# Typical 4X4's



## the reluctant cyclist (23 Jun 2009)

I haven't really had much bad luck with any so far but this morning I was merrily cycling along by a school - I was making good progress - about 19mph when all of the sudden directly outside the school gate, right in the middle of the road without pulling in, indicating or anything the 4X4 in front of my stops dead and just as I am thinking about overtaking it - inside or outside - all three passenger doors swing open and four girls jump out in the road without a by your leave on mummy's instructions! 

For god's sake - I don't understand why it is okay to just do that - if she had at least indicated her intentions it might have helped but she literally just stopped dead! 

I wouldn't mind but about 25 feet (literally) up the road there was plenty of places to pull in that weren't in the middle of the road or right next to the yellow zig zag lines! 

I know it's not even an "incident" as such but god it pi55ed me off big time!

I need to root around in my desk for a nice chill pill!!!!


----------



## Bigtwin (23 Jun 2009)

the reluctant cyclist said:


> but she literally just stopped dead!




In which case it seems a bit hard to criticise her driving.


----------



## very-near (23 Jun 2009)

Nice - thanks for the stereotype


----------



## Tynan (23 Jun 2009)

Stopping in the middle of the road without signaling and then opening three doors in the middle of the road without signaling or making sure it was safe to do so?

granted it was outside a school but that's still inconsiderate/dangerous driving


----------



## John the Monkey (23 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> Nice - thanks for the stereotype



One of the most considerate drivers on my commute drives a Silver, 57 reg. X5 (balance restored?) fwiw.


----------



## Tynan (23 Jun 2009)

I defo find that 4x4s and mpvs are more inconsiderate than other cars, broadly speaking

and that's over thirty years, when MPVs first appeared, the people that drove them then all drive 4x4s now, it a valid stereotype


----------



## very-near (23 Jun 2009)

Tynan said:


> Stopping in the middle of the road without signaling and then opening three doors in the middle of the road without signaling or making sure it was safe to do so?
> 
> granted it was outside a school but that's still inconsiderate/dangerous driving



She did signal - she used her brake lights!


----------



## Bigtwin (23 Jun 2009)

To be fair, it does take a certain mentality to drive an environment destroying, fuel guzzling, cash squandering, car crushing status symbol on the school run in a splendid effort to ensure less planet for those inside to enjoy when they grow up.


----------



## very-near (23 Jun 2009)

Bigtwin said:


> To be fair, it does take a certain mentality to drive an environment destroying, fuel guzzling, cash squandering, car crushing status symbol on the school run in a splendid effort to ensure less planet for those inside to enjoy when they grow up.



Given your previous disclosure of piloting a plane, do you see the irony in this post ?


----------



## Bigtwin (23 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> Given your previous disclosure of piloting a plane, do you see the irony in this post ?



No I don't. But if you'd like to take it up with HM Forces, perhaps they could see their way to adopting peace protests in weave-your-own yurts instead of using aircraft. Let me know how you get on.

If you argument is that we have planes, so that makes it fine to drive the kids to school every day doing <20 mpg in a frickin great 4x4, then I think we can just leave that to stick to the wall.


----------



## very-near (23 Jun 2009)

Bigtwin said:


> No I don't. But if you'd like to take it up with HM Forces, perhaps they could see their way to adopting peace protests in weave-your-own yurts instead of using aircraft. Let me know how you get on.
> 
> If you argument is that we have planes, so that makes it fine to drive the kids to school every day doing <20 mpg in a frickin great 4x4, then I think we can just leave that to stick to the wall.



I spent a couple of hours at Kemble airfield on sunday see the pic below (Copyright Linf© )

It reinforced my belief that what people do for entertainment is every bit as wasteful as what they do out of necessity.

What did you used to fly BTW ?


----------



## jimboalee (23 Jun 2009)

The driver is responsible for passengers younger than sixteen. Throwing doors open ahead of a cyclist is "endangering the life of other roadusers".

It happened to me once outside Ruckleigh Prep School on Lode Lane, Solihull ( upper class twit of the year school ).
Nearside rear passenger door.
I didn't stop short and leant on it to strain the hinges ( making sure there was some metal stretching sounds ). Then I shouted to the driver "Teach them to use their eyes!"

How is a cyclist going to bend the B post of a Mercedes if the rear door isn't open?


----------



## very-near (23 Jun 2009)

> I'd like to take this opportunity to repeat the story of the time I was on my bike and followed a school-run 4x4, which slowed to crawling pace at every speed hump.



You of course don't need to on the bike because you aren't hitting your head on the roof when going through it at 20mph


----------



## J4CKO (23 Jun 2009)

Type of car is irrelevant, my saloon car is telling me it is enjoying Super Plus at the rate of 23 miles per gallon, some 4 by 4's are more economical than that, I do see that outside my kids school though, Range Rovers driven at 40 plus between two lines of parked car, bimbo mum with phone stuck to ear, kids stood up in back, its not the cars fault its driven by idiots but the big off roaders do seem to attract them, maybe they compensate for their crap driving in choosing (what they assume to be) is a a safe car ?

I use less than a tank of fuel per month by the way, sometimes one every two so it doesnt matter what my car does to the gallon, its not just the consumption its the frequency of use.

I cannot be doing with people who needlessly waste resources, but also I cannot be doing with over zealous eco warriors.


----------



## ianrauk (23 Jun 2009)

Lovely pic. It will be at the Biggin Hill Airshow this year.. so hoping I will get a nice view if it flys over chez ianrauk



very-near said:


>


----------



## very-near (23 Jun 2009)

> There's a long way between crawling speed and 20mph
> You've just given a perfect illustration of the complete inappropriateness of 4x4s on roads



Give it a rest will you. You could say the same about any luxury car. 

A 6 litre 2 tonne S class Merc is only licensed to carry 5 occupants so why choose one over a Daewoo Matiz which is also licensed to carry 5 people ?

Come to think of it why did you bother with a Tino when you could get by with a much smaller and more economical car like a Suzuki WagonR ?


----------



## tyred (23 Jun 2009)

> This thread is about the pointlessness of 4x4s on a school run. Nothing to do with luxury saloons.



So it's okay to do the school run in a Merc S Class but not in a Range Rover. What difference does it make?


----------



## jimboalee (23 Jun 2009)

I've deleted that post.

Yeh, some peanut put his Jensen in front of my beautiful Nissan Note


----------



## jimboalee (23 Jun 2009)

Oh bugger. Tyred pasted it 

Someone from JaguarLandRover might be viewing and then I'll be 'Blackballed' for the next redundancies


----------



## tyred (23 Jun 2009)

Okay. Fixed. Post deleted. Don't want the nice people at LR knowing you drive a Nissan.


----------



## very-near (23 Jun 2009)

> You've seen a photo of our main car. It's the same size, if not smaller than, a Wagon R. And more economical. The other one only comes out when we need it.
> 
> This thread is about the pointlessness of 4x4s on a school run. Nothing to do with luxury saloons. Or practical Nissan family cars.



The technical spec for the Tino is Here weight = 1335kg length 4264mm

By contrast, the technical spec for the Wagon R is Here = 855kg = length 3400mm

What made you choose the Tino over a smaller car, what made you decide you must have such a large car by comparison to something which would have also suited your needs ? status and keeping up with the jones's perhaps


----------



## jimboalee (23 Jun 2009)

tyred said:


> I might envy your car but I don't envy your fuel bills.



Its insured for 1500 miles per year, which is only 120 gallons. Its been about £525 since last summer.
Insurance is £135 fully comp for that milage and Road tax is £185 pa.
MOT is £45.

I spend £20 every week in the Canteen to fuel my bike, so which costs less? ( hint - 46 weeks per year ).


----------



## very-near (23 Jun 2009)

> Read my post again, thickie-



So the main car isn't the Tino when you take the family out ? Seems a bit pointless having it doesn't it ?


----------



## tyred (23 Jun 2009)

jimboalee said:


> Its insured for 1500 miles per year, which is only 120 gallons. Its been about £525 since last summer.
> Insurance is £135 fully comp for that milage and Road tax is £185 pa.
> MOT is £45.
> 
> I spend £20 every week in the Canteen to fuel my bike, so which costs less? ( hint - 46 weeks per year ).



And there is the other advantage to driving an older car, you don't suffer the chequebook withering depreciation that people who insist on buying new have to put up with.


----------



## jimboalee (23 Jun 2009)

The 'school run' Range Rover argument is Safety.

Parents who can afford them, will buy them.

Although I work for JaguarLandRover, I only like the Defender model. It is the traditional working vehicle and does good work around the world with relief agencies and peacekeeping forces.

I've been on the Solihull site many times, but take on an instant dislike to the whole 4 x 4 luxury ethos, - 'Chelsea tractors' - since my Great, Great Grandfather was robbed in 1936 when the government 'stole' his land to build a tank engine factory.


----------



## very-near (23 Jun 2009)

> Well done.
> 
> 
> Nope. There are other reasons.



Like

A) Taking rubbish to the tip ? - get a trailer and hitch it to the runaround

Or

 Letting the Neighbours know you can live with the depreciation of a new car ? A show of status.


----------



## very-near (23 Jun 2009)

> Are you really that interested, or are you just desperate to trip me up?
> 
> I'll explain if you really want me to.
> 
> ...



So why not just flog it and live with the cheap runaround then ?

If you are going to criticise people for their car choices, at least start off on the moral high ground old chap


----------



## very-near (23 Jun 2009)

> I'll explain if you're really that bothered. Though I doubt you do, as it will take the wind out of your sails.



Still waiting


----------



## very-near (23 Jun 2009)

> Both need car for work.
> 
> One job requires equipment to be carried.
> 
> Enough, or you want more?



Can't you fold the seats down in the runaround ? ?


----------



## Joe24 (23 Jun 2009)

Linf, your 4x4 isnt even a proper 4x4 is it. I mean, its more of a ponces 4x4 then a big mans 4x4.
Why didnt you get a mans 4x4 instead of your ugly thing.
We have 2 cars though Linf. Have you got a problem with that? 
One is a pretty large one, one is pretty small.
What do you need a 4x4 for anyway Linf? How often do you go offroad? Or do you just use it to tow your horseys around?


----------



## very-near (23 Jun 2009)

> See point 1.
> 
> Sheesh, you're slow on the uptake sometimes.
> 
> Do feel free to continue with your spade.



You mean you carry people around for work ?


----------



## jack the lad (23 Jun 2009)

Admin - Is there a forum setting that stops V-N and MP ever posting in the same thread. Yawwwwn.


----------



## Landslide (23 Jun 2009)

jack the lad said:


> Admin - Is there a forum setting that stops V-N and MP ever posting in the same thread. Yawwwwn.



I'm not sure whether to nominate this for "Post Of The Year" or the "Stating The Blindingly Obvious" award. No offence intended to jack...


