Do you drive a 4x4 Post Reply

[juliantenniscoach]

the message of that story is not to rely solely on reversing cameras. it's a tragic story but it happens here too every year. it's about taking care, not the choice of car.

[ordinarygirl09]

adamgh, I completely disagree, people do have reasons for a 4x4 in London.

we have a 4x4 and although I do not relish driving it in Clapham (hardly ever do walk everywhere) I am from the North of Scotland and we drive home regularly. Country roads get clogged with mud, flood easily and the snow is ridiculous during the Winter so indeed we and our parents have always needed a 4x4, it is not a posh shiny 4x4 but a complete work horse.

I would like to have a small city card to whizz round here but like I say I hardly drive in London and we can't afford a second car.

[CHT]

Maybe the purchase of a 4x4 (or other large car) should be accompanied by a mandatory lesson in reversing and parking?

[juliantenniscoach]

CHT - that's not the worst idea I've ever read by far. Mercedes, Porsche and a few others offer initiation courses when buying a high performance car. I've certainly found the landcruiser a different beast in terms of braking, steering etc, and I've been driving in London for well over 20 years.

at the risk of getting into trouble, one aspect not mentioned is the driver's height. I'm 5'9" and I wouldn't want to be much shorter driving the LC because your vision of the extremities would be restricted.

[Gabrielle]

I am a 4x4 user but that is only as I now live in the depths of the country and actually need a 4x4 to get around. There is no need whatsoever to drive a tank around central London, unless I'm missing a trick and these women are planning to go off-roading over Clapham/Wandsworth Commons to avoid the traffic? They are expensive to run (it costs £120 to fill up our Discovery), impossible to park (so that explains why they always used to be parked so badly round Northcote Road, I thought it was just the airheads that drove them couldn't park) & terrifying to reverse in them as visibility is hopeless, hence a 4x4 driver will always avoid having to reverse unless 100% necessary. There ARE cars (not 4x4/off-road vehicles) for families who need three car seats across the back, and if they're not to your liking then invest in a Multimac car seat http://www.multimac.co.uk/home. I'm not sure whether they are a status symbol; I think they're a stupidity symbol, no intelligent person would ever buy one to drive around in a city.

[cheshirecat]

O.o wow!
Well I don't really like 4x4's, but then, I don't really like cars in general.

But I wouldn't be rude to anyone who has one, just because they have the money (either legitimatly, or in the case of my neighbour...otherwise) then they can have what they like and obviously enjoy driving, like big cars and in some cases, yes they want a status symbol, nothing to be ashamed of there.

The problem, as I see it is the way people drive. My kids have had just as many near escapes with 4x4 mummies, as with zafira mini-cabs, boy racers in corsas and old people who should not be on the road. It makes no difference what you drive, if you can't drive you are a dangerous entity and I despise bad drivers in any vehicle. The difference between a bad driver in a 4X4 and a bad driver in the corsa, is, the corsa is more likely to miss!

[Wimbledon]

When I had my third child, we realised that our Nissan Micra was not going to hold 3 child car seats in the back. For several months, my eldest son was in the front seat, with me squashed between two huge car seats (stage 1 & 2) in the back. It was a real incentive to lose that baby weight fast!!!!

We were tempted by the 4x4s (though not such a high status symbol version) believing that they would be a better option than driving around in a people carrier. I have to admit my driving is not always the best (hence I always drive slowly in London on the occasion that I'm not able to walk) so I wasn't looking forward to driving something big or bus-like, but actually when we visited a showroom with all our car seats and fitted them in the back of a VW Touareg they were really squashed together. I was surprised that it was still a tight fit.

In the end we decided on the Honda FRV. Its got 6 seats, three in the front and three in the back. It looks like a normal sized hatchback from the outside but its very roomy inside. We have all children sitting in one row in the back so its very sociable and I can easily reach all three of them should they need assistance in any way. I feel like in a big people carrier that sense of closeness would lost. And the boot is a decent size.

