Omega Owners Forum

Chat Area => General Car Chat => Topic started by: pauls on 02 March 2018, 14:27:52

Title: 4x4
Post by: pauls on 02 March 2018, 14:27:52
Knowning nothing really about this but after reading some stuff on here about bmw x5s and seening a land rover and a truck thing go up our hill without a problem but a chap in a range rover couldnt. My question is whats the best and why or is it just tyre choice and driver skill. Would lets say a audi quattro on winter tyres be as good as lets say a land rover. Also whats the difference in all wheel drive and a 4x4.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: YZ250 on 02 March 2018, 15:47:58
A chap around the corner from us has a blinged up Range Rover Sport with massive alloys and low profile tyres. He is awfully embarrassed when he can't get up the hill in snow and my son takes great pleasure in towing him up the hill in his pick up with arctic style tyres.
Wheel size and tyres make a massive difference.  :y

Most X5's and the likes over here are fitted with bling wheels and summer tyres so are shite in snow, just like the Range Rover around the corner. Change the wheels and tyres and they become much more usable.  :y
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Lizzie Zoom on 02 March 2018, 15:56:08
A chap around the corner from us has a blinged up Range Rover Sport with massive alloys and low profile tyres. He is awfully embarrassed when he can't get up the hill in snow and my son takes great pleasure in towing him up the hill in his pick up with arctic style tyres.
Wheel size and tyres make a massive difference.  :y

Most X5's and the likes over here are fitted with bling wheels and summer tyres so are shite in snow, just like the Range Rover around the corner. Change the wheels and tyres and they become much more usable.  :y


The trouble is that so many 4x4 drivers seem to believe they are invincible in those beasts and can do anything, with or without the correct running gear! :o :o ::) ;)
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: STEMO on 02 March 2018, 15:58:50
That's because all the adverts show range rovers and the like splashing through fords and racing down country lanes. The kind of stuff you could do in a Nissan micra.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Lizzie Zoom on 02 March 2018, 16:23:06
I remember the early days of the police using Range Rovers as full patrol cars.

They eventually found out that they were no good for speed, and especially pursuit duties.  A police friend of mine lost two colleagues in Hampshire when their Range Rover rolled, and they were banned from being a fast pursuit vehicle within that force. :'( :'( :(
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Kevin Wood on 02 March 2018, 18:04:54
Yep, with drug dealer wheels and tyres you have 4x bugger all grip instead of 2x bugger all! Net result is pretty much the same.

Plus - how many Chelsea tractor drivers have any clue how to drive a 4wd vehicle? I'd wager many don't have a clue how to engage 4wd. ;D
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Kevin Wood on 02 March 2018, 18:05:50
.. and "fast pursuit" in a Range Rover?  :o No, thanks!
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Shackeng on 02 March 2018, 18:12:47
Someone on here recommended a Subaru Forester for my daughter, which she bought 6 years ago, and loves it. Plus it has world beating hill climb grip performance. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmBibFdMIRU
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: TheBoy on 02 March 2018, 18:23:07
Even on summer tyres and bling wheels, none of the proper 4x4 vehicles (note, not AWD ones) should have no issues really.  The problem, 9 times out of 10, is the (in)competence of the driver.

The X5 is a proper 4x4, as is a Range Rover.

Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Lizzie Zoom on 02 March 2018, 18:56:39
.. and "fast pursuit" in a Range Rover?  :o No, thanks!

Ah, that is "fast" in the context of the early 1970's when Range Rover patrol arms were introduced. Even by then most cars on the road dated from the 1950's and fist half of the 1960's, and in those you were lucky to reach 60 mph, and just maybe 70 mph.  My A40 was lucky to do 50 with the wind behind it! It is my belief, correct me if I am wrong, but it was only in the late 1960's and early1970's that even the average Ford Cortina could start to do 80, 90, or even 100 mph, with new cross flow engines, and Gt, XLS, etc badges. Later that decade the really faster average car came into being, and started to do 125-130+ mph. This challenged, and still does, the Traffic police to match their patrol cars to the top speeds of even the lowly boy races hatchbacks.

It was in the mid-1970's that the limitations of the traffic police Range Rover for "fast" pursuits became apparent.  It was also when my police chum lost his two colleagues in one. ;)

Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: 2boxerdogs on 02 March 2018, 19:21:22
Have had several 4x4s over the years Toyota Land cruiser Nissan Patrol and at present have the Jeep , Subaru Forester & my son in law has my old Hyundai Terracan , never changed anything on them all kept as they left the factory. In all honesty none of them have let me down in severe weather conditions if you want one it is definitely worth spending a few quid on a course on how to drive them properly and to get the best of their capabilities.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: ronnyd on 02 March 2018, 19:26:19
Has anyone answered OPs question yet? :-\
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Kevin Wood on 02 March 2018, 19:34:12
Has anyone answered OPs question yet? :-\

Need to drag it out for a few more pages yet. ;D

Actually, I think the OP had it right from the start: 
Quote
tyre choice and driver skill.
.

AWD cars clearly aren't going to be as capable as a proper 4x4, as the suspension will be compromised towards road use rather than pure off-road, they'll lack diff locks and only be able to shift a certain amount of torque between front and back, depending on the system. For the purposes of not getting stuck on normal roads in the sort of snow we have, they should all be capable, as long as the driver isn't furiously polishing the surface of the snow and getting nowhere. ;D
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Nick W on 02 March 2018, 20:05:20
Has anyone answered OPs question yet? :-\


No.
So here it is:


AWD and 4x4 mean the same thing. But a 4x4 implies something like a Discovery, Shogun, Jimny etc.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: ronnyd on 02 March 2018, 20:18:06
So, basically they are the same.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: 2boxerdogs on 02 March 2018, 20:45:25
Someone on here recommended a Subaru Forester for my daughter, which she bought 6 years ago, and loves it. Plus it has world beating hill climb grip performance. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmBibFdMIRU
.   


Believe that was me, glad she's pleased with it we are on our second one now only this is an automatic they really are superb value for money.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Andy B on 02 March 2018, 21:23:09
Has anyone answered OPs question yet? :-\


No.
So here it is:


AWD and 4x4 mean the same thing. But a 4x4 implies something like a Discovery, Shogun, Jimny etc.

So where do you categorise the likes of many of the slip & grip part time 4 wheel drives?
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Andy B on 02 March 2018, 21:26:48
Has anyone answered OPs question yet? :-\

Need to drag it out for a few more pages yet. ;D

Actually, I think the OP had it right from the start: 
Quote
tyre choice and driver skill.
.

