Why do people drive unnecessarily large cars?

Tenzor07

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123551334#Comment_123551334

Which of the 1.838267 millions cyclists in Ireland was our Taxi driving friend referring to as Political I wonder… 🤣

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123551406#Comment_123551406

Vanilla search is pretty useless, but here's some examples;

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121539725/#Comment_121539725

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/114384528#Comment_114384528

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/113796398#Comment_113796398

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117817565/#Comment_117817565

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117821486/#Comment_117821486

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/76964138#Comment_76964138

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123551432#Comment_123551432

UP: Are you seriously asking for a number of how many people light a domestic fire on a typical winter's night? Or how many people are involved in cooking all the dinners in the country each day?

AJR: I'm not actually asking you for those numbers. 

UP: Okay, if it means that much to you, here are some figures related to those activities.

You're hilarious, Unkey P.

I'm sure Suckler will be hugely relieved to see your numbers, and will be able to work out what my numbers would have been from the sources you quoted.

Uncle Pierre

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123552211#Comment_123552211

Well, you kept making such a meal of me not giving numbers, that I thought I'd go and find them.

Furthermore, your stance of "Unkey P didn't give numbers, so why should I?" is now dead in the water. I suggest that it's now on you to produce some numbers after all to support the argument you made, instead of expecting somebody else to do it for you.

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123552300#Comment_123552300

No, I didn't make a meal about you not giving numbers. I made a meal about Suckler coming after me for numbers and going after you for numbers, which made it fairly obvious that he wasn't really interested in the numbers. It was just an arguement tactic.

If you or he think I'm going to spend a few hours being distracted down an irrelevant rabbit hole, you're going to be sorely dissapointed.

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123552316#Comment_123552316

I made a meal about Suckler coming after me for numbers and going after you for numbers, which made it fairly obvious that he wasn't really interested in the numbers. It was just an arguement tactic.

You again need to misrepresent the argument.

If you or he think I'm going to spend a few hours being distracted down an irrelevant rabbit hole, you're going to be sorely dissapointed.

But you were quite happy to do so when it suited you.

Uncle Pierre

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123552316#Comment_123552316

Oh come on, Andy. Grow up.

Yours was a clear "Unkey P didn't give numbers, so I won't either".

Unkey P has now given numbers. The ball is now in your court.

As regards "irrelevant rabbit hole"….IIRC, it was you who led us down here in the first place.

Cue more deflection and backtracking….

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123552944#Comment_123552944

No, try not changing my words and see how far you get with that argument.

Uncle Pierre

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123552970#Comment_123552970

Well, pardon me for paraphrasing. Here were your exact words: It's a bit silly to look for my numbers without looking for his numbers for context.

I've now given numbers in relation to what I wrote about, so according to your own good self, it's no longer silly to ask you to do the same.

By the way, on the topic of changing words - that's a bit rich from somebody who takes the words "linked to" and changes them to the very different "directly related to".

Yeah Right

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123535335#Comment_123535335

Par for the course, I'm afraid, with Andrew.

Take everything off on as many tangents as possible, artificially inflate numbers to hammer home your point that wouldn't be half as effective, save for the outright lying, browbeat and guilt-trip others into submission and then, when all else fails, play the man, not the ball.

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123553101#Comment_123553101

It was silly then, and it's silly now. It was silly then, because it clarified that Sucky wasn't actually interested in the numbers at all, but just thought he could bug me or delay me by pushing me down that road. Your willingness to play along is up to you, but it doesn't change the underlying fact that he wasn't actually interested in numbers in the first place.

Where did I say 'directly related to' please?

TracyMartell

I drive a Range Rover because I can afford it and I like it, it’s incredibly comfortable and feels luxurious. If people want to drive a small car they can. Seems there’s an element of jealousy off some posters here

Speedline

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123553833#Comment_123553833

I wouldn't drive a Range Rover, for several reasons, but I would absolutely respect anyone else's choice to drive one. It's their money, their choice.

magicbastarder

However, they exercise their choice on public roads, so it's not a 'none of your business' choice. It is my business what people choose to drive; especially, as has been proven, it makes the roads more dangerous for others.

blackbox

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123553899#Comment_123553899

Same here. I'd have no peace of mind regarding reliability. I drive an eighteen year old Lexus. If I was doing high mileages I'd probably get something with better fuel consumption. Not a fan of diesel.