----------



## John the Monkey (23 Jun 2009)

jack the lad said:


> Admin - Is there a forum setting that stops V-N and MP ever posting in the same thread. Yawwwwn.



It is a bit itchy and scratchy sometimes.


----------



## very-near (23 Jun 2009)

Joe24 said:


> Linf, your 4x4 isnt even a proper 4x4 is it. I mean, its more of a ponces 4x4 then a big mans 4x4.
> Why didnt you get a mans 4x4 instead of your ugly thing.
> We have 2 cars though Linf. Have you got a problem with that?
> One is a pretty large one, one is pretty small.
> What do you need a 4x4 for anyway Linf? How often do you go offroad? Or do you just use it to tow your horseys around?



Good attempt Joe  Shame you don't drive 

It was bought purely as a tow car, but no horse shows ATM so no need to run it. It is torquey, but fairly gutless and was bought because of its weight (needs to be heavy) and not for massive performance. The ability to go offroad is a bonus, but not the primary reason get it. If the horses go, then so will the car.

My regular commute is 2 wheels of one form or another. Cars are for girls


----------



## Joe24 (23 Jun 2009)

Linf, im driving Sorry pal
Bought a 4x4 for towing? You should have researched more, you can tow pretty decent amount with a normal saloon car.
The Skoda we have can tow a pretty heavy weight(and has pulled the caravan all around Europe, in some very very hills places, and towed a very heavy trailor off a field) and gets 40+mpg
No need for a 4x4
How much does your horsey trailor weigh with horseys in?


----------



## very-near (23 Jun 2009)

Joe24 said:


> Linf, im driving Sorry pal
> Bought a 4x4 for towing? You should have researched more, you can tow pretty decent amount with a normal saloon car.
> The Skoda we have can tow a pretty heavy weight(and has pulled the caravan all around Europe, in some very very hills places, and towed a very heavy trailor off a field) and gets 40+mpg
> No need for a 4x4
> How much does your horsey trailor weigh with horseys in?



2200kg with both of them aboard.
Your Skoda could pull it, but it wouldn't be safe, and wouldn't be legal either. I used to have a Xantia which could just about pull the trailer empty legally, but it was fairly scary as its weight really pushed the car around on the downhill (and the trailers brakes worked well). 

Do you honestly think I would want to drive a car (with a 0-60mph time of about 30 seconds) which does 15mpg around town when we are paying £5 per gallon for Diesel ?


----------



## Joe24 (23 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> 2200kg with both of them aboard.
> Your Skoda could pull it, but it wouldn't be safe, and wouldn't be legal either. I used to have a Xantia which could just about pull the trailer empty legally, but it was fairly scary as its weight really pushed the car around on the downhill (and the trailers brakes worked well).
> 
> Do you honestly think I would want to drive a car (with a 0-60mph time of about 30 seconds) which does 15mpg around town when we are paying £5 per gallon for Diesel ?



Well you do, dont you?
And actually, it would be legal if my dad was driving it
If its costing you so much to go around town in that,m why not get a little run about then Linf?
Surely over time it would pay for itself by you getting more MPG, and saving on using your big 4x4(womanly 4x4, why did you get a shogun linf?)


----------



## very-near (23 Jun 2009)

Joe24 said:


> Well you do, dont you?
> And actually, it would be legal if my dad was driving it
> If its costing you so much to go around town in that,m why not get a little run about then Linf?
> Surely over time it would pay for itself by you getting more MPG, and saving on using your big 4x4(womanly 4x4, why did you get a shogun linf?)



We have got an A-class merc as a runaround joe. The Shogun has been SORN'd for 5 months as we are not doing any horse shows this year (so no need for a tow car ATM)

What gives you the idea it is less capable than any other 4x4 off road in it's class, and what experience have you to give you this inside knowledge ?


----------



## Joe24 (23 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> We have got an A-class merc as a runaround joe. The Shogun has been SORN'd for 5 months as we are not doing any horse shows this year (so no need for a tow car ATM)
> 
> *What gives you the idea it is less capable than any other 4x4 off road in it's class, and what experience have you to give you this inside knowledge ?*



A brain.
A class merc as a run around?


----------



## very-near (23 Jun 2009)

Joe24 said:


> A brain.
> A class merc as a run around?



so no real experience then 

The Merc does what we need. I've never really been that much into cars TBH

Seeing as you like being impressed with numbers in a 'top trumps' kind of way Joe, an Audi RS4 will do 0-100-0mph in about 15.5 seconds (no slouch). 

The bike I'm commuting on at the moment has done the same benchmark test in 10.79 seconds which is a whole shed load more performance than any road legal car (baring a Veyron)

Now with this in mind, why am I going to feel diminished by any criticism of any car I use to run my family around in ?


----------



## Joe24 (23 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> so no real experience then
> 
> The Merc does what we need. I've never really been that much into cars TBH
> 
> ...




I dont actually think you should be allowed to have anything more then a supermarket shopping trolley. Seriously.
You have said before you got road rage and went out in your 4x4 looking for the people.
You should stay off the road.


----------



## very-near (23 Jun 2009)

Joe24 said:


> I dont actually think you should be allowed to have anything more then a supermarket shopping trolley. Seriously.
> You have said before you got road rage and went out in your 4x4 looking for the people.
> You should stay off the road.



I've calmed down a bit since then Joe - it was a knob about your age throwing a drink over me when I was cycling up the road minding my own business which fired me up.

The thing I've noticed about cycling and m/cycling is the lack of respect from other road users I get on the cycle, and the contrast to when I'm on the m/cycle where I get loads.

How long ago did you say you passed your test ?


----------



## very-near (23 Jun 2009)

User3143 said:


> Why?



Because it would exceed the MAM of a 1300kg car.


----------



## Panter (23 Jun 2009)

I certainly wouldn't attempt to pull a 2.2t trailer with anything other than a heavy 4X4.

Call me irresponsible if you like, but that's just the way it is.


----------



## tandemman (23 Jun 2009)

The caravan club advises no more than an 85% trailer to car weight ratio. the point to note is that it is illegal to exceed the car manufacturers plated gross train weight or for the trailer to exceed it's maximum plated weight .


----------



## Jim_Noir (23 Jun 2009)

Happy days


----------



## ComedyPilot (23 Jun 2009)

What I don't get is that this whole 'school run' topic is well known to people in this country, and it is reknowned to cause chaos at kicking out time - yet they still insist on driving the kids 500 yards to school????

The only reason is because they are selfish. We collectively as a nation have become Americanised in our motoring habits, and it sucks. 

Please can we change?


----------



## Black Sheep (23 Jun 2009)

Bigtwin said:


> To be fair, it does take a certain mentality to drive an environment destroying, fuel guzzling, cash squandering, car crushing status symbol on the school run in a splendid effort to ensure less planet for those inside to enjoy when they grow up.



yet some land rovers return more mpg than a vauxhall corsa


----------



## very-near (23 Jun 2009)

> Anyway, going back to the OP...
> 
> The area that RC cycles through is pretty afluent and has some expensive schools around. It's very similar to Sutton Coldfield, where it's not uncommon for roads to become virtually blocked at 3.30 each day by X5s and XC90s parked randomly around school entrances, half or fully on pavements, and covering zigzag lines.



Need pics with reg numbers - can you provide them


----------



## Bigtwin (23 Jun 2009)

ComedyPilot said:


> What I don't get is that this whole 'school run' topic is well known to people in this country, and it is reknowned to cause chaos at kicking out time - yet they still insist on driving the kids 500 yards to school????
> 
> The only reason is because they are selfish. We collectively as a nation have become Americanised in our motoring habits, and it sucks.
> 
> Please can we change?



Spot on. At my son's school, even the other mums park their sodding Range Rovers and XC90 and the like on the pavements thus stopping other parents using them. There is a huge carpark, on the same side of the road as the school, less than 50 yds away.

With that sort of mentality, what hope is there.


----------



## very-near (23 Jun 2009)

User3143 said:


> Which is?
> 
> edit: What's the maximum weight you can pull with a B license and then with a B+E. Look this up and then see that you are....WRONG!



I am aware of the ratio guidance (or lack of it), and you can exceed the MAM of the towing vehicle with a trailer which is within it's MAM with a B+E license, but the reality is you will most likely be done for carrying an unsafe load if stopped - which would invalidate your insurance in the event it caused an accident.

Only someone extremely stupid would attempt to tow a laden trailer weighing twice that of the car, and this is why the caravan club guidelines of 85% are regarded as good practice.


----------



## very-near (23 Jun 2009)

> No you don't.



Yes I do


----------



## very-near (23 Jun 2009)

> It's almost as if you're defending people you don't even know, just because you feel some affinity because you also own a 4x4. In all other respects, the school run mom is about as far from you as you can get.
> 
> Strange.



No what I am questioning is the notion that the pavements are littered with them when its time to drop the kids off.

Now I'd be interested to see how many kids parents in the school actually own them as a percentage, and how many of them as a percentage are used in the school run over other vehicles, and then how many of them actually park on the pavement in comparison to regular car drivers for an unbiased view.

Given this thread is titled 'Typical 4x4's' , don't you think it right and proper to check to see if there is any mileage in it, or is it just another pop at a soft target which you are happy to run with given your already known sentiments towards the owners of them as a group ?


----------



## Rhythm Thief (24 Jun 2009)

I used to live opposite a good school in a relatively affluent area. The road outsid (which I had an excellent view of from my third floor flat) was always crowded with badly driven Chelsea tractors at dropping off and kicking out times. Occasionally, I'd park an articulated lorry on the road for an hour or so, then go upstairs and watch the chaos unfold as everyone tried to find somewhere to park to avoid Jocasta and Jeremy having to walk more than 15 yards.


----------



## sheddy (24 Jun 2009)

I am constantly amazed as to why motorists think they have a right to park on the pavement.
I don't ever recall having to do this in 30yrs+ of driving, and I would be ashamed and embarrassed if my driving skills were that pathetic.


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

> And you've been given plenty of examples.
> 
> Obviously it depends where you live.
> 
> ...



I live on the edge of one of the most deprived area in the UK, the schools my kids went to was full of the chavs from these areas so it is fair to say we have inner city schools here as well as posh private ones. 

There was a protest a few years ago outside a private prep school which feeds the Ladies college. They ticketed a couple of the 4x4s which were turning up to drop their kids off with some dummy tickets.

The thing is though, the parents of half of these kids don't even live in the town. They are farmers/land owners, lawyers, high flying business people, MP's etc who live out in the sticks. They aren't representative of the population of the town.

You can go to any private school and see this happening, and if they aren't in a 4x4, they are in a big **** off Merc, or Beemer which are equally as difficult to park as any other car.

