Why Isn't More Made of the Ever Increasing Width of Motor Vehicles?

Bonefishblues
Posts: 11043
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Why Isn't More Made of the Ever Increasing Width of Motor Vehicles?

Post by Bonefishblues »

Cyril Haearn wrote:People, cycles, dogs, trees etc are *hazards* according to a *bad* (british assoc of drivers)

http://www.abd.org.uk/ shirley?
User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 56367
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Why Isn't More Made of the Ever Increasing Width of Motor Vehicles?

Post by Mick F »

Cyril Haearn wrote:The new mini should be called the maxi
Utterly agree.
BMW should be taken to task regarding the trades description act.

Maybe that's why it's called MINI and not Mini.
Mick F. Cornwall
Cyril Haearn
Posts: 15215
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: Why Isn't More Made of the Ever Increasing Width of Motor Vehicles?

Post by Cyril Haearn »

Bonefishblues wrote:
Cyril Haearn wrote:People, cycles, dogs, trees etc are *hazards* according to a *bad* (british assoc of drivers)

http://www.abd.org.uk/ shirley?


*hazards* was used by the iam

or did I mean *association of bad drivers*?

getting very confused, going cycling to recover :D
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies
pwa
Posts: 17427
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Why Isn't More Made of the Ever Increasing Width of Motor Vehicles?

Post by pwa »

Mick F wrote:
Cyril Haearn wrote:The new mini should be called the maxi
Utterly agree.
BMW should be taken to task regarding the trades description act.

Maybe that's why it's called MINI and not Mini.


Yes, the current Mini isn't mini at all. But though I have fond memories of driving a real mini, I'm not sure I'd buy one today if they still made them. They were uncomfortable, cramped, inclined to rust and needed a lot of tinkering.
reohn2
Posts: 45186
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Why Isn't More Made of the Ever Increasing Width of Motor Vehicles?

Post by reohn2 »

simonhill wrote:Thanks for the replies (so far).

I am very well aware why cars are wider - safety features, strengthening, etc and its good to see that people have also noticed the problem.

However, nobody has actually addressed the question why isn't more made of the wide vehicle thing. We can't really expect the manufacturers to shout too loud, but there are lots of other interested parties that could. CycleUK for starters, other interest groups, the Transport Ministry, politicians, even car mags, etc, etc My point is that we all need to shout about it, then someone might hear and realise what a dead end ever increasing size is.

You are more likely to hear someone on a property buying show complain that their car won't fit in the garage than you are to hear a safety or transport advocate talking about it.

Maybe if the lady in the big car had been clearly told that this one was xx cms bigger than her last one and would be a pain to park, she might have thought twice before buying.

I have been cycling in Japan quite a bit recently and was initially surprised that most of their cars are fairly small. Their great behemoth 4x4s are rarely seen on their roads. This got me wondering why and I found out that they have a weight tax new for cars and a reduced annual tax for small engine lightweight less than 660cc cars (kei cars). There are also other restrictions like needing somewhere to park it before you buy - but I'm no expert so google for more info. Our Govt could easily do these things to encourage sensible sized cars, but................(fill in your particular bug bear here).

The problem is that our government is in hock to the motor and oil companies,it cares more about tax garnered than it does about the welbeing of it's citizens and is already teetering on the edge of oblivion with no majority so the last thing it will do is hurt or upset the motorist in any way shape or form.
Meanwhile the motor companies keep on advertising wide open roads,near sports car performance,living the dream as we continue to choke.
We can dream on in the opposite direction if we think the government and motorists will listen.
---------------------------
Someone mentioned about car parking spaces on carparks,IMHO the best thing to be done is to re paint the bays slanted instead of being at the stupid 90degrees to the access lanes.
On chargeable carparks charge on vehicle weight(which is directly related to size and therefore pollution),on multi stoy carparks make the biggest vehicles par on the upper floors.
Last edited by reohn2 on 29 Dec 2017, 11:52am, edited 2 times in total.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
Cyril Haearn
Posts: 15215
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: Why Isn't More Made of the Ever Increasing Width of Motor Vehicles?

