I know I am at risk of being vilified by the anti 4×4 and ultra-green eco brigades but… there is a need for tough terrain capability vehicles, writes motoring editor Sharon Walters.
Thanks for all your comments. This debate is now closed
Yes, I do take the point that there seems little need for them in congested town and city streets - and especially when all they are used for is to run children to school who should be walking the mile or so, or a trip to the supermarket.
Indeed most of them aren’t even used for holidays to the glorious West Country or highlands of Scotland, as their owners generally prefer a flight to the sun or ski slopes.
These sort of people are the ones who really should be running more modest estate cars - although I have to say that some of those have a far larger carbon footprint than many of today’s 4×4s.
But, back to the need. We live in a beautiful area with many benefits, but our roads are not of the best; rain, ice and snow can make them lethal.
That is where the 4×4 is needed: a vehicle that is comfortable to get to and from work in, and which can also cope with treacherous conditions.
Let’s face it, last year we had atrocious periods of flooded roads and, once the water had receded, roads covered in mud and all manner of detritus.
Latest on our roads is the revised Jeep Cherokee, and while our roads are rarely as extreme as our picture to the right, they have come pretty close in my neck of the woods!
This is a vehicle that will take on the toughest of terrain and is a formidable towing machine - take it from one who has towed a caravan off-road (and I mean off-road, not a grassy field) it really can do the job.
The Cherokee is truly a vehicle for all seasons and needs, and priced at under £25,000 is one of the best specified and priced in its class.
By Sharon Walters
68 Comments
That is where the 4×4 is needed: a vehicle that is comfortable to get to and from work in, and which can also cope with treacherous conditions.
Let’s face it, last year we had atrocious periods of flooded roads and, once the water had receded, roads covered in mud and all manner of detritus.
Come off it hardly need a 4×4 do you - If anyone needs a 4×4 for driving through a bit of excess water on the road they should not be driving.
most 4×4s are quite good with CO2 emmissions now, and what about the people who do need them? If we didnt have a 4×4 we wouldnt be able to tow the horse trailer. At the end of the day its down to personal choice. Im quite happy with my little 4×4 which doesnt tow its only a 1.3 engine but i feel safe in it and the 4 wheel dive is there if i ever get stuck.
Lets be honest the only reason people drive 4×4’s are that they are considered status symbals by middle class families trying to appear upper class.
It’s not the vehicle that overcomes treacherous conditions, its the ability of the driver.
If there’s that much snow on the road you have to consider taking a 4×4, call in and take the day off as the road will be blocked with all the other idiots who think they can still travel at 80mph in 3 inches of the white stuff.
A 4×4 will not save you if you are spinning out of control on black ice, a level, calm and slower aproach to driving in those conditions will.
Fording a swollen river? How many pictures have we seen of 4×4 owners charging into water, wondering why their engine has cut out and why they are now drifting towards that raging torrent.
If it looks deep it probably is if it doesn’t, it probably is! Get out and check, yes you might get your feet wet and you might be a bit late, but better that than getting sucked under and never arrive at all!
So yes 4×4 are good at what they are designed for but they don’t make you bullet proof.
I have no desire to tell people what to drive, but I have a small “jeep” type 4×4 and it is far superior to these SUV’s (and there is a difference so check that your so-called off-roader meets EU requirement to be sold as one!)
I also have a 2WD for everyday use and have never required an off-road capabilities on a road.
It is a myth that they are safer in trecherous conditions, and this myth has led to deaths in our county.
Also, while in limited circumstances, they may have better traction when accelerating but are no better for sideways traction or traction under braking. That is governed by the friction of the tyres on the surface regardless of whether or not they are driven.
TO SUGGEST THAT A 4WD ON MUDDY LANES IS SAFER IS A REcKLESS COMMENT THAT MAY LEAD TO FURTHER DEATHS ON OUR ROADS.
4WD by their design are less stable on the road. You are 10x more likely to roll over in an accident in a SUV.
You might also want to compare the NCAP safety tests for the Cherokee:
Adult 4/5
Child 3/5
Pedestrian 0/5
And the VW Fox (Super-mini)
Adult 4/5
Child 4/5
Pedestrian 2/5
I’m not saying what people should drive, and if Mr Polar Bear has to get his paws wet because of CO2 emissions from these cars, then so be it.
What I am saying if forget the nonsensical reasoning that the SUV’s are safer.
THET ARE NOT SAFER AND IT IS IRRESPONSIBLE TO PROMOTE THEM AS SUCH.
I hope Sharon Walters researches this matter properly before expands the urba myth about SUV’s. I would gladly help her understand the mechanics and physics involved in automotive design is she so wishes rather than rely on what Jeep tell her while she enjoys lavish hospitality from such manufacturers.
Finally I feel sorry for these poor people who buy £25,000 cars and cant afford to take a day off work if driving conditions are bad. Thats what I do - take the day off.
4×4’s Are a great invention i would rather dive one of them rather than a mini or a smart car. If you do crash in a 4×4 you will be a lil safe coz of its weight and strength if your in a mini your pretty much screwed.
Lucy W you are once again a girl after my own heart
You speak a lot of common sense on articles which are often very badly thought out.
Perhaps Lucy W should become a reporter for the Shropshire star
To say you feel safe in a 4×4 is clearly a statement to be made by someone with little understanding of road conditions for the large majority of the time.
I drive a sports car, a nice new BMW 2 seater. Now, the emissions on this are much lower than a typical 4×4 and is MUCH safer than most other cars on UK roads in most conditions. Why?….. Because I have huge levels of grip in both wet and dry conditions, this means my brakes are incredible and if in the event of needing to swerve to avoid something there’s no dramatic sliding, spinning, body roll or under steer…. So excluding the couple of occasions a year that there is snow on the roads its far superior to most other vehicles. Flooded roads have never caused me a problem, as I tend to avoid roads that flood! (common sense really)
4 x 4’s are useful in rurals but have no place in the urban area, they may be improving but due to their heavy wieght and large engines, they are always pretty poor on mpg and co2, so for 95% of motorists, they are not neccessary, they are a work tool for rural areas, much like a tractor, they have no place on the school run or in our town centres
If a 4×4 does not spend 80% of the time off road then the owner of said 4×4 does not require a 4×4 and as such should be banned from owning one.
It is a status symbal when all is said and done.
Maybe all the poeple complaining about dangerous road conditions should invest in a tractor.
Y Mab Darogan said: Aug 27th, 2008 at 1:00 pm If a 4×4 does not spend 80% of the time off road then the owner of said 4×4 does not require a 4×4 and as such should be banned from owning one.
