4WD Debate - work in progress document

Submitted: Thursday, Feb 17, 2005 at 22:11
ThreadID: 20548 Views:2855 Replies:18 FollowUps:17
This Thread has been Archived
Evenin' all,

After ranting a bit earlier, I found myself with some spare time tonight and thought I would start putting together SOMETHING, to at least perhaps educate a few people. I've no idea what I'm going to do with it yet, but hopefully the idea will kick some ar$e$ into gear with the organisations that SHOULD be doing things like this.

Anyway, I'm after feedback on THIS. This is a work in progress, so please bear with me.

Apologies to those not as affected by this as us in Sydney, but please don't criticism me for doing something. Just ignore it as you do the 4WD bashings and move on.

I've got the following topics I want to add some truth to. Please feel free to suggest some more.

4WD are twice as likely to kill a pedestrian
4WD cause more deaths in driveways
4WD kill a higher % of people in accidents
Gas-guzzling behemoths (my personal favourite)
Those 4WD's are a menace (by David Koch)
Why are 4WD's becoming so popular
Shopping carts
Danger of a 4WD vs Torago, MPV or Voyager

As well as some positives about:
The good work clubs and organisations do for the community
4WD users such as Police, Fire, Rangers, NRMA, Surf Life Savers
Lifestyles of families with 4WD's

Eventually I may set up a website on the benefits of owning a 4wd. Sort of a 4WD appreciation group. (Shouldn't this exist already by the way?)

All comments appreciated, but please don't waste your time by telling me how pointless this is. Also, if anyone can give me some contacts for whatever groups are SUPPOSED to be representing us, I'd be greatful for that. I thought there was supposed to be a National 4WD Council or something and what about the recreational activies lobby group or something.

Cheers all.

Smocky.
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: mcgra - Thursday, Feb 17, 2005 at 22:36

Thursday, Feb 17, 2005 at 22:36
hey smocky

i like what you have done good job!!!

i would like to know out of all the accidents that involved a 4x4 how many was caused by the 4x4.

my mate has had 4 in his in 18 months and not one was caused by him he was rear ended every time.

would love for a level headed fact to show all the sheep they are being lead by some wanna be.

keep up the good work

gra

AnswerID: 98882

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 00:40

Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 00:40
maybe your mate should put bulbs in his brakelites then!!
(just having a laugh!!)
0
FollowupID: 357311

Reply By: old-plodder - Thursday, Feb 17, 2005 at 22:50

Thursday, Feb 17, 2005 at 22:50
Read some figures about 3 years ago that pajero drivers/passengers were the 2nd leat likely to have an accident or end up in hospital. First were volvo drivers.

Being a pajero driver I remembered the fact :-).

Now I know that this can be interpreted a number of ways.

1. Pajero drivers are old dodders who drive slow like volvo drivers and don't have accidents, but at least we don't wear hats.
2. Pajeros are a reasonably safe cars.
3. Pajeros only have accidents with smaller cars and wipe them out to thier own advantage.

But it does make me wonder what the actual statistics are for accidents per 1000 4wds compared to maybe accidents per 1000 for 2wd cars?
I know if you look at trucks, thier rate of accidents per kms travelled is very low compared to cars.
Can 4wds mount a similar argument?
What is the actual figure of pedestrians killed by 4wds in regard to 2wd cars on a per 1000 basis?

Any one got access to the figures?
AnswerID: 98888

Follow Up By: Member - Ross P (NSW) - Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 10:46

Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 10:46
Old-plodder,

I too am a Pajero owner and as my adult children often remark, I drive like an old fart.
After driving, somewhat professionally, for the last 30 years (sales and marketing) and doing a minimum of 40,000 kms in mostly Sydney metrpolitan traffic, I have only copped one spoeeding fine (running late for an areoplane) and had one accident.
The accident was very serious and the injuries (not to me) were serious. I was not at fault , but side swiped by a fully laden blue metal double trailer semi. While the truckie was at fault, the research I did concluded that he had only about 250 mm either side of his rig in the lane he was travelling. That did not include his mirrors.
So what's my point?

