why do people drive big 4x4 SUVs in the city?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by redferry
Some of us dont have a lot of money though. It was the best emissions of any car I could fond for under a grand by a country mile.
my car was 1.2l not 1.3
my car was 1.2l not 1.3
There were plenty more cars you could have had for under a grand that didn't have such high emissions.
Unlikely you could have bought a KA 1.2l for under a grand as those only came out brand new in 2009 and even today you don't get them for under a grand.
Original post by redferry
Except you could actually afford to buy a far more environmentally friendly car for the same price...
Except you could actually afford to buy a far more environmentally friendly car for the same price...
What car is more environmentally friendly and could carry 6 people, go into soft muddy plus hilly terrain and also carry up to 200kg of equipment I need for my business and work?
Also I do have a very environmentally friendly car that even here in Norway you do need to be fairly well-off to afford. Zero emissions to operate but certainly not zero emissions to build and then charge up, one thing for sure at almost a million NOK to buy and primarily designed for urban area usage, unlikely such a car could ever be used for the kind of work I do in UK therefore I keep the Land Rover there
Also useful to have a Land Rover, there is a certain Mercedes A Class driver that will speed up when being overtaken thus putting me in a dangerous situation, rather have one that can out accelerate it and leave it in a puff of black diesel smoke or if needed just crash into it from its sides.
Because they feel vulnerable in a smaller car, or to bully other road users, or because their friends have them.
Problem would end if to drive one, you had to take your driving test again, in one. Drive an SUV or a smaller car, the latter meaning not having to take your driving test again, and most would choose a smaller car.
Problem would end if to drive one, you had to take your driving test again, in one. Drive an SUV or a smaller car, the latter meaning not having to take your driving test again, and most would choose a smaller car.
I think middle class and wealthy people have to face it now, that although these vehicles give them a lot of comfort and feelings of security, they are also heavily contributing to the unbreathable air that we had during the last week. Continuing to drive them is getting close to being a knowing crime.
Original post by Alfissti
There were plenty more cars you could have had for under a grand that didn't have such high emissions.
Like?
The only ones I could find were corsas, Micra's and a clapped out Suzuki Jeep that needed a lot of work.
Unlikely you could have bought a KA 1.2l for under a grand as those only came out brand new in 2009 and even today you don't get them for under a grand.
Agh I was sure it was 1.2. Why was it so bad at getting up hills?!?!
What car is more environmentally friendly and could carry 6 people, go into soft muddy plus hilly terrain and also carry up to 200kg of equipment I need for my business and work?
If you have to drive in mud then fair enough - you need it. I only have a problem with people that use them soleley for city/motorway driving
Also I do have a very environmentally friendly car that even here in Norway you do need to be fairly well-off to afford. Zero emissions to operate but certainly not zero emissions to build and then charge up, one thing for sure at almost a million NOK to buy and primarily designed for urban area usage, unlikely such a car could ever be used for the kind of work I do in UK therefore I keep the Land Rover there
Also useful to have a Land Rover, there is a certain Mercedes A Class driver that will speed up when being overtaken thus putting me in a dangerous situation, rather have one that can out accelerate it and leave it in a puff of black diesel smoke or if needed just crash into it from its sides.
So you do have it just to dick on other drivers? As a defence if you crash...that's pretty sick. If you crash into someone in a land rover they ARE going to die.
(edited 10 years ago)
I always find the size argument interesting. A Range Rover is 4.99m long, a BMW 5 series estate is 4.90m long. The RR is 2.22m wide, the BMW 2.10m wide. Or to put it another way, the RR is 1.8% longer and 5.4% wider than the BMW. The only dimension that's significantly different is height, which is frankly unimportant - though does make them more imposing.
Comparing a Defender 90 with a Golf - length 3.65m/4.35m, width 1.79m/1.80m - the Defender has a significantly smaller footprint than the Golf, though admittedly the Golf is the 5 door. In fact, the Golf is only 13% shorter than the Range Rover! At 4.37m long, the 110 has virtually the same footprint as the Golf.
Land Rover also carbon offset their manufacturing processes, and the cars generally last longer (not least because they hold their value better) than most smaller cars. An average figure given is that 20% of the lifetime emissions of a vehicle are from manufacture, so if you can double the time the vehicle lasts you can make a pretty big impact on the lifecycle emissions. Land Rover are also doing some pretty interesting things on efficiency as well (partly because they have more scope to do certain things - I think the new Range Rover is about 25% lighter than the old!).
