Towcar Suggestion

[giovanni_5060838]

for, lol.

firstly clive is more than capable of answering me, does he

really need you to do it for him?

why lie, well thats how this thread started in a way, or have you

forgotten?

i only applied the same reasoning, if you don't like it, then

don't read it.

me, do i have to say it again. don't have an opinion on the

merits/demerits of a 4x4, but if someone tries to make a merit

of a 4x4 based on envioromental grounds, then i will have an

opinion on that, and if he leaves things like extra urban mpg

out, just to make the figures look better, i will have an opinion on that too.

as for the merits of towing with 4x4s ok thats sound.

but i'll tell you whats even better , get a flatbed 7.5tonne lorry with a whinch. now you can carry your caravan on the back,

no need to worry about it being fliped over in windy conditions

and you can travel legally at 70 mph on the m/ways and in the

outside lane too. overall length will be less, width, the same

and you get an even better view point from the drivers seat.

so if a normal cars not good enough, why not get a proper lorry.

 

[Lol1]

for, lol.

firstly clive is more than capable of answering me, does he

really need you to do it for him?

why lie, well thats how this thread started in a way, or have you

forgotten?

i only applied the same reasoning, if you don't like it, then

don't read it.

me, do i have to say it again. don't have an opinion on the

merits/demerits of a 4x4, but if someone tries to make a merit

of a 4x4 based on envioromental grounds, then i will have an

opinion on that, and if he leaves things like extra urban mpg

out, just to make the figures look better, i will have an opinion on that too.

as for the merits of towing with 4x4s ok thats sound.

but i'll tell you whats even better , get a flatbed 7.5tonne lorry with a whinch. now you can carry your caravan on the back,

no need to worry about it being fliped over in windy conditions

and you can travel legally at 70 mph on the m/ways and in the

outside lane too. overall length will be less, width, the same

and you get an even better view point from the drivers seat.

so if a normal cars not good enough, why not get a proper lorry.

Hi Giovanni, at first I was not going to reply to your post, there seemed no point, as it might be better to leave the topic to cool down. But after reading it a couple of times I have reconsidered, this is after all a forum on tow cars. Let me take your points one by one.

Clive is indeed capable of answering himself, if there is one member on this forum able to dispel the myths and untruths of 4x4 ownership then he's the man. After your initial post in the comments section of Gary's post you then posted in the reply

Section, which sorta indicates that you don't mind people seeing and commenting on what you have stated. As I said, it is a forum.

Why lie? Stephen did use an unusual tactic in his initial post, but there was no lie, he even says that he will explain himself later in the post. "If I don't like it, don't read it", what's not to like or dislike about running a car on cooking oil? However if you're going to lie while trying to prove a point, then the "point" cannot be made.

Where the fuel economy is concerned, I have already stated that a 4x4 will use slightly more than the equivalent normal car, and it is only slightly more.

Clive does have a valid point where environmental issues are concerned. It is a well know fact that more energy is used to produce and deliver your shiny new car than it will ever use during it's life on the road. So by keeping an old car going, you are indeed helping to limit transports impact on nature. Add to that the recognised advantages of LPG and the case is complete. Now I'm not trying to say Clive's LR is running around cleaning the environment as it goes, but it does make sense no mater what side of the fence you stand on.

You say you have no opinion on the merits/demerits of a 4x4, but you have seen fit to comment on them in the past always on the Anti side, you have certainly not portrayed yourself as sitting on the fence.

As for your last comment regarding trucks, we'll say no more about that.

 

[giovanni_5060838]

Hi Giovanni, at first I was not going to reply to your post, there seemed no point, as it might be better to leave the topic to cool down. But after reading it a couple of times I have reconsidered, this is after all a forum on tow cars. Let me take your points one by one.

Clive is indeed capable of answering himself, if there is one member on this forum able to dispel the myths and untruths of 4x4 ownership then he's the man. After your initial post in the comments section of Gary's post you then posted in the reply

Section, which sorta indicates that you don't mind people seeing and commenting on what you have stated. As I said, it is a forum.

Why lie? Stephen did use an unusual tactic in his initial post, but there was no lie, he even says that he will explain himself later in the post. "If I don't like it, don't read it", what's not to like or dislike about running a car on cooking oil? However if you're going to lie while trying to prove a point, then the "point" cannot be made.

