Amphibious Car Beats Urban Congestion

woodhouse writes "According to BBC News, a company in the UK have just tested a fully amphibious car on the Thames river. It can travel at up to 100 miles an hour on land, and its wheels fold up to allow it to speed across water at 30mph, propelled by a jet. The company responsible, Aquada, suggest it's a good way to avoid congestion."

Comments

It's a convertible?

[mmoncur]

Why a convertible? Riding it is going to be like one of those amusement park rides that gets everyone wet.

> "The Thames is a perfect location to make use
> of this vehicle as it has no speed limit and
> is greatly under-utilised."

Those silly Brits. We have speed limits posted for all bodies of water here in the US.

Re:It's a convertible?

[91degrees]

I'm not sure it is. None of the pictures indicate that it actually ahs a roof...

Re:It's a convertible?

[RussGarrett]

I dunno why they say that - the Thames speed limit is 8 knots above Wandsworth, and even below there they can stop you if they think you're affecting other craft.

Re:It's a convertible?

[Shimbo]

> "The Thames is a perfect location to make use
> of this vehicle as it has no speed limit and
> is greatly under-utilised."

Those silly Brits. We have speed limits posted for all bodies of water here in the US.

The BBC is just reporting what the guy selling the car said; it doesn't mean that it is true; it certainly isn't in general. He is a car salesman, after all. Of course, there are speed limits on the Thames.

Re:It's a convertible?

[Daz3d]

I saw this on TV yesterday a few times, on the car there is a plastic shield on both sides, just behind the mirrors (to stop splashes I guess) and the guy looked pretty dry to me. Shame it looks like a Mazda MX-5 though.

Re:It's a convertible?

[jacquesm]

Just when the Thames is getting back to a more or less clean state. Yes! let's all jump into boats to avoid the congestion, congest the waterways and pollute them to the point where the only thing that wants to live there are 6 legged frogs...

Suggesting this could relieve congestion is just stupid.

Re:It's a convertible?

[CptLogic]

I used to own a speedboat and I checked the speed limits on the Thames with the PLA (Port of London Authority) and Environment Agency.

Now it works like this:

Upstream of Teddington Lock, the river is considered non-tidal and is the responsibility of the Environment Agency and has an 8 knot speed limit.

Below Teddington Lock it's the PLA who are the responsible Navigation Authority and they say: No speed limit.

Yes, I was surprised.

So, yes, I could drive this car to my nearest public slipway (In Woolwich), drive it into the river and bash the waves at 30mph, drive out at Richmond and drive the rest of the way to work.

Fantastic!

Re:It's a convertible?

[melevitt]

Why a convertible? Riding it is going to be like one of those amusement park rides that gets everyone wet.

Right... 'Cause all normal power boats have enclosed tops...

Re:It's a convertible?

[arivanov]

It is still faster then some of British motorways in peak hours. And no speed cameras. Yet.

Actually, someone (I think MG) 30 years ago did something similar and people even used it to cross the Channel. You can see it in some of the early Grzhimek movies about Serengetty. It got banned on safety ground at the end.

Re:It's a convertible?

[Eight 01]

Would this be practical in London? I live in New York, and honestly I can't think of any situation in which taking to the river would be faster than driving. The main problem in NY is that there are no access points to the rivers. It is basically a 5-10 foot drop off a wall anywhere within 15 miles of downtown.

So to get to the airport I'd be looking at driving 15 miles out of my way in traffic to get to someplace to put in, then another 15 miles on the water, then another search for a place to get out.

The normal roads are bad, but not THAT bad.

Cool Car

[Bruha]

Can someone Loan me the $295,000 dollars to buy it?

Also I cant wait for one to be stolen in Los Angeles and the resulting police chase. I'd love to see the looks on the cops faces when it drives into one of the aquaducts and gets away from the cars at least. I'm sure the helicopter pioliot will be laughing at least.

Re:Cool Car

[AKnightCowboy]

Not to rain on your parade, but I've never seen the LA "aquaducts" even look moist. Much less with standing water.

