While they are billed as vehicles that cover rough ground or tow heavy loads, previous research has shown that three-quarters of SUVs bought new in the UK are registered to people living in urban areas.
I cannot get my head around the people who claim they need them because of "the lanes when it snows!!!".
So you live somewhere where, for 8 days every 24 months, the roads are slightly tricky to drive across, so you buy a hugely polluting vehicle that you simply don't need.
the “old” car used for the comparison is one built in 2013 FFS. By 2013, IC engines, especially petrol ones, were already massively clean and efficient.
Land rovers and range rovers are brilliant cars for ferrying families and kit around. Also considerable less polluting than they used to be. Chippy bollocks on here
It's more the pothole round here. My car has been fine versus my parents' Golf which has had multiple new tires and even a new wheel. I'm just about to restart my weekly reporting to the council of the holes on my road.
My car rocked in the snow last December and even made it up a north facing snow covered concrete drive having passed plenty of people in hatchbacks that could go no further.
Land rovers and range rovers are brilliant cars for ferrying families and kit around.
YOU SEE!!
YOU SEE!!
A HIGH-POWERED MULTI-TONNE OFF-ROAD VEHICLE - SUCH AS A GOLD COLOURED LAND ROVER DEFENDER - IS A PRACTICAL CHOICE IN RESIDENTIAL SUBURBAN AREAS WHERE FAMILIES WITH YOUNG CHILDREN LIVE!!
I thought there already was an increased tax on 4*4s, directly through car tax and indirectly through fuel duty
There needs to be a direct khunt tax though, specifically called that. 100% of the value of the vehicle, to be put towards road repair and re-education camps for yuppy ar$eholes driving around North London in a Q7.
To some extent but it's also a failure to resurface the road for decades and constant patch work repairs that allow the water and then the frost in so that the same patch is needed monthly through the winter. There is one hole from last winter where six or seven feet of the surface had come off but they only repaired the deepest three four feet and have marked the remainder for repair but done nothing so it will be back to square one in a few weeks.
I was in a posh area of the countryside at the weekend with very narrow lanes and every fooker was driving around in an enormous Range Rover - watf? If you live in an area with incredibly narrow lanes get a small car ffs
Those narrow lanes are not half as narrow as you town boys think they are. You can get two transits past each other at speed on most of this lane but at the weekend I have to sit behind people in small cars who slow down and pull onto the verge to let people past. They look terrified as I go past them in the other direction without even lifting off the accelerator.
sails if you can get two transits past then you live on a far wider lane than in the area I was driving around - they really were single track and getting past required reversing back to a passing place but the huge 4x4s had trouble even in the passing place.
Nope no line as there are a couple of bends which are single track but mainly because the aunts at the bottom of the hill don't understand their hedge needs to be cut every couple of years. Another thing to report to the council next weekend.
I've managed to pass a 4x4 and a massive caravan on a single track lane and it just needs a little experience and to pull in to the right spot rather than just the reflex of pulling as far over as possible where you happen to be at that moment. Whenever you get a sight line further down the road look to see if anything is coming and if it is get into the next gateway you pass.
I don’t live in London, shocking though it is to most roffers that people actually live elsewhere (and not DXB).
Guy I think Lada and maybe Fiat did a vehicle like that years ago but I wouldn’t be driving something like that and I suspect not many people need one! Most of my neighbours (like us) have SUVs.
Classic die hard Tories. Could combine together to pay for the road to be fixed, but instead all go out and get Range Rovers.
The simple answer to this is congestion and pollution charging per mile, plus a tax on new cars to reflect the manufacture and shipping impact. If someone minimises driving an old banger they should pay nothing, but everyone else should pay accordingly. Ring fence the cash for public transport, and for giving households with no car free public transport and money off bikes with trailers. Where I live public transport is a joke (i.e. walking 5 miles only about 20% longer than the buses), the biggest shopping centre has free parking and fuel costs in a car for one person are probably less than a bus, so I can see why the roads are crammed with cars as it's a completely rational decision.
Also to Crypto's point if people live in the sticks you have to let them off subject to encouraging less polluting vehicles as realistically public transport is never going to get better than 1 bus a day from a stop a mile away (though when they reach the outskirts of a well served city the means and compulsion to ditch the car should be there, not £10 "park and ride" that costs more than travelling into the centre and paying for parking).
Those narrow lanes are not half as narrow as you town boys think they are. You can get two transits past each other at speed on most of this lane
as usual sails, there are other roads in the world apart from the one you live on. My village has unadopted roads that are too narrow for 2 cars to pass, and many country lanes round here are similarly narrow.
I don't have an SUV, but people who do will self-justify (snow! lanes! high up!) but no-one in the UK really needs one. Even farmers don't always have them. Just admit you like them, but don't pretend you need it.
