4x4 drivers 'more likely to flout law'

Anan1

Here's a big surprise for everyone...

http://cars.uk.msn.com/news/car_news_article.aspx?cp-documentid=586453

Stark

I can't believe in this age of rapidly increasing fuel prices that sales of the things are actually increasing.

Anan1

Stark wrote:

I can't believe in this age of rapidly increasing fuel prices that sales of the things are actually increasing.

There was a thread about SUVs on here some time back. My abiding impression afterwards was that rationality was hardly a hallmark of the average owner.

maidhc

Anan1 wrote:

My abiding impression afterwards was that rationality was hardly a hallmark of the average owner.

Don't draw them on.

junkyard

That's it so Jeremy Clarkson and Ken Livingston says SUVs are bad so we should all sell them. I don't think so. I've been driving SUVs for years and have never had an accident. In fact as a panel beater I can confirm that only a tiny fraction of my business is SUVs. There are some bigger fish to fry first i.e. boy racers and lady drivers. They are my best customers and thats a fact.

Stark

junkyard wrote:

In fact as a panel beater I can confirm that only a tiny fraction of my business is SUVs.

Undoubtedly because it's the other car that always comes out the worse for wear.

junkyard

Stark wrote:

Undoubtedly because it's the other car that always comes out the worse for wear.

Contrary to popular belief SUVs are made out of plastic and metal too, just like a car, and will crumple up just as much as a car. They're not all armor plated you know. We don't go around in our SUVs thinking " oh look there's a car lets mow it down for the craic" ffs people get real.

I suppose it will be white van mans turn next week.:rolleyes:

Anan1

junkyard wrote:

That's it so Jeremy Clarkson and Ken Livingston says SUVs are bad so we should all sell them. I don't think so. I've been driving SUVs for years and have never had an accident. In fact as a panel beater I can confirm that only a tiny fraction of my business is SUVs. There are some bigger fish to fry first i.e. boy racers and lady drivers. They are my best customers and thats a fact.

Actually, it was the Imperial College, London who did the research, and the British Medical Journal who published it. The crash statistics are from Admiral Insurance. I wouldn't pay too much heed to Clarkson & Livingstone on most issues but, as they say, even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

Stark

junkyard wrote:

I suppose it will be white van mans turn next week.:rolleyes:

Nah, we've Myspace to blame for the kiddie fiddling these days

junkyard

And what relevance does a U.K survey held on U.K. drivers have on Irish drivers exactly?:rolleyes:

maidhc

Please lets not do the SUV thing again!!!

If people want them, they can have them.

junkyard

Thanks maidhc, I rest my case.:)

colm_mcm

When I went home to the west last week, there was an article obviously copied and pasted from an american paper warning about SUV's and how easy they are to roll aver, and how much fuel they use.

It's all to easy to jump on a bandwagon

Guy:Incognito

I love the people that give out about "gas guzzling" suvs. Unless you ride a bike and use no petrol, stfu.These same people arnt on ranting about large engine cars, why not? I drive a 2.5 petrol car that gets mpg in the low 20's. I reckon most new suvs are a good bit better than that. Yet no long winded threads giving out about me.

colm_mcm

Yeah, I don't get it. A Rav4 2.2 D-4D will average 40mpg, yet BMW 520 drivers don't get tree huggers on their case.

Even more bizzarely, European SUV's (which are mostly diesel) are being blamed for the hole in the ozone layer, the polar ice caps melting, the bad pop music being produced now, yet American cars with 5.7 engines are tolerated stateside.

Mailman

When I was over in Germany on work last month I was surprised by exactly how few 4X4s were on the road over there in comparission to here.
But then they have cities with narrow streets and fast motorways which don't lend themselves to 4X4s.
There were some 4X4s but they were generally either Range Rovers or hardcore 4X4s e.g. Land Rover defenders and Jeep Wranglers with all the go-anywhere kit affixed.
Practically all the caravans I saw being towed on the Autobahn were being towed by large engined saloons and estates too.
I suppose it is a case of the right tool for the job and 4X4s aren't considered appropriate transportation to satisfy users needs over there.
Maybe we need them for the potholes - can't see any compelling reason to own them. Was looking at the ladder frame of a new 4X4(through massive wheelarch) at eyelevel while parked in traffic today and was thinking to myself they are all bright and shiny but the majority of these things are very agricultural at heart.

colm_mcm

most SUV's have gone boyind ladder frames and have evoled into cool estates (with token 4X4 ability)

Lex Luthor

Mailman wrote:

When I was over in Germany on work last month I was surprised by exactly how few 4X4s were on the road over there in comparission to here.

