Are ALL Range Rover (Sport/Vogue) drivers disabled?

mr_goo

Katash wrote:

Speaking as someone who owns a Range Rover (although not the sport model) I'd just like to say we do not all fit into the negative stereotype described by the OP.

I park far away from entrances where possible to avoid people with no respect for value or property - if I carry an elderly disabled relative as a passenger they are dropped at the door then I go find a suitable space.

I do go offroad even tho my particular powertrain is the petrol V8, the person who claims petrol V8's are no good offroad could probably be surprised if ever they got the opportunity to experience it.

I never 'bully my way through' traffic - quite the opposite really, as I actually enjoy driving I'm never in a rush to get anywhere I regularly stop to let people out at junctions, waive through oncoming traffic etc ... I'm quite content locking the cruise control at 70 on motorways and following the natural flow of traffic.

I use my vehicle to help others when bad weather (snow & floods) means they are otherwise stranded, infact a lot of 4x4 owners where I live do the same - escorting medical staff, care workers and rescue teams to remote inaccessible areas when the weather gets tough - this rarely gets publicized in the press.

I'm not orange, live in Essex, or fortunate to have inherited wealth - I work shifts for a living, and I do a lot of overtime.

I live in an area that has a high percentage of 4x4's and especially Range Rovers - a lot of them are 'RR Sports' and I can honestly say whenever I see displays of poor driving / parking its usually from a wide range of vehicle types, no one specific brand is at fault although I can see how certain vehicles can become figureheads for opinions, perhaps for deeper underlying reasons.

When people make sweeping generalizations about a particular group of other people (BMW/Audi/Volvo/white van drivers .... cyclists etc...) it makes them look a bit daft really, and a little bit sad - I would have expected members of a cycling forum to have experienced being on the sharp end of the 'your all w**kers!' argument and be less likely to fall into the same behavior.

Obviously everyone is entitled to their opinion and if the OP and supporters feel we all (RR drivers) behave in the same negative way then there is nothing stopping them from expressing that view - conversely its equally valid for someone to challenge that opinion, hence my 'other side of the story' post.



Life is too short - go and enjoy whatever it is that makes you happy.

I drive between 35,000 and 40,000 miles per year. This gives me plenty of opportunity to observe the driving behaviour of other drivers. Whilst I understand your view point that it is not just RngRvr drivers that fall into the bad driving category. They are in general about the worst observers of road etiquette and parking practices.

mr_goo

After 24 hours of reflection on my OP I have come to the conclusion that I was totally out of order and very non PC and non inclusive. Therefore I have decided that drivers of the following vehicles should be considered as having the same traits as Rng Rvr drivers:

Mercedes M (one parked in the Tesco 'Pick Up' zone this morning whilst the driver went shopping...Twunt!)
Audi Q5
BMW X5
BMW X6 (whats is the point of this?)

The strange thing is that you don't find the same level of bad driving behaviour or bad road etiquette from owners of KIA Sportage, Hyundai SantaFe etc.

This 'attitude' must be down to the marque of the car ie; perceived as prestigious, therefore 'I have more money than thou'. Plus the size/height. The RngRvr and its German cousins are 8l00dy big and 8l00dy high therefore 'I can bully my way along the road'. How many times have you been overtaking in an outside lane only for the looming apparition of a RngRvr or German 4x4 closing in on you? You just know the driver is an impatient tw4t even before his front bumper nearly kisses your arse.

This is my opinion based on my long standing observations and I do not expect any consensus of agreement.

CambsNewbie

Mr Goo wrote:

After 24 hours of reflection on my OP I have come to the conclusion that I was totally out of order and very non PC and non inclusive. Therefore I have decided that drivers of the following vehicles should be considered as having the same traits as Rng Rvr drivers:

Mercedes M (one parked in the Tesco 'Pick Up' zone this morning whilst the driver went shopping...Twunt!)
Audi Q5
BMW X5
BMW X6 (whats is the point of this?)

The strange thing is that you don't find the same level of bad driving behaviour or bad road etiquette from owners of KIA Sportage, Hyundai SantaFe etc.

This 'attitude' must be down to the marque of the car ie; perceived as prestigious, therefore 'I have more money than thou'. Plus the size/height. The RngRvr and its German cousins are 8l00dy big and 8l00dy high therefore 'I can bully my way along the road'. How many times have you been overtaking in an outside lane only for the looming apparition of a RngRvr or German 4x4 closing in on you? You just know the driver is an impatient tw4t even before his front bumper nearly kisses your ars*.

