Omega Owners Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Welcome to OOF

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7   Go Down

Author Topic: 4x4  (Read 1964 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Tilbo

  • Omega Baron
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Gender: Male
  • SOUTH LINCS.
  • Posts: 3847
    • Mercedes E 430& Terracan
    • View Profile
Re: 4x4
« Reply #15 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.
Logged
Just cruising.When you are old you know everything,trouble is you have to deal with people who know nothing.

Andy B

  • Get A Life!!
  • **********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Bury Lancs
  • Posts: 35485
    • R320 TDM850 SmartRoadster
    • View Profile
Re: 4x4
« Reply #16 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?
Logged

Andy B

  • Get A Life!!
  • **********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Bury Lancs
  • Posts: 35485
    • R320 TDM850 SmartRoadster
    • View Profile
Re: 4x4
« Reply #17 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"
Logged

Shackeng

  • Omega Lord
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Ramsbury
  • Posts: 6768
    • 3.2 Elite 2.0 TitX Mondeo
    • View Profile
Re: 4x4
« Reply #18 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
Logged

TheBoy

  • Administrator
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Brackley, Northants
  • Posts: 96425
  • Millennium Man
    • Anything that goes
    • View Profile
Re: 4x4
« Reply #19 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.
Logged
I don't tolerate bickering, and I'm always grumpy.
And Lizzie Zoom says I'm a heartless bastid...and she's absolutely correct!

Lizzie Zoom

  • Omega Baron
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Kent
  • Posts: 2628
    • Omega 3.2 V6 ELITE 2003
    • View Profile
Re: 4x4
« Reply #20 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
Logged

Doctor Gollum

  • Omega Lord
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • In a colds and darks puddleses
  • Posts: 9131
  • If you can't eat them, join them...
    • Feetses.
    • View Profile
Re: 4x4
« Reply #21 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.
Logged
Onanists always think outside the box.

Field Marshal Dr. Opti

  • Over Active Thyroid
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • South Lincolnshire
  • Posts: 20384
  • Isn't she lovely.
    • Signum 2.8 T & Jaguar XFR
    • View Profile
Re: 4x4
« Reply #22 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. :-* :-* :-* :-*

Logged

Field Marshal Dr. Opti

  • Over Active Thyroid
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • South Lincolnshire
  • Posts: 20384
  • Isn't she lovely.
    • Signum 2.8 T & Jaguar XFR
    • View Profile
Re: 4x4
« Reply #23 on: 03 March 2018, 12:51:11 »

Brand new Range Rover cost 2448 in 1973. :)
Logged

TheBoy

  • Administrator
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Brackley, Northants
  • Posts: 96425
  • Millennium Man
    • Anything that goes
    • View Profile
Re: 4x4
« Reply #24 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.
Logged
I don't tolerate bickering, and I'm always grumpy.
And Lizzie Zoom says I'm a heartless bastid...and she's absolutely correct!

TheBoy

  • Administrator
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Brackley, Northants
  • Posts: 96425
  • Millennium Man
    • Anything that goes
    • View Profile
Re: 4x4
« Reply #25 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.
Logged
I don't tolerate bickering, and I'm always grumpy.
And Lizzie Zoom says I'm a heartless bastid...and she's absolutely correct!

Tilbo

  • Omega Baron
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Gender: Male
  • SOUTH LINCS.
  • Posts: 3847
    • Mercedes E 430& Terracan
    • View Profile
Re: 4x4
« Reply #26 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.
« Last Edit: 03 March 2018, 13:40:06 by Tilbo »
Logged
Just cruising.When you are old you know everything,trouble is you have to deal with people who know nothing.

Lizzie Zoom

  • Omega Baron
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Kent
  • Posts: 2628
    • Omega 3.2 V6 ELITE 2003
    • View Profile
Re: 4x4
« Reply #27 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
Logged

Lizzie Zoom

  • Omega Baron
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Female
  • Kent
  • Posts: 2628
    • Omega 3.2 V6 ELITE 2003
    • View Profile
Re: 4x4
« Reply #28 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
Logged

biggriffin

  • Omega Lord
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • huntingdon, Hoof'land
  • Posts: 7307
    • 02 3.2 mv6 estate.
    • View Profile
Re: 4x4
« Reply #29 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.
Logged
Hoof'land storeman..

Omega is a barge not a dtm-touren-wagen
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.144 seconds with 21 queries.