Decent people ?

Derek ([email protected]) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying :

> Ah you mean Chelsea Tractors or hairdresser haulage, oddly I'm on my
> 8th 4x4 a humble scooby legacy estate ( for sale shortly- more ground
> clearance req ) there are two sorts of people those who need a 4x4 and
> those who believe they look good in them.

Three.

Add in "people who enjoy getting very, very muddy indeed"

I don't *need* a 4x4, and there'd be something very wrong with me if I
drove my utter shed of a 2cv 4x4 for "image"...

Hirsty's left a note on my windscreen which said:

> problem is most of them are not real 4x4's unless you listen to the likes of
> Clarkson ( who has'nt a clue either). when people start to rant about the cd
> player or the amount of acceleration on tar mac you begin to wonder where
> their reality lies

Top speed or 0-60 I could really care less. But I quite enjoy having a
CD player, Air Con etc.
--
Stoneskin

[Insert sig text here]

Stoneskin ([email protected]) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying :

>> problem is most of them are not real 4x4's unless you listen to the
>> likes of Clarkson ( who has'nt a clue either). when people start to
>> rant about the cd player or the amount of acceleration on tar mac you
>> begin to wonder where their reality lies

> Top speed or 0-60 I could really care less. But I quite enjoy having
> a CD player, Air Con etc.

So do I. I just don't need 'em in the car I go off-roading in.

Why settle for one car that's a poor compromise when you can have separate
cars that are each good at one task?

Adrian left a note on my windscreen which said:

> > Top speed or 0-60 I could really care less. But I quite enjoy having
> > a CD player, Air Con etc.
>
> So do I. I just don't need 'em in the car I go off-roading in.
>
> Why settle for one car that's a poor compromise when you can have separate
> cars that are each good at one task?

I'm not trying to be argumentative but why would the inclusion of small
luxuries as above comprimise your off roading enjoyment?

I enjoy the small mod-cons a modern family car gives me - but if I'm
really not bothered by performance why should I pay the extra money for
a 2nd car when a 'luxury' 4x4 would do the job?

I'm thinking about buying a 4x4 for my next vehicle so I can go off-
roading on holidays, help my parents on their small holding and for
towing ability. My current car is a VW Passat which, while quite a good
car for getting me to work every day, isn't any good at the above tasks.

Namely the vehicle I'm considered is a Defender 110 SW XS. Specifically
the XS for the air-con, CD player and leather interior. I can't think
why these would make it any less of an off roader.
--
Stoneskin

[Insert sig text here]

Stoneskin wrote:

> Adrian left a note on my windscreen which said:
>
>> > Top speed or 0-60 I could really care less. But I quite enjoy having
>> > a CD player, Air Con etc.
>>
>> So do I. I just don't need 'em in the car I go off-roading in.
>>
>> Why settle for one car that's a poor compromise when you can have
>> separate cars that are each good at one task?
>
> I'm not trying to be argumentative but why would the inclusion of small
> luxuries as above comprimise your off roading enjoyment?
>
> I enjoy the small mod-cons a modern family car gives me - but if I'm
> really not bothered by performance why should I pay the extra money for
> a 2nd car when a 'luxury' 4x4 would do the job?

More complexity, more to break, more expensive things to fix - it's why I
run a 200Discovery offroad rather than a TD5 that would have been a lot
nicer.

> Namely the vehicle I'm considered is a Defender 110 SW XS. Specifically
> the XS for the air-con, CD player and leather interior. I can't think
> why these would make it any less of an off roader.

One word. Water. Lots and lots of water. Rots leather, rots electronics,
rots most things.

P.

Paul S. Brown left a note on my windscreen which said:

> > I enjoy the small mod-cons a modern family car gives me - but if I'm
> > really not bothered by performance why should I pay the extra money for
> > a 2nd car when a 'luxury' 4x4 would do the job?
>
> More complexity, more to break, more expensive things to fix - it's why I
> run a 200Discovery offroad rather than a TD5 that would have been a lot
> nicer.

I'm sure for what you are using your vehicles for, you have the most
efficient combination. But AC faliures and CD player faliures I cannot
see as costing significantly more, if at all, than the costs of running
and maintaining a comfortable family car in addition to the costs of
running a 4x4. Having said that many working 4x4's in hot climates have
AC equipped for the comfort of the occupants. I don't really see AC as
being particuarly 'anti-4x4'.

