Why do people hate on SUV drivers?

stephenmarr

https://www.driving.co.uk/news/life-saver-volvo-xc90-safest-car-road/

The J Stands for Jay

sebdavis wrote: »

The PHEV element is what makes them more appealing. 30km on battery.

Plus it used to be the biggest seller in the UK because of the PHEV, loads bought as company vehicles. You can pick them up cheap in warranty in the UK but also laods of dealers buying 80k mile versions for next to nothing in UK because out of warranty, then slapping a big margin and selling in Ireland, easy money

The story goes that the charging cables are still wrapped and sitting in the boot.

magicbastarder

stephenmarr wrote: »

The new Xc90 is the safest car in the world. What more do you need.

well, i'd prefer them to manage to achieve that in a vehicle that's not the size of a small church.

Buddy Bubs

stephenmarr wrote: »

Here's a question for all the suv bashers on this thread.
What do ye all drive and the reason you bought why you bought it.

Just for the record I drive a

2005 Xc90, it's in mint condition.
I love the extra space inside and the high driving position.

Audi A6, I'm a badge snob and I wouldn't drive anything outside the holy trinity of audi, bmw and Mercedes.

I had loads of bmws before this audi and I just wanted something for a change, but I didn't want anything with indicators.

And wanted to retain use of the German premium outside lane on the motorway, the one without the speed limit.

The J Stands for Jay

stephenmarr wrote: »

The new Xc90 is the safest car in the world. What more do you need.
Would rather have my kids safe than worry about what people think of my Xc90

I'm agreeing with you here. Volvo have come out and said they intend that none of their cars will kill a pedestrian, as well as no-one inside the cars dying.

McGrath5

stephenmarr wrote: »

The new Xc90 is the safest car in the world. What more do you need.

The XC90 that nearly left hooked me from my bicycle yesterday sure as hell didn't feel safe from my point of view.

liamog

McGrath5 wrote: »

The XC90 that nearly left hooked me from my bicycle yesterday sure as hell didn't feel safe from my point of view.

So what your saying is the car successfully avoided hitting you :rolleyes:
On a serious note, that probably does need to be the next technology improvement, offside senors to prevent left hook incidents

whisky_galore

McGrath5 wrote: »

The XC90 that nearly left hooked me from my bicycle yesterday sure as hell didn't feel safe from my point of view.

Maybe if you had an XC90 instead of a push bike you'd be safer?
Like Americans say they would be much safer if everyone had a gun.

beauf

whisky_galore wrote: »

Maybe if you had an XC90 instead of a push bike you'd be safer?
Like Americans say they would be much safer if everyone had a gun.

Tank not looking so silly now.

AndrewJRenko

E36Ross wrote: »

I drive an 'SUV', About 2200kg kerb weight, 2.8 Diesel with no DPF/Cat on it and yes it has a massive bullbar....

Why?

http://www.advanceddrivers.com/2017/09/18/crash-bull-bars-on-vehicles-cause-more-danger-than-they-prevent/

sebdavis

magicbastarder wrote: »

well, i'd prefer them to manage to achieve that in a vehicle that's not the size of a small church.

All Volvo are safe cars, one of the biggest selling points for them.

sebdavis

FrankC21 wrote: »

In my honest opinion, people buy them because its the trend much like the phones, "oh john mary bought a SUV/crossover I must have them aswell" I see it at work all the time, when somebody bought big bulky SUV another one will buy a much bigger one bloody hell. When I bought the fluence saloon they all told me at work oh why did you not qashqai or juke instead. Fck off

I'm a person that would not spend too much money on a thing that depreciate ones you brought it out of the shop, that you will only use for A to B. But sure keep buying this SUV/crossover I'll just wait, there will be plenty of saloons for the like of skoda superb/ a6 to choose from when it goes down in prices.

SUV/Crossovers are out so long now you can buy them at any budget.

If you have never driven one then you won't be aware of the advantage of them over cars. The whole market is moving towards SUV/Crossover, I can confirm that is not because XYZ bought one.

