Thread: The 4 X 4 Phenomenon Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.
To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=029510
Posted by Eirenist (# 13343) on
:
Why do some more affluent Brits (in this part of the world, at least) feel the need to transport their children to school in what amount to armoured vehicles? Is it just 'because they can', or is there a deeper reason? What are they afraid of?
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on
:
If the weekenders with second homes around here are anything to go by, the wives have 4x4s because they 'feel safer' in them. The husband buys one because he knows any damage in an accident is likely to be to the other car.
I keep a 4x4 (ancient) for towing things like boats and horse-boxes - plus its the only way for me to reach my sibling in a wet spring.
But then my 4x4, being ancient, isn't much wider than the average car and is short wheelbase. The problem is with things like a Porsche Cayenne which is massive: give one of those to someone without the skill to drive it in congested traffic and you have a recipe for disaster - we see it here in the carpark of the nearest Waitrose.
Posted by Jane R (# 331) on
:
quote:
What are they afraid of?
Zombies.
Posted by Mere Nick (# 11827) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
quote:
What are they afraid of?
Zombies.
Aha. If someone selling katana swords and crossbows could just talk to the people first.
I've noticed over the years that the cars I see that have turned over on the side of the road when it snows are always 4wd vehicles. The folks seem to think they are invincible to weather.
Posted by mark_in_manchester (# 15978) on
:
quote:
The problem is with things like a Porsche Cayenne
While walking Hadrian's wall with my brother-in-law, we had to take a detour around a farm with a large paddock. It all looked odd...a little pristine...an impression confirmed as a guy crested the hill in one of those Porsche things towing the kind of gang of mowers usually seen behind a parks department tractor. So don't let it be said that such things don't serve a legitimate, rural-life-style purpose... ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
ETA:
quote:
I've noticed over the years that the cars I see that have turned over on the side of the road when it snows are always 4wd vehicles.
I used to visit northern Finland for work - my mate drove on thick ice all winter in an ancient 2WD Polo, with studded tyres and the usual electric engine block heater (you plug your car in overnight).
My Polish motor-bike mate makes his own studded winter tyres using self-tapping screws ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
[ 10. September 2015, 14:08: Message edited by: mark_in_manchester ]
Posted by leo (# 1458) on
:
I don't know the answer but i think that they are selfish polluters of them planet who are depriving their kids of the joys of walking to school woith friends.
Posted by Mere Nick (# 11827) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by mark_in_manchester:
I used to visit northern Finland for work - my mate drove on thick ice all winter in an ancient 2WD Polo, with studded tyres and the usual electric engine block heater (you plug your car in overnight).
Is that a VW? I used to see studded tires every once and while when I was a kid but we really don't get enough snow for folks to go full time with them during the winter. It seems one of the best cars in the snow that I've seen was always the rear engine VW bugs and the VW Thing I had in college was good, too. Surely the Polo's heater is better than the Bug or Thing, too.
quote:
My Polish motor-bike mate makes his own studded winter tyres using self-tapping screws
Motorcycles in the winter? You are truly a He-Man.
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I don't know the answer but i think that they are selfish polluters of them planet who are depriving their kids of the joys of walking to school woith friends.
This is generally true. Parents even drive their adult children to work.
Posted by Mere Nick (# 11827) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I don't know the answer but i think that they are selfish polluters of them planet who are depriving their kids of the joys of walking to school woith friends.
It would have taken well over an hour for our kids to walk to any of their schools.
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
They buy them because it feeds the fantasy that they are gentleman farmers with wide acres, who need them to drive around in mud. It give the delusion that one's urban life is not where one really belongs.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
They can't reverse up lanes (or down, either, but that isn't required in the Highway Code), and given a lane which would be just wide enough for vehicles (even theirs) to pass, they can't draw into the hedge on their side. Furthermore, given a lane with verges both sides, it has to be the car without the off-road facility which goes onto the verge, and possibly slides into the ditch.
None of this applies to Landrovers of the working type.
If observed in Dulwich* while it is raining stair-rods, the driver will lean out of his pristine vehicle to cast rude remarks at a pedestrian in a Stockman raincoat and wide brimmed oiled hat as though they are out of place. Working 4X4s are never seen in Dulwich.
*A flavour of Dulwich for those unfamiliar with it. Dulwich Society It should be pointed out that it does include social housing blocks of flats and a multicultural population who don't show up much at the Society meetings.
[ 10. September 2015, 14:56: Message edited by: Penny S ]
Posted by Mere Nick (# 11827) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
They buy them because it feeds the fantasy that they are gentleman farmers with wide acres, who need them to drive around in mud. It give the delusion that one's urban life is not where one really belongs.
I can't read their minds. However, I just calculated that folks in the UK are paying 3 times what I am for gasoline and those vehicles probably get barely over the half the gas mileage of the Honda Civic I drive. The difference would sure buy lots of beer.
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Mere Nick:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I don't know the answer but i think that they are selfish polluters of them planet who are depriving their kids of the joys of walking to school woith friends.
It would have taken well over an hour for our kids to walk to any of their schools.
Bicycles. It's how I went the 8 miles to school 50 years ago. Several of us, picking up each other along the way. In winter, we'd get a drop off part way. These experiences of daily travel with age-mates are lost today.