This is my opinion based on my long standing observations and I do not expect any consensus of agreement.

Why is it to paraphrase you "I have more money than thou so I can bully my way along the road" and not "maybe this person works bloody hard, long hours or gets a bonus for being good at what they do"? The cars you have mentioned, Range Rovers, X5 and 6, M class only sell in tiny numbers compared to Fiestas, Focus, Corsa. Statistically those cars are going to be far more likely to be committing the kind of behaviour you rant against. On my ride today it was an X5 who gave me plenty of room and waited for a safe place to overtake me. It was a lady in a 53 plate Corsa who nearly put me in a ditch.

And no I don't have one of those cars but yes, if I could afford one I'd love a X5 or a Disco.

mr_goo

CambsNewbie wrote:

Mr Goo wrote:

After 24 hours of reflection on my OP I have come to the conclusion that I was totally out of order and very non PC and non inclusive. Therefore I have decided that drivers of the following vehicles should be considered as having the same traits as Rng Rvr drivers:

Mercedes M (one parked in the Tesco 'Pick Up' zone this morning whilst the driver went shopping...Twunt!)
Audi Q5
BMW X5
BMW X6 (whats is the point of this?)

The strange thing is that you don't find the same level of bad driving behaviour or bad road etiquette from owners of KIA Sportage, Hyundai SantaFe etc.

This 'attitude' must be down to the marque of the car ie; perceived as prestigious, therefore 'I have more money than thou'. Plus the size/height. The RngRvr and its German cousins are 8l00dy big and 8l00dy high therefore 'I can bully my way along the road'. How many times have you been overtaking in an outside lane only for the looming apparition of a RngRvr or German 4x4 closing in on you? You just know the driver is an impatient tw4t even before his front bumper nearly kisses your ars*.

This is my opinion based on my long standing observations and I do not expect any consensus of agreement.

Why is it to paraphrase you "I have more money than thou so I can bully my way along the road" and not "maybe this person works bloody hard, long hours or gets a bonus for being good at what they do"? The cars you have mentioned, Range Rovers, X5 and 6, M class only sell in tiny numbers compared to Fiestas, Focus, Corsa. Statistically those cars are going to be far more likely to be committing the kind of behaviour you rant against. On my ride today it was an X5 who gave me plenty of room and waited for a safe place to overtake me. It was a lady in a 53 plate Corsa who nearly put me in a ditch.

And no I don't have one of those cars but yes, if I could afford one I'd love a X5 or a Disco.

As I stated. It's my opinion. Its not the 'politics of envy.. If the driver worked hard to buy one, then good for them. But it does not entitle them to drive like a twunt. Yes there are plenty of other bad drivers in other marques new and old. I am highlighting an above average bad trait in certain types of vehicle and I am not the only one that has observed this.

morstar

Mr Goo wrote:

This 'attitude' must be down to the marque of the car ie; perceived as prestigious, therefore 'I have more money than thou'. Plus the size/height. The RngRvr and its German cousins are 8l00dy big and 8l00dy high therefore 'I can bully my way along the road'. How many times have you been overtaking in an outside lane only for the looming apparition of a RngRvr or German 4x4 closing in on you? You just know the driver is an impatient tw4t even before his front bumper nearly kisses your ars*.

This is my opinion based on my long standing observations and I do not expect any consensus of agreement.

I agree with you. Obviously it is a generalisation and there are exceptions but the above describes a very common and consistent observation that I have had for many years. Personally, my bug bear has been the X5 for a long time but it seems to have been surpassed by the RR over the last 24 months or so. Obviously fashions change.

VTech

Its a funny post in that driving different cars DOES reflect differently on people around you.

When im driving the LandRover or the Van no one will let me out, well almost no-one. When I drive a sports car it seems that everyone is my friend and lets me out.

Driving an Aston martin grabs the attention of ladies far more than men, the amount of times ladies will comment on the car is far greater than that of other sports cars.

I drove the Lamborghini Reventon a year or so back and a girl in her early 20's did a sort of "throw-up" act as if the car were the most disgusting thing she had ever seen, obviously in an attempt to make herself look something special in front of her friends.

People perceive cars in such a different way. Status symbols, love of design, aspirational, desire or transport.