There are indeed many single track roads round here too but urban dwellers invariably think their cars are much bigger than they are. In 30 years I've only lost one wing mirror to a very fast moving white van.
"There are indeed many single track roads round here too but urban dwellers invariably think their cars are much bigger than they are. In 30 years I've only lost one wing mirror to a very fast moving white van."
I would suggest that if people unfamiliar with the roads were not as cautious as they are you would have lost a lot more than that so I would be grateful for their caution personally.
It boggles the mind that SUVs are seen as more desirable in 2023 and that the production of small hatchback cars is increasingly being wound down by manufacturers.
To own one is to say I am rich and entitled to literally take up more space in the world than I need to, use more resources than I need to, and pose more of a danger to other road users than I need to (although of course I will be slightly safer in my elevated, armoured cüntwagon).
"Typical remain voter can’t believe others live outside urban areas and have different needs and experiences."
I live in rural Cornwall and a great deal of locals drive smaller cars in no small measure because the lanes are so narrow that they are the most practical car to have (and also because they are skint, admittedly).
In the summer of course, the place is dripping with home counties types piloting large SUVs who love to flex the weekend warrior outdoorsy vibe, yet struggle to reverse up a twisty lane and are terrified of mud and bramble scratches.
Mrs Face insists on a big car for the sole reason that she got hit head-on by a van when she was driving an Audi estate and said she felt like she was going to be crushed from above.
To own one is to say I am rich and entitled to literally take up more space in the world than I need to, use more resources than I need to, and pose more of a danger to other road users than I need to (although of course I will be slightly safer in my elevated, armoured cüntwagon).
Fair, but do you think the same of people who own large houses or go on many overseas holidays? I don't drive an SUV, I have an electric car, but I think SUV drivers get a lot more stick than mates who go on 5 holidays a year - nobody ever pulls them up on that.
she felt like she was going to be crushed from above
and yet, dear reader, despite not in fact being crushed from above, that feeling (proved beyond doubt as entirely wrong) has required Mrs Face to buy a vehicle so large is causes significantly more danger to pedestrians. But that's okay, because they are other people, and her driving position is so high, she doesn't get to see the momentary terror before their eyes go dull and then close forever.
To own one is to say I am rich and entitled to literally take up more space in the world than I need to, use more resources than I need to, and pose more of a danger to other road users than I need to (although of course I will be slightly safer in my elevated, armoured cüntwagon).
Sounds good to me. Mine is a diesel too, just to annoy the right sort. I don’t like driving her EV because someone may think I’ve gone woke.
While they are billed as vehicles that cover rough ground or tow heavy loads, previous research has shown that three-quarters of SUVs bought new in the UK are registered to people living in urban areas.
That's because they are very handy for the good people of Chelsea when mounting the kerb so as not to have to walk too far to use an ATM. Pity those poor souls if they were not availed of that small comfort...
Face - it’s possible to adjust the seat position in cars you know? So you can drive a small hatch and ratchet the seat high and be able to see out. Unless Mrs face is 4ft 10, she really doesn’t need an suv to sit up high
0
0
I thought there already was an increased tax on 4*4s, directly through car tax and indirectly through fuel duty
0
0
You mean it requires more energy to move a heavy thing than lighter thing? Science is wild, man.
5
1
BUT I MIGHT NEED TO DRIVE OFF-ROAD!!
I MIGHT!!
IT MIGHT HAPPEN!!
HOW DARE THEY!!
3
0
Exactly. That woman in Wimbledon for example. She had to go off road on the school run so it does happen.
0
1
Do they pay more car tax?
0
0
SUVs are quite bad but not as bad as having children
5
0
I cannot get my head around the people who claim they need them because of "the lanes when it snows!!!".
So you live somewhere where, for 8 days every 24 months, the roads are slightly tricky to drive across, so you buy a hugely polluting vehicle that you simply don't need.
1
1
Especially since they are usually still fitted with UHP summer tyres, and will therefore be sh*t in the snow
0
0
If it snows, it's a good excuse to stay indoors.
0
1
the “old” car used for the comparison is one built in 2013 FFS. By 2013, IC engines, especially petrol ones, were already massively clean and efficient.
0
1
Land rovers and range rovers are brilliant cars for ferrying families and kit around. Also considerable less polluting than they used to be. Chippy bollocks on here
0
0
It's more the pothole round here. My car has been fine versus my parents' Golf which has had multiple new tires and even a new wheel. I'm just about to restart my weekly reporting to the council of the holes on my road.
My car rocked in the snow last December and even made it up a north facing snow covered concrete drive having passed plenty of people in hatchbacks that could go no further.
3
1
I have begun to hate SUVs. Just the shape. It says cvnt.
