GET READY FOR Watchdog !

On or around 26 Jan 2005 22:16:52 GMT, Adrian <[email protected]>
enlightened us thusly:

>StaffBull ([email protected]) gurgled happily, sounding
>much like they were saying :
>
>>>> driving round in 2CV's which belch out more **** than a fleet of
>>>> Landys
>
>>> And the logic there is...?
>
>> do you see people stuffing leaflets under the wipers of 2CV's to try
>> and ban them? nope!
>
>I was trying more to follow the logic of a 2cv "belching out more **** than
>a fleet of Landys"...
>
>Yet to see any Landy manage 40mpg...

mind, yer 2CV is pretty bloody hopeless environmentally. hilarious motors,
mind.

--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.fsnet.co.uk my opinions are just that
"Festina Lente" (Hasten slowly) Suetonius (c.70-c.140) Augustus, 25

>
>
> I was trying more to follow the logic of a 2cv "belching out more **** than
> a fleet of Landys"...
>
> Yet to see any Landy manage 40mpg...


The point is it does'nt matter how much you do to the gallon it is the
harmful crap you spew out and Most Landy are far more environmentally
cleaner than a 2CV

scorpio ([email protected]) gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying :

>> I was trying more to follow the logic of a 2cv "belching out more
>> **** than a fleet of Landys"...
>>
>> Yet to see any Landy manage 40mpg...

> The point is it does'nt matter how much you do to the gallon it is the
> harmful crap you spew out and Most Landy are far more environmentally
> cleaner than a 2CV

I suggest you have a little read up on MOTs, emissions, and - if you're
referring to the difference between petrol and diesel, particulates.

BTW - all my 2cvs have always passed the MOT WAAAAY within the emission
limits. A good 'un will even get very close to the cat emission numbers.

scorpio composed the following;:
>> I was trying more to follow the logic of a 2cv "belching out more
>> **** than a fleet of Landys"...
>>
>> Yet to see any Landy manage 40mpg...
>
>
> The point is it does'nt matter how much you do to the gallon it is the
> harmful crap you spew out and Most Landy are far more environmentally
> cleaner than a 2CV

Sheeit, isn't this _JUST_ what the feckin' tree huggers want ?

4x4 owners arguing amongst themselves rather than realising we're _ALL_
tarred with the same brush anyway, whatever marque we drive. They don't
understand the difference between a 4x4 2CV and a Landrover anyway, if
it has 4x4 transmission (and yes, there _are_ 4x4 2CV's about) it's a
'gas-guzzler' and environmentally poor, in their eyes.

Personally I couldn't give a **** if someone drives a Landy, a 2CV a
Jeep a Suzuki or whatever,[1] so long as they're doing it off-road and
enjoying it, and the more people that do go legally off-road, the more
power we all have to lobby for our pastime where it truly counts, in the
ballot box, at whatever level.

[1] I _do_ dislike Mahindras though ..

--
Paul ...
http://www.4x4prejudice.org/index.php
(8(!) Homer Rules ...
"A tosser is a tosser, no matter what mode of transport they're using."

Paul - xxx ([email protected]) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying :

>>> I was trying more to follow the logic of a 2cv "belching out more
>>> **** than a fleet of Landys"...
>>>
>>> Yet to see any Landy manage 40mpg...

>> The point is it does'nt matter how much you do to the gallon it is the
>> harmful crap you spew out and Most Landy are far more environmentally
>> cleaner than a 2CV

> Sheeit, isn't this _JUST_ what the feckin' tree huggers want ?
>
> 4x4 owners arguing amongst themselves rather than realising we're _ALL_
> tarred with the same brush anyway, whatever marque we drive.

The point I'm trying to make is that claims as self-evidently wrong as
those "scorpio" is making are not going to help us in any way, either.
Quite the opposite, in fact.

Bigger heavier vehicles - be they 2wd or 4wd DO pollute more than smaller
lighter ones. At the most basic, it's very simple to demonstrate. Push a
small light car 100yds, then push a Landy 100yds. Which makes you more
knackered?

4wd vehicles DO pollute more than 2wd ones - there's more weight, there's
more transmission losses. Why else would there be selectable 4wd and free-
wheel hubs?

Diesels don't pollute less than petrols. They pollute differently.

Those are all unarguable.

Similarly unarguable is that there ARE a lot of utterly pointless 4x4s in
urban areas and that they DO cause a big problem, and that there ARE a lot
of utter irresponsible and illegal ****s on trailbikes and 4x4s causing
damage to greenlanes and the image of greenlaning.

