Guest Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 Disagree, cars are unnecessarily large today While some cars are unnecessarily large, that's marketing for you. For example the VW Up is a little shorter than a Mk1 Polo but has (from memory) more space inside. Plus it's waaay better to crash in an Up What you have lost these days are the little crisp packet cars with zero crash resistance. I'm thinking of the single skin doors in my Mk1 Mini. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horsetan Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 Disagree, cars are unnecessarily large today Might it be said that the average user of a vehicle now seems to be somewhat larger than back in the 1950s/60s/70s/80s? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
peanuts Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 Disagree, cars are unnecessarily large today especially the very incorrectly named Mini as there is nothing remotely Mini about the bloated monstrosities ! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Sidecar Racer Posted March 16, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 16, 2017 Plus it's waaay better to crash in an Up Surely it's waaaayyyy ,better not to crash at all . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baby Deltic Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 Might it be said that the average user of a vehicle now seems to be somewhat larger than back in the 1950s/60s/70s/80s? If the average car of the somewhat larger person is anything like mine, its down to the tracking being faulty. Every time my car appraches a Maccy D it veers off into the drive thru. Quite a common fault, I understand. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium jjb1970 Posted March 16, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 16, 2017 Talking of car park door dings, I can see the logic behind the rubber fenders Citroen fit to some of their range. Not especially elegant but very useful I'm guessing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coppercap Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 Talking of car park door dings, I can see the logic behind the rubber fenders Citroen fit to some of their range. Not especially elegant but very useful I'm guessing. Ford cars have (inexpensive) optional rubber-faced 'Door edge protectors' that flip out when the doors are opened more than just a few inches, and wrap around the widest part of the door, hopefully protecting it, and the side of another car, from damage, but that obviously depends on what shape that is! Unfortunately they don't have any effect on protecting the car from other careless/malicious door openers.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium MJI Posted March 16, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 16, 2017 Yes, one day you might find yourself parked next to MJI.... I park properly! 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium jjb1970 Posted March 16, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 16, 2017 One of the things I find irritating in car parks is the number of people who can't be bothered to park straight, and I'm not talking about a slight angle but people who just abandon their cars almost diagnally slewed across the space (invariably nose first). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold chris p bacon Posted March 16, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 16, 2017 I park properly! Maybe, but it's the opening of doors you struggle with.......... That, and grass verges Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Wintle Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 While some cars are unnecessarily large, that's marketing for you. For example the VW Up is a little shorter than a Mk1 Polo but has (from memory) more space inside. Plus it's waaay better to crash in an Up What you have lost these days are the little crisp packet cars with zero crash resistance. I'm thinking of the single skin doors in my Mk1 Mini. There is truth in both points. Manufacturers have gone through the exercise of making each generation of a car bigger than the previous to retain customers (upsizing into the next generation*), but there have been other driving factors including crashworthiness and required equipment. Cars now have multiple airbags (regulatory requirement), heavier structure, particularly in the doors (regulatory requirement), reversing cameras (regulatory requirement, at least over here), larger wheels (diameter and width) with lower profile tires (fuel economy, driven by regulatory requirements), etc... All this adds weight and size. *a great example is the Honda Civic. Adrian 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium PhilJ W Posted March 16, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 16, 2017 One of the things I find irritating in car parks is the number of people who can't be bothered to park straight, and I'm not talking about a slight angle but people who just abandon their cars almost diagnally slewed across the space (invariably nose first). And usually with their wheels on full lock. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold chris p bacon Posted March 16, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 16, 2017 And usually with their wheels on full lock. That's so that one of them is on the verge..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rembrow Posted March 17, 2017 Share Posted March 17, 2017 Our local Sainsbury's introduced wider parking bays when they relaid the carpark. It wasn't to assist the parker however, it was for the roving car washers that they have on site to wash cars in any parking bay. Wonder how much they get from the car wash company. I did have correspondence with them that their notice of no liability for damage to cars wasn't valid while they allowed such an operation to take place with risk of damage to cars parked alongside the one being washed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coppercap Posted March 17, 2017 Share Posted March 17, 2017 One of the things I find irritating in car parks is the number of people who can't be bothered to park straight, and I'm not talking about a slight angle but people who just abandon their cars almost diagnally slewed across the space (invariably nose first). And those I've seen like that invariably leave the rear of the car sticking out several feet beyond the line of all the adjacent cars, which also makes it even harder for the drivers of directly adjacent cars to get out of their space. