The CycleChat Large SUV Owners Club thread

[Richard A Thackeray]

The be fair to the illustrious Mr Sheppard, while I have never been up Darien's Gap (paging @Fnaar !) I was a police Class 1 driver. As such have hammered a P38 rangie V8 in the wet, dry, wind and indeed snow, fully laden and flat out (indicated 135 but I think 125 is probably nearer the truth) on public roads, speeds and conditions that he has never experienced. With that in mind I have just a little authority on the matter myself, certainly on their behaviour at the extremes of performance.

Useless fact. Even at early 2000's prices the P38's on the fleet used to guzzle their own value in fuel every year.

RRs were undoubtedly damned good at the job, & proved themselves many times over in a Traffic role


This is a cracking film, I remember watching it many years ago, about the M62
Eg, 'twin RR tow' of an artic at about 47:00

Sadly, I doubt many Officers nowadays would deal with the chump at the end, so 'bluntly' from about 49:00

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvw9DNQWymo



As An Aside'
A few years ago, when Vauxhall first brought the Monaro across, West Yorkshire Traffic had one on test
(at that point, it was the coupe, not the later saloon)

The crews loved it, the mechanics loved it
Apparantly, every time it was started up at the garage, or workshops, it emptied all of the offices due to the sound
(the neighbour of a friend of mine, had a VXR derivative, & that sounded awesome - she didn't like it, as it made her windows vibrate )

Sadly, the bean-counters didn't like it, due to the rarity (spares backup, may have been in doubt??) , the fuel consumption compared to the Bum-W 330s/etc.....

If Vauxhall had brought over the saloon first off, or the estate, we might have seen them everywhere instead of Bum-Ws??

 

[Drago]

Rather than the actual figures. I guess the key one would be deaths per vehicle anyway.

That would see the Corsa and Fiesta in the dock on murder charges then. Its difficult to see how these SUVs with significantly better pedestrian safety characteristics would be more deadly than those with poorer attributes in that area.

Perhaps you coukd elaborate as to how it could be otherwise?

As aforementioned, by all means start whatever thread you like to berate planet killing SUVs. As also aforementioned by myself, this thread is for those that own them, run them and like them, not for people who are bitter because they can't afford one themselves. I don't disrupt your threads, please extend me the same courtesy in return.

@Richard A Thackeray yes, we used to pop the P38 into low range and it could clear a lorry or a coach a short distance,msufficient tomre-open a carriageway. The cheaper X5's were all well and good - and actually surprisingly capable off the tarmac - but could not do this. So, as well as paying recovery agents to take vehickes away they also had to start paying them to clear the carriageway first, and doubtless ended spending more than theyd saved by ditching the Rangies in the first place.

 

[MrGrumpy]

 

[Richard A Thackeray]

@Richard A Thackeray yes, we used to pop the P38 into low range and it could clear a lorry or a coach a short distance,msufficient tomre-open a carriageway. The cheaper X5's were all well and good - and actually surprisingly capable off the tarmac - but could not do this. So, as well as paying recovery agents to take vehickes away they also had to start paying them to clear the carriageway first, and doubtless ended spending more than theyd saved by ditching the Rangies in the first place.

@Drago


There's another wonderfully old school Officer, at about 25;00, informing the driver of a Vauxhall Cavalier that he'd driven through a road-closure

Agree with all of your comments, or indeed move a car, that is on its roof, or has all 4 wheels locked due to RTC damage

I have this book, on my shelves!

Looking west towards Scammonden Bridge
M62, between jct 22 & 23
The spoil taken from the cutting was used to help construct Scammonden Dam, 'next door' (that also carries the M62)



The frontispiece is this picture

 

[Drago]

Ah, marvellous Mr T. Not seen either of those. May have to scout the bay of e.

View attachment 621369

Excellent work Grumpers. An inconvenient truth for the haters.

 

[MrGrumpy]

Ah, marvellous Mr T. Not seen either of those. May have to scout the bay of e.



Excellent work Grumpers. An inconvenient truth for the haters.

It is surprising and contrary to what you read! I think there is a bit of green eyed monster in some minds !

