4x4 Vehicles - Should they be banned from Town/City Centres

nelly_2

can we ban volvo drivers

hat wearers

glove wearers too please

and people who only use side lights at night

oh and stupid big spoilers and the pathetic cheap spinner things on wheels that look like there from Aldi

intel

nelly wrote:

can we ban volvo drivers

hat wearers

glove wearers too please

and people who only use side lights at night

oh and stupid big spoilers and the pathetic cheap spinner things on wheels that look like there from Aldi

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

And Beard wearers.

iwanttosave_2

How about nose pickers, thats not nice to look at when you are sat at the lights

Stormrider

I dont think anyone has any right to tell people what car they should or shouldnt buy - the lunatics in them are going to be just as dangerous in any other car. If thats their choice of car, I don't mind.

waster_2

intel wrote:

Its not the wieght its the big chunky tyres that excessively grips the road
as proven by the department of transport the VBRA and Top Gear.

Hey they all say that not me.. P.S my brothers getting a Honda CRV
and well I think hes a ruddy idiot for doing so.....

To me its just another Van with a Bully behind the wheel driving.

But thats my opinion. :beer:

This is rubbish insofar as most of what people refer to as 4x4 vehicles are in fact classified as estate cars and in may instances they take up less road space and do more mpg than a family sized vehicle such as a Volvo, Vauxhaul, Ford, BMW, Mercedes, VW, estates and/or MPV's, etc.


As far as tyres and road wear are concerned, most of the popular 4x4's i.e. Honda CRV, Nissan XT rails, Suzuki Vitara's and some of the smaller LandRovers have tyres that are no bigger or wider than the cars that I refer to above. And the same goes for the larger Volvo, BMW and Mercedes 4x4's where tyre width is no more than on many large family and executive cars.

The bottom line is that the arguments against 4x4's are not sustainable as the same arguments can generally be directed at equivalent numbers of saloon, hatchback and estate vehicles. Unfortunately many people are not very well informed and use arguments that are trotted out by the press and the “greenies” who see it as an easy way to get at the motorist without alienating a very large section of this community.

If people wish to make a stand why not use something simple and easily measurable to “penalise” the motorist. Things like CO2 emissions are objective and not subjective? As far as MPG is concerned, if you use a lot you pay more already - it's called excise duty and VAT. You also pay a Road Fund Licence based upon the pollution factor of your car. And if these vehicles are suppose to cause more injuries and deaths then the insurance industry will load premiums and/or refuse to insure them - so this would also be almost self regulating.

The only thing that I would concede to is the use of Bull Bars. But again you can put these on a Mini so shall we ban them too? You can if you wish come up with an argument to either ban or support anything and everything if that is your want!!!

Let's just be sensible and rational and not get swept up by the mass hysteria of the loony I hate the car parade. Anyone with any common sense and a modicum of intelligence can see that many, if not all, of the arguments used against 4x4 vehicles can be used against just as many other vehicles on the road. Challenge the motives!!!

the_chauffer

intel wrote:

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

And Beard wearers.

Dose that include goaties?

Poppycat

Can we ban SUV's too I hate the bloody ugly American monstrosities. 4X4 are meant for off road use not for use in towns or school runs. We get loads of them where I live and you can always tell when they come, they make a lot more noise on the road due to the wide tyres and extra grip oh and they are far more dangerous should you unfortunately collide with them if your a pedestrian.

Dora_the_Explorer_5

Excellent discussion, and whilst we're at it let's ban all women drivers, old blokes with pipes and caps, lunatic teenagers - and especially bikes which do more damage to the mental health of the nation than any other form of transpot.
Then we can all walk !

intel

waster wrote:

This is rubbish insofar as most of what people refer to as 4x4 vehicles are in fact classified as estate cars and in may instances they take up less road space and do more mpg than a family sized vehicle such as a Volvo, Vauxhaul, Ford, BMW, Mercedes, VW, estates and/or MPV's, etc.


As far as tyres and road wear are concerned, most of the popular 4x4's i.e. Honda CRV, Nissan XT rails, Suzuki Vitara's and some of the smaller LandRovers have tyres that are no bigger or wider than the cars that I refer to above. And the same goes for the larger Volvo, BMW and Mercedes 4x4's where tyre width is no more than on many large family and executive cars.

The bottom line is that the arguments against 4x4's are not sustainable as the same arguments can generally be directed at equivalent numbers of saloon, hatchback and estate vehicles. Unfortunately many people are not very well informed and use arguments that are trotted out by the press and the “greenies” who see it as an easy way to get at the motorist without alienating a very large section of this community.

If people wish to make a stand why not use something simple and easily measurable to “penalise” the motorist. Things like CO2 emissions are objective and not subjective? As far as MPG is concerned, if you use a lot you pay more already - it's called excise duty and VAT. You also pay a Road Fund Licence based upon the pollution factor of your car. And if these vehicles are suppose to cause more injuries and deaths then the insurance industry will load premiums and/or refuse to insure them - so this would also be almost self regulating.

The only thing that I would concede to is the use of Bull Bars. But again you can put these on a Mini so shall we ban them too? You can if you wish come up with an argument to either ban or support anything and everything if that is your want!!!

Let's just be sensible and rational and not get swept up by the mass hysteria of the loony I hate the car parade. Anyone with any common sense and a modicum of intelligence can see that many, if not all, of the arguments used against 4x4 vehicles can be used against just as many other vehicles on the road. Challenge the motives!!!

You may want to ask Department of Transport the VBRA and Top Gear as
thats what they said not me.... I just dont like the ugly things.

waster_2

intel wrote:

You may want to ask Department of Transport the VBRA and Top Gear as
thats what they said not me.... I just dont like the ugly things.

I'm not disputing that wider tyres may well cause more wear and tear. What I am saying is that the very same width tyres are also used on what most people would call “normal” every day cars.

What springs to mind is that well known old saying lies, damn lies and statistics. You can come up with anything to prove anything if you want. It does not mean it is wholly correct or supports an argument - you need to be able to challenge and interrogate exactly what lies behind it. And that, I would suggest, is precisely the situation here - the information is correct but it is used in a very narrow context and should be widened out to include every vehicle that uses that profile and width of tyre - may make interesting reading? But then that does not suit some people to publicise the whole truth, as they have a wider agenda!!!