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
My neighbours have a massive 4 x 4, so I tell them they look like drug dealers! Well, I hear that the Porsche is the favourite car of that profession. Although, come to think of it, on local estates, they use bikes.
Posted by Beeswax Altar (# 11644) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
quote:
What are they afraid of?
Zombies.
I've spent some time considering this. Come the Zombie Apocalypse, the most important thing one can have is a shark suit. Once you've acquired your shark suit, then you can invest in a bug out vehicle and other survival gear. Helps to have a few types of weapons depending on the type of zombie you face. All zombies die from head trauma. Prepare accordingly. I plan on joining the zombies.
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
But then my 4x4, being ancient, isn't much wider than the average car and is short wheelbase. The problem is with things like a Porsche Cayenne which is massive: give one of those to someone without the skill to drive it in congested traffic and you have a recipe for disaster - we see it here in the carpark of the nearest Waitrose.
Waitrose ought to factor that in and make their parking spaces wider ... ![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
We used to have real trouble at their Richmond store as the wide cars spilled over into adjacent spaces.
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
Of course, they buy their monster trucks, and then have to drive down narrow roads (to get to their posh, out of the way, school), and park them to drop the kids off (often on the road, because the 10 parking spaces have been taken by the first 6 vans arriving had taken them, and were still chatting to each other).
I drive to work in Rickmansworth, Hertfordshire. The number of Chelsea Tractors blocking the road is scary. They also have to drive slowly, because they are knobheads. And yes, they probably get less MPG than my TT does, because they are often huge engines, and only ever drive a mile to school and back, so never get warmed up. And if they are diesel, they pollute the school and home area that their kids live in. So much for caring about their kids.
Posted by Tortuf (# 3784) on
:
Here in the US President Bush the Lesser encouraged buying SUV's with tax breaks.
I have heard all about the safety of a larger vehicle in crashes as well as for visibility and ability to see more from on high, so to speak.
My thought, for what it is worth, is that a certain amount of follow the leader sets in and people buy the kind of vehicle their friends and neighbors drive.
Beyond that, vehicles have often been sold on the "image" that owning such and such a vehicle projects. So, fancy two-seater sports car denotes either a young well to do sporty type, or a person suffering from mid life crisis. A SUV denotes rugged individualist, or soccer parent. A mini van denotes nerd. So, people buy a SUV to have the cargo room of a mini van while avoiding the nerd image.
Not really sure such a decision is worth condemnation.
My favorite vehicle is one that is: reliable; cost effective; safe, and; paid for. If I have a lot of off road use, or I have to haul a trailer around a lot, that might include an SUV.
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
I have a 4x4 in Brazil (not an armoured SUV). In my defence, I often drive off-road.
Posted by Ann (# 94) on
:
A kittle ditty by Chawumbawumba (and Les Barker)
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on
:
Nearly late for my wedding because of those bloody things clogging up the roads around Wandsworth Common, and that was in 1997.
Basically selfish bastards too snooty/ frightened to get out of their ultrasafe space. I've always imagined that the argument for taking Tarquin and Jemima everywhere in one is that it's not safe, you see, for them to walk, because of the traffic- what traffic?- why, all those 4x4s for a start...
I'd restrict ownership to people entitled to have red diesel, or at least ownership of any 4x4 that hasn't got dents in it and moss growing at the bottom of the windows. Oh, and I'd make it legal-possibly obligatory- to scrtach the paint of any car that overlaps the boundaries of a parking sopace.
Posted by Rowen (# 1194) on
:
I have a 4x4 .... Not an enormous one, but big enough. It is my church-provided work car, but I can use it for a certain amount of private use too. I drive hundreds of kms on dirt roads, in steep ranges, through mud and snow.
This week, I am visiting some large cities. Locals stare at you car, I think, as it is so different from their 4x4s.... Mine is covered in mud, small scratches and similar! Theirs'? Pristine! Never used out o town, I bet.
Parking spaces in shopping centres are smaller here, than those at home.
Posted by Zappa (# 8433) on
:
I've driven 4 x 4s for years. They were great for smashing kangaroos.
Posted by Arabella Purity Winterbottom (# 3434) on
:
Rowan has nailed the essential distinguishing marks of a 4x4 used for its intended purpose.
Dirt. Having grown up in the country, the 4x4s I'm familiar with are rugged from rough use (my favourite cousin took the front doors off his, so he could get in and out quickly on the farm). The pristine behemoths that clog up city roads are just silly status symbols.
In terms of size, I relate the story of my teen years (1970s), when I belonged to two youth orchestras as a cellist. I used to travel with a friend, who played double bass, and his mum, in their Mini. Yes, you can fit a cello, a double bass, two teenagers, and a mum in an old-fashioned Mini if you try. Bit of a squeeze, but we did it for 2 years, every weekend.
Posted by bib (# 13074) on
:
I believe that 4x4s used in city areas are just status symbols. You only have to observe the drivers - well coiffured thirty something women who wield their vehicles as a terrifying weapon. It is a different matter using said vehicles in rural areas and for specific occupations, but I am cynical at their use for Mum's taxi.
Posted by Mere Nick (# 11827) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
quote:
Originally posted by Mere Nick:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I don't know the answer but i think that they are selfish polluters of them planet who are depriving their kids of the joys of walking to school woith friends.
It would have taken well over an hour for our kids to walk to any of their schools.
