SAFE car for a new baby

One piece of advice w.r.t. Scenic. Make absolutely sure you speak to the previous owner as some of them can be problematic. When they are good they are very very good, when they are bad they are .............(You know the rest)

A very useful resource for used cars reviews is www.honestjohn.co.uk then choose the car by car breakdown, on the LH side. It contains a 100% impartial review of every car on the market, used and new. You will see what cars have been reliable and what cars not.
 
my 2 cents.

I'm actually in the identical same position as the OP. New arrival, changing car etc etc.

My wife had a Clio. Great wee car.

We went for a new Focus in the end. 1.6 Zetec, 5 star NCAP, with ISOFix added.

Few things:
1. Re: the C-Max, Megane Scenic, Golf Plus, and their ilk. We tested the Focus C-max. They are just not worth the money. The ONLY thing that makes them safer is that they are heavier. This makes them a dog to drive.

2. I'm not convinced they have all that more room. Its just head-room. Dimension-wse, that are almost identical. How much difference does that make to a child? None. How much difference will that make to you? Probably very little

3. The ISOFix are a must in any car. Absolutely brilliant idea, and so simple to use.

4. Why look for a Jeep/minivan for your first child? Why not wait until you have 2!? and even then, I'd still go towards the bigger 4-door saloons rather thant he mini-vans or Aldi-SUV's (Rav-4, x-trail, sante-fe, honda cr-v, etc etc etc).

5. I would consider the Focus to be the smallest car I would have my wife use for the family transport; but that said, its a pretty big car (biggest in class by far, and most roomy). The hatchback is 6 inches longer than Megane or golf, which is a huge amount by any standard.

6. Excellent rear seat safety, with full length curtain airbags. 6 airbags in total.

7. Minivans, aldi-suv's and MPV's are completely different to drive than a car. There is little or no dirving experience, and the ride is like a boat.

8. the Zetec has the brilliant chassis (also now used in the new volvo S40), sports suspension, and huge 17" 205(width) tyres, so the drive and ride is fantastic.

Don't just consider safety alone when buying. Sure it should be no.1 on the list, but there is so much more to consider.
 
With all due respect, you are writing from an obviously prejudiced point of view rather than an objective point of view. It is obvious you have no idea how the SUVs you mention, and the mini-MPVs, handle. The ride is nothing like a boat and none of them handle like a dog.

Modern SUV and MPV are very practical cars and drive quite well. (I would contend they are pretty much all better to drive than most small cars, like Yaris, Clio, etc.)

The amount of times it is handy to have a van-like vehicle in the household will soon become apparent. While babies occupy little space, they have more baggage than any adult.


(And, since when was a FOCUS a "BIG" car?)
 
Gone Fishin' said:
(And, since when was a FOCUS a "BIG" car?)
Click to expand...

please re-read. 'Big' for its class. In fact, I've said it was the "smallest car I'd have my wife transport the family in". Don't be so argumentative!

Personally, (and this was 2 weeks ago) i found a monumental difference between the Focus and the identical C-max. both 1.6. Couldn't believe it. Felt like I was driving a bus.

My point was that Mini-MPV's don't really offer much extra. The dimensions are the same. Its just height, which naturally makes for a disimprovement in the ride and drive. And its not often that you will stack things to the roof.
 
FYI, the new Scenic are 5* rated, have isofix and we have a 4, 3 and 3 month in the back no problem, 4 and 3 y/o's in fitted seats, new born in carry chair, you can turn off front airbag if she happens to be in the front, not a dog to handle at all, 1.4 litre, grand for around the town and we can fit the new borns pram and the shopping in the boot no problem, you would not think it to look at the car from the outside but it is a bit of a tardis
 
have looked up the dimensions in the brochures:

Focus width: 170.6 inchdes
C-Max width: 170.9 inchdes

Focus length: 71.9 inchdes
C-Max length: 72.4 inchdes

The C-Max starts from €23.1k, the focus starts at €19.2k

Thats €4k for 0.5 inch extra in length, and (perhaps) 6 inches in height. Thats my point. Apologies if its laboured!

Also, Slave, you point is a good one; these are better suited to bigger families. I think the OP (and myself) only have 1. If we have another (in 2-4 years time perhaps), then we'd defo trade up again.
 
