Off roaders that don't do off road.

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

Quoted message said:

On a 75 mile club run to some horrible 16% hills last Saturday in the
Yorkshire Wolds, we made our way back along some quiet narrow country
lanes. What struck me was that every time a car came up behind we assumed
single file but the massive 4x4s behind would not so much as put one tyre
on the grass verge in order to overtake - they all waited until they could
do it without leaving the road.

Which is a good thing, as driving on a verge knackers it.

cheers,
clive

"Clive George" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

On a 75 mile club run to some horrible 16% hills last Saturday in the
Yorkshire Wolds, we made our way back along some quiet narrow country
lanes. What struck me was that every time a car came up behind we assumed
single file but the massive 4x4s behind would not so much as put one tyre
on the grass verge in order to overtake - they all waited until they
could do it without leaving the road.

Which is a good thing, as driving on a verge knackers it.

As does parking on them, but they don't seem to be put off then.

--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net

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

Quoted message said:

"Clive George" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

On a 75 mile club run to some horrible 16% hills last Saturday in the
Yorkshire Wolds, we made our way back along some quiet narrow country
lanes. What struck me was that every time a car came up behind we
assumed single file but the massive 4x4s behind would not so much as put
one tyre on the grass verge in order to overtake - they all waited until
they could do it without leaving the road.

Which is a good thing, as driving on a verge knackers it.

As does parking on them, but they don't seem to be put off then.

Well, yes, but I don't want to encourage them.

cheers,
clive

Simon Mason said:

Yet these same vehicles are advertised as capable of taking their occupants
to the top of glaciers for a cube of ice for their drinks but in reality
their owners are scared of driving on a few bits of grass verge.

ISTR a wonderful statistic regarding this: % of "Off-road" vehicles
which are ever used off-road in their lifetimes: 5%.

Jon

Jon Senior said:

Simon Mason said:

Yet these same vehicles are advertised as capable of taking their occupants
to the top of glaciers for a cube of ice for their drinks but in reality
their owners are scared of driving on a few bits of grass verge.

ISTR a wonderful statistic regarding this: % of "Off-road" vehicles
which are ever used off-road in their lifetimes: 5%.

They are known as LARD ROVERS etc as they are driven mainly by
lard-arses

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Yet these same vehicles are advertised as capable of taking their occupants
to the top of glaciers for a cube of ice for their drinks but in reality
their owners are scared of driving on a few bits of grass verge.

ISTR a wonderful statistic regarding this: % of "Off-road" vehicles
which are ever used off-road in their lifetimes: 5%.

I wonder if that's higher or lower than the percentage of "mountain
bikes" that have ever been cycled on (or even near) a mountain?

druidh

In article said:

Quite. Its a bit of a misnomer, a lot of so called off road cars are
really just large urban vans. From what I can work out, if its 4x4 it
gets call off road.

There are four wheel drive cars that aren't considered off-roaders,
like the Porsche Carrera 4 or Audi TT quattro.

Alan Braggins said:

In article said:

Quite. Its a bit of a misnomer, a lot of so called off road cars are
really just large urban vans. From what I can work out, if its 4x4 it
gets call off road.

There are four wheel drive cars that aren't considered off-roaders,
like the Porsche Carrera 4 or Audi TT quattro.

So its all buggered up then. You know one when you see one, but can't
quantify it

Simon Mason said:

Yet these same vehicles are advertised as capable of taking their occupants
to the top of glaciers for a cube of ice for their drinks but in reality
their owners are scared of driving on a few bits of grass verge.

Which is why the verges are wrecked and the sides of the road next to
them are broken up all around here?
Dan Gregory

in message <[email hidden]>, druidh

(') said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>Yet these same vehicles are advertised as capable of taking their
>occupants to the top of glaciers for a cube of ice for their drinks
>but in reality their owners are scared of driving on a few bits of
>grass verge.

ISTR a wonderful statistic regarding this: % of "Off-road" vehicles
which are ever used off-road in their lifetimes: 5%.

I wonder if that's higher or lower than the percentage of "mountain
bikes" that have ever been cycled on (or even near) a mountain?

Hear hear! Well said that man!

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; in faecibus sapiens rheum propagabit

Jon Senior jon_AT_restlesslemon_DOT_co_DOT_uk said:

Simon Mason said:

Yet these same vehicles are advertised as capable of taking their occupants
to the top of glaciers for a cube of ice for their drinks but in reality
their owners are scared of driving on a few bits of grass verge.