It is a status symbal when all is said and done.
What a joke of a comment. If a person needs to use a 4×4 50% of the time they shouldnt have one? What if they use it to make a living? They should not be allowed to make that living because they also need to use their transport to go to the shops, or would you rather they buy another car and run the 2? Cars use a lot more co2 being made than being run
the other thing is that most 4 x 4 drivers cant afford 1.27 per litre for these gas guzzlers so most use LPG, whilst still a fossil fuel admittedly its half price because it is a waste product of the oil industry which would only be flared if not, and because its actually quite green, being very low on emissions of Nitrous Oxides especially, so in urban areas, a clean burning LPG powered 4 x 4 is far cleaner than even a small petrol engine, so there, do not judge what you see on the tin
John Doe: You probably didnt read my NCAP comments when you posted, but the NCAP results for Cherokee are Adult 4/5, Child 3/5 and Pedestrian 0/5. There are far safer cars around than SUVs!
I see you dont like Mini’s well heres the NCAP results for Mini’s 5/5, 3/5, 2/5. That’s right - the occupants of a Mini are safer than those of a Cherokee!!! In fact the weight in a SUV is more likely to cause you to crash. Why do you think we need additional driving exams to drive heavier vehicles? It’s because weight is dangerous to stability, especially cornering on muddy roads!!
Ninja: Couldn’t agree more, BMW (Z4 I assume) is far safer and is rated better than Cherokee by NCAP in the less likely event that you will have a prang.
Y Mab: Thank you for your comment. I’d love to be a motoring correspondent but afraid I would never get invited to press previews once manufacturer realise that I will speak the truth. Plus I dont think anyone would dare publish a “truthful” article for fear of the wrath of the manufacturers.
PS When are you taking me for lunch (lol)
I have no issues about what people drive, I just want people to realise that these vehicles are not safer by far and adjust their driving style accordingly.
One final thought, if SUVs are so stable (and so safe and better at speed), why has one never won Le Mans or the WRC?
Lucy W - Lunch is on me whenever you fancy it lol
Never mind A Jones, where you refer to Y Mab Darogans’comment:
It is a status “symbal” when all is said and done.
(What a joke of a comment !!)
Well,
Actually it is worse than that because the word “symbal” actually means:
SYMbolic ALgebra. A symbolic mathematics language with ALGOL-like syntax by Max Engeli, late 60’s. Implemented for CDC6600.
NOW, what I think Y mab Darogan ACTUALLY wanted to say is that they are a status “symbol” rather than comparing 4×4’s to symbolic algrebra and rather “older”. mathematical ideas
And so …. always good to check your facts first !
(and spelling … which I have to say is a frequently occurring problem in these posts !)
Or …
You could always use the word “cymbal”, to keep up the “rhythm”, and “drum” up enthusiasm for 4×4’s!
NOW: … Could that be a “crash” or a “ride” - (if you don’t know the connection - look up cymbal types in drum kits)
Oh what fun!
ban these evil child killing machines!
who cares what people chose to drive! if people want 4×4s then let them same as if someone wants a sports car or a mini! If you compare our 4×4’s to those in USA you will know that ours are tiny incomparrison so where sre the CO2 emmissions really coming from?
people buy cars as a status symbol, that is the nature of people.
does anyone have need for a sports car? why have a car that can travel more than twice the legal speed limit?
I have 2 cars, a huge 4wd pick up, I pull horse trailers, I travel across fields with hay bales and animal feed in the back, it’s useful for collecting building materials (carries over a tonne) and gives me nearly 40 mpg on the road in 2wd.
My other car is a 4 seater family car, small boot, small engine (1.4) and with 4 in it, with luggage will do less than 35 mpg. But on a quick run to the shops single occupancy will do over 40 mpg. It can’t tow a trailer of any size, and certainly couldn’t drive across fields unless bone dry.
I use the car that does the job I need to do, doesn’t everyone?
Lucy W
You clearly know very little about the subject of 4×4s, its amazing how its always the people who know least that shout most.
With regard to motor racing, on race tracks a 4×4 is not advisable as the track is smooth and has high adhesion. Indeed, when dry, you might notice if you care to look that the cars do not even have tread on the tyres !!!
Rallying is done on tracks which are often far closer to the conditions we are likely to experience on our roads. Again, if you cared to investigate, you would find the cars are all far closer in specification to a 4X4SUV than they are to a 2WD saloon car.
If you cared to investigate how NCAP tests are conducted, you would find part of the score relates to pedestrian safety. 4X4s get marked down because they can cause greater injury to someone if they hit them. The scores do not mean the occupants of a Mini are safer than those of a Cherokee. Drive a mini head on into a 4X4 and you’re going to come out worse off.
In your first post you said:
“TO SUGGEST THAT A 4WD ON MUDDY LANES IS SAFER IS A REcKLESS COMMENT THAT MAY LEAD TO FURTHER DEATHS ON OUR ROADS.”
You also say:
“THET ARE NOT SAFER AND IT IS IRRESPONSIBLE TO PROMOTE THEM AS SUCH.”
Using capitals does not make such bold statements correct however. Both comments are so wrong as to be totally stupid. A 4×4 is certainly safer on muddy roads. Again, might I suggest you go and research the subject a little before you start shouting such garbage. Perhaps you could try driving a 4X4, its blatantly obvious that you never have.
My 4×4 vehicle has sensors on each wheel (including the steering wheel). An onboard computer analyses the vehicle’s movement, and feeds traction or braking to individual wheels to propel it in the direction the driver is trying to go. I have driven on snow, I have driven on ice, and I have driven on mud. IT WORKS !!! Sideways traction is far better.
Might I suggest you go and do some homework on a subject before you start trying to rubbish articles that have been written by people who know what they’re talking about.
I read a report that said some of these 4×4s (at the cheaper end of the market) are in fact dangerous in a crash because they’re not strong enough to take an impact. The steering Column then moves into the driver causing terrible injury or death.
If I recall correctly, the cornerstone (so to speak) of Euro NCAP Tests - in terms of protection to car occupants - consists of a front, side-on, collision with a standardised concrete block at 40mph.
This is fine, of course, when considering collisions with similar sized vehicles, but of little use when a BMW Mini collides in a similar manner with - say - a Mercedes GL-Class SUV. In such cases, the occupants of the Mini WILL be much worse off than if they collided with a Vauxhall Corsa. The size, height, weight, and design of the GL Merc will cause considerably more damage to both car and driver. So, it can be said that SUV’s ARE better in crash situations than normal cars.