Why would you want one over there anyway, when its all autobahns....I'd take a M5 over there any day over a X5

pburns

Most of us on this forum are car-lovers of one persusion or another so lets ignore the (weak) environmental debate for now.

The problem I have with SUVs is:
(a.) higher centre of gravity - even the best 4x4s won't handle as well as a car, or be as manoeuvrable in a sticky situation.
(b.) Imperial College, London/British Medical Journal / crash statistics from Admiral Insurance - like it or not there's strong evidence out there that those who are the second parties to a 4x4 crash come off second best. From the above source:

...same research suggests SUVs also do far more damage in an accident and even more worryingly, according to New Scientist, a pedestrian hit by an SUV is twice as likely to be killed as one hit by a saloon car.

junkyard wrote:

...I've been driving SUVs for years and have never had an accident...

junkyard wrote:

And what relevance does a U.K survey held on U.K. drivers have on Irish drivers exactly?

Those are pretty...eh, weak...arguments to say the least... If people want to drive SUVs in a free society fine. However the indignant and irrational response when the fallacies of these yokes is pointed out is pretty laughable.

Anan1

Stekelly wrote:

I love the people that give out about "gas guzzling" suvs. Unless you ride a bike and use no petrol, stfu.These same people arnt on ranting about large engine cars, why not? I drive a 2.5 petrol car that gets mpg in the low 20's. I reckon most new suvs are a good bit better than that. Yet no long winded threads giving out about me.

Did you actually read the article linked to the top of this thread? It's about accident statistics & driver behaviour, not fuel consumption.

junkyard

pburns wrote:

Most of us on this forum are car-lovers of one persusion or another so lets ignore the (weak) environmental debate for now.

The problem I have with SUVs is:
(a.) higher centre of gravity - even the best 4x4s won't handle as well as a car, or be as manoeuvrable in a sticky situation.
(b.) Imperial College, London/British Medical Journal / crash statistics from Admiral Insurance - like it or not there's strong evidence out there that those who are the second parties to a 4x4 crash come off second best. From the above source:

...same research suggests SUVs also do far more damage in an accident and even more worryingly, according to New Scientist, a pedestrian hit by an SUV is twice as likely to be killed as one hit by a saloon car.





Those are pretty...eh, weak...arguments to say the least... If people want to drive SUVs in a free society fine. However the indignant and irrational response when the fallacies of these yokes is pointed out is pretty laughable.

Obviously the bigger the vehicle the bigger the risk, a large van or mini bus is just or more dangerous on the road, should they be banned too?
Tbh I'm s**t sick of these stupid arguments like "I drive a small car and I'm afraid of anything bigger than me on the road so lets ban them or make it uncool or politically incorrect to drive anything bigger.
If human kind didn't progress we'd all still be living in caves.

Anan1

junkyard wrote:

Tbh I'm s**t sick of these stupid arguments like "I drive a small car and I'm afraid of anything bigger than me on the road so lets ban them or make it uncool or politically incorrect to drive anything bigger.

Why don't you try addressing the results of the research that was quoted in the article, instead of huffing and puffing around it?:)

colm_mcm

I think instead of blaming the SUVs, we should be looking at the alleged behaviour of SUV drivers due to their confidence in the safety of their motor.

Anan1

colm_mcm wrote:

I think instead of blaming the SUVs, we should be looking at the alleged behaviour of SUV drivers due to their confidence in the safety of their motor.

That's because you, unlike some, actually read the article.;)

junkyard

No matter what the argument there is always a for and against. I've read many an article in my time that was disproved over time so just because some university has done research under controlled conditions doesn't mean its set in stone, as it were, proof that their findings are to be believed.
It is only common sense that a bigger vehicle is going to take longer to stop, is going to be less maneuverable and in some cases heaver on fuel. I suppose your next argument is to make cars smaller as they would be lighter on fuel, wouldn't hurt people as much if they crash into them etc., We'll all end up on bikes that is if some study somewhere, finds that they present a serious hazard on the roads too. I think common sense is the order of the day, if you drive a SUV make allowances for other road users even the ones who shouldn't be where they are in many cases. And just in case you think I mean that I own the road or something I mean the motorist who pulls out in front of you without looking in the mirror or who thinks that they can pull any stunt on the road that they choose.