Paddyd,

You are right of course on the dimensions. Having owned a Focus I found it was definitely fine for parents + 1 child. The problem came when baby no. 2 arrived - there was simply no space in the boot for a double buggy and so on. The cabin was more than adequate - we changed car purely for the extra litres in the boot. The other problem with saloons is fitting 3 across the back seat. Try getting an adult into the back of a car with 2 child seats in place - pretty tight - this is where an MPV comes into its own.
 
This is getting silly.

A few facts -

SUV's handle and brake more poorly than other comparable cars. They are higher to provide clearance for off road work, & therefore have a much higher centre of gravity.

I've owned Focus hatchbacks, an estate, and C-Max's. The hatches handle best (the ST model is incredible) but have the smallest boot. The estate has a big boot, but is only available as an LX model, with a relatively low spec. The C-Max is a good compromise. The flexible seating system is very clever. Kids sit a little higher which they like. In Activ spec. it's actually cheaper than a similarly engined Zetec hatch. All 3 types handle well, although I wouldn't chuck an MPV into corners too hard.

I've owned 7 Foci so far so would consider myself fairly knowledgeable on them.

If you want double buggies, and a lot of luggage, and 4 people on board, you need a bigger MPV. An S-Max or Galaxy or similar.

The compact 7 seaters will carry people but nothing else. The rear seats are inches from the back window on a Zafira for example.

HTH.
 
Staples said:
Ah Bless. That makes the increased levels of environmental damage and risk to other road users all worthwhile.
Click to expand...

"The increased levels of environmental damage?" Negligible, and most modern SUVs are a hell of a lot cleaner than a 10 year old Corolla. Are you petitioning to remove them? I doubt it.

"........... and risk to other road users?" This is 100% poppycock and one of the few, tiresome, statements the anti-SUV brigade come out with time and time again. There is no increased risk to road users. The risk is the same as any other car.

Do you object to Artic trucks? Ford Transits? Rigid trucks? Busses? All these carry more risk to both the environment and other road users but how come the tree-huggers don't mention them? It's all because of inverted snobbery. SUVs carry all the pique from the ill-informed, all those jealous of others' possesions. If SUVs were banned, the same objectors would find something else to moan about.


Me? I love my SUV. It's reliable, safe and economical.
 
I'll debate this issue with anybody but I've yet to see any rational well thought out arguments from the SUV opponents.
 
Gone Fishin' said:
I'll debate this issue with anybody but I've yet to see any rational well thought out arguments from the SUV opponents.
Click to expand...

which SUV is it?

Personally, I have no problem with City Jeeps or SUV's. I think its the whole 'Ah but they pedestrians don't have a chance if hit by one' arguement that people like to wheel out; and I have to agree with you there; while it might be true, its poppycock when compared to being like by a bus truck or whatever.

also, for the tree huggers, most of the City Jeeps and SUV's ar enow diesels, and probably do the same mpg as any 1.8 or 2.0 petrol.

please note the distinction between City Jeeps and SUV's. SUV is an americam term for a luxury automatic jeep, Nagicators, X5s, M-Class merc, Cayenne, VW Tuareg etc.
City Jeeps are all 2L petrol jeeps, most with 2 and 4 wheel drive options. CR-V, X-trail, Rav-4, turacan, etc.
 
I have an Xtrail, 2.2 diesel, 40mpg and a plastic front. It's comparable with any car.
 
Gone Fishin' said:
I have an Xtrail, 2.2 diesel, 40mpg and a plastic front. It's comparable with any car.
Click to expand...

out of the big list of potential jeeps, that would be my choice I have to say.

As regards the plastic front, the NCAP test relates to hitting a predestrian at the front (obviously), but a Jeep will hit them above waist height and will push them forward, whereas a car will hit them above knee height, and throw them over the car (which is safer, in a less-hurtful sort of way!).

This is a debate that will go on and on.

I heard Ray D'Arcy giving out yards to some SUV-supporting fella yesterday; infact he was a little OTT I thought. Ban all SUV's immediately, etc etc.
 
Gone Fishin';321243 "........... and risk to other road users?" This is 100% poppycock and one of the few said:
Are you seriously making out that an SUV is equivalent to (say) a small car, if they both crashed side on into an average car? Are you really saying that the larger, heavier, SUV with greater ground clearance would not do more damage?

