I'd love a 4x4, but which one

[Lord Braykewynde]

I seem to remember this being a favourite saying of CliveV

Lordy Lordy, so I'm Clive now am I. Fear not for it is not true, Clives blood can never be as blue as mine.

 

[Kanga_5075163]

The only kangaroo who knows no bounds.

excellent reply!

 

[Kanga_5075163]

Dear Paul

i have made a reply to you in comments

 

[CliveV]

http://europa.eu.int/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexapi!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=EN&numdoc=31970L0156&model=guichett
Now that was fun! Not a sensible answer from the troll but the normal purile splat of a "Loose Stool" posting. Quote - ! laughed so much I nearly f*rted - shame you didn't follow through Kanga.

Oh and by the way Kanga quotes Council Directive 70/156/EEC in a posting hidden away from most peoples gaze ( perhaps he knows how ridiculously tenuous the quote is?)

In Kanga's reply to Paul:-

"If you care to go the eu website and read Council Directive 70/156/EEC which is the findings of the research into the protection of motorists/pedestrians and other vulnerable road users before and in the event of a collision with an off road vehicle and a freight transporting vehicle, you will find that you are far better off being hit by a truck rather than a 4x4"

Having just looked at this (try a search on Google guys) there is nothing that I can see that says anything of the sort. And in any event the document was published on the 6th Feb 1970.

YES THAT IS 1970!!! Nineteen Seventy.

I propose that as a useful document purporting to damn a 4x4 this document is spurious, out of date and about as usefull as a chocolate teapot.

1/10 Kanga - Need to try harder if you are going to play with the big boys.

 

[derek_5078799]

Thanks for that Paul. The thing is that a cmax and small 4x4 will both do the job of towing my caravan its just that Im aware of some of the differing opinions put forward as to which one is a good overall buy for both towing and normal day to day use. I have said before that I am not against 4x4s live and let live, but am aware of their social standing with a lot of people and I think I may be sensitive to public opinion and this is making my decision even harder. However , like you say it wont hurt to test drive some of them anyway, cherrs Derek.

 

[Kanga_5075163]

Do all you 4x4 pilots know the latest from ncap about 4x4 safety???

Well to put you in the picture, they test for child protection in the car sperately from adult protection.

Guess what?

Yep thats right every monster 4x4 scored zero marks, so if you think you are doing little johnny a favour by daddy buying a 4x4 YOU ARE WRONG!

SAVE A LIFE BUY A CAR!

 

[Kanga_5075163]

http://europa.eu.int/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexapi!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=EN&numdoc=31970L0156&model=guichett

Now that was fun! Not a sensible answer from the troll but the normal purile splat of a "Loose Stool" posting. Quote - ! laughed so much I nearly f*rted - shame you didn't follow through Kanga.

Oh and by the way Kanga quotes Council Directive 70/156/EEC in a posting hidden away from most peoples gaze ( perhaps he knows how ridiculously tenuous the quote is?)

In Kanga's reply to Paul:-

"If you care to go the eu website and read Council Directive 70/156/EEC which is the findings of the research into the protection of motorists/pedestrians and other vulnerable road users before and in the event of a collision with an off road vehicle and a freight transporting vehicle, you will find that you are far better off being hit by a truck rather than a 4x4"

Having just looked at this (try a search on Google guys) there is nothing that I can see that says anything of the sort. And in any event the document was published on the 6th Feb 1970.

YES THAT IS 1970!!! Nineteen Seventy.

I propose that as a useful document purporting to damn a 4x4 this document is spurious, out of date and about as usefull as a chocolate teapot.

1/10 Kanga - Need to try harder if you are going to play with the big boys.

Actually the directive is 2003 which comes into force 2010

 

[CliveV]

Yes Kanga - just looked at it. For the Pedestrian safety rating most large vehicles seem to score just one star. That includes the new Range Rover AND ALSO THE 5 SERIES BMW!

How do you feel about driving a car that rates as low as a Range Rover - Not only that, but because your head is sited lower in a BMW (God I am having trouble controlling myself after that opportunity) the greater hieght of the RR would enable you to see the problem LOng before the 5 series BMW driver would!

God you are so easy to play with

 

[CliveV]

Oh and by the way Knaga - just so you know if you look in the right place on the website you will learn that the reason why so many vehicles are not scoring anything on the Child Protection - it is because not all the tests have been done.