NSAman

Buddy Bubs wrote: »

Audi A6, I'm a badge snob and I wouldn't drive anything outside the holy trinity of audi, bmw and Mercedes.

I had loads of bmws before this audi and I just wanted something for a change, but I didn't want anything with indicators.

And wanted to retain use of the German premium outside lane on the motorway, the one without the speed limit.

Oh so you went for the yellow pack version of the trinity.....

Eric Cartman

liamog wrote: »

So what your saying is the car successfully avoided hitting you :rolleyes:
On a serious note, that probably does need to be the next technology improvement, offside senors to prevent left hook incidents

Cyclist training would solve most of these issues

liamog

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Cyclist training would solve most of these issues

Most left hook incidents are caused by a driver failing to correctly give way to a road user that is proceeding along the current road way. So it's really down to proper driver training, as a number of people have shown a completely inability to take on this skill it's probably a good idea to build safety equipment into the car to prevent it.

forestgirl

It must also be more difficult these days to trade in a car because suv's are just so popular and garages can only sell what people really want and in the next few years it will get worse

beauf

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Cyclist training would solve most of these issues

I'm not sure you could persuade drivers to do cycle awareness training.

Its really enforcement and infrastructure that is needed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41XBzAOmmIU&ab_channel=BicycleDutch

heroics

Buddy Bubs wrote: »

Audi A6, I'm a badge snob and I wouldn't drive anything outside the holy trinity of audi, bmw and Mercedes.

I had loads of bmws before this audi and I just wanted something for a change, but I didn't want anything with indicators.

And wanted to retain use of the German premium outside lane on the motorway, the one without the speed limit.

Haha this could be me

I currently have a 5 series touring.

My wife has an X1 and tbh I see the benefit of the crossover type when putting the kids into the car seats. Much easier in hers than mine. more space than the 1 series she swapped from.

Snickers Man

Allinall wrote: »

Reverse into the space, and save the hate for something more worthwhile.

Exactly. Especially if it's in a supermarket car park and you've got a big trolley full of a weekly shop.

SUV drivers just LOVE it when you scrape your Dunnes/SuperValu/Tesco/Aldi/Lidl trolley along the side of their bogmobile practical family car trying to get to your boot that you've had to place on the inside just so you can safely extract yourself from the blind spot in the car park to which you have been confined by their size and bulk.

No hate here. (Sorry about the scratch though)

jmayo

Pythagorean wrote: »

Just saw a Sky News UK piece that stated that 75% of SUVs were registered to people living in towns and cities.

This has resulted in the likes of Land Rover giving up on the old workhorse that was the original 90/110/Defender series.
The latter versions of the model were often tarted up to sell to those looking for them as a status passenger vehicle rather than a workhorse.

The new Defender is an abomination full of modern electronics with plastic stickons that won't last a week where the orginal Landys made their name.

beauf

Harry's Garage has done some good reviews of SUV in use on the farm etc.

NickNickleby

E36Ross wrote: »

I drive an 'SUV', About 2200kg kerb weight, 2.8 Diesel with no DPF/Cat on it and yes it has a massive bullbar.... I can just about get it under normal carpark height restrictions.

And its fcuking brilliant!!

This genuinely saddens me. In an earlier post I made reference to a young man who died when struck by a vehicle that had been fitted with bullbars. I knew the family, but never talked to them about this , as they were totally destroyed by their loss. But what I heard indirectly was that they were told that he might have survived if the injuries caused by the bullbars hadn't been so severe. None of us take to the road with the intention of injuring someone, but if it were to happen, surely we'd want to mitigate the risk to them as much as possible.

I'm posting this, not to attack or castigate you, but rather to try to convince you.

E36Ross

NickNickleby wrote: »

This genuinely saddens me.

My bullbar is completely original and exactly how it left the Mitsubishi factory.

I also have no airbags.

liamog

E36Ross wrote: »

My bullbar is completely original and exactly how it left the Mitsubishi factory.

