|
It is we who complain about the small size of car parking spaces who currently buy much larger cars than we did 20 years ago.
A 2m wide SUV or premium motor is rarely a necessity for the average driver, family or weekly shop. Few need 4WD, 6 cylinders, off road size wheels for the typical school run.
They may be nicer to drive and be driven in but is is a problem entirely of our own making.
Taken to a logical conclusion - we will all own superb examples of automotive technology incapable of being driven anywhere (the roads are too narrow) and there is nowhere to park.
|
|
Another thing I've found is that it's easier to reverse a car with level side window 'waistline' neatly into a space than one that has windows that slope upwards towards the rear.
|
|
|
|
The obvious answer is improved infrastructure to accommodate, or must we all live like North Koreans?
|
The obvious answer is improved infrastructure to accommodate
And where does it end. More people, more cars, bigger cars, expand out to accomodate, kiss goodbye to the green and pleasant land you used to know.
|
The obvious answer is improved infrastructure to accommodate
And where does it end. More people, more cars, bigger cars, expand out to accomodate, kiss goodbye to the green and pleasant land you used to know.
The biggest despoliation experts are supermarkets and on-line sellers like Am@zon. The massive warehouses that sprout near M'way junctions must gobble up land faster than anything else ?
|
The obvious answer is improved infrastructure to accommodate
And where does it end. More people, more cars, bigger cars, expand out to accomodate, kiss goodbye to the green and pleasant land you used to know.
The biggest despoliation experts are supermarkets and on-line sellers like Am@zon. The massive warehouses that sprout near M'way junctions must gobble up land faster than anything else ?
Not really, if we manufactured all the disposable tat that people are addicted to here then instead of massive (but super efficient and stacked to the roof with Chinese made goods) warehouses the country would have hundreds of factories, with multiple support businesses.
The nation has become one gigantic warehouse for Chinese goods instead of a manufacturing country, more land gobbled up because the population has grown by huge percentages since and will continue until its standing room only.
There's still lovely country to be found, one might imagine that important people live in such areas, ie this months Home Secretary :-) i doubt there's many Amazon warehouses despoiling the Cotswolds.
|
|
Amazon warehouses etc, far from despoiling a once green and pleasant land, may actually be saviours.
Online shopping means that for every UPS or similar white van the roads would need to accommodate 20+ private cars. Close the out of town retail parks and reflect how many multi-stories would need to be built in already congested town centres to cope.
Or we could ban any non-EV private cars weighing more than (say) 500kg. Parking spaces could be reduced in size. Very soon autonomous vehicles summoned by smartphone app will become the norm and no one will need parking for 2 tons of 4x4.
The world would be greener with less pollution.
|
Amazon warehouses etc, far from despoiling a once green and pleasant land, may actually be saviours.
Online shopping means that for every UPS or similar white van the roads would need to accommodate 20+ private cars. Close the out of town retail parks and reflect how many multi-stories would need to be built in already congested town centres to cope.
Or we could ban any non-EV private cars weighing more than (say) 500kg. Parking spaces could be reduced in size. Very soon autonomous vehicles summoned by smartphone app will become the norm and no one will need parking for 2 tons of 4x4.
The world would be greener with less pollution.
If you want to live like that then fine, but the idea of the rest of us being forced out of our 4x4s, bought with our own money, is utterly dystopian.
|
If you want to live like that then fine, but the idea of the rest of us being forced out of our 4x4s, bought with our own money, is utterly dystopian.
You seem to have a low threshold for what makes for dystopian living.
|
|
|
|
Online shopping means that for every UPS or similar white van the roads would need to accommodate 20+ private cars. Close the out of town retail parks and reflect how many multi-stories would need to be built in already congested town centres to cope.
It's hard to prove conclusively how much private-car traffic is saved by white-van deliveries. Those private cars will still be used for much off-line shopping - which, as you say, mostly happens outside town centres.
For the last 17 years I have lived within walking distance of most suppliers of necessity, plus my dentist, GP and library ; and in a large bungalow with a decent garden and a private view. Various other items do get delivered, but not groceries.