Once you look past the surface it really starts to look as though people who go on about disliking 4x4s really just dislike the kind of people they perceive as driving them.
Actually, it takes significantly more energy to make a hybrid - Toyota won't release data about the Prius (or wouldn't last time I looked) but one of their other models was available in both hybrid and non-hybrid form. Manufacture of the hybrid used about twice as much energy as the petrol engined variant. There is also huge pollution caused by the materials required for the battery. They'll also probably have a shorter life cycle, as when the battery wears out the car will probably not have enough value left in it to justify replacing the battery. There's also the issue that they have very low powered engines (it's not a standard 1.5l) so whilst they have some benefits when driving around city streets, as soon as you get into any kind of journey where you drive at sustained speeds you'd be better off with a modern diesel.
Comparing a Defender 90 with a Golf - length 3.65m/4.35m, width 1.79m/1.80m - the Defender has a significantly smaller footprint than the Golf, though admittedly the Golf is the 5 door. In fact, the Golf is only 13% shorter than the Range Rover! At 4.37m long, the 110 has virtually the same footprint as the Golf.
Land Rover also carbon offset their manufacturing processes, and the cars generally last longer (not least because they hold their value better) than most smaller cars. An average figure given is that 20% of the lifetime emissions of a vehicle are from manufacture, so if you can double the time the vehicle lasts you can make a pretty big impact on the lifecycle emissions. Land Rover are also doing some pretty interesting things on efficiency as well (partly because they have more scope to do certain things - I think the new Range Rover is about 25% lighter than the old!).
Once you look past the surface it really starts to look as though people who go on about disliking 4x4s really just dislike the kind of people they perceive as driving them.
Original post by Amphiprion
Well if people "cared" about the environment they would drive hybrids or not drive at all (impractical or what?). People who drive either 4x4s or average fuel economy cars of any kind aren't in a position to preach about environmentalism. Fact is cars are crap for the environment but they are not about to go out of use any time soon. It still causes a vast amount of emissions to MAKE a hybrid, about the same as any other car but they just put out less once they're up and running.
Published in Nature: http://www.drtulsian.com/interestingReading/energy/Hybrid_vehicles.pdf
I'm marine biologist about to graduate driving a £700, 2003 ford fiesta at about 39mpg (161g/km) - which is pretty poor but about your average - but that's because I was a student when I bought it and it's all I could afford despite fully understanding the environmental impacts of road vehicles.
If I could be driving anything right now it'd probably be a Ford reflex(65-78mpg) which sadly isn't being marketed yet or an audi A3(about 56mpg).
Published in Nature: http://www.drtulsian.com/interestingReading/energy/Hybrid_vehicles.pdf
I'm marine biologist about to graduate driving a £700, 2003 ford fiesta at about 39mpg (161g/km) - which is pretty poor but about your average - but that's because I was a student when I bought it and it's all I could afford despite fully understanding the environmental impacts of road vehicles.
If I could be driving anything right now it'd probably be a Ford reflex(65-78mpg) which sadly isn't being marketed yet or an audi A3(about 56mpg).
Actually, it takes significantly more energy to make a hybrid - Toyota won't release data about the Prius (or wouldn't last time I looked) but one of their other models was available in both hybrid and non-hybrid form. Manufacture of the hybrid used about twice as much energy as the petrol engined variant. There is also huge pollution caused by the materials required for the battery. They'll also probably have a shorter life cycle, as when the battery wears out the car will probably not have enough value left in it to justify replacing the battery. There's also the issue that they have very low powered engines (it's not a standard 1.5l) so whilst they have some benefits when driving around city streets, as soon as you get into any kind of journey where you drive at sustained speeds you'd be better off with a modern diesel.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Alfissti
Also I do have a very environmentally friendly car that even here in Norway you do need to be fairly well-off to afford. Zero emissions to operate but certainly not zero emissions to build and then charge up, one thing for sure at almost a million NOK to buy and primarily designed for urban area usage, unlikely such a car could ever be used for the kind of work I do in UK therefore I keep the Land Rover there
Also I do have a very environmentally friendly car that even here in Norway you do need to be fairly well-off to afford. Zero emissions to operate but certainly not zero emissions to build and then charge up, one thing for sure at almost a million NOK to buy and primarily designed for urban area usage, unlikely such a car could ever be used for the kind of work I do in UK therefore I keep the Land Rover there
Mayy be slightly off topic, but did you consider the BMW i8? I don't think they've started deliveries yet, but I don't think it's that far away from being on the roads?