That’s not an excuse for driving one as a matter of course though, or through the misguided belief that it singles you out as a social climber (albeit in a shallow and aspiring way).
No.
In crash situations, driving a large SUV merely transfers more danger of injury to the drivers of the other car, and that - for me - is totally selfish unless the large 4×4 really is needed for the regular traversing of rural roads and the undertaking of countryside activities where access is frequently difficult for normal cars. Moreover, as Lucy touched upon, due to their dynamics, large SUV’s will always be more prone to entering crash situations; a Lotus Elise will always have a larger envelope for accident avoidance than a SUV due to it’s low weight and centre of gravity.
I have a 4 x 2.5
It’s an estate car with two wheel drive.
If the going gets slippery though, the Haldex clutch transfers torque to the wheels that have the most grip. So it sometimes IS four wheel drive. The difference is, I can drive around in a car that a) is much better looking than a BMW X3 b) doesn’t incur the wrath of yogurt knitters on their hemp-framed bicycles and c) still achieves a real world 45mpg.
BTW, Lucy, SUV’s have won rally events (if you count bespoke Mitsubishi Pajeros in the Paris-Dakar)…
NCAP tests cannot be compared against different classes of vehicles - they are designed to compare vehicles in the same class.
There are also far better status symbols than 4×4s these days - eg Audi R8, even Ferraris are dropping to prices low enough to make them status symbols.
my daewoo 2×2 is good enough. 796cc 67 miles to the gallon £35 car tax. any thing bigger should be taxed from £250, motorhomes £500, caravan/horse boxes £500. petrol/diesel all duty free.now we are motoring
Can I remind you all that I travel by horse.
To be quite honest - I feel that the Government should ban the use of 4×4’s as road cars.
4×4’s are not needed to travel on the roads in our country.
If your competing in the suden rally then yes they may be needed
but driving on the a49 from Ludlow to Shrewsbury, a bump free road they are not required.
Going even further - I feel the Gov should ban all sales of cars unlessthey are hybrid cars
ie source Toyota and ask them to become the only supplier of hybrid cars in the UK
I would also fit into these cars a speed limiter as many HGV’s have.
This would limit all cars to a top speed of 70mph
a bag of hay for h st john peasebody please and a visit from siegfied farnon
ban them all i say
Y Mab Darogan (comment 25) - now I know you’ve lost the plot.
Y Mab
Have you ever considered emigrating ? There are many Eastern Bloc countries where you would probably be very happy.
David:
1. Sorry but if you look closely, rally cars resemble 4WD road cars, not SUVs and Paris-Dakar can hardly be a comparision to the UK roads in winter! Didn’t you witness Audi’s 4WD A4 success in saloon car racing - very successful on race track!! So successful they were given a weight penalty and so withdrew. Now I think you will find that 4WD is an advantage on a race circuit!(but not in the form of a SUV)
2. Re NCAP tests, if you could read, you would see that I listed the rating for Adult, Child and pedestrian and if you check you will see that the “Occupants” in a Mini are better off than a CHerokee as I stated.
3. Perhaps you could explain how torque to all wheels improves traction? Surley its a matter of the coefficient of friction, weight, speed and angle of rotation?
4. I do have a 4×4 for off-road use and a 2wd car for domestic use, again perhaps if you could read, you would have read that in my post.
5. You seem to be confusing Electronic Stability Program (ESP) with Anti-Blockier System (ABS) and Traction Control (TC) - found on mini’s as well as SUVs.
Neither “feeds” traction to any wheel.
ABS prevents wheels locking up under braking.
TC apllies a brake forces to reduce the torque to a spinning wheel.
ESP applies brakes with the aid of the Steering Wheel sensor and the Yaw sensor (in the centre of a car not at the wheels) to encourage steering.
None of these systems improve lateral traction or traction under braking i.e. you will be no safer on muddy roads.
I would be very interested in you explaination as to how 4WD makes a safer car other than under acceleration (which is nothing a competent driver cant achieve in 2wd).
I have done my homework and am regarded by many as an expert, but feel free to try me by explaining how these systems transfer traction as you claim. Perhaps you could advise me what vehicle you are refering so I can be specific.
By the way I used to be a test-driver/engineer for a European Manufacturer in which I spent 3 months testing 4wd cars in the French Alps.
I am also a member of the Society of Automotive Engineers.
Yes I do know what I am talking about. I dont rely on journalistic opinion, watching Top Gear and readind Nuts magazine to my automotive knowledge.
Spindrift: Re Lotus. I have driven one and quite frankly you’d have to be a muppet to crash one they handle so well.
Me: NCAP results can be compared between different classes. In Cherokee v Mini head on, Mini’s occupants will fair better.
H St John: Horses are excellent. All leg drive, no car tax/insurance, intelligent suspension and an on board computer to rival NASA. No need for SatNav, they always find their way home. You can be done for drink riding but it wont affect you driving licence!
If anyone still wishes to perpetuate the myth that 4wd is safer on a muddy lane as Sharon Walters article said, then please explain how it does so rather than say “I drive a SUV and its good”
Y Mab Darogan said:
“I feel that the Government should ban the use of 4×4’s as road cars”.
Hm.
I suspect that Subaru would be a little aggrieved as all of their road cars (Impreza, Legacy, etc) are 4WD. I suspect that Audi would consider pulling out of the UK car market also, considering the number of A3 / A4 / A5 / A6 / A8 models that have their “quattro” 4WD system fitted, not to mention the people who have ordered Audi’s R8 supercar which comes as standard with 4WD. Imagine; one places an order for one of the most accomplished supercars on sale today, only to be told that 4WD is banned. Despite the fact that said R8 driver only intends to exceed 70mph on track days.
BTW, Honda manufacture a hybrid also and it - like the Pious - can’t achieve the claimed mpg / C02 numbers in real world driving in addition to the huge carbon footprint they own if one takes into account the production and disposal of their batteries.
As an aside, I’m looking forward to car manufacturers addressing the problem of the endemic “green” dogma by producing cars with lower weight, less gadgets, and less occupant safety measures. This will mean more cars on the road like the Elise and the MK I MX-5, which equals more driving pleasure in terms of better handling and better acceleration. Not to mention the electric-powered Tesla Roadster which will hit 60 in 4 seconds
David,
you are very lucky to own a “bubble wrap” 4×4 which will save you the trouble of using your brain. I hope that you don’t find yourself in a 4×4 without the gadgets that yours does have or find that the gadgetry packs up one day on ice. To compare an suv with a 4 wheel drive rally car is like comparing a cow to a horse because both have four legs.
