Day Three: A hot sticky Saturday at the motor show - Mmmm
Welcome to my weekend. Today is the start of my SUV (stupid ugly vehicle) rant. I'm afraid it may spill over into next week, but what with this weather I've built up quite alot of steam that needs letting off. Next time I find myself blogging in a good mood, we'll have a look at the positive technical developments in low emissions technology, but not today. Today we're documenting the deal we're getting in exchange for our future, and it's a shitty deal. Next time you laugh at the Manahata indians for selling their island for $24 dollars, remember that we're busy swapping the most beautiful planet in the known universe for some of the stupidest, ugliest bits of bad design the industrial era has seen.
Firstly, a little recap of why environmentalists tend to have a slight lack of enthusiasm for these ghastly abominations. For the full horrifying details, please have a look at our website, but to summarise, driving an SUV in town has all the practical benefits of filling your boot with bricks and putting blades on your bumpers. The net result is global warming as severe and sudden as that which caused the end of the Permian period 251 million years ago - the disappearance of over 90% of species in under a century.
So, if the stake we're putting up is life on earth, what's the prize? Lurch forward, the £63,000 Supercharged Range Rover Sport HST (that's 'Higher Specification Trim'). Only Tim Westwood is actually likely to buy one of these ridiculous monstrosities, but as the purest example of a stupid, ugly Land Rover, it illustrates the flaws of the whole sector. I'm not just upset about its mileage being worse than the Ford Model 'T', I'm upset by the very hideousness of the thing. It's got deep skirts and spoilers and such a low ride that, well, let's let Geoff, the Land Rover design director, describe it for us:
"The HST gives the Range Rover Sport an especially impressive stance, hunkered down tight to the road," says Land Rover design director, Geoff Upex. "It's the extreme version of the Range Rover Sport, the design that will be chosen by those who want to stand out from the crowd."
More from Geoff later.
It also has 'privacy glass', and the version at the show appears to have that strange, blue under-lighting which is so much admired on the Romford Ring Road and Southend Strip. The only way this chav-mobile could be any more pimped is if they replaced the back seats with super woofers pumping out R Kelly.They may have already done this - the privacy glass makes it difficult to tell.
But it's an off-road vehicle, isn't it? It's a 4x4, it's a Land Rover, it's got big wheels under very, very slightly bigger arches, it may not be the vehicle of choice when Oxfam want to deliver vaccines to Mogadishu, but it's still a Land Rover, isn't it?
Yes, don't you worry, old-school purists, it's still a Land Rover. You just have to remove the 'chin-spoiler' before leaving the tarmac. I kid you not. Oh, and probably the under-lighting. You might want to jack the suspension up a little too. Or, better still, just put a bike in the back. This is beyond satire - an off road vehicle you have to partially dismantle to drive off road. Could Land Rover get any stupider?
Of course they could. They could produce something like the 'All New Freelander 2', revealed to an expectant world for the very first time at the British International Motor Show. I wonder what Geoff has to say about this little carbuncle:
"Though the genes of the highly successful original Freelander are still clearly recognisable," says Land Rover design director, Geoff Upex,"the new model looks more premium and more grown-up, without losing it's sense of fun."
Sorry, Geoff, but it doesn't look 'more premium'. What it looks, Geoff, is like a a Kia sponsored by EasyJet. Hang your head in shame, Geoff. You've created the three most hideous things in England - these two cars, and the phrase 'more premium'.
Geoff, you are a wanker of the first water, and I want my planet back.
Tomorrow, I shall endeavour to find something nice to say about Land Rover. Not that Geoff's making it easy.
Comments
Graham, I have read many Greenpeace blogs and have enjoyed reading them all. but you are definitely the best writer so far. You write superbly; I love reading your posts. Please keep going!
Posted by: Kieron | July 23, 2006 12:12 AM
Hmmm, this bloke writes anything but 'superbly'. He sounds like a foot-stamping stroppy teen. "Meh, the Land Rover designer is a wanker" you really expect to be taken seriously making comments like that?
It's just more of this badly informed, misplaced, high-horsery: why not try bothering to find out where the real problems are...
Where are your protesters standing outside Luton airport? I've never seen them. Don't you think your time would be better spent trying to discourage people from taking three holidays abroad every year?
Or encouraging your members to get rid of their utterly filthy 2CVs?
Posted by: Peter Wadsworth (Motoring Journalist and Editor) | July 26, 2006 10:04 AM
Frankly I find the drivel on this whole site insulting and childish.
How can you expect to be taken seriously writing this blinkered rubbish ?
Your video whilst impressive in production value, is nothing but an invitation for people to become violent and insulting against others.
Grow up, quote facts not twaddle. 83MPG from a Prius ??? No chance.
Posted by: Simon Harper | July 28, 2006 11:28 PM
Peter, irrespective of writing style, it is the points being made that matter. You clearly have a vested interest in car manufacturing and sales as a journalist and editor of a motoring magazine. Why don't you use spend your time writing for a more worthwhile publication? If you understand anything about consumerisim and human nature, you'll realise that people only buy SUVs etc because in sheep-like fashion they feel they need to because it's 'advancement' and it's publications like yours that exacerbate this mistaken perception and hence the problem.