Of course the (deeply) underlying problem (issue if you prefer) is continuous population growth, which is a political no-no never to be discussed.
|
|
The recommended car parking space size is 2.4m wide x 4.8m long. I don't know when this was first set in place - probably some years ago.
Car dimensions have grown over the last say 40 years - two very average popular cars - eg:
1980 Ford Escort - 3980mm x 1590mm
2020 Ford Focus - 4378mm x 1852mm
The current car needs 30% more space. If two cars are parked centrally in a bay, the Escort driver had 810mm spare width to open the door, the Focus driver only 548mm.
The space for driver to exit was even less as the door thickness increased to embrace reinforcing bars, electric motors etc. No wonder car park dings became popular.
Solutions are simple - there is no magic solution, choose the one you dislike least:
- build (say) 30% more car parking areas (access roads, and parking spaces) - need to dig up more country side and rebuild existing non-modifiable concrete structures
- use pricing, tax or legislation to restrict the size of cars people buy
- stop some people driving - probably the young and old who statistically have more accidents anyway
- do nothing and hope the problem goes away
|
use pricing, tax or legislation to restrict the size of cars people buy
I wonder why tax is not based on car's size. A bigger car should pay more.
In some countries there are high occupancy driving lanes. UK never has any. The bus lanes are total waste (especially outside London) and more of money grabber from fines. Bus lanes should allow cars with 2+ occupancy.
|
use pricing, tax or legislation to restrict the size of cars people buy
I wonder why tax is not based on car's size. A bigger car should pay more.
In some countries there are high occupancy driving lanes. UK never has any. The bus lanes are total waste (especially outside London) and more of money grabber from fines. Bus lanes should allow cars with 2+ occupancy.
There was a 2+ lane going into Bristol along the A370. It didn't appear to help and they changed it to a bus lane over the summer. It's almost complete deserted now.
I think the problem with ever-increasing roads, 2+ lanes etc is we still end up in a little cramped town at the end of it.
|
|
<< I think the problem with ever-increasing roads, 2+ lanes etc is we still end up in a little cramped town at the end of it. >>
Call it a problem if you like ; it is just the way things are, and without a major upheaval or a lot of war damage, it probably isn't going away.
|
use pricing, tax or legislation to restrict the size of cars people buy
I wonder why tax is not based on car's size. A bigger car should pay more.
In some countries there are high occupancy driving lanes. UK never has any. The bus lanes are total waste (especially outside London) and more of money grabber from fines. Bus lanes should allow cars with 2+ occupancy.
Before EVs, the tax on road fuel was effectively based on size, the bigger/heavier the car the more fuel was used.
|
|
Amazon warehouses etc, far from despoiling a once green and pleasant land, may actually be saviours.
Online shopping means that for every UPS or similar white van the roads would need to accommodate 20+ private cars. Close the out of town retail parks and reflect how many multi-stories would need to be built in already congested town centres to cope.
Or we could ban any non-EV private cars weighing more than (say) 500kg. Parking spaces could be reduced in size. Very soon autonomous vehicles summoned by smartphone app will become the norm and no one will need parking for 2 tons of 4x4.
The world would be greener with less pollution.
Presumably you own an EV. It's easy to ban things you don't rely on and can afford to change. Most people cannot. Manufacturers have a long history of making slightly bigger cars through each generation. Sometimes there is a reasonable excuse via extra safety equipment, but mostly its just bunk to sell them at an inflated price.
Perhaps if manufacturers just made them better, not bigger and a lot more expensive, things wouldn't be so bad, especially if they concentrated on design and build quality rather than cramming them full of new gizmos that went wrong a lot, costing a lot of CO2 via unwanted trips to the dealership and replacement parts/work.
|
|
I don't own an EV, and although thinking of changing my car it is unlikely to be an EV.
The charging network is insufficiently developed as during a year I may make 15-20 journeys that may require recharging on the way. If changing second car in household used for more local trips this could be EV - but as it does <3k pa it is not worth the expense.