Trucks, anecdotally, seemed to be over represented in motor vehicle accidents but they don't seemed to be targeted to the same way we do.
While in my case it was my vehicle that caused the injuries it was the truck that caused the accident in the first place and I assume that the this would be recorded as a 4WD causing an injury.
0
FollowupID: 357345

Follow Up By: old-plodder - Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 19:47

Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 19:47
Roscoe,

Agree with you.

Instead of arguing against the others, and an emotional argument at that, lets start getting some facts and positive statements on the table.
0
FollowupID: 357390

Reply By: Utemad - Thursday, Feb 17, 2005 at 23:02

Thursday, Feb 17, 2005 at 23:02
That is some great work you have done there.

This is the website of the Australian National 4wd Council

You could try them but they appear to be a voiceless bunch. It would probably help with talking to them if your were a 4wd club member in their association. I don't know if you are or not.

It would be good to see that article published in something. Preferably somewhere other than a 4x4 mag or website as we already know LOL.
AnswerID: 98891

Follow Up By: Member - Smocky (NSW) - Thursday, Feb 17, 2005 at 23:55

Thursday, Feb 17, 2005 at 23:55
Thanks, I'll give them a try.

Have been to a couple of meetings, haven't joined a club yet as haven't found one I like. I will join one though.

Incidentally, there's 3-4 pages to go in that document yet.

You are also dead right, there's no benefit in showing it here as everyone here knows the details. It has to hit mainstream, which was my point earlier this afternoon on a different thread.

And finally, I've actually changed my mind a bit and am working on a document with a working title of "Why are 1 in 4 cars sold in Australia, a 4WD?" or "What do YOU know about 4WD's?" Something like that. It will be much more of a positive document that doesn't really argue against points raised like this one does, but more positive to help educate.

I started writing this one when angry, which is a bit of a mistake. There is an important rule in publicity, which is to never give your opponent any free publicity. Meaning, let them argue there own points and you just keep talking the positives.

Cheers.
0
FollowupID: 357306

Reply By: Andrew - Thursday, Feb 17, 2005 at 23:54

Thursday, Feb 17, 2005 at 23:54
Good Stuff Smocky

Email it to me in a non pdf format (either publisher or word) and I'll run it in the 4wheelingSA magazine thats gets released at the end of this month.

email: a_hiscock@hotmail.com

Andrew

AnswerID: 98901

Follow Up By: Member - Smocky (NSW) - Thursday, Feb 17, 2005 at 23:59

Thursday, Feb 17, 2005 at 23:59
Thanks Andrew, let me work on another one first, which may be more to your liking. This current one is probably going to be 5 or 6 pages and is more of a detailed anti-anti-4WD if you know what I mean.

Be happy to send you them both and you pick and choose what you would like to print. The more education the better.

A friend of mine is a lobbyist for the Government, so I'm waiting until I get something decent together and see what he can do. He drives a Disco by the way, and I'm certain he doesn't know what locking hubs are.

Cheers.
0
FollowupID: 357307

Reply By: Brad and His Disco - Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 00:12

Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 00:12
Are you interested in posting this info on this website:

lPro 4wd website
AnswerID: 98903

Follow Up By: Member - Smocky (NSW) - Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 00:15

Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 00:15
Absolutely Brad, in due course. Let me finish it and it can be public property. Currently working on one with a different angle.
0
FollowupID: 357309

Reply By: motherhen - Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 00:27

Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 00:27
Good on you Smocky - but how are you going to reach the "brainwahsed by the media" masses? We all know the truth: Like if you are going to run in front of a vehicle driving at normal road speed - your likely to be just as dead whether it's a 4wd or 2wd. Like 4wd drivers are normal people - not arrogant, rich and rude drivers - you get that kind driving sedans too. Like people who want to access places with a 4wd should purchase a second vehicle (oh well - if we're all rich and rude i suppose we could!). Good luck
AnswerID: 98907

Follow Up By: Member - Smocky (NSW) - Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 01:02

Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 01:02
It won't happen overnight........ but it will happen.

