4x4 - The Debate

[Caledonia]

The 4x4 has been around since just after 1900, and has played a vital front role every since in our farming, military, and emergency services. It is an eminently useful machine that isn't much bigger than a standard largish saloon, yet it is vilified in the press almost daily (or at least it is in the UK). Here's a front page headline:

Where do you stand, and second question, of the working 4x4s when were/are you most impressed by their contribution. And, if this is a thread that should be somewhere else I am totally happy to move it, just move me.

 

[Lincsong]

I look at it totally in the utilitarian perspective. My F-150 is a two wheel drive truck. I don't go off roading, nor do I live where it snows a lot so I don't need one. Sure there are people who buy one and never use it. To me that's a waste of money. A 4X4; uses more gas, costs $1500 more, costs more to insure, adds 500 pounds to a vehicle's weight therefore decreasing payload and towing capacity by 500 pounds. To me its a waste of money if you don't need it. Buying a properly equipped two wheel drive with the correct engine, rear differential ratio and a either a limited slip or locking differential is really all what most people need. When I sold trucks people bought them just for the looks. I'd show people how to engage the 4X4 and they'd tell me; 'that's ok, I'm never going to use it anyway.":eusa_doh:
But, if you live in the upper Mid-West, New England or Sierra Nevada's a 4X4 would be justified.
It's other people's money let them spend it as they wish.

 

[Caledonia]

Quote: "I'd show people how to engage the 4X4 and they'd tell me; 'that's ok, I'm never going to use it anyway."

Wow, I get it the other way. Go in to get a 4X4, I'm a woman, and whatever I ask I get the 'vibe' (not clear words, but definitely a vibe) that, 'I'm a woman, what am I ever going to do with a 4x4, you're only going to go shopping....'. or, "so what's your husband going to use it for then'!!!!!!! Helloooo, I'm the one with the money! And incidentally, the one who knows how to use a 4x4. lol But let's not get mean.

Seriously, I really welcome everybody's views on this, historical, utilitarian, and current political/environmental.

 

[Tony in Tarzana]

My family had a new 1963 International Scout, a family SUV before anybody used that term.

Intellectualy lazy politicians and journalists always need something to blame things on.

 

[DiabolicalAngel]

I love 4x4's, my first was a Wrangler Jeep, I have progressed to a gas guzzling, road hogging Range Rover now. It costs me about £100 a week in petrol, insurance isn't too bad, fully comp for less than £500 per annum, I purchased it with my hard earned money yet in London we have busy bodies sticking A4 size flyers on 4x4's expressing their dislike to them. What's it to them? So much so for a free country! Maybe I should express my views to these people but I don't.:rage:

Ok, I might live in London but it was my choice of vehicle, I use it in town and off road and in truth, I don't have to justify myself to anyone as long as I am not breaking the law!

The funny thing about the United Kingdon is that when there is the slightest bit of snow the country grinds to a halt especially major cities ! So whilst all those 2 wheel drive vehicles are side sliding, skidding and kerbing it, I am safe and that is all I care about !

Have I gone off the rails here Caledonia.........sorry I am passionate about my 4x4

 

[Caledonia]

In my opinion you have definitely not gone of the rails Diabolical (if I may call you that.) I think there is a core of 4x4 users that have no real need for, nor desire to use them as such, and it's these people that cause the problem. I don't think that 4x4 users can justify their use just because occasionally in winter they don't skid, but there is justifiable cause out there. Can I come back on that tomorrow? One of the difficulties of the Fedora is that I have to stay up way too late after a really hard day to engage with anybody in an intelligent fashion - unintelligent is a whizz, but.... I'll get up early tomorrow and do a bit more thinking and post back.

 

[Maj.Nick Danger]

Ah, those road-hogging %#@*^@#$s

There is a profusion of 4x4s on our roads, mostly driven by people that have no real reason for driving one other than to impress others, it seems. A lot of guys around here tend to drive the biggest versions simply as a way of intimidating and/or impressing other drivers. Personally, I am not impressed. As the article posted here states, they are an extravagent waste of natural resources that we can ill-afford to waste at this point in history. Many people are more than willing to complain about the sky rocketing cost of energy, but they insist on driving the most inefficient of vehicles. :eusa_doh: Hopefully, the purely materialistic and ego-driven drivers of such vehicles will lose interest as energy prices continue to rise.

But on the other hand, they do have their legitimate uses and owners. A good workhorse 4x4 would be indispensible to a farmer or rancher. Some of the smaller versions are well liked by women with kids, especially during our snowy winters. Also the military advantage of 4 wheel drive goes without saying.

 

[colleency]

If someone has a valid reason to own one, say driving in the mountains or owning a landscape business, fine. Taking little Brittny to soccer practice is not a valid reason in my viewpoint.

 

[fortworthgal]

We own 2 - a Jeep Wrangler and a Chevy Tahoe. We camp quite frequently and have several friends with large ranches out in the "boondocks" - so 4WD definitely comes in handy! The big heavy Tahoe with the wider wheelbase has come in exceptionally handy more than once, hauling a ton of camping gear home on an icy country road. And try hauling enough gear for a weekend-long reenactment in a Honda Civic! lol

They each serve a valid purpose for us. If someone else wants to consider our reasons for owning them invalid, I don't really care - as long as I get to make judgment calls on their lifestyle as well.

