all wheel drive not 4wd

thats wot this bloke should have done :P
i would have been happy to offer LOL!!!!!!!!!

i havent got a problem helpin anyone in need but why make a awd version of the car coz it is no more capable off road than the 2wd version u r rite it is a plain sales pitch and no more.
you see all the adds and the way it is portrayed it is not wot it is.
also you probably should know the cars limits b4 u go to the middle of noware and find out.

>greghud posted this followup
>i havent got a problem helpin anyone in need but why
>make a awd version of the car coz it is no more capable
>off road than the 2wd version u r rite it is a plain sales
>pitch and no more. you see all the adds and the way
>it is portrayed it is not wot it is. also you probably
>should know the cars limits b4 u go to the middle of
>noware and find out.

There was a time when we posted in English.

Mike Harding

sorry mike product of my generation
greg

You don't have to be.

The English language is so rich (albeit sometimes perverse :) but if we reduce it to a minimal set of words we'll also reduce our ability to express the magical individuality we all have. Which is exactly what George Orwell was afraid of and with some justification, perhaps...?

Mike Harding

e))f += %W Ä)(/ #"! ½ Ä:;`?=

Correct me if I'm wrong here... but wasn't the car stalled because of water in the intake??? Or did I read that incorrectly? If so, how is the difference beyween AWD and 4WD an issue?

And also. as much as I agree with Mike about the English language, gregud's choice to post his sentiments in whatever language that was (just kidding!) is HIS individualism!

>gregud's choice to post his sentiments in whatever language
> that was (just kidding!) is HIS individualism!

Rubbish.

And it's this kind of sloppy thinking which has led to the situation we have in this country today where a significant number of children leave school ill educated in even basic literacy and numeracy.

In Australia we speak English as the national language: the expression "u r rite" will not be found in any text on English usage.

Mike Harding

I was hoping your response would get more bites than it did Mike. You're right but have no hope of winning that one, just check out the spoken English on television or the written word in some of the worst newspapers like the West Australian. It's atrochus oright.
I receive emails from colleagues who because it's electronic think that basic rules don't apply and leave out all capitals, full stops, commas, mostly because they truly are a product of their generation as gregud or whoever it was said.
A spell checker on this or any other forum ain't gonna fix it either! That should have been done when they were at the age when it was still possible to educate them!
Happy motoring.
Alan.

Don't denegrate anyone for their lack of spelling or grammatical skill. If everyone had the same command of the English language you would lose your sense of superiority!

Rubbish is it????

Mike.... in case you don't know...(which I strongly suspect is the case!) most people these days communicate via text messaging on their telephones.... and MOST people use as few characters per word as possible, hence the spelling of the phrase "U R RITE" (Not something I choose to do, but I believe I am in the minority on this subject)

You ARE right that it isn't in "any text on English usage. " BUT.... it will be one day! And as much as it irks me.... I got used to it.
And it isn't "this kind of sloppy thinking which has led to the situation we have in this country today where a significant number of children leave school ill educated in even basic literacy and numeracy.".... it's simply a product of a school system that has had the discipline removed, kids don't wish to learn and can't be made to learn.... and it has crept into the lounge room at home as well. Add to that a great number of parents who simply will not take responsibilty for the childrens actions... and the system is already behind the times. It is hard for me to teach my children "proper English", but I do persevere.

BUT!

If, after all is said and done, greghud chooses to write his messages in text style, whether that's because that's all he knows how to do or not, is not for you (or I) to judge..... and it isn't for you to say "RUBBISH" to me for pointing out the bleeding obvious!

>Don't denegrate anyone for their lack of spelling or grammatical
>skill. If everyone had the same command of the English
>language you would lose your sense of superiority!

Oh dear.

My complaint is not about spelling or grammar it is about a _deliberate_ corruption of the English. greghud seems to have a reasonable command of the language, "havent" is the correct contraction, "portrayed" is spelled correctly but he chooses to adulterate many words and if we keep on allowing such writing to pass unnoticed it will become accepted and I don't wish to see English damaged to such a degree. Even the Yanks haven’t managed to do that!

Mike Harding

>Rubbish is it????

Yes.

>Mike.... in case you don't know...(which I strongly suspect is
>the case!) most people these days communicate via text
>messaging on their telephones....

It’s one of the many methods of communication however it is a _very_ limited one.

>and MOST people use as few characters per word as possible,

And there is a good reason for that – limited message space, limited display, 3 or 4 letters to a key and a general pain in the bottom to use. Morse code is similar in that regard hence the use of ‘Q’ codes and other abbreviations “SOS” for example. However NONE of those limitations apply in this case.

>You ARE right that it isn't in "any text on English usage. " BUT.... it
>will be one day!

It may make it to a dictionary of slang but it won’t go any further.

>And as much as it irks me.... I got used to it.

Well I won’t. Damned if I’ll sit on my bottom and say nothing.

