4x4s often seem to be criticised by envioronmentalists for their gas-guzzling properties . . .

[shivvy]

however, are 4x4s alone in this regard or are large engined muscle cars not just as guilty re fuel comsumption? If this is true, why do 4x4s always seem to be singled out and the large engined cars seem to get away with no mention?
I am not trying to make a point, I am genuinely interested in why they get all the flack.

[almcd007]

I think it depends on what your definition of "need"

Do you need two watches, do you need twenty four pairs of shoes - 8 pairs of jeans, HDTV, a TV in every room etc - it's freedom of choice. Some would argue that they do. I would argue that I don't want to drive a Skoda or a 1.6 litre petrol Toyota (Nothing against them used for arguments purposes) If I had a crash in the toyota against anyhting bigger than a mini - I and my children would be in trouble. My needs are different to other peoples and your budget defines your needs and vice versa. It also depends on mileage used - I dont do 70k anymore more - more like 8k in the X5 - so I doubt whether I'm poluting nowadays more than when I used to drive my 1.9litre diesel scenic.

Yes tax bigger cars more - but only if they do the mileage and are using the fuel that pollutes.

[ermm...]

calm down people, its a this how over 2l no point, you can get 400 bhp from that. so shud be taxed