As a recreational activity, we'd be best putting our hands up and agreeing
with the ramblers - to a point.

Arguing the unarguable, defending the indefensible, is what's harming us
most.

"Adrian" <[email protected]> schreef in bericht
news:[email protected]

<snip>

> Similarly unarguable is that there ARE a lot of utterly pointless
> 4x4s in urban areas and that they DO cause a big problem, and that

Not true in the case of the ennvironment.
Wether you drive a 4x4 or not, it doesn't matter.
Globally the ocean-going cathedral-sized ships are accountable for one
third of the worlds atmospheric pollution.
That is a fact and a big problem. Not the 4x4.

Adrian wrote:

> Diesels don't pollute less than petrols. They pollute differently.
>
> Those are all unarguable.

Per mile driven ? Diesels are unarguably more efficient, yes they (can)
emit soot particles, but they must emit less CO2 than petrol PER MILE.

Steve

On 27 Jan 2005 14:33:17 GMT, Adrian <[email protected]> wrote:

>Paul - xxx ([email protected]) gurgled happily, sounding much like
>they were saying :
>
>>>> I was trying more to follow the logic of a 2cv "belching out more
>>>> **** than a fleet of Landys"...
>>>>
>>>> Yet to see any Landy manage 40mpg...
>
>>> The point is it does'nt matter how much you do to the gallon it is the
>>> harmful crap you spew out and Most Landy are far more environmentally
>>> cleaner than a 2CV
>
>> Sheeit, isn't this _JUST_ what the feckin' tree huggers want ?
>>
>> 4x4 owners arguing amongst themselves rather than realising we're _ALL_
>> tarred with the same brush anyway, whatever marque we drive.
>
>The point I'm trying to make is that claims as self-evidently wrong as
>those "scorpio" is making are not going to help us in any way, either.
>Quite the opposite, in fact.
>
>Bigger heavier vehicles - be they 2wd or 4wd DO pollute more than smaller
>lighter ones. At the most basic, it's very simple to demonstrate. Push a
>small light car 100yds, then push a Landy 100yds. Which makes you more
>knackered?


What does that have to do with pollution?

>4wd vehicles DO pollute more than 2wd ones - there's more weight, there's
>more transmission losses. Why else would there be selectable 4wd and free-
>wheel hubs?

You need to look at emissions, not your own preconceptions. Number of
driven wheels isn't relevant to weight or emissions.
>
>Diesels don't pollute less than petrols. They pollute differently.
>
>Those are all unarguable.
>
>Similarly unarguable is that there ARE a lot of utterly pointless 4x4s in
>urban areas and that they DO cause a big problem,


They differ significantly from estates only in height. What problem
does their height cause?


>and that there ARE a lot
>of utter irresponsible and illegal ****s on trailbikes and 4x4s causing
>damage to greenlanes and the image of greenlaning.
>
>As a recreational activity, we'd be best putting our hands up and agreeing
>with the ramblers - to a point.
>
>Arguing the unarguable, defending the indefensible, is what's harming us
>most.

How?

--

R
o
o
n
e
y

So Adrian was, like

> StaffBull ([email protected]) gurgled happily, sounding
> much like they were saying :
>
>>>> driving round in 2CV's which belch out more **** than a fleet of
>>>> Landys
>
>>> And the logic there is...?
>
>> do you see people stuffing leaflets under the wipers of 2CV's to try
>> and ban them? nope!
>
> I was trying more to follow the logic of a 2cv "belching out more
> **** than a fleet of Landys"...
>
> Yet to see any Landy manage 40mpg...

My two (1 x 2CV6, 1 x Dyane) never did less than 50mpg, no matter how hard I
towelled them.* I can't see why they should be any less environmentally
friendly than any other non-cat petrol engine. They may not be very
efficient, but then when you're towing round something that weighs as much
as a large book, you don't have to be.

*And you have to. Only problem I ever had was driving in convoy on holiday
with a guy who insisted on doing 25-30 everywhere. Knackered the plugs in
two days. A mechanic friend commented: "You have to thrash these to get the
best out of them. The French are not known for under-driving their cars."
Green for go - no problems after that.