Quoted message said:

ISTR a wonderful statistic regarding this: % of "Off-road" vehicles
which are ever used off-road in their lifetimes: 5%.

Does that include mountain bikes?

--
Chris Malcolm [email hidden] +44 (0)131 651 3445 DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

druidh said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>Yet these same vehicles are advertised as capable of taking their occupants
>to the top of glaciers for a cube of ice for their drinks but in reality
>their owners are scared of driving on a few bits of grass verge.

ISTR a wonderful statistic regarding this: % of "Off-road" vehicles
which are ever used off-road in their lifetimes: 5%.

I wonder if that's higher or lower than the percentage of "mountain
bikes" that have ever been cycled on (or even near) a mountain?

Not many mountains to cycle on here in southern England...

--
Måns Rullgård
[email hidden]

druidh said:

I wonder if that's higher or lower than the percentage of "mountain
bikes" that have ever been cycled on (or even near) a mountain?

Granted. Although I personally suspect it to be lower given the number
of MTB bikes I see being driven to & from Glentress on the back of large
4x4 off-roaders!

Jon

druidh said:

I wonder if that's higher or lower than the percentage of "mountain
bikes" that have ever been cycled on (or even near) a mountain?

Mountain _Terrain_ Bikes (MTB's), not Mountain Bikes. A better question
might be "what percentage have been near mountain terrain, e.g. bit
hilly, bit muddy, not flat?"

every one Ive ever owned has. 🙂

Plenty of MTB's have strayed a few feet away from the tarmac.

Phil

Phil Clarke said:

druidh said:

I wonder if that's higher or lower than the percentage of "mountain
bikes" that have ever been cycled on (or even near) a mountain?

Mountain _Terrain_ Bikes (MTB's), not Mountain Bikes. A better question
might be "what percentage have been near mountain terrain, e.g. bit
hilly, bit muddy, not flat?"

every one Ive ever owned has. 🙂

Plenty of MTB's have strayed a few feet away from the tarmac.

Phil

As far as I knew, MTB stands for Multi Terrain Bike, but that's hardly
the point as they're referred to everywhere as Mountain Bikes, not
Off-Road bikes.

druidh

druidh said:

As far as I knew, MTB stands for Multi Terrain Bike,

I'm pretty certain it stands for Moun Tain Bike.

James Thomson

James Thomson said:

You're familiar with Mr Brown's extravagant K-M, I presume?

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/harris/surly-rohloff/

Thats nuts. It looks like a tandam for Zaphod Beeblebrox, monkey man!

To pass a club run would involve driving a fair distance (>100 yards?)
on the verge at around 20 mph. Back when I owned a Range Rover* I
certainly wouldn't do that because:

- It cuts the verge up.

- Verges conceal nasties like drainage channels that, when taken at 20
mph, might bounce the vehicle enough off line that it would be
dangerous to whatever I was passing, dump me in the ditch or trash the
suspension.

- On roads so narrow that I'd need to mount the verge to pass cyclists
riding single-file, how many straight stretches are there where such a
manouvre would be safe?

- I don't mind slowing down untli it is safe and sensible to pass, even
if that is for several miniutes. I'd have to do it for a tractor or
horse, after all.

But hey, don't let me spoil the mindless fun with tedious rationality.
I just look forward to next week's episode in which we hear about a
maniac in a 4x4 who drove up on the verge to pass some cyclists thus
putting everyone's lives in danger.

* - We lived in the country, on a road that sometimes got buried in
snow in winter, and we used the Range Rover to haul a horse trailer in
and out of muddy fields.

--
Peter Headland

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/harris/surly-rohloff/

sothach said:

Thats nuts. It looks like a tandam for Zaphod Beeblebrox, monkey man!

I tried something similar, but I set the flat bar lower and closer than the
drop. What I really want is a Scott Drop-In 48cm wide that necks down to
22.2mm on the lower bends. Is that so much to ask?

The Karate Monkey is all very well, but Pugsley is much more my idea of
fun:

http://www.wildworks.co.nz/csr/photographs.php

http://www.wildworks.co.nz/csr/photographs.php?i=img_0861.jpg

http://www.wildworks.co.nz/csr/photographs.php?i=img_0915.jpg

James Thomson