When I was using a Hi-Lux to ferry hay back from my parent's field to
their hay sheds I really missed my car's AC since after getting very
sweaty loading the trailer it was very difficult to cool off.

> > Namely the vehicle I'm considered is a Defender 110 SW XS. Specifically
> > the XS for the air-con, CD player and leather interior. I can't think
> > why these would make it any less of an off roader.
>
> One word. Water. Lots and lots of water. Rots leather, rots electronics,
> rots most things.

Doesn't it also rot cloth just as easily? In my experience all the
leather uphostery I have had has lasted longer than cloth alternatives.
Given proper cleaning and treatment reguarly that is. The only real
drawback to leather upholstery I have found is that it can be very
uncomfortable in hot weather when you start sticking to it.

Don't get me wrong, I understand that to some people these things are
unnecessary expenses and of little use. But equally can be welcome
additions to other people who also work their vehicles. I just don't
see them making a vehicle any 'less' of a workhorse.
--
Stoneskin

[Insert sig text here]

Stoneskin ([email protected]) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying :

> I'm not trying to be argumentative but why would the inclusion of
> small luxuries as above comprimise your off roading enjoyment?

Because I don't want leather and carpets to get filthy with goo, and I
don't want aircon sapping the power.

> I enjoy the small mod-cons a modern family car gives me - but if I'm
> really not bothered by performance why should I pay the extra money
> for a 2nd car when a 'luxury' 4x4 would do the job?

It depends on how much you want to compromise your offroading.

> Namely the vehicle I'm considered is a Defender 110 SW XS.
> Specifically the XS for the air-con, CD player and leather interior.
> I can't think why these would make it any less of an off roader.

Wait until the first deep ford you want to cross.

Adrian left a note on my windscreen which said:

> > I'm not trying to be argumentative but why would the inclusion of
> > small luxuries as above comprimise your off roading enjoyment?
>
> Because I don't want leather and carpets to get filthy with goo, and I
> don't want aircon sapping the power.

I can see the point re: leather and carpets. Although leather is,
arguably, just as easy to clean.

As for AC sapping the power - you turn it off, no?

> > I enjoy the small mod-cons a modern family car gives me - but if I'm
> > really not bothered by performance why should I pay the extra money
> > for a 2nd car when a 'luxury' 4x4 would do the job?
>
> It depends on how much you want to compromise your offroading.

The point which I entered this thread was when the CD player was
mentioned. How can a CD player compromise your off-roading any more
than a radio or CB?

> > Namely the vehicle I'm considered is a Defender 110 SW XS.
> > Specifically the XS for the air-con, CD player and leather interior.
> > I can't think why these would make it any less of an off roader.
>
> Wait until the first deep ford you want to cross.

Are you saying that a vehicle, such as the Defender, would be less
capable to cross a deep ford if equipped with leather, AC or a CD
player?

--
Stoneskin

[Insert sig text here]

On Wed, 4 Aug 2004 14:12:16 +0100, Stoneskin <[email protected]> wrote:

->As for AC sapping the power - you turn it off, no?

You may find that when the AC condenser is full of mud that it will be
permanently off. ;-)

->> Wait until the first deep ford you want to cross.
->
->Are you saying that a vehicle, such as the Defender, would be less
->capable to cross a deep ford if equipped with leather, AC or a CD
->player?

Only the cost of replaceing the unit due to water damadge.


--
Geoff
www.anoraks.uk.net

Stoneskin wrote:

> Adrian left a note on my windscreen which said:
>
>> > I'm not trying to be argumentative but why would the inclusion of
>> > small luxuries as above comprimise your off roading enjoyment?
>>
>> Because I don't want leather and carpets to get filthy with goo, and I
>> don't want aircon sapping the power.
>
> I can see the point re: leather and carpets. Although leather is,
> arguably, just as easy to clean.
>
> As for AC sapping the power - you turn it off, no?

Maybe. The pump is still engaged and will still drag something off the
engine. Also the radiator impedes the airflow to the intercooler and
cooling system somewhat which in turn translates to somewhat reduced power,
albeit not that much.