Bicycles. It's how I went the 8 miles to school 50 years ago. Several of us, picking up each other along the way. In winter, we'd get a drop off part way. These experiences of daily travel with age-mates are lost today.
Some areas around here are good for that. We've never lived in an area that was. Our youngest was in a good area for riding a bike to school when she was in college, though, so that's what she did.
[ 11. September 2015, 00:28: Message edited by: Mere Nick ]
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Mere Nick:
quote:
Originally posted by mark_in_manchester:
My Polish motor-bike mate makes his own studded winter tyres using self-tapping screws
Motorcycles in the winter? You are truly a He-Man.
If you think that's macho consider Ice Speedway. In this class the bikes don't have studs: no, they have 3cm spikes in the tyres! (see about 22:00)
Posted by PaulBC (# 13712) on
:
Over here in North America the SVU makes sense you can have massive distances to cover.
A few years agio I spent an hour riding in a vehicle and never left Calgary Alberta . In the UK I wonder why you need it , unles you live in the Scottish Highlands , the Moors of the NE or Cornwall or the Welsh mountains . Come to think about it those places are a little like Canada's mountains just older & lower but beautiful.
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
I don't think anyone has a problem with people who use 4x4s for their intended, off-road purpose. It's the people who when they get a dent in the bumper (the part intended to protect the structure of the car from damage) have to get it mended immediately. It's the people who clean their car weekly to make sure it looks good. They should own something different.
And the problem, as Albertus said, is that the dangers they are trying to protect their little seed-banks from are other people like themselves. I am just waiting to see the first person to take young Francesca to school in a tank, just for safety.
My children walked to school pretty well all of their school time. I usually walked to school (my dad used to take us part of the way if he was going into work and it was convenient). Around the South East, there are plenty of schools, so there should be a school within walking distance of most people - so let them walk. Or if you have to drive them, drive something small and appropriate.
And we wonder why they grow up entitled and completely cut off from the real world, to become senior members of the Tory party.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
Actually, round here, there can be problems getting to school. Since changes in admissions policy, being in the nearest school can't be counted on. And lanes have no footpaths, and drivers, not necessarily on the school run, who can't be trusted to drive with consideration for others. So I would excuse some parents driving the offspring to and from school. Clogging up the roads from half an hour before school ends, though, is a menace.
Posted by leo (# 1458) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Mere Nick:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I don't know the answer but i think that they are selfish polluters of them planet who are depriving their kids of the joys of walking to school woith friends.
It would have taken well over an hour for our kids to walk to any of their schools.
Send them to neighbourhoo0d schools.
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Mere Nick:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I don't know the answer but i think that they are selfish polluters of them planet who are depriving their kids of the joys of walking to school woith friends.
It would have taken well over an hour for our kids to walk to any of their schools.
Send them to neighbourhoo0d schools.
If I had children, it would take them an hour and a half to walk to the nearest secondary school from my house....
Not everyone lives in an urban area.
[ 11. September 2015, 15:29: Message edited by: betjemaniac ]
Posted by Ricardus (# 8757) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
Basically selfish bastards too snooty/ frightened to get out of their ultrasafe space.
Are they safer anyway? I thought they were actually more likely to overturn because of the higher centre of gravity, but that might be a myth.
Posted by Fr Weber (# 13472) on
:
They're a lot more common in The Town than they should be, and their main purpose seems to be to display status or to make incompetent drivers "feel safer" (by endangering everyone else).
And, of course, as AJ Soprano said, to "waste petrochemical resources."
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
Basically selfish bastards too snooty/ frightened to get out of their ultrasafe space.
Are they safer anyway? I thought they were actually more likely to overturn because of the higher centre of gravity, but that might be a myth.
I think it was one particular model with a narrow wheelbase. The ones round here are pretty wide.
And I do have to be a bit fairer to the ones wh won't go near the hedges. There are a few places where, because hedge management is now done by flails, there are hidden bits of wood sticking out, which can damage a car. I lost a wing mirror while avoiding someone who didn't go very close on the other side.
Posted by argona (# 14037) on
:
I've heard that more than 60% of London registered 4x4's have never been outside the M25 ring. I suppose their owners have an ordinary car as well that's much more comfortable on a long run, not to mention having some luggage space. Keep the tank for showing off in the city.
Posted by Moo (# 107) on
:
Here is the ultimate SUV.
Moo
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
Are[/i] they safer anyway? I thought they were actually more likely to overturn because of the higher centre of gravity, but that might be a myth.
I think it was one particular model with a narrow wheelbase. The ones round here are pretty wide.
It wasn't, and isn't, one particular model. The higher you go up, the easier it goes over. Whilst suspension plays a role, it is a fairly simple width to center of gravity ratio that determines most of stability. Active suspensions do help, but gravity, mass and inertia rule.
Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on
:
There is something to be said for driving a vehicle which is resilient to a head-on smash situation. But we,re talking A -roads here, where you have the potential of combined speed crash which is equivalent to hitting a solid wall at 100 mph.
Having a 4x4 purely for city and motorway/dual carriageway does seem OTT as far as being safe from an idiot on the wrong side of the road is concerned.
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
quote:
Albertus: I'd restrict [...] ownership of any 4x4 that hasn't got dents in it and moss growing at the bottom of the windows.
