The future is here now, hehe
www.hummer.com/hummerjsp/index.jsp
I wish I could pull up in front of my daughter's flat in Tunbridge Wells, toss the keys to the nearset traffic warden and say, park this will you?!
|
An SUV is more likely to cause serious injury or death in a crash. They are also statistically more likely to crash than an ordinary car. Thirdly, they use larger amounts of the world's finite resources, both to build and to run.
It seems indisputable to me that as a choice they are anti-social for the above reasons. Making them illegal is very heavy handed and likely to breed resentment.
Personally, I would like to see a campaign similar to that in the programme, where campaigners attempted to educate their drivers. Provided that owners are aware of their anti-social nature they can choose whether or not to drive them.
And yes, I'd even be happy to give up some spare time to do it.
|
|
Yes to all that,but big Landcruisers,Pajeros and double cab trucks etc do look so good(especially with big chrome bull bars).
|
...and raised suspension, fat chunky Yokohamas, four spots on the bullbar, a nice big protruding tow-ball at grille height for any BMW that wants to get intimate at 80 mph, gunrack in the rear window and a bumper sticker reading "Insurance by Smith & Wesson".
If it's a crew-cab pickup have a Harley Softail pro-street in the back ready to rock and a Confederate flag flying from the radio antenna.
|
I think what you all missed - and repeaeated in the TV program was:
the SUV success in the States owes most of it to the facts that:
SUVs are exepmt from US fuel consumption regulations (they are defined as light trucks)
SUVs are exempt from most car safety regulations.
Each to their own: but becuase they don't steer as well, corner as well or stop as well as any normal car suggests they are more dangerous to others..
Personally I support the move to bigger ones: they will not be able to park in most carparks:-) let alone multi storey ones..
Tax SUVs by weight I say:-)
madf
|
Yup, "I don't like 'em so I don't see why you should have one".
"Well actually, no, I've never driven one, but they must be bad because it said so on TV".
My F-150 stops and steers as well as anything I've ever driven. It requires knowledgable driving technique in certain situations but that's because it isn't a Honda Civic. For that matter so does a Porsche 911 if you've never owned one. Or indeed that wonderful superannuated British 4 X 4 icon the Land Rover.
My SUV (it's a 4 X 4 and remember most are NOT) has to balance on vs off road capability so that I can go volcano bashing up the slopes of Mt Pinatubo in 4WD on Sunday with some proficiency and still handle the Monday morning expressway high speed duelling with equal aplomb.
You also are using a narrow definition of SUV: the Kia Starex, the Isuzu Crosswind, Toyota Revo are all classified the same, but are 4 X 2 10 or 12 seaters which probably use less resources per passenger on that basis.
If someday the Eurocracy wants to have everyone in hydrogen-powered Smarts like some updated version of 1960's East Germany where everyone had a Trabant, well count me out. As for use of resources, a 50,000 miles a year Mondeo which falls to bits in 3 years is surely no more of a resource hog in the final analysis than a Nissan Patrol covering 200,000 in 8 years and still good for another 5 and still holds a meaningful residual.
...anyway, PC-mobiles don't have a power take off point on the dash for a small fridge and 8 cupholders.......
|
> My F-150 stops and steers as well as anything I've ever driven.
you must have driven some pretty ropey cars!! :-)
|
Tell me about your experience of driving an F-150 then, and how it differs from mine...I'd be interested to know why America's most popular choice of truck didn't meet with your approval...
|
My Uncle in the US drives an F-150XLT 4.6 auto. I had an (admittedly short) drive when I saw him last. It was certainly powerful but didn't feel secure in corners and seemed to take a frighteningly long time to stop.
My uncle does say that it is the best he has ever driven though.
|
My Uncle in the US drives an F-150XLT 4.6 auto. It was certainly powerful but didn't feel secure in corners and seemed to take a frighteningly long time to stop.
That's because it doesn't share the same characteristics as a car - ie, high C.O.G. and a lot heavier. As mentioned earlier in the thread, people jump in these things nad expect them to drive and handle like a car.
|
|
That's what I was getting at, I find it hard to believe that anyone would thing they handle as well as a "normal" car.
|
That's what I was getting at, I find it hard to believe that anyone would thing they handle as well as a "normal" car.
But in your earlier post you mentioned - quote:- "It was certainly powerful but didn't feel secure in corners and seemed to take a frighteningly long time to stop"
By that statement of yours, that says to me that you were trying to drive the F-150XLT 4.6 auto in the same manner as you would drive a car and also expect it to handle like one!!
|
Good grief.