>
>> > I enjoy the small mod-cons a modern family car gives me - but if I'm
>> > really not bothered by performance why should I pay the extra money
>> > for a 2nd car when a 'luxury' 4x4 would do the job?
>>
>> It depends on how much you want to compromise your offroading.
>
> The point which I entered this thread was when the CD player was
> mentioned. How can a CD player compromise your off-roading any more
> than a radio or CB?
>
>> > Namely the vehicle I'm considered is a Defender 110 SW XS.
>> > Specifically the XS for the air-con, CD player and leather interior.
>> > I can't think why these would make it any less of an off roader.
>>
>> Wait until the first deep ford you want to cross.
>
> Are you saying that a vehicle, such as the Defender, would be less
> capable to cross a deep ford if equipped with leather, AC or a CD
> player?
>

I'd be more worried about leather rotting than the cloth seats which do many
things, but actually perish isn't normally one of them - they can also just
be sluiced through rather than the amount of care leather takes - just my
preference.

AC - yes, definitely. It's a whole separate system to go wrong. I *really*
don't like driving a car which has been wading which is fitted with AC when
the AC is running because all the lovely growths you get blown straight
through appear to be much less nice than the equivalent on a car without.

CD player - very much. It's a mechanical device as opposed to a radio which
is solid state. While radios don't much like being immersed in water they
can survive it and are fairly cheap to replace. CD players tend to rust up,
crud up the optics and be more expensive to replace.

To be honest, I'd be more worried about the ECUs on a modern Defender - they
have something of a reputation and aren't necessarily that well sealed
against the elements - this is a problem with modern defenders in general
to my mind - not just to ones fitted with leather/AC/CD changer.

P.

Paul S. Brown left a note on my windscreen which said:

> I'd be more worried about leather rotting than the cloth seats which do many
> things, but actually perish isn't normally one of them - they can also just
> be sluiced through rather than the amount of care leather takes - just my
> preference.

I checked to see if this had been discussed before on this and on other
groups. It seems this comes down to personal preference. Leather is
hard wearing *if* you are willing to put the care into it. Very much a
personal preference thing.

> AC - yes, definitely. It's a whole separate system to go wrong. I *really*
> don't like driving a car which has been wading which is fitted with AC when
> the AC is running because all the lovely growths you get blown straight
> through appear to be much less nice than the equivalent on a car without.
>
> CD player - very much. It's a mechanical device as opposed to a radio which
> is solid state. While radios don't much like being immersed in water they
> can survive it and are fairly cheap to replace. CD players tend to rust up,
> crud up the optics and be more expensive to replace.

Fair enough. I'm as mechanically minded as a gerbil so I'll bow to
your, and the others' superior knowledge on this points.

> To be honest, I'd be more worried about the ECUs on a modern Defender - they
> have something of a reputation and aren't necessarily that well sealed
> against the elements - this is a problem with modern defenders in general
> to my mind - not just to ones fitted with leather/AC/CD changer.

I said only a few posts up there that the 110 SW XS was the Defender I
was interested in but, having been to the local LR dealership a little
while ago I'm not so sure. I was *very* suprised at the lack of room up
front. This was a 90 XS but the salesman did say the cabin size and
spec is identical. I am 6'2" and the seat simply didn't slide back
enough, nor recline enough. He then tried to get a new Disco delivered
to me.

How capable is the Hi-Lux double cab w/hardtop for general off-roading,
reliability, space and towing ability?
--
Stoneskin

[Insert sig text here]

In article <[email protected]>, Stoneskin wrote:
>
> I said only a few posts up there that the 110 SW XS was the Defender I
> was interested in but, having been to the local LR dealership a little
> while ago I'm not so sure. I was *very* suprised at the lack of room up
> front. This was a 90 XS but the salesman did say the cabin size and
> spec is identical. I am 6'2" and the seat simply didn't slide back
> enough, nor recline enough. He then tried to get a new Disco delivered
> to me.
>

90's don't seem to have as much cabin space as my 110, everything seems a
little bit more squashed in. Also doesn't the aircon stuff fill up the tops
of the footwells, that must make it feel more cramped.

As for cooling down, as long as your moving then having the vents open along
with the windows works a treat.

--
simon at sbarr dot demon dot co dot uk
Simon Barr.
'97 110 300Tdi.

