Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules

Why the reign of SUVs on Irish roads should end

«13456720

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,973 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    ....is substantially expanding our public transport network, and possibly making it free to use, a solution to this.....



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,569 ✭✭✭Cordell


    In terms of size and weight the average SUV is similar to the average family saloon.

    The tax rate is based on CO2 emissions which is directly proportional to the fuel consumption, so if they are fuel hungry they are already taxed accordingly.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,027 ✭✭✭Lantus


    If eu policy makers are looking to how to tax and regulate future electric cars then drag coefficient and weight would be 2 ways to push towards better cars. Look at the aptera. The aircraft design makes 1000km+ on a single charge viable.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,261 ✭✭✭Gant21


    SUV’s were and always hideous. Of course the Thomas and Shirlies with their two kids Emily and twainan think it’s a life necessity.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,032 ✭✭✭✭whisky_galore




  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Should just be on weight, not emissions. Fully electric SUVs will need huge batteries, with the resulting increased demand for electricity and the minerals used in their manufacture

    I think that we are starting to move away from a focus on direct CO2 emissions to looking broader at all indirect CO2 emissions and other environmental impacts. And they are directly proportional to size

    Plus they’re too big for our roads



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,569 ✭✭✭Cordell


    They aren't too big, they only appear big. Out of those 55% the vast majority are the likes of Tucson and Sportage which are in fact smaller than a Passat.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,681 ✭✭✭Wildly Boaring


    Define SUV?

    Land cruiser, Discovery.... definitely

    Disco sport

    Sorento

    Kodaiq

    CRV, RAV 4, 5008,

    Kuga, Sportage, Tuscon, Tiguan, ID4

    Ateca, Karoq, 3008

    2008, T-roc


    Where's your line??

    Fuel efficiency? Well CRV diesel used get over 50mpg. Ateca and Tiguan pretty near.

    ICE going will sort this, natural selection.


    Height. Drag? Newer ones have got it right down ....


    If we're just talking about the big LC and Disco, I'd fully agree with taxing out of existence bar commercial.

    Rest, are they any better/worse really?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 254 ✭✭forestgirl




  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 52,320 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    they're a similar size only if you choose to ignore 'height' as being a component that makes up size. some of the more obvious examples are more than six foot tall.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,301 ✭✭✭bigroad


    Plenty of commercials used as daily kid transport.

    Double cab pickups.yes

    Disco,rangerover,landcruiser with 5 seats yes.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,681 ✭✭✭Wildly Boaring


    Agreed. I'd be all for making these types and RR etc commercial only (don't care how many seats in them) and enforce it.

    Tie them to companies properly and audit use properly. Mileage trackers etc. Still be some misuse but these auditors are getting tougher every year.

    Stick out like a sore thumb fairly quickly. Customs could be on them like VRT



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,569 ✭✭✭Cordell


    How does the height matter? Length and width take road space, weight exponentially affect road wear, but what does height do?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,681 ✭✭✭Wildly Boaring


    But I just walked past a tuscon and an id3 beside eachother. 4 or 5 inches in it height wise?


    Lot of these crossovers/soft SUVs be hard to define



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 52,320 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    visibility. takes visibility from other road users - drivers, pedestrians, cyclists. mainly a factor in urban areas, not so much an issue in a rural context.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,794 ✭✭✭StupidLikeAFox


    Why all the hate for SUVs? 90% aren't obscene yokes, they are comfortable to drive and are practical for lugging kids or associated **** around.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15 omanomad


    As usual with boards it’s just a loud mouthed minority. Go and speak to people in the real world and ask them what they think of suvs and 99% would say they like them or else have no opinion of them. Or simply look at the amount of suvs outside houses in your park, that tells you all you need to know about what the majority of people think of suvs. The ones that say they hate them are the sort of nutcases that go about shouting at birds, don’t worry about them.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,197 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    SUVs seem to take up a lot more room when parking. I know they say they mostly aren't any wide, but it doesn't feel like that.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,261 ✭✭✭Gant21


    They are the new generation Mercedes drivers. Park up and take up two spaces.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,339 ✭✭✭Ubbquittious


    I dont mind SUVs. Never had one and probably never will but I don't see why the hate.

