A green mans view of 4x4s

[gopher]

RobM77 said:

Now, what 'features' does a 4x4 like a Range Rover offer its owner? It primarily offers good ground clearance so you can straddle ruts on tracks and cross unulating rocky ground (been there, done that, it's great!). Secondarily, it offers four wheel drive to offer grip on slippery off road surfaces. These are wonderful facets that make off roaders perfect for certain people - a forester or gamekeeper's life would be very tricky and difficult without one. However, these facets have absolutely no use at all on the public road.

You missed one out, and IMO an important one. It satisfies a desire. Why shouldn't it?

[RobM77]

JagLover said:

RobM77 said:

Freedom of choice must be respected, but anyone owning an off roader purely for road use must be ready to be laughed at or puzzled over, much like someone who chooses a Chihuahua as a guard dog, or a bench drill as a bottle opener. Of course, we're all free to do these things, but don't expect people to understand!

Off roaders are also an excellent vehicle for town driving due to the number of speed humps and poorly maintained surfaces.

I've yet to see a speed bump or a public road that's so bad you need an off roader to drive over it!

[SplatSpeed]

gopher said:

RobM77 said:

Now, what 'features' does a 4x4 like a Range Rover offer its owner? It primarily offers good ground clearance so you can straddle ruts on tracks and cross unulating rocky ground (been there, done that, it's great!). Secondarily, it offers four wheel drive to offer grip on slippery off road surfaces. These are wonderful facets that make off roaders perfect for certain people - a forester or gamekeeper's life would be very tricky and difficult without one. However, these facets have absolutely no use at all on the public road.

You missed one out, and IMO an important one. It satisfies a desire. Why shouldn't it?

handle speed bumps well

[Yugguy]

dhutch profile said:

Im now on a years placement at JCB between 2nd and 3rd year of uni at loughborough living in uttoxeter.

Currently driving a 1.6l w-reg 306 which i bought of my dad around a year ago.
- She's done 150k of mainly motorway miles, but is mechanicaly sound and a dam good drive for now.

I also help my varous mates maintain there series landrovers, and laurences scimiter. And at some point would like to join in and get myself a seven replica.

Hobbies wise ive always been into my cars/engines, compeated in schools karting, but i also sail and spend a lot of time on my mountain bike at cannock/llandegla etc.

I also run/manage/maintain our steam narrowboat, which takes up much of time during summer and weekends.
- And my uncal races 2CV's

Daniel

Jesus. Now don't take this personally mate as it isn't really addressed at you, but wtf is going on at schools if they can produce a university undergraduate whose spelling is as atrocious as that?

Or tell me it was a joke?

[RobM77]

gopher said:

RobM77 said:

Now, what 'features' does a 4x4 like a Range Rover offer its owner? It primarily offers good ground clearance so you can straddle ruts on tracks and cross unulating rocky ground (been there, done that, it's great!). Secondarily, it offers four wheel drive to offer grip on slippery off road surfaces. These are wonderful facets that make off roaders perfect for certain people - a forester or gamekeeper's life would be very tricky and difficult without one. However, these facets have absolutely no use at all on the public road.

You missed one out, and IMO an important one. It satisfies a desire. Why shouldn't it?

Freedom of choice to the individual.

As I pointed out though, most sports cars are designed for road use and as such all their features (other than top speed - but that goes for any car) can be used on the public road. My Elise for instance makes full use of its feedback, steering feel, light weight responses, nimble handling etc the minute it leaves the driveway. I wouldn't mind betting that over 90% of off roaders will never use their ground clearance or traction capabilities from cradle to grave. What's more, those features actually hinder the car (conversely, in my Elise, the light weight means I get great mpg and pay low road tax). Again, it's freedom of choice - but it's not hard to see why people who buy off roaders for road use get laughed at.

[maxrider]

Now available in many supermarkets as well as all good bookshops.

[Timberwolf]

RobM77 said:

I've yet to see a speed bump or a public road that's so bad you need an off roader to drive over it!

I reckon a lot of this is down to the trend for luxury cars that are some sort of awkward compromise between Nurburgring champion and waftmobile, and everything from family saloon upwards rolling on 18s with half an inch of suspension travel.

That said, some 4x4 vehicles aren't much cop either, during a ride in an X3 I sat working out roughly how many years of useful life this one trip had removed from my spine.