AWD cars clearly aren't going to be as capable as a proper 4x4, as the suspension will be compromised towards road use rather than pure off-road, they'll lack diff locks and only be able to shift a certain amount of torque between front and back, depending on the system. For the purposes of not getting stuck on normal roads in the sort of snow we have, they should all be capable, as long as the driver isn't furiously polishing the surface of the snow and getting nowhere. ;D

How do you class my R Class then? It's permenant 4 wheel drive but uses electrickery instead of mech diff locks  ..... I've had mine driving with 1 wheel in the air  (I didn't know  ::) ) but i can lift the car on its suspension by about 4"
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Shackeng on 02 March 2018, 22:03:38
Someone on here recommended a Subaru Forester for my daughter, which she bought 6 years ago, and loves it. Plus it has world beating hill climb grip performance. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmBibFdMIRU
.   


Believe that was me, glad she's pleased with it we are on our second one now only this is an automatic they really are superb value for money.

Many thanks for the tip. She could run anything she wanted, and is using her hubby's Ranger this week as she lives in the sticks near Maidstone, and prefers the higher clearance in the drifts, but still loves the Forester. :y
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: TheBoy on 03 March 2018, 09:24:49
AWD and 4x4 mean the same thing. But a 4x4 implies something like a Discovery, Shogun, Jimny etc.
Whilst technically correct, in that all wheel drive and 4x4 both mean 4 wheels are (potentially) driven, 4x4 is taken to mean a proper 4WD system with transfer boxes (or equiv) and diff locks (or equiv), whereas AWD is taken to mean a much simpler system, ie a propshaft to front and rear, possibly with a centre diff.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Lizzie Zoom on 03 March 2018, 12:27:42
.. and "fast pursuit" in a Range Rover?  :o No, thanks!

Ah, that is "fast" in the context of the early 1970's when Range Rover patrol arms were introduced. Even by then most cars on the road dated from the 1950's and fist half of the 1960's, and in those you were lucky to reach 60 mph, and just maybe 70 mph.  My A40 was lucky to do 50 with the wind behind it! It is my belief, correct me if I am wrong, but it was only in the late 1960's and early1970's that even the average Ford Cortina could start to do 80, 90, or even 100 mph, with new cross flow engines, and Gt, XLS, etc badges. Later that decade the really faster average car came into being, and started to do 125-130+ mph. This challenged, and still does, the Traffic police to match their patrol cars to the top speeds of even the lowly boy races hatchbacks.

It was in the mid-1970's that the limitations of the traffic police Range Rover for "fast" pursuits became apparent.  It was also when my police chum lost his two colleagues in one. ;)

No one has commented on my post above, and I was hoping someone could explain one thing.

Why is the Range Rover so unstable at high speeds, but the BMW X5, that the police do use as a pursuit car, is not and regularly taken up to high speeds?  What different handling characteristics does the BMW X5 have over the Range Rover, or other differing specifications that makes them so different? What could they do to the Range Rover to bring it up to X5 standards please? ??? ???
 :y :y
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Doctor Gollum on 03 March 2018, 12:40:24
Range Rover sport with a supercharger...

Basically the X5 chassis is derived from the 5 series saloon. The Range Rover of the era you alluded to is essentially a Land Rover in a frock. New ones, following BMWs input are far more capable and are still used by some forces, although the Discovery, X5s and Shoguns are preferred SUVs of fleet managers due to ability, initial cost and reliability respectively.

Rural forces still use late Defenders and double cab pick ups as their utility transport.

The L322 Range Rovers biggest handicap is it's weight and high center of gravity. The original one was much lighter, but had a high centre of gravity and suspension travel that would embarrass a 2cv, neither of which are required components of high speed road travel.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Field Marshal Dr. Opti on 03 March 2018, 12:49:19
.. and "fast pursuit" in a Range Rover?  :o No, thanks!

Ah, that is "fast" in the context of the early 1970's when Range Rover patrol arms were introduced. Even by then most cars on the road dated from the 1950's and fist half of the 1960's, and in those you were lucky to reach 60 mph, and just maybe 70 mph.  My A40 was lucky to do 50 with the wind behind it! It is my belief, correct me if I am wrong, but it was only in the late 1960's and early1970's that even the average Ford Cortina could start to do 80, 90, or even 100 mph, with new cross flow engines, and Gt, XLS, etc badges. Later that decade the really faster average car came into being, and started to do 125-130+ mph. This challenged, and still does, the Traffic police to match their patrol cars to the top speeds of even the lowly boy races hatchbacks.

It was in the mid-1970's that the limitations of the traffic police Range Rover for "fast" pursuits became apparent.  It was also when my police chum lost his two colleagues in one. ;)

No one has commented on my post above, and I was hoping someone could explain one thing.

Why is the Range Rover so unstable at high speeds, but the BMW X5, that the police do use as a pursuit car, is not and regularly taken up to high speeds?  What different handling characteristics does the BMW X5 have over the Range Rover, or other differing specifications that makes them so different? What could they do to the Range Rover to bring it up to X5 standards please? ??? ???
 :y :y

Figures taken from road tests published by Autocar magazine in 1973, Lizzie.

Cortina 1300.....85 MPH

Cortina 1600.....92 MPH

Cortina 2000 GXL.....102 MPH

Capri 3000E.....122 MPH.

Range Rover...91 MPH.......zero to sixty.....13.9 secs......15 MPG. :-* :-* :-* :-*

Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Field Marshal Dr. Opti on 03 March 2018, 12:51:11
Brand new Range Rover cost £2448 in 1973. :)
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: TheBoy on 03 March 2018, 13:03:11
No one has commented on my post above, and I was hoping someone could explain one thing.

Why is the Range Rover so unstable at high speeds, but the BMW X5, that the police do use as a pursuit car, is not and regularly taken up to high speeds?  What different handling characteristics does the BMW X5 have over the Range Rover, or other differing specifications that makes them so different? What could they do to the Range Rover to bring it up to X5 standards please? ??? ???
 :y :y
Having driven both the X5 (a mongrel cross between a later 90s 5 series, and a BMW era Range Rover, and one of the key reasons BMW bought Rover) 4.8 flat out and a 4.2SC L322 RR flat out, handling is not hugely different.

The RR has a bit more body roll at lower speed, the X5 has the usual rock hard BMW setup, compounded with RFTs.