I'm taking a step, that's all. As I said somewhere else, there is a MASSIVE 4WD movement out there. Ford, Toyota, Nissan and the others make Squillions out of these cars.

They're already changing their adds. We've got to start portraying these things in a positive light and as you said, when someone says "I saw a dic*head 4wd driver last week, say I know what you mean, I saw a dic*head in a Falcon yesterday too. Cut me off and flipped me the bird. Their everywhere."

And remember what I said, do a good deed a day. Let people in when they indicate. etc.
0
FollowupID: 357316

Reply By: 3.0turbob - Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 07:19

Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 07:19
Great article Smocky. When you've completed it, send it to A Current Affair & Today Tonight as well as the major Syndey papers and see what their reaction is.
Oh and I'll bet Harold Scruby logs onto this and other forums daily, so he might get to have a read as well.
Keep up the great work, we're all with you.

Rob
AnswerID: 98921

Reply By: Member - Phil B (WA) - Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 08:52

Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 08:52
Good work Smocky

As said by others getting it out there will be the hard bit - but one must start somewhere.

A couple of sugesstions.

Is there an opportunity to use the National Council of 4wd clubs to help push our cause? Although little has been heard from them.

I often hear the "4wd's are so big you can't see around them" arguement - these people forget about trucks and vans and selectively pick on 4 wd's.
There is a lot of difference between
‘Human Being’ and ‘Being Human’.





Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

AnswerID: 98930

Follow Up By: Member - Smocky (NSW) - Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 09:14

Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 09:14
Hi Phil,

there's 2 main problems with the whole argument.

1. The term "4WD". All the comments of "they're too big to see around" etc. Now it's going to take me time to get everything I need, but only the big 4WD's affect vision. MOST of the 4wd and AWD vehicles sold are not Land Cruisers. Let's get to the crux of the problem: They don't like Yuppies driving them in the city, so don't blame the broader community

2. Selectively picking on 4WD's as you say. You can't see around vans, buses, trucks either. But these are on the road due to their benefit to the owners. SO ARE 4WD's. Whether the buyer wants the bigger safer car or the ability to load it up, they buy it for a reason.

I'm hoping to concentrate primarily on these 2 points to diffuse the issue a bit.

0
FollowupID: 357328

Follow Up By: Jim-Bob - Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 11:03

Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 11:03
Hi Phil

You are correct in saying that people argue they can not see around these big 4wd's and it's mainly due to their very poor driving skills(if they have any). How many times do you drive at the speed limit (or at any speed for that matter) and have these very impaitent dim wits sitting about 1/2 a car length off your butt, it's no wonder they can't see past us.

Smocky good stuff, I congratulate you on having a go, and as far as Scruby is concerned he would do more good if was to put his money and effort into educating the pedestrians of the world.
Safe travells
Jim-Bob
0
FollowupID: 357346

Reply By: Nebster - Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 09:18

Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 09:18
Hi Smocky,

When you've got it done, I'd like to post it on my website too please.

Seeknolimits

Before long we will only be allowed to drive a 4wd in a play station game
AnswerID: 98931

Reply By: Member - Ross P (NSW) - Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 11:12

Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 11:12
Smocky,

I've got a few gremlins in my PC at the moment and can't open the link you posted.

One thing that has always concerned me about this debate is what these self interested people define as a 4WD.

Perhaps you should adress this question so that we can start to understand what they are really objecting to.

If it's 4WD I'd assume AWDs would fall into that category as well.
If it's big cars then we all know that many "acceptable" sedans are as big and as heavy as the perceived 4WDs they're talking about.
If it's pollution generation, then there are many vehicles worse than the modern 4WD.
If its visibility, there are may vans and trucks on the road with the same or worse problems.
If it's driver training then this is a common problem across many sectors of the motoring community.
If it's driver attitude then it's again not only the 4WDer that has this problem and it's probably more of a factor of current 2005 social attitudes and the I'm OK Jack" thinking.
There was a post some months by Chris Becher , president of the NSW Suzuki club, which included a link to his newsletter web site. It included a well written article as well as an audio of an interview with 2UE's John Laws.

