family transportation

The_Dark_Side · 9 Oct 2006 at 23:36

the fact is you find a lot of new parents that after their first child buy a mini MPV.
they want something with more space, this we agree on.
ask a group of 25+ women what they prefer the look of between an estate and a mini mpv and they will almost certainly choose the mini MPV.
why? to them an estate looks bland...something i almost universally agree with as they do for the most part.the majority of estates look like panel vans with windows fitted.
estates are noisier than a regular car AND a mini MPV.
they look bigger and to the less than able driver this is a big deal.
while you or i are not phased at all by the size of vehicle we drive the fact is some drivers are and sometimes not even the physical size puts them off...how big they perceive it to be is important and the mini MPV with it's higher roof line maintains the high level of space while appearing shorter.
buying new the estate will lose more money than the mini MPV too so the resale value comes into play while buying second hand you may pay a premium to buy one you will also sell it VERY quickly and in turn sell on for a premium.
the high driving position makes a difference.a lot of people buy 4x4's for the very same reason so it's fairly obvious that other vehicles that offer the same thing will be bought by a similar type of buyer or at least one with similar priorities.

Fr0dders · 9 Oct 2006 at 23:39

[TW]Fox said:
I have yet to meet somebody who claims they bought their silly Scenic thing or whatever for the driving position, all cite the additional storage.

Which an Estate offers..

why not have an MPV though

apart from your irrational hatrid of MPVs. Theres no real reason to have the estates you keep banging on about over the MPV, apart from personal preference.

dilated · 9 Oct 2006 at 23:47

[TW]Fox said:
In many circles the case is simple - have kids, must buy MPV. Thinking beyond that is just not something they do.

Mr Fox sums this up brilliantly here, I cannot understand why someone would opt for an mpv as I cannot understand why anyone would spend a large sum of money without putting any thought into their purchase and i cannot understand why someone would spend more to get less.

for me the higher ride height meant more blind spots - surerly more difficult for the less than confident driver to park? the load space is larger on paper but in the real world a larger boot floor space (in an estate/saloon) is more useable unless you like to stack your shopping bags - i prefer bread shaped bread

The_Dark_Side · 9 Oct 2006 at 23:50

dilated said:
Mr Fox sums this up brilliantly here, I cannot understand why someone would opt for an mpv as I cannot understand why anyone would spend a large sum of money without putting any thought into their purchase and i cannot understand why someone would spend more to get less.

for me the higher ride height meant more blind spots - surerly more difficult for the less than confident driver to park? the load space is larger on paper but in the real world a larger boot floor space (in an estate/saloon) is more useable unless you like to stack your shopping bags - i prefer bread shaped bread

higher ride height means more blind spots?
how so?
you're driving a vehicle the same size as the car variant and you have a larger glass area to afford you better visibility.
easier not more difficult to park.

The_Dark_Side · 9 Oct 2006 at 23:52

a less than confident driver is always going to have trouble parking anyway, but parking takes up a fraction of the time you spend on the road and the fact is that while driving many people prefer a higher driving position.
why do you think 4x4's sell so well?

Fr0dders · 10 Oct 2006 at 00:06

dilated said:
I cannot understand why anyone would spend a large sum of money without putting any thought into their purchase and i cannot understand why someone would spend more to get less.

for me the higher ride height meant more blind spots - surerly more difficult for the less than confident driver to park? the load space is larger on paper but in the real world a larger boot floor space (in an estate/saloon) is more useable unless you like to stack your shopping bags - i prefer bread shaped bread

wrong wrong and wrong

you dont get less, as clearly stated above the boot space is smaller with the parcel shelf on as the wheelbase is shorter. But this is good as because its shorter, its easier to park. With the parcel shelf off (which we all do if we're taking a lot with us) then the MPV is bigger, and without the seats the MPV is bigger too.

how can you get more "blindspots". the only blindspots that exist are the ones that inbetween the FOV of your rear mirror and your side mirror. An MPV sits you up higher a couple of inches, we're not talking so high you cant see the floor here.

and as for load space. THe boot on my picasso is perfectly flat. Please tell me how this space isnt useable ?

and dont be silly. of course you can stack shopping. its common sense that you put bread and squashables in a separate bag on the top. How do you think people with superminis manage to shop ?