Of course not. They're for Hollywood car chase scenes, not for carrying water. Every chase through LA must include one or more dips into the aquaducts... it's part of their contract.

Re:Cool Car

[torpor]

The parent poster must never have seen *rain* in LA either, then. I lived there for 15 years, and could count on the ducts running through Hollywood flowing brown water every winter. I've seen water in those ducts ever year.

Parent-poster must also never have seen any of the annual news reports about 'homeless people' being swept away during the start of winter, from their aquaduct-villages ...

Re:Cool Car

[Nept]

You're probably thinking of the drainage basins to capture runoff and protect areas of the city against flash flooding. I've seen them full to the top a few times when we've had heavy rains - it's not usual, but it's always entertaining as you always get some clowns who decide to go rafting down them.
But the LA aquaducts, outside the city, are always full of water. They just pipe water in from the mountains, etc.

Hmm

[rmohr02]

The concept for this car is pretty cool, but there's just something I like about riding in a converted WWII amphibious assault vehicle. They're for different markets, but I'd prefer the "Ducks" to this car.

pollution ?

[mirko]

The company responsible, Aquada, suggest it's a good way to avoid congestion.

Well, it is, if you can prove it won't pollute the waters.
BTW, I don't know how it is elsewhere, but in France, boats over a given cylinder volume require their pilot to hold a license.

Re:pollution ?

[azaroth42]

More importantly, do you avoid the 5 pound congestion road tax in London when you're driving on the Thames?

--Azaroth

Re:pollution ?

[KDan]

It could. Back before they built the sewers in the 1850s or so, the sewage from two and a half million people went into the thames - which is a tidal river at that point. So you have 2.5mil ppl's crap going up and down the thames with the tide. They got outbreaks of cholera from that because the water companies just pumped that water and distributed that to people - drinking beer exclusively was a good plan in those days.

They finally decided to fund the sewers (a gigantic project, and very well done since the original sewers are still in use today) when the thames stank so bad that the MP's couldn't even get into the river-facing rooms of the house of parliament without choking from the awful stench (apparently comparable to the smell of a rotting body).

I'd say that was worse than now.

Daniel

Re:pollution ?

[mirko]

I have not seen the Thames, except in "A Fish Called Wanda" (and the few views were taken quite far from it), but I remember their "Smog" : while landing in London on a lovely summer day, the plane flew through something dark, opaque, a few meters thick, then landed in Heathrow.

The sky had become beige/gray and the temperature had risen.

That's why I am somehow concerned by the pollution level in London, I have to say it is much worse than in Paris and only a decent education could help fixing it : teach the people to ride their bicycles to work instead of mass-farting in the sub, forbid the cars in the Zentrum.

But just make them understand a daily physical effort might postpone the day they'll have to wear oxygen masks outside.

Re:pollution ?

[StressedEd]

It's not really true anymore. I've (unfortunatly) had a few early baths in the Thames, its just very silty. There are a *lot* of fish in there and plenty of wildlife.. Of course it could be better, but its far cleaner than it looks (shopping trollies considered)....

Re:pollution ?

[Alan Partridge]

London's 'smog' is nothing compared to that of many major cities. What you experienced was probably just the English Permacast(R) weather that we 'enjoy' over here. Apparently, London is overcast fully 50% of the time!

Re:pollution ?

[blane.bramble]

Have you seen it, or are you spouting a knee-jerk reaction because "everyone knows it's polluted"? It's considered one of the cleanest: Comparison of the Thames and the Severn

Re:pollution ?

[josecanuc]

I don't know about you, but many of the 'well-to-do' folks I have run into who have nice cars are some of the cheapest people around when it comes to paying for things that nobody can see...

That's why you hear stories of folks who make millions of [currency] per year and pay nearly nothing in taxes (in the U.S.); why pay for it when you can't flaunt it!

Re:pollution ?