 

[Pilgrim]

People make these judgements irrationally.

We own two V6 Blazers - a '97 and '99. On the highway, they'll do 20-22 MPG, which is as good as my 1983 280ZX.

Before anyone bitches and moans about the gas mileage anyone else gets, they should consider that the driver pays the bills. It's legal to drive any vehicle you wish, with any gas mileage you wish. As long as you're willing to pay the bill, it's no ones' business but yours.

OTOH, many people drive pickups and get 10-15 MPG when all they are is toy trucks. My position is that it's NOT a truck unless you're willing to drop a load of gravel in the bed - it's a toy. So yes, they are silly to do this, and they are wasting a lot of gas - but they're the ones paying the bill! They can do what they darn well please.

Really high-mileage vehicles are out there, but only a limited number of people can actually use them. Why? they are usually small, moderately powered, and usually are 2WD. (Subarus are an exception.) Aside from commuter duty for singles, couples and very small families, most people need larger vehicles. if they tow a boat, trailer or need to carry cargo, then the really high mileage vehicles do NOT address their needs.

And those who complain about gas guzzlers need to see if their own house is in order:
- do they recycycle all possible materials?
- do they water their lawn ONLY enough to apply 1" of water a week, and do that outside the hours of 10 AM and 6 PM, to make sure the water soaks in rather than evaporating?
- do they use lawn and garden chemicals ONLY at labeled rates, and according to instructions?
- do they run their air conditioning at 80 in the summer, heat at 60 in the winter?
- do they pick up trash while walking through the park?

Most of us are far from qualified to cast stones at others.

 

[LizzieMaine]

My gripe with 4x4s is pretty mundane -- our downtown is a narrow, two-lane, one-way street, and when the street is clotted with SUVs in the summer, like it is now, it's all but impossible to ride my bike to work without getting muscled off the pavement by some outastate rubbernecker, er, contributor to our tourist-driven local economy. Share the road, folks, and life will be happier for everyone.

It's the Hummer and pseudo-Hummer drivers who are by far the worst of this lot -- they don't drive as though they own the road, they drive as though they don't give a damn *who* owns the road. And that attitude, I could do without.

 

[pablocham]

Pilgrim,

SUV drivers can't and don't "pay the bill" if their choice of car results in negative effects on others. For example, SUV drivers don't pay anything for the results of heightened road fatalities and emissions; instead, those costs are spread out over society in the form of air pollution, increased risk of accident fatality, and higher insurance premiums. So really it is incorrect to say that they "pay the bill," though they certainly pay part of the bill. As you say, they are legal, but so what? Heroin and cocaine used to be legal too. Moreover, plenty of things are legal and heavily regulated or taxed. Alcohol and tobacco come most readily to mind. In many states taxes on cigarettes have been increased to pay for the health care costs associated with smoking. Why not do something similar for people who drive dangerous vehicles?

I think that SUV drivers should be made to pay the full costs of their choice, and I think that people should be discouraged from using them just as we discourage people from engaging in any other harmful activity.

 

[Sefton]

Interesting...I wasn't even aware that those things were popular in England. They seem like such an American object of desire. Well, I'll just duck out of here now since my main vehicles of choice are commuter train and my shoes...

 

[VintageJess]

Pilgrim,

SUV drivers can't and don't "pay the bill" if their choice of car results in negative effects on others. For example, SUV drivers don't pay anything for the results of heightened road fatalities and emissions; instead, those costs are spread out over society in the form of air pollution, increased risk of accident fatality, and higher insurance premiums. So really it is incorrect to say that they "pay the bill," though they certainly pay part of the bill. As you say, they are legal, but so what? Heroin and cocaine used to be legal too. Moreover, plenty of things are legal and heavily regulated or taxed. Alcohol and tobacco come most readily to mind. In many states taxes on cigarettes have been increased to pay for the health care costs associated with smoking. Why not do something similar for people who drive dangerous vehicles?

I think that SUV drivers should be made to pay the full costs of their choice, and I think that people should be discouraged from using them just as we discourage people from engaging in any other harmful activity.

Pablo,

So my question back to you is where do we draw the line? Should motorcyle riders also be discouraged and made to pay the full costs? How about people who drive those high speed sports cars? Many of them are quite dangerous and frequently cause accidents.
I guess my point is who gets to make these calls--the government? I'm not sure I want them telling me what car to drive. I say let the free markets decide. I know that recently Hummer announced their decision to stop selling their H1 model (the huge original Hummer) as they've had lagging sales with the rising gas prices.
I trust the consumer driven market of supply and demand. I don't think further regulation is the answer.

Jessica

 

[Maj.Nick Danger]

Yeah, where do ya draw the line?

Between say legitimate working stiffs that truly have a need for a big 4x4, and those that simply drive around in them in order to look cool?
It is as much a matter of personal choice as it is a matter of personal responsibility.