Yellow Peril

VTech wrote:

People perceive cars in such a different way. Status symbols, love of design, aspirational, desire or transport.

Isn't that the reason why car designers design them so differently? What practical or economical use are a Lamborghini or an Aston Martin?

VTech

Yellow Peril wrote:

VTech wrote:

People perceive cars in such a different way. Status symbols, love of design, aspirational, desire or transport.

Isn't that the reason why car designers design them so differently? What practical or economical use are a Lamborghini or an Aston Martin?

Desire and pleasure.
Both are very strong sales points.

Practicality on the other hand............

I know so many people with such cars who never drive them or if they do, drive them so infrequently that the pleasure of the drive is taken away by the apprehension of power delivery.

I think in the most, these types of car are a desire which is soon lost when you own them. Ive only ever really loved 1 of my cars throughout the entire ownership, that says a lot to me.

greasedscotsman

Read this thread yesterday and thought, yeah right, nice bit of stereotyping. Went for a ride this morning and almost got wiped out by a white 4x4! :shock:

VTech

greasedscotsman wrote:

Read this thread yesterday and thought, yeah right, nice bit of stereotyping. Went for a ride this morning and almost got wiped out by a white 4x4! :shock:

As the incredibly wise "Shaggy" once said, "it wasnt me!"

pliptrot

VTech wrote:

ruth is, I got this at an ABSOLUTE bargain, it was Lee Westwood's car (golfer) and he moved to the states shortly after getting given it by Land Rover and so we bought it at a fairly reduced price at 3 months old.
I would never buy one of these new, in fact I would rarely buy any new car. Total waste of money.

Aah.. the irony.

greasedscotsman

VTech wrote:

greasedscotsman wrote:

Read this thread yesterday and thought, yeah right, nice bit of stereotyping. Went for a ride this morning and almost got wiped out by a white 4x4! :shock:

As the incredibly wise "Shaggy" once said, "it wasnt me!"

Indeed, cos you are a model citizen!

(...actually, I think it was a Ford Kuga)

VTech

If its worth anything to anyone, the Kia Sportage is IMO the best 4wd on the road. It looks stunning (well it would be considering the designer) and incredibly affordable with excellent warranty.

the playing mantis

Katash wrote:

Speaking as someone who owns a Range Rover (although not the sport model) I'd just like to say we do not all fit into the negative stereotype described by the OP.

as this thread clealry mentions the 2 models in question, as do i in my post, ur defence of yoursefl is a waste of time and unneeded. genuine rangies are no issue, and you should be commended.

its the new money oiks in the titled that draw ire.

the playing mantis

i disagree about it being all 'prestige' marqued 4x4's though. cayennes are fine i find, as are mercs.
audi 4x4 seems to follow the rr sport rules as do X3s, but then i see this from jeeps, so its not just 'prestige' marques.

i should also say pickup trucks/utes, that are double cab but have the loading bay fully covered and ones that are covered in bling and logos, and clearly never used for lugging stuff, or carrying large things in the loading area, and are just purchased as a status symbol seem to follow OP theme. anyone who genuinely needs one of these, wouldnt have the back covered, and wouldnt buy a top end model as its pointless. genuine users, farmers, those need it to lug machinery around, etc do not buy the top end bling models of the navara, ranger, hilux, l200, dmax. (apart from the old man)

Gazzaputt

I disagree you have to have money to own one.

2nd hand prices are low and most of the morons I see driving these drive older than 10 plates mostly around 02 -08 I notice.

I watch an orange bint drive into a Tesco petrol station straddled the car between two pumps as she obviously couldn't judge it's width. Then puts £10 of petrol in! :shock:

the playing mantis

Gazzaputt wrote:

I disagree you have to have money to own one.

2nd hand prices are low and most of the morons I see driving these drive older than 10 plates mostly around 02 -08 I notice.

I watch an orange bint drive into a Tesco petrol station straddled the car between two pumps as she obviously couldn't judge it's width. Then puts £10 of petrol in! :shock:

thats a good point. 2nd hand market for these types is booming, loads on offer at good prices. i suppose the very rich replace quickly, whilst a lot of the oiks end up having to sell them as they cannot afford to run them, hence loads available 2nd hand.

Katash

the playing mantis wrote:

as this thread clealry mentions the 2 models in question, as do i in my post, ur defence of yoursefl is a waste of time and unneeded. genuine rangies are no issue, and you should be commended.

its the new money oiks in the titled that draw ire.