[AlecC]

The Thames has been massively cleaned up over the last 50 years. Yes, it is generally brown in colour; this is suspended sediment and not pollution. Fifty years ago it was essentially dead; recently the counted (I think) over fifty species in it, including salmon and seal. Not that it couldn't do with a bit more cleaning up, but it is enormously improved.

Which means that it could do without a load of speedboat/cars on it.

Re:pollution ?

[chiddiscokid]

According to Thames Water, "the River Thames is one of the cleanest metropolitan rivers in the world." (PDF).

Still wouldn't see me swimming in it though...

Re:pollution ?

[Shimbo]

Won't pollute the waters? Have you seen the Thames? I doubt it could get much more polluted....

On the contrary, ever stronger environmental controls, not to mention the fact that there is hardly any heavy industry left, mean that the Thames gets purer every year.

some notes on the Thames

Re:pollution ?

[Alan Partridge]

Yes, indeed. But 'pea soupers' have been out of fashion ever since the burning of coal was outlawed half a century ago. Hopefully, the forthcoming Euro V emissions regs should put the mockers on the current scourge of Diesel particulate emission.

Of Course

[Anonymous Coward]

This is until the Thames gets over-crowded.

If you get into a fender-bender on the water, does it sink?

At 150,000 pounds, it doesn't seem that unreasonable.

Re:Of Course

[hachete]

you wait til one of these things get in the wash from a tanker or a ferry. It'll certainly be a sink-or-swim situation then.

h.

Re:Of Course

[Zakabog]

At 150,000 pounds most people won't have this car, that's a lot of money and it doesn't seem like it's worth it. So the Thames probably won't get over-crowded. And remember, it costs 150,000 pounds, I'm pretty sure the company making it will make a bunch of saftey features in case of an accident on the water.

yeah

[fuckfuck101]

they say you could take it on daytrips to france as it has a range of 50 miles (the english channel is 22miles long) so you can drive there, drive 6 miles, and drive back, just as long as none of the waves are bigger than foot you won't get wet (why they chose a convertible i`ll never know).

Re:yeah

[hplasm]

(the english channel is 22miles long)

Yeh, but just look at the width of it...wow!

avoid congestion where?

[Ambush_Bug]

On the road, I guess...

I can hear the traffic report now "And the Thames
is all backed up with those damned amphibious vehicles"

it would still be pretty cool to have
an amphibious car anyway. :)

Fast? Not on the Thames.

[carndearg]

I cant deny that it's a really cool piece of kit and I hope the 150k price isnt so eye-watering that the company goes titsup before they've shifted a unit, but the idea of using it for high speed commuting on the Thames is a non starter.

I have run a boat on the Thames for some years now and like all other boats on that river it has to obey the speed limit, a stately 4.8 MPH.

One for the marina in Monaco methinks.

This is all well and good...

[mrgoatCEO]

But when will the missle and torpedo options be available?

Where will I enter/exit the water?

[t0qer]

Boat ramps are the first thing that come to mind, but then there are launch fee's ect that would make me not want to use one.

Which leaves only a choice.

Enter/Leave water by shore.
This car doesn't look like it has 4wd. So it looks like i'd have to gun it really fast to get over the muddy shoreline. Doesn't solve the problem of getting out of the water either. Another problem is most waterways are fenced in these days.

Dukes of Hazzard Jump.
I guess you could try jumping the thing off a bridge, but it seems a little dangerous, again, how are you going to get the thing back onto dry land?

It looks more like a toy for someone that can afford it, instead of a pratical solution for cutting down or avoiding traffic. Reminds me of when my .com CEO was going to get us all some wing in ground effect vehicles to travel from Alviso to Alameda.

Re:Where will I enter/exit the water?

[Talthane]

According to The Spy Who Loved Me you can use a beach to get out, as long as you're accompanied by Barbara Bach.

Re:Where will I enter/exit the water?

