Vehicle discussion. The SUV vs standard types of car.

[507021]

You are aware that Volvo didn't go "ah, we've got 4 stars, that'll do" and then put their feet up. A modern Volvo scores just as highly (if not higher as a result of additional safety tech such as AEB) as a Renault. Basing your car choice off of historic milestones seems a pretty odd way of going about it, but evidently you have your reasons to trust them

I'm fully aware of that, however all I did was state a fact. I won't bother in the future.

If you'd actually read what I said, I said I buy Renault cars because one of them saved my Dad and I from suffering serious injuries in a head-on car accident with a much bigger car, not because they were the first manufacturer to achieve a five star Euro NCAP rating.

 

[507021]

I fully agree that a car with a higher safety rating should (and generally is) safer. Of course, as with lots of things, when it’s 20 years old and had a few owners of unknown driving style and ability there’s often no telling what might happen in the unfortunate event of a serious accident. In fairly recent times (last 20 years or so) we have seen most manufacturers improve their vehicles safety when they release new models or revisions of current models. It was some time before another manufacturer scored so highly I think so they certainly deserved to be proud of their achievement. Did that make that particular model the safest at the time? It appears so. Are they currently the safest cars on the road, well the results seem to suggest there are many others on par but they’re certainly not making death traps and haven’t for some time. We shouldn’t ignore but also shouldn’t dwell on the 1 star scoring 1997 Clio of course, and accept that focus on pedestrian safety didn’t really get prioritised for some time after with many of their models (and countless others from other manufacturers) scoring only 1 star on that test.
A number of years ago a lorry swerved across infront of me under emergency braking (he was avoiding something himself) and I hit it (now pretty much stationary) at about 50mph, which was around 1 second worth of thinking and braking time from ‘line speed’ on the m42. After a bit of swearing, I got out pushed my car with help from the Lorry driver to the hard shoulder. Swept up the headlight debris and waited for recovery to take the car back to the garage where it was of course scrapped. Other road users were left completely and utterly lost for words as to how, not only was I not in 11 pieces but I’d just got out as if I had arrived at the local supermarket. It was baffling to them how a car had hit the lorry at such a speed and could still be recognised as a car.
I was in a 2000 (W plate) Volvo S80 T6.
Every single person I’ve ever spoken to has a story of their own or of a friend or third or forth hand about Volvo and them being safe cars. For years. 40 years even. And we have established that some of the tank like features on old Volvos turned out to not necessarily be the best way to handle crashworthiness but they have had the reputation of being safe cars for decades.
As for whether people like Renault or not. My late father was a Renault dealer / service agent until the early 90s. I’m quite fond of several of their cars old and new.

I do accept your points, and I'm pleased to hear you weren't hurt in the accident.

However I've never once denied Volvos are safe cars, and having owned two in the past has reinforced that, but all I said was they weren't the first manufacturer to get the maximum Euro NCAP safety score and it feels like I've had my head bitten off for doing so. It's disappointing and makes me wonder why I bother posting here anymore.

 

[robbeech]

I do accept your points, and I'm pleased to hear you weren't hurt in the accident.

However I've never once denied Volvos are safe cars, and having owned two in the past has reinforced that, but all I said was they weren't the first manufacturer to get the maximum Euro NCAP safety score and it feels like I've had my head bitten off for doing so. It's disappointing and makes me wonder why I bother posting here anymore.

And likewise with your own accident.

I don’t think anyone is trying to bite anyone’s head off here.

The results show an excellent performance with that 2001 model Laguna by Renault. There was much talk about it at the time and rightly so.
Volvo brought out the S60 the same year which only scored 4 stars. But this was a new design that had been in the works for several years. This was a mk2 Laguna essentially, the first ones must have started around 94/95 but it was more than just a facelift but not quite a full redesign. (They were very nice, my grandfather had one of the first off the line for the UK). What’s important to note however is that Volvo haven’t released a single car less than 5 stars since that 4 star S60, the first being the XC90. Renault have has a range of 5 star vehicles from that point but also a number of 4 star ones. The 2014 Megane initially scored just 3 stars but was rescored 4 for reasons unknown. The traffic only scored 2 stars but that is a van.
With this in mind I hope you can understand why people may not quite understand why you have used the. nCAP rating to show their safety above that of other manufacturers. But I would also hope that other people can see that you were not implying other manufacturers are unsafe.