I'm safe then ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
My Chevrolet Tracker doesn't really have dents, but a lot of scratches from having to drive through branches. I wash it around 3–4 times per year because I really have to.
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
Here is the ultimate SUV.
Moo
If you are going to drive something as a statement, that works.
For driving the local roads, I would much prefer my car, which is nippy, but grips the road superbly. From a safety aspect, I think it is very safe, as long as I drive with attention, because it handles so well.
Posted by leo (# 1458) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Mere Nick:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I don't know the answer but i think that they are selfish polluters of them planet who are depriving their kids of the joys of walking to school woith friends.
It would have taken well over an hour for our kids to walk to any of their schools.
Send them to neighbourhoo0d schools.
If I had children, it would take them an hour and a half to walk to the nearest secondary school from my house....
Not everyone lives in an urban area.
Bus?
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
Bus?
I don't know about the UK, but here in the US, school buses went the way of the dinosaur decades ago as a victim of the anti-tax/ low budget/ small government crusade. Sometimes city buses will be a possibility, but in many parts of the US, particularly rural areas, those too are unavailable/unreliable as a means of transport.
[ 12. September 2015, 13:50: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]
Posted by Mere Nick (# 11827) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Mere Nick:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I don't know the answer but i think that they are selfish polluters of them planet who are depriving their kids of the joys of walking to school woith friends.
It would have taken well over an hour for our kids to walk to any of their schools.
Send them to neighbourhoo0d schools.
If I had children, it would take them an hour and a half to walk to the nearest secondary school from my house....
Not everyone lives in an urban area.
Bus?
They rode the bus when they first started school. We moved to another school district and they often rode the bus then. However, as kids get to middle school age their behavior was not something we wanted our daughters around. When they were in high school they would ride with my wife because she was a teacher there. When they were old enough to drive they would normally drive themselves because of after school jobs, sports, or other activities. It was pretty normal for kids to car pool if they could so they could save gas money.
I drove a high school bus in the mornings during the spring of 2012. It had automatic transmission, Mercedes Benz engine, and everything was push button. Surely nothing like the ones I rode when I was a kid. The route was in the northern end of Buncombe county, bordering on Madison county. The kids were always very polite and quiet in the mornings. Any trouble and hell raising was normally in the afternoons, if then.
Posted by Pomona (# 17175) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Mere Nick:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I don't know the answer but i think that they are selfish polluters of them planet who are depriving their kids of the joys of walking to school woith friends.
It would have taken well over an hour for our kids to walk to any of their schools.
Send them to neighbourhoo0d schools.
If I had children, it would take them an hour and a half to walk to the nearest secondary school from my house....
Not everyone lives in an urban area.
Bus?
You're joking right? Rural bus services, even in the UK, are dire.
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
(PS I do admit that having a car that says "I care less about a scratch on mine than you do on yours" comes in handy when driving in Brazilian cities.)
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
I don't dislike them, in fact we used to have one. A Toyota Hilux. We went on a few holidays round Norway and Europe with the canadian canoe on top. An ideal vehicle for such jaunts.
But I still loved my little square Fiat Panda for tootling round town.
Now we have a VW Passat estate - a grand all-rounder.
I don't understand judging others for the car they drive. If it suits your needs it suits your needs. We used to be a four car family, now we are retired and we're a one car couple. It works well for us (I have the car whenever I need it and he gets on his bike, haha!)
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
I don't like the Hilux. No matter what I do, it gives me a back ache after driving longer distances. I find its four wheel drive weak too.
Posted by Hilda of Whitby (# 7341) on
:
IMO the best take-down of these 4 wheel drive behemoths was the "Canyonero" jingle on the Simpsons (sung by Hank Williams Jr.). The whole thing is great, but I especially like the line:
"12 yards long, 2 lanes wide/65 tons of American pride/Canyonero!"
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
quote:
Originally posted by Mere Nick:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I don't know the answer but i think that they are selfish polluters of them planet who are depriving their kids of the joys of walking to school woith friends.
It would have taken well over an hour for our kids to walk to any of their schools.
Bicycles. It's how I went the 8 miles to school 50 years ago. Several of us, picking up each other along the way. In winter, we'd get a drop off part way. These experiences of daily travel with age-mates are lost today.
Unfortunately it's an article of faith for most in the UK that only a lunatic would ride bike on the road in the other traffic. They base this, IME, on knowing how appallingly they drive, and how dangerous they make the roads for cyclists and motorcyclists.
Because of this belief, the roads are full of motor vehicles with the result that they're largely right. It's a self-fulfilling policy. Many schools discourage cycling; some won't allow it at all.
[ 12. September 2015, 18:11: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
Posted by Spike (# 36) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Mere Nick:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I don't know the answer but i think that they are selfish polluters of them planet who are depriving their kids of the joys of walking to school woith friends.
It would have taken well over an hour for our kids to walk to any of their schools.
So why not choose a school closer to home?
Posted by mark_in_manchester (# 15978) on
:
quote:
Many schools discourage cycling
Our kids' primary school encourages it - we're in the inner city. Traffic is bad, but more and more people are using push bikes for commuting as well as school. My kids are small enough to be on the pavement, or on the road only with me, at the mo...I'll worry, of course, as they get older.
Posted by Pomona (# 17175) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Spike:
quote:
Originally posted by Mere Nick:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I don't know the answer but i think that they are selfish polluters of them planet who are depriving their kids of the joys of walking to school woith friends.
