When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
The roads I've been on today a car with winter tyres (which type studded or blizards??) will not cut it you need the front clearance, diff lock etc - gettting another car with these 'winter' tyres today would find it difficult (for the little the 4x4 is worth too).
Though during better weather, no hills it would be better. I'm pretty sure the Scandinavians use winter tyres with studs on? which would obviosuly fling you into a hedge on a normal road. The road is winding and has steep hills and deep snow - its a lot worse than it appears in these pictures
Heres what happens when some tool(s) attempts use this road/dont how to drive/dont have the correct cars.
1. Vauxhall Astra got stuck thus abandoned - wtf was he thinking this cars not upto the job it will get stuck, the tyres are no good and snow almost upto the undercarriage and thats only half on the route - route gets worse.
2. Mitsubishi warrior comes along try to get around gets stuck on an incline no.2 abandoned.
3. Person in another Mitsubishi trys to get past you can see the snow is far too deep at that point and gets stuck we get out and loan our shovel to him and try to help with no avail - thinking back I'm sure he didnt engage diff lock even though he said he had (judging by the wheels).
4. Further down another route, an old couple get stuck in a ditch, we help them out after 20mins.
Arrive home 2hours later for what would have been a 12mile 30min journey
We have been travelling along this road for 3 weeks, taking our time and driving properly in pretty bad snow but we know what we are doing, we have fishtailed a bit etc from time to time.
We considered many 4x4's before the Gordon B announced he was going to bend you over and roger you sensless before you had even turned the ignition key!
With that in mind, we narrowed our search down to a top spec CRV or X-Trail as we knew that they were not going to break the bank in the new tax bracket, did reasonable MPG and are more than capable for the weather conditions we get in this country.
What can I say, the X-Trail has done North to South Wales & back over New Year (lots of snow) and been out and about with no issues in all this recent snow in 4 wheel drive without loosing traction any where. Wouldn't be without it - Gordon B can go & shove his head up his A _ _ E!
Originally Posted by lovegroova,Jan 14 2010, 03:33 PM
They are a perceived as a particular problem in London and the South East in general.
The roads are overcrowded to start with, and lots of them seem to be driven by people with no spatial awareness and who struggle to manouevre them properly.
Then you have the aggressive types driving in a very intimidating manner, made worse by the size and lack of manoueverability.
These behaviours are no differnt to those displayed by other drivers, but they are worsened by the dimensions of the vehicles, especially the very big versions (Q7, X5 etc)
Again, who perceive them as a problem? The self-appointed arbiters of taste most likely.
Almost all of what you say can be applied to many, many other vehicles and unsurprisingly - to me at least - the dimensions of the largest supposed 'offenders' are hardly significant when compared to other non-small-cars (albeit without the alleged stigma)...
Q7
Length: 5089
Width: 1983
Ford Galaxy
Length: 4820
Width: 1884
Volvo V70
Length: 4823
Width: 1861
BMW X5
Length: 4854
Width: 1933
Legacy Estate
Length: 4775
Width: 1780
As a counter to all the 4x4 bigotry I could be very tempted into a Q7 V12...
I've never understood the hatred of them either - the problem is that they are easily stereotyped and often driven by school mums (yes women, sorry ) who drive appallingly, park appallingly and generally have no idea what's going on around them. Like BMWs and Audis they have their stereotype and that's what people hate (I hope) rather than the cars themselves.
Originally Posted by Polemicist,Jan 14 2010, 08:57 PM
Again, who perceive them as a problem? The self-appointed arbiters of taste most likely.
Almost all of what you say can be applied to many, many other vehicles and unsurprisingly - to me at least - the dimensions of the largest supposed 'offenders' are hardly significant when compared to other non-small-cars (albeit without the alleged stigma)...
Q7
Length: 5089
Width: 1983
Ford Galaxy
Length: 4820
Width: 1884
Volvo V70
Length: 4823
Width: 1861
BMW X5
Length: 4854
Width: 1933
Legacy Estate
Length: 4775
Width: 1780
As a counter to all the 4x4 bigotry I could be very tempted into a Q7 V12...
Agree with you entirely. the 5 series estate is about 10mm shorter than an x5!!