I also have no airbags.

Must be an old car, they were banned a long time ago due to just how dangerous they are. Either that or your car doesn't have bullbars and has the replacements which cosmetically serve the same purpose.

The J Stands for Jay

OSI wrote: »

The old Defender could no longer legally be manufactured.

Isn't there a Spanish company making defenders?

colm_mcm

McGaggs wrote: »

Isn't there a Spanish company making defenders?

Santana, the crowd that built Suzuki jeeps as well. they also had an Iveco version, but they stopped making them around 10 years ago.

Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime

beauf wrote: »

Seeing more is always better than seeing less.

If you want to drive slowly with constant queue of vehicles behind you that's one thing. But people are allowed to overtake. Nothing wrong with that.

It's a bit hypocritical to argue each to their own, live and let live, then want to dictate how other people drive. That everyone has to keep in a line behind you, because you want to drive slowly.

When I drive those types of vehicles I always drive to the speed limit, sometimes sightly over, but sure whatever, because that still isint enough, people still try to get around, and when they do, that slow down and hold me up !

All just to see the road ahead ? Get a grip already. I've lost count of the amount of times I've been over taken only for the car to drive even slower than I was driving !

Isambard

i'm sure someone already pointed it out, but SUVs are just higher, they aren't generally longer or wider than the average car.

magicbastarder

that's pretty much been done to death by now!

jmayo

OSI wrote: »

The old Defender could no longer legally be manufactured.

New Defender has already been shown to be as, and in some instances more, competent than the original.

Yes the emissions were a problem and meeting safety requirements another issue, but the new version is just too electronic and plasticy.

It is not really aimed at the same market in fact.
It is nearly 15 grand more I think?
Is there even a pickup version ?
Is there a manual transmission option ?

And yes of course the new one is more competent in lots of areas like comfort and road holding.
The old one wasn't originally designed for fast driving or for being comfortable like a car.
It was meant to be alright to sit in covered in mud or shyte.
It was meant to carry stuff not fly along the motorway while you sit in heated seats.

The new one can come with 22" alloys.
Who the hell would consider going even in a field with those.

And the new air suspension won't take the battering the old old system would.

And yes the old ones had lots of faults (actually a lot of them) and were never as good as say the much used Land Cruisers.

There is a reason you only find Landcruisers in Australia.

Oh if only we could get new Landcruiser 70 here. :P

magicbastarder

magicbastarder wrote: »

that's pretty much been done to death by now!

but it is why they're less fuel efficient and worse for other road users. average fuel consumption in cars had been dropping for years, until SUVs/crossovers/what have you arrived on the scene and reversed that trend.

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/report-soaring-suv-sales-causing-car-emissions-rise

beauf

Harry has covered the new one...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYKU64utk9s&ab_channel=Harry%27sFarm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHu8VJkR9Ag&ab_channel=Harry%27sgarage

Snickers Man

liamog wrote: »

Are you telling us that most cars are registered in the places where most people live?

No. I think he/she is saying that the majority of SUVs are NOT being bought by people who need them for their purported benefits of four-wheel drive and farm-trailer pulling power.

liamog wrote: »

If you go to the data, you'll see that it's not. Here's a table from the report.
To me the report show's a statistically insignificant split between the types of cars registered in urban and rural areas, except for Large SUVs which are more likely to registered in rural areas.





https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5ebd0080238e863d04911b51/t/6065dbeb73734b58372d797b/1617288180453/Mindgames+On+Wheels+-+how+advertising+sold+false+promises+of+safety+and+superiority+with+SUVs.pdf

Utterly disingenuous statement!

Large SUVs are more likely to be registered in rural areas than are small SUVs. But even then, large SUVs are twice as likely to be registered in urban areas than they are in rural areas. That's what the figures say.

beauf

Kopparberg Strawberry and Lime wrote: »

When I drive those types of vehicles I always drive to the speed limit, sometimes sightly over, but sure whatever, because that still isint enough, people still try to get around, and when they do, that slow down and hold me up !