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium TheQ Posted March 17, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 17, 2017 ) with lower profile tires (fuel economy, driven by regulatory requirements), etc... All this adds weight and size. *a great example is the Honda Civic. Adrian Lower profile tyres INCREASE fuel consumption by putting more rubber on the road and lowering the tyre pressure. The fashion for low profile tyres is exactly that, fashion following Nascar / Formula 1. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 17, 2017 Share Posted March 17, 2017 Lower profile tyres INCREASE fuel consumption by putting more rubber on the road and lowering the tyre pressure. The fashion for low profile tyres is exactly that, fashion following Nascar / Formula 1. Yep. Been looking into electric cars and the ones with 17" low profile cars don't go as far. Renault have a little calculator where you can play with different settings. https://www.renault.co.uk/vehicles/new-vehicles/zoe-250/driving%20range.html Maye this should be in the MPG thread... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Enterprisingwestern Posted March 17, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 17, 2017 If the average car of the somewhat larger person is anything like mine, its down to the tracking being faulty. Every time my car appraches a Maccy D it veers off into the drive thru. Quite a common fault, I understand. I know of a Transit van with that problem on the way to and from exhibitions! Mike. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Wintle Posted March 17, 2017 Share Posted March 17, 2017 Lower profile tyres INCREASE fuel consumption by putting more rubber on the road and lowering the tyre pressure. The fashion for low profile tyres is exactly that, fashion following Nascar / Formula 1. They don't increase fuel consumption. While they do have a larger contact patch, the lower profile means that the sidewall is shorter, making it stiffer. This in turn means that less energy being wasted absorbing the drag generated by the flexing of the tyre, which can more than make up for the larger contact patch. The tyre pressure is not lower that an equivalent, but taller, tyre. Racing cars (but not either of your examples*) do use very low profile tyres for exactly that reason - lower drag for the same contact patch and better control and roadholding by taking up the majority of the imperfections in the road surface with the suspension (which is easier to tune) rather than the flex of the tyre. The downside of extremely low profile tyres is a harsher ride, but the manufacturers have tended not to be particularly extreme on mainstream vehicles. 'Eco' tyres are intended to reduce the rolling resistance by being very narrow (to reduce the contact patch) and by being made of harder compounds to reduce the 'squirm' of the tread blocks (a source of drag). Both of these factors mean that the ultimate level of grip is decreased, so a car with 'Eco' tyres will lose traction more easily than the equivalent car with normal tyres. *Formula 1 uses quite high profile tyres compared to most race series, mostly for historical reasons, while NASCAR uses high profile cross-ply tyres (i.e. not radials), also for historical reasons. Adrian Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Wintle Posted March 17, 2017 Share Posted March 17, 2017 Yep. Been looking into electric cars and the ones with 17" low profile cars don't go as far. Renault have a little calculator where you can play with different settings. https://www.renault.co.uk/vehicles/new-vehicles/zoe-250/driving%20range.html Maye this should be in the MPG thread... It is hard to tell since they don't bother to specify what tyres are on those wheels (width or diameter), but I'm guessing that most of the range difference will be due to the 17" wheels being wider, and therefore heavier. Note that the difference between the 15" and the 16" is insignificant. Adrian Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium jjb1970 Posted March 17, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 17, 2017 And those I've seen like that invariably leave the rear of the car sticking out several feet beyond the line of all the adjacent cars, which also makes it even harder for the drivers of directly adjacent cars to get out of their space. Two of my former employers introduced policies that people had to reverse into parking bays for health and safety reasons. In each case it was amazing how many people had anxiety attacks and started complaining because they weren't happy about reversing into a bay. And I'm not talking about new drivers or ladies either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Saunders Posted March 17, 2017 Share Posted March 17, 2017 Two of my former employers introduced policies that people had to reverse into parking bays for health and safety reasons. In each case it was amazing how many people had anxiety attacks and started complaining because they weren't happy about reversing into a bay. And I'm not talking about new drivers or ladies either. Not uncommon now but just look at the minor dents on the company cars/vans in recent times! Mark Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 17, 2017 Share Posted March 17, 2017 Two of my former employers introduced policies that people had to reverse into parking bays for health and safety reasons. In each case it was amazing how many people had anxiety attacks and started complaining because they weren't happy about reversing into a bay. And I'm not talking about new drivers or ladies either. Bloody hell. Just parking in the bay is beyond most people at our place. Inside the lines and I'm happy. Loads of times I want to park and there are multiple 0.75 car-width gaps but not one I can get a whole car into. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dvdlcs Posted March 17, 2017 Share Posted March 17, 2017 especially the very incorrectly named Mini as there is nothing remotely Mini about the bloated monstrosities ! Perhaps BMW should resurrect another 'classic' British model name and rename the Mini the Maxi 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium PhilJ W Posted March 17, 2017 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 17, 2017 I must admit there is one instance were I deliberately park at an angle. At a local Tescos part of the car park consists of bays with 10 or 11 parking places each side with about 15 feet between each side. At the back of the bays is a brick wall and the end parking places are a little bit wider. Problem is also at the back of each bay is a streetlamp about 4 feet in front of the wall. This means that if you park normally in the end bay when backing in or out you have to manouver around said lamposts, which all bear evidence of some drivers lack of sucess in doing so. By parking at an angle I can easily reverse in and out around the lamposts in one easy manouver. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now