Modern rally/ road cars like the Mitsubishi Evo have the same gadgetry that you mention in your suv and will out perform your 4×4 on a race track or rally stage. In fact just like your SUV they are virtually “idiot proof”.
I started rallying in the seventies when the only two 4×4 cars available were to my recollection the subaru and later the audi quatro which was very innovative for its day but a landrover or similar wouldn’t have stood a chance against it.
Top gear did a couple of reports about the Landrover Discovery and found that the braking was no better than a seventies Ford Anglia and more recently that they could easily turn over when doing a rapid lane change manouvere at about 50-70 MPH. Both very scary.
I drive a sports car with no gadgetry and although I have driven many vehicles over many thousands of miles, I prefer vehicles without ABS to those with…far more predictable.
It’s all very well being wrapped in a “cotton wool” vehicle as you are but many 4×4’s on the road don’t have the gadgetry that you mention.
I would guess that you are not familiar with driving “gadgetry free” vehicles on rough or extreme terrains to make the comments that you do.
Y Mab, A limit of seventy MPH on all vehicles would cause severe tailbacks on all motorways and dangerous overtaking manouveres on all main roads…if you don’t know what i mean try sticking to a maximum of seventy MPH and get back to me when you have driven another 50,000 miles.
I keep hearing this “status symbol” rubbish
I buy semi skimmed instead of skimmed, mild cheddar rather than edam.
My point is i buy things because i prefer them.
I have a 5 door 2.5V6 Petrol car, because i like it, it’s confortable, slightly luxurious by having alot of modern day gadgets, (cruise, climate, onboard computer, heated seats, and electric everything) and it’s what i can afford by costing me a little over £1500. NCAP = for those people that can afford to care!
Compare my car to Ninja’s Z4.
Firstly, i think i’d prefer and accident in my car that a “Assumed” convertable!
Mine is front week drive - proven saver, this is why in the early 80’s car producers started making most cars front wheel drive.
I have 5 seats (and yes i use all of these seats, i’m one of these rare people that car share), a large boot and a tow bar, so going on the eco side of things i think my car is the better for the enviroment and more user friendly, unlike the Z4 = 2 passengers and a suitcase, pretty much all of it’s uses!
I have TC, ABS, 4 airbags, so safe enough from an NCAP prospective. Also my car is a rigid body hard top, so again safer!
I know the comment will probably pop up about porsche, ferrari etc being rear wheel drive, but then “high” performance cars need drive to come from either rear or run off a 4 wheel drive system as asking the front wheels to deal with the effects of hi torque acceleration and steering at the same time is not safe at all.
As for not skidding out of control in the Z4, that depends on the driver. If you make an error (which people do) wet or dry. you run the risk of losing control!
look at the more hitech Nissan Skyline GT-R R34 or R35. it’s 4×4i system is probably the safest one out there! you can lose control and the car will correct ITSELF by applying either brake or power to an individual wheel, not making you invicible but giving you a fighting chance. can’t see the Z4 doing that. might i highlight though that the GT-R IS a 4×4, IS a 5 seater, and IS a suitable day to day car, and IS safer than most cars on the road!
As an ex circuit racer who knows all about grip and control, even i can make mistakes, i’m human like everyone else.
Y Mab Dargan - (government should ban all cars unless hybrid) so you have wealth then? and a hyrbid car as you are preaching? what about these people that can’t afford a BRAND NEW CAR? should they just be banned from the roads? Sounds like you are the one looking for “STATUS” and are blind to see that not everyone fit’s your class!
Also (4×4’s are not needed to travel on roads) i agree with A JONES, so yes, Y Mab Darogan, we will follow your “GREEN” advice and buy 2 maybe three cars so that the business vehicle (4×4) is not used on roads. i’d like to see you drive a normal car through a muddy field.
I have to agree though BMW X5’s should be banned, they are about status, what is the point of a 4×4 that CAN’T actually go offroad???
burning fuel at this rate is darn right irresponsible, they should be banned
Y Mab Darogan’s ‘GREEN’ advice comes from someone who denies what David Attenborough calls the ‘Truth about Climate change’ without sticking around to substantiate his views (see http://www.shropshirestar.com/2008/08/09/protesters-kicked-out-of-town-park/ comment #34).
It is as bogus as Lucy W’s claim to me on another thread that she lives ‘a low carbon footprint life’ (http://www.shropshirestar.com/2008/06/19/town-gets-cycling-boost/ comment #114)
Neither of these statements tally with what they say here.
Comment 30: If it makes you feel better, you are the best, know the most and are an expert in homework - Chill!!!
Again Huw Peach you might want to type in sarcastic on the old internet
Of course I do not believe in climate change
However I would have thought the pro climate change lobby would be all for banning cars.
Btw interesting fact - cows contribute a lot more to climate change ie excess methane than cars and industry ever do.
I suggest you start a movement to cull all cows to save our planet
TO ALL MY CRITICS: I now feel that I can justify my statement that Sharon Walter’s promotion of the Cherokee as being safer on muddy lanes as reckless, since I have spoken to Chrysler, and they agree with me that the Cherokee (as with all SUVs) is less stable than a conventional car. So much so that they (as with all manufacturers of SUVs) make the point in the owners manual that a change of driving style is required for road use. Chrysler accept my point as a valid one on the specific issue that this article raised.
I have witnessed many a Health and Safety prosecution where much emphasis has been placed on the negligent failure to read an owner/operator manual and would recommend all SUV drivers who still believe that their SUVs have superior lateral and braking traction, to read the manual and seek expert advice if they still don’t understand how to drive a SUV safely.
Brain (2): It is obvious that you understand the principles of automotive design. Very nice to see that your appreciate the Quattro system, revolutionary in what is known as the “hollow shaft” transfer developed by Jorg Bensinger, a man whom I have been privileged to have worked along side. And the Bosch KKK Jetronic fuel-injection was quite an innovation which has barely been improved on! Sadly the Quattro system was a Permanent 4wd with mechanical differential-locks (not to de confused with an AWD – All Wheel Drive). This system unfortunately was driven on the road by people who didn’t understand the mechanics and as such caused damage to the cars and created a danger on the road. Subsequently the “point and press” AWD systems dominated the market where the driver requires no additional knowledge or skill. Nevertheless the Quattro permanent system remains superior to AWD systems and perhaps I could arrange for you to drive a rally prepared Quattro sometime? (Feel free to email me quattroheaven@live.co.uk)
You make an interesting point about ABS. The Department of Transport are aware that statistically, if in an accident, you are more likely to be killed in a car with ABS than without. Most experts believe this is due to the “cotton wool” theory. I have had my ABS disabled electronically (and other electronic adjustments), because as a skilled driver I find the car more predictable and easier to control.
