2)When a road merges, driving in the outside lane and then forcing their way in at the last second. The same if there is a queue to pull off onto the motorway.
3)Pull out in front of you at roundabouts and junctions forcing you to slow down
4)If their lane is blocked by parked cars or a bus, just pulling out into your lane, forcing you to stop.

I was at the Airport yesterday, it is actually quite scary how large the percentage of cars in the car park were SUVs. It's like a massive arms race, because people have them everyone else feels they need to get one too to be "safe"

I have never driven one and I live in Greater London with no driveway. Isn't it a constant pain in the arse owning one, trying to find somewhere to park it and driving down congested narrow roads?

Classic confirmation bias.

There are similar proportions of morons in any kind of cars IME, ie very very low. Or maybe that's where I live.

[BS62]

JD82 said:

BoRED S2upid said:

QJumper said:

Julian Scott said:

vikingaero said:

Do you live anywhere where the Tyre Extinguishers have form for operating?

Tyre Extinguishers?

Eco warriors who go around letting the air out tyres on SUV's.

With a screwdriver.

Tyres tend to be expensive for SUVs.

It also makes no sense at all. Why not target vehicles of all descriptions with high CO2 or NOx figures? Or new cars that need precious metals? Or people who drive the most miles? Or all diesels? Or aggressive driving styles? Targeting 'SUVs' actually makes no sense if you care about the environment. Many in that category are less damaging than many 'normal' cars these days.

Based on this part of their website , where step 1 of deflating an SUV tyre is: "Locate an SUV. In towns and cities, you won’t have to walk far to find one. Target posh / middle-class areas." it's got fk all to do with the climate and everything to do with being a nasty, classist, spiteful, envious prick.

[nickfrog]

BS62 said:

Based on this part of their website , where step 1 of deflating an SUV tyre is: "Locate an SUV. In towns and cities, you won’t have to walk far to find one. Target posh / middle-class areas." it's got fk all to do with the climate and everything to do with being a nasty, classist, spiteful, envious prick.

Exactly. Green eyed monsters. They are inciting criminal damage basically out of bitterness.

[kambites]

nickfrog said:

Classic confirmation bias.

There are similar proportions of morons in any kind of cars IME, ie very very low. Or maybe that's where I live.

I think logic dictates that it's a bit of both. It would be amazing at a psychological level if a person's level of innate aggressiveness didn't have some form of correlation with the cars they like, specially the images they want those cars to portray (lets not kid ourselves that image isn't a significant driving factor in a significant number of car purchases); but I'm sure the correlation is pretty weak and consequently the majority of comments along the lines of "X cars are driven like idiots" is confirmation bias.

Not just confirmation bias but also other misleading perception. I think it's inevitable that a big car being driven in an aggressive way is more intimidating and hence more noticeable than a small car being driven in the same way, regardless of the personal bias of the person being intimidated.

[thebraketester]

Julian Scott said:

Sat here waiting for my new car to be delivered (F-Pace SVR). Or rather, initially waiting for the delivery driver to call to say he is an hour away.

I'm like a kid at Christmas, pretending to work, but actually looking at reviews and comments on this and other sites/forums.

This is the first SUV/4x4 I’ve owned, but not the first I’ve driven. I’m a big fan of the driving position and the drive of an SUV as much as the extra benefit the greater loadspace begets, but on this and other forums, the anti-SUV sentiment is prominent, especially to those who can’t demonstrate a specific and unequivocal need for such a car. Despite the car’s 5l supercharged V8, 542bhp and British credentials, am I set for a barrage of hatred and criticism?

I guess you are about to find out. :-)

[samoht]

I think the F-Pace is less objectionable than most SUVs, mainly because it's styled with a certain curved elegance, rather than purely focusing on trying to create as aggressive, hard-edged visage as possible to project dominance and intimidate other road users. It's also not as common, which helps I think.

So I suggest that as long as you drive it in a manner respectful of others around you, there's no reason to particularly expect any hatred.

[mat205125]

At the risk of sounding like a stereotypical SUV driver, but "who cares what other people think?"

I've had my X5 for over 8 years, and honestly can't think of a better solution for my day to day needs ..... the fact its older, less expensive, and has a few war wounds just makes it even more perfect for daily duties.

It's a licence protecting cruiser, a transcontinental comfy barge, a stable tow workhorse, a load lugging tip trip refuse disposal vessel, and a horrible weather dream.

If someone wants to criticise my "planet killing" choice, whilst renting a disposable white good every third year, then so be it.

I'm at 215k miles at the moment, and no way I'm getting rid of it before it's hit 250k