Given mine is a medium sized 4x4 but has a slightly smaller footprint than a Mondeo estate, I'd say this notion that they are massive vehicles is bogus.


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

> *And the doors?
> *
> You're taking criticism of 4x4s personally again.
> 
> And you're well aware of the number of the never-off-road things in Cheltenham, so I don't know why you're pretending that things are different.



Come again ?


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

> The doors. Of the average 4x4.
> 
> Ever parked next to one?



Every day. I've got one sat on the drive


----------



## tandemman (24 Jun 2009)

I think some people have jumped on the 4X4 hate bandwagon, without actually looking at the car size/fuel consumption side of things. My Freelander does more mpg than the wifes Mini and has a smaller footprint than a Mondeo estate, furthermore it is only in four wheel drive when the front wheels start to slip (safety feature not pose value). Maybe if people took a step back from the fashionable eco-warrior standpoint they may see that a lot of their arguments are less based on act than they previously supposed.
I work 200 yards from our local school and there is no group of cars that could reasonably be said to be any more disrespectful of other road users than any other. I've worked here for 20 years I know of what I speak.


----------



## John the Monkey (24 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> ...but has a slightly smaller footprint than a Mondeo estate, I'd say this notion that they are massive vehicles is bogus.



They tend to be taller, so they're a ballache for other traffic to see over (unlilke a Mondeo Estate) - for those of us that need to anticipate road conditions because we aren't surrounded by roll cages &c this can make them more problematic than conventional cars.

The fronts of them tend to be higher than those of normal cars, and in some cases shaped differently (that line is blurry because of the "car like" categories of 4x4, with more conventional front profiles). That can make the outcome if they do hit something/someone significantly worse for that something/someone.

That said, I'd sooner have a considerately driven 4x4 on the road with me than a (say) Cinquicento or Smart car driven by someone with a Clarkson-esque attitude to speed and other road users. FWIW, (as said previously) one of the more considerate drivers I see on my regular commute is at the wheel of an X5. In Manchester, he's very much the exception, (ime) - where I live, (fairly rural) I see 4x4 vehicles driven considerately more often than not[1] (small hatchbacks driven by local lads are a bigger problem here).

[1] Caveat - Manchester I'm cycling on weekday's at peak times, at home it's generally before or after rush hour, and early on weekend mornings, which could skew things.


----------



## Maizie (24 Jun 2009)

> The issue is about suitability.
> 
> What's the point of a never-off-road 4x4? There's a better car whatever the response -safer, roomier, more efficient, cheaper, faster.
> 
> So why do people buy them?



People probably think our 4x4 is "unsuitable" - and it is, for Hertfordshire.
But people don't tend to realise that we go on holiday in some rather rural parts of the UK, and having something that can easily go up a muddy green lane is very very handy (they know we holiday in rural UK, it just doesn't connect with them that this sometimes means hilly/slippery/muddy/etc).
Said people tend to look slightly mollified when we explain this, and then we add that it currently does 44mpg and they are invariably shocked and often admit their 'sensible' car doesn't do as well as that.


----------



## tandemman (24 Jun 2009)

> Where on the other hand, there's a Volvo saloon which averages over 60mpg.
> 
> The issue is about suitability.
> 
> ...


Volvo saloon not suitable to pull my caravan
Volvo saloon same NCAP rating as my F2
Volvo saloon not as roomy as my F2
Volvo saloon more efficient in what respect, try to be a little more precise
Volvo saloon cheaper because smaller etc no real point for comparison
Volvo saloon as capable of our national speed limit of 70 as every other car on the road
F2 is in fact the same engine and platform as a S-Max or a XC90, cos until TATA bought them they were all Fords.


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

> Where on the other hand, there's a Volvo saloon which averages over 60mpg.
> 
> The issue is about suitability.
> 
> ...



I can't speak for others, but I know why I bought mine. I actually wanted a Subaru Forester but it just wouldn't cut it (not heavy enough).

The height of a vehicle doesn't make it take anymore space on the road. 

The door issue you are digging at is a non starter as 2 door cars have longer doors than 4 door cars


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

> Fair enough. Though we spend 2 weeks every year driving the lanes of Cornwall. Never had a problem in our cars.



Try dragging a trailer or caravan out of a muddy field and will immediately see the attraction of 4wd.

4wd ability is a bit like having strong brakes or air bags. Until you actually need it, you might struggle to see the point!


----------



## the reluctant cyclist (24 Jun 2009)

Woah - what have I started!!?

I suppose I should have thought of a better title it's just that I have seen sooo much critisism of these sorts of cars but not come accross it first hand that much!

I saw her again this morning but this time she was stuck in a queue of traffic so was managing to wait without doing anything stupid!

I have to disagree with a couple of the points above re the amount outside schools etc. There are loads outside the schools in Edgbaston - especially the Edgbaston High School that is by the Botanical Gardens in Birmingham. I seriously doubt very much whether any of these vehicles are ever needed to be used off road and half the people driving them around cities are rubbish women drivers (and I am a woman!)

The last time I had an encounter with one was a couple of years ago when there was really really heavy snow one morning - I was coming down a side road on my mountain bike, slowly and carefully in one of the tyre tracks in the middle of the road. Out of a side road came a woman in her 4X4 - she then proceeded to try and use the same tracks I was using and force me into the deep snow at the side of the road. I don't understand why she thought her bloody monstrosity couldn't cope with the snow at the side of the road but I could! Just like I don't understand why stupid bint yesterday thought it was okay to hold me up by stopping dead in front of me and then letting all her kids out! 

I don't understand the attraction of such vehicles - to me cars are a symbol of speed and grace (even if you can't do more than 20mph anymore) and a good looking car is a sleek one! Give me a Jaguar XKR any day of the week (and a couple for the weekends too!!!).


----------



## tandemman (24 Jun 2009)

THere are plenty of mountain bikes that never go up or down a mountain, there are plenty of touring cycles that never tour, there are plenty of road racing bikes that have never entered a road race,
I believe it is called freedom of choice.


----------



## jimboalee (24 Jun 2009)

You think we've ( UK ) got it bad.
I worked for a while in Greenville, South Carolina.

There, there were big yellow buses to get the kids to and from school, but it didn't stop mum driving a 7 foot tall SUV or even a F350 Heavy duty. To go to the mall.

Dad would have something BIG too. And a hot rod for the weekend.

One 'truck' would pull a speedboat and the other would pull a trailer full of jetskis.
Each 'truck', because that's what they call them, did about 7 mpg from a 7 litre engine.

Addmittedly, they've got a lot more land over there than we have. Ask RandoChap, and in that part of the country there was NO congestion.

In my two years in SC, I don't recall seeing a cyclist commuting to work. then again, their commute was about 40 - 50 miles along the freeway from the hillibillie sticks in a car that typically did less than 20 mpg ( US gallon ).

While I was there, I ran a Chevrolet Camaro Z28 IROC. 5.8 litres and 18 ish mpg. Gas was a dollar per gallon ( equiv 13p per litre in 1988 ).

Really rich kids went to school 20 - 25 miles out of town and there wasn't a yellow bus. Mum took them in her 'truck'. I remember it was called Hampton Park cus I live near Hampton in Arden.

At the High schools, there were 'Student's car parks'. they could drive at sixteen over there. There were some beaut cars, Vettes, Ponchos and Ponies.

If any kid cycled to school, he was singled out as a Frikkin Freak.


----------



## the reluctant cyclist (24 Jun 2009)

God don't say that - we'll have a spate of kiddies being drive to school in tractors!!!


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

> Need. That's the word.
> 
> On family trips and holidays in the UK, I have never needed a 4x4.
> 
> ...



As tandeman has pointed out, there are more MTBs than roadies on the roads. How many of them 'ever' go offroad ?

I have never needed help to pull my trailer out of any fields in the hundreds of events we have done over the years. The car has always been up to the job - but this is mostly down to tyre choice.

When we have done the cross country events it is always the horsebox lorries which need a tow, and not the 4wd cars.


----------



## John the Monkey (24 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> As tandeman has pointed out, there are more MTBs than roadies on the roads. How many of them 'ever' go offroad ?


I can see over/around an MTB.

(Just saying).


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

> Of course it is. No-one is suggesting they should be banned. Just questioning why they are needed solely for road use, with no towing.



How do you know if they are or not. Many new 4x4s have removable towbars (IE: they are stored in the boot until needed)


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

John the Monkey said:


> I can see over/around an MTB.
> 
> (Just saying).



The same can be said of WVMs and people carriers of which they well outnumber the 4x4s up my way.


----------



## fossyant (24 Jun 2009)

MTB's are "trendy", just like 4x4's though......


----------



## tandemman (24 Jun 2009)

In my MX5 I struggle to see over anything, in my 4X4 my visibility is much safer, I struggle to overtake a peleton of 30 roadies from my local road club every Tuesday night, can't see over or round them from the MX5.


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

fossyant said:


> MTB's are "trendy", just like 4x4's though......



MTBs from JJBs or Halfords are cheap in comparison to a roadie. This is why they are so popular.


----------



## the reluctant cyclist (24 Jun 2009)

I find that you always touch a nerve with the 4X4 owners! 

I wonder if it had been a fiesta and I had put "typical fiestas" would there have been 100 replies!!!!


----------



## tandemman (24 Jun 2009)

Don't get me started on Fiestas................................


----------



## jimboalee (24 Jun 2009)

tandemman said:


> THere are plenty of mountain bikes that never go up or down a mountain, there are plenty of touring cycles that never tour, there are plenty of road racing bikes that have never entered a road race,
> I believe it is called freedom of choice.



Why would anyone ride a fixed wheel track bike on the road?

Because they WANT to.

Range Rovers et al are available to buy. They are road legal.
Any other motorcar is likewise.

It is as tandemman says, freedom of choice.

As far as I am concerned, every motorist should be viewed as a risk until they prove otherwise.


----------



## tandemman (24 Jun 2009)

You're not wrong there, and the ones that are not a risk may well become one in the next 5 seconds, expect crap driving and you'll not go far wrong.


----------



## jimboalee (24 Jun 2009)

'Proving not to be a risk' is being at least three miles from where I am.


----------



## jimboalee (24 Jun 2009)

jimboalee said:


> 'Proving not to be a risk' is being at least three miles from where I am.



Three miles?

If a tankfull of petrol is exploded, the car's bits fall within a 2.75 mile radius...


----------



## Joe24 (24 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> Try dragging a trailer or caravan out of a muddy field and will immediately see the attraction of 4wd.
> 
> 4wd ability is a bit like having strong brakes or air bags. Until you actually need it, you might struggle to see the point!



Me and my dad did. It was fine. Just had to use our brains. The trailor was pretty heave aswell(had 2 generators on, diesel, lots of chairs, big tents etc) and we took it off the muddy field. Cars were getting stuck coming onto it. We got off it fine with a very heavy trailor. 
It had big ruts at the gate aswell, so we had to take those right to get out.