 

[90019]

I feel it should be noted that the NCAP star rating has only been around since 1997, and that as cars have got safer the tests have changed, so a vehicle that got a 5 stars rating five or ten years ago would be highly unlikely to get the same score today.

 

[OneOffDave]

I got a new car in December and ended up getting a Mitsubishi Outlander as it was the only car that met all my needs. Most modern estates have such an angle on the tailgate that you lose a lot of boot space, I could get more on my 2005 Astra estate that I could in the 2009 Insignia that replaced it. The Astra went the same way when they remodelled it. I need a car with level boot access (no lip), room on the front passenger seat for my wheelchair frame (it's a rigid, non-folding one), long enough to fit my handcycle in with the back seats folded and easy to get in and out of. If they brought back 'proper' estates I'd have one of those like a shot but I'm not aware of anyone making them any more

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not as good to drive, but have you considered things like the Citroen Berlingo, Peugeot Rifter and Ford Tourneo Connect? Those are basically "boxes on wheels" (with nicer interiors than they used to have) but with far better fuel economy than your average SUV, and as a result are quite popular, often converted for wheelchair carriage, with disabled people?

 

[OneOffDave]

Not as good to drive, but have you considered things like the Citroen Berlingo, Peugeot Rifter and Ford Tourneo Connect? Those are basically "boxes on wheels" (with nicer interiors than they used to have) but with far better fuel economy than your average SUV, and as a result are quite popular, often converted for wheelchair carriage, with disabled people?

The load space in a Tourneo is about a foot shorter that the Outlander and the boot sill is 6 inches lower which means I'd have to lift things on and off my lap more rather than just sliding them as I do now. There also isn't an electric tailgate option so I'd need to screw/tie a strap to the tailgate to be able to close it. Adding wheelchair access would cost an extra £3-4K to the cost. The 'best' cars I've had in terms of accessibilty and load space were the 1996 VW Golf estate and the 2007 Astra estate. The Outlander is long and high but narrower than I was expecting. Doesn't have the blindspots that the Juke and Quashqi have. Teh Quashqi is almost an example of how not to do it. It's big on the outside but surprisingly small in the inside

 

[cactustwirly]

I got a new car in December and ended up getting a Mitsubishi Outlander as it was the only car that met all my needs. Most modern estates have such an angle on the tailgate that you lose a lot of boot space, I could get more on my 2005 Astra estate that I could in the 2009 Insignia that replaced it. The Astra went the same way when they remodelled it. I need a car with level boot access (no lip), room on the front passenger seat for my wheelchair frame (it's a rigid, non-folding one), long enough to fit my handcycle in with the back seats folded and easy to get in and out of. If they brought back 'proper' estates I'd have one of those like a shot but I'm not aware of anyone making them any more

What about a Volvo V90 or a BMW 530 touring? They have a flat boot without a load lip and an electric tailgate.
Did you look at a Passat?

 

[OneOffDave]

What about a Volvo V90 or a BMW 530 touring? They have a flat boot without a load lip and an electric tailgate.
Did you look at a Passat?

With the V90 and the 530, the slope of the tailgate means that the full boot length is only actually available for about a foot above the boot sill. This is where modern estates lose out over older ones

 

[LAX54]

No they are ridiculous, everyone who previously got a Focus or something, is now buying a huge great big Kuga or Qashqai. Which are significantly heavier, which means that they use more fuel and produce more emissions.

People don't buy them to be practical, they'd buy an estate otherwise. It's all about showing off, and they buy one to join the ridiculous band wagon.

A mini is now the size of a small SUV, how they can still call it a 'mini' ! SUV's can be very useful for older people, they can get a wheelchair or similar in one, and still have room for shopping too

 

[Nym]

A mini is now the size of a small SUV, how they can still call it a 'mini' ! SUV's can be very useful for older people, they can get a wheelchair or similar in one, and still have room for shopping too

Read up on why SUVs aren't good for PLMs.