3
0
Special loathing for the large Volvo ones. They seem to have hoovered up the "I'm an arsehole" segment of the market.
0
0
Just a cayenne ffs
1
1
YOU SEE!!
YOU SEE!!
A HIGH-POWERED MULTI-TONNE OFF-ROAD VEHICLE - SUCH AS A GOLD COLOURED LAND ROVER DEFENDER - IS A PRACTICAL CHOICE IN RESIDENTIAL SUBURBAN AREAS WHERE FAMILIES WITH YOUNG CHILDREN LIVE!!
6
2
Do you wonder if sails ever reads his posts and thinks: "am I a complete and total khunt?"
Your SUV is causing the potholes, dickhead.
6
0
you can get infinite imagined in children in the back of an imagined land rover.
5
1
There needs to be a direct khunt tax though, specifically called that. 100% of the value of the vehicle, to be put towards road repair and re-education camps for yuppy ar$eholes driving around North London in a Q7.
0
1
To some extent but it's also a failure to resurface the road for decades and constant patch work repairs that allow the water and then the frost in so that the same patch is needed monthly through the winter. There is one hole from last winter where six or seven feet of the surface had come off but they only repaired the deepest three four feet and have marked the remainder for repair but done nothing so it will be back to square one in a few weeks.
0
1
I like the high-up driving position!
Why not just fly?
3
1
High up is better. If you make eye contact with children before you mow them down, it can be rather unsettling.
2
1
I was in a posh area of the countryside at the weekend with very narrow lanes and every fooker was driving around in an enormous Range Rover - watf? If you live in an area with incredibly narrow lanes get a small car ffs
0
1
Range Rovers are a special case. Profound signifiers.
0
0
I live on an unadopted road. It’s really poor and I need high clearance plus 4x4 for the snow. My VED is already £500 a year!
0
1
can you not get small cars with high clearance and 4 x 4? If not that would seem a clear gap in the market.
0
1
I LIVE IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA OF LONDON FILLED WITH YOUNG FAMILIES SO YOU SEE I NEED HIGH CLEARANCE PLUS 4X4 BECAUSE IT COULD SNOW!!
0
0
are they goethe? surely they are down the pecking order from cargo bikes?
0
0
Those narrow lanes are not half as narrow as you town boys think they are. You can get two transits past each other at speed on most of this lane but at the weekend I have to sit behind people in small cars who slow down and pull onto the verge to let people past. They look terrified as I go past them in the other direction without even lifting off the accelerator.
0
1
tractors tho
0
1
Yup they really scare the non-locals.
2
1
sails if you can get two transits past then you live on a far wider lane than in the area I was driving around - they really were single track and getting past required reversing back to a passing place but the huge 4x4s had trouble even in the passing place.
0
0
1990s fiat Panda 4x4 and pretend you're a ski instructor.
0
0
sails's road probably had a line in the middle
0
0
Nope no line as there are a couple of bends which are single track but mainly because the aunts at the bottom of the hill don't understand their hedge needs to be cut every couple of years. Another thing to report to the council next weekend.
I've managed to pass a 4x4 and a massive caravan on a single track lane and it just needs a little experience and to pull in to the right spot rather than just the reflex of pulling as far over as possible where you happen to be at that moment. Whenever you get a sight line further down the road look to see if anything is coming and if it is get into the next gateway you pass.
0
0
I don’t live in London, shocking though it is to most roffers that people actually live elsewhere (and not DXB).
Guy I think Lada and maybe Fiat did a vehicle like that years ago but I wouldn’t be driving something like that and I suspect not many people need one! Most of my neighbours (like us) have SUVs.
2
1
Classic die hard Tories. Could combine together to pay for the road to be fixed, but instead all go out and get Range Rovers.
The simple answer to this is congestion and pollution charging per mile, plus a tax on new cars to reflect the manufacture and shipping impact. If someone minimises driving an old banger they should pay nothing, but everyone else should pay accordingly. Ring fence the cash for public transport, and for giving households with no car free public transport and money off bikes with trailers. Where I live public transport is a joke (i.e. walking 5 miles only about 20% longer than the buses), the biggest shopping centre has free parking and fuel costs in a car for one person are probably less than a bus, so I can see why the roads are crammed with cars as it's a completely rational decision.
0
1
Also to Crypto's point if people live in the sticks you have to let them off subject to encouraging less polluting vehicles as realistically public transport is never going to get better than 1 bus a day from a stop a mile away (though when they reach the outskirts of a well served city the means and compulsion to ditch the car should be there, not £10 "park and ride" that costs more than travelling into the centre and paying for parking).
0
0
Classic die hard Tories. Could combine together to pay for the road to be fixed, but instead all go out and get Range Rovers.
that’s true. I did suggest it at a residents’s meeting and that was basically the answer.
