I'm not a big fan of 4x4s, but I do see they serve some people requirements. I enjoyed tooling about in the Freelander 2 I borrowed for a month but wouldn't want to be paying the bills.
However the goverments persecution of them was/is worrying. Someone (possibly Clarkson!) said something along the lines of, 'First its 4x4s, then sports cars, the luxury cars' etc.
If you want/can afford a Range Rover then go for it. I would spent the money on emigration costs myself :-)
|
"However the goverments persecution of them was/is worrying. Someone (possibly Clarkson!) said something along the lines of, 'First its 4x4s, then sports cars, the luxury cars' etc."
Rubbsh! Max VED is £405 for CO2 > 225
Not 4x4 specific, and far from persecution on cars costing £30k+
|
|
What about the talk of banning them/charging them extra for the London congestion zone? That was targetted at 4x4s
|
|
again emission based, and not a government proposal anyway
|
|
|
|
Good point, OB.
News reporters and the halfwits they interview in the street, keep mentioning on the tellybox how many routes are only passable by 4x4. When what they mean is that these routes are only passable by cars driven sensibly and skilfully, and which have been equipped for extreme winter conditions.
Tell a lie often enough and loudly enough, and bingo. Truth.
|
|
down here in sussex there have been appeals for 4x4 owners to help doctors and hospital nurses etc to drive them in to work so they can keep them open.also to ferry elderly people to doctors.once the snow goes they will all be bashing us again.
|
Perhaps more people will buy 4x4 versions of ordinary cars and vans.
Why don't any ordinary cars have differential locks? Usually cars get stuck because one wheel starts spinning. If the diff is lockable, the car would keep going if only one wheel has enough grip.
QUOTE:..""News reporters and the halfwits they interview in the street, keep mentioning on the tellybox how many routes are only passable by 4x4.""
My front-wheel-drive VW Passat TDI is quite good in the snow and ice but I wouldn't have attempted to take it on roads where I would have gone in my old Land Rover 90, when I had it.
Edited by Sofa Spud on 14/01/2010 at 19:23
|
just replace 4x4 with "car with winter tyres" and you have the same thing.
a rr sport ain't going anywhere with 20" blingers with elastic bands on.
|
Big 4x4s are ok. Its just the arrogant pigs that drive them is the problem.
|
Now if that doesn't stir it, AE, nothing will! :)
(Do you include the Queen, btw?!)
Edited by b308 on 14/01/2010 at 20:28
|
The Queen doesent drive on the road.
|
|
|
|
" Its just the arrogant pigs that drive them is the problem. "
Thats a harsh statement! Iam certainly not & I have spent the last week or so running around in rural area's helping others & lost count of how many cars i have towed including one or two equipped with snowtrac tyres! they still can't beat a 4X4 on M & S tyres in deep snow up a steep hill with packed ice underneath!
Some of the statements about how good a two wheel drive car is with winter tyres makes me laugh! yes they are better but as sofa spud says there are places you wouldn't go unless you have a proper 4x4.
I don't rate some of the 4x4's without all the transmission toys & as for ones with big fat tyres, they are of no use.
Its certainly strange how I have been in such high demand this week & its never had a chance to cool down. May get a chance to clean at the week end & may be I shall be able to find out what colour it is & what the reg number is when I can find it under the salt.
May be I should stop helping others & become an arrogant pig!
|
Helping someone in snow that falls every thirty years is hardly a lifetime service to humanity is it.
Edited by Altea Ego on 14/01/2010 at 20:38
|
well you obviously have a very high opinion of yourself & a Big ego.
Lets hope we cross paths one day & you need help, You'll be waitng a long time!
|
not needed it yet. thats the value of 4x4 in the snow.
BUt just for you ID, I will excempt you from the list
Dont any one else run away with the idea you are exempt. I see far too many of you on the road behaving like pigs for it not to be an accurate assumption.
Edited by Altea Ego on 14/01/2010 at 20:46
|
I saw the RD department, of a major 4x4 manufacturer measuring a WW2 Half-track on the news.
It`s going to be the new Central London, school run from the transport, apparently, in 2011.
They reckon the body can be reduced to half inch plate and the weight to just under eight tons.