Uncle Pierre

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123553807#Comment_123553807

Where did you say "directly related to"? Here you go -

Do you want to keep digging?

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123554044#Comment_123554044

Thanks, I knew that wasn't the term I used when I posted the link.

In fairness 'directly related to' isn't hugely different from 'linked to'. You could argue on the directness of the relationship, and you could make up analogies that don't apply if you really want to work hard to discredit work done by industry experts, but it's really nitpicking.

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123553807#Comment_123553807

So you're not really interest in the rabbit hole I see.

It was silly then, and it's silly now.

It was. You could have admitted were plain wrong on this one. But, couldn't, and had to engage it the clearly demonstrable "silliness" you've now dragged out.

It was silly then, because it clarified that Sucky wasn't actually interested in the numbers at all, but just thought he could bug me or delay me by pushing me down that road.

Ahh glad the "Uncky P" level of childishness from you now has been extended to me.

What I was interested in was clear. You just didn't like being pulled up on "your numbers". It was clear you couldn't answer due to your own failures in understanding the link you just threw up and then very tenuously tried to link to deaths.

Your willingness to play along is up to you, but it doesn't change the underlying fact that he wasn't actually interested in numbers in the first place.

I was. You just couldn't admit you were unable to answer because you were being disingenuous (again).

Where did I say 'directly related to' please?

Why do we have to keep showing you your own direct quotes from a page or two previous?

mulbot

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123553990#Comment_123553990

It would be more a case of "your interest" rather than your business, since there's nothing you can do about their choice.

happyoutscan

Problem with big wagons is the people driving them.

Plenty have zero spatial awareness. Zero.

Zero.

That for me is the biggest problem.

Uncle Pierre

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123554060#Comment_123554060

Hmmm. You asked where did you say it, I showed you where you said it, and yet you still try to wriggle your way out of it.

And then, with a track record like yours, you attempt to suggest I'm the one with a questionable grasp of the English language.

Thank you the laughs, old chum.

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123554251#Comment_123554251

There's no wriggling out of it. I said it. And when I look back on it, it's fairly accurate, in line with the report from the EPA. But presumably, the Boards experts know better….

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123554074#Comment_123554074

What specifically was I wrong about here?

I couldn't answer, because I couldn't be arsed going down a rabbit hole which has no relevance other than a delaying tactic.

It's not me 'tenously' linking pollution to deaths. It is the EPA making that link, in more than a tenuous way. But again, presumably we're supposed to believe that the Boards denialists know better.

If you were interested in numbers, why didn't you ask Unkey P for his numbers?

Because the Vanilla search is fairly useless, and I can't be arsed going back page by page.

Suckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123554494#Comment_123554494

What specifically was I wrong about here?

You know what. But because you deal in this manner it has to be brought back to you again and again(Vanilla search bedamned)

The article you cherry picked and dumped in without understanding. The lumping of the deaths on to road deaths.

The "Wait till you hear about all the people who manage to heat their house, cook their dinner, clean up afterwards, and mow the lawn without creating toxic emissions." which we found to have absolutely no substance to.

I couldn't answer, because I couldn't be arsed going down a rabbit hole which has no relevance other than a delaying tactic.

Yeah. Sure. Saying this as you drag the arse out of this rabbit hole of your own creation.

It's not me 'tenously' linking pollution to deaths. It is the EPA making that link, in more than a tenuous way. But again, presumably we're supposed to believe that the Boards denialists know better.

You were quite happy to 'add' those deaths where and when it suited you.

At least you've admitted the tenuous links in the EPA calculations; was it that hard?

If you were interested in numbers, why didn't you ask Unkey P for his numbers?

This bit has missed you again and again. It now must be intentional as it was nearly a week ago when I explained it to you.

I don't need his numbers. I already explained how I read the article and went and looked myself at the EPA quality report and modelling documents etc.

I wasn't arguing using his numbers. I wasn't arguiing using any of his information. I was arguing what I read in the reports and how they arrived at their values and assumptions.