It would have taken well over an hour for our kids to walk to any of their schools.
So why not choose a school closer to home?
I may be wrong, but I believe in the US children who attend public school (in the US sense) always attend their local public school. In rural areas this may be hours away, even in less rural areas there may not be pavements - US cities are generally not built for pedestrians.
In the UK, catchment areas can work oddly - when I was going to secondary school, I was initially placed at a school that was actually further away than the school I ended up at because they worked out distances as the crow flies. In reality of course, transport doesn't work like this!
Posted by St. Gwladys (# 14504) on
:
People seem to think they can justify having a 4x4 for bad weather. Well, yes, if you have a "real" 4x, like a Landrover you know how to drive off road. So one of our friends, who has and who does, has helped transport people round the parish in bad weather. On the other hand, we live at the bottom of a steep hill, and quite enjoy seeing trendy 4x4s come down backwards in the snow. Another, ex army friend, got back from Somerset in a 2 wheel drive car when a number of 4 wheel drive cars got abandoned. It really depends on your driving skills.
And it's not just in the big cities that people drive their children short distances - our neighbour opposite used to drive her and her children to see her mother, who lives all of about 150 yards away in the next street.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
I consider myself honour bound to report the goodness of an urban 4X4 driver in Dulwich. We had rounded a corner to go to the library, to meet a problem. To the left, a string of parked cars, constraining us, by the Highway Code, to wait for oncoming vehicles. Behind us, a stream of vehicles which had come, like us, from the traffic lights. On the right, the oncoming traffic held up by the lights, including vans, and impossible to drive past. The first time the lights were green, the whole stream continued to fill up the space on the right again. The second time, one of the reviled vehicles stopped at the other end of the line of parked cars, and let us all flow past. Hooray.
Posted by argona (# 14037) on
:
Clearly an EAST Dulwich driver! Damn, I've blown my crossword clue.
Posted by luvanddaisies (# 5761) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Rowen:
Mine is covered in mud, small scratches and similar! Theirs'? Pristine! Never used out o town, I bet.
quote:
Originally posted by Arabella Purity Winterbottom:
Rowan has nailed the essential distinguishing marks of a 4x4 used for its intended purpose.
Dirt. Having grown up in the country, the 4x4s I'm familiar with are rugged from rough use (my favourite cousin took the front doors off his, so he could get in and out quickly on the farm). The pristine behemoths that clog up city roads are just silly status symbols.
Might be worth checking the provenance of the mud... - yeah, it's a ten year old article, but the fact that one could ever buy spray-on mud is still pretty ridiculous.
When I was learning to drive, my driving instructor told me that I should be extra attentive around 4x4 drivers in the city (I live in London), and they often do stupid things, drive as though nobody else matters, and forget the size of their vehicle. Sage advice.
Posted by Curiosity killed ... (# 11770) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Spike:
quote:
Originally posted by Mere Nick:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I don't know the answer but i think that they are selfish polluters of them planet who are depriving their kids of the joys of walking to school woith friends.
It would have taken well over an hour for our kids to walk to any of their schools.
So why not choose a school closer to home?
Spike, I grew up outside London. My first secondary school was 7 miles away and no local bus. I walked home after my GCSEs a couple of times (bloody parents) and that took a couple of hours. That was down a main A road with a decent pavement for the most part (scary numbers of lorry drivers making offers too). I caught the school bus to get to school, but if I'd taken an exam in the morning I didn't always want to wait around for four hours for the school bus home.
My second secondary school (we moved house between fifth and sixth forms) was 14 miles away. To get there I had to catch two school buses, one to take me to the nearest route. Commercial bus routes were on a weekly basis to that village (Monday to one market, Wednesday and Saturday to another.) From school I could catch a commercial bus to the town with the middle school and Monday market, the school my next sister down attended, 7 miles away. I did catch the bus and walk that 7 miles home a couple of times during my A levels, but that one really didn't feel safe - narrow lanes with no pavements, a number of lorries travelling to and from the farms and businesses on the route. Someone out jogging from one of the nearby villages was hit by a passing lorry, survived but was on the critical list for a very long time.
When we moved my youngest sister was still at primary school and she was bussed 7 miles in a different direction to the only village primary school still open.
These were the local schools for all of us and the normal catchment areas, no special travel arrangements.
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Mere Nick:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I don't know the answer but i think that they are selfish polluters of them planet who are depriving their kids of the joys of walking to school woith friends.
It would have taken well over an hour for our kids to walk to any of their schools.
Send them to neighbourhoo0d schools.
If I had children, it would take them an hour and a half to walk to the nearest secondary school from my house....
Not everyone lives in an urban area.
Bus?
Bzzz, incorrect answer. There're two buses a day that go in the opposite direction - 1.25 hours and 16 miles to the nearest city via nowhere else with a secondary school. If I wanted to pay for their education then my theoretical children could attend a number of excellent fee-paying day schools through travelling by bus.
The one local high school (and there is no choice, it is the one that you go to) is nine miles in the opposite direction to the bus.
Posted by Eirenist (# 13343) on
:
Some of the ones used round here, in tame suburban Hertfordshire, have blackened windows. Why? They can't all belong to underworld Mr Bigs, and it's impossible to see round them in Waitrose car park!