The idea is that it`s the next logical step up - in an ownership profile that started with a Peugeot 106 - to do the same job around 10yrs ago.
|
As someone who regularly drives a small hatch back, a mundane estate car and a 4x4 depending upon what I'm doing I wonder if that means I go through a Jekyll and Hyde style personality shift when I use the different cars? Somehow I rather think not.
Doesn't do to judge books by their cover. For example I once, to my utter astonishment met a chap who turned out to be quite pleasant despite his wearing a football jersey and trainers as leisure wear. I had naturally expected him to be a complete moron. Or was I being a narrow minded bigot perhaps ? Maybe so.....
;-)
|
Humph, As i said earlier up the thread, the general driving habits of *most* BIG 4x4's drivers is piggish in the extreme. Its not a matter of books and dustjackets, just plain experience.
|
|
That's the trouble with stereotypes. Can't be relied on. Slippery coves.
|
It works in this case Humph. Let us examine it
If you have a need for a big 4x4, (IE you tow, you live down the end of a farm track, etc etc then fine.
If you bought one because you think its safer for your wife and kids, then
a: you are stupid and wrong
b: its ok for your wife and kids to kill others.
If you bought one because you like them:
a: they are less capable than other cars for the same money
b: based on a: you have an inferiority complex that has to be compensated for in bulk.
|
Buy what you want, forget what others think, others opinions matter as much as you want them to.
Anyone who drives anything bigger than a Fiat Panda drives something they dont need, be it for ego, lifestyle choices such as having children or driving pleasure etc etc.
Point is, we live in a free country and we are not all expected to drive the bare minimum vehicle to meet our basic personal transport needs.
We have choice and frankly it is a more than a little bit sad that there are people who take the time to sit infront of a computer and psychoanalyse why someone may or may not have bought any particular car.
Far more important to anaylse quite why it is they feel they have any right whatsoever to insult people for picking a particular vehicle.
Sometimes people just like what a car offers them as an individual, nothing more, nothing less. Get over it.
|
Stu, someone buying a full size off road vehicle for no reason offends me for two reasons.
1. they are less likely to be able to avoid hitting in an unexpected situation me as it's less manouverable.
2. They are far more likely to kill me if they do hit me due to the weight and height of their vehicle.
It's a free country, I don't advocate banning them, but I reserve the right to think owners of such cars may have a French connection to an 11th century king of England because of their complete disregard for others.
|
Well said Stu.
Some people really do get their knickers in a twist over a persons car choice, could imagine them with a red star on their peaked cap sitting between two other cold blooded skeletal commissars in a bare office squinting through their official glasses at the evidence and passing judgment on a slightly less equal member of the proletariat who came to their notice.
|
>Far more important to anaylse quite why it is they feel they have any right whatsoever to insult people for picking a particular vehicle
Experience in thier behaviour and driving in said vehicle gives me that right.
|
>>Experience in thier behaviour and driving in said vehicle gives me that right.<<
Based on a sample group of how many people? What percentage of 4x4 drivers does this sample amount to?
|
>>Experience in thier behaviour and driving in said vehicle gives me that right.<< Based on a sample group of how many people? What percentage of 4x4 drivers does this sample amount to?
Let us say thAT 75% of the large 4x4 vehicals i see around me are being driven in an aggressive, bullying or thoughtless manner.
|
>Sometimes people just like what a car offers them as an individual, nothing more, nothing less.
quite right Stu - a good point. That makes them stupid. There are far more capable vehicles for that money in nearly every way, even 4x4 if you need it. The need to drive a big bulky 4x4 is therefore driven by something more than driving. Personal Inadequacy is the likely reason.
|
The need to drive a big bulky 4x4 is therefore driven by something more than driving. Personal Inadequacy is the likely reason.
Or the need to an off-road vehicle, capable of carrying tools, animal foodstuffs, fencing materials etc
That said, most are used as Chelsea tractors, and many (BMW X series, Merc M and GL class etc) are worse than useless off-road, the kind of 4x4 Im thinking of, are LR Defenders, and to a lesser extent Disco's (my better 1/2 has a Disco, and it DOES get used off road as part of her business!)
|
>Or the need to an off-road vehicle, capable of
that is fine. If you have the money you can even have a big luxobarge Range Rover and do it in comfort.
|
|
ST, justified use is, as suggested by its title, justified. No more objectionable than vans, trucks, tractors or any other large, heavy vehicle that is so for a good reason.
|
|
AE, thank you for putting the point more elegantly that I have ever managed.
|
"...Sir Paul McCartney's ex received a nasty shock for her birthday earlier this week when her £40,000 Lexus 4x4 was in collision with a bollard.
