UK and Europe · Public discussion

I like it!

Started by Dirtylitterboxo · · Last activity · 291 posts · 8,268 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
UK and Europe
Published
22 May 2004
Last activity
27 May 2004
Original author
Dirtylitterboxo
Posts
291
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
8,268
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 41–60 of 291
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Tony Raven said:


    You can achieve all those by staying back from the car in
    front. Even overtaking is easier if you stay back to get a
    better view although the modern style seems to be to
    tailgate and pop out.

    Tony

    He is talking about London you know.

    Lets see what are the advantages to having a Tonka in
    London:

    1) Low mpg
    2) No crumple zones
    3) Bumber height that matches head height in normal cars
    giving the owner the ability to bypass the side impact
    zones and stuff it straight through the window of the car
    or ride over the bonnet and stuff it into the windscreen.
    4) Poor braking distance and driven as though they are cars
    and not trucks to exasperate the above feature.
    5) Improve the owners view at the expense of others.
    6) Poor manouverability in narrow London streets to cause
    maximal delay when two or more come down the same narrow
    street at a time from opposite ways.
    7) The ability to not have to bother to slow down for speed
    humps/ramps especially near schools.

    Owning one in London may not make you an idiot per se but
    it does make you a bit of a selfish [censored], which is handy
    as you normally know to avoid people in them, they are
    sort of an identity kit. Like permanently on fog lights
    and loud stereos.

    Gotta keep up with the Jones!

    My favourites are the [censored] who lower them and put big
    chrome all over them. Class.

  2. in message <[email hidden]>, [Not

    Responding (') said:

    Banning or slowing down traffic around schools would get
    my support. Banning or taxing polluting vehicles would get
    my support. But picking on 4x4s merely because of their
    design is, in Ken's words, "idiotic".

    '4x4' is, here, being used as shorthand. While there are
    small, light, relatively economic 4x4s (the Fiat Panda 4x4,
    the Subaru Justy, the Suzuki Jimny) the fact is that the
    majority of extra large, extra polluting cars on urban roads
    are Range-Rover lookalikes which have, among other features,
    four wheel drive. I don't believe that Livingstone meant
    'things like a Suzuki Jimny' when he said '4x4'. I think he
    meant things like Range Rovers, Grand Cherokees, Shoguns,
    X5s and the like.

    And I agree with him. I think they are utterly unsuitable
    for urban use, and anyone who buys one for mainly urban use
    is, in his words, 'idiotic'. But I'll continue to drive my
    Frontera, because for remote rural use, bits of forestry,
    hauling boats around and other things which are part of my
    every day life, it's extremely useful.

    --
    [email hidden] (Simon Brooke)
    jasmine.org.uk~simon Windows 95: You, you, you!
    You make a grown man cry...
    M. Jagger/K.
    Richards

  3. [email hidden] (dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    Article in the Telegraph today.

    It's online, but you have to register for the Telegraph to
    access it..

    Here's part.

    "Livingstone condemns 'Chelsea tractor' drivers By George
    Jones, Political Editor (Filed: 22/05/2004)

    Londoners who use four-wheel-drive vehicles and people
    carriers on the school run are complete idiots, according
    to Ken Livingstone, the London Mayor.

    Four-wheel-drive vehicles, such as Range Rovers, and up-
    market BMW and Mercedes, are known in London as "Chelsea
    tractors" - which rarely go off road.

    In an interview for GMTV's Sunday Programme to be
    broadcast tomorrow, Mr Livingstone said: "When I see a
    farmer going over rugged terrain in a four-wheel drive, I
    think that's a reasonable decision to have made.

    "When you see someone trying to manoeuvre it round the
    school gates, you have to think, 'You are a complete
    idiot'."

    I think he's totally correct :-)

    Indeed and let's hope OPEC keep the oil price going up to
    weed out a few of these gas guzzlers. I've seen a few large
    4x4s on the road with "for sale" signs on recently.

    --
    Simon M.

  4. "Nathaniel Porter" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:


    I cited the 8mpg programme from a J*r*my Cl*rks*n
    dockumentary on the history of cars. They took an off-road
    (a Freelander IIRC) and drove it around town for a while
    (in true stereotypical "Chelsea tractor" style)


    and

    Quoted message said:

    then calculated the milage - which worked out a 8 mpg. Of
    course you'd get higher in the country.

    It was a Range Rover (V8 thingie in it).

    Neil

  5. Al C-F said:


    I'm sure that with numerous short, stop-start journeys in
    London in the morning hate, you could manage it.

    And what would be the mpg of a frugal car in those
    circumstances? 12mpg? You could make them all 0mpg by
    parking them up and leaving the engine running

    Tony

  6. dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers posted ...

    Quoted message said:

    Off-roaders have their uses - off-road. For use as
    described above, they indicate quite a different thing
    altogether.