All just to see the road ahead ? Get a grip already. I've lost count of the amount of times I've been over taken only for the car to drive even slower than I was driving !

That people overtake and then slow down, just means they are bad drivers. It in no way negates the fact that seeing more is better than seeing less. Or that people are allowed to over take. Even if it annoys you so much.

If you are being plagued by people over taking so much that is such a sore point with you. Don't shoot the messenger but perhaps the common variable there is you.

Personally I've never had a problem with trying to overtake SUVs because in my experience they don't tend to be driven slowly. Which is ironic because they are one of the least suitable vehicles for high speed driving.

beauf

magicbastarder wrote: »

but it is why they're less fuel efficient and worse for other road users. average fuel consumption in cars had been dropping for years, until SUVs/crossovers/what have you arrived on the scene and reversed that trend.

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/report-soaring-suv-sales-causing-car-emissions-rise

It's funny with the focus on fuel efficiency people are choosing to drive the least fuel efficient vehicles. Then complaining about the cost of fuel and such.

colm_mcm

beauf wrote: »

It's funny with the focus on fuel efficiency people are choosing to drive the least fuel efficient vehicles. Then complaining about the cost of fuel and such.

I have never heard anybody’s who’s dropped €100k on an SUV complain about the price of diesel.

I’m pretty sure the figure in that article covers everything from a Nissan Juke to a Range Rover.

liamog

Snickers Man wrote: »

No. I think he/she is saying that the majority of SUVs are NOT being bought by people who need them for their purported benefits of four-wheel drive and farm-trailer pulling power.

Utterly disingenuous statement!

Large SUVs are more likely to be registered in rural areas than are small SUVs. But even then, large SUVs are twice as likely to be registered in urban areas than they are in rural areas. That's what the figures say.

The statement was that 75% of SUVs are registered in Urban areas (correct), but 75% of vehicles are registered in Urban areas, this indicates that there is no significant difference between SUVs and non-SUVs when it comes to urban/rural splits.
As you move to Large SUVs, there is a statistically significant increase in proportion of vehicles that are registered in rural areas.

To be categorised as an SUV does not require 4x4/towing abilities. It's simply a body shape characterised by having a taller body. Most SUVs sales seem to have replaced minivans and estate cars.

sebdavis

Just to confirm

You have SUV and then you have Crossovers, then compact crossovers etc. None of these should ever be called a SUV

A Toyota Land Cruiser is a SUV and can be seen pulling a trailer load of cattle on the road

A Crossover and all the members of its family can be seen in urban areas carrying little Johnnie and Mary to school. More commonly called “soccer Mam car”

The majority of people on this thread seem unaware of the difference

A Nissan Juke is not a SUV

liamog

sebdavis wrote: »

You have SUV and then you have Crossovers, then compact crossovers etc. None of these should ever be called a SUV

Whilst I agree with you, the report being used to justify the headlines does not make the distinction, it treats a Nissan Juke in the same manner as a BMW X7, only separating them for the purposes of the small SUV vs large SUV stats.

magicbastarder

sebdavis wrote: »

The majority of people on this thread seem unaware of the difference

oh, i think most people are aware of the difference, i just think in many cases we don't see the relevance?
i don't care whether a car is four wheel drive or two wheel drive for example, that's not the issue people generally seem to be complaining about.

BnB

magicbastarder wrote: »

oh, i think most people are aware of the difference, i just think in many cases we don't see the relevance?
i don't care whether a car is four wheel drive or two wheel drive for example, that's not the issue people generally seem to be complaining about.

People are just seeing a vehicle on the road like a Tuscon or a Rav4 or something like that, calling it an SUV in their head and then making loads of wild jumps in their head about it being bad for the environment etc and that the driver is obviously an utter backstard.

Ultimately the vast majority of "SUV's" are just saloon cars with a different bodyshape on top that just happens to be fashionable right now.