[townieatheart]

I'm confused by twice-as-nice's post. She says, quoting from a study that was carried out in 2008....
'However pedestrians, motorcyclists and drivers of small cars are more seriously hurt when hit by large 4X4s.'
But then goes on to say 4x4's are fine. Surely this just goes to prove that they are not a good option for an urban area. I could never contemplate driving a car that poses such a danger to others. As a mother of 4 I totally understand the desire to put your precious cargo in something safe but people carriers are not unsafe, especially if you drive responsibly.
I have 4 children and drive an S-Max. It's very comfortable and drives well plus there's enough room for our luggage and pushchair. I visit family in the countryside at least once a month and have never got stuck because I don't have 4 wheel drive, even in the snow!

[supergirl]

I am amazed that nobody mention the extra pollution ... Does anybody care or are we really living in a shelfish society? I refuse to believe the latter... maybe I am too naive

[MGMidget]

The sheer volume of 4 x 4 in this area tells me that not everyone has a good reason for having one! Yes, I know of some people who genuinely find a 4 x 4 useful for offroading it on the family estate at weekends (rah!) but come on they are in the minority! I've heard comments coming from the mouths of some 4 x 4 drivers that they drive a 4 x 4 because they don't have to worry about other cars on the road as they know the other cars will come off worse than them in a collision! What proportion of 4 x 4 drivers they represent I don't know but certainly there are some like that. As far as prestige is concerned, personally I think of 4 x 4s as cluncky tanks. If I wanted prestige I would rather have a nice flashy sports car.

[DinosMom]

Wow! C section vs homebirth, breast feeding vs formaula and now small cars vs 4 x 4's. No topic is off limits for judging other women! So, there are road hogs in all types of cars. I see people on mobiles, texting, lipstick, etc. in small and big cars. I actually dislike motorcycles speeding up out of no where next to me and then cutting me off.

As far as CO2 emissions and big car owners not caring about the environment for their children, bla bla, I would do the research first. Eating on omnivorous diet that is not organic and free pastured contributes more to destroying the earth than driving an SUV. So a vegetarian or vegan who carries a reusable water bottle, recycles, reuses and limits spending, but drives an SUV is doing a better service to the planet than a factory farm meat eater who buys bottles of Evian but drives a Prius!

We had a small BMW (company car) that was easy to navigate on these narrow roads. I loved it, but my husband's head hit the ceiling and now we have another child. But it just got turned in for a large Range Rover Sport (company car again) to fit my now expanded family. I LOVE driving it. It rides so much smoother. But I am super vigilant about backing up and parking. Yes, it worries me about children and animals. But I couldn't care less about status symbol. I'd take whatever car his company wants to give us. No car payment and no insurance cots!

[supergirl]

[juliantenniscoach]

supergirl - the pollution of all new cars is less than their 5 year old equivalents including 4x4's in term so CO2/gs. so a 10yr old mondeo petrol throws out more muck than a new volvo xc. fuel costs are a different thing unless you have lpg where the difference is huge.

[Happymama]

Juliantennis coach I always like your posts so I hate disagreeing with you!

So may I politely disagree with your statement, and apologise for being such a Saddo!!!

In terms of CO2 emission, I use as an example a Land Rover Sport ....simply because I look out of my window and there are 4 parked on my street! Clearly it would depend on the exact model but a diesel 2010 land rover Sport would approximately produce 295 g/km and a petrol model 350g/km.

A 2001 (so 10 years old) petrol mondeo would produce around 200 /220 g/km. (again clearly the figure would change slightly depending on the model) A new mondeo diesel produces about 140g/km.

I am not one of these people that has a major issue with 4x4 drivers. I would never drive one, and before buying a car I did extensive research on CO2 emissions because it is something that matters a lot to me. My kids will grow up in London breathing this air!

Dinosmum.....Road transport accounts for 22% of total UK emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) – the major contributor to climate change. This is a government statistic not something i made up. So please don't kid yourself that by being a vegetarian or vegan who carries a reusable water bottle, recycles, reuses and limits spending, but drives an SUV you are doing a better service to the planet than a factory farm meat eater who buys bottles of Evian but drives a Prius!

As I said everyone makes their own decisions and I only joined the post because I found the initial question interesting!

[juliantenniscoach]

Happymama - I stand corrected on the facts and figures. I still do champion LPG (though I fear we are drifting away from the point of the original post!)