    What about those of us who use an off-roader both off-road,
    and take it to the shops, or to drop the kids at school
    occasionally ?

    We have a choice to make, and buying one vehicle that can
    satisfy the multiple roles that we use vehicles for makes
    far more economical, environmental and basic common sense
    than having the seven or eight 'specialist' vehicles we'd
    need to satisfy our lifestyle.

    --
    Paul

    (8(|) Homer rocks .. 😉

  7. Simon Mason posted ...

    Quoted message said:

    [email hidden]
    (dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers) wrote

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    "When you see someone trying to manoeuvre it round the
    school gates, you have to think, 'You are a complete
    idiot'."

    I think he's totally correct :-)

    Indeed and let's hope OPEC keep the oil price going up to
    weed out a few of these gas guzzlers. I've seen a few
    large 4x4s on the road with "for sale" signs on recently.

    I agree .. I'm after a decent V8 to use purely for off-
    roading and petrol guzzling .. 😉

    --
    Paul

    (8(|) Homer rocks .. 😉

  8. Tony Raven said:
    Doki said:

    I generally drive quite quickly myself, but doing it in
    a 4x4 is a particularly daft thing to do because they
    don't go round corners or stop nearly as well as a big
    car does.

    Providing you make allowances for that and corner more
    slowly and leave more braking room why's it a problem?

    The bulk of the anecdotal evidence suggests that most of the
    people driving them don't do that - they are, as Ken
    Livingstone said, "complete idiots".

    But even if you are making allowances by cornering more
    slowly and leaving more braking room, that's taking up more
    road space and increasing congestion, which in London is
    still pretty antisocial.

    Quoted message said:

    Or should we all drive Porsches and Lotuses on the
    basis that they corner and stop much better than your
    average car?

    I would tend to discourage this approach, as straw men
    usually lack the muscular and skeletal strength to be
    considered adequately in control of a motor vehicle.

    -dan

    --
    "please make sure that the person is your friend before
    you confirm"

  9. Not Responding said:

    Of more interest was the second part of Ken's interview.
    Where he said that he wanted to stop Londoners concreting
    over their front gardens to make car parking space. This
    one would get my vote every time. The

    Apparently it's what's known as a "free country" (the UK
    used to be one, I read somewhere).

    -dan

    --
    "please make sure that the person is your friend before
    you confirm"

  10. On Sat, 22 May 2004 14:37:54 +0100, Daniel Barlow <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:

    "[Not Responding]" <[email hidden]>

    Quoted message said:

    Of more interest was the second part of Ken's interview.
    Where he said that he wanted to stop Londoners concreting
    over their front gardens to make car parking space. This
    one would get my vote every time. The

    Apparently it's what's known as a "free country" (the UK
    used to be one, I read somewhere).

    -dan

    Not the freedom to do things of benefit only to oneself
    at the expense of the wider community. In this instance,
    the concreting of front gardens is bad news for pretty
    much everyone with the exception of the person who gets
    free parking.

  11. Quoted message said:

    What about those of us who use an off-roader both off-
    road, and take it to the shops, or to drop the kids at
    school occasionally ?

    We have a choice to make, and buying one vehicle that can
    satisfy the multiple roles that we use vehicles for makes
    far more economical, environmental and basic common sense
    than having the seven or eight 'specialist' vehicles we'd
    need to satisfy our lifestyle.

    Fine if you believe that the majority of people who have
    these vehicles have based there choice on rational
    grounds then thats your choice. I think they got them so
    that when they park at Holmes Place and Sainsburys they
    can exude outdoor life style and not look out of place.
    Say it isnt so.

    Anyway they're old hat now, didnt you know that Hummers are
    appearing on the streets of London. Mines bigger than yours!

  12. Not Responding said:


    Not the freedom to do things of benefit only to oneself at
    the expense of the wider community. In this instance, the
    concreting of front gardens is bad news for pretty much
    everyone with the exception of the person who gets free
    parking.

    Have you considered that being forced to do gardening might
    be bad news for pretty much everyone but yourself?

    Tony

  13. Vincent Wilcox said:


    Fine if you believe that the majority of people who have
    these vehicles have based there choice on rational grounds
    then thats your choice.

    Do you have evidence they haven't? How can you tell? If you
    looked at me driving my 4x4 how would you tell whether I had
    rationale grounds for choosing it?

    Quoted message said:

    I think they got them so that when they park at Holmes
    Place and Sainsburys they can exude outdoor life style and
    not look out of place. Say it isnt so.

    There you go then. Nobody who wants to "be seen" goes to
    Sainsburys. Waitrose, dear boy, Waitrose.

    Quoted message said:

    Anyway they're old hat now, didnt you know that Hummers
    are appearing on the streets of London.

    So are stretched limos.

    Tony

  14. Daniel Barlow said:


    The bulk of the anecdotal evidence suggests that most of
    the people driving them don't do that - they are, as Ken
    Livingstone said, "complete idiots".

