Big Car/Little Car

[UltraWomble]

Ah good. The old 'new cars R shit' topic in yet another form. 

Nah, not "all new cars are shit" 

Just all new cars are incredibly lardy, though I concede that the Disco Sport was my bad - even so the new Disco - HOW THE FLUFF MUCH??? Good god, Ive bought houses for less than the cost of a new one.

 

Just looking at 7 seat replacements for the family car and thinking "WTF" then got looking at smaller cars and most small cars are now 4 seat not 5 due to the amount of padding they seem to contain.

 

I dunno - its going to be cheaper to buy two motorbikes and sidecars and get the lad a scooter at this rate ( and we could get all 3 in one parking space).

But back on topic - Why is this so bloody wide? For European roads???

Just market forces. Im sure if someone produced a 5 seat car the same size as the old K11 they would sell.

 

Likewise, does anyone really need something bigger than a Cortina when all you have to buy i from Ford)n that class is the Mondeo these days

[Timewaster]

Like it or not its evolution!

 

Once cars became universal and foreign cars became available, the manufacturers had to find new reasons for people to choose their product.

Then they had more legislation to comply with.

Then they had to make a profit.

 

Be assured, if Ford thought they could still sell us mk1 Fiestas then they would.

[forddeliveryboy]

 

Likewise, does anyone really need something bigger than a Cortina

 

Space around passengers is the cheapest form of safety, plus we're all a lot wider and taller than in the sixties and seventies. So bigger cars, especially the 'small' ones.

 

I just wish steering weren't so woolly, but with such lardy cars perhaps it's inevitable?

[jayroller]

I always thought that Capri's were massive things...

 

 

*picture probably originally pinched form somewhere on here

[Sir Snipes]

Like the new Prius, previous model Minis actually don't look too bad in comparison to their later versions.

[eddyramrod]

I always thought that Capri's were massive things...

 

 

*picture probably originally pinched form somewhere on here

I parked my mk1 at the roadside in Paphos, nose to nose with a mk2 Focus rental car.  Like you, I always thought the Capri was a biggish motor.  Until that day!

[Tayne]

Nah, not "all new cars are shit" 

Just all new cars are incredibly lardy,

But back on topic - Why is this so bloody wide? For European roads???

Just market forces. Im sure if someone produced a 5 seat car the same size as the old K11 they would sell.

 

 

It's six inches wider than a Range Rover Classic.

 

That means an SUV growth rate of 5mm per year.

 

ALL MODERNZ R SHIT.

[John F]

From msn:

 

"UK drivers cause £716 million worth of damage every year through simple parking scrapes, according to new research by accident aftercare specialist Accident Exchange – that’s £1,428 every day. The average parking bay is 237.5cm wide, but modern cars are growing girthier, so something has to give – and generally it’s bodywork. If you own one of these wide loads, you’ve got your work cut out trying to park it…

 

Our point about increasing car widths over the years, the original Range Rover measured 1.778m over its widest point, meaning it wasn’t exactly slim-hipped to begin with. Today, the fourth-generation car comes in at 2.073m across, making it pretty much the widest production car on sale in the UK and around 17% more girthy than its ancestor."

[UltraWomble]

 Today, the fourth-generation car comes in at 2.073m across, making it pretty much the widest production car on sale in the UK and around 17% more girthy than its ancestor."

 

 

The following are standard space requirements of some typical vehicles. These may be used as basic minimum reference values but different layouts such as parallel, herringbone and in-line, have slightly different overall space requirements and detailed layout of parking spaces will be site specific.

• Car: 2.4 metres x 4.8 metres
• Light Vans: 2.4 metres x 5.5 metres
• Rigid Vehicles: 3.5 metres x 14.0 metres

The above from the Planning Portal website - so the parking space is 33cm wider than  the car - which if positioned centrally doesnt give driver and passenger a whole lot of room to open the doors.

[fordperv]

I always thought that Capri's were massive things...

 

 

*picture probably originally pinched form somewhere on here

Oooofffffff Look at the length on that bonnet I love capris

[Ghosty]

I'd really like to park the Volvo next to a new model Mini Clubman to compare sizes etc. They've gone from a slightly elongated Bini to a fully fledged estate

[andy18s]

Like the new Prius, previous model Minis actually don't look too bad in comparison to their later versions.

Maybe so but the the BMW Mini had the same wheelbase as a Range Rover classic when it was released....

[Tayne]

Maybe so but the the BMW Mini had the same wheelbase as a Range Rover classic when it was released....

 

 

 

You mean the 2002 MINI had the same wheelbase as the 1970 Range Rover Classic?

[Guest Hooli]

You mean the 2002 MINI had the same wheelbase as the 1970 Range Rover Classic?

 

http://www.automobile-catalog.com/make/mini/mini_1gen/mini_1_hatch_cooper/2002.html

 

97.1" for the BMW Maxi

 

RRs were 100", so near enough the same yeah.