Heather, 42, who was praised for her performance on Sunday's Dancing On Ice, seemingly found manoeuvring the luxury motor more of a challenging than moving around the rink.
The mother-of-one was seen charging straight into the post at north London's Alexandra Palace ice rink following rehearsals."
As with most cars, the bashers are talking about the drivers rather than the vehicle.
|
|
|
4x4s are ok. Its just the arrogant pigs that drive them
Been at the alcopop AE? I didn't have you down as a make or category bigot. Surely no innocent vehicle is immune from falling into the hands of one of the rich variety of carphounds?
Vehicles are innocent and harmless. It's just the PsITA that get their grubby paws on them and purport to 'drive' them.
Surely that was what you really meant?
Edited by Lud on 14/01/2010 at 22:07
|
Very true Lud. Trouble is that particular vehicles attract more then a fair share of PsITA's
Alcopop? nope. Not even any limoncello. Just a few bottles of Becks Blue.
|
Dire news in the business supplement today. Belgian workers are blockading the breweries, threatening Leffe supplies Europe-wide.
Bumboclaat!
|
|
I'm happy to report that there is no problem with the supply of weissbeer in Germany this evening. I've checked several times and it's just fine!
|
Damn, panic buying in Waitrose tomorrow.
|
|
Maybe I should be bringing some back with me? That should cheer the gf up!
|
No shortage of single malt in this arrogant 4X4 driver's study tonight !
Ted
|
|
>>Trouble is that particular vehicles attract more then a fair share of PsITA's<<
As do BMWs, Volvos, Audis, Minis, lorry drivers, smug Skoda owners.......blah blah blah.
Pick almost any vehicle and you can find a twit driving one, but even if you banned 4x4s, it wouldnt make the slightest bit of difference to how these people drive. Thats because the problem isnt the type of car, but the idiot behind the wheel who is at large on our roads with a license that transfers to any car.
|
Stu, they should no more be banned than the (insert term the swear filter wouldn't like at all) individuals who are planning marching on Wooton Basset. Repugnant, objectionable, but a necessary part of living in a free country. Criticise, stand up to, ridicule, argue, but don't ban.
Seriously, people died for the right for us to be morons if we wish. Fortunately also for other more important reasons, but you know what I mean I hope.
Edited by Gordon M on 14/01/2010 at 22:20
|
|
Moron signing off. Goodnight.
|
This is priceless ! I really can't help reading some of these posts in an "Alf Garnett" accent.
" Now yer 4x4, work of Satan yer 4x4"........
:-0
Keep it up chaps !
Here's a thing, sometimes, not often, but sometimes, I drive I a blinged to Hades X5 which is kicking around at work because it happens to be convenient. Must try to remember to drive it more thuggishly in future, wouldn't want to disappoint anyone or disavow them of their views. Or maybe I won't bother......lost cause I fear.
BTW it's a stonking thing to drive !
|
well at least you guys have got something meaty to argue about now, and not the fact that your courtesy car didnt have enough petrol in it.
As a general rule tho, certain types of car draw certain types of people, so its valid to make generalisations on them based on the behaviour you see.
|
|
Just out of curiosity AE, what kind of car do you choose to drive?
|
Just out of curiosity AE what kind of car do you choose to drive?
Had a Touran, An Altea XL, and now drive a Lancer Estate.
|
|
Time for a new handle, possibly referencing Bengal.........or boils.
|
BTW it's a stonking thing to drive !
Lets face it, if you want an urban 4X4 then you can't really climb much higher than either an X5 or a Range Rover (including Sport).
Would love one :-)
|
My big gripe with 4x4 is the amount of congestion they have caused recently. As soon as a single snow flake falls anyone with a 4x4 hits to road. I find them to be slow and cumbersome and have had to overtake a few in my 2WD.