Nothing to do with all 4x4's scoring zero! In fact the wonderful VW Touarag 2004 model scores a very respectable 4 stars. As does the 2004 BMW 5 series - I note that the earlier model is not rated tho' - I do hope that dosn't upset you.

SO IN SUMMARY ONCE AGAIN THE ANTI IS PROVED BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT TO BE QUITE CAPABLE OF TELLING LIES.

a) the EEC directive of 1970 vintage - and don't give that trollop about "Its 2003 actually - coming into force in 2010" - If its not relevent until 2010 how the heck can it be applied to anyones car on this Forum.

b) Ncap - good site hard data says it as it is. BUT it does not say what Kanga intimates - quite the opposite as a 4x4 scores VERY well!!

Knowing that Kanga drives a 5 series - you all may like to read what Ncap has to say about the 1998 model - they are not that complimentary about the 2004 model either!

I quote:-

"BMW modified the 5-series after initial testing, chiefly because its front airbags fired late. Changes included a new airbag crash sensor, load-limiting front belts, and additional weld points in the footwell. Results given here are for upgraded cars which BMW says are on sale now. In the frontal impact, the driver's upper body was well protected, and the car meets side-impact legislation effective from October. The head protection airbag also worked well. Pedestrian protection was poor, however - the bonnet and bumper were judged to be particularly 'aggressive'.

Seems like Kanga has borrowed the personality of his cars "bonnet & bumper".

This is really fun!

 

[CliveV]

Do all you 4x4 pilots know the latest from ncap about 4x4 safety???

Well to put you in the picture, they test for child protection in the car sperately from adult protection.

Guess what?

Yep thats right every monster 4x4 scored zero marks, so if you think you are doing little johnny a favour by daddy buying a 4x4 YOU ARE WRONG!

SAVE A LIFE BUY A CAR!

WRONG WRONG WRONG - The VW Touarag score 4 stars - when are you going to wake up and smell what you are standing in?

Trouble is you dish out so much Cr*p you don't realise what is truth anymore!

 

[Pelyma1]

Seeing as my car has not been tested by NCAP I'd have trouble. Further to your comment to me. I'd suggest you need to get out and see 7.5 tonne lorries wacking along the motorway in the fast lane.

Also are you really suggesting that a 40 tonne artic is going to do less dammage to a Mondeo than a 4x4 - dream on my good friend. The occupants are going to die if hit by the artic - didn't you watch Cold Feet? In an impact with an artic the car is going to be so violently shaken that the occupants will be tomato soup. They may well die if my car hits them too. But as I said I see no scathing attacks on lorries.

As for your mate I was using it as a loose term and meant Sloppy Performer.

I will continue to enjoy my wonderful car that I do about 25K miles a year in. I will let you enjoy yours and let you sit in smug satisfaction that you are so much safer than I.

 

[CliveV]

Arr but Paul would you use your 4x4 to pull his outfit off a wet muddy field?

 

[Lol1]

Do all you 4x4 pilots know the latest from ncap about 4x4 safety???

Well to put you in the picture, they test for child protection in the car sperately from adult protection.

Guess what?

Yep thats right every monster 4x4 scored zero marks, so if you think you are doing little johnny a favour by daddy buying a 4x4 YOU ARE WRONG!

SAVE A LIFE BUY A CAR!

Overall my little old Sorento, gets 4 stars, not bad for a snarling mass of anti social, death causing, planet stripping, metal....whats BMW stand for? Bent My Wheels, thought it was the ultimate driving machine, and got it wrong!

 

[Wendy-Norfolk]

Arr but Paul would you use your 4x4 to pull his outfit off a wet muddy field?

I would'nt tow him off if he was up to his neck in it..

 

[BrianStAlbans]

Kanga,are you ok,I saw what happened there,that must have really hurt.Do you want me to get you an ambulance,you know one of those big white vans loaded with equipment to make them really heavy and then driven at way over the speed limit,though red lights to come and get you....hung on that sounds really dangerous.....ban ambulances I say...Kanga get on ya bike!!!!

 

[Wendy-Norfolk]

I would'nt tow him off if he was up to his neck in it..

Ohh and another thing, Kanga admitted to not using CLs, he only frequents superpitches. So nobody would have the pleasure.....PITY!

