Will the marine world follow the 4x4 trend?

jprstoney

jprstoney

Well-Known Member
Joined
2 Dec 2005
Messages
881
Location
At work, honest
www.bluesheets.co.uk
Taking a 2 year old to school in a small tank does not seem like a good use of resources, will the marine world follow suit?

Will Tamsin soon be taking Tabitha for a day out in a frigate with 37 dvd players, 121 cup holders and 4 patriot missiles?

Air your opinions on this and other topics at blueboatblog
 
There is a similar boat in Watchet harbour, complete with machine guns etc. Are we expecting an invasion from Wales?
 
got a 4x4 and would love a nautical equivalent, such as Botnia Targa. The 4x4 is 2.5 tonnes and does 36 mpg diesel on the motorway. I'd love a few patriot missiles to shoot some of the idiots on the road, but that's not an option on either the 4x4 or the boat.

What is your point?
 
Apologies Brendan. No offence meant. 4x4's are useful vehicles when needed. We have one for towing the boat and I've used many off road in the last 15 years.

Our area, Hook - Hampshire has many that are driven from home to school, over to Tesco's and back again. This seems a bit excessive for a vehicle that is designed for ditches, firetracks and off road scenarios. Maybe something smaller would be more appropriate, cause less congestion and use less fuel....

My 'point' was that if the current trend is for inexperienced buyers to purchase 4x4's for no other reason than status (which is their choice,I agree) then will this follow through to the leisure marine industry.
 
Oh please !...... enough.
Many 4x4s are capable of 35 mpg or better while manyother luxury cars return less than 30 mpg, It's the same for every excuse that the anti-4x4 campaign chooses. Safety: some 4x4s have better safety ratings than most cars on the road today; Height: many 4x4s are shorter than many MPVs; Space taken up on the road: most 4x4s have smaller footprints than the equivalent non-4x4 types.

Fed up with The anti-4x4 lobby who cannot even define or evidence what it is they are against except by physical appearance. The conclusion is that they are against 4x4s because they do like the look of them rather than any justifiable reason.
So are we going to have a anti sports car,anti jag, anti V6, V8, V12 lobby no I think we're not..... hummm.... and yes, I have one, I chose it for it's economy, it's towing ability and for it's off road peformance, and yes, occasionally I do the school run.
So if the marine world follows the 4x4 trend maybe we will all benefit from improved safety, security, ecomomy and towing abilities !
 
I reckon it is more than a littlte bit cheaky to come onto this forum for the express purpose of getting others to move to your forum.
 
Oval masculine objects.

If you compare the fuel ecconomy of a small diesel tonka toy jeep, sure you'll 'prove' better fuel economy than a bigger petrol engined car. But compare like for like and you won't.

BMW X5 3litre petrol (231bhp) 22.2 mpg
BMW 530i petrol (258 bhp) 32.1mpg

Toyota RAV4 2.0VVT petrol (112 Kw) 32.8 mpg
Toyota Avensis 2.0VVT petrol (108Kw) 34.9 mpg

etc
 
Ever seen a 4X4 hit something? 2.5Ton vs 1Ton = no contest.
These things don't stop as well as a decent small car (OK there are crap small cars too).
Some 4X4 drivers (not prodding anyone in particular here) definitely exhibit the signs of invulnerability. Ever seen one that slows down for speed humps?
The majority of 4X4s are not designed with pedestrian safety in mind.

Put this in boaty terms - the 4x4s of the seas are the ferries / tankers. All of the above points apply in trumps.

Thats my own beef about 4x4s.

On the fuel economy side, if little Johnny got on the schools bus and 20 fewer cars parked outside the school gates, then that would start to save fuel.
 
Absolutely.
When I point out that our last car (Rav4) was economical and small and our CRV is just as economical and small (compared to a Volvo/Mondeo/Merc etc) they fall back to "I don't mean ones like that".
If they're going to categorize by the number of driven wheels, then the logic is a bit squiffy.
OK. my Cherokee used to do a miserable 16 mpg, but it's footprint was smaller than a Ford Orion (remember them?).
I don't think the Twickenham Moaners are actually concerned about how much fuel you have to buy to run one. They're just annoyed that people park all over the shop outside Tarquin's school. But if the glitterati had Smart's or Kia's they'd still abandon their cars as near the shool gates as possible.

People Carriers are enormous, difficult to drive, thirsty and usually half empty so why aren't there Ban the MPV web sites?
 
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think the Twickenham Moaners are actually concerned about how much fuel you have to buy to run one. They're just annoyed that people park all over the shop outside Tarquin's school.

[/ QUOTE ] good summation
 
IMHO no child should be driven to or from school if it lives within two miles of the school, unless disabled or heavy objects need to taken with it on occaisions. It would reduce the amount of traffic on the roads quite considerably and go a long way to raising fitness levels too. Just to keep it boaty, those on the coast should row to school ! /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top