You misunderstand, as have a few others here - something I took into account with my post - I drive an Range Rover, not a Sport or Evoque and not a beaten up old Classic either.

'Vogue' is a trim level, not a model - Referring to one as a "Range Rover Vogue" is like calling a Mondeo a "Ford Ghia" - my vehicle IS one of the series 3 Range Rovers that presumably the OP is venting about (as there is no such thing as a 'Sport Vogue')

Its however not a 'Vogue' .... Its an 07MY 'Supercharged'

Am I to still be "Commended" or 'Condemned' now you know that?

the playing mantis

whoops, i must confess i thought this was about the sport and the evoque. hadnt even noticed that in the title.

im not sure why i said commended in my post, thats BS. i think i had a brain melt.

on balance i reckon u fall under ops banner anyway, as u are on a cycling forum, and ur only posts are on this topic. and it seems you only joined on the back of this thread, so ur probably an alter ego of someone else here.

Katash

the playing mantis wrote:

whoops, i must confess i thought this was about the sport and the evoque. hadnt even noticed that in the title.

im not sure why i said commended in my post, thats BS. i think i had a brain melt.

on balance i reckon u fall under ops banner anyway, as u are on a cycling forum, and ur only posts are on this topic. and it seems you only joined on the back of this thread, so ur probably an alter ego of someone else here.

I can assure you I have no alternate username on here - I have zero interest in cycling apart from cycling to work on my chepo Halfords bike when the mrs has the car and I did join specifically to post on this thread.

I think the fact that you "Commend" me (despite your protestations it was accidental) when you thought I was a driver of an old Range Rover Classic who as stated by me does not exhibit the poor driving signs described by the OP BUT as soon as you find out I'm a driver of a modern Range Rover (Lets call it a Vogue as thats what most of you seem to think it is) who again does not exhibit the poor driving characteristics you suddenly U-turn your opinion of me and and now I'm 'one of those'.

I think this categorically proves the point its the actual vehicle not the behavior you seem have an issue with here.

mr_goo

Katash wrote:

the playing mantis wrote:

whoops, i must confess i thought this was about the sport and the evoque. hadnt even noticed that in the title.

im not sure why i said commended in my post, thats BS. i think i had a brain melt.

on balance i reckon u fall under ops banner anyway, as u are on a cycling forum, and ur only posts are on this topic. and it seems you only joined on the back of this thread, so ur probably an alter ego of someone else here.

I can assure you I have no alternate username on here - I have zero interest in cycling apart from cycling to work on my chepo Halfords bike when the mrs has the car and I did join specifically to post on this thread.

I think the fact that you "Commend" me (despite your protestations it was accidental) when you thought I was a driver of an old Range Rover Classic who as stated by me does not exhibit the poor driving signs described by the OP BUT as soon as you find out I'm a driver of a modern Range Rover (Lets call it a Vogue as thats what most of you seem to think it is) who again does not exhibit the poor driving characteristics you suddenly U-turn your opinion of me and and now I'm 'one of those'.

I think this categorically proves the point its the actual vehicle not the behavior you seem have an issue with here.

Katash.
Did you really join Radar just to discuss this topic? And how did you find it then?

For what it's worth. My OP is about the driving behaviour and the above average bad etiquette of RngRvr drivers. Couldn't give a stuff about the car itself. In fact I like the Range Rover. If I could afford one, perhaps I would consider one. I would then have to check myself into a private clinic to be lobotomised before getting behind the wheel, as clearly many of the drivers of said marque display the intelligence and knuckle dragging traits of Oddbod.


There is also a valid point made about the top end twin cabs. Many of their drivers exhibit similar behaviour, although you don't tend to see as many bombing down the outside lanes of motorways. Possibly to do with engines and power (lack of it).
The observation here then is that it is to do with size of vehicle and the perceived superiority that many of the drivers think they have. Please note the use of word many, not ALL.

the playing mantis

Katash wrote:

the playing mantis wrote:

whoops, i must confess i thought this was about the sport and the evoque. hadnt even noticed that in the title.

im not sure why i said commended in my post, thats BS. i think i had a brain melt.

on balance i reckon u fall under ops banner anyway, as u are on a cycling forum, and ur only posts are on this topic. and it seems you only joined on the back of this thread, so ur probably an alter ego of someone else here.