>>And it isn't "this kind of sloppy thinking which has led to the situation
>>we have in this country today where a significant number of children
>>leave school ill educated in even basic literacy and numeracy."
>it's simply a product of a school system that has had the discipline
>removed, kids don't wish to learn and can't be made to learn....

Can you not see the contradiction in your statement? If we allow children to “express themselves freely” with wild English then what hope is there for them to ever learn to use it properly? Like all skills; one must first become, at least, reasonably competent before one may start to break the rules.

>and it has crept into the lounge room at home as well.

It bloody well hasn’t / didn’t in my lounge room!

>Add to that a great number of parents who simply will not
>take responsibilty for the childrens actions...

I’ll agree with you there.

>and the system is already behind the times. It is hard for me
>to teach my children "proper English", but I do persevere.

Funnily enough my elder son (who is now in his mid twenties) recently said that he was very glad I put the effort into helping him develop his vocabulary and grammar. He feels he can communicate with people from all walks of life with confidence.

>If, after all is said and done, greghud chooses to write his messages
>in text style, whether that's because that's all he knows how to do or
>not, is not for you (or I) to judge.....

It damn well is! If we allow this kind of sloppy language (and thinking) to go unchallenged then, in time, the language will be damaged and people will be less able to express themselves. A grasp of language is very empowering for many people and I will not stand idly by and watch that be destroyed.

>and it isn't for you to say "RUBBISH" to me for pointing
>out the bleeding obvious!

It certainly is. I though you were the one who was fully in favour of free expression? :)

Mike Harding

"There was a time when we posted in English."

Hmmmmm! I would have thought that would encompass both spelling and grammar, including the language's inflexions, phonetics and syntax?

. . . but what would I know?

Gee, and here's me thinking it was a post about a ford territory getting stuck in a water crossing.

What a boring post that would be!

EU Proclamation

The European Parliament have just announced an agreement whereby English will be the official language of the EU rather than German, which was the other possibility. As part of the negotiations Her Majestey's Government conceded that English spelling had some room for improvement and has accepted a 5 year 'phase-in' plan that would be known as Euro-English.

In the first year "s" will replace the soft "c", certainly this will make the sivil servants jump with joy. The hard "c" will be dropped in favour of the "k". This should klear up konfusion and keyboards kan have one less letter eventually.

There will be growing publik enthusiasm the sekond year, when the troublesome " ph " will be replaced with the " f ". This will make words such as " fotograf " and " elefant " 20% shorter.

In the third year, publik akseptans of the new spelling kan be ekspekted to reach the stage where more komplikated changes are possible. Governments will enkorage the removal of double letters which have always ben a deterent to akurate speling. Also, al wil agre that the horible mes of the silent " e " should be respolvd now.

By the fourth year peopl wil be reseptiv to steps such as replasing " th " with " z ", also " w " wiz " v ". During ze fifz year ze unesesary " o " kan be dropd from vords kontaining " ou " and similar changes vud ofkurs be aplaid to ozer kombinashons of leters. After ze fifz yer ve hav a reli sensibl riten styl. Zer vil be no mor trubl or difikultis and everivun vil find it ezi tu understand ech ozer.

ZE DREM VIL FINALI KOM TRU

Its funny, I'm currently studying for my Amateur Radio licence and have been studying a bit of morse code. You know, a lot of morse code text reads very similar to SMS messages with regard to abbreviations etc.

I'm sure in the early 1900's people bemoaned the demise of the english language due to morse code operators corrupting english usage....

Having said that, I always appreciate an author who takes a few minutes to at least apply basic grammar and punctuation.

">>And it isn't "this kind of sloppy thinking which has led to the situation
>>we have in this country today where a significant number of children
>>leave school ill educated in even basic literacy and numeracy."
>it's simply a product of a school system that has had the discipline
>removed, kids don't wish to learn and can't be made to learn....

Can you not see the contradiction in your statement? If we allow children to “express themselves freely” with wild English then what hope is there for them to ever learn to use it properly? Like all skills; one must first become, at least, reasonably competent before one may start to break the rules. "

I didn't write the bit about the sloppy thinking Mike.... you did! So my statement isn't contradictory at all.... but you certainly tried to make it look that way..... Bravo! When I went to school, I was MADE to learn, at least enough to be competent and yes I am glad now that I did and I encourage my children to learn as well, but sadly not everyone else does. The English language, along with many other education skills, is in decline mostly due to the discipline situation. You can get on your soap-box all you like about it, and good for you for doing that and more power to you if you manage to change the system, but it still does NOT give you the right to lambaste anybody for not conforming to your standards.

And lastly,freedom of speech, in my opinion, has nothing to do with berating another person for their particular views on a subject as you have done... that is the written equivalent of a bar room brawler "king-hitting" the bloke who doesn't support the same football team as he does........ I do support freedom of speech, but I don't believe you will find a post by me where I have belittled the opinions of others on this, or any other, forum.

To quote the Truckster
YMMV

>I didn't write the bit about the sloppy thinking Mike.... you did!

I know. That’s why I quoted it with double “>>”.