Both are pretty rapid to 100mph, and both start to run out of steam at about 120-130mph.

Both take some stopping, due to weight, but will stop from 100mph reasonably quickly, clearly not as quickly as a lighter, luxury saloon.

Both exhibit understeer under heavy acceleration, and the RR does under heavy braking, where the X5 oversteers.

Both are horrific on fuel when pushed, and simply bad when cruising.


Owning either makes no difference to what people think of you - you're a knob jockey in either.  I'd prefer the RR due to a better ride, easier maintenance, and better reliability from the drivetrain.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: TheBoy on 03 March 2018, 13:05:06
I should point out, back in the days I had occasional access to a long strip of tarmac filled with cones, used primarily for Police training.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: 2boxerdogs on 03 March 2018, 13:28:46
The trouble is a lot of people who buy 4x4s don't really need them, I have a friend in Kent who has an 09 LWB Defender travels to work by train & mostly uses the other car they have (Zafira) the LR is always gleaming & parked in the drive & used probably for 3 weeks in the year when they tow a medium sized caravan to France.When I worked in the Ambulance Service we got our Bedford ambulance stuck one winter & they sent the ECV Land Rover to pull us out & it was totally useless however a resident got his Landcruiser attached to us & pulled us out with ease  put me off Land Rovers for life.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Lizzie Zoom on 03 March 2018, 14:04:51
Range Rover sport with a supercharger...

Basically the X5 chassis is derived from the 5 series saloon. The Range Rover of the era you alluded to is essentially a Land Rover in a frock. New ones, following BMWs input are far more capable and are still used by some forces, although the Discovery, X5s and Shoguns are preferred SUVs of fleet managers due to ability, initial cost and reliability respectively.

Rural forces still use late Defenders and double cab pick ups as their utility transport.

The L322 Range Rovers biggest handicap is it's weight and high center of gravity. The original one was much lighter, but had a high centre of gravity and suspension travel that would embarrass a 2cv, neither of which are required components of high speed road travel.

Thanks DG :y :y
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Lizzie Zoom on 03 March 2018, 14:09:11
.. and "fast pursuit" in a Range Rover?  :o No, thanks!

Ah, that is "fast" in the context of the early 1970's when Range Rover patrol arms were introduced. Even by then most cars on the road dated from the 1950's and fist half of the 1960's, and in those you were lucky to reach 60 mph, and just maybe 70 mph.  My A40 was lucky to do 50 with the wind behind it! It is my belief, correct me if I am wrong, but it was only in the late 1960's and early1970's that even the average Ford Cortina could start to do 80, 90, or even 100 mph, with new cross flow engines, and Gt, XLS, etc badges. Later that decade the really faster average car came into being, and started to do 125-130+ mph. This challenged, and still does, the Traffic police to match their patrol cars to the top speeds of even the lowly boy races hatchbacks.

It was in the mid-1970's that the limitations of the traffic police Range Rover for "fast" pursuits became apparent.  It was also when my police chum lost his two colleagues in one. ;)

No one has commented on my post above, and I was hoping someone could explain one thing.

Why is the Range Rover so unstable at high speeds, but the BMW X5, that the police do use as a pursuit car, is not and regularly taken up to high speeds?  What different handling characteristics does the BMW X5 have over the Range Rover, or other differing specifications that makes them so different? What could they do to the Range Rover to bring it up to X5 standards please? ??? ???
 :y :y

Figures taken from road tests published by Autocar magazine in 1973, Lizzie.

Cortina 1300.....85 MPH

Cortina 1600.....92 MPH

Cortina 2000 GXL.....102 MPH

Capri 3000E.....122 MPH.

Range Rover...91 MPH.......zero to sixty.....13.9 secs......15 MPG. :-* :-* :-* :-*

Thanks Opti! :y

That confirms what I thought.  I know my 1100 Escort Mk1 in 1973 could just about reach 85 mph, and my later Cortina's Mk3,4 &5 1600's could get me to 100 mph and hold it for a bit.  The Vauxhall Cavalier 1800 SRi was the first that I got to 130 mph in 1986. 8) 8) :-* :y
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: biggriffin on 03 March 2018, 14:13:28
A range rover fitted with the CORRECT tyres will do what you ask of it, the problem is they are fitted with tyres for road use now, which ar'nt suitable for real off roading,  it's all about grip and the self cleaning ability of the tyres.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Lizzie Zoom on 03 March 2018, 14:19:07
No one has commented on my post above, and I was hoping someone could explain one thing.

Why is the Range Rover so unstable at high speeds, but the BMW X5, that the police do use as a pursuit car, is not and regularly taken up to high speeds?  What different handling characteristics does the BMW X5 have over the Range Rover, or other differing specifications that makes them so different? What could they do to the Range Rover to bring it up to X5 standards please? ??? ???
 :y :y
Having driven both the X5 (a mongrel cross between a later 90s 5 series, and a BMW era Range Rover, and one of the key reasons BMW bought Rover) 4.8 flat out and a 4.2SC L322 RR flat out, handling is not hugely different.

The RR has a bit more body roll at lower speed, the X5 has the usual rock hard BMW setup, compounded with RFTs.

Both are pretty rapid to 100mph, and both start to run out of steam at about 120-130mph.

Both take some stopping, due to weight, but will stop from 100mph reasonably quickly, clearly not as quickly as a lighter, luxury saloon.

Both exhibit understeer under heavy acceleration, and the RR does under heavy braking, where the X5 oversteers.

Both are horrific on fuel when pushed, and simply bad when cruising.


Owning either makes no difference to what people think of you - you're a knob jockey in either.  I'd prefer the RR due to a better ride, easier maintenance, and better reliability from the drivetrain.

Thanks TB :y :y

That is very interesting to me as I have neither driven a Range Rover or BMW X5 so have always wondered how the differed.  I must say, in my humble opinion, the RR has far more street presence than the X5, especially as (you are absolutely right TB! >:( >:( >:()  some 'knob jockey' comes right up to your rear (yet again!) in a bid to intimidate me as I was doing the speed limit on a local road after he tried to cut me up on a roundabout >:( >:( >:(  On that occasion he come unstuck, as I puled a police type stop maneuver on him and highlighted his driving deficences to him; he was not happy, but  went very quietly indeed, with him driving very carefully after that behind me until I pulled off the main road! :D :D ;)
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Doctor Gollum on 03 March 2018, 14:20:36
And I thought you were intelligent.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Lizzie Zoom on 03 March 2018, 14:31:13
And I thought you were intelligent.