--

Rich

Pas d'elle yeux Rhone que nous

Adrian composed the following;:
> Paul - xxx ([email protected]) gurgled happily, sounding
> much like they were saying :
>
>>>> I was trying more to follow the logic of a 2cv "belching out more
>>>> **** than a fleet of Landys"...
>>>>
>>>> Yet to see any Landy manage 40mpg...
>
>>> The point is it does'nt matter how much you do to the gallon it is
>>> the harmful crap you spew out and Most Landy are far more
>>> environmentally cleaner than a 2CV
>
>> Sheeit, isn't this _JUST_ what the feckin' tree huggers want ?
>>
>> 4x4 owners arguing amongst themselves rather than realising we're
>> _ALL_ tarred with the same brush anyway, whatever marque we drive.
>
> The point I'm trying to make is that claims as self-evidently wrong as
> those "scorpio" is making are not going to help us in any way, either.
> Quite the opposite, in fact.

So what? Who gives a flying fart, other than the tree-huggers, who's
4x4 does what for the environment really? Most of the time we're
tearing the ground up anyway (With Land-owners permission) so cackling
among 'ourselves' as to whose is biggest, smallest, cleanest etc just
throws us all into the environ-mentalists hands.

> Bigger heavier vehicles - be they 2wd or 4wd DO pollute more than
> smaller lighter ones. At the most basic, it's very simple to
> demonstrate. Push a small light car 100yds, then push a Landy 100yds.
> Which makes you more knackered?

Which has what, and be as precise as you can be, to do with vehicle
emissions?

> 4wd vehicles DO pollute more than 2wd ones - there's more weight,
> there's more transmission losses.

My 4x4 doesn't pollute as much as my immediate neighbours 2wd

> Why else would there be selectable 4wd and free- wheel hubs?

Selectable 4wd makes it a ****-load easier to steer on the road, as do
fwh's, and they do increase economy, but still have feck all to do with
emissions, other than as a by-product in that the engine is likely to be
running under less load, so not using as much fuel. The engines still
put out the same levels of emissions though ...

--
Paul ...
http://www.4x4prejudice.org/index.php
(8(!) Homer Rules ...
"A tosser is a tosser, no matter what mode of transport they're using."

I'm doing my bit for the environment - I run LPG ( nothing to do with cost
of course) the V8 sounds bloody amazing now, had a guy build me a stainless
exhaust,. awesome!!!


"StaffBull" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> do you see people stuffing leaflets under the wipers of 2CV's to try and
> ban them? nope!
> "Adrian" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> StaffBull ([email protected]) gurgled happily, sounding
>> much like they were saying :
>>
>>> driving round in 2CV's which belch out more **** than a fleet of
>>> Landys
>>
>> And the logic there is...?
>
>

StaffBull composed the following;:
> I'm doing my bit for the environment - I run LPG ( nothing to do with
> cost of course) the V8 sounds bloody amazing now, had a guy build me
> a stainless exhaust,. awesome!!!

Bastard ...

Heheheh ... I want a V8 for my Disco ..

--
The Caretaker.
www.4x4prejudice.org
A balanced argument.

On or around 27 Jan 2005 14:33:17 GMT, Adrian <[email protected]>
enlightened us thusly:

>
>Bigger heavier vehicles - be they 2wd or 4wd DO pollute more than smaller
>lighter ones. At the most basic, it's very simple to demonstrate. Push a
>small light car 100yds, then push a Landy 100yds. Which makes you more
>knackered?

valid point, except that the latest engines are considerably more efficient
than the one in the 2CV which dates from about 1948. OK, they probably
imp[roved the carbs and such, but still, it pollutes much more than for
example a Smart car, with the same size engine and similar weight.

>Diesels don't pollute less than petrols. They pollute differently.
>
>Those are all unarguable.

wanna bet?

besides, you have to compare like-for-like. look at the emissions on a
50-yera od petrol engine and a brand-new diesel...

>Similarly unarguable is that there ARE a lot of utterly pointless 4x4s in
>urban areas and that they DO cause a big problem, and that there ARE a lot
>of utter irresponsible and illegal ****s on trailbikes and 4x4s causing
>damage to greenlanes and the image of greenlaning.
>
>As a recreational activity, we'd be best putting our hands up and agreeing
>with the ramblers - to a point.
>
>Arguing the unarguable, defending the indefensible, is what's harming us
>most.

I think you'll find the irresponsible tw*ts are not as many as you reckon,
though of course the effect they have is huge.

Personally, I reckon that all off-roading is gonna end up on private sites,
before much longer, except perhaps for a few high-profile routes which get
enough publicity and maintenance. Which, in the end, is no bad thing. If
you want to play in the mud and water, do so on private land where you don't
cause problems.

--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.fsnet.co.uk my opinions are just that
"Quos deus vult perdere, prius dementat" Euripedes, quoted in
Boswell's "Johnson".