So whats this about 4x4?


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

Joe24 said:


> Me and my dad did. It was fine. Just had to use our brains. The trailor was pretty heave aswell(had 2 generators on, diesel, lots of chairs, big tents etc) and we took it off the muddy field. Cars were getting stuck coming onto it. We got off it fine with a very heavy trailor.
> It had big ruts at the gate aswell, so we had to take those right to get out.
> 
> So whats this about 4x4?



So your trailer weighed 500kg whilst being towed by a 1200kg car. 

What is your point, do you think that they bothered to put centre diff locking 4wd and an LSD on the back axle on my car as a sales gimmick or do you think it could follow mine through a track in a field which has already been churned up by other vehicles Joe ?

Do you think your old mans runaround car could follow mine through this ?


----------



## tandemman (24 Jun 2009)

Whoa thats some caravan site I'd never get my van level there.


----------



## skwerl (24 Jun 2009)

Start questioning the logic of car choice and you have to start on everything else too. Why should a family of four live in a huge house? It's also wasteful. Why do people need to travel abroad on holiday when the UK will do? In fact, why drive to Cornwall? Why not holiday in your local area? If you don't want people to make their own choices then you have to start legislating. Then we're into communism territory so may as well keep going towards that Marxist Utopia.


----------



## John the Monkey (24 Jun 2009)

Isn't that the old "crime exists, so let's abolish the law" fallacy though?

The idea that because you can't do everything, the only logical choice is to do nothing.


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

tandemman said:


> Whoa thats some caravan site I'd never get my van level there.



This is what happened to the guy who followed me down off the top ledge (he got it wrong)


----------



## Panter (24 Jun 2009)

Joe24 said:


> Me and my dad did. It was fine. Just had to use our brains. The trailor was pretty heave aswell(had 2 generators on, diesel, lots of chairs, big tents etc) and we took it off the muddy field. Cars were getting stuck coming onto it. We got off it fine with a very heavy trailor.
> It had big ruts at the gate aswell, so we had to take those right to get out.
> 
> *So whats this about 4x4*?



I've had to tow plenty of people out of muddy camping fields with my 4X4. All sorts of saloons, motorhomes, trailer tent combo's, you name it.

Never needed a tractor either, and during the heavy rains of last Year the exit to the rally field we were in was so muddy that people struggled to walk through it but the good ol' 4X4 pulled everything through with no problems.


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

> Stop it linf. You know as well as anyone that in certain areas a 4x4 is a status symbol and not bought because of its functions.



Who is more believable. Someone who set up a 4x4 owners club, who regularly mixes with people who actually own the vehicles, or someone who just dislikes them and takes a pop at ownership at every opportunity.

Just because the 4x4 you see the kids being dropped off in hasn't got a caravan or trailer on the back of it doesn't mean that was not the primary purpose for it's purchase.

The club I helped set up has 2 different categories of owners.

The 'shinies' and the off roaders.

The 'shinies' are caravan owners who bought a car which was safe and fit for purpose (towing their huge caravans) but would never dream of taking it down a byway, and the offroaders cars are usually covered in dents and scratches with either All terrain or Mud terrain tyres.

I fall in between the two where it is now covered in dents and scratches and used as a tow car, but was previously immaculate and was owned previously by an Ex SAS bloke from Hereford, who was using it to drive footballers around Manchester as it is obviously a big enough lump to use as a battering ram in the event of a hijack (he was contracing as a bodyguard).

Mine has always been a 'working' car which was fit for purpose in the UK even when it fell into your idea of the stereotype.


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

> The differences that an MTB has over another type of bike are equally worthless if it never goes off road. But this thread isn't about MTBs, it's about school run 4x4s.



That doesn't stop them being the most popular of cycles purchased by a country mile.


----------



## tyred (24 Jun 2009)

I don't see the appeal of using a 4 x 4 as everyday transport if you didn't actually need it but I defend people's right to make that choice. And anyone who thinks a normal road car is as good off road as a 4x4 is sadly mistaken or has never tried in the winter. Many modern cars have very poor ground clearance anyway so are completely unsuitable for going into fields. If you do see a 4x4 stuck in a field, it's most probably because either the owner hasn't a clue how to drive or it has been fitted with road tyres.

With regards to the eco argument, proper 4x4s are strongly built work horses which will have much longer lifespan than some cheapo tin box city car. This could possibly make them greener in the long term.


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

> Probably someone who rides past a school and sees a gaggle of X5s/XC90s with not a scratch on them parked outside a school.
> 
> If you had half a noggin you'd realise that yummie mummies don't join 4x4 clubs.
> 
> ...



Doh, he was a retired SAS officer working as a bodyguard for the rich and famous. He was a wiry looking chap but obviously very intelligent when conversing.

He had photos of himself all over his study hopping out of helicopters in desert locations with an automatic weapon under his arm (probably Iraq). I have no doubt that he chose the vehicle most suitable for the task.

He wasn't the average 4x4 owner by any means given his bacgkground and sold it to set up a driving school as he had enough of doing big miles to Manc every day from Hereford (you know, Hereford, the home of the SAS )


----------



## ianrauk (24 Jun 2009)

You know my nieghbour then?
Smallest piece of mud on his 4x4 and he goes into apoplexy




> Stop it linf. You know as well as anyone that in certain areas a 4x4 is a status symbol and not bought because of its functions.


----------



## John the Monkey (24 Jun 2009)

ianrauk said:


> You know my nieghbour then?
> Smallest piece of mud on his 4x4 and he goes into apoplexy


apropos of that, I half remember that there used to be a "spray on mud" product marketed at non-offroading 4x4 owners, to give them the cachet they might otherwise have felt a lack of, didn't there?


----------



## skwerl (24 Jun 2009)

John the Monkey said:


> Isn't that the old "crime exists, so let's abolish the law" fallacy though?
> 
> The idea that because you can't do everything, the only logical choice is to do nothing.



no. it's about balance


----------



## tyred (24 Jun 2009)

> So is a Skoda.



Indeed it is. But not everyone drives a Skoda. People buy Reanults for example. And anyway, the newer VAG products aren't half as well built as they used to be.


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

> Doh, his background is irrelevant. You said he had a huge 4x4 to transport footballers so he could ram his way out of trouble.



Did you completely miss the reason he bought it.

He'd hardly be ferrying people around in a protective roll in a 2CV would he


----------



## jimboalee (24 Jun 2009)

Just been looking through a Powerpoint Presentation on Land Rover's internal web.

Basically, reading between the lines, the target customer for the Range Rover is an arrogant, self opinionated, grammar school educated professional. Target for the RR Sport is a self confident upper management oik. Target for the LR3 is a middle management 30 something who can't yet afford a Range Rover. Target for the Freelander is everybody not covered by the above. Target for the Defender is a Farmer, Horsey type or 'Outdoor professional' – Tree surgeon !

So the mother who's doors flew open WAS the target customer.


----------



## John the Monkey (24 Jun 2009)

John the Monkey said:


> apropos of that, I half remember that there used to be a "spray on mud" product marketed at non-offroading 4x4 owners, to give them the cachet they might otherwise have felt a lack of, didn't there?



Found it - this is the chap, reported in the Gruan, so some caution needed;

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2005/jun/14/uknews


----------



## jimboalee (24 Jun 2009)

John the Monkey said:


> Found it - this is the chap, reported in the Gruan, so some caution needed;
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2005/jun/14/uknews



​A UK company based in Shrewsbury, Shropshire, has developed a spray on mud for clean 4x4’s. It’s proved to be very popular with Londoners and it’s called ‘sprayonmud’. The washable compound is available in 75 centilitre bottles. An unfortunate by-product of this spray is that it can effectively obscure the numberplatesof vehicles using it, although the literature clearly states that it’s an offence to do so. _Source: sprayonmud.com_


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

John the Monkey said:


> Found it - this is the chap, reported in the Gruan, so some caution needed;
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2005/jun/14/uknews



That reads like an advertisement to the readership of the Guardian. I'm not at all surprised they ran it given the hypocritical nature of their readership


----------



## John the Monkey (24 Jun 2009)

Say it ain't so, Linford, say it ain't so...


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

jimboalee said:


> A UK company based in Shrewsbury, Shropshire, has developed a spray on mud for clean 4x4’s. It’s proved to be very popular with Londoners and it’s called ‘sprayonmud’. The washable compound is available in 75 centilitre bottles. An unfortunate by-product of this spray is that it can effectively obscure the numberplatesof vehicles using it, although the literature clearly states that it’s an offence to do so. _Source: sprayonmud.com_



That is a so obviously a photoshopped spoof for the web design company who are hosting it 


Funnily enough they also host this website for a Guardian contributor 

http://www.robertbullard.com/blog/

He looks like a really sanctimonious knob

Pathetic 

Next thing you will be implying is the vid I posted up has been done with CGI generated mud


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

John the Monkey said:


> Say it ain't so, Linford, say it ain't so...



It ain't so John


----------



## jimboalee (24 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> That is a so obviously a photoshopped spoof for the web design company who are hosting it
> 
> 
> Funnily enough they also host this website for a Guardian contributor
> ...



It's a clipsheet off Land Rover's internal info network


----------



## John the Monkey (24 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> It ain't so John


Oo, you cheater!

The original message to which I replied spoke of the gentleman's hypocrisy, not the alleged sanctimony of his visage &c!

curse you and your rapid editing!


----------



## Joe24 (24 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> So your trailer weighed 500kg whilst being towed by a 1200kg car.
> 
> What is your point, do you think that they bothered to put centre diff locking 4wd and an LSD on the back axle on my car as a sales gimmick or do you think it could follow mine through a track in a field which has already been churned up by other vehicles Joe ?
> 
> Do you think your old mans runaround car could follow mine through this ?



It was a twin axle trailor Linf loaded up. The car weighs alot more then 1200kg aswell, because the max caravan weight it can tow is 1600kg, but we tow less then that with out caravan.
The twin axle trailor was alot heavier then 500kg. It was 2 big diesel generators, with alot of deisel and big metal chairs. Oh, and also a pump up mast, antennas, rotator motors for the atennas, 2 big masts..........

No Linf, my dads car wouldnt be able to get through that (Skoda Superb) but we could tow another vehicle on the back of our car that would be able to get through that alot better then what your girlie 4x4 has got through it


----------



## Bigtwin (24 Jun 2009)

> Pathetic, isn't it?