The problem is that footballers wives, drug dealers and wide boys are all atracted to the image of a big 4x4. There are of course exceptions and have ave seen to odd 'real' 4x4 with proper M&S tyres and beiong driven apropriately.
People can drive whatever they choose so long as its legal, but when you get fools in X5s putting others lives at risk then I think something should be done.
|
I do wonder if the perception that large 4x4 drivers are more aggressive is due to the fact that when they do tailgate you they are much more noticeable than an ordinary car, and therefore stick in the mind more?
BTW Stu why are Skoda drivers "smug" but the others you mention not??!
Just wondered, being a Happy Skoda driver, but not, as far as I was aware, smug!
Edited by b308 on 15/01/2010 at 08:51
|
>>BTW Stu why are Skoda drivers "smug" but the others you mention not??!<<
Its only a silly stereotype ive heard quite often, which seems to be based on the 'I bought a VW at 2/3 the price'. Then again, if I owned one of the current Skodas, id be quite pleased with myself, perhaps even a little smug. But I drive a lilac Daihatsu so ill keep quiet :-) actually though, my car has eco-smugness written all over it!
|
Here in S Wales we've had a good amount of snow and I've enjoyed the challenge in our Octavia tdi and Fiat Panda, both of which have been excellent. The Panda at one point was almost thwarted by the depth of snow, perhaps 10inches, when it started to act as a snowplough with the front grille! Having said that, our street is uphill onto flat and the 4 wheel drives have definitely, as expected had a real advantage in traction uphill, particularly the more agricultural ones fitted with decent tyres, eg Freelander, Discovery. I heard that a local Range Rover Sport was worse than useless (too powerful and wrong tyres).
I think it's too simplistic to categorise all 4x4s together. Some are obviously image-based, others are proper working vehicles, others still are small enough for sensible everyday use without excessive running costs (eg Terios, Jimny, RAV4) I don't see a problem with them. I may even consider one at some point if I need something that can cope with a small amount of tracks, mild off- roading etc.
Over the next months/years, we're going to see punitive increases in fuel prices and road tax, whichever government gets in and as the price of crude rises with global demand post recession. The market for the excessive, needless school run 4x4 will undoubtedly decline as people switch for economic reasons.
|
The market for the excessive needless school run 4x4 will undoubtedly decline as people switch for economic reasons.
Wish that were the case, bazza. Sadly, there have always been strong economic reasons for not buying one, however people still persist for image reasons.
|
SQ
Wish that were the case bazza. Sadly there have always been strong economic reasons for not buying one however people still persist for image reasons.
Fools and their money are easily parted...
From a purely consumption based economic view, 4x4s are devine! I'm all for people handing over their money to our broke government.
PS - apologies for the terrible typos in my earlier post.
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 15/01/2010 at 12:43
|
Lets face it if you want an urban 4X4 then you can't really climb much higher than either an X5 or a Range Rover (including Sport). Would love one :-)
Any particular reason, other than for people to think you might be one of the peabrained bladder-kickers from Slumford Bodge, in Fulham?
|
Why dont you attack Mondeo drivers who clearly drive a hatchback that is stupidly large and heavy and then proceed to fill it with just a driver, which begs the question, quite why does one person need such a large car? These people are everywhere, funny enough, I saw three this morning on my short journey to work - one man, one jacket hanging up in a car that can seat 4 people... and they say a 4x4 is too much for a car full of kids, but this level of excess is ok then?
|
My main problem with 4x4s has always been one of visibility.
If you are driving a typical hatch, you simply can't see through a high-sided vehicle. This is fine in itself -- just move back -- but then you get another one pulling into the gap and so on. It reduces safety on the road.
Vans, trucks and buses have the same issue, but they are restricted to 60mph in most cases. 4x4s -- and large MPVs -- are not.
I wouldn't want either banned, but I still class the drivers as selfish for gaining an advantage at others' expense for no practical reason.
Perhaps if 4x4s and MPVs were treated as vans for the purpose of the law and restricted to 60mph the problem would go away. Many 4x4s aren't safe much above this speed anyway.
A Mondeo is no higher up than a Fiesta, so the problem doesn't arise.
|
|
Your're right, primeradriver. Only I'd argue your MPV point - it's easier to see through one of these as there's usually much more glass in one, and that glass is far less likely to be black.
|
this level of excess is ok then?