Based on that, I question you on your nonsensical response of:

Wait till you hear about all the people who manage to heat their house, cook their dinner, clean up afterwards, and mow the lawn without creating toxic emissions.

Because the Vanilla search is fairly useless, and I can't be arsed going back page by page.

It doesn't require use of the Vanilla search function. It doesn't require going back page by page. They were very recent quotes only one page back.

But you knew that. You were just hoping no one remembered your lumbering illogical statements.

SeanW

There is one segment from that pile of ancient posts above (none of which have anything to do with SUVs or "unnecessarily large cars") that I still agree with, about the posting style of certain posters:

Just spout a bunch of irrelevant crap to deflect and distract.

Uncle Pierre

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123554494#Comment_123554494

You've yet again shown that you've completely missed the key point of a discussion, or that you simply don't understand it.

As previously explained to you, it's the WHO (not the EPA) who concluded that 1,300 premature deaths in Ireland each year are linked to PM2.5 pollution. Reminder yet again that this is the pollution from activities you considered to be harmless, thereby showing your own almost complete ignorance of the subject matter.

The EPA then misrepresents this as 1,300 deaths caused by PM2.5, which is even worse than your "directly related to", and other organisations and the media then repeat this misrepresentation of things.

As for a tenuous way in which those deaths are linked to air pollution in the first place - consider the case of a heavy smoker who develops lung cancer, or an extremely overweight person who develops heart disease. They die from those conditions.

The boffins then determine that their lives were also shorted to a far lesser degree by breathing in PM2.5, which exacerbated their pre-existing conditions. Thus, their deaths are linked to the pollution, but were not caused by it.

In fairness to you, you could argue that their deaths were "directly related to" the pollution, but they'd be related to the pollution far less than they'd be related to the cancer or the heart disease.

And again, this is all in relation to PM2.5, which I suspect you didn't even know about. The number of deaths either linked to, directly related to, or caused by vehicular emissions is miniscule by comparison.

I've had enough of this tangent, and you clearly aren't capable of grasping its central point.

So, back to what should be the main point - any opinion on why people drive "unnecessarily large" cars?

SeanW

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123555047#Comment_123555047

That poster has a long history of hijacking and polluting threads with irrelevant crap.

Did you smash it

I presume it’s a status symbol. I just don’t see the point of SUVs for the average Irish driver where there isn’t any seriously rough terrain. An Audi A6 Avant over any SUV for me.

Yeah Right

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123555204#Comment_123555204

Why not both? 🤫 Though the avant looks like a hearse, tbh.

This thread has been some insight into the life of the average curtain-twitcher.

From claims that they know that cars are too big for the driver's needs, to claims that people are only buying them because they feel they 'need' them, to others saying they're 'dangerous' (lol), then onto one poster saying everyone should sell their SUVs and donate the money to the poor (more lols), to false dichotomies, refusing to answer questions because it doesn't suit their narrative, posting pictures of cars getting fined for reasons unrelated to their size, posters contradicting themselves over and over, refusing to nail their colours to the mast, using dead kids as pawns………

Listen lads, we get it, you just want to wag the finger and cluck your tongues at others for their own personal choices. There's a supreme irony in telling everyone that the main reason for buying bigger cars is so you can feel superior, while chastising everyone else to boost your own ego.

But guess what good that's gonna do?…………..Absolutely SFA.

elperello

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123560220#Comment_123560220

Audi A6 Avant doesn't look like any hearse I've seen.

It's drop dead gorgeous IMO.

https://www.audi.ie/en/models/a6/new-a6-avant-2025/

Worth pointing out to all the anti SUV people that it's also longer, wider and heavier than a lot of cars classed as SUVs.

AndrewJRenko

Here's another one of Sean's 'safest drivers in the world' - doubling up on his tachograph cards to exceed daily driving limits, continuing to drive on a tyre that he knew to be dodgy, speeding, up until the point that he killed another driver.

https://www.irishtimes.com/crime-law/courts/2025/06/18/mother-of-man-killed-in-crash-appeals-to-commercial-drivers-to-prioritise-safety/

And looking for the Court's help to keep up his 'fledgling business' with three trucks.