 

[swansonj]

It is indeed a courtesy not to derail someone else's thread. It is only a courtesy, not a rule - you don't control the thread, and if someone objects to what you wanted the thread to be about, you can't stop them saying so (it's kind of the essence of posting your views on an internet forum that people might react to them...). But it's a courtesy nonetheless and the world is often a better place for following courtesies. I find the general tone of this thread pretty objectionable in the context of a cycling forum. But you'll have noticed that I mostly just sat on my hands, in that spirit of courtesy. It was the post about no-one having being killed in certain SUVs that seemed to me to embody such cyclist-unfriendly attitudes that I posted a single (pretty mild, I thought) response. I do not intend to turn this thread into a punch up about the overall merits/evils of SUVs and I am not participating in the subsequent discussion about pedestrian safety ratings.

 

[MrGrumpy]

It is indeed a courtesy not to derail someone else's thread. It is only a courtesy, not a rule - you don't control the thread, and if someone objects to what you wanted the thread to be about, you can't stop them saying so (it's kind of the essence of posting your views on an internet forum that people might react to them...). But it's a courtesy nonetheless and the world is often a better place for following courtesies. I find the general tone of this thread pretty objectionable in the context of a cycling forum. But you'll have noticed that I mostly just sat on my hands, in that spirit of courtesy. It was the post about no-one having being killed in certain SUVs that seemed to me to embody such cyclist-unfriendly attitudes that I posted a single (pretty mild, I thought) response. I do not intend to turn this thread into a punch up about the overall merits/evils of SUVs and I am not participating in the subsequent discussion about pedestrian safety ratings.

No arguments from me on that front however it’s well been established in some of my social media circles the view that big bad SUVs , 4x4 are the devil incarnate. A quick google and even im surprised at what I’ve found .

 

[Drago]

Certainly in the old days of ladder chassis, leaf springs and cliff face front ends, that was likely true.

The reality has since moved well on. Bigger vehicles have space to incorporate energy absorving structures, devices to deflect pedestrians upwards and not under the wheels, all sorts of collision avoidance gear that small cars have neither the space nor the budget to accommodate. Hence smaller cars usually score relatively poorly in the vulnerable road user category, and their occupants themselves are more likely to shuffle off this mortal coil.

Indeed, the XC90 was the first mass produced car ever to make any real research and design effort into pedestian safety. Not a hatch, not a city car, but a dirty great 2.2 tonne SUV led the world in the field of vulnerabke road user safety. The very vehicles you vilify were at the forefront of the effort to peotect those outside the vehicle.

I drive my enormous SUV sparingly, and with great respect and consideration towards cyclists. I daily see plenty of hatchback drivers who do neither of those things - being forced to drive a Golf or Focus because you're poor does not make you safer or any more righteous. Indeed, Grumpers has already reasonably demonstrated that the situation is the opposite to that which you perceive.

Don't like it? Then take your bleating and start your own thread, because that is not what this thread is for.

 

[Hacienda71]

Just for balance....
https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2019/oct/07/a-deadly-problem-should-we-ban-suvs-from-our-cities
Now back to talking about your lovely big SUVs

 

[Drago]

Im not too keen on the colour, but what the cost of a respray against the cost of buying it in the first place?

https://www.theparking-cars.co.uk/used-cars-detail/hummer-h1/5VNV1YA4.html

It should annoy a lot of people, particularly the impoverished drivers of small cars who can't afford a large SUV of their own, so might be worth buying for that reason alone.

Warm climate car, slush box, its doing it for me.

 

[Scoosh]

MOD NOTE:
If you wish to discuss the issue of the real (or imagined) matter of the negative effects of large SUVs – as has been said upthread ... start your own thread in the Motoring Section.

If you only want to disrupt/ start arguments in this thread – you will find your access to it severely restricted.

Thank you.

 

[MrGrumpy]

Just for balance....
https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2019/oct/07/a-deadly-problem-should-we-ban-suvs-from-our-cities
Now back to talking about your lovely big SUVs

Just for balance it’s not the car though that’s the problem ! It doesn’t drive itself !

sorry mods

 

[fossyant]

Just for balance it’s not the car though that’s the problem ! It doesn’t drive itself !

sorry mods

Just sat through a whole day of environmental litteracy programme at work. Apparently, me eating a steak one a month, and drinking lots of milk and bananas to power my bike, is still worse than driving a panzer... us meat and dairy consumers were made to feel worse than a panzer driver....

 

[Hacienda71]

Just for balance it’s not the car though that’s the problem ! It doesn’t drive itself !

sorry mods

I hope you are not suggesting SUV drivers are a problem. Sorry mods
I think I will start an alternative thread. No need to reply here.