I drove around 20,000 miles in a Tesla model 3 as a company pool car over the space of a few months and the small boot opening is a problem if you want to get a lot of stuff in and out of the back several times a day. The load area is fine with the seats folded down it is the low height of the opening that I found to be a nuisance. No good for us anyway as we needed a car about the same size as the Tesla model 3 but a hatchback as we need space for the dogs in the back. I did have a look at the model Y and drove one for a day but I was not very impressed by it to be honest and anyway it is not going to be available here for some time yet.Years ago I walked into a Tesla showroom in a shopping mall in Bristol. They had the new Model 3 which I looked around. I was very positive about it until I realised it's a saloon, not a hatchback. Since I've driven estate cars for decades, I couldn't switch to a saloon, because of the limited size of the access to the luggage space. I've always considered an estate car much more practical for most people than an SUV. Those who need an SUV probably need a four wheel drive one. Farmers and suchlike. I suspect most SUVs go offroad no more frequently than most saloons, estates, hatchbacks. National Trust overflow car parks, anyone?
The range of SUVs or Crossovers on the market now is huge, from Range Rovers to Suzukis. But they are typically higher off the ground, blunter at the front (less aerodynamic, probably more harmful to impacted pedestrians) and therefore less fuel efficient than their estate equivalents. And you'd think they would offer much more interior space, but that turns out generally not to be true. So their popularity is down to style. People apparently want the high, commanding stance on the road and the ruggedized styling. Is it to do with being able to look down on 'lesser' road users, or am I just being an old cynic?
They may not look down on us metaphorically, but they do literally, which means that people in normal small cars feel the need to get an SUV or crossover next time so that they feel more confident on a road full of trucks. Thus the taller and bigger arms race continues.The idea that people 'look down' on lesser road users is about as realistic as saying that Tesla drivers look, down on lesser evs..
Perhaps, or folk nowadays rather everything is in the boot alone, I recall going to the beach as a kid in a classic mini most of the kit was piled on top of the kids in the back seat.And people now carry far more stuff around with them than they ever used to years ago.
People have got a bit wider, but not a lot taller.
Yep, take your point about safety in an old car. But modern smaller cars can be safe too - although people may reasonably still be concerned about being hit by a Range Rover in one.Try crashing an old mini and a new one...
I know which i'd rather be inside.
The crossover seems a reasonable compromise. You get the height and practicality of an SUV, while much better efficiency than you'd get from an actual SUV. Yes, its not quite as good as you'd get from a smaller car, but its still far better than it could be!
I find the whole thing somewhat patronising. No-one complains about someone driving around in a Citreon Picasso, or VW Touran. Instead they target "SUV"'s because of how they're styled? Its dumb as fk.
Guinness World record for the number of people in an original mini is 27 surely 30 should be possible in a Leaf ;-).Try crashing an old mini and a new one...
I know which i'd rather be inside.
Some people simply need (or want) larger cars. We have a LEAF. Its too small. The children barely fit in the back, the middle seat is unusable, and the boot is tiny.
MX-5s are lovely. Unfortunately I am too long to drive them - darn! I had a series of very low cars for a while. I love driving sports cars and still think that everyone should learn to drive in one. Something small and light with a great chassis; you learn so much about the dynamics of driving and how to drive more safely. In one, I could tell if I had slightly low pressure in one of the tyres by the way it handled. In the same car I could also feel the tyre temperatures in winter even though it had pretty ordinary skinny tyres. With another of them I had to take my jumper off to fit in it. One day, with that car, I tried and succeeded in driving underneath an articulated lorry trailer. I can also say that most people get spooked when they are sat that low though. It is more aerodynamic but for many, also just frightening.I took my daughter to her netball camp this morning in my elderly (hopefully soon to be electrified) MX-5. In the carpark the ratio of SUVs to “normal” cars was about 3 to 1, which is typical of the middle class school run ratio round here. My little car, which I concede is not the easiest thing to get in and out of for a 6’4” bloke in his late forties, doesn’t even come up to the window line of any of them.
I think the origin of the arguments against SUVs are:I suspect that the main argument against the real SUVs is that they are petrol or more likely diesel and never get warmed up on the school run, so are dreadfully inefficient and polluting. None of that would apply to an EV variant.
Agree, while some people buy them for practicality I think the aspirational aspect plays a major part, originally they started as working vehicles for people living out in the country doing practical things, then they gradually shifted up market and toward the luxury end, becoming high-end vehicles being used in urban areas, then the mass market manufacturers starting running with the idea and now they're everywhere.Manufacturers make them because that’s what the fashion-led, aspirationally-focused market wants and where the profit margin is. It doesn’t make them any less offensive (to me at least).
Hopefully as environmental responsibility becomes more mainstream fashion will change, these things will become less appealing, and we can get back to the small, light, (possibly hatchback) cars we need.
Who cares. It's just a lazy slang categorisation in any case. Maybe S is for silly rather than soft?We all know that EVs have their batteries under the floor and that makes them slightly taller than a directly equivalent ICE vehicle. The popular style for all cars at the moment is the hatchback. Versatile enough for families with buggies, doing the trip to the local waste disposal site, carrying your sports gear and so on, they are the Swiss army knife of car body styles. EVs have evolves to largely become slightly tall hatchbacks, with the notable exception of Tesla saloons. Then within that category, the rugged hatchback with details such as rubbing strips and plastic wheel-arch surrounds has become the most popular sub-category of all, for the obvious reason of additional practicality.
Yet influencers so often refer to a Kia Niro, VW ID.4 and many others as an SUV even while they have neither the ground clearance or, for the most part, the four-wheel drive requisite to the definition. Why do commentators who spend their time thinking about the topic and studying the detail, who are not uneducated, not unaware of what they are saying, do this? They could say that 'this is a hatchback with the styling of a mini SUV' but no, to them it is simply an SUV. Why do they conflate what clearly are the modern descendents of the iconic Golf or Panda with the Range Rover or Cherokee?