The origional point I was trying to get over was that perhaps for an Auto
Show a comparison of points related to the real role of the vehicle wrere
more important than some poxy after market add on cd or what ever.
Surely a 4x4's off road role is more important as a working vehicle, so test
these factors not the amount of junk that can be put into it. How mant times
do these programmes actually come up with departure angles and approach
angles etc. If not then lets not include include them in the same catergory
as SUV's ( bimbo's toys ), ML's & X5's ( hang me by my gold chains while I
phone on this here mobile ). Perhaps a good indicator of a 4x4 is those seen
in real serious use in the bush and the outback, eg. Defenders. Nissans.
Toyotas of the boxy chassis variety.

Hirsty's wrote:

> The origional point I was trying to get over was that perhaps for an Auto
> Show a comparison of points related to the real role of the vehicle wrere
> more important than some poxy after market add on cd or what ever.
> Surely a 4x4's off road role is more important as a working vehicle, so
> test these factors not the amount of junk that can be put into it. How
> mant times do these programmes actually come up with departure angles and
> approach angles etc. If not then lets not include include them in the same
> catergory as SUV's ( bimbo's toys ), ML's & X5's ( hang me by my gold
> chains while I phone on this here mobile ). Perhaps a good indicator of a
> 4x4 is those seen in real serious use in the bush and the outback, eg.
> Defenders. Nissans. Toyotas of the boxy chassis variety.


I'd agree that the way 4x4s are treated on the TV is a bit silly. Top Gear
has become somewhat more balanced recently in as much as it takes the ****
out of the X5/X3s and espouses the virtues of Landies, but on the whole you
still have the whole Tiff Needell "It's a bad car because I can't J-Turn it
at 90MPH without rolling it and its 0-60 is only 22 seconds" malarky going
on.

Maybe we need a 4x4 review program.

How many 4x4 drivers are around who are reasonably photogenic (only have to
match James May for this one) and want to do it?

P.

I crack lenses at 5 Km )



> How many 4x4 drivers are around who are reasonably photogenic (only have
to
> match James May for this one) and want to do it?

Hirsty's wrote:

> I crack lenses at 5 Km )
>

You're hired.

Your first job is to review a Dacia Duster offroad.

P.

Adrian wrote:
> jim ([email protected]) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :
>
>> Do decent people drive any 4x4s except the Defender?
>>
>> surely they are all pimps/ crooks/ drug dealers / football wives (or
>> those crap female drivers who aspire to be one of the above)
>
> I don't think I'm any of those. I'm pretty sure my bank balance would
> be healthier if I were.
>
> I don't drive a Defender, either.
>
> If you were to narrow it down to camp, incompetent "lifestyle" 4x4s,
> then you may well have a point.
>
> Any 4x4 with carpets, even.

I had an old bit of loose carpet in my old Lightweight, does that count ?

Alan

Alan Walker ([email protected]) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying :

>> If you were to narrow it down to camp, incompetent "lifestyle" 4x4s,
>> then you may well have a point.
>>
>> Any 4x4 with carpets, even.

> I had an old bit of loose carpet in my old Lightweight, does that count ?

Depends.

Did it have an unidentified stain and an odd odour? If so, then I think you
should be OK...

Strange you mention them I saw one two days ago with it's awful red paint/
undercoat. Did'nt know any had survived.


"Paul S. Brown" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Hirsty's wrote:
>
> > I crack lenses at 5 Km )
> >
>
> You're hired.
>
> Your first job is to review a Dacia Duster offroad.
>
> P.

I agree a lightweight is a proper 4x4 (except its not lighter is it?)

for example an x3 is a 3series with bigger springs, less well built BMW
(who don't build it) which they charge 5 series prices for

I would buy BMW shares except they are all owned buy the daughter in law of
Goering

Also - In other words a GAP or Polo lifestyle accessory (except the shirt/
rugby shirt is not actually worse than the C&A/ M&S alternative?

They really do appeal to people with much money and little class


"Adrian" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Alan Walker ([email protected]) gurgled happily, sounding much
like
> they were saying :
>
> >> If you were to narrow it down to camp, incompetent "lifestyle" 4x4s,
> >> then you may well have a point.
> >>
> >> Any 4x4 with carpets, even.
>
> > I had an old bit of loose carpet in my old Lightweight, does that count
?
>
> Depends.
>
> Did it have an unidentified stain and an odd odour? If so, then I think
you
> should be OK...