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Rump Steak
Mayy be slightly off topic, but did you consider the BMW i8? I don't think they've started deliveries yet, but I don't think it's that far away from being on the roads?
Posted from TSR Mobile
Posted from TSR Mobile
No. Estimate price for one when it is finally launched here will be close to 1.4mil NOK at that type of money I rather buy a Jaguar F-Type.
Also where my Tesla can easily do 380km (my personal best record) purely on electric, this i8 can only do 25-30km all electric.
The other reason, battery technology will evolve in the next 5-10 years where they can be charged for less time, be lighter and yet be more powerful. The i8 like many electric cars will have a battery pack that won't be easy to swap out where the Tesla is designed for the battery pack to be swapped and is a 2 minute process.
Original post by redferry
If you crash into someone in a land rover they ARE going to die.
That depends, many older Land Rovers do quite poorly in a high speed crash especially against newer cars.
I must say this test did surprise me at how badly the Land Rover performed.
Actually most Land Rovers aren't even the safest cars for its own occupants as it does score poorly in crash tests when compared against other SUVs even those that are less expensive to buy.
Original post by redferry
Like?
The only ones I could find were corsas, Micra's and a clapped out Suzuki Jeep that needed a lot of work.
The only ones I could find were corsas, Micra's and a clapped out Suzuki Jeep that needed a lot of work.
You weren't looking hard enough then. Cars in the same class and size that does better on emissions than a KA and of the same era :-
VW Lupo/Seat Arosa.
Daihatsu Sirion/Cuore/Charade.
Original post by redferry
Agh I was sure it was 1.2. Why was it so bad at getting up hills?!?!
Agh I was sure it was 1.2. Why was it so bad at getting up hills?!?!
Nope, unlikely you'd have had a 1.2l KA unless it was the one made by Fiat that came out in 2009.
Why was it so bad at hills? The ones I drove wasn't bad, probably the one you had a worn out engine and various other components and a bigger environmental disaster than the SUVs you're trying to diss
Original post by redferry
If you have to drive in mud then fair enough - you need it. I only have a problem with people that use them soleley for city/motorway driving
If you have to drive in mud then fair enough - you need it. I only have a problem with people that use them soleley for city/motorway driving
Do you have problems with empty lorries/buses/vans as well?
Do you have problems with people who own 7 seater MPVs as well? Many of which do get driven with only 1 person in it the majority of the time.
Original post by redferry
So you do have it just to dick on other drivers?
So you do have it just to dick on other drivers?
I don't have time to care about other drivers and have no time for those who block my way, not everyone is a funded phd student with all the time in the world.
Original post by Alfissti
That depends, many older Land Rovers do quite poorly in a high speed crash especially against newer cars.
I must say this test did surprise me at how badly the Land Rover performed.
Actually most Land Rovers aren't even the safest cars for its own occupants as it does score poorly in crash tests when compared against other SUVs even those that are less expensive to buy.
You weren't looking hard enough then. Cars in the same class and size that does better on emissions than a KA and of the same era :-
VW Lupo/Seat Arosa.
Daihatsu Sirion/Cuore/Charade.
I must say this test did surprise me at how badly the Land Rover performed.
Actually most Land Rovers aren't even the safest cars for its own occupants as it does score poorly in crash tests when compared against other SUVs even those that are less expensive to buy.
You weren't looking hard enough then. Cars in the same class and size that does better on emissions than a KA and of the same era :-
VW Lupo/Seat Arosa.
Daihatsu Sirion/Cuore/Charade.
No way could you get those for under a grand in 2009
Nope, unlikely you'd have had a 1.2l KA unless it was the one made by Fiat that came out in 2009.
Why was it so bad at hills? The ones I drove wasn't bad, probably the one you had a worn out engine and various other components and a bigger environmental disaster than the SUVs you're trying to diss
No it had a perfect engine the only problem with it was it got a bit rusty underneath.
I think I just used to fill it too full of stuff but accelleration up hill was never its forte.
