How many of you drive SUV's?

wildsaffy

Darn!

I think that will be where the revolution starts - when people can't get petrol / diesel.

Happened before. Think this time will be the judgement.

And what the hell happened to these people that showed engines could run on water? Bought out?

thebman

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

A car with a 5l petrol engine will pollute more than an SUV/pickup with a 2.5 deisel. The car may very well be quite a small sports car while a Hilux/Navara/Pathfinder etc are quite big and heavy.

You need to compare like for like and not give sweeping generalisations.

How many 5 litre petrol engine cars do you see in Ireland

A 2.5 litre SUV will use more fuel than a 2.5 litre car as it has to work harder to move the same distance.

prospect

This debate was done recently, I can't remember who I had it with, but anyway, I was conclusively able to disprove EVERY common misconception regarding 4x4's, including the B.S. safety & environmental arguments.....

The fact of the matter is, you cannot define an individual by what they drive. And if you go around worrying about what others drive and labelling people you do not know, then quite simply you are a sad individual who needs to get some friends and a life.

I drive a 'soft roader' and I guarantee my MPG & CO2 figures are better than well over 50% of those who look down their noses at it.

Anan1

prospect wrote: »

This debate was done recently, I can't remember who I had it with, but anyway, I was conclusively able to disprove EVERY common misconception regarding 4x4's, including the B.S. safety & environmental arguments.....

You were in your head, prospect.;)

Cookie_Monster

brim4brim wrote: »

How many 5 litre petrol engine cars do you see in Ireland

A 2.5 litre SUV will use more fuel than a 2.5 litre car as it has to work harder to move the same distance.

Lots of big mercs/BMW's of high end spec will have large engines like this, maybe not quite 5l but the point still stands.

As for the second point, I totally agree with that. It just seems the the general flow of the thread is big Suv's are bad purely because they are big engined. But a 2.5-3l deisel which most average suv would have is still more efficient than the equivilant petrol, certainly gets better milage even if it is pulling a bit of extra weight.

The problem is with the like of RR/BMW/Merc which all have high capacity petrol engines more so than many Nissans/Toyota etc with mid capacity deisels

astraboy

prospect wrote: »

This debate was done recently, I can't remember who I had it with, but anyway, I was conclusively able to disprove EVERY common misconception regarding 4x4's, including the B.S. safety & environmental arguments.....

The fact of the matter is, you cannot define an individual by what they drive. And if you go around worrying about what others drive and labelling people you do not know, then quite simply you are a sad individual who needs to get some friends and a life.

I drive a 'soft roader' and I guarantee my MPG & CO2 figures are better than well over 50% of those who look down their noses at it.

I remember that. The Anti-SUV brigade could'nt handle that their small minded preconceptions were wrong! You consistently proved that many SUVs are smaller then a comparable saloon, yet the antis still ranted on "but they are dangerous/selfish/over turn/will kill my family" bull. If people give out about SUV's they need to get off their high horses and stop buying anything they have no need for, including expensive food, holidays and large houses.

I've no problem with SUV's I like them and I judge a driver on how they drive, not what they drive.

prospect

Anan1 wrote: »

You were in your head, prospect.;)

:rolleyes:
Hmmmm:

astraboy wrote: »

I remember that. The Anti-SUV brigade could'nt handle that their small minded preconceptions were wrong! You consistently proved that many SUVs are smaller then a comparable saloon, yet the antis still ranted on "but they are dangerous/selfish/over turn/will kill my family" bull. If people give out about SUV's they need to get off their high horses and stop buying anything they have no need for, including expensive food, holidays and large houses.

I've no problem with SUV's I like them and I judge a driver on how they drive, not what they drive.

Anan, obviously it was you who couldn't drag out any conclusive evidence that all SUV's are evil......

dh2007

I was in the states for a few weeks a while ago and I was given the use of a V8 Jeep Cherokee. I think it has an engine size of about 4.8 litres!!

I was always anti SUVs and still am on principle but I can understand why people buy them - they're amazing to drive!! You definitely have a feeling of security when overtaking and are really comfortable etc.

In saying all of that I'd never buy one (prob could never afford one!) because they drink petrol and must be terrible for the environment.

Plus I'm only a teeny little girl and I look ridiculous driving such a car!

dh2007

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

I'd like to be able to afford an suv, (well pickup really) and if I could I would actually use it off-road or for luggin stuff around.

But it would also get used for a lot of town driving, still if I could afford it I want the choice.

