To think the law needs to change on 4x4s and Supersized SUVs in Cities.

[JustMint]

Unsure how, but today's news is just horrifying, these vehicles really need to be reduced in numbers in residential areas in my opinion. They are significantly heavier than smaller cars (I know that's stating the obvious) but who really needs a 4X4 in a city?

I personally believe there should be an additional driving test for SUVs.

If you can afford one, you can afford an extra test.

SUVs should be an additional code on your license.

@pimplesquisher 🙄. Yep lots of off road driving in London and the Home Counties. It’s pretty fucking obvious that no one is talking about the tiny tiny number of SUVs that are used for their original reason.

@Fordian i suggested this up thread and got torn to pieces.

@Fordian good idea - maybe with 5 years of driving lessons attached and they have to display a W plate for the first 20 years of ownership 😉.

Some of it, not all. It’s an argument the car companies have used over the years to fight against obligatory safety features like airbags and crumple zones. Thankfully they have been defeated.

Look at the IIHS Chevy v Chevy crash test. The 1950s car is enormous and weighs much more than the modern one, yet comes off much worse in the test.

Additional safety features can add additional weight but they are not the reason most modern cars are so huge - that is purely a fashion thing.

Plus in the USA, SUVs count as trucks so are not subject to the same testing standards and tax bands. Manufacturers build cars for their biggest markets - eg USA - and sell them to the rest of the world - eg us - so we get what the US wants. That’s why we have so many SUVs and it’s almost impossible to buy an estate anymore.

Actually there is a solution that could work quite well.

Resize on-street parking spaces to fit only smaller cars. (In other words back to the size they used to be). Parking tickets for any private vehicle whose car goes outside the lines.

This is how many European cities work, the parking spaces are tiny, any large car would be impossible to park, hence everyone drives a tiny car.

And there is plenty of data showing 4x4s are more dangerous for pedestrians in a collision. It’s not just the weight, it’s the height and where they hit you which means death or serious injury is more likely. Especially for children.

The additional driving test is not practical. You have to be able to drive a small van on a normal licence, and the SUVs are no bigger.

Obviously, your average Chelsea tractor driver wouldn’t be seen dead in a van, but a licence has to be by size, not type of vehicle.

Most reasonable two-car families in built up areas have a small city car, and a bigger (eg an estate) for longer family trips with luggage and eg tow bar usage for bikes etc.
SUVs hit children higher, in the head, and are more likely to kill. I can’t stand seeing them being used for school runs.

@JustMint We have an SUV but we are nowhere near London though. We have to have a larger car as Dh is 6'3" and trying to find a car where his head doesn't touch the roof, his left leg doesn't get trapped between the steering wheel and the centre console when gear changing and that still leaves enough space behind him to fit our almost 6' tall sons is a tall order, excuse the pun. In the past we have had to put the car seat behind his driver's seat to see if a child can fit behind him. We have been car buying for almost 30 years. It is a logistical nightmare. We have had automatics and paddle shift cars but that still means the back maybe too small. It certainly isn't a status symbol just a car that he can drive safely and in comfort.

As for charging for an SUV in London people will just pay it. I think what happened today was utterly horrific and tragic but cars are heavy and kill.

It's complicated and yes of course plenty of people have need for them. But there are also plenty of people with SUVs/American style pickups that just got them because they fancied it, or as a status symbol. We seem to have a real penchant for importing American concepts/tastes, even when it doesn't work well with our infrastructure or even makes things dangerous.

The thing is, they are more dangerous, and not just for weight - an electric car in a standard build shape is still safer. SUV/trucks' shape makes them more likely to roll in accidents (SUV drivers are twice as likely to die in a rollover than in a standard car), and more likely to cause serious/fatal injury to pedestrians and cyclists in accidents - iirc you're 3 times more likely to die from a crash with an SUV than a standard car. They can also create a false sense of security on the driver's part from them perceiving themselves as "safer" from being higher up or in a bigger car, when actually their visibility at short range is actively poorer.

This discusses the issues really well (and there are plenty of sources with it too).

Not necessarily.

You can look at the pedestrian impact ratings on ENCAP but it's not always worse for a larger car. If you have a nice flat front of the car and a fairly deep engine bay then the impact is spread and the head is likely to have slowed down by the time it hits anything really solid (the engine block is much more solid than the bonnet). Some of the premium SUVs actually have things like deployable bonnets and pedestrian airbags to absorb the impact of the pedestrian in the same way as the internal airbag works for the occupant, and their driver assistant systems should prevent or at least reduce the speed of impact. If you're interested, look up AEB pedestrian test videos.

You are right though that you want the pedestrian going up a bit but that's mostly because it does less damage to hit the window or roof than the engine block and the really important bit to protect is the head.

Essentially, if you're going to be hit by a car you want to be hit by one with lots of safety features geared at pedestrians that weighs as little as possible and has a nice flat front with the top at the right height to flop you over so your head hits the soft bits. For a lot of adults that is likely to be a premium SUV. Generally the worst car to be hit by is one of the low pointy sports EVs that haven't bothered with the pedestrian impact stuff because of the extra weight and are still heavy because of the battery. Personally I'd be quite happy to ban those as they are well and truly pointless.

My other half is taller than yours and our first car was a VW Fox, so don’t talk nonsense. We did plenty of long trips with mates in the back seat. There is a middle ground - you don’t need an SUV.

In all likely hood she was pinned or crushed. Any car of any weight would have done the same. Its desperately sad but it would have happened if it was a fiat 500.

@TakeMyStrongHand is that comment serious? That child was innocently sat in her school field. She didn't need to look where she was going... The car driver who ploughed into and killed her did. FFS

Did the driver live in the city?
Do you have stats linked to how heavier cars cause more serious injuries in collisions?

@Curiouscarla it wasn't even relative to the accident today but if I was to relate it to today - it would obviously be relevant to the fucking driver. Jesus!

In the UK, a Prius is the car most likely to be involved in an accident that causes injuries. In the US, a Ford Puma is most likely to be involved in a fatal accident.
Posters may have a perception that SUVs are more dangerous but the statistics don't actually support it.

The OP makes it clear this is about SUVs in the city. No one is trying to say they should be banned everywhere. So stop your silly frothing and go milk a cow.

Surely where a car hits a pedestrian depends on 2 crucial factors - the height of the car AND the height of the pedestrian!

Agree that this is bobbins.

My Dad is 6ft 5, my brother the same, my mum and I both 6 foot. We all had absolutely no problem in a standard estate car.

I sat in one of the new minis and my head hit the ceiling.

Yes exactly, if an SUV hits a child, it’s bonnet hits their head……

Quite. DH is also 6’3 and we’ve had numerous cars, with car seat and older child behind him, none of which was an SUV.

I know so many people with SUVs and they all have some tenuous reason why it’s “needed” … the bulky sports equipment upthread is an example… the need to fit visiting grandparents in… the need to liftshare other kids to sports matches… the dog… Let’s face it it would be perfectly possible to manage without and if SUVs were penalised they would find a different solution.

I just wish people were honest that they have an SUV because they WANT one more than they care about the impact on others, rather than pretending it’s some sort of necessity.

So we should leave our cars where? Beside the cows and walk into the city.
Your lack of respect to other posters and the families involved in the incident today is actually sickening.