I can assure you I have no alternate username on here - I have zero interest in cycling apart from cycling to work on my chepo Halfords bike when the mrs has the car and I did join specifically to post on this thread.

I think the fact that you "Commend" me (despite your protestations it was accidental) when you thought I was a driver of an old Range Rover Classic who as stated by me does not exhibit the poor driving signs described by the OP BUT as soon as you find out I'm a driver of a modern Range Rover (Lets call it a Vogue as thats what most of you seem to think it is) who again does not exhibit the poor driving characteristics you suddenly U-turn your opinion of me and and now I'm 'one of those'.

I think this categorically proves the point its the actual vehicle not the behavior you seem have an issue with here.

i dont think you can categorically prove anythign on an internet forum, thats nigh on impossible.

very suspect, zero interest in cycling yet join a cycling forum and then post on the non cyclign section, do you simply google range rover bashing? do you not have better things to do with your time (well as you seem to have posted on a saturday night perhaps not), i have no issue with modern rangies, bar the crude behaviour highlighted in the op exhibited by the majority (not all as i stated before) of those in the chav models. if i needed an a high riding, 4wd off road vehicle with lots of towing abiltiy and load capacity i would make no other choice. but i dont, so i wouldnt, as it would be a waste of money for me.

Katash

Mr Goo wrote:

Katash.
Did you really join Radar just to discuss this topic?

Yes

Mr Goo wrote:

And how did you find it then?

It was posted on a RR forum

Mr Goo wrote:

For what it's worth. My OP is about the driving behaviour and the above average bad etiquette of RngRvr drivers. Couldn't give a stuff about the car itself. In fact I like the Range Rover. If I could afford one, perhaps I would consider one. I would then have to check myself into a private clinic to be lobotomised before getting behind the wheel, as clearly many of the drivers of said marque display the intelligence and knuckle dragging traits of Oddbod.


There is also a valid point made about the top end twin cabs. Many of their drivers exhibit similar behaviour, although you don't tend to see as many bombing down the outside lanes of motorways. Possibly to do with engines and power (lack of it).
The observation here then is that it is to do with size of vehicle and the perceived superiority that many of the drivers think they have. Please note the use of word many, not ALL.

Assuming there is a slim possibility your being serious about owning a RR if you had the cash I'd say its probably best to not to - you'll likely become perceived as the very thing your arguing against, thereby ironically highlighting the flaw in your original argument - "Are ALL Range Rover (Sport/Vogue) drivers disabled?" - that is unless you either are a)disabled or b)intending to exhibit the behavior you describe.

I think the discussion with the playing mantis above speaks volumes - notice how I'm OK as long as I drive an old Range Rover but once he twigs the truth there is an attitude U-turn?

Your attempts to insult by comparing a carry on character to RR drivers wont work with me I'm afraid mate, despite the fact that to own and run a RR you'd need to be financially in a position that generally precludes the sort of person your poking at, fortunately I'm a firm believer in the 'sticks and stones' principal - I read this on twitter earlier and it instantly springs to mind

Ricky Gervais twitter feed wrote:

Trolls don't hate you. They hate themselves. They're in pain & you getting upset is like their morphine. Don't administer. Enjoy the screams

But if it makes you feel somehow 'complete' inside by hurling crudely compiled cliché based insults then crack on my friend.

Re:- Size of vehicle - Nothing to do with it really - a Discovery is roughly the same size yet somehow exempt from your generalization?

Your argument is so full of holes its laughable.

But what I absolutely find the most hilarity in here is this, may I direct you to the following post entitled "Bl00dy horses"

viewtopic.php?f=40088&t=12925962&start=40

Someone starts a similar thread bashing horse riders, accusations of how they are all 'rich snobs who think they own the track' are thrown in - In you step with the following reply

Mr Goo wrote:

Possibly one of the most moronic and selfish original posts I have ever read on here. There does seem to be an undercurrent of road cyclists on here that have a superiority complex when it comes to road use.

I live and cycle in the New Forest. Plenty of ponies and horse riders in the area plus livestock. They have the right of way in the New Forest not vehicles or cyclists, and as a resident you have to respect that. However there is a selfish attitude of a growing minority of road cyclists who treat the New Forest area as a private training ground. They race past the NF ponies and verbally abuse the horse riders. This has ruined the reputation of those cyclists that have respect for ALL road users, resulting in the Sportives in the area now being targeted and sabotaged.
Well Done!