I will look for the link. I can put you in contact with Chris if you would like. MM me if you want his contact details
AnswerID: 98950

Reply By: Wombat - Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 11:21

Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 11:21
Good morning Jason,

I've read each and every word in your document at least twice, and wholeheartedly congratulate you on your willingness to respond to the discriminatory, anti-4WD publicity which we have recently been bombarded with . . . . but . . . . "A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still" - my perception is that your missive has been penned by an angry four wheel drive owner. I would humbly suggest, that, to gain maximum benefit your article must be written with tolerance towards the general communities' attitude regarding 4WDs, with the objective being a general understanding of the reasons for our purchase, therefore engendering a basic aspirational desire to either join the 4WD movement or, at the very least, be compassionate towards responsible 4WD ownership.
AnswerID: 98951

Follow Up By: Member - Smocky (NSW) - Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 12:24

Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 12:24
Hi Wombat,

Yep, I agree. I've admitted that I didn't like the first one and I'm working on a second one.

The challenge is that I'm writing this not for the benefit of 4WD owners as they know the facts, it's for the benefit of NON-4WD owners. Also, I'm definately not trying to convince them to love us, that will never happen. I'm also not trying to convince them that they are safer for kids in drive-ways. That won't work.

What I'm trying to do is to diffuse the arguments and put some perspective into the "4wd's are the cause of everything evil" and "all 4wd's are shopping trolleys.

Thanks for your help. Will put updated one on tonight.
0
FollowupID: 357360

Reply By: Member - Jeff M (WA) - Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 12:20

Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 12:20
Member - Smocky (NSW), MATE WELL DONE!
I think you are on an absolute winner and it is just so fantastic to see someone actually getting of their bums and doing somthing other than just whinging. I think it's a very good document but perhaps for maximum impact it would require a few more of those lovley "stats". Showing the stats as they are claimed then twisting them (just like they do) and showing them in our favour instead. Stuff like that. But I would love a copy of the finished document to be placed on David Kosh's desk...
KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK!
AnswerID: 98959

Reply By: Rick Blaine - Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 13:53

Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 13:53
Smocky... Mate this is good... this is what is needed... sitting down whinging and whining in here does nothing for the cause.... As to what you do with it, I suggest you do what Harold Scrooby does with his garbage....Not that yours is garbage but if you notice he conducts a "Flood" campaign so email, mail or fax it to every media outlet you can.. including radio stations, John laws would love it..Toyota are sponsors of his, the daily papers, television and Magazines, political parties and councils. Ok big job finding the adresses, fax no's etc...Maybe I can give you a hand there. Probability is that maybe if you sent out 100 copies you would get an initial strike rate of around 5% but as you know as soon as 1 tv channel takes it up the others will follow. The important thing to bear in mind is that preaching to fellow 4x4 owners won't do much good but will win support after all it is the non 4x4 drivers that need to be swung. Another thing is not to get involved with the radical extremists they tend to scare the average person and creat a negative attitude....
The fact that you are in Sydney has no real bearing on the matter, the garbage that is being spruked at the moment spreads like cancer... as soon as North sydney council charges more for 4x4's to park then they will all jump on the bandwaggon and it will become Australia wide....
Again an outstanding effort...
AnswerID: 98972

Reply By: Member - Ross P (NSW) - Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 15:47

Friday, Feb 18, 2005 at 15:47
Smocky,

Check out the article "4WD Menace" on this web site. It might give you some more good ideas.

http://www.suzuki4wd.net
AnswerID: 98982

Reply By: Wazza (Vic) - Sunday, Feb 20, 2005 at 13:12

Sunday, Feb 20, 2005 at 13:12
From an English newspaper today:

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/australasia/story.jsp?story=612853

"Across the Harbour Bridge, in North Sydney, another council has infuriated ratepayers by introducing higher parking fees for the gas-guzzling 4WDs so beloved of local "urban cowboys". While owners of ordinary cars pay £18 for a residential permit, drivers of Jeeps and Landcruisers will have to fork out £37 a year.

