Idiot motorbiker

[Rhythm Thief]

I take it this a pop at me MrP

You might want to get that ego looked at.

 

[Rhythm Thief]

It is a bit of a stab in the dark isnt it Paulie, it has been proven that 4x4s are driven with more consideration than others - no accident, no injury.

How could such a ridiculous statistic ever be "proven" in any way? Is every 4x4 bought by a particular kind of driver or something? Of course not.

... oh, I can't be bothered any more. Isn't it about time you flounced off again?

 

[Rhythm Thief]

All I see is a frenzy of denial when faced with the unthinkable. The proof is there that you are substantially less likely to be hit by a 4x4, means that 4x4 drivers are safer drivers and execute the task with more consideration to those around them than those of you driving regular cars.

"You are substantially less likely to be hit by a 4X4" might well mean simply that there are fewer 4X4s on the road than saloon cars. Not that all 4X4s are impeccably driven.
I don't have a problem with 4X4s, by the way - I nearly bought an old Range Rover this afternoon 'cos I love them - but I do have a problem with poorly interpreted data.

 

[mr_hippo]

Right

Saab driver nearly takes out a motorcyclist.

Saab driver has THINK BIKE! sticker in rear window.

Any more comments on this ironic incident?

Any proof that the Saab driver is a motorcyclist? Could the previous owner of the car put the sticker in?

 

[Virtual DBP]

can i just say i don't like the way people refer to a particular transmission type to refer to (i'm assuming) body style.

most of the 4x4 which people complain about are actually 2WD which now seem to be known as 'soft' roaders as opposed to off roaders. they are probably more fuel efficient and have less co2 than most saloon cars and will only engage all wheel drive (if at all possible) below 10mph on the owners instruction or if a computer senses wheels are slipping.

then again, i might be wrong and people are actually complaining about cars such as the 4WD fiat panda

 

[BentMikey]

STFU very-near, or at least take your 4x4 whinge off to cafe or something.

 

[Tynan]

I was right about the OP being unclear wasn't I

as for the rest, get a room init

 

[goo_mason]

Linf,

Do you ever actually contribute to a thread about cycling, or talk about cycling, or even - dare I ask - cycle yourself?

I can't remember ever seeing you talk about your rides, discussing bike accessories, talking about your commute or whatever - you only seem to come on to talk 4x4s and horses / horse-boxes / climate change.

Are you SURE you're on the right forum?

The original post was about the irony of a Saab driver with a THINK BIKE! sticker in their window who most certainly wasn't thinking bike. Things took a turn for the worst when you jumped in with a weird, paranoid post where you seemed to think this thread was Mr P having a pop at you. Once again, you managed to drag the whole thing down into one of your 'persecuted 4x4 driver' whines.

Mr Paul has tried to drag the thread back towards it's original intent - the irony of the sticker vs the driver's behaviour. Will you be able to stick to the point, or will you attempt to drag it back to your favourite subject?

 

[very-near]

"You are substantially less likely to be hit by a 4X4" might well mean simply that there are fewer 4X4s on the road than saloon cars. Not that all 4X4s are impeccably driven.
I don't have a problem with 4X4s, by the way - I nearly bought an old Range Rover this afternoon 'cos I love them - but I do have a problem with poorly interpreted data.

That is not what the report said, and that is why I posted it - Read this bit again RT. It is not the fact that the percentage of them is lower, but that they are obviously being driven with more care.

I can't see this being any more clearly stated than in this paragraph below:-

Overall, the number of collisions in London involving SUVs was relatively small, with 2.7% of cars involved in collisions being SUVs. Relative to the number of registered SUVs, small and large SUVs were around 30% less likely to be involved in a collision than a non-SUV passenger car. Pedestrians in London were 21% less likely to be involved in a collision with a large SUV than with a non-SUV, relative to the number of registered vehicles. The pedestrian casualty rates for small SUVs and non-SUVs did not differ significantly. Pedal cyclists and motorcyclists also had a significantly lower risk of being injured in a collision with a large or small SUV compared with the average passenger car (on average around 20% lower).

 

[very-near]

Linf,

Do you ever actually contribute to a thread about cycling, or talk about cycling, or even - dare I ask - cycle yourself?

I can't remember ever seeing you talk about your rides, discussing bike accessories, talking about your commute or whatever - you only seem to come on to talk 4x4s and horses / horse-boxes / climate change.

Are you SURE you're on the right forum?

The original post was about the irony of a Saab driver with a THINK BIKE! sticker in their window who most certainly wasn't thinking bike. Things took a turn for the worst when you jumped in with a weird, paranoid post where you seemed to think this thread was Mr P having a pop at you. Once again, you managed to drag the whole thing down into one of your 'persecuted 4x4 driver' whines.

Mr Paul has tried to drag the thread back towards it's original intent - the irony of the sticker vs the driver's behaviour. Will you be able to stick to the point, or will you attempt to drag it back to your favourite subject?

Ah, good to see you are now addressing me directly Goo.

All of MrPs anti 4x4/anti m/cycle threads are done with me in mind and this new one is no coincidence (especially as I pulled his chain for the first time in months yesterday) It is not paranoia to see him respond in this way. He is just following a well trodden path again. We have had very long discussions regarding both subjects for a damned sight longer than you have been a member here so i'll put to you that you simply don't understand the history between us.