 

[CliveV]

One final parting shot from me before I have to stop this nonsense and do some work:-

Have a look at the following seven quotes concerning PEDESTRIAN SAFETY - they a taken at random from the Ncap site (worth a look!) and two of them are from 4x4's and 5 from the Executive or Large Car catagory. (Mainly because I assume most of us have larger cars to of whatever type to tow with.)

a)The car protected its child occupants but did little to keep pedestrians from harm.

b)An intelligent seat belt reminder operates for the driver and front passenger. Both child occupants were protected, but the car's ability to protect pedestrians was dire.

c)The protection offered to child occupants was also very good while that for pedestrians and other vulnerable road users was judged to be fairly good.

d)The car protected its child occupants reasonably but pedestrians fared poorly.

e)Protection for child occupants was good, but pedestrians fared less well.

f)Pedestrian protection was better than for some cars here, although parts of the bonnet provided poor cushioning.

g)Protection for pedestrians was average for this type of vehicle.

So there we have it - getting hit by any vehicle is going to do damage. Large Saloons score as badly as 4x4's and visa versa. Rememeber Kanga - only two of the above are 4x4's and the data is in the public domain - you cannot lie anymore about this. You have been well and truly caught out*

I am tired of the Anti's bleating on and lying about how selfish we 4x4 drivers are (Killing Children was the over emotional phrase used) when in fact some large saloons actualy score worse than 4x4's!!

Kanga for one has the "Arthur Scargil" mentality in that he famously said on TV " Do not confuse me with the facts - my mind is made up!"

*Sod work - lets watch the cricket

 

[CliveV]

Arr but Paul would you use your 4x4 to pull his outfit off a wet muddy field?

He produces it Wendy!

 

[Lord Braykewynde]

Kanga,are you ok,I saw what happened there,that must have really hurt.Do you want me to get you an ambulance,you know one of those big white vans loaded with equipment to make them really heavy and then driven at way over the speed limit,though red lights to come and get you....hung on that sounds really dangerous.....ban ambulances I say...Kanga get on ya bike!!!!

Brian its not a white ambulance Kanga needs, its a Black Maria with men in white coats to take him to the funny farm. Theres a spare padded cell for him I'm sure.

 

[Lord Braykewynde]

One final parting shot from me before I have to stop this nonsense and do some work:-

Have a look at the following seven quotes concerning PEDESTRIAN SAFETY - they a taken at random from the Ncap site (worth a look!) and two of them are from 4x4's and 5 from the Executive or Large Car catagory. (Mainly because I assume most of us have larger cars to of whatever type to tow with.)

a)The car protected its child occupants but did little to keep pedestrians from harm.

b)An intelligent seat belt reminder operates for the driver and front passenger. Both child occupants were protected, but the car's ability to protect pedestrians was dire.

c)The protection offered to child occupants was also very good while that for pedestrians and other vulnerable road users was judged to be fairly good.

d)The car protected its child occupants reasonably but pedestrians fared poorly.

e)Protection for child occupants was good, but pedestrians fared less well.

f)Pedestrian protection was better than for some cars here, although parts of the bonnet provided poor cushioning.

g)Protection for pedestrians was average for this type of vehicle.

So there we have it - getting hit by any vehicle is going to do damage. Large Saloons score as badly as 4x4's and visa versa. Rememeber Kanga - only two of the above are 4x4's and the data is in the public domain - you cannot lie anymore about this. You have been well and truly caught out*

I am tired of the Anti's bleating on and lying about how selfish we 4x4 drivers are (Killing Children was the over emotional phrase used) when in fact some large saloons actualy score worse than 4x4's!!

Kanga for one has the "Arthur Scargil" mentality in that he famously said on TV " Do not confuse me with the facts - my mind is made up!"

*Sod work - lets watch the cricket

Scargill was at least right on one thing Clive - they closed all the mines, we are all STILL waiting for Kanga to be right on ANYTHING.