Mickk

I drive a 6l petrol hummer that gets 8 miles to the gallon, I honestly think I would sell it only for the sheer pleasure I get from the looks of utter contempt I get from certain cyclists and individuals with dreadlocks. It really makes my day, I hope I see you one day anan1

On a serious note if this hairbrain goverment got its finger out and realised the amount of them on Irish roads is largely due to the fact you can import them without paying vrt and tax them for 250euro. They have created this situation by being such extortionate thieves in the first place (vrt).

colm_mcm

I think you're confusing SUV's with Commercial 4X4's

Mickk

Well what would you call a hummer or an x5? I paid 50 euro vrt on my hummer, 3.8tonnes of road wrecking gas guzzling destruction but the goverment wants ~3k vrt on a toyota prius?

They can swivel on it I am sick of being robbed in this country, my next car is going to be a 6l 400bhp 1970 mustang fast back, a complete rebuild with a brand new engine and everything brand spanking on the treated old chassis and again it'll be 50vrt and 42 tax!

colm_mcm

This study was carried out on SUV's.

Mickk

Both hummers and x5's are suv's? What point are you trying to make?

colm_mcm

My point is that the government charging €50 VRT on commercial vehicles doesn't encourage people to go out and buy SUV's. Given that the study was carried out in the UK, where commercial 4X4's aren't that common, I can't really see where you're coming from.

SUV's are popular the world over, and commercial jeep sales are only one segment of the 4X4 market.

The sort of person who buys a commercial jeep is using it as an alternative to a van, which would come in for the same criticicisms for handling and pedestrian safety

I'm guessing that this study is implying that the type of person who drives an SUV is the type of person that is more likely to not wear a seatbelt, talk on a mobile and cause more accidents. Your conservative, law abiding citizen is more likely to drive a saloon? The thing that bugs me is people assuming that the SUV turns you into some sort of monster behind the wheel.

On a serious note if this hairbrain goverment got its finger out and realised the amount of them on Irish roads is largely due to the fact you can import them without paying vrt and tax them for 250euro. They have created this situation by being such extortionate thieves in the first place (vrt).

Mickk

colm_mcm wrote:

My point is that the government charging €50 VRT on commercial vehicles doesn't encourage people to go out and buy SUV's. Given that the study was carried out in the UK, where commercial 4X4's aren't that common, I can't really see where you're coming from.

Yes it does, you do realise that a commercial is just a class the goverment puts the vehicle in, its the exact same vehicle as a private minus the back seats? You can go to england, buy a private x5, take out the backs seats and show it to customs and pay 50 euro for vrt and 250 for tax. Also a percentage put the back seats back in after registering it.

You talk as if they are completely different vehicles, same 4x4 just a loophole in the irish law classes it differently. Also the study took pictures from a bridge or somewhere, do you really think they checked to see if the jeeps has back seats or not?

pburns

junkyard wrote:

...lets ban them or make it uncool or politically incorrect to drive anything bigger.
If human kind didn't progress we'd all still be living in caves.

In what way or how is driving a big lump of SUV 'progress' ?!?

junkyard wrote:

...I suppose your next argument is to make cars smaller as they would be lighter on fuel, wouldn't hurt people as much if they crash into them etc....

Well, yeah actually!! Not making cars smaller in terms of road footprint, but the use of lighter materials, more compact electronics etc. Make cars strucurally stronger but also lighter... This benefits economy, performance, handling and yes, ultimitely safety.

I appreciate that some road vehicles will always be lighter/heavier but that's not the point. A van, truck or bus has a function on our roads. The only functional use most SUVs have is to massage the ego of it's driver or mount a particularly nasty kerb outside a school in D4.

And no, I'm not a jealous tree-hugger. Actually, I drive a 4x4 very occasionally - an oldish Pajero - but this is a farm workhorse. Friends of mine who work in construction/agriculture have commercial 4x4s. But Merc MLs, Jeeps, X5s...not to mention f***** Hummers...

maidhc

Mickk wrote:

You can go to england, buy a private x5, take out the backs seats and show it to customs and pay 50 euro for vrt and 250 for tax. Also a percentage put the back seats back in after registering it.

You only get away with breaking the law for so long. As someone who was a FF politician in the 80's for confirmation.

Your comments do give some credence to the factual accuracy of the suvey.

Interestingly for those who feel SUVs are safer in a crash, it should be noted that they are only safer if you crash into a smaller vehicle. If you hit a wall or a tree the extra mass of the SUV will cancel out the stronger body, thus causing the structure to deform just as badly as a small car. There is also research proving this.