Post by Cyril Haearn »

reohn2 wrote:
Grandad wrote:
I noticed this back when the first BMW Mini was released. Having owned an old Mini, I went to have a look to see if they were worth buying. There was nothing "mini" about the new ones at all,

I refer to the new one as being a mini on steroids :?

But why be so surprised about the new Mini not being anything like the old,the name is just a marketing concept.Is the newest Fiesta anything remotely like the th first one?


I had a fiesta mk1 (made in 1977)
It seemed very B.I.G to me back then cos it was my first vehicle, I had only ridden a bike before, but it would seem small now
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies
Cyril Haearn
Posts: 15215
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: Why Isn't More Made of the Ever Increasing Width of Motor Vehicles?

Post by Cyril Haearn »

pwa wrote:
Mick F wrote:
Cyril Haearn wrote:The new mini should be called the maxi
Utterly agree.
BMW should be taken to task regarding the trades description act.

Maybe that's why it's called MINI and not Mini.


Yes, the current Mini isn't mini at all. But though I have fond memories of driving a real mini, I'm not sure I'd buy one today if they still made them. They were uncomfortable, cramped, inclined to rust and needed a lot of tinkering.


The little smart is the equivalent of the mini

It would be quite possible to make reliable simple *old* minis now but what was the payload? Could 4 big muscular cyclists fit in?
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies
Cyril Haearn
Posts: 15215
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: Why Isn't More Made of the Ever Increasing Width of Motor Vehicles?

Post by Cyril Haearn »

reohn2 wrote:
simonhill wrote:Thanks for the replies (so far).

I am very well aware why cars are wider - safety features, strengthening, etc and its good to see that people have also noticed the problem.

However, nobody has actually addressed the question why isn't more made of the wide vehicle thing. We can't really expect the manufacturers to shout too loud, but there are lots of other interested parties that could. CycleUK for starters, other interest groups, the Transport Ministry, politicians, even car mags, etc, etc My point is that we all need to shout about it, then someone might hear and realise what a dead end ever increasing size is.

You are more likely to hear someone on a property buying show complain that their car won't fit in the garage than you are to hear a safety or transport advocate talking about it.

Maybe if the lady in the big car had been clearly told that this one was xx cms bigger than her last one and would be a pain to park, she might have thought twice before buying.

I have been cycling in Japan quite a bit recently and was initially surprised that most of their cars are fairly small. Their great behemoth 4x4s are rarely seen on their roads. This got me wondering why and I found out that they have a weight tax new for cars and a reduced annual tax for small engine lightweight less than 660cc cars (kei cars). There are also other restrictions like needing somewhere to park it before you buy - but I'm no expert so google for more info. Our Govt could easily do these things to encourage sensible sized cars, but................(fill in your particular bug bear here).

The problem is that our government is Kinnock to the motor and oil companies,it cares more about tax garnered by tax than it does about the welbeing of it's citizens and is already teetering on the edge of oblivion with no majority so the last thing it will do is hurt or upset the motorist in any way shape or form.
Meanwhile the motor companies keep on advertising wide open roads,near sports car performance,living the dream as we continue to choke.
We can dream on in the opposite direction if we think the government and motorists will listen.
---------------------------
Someone mentioned about car parking spaces on carparks,IMHO the best thing to be done is to re paint the bays slanted instead of being at the stupid 90degrees to the access lanes.
On chargeable carparks charge on vehicle weight(which is directly related to size and therefore pollution),on multi stoy carparks make the biggest vehicles par on the upper floors.


Charge by weight, +1
Best to weigh vehicles leaving AFTER the Shopping Experience
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies
reohn2
Posts: 45186
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Why Isn't More Made of the Ever Increasing Width of Motor Vehicles?

Post by reohn2 »

pwa wrote:
Mick F wrote:
Cyril Haearn wrote:The new mini should be called the maxi
Utterly agree.
BMW should be taken to task regarding the trades description act.

Maybe that's why it's called MINI and not Mini.


Yes, the current Mini isn't mini at all. But though I have fond memories of driving a real mini, I'm not sure I'd buy one today if they still made them. They were uncomfortable, cramped, inclined to rust and needed a lot of tinkering.

