Last edited:
SUVs are useless for carrying stuff
- Thread starter Pale Rider
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
mustang1
Legendary Member
- Location
- London, UK
Yes I agree. For an SUV and an estate car of the same length, the SUV hasn't got as much space.
Having said that, I use my sub with 4 bikes, 4 suitcases, 2 large picnic cooler bags, 4 rucksacks, 2 large bags with food and cannot be squashed, a few other small bags that are squashable, cricket bat, hockey stick, football, frisby and various smaller balls. Inside the cabin are several large iced drink bottles, many phones and iPads and laptops, books and things like that. It's a hoot when we go on holiday!
Edit: oh yeah, I forgot the bike stuff: 2 shoe boxes of bike tools, track pump, 4 D locks, 4 water bottles.
Having said that, I use my sub with 4 bikes, 4 suitcases, 2 large picnic cooler bags, 4 rucksacks, 2 large bags with food and cannot be squashed, a few other small bags that are squashable, cricket bat, hockey stick, football, frisby and various smaller balls. Inside the cabin are several large iced drink bottles, many phones and iPads and laptops, books and things like that. It's a hoot when we go on holiday!
Edit: oh yeah, I forgot the bike stuff: 2 shoe boxes of bike tools, track pump, 4 D locks, 4 water bottles.
I like to use the box and bag analogy. Imagine the box that the car came in.
The imagine a bag inside the car filled with water into every nook and cranny.
You now have the ratio of intetior to exterior volume.
Modern safety regs grab a some interior volume. Aerodynamic slipperyness takes a bit more. A huge chunk of the loss in space efficiency is due to styling. I wouldn't even call it design ( except in the case of "hair design studio").
Do the car mag reviews do this metric.
The imagine a bag inside the car filled with water into every nook and cranny.
You now have the ratio of intetior to exterior volume.
Modern safety regs grab a some interior volume. Aerodynamic slipperyness takes a bit more. A huge chunk of the loss in space efficiency is due to styling. I wouldn't even call it design ( except in the case of "hair design studio").
Do the car mag reviews do this metric.
Pass. I do know the for EVs, much more attention is paid to the aero as poor aero can dramatically reduce range.
- Location
- Inside my skull
Jenkins
Legendary Member
- Location
- Felixstowe
SUV = Sodding Ugly Vehicle
Time Waster
Veteran
Since a lot of SUVs are 2WD what's the difference between them and an MPV?
We got an mpv because we needed more room than our old estate. Space was better arranged too despite it being a SEAT.
A Ford main dealer saleswoman was showing us various secondhand cars and we got talking about models. She listed the basic platforms models are made out of. Basically there are something like 4 platforms with basic car, SUV and MPV. One size had two MPVs at the time, a high v volume one and sportier one. She was very derogatory towards SUVs. She said a new model range came out in DUVs based on the normal car platform. It went from 4 or 5 NCAP safety rating in the car to iirc 2! The SUV version simply wasn't as safe despite the perception SUVs are safer. She Basically said they had no suitable car but we shouldn't look at the SUVs they had a few of. We should wait for a car.
She said a lot more too. She really hated the fashion for SUVs but it was her job to sell them. I think there's a push for them by brands back then.
We got an mpv because we needed more room than our old estate. Space was better arranged too despite it being a SEAT.
A Ford main dealer saleswoman was showing us various secondhand cars and we got talking about models. She listed the basic platforms models are made out of. Basically there are something like 4 platforms with basic car, SUV and MPV. One size had two MPVs at the time, a high v volume one and sportier one. She was very derogatory towards SUVs. She said a new model range came out in DUVs based on the normal car platform. It went from 4 or 5 NCAP safety rating in the car to iirc 2! The SUV version simply wasn't as safe despite the perception SUVs are safer. She Basically said they had no suitable car but we shouldn't look at the SUVs they had a few of. We should wait for a car.
She said a lot more too. She really hated the fashion for SUVs but it was her job to sell them. I think there's a push for them by brands back then.
Richard A Thackeray
Legendary Member
We had one of those, a ‘57’ plate, it was a vile thing
Its only redeeming feature was LED tail-lights
A 1.8 petrol, that always needed the a/c on or it misted up
3 cracked windscreens too!
I loathed it that much, l used to leave all 4 windows down overnight
Even the local scrotes had more taste than to take it
My wonderful Octavia estate took over from it (March 2012 - May 2021)
Last edited:
Or Shite Understeering Vehicle
rogerzilla
Legendary Member
My CX-5 was pretty good for sticking bikes in. I decided I looked a bit of a knob driving an SUV, though, so I have a Mazda 3 now.
rogerzilla
Legendary Member
That's worse than Trump's gold lift.
Gillstay
Über Member
I bought a Berlingo off a nice lady who's Dad had owned it, but she took it off him at holiday time as the SUV she owned did not carry all the stuff they took camping. Mate has a new Porche SUV. Cannot even manage 30mpg. I cannot recall when I last had a car that would pollute so much. 1982 perhaps.
rogerzilla
Legendary Member
There have been huge improvements in engine technology in recent years, mostly cancelled out by larger, bluff-shaped cars.