 

[37424]

Read up on why SUVs aren't good for PLMs.

My elderly Dad find's the height of SUV's a problem, but a problem with all modern vehicles is that the seats tend to be further in from the side of the door no doubt better for safety but more awkward to get in if you have limited mobility, consequently he finds some older cars easier.

 

[OneOffDave]

Read up on why SUVs aren't good for PLMs.

It definitely depends on the SUV. MY XC60 was great, the XC40 I looked to replace it with didn't have the space to lift my wheelchair frame over me onto the passenger seat. Was a similar problem with the Peugeot 3008 and 5008 due to the high centre console. The Tiguan was ok for me. I've got decent upper body strength and my wheelchair is rigid frame so that approach suits me best. Other people will have different experiences. It's one of the reasons that sites like https://www.ridc.org.uk/features-reviews/out-and-about/car-search/advanced-car-measurements exist. They have a massive range of measurements for a huge range of cars to help narrow the search down. They also have measurements not in the manufacturer manuals such as door opening angles, widths and seat height off the ground

 

[Tetchytyke]

Read up on why SUVs aren't good for PLMs.

Depends on the mobility issue. My mother in law, who is in her 80s and has Parkinsons, finds my Qashqai a lot easier to get into, and especially out of, than my Fiesta, because the seat is higher up.

Everyone's experience is different. The Qashqai clearly didn't work for you, it does for me. And we chose it ahead of other cars, including the Honda Civic and the Skoda Octavia, because it worked for us.

It's almost as though different people have different tastes and needs, isn't it

 

[gg1]

Depends on the mobility issue. My mother in law, who is in her 80s and has Parkinsons, finds my Qashqai a lot easier to get into, and especially out of, than my Fiesta, because the seat is higher up.

Everyone's experience is different. The Qashqai clearly didn't work for you, it does for me. And we chose it ahead of other cars, including the Honda Civic and the Skoda Octavia, because it worked for us.

It's almost as though different people have different tastes and needs, isn't it

That was my dad's experience with the Qashqai my partner had on motability around 10 years ago. He was in his late 70s at the time with 2 artificial hips and arthritis in his knees, he can walk but needs 2 sticks. He absolutely loved the Qashqai, the first time for years he'd been able to get in and out of a car with (relative) ease. He's on motability too and all his car choices since then have had ride height as the number 1 criteria.

 

[Halish Railway]

I saw the title of this thread so I'd thought I'd add my opinion.

SUVs (particuarly Crossovers) are definitely made for the general public and aren't particularly pleasing to enthusiasts as the hatchback/saloon car that they are based on are mostly cheaper, more fuel efficient quicker and smoother riding as the suspension doesn't need to be stiffened up as much for handling. Plus how often is a normal member of the general public going to go off road?

You can just tell that Cars such as the Lamborghini Uris, Rolls Royce Cullinan and Jaguar F-Pace are made to make money and not be great cars.

I can understand the attraction for a normal member of the general public, but they're just not my sort of taste.

 

[corfield]

Spent a lot of time in the US on work, always with massive SUVs (Ford Explorer/Expedition and Chevy Tahoe/Suburban). Of them the Explorer was my favourite as it handled more like a car. I loved it actually, being high up felt incredibly safe given the vision it gave (not so much over other vehicles, but the surroundings). I always felt it wasn't any bigger on the inside than a mid-size hatchback. The flat loading however made life easier vs over and "down" into a boot. The Expedition was truly cavernous but felt like driving a truck. Didn't like the chevys at all, but then my UK car is a Mondeo so the Fords felt and were familiar in instruments etc.

Given where I was, I did a lot of dirt and rock road driving as well as blizzards - in 4x4 modes they took it all without missing a beat, again the high up position helped massively with visibility and pushing through snow on the ground.

Coming back, my Mondeo felt like I had to lie down to get in! But the ability to corner faster was a revelation, realising how much slower I'd been driving the SUVs.