Yes.
It's big enough to be a true multi-purpose vehicle, but not so big that it's an unnecessary danger to others. Your geezer with the jacket may have bee on his own today, but running with a load to the tip on Sunday and driving his children around on Saturday. Are you suggesting he should also buy a Smart ForTwo when he's on his own? Your arguments get weirder every time we have this debate.
|
So your only arguement against 4x4s is based entirely on your inability to see round them then?
I ask because they dont weigh any more than a normal car of similar footprint and are no longer or wider - there is a similar sized saloon/estate equivilent for any 4x4.
Its a poor arguement for MPVs though because how well you can see through one depends entirely on how high your car is - if your in a low slung coupe, you have no more chance seeing through a Mondeo or a Galaxy than a Merc GL. Unless your now going to argue that cars must not be too low either.
You really better come up with something more substantial although I somehow doubt you will, havent done yet.
|
So your only arguement against 4x4s
Stop making yourself look silly. You know full well I have put forward other arguments. I am discussing htis one point in response to another poster who raised it. I'm hardly compelled to lay out my entire set of arguments here and now.
You really better come up with something more substantial
Or what? Your argument is simply based on "do woteva u like, bruv".
a normal car of similar footprint
I have never once objected to their footprint. Most of them are too high, which poses stability and other safety issues, and too blunt at the front, and constructed in such a way that they turn anything they hit in to pâté. Which is great when you're trying to catch a batallion of retreating Revolutionary Guard just outside Basra, but overkill on Northumberland Avenue in Reading.
But we've danced this dance before, stu. Don't know why you're trying to discuss things with a mindless person.
|
"Why dont you attack Mondeo drivers "
Don't mess with Sales reps.... we own the outside lane
Edited by mr.freezer on 15/01/2010 at 12:46
|
Well to answer the OP, its fair to say that the 4 x 4 bashers will never be silenced and they will dredge up any fact-light arguement in order to go on the attack. You will note that when challenged with facts and figures, they fall silent, as they often dont actually bother to research what they are saying, but base it on their judgement from a quick glance.
Im not an advocate of large cars funny enough and as for 4x4s, I think that many are too thirsty, too heavy, poorly designed in terms of visability for the driver and nowhere near efficient enough with the space they take up.
However, I would also conceed, as a reasoned human being, that great strides have been taken in pedestrian safety, stability and handling, economy, emissions and even weight saving technologies.
The fact that Lexus sell a large, petrol 4x4 that is more econonomical than a 1.6 Focus is something that should be praised and Ford should be the ones hounded for clearly dragging their feet.
The very latest 4x4s available have addressed many of the traditional areas of concern with 4x4s, it just doesnt suit the arguements of their detractors, so they ignore this. Its why they cannot be taken seriously. They are quite often driving cars just as heavy, just as thirsty and just as polluting.
And yes, I believe you should drive whatever you like, this is a free country. I drive a low-emissions, economical hatchback, even though id like something bigger - Ill stick that one up on the Green Wall.
I would never however, stand in judgement of my BR neighbour and his very nice Hilux, which Im quite sure, I could park my car in the loadbed of.
|
While I would not wish for a SUV like an X5 it is just an easy way for owners to show that they are a bit wealthy and do not need to worry about fuel costs and for all we know they may have a better car for fun motoring.
No harm done.
However, regardless if you agree with their right to exist, they are a hazard to be behind on the motorway, invade two supermarket parking spaces, and magnify the drivers flaws (spacial awareness, aggression etc) more than if the driver were in a smaller vehicle.
They are on a par with putting your satelite dish on the front of your house, leaving your fancy mobile phone on the cafe table and not letting your shirt cuff cover your expensive watch and lots of other things.
We all have something we like to show off. If a 40 grand SUV that is outperformed in the majority of circumstances by a 30 grand one by the same manufacturer floats your boat then so be it
|
|
Somebody is letting ALL their little prejudices show!
|
> They are on a par with putting your satelite dish on the front of your house
If the front of your house faces 28 degrees east of due south, where else are you supposed to put it? Sure as eggs is eggs it wouldn't be receiving much over the back door!
|
"Somebody is letting ALL their little prejudices show!"