Now it has emerged that the mayor, Genia McCaffery, herself owns a 4WD - a Volvo XC70, which is a large station-wagon. Under the council's new rules, however, her vehicle is classed as fuel-efficient and does not attract the higher charge. Her chief political opponent, Jilly Gibson, whom she defeated in the mayoral election, challenged her to sell her car. "She should be setting the example," said Ms Gibson, who is currently carless, but last owned a Mazda 121."
AnswerID: 99151

Reply By: PhineasP - Sunday, Feb 20, 2005 at 15:52

Sunday, Feb 20, 2005 at 15:52
Smocky & Co

Awright, I'll out meself. I too am dead against the "urban cowboy" type of large 4WD owner who has no intention of letting dirt or tribes of kids mess up his gleaming runt truck with its stainless steel cocktail fridge and 16 speaker stereo.

I have no argument with genuine off-roaders (or on-dirt-trackers) who need large 4WDs to pursue their legitimate recreational activities. Although I only have part-time 4WD on my (compact) AWD, I identify to some extent with the latter group. I genuinely want to continue to "explore Oz" with my modest rig, and benefit from the knowledge and experience of off-roaders in the process.

The question is, how to we promote the off-roader's interests without seeming to argue the case for those who use large 4WDs as a fashion accessory? It's those people who have given 4WDs a bad name by clogging the urban and suburban streets with excessive numbers of 4WDs for no legitimate reason.

I think one way is to clearly brand the campaign as being off-road oriented, including the right of off-roaders to use their vehicles around town, and forget arguments that appear to promote 4WD ownership for its own sake, regardless of lifestyle. We will win no sympathy by pushing the argument that families are safer in them on urban roads, I suspect there are too many stats against that line for a start.

I don't believe that the proliferation of different brands and models of large 4WDs in the towns and cities has really helped the development of legitimate off road rigs. If anything I suspect the yuppie-driven demand has made the vehicles and their parts and accessories more pricey, and directed efforts more into the "toy" side of the market than useful lines of products.

AnswerID: 99159

Follow Up By: Member - Smocky (NSW) - Sunday, Feb 20, 2005 at 17:25

Sunday, Feb 20, 2005 at 17:25
Hi Phineas,

Well you're entitled to your opinion.

Just a couple of comments regarding your post:

1. "clogging the urban and suburban streets with excessive numbers of 4WDs for no legitimate reason"

I wholeheartedly DISAGREE with you on this point. I think P platers in hotted up V8's or lowered turbo-charged race carts are WAY more dangerous and account for far more of the accidents and deaths. What are the 3 main causes of accidents and death from motor vehicle? SPEED, ALCOHOL and FATIGUE.

I'll defend to my last breath, any Australian's right to choose on ANY purchase, so long as it's legal. It will be a very sad day indeed when we have to apply for permission for things like 4WD's.

2. "I suspect there are too many stats against that line for a start"

This isn't true. Studies (including the Monash Uni study) generally show that 4WD's are SAFER for their occupants. There are a few extra issues like roll-overs, but this is a small percentage of the overalls. When you factor in other things like the fact that 4WD's would account for higher rural accidents and fatalities at higher speeds due to them being more common in the bush, it's pretty clear that they are safer. What the anti-4WD mob are complaining about is that they are NOT safer for everyone else. Try using that argument to ban buses !!!

3. "If anything I suspect the yuppie-driven demand has made the vehicles and their parts and accessories more pricey"

With due respect, so what? Ususally demand LOWERS costs and competition from venders ADDS VALUE to the market. Being harsh for a minute, What right do you have to say that someone in Nth Sydney shouldn't be able to buy a 4WD because it will make it less of a vehicle for you?

