Anyway, for years I've always responded to the "I feel so much safer in my big car/truck" with "I always stand up in movie theaters because the view is so much better"
My point was that both do something which benefits me that directly disadvantages other people. When people talk about their massive truck feeling safer, somehow this dynamic is ignored. But if someone applied the same reasoning about standing up in a movie theater, the selfishness is apparent to everyone.
https://www.renault.co.uk/electric-vehicles/r5-turbo-3e.html
Alas it's more of a concept car with limited sales and a 6 figure price
I imagine a world without drivers to be a lot safer from a driving quality perspective.
I can imagine a world in cars where, like trains, it is no longer the norm to wear a seatbelt because crashes are so rare.
What implications does that have for the interior design of cars? Does that make the perfect car bigger or smaller?
It is as if professional politicians are completely incapable of learning about perverse incentives and unintended consequences.
If she needs a car, it is what it is. But her situation specifically is one where a minivan would solve her problems. She says the SUV gets cramped with 3 kids and their sports equipment. This is exactly the problem minivans solved. I think the problem being faced here is more about societal trends and cars as status symbols and expressions of self. SUVs are cool and trendy, minivans are lame and boring.
Another person said they need a Land Rover Defender. Also, minivan solves their specific problems of shuttling people and needing to fit a door on occasion.
Minivans aren't small by any means, but they are much more functional and useable than what most people are buying.
Even still, are people buying an SUV or minivan for the driving experience?
I have a Honda Pilot (full-size SUV) and CR-V (crossover SUV) and I've driven my brother-in-law's Odyssey (minivan) a fair amount.
The Pilot feels like a lumbering beast that begs to roll over. It also has less visibility than the CR-V and the Odyssey.
I don't feel a ton of difference between the CR-V and the Odyssey. I also never worry about the CG in either one. They have a very similar feel. I can definitely see around both of them better than the Pilot (though I think the CR-V has a little bit of an advantage).
This is an English thing and I don't really get it, despite being English originally. Our English neighbour imported their Land Rover when they moved here from the UK, all the way to NZ. As far as I can tell their appeal is just for talking about it in-between trips to the mechanic, which is where they'll spend a lot of their time. Said neighbour's one is currently unroadworthy. They're ugly (subjective), inefficient, rattly, unreliable, not super fun to drive. I could understand if it was a nationalistic thing, but LR is owned by Tata motors.
Ford Galaxy (large MPV, 2015): 4,853mm × 1,916mm × 1,811mm Ford S-Max (mid-size MPV, 2015): 4,796mm × 1,916mm × 1,655mm Renault Espace (2015): 4,878mm × 1,888mm × 1,675mm Lexus RX (2015): 4,890mm × 1,895mm × 1,685mm
The Galaxy and S-Max are actually wider than the Lexus, while the Espace is only 7mm narrower. Length differences are minimal, the S-Max is 94mm shorter, the Galaxy 37mm shorter, and the Espace 12mm shorter than the RX.
Beside both the Galaxy and S-Max have been discontinued, and the Renault Espace, the vehicle that essentially created the MPV segment has rebranded itself as a "mid-size crossover SUV" for its sixth generation and follow on generation. The distinction between MPVs and crossover SUVs has largely collapsed.
Especially EVs, with the exception of direct emissions.
ChrisArchitect•2mo ago