Yup, and as I said we all show off about something. I am sure I do lots of naff stuff that I am unaware of just I don't own a SUV
|
We all have something we like to show off. If a 40 grand SUV that is outperformed in the majority of circumstances by a 30 grand CAR by the same manufacturer floats your boat then so be it
EDIT
|
Have a wee gander at some of the sources on this website, stu.
www.stopurban4x4s.org.uk/safety.htm
RAC, IAM, New Scientist, British Medical Journal, reputable insurance companies. I like the IAM quote myself. And the insurance company stats. Oh, and Euro NCAP.
Yes, it's a campaign webiste, but the sources of its quotes are impeccable.
Whilst some new 4x4s are doing better, the vast majority of these nuisances on our roads are not of this type. So, as you rightly point out this is a free country, and the bashing and detracting will continue.
Then there's the Australian experience:
www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/RN/2003-04/04rn27.htm
Edited by Alanovich on 15/01/2010 at 15:19
|
|
stunorthants26. If its the hybrid Lexus you mean, the "combined" fuel figures are v. doubtful. Scope for hybrids to stretch the test results had not been anticipated. On test though, 27mpg! Not so astounding. Autocar IIRC.
Edited by nortones2 on 15/01/2010 at 15:41
|
'The reality of the fuel savings, however, will depend on how you drive' to quote Autocar. Their test figures were 29.1 mpg btw.
I would be more interested to see a long term test regarding the economy. There are also alot of people who come to this website complaining that their cars wont reach official figures when the car is new ( the auto Focus only does 36 mpg officially so I wouldnt expect the reality to differ much from the Lexus ).
Its still pretty astounding when you consider what a V8 petrol Range Rover will do ( 18 mpg ) - even the diesel RR will officially do just 25 mpg.
|
|
Compared with other behemoths it does do pretty well!
|
So, as you rightly point out this is a free country,...................
And that really is the most important aspect of this discussion. To ban a certain type of vehicle because it doesn't fit with the kind of model that governments, pressure groups, nannies and the like would have us believe in, really is the thin end of the wedge. I'm very much into efficiency and low price motoring from day to day but I also own a Honda Hornet 900 for those days when I want to be my alter ego! Many people would and do find high performance bikes anti-social and would like them banned, so we all have to be a little careful not to see the faults in others and not ourselves!
|
It is a free country, and if you want a 4x4 have one, as long as it is legal.
However, don't tell me you need one, because you almost certainly don't need one anymore than I need a powerful motorbike.
Don't tell me that they handle well either. They might handle ok, for a big, heavy tractor, but I doubt the M series BMW chassis engineers are too worried about a Range Rover.
Don't tell me they are safer. Personally I prefer not crashing, than crashing into something hopefully small than I. Oh, and what happens when you crash a 4x4 into a tree?
Don't tell me they are economical. You might be able to eek the same MPG out of a forty grand Lexus Hybrid as a Focus driven normally, but I wouldn't budget for it.
Don't forget that driving summat big and heavy comes with certain responsibilities.
Thanks for listening.
|
I am not attacking the 4x4, meely the people who drive them
Looking at it from that viewpoint given it some thought:
I have made a class of driver called the "pig" class.
In here fits the tailgaters, the bullyers, the lane weavers, the people who force into gaps that dont exist, those who block you. etc
Then I add this to the cars that you see them perform in more often than others
They are BMW 3's and 5's, Mercedes C and E class and R8, Range Rover, BMW X5, Audi Q7.
The audi Q7 drivers outperfom thier breed by a large margin.
Edited by Altea Ego on 15/01/2010 at 18:41
|
|
Is the Q7 the elephantine Audi SUV? Sure is a sizeable mother.
|
>>Is the Q7 the elephantine Audi SUV? Sure is a sizeable mother. <<
Yes ALTHOUGH, a Range Rover is much harder to clean as it is much taller. Landcruiser Amazon is the daddy though, although the Merc GL, of which ive only seen one around where I live, does look like a task and a half aswell.
|
Is the Q7 the elephantine Audi SUV? Sure is a sizeable mother.
5.089 metres long, 2.177 metres wide, 1.737 metres high, 2455 kg.
|
Merc GL450 5.099m, 2.124w, 2550kg.