Here we go again!! ::) ::) ::)

I am intelligent, so you tell me how I may not be! ::) ::) ::) :-* :-*
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: TheBoy on 03 March 2018, 14:33:34
When I worked in the Ambulance Service we got our Bedford ambulance stuck one winter & they sent the ECV Land Rover to pull us out & it was totally useless
The driver was a first class prat then.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Field Marshal Dr. Opti on 03 March 2018, 14:50:15
.. and "fast pursuit" in a Range Rover?  :o No, thanks!

Ah, that is "fast" in the context of the early 1970's when Range Rover patrol arms were introduced. Even by then most cars on the road dated from the 1950's and fist half of the 1960's, and in those you were lucky to reach 60 mph, and just maybe 70 mph.  My A40 was lucky to do 50 with the wind behind it! It is my belief, correct me if I am wrong, but it was only in the late 1960's and early1970's that even the average Ford Cortina could start to do 80, 90, or even 100 mph, with new cross flow engines, and Gt, XLS, etc badges. Later that decade the really faster average car came into being, and started to do 125-130+ mph. This challenged, and still does, the Traffic police to match their patrol cars to the top speeds of even the lowly boy races hatchbacks.

It was in the mid-1970's that the limitations of the traffic police Range Rover for "fast" pursuits became apparent.  It was also when my police chum lost his two colleagues in one. ;)

No one has commented on my post above, and I was hoping someone could explain one thing.

Why is the Range Rover so unstable at high speeds, but the BMW X5, that the police do use as a pursuit car, is not and regularly taken up to high speeds?  What different handling characteristics does the BMW X5 have over the Range Rover, or other differing specifications that makes them so different? What could they do to the Range Rover to bring it up to X5 standards please? ??? ???
 :y :y

Figures taken from road tests published by Autocar magazine in 1973, Lizzie.

Cortina 1300.....85 MPH

Cortina 1600.....92 MPH

Cortina 2000 GXL.....102 MPH

Capri 3000E.....122 MPH.

Range Rover...91 MPH.......zero to sixty.....13.9 secs......15 MPG. :-* :-* :-* :-*

Thanks Opti! :y

That confirms what I thought.  I know my 1100 Escort Mk1 in 1973 could just about reach 85 mph, and my later Cortina's Mk3,4 &5 1600's could get me to 100 mph and hold it for a bit. The Vauxhall Cavalier 1800 SRi was the first that I got to 130 mph in 1986. 8) 8) :-* :y

We managed the exact same (130 MPH indicated) in a 1.8i Belmont (Mk2 Astra with a boot but same engine as the Cav) on a private road not a million miles from the M6 at 3 AM. ::) True speed was probably in the 118/120 mph region.  :)
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Doctor Gollum on 03 March 2018, 15:19:25
Quote
some 'knob jockey' comes right up to your rear (yet again!) in a bid to intimidate me as I was doing the speed limit on a local road after he tried to cut me up on a roundabout On that occasion he come unstuck, as I puled a police type stop maneuver on him and highlighted his driving deficences to him; he was not happy, but went very quietly indeed, with him driving very carefully after that behind me until I pulled off the main road!

Where do I begin?

Two wrongs don't make a right. Such a reaction to aggression in that way is likely to get you slapped, or worse. It is not your, or my, job to 'police' crap driving, our only defense is just that, defensive driving.

At best, your behaviour was twa-tish, at worse impersonating a police officer, which last time I looked was an offence... careless or dangerous driving being somewhere in the middle: which one depends the outcome of the situation, but rest assured deliberate actions leading to a collision would be considered dangerous.

All of your alleged training should teach you not to react to other drivers shortcomings, especially not whilst driving. Your first mistake was allowing yourself to be intimidated, the only response to this is to slow down and move left,turn left if you have to to remove yourself from the situation. Your second mistake was to react and respond to the situation in the way that you did.

Say what you want, you know I am right whether you admit it or not*.

*Before replying to this post, do yourself a favour and stop, consider the situation and run through the possible outcomes had anything happened differently regardless of whether positive or negative.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Lizzie Zoom on 03 March 2018, 15:57:28
Quote
some 'knob jockey' comes right up to your rear (yet again!) in a bid to intimidate me as I was doing the speed limit on a local road after he tried to cut me up on a roundabout On that occasion he come unstuck, as I puled a police type stop maneuver on him and highlighted his driving deficences to him; he was not happy, but went very quietly indeed, with him driving very carefully after that behind me until I pulled off the main road!

Where do I begin?

Two wrongs don't make a right. Such a reaction to aggression in that way is likely to get you slapped, or worse. It is not your, or my, job to 'police' crap driving, our only defense is just that, defensive driving.

At best, your behaviour was twa-tish, at worse impersonating a police officer, which last time I looked was an offence... careless or dangerous driving being somewhere in the middle: which one depends the outcome of the situation, but rest assured deliberate actions leading to a collision would be considered dangerous.

All of your alleged training should teach you not to react to other drivers shortcomings, especially not whilst driving. Your first mistake was allowing yourself to be intimidated, the only response to this is to slow down and move left,turn left if you have to to remove yourself from the situation. Your second mistake was to react and respond to the situation in the way that you did.

Say what you want, you know I am right whether you admit it or not*.

*Before replying to this post, do yourself a favour and stop, consider the situation and run through the possible outcomes had anything happened differently regardless of whether positive or negative.

Ah at last a full explanation instead of one cynical sentence! ::) ::) ::) :D

You have read so much into what I said and assumed soooo much as you often do.

In this case you have centred everything on "impersonating a police officer".  Right, let's take that on first.  I didn't actually say I was enacting a police stop, but a "police style".  Big difference.  I work alongside the Police service, and have had police officers explain what they do and how they do it for many decades.  So I will NEVER, and have NEVER impersonated a police officer.  In fact although I have a pass to go into any police establishment in the County, I have to tell some very vulnerable people that I am definitely NOT a police officer and never have been; I am a civilian who acts as an advisor for the police and have seemingly worked alongside police officers most of my professional life.  In fact, having had many police family members and friends, let alone going out on patrol with police officers, I know how much responsibility they carry on their shoulders which they can only do after much training and years of on the job experience.  Therefore, I well know what the difference is between me as a civilian advisor and them as police officers. 