I was replying to Growlers note
"My F-150 stops and steers as well as anything I've ever driven."
and merely saying that it doesn't handle like a normal car and no one would expect it to, which is why I suggested he hadn't driven particuarly well handling cars. I'm not disagreeing with you.
It was only a throw away comment to begin with, give me a break!!! :-)
|
|
Having just got back from the Alps last night I lowered my guard and put on "Men & Motahs" for a bit of mindless relaxation, to be confronted with another of those endless police chase programmes. This one focussed on the "TiP" manouvere, where a US police cruiser nudges the "perps" car just to the rear of the rear axle, causing it to spin.
They showed countless examples of this being applied to saloons, light pick-ups and hatchbacks, all of which spun out and came to a halt. Then it was the turn of an SUV. It rolled about 3 times after the gentlest of touches. Now admittedly this is a manouvere intended to spin car, but it is very similar to the impact you may get if a car nudges you whilst changing lanes and it is likely to be exacerbated by braking, as you would get in a sudden lane change.
Personally I don't have a problem being in a "euro-box" in the event of an impact with an SUV. Like Mark (RLS) I drive to survive and try and maintain a reasonable distance from everything around me, so the chances of a sudden and unavoidable impact are reduced.
BTW, in over 1800 miles I witnessed lunacy by one Range Rover driver (est.120mph through st.gotthard tunnel) and one very dead bmw driver (clipped armco, went up bank, clipped underside of bridge and crashed back down on its roof). Also witnessed some horribly good driving from drivers of all makes, but on the Autoroutes there's never any traffic anyway. Some may use this as an argument against BMWs and SUVs. Personally, I think it's an argument against the abilities of those two drivers, nothing else.
Suffice to say, after 2 and a half hours on british Mways yesterday, I want to go back to France!!!!
|
>>"My SUV (it's a 4 X 4 and remember most are NOT) has to balance on vs off road capability so that I can go volcano bashing up the slopes of Mt Pinatubo in 4WD on Sunday with some proficiency and still handle the Monday morning expressway high speed duelling with equal aplomb.<<"
Growler,
You have hit the nail on the head here - you can justify an SUV. But it's hard to justify as a school run vehicle especially if it has huge "lethal" bull- bars. What gets me (and I have no real axe to grind here - if you like them buy one) is that many are not suited to their purpose and are merely to create an impression. I pass 2 each morning on my way to work - b***** great Shoguns which are magnificent off road vehicles but they have alloy wheels with at least 17 inch 205/40(?) tyres so they would be useless off road and they have the full body kit so that ground clearance is about 6 (?) inches. So what is the point except for image? And the image is "that looks, and is, b***** ridiculous!!" Ok, so it's my problem, and these blokes like their cars. But do they really want to be laughed at? Or don't they realise? Or is it just me?. Must go and sharpen my pencil, but where's the chain saw?
|
...yeah I know, they are getting a bit common. Not sure how useful an angle of tilt indicator is when you're tackling the challenges of Tesco's car park. Everyone and his dog seems to have got one these days. Honda even make that dinky little CR-V for the wannabe's who haven't quite got there yet. It's getting harder to stand out when you double park outside Junior's school. Of course you could go one better and get the optional power winch fitted on the front....
Us afficionadoes will have to move the goalposts lest we get tarred with the same brush.
I've been looking at the Mack truck catalogs......
|
|
|
|
Yes, I got stung on this one, but in reverse. When I bought my F-150 pick-up it was taxed as that, a pick-up, commercial vehicle etc. For which I paid about £26 equivalent road tax p.a. Last year when I renewed it it now qualifies as an SUV and I had to pay nearly £50 equivalent. OK, OK, no need for the violins....
|
|
|
|
|
Forgot to mention,but i like mine with chrome ladders on the back and dark,very dark privacy glass,its a shame really in the UK that we can't have them with the real engines,i always have to make do with a coal burner.
|
|
|
|
|
>>Provided that owners are aware of their anti-social nature>>
Strange argument...... are you saying that ALL people who drive Land Rovers, Landcruisers. RAV4's, Freelanders, X5's and so on are anti-social ?
Regardless of how they drive, what their beliefes are etc.etc.??
You could level the same accusations at ANY area of the motoring such as any car that does more than 70mph, accelerates faster than another and is slightly louder than another.
It gets me how people say how pointless SUV's are and then disregard any other vehicle (of which there are many) that doesn't quite fit in with their image of what we shoukld be driving.
To say people who purchase a particular style of vehicle are anti-social is ridiculous.....
JD
|
>>To say people who purchase a particular style of vehicle are anti-social is ridiculous.....