Discovery V6 diesel 4.829m, 2.176w, 2583kg
Range Rover diesel 4972m, 2216w, 2717kg
Toyota Landcruiser V8 4950m, 1970 w, 2616kg
Whats incredible is that they all weigh more than a Rolls Phantom. The Q7 is a lightweight.
|
See, I do get that some people with overinflated egos do drive certain cars, but quite often, they just drive a Mondeo too. A twit is a twit and money may bolster arrogance and selfishness, but it doesnt create it.
I think one class of person ive noticed around, who do tend to drive either an SUV or MPV are the ones that have parking sensors, even cameras to help them park yet still find themselves unable to park in just one space or even better, not to hit things despite every gizmo going telling you when your about to dent your parking sensor.
Invariably almost, big cars with parking sensors have bumper damage. The irony amuses me greatly :-)
|
|
An idiotic driver can be in any car. But usually its a cheap old banger, or its an expensive luxury car like the ones already mentioned. In a way this is good because it makes it easier to spot the troublemakers on the road.
|
> Point is, we live in a free country and we are not all expected to drive the bare minimum
> vehicle to meet our basic personal transport needs.
This is not a criticism of the poster but that's the narrowest possible definition of freedom on which this thread, and most others of its ilk depend.
Freedom is one of the most paradoxical things about life.
>I have made a class of driver called the "pig" class.
>In here fits the tailgaters, the bullyers, the lane weavers, the people who force into gaps >that dont exist, those who block you. etc
Performing an action, in this case owning and using a car or motorbike whether fast, slow, 4x4 or otherwise doesn't confer upon the user the right or freedom to use it as they wish. It gives you something far worse than that, namely the responsibility to use it appropriately.
That means ensuring that by exercising your freedom you do not act in a way that impacts the freedom of others to go about exercising their freedom.
Without this self restraint, freedom tips over into tyranny. It seems logical to argue that the 'nanny state' so often derided here stems from the actions of individuals who fail to temper their actions with responsibility.
|
The motor car, in terms of the history of human achievements, is of course a relatively recent phenomenon. Already though, it has managed in the minds of some to represent so much more than transport. Preposterously enough it in some forms has become reviled.
Soon in relative terms, it will of course cease to exist in any currently recognisable form when ire at the actions of others and envy for the possessions of others will have to be directed alternatively.
It is not the car or its design per se which creates this discomfiture but the insecurities of its user or beholder. Western society in particular has evolved a pecking culture, one where it has become important to those who choose not to reflect upon its toothlessness to identify their own perceived status and to fixate upon their perception of how that relates to others. Visible / conspicuous markers have evolved from simple tricks of apparel and personal adornment in their most primitive form to include the advantageously moveable marker of the motor car. The trouble with relatively subtle non-verbal communication is its habit of being miscontrued depending upon the standpoint of its intended or otherwise observer.
It is therefore much easier in truth to choose not to care how one is perceived by others of no consequence to you nor to concern yourself with the displays of strangers.
Edited by Humph Backbridge on 15/01/2010 at 20:03
|
|
HB: did you make that piece up yourself, or have you copied and pasted from Setright?
|
|
All my own I'm afraid. What's more I believe it.
Edited by Humph Backbridge on 15/01/2010 at 20:10
|
Very profound Humph, and very true. The motor car however, is merely the current "vehicle" for mans badge of percieved (or false display) of power, rank or privelage. Some other form of bright plumage will take over in the future.
Edited by Altea Ego on 15/01/2010 at 20:17
|
All my own I'm afraid. What's more I believe it.
Respect.
MD
|
Well something interesting had to come up in this thread eventually - thanks Humph.
I like the idea that the person who sees others' cars as their plumage is as foolish as those who use them as such.
|
To 75% of car owners it is their plumage. to 99% of male youth its plumage.
Anyone who doesent recognise that fact is misguided.
|
I also like the idea that those who sees others' cars as plumage are the same people who wear there own cars that way;-)
|
And what of those who mimic the plumage of less threatening breeds for the purpose of subterfuge?
|
"And what of those who mimic the plumage of less threatening breeds for the purpose of subterfuge?"
You know you're retired when you start to sound like Bill Oddie.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
