On Thu, 14 Jul 2005 16:09:40 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

T i m wrote:

I don't think right minded folk have any issues re 4x4's in general
just their suitability in many cases. Yes it's their (your) choice
etc but in these days when many people are looking to reduce emissions
AND increase mpg (reducing emissions further) they are just seen as a
'luxury' that the rest of us could do without?

Ah, envy you mean? ;-)

Well for some possibly but not in this case ;-) We (mainly my daughter
and I) were thinking of buying a older 'series' Landy after we went
round an off-road course in my BIL's Disco. Not got round to it yet
and now I'm not sure if we could afford to run it anyway ;-(

Also their size means they take up more room on the road (given their
typically low occupancy) creating more congestion, take up more room
when parked (congestion again) and mass mass to recycle (energy
consumption again)?

This has been disprove enough times (in this country anyway), it makes
me wonder why people keep going on about it.

(Sri, not seen that mentioned John)

If you look at most of the
off roaders you actually see people driving, they are often no longer or
wider than a saloon or estate car. They may be a bit taller, but that is
not usually the "problem" axis (although it is what makes them look much
bigger).

I won't argue the facts but am aware that they *are* often the ones at
the front of a blockage, holding up many cars? That could be because
the drivers only ever do the 'school run' etc so don't ever drive in
the real everyday 'driving a long way though all types of traffic'
world?

In many ways the big people carriers would seem to suffer all the same
faults as an offroader, yet people seem to spend less time complaining
about them.

Agreed (both counts). No less an issue though re fuel comsumption etc.

More than once I have seen big off road cars (I don't care if they
were 4x4 or not) parked across two bays because:

1) They won't fit in a std *car* bay.
2) Their owners don't want them damaged.

I have seen people do that with any (usually new) car for the same
reason....

True, as have I (new Marc coupe) but that was as big / wide as a 4x4
anyway!

Bottom line, vehicles should be (in my little world anyway) for taking
us and our belongings from a to b as efficiently and safely as
possible.

yup, give it a couple of hundred bhp and aircon and it sounds good to me
;-) (oh and 4wd is nice as well)

Enjoy it while you can John ;-)

Should we all drive round in Porches or (for example) Megans (etc)?

Probably not... although one could argue that the performance car is
safer (for its occupants) for just those reasons. It will stop in a
shorter distance when required, it will also be able to swerve round a
obstacle at speed and have a better chance of the driver maintaining
control.

Oh indeed .. however that set's the 'lowest (reasonable) common
denominator' at something thats unaffordable and unwanted / needed by
a majority of folk? Hence why I think motorspport has a part to play
(ignoring the pollution) re the developement of many of todays safety
features, however, they should (and happily now *are*) be incorporated
in 'everyday' cars, those that represent the majority of vehicles on
the road and are carriying everyday folk and their families.

We still haven't resolved the issue of (especially) Mr 'flash' (rather
than 'working') in his 12 mpg 4x4 when he looses it on a bend and
wipes our Mr Nice Family coming the other way in a 50 mpg Micra? Maybe
they would have had a better chance if it was another 'car' that hit
them not a truck (and I believe most 4x4's are built on a (fairly
rigid / heavy) chassis whereas many MPV's are monocoque)?

All the best ..

T i m