Why do people hate on SUV drivers?

deandean

forestgirl wrote: »

..take the skoda kodiaq,seat tarraco ,vw allspace or nissan x trail or any of those 7 seater are brilliant for carrying long awkward things and can still carry passengers example the driver could have 2 passengers behind him one the middle row and one in the third row and have all other seats dropped flat including the front seat passenger all the different configurations are extremely handy

NOOO this is very dangerous and can lead to a driver fatality.
Many years ago now, I set up my car like this. Great idea I thought, the two surfboards fit along the left side and my girlfriend sat behind the driver's seat. And off we went on the 5h drive to Kerry.
GF was disgusted at being relegated to the back seat by a surfboard and I got it in both ears for the most of the trip, with threats of what she'd do if I pulled this lark again.
After long consideration of the available options, I bought a roofrack.

YellowLead

Because they are driven by total Karen’s who can’t drive....

Dav010

YellowLead wrote: »

Because they are driven by total Karen’s who can’t drive....

Karen’s can drive, they just think everybody else can’t.

circadian

I don't hate on SUV drivers but I wouldn't have one myself. I just don't really get it. As some people mentioned they're great for reduced mobility and I'd agree but a lot of my friends by SUV or crossovers for the space.

It's a hatchback on big wheels essentially. We were all going on a big holiday down th country a few years back and the amount of ****e I could fit into my estate compared to them was astounding. Not to mention the fantastic headroom in the back, even 6ft-ers are comfortable in there.

sebdavis

circadian wrote: »

I don't hate on SUV drivers but I wouldn't have one myself. I just don't really get it. As some people mentioned they're great for reduced mobility and I'd agree but a lot of my friends by SUV or crossovers for the space.

It's a hatchback on big wheels essentially. We were all going on a big holiday down th country a few years back and the amount of ****e I could fit into my estate compared to them was astounding. Not to mention the fantastic headroom in the back, even 6ft-ers are comfortable in there.

So you complain about SUV but then you buy an estate? which is a monster of a thing and for 99% of its life will have dust been carried in the boot

If going that direction better off buying a saloon and then having a roof box for the odd time you might need additional space

Just to add to mindless complaining about what people choose to drive by the way

Dav010

circadian wrote: »

I don't hate on SUV drivers but I wouldn't have one myself. I just don't really get it. As some people mentioned they're great for reduced mobility and I'd agree but a lot of my friends by SUV or crossovers for the space.

It's a hatchback on big wheels essentially. We were all going on a big holiday down th country a few years back and the amount of ****e I could fit into my estate compared to them was astounding. Not to mention the fantastic headroom in the back, even 6ft-ers are comfortable in there.

Test drive one, not one of those crossover/mini SUVs, you’ll get it.

forestgirl

sebdavis wrote: »

Exactly like an estate :-) Just a little higher

Exactly and estate cars are so convenient Compared saloon cars I had a passat saloon and the big boot was useless really because the opening of the boot was very shallow and anything that did fit in like shopping was impossible to reach unless you are someone with 6ft long arms

magicbastarder

Dav010 wrote: »

But your contention that a measurement for engine efficiency/pollution should take into account variables which are not connected to the engines performance, is daft

are you serious?
the CO2 generated to power your car actually exists. of *course* we have to try to quantify it.
i would argue that not including potential generation emissions is an even more egregious oversight than the likes of what VW et al were up to with dieselgate.

Dav010 wrote: »

Are you serious? Do you think they should include the emissions in production and transportation of the car, the mining of the metal etc?

hell, yes, i'm serious, for reasons Wibbs has already gone into.

hybrids are worse for the environment to manufacture than ICE cars.
yours - according to the top gear link i posted - weighs *3.2 tons*. it's like you're actually driving two cars.

to get my car up to that weight - it's not a small car, it's an octavia - would require sitting 5 reasonably heavy men in it, and then sitting *13 more* men on the roof.

theteal

I had my first proper drive of the wife's CRV on a jaunt down to East Sussex yesterday. I can see the appeal although completely unnecessary for me as a "daily" driver. Absolute thirsty bugger, 2.0 petrol, was to be expected. It will make our, hopefully more regular, trips back to Dublin a lot more comfortable. She wanted it to replace the old Yaris which was never going to see a 2nd child seat and the added height makes it easier getting them in - I can't really argue (what's the point?) with that logic.

forestgirl

magicbastarder wrote: »

i live very near a school, so probably see them more often than most. but yes, it's rare. occupancy on motorways and for work commuting is very down near 1 IIRC.

i don't think your bus analogy stands, unless we're running buses on routes where a considerable majority of trips are made with a nearly empty bus.

my point was i don't see the point in buying a car with (for most people!) a very rare outlier case in mind. go vans are available from as low as €10 per hour.