US fuel usage was insanely low, I think we never had a vehicle over 20mpg even on cruising interstate journeys. The Explorer had a very small tank, never got more than 300miles out of it, which out there and where we were was a real planning headache. Compared to over 700 I get from my 2.0 TDCi Mondeo.

I think the high sitting position and vision is a massive selling point for them, it is certainly something I hear from every SUV owner, again, not so much over other vehicles, but all the surroundings and clutter.

The funniest were the pickups we had F150/250 and Dodge Rams. I've driven tanks, various armoured vehicles and HGVs - the pickups were worse! We were using the back for loads all the time, but when shifting personal kit there was the constant fear of theft/weather. Why you'd want one if you didn't want the back for load carrying is beyond me. I note most pickup owners have lockable boxes in the rear, which seems both necessary and ironic in defeating the object - just get a vehicle with a boot! The pickup seems more a US culture thing, (see Back to the Future for instance!) which has never been in the UK probably due to effects of weather and a more cramped environment leading to theft concerns.

 

[Bletchleyite]

US fuel usage was insanely low, I think we never had a vehicle over 20mpg even on cruising interstate journeys. The Explorer had a very small tank, never got more than 300miles out of it, which out there and where we were was a real planning headache. Compared to over 700 I get from my 2.0 TDCi Mondeo.

That's to a fair extent petrol vs. diesel - diesel is much more efficient on a large, heavy car. My present LWB Land Rover Defender isn't much different on fuel economy (diesel) as my previous Vectra estate was (petrol). Assuming both vehicles are diesel, a typical UK small SUV isn't going to do much differently from a large, heavy estate like the Vectra (Insignia) or Mondy.

 

[corfield]

This is why the building crusade against diesels bothers me, as I really don't want to go back to petrol economies. With diesel/litre now much closer to petrol than my calcs allowed for when I bought the current car, I've been benefitting (15-20k miles a year).

Performance/noise wise the Mondeo TDCI is incredible, I feel no need at all for a petrol and I would consider myself a fast driver (well, as others do too!).

The anti diesel is especially annoying as the particulate problem was known decades ago, and the Govt pushed everyone down this road from circa 2000. With changing personal circumstances, replacing it isn't an option for me and is unlikely to be so for a good decade, yet the economy and capacity is fundamental to my life. Hoping it'll do north of 200k!

 

[cactustwirly]

That's to a fair extent petrol vs. diesel - diesel is much more efficient on a large, heavy car. My present LWB Land Rover Defender isn't much different on fuel economy (diesel) as my previous Vectra estate was (petrol). Assuming both vehicles are diesel, a typical UK small SUV isn't going to do much differently from a large, heavy estate like the Vectra (Insignia) or Mondy.

Except the Land Rover is much heavier...
A mondeo will do 48 mpg, compared to 31 on the Land Rover

A Jaguar XF Sportbrake 3 Litre Diesel will still do 37.8 mpg

Love how you complain about polluting DMUs on other threads, but drive a great big poluting diesel SUV

 

[Bletchleyite]

Love how you complain about polluting DMUs on other threads, but drive a great big poluting diesel SUV

I'll give you that. I do tend towards big vehicles because I'm a big person, but the Defender was something I just wanted to own at some point. My next vehicle will be more sensible. I don't do huge mileages, though, mostly preferring the train for long distances or cycling for short ones and have no daily commute.

Edit: another answer to this is that the railway claims environmental credentials but a Land Rover Defender does not.

Back to the comparison, though, I was more thinking diesel Mondy vs. a smaller, more modern design of SUV rather than a giant overweight brick which is basically a 1940s vehicle with a 2010s Transit engine in it.

 

[Domh245]

US fuel usage was insanely low, I think we never had a vehicle over 20mpg even on cruising interstate journeys.

The other thing to bear in mind is that US Gallons are smaller, so their miles/gallon are smaller as a result! When comparing identical cars at home and the US, the US stated MPG will always be a few points smaller.

Back to the comparison, though, I was more thinking diesel Mondy vs. a smaller, more modern design of SUV rather than a giant overweight brick which is basically a 1940s vehicle with a 2010s Transit engine in it.