    For many people the bulk of the anecdotal evidence suggests
    that most cyclists are lycra louts who ignore red lights and
    should be banned from the roads.

    Quoted message said:


    But even if you are making allowances by cornering more
    slowly and leaving more braking room, that's taking up
    more road space and increasing congestion, which in London
    is still pretty antisocial.

    How much more. Can you quantify it? Should they all drive
    Smart Cars

    Quoted message said:


    I would tend to discourage this approach, as straw men
    usually lack the muscular and skeletal strength to be
    considered adequately in control of a motor vehicle.

    Straw men may, but surely sports cars are much easier to
    drive than the vehicles they are currently using

    Tony

  15. Al C-F said:
    Simonb said:

    every 4x4 you see with bull bars has had them fitted on
    owner's active insistence -- they are willfully making
    their vehicles more dangerous to peds and the like!

    And that affects the driver how, exactly?

    (In fairness, they offer protection against hazards in
    these vehicles' natural habitat. i.e. they protect lights
    from shopping trolleys in Waitrose's car park).

    If a driver needs bull-bars to protect their lights from
    shopping trolleys, then I'd suggest they're unfit to be in
    charge of a vehicle as large as that (their 4x4ish thing,
    NOT the trolley, though sometimes I wonder about that too..)
    - if they can't manuevre it in a confined space without
    running over trolleys, what chance have they of seeing and
    not squishing a kid?

    --

    Velvet

  16. Tony Raven said:
    Ningi said:

    On a bike, being able to see past, or over, the car in
    front allows me to decide where to overtake, see traffic
    lights, junctions etc. I can get in the right position,
    pick lanes at junctions, See in advance if I have to turn
    off the road etc. It's just easier if you have more notice
    on what's coming up.

    You can achieve all those by staying back from the car in
    front. Even overtaking is easier if you stay back to get a
    better view although the modern style seems to be to
    tailgate and pop out.

    Tony

    And if you stay that far back, the car behind you will
    overtake and cut into a gap that's not really suitable, thus
    squeezing your on your bike in the process...

    --

    Velvet

  17. "Simon Mason" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    [email hidden]
    (dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers) wrote in


    message news:<20040522030021.10421.00001863@mb-
    m02.aol.com>...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Article in the Telegraph today.

    It's online, but you have to register for the Telegraph
    to access it..

    Here's part.

    "Livingstone condemns 'Chelsea tractor' drivers By
    George Jones, Political Editor (Filed: 22/05/2004)

    Londoners who use four-wheel-drive vehicles and people
    carriers on the


    school

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    run are complete idiots, according to Ken Livingstone,
    the London Mayor.

    Four-wheel-drive vehicles, such as Range Rovers, and up-
    market BMW and Mercedes, are known in London as "Chelsea
    tractors" - which rarely go


    off road.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:


    In an interview for GMTV's Sunday Programme to be
    broadcast tomorrow, Mr Livingstone said: "When I see a
    farmer going over rugged terrain in a four-wheel drive,
    I think that's a reasonable decision to have made.

    "When you see someone trying to manoeuvre it round the
    school gates, you


    have

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    to think, 'You are a complete idiot'."

    I think he's totally correct :-)

    Indeed and let's hope OPEC keep the oil price going up to
    weed out a few of these gas guzzlers. I've seen a few
    large 4x4s on the road with "for sale" signs on recently.

    Problem with that is you also unfair price the poor out of
    reasonable car use.

  18. Quoted message said:

    dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers posted ...

    Quoted message said:

    Off-roaders have their uses - off-road. For use as
    described above, they indicate quite a different thing
    altogether.

    What about those of us who use an off-roader both off-
    road, and take it to the shops, or to drop the kids at
    school occasionally ?

    We have a choice to make, and buying one vehicle that can
    satisfy the multiple roles that we use vehicles for makes
    far more economical, environmental and basic common sense
    than having the seven or eight 'specialist' vehicles we'd
    need to satisfy our lifestyle.

    If off-roaders were used off-road for a significant
    percentage of the time, they'd not be in pristine gleaming
    condition that I see around london - completely scratch and
    small-dink free. They'd often be mud-splattered in winter,
    have bits of vegetation trapped around the bull-bar mount
    points or in the edges of the bumpers, etc etc.

    --

    Velvet

  19. "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    I agree .. I'm after a decent V8 to use purely for off-
    roading and petrol guzzling .. 😉

    You'll be lucky then, it's a buyer's market ;-)
    --
    Simon M.

  20. "Nathaniel Porter" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:c8nrr1$4i6$1@wi

    Quoted message said:


    Problem with that is you also unfair price the poor out of
    reasonable car use.

    They might then use it only when they *have * to instead of
    driving half a mile to buy stamp.

    --
    Simon M.

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.