 

[CliveV]

One final parting shot from me before I have to stop this nonsense and do some work:-

Have a look at the following seven quotes concerning PEDESTRIAN SAFETY - they a taken at random from the Ncap site (worth a look!) and two of them are from 4x4's and 5 from the Executive or Large Car catagory. (Mainly because I assume most of us have larger cars to of whatever type to tow with.)

a)The car protected its child occupants but did little to keep pedestrians from harm.

b)An intelligent seat belt reminder operates for the driver and front passenger. Both child occupants were protected, but the car's ability to protect pedestrians was dire.

c)The protection offered to child occupants was also very good while that for pedestrians and other vulnerable road users was judged to be fairly good.

d)The car protected its child occupants reasonably but pedestrians fared poorly.

e)Protection for child occupants was good, but pedestrians fared less well.

f)Pedestrian protection was better than for some cars here, although parts of the bonnet provided poor cushioning.

g)Protection for pedestrians was average for this type of vehicle.

So there we have it - getting hit by any vehicle is going to do damage. Large Saloons score as badly as 4x4's and visa versa. Rememeber Kanga - only two of the above are 4x4's and the data is in the public domain - you cannot lie anymore about this. You have been well and truly caught out*

I am tired of the Anti's bleating on and lying about how selfish we 4x4 drivers are (Killing Children was the over emotional phrase used) when in fact some large saloons actualy score worse than 4x4's!!

Kanga for one has the "Arthur Scargil" mentality in that he famously said on TV " Do not confuse me with the facts - my mind is made up!"

*Sod work - lets watch the cricket

Still laughing!! This just gets better and better!

 

[Lol1]

I think I know what really bothers Kanga about 4x4's and to some extent I would probably think the same way in his position. Imagine if you will, the Roo getting up in the morning and driving to work. There he's sat in his cocoon of German engineering, looking out at the minions who are forced to travel in inferior brands. The likes of Fords, Vauxhalls and poor Rovers really can't cut it against the quality of his car, in short, he's feeling smug. Why not, the "BM" has cost the earth, to buy, service, tax, fuel and the tyres etc, and lets face it, they are as much a drain on earths resources as a 4x4 when you consider car life cycle. But I think I would be sat there too, in the traffic cue, thinking life is good.

Imagine then, a dirty great 4x4 pulling up next to you; suddenly your view through to the other side of the road is gone, replaced by a steel door. How can you feel superior when someone else is looking down at you? That someone else is also cocooned in strong hard metal, and in a straight head on accident, that someone is going to survive better than you. What's more, that someone has probably paid

 

[MarkG.]

I think I know what really bothers Kanga about 4x4's and to some extent I would probably think the same way in his position. Imagine if you will, the Roo getting up in the morning and driving to work. There he's sat in his cocoon of German engineering, looking out at the minions who are forced to travel in inferior brands. The likes of Fords, Vauxhalls and poor Rovers really can't cut it against the quality of his car, in short, he's feeling smug. Why not, the "BM" has cost the earth, to buy, service, tax, fuel and the tyres etc, and lets face it, they are as much a drain on earths resources as a 4x4 when you consider car life cycle. But I think I would be sat there too, in the traffic cue, thinking life is good.

Imagine then, a dirty great 4x4 pulling up next to you; suddenly your view through to the other side of the road is gone, replaced by a steel door. How can you feel superior when someone else is looking down at you? That someone else is also cocooned in strong hard metal, and in a straight head on accident, that someone is going to survive better than you. What's more, that someone has probably paid

 

[GrahamW]

I think I know what really bothers Kanga about 4x4's and to some extent I would probably think the same way in his position. Imagine if you will, the Roo getting up in the morning and driving to work. There he's sat in his cocoon of German engineering, looking out at the minions who are forced to travel in inferior brands. The likes of Fords, Vauxhalls and poor Rovers really can't cut it against the quality of his car, in short, he's feeling smug. Why not, the "BM" has cost the earth, to buy, service, tax, fuel and the tyres etc, and lets face it, they are as much a drain on earths resources as a 4x4 when you consider car life cycle. But I think I would be sat there too, in the traffic cue, thinking life is good.

Imagine then, a dirty great 4x4 pulling up next to you; suddenly your view through to the other side of the road is gone, replaced by a steel door. How can you feel superior when someone else is looking down at you? That someone else is also cocooned in strong hard metal, and in a straight head on accident, that someone is going to survive better than you. What's more, that someone has probably paid

 

[Lol1]

Did you mean IMPORTANT !!!

Believe you me, I checked that one on the thesaurus, have a look at it yourself.