-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
4X4 or car to tow
Page 3 - Passionate about caravans & motorhome? Join our community to share that passion with a global audience!
Lord Braykewynde said:
Another valid point that I should have added to this thread is that when I towed with the Passat I never once got stuck despite towing March to November. Saying that, when I had the Passat, we only used Club or private sites with hardstanding whenever possible.
Now we are older and retired we try to be a bit more thrifty with our pensions so use CLs more which means driving across a lot of unmettalled drives and fields.
My comment about passing car transporters was because when towing with the Passat the three times I came across this the outfit definitely felt unstable when overtaking. This doesn't happen with the Kia although thinking about it maybe the ATC has something to do with that which I didn't have on my previous van.
It's quite interesting that a topic I started over 6 years ago is still alive and kicking.
Over the last 3 years we have full timed in our single axle caravan which incidentally is only one foot shorter than the twin axle van we had back in 2005. I have changed up to a Rover 75 diesel estate to tow the van as it was getting too expensive to run the laguna petrol estate.
Now as for using 4X4's I'm still of the oppinion that you don't realy need a 4X4 to tow a large caravan unless you have to tow off road or in adverse weather conditions. That's not to say that 2 wheel drive doesn't have draw backs, but being practical, my rover which shares the freelander BMW 2 Ltr diesel engine gives a very respectable 53.8 Mpg on a short 14 mile run between Leominster and Hereford, and it achieves 60 Mpg on longer runs. As for towing it returns between 38.7 and 41 Mpg towing. Now that ain't a bad fuel economy. But when we get snow like we did in the last 2 years, when we had to move our caravan between sites on Jan 7th 2010 (7 inches) & 2011 (4 inches), one does have to bite the bullet and borrow a 4X4. Especially as both the site we left and the site we arrived at had not done any snow clearance at all.
I used both a freelander (ex highway patrol spec) and a Nissan navara double cab pick up. Out of the two, the nissan was definately more capable but both actually got stuck while in 4WD mode, and I still had to revert to using my 6'000 Lb 12 volt winch that I have made up into a portable unit to attatch to a tree and winch the caravan into place.
This winch was the best £70 christmas prezzie my kids ever bought me. So with that in mind, I'll be taking the winch with us when we go caravanning as has proven more usefull than a 4X4 and given that our Rover gives around 30% better fuel economy we will have a substancial ice cream fund too.
Choice of vehicle is very much a personal one and as such all of us here on the forum can tender advice but it is realy down to making the decission after considering which of the advantages or disadvantages you're going to accept or put up with.
Over the last 3 years we have full timed in our single axle caravan which incidentally is only one foot shorter than the twin axle van we had back in 2005. I have changed up to a Rover 75 diesel estate to tow the van as it was getting too expensive to run the laguna petrol estate.
Now as for using 4X4's I'm still of the oppinion that you don't realy need a 4X4 to tow a large caravan unless you have to tow off road or in adverse weather conditions. That's not to say that 2 wheel drive doesn't have draw backs, but being practical, my rover which shares the freelander BMW 2 Ltr diesel engine gives a very respectable 53.8 Mpg on a short 14 mile run between Leominster and Hereford, and it achieves 60 Mpg on longer runs. As for towing it returns between 38.7 and 41 Mpg towing. Now that ain't a bad fuel economy. But when we get snow like we did in the last 2 years, when we had to move our caravan between sites on Jan 7th 2010 (7 inches) & 2011 (4 inches), one does have to bite the bullet and borrow a 4X4. Especially as both the site we left and the site we arrived at had not done any snow clearance at all.
I used both a freelander (ex highway patrol spec) and a Nissan navara double cab pick up. Out of the two, the nissan was definately more capable but both actually got stuck while in 4WD mode, and I still had to revert to using my 6'000 Lb 12 volt winch that I have made up into a portable unit to attatch to a tree and winch the caravan into place.
This winch was the best £70 christmas prezzie my kids ever bought me. So with that in mind, I'll be taking the winch with us when we go caravanning as has proven more usefull than a 4X4 and given that our Rover gives around 30% better fuel economy we will have a substancial ice cream fund too.
Choice of vehicle is very much a personal one and as such all of us here on the forum can tender advice but it is realy down to making the decission after considering which of the advantages or disadvantages you're going to accept or put up with.
Parksy
Moderator
There are valid points in favour of a 4x4 and also against a 4x4, a lot depends on what you want the vehicle to do.
I use an older Mitsubishi 4x4 but I can honestly say that it's quite rare for me to engage 4wd and if I do it's more of a precautionary measure to prevent the possibility of churning up the grass, because I've never become bogged down or been in a position where I would have been likely to.
I tow fairly regularly and because I attend rallies some of our 'campsites' are on farmland with no tarmac, not that this in any way deters or inhibits our friends who use saloon cars who seem to have little or no trouble on the same rallies.
