What do people recommend for mid range 4 x 4

pblakeney

pinarello001 wrote:

Your a streak with a huge tool and you're jealous. ?!

Scratches head...

Yes, a jealous streak and you're with a huge tool.

Not the best grammar I grant you.

pinno

PBlakeney wrote:

pinarello001 wrote:

Your a streak with a huge tool and you're jealous. ?!

Scratches head...

Yes, a jealous streak and you're with a huge tool.

Not the best grammar I grant you.

You need a big tool to tighten the wheel nuts on your 4 by 4.

ballysmate

philthy3 wrote:

Ai_1 wrote:

philthy3 wrote:

DesB3rd wrote:

As to the whole 4x4 business. If we were stone-cold rational consumers 95% or more would be buying Fiestas, Golfs and Mondeo Estates (as to our needs, brands may vary) with the smallest engines that could get them up steep hills and hold 80-odd mph with ease and comfortably - and they'd be run until they became maintenance liabilities (all a bit Chairman Mao really.) But the heart wants what it wants - floppy affairs with detachable roofs, two seaters, 7ft high brutes that are slower, thirstier and dynamically worse than the 4.5ft equivalent, big wheels and rubber band tires and anything backed by a particularly condescending and self-satisfied marketing campaign...

The translation of which means; can't afford one and jealous as fek.

No, that's not the translation. However I think you're admirably demonstrating why the "particularly condescending and self-satisfied marketing campaign" piece of the quote above is actually true, and effective. People like yourself seem to revel in the idea that everyone else is either impressed or jealous of you and are in fact induced to purchase products marketed on that basis. I would suggest that it's really not those criticising 4x4 owners that are deluded. It's those who are in denial of their own true motivations for owning one. Some 4x4 owners may have done so with completely reasonable motivations. However, many have undoubtedly done so because they think it'll impress others and/or make them jealous. I strongly suspect you belong to the later group.

No I say it because the arguments against are so pathetic. I'm selfish for choosing to drive something which will come off better in a traffic collision than a small car. My car won't be as good at braking as a small car, which is factually incorrect incidentally. I'm being selfish in contributing to the carbon footprint? Well when there are planes running virtually empty to avoid missing their slot, heavy industries churning out waste products some countries would be proud of and countries like China, Russia etc ignoring carbon footprint targets i'm the all important rogue? The anti SUV brigade make judgements based on their own lifestyle and bugger anyone else. A SUV is a practical vehicle for my family and me but I'm a chauvinistic male with a small penis because I drive one. It's easy to see how some cyclists get on other sections of the publics tits.

Ai 1 has a point about the slick advertising campaign and who they appeal to. I don't know you so can't say which camp you fit in. But the fact that you feel you need to try to justify your choice is telling.
All you need to say is "It's my money and I will spend it as I please. I like 4x4s and I'm buying one" The end. Finito.
Genuine need or not, it's your choice. You may have to lug nags around the country - fair enough. You may only have to take Tarquin to school, again fair enough , it's your money.
Or you may be one of those tw4ts that struggle to get out their vehicle in supermarket car parks because they can't open their doors fully.
VTech has his choice of supercar to drive but has stated numerous times that a tranny van is often his vehicle of choice.
Sometimes when you follow some one in his Ferrari or Lambo inching over speed humps you question their choice of vehicle, but as I said earlier - their money, their choice.

Velonutter

Bally, spot on, fully agree with what you said. 8)

bernithebiker

You might change your mind if you and your family got rear-ended at 60mph by one at a set of lights....

3000kg x 60mph = a lot more energy than 1300kg x 60mph.

Velonutter

Ooops what a shame philthy3 is no more

Sensible conversations are always welcome along with some gentle teasing, but when it gets to the levels of philthy3 then you have to draw the line.

veronese68

I agree with VN on the previous page, I think there are better cars for the job most people seem to use them for. Even if you think you need a 4x4 due to occasional snow and you need an estate car, something like an Audi A6 Quattro would be probably better for most people. Certainly a lot better on motorways.
I've driven a few 4x4s and don't like being so high up myself. Drove a Range Rover to Gloucester about 5 years ago. Turning a tight left by the Air Balloon pub to go down Birdlip hill it felt horrible, kind of tip-toey. Driving n the motorway in the dark wasn't very nice for any cars we overtook. Bright headlights mounted so high up fill any cars you are passing with light. A couple of people flinched as we were passing them.
But, as Bally says, ultimately people can do what they want with their money and really only have to justify it to themselves.