The Irritations of Modern Life: 51. People Carriers

John Walsh
Tuesday 29 June 1999 23:02 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

SO NOW we know. Should you crash head-first into something while driving your people carrier, four things will happen: the front section will cave in, the steering wheel will plunge into your chest like a metal assegai, your left leg will be sheared off and, because the child restraints are so ineffectual, your children will fly across the vehicle like doomed Peter Pans. Oh, and any pedestrian hit in this notional accident runs a higher than usual risk of being killed. So much for the British middle- class family's ultimate travelling machine.

Perhaps I exaggerate. After all, only the Chrysler Voyager scored the "zero safety rating" in tests at the Transport Research Laboratory in Berkshire. But the Peugeot 806 and the Vauxhall Cintra scored only one star for "pedestrian protection"; and of the eight vehicles tested only the Renault Espace and the Toyota Picnic got four-star ratings. "Unfortunately," the report concluded, "many of the `people carriers' we tested provided a very poor safety performance in frontal collisions".

Hah! I always thought there must be something wrong with them. But then I've loathed them for years for all kinds of non-technical reasons. They park outside the school gate, taking up acres of suburban lebensraum. They are a waste of space. Oh, but I'm forgetting. They're people carriers, not cars; they have a higher function than cars (symbolised by the driver's height above the road); they are transporters of personnel, as in a war. They suggest that this family is so in demand it's always in transit, dividing its time between school, gym, restaurant and party, between town house and sylvan glade.

They barrel along the motorway crammed with the impedimenta of middle- England holidaymaking. You can hear the wife cooing down from the bedroom window, "Darling, did you put the asparagus kettle in the Picnic?" These families. radiate smugness. They are driving the Chrysler Smug. They think it's the next thing up from driving a Volvo. But it's not. It's like driving a naff-looking cardboard box and pretending it's a tank.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in