You are quite right of course - the obvious solution to parking space problems is to make them smaller (and better). Some folk do however see this as a threat to their absolute civil freedom to drive guzzling 2 ton 4x4s and large SUVs.
|
|
Well I am certainly not going to have some socialists telling me I must drive a smaller car, that is not the role of government.
|
Well I am certainly not going to have some socialists telling me I must drive a smaller car, that is not the role of government.
How predictable ... :-)
|
Well I am certainly not going to have some socialists telling me I must drive a smaller car, that is not the role of government.
How predictable ... :-)
Back at ya! ;-)
|
|
Ha! You too, hopefully we can disagree amicably :-)
|
Well I am certainly not going to have some socialists telling me I must drive a smaller car, that is not the role of government.
If your large car is guzzling finite oil reserves, adding NOx and other pollutants to our city's air and, by its size etc intimidating others it's not just the role but the duty of government to act.
A Socialist government is a thing of dreams in the UK right now.
For the second time in 25 years I've left Labour over rightward drift.
Last time it was privatising ATC and other stuff. This time it's the absurdity of ruling out more tax on giga incomes or multi million pounds of wealth.
|
|
|
<< Manufacturers have a long history of making slightly bigger cars through each generation. Sometimes there is a reasonable excuse via extra safety equipment, but mostly its just bunk to sell them at an inflated price. >>
Don't forget that car makers have to allow for steadily expanding occupants as well :-)
|
<< Manufacturers have a long history of making slightly bigger cars through each generation. Sometimes there is a reasonable excuse via extra safety equipment, but mostly its just bunk to sell them at an inflated price. >>
Don't forget that car makers have to allow for steadily expanding occupants as well :-)
Perhaps, but many new versions of cars are lower (less headroom) and often have less interior space due to the extra gizmos, 'padding' and safety features in the doors and consoles.
When I test drove the gen-3 Mazda3 back in early 2017, it felt quite smaller inside compared to my gen-1 car, quite 'claustrophobic' for want of a better term. The car is lower than mine, but slightly longer and wider, though not by as much as many rivals.
From sitting in many similarly-sized rivals, I had a similar experience. No wonder bulbous SUVs are so popular these days - they are designed to haul obese people around. Maybe governments should look at food and diet rather than cars, given the latter will change to suit the former for people in both directions.
|
|
No wonder bulbous SUVs are so popular these days - they are designed to haul obese people around.
Disagree !
Our Kia Sportage is designed to haul us around at a decent height on comfortable sized tyres.
We both need good seating and reasonable comfort for our backs and hips, Doesn't work in a Corsa. We pay appropriate fuel and ved duties so are paying for the privilege.
|
No wonder bulbous SUVs are so popular these days - they are designed to haul obese people around.
Disagree !
Our Kia Sportage is designed to haul us around at a decent height on comfortable sized tyres.
We both need good seating and reasonable comfort for our backs and hips, Doesn't work in a Corsa. We pay appropriate fuel and ved duties so are paying for the privilege.
I was comparing like with like - i.e. my 2005 build Mazda3 with one two generations ahead, and of many similar cars such as the Focus, etc. I've no doubt that many SUVs and crossovers are more suited to people who have mobility or back problems.
I looked at one myself back in 2017 (the Mazda CX-3) which was easier to get into the the Mazda 3, but which I found to have even less room inside because, despite its outward dimensions, inside in based on the smaller Mazda2.
Not uncomfortable per se, but I preferred the seating arrangement (when actually in the seat, but not getting in/out) of the Mazda3 as I felt I was 'perching' on the seat of the CX-3. Too high up for my liking. My existing car is, for me at least, a 'happy medium' in between the two.
Unfortunately many modern cars come shod as standard on big wheels and low profile tyres, sometimes to (some degree to) cover up for poor innate handling. I do recall ORB saying that his Sportage didn't handle so well round the bends, and one of the reasons why he changed it to another car.
I suppose it often comes down to the individual's needs - whether they are realistic to suit their current and future driving situation or not. I must admit as I get older wanting more of a comfortable driving experience than a really 'dynamic' one, partly because the driving experience isn't exactly 'enjoyable' these days as it once was - sometimes.