Anan1

Mickk wrote:

I drive a 6l petrol hummer that gets 8 miles to the gallon, I honestly think I would sell it only for the sheer pleasure I get from the looks of utter contempt I get from certain cyclists and individuals with dreadlocks. It really makes my day, I hope I see you one day anan1

Funny you should say that, I actually had a run-in with a Hummer in Leopardstown a few months ago. Best bit was, I was driving a Beetle turbo at the time, flower vase on the dash etc etc. Bit slow, aren't they?;)

Rovi

Mickk wrote:

Yes it does, you do realise that a commercial is just a class the goverment puts the vehicle in, its the exact same vehicle as a private minus the back seats? You can go to england, buy a private x5, take out the backs seats ...

AFAIK, these days you'll also be required to black out the rear side windows and weld up the rear seatbelt mounts.

colm_mcm

Mickk

You are saying that it's the (IRISH) government's fault that there are so many SUV's on the road due to the VRT loophole for commercials.

Surely then, they are doing their bit by charging huge amounts of VRT on passenger SUV's, and then effectively, for every one person who buys a commercial jeep because it is relatively affordable, the increased VRT on passenger models puts an SUV out of reach for another person.

The fact commercial off roaders don't have back seats means that they will never be used as family cars. Any commercials I've sold are bought for work.
When you tax a jeep as a commercial, you must sign a decleration saying that you will be using the vehicle for purely business purposes.

How then can you say that the VRT exemption on commercial jeeps encourages the use of SUV's

Mickk

maidhc wrote:

You only get away with breaking the law for so long. As someone who was a FF politician in the 80's for confirmation.

Tell that to the monk (who also happens to drive a hummer:D )

Mickk

Anan1 wrote:

Funny you should say that, I actually had a run-in with a Hummer in Leopardstown a few months ago. Best bit was, I was driving a Beetle turbo at the time, flower vase on the dash etc etc. Bit slow, aren't they?;)

6litre petrol v8 with 325 bhp, I would say it is more like he didn't want to waste the petrol on you...

I dont think I've gone over 40 miles an hour often in mine, I have a cbr400, a volvo 850 T5, and a v6 galant if I want to race.

Mickk

colm_mcm wrote:

Mickk

You are saying that it's the (IRISH) government's fault that there are so many SUV's on the road due to the VRT loophole for commercials.

Surely then, they are doing their bit by charging huge amounts of VRT on passenger SUV's, and then effectively, for every one person who buys a commercial jeep because it is relatively affordable, the increased VRT on passenger models puts an SUV out of reach for another person.

The fact commercial off roaders don't have back seats means that they will never be used as family cars. Any commercials I've sold are bought for work.
When you tax a jeep as a commercial, you must sign a decleration saying that you will be using the vehicle for purely business purposes.

How then can you say that the VRT exemption on commercial jeeps encourages the use of SUV's

I really think that a huge percentage of the 4x4's on the road are due to this loophole and I think it is their fault, not for allowing it, but for having vrt in the first place. I would not have bought a hummer if it were not for the classification it falls into over here because of the extortionate vrt rates on everything else. It is illegal what they do by having vrt and shouldn't be allowed. I will take any chance I get to dodge it and stick two fingers up right at them while doing so.

colm_mcm

Pretty much all the people who buy Land Cruisers from me are VAT registered, this would imply that they have businesses and are using them as commercial vehicles. nothing wrong with that

maidhc

Mickk wrote:

I really think that a huge percentage of the 4x4's on the road are due to this loophole and I think it is their fault, not for allowing it, but for having vrt in the first place. I would not have bought a hummer if it were not for the classification it falls into over here because of the extortionate vrt rates on everything else. It is illegal what they do by having vrt and shouldn't be allowed. I will take any chance I get to dodge it and stick two fingers up right at them while doing so.

But you just got a glorified van for your trouble that can legally carry less passeners than a Punto and that drives and costs as much run as a HGV. Way to go.

As colm said almost everyone who buys a commercial 4x4 needs one as a workhorse to run their business. Normally these are astute business people who would rather the low running costs of a berligo or transit, but need a 4x4 for a variety of reasons.

\m/_(>_<)_\m/

colm_mcm wrote:

The fact commercial off roaders don't have back seats means that they will never be used as family cars. s

not all...
my last two jeeps had back seats and i was still able to tax them commercially.
loop hole that the government cant or wont close. i did sign the declaration, but as i have my own company... every trip i make can be for business.:D
and asking a garda friend of mine, they don't enforce the law on this.

Mickk

\m/_(>_<)_\m/ wrote:

not all...
my last two jeeps had back seats and i was still able to tax them commercially.
loop hole that the government cant or wont close. i did sign the declaration, but as i have my own company... every trip i make can be for business.:D
and asking a garda friend of mine, they don't enforce the law on this.

