• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Do you currently,or would you ever own a 4x4

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #51
    Originally posted by angusglover
    The point that a 4x4 does not accelerate, brake or handle as well as a road car is crap. A Range Rover (no, I don't have one..) will handle much better than say...a SMART car, which was specifically designed for town use. Anyone that has seen the Top Gear show where they tried to corner 3 small town cars will agree that most of them handle sooooo bad.
    Thats the point, they are small town cars. Where in central London, or any other major city or town are you going to be cornering at speed in one of these?
    "Being nice costs nothing and sometimes gets you extra bacon" - Pondlife.

    Comment


      #52
      jedi,

      insults are all tongue in cheek and mean't in the nicest most humourous way

      forgive me, but when you put a gun to your head and comment on the comparison of a smart to a rangerover, you are infact comparing the retort to the argument offered by yourself and others here, your arguments are all one sided. Fact is, range rovers and smarts are both on the road, perhaps even in the same numbers ? so why not to compare them ?

      if you want to compare lower market 4x4's then you need to compare them to lower market saloons
      but if you want to go to the nth degree with these comparison's then why not get some standards introduced to create a level pedestrian and cyclist friendly playing field where all cars no matter how big and how expensive must meet certain cyclist and pedestrian collision standards including capability in breaking and accelerating and then with standards in place let the market decide which product they want to buy

      Milan.

      Comment


        #53
        thanks for your stats Jedi,

        let's try something what if you replaced all the school run 4x4's with similarly priced saloon cars, Mercedes S, BMW 7, Audi 8 etc

        I reckon the collision stats would be the same, it's the drivers, not the vehicles !

        Milan.

        Comment


          #54
          Originally posted by DaveB
          Thats the point, they are small town cars. Where in central London, or any other major city or town are you going to be cornering at speed in one of these?
          They were only doing about 20mph...is that too fast for you?

          Comment


            #55
            Originally posted by milanbenes
            Look lads, it's like this, what offers the most safety and protection for you and your family, a 4x4 or a saloon/estate car ?

            Do the maths, it's not rocket science, go figure, numbers speak for themselves etc

            Milan.
            Do you live inside a Mad Max film or something? This isn't how society works you know. You don't say, "I'm going out in town for the evening, what offers the most protection, ensuring that I stick together with friends or carrying a sawn-off shotgun?"

            Carrying a sawn-off shotgun might technically be the correct answer, but fortunately there are legal restrictions on the intent to harm other citizens, even if it is in self defence. (Otherwise we could all electrify our car door handles to deter thieves.)

            If you purchase a 4x4 purely to ensure that you do more harm to your opponent - er, I mean fellow road user - in the case of an accident, then I'm pretty sure you'd be breaking the law, though it might be difficult to prove that was your intent, unless you stated the fact on a forum or something.

            As for cyclists being on the road... might be worth reading this item about the wording in the new edition of the Highway Code.

            Comment


              #56
              [QUOTE=dang65]

              If you purchase a 4x4 purely to ensure that you do more harm to your opponent - er, I mean fellow road user - in the case of an accident, then I'm pretty sure you'd be breaking the law, though it might be difficult to prove that was your intent, unless you stated the fact on a forum or something.
              QUOTE]
              I don't think anyone purchases a 4x4 for that purpose so you might be turinging the arguement to fit your answer here.

              I bought one becasue it holds all my kit, is large enough to take my family and I fell that my family are safer in it than they would be in a car. It is my choice so all you tree huggers, get out more!!!!!

              Comment


                #57
                I have no problem with people buying them, just wish these X5/Cayenne types wouldn't drive them like fooking nutters, no it won't go around a corner as fast as a performance car, so please don't wobblie into my lane as you lose control. No wonder you see so many of them at the front of an accident, usually lying on their side.
                I remember the good old days of this site when people used to moan about serious contractor related issues like house prices and immigration. How times have changed!?

                Comment


                  #58
                  Originally posted by dang65
                  Do you live inside a Mad Max film or something? This isn't how society works you know. You don't say, "I'm going out in town for the evening, what offers the most protection, ensuring that I stick together with friends or carrying a sawn-off shotgun?"

                  Carrying a sawn-off shotgun might technically be the correct answer, but fortunately there are legal restrictions on the intent to harm other citizens, even if it is in self defence. (Otherwise we could all electrify our car door handles to deter thieves.)

                  If you purchase a 4x4 purely to ensure that you do more harm to your opponent - er, I mean fellow road user - in the case of an accident, then I'm pretty sure you'd be breaking the law, though it might be difficult to prove that was your intent, unless you stated the fact on a forum or something.

                  As for cyclists being on the road... might be worth reading this item about the wording in the new edition of the Highway Code.
                  Stick ASBOs on urban 4x4 drivers. It's good enough for yoofs hanging around in hoodies shouting at old ladies. Should work for all the parents dropping off their little ones at school, double parking and meaning that everyone else is too scared to let their kids walk to school, so get a 4x4 instead. Anti-social behaviour is anti-social behaviour. Do the same for Tesco lorry drivers (sorry Sockpuppet, we'll do it to the managers instead) that make 10 deliveries per day to town centre Tesco Express stores.

                  That's my Monday morning rant - I feel better already.

                  Comment


                    #59
                    Do you live inside a Mad Max film or something? This isn't how society works you know. You don't say, "I'm going out in town for the evening, what offers the most protection, ensuring that I stick together with friends or carrying a sawn-off shotgun?"
                    See thread on Scotland the Crap

                    HTH

                    Comment


                      #60
                      Originally posted by milanbenes
                      thanks for your stats Jedi,

                      let's try something what if you replaced all the school run 4x4's with similarly priced saloon cars, Mercedes S, BMW 7, Audi 8 etc

                      I reckon the collision stats would be the same, it's the drivers, not the vehicles !

                      Milan.
                      I beg to differ, they all stop, start and handle better on roads than the equivalent off roaders plus the drivers would be at the same eye level as the Ka drivers, I know this takes away some of the sense of superiority and invincibility but that’s the price of safety I'm afraid.
                      Science isn't about why, it's about why not. You ask: why is so much of our science dangerous? I say: why not marry safe science if you love it so much. In fact, why not invent a special safety door that won't hit you in the butt on the way out, because you are fired. - Cave Johnson

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X