On a further note I would be under the impression that the engines in a lot of these vechiles are smaller in Ireland/ Europe than anyway. Don't see too many 5.3l V8 Petrol Grand Cherokees around...

actually maybe it was a 5.3 litre one then! I was just told that it would be about 4.8l...holy moly. It was a beast though. I even got a speeding ticket in the thing! it was all very thelma and louise

richieg

I have just traded my 530D for a lexus RX400H. The emmissions are about the same. The lexus is 200mm shorter and the mpg around town is better. Also the boot/rear space is more verasatile for carrying loads and the kids.

I don't see how I am now causing more damage to the environment just because I bought a SUV.

Anan1

astraboy wrote: »

You consistently proved that many SUVs are smaller then a comparable saloon, yet the antis still ranted on

In the interests of clarity, how exactly do you all define SUVs? Sure a Range Rover is an SUV, but what about a RAV4? A Volvo XC70? A Subaru Forester? I have the distinct impression that some of you are trying to defend vehicles that others may not be trying to attack?

Gumbo

i love these threads, no side can win the argument LOL
i love my X5, hope you all like my signiture....can you imagine trying to fit my golf clubs into a micra.....no way!


no offence to micra owners.

astraboy

Anan1 wrote: »

In the interests of clarity, how exactly do you all define SUVs? Sure a Range Rover is an SUV, but what about a RAV4? A Volvo XC70? A Subaru Forester? I have the distinct impression that some of you are trying to defend vehicles that others may not be trying to attack?

Personally I hate the term. A car is a 4x4 off road car, a soft roader, or an imatation of either. SUV is a stupid american term not relevant over here really. I asked and asked the anti brigade to define an SUV in the last thread and all I got was a link to wikiipedia. They don't even know themselves what they hate, just as long as it looks "big" it must be unnecessary and must be hated.

WHITE_P

Have a commercial landcruiser for work, couldn't do my job without it, as I'm off road a fair bit and also needed for towing. Jeep's, 4x4's, SUV's, whatever name you wish to give them are very versatile and no more offensive than any other car on the road.

However, I don't think the yummy mummy brigrade, using them to ferry their spoiled brats around are doing these type of vehicles any good.

Also blokes who only want them to show off (over compensate for other shortcomings in their lives) would probably be better off in something sporty rather than an SUV.

Personally if the choice was between a nice salon car versus an SUV, and I was never going to be off road or tow anything large / heavy, I would go for the salon car everytime. (eg. BMW 535d or an X5, mine would be the 535d any day).

junkyard

WHITE_P wrote: »

Have a commercial landcruiser for work, couldn't do my job without it, as I'm off road a fair bit and also needed for towing. Jeep's, 4x4's, SUV's, whatever name you wish to give them are very versatile and no more offensive than any other car on the road.

However, I don't think the yummy mummy brigrade, using them to ferry their spoiled brats around are doing these type of vehicles any good.

Also blokes who only want them to show off (over compensate for other shortcomings in their lives) would probably be better off in something sporty rather than an SUV.

Personally if the choice was between a nice salon car versus an SUV, and I was never going to be off road or tow anything large / heavy, I would go for the salon car everytime. (eg. BMW 535d or an X5, mine would be the 535d any day).

Have you driven an X5?

Anan1

astraboy wrote: »

They don't even know themselves what they hate, just as long as it looks "big" it must be unnecessary and must be hated.

I know which ones I hate, and it's the Range Rovers, VW Touregs, Porsche Cayennes, BMW X5s, XC90s and the like. I parked nose to nose with a Range Rover the other day, and its bonnet was higher than my (fabric) roof. Not a good feeling.

junkyard

Anan1 wrote: »

I know which ones I hate, and it's the Range Rovers, VW Touregs, Porsche Cayennes, BMW X5s, XC90s and the like. I parked nose to nose with a Range Rover the other day, and its bonnet was higher than my (fabric) roof. Not a good feeling.

Do you hate trucks, vans, buses and all other vehicles taller than your fabric roofed car too?:D

Anan1

junkyard wrote: »

Do you hate trucks, vans, buses and all other vehicles taller than your fabric roofed car too?:D

*yawn*;)

astraboy

Anan1 wrote: »

I know which ones I hate, and it's the Range Rovers, VW Touregs, Porsche Cayennes, BMW X5s, XC90s and the like. I parked nose to nose with a Range Rover the other day, and its bonnet was higher than my (fabric) roof. Not a good feeling.

