Thread: 20000 IGNORANTS calling for ban 4WDs

When an MP moves this quickly and publicly to distance themselves from a dead cat topic, it pretty well sums up the electorate's attitude...

...which is most people either don't care about 4WDs or flat out disagree with the idea proposed!

I agree with what others have suggested, what are they trying to table in parliament today whilst we are all nicely distracted with this ****?

F4phantom, a tip for when you next get in a discussion about the merits off 4x4's dollar for dollar they are as economical as most cars and are a similar(often smaller) size if not weight. Compare a(35-49k) rav4/forester/ xtrail to it's equal dollar size a falcon/ commodore ,which is more fuel efficient and smaller in size? The 4x4. Now do a (50k-60)freelander, prado, pajero to a holden statesman or calais/ ss crummy, again the 4x4 wins in size ( prado is within 100kgs of a statesman) and economy , except for the petrol prado/ pajero. Next in the big class, disco, landcruiser200 v hsv /fpv or mid size euro import 4x4's win on economy against locals and on seating, safety and space against all.

Originally Posted by djhampson

This is the website of Fiona Simpson who raised the petition in parliament...

I suggest you all send a short message to her showing your opposition to this crap.

Contact - Fiona Simpson MP

done.

Dropped my daughter to prep this morning in the HumVee and manage not to squash a single child

Let the try and ban them........

Cheers,

Originally Posted by frantic

F4phantom, a tip for when you next get in a discussion about the merits off 4x4's dollar for dollar they are as economical as most cars and are a similar(often smaller) size if not weight. Compare a(35-49k) rav4/forester/ xtrail to it's equal dollar size a falcon/ commodore ,which is more fuel efficient and smaller in size? The 4x4. Now do a (50k-60)freelander, prado, pajero to a holden statesman or calais/ ss crummy, again the 4x4 wins in size ( prado is within 100kgs of a statesman) and economy , except for the petrol prado/ pajero. Next in the big class, disco, landcruiser200 v hsv /fpv or mid size euro import 4x4's win on economy against locals and on seating, safety and space against all.

if this is true that is fine by me, I often take my diesel RR over the smaller engined FWD v6 sedan because it uses less fuel. I would have put my money on the diesel LR's as more economical but I am surprised to see things like prados and LC's as cheaper as I dont see them as cheap to own vehicles.

I dont mind discussing the negatives of 4x4 ownership in the spirit of being unbiased, in fact I have talked a few mates out of 4x4's because they were not going to tow or go off road and I could not see the point for them.

What about factors such as stopping, crash avoidance - handling, cost of brake pads, oil change volume, tyres surely a 4x4 would have to cost more than a commondoor. RR's are awd and so are fairly easy on tyres as are subies and like.

The problem is that when a 4wd rocks up to a school with a front bar that wouldn't look out of place on a mack truck, as the picture's in dm-td5 thread titled Define ugly(wish I knew how to move picture's from 1 thread to another), you can understand the sheep mentallity of the general public..
I dont think i'd be to impressed seeing some of those bars getting around a pre school car park. It doesn't mean I support the petition or the way it has come about, but can understand it to a degree.
Cheers Ean

Hang on chaps..... I've got an idea..........


how about we petition for the registration to be based on HP/GVM or GCM if the vehicle is designed as a towing vehicle (prime mover type setup).

Four wheel drives are bigger and must therefore have bigger more powerful engines right......

Think About it beofre you flame me

Several points need making for these people -

1. How many driving wheels a vehicle has almost no bearing on any other property of the vehicle - two and four wheel drive vehicles can be almost identical in all other factors, a good example being the Territory, which has little difference between two and four wheel drive versions.

2. In particular, height does not depend on number of driving wheels. Many "people movers" for example are higher than many four wheel drives and almost all four wheel drives are lower than typical delivery vans and light or medium trucks, let alone buses (even minibuses) and heavy trucks.

3. Rear visibility in many four wheel drives is better than in many mainstream cars, and again, number of driving wheels is irrelevant.

4. According to research by Monash University, large four wheel drives are under-represented in accidents and injuries/deaths both to occupants and third parties. Presence or absence of safety features in cars does not correlate well with incidence of accidents or injuries/deaths. The only circumstance in which they have a slightly higher rate is when driven by teenagers. (see muarc241.pdf, downloadable from the Monash website)

5. Many people need four wheel drives other than farmers for a variety of reasons. Banning them from specific areas (apart from the problem of "what is a four wheel drive?") there is the problem of banning tourists and rural residents from the areas!

6. Perhaps all concerned ought to consider that according to statistics, delivering your child to school by car, regardless of the number of driving wheels, is by far the most dangerous way they can travel, being even more dangerous than their cycling. (bus is the safest)

7. Queensland already has the illogical method of taxing registration on number of cylinders. Which has the ludicrous result of making a TD5 Defender cost more than a Puma. Changing this to a carbon emissions rate would more sensible, but putting the tax onto fuel would be even more sensible.

John