Re: Decent people ?

[Derek]

"Adrian" <spamtrap@achapman.freeisp.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Xns953AC5BD84538adrianachapmanfreeis@130.133. 1.4...
> jim (k@y.com) 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.

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.
Derek


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.726 / Virus Database: 481 - Release Date: 22/07/2004

[Hirsty's]

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


"Derek" <delwattsspamnoman@cwcom.net> wrote in message
news:mfTPc.859$UA2.810@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net...
>
> "Adrian" <spamtrap@achapman.freeisp.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:Xns953AC5BD84538adrianachapmanfreeis@130.133. 1.4...
> > jim (k@y.com) 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.
>
> 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.
> Derek
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.726 / Virus Database: 481 - Release Date: 22/07/2004
>
>

[Adrian]

Derek (delwattsspamnoman@cwcom.net) 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"...

[Adrian]

Stoneskin (no@thanks.com) 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?

[Stoneskin]

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]

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]

[Paul S. Brown]

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.

[Stoneskin]

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]

[Simon Barr]

In article <MPG.1b7af81adcea2e5498995a@news.individual.net>, 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.