Being tall's a pain in the @rse sometimes!

[Alison]

Just a point to note for all you guys who are going on about the good safety record of higher vehicles, whilst they might do well in a crash (and am sure some are better than others) there is increasing evidence that the poor visability many of them provide can make you a liability for pedestrians and the size of the vehicle means that you are more likely to seriously harm somebody you hit. Whilst we obviously all care about our own firstly, it's worth bearing in mind the imact (no pun intended) on others.

Oh and agree with the comment above about Freelanders, friend has one and was shocked by how small they are inside for such a ridiculously large piece of metal.

[allotmentlady]

Talking about accidents, I was involved in one in 2002, a young boy racer in his clio smashed into my stationery Vauxhall Zafira. His car was a complete write off, although my car had damage to the front wing and I was very shaken up, my young daughter did all the screaming, she was 11 months old. He was high on drugs with 4 others in the car. I called the police and the road was blocked off.........I actually drove home after the police had yanked off the wing, it was about an hour later that shock set in and I was taken to hospital, didnt realise i had hurt my hand and shoulders.

Later found out it was his mums car and he had taken it without knowledge.

That car saved my life.

[Hazel at the Hill]

Er - are you sure that LW wants to spend all her time sat behind you whilst you drive?

I thought that babies spent 90% of a car journey asleep anyway - and unless LW is in the passenger seat, you'll only ever be able to have a shouted conversation with her in the back? (think about trying to communicate with a minicab driver whilst you're sat in the back!)

She'll be a hundred times more comfy in the passenger seat than in the back on ANY car with you sat infront with the driver's seat right back, and it might be the only sensible conversation time that you have with each other for months....

[HeyWayne]

Er - are you sure that LW wants to spend all her time sat behind you whilst you drive?

I thought that babies spent 90% of a car journey asleep anyway - and unless LW is in the passenger seat, you'll only ever be able to have a shouted conversation with her in the back? (think about trying to communicate with a minicab driver whilst you're sat in the back!)

She'll be a hundred times more comfy in the passenger seat than in the back on ANY car with you sat infront with the driver's seat right back, and it might be the only sensible conversation time that you have with each other for months....

Not forever- just the first few months.

[Matt.]

I think the idea of LW sitting in the back might change as well. My wife did for the first few trips but as Hazel says the babies just go to sleep and are very content.

Also with all the comments on crash suitability its worth reading the reports into why a car got the NCAP score it did. Some cars score only 4 because they aren't pedestrian friendly despite the internals meeting all the standards. It depends on your point of view but it may well mean two cars you are considering have different scores but do actually meet your standards.

[miffy]

Being a person of diminshed vertical growth can be a challenge too. I can't reach the cereals in Sainsburys for a start or anything on the top shelf without standing on the bottom shelf and jumping!! Thats why i take Mr Miffy with me to help get the stuff down!!
Don't have the same challenges though when it comes to cars, minis were made to fit rabbits like me.

[HeyWayne]

Also with all the comments on crash suitability its worth reading the reports into why a car got the NCAP score it did. Some cars score only 4 because they aren't pedestrian friendly despite the internals meeting all the standards. It depends on your point of view but it may well mean two cars you are considering have different scores but do actually meet your standards.

The NCAP website (shown on one of my previous posts) list the pedestrian scores as well - where applicable (it's a relatively recent test). You can see colour coded diagrams showing you which parts of the car are scored, and it also shows you colour coded diagrams of the vehicle passengers and how each area of the body is affected during crash tests.

Regarding Alisons point about visibility - this can also be a problem (perhaps not to the same extent) with "regular" sized cars.

When I was looking to possibly replace my Leon at the end of the agreement I looked at trading up to a new Leon. Once I got into the car however and adjusted the seat to a comfortable driving position my visibility was restricted to around the size of a sheet of A4 paper. A combination of a heavily raked windscreen, thick "A" pillars and my high driving position. I decided against the car on that principle.

People often comment that "all cars look the same these days" - this is in part to them being designed to be more "pedestrian friendly" in the case of an accident. Bonnets sloping a certain way, having a certain amount of "give" and harsh edges/corners being kept to a minimum.

Not sure I'd want to be a car designer these days - too many things other than "does it look cool" to consider.

[Peter]

Just a point to note for all you guys who are going on about the good safety record of higher vehicles, whilst they might do well in a crash (and am sure some are better than others) there is increasing evidence that the poor visability many of them provide can make you a liability for pedestrians and the size of the vehicle means that you are more likely to seriously harm somebody you hit. Whilst we obviously all care about our own firstly, it's worth bearing in mind the imact (no pun intended) on others.

Oh and agree with the comment above about Freelanders, friend has one and was shocked by how small they are inside for such a ridiculously large piece of metal.

Alison are you talking about the Freelander or the Freelander-2?
The former was designed in the 1980's, the "mules" that the greasy bits were tested in were Maestro Van bodies and it is piss poor to crash in.
The latter is what I have and I consider it to be a very roomy vehicle.

Have to admit that I really do not follow the logic of your comment about poor visibility provided by higher vehicles.

The only current visibility issue is common to all recent designs of car in all categories. It is caused by the marketing need for good crash performance for occupants, (i.e. we need NCAP-5*), which dictates a stronger "A" pillar, that tends to be thicker, so the sides of the windscreen have this wonderful hiding place for all sorts of objects.

Higher vehicles however do extend the distance you can see for, which mitigates the narrower aperture.

All vehices trade different areas, a low vehicle tends to have poorer length of visibility, but will go round corners better, while a high vehicle has good distance vision and rolls more in corners. You picks what you likes and Boy, is car choice subjective.

To take it to extremes, fit a mast with the driver in a crows nest, you would see every hazard for about a mile, but would not be able to corner at more than about 5mph and bridges would be, err, um, interesting?

Car Magazine was pretty hot on the visibility subject a year or two ago.
Why have better safety for when you crash, when you could have better visibility and thus avoid the crash in the first place.

Oh and before I forget, Wayne, one guy I know has just ordered a brand new Nissan Murano and got thousands off list. If you have the money, now really is a good time to buy a car. If they won't cut the price, just walk....

[kirsty b]

Not forever- just the first few months.

Until pickle was about 6 months old she used to go straight to sleep the minute she heard the seat belt click on tha car seat. Very occasionally she would hang on till the engine was started!

[lainey lou]

Not forever- just the first few months.

Aaaahh! Bless. x

[Alison]

Alison are you talking about the Freelander or the Freelander-2?
The former was designed in the 1980's, the "mules" that the greasy bits were tested in were Maestro Van bodies and it is piss poor to crash in.
The latter is what I have and I consider it to be a very roomy vehicle.

Have to admit that I really do not follow the logic of your comment about poor visibility provided by higher vehicles.

No idea which Freelander it was but it was horrible and squashy and you felt like you were on stilts. My mate loved it though so what you like is always subjective.

It's not my logic re the visability thing, have read a study on it (but as ever can't find a link when I need one ). Basically, you may well be able to see further but you can't see as well close up as there is more road around your car in the shadow of the actual vehicle. I'm sure I could have worded this much better but they did some basic tests where they stood kids round the back of the cars in the mimic of a lot of schools etc and they couldn't be seen very easily in quite a few of these vehicles. I appreciate that you're not going to agree with me on this one but that's life!