Why are there so many SUV's on the road?

[Sausagenbacon]

I've just had a wonderful cycle ride (we used to cycle a lot during lockdown but not since).
We really noticed how busy the roads were, which was unsurprising, but we also noticed that most people drive suv's now, which is a pita.
Why is this, and how do people afford them?

@Orangebadger Might I suggest a Porsche Macan to you then! I guess you have not driven one if you don’t think SUVs are as good as an Audi A4. Certainly not dull to drive. The advantage of a larger suv like a Discovery is off road ability too and definitely a bigger boot than a A4!

People like the look and feel of an SUV. Being higher up makes them feel safer, having a larger looking car makes it feel more expensive. The fact they were originally designed for people who do lots of outdoor sports makes them seem more exclusive. They don't bother to think of the impact on other road users. Of course those of us who bother to do the research know there's often far more space in an estate car and they are often cheaper to run being more aerodynamic. We have a hybrid skoda superb and it works perfectly for trips to the mountains to ski or the beach and fits our Pointer's large crate in the boot.

Ha ha I am sure that is a better drive but out of my budget! But boot space, I did say the larger SUVs have larger boots in my previous post. But off road ability I have no need for that in my suburban environment! But absolute no to a discovery! Never!!

I hired a van when I moved DD back home a couple of years ago. She was living in a residential area with plenty of parking and easy access to the motorway, so driving a vehicle with limited surrounding visibility was not much of a problem.

DD now lives in a city centre with limited on street parking. The drive there involves many lane changes in a busy city and, quite frankly, I wouldn’t feel safe driving a van there as there are too many blind spots and I don’t have enough surround vision to see the traffic around me and am more likely to cause an accident.

As I have only driven a van a couple of times in my life, it is not a safe option to drive one with my limited experience where DD lives now.

My SUV is not a large one and takes up the same footprint as my old Honda Civic.

Then hire a van with a driver. It's once a year for 3-4 years to move a student. It's hardly a regular need and hardly a reason to want or need an SUV.

And yet here people are doing just that.

When I was looking for a new car, these tended to be cheaper to buy and run.

People are having to buy what they can afford.

Some of them do seem way too big for our little roads. I wonder if they’re based on American models.

They can be a PITA when meeting them down a country lane but so are vans, horse boxes, tractors and bad drivers.

I’m not sure how they affect cyclists as the vehicles should be giving you the same amount of space regardless of its size.

Define what is or isn't an SUV?

Higher cars are easier to get in and out of.
Easier to assist children.
More space for batteries. Theres a reason Ford have stopped selling fiestas, focus and mondos.

I have a huge car. I have a huge car because I have a profoundly disabled child and this is what we have to have to meet his needs. I would love to not need it and drive a fiat 500 but that’s the way life is.

Exactly. We have a very old Range Rover. The V5 says it’s an estate car.

Oh for goodness sake! No!

Unless you are talking about stuff like nitrogen dioxide pollution or other emissions from diesel / petrol, then the issues re electric cars aren’t too dissimilar to combustion ones. Both petrol & electric SUVs have the problems with bonnet size & rolling in crashes & they both have the issue of being heavy re older cars parks. Electric cars are heavier, but the warnings re car park weight that I referred to were clear that it’s SUVs not electric city minis that are the problem.

I do understand why SUVs are popular (they’ve been heavily promoted by manufacturers) but they do have these downsides & they need to be recognised as they affect us all. For example, my local council’s preferred tactic to reduce speeding is to install speed bumps - these probably won’t work with SUVs, which means that more serious measures (eg cameras or LTNs) are needed if you actually want to stop the speeding, and also means that installing the speed bumps is just a waste of money. If the car park issue isn’t addressed, then there’s a risk some will close if operators don’t have the money to fix older structures. Again with potholes & pavements (a hot topic near me re local elections), if SUVs are meaning more potholes then there’s a need to increase the budget & capacity local councils have to fix them - how is that going to be funded? Pavement parking is currently under debate in Parliament, but successive governments have really been reluctant to expand the London rules to the rest of the country - yet cracked pavements are a trip hazard for everyone and a particular danger for the elderly.

