| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 76662 | 2007-02-08 09:28:00 | 4WD vs Passenger vehicle. | Sweep (90) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 523865 | 2007-02-09 06:45:00 | Wasn't a good look when one of the SUV testers actually liked the vehicle so much she wanted one :) Groan. She couldn't drive it though :horrified |
dolby digital (5073) | ||
| 523866 | 2007-02-13 04:53:00 | I missed this program...........will it be repeated you think? or did anyone bother to record it? |
dots (24) | ||
| 523867 | 2007-02-13 05:51:00 | Groan. She couldn't drive it though :horrified Don't worry - if she keeps parking on the lawn at her work, she will probably get fired & won't be able to afford to keep the SUV. There is nothing wrong with driving a SUV like a Toyota Prado if you use it as a work vehicle (to transport stuff that would be a pain to transport in an ordinary car, not just to take you to work & home again). However, there is no excuse for having bullbars, there is no excuse for driving a small SUV like a RAV4, and people who drive a Rav4 with bullbars are beyond redemption. |
Greven (91) | ||
| 523868 | 2007-02-13 06:26:00 | the problem is simply people don't drive them to how they are ment to be driven.... those who do not want to learn to drive should be banned from driving ! Couldn't agree more. Great post. |
manicminer (4219) | ||
| 523869 | 2007-02-13 06:31:00 | Can't see around them (try backing out of a park beside one, or attempt a left turn at intersection with one besde you) Yes, they are annoying for that. On more than one occasion I've deliberately stayed near the centre of the lane when turning left so the 4WD behind can't get alongside me and block my view of the road. I'm sure that this annoys them intensely, but all it means is they have to wait a couple more seconds and I don't have to edge out into the road or block other traffic behind me also wanting to turn left. |
manicminer (4219) | ||
| 523870 | 2007-02-13 12:20:00 | lol when i saw that woman park up that bank and saw she was all stoked, i couldn't help but notice my FWD 1300cc automatic toyota starlet could do that too. actually, on my farm i have a few mates who occasionally go for a paddock bash. the 4WD 3.1litre turbo diesel izuzu bighorn guy goes walking pace everywhere and refuses to go on hills incase it rolls, while my mate in a ford laser exactly like my starlet minus powersteering and with bald front tyres goes nuts and even gets through bike tracks, even in the wet - meanwhile the bikes just run circles round everything lol. point being, unless there is deep ruts involved, i find the FWD hatchback to be even better than a 4WD SUV montrosoty, and they don't roll. as for 4WD DRIVERS, well, i'll say only this: of all my/friends.family's close misses and actual accidents where the other driver was at fault, 99% of the 'guilty' drivers were in some sort of 4WD. they just don't look, if they can look, and cannot dodge obstacles. i ride a motorbike safe in the knowledge that if i screw up i won't take some poor innocent person with me. also, my two near misses where i nearly rear ended people (distracted, my fault) the bike size and manuverability actually saved me. even in my car i would've totalled both vehichles and badly injured myself. safer on the bike? no, but it sure looks that way:p i do not think that 4WD should be banned, as for many people they are actually useful, but i do think that people should think about what they're buying. perhaps they should change the licences to put 4WD/SUVs in their own class? they weigh as much as light trucks, handle as well, roll more easily, and would keep the people who don't need them in cars. they should atleast make the safety standards equal. crumple zones are to lessen the impact on you body, even with them you need a seatbelt. the idea is that as the force is spread over a greater time there is less maximum force exerted on your body/organs. it's like jumping onto cement or a matress; you still stop but the cement does much more damage. the safest cars are the ones where the front/rear completely crumple, but the cabin stays intact, so the doors still open and no-one is crushed inside. |
motorbyclist (188) | ||
| 523871 | 2007-02-13 12:39:00 | Wow! I read all that! I swear! (not) | Greg (193) | ||
| 523872 | 2007-02-13 21:31:00 | 99% of the 'guilty' drivers were in some sort of 4WD. they just don't look, if they can look, and cannot dodge obstacles. exactly, lazy driving. they can't be bothered geting out of the vechile to check. i know people who just guess where they are backing. a suv licence ? interesting idea. funny enough light trucks which are the same weight and size of a suv are often driven like trucks while suv's get driven like cars. |
tweak'e (69) | ||
| 523873 | 2007-02-13 22:37:00 | I remember a year or so ago the PRESS had a report on a large Farmers meeting with a huge number of cars in the car park. Not one was a SUV - the farmers obviously know a lot more than the idiots who do insist on buying monstrosities. Tom |
Thomas01 (317) | ||
| 523874 | 2007-02-14 00:38:00 | the farmers obviously know a lot more than the idiots who do insist on buying monstrosities. Tom SUVs were never designed for farmers - they need a ute they can chuck things (and people/dogs) on & off easily without the hindrance of a roof. 4WDs have always been about fun ever since they broke out of the militrary and were made available for the general public to buy. |
Greven (91) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | |||||