Which can only come from;
1) Jealousy
2) An "I don't want to, so you are not allowed to" attitude
3) Ummmmmm...
People make exactly the same comments about vanity/private plates - I don't want one, its not how I choose to spend my money; but its not my money or my choice. I never have understood why it makes them sad in some other peoples' eyes.
Ditto baseball caps on backwards. I think its uncomfortable, but then someone else wearing them doesn't affect me.
We spend much too much time worrying about what other people do with their lives and/or money.
Until a year ago I could justify having one to anybody - I lived in the mountains. To be honest, now I have one because I like them.
And why shouldn't I ? If you don't want one, then don;t have one. I wouldn't drive a Mini, but you can if you like.
|
I think you are missing the point. private plates don't directly effect other road users in a day to day situation. Certain choices that people make do affect other people and if there is no considereation of this affect then surely they are being anti-social.
What other people choose to do is of no concern to me as long as their choice does not affect me or any one else.
|
Someone choosing a 4x4 doesn't affect you in the least. How they drive it might.
However, that's true whatever they are driving.
Anything to be said about the appalling way the most SUVs are driven is generally pretty accurate. I would not even see it unreasonable that a difference driving licence category applied, they are quite different to drive.
But lets focus on how they are driven, not whether or not somebody should be permitted to have one because of other people's jealousy or disapproval.
|
Someone choosing a 4x4 doesn't affect you in the least.
Thats rubbish. If they are consuming resources at three times the rate of everyone else then they are affecting me.
Trying to say that everybody is jealous is a desperate stab to defend the indefensible!
|
That argument can be equally well applied to a cyclist who might assert you are also affecting him by driving a car instead of using a bicycle.
|
|
|
What do you drive ? Do you use public transport and/or a bicycle and/or your feet whenever you can ? What does it do to the gallon ?
Do you avoid unneccessary journeys ? Do you always drive at the most efficient rev-range and speed for your car ? Is it always perfectly in tune ?
Put your own house in order before you start worrying about mine.
|
I drive a small car which does about 45MPG and catch the train to work. It is regularly serviced.
You seem to be very defensive, are you perhaps realising that your choice is selfish?
|
>>You seem to be very defensive, are you perhaps realising that your choice is selfish?
No. And I would have said I was being offensive rather than defensive. I am secure in the knowledge that you can't do anything about it. Sad that your life would be so empty that my activities are more interesting than your own, though.
And I have three of them - 4-Runner, Landcruiser and Dodge Ram. Two of them I need, one of them I drive for no better reason than the fact that I want to.
|
oh dear. I am sorry that you have come to the end of your intellectual argument and have had to resort to insults.
The days of your "security" are numbered. Pretty soon you will have to give them up. Fact.
|
>>Fact.
Fact ? Well if that's your definition of a fact I won't worry about the future too much.
>>... to the end of your intellectual argument
An intellectual argument would have been somewhat inappropriate, don't you feel ?
|
An intellectual argument would have been somewhat inappropriate, don't you feel ?
...or impossible depending on how you look at it.
|
This old battleground: SUV's vs the rest, like the Harley vs the cookie cutter Rice Rocket - is such an emotive topic and it seems to bring out all kinds of tub-thumping moralisation which is more often than not predicated on prejudice and ignorance than anything else. The eco-freaks particularly are disgracefully guilty of false and misleading propaganda in this regard, and regrettably inhabit too many positions where they are able to brainwash the younger and more impressionable.
The British "nanny knows best" concept is alive and well.
The loudest critics tend to be those who have no experience of that which they are criticising. I don't go round slagging someone's choice of a Kia Pride if that's what works for him. I have driven one and it's a competent little car. I wouldn't want one but if JUan de la Cruz next door thinks it's right for him, that's none of my concern. As for me I wouldn't be seen dead in a Rover but if that floats some other guy's boat that's no concern of mine. Also I haven't driven one so I'd better zip it before passing any opinions, right?
Now, if anyone presents to me a sensible argument to back up his vehiclular beliefs in difference to mine, I'll usually give him a hearing. At the end of it all we'll probably differ because I've made my choice on the basis of my preferences and he's done the same based on his. If never the twain shall meet let us be glad we still live in a part of the world where that is (still, but watch the Eurocrats) more or less possible.
Your 45 mpg economobile may do 4 times the mileage that Mum's Shogun does. Who knows? If that's the case who's using more resources? Can't generalise without some facts. What are resources for anyway? No point in keeping all that stuff underground if we're all riding around on donkeys and beating our breasts in self-mortification about how we're pursuing some eco-dream for future civilisations. Let's leave that to the Democrats.