I’m glad to hear that you enjoy “gadget free” cars. I do likewise, I enjoy driving - not being guided by a computer. I still have a 15 year old “electronic-free” car and love the joy of driving it over the Hard Knott pass in the early hours. Perhaps we should start an enthusiast club? Say call it “Gadget Free Drivers Club” with the slogan “The club for drivers who can drive”?
Andy: I don’t deny that ESP is an impressive tool. I have driven ESP cars with ESP enabled and disabled and the difference really is quite amazing! No amount of driver skill can compensate for ESP. However, my word of warning is if the system fails (which it often does), it is unlikely that you will have the skill to control the vehicle. In my opinion ESP (along with other electronic driver aids) lures driver into a danger zone. There have already been deaths attributed to a driver relying on ESP and then being killed as they have not adjusted their driving style in the absence of ESP. The problem with ESP is you don’t know when its operating and thus how much you are relying upon it rather than driver control. This could be solved by an “Activation” light to advise you that the cars electronics were require to maintain stability but sadly the industry feels that this would cause even more confusion and accidents because people don’t read the Owners Manual!
My partial solution to road safety it that new car purchasers should take a competence test before taking delivery of a new vehicle to ensure that they understand how the vehicle should be driven. This would merely be an extension current New Car Handover that manufacturers require their dealers to carry out to comply with H&S legislation. (Please note I said partial solution before you raise the issue of used cars).
Also, if cars need annual MOTs, why not the drivers?
Huw: What relevance is the fact that my carbon foot print is lower than yours to this thread? How do my comments here contradict my claim to live a lower carbon footprint than you? I honestly though you may have some relevant comment to SUVs and their road safety. Obviously I’m wrong.
If anyone is still reading this far, I apologise for such a long post – I just cant help myself when I get going!
Greens are not advocating banning cars, but are campaigning for a green industrial revolution in all areas of our society, to reduce our carbon impact (transport and agriculture included).
Please engage with the points we are making rather than making up straw man arguments.
The following scientific institutions have made statements saying that they believe mankind is contributing to climate change.
The IPCC, the science academies of Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, Italy, India, Japan, Mexico, Russia, South Africa, the UK and the USA, as well as the International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences; European Academy of Sciences and Arts; Network of African Science Academies; the International Council for Science; the European Science Foundation; the American Association for the Advancement of Science; the Federation of American Scientists; the World Meteorological Organization; the American Meteorological Society; the Royal Meteorological Society (UK); the Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society; the Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society; the Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences; the American Geophysical Union; the American Institute of Physics; American Astronomical Society; the American Physical Society; the American Chemical Society; the National Research Council (US); the Federal Climate Change Science Program (US), the American Quaternary Association; the Geological Society of America; Engineers Australia (The Institution of Engineers Australia); the Stratigraphy Commission of the Geological Society of London; the European Geosciences Union; the International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics; and the International Union of Geological Sciences.
Which scientific institutions back up your view, Y Mab Darogan?
ban them from urban areas, they are posh tractors
Huw: Just what has your comment No 39 got to do with the safety of SUV’s? What is the point of copying and pasting a list of Institutions?
Y Mab could be right - at one point the eminent experts believed the world was flat and were proved wrong!
I have tried to contribute to this fertile forum on SUV safety with my own expertise, rather than list other organisations who share my point of view. Do you personally have any expertise on the safety of SUV’s (or anything else)? Or are you going to turn this forum baron?
Do you have any expertise Global warming, or do you just quote other people? If so, perhaps you could share it on another forum where you and your bunny hugging greenies can revel in your self-righteous belief that you are saving the world.
OMG Don’t look now Huw! I‘ve just seen Y Mab driving a CO2 belching 4×4 with a trailer load of methane “emitting” cows!!!!!
Huw,your “straw man arguments” (where have I heard that phrase before) are not relevent to this post.
This is a post about the benefits or otherwise of 4×4s not an opportunity for you to show us your christmas card list for green supporters….;-)
Lucy… I think I love you, one of the first people I have seen on this site that actually bases their opinons on fact!
Andy, its a good point. If my car were to roll over, then my chances are slim. However the chances of a car such as mine rolling are minimal due to the fantastic dynamics of cars of this type.
Its an interesting point made about ESP and other electronic programs, which I tend to agree with. Most people rely on this software controlling thier car these days and in the event of failure woudl be in alot of trouble. Both of my cars have such programs and I think they are amazing, however, I also know how to handle the vehicle with the electronics turned off. Difficult argument, as the failure rate is probably very low and I beleive ALL cars shoudl ahve such programs, but how do we educate people how to drive without relying on them. Its hard enough to get people to use their mirrors! (I also ride a motorbike.
The front wheel drive, rear wheel and 4×4 argument is an interesting one. I recently started driving a front wheel drive car again regularly and feel that it is actually dangerous in comparisson to a rear wheel drive car. However, this is because im very confident at handling a powerful rear wheel drive car, but for the majority FWD is probably safer.
I think its fairly clear if we look at the facts, and dont get blinkered by ridiculous opinion based on our own lifestyle choices. Large 4×4’s or SUV’s only show their true advantages in an ‘off road’ environment, with their on road ability a long way behind a typical car. Typically (but not always) the engines will be larger and not clean on emmisions, which regardless of your opinion on climate change and other media/political hype is also something we shoudl consider. Safety is an argument that has no clear conclusion because there are so many variables for each given scenario so can only be left to NCAP ratings.
David seems to have gone quiet but I can hear Humble Pie being chewed in big bites….;-)
Lucy W
I’m sorry, I didn’t realise from the ridiculous comments you were making that you were in fact a complete expert on all things 4WD. Unfortunately your opening statements were so ludicrous I must admit I didn’t bother to read through the rest of your extremely long winded posts.
I can’t quite grasp how you can be such an expert and yet not have come across the modern intelligent 4WD system to which I refered. Perhaps you have been on holiday for the last few years?
I will try to make the explanation of the system simple, as I am still not convinced just how ‘expert’ you are:
The vehicle puts drive to each of the four wheels independently according to the traction available and the position of the steering wheel. If you steer right on a greasy surface, the system will calculate the amount of torque required for each wheel and adjust it according to the feedback it gets from motion sensors. In very simple terms it will put more power to the wheels on the left so pushing the car round to the right. You need to be able to understand a few basic scientific principles which any expert would already know.
