Sir — I am not an eco-activist, nor do I condone letting down the tyres of 4x4 vehicles. The poor dears who drive them have enough on their plates already, what with escalating fuel prices and the ever-growing cost of keeping horses.

But I really must question the objectivity of David Duffy, in the light of his glowing review of the Volvo XC90 in the motoring section (September 26).

If Mr Duffy really needs to transport a six-a-side team plus manager, he could buy an MPV for about half the price, in a much cheaper insurance group (group 10 or 11 instead of 15), and a lower tax band (probably D instead of F). Plus get around 33 per cent better fuel economy (around 45mpg compared to 34mpg).

But what I find hardest to comprehend is why anyone would want to buy a thing like the XC90 in the first place. With the styling of a Victorian lavatory cistern and the aerodynamics of a four-drawer filing cabinet, what sort of fashion statement is it trying to make? And as for its ability to handle extreme off-road terrain, how many UK motorists ever venture further off-road than the overspill parking for the school fete?

So while Mr Duffy and Mr Clarkson may enjoy driving the vehicular equivalent of beer-belly-enhancement surgery, why on earth does The Oxford Times devote a whole front page to its promotion?

Rick Sturrock, Merton