A girl I work with lives in Blanchardstown, she drives daily to Summerhill in her car. Why t f?
What’s wrong with a modest hatch back?
She’s unmarried and no kids. What the f does she need it for?
It was about the necessity of large cars but has morphed into banning SUVs on safety grounds.
I'm not sure anybody can really define an SUV either which doesn't help matters. Would you consider a Hyundai IX20 to be an SUV, howabout a Kia Niro? Both cars have relatively high bonnets and tall driving positions but neither are massively large cars
A lot if Americans drive large cars it's a status symbol it's bad for the environment it costs more to run a large car
The lack of definition was a bugbear of mine at start of thread.
The ix20 is nowhere near an SUV. The Niro isn't either, the petrol Niro is lower to the ground than the eNiro. Petrol Niro is a modern hatchback car. I wasn't sad to see my eNiro go because boot was too small for a family.
The IX20 is a micro-suv (so small it doesn't even get capital letters) at best, but it does have a relatively high bonnet
SUV = "Cars I don't like"
I have strong misgivings about the larger SUVs, especially since you are more likely to see them in Dublin city than in rural Ireland. They often serve no practical purpose and are merely status symbols. But because there isn't any clear boundary about where an SUV ends and a non-SUV starts, what's considered an SUV will depend on the individuals perceptions of an SUV (evil/neutral/useful) and what type of car they drive themselves.
And anyone who so quickly and comprehensively contradicts their own words runs the risk of having their entire argument dismissed as a giant pile of bollocks. Keep being a hypocrite, keep getting dismissed.
That's the point, all these larger cars coming onto the market have done is wipe out all the previous benefits of smaller more economical Petrol cars by having heavier less aero vehicles driving around, plus the fact that a Gallon of fuel in the USA is about €3 per Gallon cheaper than here… SUV style cars are bad for the environment, for vulnerable road users and impractical for the majority of Irish road users.
What I usually say to those who post up daft messages that "1m of space is fine" is to go to their nearest train station and stand 1m from the edge as a train rolls through the station at 30kph++ and see how comfortable they are with it..
We could have saved a lot of time if you had 'granted' that earlier.
For someone moaning about making assumptions and saving time, you then go on to post this quite obviously in a disingenuous manner.
My use of the word "granted" has be intentional distorted here in an obtuse manner.
My Ford Danger story was indeed an anecdote, albeit with photo evidence. Your reference to banning SUVs wasn't an anecdote.
No; My BMW/Audi/white van man experiences are the similar anecdotal evidence, which you've ignored.
SUV style cars are bad for the environment,
Most of the SUV's on the road are 1.6/1.8 litre with bigger 4x4's maxing at 2.0 litre - 3.0 litre. If the environment is your, supposed concern now, why are you not complaining about cars with "unnecessarily" big engines?
They also demonstrably have not "wiped out" smaller engine cars nor the benefit for those who buy them. There's plenty of options there for everyone's needs, wants and practicalities. You just seem to want to enforce your choices on others and will cling to any tenuous argument to do so.
Where's the contradiction? I commented on the tactic of trying to drag me down to the gutter. I didn't comment about the person.
I ignore lots of things. Making assumptions about my views based on what I didn't say isn't very reliable, as previously pointed out.
I ignore lots of things.
A sound basis for a reasoned argument….
And I have no problem with the people who want their overpriced 4 wheeled status symbol. But they should be willing to pay more in taxation for it than those of us who buy the cars we need
i doubt there is always 1m of space between people on footpaths and cars passing to be honest.
But they should be willing to pay more in taxation for it than those of us who buy the cars we need
But you assume they simple purchase the as a status symbol, not based on their needs. Are we to judge you on your car/house/pastimes based on 'needs'? I doubt it.
Many of them do sadly
"Many" you're guessing at.
Some do, inevitably, just as they do so in all other facets of life. Yet we're expected to accept it as an irrevocable fact when it comes to auto choices and have others life choices/situations enforced on others.
I'll ask again; why stop at SUV's? Why not sports cars? Why not vintage cars? Motorbikes / convertibles / kit cars etc. etc. All have less to do with need.
This is solely curtain twitching based on personal choices.
…and what?
My point was that the RSA are the ones who have come up with this "give at least 1m" stuff. The reality is that a driver passing 1m from someone whilst driving at 50km/h is not a pleasant experience for that person so the driver needs to slow down.
The law on passing (or inconveniencing) cyclists however is clear but does not make reference to actual distances - S.I. No. 495/2019 - Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) (Amendment) Regulations 2019
Who is trying to stop SUV's?
People on footpaths aren't on a two- wheeled moving vehicle being forced by the close pass into gutters with drains and often debris/ broken glass (or worse, puddles, which mean you've no idea what might be under the water). And if you come off, it's 50/50 whether you fall onto the footpath or under the next oncoming vehicle.
I've had oncoming vehicles practically forcing me off a particular narrow road, where all the obstruction is on their side meaning I have right of way, so I've taken to cycling straight at them, forcing them to slow up and give me safe room to pass.
Just have a bit of patience and give enough room.
(For the record, in Dublin I drive about 60% of the time, cycle 40%)
i don't have to interact with your house going about my daily business. nor do i have to deal with you playing tennis or whatever else it is you get up to to entertain yourself; you're trying to compare private activities with driving, which is a public activity.
I and I think most rational people would say it is in no way an SUV. It is too small and doesn't have 4 wheel or all wheel drive. The almighty Wikipedia describes it as a mini MPV.
That’s not what I wrote; I said why stop at SUV’s in relation to the justification on the basis of “need”.
But some are using the “environmental” argument in relation to SUV’s; similarly this can be used in your house choice/lifestyle & pastime choices etc. People also make status/vanity choices in other aspects of their lives.
You’re also not interacting with all SUVs on the road or even close to you going about your daily business.
i'm not sure what you mean. if you mean i'm not interacting with SUVs (or most other traffic), are you saying i can walk/cycle/drive as if it is not there?
and FWIW there have been plenty of (similarly bad tempered at times) threads about the environmental impact of one off houses on boards. but that's whataboutery.
The contradiction is in you claiming you never suggested you were better than anyone else, then immediately saying you were better than someone else…..i.e. you wouldn't be getting dragged down into 'their' gutter.
You knew that though.
You aren't "interacting" with every car/SUV/Truck etc. you see on the road either walking or driving in your daily business.
Your "interaction" (if it even can be described as such) is minimal.
The arguments put forward within the thread range from Environmental criticism to "I don't like the look of them" to "They don't need them".
You're trying to compare private activities with driving, which is a public activity.
The vast majority of our private activities come with public impact. The simply aren't as independent of each other.
Using your tennis example; who has a tennis court at home? Not the majority; therefore they are travelling to play. Same with golf / football / hiking / trainspotting etc. etc. they all come with public activity impact. (And environmental impact & some are status choices)
It's not "whataboutery" when one singular aspect of peoples lives is subject to what you/I/others decide are valid 'needs'.
Ah apologies
SUV's are more likely to kill people than lower down cars, are they not?
micro-MPV or nano-MPV might be more appropriate but I get the idea yes