It's why I changed out my car's OEM 16in wheels and tyres (when a tyre started leaking [wheel corrosion] and the tyres were 6-12 months away from needing replacing anyway) to higher profile 15 tyres and matching wheels.
The ride is now back to much nearer what it was when the car (and thus the springs and dampers) was much newer, and it only cost me about £100 more than just replacing one 16in wheel and all 4 tyres.
|
|
<< The ride is now back to much nearer what it was when the car (and thus the springs and dampers) was much newer, and it only cost me about £100 more than just replacing one 16in wheel and all 4 tyres. >>
Andy, how much of your impression is due to the tyres, and how much to the change of wheel size ? I recently treated my 207SW to a full set of Kumho tyres as the previous Avons were 7 years old, still with over 3mm of tread but probably firmer than when new. The change in sound level is immediately noticeable - can't comment on handling or grip yet. This coincided with an oil and filter change, which I suppose may have contributed slightly ?
|
|
When i started driving, it was in a Metro. All 12 feet of it. Plenty of room for people in it though, but very little protective metal around them. Small cars are getting bigger outside, but are small cars getting bigger inside, of just the metal that protects us? You couldnt make a car the size of a Metro these days. There would be no room inside for people.
Having said that i wish we were encouraged to buy Kei car sized vehicles in the UK as they are in Japan. Instead we are encouraged to buy cars that notionally produce little CO2 and car makers are largely dropping their small cars from sale as their CO2 isnt low enough, and electrifying them makes them too expensive.
|
Small cars are getting bigger outside, but are small cars getting bigger inside, of just the metal that protects us?
An interesting question, but on the whole I think small cars are getting bigger on the inside, just not to the extent the increase in exterior size would suggest!.
We've just come out of a Suzuki Ignis, and accepting the narrow cabin limiting occupants to four (basic version has a fixed three person bench in the rear, all others had two separate sliding seats instead), it had a truly amazing amount of interior space for its size, especially noticeable in the rear.
You couldnt make a car the size of a Metro these days. There would be no room inside for people.
Having said that i wish we were encouraged to buy Kei car sized vehicles in the UK as they are in Japan.
There is a contradiction here because the Metro would only just fit into (current*) Kei car regs in terms of length, but actually exceeds the width allowance by 70mm (and the engine capacity allowance by at least 348cc) and most of them also have a huge amount of interior space for four.
car makers are largely dropping t
heir small cars from sale as their CO2 isnt low enough
That isn't really the case. The reason manufacturers are dropping small cars is because not enough people want to buy them, and (more importantly) there is not enough profit in them.
and electrifying them makes them too expensive.
As I have mentioned many times before when the list price crops up, it isn't relevant for most, because most lease rather than buy. The monthly payments are what matters, not the list price.
As it happens, VW is working on a small (it would replace the Up) EV, the ID 1, which they are aiming to have a list price starting off under £17k. Granted that isn't exactly a bargain, but it is less than £2.5k more than the list price of dearest current (ICE) Up.
And there are plenty of small Chinese EV's which have the potential to provide cheap urban transport.
|
<< The ride is now back to much nearer what it was when the car (and thus the springs and dampers) was much newer, and it only cost me about £100 more than just replacing one 16in wheel and all 4 tyres. >>
Andy, how much of your impression is due to the tyres, and how much to the change of wheel size ? I recently treated my 207SW to a full set of Kumho tyres as the previous Avons were 7 years old, still with over 3mm of tread but probably firmer than when new. The change in sound level is immediately noticeable - can't comment on handling or grip yet. This coincided with an oil and filter change, which I suppose may have contributed slightly ?
Back in 2011-12 (my car was only 5-6 years old at the time and had done about 40,000 miles), the firm I was working for at the time owned a similar gen-1 Mazda3 1.6 petrol TS hatch as a pool car, which had 15in rims and 195/65 R15 tyres, but had done nearly three times the mileage.
My car's OEM 205/55 R16 tyre setup gave a firm-ish ride - fine when a set of tyres were new, but a bit too firm (not terrible though) for my liking after about 1/3rd of their life onwards.