On occasion I've towed struggling saloon cars towing caravans off wet slopes on rally fields but I didn't buy a 4x4 in order to help others. In most cases the stuck saloon car driver would have been ok if he'd chosen his pitch more carefully, the good drivers are never stuck no matter what they drive.
Our t /a caravan has an MTPLM of 1650 kg and while there are probably MPV's that would have towed the caravan as well as my Mitsubishi and use less fuel when they did it I decided on a 4x4 because it is fairly indestructible in terms of reliability.
It's an old 1996 model, quite comfortable but built like a tank with no computerised expensive to fix engine management system, no electronically aided stability or traction devices which could mask the behaviour of a trailer or caravan under tow and in the highly unlikely event of it breaking down there's a better than evens chance that I could fix it with a few sockets and spanners and a big hammer.
It's not exciting to drive, I did all of that when I was younger and at my time of life and with a caravan on the back I'm happy with a vehicle that provides a driving experience similar to that of driving a 3 piece suite down the road, the last thing that I need is excitement when I'm towing.
I could conceivably keep it for another ten years, when I decide to change it I'll look for a similar model that's slightly newer and a bit more shiny which won't cost much to buy and apart from admittedly high fuel costs it won't cost much to own.
I must admit though that when I see some of the 21st century kit levels on 'modern' cars I feel a slight pang of envy but the fact is that the old 4x4 does exactly what I want it to do, no more and no less.
I use an older Mitsubishi 4x4 but I can honestly say that it's quite rare for me to engage 4wd and if I do it's more of a precautionary measure to prevent the possibility of churning up the grass, because I've never become bogged down or been in a position where I would have been likely to.
I tow fairly regularly and because I attend rallies some of our 'campsites' are on farmland with no tarmac, not that this in any way deters or inhibits our friends who use saloon cars who seem to have little or no trouble on the same rallies.
On occasion I've towed struggling saloon cars towing caravans off wet slopes on rally fields but I didn't buy a 4x4 in order to help others. In most cases the stuck saloon car driver would have been ok if he'd chosen his pitch more carefully, the good drivers are never stuck no matter what they drive.
Our t /a caravan has an MTPLM of 1650 kg and while there are probably MPV's that would have towed the caravan as well as my Mitsubishi and use less fuel when they did it I decided on a 4x4 because it is fairly indestructible in terms of reliability.
It's an old 1996 model, quite comfortable but built like a tank with no computerised expensive to fix engine management system, no electronically aided stability or traction devices which could mask the behaviour of a trailer or caravan under tow and in the highly unlikely event of it breaking down there's a better than evens chance that I could fix it with a few sockets and spanners and a big hammer.
It's not exciting to drive, I did all of that when I was younger and at my time of life and with a caravan on the back I'm happy with a vehicle that provides a driving experience similar to that of driving a 3 piece suite down the road, the last thing that I need is excitement when I'm towing.
I could conceivably keep it for another ten years, when I decide to change it I'll look for a similar model that's slightly newer and a bit more shiny which won't cost much to buy and apart from admittedly high fuel costs it won't cost much to own.
I must admit though that when I see some of the 21st century kit levels on 'modern' cars I feel a slight pang of envy but the fact is that the old 4x4 does exactly what I want it to do, no more and no less.
Parksy said:
The biggest mistake we ever made was getting rid of the Pajero when the head gasket started to go. She's still going strong locally without towing and would of been fine towing again with us had I had it fixed!! Trouble was when weighing it up I kept thinking but wht else big will go in the next twelve months, which in hindsite was very silly!! Although no major problems with the Rexton lots of minor niggles which we never had with the 94 Pajero!! When we did change we scoured the country looking for a 99/2000 last of the 2.8's to no avail which was when we got the Rexton. As far as the kit went it had as much on it as the Rexton (55) and it all worked. Now the new toy (when she arrives) really is going back to basics!
Martin,re your quote " when will the next big bill be", I've just been in that self same situation.My 94 Range Rover needed a small brake job, which turned into three weeks and almost £1000! By the time I was told about the cost, a lot of the work had been done, so had I decided to scrap the car, I would still have had a hefty bill, and no car. And of course I would still have to find (and fund) a replacement.
Well, I had the work done, and tried to smile as I paid the bill, which was probably half the car's value.But, in hindsight, I don't regret doing it, because I still have a car I know and love, which has carried me all over the UK and Europe over the last few years, and which I would find difficult to replace. (its a LSE Range Rover, with lots of special equipment).
So I now accept that the actual value of the car is secondary; the main qualification is that it suits my purpose. This is the first major cost in over 30,000 miles, and I've no doubt it won't be the last, but I've still got the car I know and trust.
(plus the fact that Herself says she just cannot image me ever driving any thing else!)
Well, I had the work done, and tried to smile as I paid the bill, which was probably half the car's value.But, in hindsight, I don't regret doing it, because I still have a car I know and love, which has carried me all over the UK and Europe over the last few years, and which I would find difficult to replace. (its a LSE Range Rover, with lots of special equipment).
