Food for thought alright
There are many solutions to tackle the SUV problem, which will need bold action from policymakers. These solutions – taxation, education and exclusion – have parallels with the successful campaign against cigarette smoking.
Footpaths are go every high nowadays you need a really big SUV to park on them. It risky pulling onto them with an Quasqui or similar
A qashqui is classed as an SUV and ruled unopposed the urban jungle for a number of years until overthrown by the Tuscon / Sportage. For 12 points - what is an SUV?
The Quasqai is not an SUV neither is the modern Tuscon or the Sportage.
So what is an SUV?
They are all "crossovers" - but everyone and their mother refers to crossovers as SUVs so its just pedantry to claim they arent.
You know well what is meant.
The latest landrover defender 110 and 130 is my dream car currently. Who cares about emissions.
It's a sports utility vehicle. There are two main types large and small/compact, they will generally have better ground clearance than a car with some off road capability with decent towing capacity ( generally 2T+ for the small ones.
The RAV and Kuga have this across there range although they too are changing towards being Crossovers. Crossovers are similar to compact SUV's but have poor towing capacity, and have little off road ability.
Large SUV such as the LC, BMW X5 etc are different beasts completely well capable of parking on an 9'' high kerb
You could at least give credit to the source of that quote, Lunchtime live on Newstalk today.
Sorry I thought you were being ironic here. Never owned an SUV and have pulled up onto many a footpath without an issue even with 16'' wheels. Its all about the angle of accent.
Problem with people calling for SUVs to be banned is that there is very little clarity about what class of vehicles are to be included. Was driving behind a pristine 232 Ford Ranger Raptor with the 3L petrol burbling away recently. Self employed owner using it to drop kids to school. Must say a lovely sounding machine but wondering would such a vehicle fall within the SUV ban or is it only when such vehicles are driven by private owners are they considered inappropriate
Its clear most Irish people have no idea what an SUV actually is.
You've fallen hook line and sinker for the marketing departments of verious manufacturers. Take a vw golf, keep the engine, running gear, suspension and chassis, stick on a tall body, call it an SUV and watch the money roll in. A ford ranger does not share such things with a focus for instance.
I see it in work when charging the leaf, parked next to other cars marketed as SUVs, EV6 etc. Barely a difference in height/ground clearance. Yet my old range rover towers over tiguans, tuscans etc.
I shoulda, was half-listening, that comment stuck out as I never considered it, and went looking for the thread
The only SUV's that should be banned on Irish roads are the Dacia Duster....a horrible excuse of an SUV
It's a nonsense term in an Irish context.
Irish SUVs are crossovers everywhere else. A 5 series BMW is longer, wider and heavier than most cars that people call SUVs.
A Duster isn't an SUV.
the irony that people love "SUV", which were invented to circumnavigate crash and emissions testing in the US is not lost on me.
That said, I do like Rangers's though.
Is this thread based on a myth ?
And yes SUV owners will park on footpaths because they don't want to risk their giant ego machine getting dinged when it blocks the road
Unfortunately under the system of vehicle classification that we currently use it is. This has been my main problem with all the calls for SUV regulation. It does at least appear that the motorstats website has now at least started breaking the SUV group into size classes. There were too many articles using the SUV number as a whole with pictures of cars in the large SUV class to justify outrage. Most SUV's on our roads are in the Kia Sportage/Ford Kuga size and not the truly large SUVs such as seen in the US.
People would say that the Leaf was fine because it wasn't an SUV vs a Qashqai that was the scourge of our cities.
They are not going to be banned.
The manufacturers are not going start making family saloons again to suit our tiny market.
Why not just put it on the fuel and simplyfy it altogether? No discs no, admin or evasion.
Without an objective measure of what an SUV is, how could you ban them?
No interest in the marketing of the SUV term or in SUVs themselves. I agree with you that most cars in this country classed as such are hatchbacks on stilts which is why I find it strange when people get all hot under the collar and call for the banning of such vehicles. IMO the increasing popularity of pickups for non commercial activity should be far more worrysome for such persons but of course they're not SUVs
People who don't like the higher crossovers call them SUVs as a term of abuse.
Manufacturers call them SUVs to entice people to buy them.
Older people like the elevated seating position because it's easier to get in and out.
People with families find them easier to load kids into car seats.
I can't see them going away any time soon unless there is some sort of EU wide phase out.
Why not abolish it altogether? There's plenty of tax in the fuel already, more than half of the price is made of taxes. Also it's not fair, the tax is the same if you drive it or not, and yet somehow is tied to CO2 emissions.
The argument against will be that commuters and rural drivers who have no alternative to the car would be unfairly impacted.
The idea is attractive though because of its simplicity.
A low emission vehicle that does high mileage can emit more than a high emission vehicle that is used sparingly. This is not taken into account with our current motor tax system.
True, a Rolls doing 2000 miles a year will produce less emissions than a mini doing 12,000 a year.
I guess the argument that getting rid altogether would be a loss to the exchequer?
Department of Finance won't be having it.
No matter who is running the country they have to find the money to pay for it and they take their job very seriously.
Stupid plastic covers over the wheel arches makes a car into a gas guzzling planet destroying menace of an SUV.
Weight, height and footprint actually have nothing to do with it.
It's science
The move towards electric vehicles means any system built on fuel excise duty becomes less effective over time. From a government revenue point of view we need to look at alternatives to replace the tax revenue in way that can also the principal of the user pays. Fuel excise duty was great for this, but it's almost impossible to apply when a well off person can install solar panels and get potentially unmonitored free electricity.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/c4199a9ade0a2d2a249cb2444a358382.svg)