The_Dark_Side · 10 Oct 2006 at 00:10

dilated said:
Mr Fox sums this up brilliantly here, I cannot understand why someone would opt for an mpv as I cannot understand why anyone would spend a large sum of money without putting any thought into their purchase and i cannot understand why someone would spend more to get less.

what exactly are they getting less of?

so let's take the picasso.
it's almost the same length as the regular xsara, yet looks shorter as the higher roofline gives it the short and stumpy appearance.
performance is almost the same...but no relevance or importance to this type of vehicle.
the picasso has more load space.
it'll sell much faster and for more money
has a higher driving position, again something that reassures an inexperienced driver.
isn't expensive and as they're so popular there are umpteen examples to choose from.

the above is also true when comparing the Xsara estate against the picasso.

and you STILL cannot see why this makes sense for some drivers?
i honestly fail to see how you cannot comprehend that some of the above features, while not important to you or i, are very important to a section of the buying public.

Fr0dders · 10 Oct 2006 at 00:19

The_Dark_Side said:
i honestly fail to see how you cannot comprehend that some of the above features, while not important to you or i, are very important to a section of the buying public.

its the clarkson esque irrational hatrid of all things MPV

im still waiting for the "Handling" argument to come out. allways makes an apperance.

Dtab · 10 Oct 2006 at 00:21

[TW]Fox said:
I see exactly why they do it - they do so becuase they feel they need one. Most simply do not even bother to look at the alternatives. In many circles the case is simple - have kids, must buy MPV. Thinking beyond that is just not something they do.

or maybe its because they do exactly what they want and need them to do ?
a.n.other type of car might do that too,but saying they buy mpvs because of some sort of herd instinct is as naive as you are claiming they are being.

The_Dark_Side · 10 Oct 2006 at 00:22

MrLOL said:
its the clarkson esque irrational hatrid of all things MPV

"i don't do facts, i do opinions"
quote, Jeremy Clarkson 2005.

dilated · 10 Oct 2006 at 00:53

The_Dark_Side said:
what exactly are they getting less of?

you pay more for an older/higher mileage car - maybe you will try to claim you get more miles and more age next :rolleyes:

[TW]Fox · 10 Oct 2006 at 08:19

MrLOL said:
why not have an MPV though

Becuase they are expensive for what they are, they pitch and roll into corners, they are not as refined as cars and in many cases are like driving a van.

I know you have to try and defend your decision to buy an MPV at the age most of us buy sports cars, but come on

The_Dark_Side · 10 Oct 2006 at 11:36

[TW]Fox said:
Becuase they are expensive for what they are, they pitch and roll into corners, they are not as refined as cars and in many cases are like driving a van.

in your opinion do you think the picasso isn't as refined as a regular xsara?
as far as i'm aware they're the same car apart from a slightly different bodyshell.
I've driven both and I think I can safely say that if you blindfolded a passenger and took then for a drive in both vehicles they wouldn't be able to tell them apart.

in what way do you mean the MPV is less refined?

The_Dark_Side · 10 Oct 2006 at 12:00

dilated said:
you pay more for an older/higher mileage car

I love the way that while I'm trying to give comprehensive answers to your questions, you pick out one point and address it.....talk about clutching at straws.