[Redneck Rocket]

kambites said:

MK4 Slowride said:

Well the blokes clearly an idiot if he thinks 1, there's such a thing a global warming.

It's that kind of comment that makes people who deny global warming look like they're all closed minded idiots. Whether I believe in MMGW or not, and personally I'm undecided, that kind of attitude doesn't help anyone.

unless of course you were bring ironic in some way I don't understand, in which case I appologise

Edited by kambites on Monday 10th December 14:29

Seconded. And that's similar to the point the article's author was making, which is that reasonable discourse and reasonable problem solving are impossible when the discussion is hijacked by extremism (at either end of the spectrum)

[MilnerR]

Yugguy said:

Jesus. Now don't take this personally mate as it isn't really addressed at you, but wtf is going on at schools if they can produce a university undergraduate whose spelling is as atrocious as that?

Or tell me it was a joke?

I think modern secondary schools refer to it as "deferred success"

I'm not that surprised, we get straight A medical students doing lab placements who are struggle with simple mathematics (percentages, dilutions etc etc). I blame all the fumes from these horrid 4X4s!

[Big Rod]

RobM77 said:

I don't wish to start another huge thread regarding this, but that particular viewpoint is often raised, and there are so many misunderstandings.

At its base level, every car offers its owner the ability to get from A to B. With almost all cars, on top of this ability come extra things. Those extra things might be great fuel economy, space for your dog, or the ability to tow a trailer etc. Sports cars offer great responses, nimbleness, feedback and handling, usually at the expense of carrying capacity. However, all of the facets of a sports car can be used and enjoyed tangibly on the public road. They also offer good acceleration and speed (at the expense of fuel economy over a similar weight of car). Whether acceleration and speed are dangerous or not is getting into the debatable, so we'll stick to the facts. Now, what 'features' does a 4x4 like a Range Rover offer its owner? It primarily offers good ground clearance so you can straddle ruts on tracks and cross unulating rocky ground (been there, done that, it's great!). Secondarily, it offers four wheel drive to offer grip on slippery off road surfaces. These are wonderful facets that make off roaders perfect for certain people - a forester or gamekeeper's life would be very tricky and difficult without one. However, these facets have absolutely no use at all on the public road. In fact, these facets make an off roader compromised for use on the public road because a higher CofG and large wheel travel means less stability than if the same vehicle was lower, and the extra weight and friction of 4WD inevitably leads to lower mpg than if the car was 2WD. Additionally, concentrating the mass and strength of a vehicle higher up means that if it hits something like a Focus or a Fiesta they will be carnage. Those are facts, whether you're a greeney or not. I'm sure we all agree on everything there.

Freedom of choice must be respected, but anyone owning an off roader purely for road use must be ready to be laughed at or puzzled over, much like someone who chooses a Chihuahua as a guard dog, or a bench drill as a bottle opener. Of course, we're all free to do these things, but don't expect people to understand!

[stands up]

My name is Rod and I have a 4x4.

[/stands up]

It's no more environmentally unfriendly than my last big estate car, I have it primarily because I needed something with a larger gross train weight so I can tow a laden car transporter with it legally and safely when I need to.

It's big enough to fit the whole family and luggage in for trips to the 'outlaws', admittedly it's road manners aren't as good as my last estate car, but that's to be expected, so I don't expect so much from it and resultantly tend to drive a bit slower. It does have a slightly larger than average engine but I do tend to drive a lot on motorways and having something with shorter legs would destroy my sanity on a 1000 mile round trip.

If I could afford it I would seriously consider having a smaller car for when I didn't need it's load carrying/pulling characteristics but I can't and that's the end of it.

[JagLover]

RobM77 said:

JagLover said:

RobM77 said:

Freedom of choice must be respected, but anyone owning an off roader purely for road use must be ready to be laughed at or puzzled over, much like someone who chooses a Chihuahua as a guard dog, or a bench drill as a bottle opener. Of course, we're all free to do these things, but don't expect people to understand!

Off roaders are also an excellent vehicle for town driving due to the number of speed humps and poorly maintained surfaces.

I've yet to see a speed bump or a public road that's so bad you need an off roader to drive over it!

You can drive over it with other cars, but some 4x4s will probably be the best cars for doing so in comfort and with a minumum of damage to the vehicle. Hence they serve a practical purpose.