[meta-monkey]

You make some interesting points, but I think the "Dukes of Hazard Jump" option would only be available if the horn plays "Dixie." As it's a British vehicle, I doubt that's an option. Also, since it's an open-top car, how do you plan to jump through the window? Sorry, I'm afraid this vehicle simply isn't up to the standards of the Duke boys of Hazard County.

P.S.

I can see ol' Roscoe throwing his hat out the window right now when this thing goes into the water and motors off, while he crashes into the surf! Lordy, the messes he gets into!

Obligatory.

[Ritontor]

I for one welcome our new beowulf cluster of... oh, never mind...

Was it also resistant...

[EvilNutSack]

... To all the pollution in the Thames? Ok, so we don't dump raw sewage into it like in the Victorian times but I'd hardly bathe in it.

Re:Was it also resistant...

[Alan Partridge]

It's not all that filthy, actually - doesn't smell bad at all. You wouldn't want to swim in it though, it's tidal (in London) and extremely treacherous.

Ze Germans

[Trurl's Machine]

In fact, sir, the Krauts were at it long before the Brits. The had an interesting 4x4 volkswagen type 166 aka Schwimmwagen. I always wondered how the SUV's would look like in the "Nazis won WW2" alternative history. Since the Allies won, most 4x4 vehicles are more or less jeep-like. In the "Vaterland"/"Man From The High Castle" worlds, 4x4 vehicles would probably resemble the military volkswagens. And thus would have amphibious capability as early as in 1940's.

Re:Ze Germans

[Gestahl]

Technically, he only mentioned Germans, not Nazis or Hitler. And he did not use it to argue or to compare something to out of malice. I wouldn't invoke Godwin's law here. Now if he said "These amphibious cars are the destruction of society... you know who else had them right? The Nazis!" then we might have an issue. Or maybe my sarcasm detectors just out of batteries... (goes to find battery tester).

Empty rivers...

[madprof]

Many rivers in the UK have speed limits far lower than the 30mph top speed of this vehicle to stop bank erosion, and why do they insist in the article that the Thames is underused?
There are lots of boats on the Thames already - often rowers in lightweight crew boats that swamp easily. They can do without tidal waves being generated.

Re:Empty rivers...

[dcollis]

I currently row on the river for my university in an 8 (one of the more stable rowing boats) and we already have problems being washed down by other boats. And thats at 6 in morning. During the day the problems increase. I'd say there was already plenty of traffic on the thames. If there is going to be more usage of the thames, then water bus/taxis should be the answer. In sydney this system works extremely well.

Re:And in 40 years...

[vidarh]

No big ships use the Thames anymore, at least not up as far as London. Docklands, what used to be some of the largest docks in Europe, have mostly been converted to luxury offices and housing. Large ships dock further east, as cheap train and road transport made the London docks uneconomical.

As for rough water, you won't find much of that either on the Thames around London

People would be mostly competing with a few barges and small tourist boats.

Eco Possibilities are guresome

[Bo Vandenberg]

Just what we need:

Jets chewing up fish beds
Pollution in whole new areas, right in the water table.
Yahoos leaving the road at strange places to enter water.
Soil erosion and commuter traffic on the river.

yipee

style

[meta-monkey]

I just watched the video on their website...I expected it to be boxy and ugly, as I would imagine a lot of compromise would have to be made to design a vehicle like this. I was pleasantly surprised to see it actually looks pretty stylish. Makes sense...the price tag is pretty hefty, so you'd have to have some serious scratch to buy one, and nobody wants to spend a few hundred grand to look like you're driving a box.

Unfortunate location for the press conference

[Anonymous Coward]

I saw this on the BBC news last night.
The funny thing was (which the presenter pointed out), was that the location they had used for showing off their new toy was in front of the Millenium Dome in London - a symbol of overspending development on something no one wants to use!
Saying that, it does act like quite a good speed boat on water. The wheels fold up and the bottom of the car is shaped like a hull, so it does look quite like an average speed boat (although a rather cheap looking one) and lift up out the water at speed.

Speed limits

[Anonymous Coward]

We have speed limits posted for all bodies of water here in the US.