As for the 'posting about rides' over all other stuff, I don't commute on my Marin, I use it for purely for leisure. There are too many twats on the road in the morning rushing to get to work, and my commute involves fastly driven narrow country lanes.

If I want to find something out about any cycling subject, I use this and it gives me an answer 99% of the time

Are you suggesting we start posting about cycling in P&L in future to even out the balance ?

 

[BentMikey]

MrP, do you *have* to engage with the spanner?

 

[Virtual DBP]

up until last week i used to drive one of these off roader styled vehicles and it was more fuel efficient and in a lower tax band that the majority of my work colleagues who drove things like jags, bmw's, etc.

it's quite a common yet incorrect assumption that off roaders are the worst polluters and when the gov. were introducing new tax bands every talked about 4x4's but they actually made up the minority of the gov's vehicle list. yes the list included some off roaders, but it also included ford mondeo's and the like. lastly, new ones are much better for the environment than big old saloon cars.

 

[hackbike 666]

Eh I've got nothing against 4x4,BMW,Mercs,White van man,Cab Drivers + Bus Drivers only idiot drivers.TIA.

 

[GrasB]

I'm interested in the bit in bold. How is a heavier, less-aerodynamic car with fatter tyres going to be more efficient than a comparable saloon?

In short, they're not. In a random sample of cars with the same or similar engines I bring you the summery that only the Panda Cross 1.3 mJTD (aka MultiJet) which is equal with it's non-4x4 sibling & Lexus gift the RX with an economy win (performance however is a different kettle of fish, due to the seriously hot, in production car terms, cams & performance orientated setup on the GS450h). And for the record you don't get much bigger than the Audi A8 or BMW 7 series in LWB guise.

Audi:
Q5 Quadro 2.0 TDI (170bhp) - 42.1mpg
A6 2.0 TDI (170bhp) - 49.6mpg
Q7 FSI 4.2 - 22.2mpg
Q7 TDI 4.2 - 28.5mpg
A8 FSI 4.2 Quadro - 25.9mpg
A8 TDI 4.2 Quadro - 30.1mpg

BMW:
X1 23d (204bhp) - 44.8mpg
325d (197bhp) & 330d (245bhp) - 49.6mpg
X6 50i (408bhp) - 22.1mpg
750Li (407bhp) - 24.8mpg

Fiat Panda v's Panda 4x4
1.3 16v mJTD Dynamic - 65.7mpg
1.3 16v mJTD Cross - 65.7mpg
1.2 Eleganza - 50.4mpg
1.2 4x4 - 42.8mpg

Ford
Kuga 2.0 TDCi 4x2 136ps - 46.3mpg
Mondeo 2.0 TDCi 140ps - 47.9mpg
Kuga 2.5i AWD - 28.5mpg
Mondeo 2.5T - 30.4mpg

Honda Accord Tourer (AT) v's CR-V:
2.0 i-VTECH manual - AT 39.2mpg, CR-V 34.9mpg
2.0 i-VTECH Auto - AT 37.7mpg, CR-V 34.4mpg
2.2 i-DTEC manual - AT 50.4mpg, CR-V 43.5mpg

Lexus (indirect comparison, the GS uses a different engine setup)
RX 450h (183kW) - 44.8mpg
GS 450h (218kW) - 37.2mpg

Toyota
Auris 1.4 D-4D - 60.1mpg
Urban Cruiser 1.4 D-4D - 57.6mpg
Avensis 2.0 D-4D - 51.4mpg
RAV4 AWD D-4D - 48.7mpg

To this I'll add a heavily modified Alfa Romeo 159 SportsWagon Ti Q4 2.4 JTDm (that's all the trimmings) with 280bhp & 410lbft averages 48mpg & an stock Lotus S2 Exige S (somehow) manages 38mpg & those two will put shame to most of the cars above.

 

[goo_mason]

Ah, good to see you are now addressing me directly Goo.

All of MrPs anti 4x4/anti m/cycle threads are done with me in mind and this new one is no coincidence (especially as I pulled his chain for the first time in months yesterday) It is not paranoia to see him respond in this way. He is just following a well trodden path again. We have had very long discussions regarding both subjects for a damned sight longer than you have been a member here so i'll put to you that you simply don't understand the history between us.

As for the 'posting about rides' over all other stuff, I don't commute on my Marin, I use it for purely for leisure. There are too many twats on the road in the morning rushing to get to work, and my commute involves fastly driven narrow country lanes.

If I want to find something out about any cycling subject, I use this and it gives me an answer 99% of the time

Are you suggesting we start posting about cycling in P&L in future to even out the balance ?

The thread had sod all to do with you or 4x4s. You seem to think that every time Mr P posts, he's REALLY just directing it at you. This was a post in Commuting, regarding the irony of driver behaviour / sticker message conflict. Despite denying paranoia, you're exhibiting it in spadefuls in this thread.

Personally, I think you use the search box with some saved searches looking for (a) any threads started by Mr P and ( any mention of 4x4s.

Would you believe that you and I signed up to CC on the same day (10 July 2007, when you were under your previous guise of LLB) ? Of course, you may have had history with Mr P prior to that username - but I think I've been here long enough to have seen most of your spats with Mr P.

Perhaps people might think more of you if you'd joined a cycling forum to discuss cycling, rather than spending most of your life defending 4x4s in P&L and getting paranoid about Mr P subliminally having a dig at you in a post about an ironic sticker.