An SUV is more dangerous? If that bothers you, don't buy one. But don't lecture those who think differently. I can only say what I feel most safe in is my truck, and if you saw the traffic conditions where I live you would understand that. There also the personal security issue: carnapping, attempted robbery, which is well served by a larger vehicle. I don't think any vehicle is inherently dangerous: however. how it is conducted and the skill of its operator, may indeed constitute it being used dangerously. But that is something else.
It's really live and let live, a commodity I was brought up on by parents who went through a war to ensure it was handed down to me intact, and a also a commodity I find increasingly lacking in the self-appointed moralisers who are appearing from all over to give me there unsolicited and unwanted views on my choice of, in this case, motor vehicle.
I like my SUV, it's fun, I don't do silly things with it, my mileage isn't that great, and it opens up all sorts of recreational possibilities. I can (just did) move a friend's household goods with it to save her money, take two 650lb motorcycles in the back, give 18 construction workers a ride home, sitting in the back, when their shuttle bus broke down on the highway the other day, pull an empty 52 seater stranded bus in a typhoon out of a metre-deep flood last year.....
See what you're missing ;-)
Growlette is rubbing my neck and saying give it a rest, when we get all that Iraqi oil who's going to worry about resources.....
....later
|
I drive a small car which does about 45MPG and catch the train to work. It is regularly serviced. You seem to be very defensive, are you perhaps realising that your choice is selfish?
A bit of a holier than thou attitude. What about the guy who has never left his home town and leaves 2 minutes walk from his work? You're using a damn sight more "resources" than he is. Are you being selfish?
Does this mean that anyone who wants to drive or fly for pleasure shouldn't?
What about the thousands of tons of coal/oil that get burnt at the power stations every year to power places like Alton Towers and Blackpool?
It's a free choice. I'll drive what I damn well like whilst the government lets me - My car is far from efficient but just think of all those schools and hospitals I am supporting via the thousands I pay in motor related taxes...
|
> It's a free choice. I'll drive what I damn well like whilst the government lets me - My car is far from efficient but just think of all those schools and hospitals I am supporting via the thousands I pay in motor related taxes...
.....and making sure those hospitals are kept full and all of those school children are polluted, destined to a restricted motoring future because we used the resources all up before hand.
|
Oh gawd...let's all give up and go home now, we're all doomed.
I met that Nostradamus in a pub once...
|
Polluted school children?
Where are most modern day airborne and water pollutants coming from? Cars? Er no actually, not that most "green" orientated establishments would have you belive. Industry actually. And they're getting significantly worse as well whilst cars get cleaner. Fact.
So do you think by using your 45mpg car you're making a significantly less impact on the world than if you had a Lancruiser that did 20?
If you hit someone in your car at 40, are they really much more likely to survive than if you were driving something larger? Nope.
We're all going to be using oil for a long time yet - a situation well engineered by oil companies and tax dependent governments. Get used to it.
And if you are genuinely concerned about the earth's pollution issues, join Greenpeace. You'll get to see where 95% of it really does come from...
|
> Where are most modern day airborne and water pollutants coming from? Cars? Er no actually, not that most "green" orientated establishments would have you belive. Industry actually. And they're getting significantly worse as well whilst cars get cleaner. Fact.
Industry is of course the largest "polluter" in global terms. Cars are still a significant contributor particularly on a local scale - it is not neccesarily industry that can make the air in London choking on hot dry days -. Industry are, as cars are, subject to emmission limits. Power generating stations (particularly coal) are subject to annual emmission limits which are changed over time taxes on energy use aim to reduce consumption and renewable energy can be encouraged with traded mechanisms (such as Carbon trading) or obligations (such as RO)
So do you think by using your 45mpg car you're making a significantly less impact on the world than if you had a Lancruiser that did 20? If you hit someone in your car at 40, are they really much more likely to survive than if you were driving something larger? Nope.
Of course not but that is not the argument. But if I hit another car it will undoubtedly do less damage in the same circumstances than the Landcruiser. And use half the fuel in doing so. :-)We're all going to be using oil for a long time yet -
and it would last a hell of at lot longer if people used it a slower rate.
|
|
|
|
"We spend much too much time worrying about what other people do with their lives and/or money."
Couldn't agree more. The only things that I want to ban - are people who want to ban things.
The whole joy of motoring hangs around the amazing choices we all have.
The risks of being around any vehicles at motorway speeds will always owe more to the attitude and competence each driver.
Frankly, worrying about SUVs being a problem when they collide with you is bizarre when we drive in a crowded country where there are so many vans, coaches, buses & lorries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