Where the fuel economy is concerned, I have already stated that a 4x4 will use slightly more than the equivalent normal car, and it is only slightly more.

Clive does have a valid point where environmental issues are concerned. It is a well know fact that more energy is used to produce and deliver your shiny new car than it will ever use during it's life on the road. So by keeping an old car going, you are indeed helping to limit transports impact on nature. Add to that the recognised advantages of LPG and the case is complete. Now I'm not trying to say Clive's LR is running around cleaning the environment as it goes, but it does make sense no mater what side of the fence you stand on.

You say you have no opinion on the merits/demerits of a 4x4, but you have seen fit to comment on them in the past always on the Anti side, you have certainly not portrayed yourself as sitting on the fence.

As for your last comment regarding trucks, we'll say no more about that.

so anyone who makes any sort of statement that doesn't, give

a glowing account of 4x4, is anti.

thats whats bugging me. no one has set up a anti 4x4 group,it

seems those that favour the large 4x4, have decided that anyone

who gives a different view is anti. is that the same as not

having a coloured friend, would make you racist?

does that mean 4x4 owners should be viewed as anti 2wd, which is

basically what you and others are saying.

lastly the 7.5 tonne bit, having thought about it, whats wrong

with that? seriously, it may have started out as a dig, but it

realy does have some merits, even to parking up. 1 vehicle of

26 foot rather than two well over 26 foot togeather.

never had a towing outfit take over me on the road, so the lorry

can actually travel faster, safer.

 

[Lol1]

Hi Giovanni, at first I was not going to reply to your post, there seemed no point, as it might be better to leave the topic to cool down. But after reading it a couple of times I have reconsidered, this is after all a forum on tow cars. Let me take your points one by one.

Clive is indeed capable of answering himself, if there is one member on this forum able to dispel the myths and untruths of 4x4 ownership then he's the man. After your initial post in the comments section of Gary's post you then posted in the reply

Section, which sorta indicates that you don't mind people seeing and commenting on what you have stated. As I said, it is a forum.

Why lie? Stephen did use an unusual tactic in his initial post, but there was no lie, he even says that he will explain himself later in the post. "If I don't like it, don't read it", what's not to like or dislike about running a car on cooking oil? However if you're going to lie while trying to prove a point, then the "point" cannot be made.

Where the fuel economy is concerned, I have already stated that a 4x4 will use slightly more than the equivalent normal car, and it is only slightly more.

Clive does have a valid point where environmental issues are concerned. It is a well know fact that more energy is used to produce and deliver your shiny new car than it will ever use during it's life on the road. So by keeping an old car going, you are indeed helping to limit transports impact on nature. Add to that the recognised advantages of LPG and the case is complete. Now I'm not trying to say Clive's LR is running around cleaning the environment as it goes, but it does make sense no mater what side of the fence you stand on.

You say you have no opinion on the merits/demerits of a 4x4, but you have seen fit to comment on them in the past always on the Anti side, you have certainly not portrayed yourself as sitting on the fence.

As for your last comment regarding trucks, we'll say no more about that.

I don't ask for glowing reports of 4x4s, only that if you're going to criticize them on environmental issues, you don't single them out. You have not mentioned any large cars which have as much impact as a 4x4, you also don't see 4x4 owners criticizing owners of two wheel drive cars unless provoked, have any of them mentioned an S class Merc as being a bad tow car or A Ford Escort as being incapable? 4x4 owners are generally happy with what they drive, so if they get the chance to say it, then why not? If this were a forum on motor racing would not someone who had a particularly good and fast car not want to talk about it? Should that person then be derided for having that car? Should he be called a racist for not going with the pack?

Why would a 4x4 owner be anti 2wd when that owner has more than likely owned a 2wd before and will probably again, and yes there has been an Anti 4x4 club set up on this forum.

 

[Roger_5040982]

I drive a shogun lwb because I like it.

and for no other reason, altrustic or otherwise.

roger

 

[giovanni_5060838]

I don't ask for glowing reports of 4x4s, only that if you're going to criticize them on environmental issues, you don't single them out. You have not mentioned any large cars which have as much impact as a 4x4, you also don't see 4x4 owners criticizing owners of two wheel drive cars unless provoked, have any of them mentioned an S class Merc as being a bad tow car or A Ford Escort as being incapable? 4x4 owners are generally happy with what they drive, so if they get the chance to say it, then why not? If this were a forum on motor racing would not someone who had a particularly good and fast car not want to talk about it? Should that person then be derided for having that car? Should he be called a racist for not going with the pack?