Really?

What's the speed limit for your average Alaskan lake?

Is it high enough for all reasonable floatplanes to be able to take off?

If so, is there really anything that might want to go faster than that?

Re:The problems of British industry

[Viol8]

"Hovercraft"

Yes , their impracticality would be why they were used in passenger service cross-channel for 30 years and why so many military marine forces (including the US)
use them as landing craft.

"Concorde"

Twice the speed of sound and still not matched by anything built elsewhere. Nuff said.

"The Titanic"

A good ship with a lousy crew. Your point is?

"Nuclear waste reprocessing"

Yeah , why reprocess and reuse it when you could just toss it in the sea instead.

You're an idiot.

Nothing new here... move along :)

[advocate_one]

We've got one of these amphibious cars that tootles up and down our river every so often already...

www.amphicar.com

This "new" one is just one in a long line of press releases from marketing people who haven't looked into the history of the concept... mind you this new one does look cool...

Re:No way

[10Ghz]

You can't drive on wet roads? Uhhhh, maybe you should go back to driving-school.

Re:Only the English!

[Viol8]

And only the americans could come up with something as pointless as an SUV. A 4 wheel drive vehicle that does 2 mpg, tips over in a tight swerve
has poor crash protection and if it does go off road it gets stuck. Compared to that an amphibious car sounds pretty sensible.

Re:The problems of British industry

[pubjames]

The UK has a long sad history of inventors producing things that are unaffordable, impractical, or both, owing to a cultural blindness that seems to prevent reality checks.

I think your interpretation is incorrect. The Brits have an amazing history of invention -- I think they could quite probably boast at being the greatest nation of inventors in the world. However, they are normally really crap at the business side of things.

Re:No way

[browman]

Er.. you're obviosly not familiar with English weather...

Forget driving through rivers, every spring for the last 5 years or so has seen major flooding on everything from back roads to town centres and motorways in the UK.

Re:The problems of British industry

[Moderation abuser]

Internal Combustion Engine
Jet Engine
Electric Motor
Television
Disc Brakes
Depth Charges
Fax Machine
Lightbulbs
World Wide Web
Viagra
Vacuum Cleaner
Toilet Paper

etc etc etc...

Yeah, the problem with the British is that they keep inventing these unaffordable, impractical things...

Re:Nice idea but sportscar it isn't

[Alan Partridge]

Not legally, it can't.

Re:The problems of British industry

[GusCubed]

Good point, well made. But I still feel the need to wave the Union Jack and say:

• The Steam engine
• The Jet engine
• The lightbulb - yes you read that right - Joseph Swann beat Edison by several years
• The Electric motor
• Radar and Sonar
• Television
• the World Wide Web
• The telephone
• Penicillin
• The decimal point!
• Cordite
• tarmac
• polyester

And many more I've missed. I don't think you could call any of these inventions impractical. As for reality checks, several inventions were condemned as pointless at inception, it just goes to show you never can tell...

personally I think this amphibious car will sink without trace.

'The telephone is such a marvelously useful invention that I can see the time when every town in America will have one!' - Mayor of Chicago, some time long ago.

Sinkage?

[dolo666]

Amphibian cars have sunk before on several occasions. What's stopping this one? And what happens when the car rusts out? I'm guessing they have compensated for water usage, but I'm of the school that believes that boats are designed to be boats and cars are designed to be cars. Combining the two isn't going to make for a top-quality full-use vehicle. And plus...

How many of you own boats? After even one season, they smell like mildew. You can use spray-nine to clean it, but it's still a boat smell, which is wonderful for a weekend or a couple weeks here and there, but in all honesty, do you want your car smelling like that? I can see some guy on a date...

Stud: "Do you like my James Bond super-car? It goes 100mph on land and 30 in the water!"

Date (pinching nose): "It smells like a zoo. Can I go home now?"

Re:Only the English!

[Alan Partridge]

But didn't Land Rover invent the SUV when it designed the ludicrous Range Rover? The original and best SUV, surely?