As I was planning on keeping my car for a decent amount of time (originally going to be 10-15 years), I thought I would use the pool car one day on a site visit (that I'd already done the route in my own car) as a comparison that effectively had only one significant variable - the tyre sidewall height. The tyres fitted to the pool car were the same make as the ones I'd just had fitted as a replacement for my original OEM set.
The difference in ride quality was noticeably better, without little if any discernable penalty in handling. Noise-wise not much in it though. At the time, my OEM 16in alloys weren't corroding sufficiently to cause the tyre leaks it did about 5 years later when I changed them out and the tyres to 15in ones.
All my tyre changes (including wheels and tyres) were well away from the service time, in August (2012) and April-May (2018). I'm sure choice of tyres will make a big difference to noise and ride quality, as my original 16in OEMs (Bridgestone ER30s) were, IMHO, terrible after about a year from new, though far more on the noise side than ride - they were awful on top-dressed and concrete roads.
The first set of replacements (Dunlop SP Sport FastResponse) were excellent on noise right up to their replacement 5.5 years later and very good on the handling front too compared to the Bridgestones, which weren't good in the wet, especially when older (even though they had 3-4mm of tread left when changed in 2012).
My current set of Michelin CC+s aren't quite as quiet as the Dunlops, but still good enough on that score, and are a good compromise A/S tyre for the climate in E. Anglia.
|
|
|
|
The nation has become one gigantic warehouse for Chinese goods instead of a manufacturing country,
Why on earth would anyone open a factory in the UK? In modern Britain people don't want to work in a factory. People prefer more comfortable jobs and don't want to work weekends. On top of that workplace politics is terrible.
Imagine if someone decided to open a factory in the UK, only to be accused they are exploiting workers... and they owe their success to the workers. For a wealthy individual to open a business, they would have to give up enjoying their millions to open a factory, rather spending on a luxury chateaux in the South of France and never work again.
We had high taxation in the 1970s which destroyed wealth. It was indiscriminate misallocation of capital into the hands of the state, who did n't spend it wisely. All in the name of equality. If everyone is equality broke, who is going to open those businesses?
The super rich move overseas, to escape UK taxation, whilst Blair/Brown give out the welcome mat to oligarchs to live in Britain and pay no taxation on their foreign earnings. Bizarre.
The wealth is in the hands of large corporations and sovereign wealth funds. Aside from Dyson, can't think of many equivalents to him. He is a role model, but he has moved to overseas to Singapore.
Even when people have built up wealth, they have to deal with 40% inheritance tax. It does not encourage generational wealth (and some companies can take years to grow), like oak trees. Some generation may loose it all e.g. Wilko. However, some may end up doing amazing things. Alan Sugar tried to move to Australia. I suspect for inheritance tax reasons (which probably does n't exist there).
It is pointless, as the well off can afford tax planning, but these tax advisors are ludicrously expensive. For many in the middle, it just is n't financially viable.
If I had a brilliant idea for a product, I would get it built in China and import it to the UK.
We need a fairer country, which looks after the poor and elderly, but not one which is nasty to those who have genuinely created fair in a fair way....
|
|
<< If I had a brilliant idea for a product, I would get it built in China and import it to the UK. We need a fairer country, which looks after the poor and elderly, but not one which is nasty to those who have genuinely created fair in a fair way. >>
I don't think you will have a brilliant idea for a product. When nearly everything we demand is made overseas (usually in China) and we have to import food too, because we can't (or won't) grow enough of our own, we have to think about the balance of payments. So far we have managed to live on our wits, meaning finance and technology. How long will we continue to keep our heads above water - especially allowing for the covering of arable land with import warehouses ?
Off topic - sorry ....
|
|
In 1970 the average house price was £5k, average pay £1200 pa, and a colour TV £2-500.
The price of a (much better) TV has not changed much. House prices are 50 and pay 30 times higher than 1970.
A slightly extreme example - but what has this to do with manufacturing. Fundamentally material goods and basic foods are now very cheap. What costs are services - healthcare, media, restaurants, entertainment, holidays etc.