So the system IS feeding traction to each wheel, and IS improving lateral traction. You clearly haven’t done ENOUGH homework. As for asking what car I drive, everyone reading this must be falling out of their seats laughing - an expert who doesn’t know the first thing about the current range of SUVs. Me thinks you insult the intelligence of readers on here with your claims.
Yes I understand what ABS, TC and ESP are. Those technologies have been about so long I’m sure anyone with the remotest interest in cars would know. You certainly don’t need to be an expert.
And No I never said that rally cars resembled SUVs.
Brian (2)
I don’t own it, it’s a company car, although I did choose it. It isn’t a Landrover Discovery either. It has similar MPG and emissions to an estate car, but a higher load area which I need.
My first car was a MkI Escort. I have driven plenty of ‘gadget free’ cars since, as I have been driving for 30 years. I have also been lucky enough to drive on a rally course (it was a Mini Cooper and I won!), and a race track (not a Mini Cooper or an SUV!).
I would not argue with your comment that to ” compare an suv with a 4 wheel drive rally car is like comparing a cow to a horse”. What I said was that the rally car was “closer in specification to a 4X4SUV than they are to a 2WD saloon car.” To put it in your own terms, a cow is closer in terms of leg quantity to a cow than it is to a chicken ! Unless of course some ‘expert’ wishes to correct me.
It is interesting that you prefer cars without ABS as they are more predictable. Most would say the only predictable thing is that if an average driver hits the brakes hard on a greasy road, they will hit the back of the car in front that has ABS. But then, of course, you are an above average driver, not everyone is.
Sadly I drive many miles as part of my job, and get delayed by accidents daily caused by drivers who are not so ‘above average’ (although I’m sure many of them consider themselves to be). Fortunately, in almost a million miles of driving so far, I have never yet been involved in one, but I am realistic enough to recognise that one day it could happen regardless of how vigilant I am or how carefully I drive. When it does happen, I believe I will be more likely to survive in my SUV than I would in a Mini, regardless of how vociferously some self proclaimed ‘expert’ might argue.
Can I join the “Gadget-Free Drivers Club” also?
As a recent convert to the MK I MX-5, surely I qualify?!?
I’ll ask some lads from the local PistonHeads meet to apply also; at the last meet, there were 3 TVR’s, a Caterham 7, a Lancia Delta Integrale, a Triumph Spit with a GT6 engine transplant, and a Noble M12 GTO.
Ninja makes some interesting points about Front Wheel Drive cars and I agree that I prefer rear wheel drive to FWD although I have found FWD to have better grip than some rear wheel drive in deeper snow (3-4inches). I certainly don’t like automatic gear boxes although I haven’t tried any of the later paddle type changes.
David, I’m not sure if you’ve just changed your scriptwriter since your first post or if you are the genuine article but the point you mention about ABS is an interesting one and I would be interested to hear what other experienced drivers think about it.
I am lucky to own more than one vehicle and have driven many vehicles over the course of time and sometimes many different vehicles within the space of a week. It is only when you change from an ABS to non ABS vehicle on a regular basis that you probably notice the difference and I would suspect that If you drove a vehicle with ABS continuously that you would get used to it but the braking strategy for the two types is totally different and for this reason I am concerned for younger drivers who may learn to drive in cars with ABS and lots of other gadgetry because if they were to find themselves in a gadget free car and an emergency situation or bad road conditions were to be encountered then their skills in handling said car would be limited and perhaps with very serious consequences.
So what I’m saying is, although this modern gadgetry is ok to have, it could be a problem if you become to rely on it too much and then suddenly find yourself in a gadget free vehicle in bad conditions or an emergency situation.And unless all cars become gadget laden then I would prefer to have one that depends on some sort of skill and driver awareness to keep it on the road because if drivers become too comfortable in the thought that they can’t “put a foot wrong”, then that’s when mistakes are likely to be made.
Thanks for that tsunami of warmth, Lucy and BRIAN(2). I love you, too.
Which scientific institutions back up your view that climate change is unaffected by mankind, Y Mab Darogan?
spindrift or any member of the climate-change-denying Safe Speed, ABD or Drivers’ Alliance can answer if Y Mab Darogan has decided to leave this forum. (Now when has that happened before…?)
Brian (2)
I have not gone quiet, but I do work. Neither have I changed my scriptwriter or my views. Certainly I dont see the need to be eating any humble pie as no one has yet put one sensible argument against anything I have said (and no, I dont consider the argument that passengers in a mini are safer than those in an SUV to be at all sensible).
As for your concerns on ABS, as the system only kicks in at the point when you lose traction under severe braking, anyone who is ‘relying on it too much’ is surely an accident waiting to happen anyway. I certainly have never had need for ABS myself yet, but I am glad it is there if ever I do suddenly have to brake hard and misjudge the road conditions.
To be driving in such a manner that ABS is frequently ‘kicking in’ is surely to be driving like a lunatic ?
If anyone has gone quiet, surely it is our self confessed “expert” who supposedly is a fully fledged test driver and engineer. Funny how on anonymous forums, when you shoot someone’s ridiculous argument to pieces, they try to bluff their way out of it by becoming an ‘expert’. Very silly.
Brian2: Why did you have to mention X-mas? The next thing we will be hearing is that it doesn’t snow anymore at X-mas because of Global Warming!! (lol)
Ninja: Of course I accept the failure rate is low of electronics and the benefits outweigh the disadvantages. However one problem I have come across on a regular basis is the “Electronic Throttle” warning light comes on, usually due to sooting-up inside the throttle housing. The car will appear to operate as normal but in fact the ESP may be disengaged (for technical reasons I won’t elaborate on here) with no warning lamp to advise the driver. As a result the driver may take a corner at a speed that they have “mastered” oblivious to their dependence on ESP. The result is the driver is travelling too fast for non-ESP mode and no amount of driver skill can compensate for, or simulate the independent brake intervention of ESP. There have been deaths on our roads attributed to this.
I say all cars should have ESP, merely an expansion of the existing ABS unit, but an “activation” light should be fitted to make the driver aware that he is still on the road due to ESP intervention and not driving style. Rather like whenever I feel the pedal pulse of ABS it “calms” me down.
Re Mirrors, well you make a fair point there! Don’t get me started!