[Junkman]

If the consumer goes into, say, a Peugeot showroom with the option of a 308 or a 3008 and they buy the 3008 then I'd say that it's the consumer at fault.

 

I thought so too. Then I started to do a few comparisons between the 405, 308, 3008 and yes, the 508.

 

Interestingly, in case of the 508, Peugeot tells me there are three reasons to buy it:

 

- Distinctive Design

- Driving Experience

- Technology (ironically illustrated with a start button, something I thought became obsolete in the 1930s)

 

Please note that practicality obviously is no longer a reason to chose an estate car.

 

The 508 is a whopping 1.41404 feet longer and - believe it or not - 1.22703 feet wider than a 405.

In fact, it's wider than a '78 Caprice!

The width actually makes it unsuitable for its allocated space at the Junktowers.

Admittedly, the boot space is marginally bigger, but the distance between the rear inner wheelhouses

is significantly shorter. It's exactly this distance that was a hallmark of the clever rear axle design

of the 405 and one of its most cherished features.

 

 

So on to the 308.

 

It's 7.3622 inches longer and 6.65354 inches wider than the 405.

However, the boot space is significantly smaller and especially almost 6 inches lower than the 405's.

The only petrol engine available with automatic is a measly 1.2 litre and there are exactly zero

interior colour choices. Also, I can't get it in green. Any green.

 

So fuck that.

 

Let's have a look at the 3008 instead.

 

I can get it in brown!

There is only a 1.6 litre engine available. But despite it weighs 300kg (!) more than the 405, it has the same top speed.

 

But the important stuff is this:

 

It's merely 1.5 inches longer than a 405 and although it's 5.8 inches wider, it's still the narrowest of the three modernz.

And save for the distance between the rear wheel houses, it has almost exactly the same boot space as a 405.

 

So I'm no longer convinced that the SUV/Crossover is such a bad idea.

[AlabamaShrimp]

All modern cars are shit with their metal rooves and glass windows.

 

Not one of them has a starter handle and I've even seen some steered with a wheel!

[vulgalour]

One thing the French did get right was to make cars longer, not wider, if you needed a bigger car.  See Citroen estates 1970-1990.

[Sir Snipes]

http://www.automobile-catalog.com/make/mini/mini_1gen/mini_1_hatch_cooper/2002.html

 

97.1" for the BMW Maxi

 

RRs were 100", so near enough the same yeah.

3 inches is a lot in engineering terms!

[HH-R]

I could *just* fit a Rover Metro in my 1960s built garage. Not sure what they were expecting to be parked in there! An Austin 7 maybe? I could get my mk3 Panda in (easier than the Metro actually) but kept scratching the paintwork with buttons/zips squeezing in and out of it.

[NorfolkNWeigh]

When we got our Freelander 2 my brother had a late Range Rover "Classic" - they were the same size.

Here's a pictur I took last week of a giant Mini next to a little old fashioned BMW.

[Guest Hooli]

3 inches is a lot in engineering terms!

 

It's 3%, about the difference between the 90" most people think a 90's wheelbase is & the 92.7"(? I think) it really is.

[Junkman]

One thing the French did get right was to make cars longer, not wider, if you needed a bigger car.  See Citroen estates 1970-1990.

 

They must have slightly* deviated of that path if you look at my post above.

[Cleon-Fonte]

I thought so too. Then I started to do a few comparisons between the 405, 308, 3008 and yes, the 508.

 

Interestingly, in case of the 508, Peugeot tells me there are three reasons to buy it:

 

- Distinctive Design

- Driving Experience

- Technology (ironically illustrated with a start button, something I thought became obsolete in the 1930s)

 

Please note that practicality obviously is no longer a reason to chose an estate car.

 

The 508 is a whopping 1.41404 feet longer and - believe it or not - 1.22703 feet wider than a 405.

In fact, it's wider than a '78 Caprice!

The width actually makes it unsuitable for its allocated space at the Junktowers.

Admittedly, the boot space is marginally bigger, but the distance between the rear inner wheelhouses

is significantly shorter. It's exactly this distance that was a hallmark of the clever rear axle design

of the 405 and one of its most cherished features.

 

 

So on to the 308.

 

It's 7.3622 inches longer and 6.65354 inches wider than the 405.

However, the boot space is significantly smaller and especially almost 6 inches lower than the 405's.

The only petrol engine available with automatic is a measly 1.2 litre and there are exactly zero

interior colour choices. Also, I can't get it in green. Any green.

 

So fuck that.

 

Let's have a look at the 3008 instead.

 

I can get it in brown!

There is only a 1.6 litre engine available. But despite it weighs 300kg (!) more than the 405, it has the same top speed.

