I once heard SUV's being likened to nuclear weapons, and the analogy of mutually assured destruction, or MAD as it was referenced to during the height of the cold war is a good one. Eurocap ratings for large SUVs are not much different from a modern family hatch back, however if you and your offspring were to be involved in a smash, i bet most of you would prefer to be cocooned in three tons of off-roader instead of a paper-thin Citroen.
When we started to plan our family four long years ago, I was very reluctant to buy a people carrier, as an enthusiastic motorist it to me it said i've given up on cars now, this is just a box to carry my children around in, some were red but most were silver and had oddles of room.
Then i started to read reviews of them, and watched videos of seven seaters being rear-ended, the result of which is that the rear-most seats, which are fixed in the crumple zone do not fair well.
So I started to look at 4x4s. No, i'm not the only parent who sore the scary video of a people carrier being smashed from behind, lots of others did too, and they started buying 4x4s, and 4x4s started to sell well, so much so that these agricultural, gas-guzzling farm yard road tractors became a common sight on the roads. Car manufactures recognised this and they started to build SUVs, almost everyone of them. And they did it as quickly and cheaply as they could - by taking a regular car and jacking up the suspension.
Back in 1970, a chap called Spen King created the range-rover, cleaver bod who decided that after driving a rover saloon over a ploughed field that the ride was far better than the series land rovers his company produced. So, he decided to fit independent suspension to a four wheel drive