Hating people who drive them (as a lot of twats on this tread are trying to justify) is about as pointless as hating people who wear drink frappachinos, grow beards or listen to Led Zepplin

beauf

sebdavis wrote: »

Just to confirm

You have SUV and then you have Crossovers, then compact crossovers etc. None of these should ever be called a SUV

A Toyota Land Cruiser is a SUV and can be seen pulling a trailer load of cattle on the road

A Crossover and all the members of its family can be seen in urban areas carrying little Johnnie and Mary to school. More commonly called “soccer Mam car”

The majority of people on this thread seem unaware of the difference

A Nissan Juke is not a SUV

Nissan call it a "compact SUV"

magicbastarder

BnB wrote: »

People are just seeing a vehicle on the road like a Tuscon or a Rav4 or something like that, calling it an SUV in their head and then making loads of wild jumps in their head about it being bad for the environment etc

well, a lot of the extra environmental impact will be due to extra height due to increased air resistance; so if a car has a similar body shape to a 'true' SUV, this is a relevant point, no?

amacca

BnB wrote: »

Hating people who drive them (as a lot of twats on this tread are trying to justify) is about as pointless as hating people who wear drink frappachinos, grow beards or listen to Led Zepplin

Oh dear I really need to take a good hard look at myself....I mean I don't drink frappachinos so that's a bright spot in an otherwise reprehensible selection of life choices I've made I guess.:p

magicbastarder

BnB wrote: »

Hating people who drive them (as a lot of twats on this tread are trying to justify) is about as pointless as hating people who wear drink frappachinos, grow beards or listen to Led Zepplin

just picking up on this point; it's been made several times in the thread that what someone else chooses to drive is none of anyone else's business.

well, if people feel that way, don't take your large chunk of private property out in public. you've bought a vehicle almost by definition to be used on shared public property, so i'd argue it's *not* the same as judging you on what coffee you drink.

to pick up your led zeppelin analogy; if you choose to listen to zep out loud in public, you kinda *have* made it my business.

amacca

magicbastarder wrote: »

just picking up on this point; it's been made several times in the thread that what someone else chooses to drive is none of anyone else's business.

well, if people feel that way, don't take your large chunk of private property out in public. you've bought a vehicle almost by definition to be used on shared public property, so i'd argue it's *not* the same as judging you on what coffee you drink.

to pick up your led zeppelin analogy; if you choose to listen to zep out loud in public, you kinda *have* made it my business.

Can I listen to led zeppelin on a moderate setting with the windows rolled up?:)

sebdavis

beauf wrote: »

Nissan call it a "compact SUV"

Toyota also say they have a "self charging hybrid" which is a lie and is banned in some countries.

Car companies will slap anything on a car to sell it, just look at the VW scandal and all the other manufacturers who done the exact same thing.

sebdavis

magicbastarder wrote: »

oh, i think most people are aware of the difference, i just think in many cases we don't see the relevance?
i don't care whether a car is four wheel drive or two wheel drive for example, that's not the issue people generally seem to be complaining about.

A SUV is built as an SUV, it is built to pull trailers, large horsepower and no consideration for how much is blowing out the tail pipe

Most Crossovers are a car with a few cm's added to stick them into the "SUV bracket". They also wouldn't pull snow off a rope.

The 4 wheel drive as well, you will have proper 4 wheel drive on SUV....then you have "All Wheel Drive" on the Crossover. Bit of a difference

All done by marketing fo course but in real World a huge difference.

magicbastarder

sebdavis wrote: »

Toyota also say they have a "self charging hybrid" which is a lie and is banned in some countries.

Car companies will slap anything on a car to sell it

my favourite is the phrase 'mild hybrid'.
there's nothing hybrid about it, it's just an automatic stop/start system.

magicbastarder

sebdavis wrote: »

A SUV is built as an SUV, it is built to pull trailers, large horsepower and no consideration for how much is blowing out the tail pipe

a utility vehicle so?
in general, there isn't dislike for vehicles which are actually used for those purposes.