If so, you might find this interesting:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_86RuYXoJA

I'm not anti-SUV, but I certainly would not want one to crash into me, because its more likely to do me serious damage than a regular vehicle... if you cannot accept this, no wonder you've "yet to see any rational well thought out arguments from the SUV opponents".
Click to expand...
 
Bootdog said:
Are you seriously making out that an SUV is equivalent to (say) a small car, if they both crashed side on into an average car? Are you really saying that the larger, heavier, SUV with greater ground clearance would not do more damage?

If so, you might find this interesting:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_86RuYXoJA

I'm not anti-SUV, but I certainly would not want one to crash into me, because its more likely to do me serious damage than a regular vehicle... if you cannot accept this, no wonder you've "yet to see any rational well thought out arguments from the SUV opponents".
Click to expand...

With all due respect that is a ridiculous argument. Who, of us, can choose who is going to hit us? There are so many cars of different sizes, why pick on an SUV and a small car? You will rarely get an accident like Monaghan's recent accident, where 2 identical cars crashed into each other.

Using this logic why not ban all large cars as they might hit something smaller than themselves. What about our Minister for Environment's choice of car? 2.125 tonnes of Lexus. (The same as a Rav 4, but heavier than a BMW X5). If he hits a Yaris then God help the Yaris.

What about Bertie Ahern's car? 2.475 tonnes. Heavier than a lot of SUV's, and, given the speed it is driven at, possibly the most dangerous car in the State?

What about all the Vans and trucks? Heavier, less stable and a hell of a lot more dangerous than any SUV, but one never hears any opposition to their presence on the roads? (Despite they being in a hell of a lot more accidents than any SUV)

When I buy a car I consider the safety of me and my occupants first. Others, second.

I would consider combody buying a Yaris to be reckless with the safety of their own health and that of their occupants.

Unfortunately accidents will happen and if people have not taken appropriate measures to protect themselves it's unfortunate.

If somebody, through their driving, causes harm to others then they deserve the full rigours of the Law, REGARDLESS of what they are driving.

To me all the anti-SUV hysteria is ill informed and ridiculous. Blaming the car when it's obvious the venom is being directed at the drivers, and their perceived social status, is pathetic.

There are a hell of a lot more dangerous drivers in non-SUVs than in SUVs, but that is conveniently ignored too.

So what if you see a BMW X5 in the Supermarket car park. Rest content that the owner has just contributed e50,000 in tax for the education of your children.
 
You completely missed my point and ignored my question. I can't choose who hits me, but YOU can choose what you hit someone with. If you choose an SUV you are also choosing to do more damage and injury to the person you hit. This creates a greater risk to those people than if you chose a lighter car, or a car with same weight and lower centre of gravity.

About the govt. cars, don't cars almost always stop quicker than SUVs due to stiffer suspension and generally lower profile tyres on cars? Would your x-trail outbrake a Primera or a Micra?

Re the trucks - one of the aims of the biggest civil engineering project ever undertaken in the state was to get trucks off the quays ... but don't get me started on the Port Tunnel.

"When I buy a car I consider the safety of me and my occupants first. Others, second."
Thats fair enough (thats why I never bought the likes of a Yaris), but I would still never consider an SUV. You also might find this interesting : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIKu1UDoa6s

Haven't seen much anti-SUV hysteria myself recently (you must be getting a lot of stick over it ??? :) ), maybe its more in the UK... and I wouldn't attach any particular social status to them either.

I might actually agree with you on there being less dangerous drivers in SUVs - boy racers / enthusiastic-drivers-who-don't-like-to-see-themselves-as-boy-racers don't generally go for them (would that be because they don't handle so well I wonder?).
 
Once again we seem to have strayed from the question that bagoftricks originally asked!
 
Why does eveyone go buy a SUV or Jeep. Buying a big feck ass york like that for two people, that makes sense.

Big is better.

Traditionally Renault have the safest NCAP ratings.

Although the cars can go wrong.

My recommendations:

Skoda Octavia
Honda Civic (new)
Opel Astra.
Ford Focus.
Toyota Corrolla.

I picked these cars due to fuel ecomony and booth size and interior equipment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top