Utterly. But that's the sort of witless crap you get from people that desperate for an excuse. Laughable, but sadly true


----------



## sunnyjim (24 Jun 2009)

jimboalee said:


> Just been looking through a Powerpoint Presentation on Land Rover's internal web.
> 
> Basically, reading between the lines, the target customer for the Range Rover is an arrogant, self opinionated, grammar school educated professional. Target for the RR Sport is a self confident upper management oik. Target for the LR3 is a middle management 30 something who can't yet afford a Range Rover. Target for the Freelander is everybody not covered by the above. Target for the Defender is a Farmer, Horsey type or 'Outdoor professional' – Tree surgeon !
> 
> So the mother who's doors flew open WAS the target customer.



I've got a 10 year old Disco - what demographic should I aspire to have been?


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

Bigtwin said:


> Utterly. But that's the sort of witless crap you get from people that desperate for an excuse. Laughable, but sadly true



It was a tool of the trade - part of the job description.

You still haven't answered the question I put to you about the types of planes you were flying ?


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

Joe24 said:


> It was a twin axle trailor Linf loaded up. The car weighs alot more then 1200kg aswell, because the max caravan weight it can tow is 1600kg, but we tow less then that with out caravan.
> The twin axle trailor was alot heavier then 500kg. It was 2 big diesel generators, with alot of deisel and big metal chairs. Oh, and also a pump up mast, antennas, rotator motors for the atennas, 2 big masts..........
> 
> No Linf, my dads car wouldnt be able to get through that (Skoda Superb) but we could tow another vehicle on the back of our car that would be able to get through that alot better then what your girlie 4x4 has got through it



That was Mitsubishi's UK training facility near Marlborough and is used by the environment agency to train their people how to handle a 4x4 off road. I was just doing it for a bit of fun.

My 4x4 was bought as a tow car for moving a heavy trailer and a couple of heavy animals safely. If I wanted an off road toy, I'd have picked up a modified short wheelbase Vitara, not a 7 seat long wheel base Shogun. 

Give it up Joe, I'm not going to do the my dads bigger than your dad thing with you any more. You know jack shoot about the subject.


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

User3143 said:


> If you are pulling a trailer that weighs 2200kg then based on your 85% weight ratio how heavy should the towing vehicle be?



2600kg, but we've already covered that haven't we Lee


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

so good you said it twice


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

User3143 said:


> So what you are saying is that if the trailer is 2200kg then the towing vehicle should be 2600kg?



No, that is the caravan clubs (safe) guide.


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

> Not 75%?





> As for towing caravans, existing general guidance recommends that the laden weight of the caravan does not exceed 85% of the unladen weight of the car. In the majority of cases, caravans and small trailers towed by cars should be within the new category B threshold./QUOTE]
> 
> http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/DriverLicensing/CaravansTrailersCommercialVehicles/DG_10013073


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

> This gets even funnier.
> 
> _Is _Manchester in Iraq?



Obviously not. do you think you know better than a professional bodyguard trained to the highest standards in these matters ?

Many of these ex SAS boys are doing this type of work. Why do you think he chose it ?


----------



## Joe24 (24 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> Obviously not. do you think you know better than a professional bodyguard trained to the highest standards in these matters ?
> 
> Many of these ex SAS boys are doing this type of work. Why do you think he chose it ?



Do they do it in Mitsibishis though Linf?
No, because your shogun isnt a proper 4x4


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

User3143;772760][quote=very-near said:


> Which contradicts your figures for a vehicle+trailer combination.



MrP wanted clarification on the Caravan club guidance. This is corroborated on the directgov website. It is however not the definitive law, but a safe rule of thumb.


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

Joe24 said:


> Do they do it in Mitsibishis though Linf?



They don't do it in Skoda's Joe 

What is your idea of a 'real' 4x4 ?


----------



## Joe24 (24 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> They don't do it in Skoda's Joe



The Skoda could pull the offroader on a trailor though Dr Linf


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

Joe24 said:


> The Skoda could pull the offroader on a trailor though Dr Linf



You need to stop smoking the weed Joe, you are talking in riddles tonight.

We aren't in the states BTW, it's 'Trailer'


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

Joe24 said:


> The Skoda could pull the offroader on a trailor though Dr Linf



A car trailer weighs in at least 1 metric tonne (maybe more). Unless you are towing a kit car of less than 800kg, you would be overweight with a 2.0TDi Superb which has a towing limit of 1800KG in a braked trailer.

If your old man is exceeding the MAM with all his generators and other gear, you might well find he is actually towing illegally.

Don't take my word for it of course, the Skoda website give all the numbers on maximum towing capacity when you look at the weights section. http://www.skoda.co.uk/ourcars.aspx


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

[QUOTE772826]


very-near" said:


> I know that. My comment was a little reminder that you used to think it was 80%. Until I helped you out.



I did ?


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

> Tee hee. Macho boys talking butch.
> 
> How many footballer hijacks have there been in Manchester? Do the Bentley convertibles that many of them drive have invisible force-fields around them?
> 
> ...



No, the car was immaculate when I bought it. It had only been imported a 18 months before from Japan. The first person to take it offroad was me.

Do you honestly think he would have been taken seriously by his employer if he turned up to collect the footballers family in a Tino ?

The guy was most certainly not macho in demeanour, or build. I had no idea that he was until I went into the study to sort the docs out and saw the pics from his army career on the wall and I asked him why he was selling it.

He just looked like an average guy.


----------



## Joe24 (24 Jun 2009)

Actually linf he wasnt and he could have towed more


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

Joe24 said:


> Actually linf he wasnt and he could have towed more



The trailer wasn't that heavy then was it 

Perhaps we can set up a test one day.

I'll hook up both cars with a recovery strap in a nice soft field in the middle of winter, Drag the skoda into the middle of it and then he can drive it out under its own steam


----------



## very-near (24 Jun 2009)

> You haven't answered my questions.
> 
> When was the last footballer hijack in Cheshire?
> 
> ...



Well done, I think the Hummer is shyte as well.

I'm not defending the footballers own driving.

What law is there against using reasonable force to avoid an abduction attempt ?

If you recall, there was a couple of kidnap plots on the Beckhams a few years ago. If these footballers want a bodyguard service, what is wrong with supplying them with it ?

When you are earning £100k per week and live in the public domain, you become a target for all sorts of types.


----------



## jimboalee (25 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> No, the car was immaculate when I bought it. It had only been imported a *18 months before from Japan*. The first person to take it offroad was me.
> 
> Do you honestly think he would have been taken seriously by his employer if he turned up to collect the footballers family in a Tino ?
> 
> ...



He bought a Japan spec re-import? Cheapskate

Why didn't he go for a kevlar lined, armour plated, toughened glass 'Special Vehicle Operations' car direct from Solihull if the job was THAT serious


----------



## very-near (25 Jun 2009)

jimboalee said:


> He bought a Japan spec re-import? Cheapskate
> 
> Why didn't he go for a kevlar lined, armour plated, toughened glass 'Special Vehicle Operations' car direct from Solihull if the job was THAT serious



It wasn't that cheap when he bought it. I've had the car myself since 03.

After watching them in action off road (at a few of the the abingdon meets organised by Abingdon landrovers club), I've changed my opinion of Landrover as a class leader - most of them broke down as soon as they hit a puddle, and were no more capable than any other make or model on the course.

Give me a Japanese 4x4 any day.

How much did you say these armoured Lawnmowers cost ?


----------



## very-near (25 Jun 2009)

> No footballer has ever been kidnapped in the UK. Nor his family.
> 
> Your 4x4 was bought for image. Whether it's his boss telling him or his own decision, it was intended to portray the image of a hard man.
> 
> ...



So you say that everyone who buys a 4x4 does so to portray the image of a hard man - have you any idea how ridiculous you are sounding 

He most certainly didn't come across that way. He was public school and in his 50's. He sold it because he wanted a change of direction. He gave me the impression that the most valuable asset was being able to assess and act upon a situation, and not just throw ones weight around. The ability to use the mass of a vehicle to move another one is obviously a last resort.

When bank robber types go ram raiding (IE need something heavy to go through an obstacle), they use 4x4s, not Grand voyagers or Nissan people carriers or 2CV's 

The heavier the vehicle, the easier it is to push something else out of its way. That is the reason he chose it, and I chose it because it is heavy enough to tow a heavy trailer with a good margin of safety. It's not rocket science


----------



## very-near (25 Jun 2009)

> No I don't.
> 
> You're not talking about illegal robberies. You're talking about chauffeuring.
> 
> ...



I did ?

Would you say that a footballer earning £100k per week is at greater risk of robbery than someone like you ?

Also given that he was selling it to buy a Fiesta so he could teach people to drive indicates that ego is not a problem to him.

So if you pissed someone off in your Tino, and they did a road rage thing, came at you and your family with a knife or baseball bat, and you could get away by pushing their car out of the way with yours, would you just sit there or put your foot down ?


----------



## very-near (25 Jun 2009)

> You've got the dimmer on this morning.
> 
> You're talking about victims of robbery now. Before you were talking about perpetrators.
> 
> ...



I think you will find that most of these high profile types use the services of private security firms.

I saw Jordan walking through the Bullring a few years ago with a couple of enormous bodyguards. Using a big lump of a car for this type of work goes with the territory.

The customers of these firms expect a visible physical presence from those guarding them at the end of the day.


----------



## very-near (25 Jun 2009)

> Again, this is the UK, not Iraq. Your (claimed) ex-SAS "boy" that you're so eager to rub yourself up against was only interested in image.




I think your ego takes a real hammering when faced with someone with those sort of credentials - which is sad

I accepted his credentials given what I saw and what he said. I have no reason to doubt him.

Why would he want sell it to spend his days driving a Fiesta with L plates if image was a primary concern ?

You are like this with Bikers, you are like this with regular 4x4 drivers, you are now like this with people who work protecting other people. You see something you don't have the skills or bottle for as an affront to your sensibilities.

You come across as very insecure.


----------



## very-near (25 Jun 2009)

> You said that it was part of the company's image requirement.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



No, I said that was what his customers expected to see. He was a freelance from what I gather.

Why are you so insecure if you claim you are so comfortable in yourself 

You really have an enormous chip on your shoulder.


----------



## very-near (25 Jun 2009)

> It's all about image. If the police don't need battering rams then neither does your Dog the Bounty Hunter mate.



The police are unlikely to be hijacked at the end of the day


----------



## Joe24 (25 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> The police are unlikely to be hijacked at the end of the day



Dog the Bounty Hunter has 4x4s for work because of how huge they all are!!!
All of them squashed into a few 4x4s. Jesus, if they went into would be grinding along the floor!!!


----------



## Joe24 (25 Jun 2009)

But actually Dogs car is a Jag thats all blinged up IIRC


----------



## very-near (25 Jun 2009)

Joe24 said:


> Dog the Bounty Hunter has 4x4s for work because of how huge they all are!!!
> All of them squashed into a few 4x4s. Jesus, if they went into would be grinding along the floor!!!



There is a marked contrast between the build of the US soldiers and that of ours.

