Pick-up trucks

[fossyant]

The local Scooby garage has a Scooby converted to a pick up !

 

[Deleted member 23692]

There aren't any estate cars out there that can handle a standard sized pallet, or haul a 1.2 tonne payload on board.

And if you do like i did and get a canopy, you can clip them on in under a minute and keep your more delicate cargo dry.

You can haul a pile of manure while keeping the cabin smelling sweet and fragrant.

You can chuck bikes in the back without taking wheels off first or worrying about getting the chains on the upholstery.

I do agree they should be used for the school run- but then no car should be used for that - but they have uses and up sides. When you've owned a few yourself then you'll know that first hand.

All very true...

and they take heavy weaponry far easier than an estate car too

 

[SD1]

Exactly this.

What is more concerning is why is it a problem to some people what others do?

And you have no problems with what other people do? A touch of hypocrisy?
I the believe the OP was asking a question?

 

[SD1]

Sweat the big stuff like: the deteriorating provision of social healthcare, staffing levels in hospitals, combatting poverty and having access to affordable housing and my doppelganger

 

[SD1]

The drivers of these vehicles break the law more often. They use mobiles more or ignore the seat belt law. They are often driven stupidly and aggressively, especially those L200s. Popular with thugs and rednecks in Norfolk and marketed directly toward inadequate men, that's why they choose those stupid names. It's advertised as "Aggressive".



https://www.carwow.co.uk/blog/Mitsubishi-L200-Barbarian-Black-206#sthash.ekmgGYxB.dpuf

Nowt like a bit of generalisation, you missed out white people!!

 

[SD1]

These ladies need their Pick Up Truck

I have just been sick. My dog likes this picture. Yummy yummy part digested food.

 

[glenn forger]

Nowt like a bit of generalisation,

Imperial College London found 4x4 drivers were four times more likely to use mobile phones than other drivers, while a third more shunned seat belts.

The team, who observed 41,000 motorists, said those in 4x4s took more risks as they felt safer in their cars, the British Medical Journal reported.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/5107708.stm

 

[SD1]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/5107708.stm

All stastics are generalisation. Unless they relate to ethnics and then they are racists generalisation.

 

[glenn forger]

So 41,000 motorists are monitored and the ones that break the law with regard to mobile phones and seat belts are noted. Where does the generalisation enter the equation?

 

[SD1]

Slowly...all...statistics...are....generalizations.

 

[glenn forger]

I know. You said that. I'm asking you where you think the generalisation is in recording illegal behaviour by drivers.

 

[SD1]

Because you are implying all truck drivers do it. Which is hypocrisy as you wouldn't say it if we wore quoting statistics (generalizing) about black people. I have no problem with statistics used as generalisation. Personally I would not allowe people to drive cars like that unless they could prove a need.
By the way are you generalising when you refer to pickups? They are not the same as 4x4.

 

[glenn forger]

Because you are implying all truck drivers do it.

I implied nothing of the kind and didn't even mention truck drivers. Now, where is the generalisation in citing evidence?

 

[Drago]

They are if they're a 4x4 pickup.

 

[perplexed]

My last 3 cars have been estate cars, because we haul ass around the continent on holiday. I like being able to fill the back with luggage including all the catering gear without it over-spilling into the back seat.

I did seriously consider a pick up at the time we were doing a lot of gardening and DIY - the back of the car was constantly filthy, which of course spread to the front. There are only the two of us in the car 99% of the time.