Five years ago I hardly saw any SUVs and now I see one every 20 cars.
It is shocking that at a time when petrol prices are rising (somewhat unnecessarily if you recorded BP's massive profits the other day), violent weather patterns are becoming a regular occurence, the concept of global warming is being covered regularly by news and current affairs programmes, people feel it is acceptable to buy a SUV. Quite frankly, what is wrong with these people?
I watched your short movie re an SUV driver - I also mutter 'wanker' under my breath at people I work with that drive this ridiculous vehicles! Greenpeace, I am forever in your debt - keep highlighting these immoral people!
Posted by: Cat | July 29, 2006 9:57 AM
Hello Simon, you're quite right that a Prius doesn't get 83mpg, that's the Honda Insight, a somewhat smaller hybrid. The Prius gets 65.7mpg on a combined cycle, which is actually less impressive than some of the diesel Citroens, although they're also a bit smaller. Unfortunately, the only place I've been able to locate this mistake is in your email - got a source?
Posted by: graham | July 29, 2006 2:37 PM
Actually, it is the brochure which claims the Prius does 65mpg. I have seen it tested on 4 motoring shows (Top Gear, Fifth Gear, Pulling Power and Maxi Test) and they all worked out that it actually did between 43 and 48mpg in real world conditions.
There are diesel suvs that can almost match that (Land Rover Discovery for one).
Posted by: jack | July 29, 2006 5:15 PM
Actually, Jack, it's the government's Vehicle Certification Agency which claims the Prius does 65.7mpg here : http://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk/search/vehicleDetails.asp?id=10982
Still, I'm sure Clarkson knows best...
Posted by: graham | July 29, 2006 5:28 PM
I'm an environmental research for the university of london, and i have been lucky enough to both visit the Honda Pruis production plant, and also drive one for 6 month. First point - i drove the Prius for six months in exactly the same sedate fashion i usually drive my 2 5 year old diesel Golf. I drive a mixture of motorway and town miles, and i managed an average of... 42.8mpg. In the previous 6 months whilst driving my Golf, i managed 48.5mpg!
Seconds point - according to Honda's own figures, the process for making the Prius produces EIGHT TIMES more harmful emissions than making the equivalent Civic! when you consider that the average car, used for 10 years, causes 25% of its harmfull emisions in the construction stage, the prius would have to be run for
Posted by: edwardb | January 20, 2007 8:29 PM
run for 15 years before it began to be more environmentally friendly than the Civic! Honda's own figures also show than the average Prius owner earns in excess of £54,000 p/a, and intends to keep the car for under 3 years!
Whilst the prius produces (marginally) less harmful emissions than most large cars, it more than makes up for it in the production stage. In fact, a recent study showed that the most "environmentaly friendly" car on the marked today, based on environmental cost to make, and emisions based on driving 12000 miles p/a over 10 years was.... the JEEP wrangler! This is due to its simple construction process.
Bottom line - if you really want to do your bit, ignore the smug Prius, the gas guzzling bus, and the electric train (which mearly produces its emissions elswhere, and then forces you to get a smelly 10yr old taxi to your destination!), and get a small/medium second hand diesel, like an astra, focus, golf etc, and run it until it dies!
Posted by: edwardb | January 20, 2007 8:38 PM
Hello Edwardb, you are quite right that there are some small diesels on the market with lower emissions than the Prius, including three Citroens, but I'm afraid most of your other arguements are a bit irrelevant. If Prius owners all sold their cars within the first week of buying them, that wouldn't make the Prius any more or less efficient. Buses are FAR more efficient than cars, even half-empty, ancient, knackered ones, and electric trains have the capability to be powered by clean energy, unlike diesel cars. The Jeep 'fact' I'm afraid I'm going to ignore unless you provide a source, as it sounds like nonsense to me. Was it, by any chance, from CNW Marketing Research? They tend to talk alot of nonsense. Finally, you haven't visited the Honda Pruis production plant, nor even the Honda Prius production plant, although I suppose it's just about possible that you might have visited the Toyota Prius production plant, borrowed the car for six months, and then forgotten which company it was.
Posted by: graham | January 22, 2007 10:47 AM
u r a fucin dick and u av got a biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiig head
Posted by: jamie henderson | February 21, 2007 10:39 AM
OK, I've posted Jamie's comment out of a spirit of freedom and democracy, but can future comments please be spellchecked or something. There are twelve words in that sentence (and I use the term loosely), only one of which is over four letters long, and yet he's managed to spell six of them incorrectly. How you can manage to grow up in Britain and not know how to spell the word 'fuck' I cannot imagine. Has he never been in a public toilet?
Come on chaps, for the honour of the motoring fraternity, do make a bit more of an effort.
Posted by: graham | February 21, 2007 5:27 PM