On the question of what I did in the case I highlighted with the Range Rover driver, I will now give you the details to replace your cynical assumptions.  It was a local urban road crammed with traffic and many people in cars.  It was daylight, and I had many witnesses around if any trouble had arrupted. I was ahead of the RR after he tried to race on the inside down a dual carriageway, past others, at a speed above the 40 mph limit, then take the wrong approach to the third exit on the roundabout, almost forcing some young women driver into the roundabout. He arrived behind me at full speed, on a mobile phone, and then tail gate me within inches of my rear bumper. As I approached a central reservation with bollard, with a queue of traffic coming the other way, I braked him down to a stop, and swung the Omega across the road so he had no-where to go. I had nowhere to go, left or right! I then got out with many witnesses watching and spoke to him in my nice, professional voice, in a matter of fact way as a member of the driving public, explaining what he had just done that was so wrong.  He accepted that, grudgeling, and said "sorry".  Within two minutes I had got back in the car and we were all on our way.  It was handled in a safe and controlled manner, with at NO STAGE me pretending to be a police officer.  I am professionally trained to risk assess, and this is one rare occasion where I could as a female driver take the action I did to potentially save other drivers their property from damage, or worse still, personal injury. I did what a responsible member of the public can do when, as I am acutely aware knowing what I do about Kent Police, there are just not enough police officers to go around and sometimes us civilians have to step up to the plate and not be the "snowflakes" that so many on the OOF moan about.  The police need our help when it is SAFE for us to do so; in this case is was perfectly safe and all under control.

I have replied to your post without having to consider what could have gone wrong as I DID THIS BEFORE MY ACTION ON THE DAY.  I have had the displeasure of dealing with some hardened criminals during my retail career, when I had to take action bringing in the police to assist, but after they COULD have taken me out; some had knives, heavy fists, and even firearms.  But I had a job to do to protect the company's monies and stock, let alone the jobs of my thousands of staff.  So, I have the experience, knowledge, and total commitment to do what is professionally necessary in a safe and controlled manner.  You should have recognised by now DG I am no shrinking violet of a women, but one who is large built and can hold her own when physically attacked; yes that happened to me as well on quite a few occasions.

So, DG stop worrying about me (if ever that was the case ;D ;D :-* :-* :-* :-*) and cease reading so much into simple statements made on the OOF. 8) 8) 8) ;)
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Doctor Gollum on 03 March 2018, 16:07:45
I get tailgated and carved up on roundabouts every single day. No matter how irritating both of these things are, not once would I consider shutting down a dual carriageway a rational response, regardless of how polite, capable or  experienced I might consider myself to be or how many witnesses that I might think I have...
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Lizzie Zoom on 03 March 2018, 16:10:35
I get tailgated and carved up on roundabouts every single day. No matter how irritating both of these things are, not once would I consider shutting down a dual carriageway a rational response, regardless of how polite, capable or  experienced I might consider myself to be or how many witnesses that I might think I have...

Who said I shut down a dual carriageway? ::) ::) ::) ;)
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Doctor Gollum on 03 March 2018, 16:28:44
You implied it...

Anyways, nowt I say will make you stop and actually consider your actions, so that's all to be said about that.

Back to the original question... ::)

The X5 is a performance suv, that's why it has wide, low profile tyres. The Range Rover is an expensive way of retrieving a horse from a muddy field, that happens to scrub up enough to be used in Chelsea.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: henryd on 03 March 2018, 16:32:48
You implied it...

Anyways, nowt I say will make you stop and actually consider your actions, so that's all to be said about that.

Back to the original question... ::)

The X5 is a performance suv, that's why it has wide, low profile tyres. The Range Rover is an expensive way of retrieving a horse from a muddy field, that happens to scrub up enough to be used in Chelsea.

The difference being that the Range Rover could and the X5 couldn't as worse than useless offroad :y
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Andy B on 03 March 2018, 16:50:17
I frequently disagree with Dr G .... but on this occasion I agree whole heartedly. It's not Joe Public's job to police other road users what ever you do to a living. You'd have had a 2 word reply from me. What the other driver did was wrong, but not your concern.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Lizzie Zoom on 03 March 2018, 16:53:01
I frequently disagree with Dr G .... but on this occasion I agree whole heartedly. It's not Joe Public's job to police other road users what ever you do to a living. You'd have had a 2 word reply from me. What the other driver did was wrong, but not your concern.

Ah, right.  When he has just forced another driver out of the way and been a few inches from my rear end whilst on the mobile phone............. ::) ::) ::)
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Kevin Wood on 03 March 2018, 16:59:36
It's easy for the red mist to descend in such situations, but the best policy is to let him go and crash into some other sucker IMHO.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Nick W on 03 March 2018, 17:03:19
Pull over, let him pass, and watch his crash rather than be part of it. Or the partial cause of it. There's enough bad tempered cretins driving for you to become another one.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Lizzie Zoom on 03 March 2018, 17:18:32
Pull over, let him pass, and watch his crash rather than be part of it. Or the partial cause of it. There's enough bad tempered cretins driving for you to become another one.

But, as I have said I had no room to pull over, and traffic was backed up ahead of me and coming the other way.

No, what it is I as a woman took action when I knew what to do, without risk.  What I have noted on the OOF over years is that with so many of the men on here you are full of what you would do, and how you would do it, but it is all mouth and trousers.  This is what it is like "out there" in our poor society; when push comes to shove there is no do, just look the other way and walk on.  As a women I do, not just talk about it; that is how I was brought up and have lived.  People on here comment on "snowflakes" all the time, but how many of you men are any different?  There are many around where I live who will not help anyone, let alone the police, for all kinds of reasons but basically the one of "I don't want to become involved [in case I have to do something and stand up for what is right]".

What a load of self centred pansies there are 'out there'!! ::) ::) ::)

Just like the many 4x4 drivers I have seen who force there way through and basically are saying fxxk the rest of you, like the one I dealt with of the great many who I have not been able to tackle over the decades! ::) ::) ::) ::)

Rant over!! :-* :-* :-* :-* 8) 8) 8) ;)
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Andy B on 03 March 2018, 17:20:56
Pull over, let him pass, and watch his crash rather than be part of it. Or the partial cause of it. There's enough bad tempered cretins driving for you to become another one.

But, as I have said I had no room to pull over, and traffic was backed up ahead of me and coming the other way.