The absolute irony really does astound me.

And so onto the playing mantis

You are right - nothing can be proven here but again your U-turn speaks volumes, perhaps there is another reason for it but as always the simplest explanation is usually the right one. I should have better things to do on a Sat but working overtime whilst being paid an extortionate amount of cash to do very little always takes priority over most things.

In summary an attempt was made to get you guys to see that sweeping generalizations are usually (and in this case defiantly) incorrect - mantis came the closest to understanding it but sadly let himself down at the end.

I see no further point in 'Troll baiting' here and refuse to get drawn even further into a keyboard war so will leave you lycra-loving types to continue to agree with each other about how morally superior you all are.

Have a nice day.

bompington

Katash wrote:

I'm OK as ... I drive .... Range Rover ... I'm ... financially in a position that... being paid an extortionate amount of cash to do very little .... somehow 'complete' inside ... Size of vehicle ... its laughable.... really does astound me.

... You are right ... you lycra-loving types ... how morally superior you all are.

Have a nice day.

The alternative TLDR is that he has reinforced a few RR stereotypes rather better than he intended - surely he realised that when he started boasting about getting paid extortionate amounts?

the playing mantis

potential here hopefully!

an invasion by people (a person so far )from a range rover forum, wow, why would this thread be on there, unless either some saddo has intentionally searched for it, or someone off here has put it there (monkeypump maybe!!), and why would anyone bother to act on it, go through the hassle of registering and posting in the middle of the night (a saturday too), is it really that annoying that and drive someone to the effort of posting on here about it.

as ever with such types as this guy, they bring it down to money; how much they earn and affordability, a path that people shouldnt really go down, as they have no idea of the means of those they are attempting to brag over, and its a pretty classless thing to do, but fits in perfectly with the stereotype of the owners of such vehicles.

the playing mantis

bompington wrote:

Katash wrote:

I'm OK as ... I drive .... Range Rover ... I'm ... financially in a position that... being paid an extortionate amount of cash to do very little .... somehow 'complete' inside ... Size of vehicle ... its laughable.... really does astound me.

... You are right ... you lycra-loving types ... how morally superior you all are.

Have a nice day.

The alternative TLDR is that he has reinforced a few RR stereotypes rather better than he intended - surely he realised that when he started boasting about getting paid extortionate amounts?

great minds? u wrote that as i typed mine, glad im not the only one who thought that was ironic. hopefully this thread has some entertainment legs!

Monkeypump

the playing mantis wrote:

potential here hopefully!

an invasion by people (a person so far )from a range rover forum, wow, why would this thread be on there, unless either some saddo has intentionally searched for it, or someone off here has put it there (monkeypump maybe!!), and why would anyone bother to act on it, go through the hassle of registering and posting in the middle of the night (a saturday too), is it really that annoying that and drive someone to the effort of posting on here about it.

as ever with such types as this guy, they bring it down to money; how much they earn and affordability, a path that people shouldnt really go down, as they have no idea of the means of those they are attempting to brag over, and its a pretty classless thing to do, but fits in perfectly with the stereotype of the owners of such vehicles.

Hold on a sec! I might have said the OP wrote a load of old tosh (which has been followed up with even more prejudiced nonsense), but I've got better things to do than cross-post on RR forums.

IMHO this is one of the saddest, grumpiest threads on here for a while, but do carry on with your blinkered blathering.

In response to Vtech's thoughts on the Sportage, I would agree - great cars. I've also been using a new Rav4 for the last few days, which was really good too. I do like the Disco, but a white Overfinch? Bit bling for me!

crumbschief

Carry On Screaming aaaaaahhhhhhhhhhh

bompington

cyd190468 wrote:

Dunno why anyone would buy a Range Rover, or any 4wd that isn't a Landcruiser or a Hi-lux. Maybe a nissan Patrol. And before all you Poms blow up about crap, I live in Australia. If you're on a 4wd holiday over here and it breaks down you're probably gonna die before help can get to you, so reliability is more importannt than anything.

I've only ever been on one 4wd hol in Oz, it was with friends in their Range Rover. They always got surprised looks from other off-roaders who wouldn't have taken the RR seriously as an off-road vehicle, they just assumed it was for people with more money than brains...

Gazzaputt

bompington wrote:

they just assumed it was for people with more money than brains...

Which it is