Observations:

[wowbagger]

First - they make a big deal about how this car can "go over 100MPH on land". SO WHAT! Sitting in my garage I have a car that can go over 130MPH - more if I pull the civilian chip from the engine and put a cop chip in.

Second - is the Thames as polluted as some of the other major rivers near population centers (sorry, centres)? If so, then I damn sure wouldn't want to go hotrodding around on it in an open boat - talk about your shitty experiences!

Third - for the cost of this vehicle, I can stop working for several years, and not have to commute at all. Alternatively, I can work somewhere that isn't as crowded, and not have to deal with the commute. I could also buy a damn fine car, a damn fine boat, a damn fine boat trailer for the boat, a damn fine truck to tow the boat trailer, and probably still have money left over for a damn fine camper for the damn fine truck to stay in.

This vehicle seems to be target to the same crowd as the H2 Hummer is - folks with far more money than common sense.

I'm pretty sure the inventors are US based

[ukgod]

Just commenting on all those jovial "crazy brits" postings. Mr Alan Gibbs is from New Zealand, although he was in partnership with a Brit, Neil Jenkins, and got Lotus (UK) to do some feasibility studies. The concept work was done by Eurotech and MSX in Detroit, USA. The vehicle is being built in the UK because we have a good engineering record and a lot of expertise in low volume car manufacture and "racing" (especially F1) cars.

Re:Only the English!

[Yorrike]

Actually, the man behind the whole venture is a New Zealander. We've had this story all over the news tonight. Here's an article from stuff.co.nz claiming it was us all along.

Another video

[logic-gate]

Longer video available here [nzoom.com]

Re:The problems of British industry

[Anonymous Coward]

*ahem* Mr Joseph Swann came up with lightbulbs several years before Mr Edison.

John Logie Baird, a Scotsman, invented the television.

As for jet engines: http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/bljet engine.htm -- so Britain and Germany really share equal honours here...

Go away and *research* things before posting wildly innaccurate statements...

Re:The problems of British industry

[LSD-OBS]

Lightbulbs- NO. You GOTTA be joking here. Thomas Edison was NOT British...

Erm, Nikola Tesla actually. Although he was Serbian. Edison funded research and marketted the suckers.

Re:The problems of British industry

[LSD-OBS]

And to clear it up, the lightbulb does seem to be a british development.

In Gotham City....

[ngyahloon]

.....we called it the bat mobile:)

Good ways

[nnnneedles]

The company responsible, Aquada, suggest it's a good way to avoid congestion.

Maybe, it's just a good way to avoid profit.

This takes me back...

[C A S S I E L]

In London in the swinging '60's, it was hard to spend more than a week or two without encountering an Amphicar somewhere on the road. This new product is certainly a lot less ugly.

Re:"the Thames river"

[rpjs]

Of course.

It is our language, after all.

(my fiancee is both American and a linguist, so you can imagine how well that line goes down when I come out with it at home...)

Re:Only the English!

[mark2003]

If SUVs are safer then why do American road stats show that you are more likely to die in one? Mainly due to the fact that American SUVs are a con based on 1970s truck designs - half of them don't even have independant rear suspensions. Have you ever tried cornering in an Explorer? Compare that to an X5 and you will see how an SUV can handle when made in Germany.

As for the big vehicle vs. smaller vehicle argument where do you stop? Are you in some kind of arms race? The only reason the Toyota would get totalled is because some moron is driving 15 tons of SUV. If the other car was a normal sized vehicle then they would both be fine. Why not buy yourself an 18 wheeler - then the guy in the Hummer would be toast.

More Pictures...

[cdneng2]

There's a Yahoo slideshow of the vehicle being driven on and off the Thames, here.

Another problem.

[AlecC]

As everybody knows, the UK drives on the left. Well, on the roads it does; on the rivers it drives on the right. So if this thing is going down a flooded road (a good reason to buy it), which side should it drive on? Every time the wheels float off or touch ground, it should change sides. And if, on boar mode, it meets (say) an agricultural tractor going the other way, you have a free fender bender right there.