Why would a 4x4 owner be anti 2wd when that owner has more than likely owned a 2wd before and will probably again, and yes there has been an Anti 4x4 club set up on this forum.

lol.

don't label me with any anti group, i read your statement earlier, about the mpg.

you stated that a 4x4 was a little thirstier. ok thats correct to

the piont of how longs a piece of string.

may i remind you that this thread started off with the point of

view of showing one particular 4x4 was indeed as economical and

environmentally as good as some well favoured cars.

i thought that this was a nonsense,and still do.

i explained that for some reason the starter of this thread had

delibratly took the urban figures. well this is wrong 2 fold.

firstly its stop start from cold, this would mean you accept that the 4x4 was to be used solely around towns, for very short

journeys and nothing else.

now if like me you accept it is bought to do everthing,then

the extra urban figures are of more importance.THESE were not

shown, why because the gap would have been considerably more than, as you state "a little thirstier".

by all means let people state what they own and like, but and i

say this for the last time, don't try to justify any 4x4 on

envioronmetal grounds.

as for using older 4x4s and converting them to lpg, again how

old is old? is it pre cat? does it have to comply with the latest mot emmissions? if no is answerwed to either of these questions, then again it would be nonsense to try to claim that

this was indeed envioronmentally good, to justify what had been

done.

 

[Lol1]

I don't ask for glowing reports of 4x4s, only that if you're going to criticize them on environmental issues, you don't single them out. You have not mentioned any large cars which have as much impact as a 4x4, you also don't see 4x4 owners criticizing owners of two wheel drive cars unless provoked, have any of them mentioned an S class Merc as being a bad tow car or A Ford Escort as being incapable? 4x4 owners are generally happy with what they drive, so if they get the chance to say it, then why not? If this were a forum on motor racing would not someone who had a particularly good and fast car not want to talk about it? Should that person then be derided for having that car? Should he be called a racist for not going with the pack?

Why would a 4x4 owner be anti 2wd when that owner has more than likely owned a 2wd before and will probably again, and yes there has been an Anti 4x4 club set up on this forum.

MERCEDES

S320CDI 3.0 V6 diesel 7-Gtronic: 0-60 7.2 seconds; top speed 156mph; 8.6 l/100km (32.85mpg) combined. EU4.

Kia SORENTO

Fuel Consumption Manual Auto Auto

(Official Government Test Figures) mpg (I/100km)

Fuel type Diesel Diesel Unleaded

Urban (cold) 28.5 (9.9) 25.0 (11.3) 16.6 (17.0)

Extra urban 43.5 (6.5) 41.5 (6.8) 31.4 (9.0)

Combined 36.7 (7.7) 33.6 (8.4) 23.7 (11.9)

Ok, this is the first example I could find. At the top is the Merc that does 32.85 mpg combined; below is the Sorento that does 33.6mpg combined. The Sorento, while being much slower and not as powerful is rated for towing 2.8 tonnes although I personally would stick to the 85% rule.

So what does this show? It shows that an equivalent normal car and the average 4x4 do in fact consume similar amounts of fuel.

We are in a caravan forum, so I presume that the important figures you want to compare are towing capabilities against fuel consumption. In another type of forum this sort of match would make no sense, as someone considering a Merc S class wouldn't go for a Sorento.

And yes, Clive's LR is very old, and must pass the relevant emissions test to gain an MOT.

 

[giovanni_5060838]

MERCEDES

S320CDI 3.0 V6 diesel 7-Gtronic: 0-60 7.2 seconds; top speed 156mph; 8.6 l/100km (32.85mpg) combined. EU4.

Kia SORENTO

Fuel Consumption Manual Auto Auto

(Official Government Test Figures) mpg (I/100km)

Fuel type Diesel Diesel Unleaded

Urban (cold) 28.5 (9.9) 25.0 (11.3) 16.6 (17.0)

Extra urban 43.5 (6.5) 41.5 (6.8) 31.4 (9.0)

Combined 36.7 (7.7) 33.6 (8.4) 23.7 (11.9)

Ok, this is the first example I could find. At the top is the Merc that does 32.85 mpg combined; below is the Sorento that does 33.6mpg combined. The Sorento, while being much slower and not as powerful is rated for towing 2.8 tonnes although I personally would stick to the 85% rule.