On or around Thu, 27 Jan 2005 15:02:19 +0000, Rooney <[email protected]>
enlightened us thusly:

>They differ significantly from estates only in height. What problem
>does their height cause?

bugger, I didn't intend to get into this thread.

was ogling an XJS jag today. lovely motor. longer than the disco, just as
wide, 5.3 petrol engine, sod-all to the gallon, and basically, really, it's
a 2+2. Where does that come on the scale?


--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.fsnet.co.uk my opinions are just that
"Quos deus vult perdere, prius dementat" Euripedes, quoted in
Boswell's "Johnson".

On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 21:40:57 +0000, Austin Shackles
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On or around Thu, 27 Jan 2005 15:02:19 +0000, Rooney <[email protected]>
>enlightened us thusly:
>
>>They differ significantly from estates only in height. What problem
>>does their height cause?
>
>bugger, I didn't intend to get into this thread.
>
>was ogling an XJS jag today. lovely motor. longer than the disco, just as
>wide, 5.3 petrol engine, sod-all to the gallon, and basically, really, it's
>a 2+2. Where does that come on the scale?

Politically acceptable, as endorsed by John Prescott.

--

R
o
o
n
e
y

"Austin Shackles" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Personally, I reckon that all off-roading is gonna end up on private
sites,
> before much longer, except perhaps for a few high-profile routes which get
> enough publicity and maintenance. Which, in the end, is no bad thing. If
> you want to play in the mud and water, do so on private land where you
don't
> cause problems.

Until the new ex-townie neighbour complains about the noise/mud/spoiled view
there too. Just like the "lets buy this house next to this big airport
dear, they're selling it really really cheap ...... and then we can complain
like feck about the aircraft noise and form a close-the-airport pressure
group". Yes townies, in the countryside stuff gets chased. Stuff gets
eaten by other stuff. Stuff dies, often less than clinically cleanly or in
an "animal hospital" environment. Cockerels crow at dawn. Combine
harvesters run all hours, often well after dusk. Landrovers are used for
what they're best at. Oh yes, and **** stinks.

I feel much better now.

Steve

Austin Shackles <[email protected]> wrote:

> was ogling an XJS jag today. lovely motor. longer than the disco, just as
> wide, 5.3 petrol engine, sod-all to the gallon, and basically, really, it's
> a 2+2. Where does that come on the scale?

You forgot that the bonnet design is such that it probably slices
pedestrians in half.

--
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

-- Benjamin Franklin, 1759

Steve <[email protected]> wrote:

> Just like the "lets buy this house next to this big airport dear, they're
> selling it really really cheap ...... and then we can complain like feck
> about the aircraft noise and form a close-the-airport pressure group".

Oh, you mean Sting.

--
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

-- Benjamin Franklin, 1759

Steve composed the following;:
> "Austin Shackles" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> Personally, I reckon that all off-roading is gonna end up on private
> sites,
>> before much longer, except perhaps for a few high-profile routes
>> which get enough publicity and maintenance. Which, in the end, is
>> no bad thing. If you want to play in the mud and water, do so on
>> private land where you
> don't
>> cause problems.
>
> Until the new ex-townie neighbour complains about the
> noise/mud/spoiled view there too. Just like the "lets buy this house
> next to this big airport dear, they're selling it really really cheap
> ...... and then we can complain like feck about the aircraft noise
> and form a close-the-airport pressure group". Yes townies, in the
> countryside stuff gets chased. Stuff gets eaten by other stuff.
> Stuff dies, often less than clinically cleanly or in an "animal
> hospital" environment. Cockerels crow at dawn. Combine harvesters
> run all hours, often well after dusk. Landrovers are used for what
> they're best at. Oh yes, and **** stinks.
>
> I feel much better now.

LOL

--
The Caretaker.
www.4x4prejudice.org
A balanced argument.

Paul - xxx ([email protected]) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying :

> So what? Who gives a flying fart, other than the tree-huggers, who's
> 4x4 does what for the environment really?

The point is NOT off-roaders used off-road. It's "Chelsea Tractors".

>> Bigger heavier vehicles - be they 2wd or 4wd DO pollute more than
>> smaller lighter ones. At the most basic, it's very simple to
>> demonstrate. Push a small light car 100yds, then push a Landy 100yds.
>> Which makes you more knackered?

> Which has what, and be as precise as you can be, to do with vehicle
> emissions?

Clue, Paul :- If the engine has to work so much harder to move the vehicle,
that takes power. Power that has to be created. By burning fuel.

My everyday car is a big car. By car standards, it's heavy. It's HALF the
weight of the new Disco.