There isn’t currently a definition as it’s a marketing term - that’s what Sadiq Khan is looking at for London due to research on their impact in crashes & other issues like being too big for parking spaces. His definition will probably be aimed at the very heavy & large SUVs.

That's exactly my point there isn't a definition of SUV.
The best description is a boxy car. But vintage cars could be described as boxy and fit the SUV description.

But the fashion is moving from boxy back towards a large hatch.

Any description or restrictions to do with weight is going to hit electric cars more than a petrol car regardless of shape.

Something like a Ford puma is hardly causing any issues but would be classed as a suv. Families like space and a higher driving position. Manufacturers made people carriers when my dc were little and they have largely gone. This whole complaint is about more expensive cars! They are not involved in a higher proportion of accidents in relation to their popularity and most accidents are not involving cyclists at all. People want cars with a good safety score and often this cannot be a V city car. These are often second cars and useless for family life. They are more of a luxury.

I don’t think it’s the Tiguan of Kia type family cars that are the issue; it’s the ridiculous defender or discovery huge tank things where you’re about 30ft in the air, can’t park in a space or go two down a lane!

I agree. My car is described as a smaller compact SUV. When I park next to Tiguan, Range Rovers large Kia SUVs my car is dwarfed by them.

Couple of points.........

Firstly the figures suggest that SUV's are LESS safe than normal vehicles because they are more likley to roll over

Secondly with an aging population I can see a level of market failure in that we are not producing enough vehicles that are easy to get into. The Kia Venga & old shape Vauxhall Agila/Suzuki Wagon R 'Mini MPV's' dont seem to have a current equivalent.

Thirdly there is the question of the extent to which our expectations have been driven by the availability of ever larger and more powerful vehicles. Look at the boot on a Morris Minor! Clearly if you cant use your car to tow the QE2/horsebox/whatever round the country then as I put it the world would be a different place. Interestingly enough my local model engineering society isnt using its portable miniature railway track this year as there are fewer people with vehicles able to carry it.

Finally as my ambulance man next door neighbour puts very clearly you cant see a small child over the bonnet of a SUV but its dead easy to see one from the drivers seat of his VW camper/MPV thingy

Why on earth not?

Because it’s her life and she can do as she pleases?

I don't like being dictated to by sanctimonious posters.

My small SUV has the same footprint as my old Honda Civic. I rarely drive in residential areas where there might be children or dogs running about and I drive within speed limits, especially in residential areas, and slow down when I see dogs not on leads or children running about.

Motobility is only available to people who were on the benefit before pension age…a female aged 80 now must have been on the benefit for over 20yrs….she must have serious problems that enable her to claim the allowance.

Why are you asking that? I merely said 90% of new cars at my local dealer were pcp (if that’s what it’s called ) or motobility. Can you explain?

I do find it fascinating that so many people want, and feel entitled, to dictate how others spend their own money.

I said. Would you like to swap. You can have a Kia picanto and I’ll have no disabilities.

it’s not the good deal you think it is. Your legs won’t work properly anymore. But they’ll work just enough for sanctimonious twats to think you don’t need the car or the BB.

you will be in pain all the time and on strong opiates. You’ll have nerve pain that makes you want to cut your leg off. Except, of course, there is no guarantee that would even cure the pain.

you’ll have back and hip pain. Knee pain. All the time. Shoulder pain from the crutches.

you also get autism and adhd. Just to keep things interesting.

depression. Agoraphobia. Self harm. A lot of self harm as a rape and SA victim. Suicidal ideation.

then you get cancer and as a bonus from the rape, genital herpes (at least, I think that’s where I got it from, I never had it before)