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
I think it is sun screening. Our Focus has that, and it means that kids in the back are shaded from the sun without the need for things stuck on the windows.
Except for the one you accidentally dent, of course. That is owned by Harry "slice you open and use you as a settee" Giles.
Posted by Spike (# 36) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
quote:
Originally posted by Spike:
quote:
Originally posted by Mere Nick:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I don't know the answer but i think that they are selfish polluters of them planet who are depriving their kids of the joys of walking to school woith friends.
It would have taken well over an hour for our kids to walk to any of their schools.
So why not choose a school closer to home?
Spike, I grew up outside London. My first secondary school was 7 miles away and no local bus. I walked home after my GCSEs a couple of times (bloody parents) and that took a couple of hours. That was down a main A road with a decent pavement for the most part (scary numbers of lorry drivers making offers too). I caught the school bus to get to school, but if I'd taken an exam in the morning I didn't always want to wait around for four hours for the school bus home.
My second secondary school (we moved house between fifth and sixth forms) was 14 miles away. To get there I had to catch two school buses, one to take me to the nearest route. Commercial bus routes were on a weekly basis to that village (Monday to one market, Wednesday and Saturday to another.) From school I could catch a commercial bus to the town with the middle school and Monday market, the school my next sister down attended, 7 miles away. I did catch the bus and walk that 7 miles home a couple of times during my A levels, but that one really didn't feel safe - narrow lanes with no pavements, a number of lorries travelling to and from the farms and businesses on the route. Someone out jogging from one of the nearby villages was hit by a passing lorry, survived but was on the critical list for a very long time.
When we moved my youngest sister was still at primary school and she was bussed 7 miles in a different direction to the only village primary school still open.
These were the local schools for all of us and the normal catchment areas, no special travel arrangements.
OK, fair enough. It still doesn't address the OP though. If it's necessary to use a car, why use a bloody great tank instead of a "normal" car?
Posted by Curiosity killed ... (# 11770) on
:
Oh, I'm not defending 4x4s, was just pointing out that not everyone can bus or walk to school.
When I lived in that area as an adult I drove a Ford Fiesta followed by a Nissan Micra and coped with hills with marked gradients, snow, ice, floods, mud and lanes next to farms that were extensions of the farmyard. My daughter has nightmare memories of me wading into floods to check if I could drive through them. Over the top of my wellington boots was too high.
Neither can I stand the damn things being driven like tanks around here. When I was cycling to one job locally using the back roads I used to regularly encounter a Hummer that filled the entire double track lane. It caused far more hold ups on that lane than I did on a bike. I could and did pull over out of the way into the side tracks if the road was busy, but could be passed by normal cars if the opposite side of the road was clear. This Hummer just blocked the road for all other vehicles, except me on a bike.
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
I don't have - and I don't think anyone else has - a problem with people who need to drive their children to school. If it is a 7 mile journey, and there are no buses, it might be the right choice.
If you also happen to live on a farm where a 4x4 makes sense, then have a 4x4 and drive the kids to school in it.
The problem is mothers who use 4x4s to drive their kids half a mile along ordinary roads to school, because they are too scared to let them out of a bubble. It is those people who don't need to drive their kids to school, and those people who have completely the wrong sort of car for their needs. They are the dickheads.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by argona:
Clearly an EAST Dulwich driver! Damn, I've blown my crossword clue.
Hah hah - like it. But is there any room to put a 4X4 in the streets of East Dulwich? And you've reminded me I meant to drive over for folk music this evening and totally forgot.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by luvanddaisies:
quote:
Originally posted by Rowen:
Mine is covered in mud, small scratches and similar! Theirs'? Pristine! Never used out o town, I bet.
quote:
Originally posted by Arabella Purity Winterbottom:
Rowan has nailed the essential distinguishing marks of a 4x4 used for its intended purpose.
Dirt. Having grown up in the country, the 4x4s I'm familiar with are rugged from rough use (my favourite cousin took the front doors off his, so he could get in and out quickly on the farm). The pristine behemoths that clog up city roads are just silly status symbols.
Might be worth checking the provenance of the mud... - yeah, it's a ten year old article, but the fact that one could ever buy spray-on mud is still pretty ridiculous.
When I was learning to drive, my driving instructor told me that I should be extra attentive around 4x4 drivers in the city (I live in London), and they often do stupid things, drive as though nobody else matters, and forget the size of their vehicle. Sage advice.
The impression I get of their knowledge of the size of their vehicles is that they think they are larger than they actually are.
Saw some really bad parking in several spaces today at a garden centre.
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
quote:
Penny S: The impression I get of their knowledge of the size of their vehicles is that they think they are larger than they actually are.
Only their vehicles? ![[Two face]](graemlins/scot_twoface.gif)
[ 13. September 2015, 20:36: Message edited by: LeRoc ]
Posted by Mere Nick (# 11827) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Spike:
quote:
Originally posted by Mere Nick:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I don't know the answer but i think that they are selfish polluters of them planet who are depriving their kids of the joys of walking to school woith friends.
It would have taken well over an hour for our kids to walk to any of their schools.
So why not choose a school closer to home?
They always went to the closest school. Even then, with the curvy and hilly roads, or along roads where I've driven over 90mph, no, I would not have our daughters do that walk.
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
Is driving at over 90mph legal or safe? If not, then you're the problem. Stop it.
