Interesting Theory: 4x4s are better for the environment than Eco Euro Boxes...

Caporegime
Joined
8 Mar 2007
Posts
37,146
Location
Surrey
I think it was in Evo or some other mag, but I read an interesting theory on the environment and modern cars.

Basically, modern cars are a dam site more heavier than there counterparts 20 years ago (im no expert so ill let someone more anorack-ish than me post kerb weights of comparible cars (Fox, e90 vs e30 please :))), all weighted down by additional comforts and luxuries and safety features. These means they are all less economical because of the extra weight they are carrying around. Compare this to large 4x4's that already weight 2 tonnes and adding these luxuries has much less of an effect on weight. But the small euro boxes and family hatchbacks outnumber the massive 4x4's by a sizeable margin.

So are these so called small economic cars actually that, or when you add in the sheer number of them, your talking about hundreds of thousands of small cars pulling around 25% more weight than they need to with EU safety equipment and creature comforts, burning all that extra fuel in the proccess, while the 4x4 gas guzzlers pumping out the evil CO2 are in comparitively minute numbers.

Are the hoards of Fiesta and Polo and Hyundai drivers actually doing more to damage the environment in there masses than the comparitively small number of people who choose to drive around in 4x4's....?

Discuss.
 
Soldato
Joined
24 Jul 2006
Posts
8,855
Location
Edmonton, London, UK
With the amount of beans i have to give my mums 08 Micra 1.2 Auto to make any progress and horrendus (< 30mpg) mileage i'd not be surprised. I get 44+ mpg on my 1.9TDI Ibiza FR in town and average 380 miles or so to a tank, on the motorway i've even hit 68mpg and covered 470 miles on a Tank and its a supercar in comparison :D Little eurobox engines are fail imo.
 
Caporegime
OP
Joined
8 Mar 2007
Posts
37,146
Location
Surrey
Not really. What would happen if everyone driving a small 'economical' cars switched to 4x4s?

The planet would die.

Thats not the point. This is about the evil monster CO2 factory 4x4's being in such a minority to compared to the 'not as economical as they could be' hatchbacks and shopping cars that the large CO2 producing few are less damaging than the less CO2 producing masses.

Of course a 4x4 produces more CO2 than a 1.2 Fiesta, but when you add in the numbers of these types of car it changes everything. Would taking every 4x4 off the road save as much CO2 as say reducing the weight of every new car by 10%?
 
Last edited:
Man of Honour
Joined
17 Oct 2002
Posts
158,701
Not really. What would happen if everyone driving a small 'economical' cars switched to 4x4s?

Evo published figures a year ago showing the effect on world CO2 emissions if everyone in the UK purchase a 4.4 litre Range Rover.

I can't remember the exact figure but it was something like a 0.001% increase.
 

olv

olv

Soldato
Joined
12 Jan 2005
Posts
5,292
Location
london
What was the statistic, can't remember where from, that said if everyone drove around in Range Rovers that overall fuel consumption for the country would rise by 1%? Anyone remember that?
 
Caporegime
Joined
19 Apr 2008
Posts
25,925
Location
Essex
Cows produce more greenhouse gasses than we do IIRC. You don't see greenpeace getting annoyed with cows :p I think you are assuming most campaigners are pretty level headed when in fact they are not. The 4x4s are just an easy target for smelly hippy students when in fact there are bigger issues in hand than a few 4x4s.

Saying 4x4s are less damaging is wrong but you can certainly say that in the bigger scheme of things, it's a total non-issue.
 
Last edited:
Man of Honour
Joined
17 Oct 2002
Posts
158,701
If everyone in the UK stopped using cars tommorrow the CO2 saving would be cancelled out in a week by Chinas coal power station openings.
 
Caporegime
OP
Joined
8 Mar 2007
Posts
37,146
Location
Surrey
Cows produce more greenhouse gasses than we do IIRC. You don't see greenpeace getting annoyed with cows :p I think you are assuming most campaigners are pretty level headed when in fact they are not. The 4x4s are just an easy target for smelly hippy students when in fact there are bigger issues in hand than a few 4x4s.

Saying 4x4s are less damaging is wrong but you can certainly say that in the bigger scheme of things, it's a total non-issue.