True but word of warning you wana be careful, the garda dont care but have you ever been through a customs checkpoint? They do and they will take it off you there and then and fine you through the nose. They often have them in the nice areas, I've seen them in Sandyford and Killiney. Mostly they are looking for yellow reg irish drivers. Last year I went through two both on a sunday afternoon. http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/motoring/2005/0608/4055608995MOT08IMPOUNDED.html

They dont look like they take any **** either, no uniformed garda just plain clothes customs all with guns!

Mickk

maidhc wrote:

But you just got a glorified van for your trouble that can legally carry less passeners than a Punto and that drives and costs as much run as a HGV. Way to go.

As colm said almost everyone who buys a commercial 4x4 needs one as a workhorse to run their business. Normally these are astute business people who would rather the low running costs of a berligo or transit, but need a 4x4 for a variety of reasons.

If you read my post I said you can buy an x5 and take the seats out and register it. The reason you have to take the seats out is that it is less than 3.5tonnes. Any vehicle over 3.5tonnes (hummer 3.8tonnes;) ) with a bed a certain percentage of the wheelbase can have as many seats as you want.

Also colm I wouldn't doubt that most people who buy land cruisers want them as work horses, but do you really believe that the people buying and changing to commercial bmw x5's, porsche cayennes, vw touregs, range rover sports, merc ml's buy them because they are more suited to their business needs than a transit?

\m/_(>_<)_\m/

Mickk wrote:

True but word of warning you wana be careful, the garda dont care but have you ever been through a customs checkpoint? They do and they will take it off you there and then and fine you through the nose. They often have them in the nice areas, I've seen them in Sandyford and Killiney. Mostly they are looking for yellow reg irish drivers. Last year I went through two both on a sunday afternoon. http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/motoring/2005/0608/4055608995MOT08IMPOUNDED.html

They dont look like they take any **** either, no uniformed garda just plain clothes customs all with guns!

i was stopped by them and dipped. they asked all the relevant questions and of course i gave the relevant answers, and had my two kids in the back as well.
the big problem for them is, i run my own business so every trip i do in my 4X4 is business related.... if ya know what i mean. and it costs them to much to bring me to court and prove that my trip isn't business related. they are only looking company vans/4x4 that have a clear 9 to 5 or 5 day a week policy easy conviction...
any bit of complication they don't want to know... well that's my experience.

Mickk

Ah I think you just got the relevent form and taxed your vehicle for business purposes, you didn't evade vrt by bringing it in as a commercial and then putting the seats back in... Am I right?
If you had chances are they would have taken it off you there and then and left you and your kids by the side of the road.
What you did is perfectly legal and can be done on estates and hatchbacks not just jeeps.
See http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054930560&referrerid=59211&highlight=commercial+tax

\m/_(>_<)_\m/

Mickk wrote:

Ah I think you just got the relevent form and taxed your vehicle for business purposes, you didn't evade vrt by bringing it in as a commercial and then putting the seats back in... Am I right?
If you had chances are they would have taken it off you there and then and left you and your kids by the side of the road.
What you did is perfectly legal and can be done on estates and hatchbacks not just jeeps.
See http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2054930560&referrerid=59211&highlight=commercial+tax

mabye so,
no i didn't bring it from abroad. bought it from the showroom floor, ( well my company did ). got my VAT back for it, no NCT just a DOE. and road tax that as cheap as chips. oh and vat back for all the diesel i burn... great country

dts

So you can import an SUV for nothing as long as it has 2 seats and blacked out windows and its only 250euro instead of the 720 I am paying at the moment?
Hows that work then?

Mickk

Yea it can be, I might be able to claim the vat off my petrol as a business expense! They will try and rip you off but if you know the law you can legally duck and dive and really take the piss. I have just got a motor traders policy so soon as I get a rates bill I can buy whatever I want and drive them on garage plates without ever paying vrt:D
I really want a 70 mustang fastback like this: Sema Gambler

50 euro vrt and 42 tax, 450bhp new EVERYTHING barr the 36yo chassis!

Mickk

dts wrote:

So you can import an SUV for nothing as long as it has 2 seats and blacked out windows and its only 250euro instead of the 720 I am paying at the moment?
Hows that work then?

Yea 50 euro vrt and 250 tax. How it works is you go and show your local vrt office your converted suv and they ask you for 50 euro, you get a reg number and go into the tax office and they ask you for 250 euro and they give you a years tax! You do need to doe it every year tho instead of nct every two but its very simple to do.