0
0
I'd be happy to go out and repair it myself but when Rod Stewart did that the council told him he could be sued.
5
1
as usual sails, there are other roads in the world apart from the one you live on. My village has unadopted roads that are too narrow for 2 cars to pass, and many country lanes round here are similarly narrow.
I don't have an SUV, but people who do will self-justify (snow! lanes! high up!) but no-one in the UK really needs one. Even farmers don't always have them. Just admit you like them, but don't pretend you need it.
7
0
Sails' lived experience is his truth, and no other truth exists.
0
0
NO!!
IT IS A PRACTICAL CHOICE!!
ESPECIALLY IN RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBOURHOODS WHERE FAMILIES WITH YOUNG CHILDREN LIVE!!
I MIGHT NEED TO DO SOME OFF-ROAD ADVENTURING IN THE WILDERNESS JUST LIKE IN THE ADVERTS!!
0
2
There are indeed many single track roads round here too but urban dwellers invariably think their cars are much bigger than they are. In 30 years I've only lost one wing mirror to a very fast moving white van.
1
0
Typical remain voter can’t believe others live outside urban areas and have different needs and experiences.
0
1
UNSTOPPABLE!!
https://youtu.be/hgT2v0syirI?si=o-wMhTqHJmcl4tQl
ALTHOUGH I MUST SAY I PREFER IT IN GOLD
2
0
Fuel duty is a decent proxy for pollution but maybe doesn’t capture how bad the particulate matter is? Anyway, gas guzzlers should be taxed more.
0
0
As I've said before to discourage them in town just adjust residents parking fees. Perhaps even base the fee on the length of your vehicle as well.
0
0
"There are indeed many single track roads round here too but urban dwellers invariably think their cars are much bigger than they are. In 30 years I've only lost one wing mirror to a very fast moving white van."
I would suggest that if people unfamiliar with the roads were not as cautious as they are you would have lost a lot more than that so I would be grateful for their caution personally.
4
1
It boggles the mind that SUVs are seen as more desirable in 2023 and that the production of small hatchback cars is increasingly being wound down by manufacturers.
To own one is to say I am rich and entitled to literally take up more space in the world than I need to, use more resources than I need to, and pose more of a danger to other road users than I need to (although of course I will be slightly safer in my elevated, armoured cüntwagon).
0
0
Don't forget the dog being more comfortable and safer too.
0
0
I live in rural Cornwall and a great deal of locals drive smaller cars in no small measure because the lanes are so narrow that they are the most practical car to have (and also because they are skint, admittedly).
In the summer of course, the place is dripping with home counties types piloting large SUVs who love to flex the weekend warrior outdoorsy vibe, yet struggle to reverse up a twisty lane and are terrified of mud and bramble scratches.
0
1
Mrs Face insists on a big car for the sole reason that she got hit head-on by a van when she was driving an Audi estate and said she felt like she was going to be crushed from above.
0
0
How is a dog safer in a larger boot? Would have thought the opposite was true.
0
1
Fair, but do you think the same of people who own large houses or go on many overseas holidays? I don't drive an SUV, I have an electric car, but I think SUV drivers get a lot more stick than mates who go on 5 holidays a year - nobody ever pulls them up on that.
5
1
and yet, dear reader, despite not in fact being crushed from above, that feeling (proved beyond doubt as entirely wrong) has required Mrs Face to buy a vehicle so large is causes significantly more danger to pedestrians. But that's okay, because they are other people, and her driving position is so high, she doesn't get to see the momentary terror before their eyes go dull and then close forever.
0
0
Fair, Jelly. Except most of our driving is on rural roads where we never see pedestrians. We'd probably kill a cyclist more effectively, however.
0
0
True Threep I'm safer with the dog in a separate large boot as she is less likely to fly through the gap between the front seats and take me out.
0
1
To own one is to say I am rich and entitled to literally take up more space in the world than I need to, use more resources than I need to, and pose more of a danger to other road users than I need to (although of course I will be slightly safer in my elevated, armoured cüntwagon).
Sounds good to me. Mine is a diesel too, just to annoy the right sort. I don’t like driving her EV because someone may think I’ve gone woke.
0
0
While they are billed as vehicles that cover rough ground or tow heavy loads, previous research has shown that three-quarters of SUVs bought new in the UK are registered to people living in urban areas.
That's because they are very handy for the good people of Chelsea when mounting the kerb so as not to have to walk too far to use an ATM. Pity those poor souls if they were not availed of that small comfort...
0
0
Face - it’s possible to adjust the seat position in cars you know? So you can drive a small hatch and ratchet the seat high and be able to see out. Unless Mrs face is 4ft 10, she really doesn’t need an suv to sit up high
Join the discussion