If one were looking at a future strategy one would focus on that which is highly valued and could generate a decent income. You would let others do that which is increasingly driven by reducing costs.
|
Fundamentally material goods and basic foods are now very cheap. What costs are services - healthcare, media, restaurants, entertainment, holidays etc.
Can you show that restaurants and holidays are relatively expensive - at least compared with 1970 ? I agree that many people switched to Staycation during Covid, but until then millions of people went abroad for holidays, often more than once a year ! Not so in 1970 I suggest.
|
Can you show that restaurants and holidays are relatively expensive - at least compared with 1970 ? I agree that many people switched to Staycation during Covid, but until then millions of people went abroad for holidays, often more than once a year ! Not so in 1970 I suggest.
!Quite simply - people could not afford to eat out or take holidays as we do today.
Many fast food chains did not launch in the UK until after 1970 - eg: McDonalds 1974, Pizza Hut 1973, Dominoes Pizza 1985, Costa 1971, Starbucks 1998.
In 1970 there were ~1300 curry houses in the UK - now about 10,000.
Greek, Turkish, Italian, Thai, etc etc were largely regarded as "foreign muck". The dominant UK fast food was fish and chips - in fairness there are probably less today than then.
In 1970, Britons took 5.7 million trips abroad for a holiday, by 2018 this had grown to 47 million
|
|
<< Greek, Turkish, Italian, Thai, etc etc were largely regarded as "foreign muck". The dominant UK fast food was fish and chips - in fairness there are probably less today than then. >>
While perhaps true, none of that shows that 'restaurants are expensive', just that the choice of foreign muck is much wider. Food now is a relatively small part of a family budget, accommodation is usually the big expense.
|
|
|
There are two easy ways to avoid inheritance tax.
The first is to not hoard wealth in the first place. You are heavily taxed on 8t because it does no good to the economy sitting in the bank. Just spend it - presumably that's why you worked for it in the first place.
The second, if your offspring are so feckless as to not be able to support themselves, is to pass them all of your money over £325k to them every year.
I'm slightly perplexed about Dyson being a role model. He built his brand off the back of British labour, then moved production overseas to make more profit. If you want a role model, maybe someone like Boyd Tunnock, or go back to Titus Salt, the Lever Brothers or the Cadbury family - all British manufacturers that took care of their workers and made a good product.
|
There are two easy ways to avoid inheritance tax.
The first is to not hoard wealth in the first place. You are heavily taxed on 8t because it does no good to the economy sitting in the bank. Just spend it - presumably that's why you worked for it in the first place.
The second, if your offspring are so feckless as to not be able to support themselves, is to pass them all of your money over £325k to them every year.
Wealth isn't normally "hoarded" - it's usually invested, directly in Stock Market investments, indirectly in pension and investment funds which can include property, commodities and government funds, ie government borrowing
|
|
<< Wealth ... is usually invested, directly in Stock Market investments, indirectly in pension and investment funds which can include property, commodities and government funds, ie government borrowing >>
Some of us octogenarians foresee the possibility of having to pay for late-life care, which can eat rapidly into any savings, even allowing for the low wages of those that provide it. I suppose one could go as far as to give away nearly everything and let the State pick up the bill, but I suspect most don't do that ?
|
<< Wealth ... is usually invested, directly in Stock Market investments, indirectly in pension and investment funds which can include property, commodities and government funds, ie government borrowing >>
Some of us octogenarians foresee the possibility of having to pay for late-life care, which can eat rapidly into any savings, even allowing for the low wages of those that provide it. I suppose one could go as far as to give away nearly everything and let the State pick up the bill, but I suspect most don't do that ?
I find it endlessly depressing how few people realise this. You can save your whole life and make whatever investments you like and, in the end, you'll hand it all back in care costs of thousands every week. Better to spend it all, pay your taxes and hold the state to account when the time comes.
|
|
The discussion on the size of car parking spaces seems to have been hijacked by inheritance tax feelings!
As the apprentice Moderator, I have yet to learn how to close down a thread, so can I suggest that, if any members wish to continue discussing Inheritance Tax or dispersion of life savings, they should do so by commencing a new thread under General Discussion.
Thank you
Edited by leaseman on 05/12/2023 at 19:17
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