[arfur]

I was berated for daring to have a Forester the other day ...Lady in Waitrose carpark telling me that I should not have something so large and unfriendly

I parked it next to her Mondeo ... and pointed out that it was actually smaller and weighed less. Told her that her car was killing the planet

lol .. silly cow

[RobM77]

Timberwolf said:

RobM77 said:

I've yet to see a speed bump or a public road that's so bad you need an off roader to drive over it!

I reckon a lot of this is down to the trend for luxury cars that are some sort of awkward compromise between Nurburgring champion and waftmobile, and everything from family saloon upwards rolling on 18s with half an inch of suspension travel.

That said, some 4x4 vehicles aren't much cop either, during a ride in an X3 I sat working out roughly how many years of useful life this one trip had removed from my spine.

It is indeed jolly difficult to make an off roader handle and ride well. Most decent car manufacturers spend millions trying to lower the centre of gravity of their cars or increase wheel control. The demands on the suspension for off road driving are so different to the demands of road driving that it blows all this apart. It makes judging the compromises between road and track in a car like a 911 GT3 or an Exige seem like child's play! Cars like Range Rovers are a great solution for someone using their vehicle for 50:50 road : off road use. Anything much different from that ratio and the call for multiple cars or a compromise (Subaru Legacy for instance - as used by most farmers and gamekeepers) is the most intelligent answer.

Edited by RobM77 on Monday 10th December 15:36

[cottonfoo]

MilnerR said:

Does that include cars like mine?

And mine. There are lots of four wheel drive cars out there that don't get tarred with the same brush, and also those that look like an "SUV" that are in fact only two wheel drive.

Just goes to show the lunacy involved.

[Gizmo535]

dhutch said:

A load of badly thought-out, mis-spelled, syntactically tortured old toss

Hush now, eh?

[snotrag]

Brilliant article - I am sending these to my Dad.

Now, My dads a Garden Designer. So he travels round, with a car full of bits of wood, tools, cement, gravel, wheel-barrows, surveying equipment. his car is also his mobile office, with lots of paperwork and book inside. He also works with Stone-masonry a lot - which involves driving into quarries to pick up huge raw cut slabs of limestone. He also often tows a very large trailer.

Thus, he drives a pick up truck. An Isuzu, actually. Its great.

So occcasionally, 'Queen Green' takes a disliking to it. He's had all sorts of abuse - I wont go into too many details, but the usual anti-4x4 stuff.

However, these arguments are ridiculous. Like the author of said articles Land Rover. It does 45mpg. It runs on economical Van tires. Because it has 5 seats, it means he doesnt need a regular car when we all go out on a daytrip.
When parked next to a typical Volvo estate - it is shorter.
But heres the best bit. Its not 4wd. Its the Rear drive version - more economical you see, yet still all the benefits of the pick-up style body and tough chassis.

Try explaining that to Queen Green. There arguments are fundamentally flawed. If I was going to campaign about something, the first thing I would do is make sure I was pretty savvy with the ins and outs of the subject matter - otherwise I may make myself look a little foolish.

This goes to prove the authors point -

4x4Man said:

The problem I have is with the way the green movement is increasingly hijacked by the envious, the hateful, the spiteful, the controlling, the fascist, the ignorant, the misguided and the mis-informed.

They dont even know what 4x4 is. Its ridiculous.

Case In point -


Four Wheel Drive


NOT Four Wheel Drive.


Just one more way in which the lentalists arguments, are fundementally flawed.

[RobM77]

Big Rod said:

RobM77 said:

I don't wish to start another huge thread regarding this, but that particular viewpoint is often raised, and there are so many misunderstandings.