Its was just fashionable to have a pop at 4x4s back when they were significantly larger than estate cars and did 10mpg. Most estate cars have grown in size so the difference is much smaller now. Most people have no idea of the dimensions, consumption and performance of modern day 4x4s so think they are still fair game. Then when youve argued the size aspect and emmissions side I guarantee youll get the "its useless off road" well of course it is you dildo, its got 20" wheels with low profile rubber!!!! in any case why do I want to go off road? Id buy a Land Rover if I needed to do that!
As you've helpfully shown, they are generally larger than their estate car counterparts, and as I've shown, are a lot heavier, which makes a big difference to low level pollution and noise levels in congested stop-start traffic. The added weight also makes them far more dangerous to more other road users, and the added height blocks the view of other road users of all varieties, making things less safe.
dreamer has it right, it's nothing to do with taste (I think some of the 4x4s are very handsome), the big 4x4s make a lot of sense in many situations, but not in urban and suburban South East England.
Originally Posted by lovegroova,Jan 15 2010, 10:26 AM
As you've helpfully shown, they are generally larger than their estate car counterparts, and as I've shown, are a lot heavier, which makes a big difference to low level pollution and noise levels in congested stop-start traffic. The added weight also makes them far more dangerous to more other road users, and the added height blocks the view of other road users of all varieties, making things less safe.
dreamer has it right, it's nothing to do with taste (I think some of the 4x4s are very handsome), the big 4x4s make a lot of sense in many situations, but not in urban and suburban South East England.
I might give some credence to the pollution and safety argument if 4x4s represented a huge segment of the car population... it would interesting to see the data for the numbers of large 4x4s on the road compared to more 'acceptable' vehicles.
As for the added height blocking the view of other road users, how do 'they' (there 'they' are again...) cope with vans and trucks? - of which there are considerably more on the road than 4x4s I'd suggest.
If large 4x4s make no sense in urban and suburban South East England then conversely, nor do cars such as S and other sports cars with only two seats.
Originally Posted by Polemicist,Jan 15 2010, 10:52 AM
I might give some credence to the pollution and safety argument if 4x4s represented a huge segment of the car population... it would interesting to see the data for the numbers of large 4x4s on the road compared to more 'acceptable' vehicles.
As for the added height blocking the view of other road users, how do 'they' (there 'they' are again...) cope with vans and trucks? - of which there are considerably more on the road than 4x4s I'd suggest.
If large 4x4s make no sense in urban and suburban South East England then conversely, nor do cars such as S and other sports cars with only two seats.
There are a lot of them down here, that's for sure.
It means that there are even more vehicles blocking the view of road users, largely un-necessarily in the case of 4x4s.
Most cars only carry one person most of the time, 4x4s included, so it's a moot point.
Originally Posted by Polemicist,Jan 15 2010, 11:52 AM
I might give some credence to the pollution and safety argument if 4x4s represented a huge segment of the car population... it would interesting to see the data for the numbers of large 4x4s on the road compared to more 'acceptable' vehicles.
As for the added height blocking the view of other road users, how do 'they' (there 'they' are again...) cope with vans and trucks? - of which there are considerably more on the road than 4x4s I'd suggest.
If large 4x4s make no sense in urban and suburban South East England then conversely, nor do cars such as S and other sports cars with only two seats.
Without getting to the obvious conclusion of the car fit for purpose argument you've been provided with ample reason for why "people" don't like the Chelsea Tractor.
They are bigger than cars with equal capability - X5 / Q7 vs Legacy
They are definitely heavier than equivalent cars - X5 vs 5 Series etc
It's quite a spurious argument to compare sports cars and 4x4s in the urban environment and the sense they make. I don't know what percentage of journeys are made with only 1 person in the car but surely that in itself justifies the 2 seater
The objection - just in case you don't understand it - is the need for a four wheel drive car used in a confined urban environment under the control of someone who does not necessarily have training, skill or spatial awareness to drive a car of that size.
A 4x4 with actual off road capability, where needed is not in question.
01-14-2010, 10:36 AM
) who drive appallingly, park appallingly and generally have no idea what's going on around them. Like BMWs and Audis they have their stereotype and that's what people hate (I hope) rather than the cars themselves.
