Driving a SUV is an anti-social behaviour?

[Kelpie]

1. It seems like major cities in Europe, Paris, Netherland and etc are begining to ban SUVs from entering into cities. Some States in USA, car that is >3 tons are not allowed in cities' roads. This affects those big SUVs.

 

2. In Paris, the idea being that SUVs are incompatible with city life. They want to limit traffic to much smaller vehicles and provide more space for bike lanes and anything more environmentally correct.

 

3. In Netherland, a city counsel felt that SUV is merely serve as a status symbol for the owner. They are designed for off-road conditions, but they are not used as such. They consume a lot of fuel, pollute, clog up traffic and are hazardous for the other traffic as well as for the owners. Driving them is considered as antisocial behavior. Denying them parking spaces is the best way to prevent them driving around the city as they cannot be denied entry to the city at the moment.

 

4. What do you think, this trend will catch on in Singapore sooner or later? It seems like driving a car these days also have to shoulder some social responsibility.

 

Regards,

[Chemz]

if thats the case, then driving super cars are a form of antisocial behaviour too..

 

similarly they take up a lot of space, consume huge amts of petrol and are not used as much on the tracks as well.

[Kelpie]

1. But then how many of these super cars you have on the roads versus the increasing number of SUVs on the road? I think their argument is also that if these are meant for off-roads why allow to drive on cities' roads?

 

2. The mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, once described SUVs as "bad for London -- completely unnecessary" and called their owners "complete idiots.

 

3. In States,many SUVs are exempted from the tougher gas mileage and safety standards of cars because they're classified as trucks, hence not a popular thing among environmentalist. Some very straightforward reasons are the heavier the vehicle, the more it chews up the roads, endangers pedestrians and smaller vehicles and makes noise.

 

Regards,

[Chemz]

yeah it seems that the major factor would be pt no. 3. with respect to pedestrian/small veh safety. the SUVs in the states are way way bigger than what we've have here in sg.

 

but in singapore context, i doubt SUVs really pose an extensive threat, perhaps the fortuner or prado series, but what we do commonly see here on the roads are still within acceptable means in terms of size, engine capacity. maybe not pedestrian safety though.

[Darth_mel]

Don't you know SUV also stands for Socially-Unacceptable-Vehicle ?

[Kelpie]

yeah it seems that the major factor would be pt no. 3. with respect to pedestrian/small veh safety. the SUVs in the states are way way bigger than what we've have here in sg.

 

but in singapore context, i doubt SUVs really pose an extensive threat, perhaps the fortuner or prado series, but what we do commonly see here on the roads are still within acceptable means in terms of size, engine capacity. maybe not pedestrian safety though.

 

But do you know the new Santa Fe scored a Zero for NCAP pedestrain safety rating? one of 4 such cars to get it in the past 11 years? So SUV of such size is already threat to the pedestrian liao.

 

Regards,

[Watwheels]

Sg will only catch on if the gov catch on with the environment issue.

 

But sg on the whole is only concern with $$$. So it'll be unlikely that sg will follow suit that quickly.

[Ls430]

1. It seems like major cities in Europe, Paris, Netherland and etc are begining to ban SUVs from entering into cities. Some States in USA, car that is >3 tons are not allowed in cities' roads. This affects those big SUVs.

 

2. In Paris, the idea being that SUVs are incompatible with city life. They want to limit traffic to much smaller vehicles and provide more space for bike lanes and anything more environmentally correct.

 

3. In Netherland, a city counsel felt that SUV is merely serve as a status symbol for the owner. They are designed for off-road conditions, but they are not used as such. They consume a lot of fuel, pollute, clog up traffic and are hazardous for the other traffic as well as for the owners. Driving them is considered as antisocial behavior. Denying them parking spaces is the best way to prevent them driving around the city as they cannot be denied entry to the city at the moment.

 

4. What do you think, this trend will catch on in Singapore sooner or later? It seems like driving a car these days also have to shoulder some social responsibility.

 

Regards,

 

 

attended an environmental conference in SF

 

the bottom line is if we are all socially responsible then we should not drive CAR

 

how many pedestrians killed every year

how many drivers killed every year

how much pollution each year from vehicles

how many I driver car travelling along the road each day

 

 

I am a sinner please forgive me (first two haven't committed yet and don't intend to).