 

But the important stuff is this:

 

It's merely 1.5 inches longer than a 405 and although it's 5.8 inches wider, it's still the narrowest of the three modernz.

And save for the distance between the rear wheel houses, it has almost exactly the same boot space as a 405.

 

So I'm no longer convinced that the SUV/Crossover is such a bad idea.

 

I was playing devil's advocate to a certain extent with my last post, as I genuinely believe a good proportion of crossover buyers overlook a lot of the rational factors you note above, and are instead swayed by the fact that they're big shiny things that can be used to look down on their fellow motorists. I can, to a certain extent, see the appeal of crossovers though: if you want all the old car virtues such as actual interior space, big glass areas, wheel travel and tall sidewalls they're often the only choice.

 

It's a shame the new 3008 is such a stiffly sprung bucket of pish, really. The original model, whilst not perfect, really reminded me of what old French family cars used to be like decades ago and was a very likable car for a modern. It's just a shame Peugeot's stylists had taken a lot of the wrong kind of drugs the day they sat down to design it.

[vulgalour]

Past tense there.  These days they're all about Bloat & Bland, though Citroen are trying to buck that trend a little bit with things like the Cactus, and utterly failing with things like the DS nonsense.  Not the good kind of DS nonsense at that.

[Cleon-Fonte]

PSA do deserve credit for at least trying to downsize, the 208 is smaller than a 207 despite offering identical interior dimensions, whilst the current 308 is externally smaller than its predecessor and has a bigger boot. Then again, both those older cars were much bigger and heavier than their rivals and suffered a lot of unnecessary bloat that I imagine was easy enough to cut out.

[Junkman]

I was playing devil's advocate to a certain extent with my last post, as I genuinely believe a good proportion of crossover buyers overlook a lot of the rational factors you note above, and are instead swayed by the fact that they're big shiny things that can be used to look down on their fellow motorists. I can, to a certain extent, see the appeal of crossovers though: if you want all the old car virtues such as actual interior space, big glass areas, wheel travel and tall sidewalls they're often the only choice.

 

It's a shame the new 3008 is such a stiffly sprung bucket of pish, really. The original model, whilst not perfect, really reminded me of what old French family cars used to be like decades ago and was a very likable car for a modern. It's just a shame Peugeot's stylists had taken a lot of the wrong kind of drugs the day they sat down to design it.

 

I'm glad that I have found a relatively unfucked R16, which is not a cherished collectible for me.

It's rather what it always was - a sensible anser to a transport requirement.

 

But who in his right mind would go that far?

Fact is, a modern interpretation of the R16 concept has never been built.

It was replaced with a much larger car having distinct ISIS overtones.

This very much larger car has in itself never been replaced with anything.

So which options do you have?

 

Staying with the Peugeot theme, let's for a moment forget the terminally talented Pinin Farina.

 

If you look at the lineup up to and including the 405, you can clearly identify who they built their cars for, model for model.

Once the 405 was ditched (in this part of the World), it was never clear who Peugeot built their cars for.

This cannot be said about their pepper mills. May I remind you that Peugeot is a pepper mill manufacturer with a car and

bicycle department, that just bought Opel?

 

Opel, same thing.

For a century, it was absolutely clear who they built their cars for.

The Kadett for the secretary, the Rekord for the man who has a secretary and the Kapitän/Admiral/Diplomat for the boss.

 

What I have a serious difficulty with is who those clowns running the car industry today actually think they build cars for?

 

But it's irrelevant anyway, because the car industry now is a completely fascist business, that doesn't have to build anything

for anyone, because if there is problem, it's bailed out with your money anyway.

Until then, let the marketing monkeys prevail.

 

Besides, it's much more fun to drive a car that enables you to look over the typically British privet hedge.

[Ghosty]

Bini Clubman:

 

length- 4253mm / ~167.5" / 13' 11"

width-1800mm / ~71" / 5' 11"

height- 1441mm / 56.75"/ 4' 8.5"

 

Volvo 740:

 

length - 4800mm / 189" / 15' 9"

width - 1750mm / 68.9" / 5' 9"

height - 1435mm / 56.5" / 4' 8.5"

 

so a 740 is almost 2' longer than a Clubman, but slightly narrower. Which either means the Clubman is crap for interior space (door thickness etc will put paid to the 2" difference), or has sod all loadspace, or knowing modern cars, both. It's like having a Volvo that just stops behind the rear seats in a sense.

[Lacquer Peel]

I see Junkman is a libertarian except when it comes to things he doesn't like.

 

Do any modern cars eschew aggressive or chunky styling?

Is it possible to design a delicately styled mass produced car that meets all of the crash safety requirements?

[UltraWomble]

Is it possible to design a delicately styled mass produced car that meets all of the crash safety requirements?

[Lacquer Peel]

I wouldn't say that's delicately styled, but it is a neat design, it's also not a current model and scored three stars in the 2004 EuroNCAP