So what does this show? It shows that an equivalent normal car and the average 4x4 do in fact consume similar amounts of fuel.

We are in a caravan forum, so I presume that the important figures you want to compare are towing capabilities against fuel consumption. In another type of forum this sort of match would make no sense, as someone considering a Merc S class wouldn't go for a Sorento.

And yes, Clive's LR is very old, and must pass the relevant emissions test to gain an MOT.

you play devils advicate and at the same time go to the extreme

to make a point, why? i wouldn't waste my time doing so,yet you dig up a comparison and base it on towing weight? wow!!!!

stick to the original cars mentioned instead, or indeed any normal criterior.. but then you already know that a 4x4 will

be 15% atleast worse than a 2wd system,but as you have already

said "thats a little".

how anyone could compare a 156mph car with a 115mph car, is just

beyound believe.do the facts that if mercedes build this car

not show you that they can

get the same mpg from a vehicle that is still capable of some

exceptional performance, which would also mean that if this model has a smaller less powerfull diesel engine, it would

be A. MORE ENCONOMICAL. B, STILL CAPABLE OF TOWING THE SAME WEIGHT.

like i said go find a proper comparison... but then when i say

15% difference, i am being rather conservative.

 

[Lol1]

you play devils advicate and at the same time go to the extreme

to make a point, why? i wouldn't waste my time doing so,yet you dig up a comparison and base it on towing weight? wow!!!!

stick to the original cars mentioned instead, or indeed any normal criterior.. but then you already know that a 4x4 will

be 15% atleast worse than a 2wd system,but as you have already

said "thats a little".

how anyone could compare a 156mph car with a 115mph car, is just

beyound believe.do the facts that if mercedes build this car

not show you that they can

get the same mpg from a vehicle that is still capable of some

exceptional performance, which would also mean that if this model has a smaller less powerfull diesel engine, it would

be A. MORE ENCONOMICAL. B, STILL CAPABLE OF TOWING THE SAME WEIGHT.

like i said go find a proper comparison... but then when i say

15% difference, i am being rather conservative.

It's true, the Merc is a lot faster, like all the other normal cars, but you try finding an equivalent normal car and see what you can come up with, go on feel free, search to your hearts content, I want an equivalent normal car capable of towing similar weights. Should be simple according to you.

 

[giovanni_5060838]

It's true, the Merc is a lot faster, like all the other normal cars, but you try finding an equivalent normal car and see what you can come up with, go on feel free, search to your hearts content, I want an equivalent normal car capable of towing similar weights. Should be simple according to you.

ok thats simple, so now i decide i need a vehicle capable of towing 3300 kgs, which brings me back to a 7.5 tonne, 2wd.

why do you need a vehicle capable of towing 2800 kgs, which

caravan do you tow? again you go to the extreme of some niche

market.

there are plenty of comparisons for normal caravans, and for

that matter big caravans.

no doubt you will tell me which caravan needs to be towed by

a vehicle capable of towing 2800kgs. so that means a caravan

weighing around 2400 kgs?

 

[Lol1]

It's true, the Merc is a lot faster, like all the other normal cars, but you try finding an equivalent normal car and see what you can come up with, go on feel free, search to your hearts content, I want an equivalent normal car capable of towing similar weights. Should be simple according to you.

Have you found one yet, a car comparable in weight with similar sized engine? This car that your comparing with a full sized 4x4, what is it?

 

[ProfJohnL]

Oh dear Stephen,

You seem to have set off another never ending debate between two sparing partners. they seem to have lost the thread.

Lol and Giovanni, You both agree that using a vehicle of any sort has a varity of impacts on the environenment. Q.E.D.

It seems to me to be rather futile quoting mpg figures and g/m3 etc for the vehicles you are arguing about, I'll bet that I can drive any of the cars so they are dreadfull dirty and inefficeint, so a lot of it is down to the driver.

Its time to move on, so plesae agree to disagree.

 

[Lol1]

Fair enough John, I don't think I was getting anywhere with Giovanni anyway. Nice refereeing, how's the mods job coming along?