People who go on about how dangerous the roads are but drive like fucking cretins boil my piss.
[ 13. September 2015, 20:55: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
Posted by Eirenist (# 13343) on
:
Thanks shipmates. As well as air pollution and traffic congestion, these vehicles clearly generate a great deal of unChristian feeling.
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
When I lived in that area as an adult I drove a Ford Fiesta followed by a Nissan Micra .
If the Micra was following the Fiesta all the time, you should have either called the police or undone the tow-rope.
[ 16. September 2015, 16:14: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
Penny S: The impression I get of their knowledge of the size of their vehicles is that they think they are larger than they actually are.
Only their vehicles?
I'd the impression the size of a4x4 was to compensate for a particular lack elsewhere...
Posted by Chorister (# 473) on
:
I have definitely noticed a change in the last 30 years. It used to be that dad drove the car (or the best car (if there were two) to work. There it stayed all day, not being used. Meanwhile, mum and the kids had to manage all the shopping and getting to and from school with either no car at all, or a cheap, rusty old banger. More recently, though, either the family has spent more of their budget on a decent car for mum and the kids to use, or else dad has been willing for them to have the best car instead of him.
I live in an area where the only way in and out is via narrow lanes. We always joke that the largest cars have the smallest children in them. The very largest cars have only one child, of course.
The idea about car sharing with other parents, to save petrol costs and number of cars clogging up the lanes, has gone out of fashion. Partly, maybe, due to child protection concerns? Go back a generation, and my dad used to boast that he could get the whole school football team in the back of his estate car! Only one car needed to get them all to the match.
Posted by Jane R (# 331) on
:
I did wonder if sexism was a factor for some of the resentment about 4x4 drivers; the idea that there is something Not Right about women being allowed to drive big fancy cars... I am not a fan of big fancy cars myself, but if they are available to buy, why is it more of a crime against the environment to buy one for a woman to use?
Also, leo has either forgotten what it was like being a child or had an idyllic bully-free childhood:
quote:
...depriving their kids of the joys of walking to school with friends.
I had to go to and from school on the bus. I used to walk into town after school and spend half an hour hanging round at the bus stop there to avoid going home on the school bus, because otherwise you had the school bullies' undivided attention for what seemed like a lifetime. Hell on wheels.
Posted by Mere Nick (# 11827) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Is driving at over 90mph legal or safe? If not, then you're the problem. Stop it.
People who go on about how dangerous the roads are but drive like fucking cretins boil my piss.
I was 16 and, therefore, dying was what other folks did. It would be impossible to drive on the road at 90mph anymore. 9 mph is hard enough. Still too dangerous.
Only if the roads were 20 mph streets, or maybe just 35 mph and not very curvy or hilly would I've ever considered it.
Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
quote:
Penny S: The impression I get of their knowledge of the size of their vehicles is that they think they are larger than they actually are.
Only their vehicles?
I'd the impression the size of a4x4 was to compensate for a particular lack elsewhere...
Very much so - the drivers may have big bums, but if they have big boobs, they are no longer the attraction they were 15 to 20 years before. The 4WD has to serve as a substitute.
Karl, quite a bit of road here where driving at 90 mph (or 150 kph as we know it) is both legal and safe. It was both when I was a young driver over a much wider area than now.
[ 18. September 2015, 01:13: Message edited by: Gee D ]
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on
:
Plenty of bits are. I was just opining that if a section of road that one might legally walk or cycle on is made dangerous by 90mph motor traffic, then that 90mph traffic is definitely not safe, and should therefore not really be legal either.
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on
:
Where is it both legal and safe to drive at 90 mph?
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
quote:
mr cheesy: Where is it both legal and safe to drive at 90 mph?
German motorways (Autobahn). I've done it sometimes.
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
German motorways (Autobahn). I've done it sometimes.
It is hard to describe the German autobahns as safe.
Gee D is in Australia. The implication from the above post appears to be that there are roads in Australia where 90 mph is safe and legal.
Outside of Germany, I don't think there are any roads anywhere with a legal limit above 90 mph. And driving at that speed is never safe.
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Eirenist:
Thanks shipmates. As well as air pollution and traffic congestion, these vehicles clearly generate a great deal of unChristian feeling.
They generate a good deal of unChristian driving too, within and without.
Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on
:
mr cheesy, thee are some highways in the Northern Territory where there is no legal limit, and more where the limit is 130 kph. I would not travel at that sort of speed at night, dawn or dusk, but in the rest of the day and on those roads, well surfaced with little traffic and few curves, where those speeds are quite safe. You must bear in mind that traffic densities are much lower than in Europe.
Indeed, in the late 60s/early 70s, there were similarly empty roads not far from Sydney where such speeds were legal* and at most times and in the then usual traffic conditions also safe.
* There was no limit, but if you were travelling at a speed in excess of 100 kph, the burden was on you if required to satisfy a court that it was safe.
[ 18. September 2015, 11:27: Message edited by: Gee D ]
Posted by Mere Nick (# 11827) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Where is it both legal and safe to drive at 90 mph?
The speed limit on the particular road is 45. Like I said, I was 16 and invincible.
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
I would not travel at that sort of speed at night, dawn or dusk, but in the rest of the day and on those roads, well surfaced with little traffic and few curves, where those speeds are quite safe.
