[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

[Rendel Harris]

levestane wrote:

SUVs are the same as every other vehicle

They’re not though, are they, the higher bonnets make it much more likely that anyone they hit is going to go under the wheels rather than over the bonnet. That’s the reason that children hit by an SUV are eight more times likely to die than those hit by ordinary saloon cars.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022437522000810?via%3Dihub

[levestane]

SUVs are the same as every

SUVs are the same as every other vehicle, it’s the ‘squidgy things’ that tend to choose the SUV lifestyle statement that are the issue. Once all vehicles are autonomous they will hopefully all be driven similarly.

[Dnnnnnn]

the little onion wrote:

the little onion wrote:

an idiot driving a hatchback is not as dangerous as an idiot driving a SUV. Basic newtonian physics, when dealing with a larger, heavier vehicle. Plus basic biomechanics of a higher, squarer bonnet

And those who have an inflated sense of their own safety may well drive faster, more aggressively or less attentively – increasing the risk of collisions, as well as the consequences of a collision.

[chrisonabike]

Well – the video is US

Well – the video is US centric I guess because this is where they originated from.  However – it is replete with specific examples.

Being specific (e.g. if reporting “growth in number of SUVs”) is important.  No lesser grouch/pedant than BikesnobNYC has pointed out that what’s in and what’s out of “SUV” is somewhat arbitrary, if not completely meaningless.  And I notice the Kona says “SUV-style bodywork” and “Sleekly sculpted SUV style” on their site – presumably referring to the high front / some kind of look.  But that itself may be a safety concern if it affects your ability to see well out of it.

Definitions being more sloppy of course don’t make a given vehicle less dangerous, or more efficient, give it more internal space or make it less of a scam on the public if you just move it to Europe.

If you can think of a catchy word or phrase which more accurately describes “vehicle which is principally designed to safely transport fragile egos – which is way larger / heavier / less efficient than the current norms for these things, or is less safe for those on the outside e.g. due to very high front / lesser ability to see what’s around you” I’m all for it.

[Left_is_for_Losers]

SUV’s are simply the

SUV’s are simply the equivalent of riding around on a WT level super expensive bike. You don’t actually need one, it does the same as a £1.5k (or less) bike and it’s usually only a way to pretend you’re affluent and show off. 

[Adam Sutton]

Bless. Try again.

Bless. Try again.

Edit: A strawman would be trying to equate American vehicles to the SUVs on British roads.

Taking the example I gave a Hyundai Kona is sold as an SUV, yet it is 4350mm long and 1825mm wide. A focus hatchback is 4397 long and 1844mm wide.

[Anonymous]

Strawman!
Strawman!

[Anonymous]

Which solves exactly what as
Which solves exactly what as regards SUVs?

[Adam Sutton]

The video like many arguments

The video like many arguments against is very US centric. Any debate on SUV’s as the grauniad article hints needs to properly define SUV, as in Europe they term is applied to a broad spectrum of vehicles and intermixed with the crossover term. There is for example a huge difference between something like a current Land Rover defender or BMW X(whatever the biggest one is) and something like, say a Hyundai Kona, which is little more than a slightly taller hatchback. Even a lot of European “SUV” including thise with AWD capability actually share a platform with saloon counterparts and in term of footprint are maybe a few mm bigger.

[qwerty360]

And of course the best 4×4

And of course the best 4×4 for ease of driving up that track is probably a Fiat panda 4×4.

You aren’t trying to go over massive obstructions, so being significantly smaller makes driving a lot easier because you have a lot more margin for error…

 

I suspect your mini cooper, given suitable tyres gets up there more easily than 80% of 4×4 SUV’s on UK roads would. (My understanding is 4×4 capability is minimally useful without tyres that take advantage – going from spinning 2 tyres to spinning 4 otherwise…)

[chrisonabike]

OTOH as the speed goes above

OTOH as the speed goes above e.g. 20mph it rapidly becomes moot if you’re a vulnerable road user.  I bet they do more damage when they are driven into houses though.

SUVs are a gigantic scam on us all in many ways (lengthy video but definitely worth the time).  While I’ve read that they’ve patched around a few of the safety issues* for one they still have reduced visibility (closer to them, A pillars) relative to other cars.

* Such as the one where they were considerably more dangerous to their occupants than other types of cars.

[levestane]

Given the technofanaticism of

Given the technofanaticism of contempory society hopefully all motor vehicles will become autonomous and AI will be better at driving than most.

[SimoninSpalding]

Would that 1.6T include or

Would that 1.6T include or exclude the driver? I just checked the kerb weight of my car, and it is 1510kg – so with me in it I would only be a reasonable breakfast away for the 1600kg threshold 

[SimoninSpalding]

This is true, and a heavy

This is true, and a heavy electric vehicle is also bad for the environment, however one with a massive V8 engine is even worse, so I would suggest a dual scale, one for weight, and one for emissions, with the result from the 2 being added together to come up with a total for the vehicle.

[the little onion]

I disagree – an idiot driving

I disagree – an idiot driving a hatchback is not as dangerous as an idiot driving a SUV. Basic newtonian physics, when dealing with a larger, heavier vehicle. Plus basic biomechanics of a higher, squarer bonnet

[Author]

Replies