I remember this one time I bought a microwave standard enough size and I couldn't fit it in the boot of the passat as the opening wasn't wide enough,also the box it came in would add several inches so would i order a go van or whatever you call it in that scenario? I don't think so

beauf

sebdavis wrote: »

So you complain about SUV but then you buy an estate? which is a monster of a thing and for 99% of its life will have dust been carried in the boot

If going that direction better off buying a saloon and then having a roof box for the odd time you might need additional space

Just to add to mindless complaining about what people choose to drive by the way

We use the boot space in our 7 seater car a lot. The extra seats on a regular basis in normal times. The wide opening doors and big doors are great for getting elderly people in.

Dav010

magicbastarder wrote: »

are you serious?
the CO2 generated to power your car actually exists. of *course* we have to try to quantify it.
i would argue that not including potential generation emissions is an even more egregious oversight than the likes of what VW et al were up to with dieselgate.


hell, yes, i'm serious, for reasons Wibbs has already gone into.

hybrids are worse for the environment to manufacture than ICE cars.
yours - according to the top gear link i posted - weighs *3.2 tons*. it's like you're actually driving two cars.

to get my car up to that weight - it's not a small car, it's an octavia - would require sitting 5 reasonably heavy men in it, and then sitting *13 more* men on the roof.

I think you are trolling. The efficiency with which electricity to charge a car engine is produced has nothing to do with a measurement of the efficiency with which the car engine uses it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_power_stations_in_the_Republic_of_Ireland

There is a list of power stations in Ireland, are you honestly saying the CO2 value for a car engine should include emissions from the various types of power station used to generate the electricity the car engine uses? The same car would have different CO2 emission values dependent on the Irish power station supplying the EV charger. Have another cup of coffee.

forestgirl

beauf wrote: »

I find most of them are heavily compromised on interior space. Especially in the rear. They curve inwares from the sides and the rear and have heavy hipped designed, meaning they are a lot more cramped inside than a reasonably MPV which are boxy for a reason.

Yes thats true indeed but I think a lot of people buy the 7 seater but use primarily as a 5 seater because it gives the more boot space and of course should the need arise to carry an extra 2 at least the option is there which is probably rare enough with a lot of people

forestgirl

circadian wrote: »

I don't hate on SUV drivers but I wouldn't have one myself. I just don't really get it. As some people mentioned they're great for reduced mobility and I'd agree but a lot of my friends by SUV or crossovers for the space.

It's a hatchback on big wheels essentially. We were all going on a big holiday down th country a few years back and the amount of ****e I could fit into my estate compared to them was astounding. Not to mention the fantastic headroom in the back, even 6ft-ers are comfortable in there.

Yet again depending on the suv

magicbastarder

Dav010 wrote: »

There is a list of power stations in Ireland, are you honestly saying the CO2 value for a car engine should include emissions from the various types of power station used to generate the electricity the car engine uses?

CO2 is generated to power your car. you are arguing that that should *not* be captured.
if i drive a leaf or tesla, do i get to claim my car creates zero emissions? i know the leaf has 'zero emissions' written on the boot lid, but that's a con.

magicbastarder

forestgirl wrote: »

I remember this one time I bought a microwave standard enough size and I couldn't fit it in the boot of the passat as the opening wasn't wide enough,also the box it came in would add several inches so would i order a go van or whatever you call it in that scenario? I don't think so

because you couldn't fit a microwave into a passat is not, in itself, an argument that an SUV is the answer. there are *plenty* of cars that microwave would have easily fitted into which are approx the same size.

but let's take your point at face value. how often have you faced that scenario? i guess you don't buy microwaves often. you are saying you need to buy a bigger car (presumably more expensive) for the odd occasion you need to do this. why is hiring a van for maybe a total cost of €100p.a. such a big leap compared to actually having to change your car?

Dav010

magicbastarder wrote: »

CO2 is generated to power your car. you are arguing that that should *not* be captured.
if i drive a leaf or tesla, do i get to claim my car creates zero emissions? i know the leaf has 'zero emissions' written on the boot lid, but that's a con.

If the engine discharges zero emissions when driven, then yes, you get to claim your car creates zero emissions when driven.

How the electricity is made has nothing to do with your engines performance.

The J Stands for Jay

Dav010 wrote: »

McGaggs, why would anyone imagine that?

Because some of us care about the environment and other externalities of our decisions.

magicbastarder

Dav010 wrote: »

If the engine discharges zero emissions when driven, then yes, you get to claim your car creates zero emissions when driven.

How the electricity is made has nothing to do with your engines performance.

you keep going back to the *engine*. i am talking about the *car*.
and if you're going to argue that a tesla creates zero emissions when being driven, while ignoring the emissions created to charge it - which you obviously have to do to be able to drive it, that's a leap of logic straight into the realms of fantasy.

Dav010

magicbastarder wrote: »

you keep going back to the *engine*. i am talking about the *car*.