As for front/rear/4×4 (and the different types of 4×4 transmissions), it’s horses for courses. But as you have pointed out, different types of cars need different driving styles, which was the point of my initial contribution to this thread. I trust that my first paragraph of comment 38 has now closed that issue.
With regards to off-road use, there are SUVs and Off-roaders – there is a difference under EU regulations! The correct policy of some manufacturers is for their sales staff to ascertain the level of off-roading, and recommend the “off-road” option where appropriate and ultimately concede that their “off-road kitted SUV” is not as capable as a Utilitarian Off-roader.
It is interesting that Germans buy SUV’s in 2wd form (4wd being an option), as they purchase the cars for the ride and suitability for their needs, and don’t delude themselves that they are driving some invincible go anywhere machine and 4wd will have any significant effect other that being faster off from the lights. Most traction is found at the front wheels - engaging the rear wheels does not double the traction!
David: Well you shouldn’t comment on what you haven’t read! But don’t mind me, I’ve engaged in some very interesting and though provoking people here who have read my posts (and made a friend in the process), and I likewise have read theirs with great interest.
You now harp on about a “modern intelligent 4WD” but declined to tell me what type of system you are referring to or name the car it is fitted to if you don’t know what its called.
In my defence, you mentioned steering wheel sensors, wheel sensors. These are associated with ABS, TC, and ESP. I invited you to explain how these sensors assisted in the transfer of torque as you claimed, but you failed to explain that either.
I am sorry I can’t be specific and you won’t tell me what you drive or the system you are referring to. It now sounds like you are referring to a Torsen Diff, however I am unsure because a Torsen does not require Steering Wheel sensors or Wheel Velocity Sensors.
I have read your description and you seem to be describing a mis-match of TC and ESP. You also talk about power at the wheel, I think you mean torque. However, increasing torque at a wheel will not cause the car to turn. If I may explain: If you snap a drive shaft, all torque will be lost through it via the differential. This can be over come by engaging a differential lock and so 100% of the torque will pass through one wheel. The car goes forward and not in a circle as you suggest, rather like a steam traction engine is only driven by one rear wheel. Some ride-on mowers onkt drive one wheel, the list is endless. Perhaps you might like to get a grasp of scientific principles after you have learnt the difference between power and torque.
As for your comment of “feeding traction”, that is governed by the vector forces involved and the coefficient of friction. Traction just can not be “fed” to a wheel (torque can). TC will reduce excess torque to regain traction, but this is not “feeding” traction as you describe it and feeding torque (or power as you call it) increases the likelihood of loosing traction! Perhaps we are at loggerheads due to our different terminology?
However, I still don’t understand why you wont tell me what you drive (surely you’re not that embarrassed?), the system or explain how it works – lets face it “clever sensors make it do it all itself” is hardly an explanation is it?
May I just point out that ABS in fact increases braking distances but improves “steerability”. The EU law on ABS is complex, but for briefness, many SUV’s/Off-roaders are able to disengage ABS to improve braking off-road. I speculate that Brian2 uses throttle techniques, left foot braking and general handling characteristic unique to his car to maintain steerabilty. The compromise with ABS is the more you steer the less you brake – one possible explanation of why, when in an accident, you are more likely to be killed in a car with ABS than without! In fact if Brain should ever run into the back of me, I would rather him hit me square on at a slower speed than a hit me half on, at a faster speed – its all down to crumple zones and impact absorbsion.
Whereas, David, in his all singing and dancing whatever-its-called, would no doubt maintain steerability by reducing braking force and go whizzing past me, into oncoming traffic and so have a greater likelihood of killing himself (and others). This is another theory behind the “ABS deaths phenomenon” – an ABS car may avoid a minor risk to steer into a greater one at a higher speed.
Being aware of the numerous and thorough NCAP tests a car goes through, I am inclined to accept NCAP results rather than make my own judgement on what I think looks safe from its aesthetic qualities – looks can be deceiving. There is more to a NCAP testing than flinging the car into a lump of concrete!
Spindrift: By all means – just take your SatNav out (lol). Glad to see that you have no hang-ups about what you drive.
I guess we wait with bated breath to hear what David actually drives. Does VEB make a SUV derivative of their Trabant ? Perhaps I missed the launch when I was on holiday.
Huw: Perhaps Y Mab is busy slaughtering cows to reduce global warming so you can continue enjoying your high carbon foot-print.
You never did tell me when and where the next Green Party meeting is so I can count the cars in the car park and make a note the single occupancy journeys aswell.
Quite frankly I stopped taking the Green Party seriously after you booted out David Icke aka The Son of God - a lost opportunity if ever ther was one. What is the Green Party left with now? I’ll tell, a bunch of nutters that make Mr Icke look like a sage!
The problem with ABS, ESP etc is they are working all the time but you are not aware of them most of the time. Cadence braking might only kick in at the point of lock up but the ABS and others are doing their jobs all the time and many people do not realise this but there are a couple of interesting articles that I found over the weekend that supports my theory that too much “cotton wool ” motoring is making the average driver less skillful.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/main.jhtml?xml=/motoring/2002/06/28/emrip29.xml
and http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/driving/features/article785747.ece are two links which show what I am trying to get over to you David.
The other concern that I have with ABS is that I have found that when braking and you hit a large pothole etc that the brakes can release suddenly for a second or two and if this were to happen when approaching a line of stationary traffic could have serious consequences. Apart from that, people who are only used to ABS cars would find their braking being far too severe in an emergency if they were to have to drive a non ABS car at any time.
It’s nice to see that you too were weened on Mk1 Escorts, which model did you have? Did it have drum or disc brakes? I still smile at the thought of the windscreen washer switch on those cars.
David: Re you comment 50. Whislt at the time of this post, I still have no idea what transmision system you are refering to. I suspect that you are going quiet because you fear I am right.
As for “sensible” arguements, you have not made one point to suggest that your judgement made on the aesthetic qualities is superior to NCAP. On what basis do you believe that a Mini is safer than a Cherokee? If Chrysler accept the results of NCAP, why can’t you? I think it is you who is not being sensible and your ranting are the reason many people are chatting via my email.
With regards your comment “I certainly have never had need for ABS myself yet” - just how do you know that ABS has never intervened? It is quite clear to me that you dont fully understand how ABS works! But perhaps you could explain so we can all have a good laugh.
If anyone is interested in how ABS works, please email me quattroheaven@live.co.uk and I will forward an easy to understand explaination by VW AG/Bosch. And dont worry, its not rocket science.
I am still waiting to hear how traction is “fed” to the wheels?