No, what it is I as a woman took action when I knew what to do, without risk.  What I have noted on the OOF over years is that with so many of the men on here you are full of what you would do, and how you would do it, but it is all mouth and trousers.  This is what it is like "out there" in our poor society; when push comes to shove there is no do, just look the other way and walk on.  As a women I do, not just talk about it; that is how I was brought up and have lived.  People on here comment on "snowflakes" all the time, but how many of you men are any different?  There are many around where I live who will not help anyone, let alone the police, for all kinds of reasons but basically the one of "I don't want to become involved [in case I have to do something and stand up for what is right]".

What a load of self centred pansies there are 'out there'!! ::) ::) ::)
Sandra Bullocks
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Lizzie Zoom on 03 March 2018, 17:23:53
PS Most men are delightful and charming, whom us women cannot do without.  But you can't half get us going!! ::) ::) :-* :-* ;D ;D ;D ;)
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Sir Tigger KC on 03 March 2018, 17:25:42
PS Most men are delightful and charming, whom us women cannot do without.  But you can't half get us going!! ::) ::) :-* :-* ;D ;D ;D ;)

Some can, some can't Lizzie!  :P  :-*  :)
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Lizzie Zoom on 03 March 2018, 17:35:29
PS Most men are delightful and charming, whom us women cannot do without.  But you can't half get us going!! ::) ::) :-* :-* ;D ;D ;D ;)

Some can, some can't Lizzie!  :P  :-*  :)

Indeed Sir Tigger, indeed!! ::) ::) :-* :-* ;D ;D ;)
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Lizzie Zoom on 03 March 2018, 17:37:11
Pull over, let him pass, and watch his crash rather than be part of it. Or the partial cause of it. There's enough bad tempered cretins driving for you to become another one.

But, as I have said I had no room to pull over, and traffic was backed up ahead of me and coming the other way.

No, what it is I as a woman took action when I knew what to do, without risk.  What I have noted on the OOF over years is that with so many of the men on here you are full of what you would do, and how you would do it, but it is all mouth and trousers.  This is what it is like "out there" in our poor society; when push comes to shove there is no do, just look the other way and walk on.  As a women I do, not just talk about it; that is how I was brought up and have lived.  People on here comment on "snowflakes" all the time, but how many of you men are any different?  There are many around where I live who will not help anyone, let alone the police, for all kinds of reasons but basically the one of "I don't want to become involved [in case I have to do something and stand up for what is right]".

What a load of self centred pansies there are 'out there'!! ::) ::) ::)
Sandra Bullocks

Are those the two words you would have used Andy?  Quiet polite really. ;D ;D ;)
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: TheBoy on 03 March 2018, 18:04:57
We managed the exact same (130 MPH indicated) in a 1.8i Belmont (Mk2 Astra with a boot but same engine as the Cav) on a private road not a million miles from the M6 at 3 AM. ::) True speed was probably in the 118/120 mph region.  :)
A 1.8GLSi Belmont was the first car I ever had reading 140mph (downhill, mind), and still felt it had plenty to go...

A few weeks later, pistons and valves had a big, big coming together, and the replacement engine was a dog, so I replaced the car with a 2l MK2 Astra GTE...  ...which had an indicated top speed of only 129mph, at which point it was banging on the rev limiter. Apparently.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Andy B on 03 March 2018, 18:20:39
Pull over, let him pass, and watch his crash rather than be part of it. Or the partial cause of it. There's enough bad tempered cretins driving for you to become another one.

But, as I have said I had no room to pull over, and traffic was backed up ahead of me and coming the other way.

No, what it is I as a woman took action when I knew what to do, without risk.  What I have noted on the OOF over years is that with so many of the men on here you are full of what you would do, and how you would do it, but it is all mouth and trousers.  This is what it is like "out there" in our poor society; when push comes to shove there is no do, just look the other way and walk on.  As a women I do, not just talk about it; that is how I was brought up and have lived.  People on here comment on "snowflakes" all the time, but how many of you men are any different?  There are many around where I live who will not help anyone, let alone the police, for all kinds of reasons but basically the one of "I don't want to become involved [in case I have to do something and stand up for what is right]".

What a load of self centred pansies there are 'out there'!! ::) ::) ::)
Sandra Bullocks

Are those the two words you would have used Andy?  Quiet polite really. ;D ;D ;)

That's the radio edit  version ......  ::)
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Doctor Gollum on 03 March 2018, 18:39:28
Ah yes, taken from that timeless romantic lullaby...

 "... she'll grab your sweaty bollix and slowly raise a knee. Don't marry her, opps me..." (https://youtu.be/GYZfFKDsXHk)
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Andy B on 03 March 2018, 20:31:46
Ah yes, taken from that timeless romantic lullaby...

 "... she'll grab your sweaty bollix and slowly raise a knee. Don't marry her, opps me..." (https://youtu.be/GYZfFKDsXHk)

That's the one  :y :y
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: 2boxerdogs on 04 March 2018, 12:20:13
We managed the exact same (130 MPH indicated) in a 1.8i Belmont (Mk2 Astra with a boot but same engine as the Cav) on a private road not a million miles from the M6 at 3 AM. ::) True speed was probably in the 118/120 mph region.  :)
A 1.8GLSi Belmont was the first car I ever had reading 140mph (downhill, mind), and still felt it had plenty to go...

A few weeks later, pistons and valves had a big, big coming together, and the replacement engine was a dog, so I replaced the car with a 2l MK2 Astra GTE...  ...which had an indicated top speed of only 129mph, at which point it was banging on the rev limiter. Apparently.
.   




Faulty Speedos no doubt 😀😁😂
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: TheBoy on 04 March 2018, 18:26:47
We managed the exact same (130 MPH indicated) in a 1.8i Belmont (Mk2 Astra with a boot but same engine as the Cav) on a private road not a million miles from the M6 at 3 AM. ::) True speed was probably in the 118/120 mph region.  :)
A 1.8GLSi Belmont was the first car I ever had reading 140mph (downhill, mind), and still felt it had plenty to go...

A few weeks later, pistons and valves had a big, big coming together, and the replacement engine was a dog, so I replaced the car with a 2l MK2 Astra GTE...  ...which had an indicated top speed of only 129mph, at which point it was banging on the rev limiter. Apparently.
.   




Faulty Speedos no doubt 😀😁😂
Undoubtedly over reading, but probably not by the maximum 10%....
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Nick W on 04 March 2018, 18:35:03
We managed the exact same (130 MPH indicated) in a 1.8i Belmont (Mk2 Astra with a boot but same engine as the Cav) on a private road not a million miles from the M6 at 3 AM. ::) True speed was probably in the 118/120 mph region.  :)
A 1.8GLSi Belmont was the first car I ever had reading 140mph (downhill, mind), and still felt it had plenty to go...