Made for Washington, DC

[TheSync]

DC traffic is horrible, and the slow rebuilding of the Wilson Bridge across the Potomac is making is even worse.

On the other hand, DC has many public marinas on the Potomac with boat ramps. There is one in Georgetown, one near National Airport, two in Alexandria, and a few in southern PG county.

Re:I think I'll park it next to my Segway

[TheSync]

Every morning, I see a disabled lady using her Segway to go to and from the a Washington, DC rail station. Sometimes when I'm waiting for a train and reading, I'll hear a quiet whizzing sound, look up, and she just went right by me! It makes Segways less of a joke to me.

Re:Only the English!

[mamahuhu]

Alan Gibbs is a New Zealander - the jet boat is a New Zealand innovation - he is just using British money.... so this thread should be "Only the Kiwis!" - and I'd a gree with that - if ever there were a pack of wishful thinkers it's New Zealanders....

Sorry - I can't link to a Flash page - where's the HTML version?

Only the British . . .

[mr_luc]

Only the British would *admit* to inventing Viagra.

Here, in the US, we have commercials for it, but nobody *needs* to use it, because we have enormous turgid 12-cylinder American penises that get 3mpg and are not in compliance with the Kyoto accord.

Re:Only the English!

[untaken_name]

If SUVs are safer then why do American road stats show that you are more likely to die in one?

Simple: they don't. They show that you are more likely to SURVIVE if you are in an SUV which has a collision. That's why they are safer.
http://www.mrtraffic.com/suv.htm

Mainly due to the fact that American SUVs are a con based on 1970s truck designs - half of them don't even have independant rear suspensions.

A con? Whatever. They're designed to be the new, more hip mini-van, and they perform admirably for that task. If you need to carry 8 people on a 4 hour drive, that toyota prius gets awfully crowded. I know how they're advertised, but I don't work for an ad agency so I have no control over that. Everyone with intelligence knows that they are not really designed for driving straight up mountains. If you believe that they are, please remove yourself from the gene pool immediately. (I know *some* are really meant for off-road use, but in general, SUVs fill the same role as mini-vans)

Have you ever tried cornering in an Explorer? Compare that to an X5 and you will see how an SUV can handle when made in Germany.

Yes, actually, I have. I had NO PROBLEM taking corners at reasonable speeds with reasonable caution. If I wanted a vehicle that drove like a Lotus, guess what? I'd buy a Lotus. If I want a vehicle to cart around a family + friends in comfort, and also be able to shove a ton of groceries/luggage/lumber/whatever in there, then I'm going to buy an SUV.

As for the big vehicle vs. smaller vehicle argument where do you stop? Are you in some kind of arms race? The only reason the Toyota would get totalled is because some moron is driving 15 tons of SUV. If the other car was a normal sized vehicle then they would both be fine. Why not buy yourself an 18 wheeler - then the guy in the Hummer would be toast.

Yeah, the SUV is certainly the largest common passenger vehicle. Of course, pickups and vans have been around far longer, and in many cases have worse rearward vision, worse handling, and worse gas milage. It's not an arms race for me, as I drive a 4 door econo-box. I just don't think that SUVs are Satan. I personally believe that SUVs gained popularity so quickly because people were tired of the 8 foot by 5 foot 'sedans' that have been churned out since the '80s. (yes, I know that's an exaggeration, it's for effect, like your '15 tons of SUV') If you crash two 'normal-sized' vehicles together, people in both cars are equally likely to be killed. If you crash 2 SUVs together, the same applies. (although the chances of being killed at all are smaller) It's when a sedan/coupe/motorcycle and an SUV have a collision that the SUV driver is far more likely to survive.
As for why I don't buy an 18-wheeler, well, I don't feel like getting my commercial license. If I felt like I needed an 18-wheeler, say for hauling a large cargo across country, I'd get one. If I need a vehicle for carrying lots of stuff/people, I'll get an SUV. Trying to get soccer moms to buy a prius or a kia rio or something is just stupid.