I thank you for your courage to be honest on here and wish everyone were the same. BUT, your post is a great example of the problem 4WD's face at the moment. Does everyone NEED a mobile phone? DVD player? Rally Car? etc, etc. Of course not, but everyone has the right to choose what they want. And thank God for that.

0
FollowupID: 357496

Follow Up By: Member - Mungo Explorer (NSW) - Monday, Feb 21, 2005 at 01:00

Monday, Feb 21, 2005 at 01:00
"I wholeheartedly DISAGREE with you on this point. I think P platers in hotted up V8's or lowered turbo-charged race carts are WAY more dangerous and account for far more of the accidents and deaths. "

Two wrongs don't make a right.

"I'll defend to my last breath, any Australian's right to choose on ANY purchase, so long as it's legal."

Dangerous argument: in that case, why not make them illegal?

"What the anti-4WD mob are complaining about is that they are NOT safer for everyone else. Try using that argument to ban buses !!!"

Silly argument. Buses are public transport, as are trains.

"Does everyone NEED a mobile phone? DVD player? Rally Car? etc, etc. Of course not, but everyone has the right to choose what they want. And thank God for that."

Well, no. You don't have the right to keep dangerous animals in your backyard, for example. Public debate is over what's good for society, and therefore how individual rights/choice should be limited.

I'm making these points even though I drive a 4wd myself, in the interests of rational debate. Pointing the finger at others, comparing apples with oranges, or asserting selfishness against (some) justified public concerns, won't get us anywhere.
0
FollowupID: 357593

Follow Up By: Member - Smocky (NSW) - Monday, Feb 21, 2005 at 01:57

Monday, Feb 21, 2005 at 01:57
"2 wrongs don't make a right" How did you come to 2 wrongs?. drink-driving and speeding are wrong, but driving a 4WD isn't. I pointed out that limiting what P platers can drive may help. Or tougher penalties for speeding. My point of this was that 4WD's are not the problem. They don't need to be banned and the original post was saying that people who don't go off road don't deserve to have a 4WD. Read my responses in line with the original post.

"why not make them illiegal" On what grounds? That's ridiculous. Again, my point is that why shouldn't a family be able to choose what they want to drive? What about the other benefits of a LandCruiser other than off road?

"Silly argument" No it isn't. The point is that trucks, buses, vans etc are tolerated due to their value. Why is it so different for 4WD's?

And whilst we're on this subject, let's not refer to them as 4wd's as this is half the problem. You don't want to ban ALL 4wd's do you? Just stop people who don't need to go offroad from buying the big ones. THIS is the silly argument!

"what's good for society" this is an interesting argument and probably the crux of it. Things like dangerous animals is different. AND the reason they are banned is because they get out and kill on their own. Again what I am saying with this point is that why make a discriminatory ban on something like this?

Finally, apologies if I offended with my comments, but really, saying that "I'm allowed to have one as I go offroad, but no-one else can" IS selfish. I'm not pointing the finger at anyone. I responded to Phineas' post directly and argued the other side.

This is a quote from the post I responded to: "how to we promote the off-roader's interests without seeming to argue the case for those who use large 4WDs as a fashion accessory?"

They're only a big wagon, not much bigger than a Ford Territory.

Kind regards,

Jason.
0
FollowupID: 357594

Follow Up By: PhineasP - Monday, Feb 21, 2005 at 13:06

Monday, Feb 21, 2005 at 13:06
Whoops, I think I have been misrepresented. I do not favour any bans. Bans are a politician's solution and generally represent a failure of civil society to deal sensibly with a problem. For instance, I am opposed to smoking bans, firearms bans, and bans on using mobile phones while driving. And I'm a non-smoker and non-shooter. Why should the majority of sensible people be denied a pleasure or service because of the carelessness of a few?