You understand engine CO2 emission values are a measurement engine performance?

magicbastarder wrote: »

So the claimed 72g/km is a fantasy. I know manufacturers claims usually are, but this adds a very tangible new layer to that

magicbastarder

Dav010 wrote: »

You understand engine CO2 emission values are a measurement engine performance?

your car has a motor as well as an engine. i'm amazed this is such a difficult concept to explain.

forestgirl

magicbastarder wrote: »

because you couldn't fit a microwave into a passat is not, in itself, an argument that an SUV is the answer. there are *plenty* of cars that microwave would have easily fitted into which are approx the same size.

but let's take your point at face value. how often have you faced that scenario? i guess you don't buy microwaves often. you are saying you need to buy a bigger car (presumably more expensive) for the odd occasion you need to do this. why is hiring a van for maybe a total cost of €100p.a. such a big leap compared to actually having to change your car?

I have a lot of scenario's though like a lot of people e.g going on holidays the extra large boot is needed(I way over pack by the way like most people)plus I love to take a folding bicycle with me to so for me its probably some way justified and we carry surf boards and wetsuits and we do self catering so I bring shopping and other bits too like my espresso machine 😀 and 2 teens and I don't have enough space

Dav010

McGaggs wrote: »

Because some of us care about the environment and other externalities of our decisions.

Honestly, I have to admit the reasons I bought it are:

• I love driving RR’s
• The VRT is considerably lower than the petrol/diesel versions.
• I usually drive small distances so a lot cheaper than petrol/diesel.
• €150 yearly tax.
• As car manufacturers move more towards hybrid/full EV production, the value will be better when I change it in 2 yrs.

Saving the environment is not on that list.

magicbastarder

forestgirl wrote: »

I have a lot of scenario's though like a lot of people e.g going on holidays the extra large boot is needed(I way over pack by the way like most people)plus I love to take a folding bicycle with me to so for me its probably some way justified and we carry surf boards and wetsuits and we do self catering so I bring shopping and other bits too like my espresso machine �� and 2 teens and I don't have enough space

you should buy an octavia, they're like the bleedin' tardis. huge boot, nice wide boot lid.

circadian

sebdavis wrote: »

So you complain about SUV but then you buy an estate? which is a monster of a thing and for 99% of its life will have dust been carried in the boot

If going that direction better off buying a saloon and then having a roof box for the odd time you might need additional space

Just to add to mindless complaining about what people choose to drive by the way

Where did I complain? I just stated I don't get it. I use the boot almost daily between shopping and throwing kids stuff in there like bikes/beach toys or whatever. We holiday in Ireland so it's extra handy there. It's also a phev so at least I'm rarely relying on ICE around town.

forestgirl

magicbastarder wrote: »

you should buy an octavia, they're like the bleedin' tardis. huge boot, nice wide boot lid.

I had the passat estate and it was brilliant like that its just a pity it wasn't a little higher to sit into thats the only reason I changed to the allspace it was the best of both worlds 😀 at least in my vw world

Dav010

magicbastarder wrote: »

your car has a motor as well as an engine. i'm amazed this is such a difficult concept to explain.

I’m amazed you don’t understand that car CO2 are a measurement of emissions when driving, not the national power grid.

Damien360

Dav010 wrote: »

I’m amazed you don’t understand that CO2 are a measurement of emissions when driving, not the national power grid.

If you didn't have 5000 posts, I would have thought you were trolling. How you think that the emissions to actually produce your car including its battery metals and the emissions to produce the electricity magically disappear as soon as you say you bought an EV or PHEV.

alias no.9

magicbastarder wrote: »

yours - according to the top gear link i posted - weighs *3.2 tons*. it's like you're actually driving two cars.

Per your own link, the kerb weight is a shade over 2.5 tonnes, still high but its important to keep to facts when you are also claiming that these big cars are driving around empty except for the driver (usually included in the kerb weight).

Wibbs

magicbastarder wrote: »

yours - according to the top gear link i posted - weighs *3.2 tons*. it's like you're actually driving two cars.

In my case it's two of my car with 1000 kilos left over. :eek::D*EDIT* as per Alias' post OK two of my yoke with 300 kilos left over.

theteal wrote: »

She wanted it to replace the old Yaris which was never going to see a 2nd child seat and the added height makes it easier getting them in - I can't really argue (what's the point?) with that logic.

They became popular as family cars for very good reasons alright, especially when you have young kids and child seats and the like.

Dav010 wrote: »

Honestly, I have to admit the reasons I bought it are:

• I love driving RR’s
• The VRT is considerably lower than the petrol/diesel versions.
• I usually drive small distances so a lot cheaper than petrol/diesel.
• €150 yearly tax.
• As car manufacturers move more towards hybrid/full EV production, the value will be better when I change it in 2 yrs.

Saving the environment is not on that list.

You're honest about it and fair play. Quite the few out there claim "green" credentials but it's pretty much all self delusion or bullshít.