A few weeks later, pistons and valves had a big, big coming together, and the replacement engine was a dog, so I replaced the car with a 2l MK2 Astra GTE...  ...which had an indicated top speed of only 129mph, at which point it was banging on the rev limiter. Apparently.
.   




Faulty Speedos no doubt 😀😁😂
Undoubtedly over reading, but probably not by the maximum 10%....


When did that come in? Isn't the requirement for an accurate reading at 30mph, and then for it never to under-read? With a suggested 10% tolerance for speeding prosecutions.


I only ask, as I've seen 140mph from several stock 2.0l Capris. Which is clearly ridiculous; working it out from the gearing the cars might have achieved nearly 120.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: TheBoy on 04 March 2018, 18:37:39
It has need never to underread and never to overread by more than 10% for decades...  ...not sure if back to Capri days though.

I think its now becoming 2% max overread.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: pauls on 04 March 2018, 19:54:22
So reading between all the other stuff that has been written. Would you really need a 4x4 with diff lock etc to cover the odd bit of snow on our roads or would a awd with winter tyres do just as well. Not counting for height clearence. I just dont really want to buy a x5 or a range rover for the odd couple of days.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: 2boxerdogs on 04 March 2018, 19:59:37
So reading between all the other stuff that has been written. Would you really need a 4x4 with diff lock etc to cover the odd bit of snow on our roads or would a awd with winter tyres do just as well. Not counting for height clearence. I just dont really want to buy a x5 or a range rover for the odd couple of days.So no diff lock required.



Subaru Forester would fit the bill perfectly , we are on our second one ideal choice will cope adequately with the weather we have just had , would not take on hard off roading but will travel across fields easily, no diff lock on these, have taken ours across farmland with no problems.Classed & badged as AWD.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Nick W on 04 March 2018, 21:02:12
So reading between all the other stuff that has been written. Would you really need a 4x4 with diff lock etc to cover the odd bit of snow on our roads or would a awd with winter tyres do just as well. Not counting for height clearence. I just dont really want to buy a x5 or a range rover for the odd couple of days.


I would buy either a cheapish(<£1000) 2.0l Vitara as a second car.
Or, more likely a £200 Corsa/Fiesta/clit and fit  a set of the cheapest chunky tyres I could find. Your basic throwaway transport.


It's the tyres and driver that matter in even the worst snow we see, not the car.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: 2boxerdogs on 04 March 2018, 21:15:41
So reading between all the other stuff that has been written. Would you really need a 4x4 with diff lock etc to cover the odd bit of snow on our roads or would a awd with winter tyres do just as well. Not counting for height clearence. I just dont really want to buy a x5 or a range rover for the odd couple of days.


I would buy either a cheapish(<£1000) 2.0l Vitara as a second car.
Or, more likely a £200 Corsa/Fiesta/clit and fit  a set of the cheapest chunky tyres I could find. Your basic throwaway transport.


It's the tyres and driver that matter in even the worst snow we see, not the car.



Don't waste any cash on any 2WD car  they will not cope regardless of what tyres are fitted.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Doctor Gollum on 05 March 2018, 03:52:26
Well my rwd £350 Omega managed just fine with only winter tyres... ::)

Pauls biggest issue is actually the need for an auto...
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: 2boxerdogs on 05 March 2018, 07:19:24
All I am saying is an AWD vehicle will cope better than a 2WD he won't require a  " monster truck" to cope with the recent conditions , I'm not questioning anybody's driving skills , it's just common sense that an AWD vehicle will cope easily.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: LC0112G on 05 March 2018, 09:39:15
All I am saying is an AWD vehicle will cope better than a 2WD he won't require a  " monster truck" to cope with the recent conditions , I'm not questioning anybody's driving skills , it's just common sense that an AWD vehicle will cope easily.

I disagree. A 2WD car with winter tyres will easily out perform a 4WD/AWD car with summer tyres in snowy/icy conditions.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Kevin Wood on 05 March 2018, 09:42:50
Indeed.

Anyway, the snow's gone now so we can all enjoy the comfort, economy and performance of not owning a 4x4 for another couple of years until it happens again. :D

 ;)
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: 2boxerdogs on 05 March 2018, 10:09:43
All I am saying is an AWD vehicle will cope better than a 2WD he won't require a  " monster truck" to cope with the recent conditions , I'm not questioning anybody's driving skills , it's just common sense that an AWD vehicle will cope easily.

I disagree. A 2WD car with winter tyres will easily out perform a 4WD/AWD car with summer tyres in snowy/icy conditions.




😀😁😂
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Automaticman on 05 March 2018, 11:25:31
V6 Frontera coped easily without engaging 4wd, affordable relaxing 4x4, whats not to like  :D
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: 2boxerdogs on 05 March 2018, 11:45:51
V6 Frontera coped easily without engaging 4wd, affordable relaxing 4x4, whats not to like  :D
.



Exactly the 4 wheel drive is available if required.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Field Marshal Dr. Opti on 05 March 2018, 11:50:47
The 600 BHP 2018 BMW M5 and Mercedes E63S are both two and four wheel drive.

In my warped mind this makes both cars 'the sensible choice'.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Andy B on 05 March 2018, 12:04:28
Indeed.

Anyway, the snow's gone now so we can all enjoy the comfort, economy and performance of not owning a 4x4 for another couple of years until it happens again. :D

 ;)

What if you already owned one?  ::)
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: 2boxerdogs on 05 March 2018, 12:09:49
Indeed.

Anyway, the snow's gone now so we can all enjoy the comfort, economy and performance of not owning a 4x4 for another couple of years until it happens again. :D

 ;)

What if you already owned one?  ::)
.   



Or three 😀
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Doctor Gollum on 05 March 2018, 12:12:52
No accounting for taste :D

Although a late R55/63 would be nice...
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: TheBoy on 05 March 2018, 17:51:26
So reading between all the other stuff that has been written. Would you really need a 4x4 with diff lock etc to cover the odd bit of snow on our roads or would a awd with winter tyres do just as well. Not counting for height clearence. I just dont really want to buy a x5 or a range rover for the odd couple of days.
Most AWD designs are done for cost, and thus its almost as likely to get stuck as 2wd, due to the way all the diffs work.  Some has LSD options which help to an extent.