    A similar hate for SUVs appeared around 2005. At the time they did drink a lot more fuel than ordinary cars but this isn't really the case with the modern ones unless you get something properly luxurious. I don't get it, why cant people mind their own business as to what sort of cars people decide to drive?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,373 ✭✭✭✭Hurrache


    I don't own one but this is a point I always make when people bring this up, and people rarely answer it.

    Some saloons and estates take up much, if not more, road space and are efficiency can be common across them. But they're deemed more acceptable.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,941 ✭✭✭✭elperello


    Most of the manufacturers are moving away from traditional saloons and estates especially in the family car sector, so if people want a car with room for kids, gear, dog etc. they are pretty much confined to the small to medium car based SUV's.

    Most of these are the same width and length as the vehicles they are based on. They may be a bit taller but I don't see that as a road space issue.

    As for the big SUVs they are already very expensive to purchase and attract high annual motor tax.

    For example a RR Sport costs €109,520 and motor tax is €2400 pa.




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,787 ✭✭✭Phil.x


    The greens have an unhealthy obsession about suv's,



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,197 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997



    SUVs are are still less efficient even if that's exaggerated and modern technology helps to elevate it a bit.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,729 ✭✭✭✭CianRyan


    I dislike SUV's because they are just less enjoyable machines. They drive like half sunken boats but can't even make it over rough terrain. All looks, no substance.


    There are far fewer options available for those who have a family but also enjoy driving. You could throw an Old Primera around a bend that a Qashqai would flip through.

    Nissan don't even offer any saloon cars in Ireland anymore. They exist but not in Europe.


    I could throw more rambling thoughts in here but it would end up as a short story without merit.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,722 ✭✭✭✭freshpopcorn


    People I know bought SUv/Cross overs/etc for the following reasons.

    They like being a little higher up.

    Some find them easier to get in and out of.

    Folding down the rear seats and putting stuff in them is easy enough. I know this is possible with other cars also.

    Some aren't gone on the shape of saloons and they aren't mad on parking them either.

    People do seem to like the look of them.

    Also a lot of drivers aren't overly pushed about performance and being a bit slower doing 0- 100km/h.

    We don't have one by the way.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,197 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    I think SUV use internal storage very poorly unless you get a huge one. Style over substance for the most part. But you can only buy what's available.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,140 ✭✭✭Gregor Samsa


    People who don’t know any better mouth off against SUVs like everyone is driving Hummers on the school run. The vast majority of SUVs on Irish roads are no bigger in width or length than regular cars, and even the height isn't that significant on most - about 20cm. Someone above mentioned that some of the most obvious examples are over 6ft. Range Rovers, maybe (which aren't even SUVs), but even rare massive yokes like the BMW X7 or an Audi Q7 is under 6 foot tall.

    I’ve a Skoda Superb estate. Longer and wider than common large SUVs like the Hyundai Tuscon, a VW Tiguan or a Nissan X Trail, let alone the smaller crossover ones like the T-Roc, Qashqai or new C4. There's only a handful of very large and expensive SUVs that are in any way common, like the the XC90 and X5, that take up more space than it, and even then it's 10cm in the length and less than 20 in the width.

    As for visibility, the little bit of extra height on and SUV is nothing compared to what a van, truck or artic blocks out. Yet we share our roads with thousands of them every day.

    Personally, I prefer the form-factor of cars over SUVs - an estate for a large one, a hatchback for a small one. I personally don't understand why saloons exist (well, of course I do really, but I wouldn't be interested in buying one), but I wouldn't knock anyone for preferring them. Same with SUVs - some people like the slightly higher driving position, some people with age-related joint issues find them easier to get in and out of. Some people with young children find them easier to deal with car seats, or getting bags and buggy in and out of the boot. They're popular for a reason.

    The article in the OP is about fuel efficiency. That's a completely different argument than one about the form factor of the vehicle. For some reason the two get confused.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 52,320 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    20cm is significant. the difference between a 150cm tall vehicle and a 170cm tall vehicle is the difference between someone of average height being able to see over one, and not being able to see over one. in an urban context, with them parked on the street as an example, it means that someone crossing the road cannot see over a parked car, and just as important, motorists cannot see them behind the parked car.

    and yes, of course we share the roads with commercial vehicles which are bigger. but they're quite a bit rarer, and they usually *need* to be that size. it'd be a bit ridiculous to claim that because artics are taller, it makes no difference for SUVs to be tall too; i don't think it makes sense to use the size of an artic to justify the size of a private car.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,373 ✭✭✭✭Hurrache




Advertisement