Personally, I would like to see the auto makers become more responsible and produce a hybrid with the same load capacity and power as the best 4 wheel drive trucks available. (Yeah, right) But I'm certain we have the technology to greatly improve the situation.
But as long as there is a ton of cash to be made, auto makers and the energy industry will continue to milk the cash cow until the last second, until something absolutely has to be done.

The energy producers and the auto industry, should have made some drastic changes when that first "energy crisis" hit us in the 70's. :rage:

 

[pablocham]

Vintage Jess,

What does the U.S. automobile industry have to do with free markets? In a free market economy there would probably be no domestic auto-makers. As it stands now, the government subsidizes the american auto industry in a variety of ways including immunity from environmental laws and standards as well as lax enforcement of tax codes and substantial tax breaks (both to the automakers themselves and to those who buy gas guzzlers, remember the Hummer tax break: http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/Taxes/P97282.asp. Similarly, in the seventies the automaker's unions and the manufacturers themselves, faced with rising fuel costs and stagflation, convinced/coerced the Japanese automakers into restricting imports in order to forestall an imposition of tariffs. Does any of that sound like a free market to you?

As to your question about motorcyclists and drawing the line, ideally everbody should pay the costs of their own actions. The line, as you note can be difficult to draw; however, it is not impossible. That is probably how I would draw the line. When it is possible to show that somebody is causing harm or increasing risk to others I think they should bear those costs. Where causation can't really be demonstrated, then I don't think there are any costs to assess. Btw, the societal costs of motorcycles are probably very low as they get very good milage and are mostly only dangerous to their operator.

In a true free market people would reap what they sow. The nature of being a responsible citizen in a free society is facing up to the consequences of ones own actions whether they are positive or negative. Forcing others to pay for the costs of your actions is the exact opposite of personal responsibility.

On preview, I also agree with everything Nick Danger said.

 

[JustJen]

It's the Hummer and pseudo-Hummer drivers who are by far the worst of this lot -- they don't drive as though they own the road, they drive as though they don't give a damn *who* owns the road. And that attitude, I could do without.

LizzieMaine: As my husband always says, "Go ahead, hit my Ford truck with your brand new Hummer...."

That Ford by the way, is a 4x4. I ranted at the time he bought it that he didn't need one. We're in a metro area in Texas for crying out loud. And the only 'offroading' he does is when he has to find his golf ball in the rough.

So now he drives my car on the days I telecommute. Since I don't drive his truck very often, the only noticible differences are that it rides very rough due to the 4x4, and I can't get into when I'm wearing a skirt (there's no step railing). Our gas bill alone last month was roughly $600. Now I can't get my mid-life crisis car.....goodbye Mustang GT.....hello PT Cruiser. Which, by the way, I like and won't mind getting when it's time.

 

[GA Wildlifer]

Quite utilitarian

I work outdoors, often alone, and miles from anywhere. Four wheel drive is a necessity. I wish I had a winch too.

I only run into the casual 4x4 owners when I need a new truck and buy their perfect, 2-year old, still under warranty truck for 75% of what they paid. They are not all that bad.

As an environmentally aware forester and wildlife biologist, I do wish that the car makers would make some effort to lower their impact on the environment.

Robert

 

[PADDY]

Me and my Landy...

I have just sold my Landrover Discovery after years of happy driving. I love the outdoors and the Landy as a basic utilitarian vehicle (it was a basic, but functional model) is great just for throwing the dogs and the camping kit in the back and heading for the hills.
Living on the Scottish Borders, the winters can be iffy, with snow..etc, so the Landy comes into its own then. Also, the higher seating position gives better visibility and it's a pretty safe vehicle to be in, in the event of a collision.
Had use of a friend's Victorian Hunting Lodge about 30 miles south of Oban on the West Coast of Scotland, and in the winter the Landy was a must!! It really takes the stress away.
I off-roaded it quite a bit too (having been trained years ago in the army on military Landys and then having done more advanced off roading courses in the last few years, paid out of my own pocket). These vehicles can be dangerous if you don't know how to handle them properly, as they are quite different in how they perform in relation to a normal, standard family car. How do you use the gears, when to pop on the dif-lock, how to peform a reverse hill start when the engine cuts half way up a rise, how to take corners..etc, etc. I just love the whole functionality of it..!

Concerns (if any)..? well, the pollution aspect, I'm not into wrecking the environment if I can help it as I want plenty of other generations to enjoy it.
Fuel economy? eeekkkkkkkkkk!!!! Let's say, not great (and mine was a diesel).
Sadly, I am no longer a Landy Man. But the ice man will cometh again

OH and as for women in green wellies, an old mud splattered Barbour jacket driving a Landy (and maybe a couple of labs in the back!)...well, that's just soooo sexy.

 

[jeep44]

Well, I'll always have a 4X4,no matter what. Actually,I have 5 of them right now (three are vintage military vehicles). I may really only need that four wheel drive a handful of times in the winter,or when pulling my boat up a slippery ramp,but I want it there when I need it. If the forecast calls for snow,my wife always takes my truck,and no matter how snowy or icy,has an uneventful drive home from work late at night.