The yanks spend their day pumping up in the gym, but get chauffeured everywhere in Hummers. Our boys are trained to march big distances.

Take a look at the average yank on the streets over there. They are mostly bloaters


----------



## John the Monkey (25 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> Take a look at the average yank on the streets over there. They are mostly bloaters


By gum, for someone who dislikes the stereotyping of 4x4 owners, you can come out with some yourself...

I had a similar opinion before I visited the US. I was a bit surprised to hear the people I was seeing and thinking "Bah, typical, look at the SIZE of them" suddenly suggest breakfast, or a particular bit of sight seeing in broad Yorkshire accents (f'rexample).

Mebbe all the tubby Americans were in their cars, and that's why I didn't see them while I was walking around?


----------



## very-near (25 Jun 2009)

John the Monkey said:


> By gum, for someone who dislikes the stereotyping of 4x4 owners, you can come out with some yourself...
> 
> I had a similar opinion before I visited the US. I was a bit surprised to hear the people I was seeing and thinking "Bah, typical, look at the SIZE of them" suddenly suggest breakfast, or a particular bit of sight seeing in broad Yorkshire accents (f'rexample).
> 
> Mebbe all the tubby Americans were in their cars, and that's why I didn't see them while I was walking around?



I could be eating my words here. I'll be over there in a couple of days so I'll report back with my 'findings'. The reality TV stuff shown on sky does seem to show them in a bad light. Cheap low quality junk food and cheap transport can't help.


----------



## John the Monkey (25 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> I could be eating my words here. I'll be over there in a couple of days so I'll report back with my 'findings'.


I reckon you'll be surprised. 

I was surprised at the courtesy, and downright brilliant service pretty much everywhere you go too, I really enjoyed my visits.


----------



## Crankarm (25 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> I could be eating my words here. I'll be over there in a couple of days so I'll report back with my 'findings'. The reality TV stuff shown on sky does seem to show them in a bad light. Cheap low quality junk food and cheap transport can't help.



Plus having a burger bap for a brain .


----------



## very-near (25 Jun 2009)

Crankarm said:


> Plus having a burger bap for a brain .



I'm trying to wean myself off the Jeremy Kyle show


----------



## very-near (25 Jun 2009)

> You said his employer wouldn't let him turn up in anything else.
> 
> It's all about image.
> 
> ...



The footballers were his employers.

You have more than enough ego inadequacies already without attaching yourself to any other groups


----------



## very-near (25 Jun 2009)

> Linf is going to Florida. It's not a real picture of the USA.



Have you been there ?


----------



## very-near (25 Jun 2009)

> Yup. A couple of times.
> 
> I've been fortunate enough to properly see both the resort side of Florida and the residential side. They're quite different.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, it's a great place to go. But it's not a realistic picture of the USA.



Just as well I'm getting a huge gas guzzler over there to do the grand tour then


----------



## jimboalee (25 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> It wasn't that cheap when he bought it. I've had the car myself since 03.
> 
> After watching them in action off road (at a few of the the abingdon meets organised by Abingdon landrovers club), I've changed my opinion of Landrover as a class leader - most of them broke down as soon as they hit a puddle, and were no more capable than any other make or model on the course.
> 
> ...



I didn't. What is Rooney's missus worth?


----------



## Sh4rkyBloke (25 Jun 2009)

jimboalee said:


> I didn't. What is Rooney's missus worth?


A glass of cheap wine and dinner at a Taco Bell, and not a penny more to me.


----------



## jimboalee (25 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> It wasn't that cheap when he bought it. I've had the car myself since 03.
> 
> After watching them in action off road (at a few of the the abingdon meets organised by Abingdon landrovers club), I've changed my opinion of Landrover as a class leader - *most of them broke down* as soon as they hit a puddle, and were no more capable than any other make or model on the course.
> 
> ...



Can you PM me the VIN numbers of these cars and I'll check their warranty history.
Chances are the mischievous Abingdon chappies have tinkered with them.


----------



## skwerl (25 Jun 2009)

> Don't get me wrong, it's a great place to go. But it's not a realistic picture of the USA.



What is? The USA is just a large collection of small countries (not literally, before someone starts). No one state gives you a real view.


----------



## very-near (25 Jun 2009)

jimboalee said:


> Can you PM me the VIN numbers of these cars and I'll check their warranty history.
> Chances are the mischievous Abingdon chappies have tinkered with them.



I'd say that they couldn't cope with the conditions presented.

Petrol Landys don't like puddles.


and I didn't see any new ones there (owners didn't want to mark them)

http://www.abingdonphotos.com/Abingdon2008/


----------



## jimboalee (25 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> I'd say that they couldn't cope with the conditions presented.
> 
> *Petrol Landys don't like puddles*.
> 
> ...



If you want to take any spark ignition engine into a river or the sea, its best to waterproof it first.

A liberal coating of grease, the type used on speedboats, all along the electrics.

I can't be held resonsible for owner's lack of preparation.


----------



## jimboalee (25 Jun 2009)

Some Land Rover owners take their vehicle into the dealer complaining of a rythmic 'ticking' sound when the car is being driven.

The service technician sits for an hour with a screwdriver picking gravel out of the tyre treads.

W****rs.


----------



## fossyant (25 Jun 2009)

21 pages and counting


----------



## User482 (25 Jun 2009)

> Yup. A couple of times.
> 
> I've been fortunate enough to properly see both the resort side of Florida and the residential side. They're quite different.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, it's a great place to go. But it's not a realistic picture of the USA.



That's my experience too, based on some family holidays over there. If you get off the tourist routes, you realise just how poor a lot of Americans are.


----------



## very-near (25 Jun 2009)

User482 said:


> That's my experience too, based on some family holidays over there. If you get off the tourist routes, you realise just how poor a lot of Americans are.



They did invent the term 'Trailer Trash' after all.


----------



## User482 (25 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> They did invent the term 'Trailer Trash' after all.



These people aren't trash, they're just poor. Something that appears to be depressingly common in the US.


----------



## mm101 (25 Jun 2009)

I wonder what it is about the 4x4 which inspires such loathing in people. The vast majority of drivers parking outside schools are a nightmare. In fact the roads in general, at chucking out time, are best avoided. It is not just 4x4 drivers. It is all drivers, with various makes of car. 

I don't think 4x4 drivers are any more or less skilled and considerate as drivers. I wonder why they are more conspicuous though. Probably because they are brutish and brash looking things .


----------



## User482 (25 Jun 2009)

mm101 said:


> I wonder what it is about the 4x4 which inspires such loathing in people. The vast majority of drivers parking outside schools are a nightmare. In fact the roads in general, at chucking out time, are best avoided. It is not just 4x4 drivers it is all drivers, with various makes of car.
> 
> I don't think 4x4 drivers are any more or less skilled and considerate as drivers. I wonder why they are more conspicuous though. Probably because they are brutish and brash looking things .




I suppose it's because selfish or stupid driving is exacerbated by 4x4s, due to their size and weight. They are also a conspicuous example of pointless over-consumption.

Insurance companies will tell you that 4x4 drivers are more likely to be involved in accidents, and are more likely to be at fault.


----------



## User482 (25 Jun 2009)

> I know. 2 minutes off a main tourist strip and you're down a gravelled road full of faded wooden houses.



I last went to Florida 15 years ago, but it sounds from your description that it hasn't changed. Rows and rows of houses barely better than sheds, housing workers at the orange juice plants.


----------



## very-near (25 Jun 2009)

User482 said:


> I suppose it's because selfish or stupid driving is exacerbated by 4x4s, due to their size and weight. They are also a conspicuous example of pointless over-consumption.
> 
> Insurance companies will tell you that 4x4 drivers are more likely to be involved in accidents, and are more likely to be at fault.



Selfish or stupid driving is not the reserve of 4x4 owners. I am just as likely to be pee'd off by a Fiesta doing this as a Hummer.

However resentment and envy play a part in the reaction to a badly driven Hummer.

Your assertion of insurance companies comes from a report commissioned by Churchill. This is not reflected in the premiums of the Insurance companies I have dealt with over the years who specialise in underwriting the policies on them.
Churchills article just looks like a lazy way of excluding them as they cost more to put right than regular shopping trolley cars. They have never been able to offer a competitive quote on any vehicle I've owned whenever I've tried them.

I expect they say the same about Jag owners as well.


----------



## Joe24 (25 Jun 2009)

But you would be more likely to go after the Fiesta then the Hummer?


----------



## skwerl (25 Jun 2009)

> Hands up who has ever been envious of a Hummer driver......



never. There is something incredibly camp about Hummers. There's too much macho Village-People-contruction-worker going on there


----------



## jimboalee (26 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> They did invent the term 'Trailer Trash' after all.



Do you mean 'Tinkers' or 'Gypsies'?

BTW, Eurps invented them, the septics changed the name ( as they ALWAYS do ).

I've been to eleven states of the Union. They were all the same to me. Glitzy malls, rich suburbs, trashy downtown and 'the other side of town'.

The weirdest place I went to was a small village near Ashville, Tennessee. The locals hardly spoke. They just drooled some words slowly. Everyone knew what they were saying except me.
After a couple of shots of the local illicit alcohol, they were perfectly legible...


----------



## User482 (26 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> Selfish or stupid driving is not the reserve of 4x4 owners. I am just as likely to be pee'd off by a Fiesta doing this as a Hummer.
> 
> However resentment and envy play a part in the reaction to a badly driven Hummer.
> 
> ...



You've rather missed the point, which is that stupid driving in a 4x4 is likely to present more risk to others than stupid driving in a smaller car.

My "assertion" comes from two large insurance companies, based on their data of real insurance claims. If you're able to show that they are wrong then please present your evidence. The cost of premiums isn't relevant.

If you really believe that people are envious of large 4x4s then you are rather detached from reality. If I wanted one, I would buy one.


----------



## jimboalee (26 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> Selfish or stupid driving is not the reserve of 4x4 owners. I am just as likely to be pee'd off by a Fiesta doing this as a Hummer.
> 
> However resentment and envy play a part in the reaction to a badly driven Hummer.
> 
> ...



Quotes on newer Jags will always be high. They are aluminium bodied and Jag have a list of approved repairers. Its not up to the insurance company to select the repairer.


----------



## very-near (26 Jun 2009)

User482 said:


> You've rather missed the point, which is that stupid driving in a 4x4 is likely to present more risk to others than stupid driving in a smaller car.
> 
> My "assertion" comes from two large insurance companies, based on their data of real insurance claims. If you're able to show that they are wrong then please present your evidence. The cost of premiums isn't relevant.
> 
> If you really believe that people are envious of large 4x4s then you are rather detached from reality. If I wanted one, I would buy one.



And stupid driving gets rewarded through loading insurance premiums if the drivers get caught. Drivers with a good track record pay lower premiums at the end of the day and a 4x4 is very difficult for a younger less experienced driver to insure.