Do you have problems with empty lorries/buses/vans as well?
I'm a bog advocate of moving freight onto the railways
Do you have problems with people who own 7 seater MPVs as well? Many of which do get driven with only 1 person in it the majority of the time.
If they don't need one (big family/loads of rescued dogs/whatever) then yes I do take issue with it.
I love people who do the school run with them full of kids though
I don't have time to care about other drivers and have no time for those who block my way, not everyone is a funded phd student with all the time in the world.
You are probably a very selfish and dangerous driver given you are that impatient then.
Personal digs are uncalled for, I request that you don't engage with me again because you are outright mean.
Original post by james1211
I am maybe protesting at the wrong people here, as i still believe the OP posted what he did to be controvertial and it was a premeditated argument, rather than a "tell me the reason why people like them", it was more of "there are no legitimate reasons why someone should own them".
I am maybe protesting at the wrong people here, as i still believe the OP posted what he did to be controvertial and it was a premeditated argument, rather than a "tell me the reason why people like them", it was more of "there are no legitimate reasons why someone should own them".
No it was the former.
I was wondering why people drive big cars in small uk roads
As I personally didn't get it
Original post by jusdorange
No it was the former.
I was wondering why people drive big cars in small uk roads
As I personally didn't get it
I was wondering why people drive big cars in small uk roads
As I personally didn't get it
Did you see the point I made earlier? They're only significantly bigger vertically. Footprint is pretty similar to a comparable car.
Original post by CurlyBen
Did you see the point I made earlier? They're only significantly bigger vertically. Footprint is pretty similar to a comparable car.
Range rover is 10 cm wider than a 5 series which is a big car already
Original post by jusdorange
Range rover is 10 cm wider than a 5 series which is a big car already
I know, which is about 5%, or to put it another way, not a lot. You never see people getting worked up about all these people clogging up the roads in their saloons or estates, despite the fact they take up a similar amount of space on the road...
Original post by CurlyBen
I know, which is about 5%, or to put it another way, not a lot. You never see people getting worked up about all these people clogging up the roads in their saloons or estates, despite the fact they take up a similar amount of space on the road...
It's a huge amount
Have you ever been cycling on a busy road and had to contend with a Land Rover trying to shove you off the road?
Original post by redferry
Like?
The only ones I could find were corsas, Micra's and a clapped out Suzuki Jeep that needed a lot of work.
Agh I was sure it was 1.2. Why was it so bad at getting up hills?!?!
If you have to drive in mud then fair enough - you need it. I only have a problem with people that use them soleley for city/motorway driving
So you do have it just to **** on other drivers? As a defence if you crash...that's pretty sick. If you crash into someone in a land rover they ARE going to die.
The only ones I could find were corsas, Micra's and a clapped out Suzuki Jeep that needed a lot of work.
Agh I was sure it was 1.2. Why was it so bad at getting up hills?!?!
If you have to drive in mud then fair enough - you need it. I only have a problem with people that use them soleley for city/motorway driving
So you do have it just to **** on other drivers? As a defence if you crash...that's pretty sick. If you crash into someone in a land rover they ARE going to die.
Original post by manus062
Have you ever been cycling on a busy road and had to contend with a Land Rover trying to shove you off the road?
4 year old thread but cyclists should still piss off.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- What is your favourite city car?
- Don't fit in
- Driving test
- Insurance is really high for new drivers
- Parents making us go up by train when I move to uni
- City uni’s
- So will we be banned from driving petrol cars in 2030
- Durham university social and city life?
- Private school and Russell group university
- Kallisto's Saturday Question: Favorite Cities II
- University choice
- Geology Degree
- Driving anxiety and near crash experience
- How to understand football as a girl - help
- Why is Man City hated so much?
- UCAT booking. Advice needed.
- do women need sexual release as much as man?
- I have a SUNDAY morning driving test...
- Make it More Horror-ey !!
- Idea silver badge (Gamer) Part 1
Latest
Trending
Last reply 5 months ago
Where is my car parked during the day? Advice for first car insuranceLast reply 7 months ago
Will paying £1,900 a year for insurance as a new 21 year old driver be a lot?Trending
Last reply 5 months ago
Where is my car parked during the day? Advice for first car insuranceLast reply 7 months ago
Will paying £1,900 a year for insurance as a new 21 year old driver be a lot?