Yup, there's only a couple MPG in it - comparing an F Pace and an XF Sportbrake (both sit on the same platform and have good as identical engines), the 4WD 180bhp diesel will (notionally!) return 42.9mpg in the XF and 40.8mpg in the F Pace. Ditto 3 Series Touring/X3 - the same spec powertrain (190bhp AWD) gets around 5-6 mpg more in the Touring

 

[corfield]

The other thing to bear in mind is that US Gallons are smaller, so their miles/gallon are smaller as a result! When comparing identical cars at home and the US, the US stated MPG will always be a few points smaller.



Yup, there's only a couple MPG in it - comparing an F Pace and an XF Sportbrake (both sit on the same platform and have good as identical engines), the 4WD 180bhp diesel will (notionally!) return 42.9mpg in the XF and 40.8mpg in the F Pace. Ditto 3 Series Touring/X3 - the same spec powertrain (190bhp AWD) gets around 5-6 mpg more in the Touring

True although to be fair I think we corrected for that. We were moving kit about so the vehicle’s weren’t light, we actually broke quite a few! I ultimately switched the Explorer for a Chevy due to the tank size, and the brakes were on metal after 35k miles in 5 months!

With modern vehicles I suspect weight and any aerodynamic differences are quite minimal between a SUV and mid-size once you have the same engines and other systems. Most 4x4s are smart and turn that off when not needed as if nothing else it wears the system if on road.

The reality is they are quite safe with the space for crumple zones and air bags etc, the extra visibility really has to be experienced to appreciate (I massively do vs my Mondeo which is hardly a poor vis car) and helps in safety as well by better awareness.

 

[CM]

True although to be fair I think we corrected for that. We were moving kit about so the vehicle’s weren’t light, we actually broke quite a few! I ultimately switched the Explorer for a Chevy due to the tank size, and the brakes were on metal after 35k miles in 5 months!

With modern vehicles I suspect weight and any aerodynamic differences are quite minimal between a SUV and mid-size once you have the same engines and other systems. Most 4x4s are smart and turn that off when not needed as if nothing else it wears the system if on road.

The reality is they are quite safe with the space for crumple zones and air bags etc, the extra visibility really has to be experienced to appreciate (I massively do vs my Mondeo which is hardly a poor vis car) and helps in safety as well by better awareness.

I very much doubt the brakes on any car would last 35,000 miles...

 

[AM9]

I very much doubt the brakes on any car would last 35,000 miles...

Apart from an EV!

 

[Bletchleyite]

I very much doubt the brakes on any car would last 35,000 miles...

If you use them sensibly 20K is certainly possible.

 

[gg1]

Apart from an EV!

Or a hybrid.

I've read that if carefully driven you can supposedly cover 100,000 miles on a Prius without changing the brake pads.

 

[cactustwirly]

Apart from an EV!

An EV still has convention disks and pads, and these will still wear away like ICE cars.

 

[Bletchleyite]

An EV still has convention disks and pads, and these will still wear away like ICE cars.

Not to the same extent, because regen is used where possible in preference to using the friction brakes.

That said, you can use engine braking on an ICE car as well, so you'll get a lot of variation in wear between smooth drivers who do make use of engine braking where possible, or harsher drivers who just stick the clutch down/knock it out of gear and use friction brakes for all of it, just like some drivers will wear a clutch out within a few years and for others it'll last the car from the day it was made to the day it was scrapped. It'll also vary based on how good the engine braking effect of that engine is, which can vary and tends to be better on a diesel due to the higher compression level.

 

[cactustwirly]

Not to the same extent, because regen is used where possible in preference to using the friction brakes.

That said, you can use engine braking on an ICE car as well, so you'll get a lot of variation in wear between smooth drivers who do make use of engine braking where possible, or harsher drivers who just stick the clutch down/knock it out of gear and use friction brakes for all of it, just like some drivers will wear a clutch out within a few years and for others it'll last the car from the day it was made to the day it was scrapped. It'll also vary based on how good the engine braking effect of that engine is, which can vary and tends to be better on a diesel due to the higher compression level.

But you only would use that for a gradual slow down.
If you're stopping at traffic lights or coming off a motorway junction you would mostly use friction brakes.