In other words a pile of poop :wink:
Personally I never understood the attraction of them.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
pwa
Posts: 17427
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Why Isn't More Made of the Ever Increasing Width of Motor Vehicles?

Post by pwa »

reohn2 wrote:
pwa wrote:
Mick F wrote:Utterly agree.
BMW should be taken to task regarding the trades description act.

Maybe that's why it's called MINI and not Mini.


Yes, the current Mini isn't mini at all. But though I have fond memories of driving a real mini, I'm not sure I'd buy one today if they still made them. They were uncomfortable, cramped, inclined to rust and needed a lot of tinkering.

In other words a pile of poop :wink:
Personally I never understood the attraction of them.


They looked good (to me) and the went around corners like they were on rails.

Same defects as all cars of that era.
reohn2
Posts: 45186
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Why Isn't More Made of the Ever Increasing Width of Motor Vehicles?

Post by reohn2 »

Cyril Haearn wrote:
reohn2 wrote:
Grandad wrote:I refer to the new one as being a mini on steroids :?

But why be so surprised about the new Mini not being anything like the old,the name is just a marketing concept.Is the newest Fiesta anything remotely like the th first one?


I had a fiesta mk1 (made in 1977)
It seemed very B.I.G to me back then cos it was my first vehicle, I had only ridden a bike before, but it would seem small now

An old lady(thnk Mrs Marple wearing a hat) in the village(which has also grown exponentially since we moved here in 1978)had a MK1 Fiesta up until about five years ago until she sropped driving.
It always turned heads when she was out in it,mainly coz it like her looked so quaint.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
Cyril Haearn
Posts: 15215
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: Why Isn't More Made of the Ever Increasing Width of Motor Vehicles?

Post by Cyril Haearn »

Memories can be deceptive
Fortunately

Remember double-declutching, cross-ply tyres etc etc?
And Marc Bolan?
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies
reohn2
Posts: 45186
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Why Isn't More Made of the Ever Increasing Width of Motor Vehicles?

Post by reohn2 »

pwa wrote:
reohn2 wrote:
pwa wrote:
Yes, the current Mini isn't mini at all. But though I have fond memories of driving a real mini, I'm not sure I'd buy one today if they still made them. They were uncomfortable, cramped, inclined to rust and needed a lot of tinkering.

In other words a pile of poop :wink:
Personally I never understood the attraction of them.


They looked good (to me) and the went around corners like they were on rails.

Same defects as all cars of that era.

I was never a fan of sitting on with my backside a few inches off the road surface,I friend gave me a lift in his Minivan it confirmed all my suspicions about them and I found the way the gearstick juggled about as we went along to be a symptom of something not good :shock: :wink:
PS,I really liked my 1966 MK1 Contina estate,and the Capri I had after that :D
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
reohn2
Posts: 45186
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Why Isn't More Made of the Ever Increasing Width of Motor Vehicles?

Post by reohn2 »

Cyril Haearn wrote:Memories can be deceptive
Fortunately

Remember double-declutching, cross-ply tyres etc etc?
And Marc Bolan?

Look what happened to him in an original Mini :shock:
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11043
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Why Isn't More Made of the Ever Increasing Width of Motor Vehicles?

Post by Bonefishblues »

Cyril Haearn wrote:
pwa wrote:
Mick F wrote:Utterly agree.
BMW should be taken to task regarding the trades description act.

Maybe that's why it's called MINI and not Mini.


Yes, the current Mini isn't mini at all. But though I have fond memories of driving a real mini, I'm not sure I'd buy one today if they still made them. They were uncomfortable, cramped, inclined to rust and needed a lot of tinkering.


The little smart is the equivalent of the mini

It would be quite possible to make reliable simple *old* minis now but what was the payload? Could 4 big muscular cyclists fit in?

It would be possible, but I don't think legal to put them on the road. Crisp packets are now so much bigger than they used to be*, so would likely write off a Mini in a collision.

*Although of course now only contain approx 4 crisps, on average :wink:
Post Reply