So I now accept that the actual value of the car is secondary; the main qualification is that it suits my purpose. This is the first major cost in over 30,000 miles, and I've no doubt it won't be the last, but I've still got the car I know and trust.
(plus the fact that Herself says she just cannot image me ever driving any thing else!)
Parksy
Moderator
We had a K plate 2.5 td swb Pajero for seven years, I was really sad to sell it because it was as good as the day that I bought it but with rallying we felt that we needed a bit more room that the lwb Pajero provided.Martin24 said:
The difference in power between the 2.5 and the 2.8 when towing is quite noticeable!
Good luck with the Defender, it should pull a houe down
Why is it becoming "forum trendy" to quote verbatim the previous reply when responding. We are all surely capable of scrolling up a couple of paragraphs. It makes managing my life from the Ipod (yes IPod) so much more complex!!!
Parksy
Moderator
To save Clive from further exasperation I've refrained from adding a quote to let everyone know exactly which comment my answer is addressed to but therein lies the answer to why quotes are added and forum trendiness has got nothing to do with it.
I admire the dogged determination that it must take to make sense of this forum on an i-pod, I should imagine that any website or forum would present a challenge.
I admire the dogged determination that it must take to make sense of this forum on an i-pod, I should imagine that any website or forum would present a challenge.
My MacBook resides with daughter and I am too lazy to go upstairs to the apple mac and the IPod isnt my sole source of Internet access but it is convenient. But I stand by my point that there is an increasing tendency to just quote verbatim when the post under discussion is just above.
…….those of us with older 4x4s will face a problem when at some point in the future we might want to replace them.
Most of the large 4x4’s first registered after March 23rd 2006 fall into the highest VED band……… currently £460 per year
No way am I paying that........ so I will be keeping my 2001 model (£260/year) as long as possible.
Some of you will be Paying £215 now, so buying a post 23rd March 2006 replacement will more than double your VED rate.
Most of the large 4x4’s first registered after March 23rd 2006 fall into the highest VED band……… currently £460 per year
No way am I paying that........ so I will be keeping my 2001 model (£260/year) as long as possible.
Some of you will be Paying £215 now, so buying a post 23rd March 2006 replacement will more than double your VED rate.
Gafferbill said:…….those of us with older 4x4s will face a problem when at some point in the future we might want to replace them.
Most of the large 4x4’s first registered after March 23rd 2006 fall into the highest VED band……… currently £460 per year
No way am I paying that........ so I will be keeping my 2001 model (£260/year) as long as possible.
My new LR will be about 250! much the same as the current Rexton
Some of you will be Paying £215 now, so buying a post 23rd March 2006 replacement will more than double your VED rate.
Martin24 said:
...........are you sure the VED on your new Land Rover Defender will be "about 250" ?
Gafferbill said:
From 1st April 2009 all the Defender 110 Station Wagons featuring the Utility Pack will gain a classification change from M1 passenger carrying to N1 Light Commercial Vehicle. With a payload capability in excess of 1,000kg, the Land Rover Defender 110 Utility Wagon also meets requirements to be classified as a light goods vehicle for VAT purposes should the usage be commercial.
That's how
But when it is due for the MOT in three years time
Standard : 110
Gross vehicle weight 3,050
Minimum kerb weight* 1,955
Maximum payload** 1,095
When I take my truck, the first thing they do is check the plate, mine is GVW 2900kg class 4
MOT test groups
Martin24 said:
Gafferbill said:
Hope you are enjoying your new LR Defender.....the pictures shown in another post look good.
Are you willing to tell us what the VED on your new Defender is?
I think you will have paid £1000 for this first year and (as of now) £460 in subsequent years or am I wrong?
PS ..... I am trying to keep this thread of the OP steveinleo going to it's 7th birthday....
"Most of the large 4x4’s first registered after March 23rd 2006 fall into the highest VED band……… currently £460 per year ""
No way am I paying that........ so I will be keeping my 2001 model (£260/year) as long as possible"
Sky Sports subs - pint of beer - bottle of wine - packet of fags - ladies regular appointment at the beauty salon - cinema tickets.
VED difference is not very much when you consider what people find money for, *** away or send up in smoke.
No way am I paying that........ so I will be keeping my 2001 model (£260/year) as long as possible"
Sky Sports subs - pint of beer - bottle of wine - packet of fags - ladies regular appointment at the beauty salon - cinema tickets.
VED difference is not very much when you consider what people find money for, *** away or send up in smoke.
ZeGecko said:
........that is a perfectly valid point of view and welcome to the PC Forum
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Mandatory eye tests for drivers over 70 being proposed by HMG. Good or bad?- Started by Dustydog
- Replies: 227
-
Caravan Battery we think is dead even though we have solar- Started by Saxo Appeal
- Replies: 172
-
-
-