[Weuji]

I think the SUV trend will die down soon la...

[Quantum]

yes! agree

but can't implement in Singapore lah

Singaporean are 'poor' lah! mostly can only tahan one car,

so work/weekend shopping/outing all same car, this why in Singapore so many peoples drive SUV, MVP to/from work, such as Wish, Odyessy, even Estima also only one driver inside

[Porker]

Good question there.

 

First off... I think driving SUVs in Singapore is not considered an anti-social behavior. Its more of a trend thing. The SUV concept came from US (if I'm not mistaken) as the folks there like their vehicles big and flashy (well not all but its in the culture). This trickled down stream and led manufacturers to come up with these big gas guzzlers as US is afterall one of the biggest market for cars.

 

Hope I've answered your question.

 

And personally: I will never drive a big SUV because I think its a huge waste of resources for all the wrong reasons. I think the Suzuki Jeep/Jimny is decent though.

[Kelpie]

Sg will only catch on if the gov catch on with the environment issue.

 

But sg on the whole is only concern with $$$. So it'll be unlikely that sg will follow suit that quickly.

 

Easy, just tax heavier on SUVs to deter buying. Solve the number and in the process more tax monies .

 

Regards,

[Kelpie]

Yap, for that matter, SUV such as a Forester is not really considered as an SUV in States. It is too small to be classifed as one and at most taken as an estate car or small crossover.

 

Regards,

[Arowana1]

1. It seems like major cities in Europe, Paris, Netherland and etc are begining to ban SUVs from entering into cities. Some States in USA, car that is >3 tons are not allowed in cities' roads. This affects those big SUVs.

 

2. In Paris, the idea being that SUVs are incompatible with city life. They want to limit traffic to much smaller vehicles and provide more space for bike lanes and anything more environmentally correct.

 

3. In Netherland, a city counsel felt that SUV is merely serve as a status symbol for the owner. They are designed for off-road conditions, but they are not used as such. They consume a lot of fuel, pollute, clog up traffic and are hazardous for the other traffic as well as for the owners. Driving them is considered as antisocial behavior. Denying them parking spaces is the best way to prevent them driving around the city as they cannot be denied entry to the city at the moment.

 

4. What do you think, this trend will catch on in Singapore sooner or later? It seems like driving a car these days also have to shoulder some social responsibility.

 

Regards,

 

there we go again, stereotyping suv.

 

1. No reason stated why ban.

 

2. It should be size of vehicle and not type of vehicle. Rolls Royce smaller than all SUV?

 

3. Status symbol? I thought it is reflected in the cost of vehicle, not type. Consume a lot of fuel? Then set min FC rule. Pollute? Set pollution standard rule. Clog up traffic? Don't other vehicles do that as well? Hazardous to traffic and owners? Set safety standards. Anti social? What basis is this argument base on? Deny parking space to prevent them entering city? Why go with vehicle type?

 

4. I think all these people have flawed arguments and an idiot by referring to SUV or category of vehicle since it does not relate directly to the issues. If there is certain concern, address in a correct manner.

 

The thing I hate most is when people say SUV are petrol guzzlers. I get 10km/l on my SUV compared to <10km/l for european lux cars. So how?

Edited April 17, 2007 by Arowana1

[Coltplussport]

What more, Fifth gear showed that at 70km/h, to swerl away from danger in case of front car doing e brake, a SUV like Land Rover will flip. Scary!!!

[Porker]

Cool it dude. Ever set in one giant SUV (not those RAV4, Murano and etc you find in Singapore) where the average consumption is less than 10 miles per gallon?

 

THAT is a real true blue SUV! I know cos I sat in my friend's in Vegas. Weighs over 2 tonnes and the question behind my mind is... what for?

[Arowana1]

i agree some suv are the bad apples and used in the wrong manner but hell, why stereo type or use category of vehicle? that is the wrong approach.

 

im

[Kelpie]

Yap more, more info available on http://www.bansuvs.com/ and http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3064821.stm.

 

Regards,

Edited April 17, 2007 by Kelpie