 

[giovanni_5060838]

was that an arguement, or a debate!

i saw no bad insults or name calling!

yes i see somebodies thank full time has been called,as i was still waiting to find out which range of popular caravan has a

weight of 2400 kgs.

 

[RichardH]

I have to say as a newbie vanner and a newbie to this forum I am considering going elsewhere for my advice becuase despite the extremely helpful and friendly people on this forum there seems to be a small group that turn every thread into an environmental debate about 4x4's. If I want that I will sign up to practical environmentallist or something similar. Everyone on here is aware of the environmental impacts of all cars, towing caravans adds to that impact, but please for the love of sponge pudding (would say god but dont want a religious debate) can we keep the topics to the subject and not keep debating the same stuff in every single thread.

 

[Lutz]

Richard, I'd suggest you open up a new thread if you're looking for advice and let the adversaries continue this one.

 

[RichardH]

if I was looking for advice I would open a new thread but i can be fairly sure it would end up back in a discussion about 4x4's

 

[Lutz]

Richard,

As a forum member seeing it all from a distance (I live on the Continent) I sit back and wonder why it's such a contentious issue. On my side of the Channel you use a car unless you've got a good reason to use a 4x4 and those that have decided for themselves that they've got a good reason are respected by others. After all, they're paying a lot more for what they get, so they must have weighed up their own personal priorities. It's an absolute non-issue.

 

[Lol1]

Hi Lutz, please don't get the wrong idea, I'm just curious (according to some) about the situation on the continent, do you have protest marches regarding 4x4s or the same mentality that 4x4 owners are doing harm as soon as a wheel is turned? Is it just the UK that has these problems?

 

[Lol1]

Oh dear Stephen,

You seem to have set off another never ending debate between two sparing partners. they seem to have lost the thread.

Lol and Giovanni, You both agree that using a vehicle of any sort has a varity of impacts on the environenment. Q.E.D.

It seems to me to be rather futile quoting mpg figures and g/m3 etc for the vehicles you are arguing about, I'll bet that I can drive any of the cars so they are dreadfull dirty and inefficeint, so a lot of it is down to the driver.

Its time to move on, so plesae agree to disagree.

See what I mean?

 

[Lutz]

Like I said, Lol, it's a non-issue over here. The general attitude is, if the people are willing to pay extra for the privilege of driving a 4x4, they've probably got a darned good reason for doing so. It's a matter of selection by pricing.

Apart from 'bull bars', nobody particularly targets 4x4's for inadequate pedestrian or occupant protection because they are enough saloon cars on the market that aren't any better, especially when put into a market share perspective.

It's all a very pragmatic approach.

 

[ProfJohnL]

Fair enough John, I don't think I was getting anywhere with Giovanni anyway. Nice refereeing, how's the mods job coming along?

Now lol don't cheek the headmaster, I'll put you on detention.

Come to my office at lunch time and write out 100 times

"I must not drive my Humvee over the headmaster's toes"

 

[ProfJohnL]

I have to say as a newbie vanner and a newbie to this forum I am considering going elsewhere for my advice becuase despite the extremely helpful and friendly people on this forum there seems to be a small group that turn every thread into an environmental debate about 4x4's. If I want that I will sign up to practical environmentallist or something similar. Everyone on here is aware of the environmental impacts of all cars, towing caravans adds to that impact, but please for the love of sponge pudding (would say god but dont want a religious debate) can we keep the topics to the subject and not keep debating the same stuff in every single thread.

Hello Richard,

Please look in the "Chit Chat" section

 

[Andy5Z]

Stephen, My suggestion would be a 6 cylinder Diesel like BMW 525/530d or a Merc E Class. I have a X plate 530d, weighs aprox 1760kg, gives about 35mpg in normal use (calculated - 40 on trip computer!!) and about 22-26 towing on the motorway depending on speed! (Caravan 1650 kg Max Loaded). Personally I wouldn't have anything else at present.

More torque than most if not all age comparable 4x4's, rear wheeel drive, incredibly refined - it won the best exec car for about 5years of its 7 year run and you can get a goodun now for

 

[Pete4]

Lutz, are you sure about people attitudes to 4x4s?

I found this after a very brief search but there's tons more:-

http://www.hns-info.net/article.php3?id_article=7101
P.S. Having a 4x4 isn't a "privilege", it's an abuse.