The envy comes from the display of disposable income. The same attitude of derision is shown to people driving exotic sports cars. You can keep on denying it, but your motivation is fairly transparent.

No doubt this 'data' is a bit like the spoof 'spray on mud' for the chelsea tractors advert which was created by the web designing mate of the Guardian writer - In absence of real facts, just make it up  

Who are these insurance companies and where is their 'data' ?


----------



## nilling (26 Jun 2009)

> Hands up who has ever been envious of a Hummer driver......



Every time I see a Hummer I try to think where the nearest petrol station is


----------



## skwerl (26 Jun 2009)

> You've may the huge but predictable assumption there that everyone is materially driven. Any that's not the case. Neither is it the case that 4x4s are affordable only by the rich. You've got one.
> 
> Take that out of the equation and you've got nothing.



I think the last 10 years and the financial mess we're now in is proof that a large chunk of the western world is materially-driven.

You've made an equally huge and predictable assumption that they're not.


----------



## User482 (26 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> And stupid driving gets rewarded through loading insurance premiums if the drivers get caught. Drivers with a good track record pay lower premiums at the end of the day and a 4x4 is very difficult for a younger less experienced driver to insure.
> 
> The envy comes from the display of disposable income. The same attitude of derision is shown to people driving exotic sports cars. You can keep on denying it, but your motivation is fairly transparent.
> 
> ...



Try google - two insurance companies have provided data based on claims they receive. If they're wrong, show how, or admit defeat. I note that the best "fact" you can come up with is some irrelevant and unsubstantiated drivel about insurance premiums. If you're in a glass house, don't through stones...

I'm staggered that you think that people are envious of 4x4 drivers. I pity them actually - they just go to prove that a fool and his money are soon parted. In a list of things to spend my disposable income on, cars are way down the bottom. You need to understand that for most people, cars are simply a means of transport. 

Your self-interested defence in the face of all the available evidence is dull, familiar, repetitive and wholly unsubstantiated.

I note you failed to respond to the point that stupid driving in a large, heavy car is riskier to others than stupid driving in a smaller, lighter car.


----------



## skwerl (26 Jun 2009)

> I know a bloke who is a multimillionaire. He's just got rid of his 16 year old Volvo because he'd run it into the ground. He replaced it with another average Volvo.



that's great. yet again we get the n=1 statistcal analysis that's extrapolated to the rest of the world


----------



## Bigtwin (26 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> The envy comes from the display of disposable income. The same attitude of derision is shown to people driving exotic sports cars. You can keep on denying it, but your motivation is fairly transparent.




This is brilliant entertainment - rarely have I heard such drivel.

The value of 4x4s has gone through the floor now that fuel is up, and they are to pay swinging road tax. Driving one simply says more than ever "more money than sense" - not a source of envy in any intelligent person's book, or "I really screwed that up didn't I - listen, you can hear the depreciation" - ditto.


----------



## garrilla (26 Jun 2009)

An old Toyota 4x4 was behind me at the lights today, revving his 3l engine. When the lights changed I nipped off, he flooded and stalled.


----------



## skwerl (26 Jun 2009)

> No, read my posts again.
> 
> It wasn't a response to you anyway. It was a single illustration of my previous point.



I know. you were trying to illustrate that not everyone is materially-driven. So now we know that at least everyone except yourself (i assume) and your millionarie friend is possibly materially-driven.

My point being that you're attempting to derail an argument that uses sweeping assumption by making, that's right, a sweeping assumption.

"It's like goldy and bronzy, only it's made of iron".


----------



## very-near (26 Jun 2009)

Bigtwin said:


> This is brilliant entertainment - rarely have I heard such drivel.
> 
> The value of 4x4s has gone through the floor now that fuel is up, and they are to pay swinging road tax. Driving one simply says more than ever "more money than sense" - not a source of envy in any intelligent person's book, or "I really screwed that up didn't I - listen, you can hear the depreciation" - ditto.



What aircraft were you flying in your military career?

Are you afraid or too embarrassed to answer ?


----------



## mangaman (26 Jun 2009)

Sorry to butt in - I've had a £20 on Betfair that this will be in Room 101 by page 30 and it still hasn't moved

What's wrong with you?? How about a little more aggression?


----------



## very-near (26 Jun 2009)

User482 said:


> Try google - two insurance companies have provided data based on claims they receive. If they're wrong, show how, or admit defeat. I note that the best "fact" you can come up with is some irrelevant and unsubstantiated drivel about insurance premiums. If you're in a glass house, don't through stones...
> 
> *How about you try Google and post up the URLs seeing as yet again you are on a mission to prove me wrong *
> 
> ...



*Didn't you apply this same argument to the 60mph NSL down to 50 mph a while back ? 

Make up your mind because 4x4's are not bought as speed machines.

Most 4x4s are slow to accelerate, drink loads of juice, and as such are not driven that the speeds of 'normal' cars - therefore making them less risky (by your NSL argument)*


----------



## very-near (26 Jun 2009)

> Not at all.
> 
> I said that not everyone is materially driven, in response to Linfy's sweeping assumption-led statement that 4x4 hate is driven by financial envy. No assumption on my part, and no brooms used.
> 
> ...



I can only reconcile envy as your motivation to despise the lifestyle choices of so many other people MrP - oh and self denial.


----------



## skwerl (26 Jun 2009)

> Not at all.
> 
> I said that not everyone is materially driven, in response to Linfy's sweeping assumption-led statement that 4x4 hate is driven by financial envy. No assumption on my part, and no brooms used.
> 
> ...



ok. now reverse all of that and you'll see that his assumption is also correct. that's what I'm trying to point out


----------



## User482 (26 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> *Didn't you apply this same argument to the 60mph NSL down to 50 mph a while back ?
> 
> Make up your mind because 4x4's are not bought as speed machines.
> 
> Most 4x4s are slow to accelerate, drink loads of juice, and as such are not driven that the speeds of 'normal' cars - therefore making them less risky (by your NSL argument)*



More irrelevant waffle. I repeat again, for the hard of thinking:

1. Stupidity at the wheel of a 4x4 presents more risk to others than stupidity at the wheel of a smaller and lighter car.

2. Two leading insurance companies have found that 4x4s are more likely to be involved in accidents, and the drivers are more likely to be at fault.

3. Accusations of envy are utterly risible. Most of us have better things to spend our money on.


----------



## mangaman (26 Jun 2009)

> Shut up fatty




That's more like it


----------



## Joe24 (26 Jun 2009)

You need a 4x4 to tow stuff and carry stuff on/in better







A kayak and canoe on the roof, boot filled, 5 people in the car.
Caravan with a bike in, and other caravan stuff.

This year, it will be 3 kayaks not 2, and 2 bikes, aswell as all the other stuff.
Do we need a 4x4?


----------



## User482 (26 Jun 2009)

A large estate car is likely to have more load space than a 4x4.


----------



## very-near (26 Jun 2009)

Joe24 said:


> You need a 4x4 to tow stuff and carry stuff on/in better
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Is that your BMX bike in the foreground Joe ?


----------



## Joe24 (26 Jun 2009)

> Want to sell a kayak Joe?



My brother has designed and made his own(which another company has sort of stolen abit of, and if freestyle kayaks go composit, it could possibly be because of his! Its going to the Worlds, which is like the olympics for freestyle kayaking!). Wouldnt be good for you to start off with though.
I sold mine March this year.
He works in a kayak shop though, so if you needed any sound advice on stuff that would be the place to call/go into, and you would possibly get discount.


----------



## Joe24 (26 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> Is that your BMX bike in the foreground Joe ?



No, dutch kids in the trailor tent.
Plastic wheels


----------



## very-near (26 Jun 2009)

User482 said:


> . I repeat again *more irrelevant waffle for your reference below*, for the hard of thinking:
> 
> 1. Stupidity at the wheel of a 4x4 presents more risk to others than stupidity at the wheel of a smaller and lighter car.
> 
> ...





*Corrected *


----------



## very-near (26 Jun 2009)

Joe24 said:


> No, dutch kids in the trailor tent.
> Plastic wheels



Are you sure you didn't lend it to him Joe


----------



## Joe24 (26 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> Are you sure you didn't lend it to him Joe



Yes Dr Linf, im sure
I had my folder when i was on that holiday.
This year my Giant and my fixed are going along.
And 2 boats my brother made, and a squirt boat


----------



## User482 (26 Jun 2009)

very-near said:


> *Corrected *



In other words: I'm right and you're linf.


----------



## skwerl (26 Jun 2009)

> You're missing the fact that I'm making no sweeping assumptions.
> 
> Do you think that the only alternative to a sweeping generalisation is an opposing sweeping generalisation?





> "You've may the huge but predictable assumption there that everyone is materially driven. Any that's not the case!"



By stating that everyone is NOT materially driven you're making a sweeping generalisation. You don't know what you're saying is true, except for the handful of people you actually know. So your statement is assumed for the 99.9999...% of the population. How is that not a sweeping generalisation? It is the exact opposite of Linf's generalisation about 4x4 envy.


----------



## Joe24 (26 Jun 2009)

> Thanks
> 
> I would just like a leisure one really for calm water. Something I could get a bit of exercise on, but also get one or two of my (little) boys on with me for messing about.
> 
> New ones are expensive.



Well the sit on tops would be the thing, unless you mean canadian canoes? Thats what i used to paddle. When i was younger, in about year 9, i was in a 19ft canadian canoe paddling it myself. Used to get some right strange looks.
The thing with sit on tops, is they are good to mess around on. You fall out, just tip it back over and it empties itself.
The kayak shop may have some second hand ones in, but from what ive heard, they have been going pretty well.
Canadian canoes are pretty expensive though.
They are good fun Mr P, i spent about 3/4 years paddling canadian canoes. 
If its the expense thats getting you though, go to a canoe club! Good fun, learn how to paddle them right and be safe, and you can just borrow all their stuff.


----------



## Joe24 (26 Jun 2009)

> Yeah, I might do. We're off to Cornwall, by the Camel estuary, in a few weeks. I have been trying to find someone who might hire me one down there for a week, but no-one seems interested.



Ill see if my brother knows of anyone for you Mr P, they deliver down there abit, so might know of a place to hire one out.........
Make sure you know what your doing before you do go out though.


----------



## Cubist (28 Jun 2009)

Given that I apparently have sufficient income to own a landrover, and I use it to further an entertaining and healthy lifestyle, live on the top of a great big steep hill where it snows a lot and make my kids cycle to school, am I a typical 4x4 owner? On the days that I do take them in the car I park three streets away from the school to avoid congestion (which isn't caused by the vehicles, but by lazy stupid drivers by the way) Bear in mind that I haven't been on a plane in 15 years because we always drive to France, recycle as often as I can and don't give a flying f*ck what people think of my wealth or lack of it. Oh, and I could fit a kayak in the boot. Probably, (if it was a small one...)