At its base level, every car offers its owner the ability to get from A to B. With almost all cars, on top of this ability come extra things. Those extra things might be great fuel economy, space for your dog, or the ability to tow a trailer etc. Sports cars offer great responses, nimbleness, feedback and handling, usually at the expense of carrying capacity. However, all of the facets of a sports car can be used and enjoyed tangibly on the public road. They also offer good acceleration and speed (at the expense of fuel economy over a similar weight of car). Whether acceleration and speed are dangerous or not is getting into the debatable, so we'll stick to the facts. Now, what 'features' does a 4x4 like a Range Rover offer its owner? It primarily offers good ground clearance so you can straddle ruts on tracks and cross unulating rocky ground (been there, done that, it's great!). Secondarily, it offers four wheel drive to offer grip on slippery off road surfaces. These are wonderful facets that make off roaders perfect for certain people - a forester or gamekeeper's life would be very tricky and difficult without one. However, these facets have absolutely no use at all on the public road. In fact, these facets make an off roader compromised for use on the public road because a higher CofG and large wheel travel means less stability than if the same vehicle was lower, and the extra weight and friction of 4WD inevitably leads to lower mpg than if the car was 2WD. Additionally, concentrating the mass and strength of a vehicle higher up means that if it hits something like a Focus or a Fiesta they will be carnage. Those are facts, whether you're a greeney or not. I'm sure we all agree on everything there.

Freedom of choice must be respected, but anyone owning an off roader purely for road use must be ready to be laughed at or puzzled over, much like someone who chooses a Chihuahua as a guard dog, or a bench drill as a bottle opener. Of course, we're all free to do these things, but don't expect people to understand!

[stands up]

My name is Rod and I have a 4x4.

[/stands up]

It's no more environmentally unfriendly than my last big estate car, I have it primarily because I needed something with a larger gross train weight so I can tow a laden car transporter with it legally and safely when I need to.

It's big enough to fit the whole family and luggage in for trips to the 'outlaws', admittedly it's road manners aren't as good as my last estate car, but that's to be expected, so I don't expect so much from it and resultantly tend to drive a bit slower. It does have a slightly larger than average engine but I do tend to drive a lot on motorways and having something with shorter legs would destroy my sanity on a 1000 mile round trip.

If I could afford it I would seriously consider having a smaller car for when I didn't need it's load carrying/pulling characteristics but I can't and that's the end of it.

As I said - freedom of choice.

By the way, what are you towing?! An Omega is rated up to 1.8 tonnes, and a 5 series will tow 2 tonnes!!

[RobM77]

JagLover said:

RobM77 said:

JagLover said:

RobM77 said:

Freedom of choice must be respected, but anyone owning an off roader purely for road use must be ready to be laughed at or puzzled over, much like someone who chooses a Chihuahua as a guard dog, or a bench drill as a bottle opener. Of course, we're all free to do these things, but don't expect people to understand!

Off roaders are also an excellent vehicle for town driving due to the number of speed humps and poorly maintained surfaces.

I've yet to see a speed bump or a public road that's so bad you need an off roader to drive over it!

You can drive over it with other cars, but some 4x4s will probably be the best cars for doing so in comfort and with a minumum of damage to the vehicle. Hence they serve a practical purpose.

Can't you just slow down? Having something with such a high CofG and poor driving characteristics just so you don't have to brake a bit before a speed bump seems a bit OTT to me.

I should add that I'm not against 4x4s as such. I drove an X5 for a few weeks last year, and had an instructor show me the ropes on an off road driving course in a similar model. Growing up in the country, I also know plenty of people with Land Rovers and Range Rovers etc. I've also got a few friends that own off roaders for use in off road treks etc. My issue is that I fail to see the point of them for purely road use. Something like an X5, Land Rover or Range Rover is immensely capable off road, but the compromises that they suffer on the road are fairly considerable. Obviously, it's up to an individual what they drive, but it just confuses me when people volunteer to take on all the downsides without ever using the upsides.

Edited by RobM77 on Monday 10th December 15:48

Edited by RobM77 on Monday 10th December 15:49

[Big Rod]

RobM77 said:

As I said - freedom of choice.

By the way, what are you towing?! An Omega is rated up to 1.8 tonnes, and a 5 series will tow 2 tonnes!!

Well, it was an Omega 3.2 MV6 estate I had and quite frankly it didn't cope all that well with my transporter. Sure it would pull it, but it tended to wander a bit when it was laden and didn't feel comfortable with it at all. I think the laden trailer would've exceeded the Omega's rating.

I now have a 3.2 Frontera and it's like chalk and cheese. Admitedly, it's nowhere near as comfortable as the Omega in general terms, but I towed the aforementioned trailer with a car on it all the way to Nottingham, (about 350 miles), and it felt like it wasn't there. IIRC, the Fronty's rated at 2.4 tonnes. It's not entirely about the max train weight, but how it copes with it really.

[snotrag]

Sometimes, I wonder quite what website I'm on.