Im not saying 4x4's are less damaging. Im saying that the number of 4x4's is less damaging compared to the number of poorly economical small cars.

Should the EU be investing in making sure all its mandated safety equipment is as light as possible, and that car makers are making cars as light as possible, rather than just forcing them to put small overworked engines in fat cars to sell to the masses.
 
Caporegime
Joined
19 Apr 2008
Posts
25,925
Location
Essex
For sure. The developing world is the biggest cause. They are using up natural resources and damaging the environment no end but instead a few select idiots think that if everyone stopped driving 4x4s the world would be saved.
 
Caporegime
OP
Joined
8 Mar 2007
Posts
37,146
Location
Surrey
For sure. The developing world is the biggest cause. They are using up natural resources and damaging the environment no end but instead a few select idiots think that if everyone stopped driving 4x4s the world would be saved.

And I bet that select idiot drives a 1.0l Polo that weights 1.5 Tonnes because they speced aircon and 5 airbags and carry 200kg's of junk everywhere in the boot :)
 
Caporegime
Joined
19 Apr 2008
Posts
25,925
Location
Essex
But that's ok because it's only a 1.0. Forgetting the fact they'll need to thrash the nuts out of it to go anywhere thus throwing the factory quoted mpg and co2 figures out the window.

It would really be interesting to see what co2 and mpg a 1.0 Polo kicks out when driven in real world conditions.
 
Soldato
Joined
28 Mar 2005
Posts
13,678
Location
Drunken badger punching
Even if manufacturers developed and proved that all of their 4x4s were more fuel efficient and produced less CO2 than a Prius, the stinking, unwashed hippies of the world would still go around letting their tyres down because they've nothing better to do.

I imagine my CTR is as bad/worse than many a 4x4, although that's probably down to the way I drive it.
 
Caporegime
OP
Joined
8 Mar 2007
Posts
37,146
Location
Surrey
Erm, so because there are more of them, small cars are worse than 4x4s, so we should all drive 4x4s?

Not quite. This thread is about:

"Erm, so because there are more of them, small cars are worse than 4x4s."

No we shouldnt all drive 4x4's. But the do gooders in there Scrappage Scheme hatchbacks should be educated on how they, in there masses, are doing more harm than Farmer Joe whith his Range Rover. This isnt about changing what cars people drive, its about using the full picture when making claims, the volume of the type of car should be factored in when assessing there (perceved) impact on the environment.
 
Soldato
Joined
15 May 2007
Posts
12,804
Location
Ipswich / Bodham
Not quite. This thread is about:

"Erm, so because there are more of them, small cars are worse than 4x4s."

No we shouldnt all drive 4x4's. But the do gooders in there Scrappage Scheme hatchbacks should be educated on how they, in there masses, are doing more harm than Farmer Joe whith his Range Rover. This isnt about changing what cars people drive, its about using the full picture when making claims, the volume of the type of car should be factored in when assessing there (perceved) impact on the environment.

Sorry - what a load of absolute tosh.

Please tell me this is 1 April.
 
Soldato
Joined
8 Mar 2006
Posts
13,290
Location
Near Winchester
Not quite. This thread is about:

"Erm, so because there are more of them, small cars are worse than 4x4s."

No we shouldnt all drive 4x4's. But the do gooders in there Scrappage Scheme hatchbacks should be educated on how they, in there masses, are doing more harm than Farmer Joe whith his Range Rover. This isnt about changing what cars people drive, its about using the full picture when making claims, the volume of the type of car should be factored in when assessing there (perceved) impact on the environment.

Oh, so the 4x4 driver shouldn't be the target of the green brigade, as they are a minority. This is true.

But - assuming car's CO2 emissions are at all a bad thing - small cars are better, as it's less emissions per driver.
 
Caporegime
OP
Joined
8 Mar 2007
Posts
37,146
Location
Surrey
Oh, so the 4x4 driver shouldn't be the target of the green brigade, as they are a minority. This is true.

But - assuming car's CO2 emissions are at all a bad thing - small cars are better, as it's less emissions per driver.

But that the point. Why count emisions per driver when people who are in the 'better' cars outnumber those in the worse by a substantial margin.

Its also about maybe the EU should look at how its regulations on cars are just making them fatter and heavier. Lighter cars would be more economical and greener.
 
Top Bottom