I don't own a mini MPV and to be honest I wouldn't buy one.
why?
because as fox stated I'd get an estate that would carry almost the same load/passengers for less money, however this doesn't tell the full story.
a high driving position isn't important to me for starters and neither is the aesthetic aspect of an estate.
the estate is a longer vehicle but that doesn't phase me one iota either and neither does the fact that the estate is a little noisier than the mini MPV.
even the resale value isn't a concern to me so the best choice if I were in the market would be a cheap estate car.

but, and i'll try to make this easy for you to understand, SOME PEOPLE DO CARE ABOUT THESE THINGS !

now what you're saying is you cannot comprehend that there are people around that, to them, any or all of the factors above ARE important when choosing a vehicle.
which brings us full circle back to my original statement that there are way too many members in here that can't see anything but there own point of view.

so, mr.rollseyes genius answer me this.
I'm an inexperienced driver and I'm looking for a new car. I want estate/mini MPV amounts of load space and the ability to carry 5 people. it must be no longer than a regular saloon, be inexpensive, common as hell to give me maximum choice and come from a high street marque....add excellent residual value and I think we're done.

so suggest me a vehicle that fits my requirements.

alg1a · 10 Oct 2006 at 12:14

The OP has a focus already, so an MPV for family transportation is the most practical option here. People with kids know how difficult it is getting car seats and the kids in and out of regular cars such as saloons and estates. The higher set seats are not only good for a hihger driving position but also for getting the kids and car seates in and out without bending too much.

Buttons · 10 Oct 2006 at 12:14

I think (and sort of hope) my post will get lost in all the banter but I'm going to suggest a larger vehicle.

I drive a Nissan X Trail and it fits your requirements perfectly. It's the 2.5l Automatic, does 30mpg which although not great, is not half bad either. It can be had for around 12-13k with DVD type gadgets fitted. It has boot space that puts all of your MPVs to shame and anyone saying you don't need that much space doesn't have kids. Trying to fit our pram in anything smaller for a start would be nigh on impossible.

I am going to stress now so I don't get lynched that I DO NOT CARE ABOUT CORNERING AT HIGH SPEED as I do not drive in a style that is bothered. Nice and steady does it thanks now that the family is in the car almost all the time.

It's fantastically comfortable, immensely reliable (steer clear of the diesel) and the auto 4WD is tremendously re-assuring to have as ice really does not phase this car.

At the end of the day it's just a very big car and very well suited to family life. I've had it from new (try motorpoint, 17k new generally) and don't plan changing car for the foreseeable future which is a first for me!

dilated · 10 Oct 2006 at 13:21

The_Dark_Side - to clarify I know the reasons why someone would buy an mpv - in your long winded posts you have said nothing new, you have contributed little towards the topic in hand which (if you have forogtten) is to suggest cars for someone who shares my view on mpvs.

there is a differance between knowing why someone does this and understanding the logic - do you not see this? :confused:

willd58 · 10 Oct 2006 at 13:24

The_Dark_Side said:
I've driven both and I think I can safely say that if you blindfolded a passenger and took then for a drive in both vehicles they wouldn't be able to tell them apart.

Iv been in both and they certainly felt very different, allthough to be fair my cousin says she bought a picasso cause of her 2 kids, and loves it.

The_Dark_Side · 10 Oct 2006 at 17:14

dilated said:
i ask as i really cannot understand why the mumsie-mobile would appeal over a saloon.

dilated said:
i really cannot see what the picasso can do than my car cannot.

dilated said:
to clarify I know the reasons why someone would buy an mpv

sesame street is brought to you today by the word "CONTRADICTION".

dilated said:
there is a differance between knowing why someone does this and understanding the logic - do you not see this?

err, correct me if i'm wrong here but no there is not.
if you know why someone does something then by definition you understand their logic.

The_Dark_Side · 10 Oct 2006 at 17:22

willd58 said:
Iv been in both and they certainly felt very different, allthough to be fair my cousin says she bought a picasso cause of her 2 kids, and loves it.

they are different to ride in...no doubt about it.
sitting higher gives you a different viewpoint, the larger glass area adds to this and the higher roofline makes the passenger cabin seem much more airy and spacious.
my point was they're mechanically identical and if you ask someone who has no real interest in cars and sees them as a means to an end they will tell you they can't tell them apart purely by the way they drive.
the Picasso is approx 20cm taller and 150kg heavier than a regular Xsara so it'll be a tad slower and roll a little more in the corners, but the type of person they're aimed at will hardly notice as they don't drive them in anything resembling an aggressive manner.