I certainly don't favour a ban on large 4WDs in cities: my argument was the opposite in fact. It's the use of these commercial truck-type vehicles by people who do not need them and are essentially being misled into buying them (by marketing them as accessories not to be done without in fashionable society) that is putting pressure on legitimate users, and yes, some politician or other is going to start espousing bans.

Education is my solution to problems such as "urban cowboys". Work patiently to counter the marketing campaigns and convince people that the selfish (that word again) pursuit of an undesirable whim, habit, whatever you like to call it, is just bad form, and eventually it just might become unfashionable and the problem will disappear. Or at least abate.

I believe that is what Smocky wants to achieve, but to use his own argument, let's accentuate the positive features of the sensible use of 4WDs, and encourage people to differentiate between legitimate off-roaders and the Toorak tractor set.

Phineas_NO_BANS_p

0
FollowupID: 357626

Follow Up By: Member - Smocky (NSW) - Monday, Feb 21, 2005 at 13:43

Monday, Feb 21, 2005 at 13:43
Hi Phineas, well said.

I can get caught up in this discussion. My WHOLE angle on this is basically as you said, with a slight differnce.

4WD's are not the problem. Like anything else, it's the user. Take a 4WD off an idiot and give them a different car (or someone who can't drive for that matter) and the problem is the same.

The slight difference is that I don't really have a problem with Toorak Tractors. If there were more tolerence and consideration, this wouldn't be a debate (not directing that at you by the way.) For some reason, there are sections that beat this up into some major problem with society when it isn't.

Cheers.

P.S. I think it was ME that introduced the word ban.
0
FollowupID: 357633

Follow Up By: Member - Mungo Explorer (NSW) - Monday, Feb 21, 2005 at 14:01

Monday, Feb 21, 2005 at 14:01
"The slight difference is that I don't really have a problem with Toorak Tractors. If there were more tolerence and consideration, this wouldn't be a debate (not directing that at you by the way.) For some reason, there are sections that beat this up into some major problem with society when it isn't."

Well if the Toorak Tractors weren't a problem we wouldn't be discussing all this! Like it or not, they are perceived as a problem, and the danger is that the answer to that problem might affect those of us who use 4wds for their intended purpose. And that's my point: we have a better chance of getting somewhere if we acknowledge that problem. It shouldn't be beyond society's wits to discourage the overgrown shopping trollies without affecting legitimate 4wding.
0
FollowupID: 357639

Follow Up By: Member - Mungo Explorer (NSW) - Monday, Feb 21, 2005 at 14:06

Monday, Feb 21, 2005 at 14:06
""Silly argument" No it isn't. The point is that trucks, buses, vans etc are tolerated due to their value. Why is it so different for 4WD's?"

This is the nub of the issue. Buses etc, as you say, are tolerated due to their value to society. 4wds, by contrast, are not seen as having a value to society, on the contrary: they're more polluting, more wasteful of resources, and take up more space than other cars. Those who drive them are perceived as selfish.

This is what needs to be addressed.
0
FollowupID: 357640

Reply By: Skinny- Monday, Feb 21, 2005 at 16:03

Monday, Feb 21, 2005 at 16:03
I'd like to see family a with a Patrol or TLC or so unload a weeks camping supplies and 4 -plus adults and have a normal family car parked next to it try to pack it all in safely.

Heading 4x4 carries normal holiday gear more safely and efficiently than two sedans.

Jeez I spent a few years prior to this 4x4 trying to cram everything in my misses car for a holiday, never again.

Skinny
AnswerID: 99331

Reply By: hoyks - Monday, Feb 21, 2005 at 19:11

Monday, Feb 21, 2005 at 19:11
One of scrubbies favorite claims is that 4x4s are more likely to roll in an accident. From what I have heard, this is baised on US figgures that are scued by the Explorer/Firestone debacle. A lot of the figgures quoted (his 2 tonne 4x4 one for starters) are also baised on US figgures that are different to the Australian experence. Over there the Landcrusier is a mid sized wagon.
AnswerID: 99356

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (13)