Bullshit
Those who travel at high speeds on public highways are living in la-la land about their own reactions at that speed. Nobody safely drives at over 90 mph without specialist training.
[ 18. September 2015, 13:01: Message edited by: mr cheesy ]
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on
:
Not got much experience of driving on Australian roads but I have been on some where you can see pretty much forever and you can see when the sides of the road are empty too. Not that I think that driving at 90 is a good idea anywhere, but if there was anywhere it might be less of a bad idea than other places, those roads might be it if there is nothign else in sight.
Posted by Ricardus (# 8757) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Outside of Germany, I don't think there are any roads anywhere with a legal limit above 90 mph. And driving at that speed is never safe.
There are no speed limits on most roads in the Isle of Man. You can, if you wish, bomb along the coastal road at 120mph, ricochet off the cliff face and plummet into the Irish Sea, all without breaking the law.
Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on
:
That article contains no data on accidents on the Stuart Highway after the alteration. Of course, if you are travelling at 100 kph when you have your accident, you are more likely to die than if your speed was a tenth that. The argument I'm positing is that on places like the Stuart Highway, and those where I drove, there was ample vision, no entering traffic for the next 20 km and so forth. Not the same as driving down Brompton Rd at 10 am on a wet Saturday.
Posted by Rowen (# 1194) on
:
The highways in my part of Australia are either 100 or 90 kms an hour. I don't see many crashes but then I don't see much traffic.... I live in an isolated art of the nation. We have numerous examples of dead kangaroos and wombats however, but when they crash into cars, cars usually win and keep on going.
The majority of folk, out here in the back of nowhere, drive 4 x 4.
The majority of our roads are unsurfaced and on the Alps, amidst snow and mud.
Posted by Dave W. (# 8765) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
German motorways (Autobahn). I've done it sometimes.
It is hard to describe the German autobahns as safe.
Is there something specific in that document that leads you to this conclusion? I didn't see anything that would preclude the description "safe". According to the international comparisons here, German autobahns seem fairly safe on the basis of persons killed per billion vehicle-kilometers basis, despite some stretches with average speeds measured at 88 mph (with 30% faster than 93 mph and 15% faster than 106 mph.)
Posted by Curiosity killed ... (# 11770) on
:
The UK only introduced speed limits on the motorways in 1965 as a temporary trial measure and 1967 permanently. I have travelled legally at 120mph-140mph in the UK, on the M1 in the back of a car driven by my father. I was a preschooler and only remember this because it was incredibly scary. (Also German motorways as a teenager, but that wasn't so frightening.)
My father had only just given up motor-racing. (He has trophies from Le Mans and various races at Brands Hatch and Silverstone.) He pointed out that travelling at 120mph you travel 2 miles in a minute. To stand a chance of doing something sensible you do need to be able to see several seconds ahead. 7.5 seconds isn't long, but at that speed you are covering a quarter of a mile, having to see, negotiate and react to all the other stuff that's happening in that stretch of road, particularly on the UK.
Posted by LeRoc (# 3216) on
:
My parents live very close to the German border. It's a bit of a tradition there when an 18 year old boy gets his driver's licence that his father lends him his car to do a stretch on the Autobahn.
To get it out of his system.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
My parents live very close to the German border. It's a bit of a tradition there when an 18 year old boy gets his driver's licence that his father lends him his car to do a stretch on the Autobahn.
To get it out of his system.
Hmmmm!
OH often does 100/110 mph on the Autobahn. He let Boogielet1 do it once. That didn't do either of our systems any good!
[ 19. September 2015, 14:03: Message edited by: Boogie ]
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on
:
I'm convinced that the cause of many of the accidents on UK motorways are caused by poor lane discipline and lack of proper training as much as anything else.
It is a nonsense that a person can take and pass a driving test in the UK without ever having driven on a motorway or dual carriageway and then be let loose on, say, the M4/M5/M48 interchange without any experience. Its also crazy that many people pass a test without ever having driven in fog, snow or at night.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
I'm convinced that the cause of many of the accidents on UK motorways are caused by poor lane discipline and lack of proper training as much as anything else.
Poor rules too. Far better in countries where overtaking is allowed on both sides.
I know many people hate them, but I love the new 'smart' motorways where everyone is forced to do the same speed - they feel much safer and less stressful.
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on
:
I am currently doing advanced driving training. One of the core things I am learning is to look ahead, and to make sure that I can stop on my side of the road, in control, within the distance I can see.
While I also have to stay within the speed limit, there are times when I could do this at over the speed limit, and it would then be safe.
A lot of the problem is when people don't follow the first of these. Even if the limit is 70, if you can't see far enough to do more than 50, you shouldn't do more than 50.
Posted by MarsmanTJ (# 8689) on
:
One of the schools I was working in briefly had their first car accident. It was a mother who hit her own child (fortunately fairly slowly!) in a 4x4, it escapes my memory what 4x4 it was. Because after her child got out of the car, she assumed where the child was and the massive blind spots on her car she couldn't see her 8 year old son. Fortunately the car behind her had a Paediatrician in it who rushed the 8 year old to hospital and the only damage done was severe bruising. It was enough to make me say that no-one should EVER drive a 4x4 on the school-run, since seeing Primary/Elementary age kids is hard enough, let alone with blind spots big enough to drive a truck through...
© Ship of Fools 2016
UBB.classicTM
6.5.0