Nantha August 6, 2012 08:49 AM Sounds good on the surface, but really the high body, should be tested for stability against overturning in an accident. I may be wrong but in the US they have a "Moose Test"? IMHO, the authorities and the Cab companies need to be assured of safety as they ferry millions of passengers yearly.I suggest this because i once witnessed an accident in which a high bodied car or MPV, after hitting a vehicle beside it without too much impact, actually somersaulted and landed on its roof right beside me, as i was driving to get out of the way. Mark Penver August 6, 2012 09:58 AM Ugly things. It's as if they hire body kit mad graduates to design a car. You know, those body kits made for cars and don't actually suit them? Nissan had another chance to wow the world and that's what they show. Slowburn August 6, 2012 10:08 AM re; NanthaI once saw motorcycle T-bone a civic and the guy killed was the one in the car. Strange things happen.ps it was a Goldwing. Facebook User August 6, 2012 07:45 PM Fantastic. I wish we had taxis like these in Australia. We still have rediculously massive V6 Falcodores as the majority of our taxis which is just stupid. Slowburn August 7, 2012 01:24 AM re; Kriss Heibananas Is a Falcodore a specific model or a class. Ozuzi August 7, 2012 03:31 AM Slowburn, its a genus Kriss, we have a lot of Prius' in Tassie, about the only forward thinking thing. JPAR August 7, 2012 05:03 AM I've never understood the justification for taxis being 'efficient' public transport. How are they different from people using their own car, except for parking space? Many taxi's are only taking one person, yet require fuel to transport 2 (driver as well as passenger) and a vehicle capable of carrying six. Yet they get exempt from congestion charge, and they are allowed to use bus lanes. Why? I'd like to see 2 changes to the current system:1 - a new 'discounted' taxi capable of carrying only 2 passengers (or 1 wheelchair), and half the road space of the current minibus style.2 - ban on taxi's using bus lanes, so that real public transport becomes more efficient and quicker. The more people that use buses, the better the service will get. Mel Tisdale August 7, 2012 10:29 AM Having a 'maximum' turning circle of 25 feet must make roads that only curve slightly, or are even straight, impossible to drive along! However, being able to turn round 'on the spot' must make parking a piece of cake, or is there a more realistic minimum turning circle, too? bergamot69 August 7, 2012 01:06 PM @Nantha,Moose are a fairly rare sight in London for some reason. Therefore the moose test would be less relevent.I'm not in favour of these converted panel vans being used for taxi use. I very much doubt that they would offer the durability of the famous TX4 London taxi which was purpose-engineered for that job, and nothing else. And the TX4 is a truly iconic vehicle- with the dissappearance of the famous Routemaster bus it would be a shame if we saw the loss of these wonderful vehicles in favour of a panel van which is not likely to have the longevity of these taxis. Not only that but road tests of the NV200 criticise the ride quality, especially over potholed roads.@funglestrumpet, 'maximum turning circle' refers to the turning circle at full lock! The tiny turning circle requirement was initially brought in because of the extremely tight forecourt of the Savoy Hotel. Such vehicles can travel on straight roads thankfully! Slowburn August 7, 2012 01:25 PM re; funglestrumpetIt could be a typo or the circle made when making a maximum turn. Being an an American my dialect is different.