a bus needs to be the size/weight it is due to the number its transports, a transit van needs to be the size it is due to the items it is carrying as does and arctic. a 4x4 (most of which only transport 4/5 adults the same as any saloon or hatch of less than half the weight) dramatically increases the rate at which roads wear out.
ClioSport.net
Register a free account today to become a member!
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Read more here.
chelsea tractors
- Thread starter benji&eka
- Start date
a bus needs to be the size/weight it is due to the number its transports, a transit van needs to be the size it is due to the items it is carrying as does and arctic. a 4x4 (most of which only transport 4/5 adults the same as any saloon or hatch of less than half the weight) dramatically increases the rate at which roads wear out.
Loony - I understand your reply to my comment, but Im not sure that I understand if youre agreeing with me or not. To be clear, although I think this is unreasonable and unworkable, I would like them banned largely through my fear that they will create havoc for me if Im hit (in my Clio-sized car) head on by one or in a side impact. And my fear is that as more people buy 4wds to replace their more crash compatible cars (Mondeo V Clio), that my chance of injury could - in theory - go up. Granted, thats not enough of a reason to ban them. Im not going to make assumptions about 4wd drivers as I honestly dont think theyre any worse driven than other types of cars.
g
I dont think the drivers are any worse than any other road users however they are piloting alot more metal than most and a high percentage of them arent used to this. The school run mum taken out of her sensibly sized car and plonked into a car thats alot higher alot heavier normally longer and wider and they dont seem to take this into consideration. Im agreeing with you that they cause more problems than they solve. I dont think they should be banned merely their numbers limited and owners possibly having to justify needing one (ie living somewhere rural hence a "normal" car not being suitable). And possibly an additional test or course taken before they can drive them so they are taught the differences between driving them and a "normal" car so hopefully they drive in a way that takes the characteristics of the things into mind.
Loony the arguement that 4x4s are heavier does not stack up :
Renault Espace - 1845 kg
BMW 7 Series - 1945 kg
BMW 5 Series esate - 1783 kg
Renault Vel Satis - 1735 kg
Ford Galaxy - 1696 kg
Now look at the weight of these supposedly heavier 4 x 4s
Nissan X Trail - 1546 kg
Freelander - 1404 kg
Rav 4 - 1496 kg
Public perception like yours is that 4x4 are heavier and that is becasue they look heavier. In reality you would be better off being hit in an accident by one of these 4 x 4 s rather than any of these other saloons, MPVs or estates. They are also doing more damage to the roads than these 4x4s according to your weight arguement ! I would rather be on a race track in a RAV 4 than in a Ford Galaxy as well.
Honda CRV is actually cleaner and more econimical than a Mini Cooper S, which is a city car !
My ML weighs 1999 kg, so only slightly heavier than a 7 series and actually has a smaller footprint, so takes up less space on the roads.! How considerate is that of me.
Dont be led by the anti 4 x 4 brigade until you have all the facts. Done be sheep, not all 4x4s are the same.
Figures courtesy of Autocar
It really isnt making sense that a performance Clio owner, not the safest or most responisble car to own, wants to deny free will.
G - Your arguement doesnt make a whole lot of sense either, someone in a Mk1 Golf would probably be totalled by someone in a Mk5 Golf in the event of the crash. The problem is weight, and it affects every type of vehicle.
In a perfect and responsible world, 4x4s should be banned. But you could argue any type of car could too.
-Rob
LMAO i love the way you have put spin on the weights by putting heavy saloons/MPVs Vs the lighter end of the 4x4 market. how about you put the weights of an X5, porsche cayenne, mitsubishi shogun LWB (the only version i ever seem to see) and a range rover 4.4 HSE. Im not stupid enough to fall for the "it looks bigger so its heavier" thing i work in the motortrade so i realise that looks are deceptive. Also i have a few mates who run sprinter vans for work and unladen they weigh next to nothing.
Rob im not denying free will it would just be nice if the people who bought them actually knew how to drive these things better because on the whole the 4x4 drivers i encounter day in day out use the "im bigger/longer/wider/heavier/higher so ill intimidate or push people out of the way" tactic. either that or they drive the thing in the same manner they would with a hatchback or saloon which to be honest is totally inappropriate.
No spin, they are all 4 x 4 s and therefore tarnished by the media and sheep like you. I agree they are the lighter versions though.
I drive my 4x4 occasionally and I receive harassment from road users that beggars belief. Most of the time they are right behind me, glued to my arse and will do anything to get past me just becasue of the type of car in front of them. This includes white vans, mums on school run, reps etc. On the motorway I see people speed up to stop me overtaking them.
It goes both ways mate.
Ahh right then.
Perhaps the anti 4 x 4 brigade need to be more specific then. Thats not how this debate started though. They were all accused of being gas guzzlers and dangerous to other road users. This is not so as I have shown.
Arguement does not wash does it ?
Say shall we say anything over 2000 kg ? Oh no we cant because that also includes cars such as Bentleys, Rollers and Merc S Class. What now ?
yeah im always fighting my way through cars like that theyve really become a blight in the last five years and theres at least one on every street of every housing estate in the country, not like rare 4x4s that are only owned by monied people and not a large and growing number of the population.
So now its only 4 x 4s over a certain weight and that are common that are dangerous to everyone else. Be more specific for everyone please.
lets put it another way then. if you take all the saloons/hatches (ie traditional family cars) on the market and calculated the mean weight (shall i explain or is this simple enough?) and compared it to that of all the 4x4s on the market its pretty obvious which is going to be the heavier. Same with the handling/braking characteristics on the whole they will be slower to stop and more unstable than a car. I really cant be bothered to argue this any further tbh. You have your point of view, i have mine and we could talk about this all day long and neither of us will budge on it. For the record if/when i have kids i WILL NOT be buying a 4x4 unless i decide to move to some remote village that requires one to travel to and from.
if you do a search for the TUV (I think thats the German testing body) it did some tests between three new MK5 Golf and three 4WDs. One was the Volvo (with its car friendly lower crunch zone), the other a Hyundai (I think) and I cant remember what the last one was. Anyway, have a look at their crash results. Theyre quite sobering.
Rob - I take your point. A test between an S-Class saloon, and a Corsa and MK3 Golf in the mid 90s left the Golf and the Corsa squished. But the occupants had some chance because the height and crumple zone compatibility with the Merc was more evenly matched. Plus, Merc engineers a softer initial crumple zone to be more sympathtic to smaller, lighter cars. If you view the test above with the MK5 Golf, the 4wds ran over the car. If nothing else, thats just not giving the Golf a chance.
g