>So my statement isn't contradictory at all....

On the one hand you stated the reason some children were not doing as well as they might at school was because of “a school system that has had the discipline removed” and on the other you defend as “individuality” a complete lack of discipline in the use of the language. You see no contradiction in that?

>The English language, along with many other education skills, is
>in decline mostly due to the discipline situation.

And is that a reason why we should tolerate such a decline?
I suggest it’s probably due more to the influence of TV and American “culture” but that’s another discussion.

>if you manage to change the system

“wot” and “u r rite” is NOT the system and will not become so if we don’t allow them to.

>but it still does NOT give you the right to lambaste anybody for not
>conforming to your standards.

They are not _my_ standards. They are very basic standards for English usage and are taught to millions of people worldwide. Don’t, as other on this thread have tried to do, twist my argument to try and present me as a arbiter of perfect spelling and grammar. If I were to take such a stance then I would indeed be a pedant but that’s not the case I’m merely arguing that the foundations of the language should not be adulterated for no good reason.
“2 b or not 2 b” doesn’t have quite the same ring, does it? :)

>And lastly,freedom of speech, in my opinion, has nothing to do
>with berating another person for their particular views on a
>subject as you have done...

Rubbish.

If you can’t handle your statement about “individualism!” being called rubbish then I can only suggest you stop debating on the internet. You’ll find many more “robust” debaters than me on this medium – better get used to it.

Mike Harding

Your "debate" is now based on circular argument that has come full-circle toi where it began... Your Judgement!

That's not debate Mike.... that's arrogance.

You try to make it sound as if the rules of English were written by me. There are thousands of books on English grammar and usage. Broadcasting companies and publications have whole departments dedicated to them. Almost everyone who posts to this forum, more or less, follows them. None of them telephone me to ask my opinion on the matter. Are they arrogant too Brian? Or is it just people who directly disagree with you?

If there is arrogance here it rests with people who think they can throw away this structure and replace it with their own interpretation of the language.

Mike Harding

No Mike, I am not trying to make it sound as if the rules of English were written by you.
And I could not care less if people disagree with me, however it isn't that you disagree with me that I am writing any of this. You, sir, belittled Greg at the top of this post because you obviously didn't like his method of posting, and then lambasted me defending his right to post however he feels. If he feels the need to post in SMS text style, what gives you the right to denigrate him for it.
And again, three posts above you have again called my posts "rubbish"... if that isn't arrogance, I don't know what is!

>You, sir, belittled Greg at the top of this post.

Hey Brian! Thanks for the patronising "sir" - it should, really, though have been a capital 'S' :)

Challenging people is not belittling them, otherwise you would be guilty of same - but I guess that would be OK, would it? And you failed to mention that when Greg responded to me with: "sorry mike product of my generation" my response was jocular and relaxed.

And perhaps you would point out where I "denigrate" him?

>And again, three posts above you have again called my posts
>"rubbish"... if that isn't arrogance, I don't know what is!

It certainly looks as if you don't.

I didn't refer to your "posts" in their entirety as rubbish just a couple of the points you made in those posts. Are you so delicate that any criticism or dismissal of your opinions offends you? Or is everything you say supposed to be accepted by the world without comment?

Go well Brian - I'll not bore people any further with this thread.

Mike Harding

well they would have to be diesal cruisers. I had to help out a shorty 40 series petrol with a can of crc after the german tourists failed to negotiate King Edwars River on the way to miitchell falls that even a landie Freelander sneezed at

Well..... if we ALL drove Landcruisers, who be around to recover us ??? We'd be sitting around wondering why no-one invented the Patrol!!
And if you don't like reading the mumbo.....

then don't!
It's your call

:-)

Just Remembered this one

There was one of those Holden Cruman cross 8 utes on the beach at Lancelin that got bogged rather badly so a another 4WD did the right thing and gave him a snatch and the hole front bumper assembly broke off the car was a week old. Poor bloke

Steve,
I would rather know that the strap is attached to somewhere secure so it would not fly back and smash the front of recovery vehicle. Just my opinion. Hope the grammar and spelling is up to the professors standards at this discussion.
Regards Trevor.

If you have another look at that photo in the mag, the bumper was popped off by the sand itsself, not by trying to recover it, its the same as every crummodore, held on by 2 plastic guides and 6 small screws betwen the bumper and plastic inner guard. There is no place to attach a strap etc to the front of a crummodore even if you wanted to.

Re attaching the strap yourself, yes damn oath, if you are going to rish your vehicle and equipment helping, then you want to make sure that its up to scratch. Plenty of good samaritans have copped the shackle etc in the back of their rigs through others attaching gear incorrectly.

If my spelling etc is not up to my usual high standards (not!!) then its late and ive had a few ales and me dont care :-))))

no sign at the crossing only at the entrance to the track and that was
" 4wd only no caravans"
maby they need to state the make and models suited to the road on a sign?????!!!!! lol
greg

Alloy c/t

"Tits a pity"

LOL..........