Its just the hippies getting stroppy. When they have money all the save the planet crap goes out of the window as they buy hulking great 4x4 too.
2006-10-17 08:50:12
·
answer #1
·
answered by Rich S 5
·
2⤊
2⤋
Having been a 4x4 nut for years I feel qualified to answer this question and the guy that gave the first answer summed it all up when he said they are big and he cannot see around them. Being a lorry driver too I come across this type of attitude all the time and there is a very simple answer to it. OBEY THE LAW AND DON'T TAILGATE. That way you will be far enough back to see when the road is clear ahead and if your car is so fast and the 4x4 is so slow then overtake it in safety. I also own a smaller car and despite the fact that this is a 56 model and the Shogun is a "H" reg I still prefer the comfort and quality of my 4x4 to the new one as well as the fact that it is more economical to run.
2006-10-17 09:04:28
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I own a 4x4 and the safety issue did not cross my mind. We got it for our caravan so we didnt get stuck on the muddy feilds as we do like to caravan from early march to end of october. We have decided to holiday in this country and spend our hard earned money on british torisum instead of jetting abroad wasting all that jet engine fuel. However i am classed as a gas guzzeling monstor. These anti 4x4 protesters have jumped on the band wagon and just follwed the crowd. I also like the 4 wheel drive when its icy, i have confidence my car will not spin off the road although i do take extra care but my route to work is not gritted and is an ice sheet at 6.00AM It has nothing to do with the car being big and bulky but how many small cars have 4WD apart from the Evo sports car which is very expensive to run? If they gave us the option of 4WD on smaller more eco friendlier cars prehaps more people might not buy the bigger bulkier ones.
2006-10-18 08:00:33
·
answer #3
·
answered by sonic 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's all a political thing, this anti-4x4 nonsense, and it's all based on prejudice rather than proper science and fact.
A Disco will probably use as much fuel as some Galaxy-sized MPVs, and let's be honest, it'd be impractical for a lot of families to trade in such large cars and drive around in Vauxhall Corsas.
Not everyone is car-wise, so all a so-called 'environmentalist' has to do is in some way make the general public think that any car with chunky bumpers and an increased ride height pollutes like a Russian power station. They're simply playiong an the asthetics of such cars to turn us all against the 4x4.
It has been said by some that this is simply the anti-car liberal elite picking upon one type of car at a time with all the scare stores and skewed statistics,a nd they can do that because not everyone is a card-carrying petrolhead. I suppose they'll target sports cars next...
If you want a 4x4, and are prepared to handle a less agile beast, go for it. Don't listen to any of these pompous right-on Guardian readers who seem to think they can look down their noses at us with their top-end degrees which they see s a licence to dictate what is good for the rif-raff thgat is you and me.
2006-10-17 09:12:37
·
answer #4
·
answered by mr_carburettor 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
I have just posted a similar question! I have a diesel Land Rover Defender 110. It is safer than most cars as it is quite incapable of reaching top speeds and affords a wonderful view of the road and potential hazards. It does about 30mpg, more than most sports cars or 2 litre petrol cars. It also seats up to 9 people, and mine does regularly - much more useful and greener than a two-seater. It is such a pleasure to drive I rarely find myself doing faster than 60 mph whereas the only pleasure in most other cars is purely speed. I would be interested to know how many road accidents involve Land Rovers compared to other types of car. yet, Land Rover owners are penalised for using a car that is at least no worse than most 'family' cars. By the way, I live in rural Devon, on Dartmoor. So before anyone starts...
2006-10-20 13:38:38
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
people hate 4x4 is because most customers are wives driving kids to school, firstly i doubt many go off road, large 4x4 when a small car is much more friendly- less waste of space, less road hugging, also its a fact, the wives driving kids to school all over the uk can't drive or park, thus creating this hatred of 4x4. also the 'snob' element is attached, i don't agree fuel consumption is same as a espace, as u are constantly 4 wheel drive.
the main reason is the school runs that has caused this negative element.
2006-10-19 18:12:43
·
answer #6
·
answered by dennis s 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Dear Ray
Perhaps,also,usually people with larger vehicles(lorries,coaches,buses etc) are professional drivers who have extra training and are very safe.
If I went out tomorrow and got a 4x4 I could take it away without having any extra training . I would feel safer-but the rest of you wouldn't be!
Sometimes there are moments on the road when there is a "near thing"
Well If you're facing the "Roo bars" on a 4x4 you get the idea that you in your family car are going to come off worse. So you feel a lot safer in your 4x4 because of this,
Perhaps the 4x4 drivers need to take a turn down at Bovington to realise what it's like to be on the roads with them?
Equally I expect the bikers would like to see all car drivers put on a bike for the day,( a lot of us have been -that's why we're back safe inside our crumple zones!)
It's a healthy debate, but answer this question?If you have a 4x4 (and you're not a farmer/harpist etc or someone who daily travels through country lanes) , is it because you feel safer in it? And why do you feel safer?( because we will go splat before you do!)
So please keep up the safe driving, and when we get stuck in a jam I will continue to wind my window down and ask you what's going on !
Happy driving
M
2006-10-17 14:19:00
·
answer #7
·
answered by mesmerized 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
4x4 do gas guzzle but then so do larger 4x2s.
My beef with 4x4s is the safety issue. The grill and bonnet are much higher than regular cars and are much more likely to cause head injuries to unlucky pedestrians. Another one is that they are unsafe in an accident. If you read your "ncaap" safety stuff, most 4x4 drivers are at serious risk in a head on collision at just 40mph from the steering wheel and dashboard hitting them. Also, for small car drivers involved in a head on with a 4x4 at any speed your chances of survival are just about nil.
A recent episode of top gear asked what the minimum speed was that they could tip over a 4x4 just by turning sharply. The answer was a little over 30mph.
So in conclusion, I pick on "chelsea tractors" because they are an effing menace to everyone else on the road.
2006-10-17 09:03:53
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
I guess it has to do with the fact that most 4x4's are not clearly not bought to meet any real off road requirement. Consequently, not many people can understand the logic behind there being so many of these vehicles about. Couple that with the amount of space they take on the roads, the (real or otherwise) extra CO2 emissions etc and its inevitable they annoy a lot of people.
2006-10-17 09:08:34
·
answer #9
·
answered by Seryt 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
I agree with u man, see 4x4 are much better than regular vehicles. 4X4 are capable of doing many things that a simple 4x2 cant. U get better traction, won't get stuck on mud or sand, can easily pull out a 4x2 out of anywhere, So i mean why hate on 4X4's when a 4x2 can only take u for a boring ride on the streets. 4X4's are the best out there and much more fun to drive.
2006-10-17 09:04:05
·
answer #10
·
answered by chevy_arenivas 2
·
0⤊
2⤋
It's not just the 4x4's that I loathe, but the niggling, annoying people that drive them! Stop trying to make yourself feel less guilty about driving one and get an environmentally friendly vehicle. Our roads are congested enough without egotistical tank driving plonkers making matters worse. A Rolls Royce is not what I would call a normal car and when do you ever see them on the road? - hardly ever.
2006-10-17 08:57:48
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