But as others have suggested, for that 1 day a decade?  In 15 years of Omega ownership, I've never had (unprovoked) issues, and in all my years driving, the only winter issues I've had was a transit not wanting to go straight or slow down on an icy decline, a FWD struggling (but made it) to get up a block paved incline, and roads that you would never attempt as the snow is significantly above the lower front bumper.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: TheBoy on 05 March 2018, 17:51:44
Oh, and rarely use winter tyres either.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Doctor Gollum on 05 March 2018, 19:03:58
Summat like the Insignia 4x4 that can be switched into full time 4x4 works better than an awd that claims to automatically send all the torque to the one wheel that isn't spinning  ;D
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: pauls on 05 March 2018, 19:38:34
Never had any problems with snow in my omega ownership bit of xtra weight in the back and all good. But 2 issues now i live down here. Lots more hills just outside my house with single lane traffic 2nd is a fwd audi that just turned into a snow plough when i did get it off the drive. We now have the issue of roads that look like rivers. Went over the hills to work this morning and snow drifts on the side of the road where huge.
 I have been looking at a bmw x3 3ltr. Standard size wheels and tyres. Was looking at this as nice to drive for summer and should be high enough and capable for the winter rain/mud/snow.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: hotel21 on 05 March 2018, 21:42:46
The biggest challenge, in my eyes, is ground clearance.

Dunno about the x5 but a top end rr , if you have deep pockets, does go quite well in the snow even on standard tyres with height raised to max.

Just don’t give it too much welly in hills or bends, jobs a good one!
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Sir Tigger KC on 05 March 2018, 22:59:42
Thing is most 4x4 drivers don't know how to use their expensive toys anyway!  ::)

I was driving down a lane in the Disco this afternoon and came across a flood with a few people sat in their cars looking forlornly at the lake across the road. I merrily drove by them, raised the suspension and entered the deluge!  :y 

As I came out the other side there was lots of steam coming from under the car which I thought was odd, as I didn't think the water was that deep, but then realised that I'd pushed the switch the wrong way and lowered the suspension!  :-[  :D  ;D
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: 2boxerdogs on 06 March 2018, 07:41:57
As I said earlier it's worth learning what these vehicles are capable of , cope with anything you put before them if you know what you're doing, excellent training ground near Rutland Water & also of course the LR course done them both & highly recommend it.😀
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: 2boxerdogs on 06 March 2018, 09:16:51
As I said earlier it's worth learning what these vehicles are capable of , cope with anything you put before them if you know what you're doing, excellent training ground near Rutland Water & also of course the LR course done them both & highly recommend it.😀
.

This of course only aimed at those wanting a 4x4 not to those whose Omegas perform perfectly.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: TheBoy on 06 March 2018, 17:55:28
As I said earlier it's worth learning what these vehicles are capable of , cope with anything you put before them if you know what you're doing, excellent training ground near Rutland Water & also of course the LR course done them both & highly recommend it.😀
That's the key really, whether that be formal courses, or if you're lucky enough to have access to such facilities, messing about.  TBH, that counts for all vehicles though, not just offroading.


I know back in the Ford days, there was that year at Silverstone F1 GP where all the 4x4s got stuck due to mongrel drivers.  Land Rover offered those that got theirs stuck a short offroad course (obviously, only if you had bought the car new), which showed them that burying the throttle does not achieve much when traction is limited. By all accounts it went down well with the knob jockeys who clearly didn't have a clue.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Automaticman on 06 March 2018, 19:41:28
 ;D
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: T.m.f on 09 March 2018, 20:30:29
Didnt have a problem with my discovery last week,didnt get stuck,also run all terrain tyres,and take my time.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: aaronjb on 12 March 2018, 09:13:49
and take my time.

Half the battle in bad weather - nobody wants to take their time! Goodness only knows how old Binary Throttle Boy manages to stay on the road like he says he does ;) ;D
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Kevin Wood on 12 March 2018, 09:32:17
and take my time.

Half the battle in bad weather - nobody wants to take their time! Goodness only knows how old Binary Throttle Boy manages to stay on the road like he says he does ;) ;D

.. until you're following them up a slippery hill with plenty of momentum on your side. ::)
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: TheBoy on 12 March 2018, 17:52:35
and take my time.

Half the battle in bad weather - nobody wants to take their time! Goodness only knows how old Binary Throttle Boy manages to stay on the road like he says he does ;) ;D
Its been a long, long, looooonnnggg time since I last went off the road* (unintentionally).  Touch wood.


*Race tracks clearly don't count, as if you don't use your racecar or go-kart as a lawnmower, you ain't trying hard enough.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: TheBoy on 12 March 2018, 17:54:25
Actually, sat here racking my brains, and I *think* the only time I unintentionally left the road was an Ital van, when the NSF wheel beat me into a tight corner.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: TheBoy on 12 March 2018, 17:56:17
Actually, sat here racking my brains, and I *think* the only time I unintentionally left the road was an Ital van, when the NSF wheel beat me into a tight corner.
Actually, thats only true if we exclude Escorts, as clearly they don't count.

If we include Escorts, its all a lie.  I have been known to get them into a ploughed field, taking the signposts, hedge and small tree with me.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Migv6 le Frog Fan on 12 March 2018, 18:04:00
I went offroad intentionally about a month ago to avoid a really nasty head on crash. I try not to make a habit of it though.
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: aaronjb on 12 March 2018, 18:41:28
Actually, sat here racking my brains, and I *think* the only time I unintentionally left the road was an Ital van, when the NSF wheel beat me into a tight corner.

Ah the Ital. I was listening to the radio the other day when a caller was saying he'd left his deceased relative's Ital in a barn for 20 years as something of an investment..

Won't be much left of that but brown powder by now, I thought! ;D
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: Kevin Wood on 12 March 2018, 18:48:39
Plus the essential consumables are now in short supply - 4 star and lower trunnion joints. Add clean underpants to the list if intending to "press on".  ::)
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: TheBoy on 12 March 2018, 18:51:45
The Ital truly was an awful vehicle. Mine was a works van, so I had no choice.  But I understand that people actually bought the car version. With their own money :o
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: STEMO on 12 March 2018, 19:41:17
A trip down memory lane:
(https://preview.ibb.co/f6tzHn/DB3_F9989_6_DBB_41_F0_B04_B_ECE50_B6_E6942.jpg) (https://ibb.co/dQZTA7)
Title: Re: 4x4
Post by: TheBoy on 12 March 2018, 20:04:16
Mine was the posher 575, most at our place were the 440.  Still a PoS.