[Tom_77]

Interesting piece in The Guardian about SUVs.

[quote]

Sold as a means of escape from the concrete realities of the modern world, a symbol of individualism and the pioneer spirit, the SUV represents instead a uniform kind of selfishness, a collective indifference to community to which, alas, we are all more or less prone.

[/quote]

 

Topic

[mark1a]

Spangly Shiny wrote:

I would like to see them all (Wankpanzers and pick-up trucks), speed restricted the way that vans are. i.e. 50MPH national limit and 60MPH on dual carriageways.

Pick-up trucks already are. If they have class N1 type approval and a payload capacity of over 1000kg – which they would have to as the VAT & BIK tax advantages are only applicable if they are commercial vehicles, then they are subject to the same reduced limits as a van.

[Sriracha]

And with the right tyres they
And with the right tyres they wouldn’t “need” an SUV anyway!

[Spangly Shiny]

I would like to see them all

I would like to see them all (Wankpanzers and pick-up trucks), speed restricted the way that vans are. i.e. 50MPH national limit and 60MPH on dual carriageways.

[bikeman01]

Its a problem caused by the

Its a problem caused by the exchequer when he effectively abolished ved bands based upon emissions in 2017.

Now prettty much all cars have a flat rate of £180 pa is it any surprise that that larger vehicles have bcome popular. 

[wtjs]

And they’re more the choice

And they’re more the choice of VED and MOT evading crooks. I suppose that guzzler pickups are worse but similar to SUVs, although most of the new evading vehicles around here are Mercedes, BMW, Audi and Range Rover. Pickups are the worst in terms of numbers on the road. This one is 6 months without MOT.

[Robert Hardy]

They are considerably more
They are considerably more dangerous to pedestrians.

[ktache]

Except they will have the

Except they will have the wrong tyres on for that day.

[richliv]

I spent a month on honeymoon
I spent a month on honeymoon driving a very ordinary Ford Laser around Namibia, including on dirt roads and bush tracks. Ok, the weather was good but it was more than capable. In the UK, SUVs are barely ever needed. Around me in the rural UK (N Somerset), so many people have them as main vehicles with no need except for that 1 day a year when it’s snowbound.

[hawkinspeter]

chrisonatrike wrote:

Being charitable, is it just that people:
 – like being higher up than others (psychological need)
 – like having an “outlook” (e.g. looking out further) (psychological need)
 – do SUVs* – while actually being even more space inefficient – offer more space *around* the front seats, for a feeling of spaciousness?
 – people very often gauge the value of things by what they cost, and these cost more – ergo they’re “better”.
 – once some people you know / aspire to have something, you’re afraid of being the one without (more psychological needs)

* SUV – quite rightly there’s debate about an expansive term (expansive by design, once it was known and manufactures realised people wanted “that”).  Without making this circular are we OK with “larger / heavier / higher front than the previous generation ones”?  Else we’ll be here all night…

Small vans provide all the benefits of SUVs apart from the social signalling. Vans are seen as being a working class vehicle and I suppose driving an SUV is like a peacock brandishing their huge tail – over-sized and not very practical.

[David9694]

Stop advertising them for one

Stop advertising them for one thing?

https://news.sky.com/story/toyota-suv-advert-banned-for-disregarding-impact-of-vehicles-being-pictured-driving-on-environment-13013468

 

[chrisonabike]

Being charitable, is it just

Being charitable, is it just that people:
 – like being higher up than others (psychological need)
 – like having an “outlook” (e.g. looking out further) (psychological need)
 – do SUVs* – while actually being even more space inefficient – offer more space *around* the front seats, for a feeling of spaciousness?
 – people very often gauge the value of things by what they cost, and these cost more – ergo they’re “better”.
 – once some people you know / aspire to have something, you’re afraid of being the one without (more psychological needs)

* SUV – quite rightly there’s debate about an expansive term (expansive by design, once it was known and manufactures realised people wanted “that”).  Without making this circular are we OK with “larger / heavier / higher front than the previous generation ones”?  Else we’ll be here all night…

[Slartibartfast]

I have a fabia estate which
I have a fabia estate which felt massive when I bought it. It’s easily taken two adults, two kids, bikes and luggage on holiday multiple times. This week it was parked next to a new, swb defender and it looks comically small suddenly. AFAIK the defender has two functional seats and less boot space. I live 10 mins from the city centre and I’m 99% certain the owner isn’t a secret farmer.
I don’t get it. It’s pure vanity, they’re not even more practical.

[Anonymous]

Seems as if Right_is_for

Seems as if Right_is_for_Dickheads…

[quiff]

Paris Mayor trains sights on

Paris Mayor trains sights on SUVs: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-67424678

[BalladOfStruth]

Not sure about the USA,

Not sure about the USA, though I do remember seeing in a Not Just Bikes video that the influx of SUVs and Trucks had a lot to do with tax.

Here though, pickups are classed as LCVs in the same way as vans, and therefore are VAT exempt (technically reclaimable). I’m not 100% on exactly how it works, but a lot of self-employed business owners (or people related to them) will get double-cabs as their personal “daily” for essentially a 20% discount. I used to know a load of builders in a previous life and they almost all did this – my best friend still drives a massive Navarro he got through his dad’s building company. I think VED works differently for them too. Honestly, 90% of the immaculate, clean double-cabs you see with nothing in the bed are probably there for this reason.

[Author]

Replies