Traction can be measured as maximum acceleration that can be applied before traction is lost measured in m/s2 (sorry I can’t do a little 2 for “squared”). The formula is quite simple for someone who is “able to understand a few basic scientific principles” [your words in comment 45] but I state it as follows for those who don’t share our scientific understanding of Motor Vehicle Dynamics:
Max Acceleration [upgrade] (m/s2)
a(max) = k.g(Ur cos (angle) - sin (angle))
Where :
k = ratio of load on driven wheels.
g = Gravitational acceleration (9.81 m/s2)
Ur = Coefficient of static friction
Angle refers to the angle of upgrade.
It is quite clear that maximum acceleration (traction) is a constant. Traction can’t be “fed” to a wheel by increasing/decreasing torque. Unless you have a formula that you wish to share?
Now you dont need to be an Einstein to understand that!
PS Look forward to hearing what SUV you drive.
Dear David, I haven’t gone, its just that my longer posts for some reason are still awaiting moderation!
Please be patient - Normal service will resume shortly.
Huw: I have just been reading extracts of the Stern Report. Very interesting stuff. Do you stand by its findings?
“Huw Peach In Thread Hijack Shocker!!”
*rollseyes*
Which scientific institutions back up your view that climate change is unaffected by mankind, Y Mab Darogan?
Lucy, maybe you could answer this important question.
Silence may encourage Shropshire Star readers to draw their own conclusions on who the nutters are.
Hi, spindrift.
Perhaps you could answer the same question, which you seemed strangely reluctant to answer at the end of this thread ( http://www.shropshirestar.com/2008/06/13/group-to-air-views-of-drivers/ )
Thanks in advance.
Huw needs a sat nav, he’s lost his thread and “skidded” onto another one.
You mentioned Stern, Lucy.
He predicted the greatest and widest-ranging ‘market failure’ ever seen if world governments don’t act.
Even if you are not concerned about polar bears, habitat loss or the appalling potential human costs, Lucy, the economic disruption that climate change will unleash must surely cause concern to the company you work for.
The Garnaut Report on climate change, is due to be handed to the Australian government on 30 September 2008. Professor Garnaut is reported as saying that Professor Stern has UNDER-estimated the severity of the problem.
Stern himself in June 2008 corrected his earlier assessment of the severity of the problem, and now believes that we must invest 2% of GDP in cutting carbon, double what he originally forecast.
I accept journalist Sharon Walters’ point that there is a need for strong vehicles in a rural area like Shropshire, but I hope she agrees that the casual, baseless denial of climate change, which is so common in Shropshire Star forums, needs to be robustly challenged.
People making credible arguments do not run away, but stand up and engage.
Huw: Re Institions/Experts who claim that Global warming is not man-made, I have no intention of Googling the subject and pasteing the results. However, I have been led to believe that the planet has had serveral ice-ages, and so, periods of global-warming long before man had evolved.
I do feel that Global Warming is yet another dooms-day scenario the human condition has been prone to through out the ages, leading man to believe in such fates. Nostradamus’ book has hardly been out of print since 1555 and was taken very seriously in his day (and now). What happened to all the trees dieing of acid rain and the Y2K bug bringing the world to a halt?
I feel that all this Global Warming is more dooms-day dribble and through out time men have made money, wealth and power exploiting those who will believe it.
Personally I live a low carbon foot-print, as you know, and do my bit without preaching to others. For example, today, I have completed a chicken shed all from re-claimed materials.
The interesting point of the Stern report is the UK’s homes cause considerably more CO2 than its cars. But we have yet to see those who actively target large cars drivers, rushing out to lecture residents of Victorian homes about the evils of draughty sash windows.
From where I sit, now those bunny huggers, who envied of rural folk for making a day out of killing a fox or two, are now directing their envy at large car drivers as they have stopped hunting with hounds.
What have you done today Huw to support your Green credentials?
Lucy W
If you really seriously do believe that the occupants of a mini would fare better in a crash than those of a much larger 4×4, then I see no point at all in trying to continue a sensible discussion with you.
The 4×4 system fitted to my vehicle that feeds traction to independent wheels is by Nissan. It is in their sales literature and owners manual explaining how it operates with motion sensors exactly as I have tried to convince you above, which gave me an idea as to how we could resolve our differences of opinion:
If you are soooo right and everyone else is sooo wrong, why don’t you put your money where your mouth is and sue one or two of these manufacturers who are making these claims about 4WD. After all, gullible ‘punters’ like me are believing their claims. Surely an ‘expert’ like yourself has a duty to the rest of us to put them straight on the subject ?
With advertising standards etc being so strict, I find it hard to believe someone hasn’t already done this already if in fact you are correct, but perhaps no one ‘expert’ enough has broached the subject until now.
Do please let us know how you get on. Imagine when you win, and millions of us trade in our unsafe 4×4s for humble minis. You will have gone a large way towards saving the planet all on your own.
Huw
We know who they are, but its interesting engaging them to unravel just how unbelievably nutty they can be, dont you think.
Brian (2)
It was the 1.3 high compression engine saloon with drum brakes all round. It was certainly huge fun to drive, especially in the snow.
I take your point about ABS and ESP working constantly, what I meant was that with purely ABS (not ESP or EBD), although the system works constantly, it does not actually make a difference “kick in” until you lose traction. When that happens, you can feel it.
I totally accept however that things are happening that you dont ‘feel’ with EBD and the like, which is now fitted to most cars together with ABS.
ROFL @ #59. Enjoyed that one Bri
nothing sensible from david yet again then!!!
Brian: Yes I am equally dissappointed that David declined to explain how ABS works to justify his statement. I think he may have asked an expert and realised how silly his previous statement was. We dont know what he drives either preventing any engagement about how safe/capable his car is as he claims.
But fair play to Huw, he backs is arguements up with facts so that others can give them serious consideration.
David: Nissan employ various systems through out their range.You are obviously being evasive now.
You still camt explain how traction is “fed” to wheels, nor can you explain how you can be sure that you never rely on ABS as you cant explain that either.
You still wish to claim that you know beter than NCAP but cant say why.
Not everyone else is “soooo” wrong. Chrysler accepted my point about safety and handling of the Cherokee.
At the end of the day, it is peoples ignorance of how their cars really work that creates a serious risk on our roads.
Perhaps you will explain how ABS works so you can be so sure that you never rely o it. And let me know the make model and year of your SUV so that consider your claims upon that issue, rather than ranting like someone who knows nothing about the subject but feel that if they shout loudest, they will be right.