Does that sum it up and close the arguments now?


----------



## Cubist (28 Jun 2009)

Oh, and I am materially driven. To pretend otherwise would be hypocritical and make it look like I was content to own crap rather than quality. If I could fit several rifles and large dead animals in a 2CV I'd get one.


----------



## Rhythm Thief (28 Jun 2009)

Cubist said:


> Oh, and I am materially driven. To pretend otherwise would be hypocritical and make it look like I was content to own crap rather than quality. If I could fit several rifles and large dead animals in a 2CV I'd get one.



You'd be surprised what you can fit in a 2CV ... and at how good they are off road.


----------



## Cubist (28 Jun 2009)

Rhythm Thief said:


> You'd be surprised what you can fit in a 2CV ... and at how good they are off road.


Yep, skinny little wheels and a centre of gravity that shifts sideways when the car leans into corners. Awesome. 

But I don't have a beard or smell of lentils.


----------



## Rhythm Thief (28 Jun 2009)

Cubist said:


> Yep, skinny little wheels and a centre of gravity that shifts sideways when the car leans into corners. Awesome.
> 
> *But I don't have a beard or smell of lentils*.



You don't need all that, it's optional. An ability to appreciate clever but simple engineering is all that's required.

The centre of gravity, by the way , is somewhere down at the top of the wheels. They handle much better than youy'd think.


----------



## Cubist (28 Jun 2009)

Rhythm Thief said:


> You don't need all that, it's optional. An ability to appreciate clever but simple engineering is all that's required.
> 
> *The centre of gravity, by the way , is somewhere down at the top of the wheels. They handle much better than youy'd think*.



Yes, that's why they are supposed to be impossible to roll


----------



## Joe24 (28 Jun 2009)

Cubist said:


> Given that I apparently have sufficient income to own a landrover, and I use it to further an entertaining and healthy lifestyle, live on the top of a great big steep hill where it snows a lot and make my kids cycle to school, am I a typical 4x4 owner? On the days that I do take them in the car I park three streets away from the school to avoid congestion (which isn't caused by the vehicles, but by lazy stupid drivers by the way) Bear in mind that I haven't been on a plane in 15 years because we always drive to France, recycle as often as I can and don't give a flying f*ck what people think of my wealth or lack of it. Oh, and I could fit a kayak in the boot. Probably, (if it was a small one...)
> 
> Does that sum it up and close the arguments now?



Can only fit one in?
My brother can fit 2 in his boot, and 3/4 on the roof of his 106


----------



## Cubist (28 Jun 2009)

Joe24 said:


> Can only fit one in?
> My brother can fit 2 in his boot, and 3/4 on the roof of his 106


Yeah, Ok, but I'd have to take some of the bikes out to fit more than one in....


----------



## Joe24 (28 Jun 2009)

Cubist said:


> Yeah, Ok, but I'd have to take some of the bikes out to fit more than one in....



He has no back seats in his car.
And in my dads car, i can get my bike in the boot with just taking the boot off
Whats with these 4x4s


----------



## tyred (30 Jun 2009)

Rhythm Thief said:


> You don't need all that, it's optional. An ability to appreciate clever but simple engineering is all that's required.
> 
> The centre of gravity, by the way , is somewhere down at the top of the wheels. They handle much better than youy'd think.



I've always admired the engineering behind the 2CV. It's a shame they forgot to rustproof the thing. They almost make a Fiat Ritmo seem long lasting.

But a Renault 4L is built along similar lines and is a much better car.


----------



## asterix (30 Jun 2009)

There are plenty of 2cvs running around this part of France. Not quite as many R4s but it's quite usual to see them around.

My father had a 2cv in the 50's in Cyprus. It was just the job on the rough roads in those parts and we used it to get to the UK in 1960. Ferry to South Italy, drive to Northern France over the alps and fly cross channel with Silver City airline. My first car was a knackered R4 with a 3-speed gearbox and 2 dodgy drive-shafts. Towards its demise only 3 cylinders fired. I used it to get down farm tracks to my boat.

Better than the 2cv? Hmm, not much in it, IMO.


----------



## Tim Bennet. (30 Jun 2009)

> Ferry to South Italy, drive to Northern France over the alps and fly cross channel with Silver City airline


We must have passed you going the other way down to Malta. If we had seen you we probably would have stopped for a chat as meeting another Brit car on the continent in those days was a bit of a rarity.

I loved putting the car in an aeroplane. We went from Southend to Calais and I think the Bristol Freighter took two cars (maybe three?) Will have to look at the photos.


----------



## very-near (12 Jul 2009)

Joe24 said:


> He has no back seats in his car.
> And in my dads car, i can get my bike in the boot with just taking the boot off
> Whats with these 4x4s



I'd say he has in that picture. He has only got one of the seats down, and he could get another cycle in there if he wanted.

I can get 3 mtbs stood up in the back of mine without removing any components by just sliding the rear seat into the forward position - Not folding them.

You might find an estate car with more space, but they don't do very well in inclement conditions. They don't put an expensive 4wd on to a vehicle as a gimmick even if some owners don't know how or need to use it.


----------



## very-near (13 Jul 2009)

> That must win the award for the most unaware statement of the century. That's exactly why vehicles like the Qashqai were designed -someone in an office realised that they were building these 4x4s for no reason other than to feed the fashion needs of the ignorant, and that if they could fool the public into buying a car that looked like a 4x4 but wasn't then they'd save themselves money.
> 
> Linf, I'm disappointed in you.
> 
> I've never struggled in inclement weather, and I've never owned a 4x4.



I would never buy a Cumquat. I don't see the point. They do neither roll very well TBH, and they are the size of a Focus with a 1.5 engine, they are not by any measure a large car.

You live, work and play in the middle of Birmingham at the end of the day MrP, you have no need for one. I am not moving horses around at the moment, and that is why mine has been off the road for 6 months now. My requirement for one is all about need, not desire.


----------



## very-near (13 Jul 2009)

> Incorrect, but irrelevant anyway. We're not talking about towing horses. You said that 4x4s aren't gimmicks. In a huge number of cases, they're exactly that, and a great many are built with an acceptance that they'll never venture off tarmac.
> 
> Did you not know this?



A friend of mine got married on Saturday. Whilst I was waiting with the driver for the bride to emerge from the house (I was on the camera), he started talking about the very nice 5 year old Audi A8 which was the main wedding car. He said he had owned it for 3 months, and amongst other things, stated that the rear seats had not ever been used by the previous owner.

There are loads of saloons out there being used by drivers who don't need the rear passenger space, and also there are many drivers using large estate cars who never utilise the load space to its capacity.

I think you are trying to make an argument out of nothing on this one.

Do you feel the same way about the Jimny given its diminutive size ?


----------



## Joe24 (13 Jul 2009)

I guess though, Linf, that with your job as a vet, you will think you need a 4x4


----------



## very-near (13 Jul 2009)

Joe24 said:


> I guess though, Linf, that with your job as a vet, you will think you need a 4x4



Believe what you want to Joe. You only like the sound of your own voice anyway.


----------



## Joe24 (13 Jul 2009)

Cant you just tell us what job you do, do?


----------



## very-near (13 Jul 2009)

Joe24 said:


> Cant you just tell us what job you do, do?



I have never made a secret of it.


----------



## Joe24 (13 Jul 2009)

very-near said:


> I have never made a secret of it.



So what is your job


----------



## very-near (13 Jul 2009)

Joe24 said:


> So what is your job



Why, is it important ?


----------



## Joe24 (13 Jul 2009)

very-near said:


> Why, is it important ?



Yes


----------



## very-near (13 Jul 2009)

Joe24 said:


> Yes



Amongst other things I'm a Design Draughtsman.


----------



## very-near (13 Jul 2009)

> Many 4x4s are bought with no intention of ever being taken off road. The manufacturers are well aware of this.
> 
> What has this fact got to do with saloon cars?



You cannot blame the manufacturer if the customer doesn't want to risk putting a scratch in a mint £30k vehicle.


----------



## User482 (13 Jul 2009)

very-near said:


> You cannot blame the manufacturer if the customer doesn't want to risk putting a scratch in a mint £30k vehicle.



Of course you can. These vehicles are an utterly cynical exercise in marketing BS.


----------



## very-near (13 Jul 2009)

> He's an engineer Joe. He makes banisters for bridges.
> 
> And has a hobby of selling some revolutionary horse-thing.



Not quite MrP


----------



## very-near (13 Jul 2009)

> Nearly though, eh?



The notion I make 'banisters' for bridges is a funny one  
I spend my day designing pathways in anything from 1000 to 5000 tonne presses for semi molten metal to flow through and form close tolerance shapes.

Banisters as you call them or lightweight armco for bridges might be a single profile made and sold by our customers for manufacture, but the next job could be a heatsink, window profile, cycle frame tubing, car chassis's, airframe components or anything which a UK or continental manufacturer can come up with and want made out of ally.


----------



## very-near (14 Jul 2009)

> I was right then.



I think the definition you are looking for is 'fabricator'. Now I like working with my hands (how I got into engineering), but I don't fabricate any components.


----------



## very-near (14 Jul 2009)

> HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/somerset/8149270.stm



LandRover owners from Birmingham get caught out like so many other vehicle owners each year in this area, whatever next MrP ?

How about this one. You couldn't make it up


----------



## very-near (14 Jul 2009)

> _"The owners had been testing out the vehicle in the mud"._
> 
> Testing for what?



I like the way which you tar all 4x4 owners with the same brush MrP. this would be like calling me a brummie because I get central news on TV

Why didn't you report this one instead for a fuller picture ? - perhaps because it show there are people in all walks of life with all sorts of devices who make bad calls perhaps ?


----------



## dodgy (14 Jul 2009)

> HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
> 
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/somerset/8149270.stm



Happens all the time around here - 
View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vP0KDQoDp8Q


And - http://www.wirralnews.co.uk/wirral-...s-trapped-in-sand-near-hilbre-80491-23164109/

Always a 4X4.

I heard once that statistically you're more likely to come a cropper in the snow in a 4X4 than a 2WD car. Possibly because a lot of owners go out to 'test' their car's ability in the bad conditions and sometimes crash, while the 2WD drivers are sat at home watching the TV


----------



## very-near (14 Jul 2009)

Or this one







Or this one






Or this one 






Get the picture


----------



## very-near (14 Jul 2009)

> I've never tarred all 4x4 owners with the same brush.
> 
> Because that story wasn't on the BBC news front page this morning.
> 
> And it doesn't involve a 4x4 driver testing out his failsafe 4x4 capability, just in case he may ever need to drive across a muddy beach.



He was a Brummie, what do you expect


----------