So? What, should we all drive a standard height of car now? A range rover once driven properly is no problem on our roads.

Anan1

astraboy wrote: »

A range rover once driven properly is no problem on our roads.

Read what you just wrote, astraboy. Think about it. Honestly, I can't help you any more than that.:)

Stark

It's more a case of who could be driving them imo. In the case of a bus or a truck, it's going to be driven by a qualified driver. In the case of an oversized car, it could be driven by someone qualified and responsible or it could be driven by some muppet who just got their provisional license and is scared to drive anything smaller in case they're killed doing while doing something stupid. Had one nearly take me out last week as they decided to take the first exit on a roundabout coming from the righthand lane entering the roundabout (I was in the lefthand lane going straight ahead). You don't get bus and truck drivers doing stupid things like that.

Gatster

Stark wrote: »

You don't get bus and truck drivers doing stupid things like that.

Seriously, are you driving in Ireland

junkyard

Plenty of muppets driving buses and trucks around the place and not all on Irish licences either.

astraboy

Anan1 wrote: »

Read what you just wrote, astraboy. Think about it. Honestly, I can't help you any more than that.:)

I don't need your help. I'm an experienced driver and have experienced no more ignornace from SUV drivers then from drivers of vans, taxis, small cars, repmobiles, name your cliche here. A properly driven vehicle driven by a competent driver causes no issues. A muppet in a micra or an X5 is still a muppet and will cause hassle to others no matter what they drive. Anyway, why tar all SUV owners with the one brush? Did it occur to you they may have bought their car because they LIKED it and it suited their needs?

To address starks point, I can drive a transit van on my car license, does this make van drivers "more qualified". Balls. You just don't like people showing off in a fancy x5 and want to prevent this as much as possible.

WHITE_P

junkyard wrote: »

Have you driven an X5?

Can't say I have, but I would still go for the 535d or similar anyday, over the yuppie type Jeeps, 4x4's or SUV's (call em what you like).

As I said in previous tread, I drive a Landcruiser for work and I think it's a brilliant machine for what I use it for. (have been driving 4x4's for 10 years now).

As has been stated already here, it's the drivers that are the problem, not the type of vehicle, any vehicle for that matter.

As for Bus / truck drivers, these day's you are as likely to be run off the road by any of these so called professional drivers as you are by a 4x4 driver.

My brother drove trucks for years back in the 80's / 90's and he is appalled by the standard of many truck drivers nowaday's.

f22

Jesus some people here want to get a life. Trying to stereotype a driver of any type is just plain silly. SUV covers a huge variety of vehicle types, some of which pollute less than many saloons out there and certainly less than cars over 8 years old.

Yes, I have a problem with some twat taking up two parking spaces, driving like an idiot, driving up my ass, but unfortunately thats down to the driver not the vehicle.

On the parking front, its a known fact that alot of women can't park. Whether yummie mummie happens to have an X5 or a primera the chances are the vehicle will be parked ass ways regardless.

Bad driving / parking / road manners / common courtesy are evident accross all parts of Irish society and their chosen vehicles, so trying to pigeon hole vehicle types is plain dumb.

lightening

astraboy wrote: »

I'm an experienced drive

astra BOY... you might want to change your profile, it says you are 22! You can't have had that much experience.

Duckjob

Dudess wrote:

Top of the line in utility sports,
Unexplained fires are a matter for the courts!

My favorite line in that song... cracks me up every time.

f22 wrote: »

Jesus some people here want to get a life. Trying to stereotype a driver of any type is just plain silly.

f22 wrote: »

On the parking front, its a known fact that alot of women can't park.

Somebody made this point to me before in relation to SUVs:

If you tell somebody to ride a motorbike down the road in their underwear. Chances are they'll drive live a granny. Why? because of the sense of vunerability means that horrific consequences of having an accident are foremost in their mind, and their driving style modifes itself accordingly.

Now suppose you put somebody inside something that makes them feel virtually invincible. Logically, is it not fair to assume that their driving style will tend to modify itself in the opposite direction?

astraboy

lightening wrote: »

astra BOY... you might want to change your profile, it says you are 22! You can't have had that much experience.

5 years in 3 countries. God knows how many miles but well over 12,000 per year. Keep your silly judgments to yourself.

lightening

astraboy wrote: »

Keep your silly judgments to yourself.

Wooohooo! Easy there tiger, only having a laugh.