Jetskis

[kupci]

In Wisconsin they are considering requiring some sort of license for Jetskiers. They comprise 1% of the watercraft yet are involved in somewhere around 30-40% of the water accidents.

Only for the first ones...

[hoggoth]

> The company responsible, Aquada, suggest it's a good way to avoid congestion."

Only for the first ones...
And only for a short time...

Re:Only the English!

[MrLizardo]

If all you really want to do is haul around your family/friends/groceries then why not get a nice station wagon? Similar cargo passenger/cargo space, lower center of gravity, higher gas mileage/lower emissions. Or isn't it cool enough? Or do you not fancy your odds of surviving a crash when you're in something that's size is on the same order of magnitude with the rest of the vehicles on the road? For what you're using your SUV for its just a (unnecessarily) raised station wagon with crappy gas mileage.

I think I'll enjoy my '82 Honda Accord a couple years longer: Seats 3 in reasonable comfort + a sub woofer behind the driver's seat, 35 mpg highway, 30 city. Tons of room for luggage if I put the cargo carrier on the roof and the bike rack on the trunk. That's right! I can add more storage space if I need it. Crazy that, huh?

SUVs are for the most part an unnecesary waste of road space and a threat to drivers of smaller cars. I can't even count on two hands the number of times I've had SUVs try and merge into my Honda on the freeway. If you really take 6 people with you every place you go, along with 2 bikes and a propane grill, crossing snow/gravel/dirt/mud on your way on a daily basis then yes an SUV might fit the bill but I highly doubt thats what you're doing. If you got an SUV so you could look cool and screw over other drivers in the event of a crash than at least be honest about it, that's all I ask.

-AX

That's pretty cool, but uh...

[sackeri]

The Cubans beat them to it.

PLA in charge of the Thames?

[siskbc]

Below Teddington Lock it's the PLA who are the responsible Navigation Authority and they say: No speed limit.

Damn, that was stupid putting the PLA in charge. What, do they blow you up for speeding? Maybe have Arafat look at you all twitchy if you turn without signalling out there? Small wonder Britain has no amphibious cars.

Re:brits invent World Wide Web?

[glesga_kiss]

Because it's true? But of course everything must be invented by an American unless proof is provided. You're an idiot.

He's not an idiot. It's just the way everyone's educational system works. Lot's of flag-waving and chants of "we are the best". Go and ask various people from Britain, Japan, USA and Cuba how WW2 or the Cuban missile crisis started, and you'll get entirely different answers from each. No one wants to admit they are at fault, or that they didn't think of something first.

Propaganda begins in the first grade. The catholics have know this for centuries.

Re:The problems of British industry

[otis wildflower]

Go tell a Scot that. Face to face.

You guys DO have national health insurance, right?

Re:Only the English!

[el-spectre]

The problem is that too many people try to drive SUVs like their little 2-door compact, and that is inherently dangerous. They (SUVs) have a higher center of gravity, stiffer suspension, and a shorter (relative to overall size) wheelbase. It takes a different style of driving, just like a jeep and porsche take different styles.

Now, I drive a 1/2 ton pickup, and so a SUV is basically just like having a heavy shell welded on. It's no problem for me to drive, because I _drive it like a truck_!

Re:Only the English!

[dave420]

I'm not saying you need it, but to be a truly off-road vehicle, automatic hill descent is a must.

Oh, and with off-road vehicles it's the torque that counts, not the BHP. The range rover, on wet grass, can out-accelerate a mercedes SLK on dry pavement. I'd like to see your Chevy Blazer do that :-P

And the reason you can buy 2-3 durangos for the price of a range rover, is that chevy cars/suvs are awful. Do they really think they look good? please don't say yes!

Obviously the SUV lobbyists have got to you, so there's no help. You probably vote republican too, so redemption is nigh-on impossible ;)

apt sig, btw.