to get fed up with receiving more than the average amount of abuse on the road just because I drive a range rover?

[Mrs4x4]

I get the whole environment thing psses some people off but this seems out of proportion with the abuse. I am a considerate driver and really object to the abuse especially when my DC's are in the car and people are swearing. Recently parked car in a supermarket carpark to have someone who lived in a nearby flat on one of the higher floor start shouting that i should get back in my RR and pss off.

opinions

lets just face facts

what would you rather be in an impact with?

get out your4x4 and off your bloody high horse

Q exavtly, more speed related accidents. Why aren't these as glamorous as pedestrian accidents?

Its an element of bitching again, we all do it..public versus private schools etc.
Rise above it!

'speed related accidents. Why aren't these as glamorous as pedestrian accidents'

are you pissed?

[double thud]

HMC, I read your links and I was surprised to see that some of the small 4x4s were relatively pedestrian safe in crash-testing.

But you haven't addressed the accident statistics either, you know!

that was at HRoad btw

There are far fewer sportscars of the ferrari breed which is one of the many reasons they don't figure in accidents as much as 4x4's - of which there are many. The shape of a traditional 4x4 also means that pedestrians being hit by it are more likely to be injured than if hit by a, lets say a Ferrari, travelling at the same speed.

Oh christ what now Quattro - can you pose your specific question and I'll come back an answer it tomorrow? It's nearly midnight

HR I wouldn't want to be in an impact with a lorry either but there's no call to get them off the streets.

Bad drivers are a hazard whatever they drive.

hmc i do see your argument is valid
i would still rather be run down by an astra than rr .......you?

MWO - the only conclusion I can draw from your last post is that one of us is drunk.

It might be me. After 14.5 hours of incomprehensible stuff I have to say I feel pretty drunk.

"HMC, I read your links and I was surprised to see that some of the small 4x4s were relatively pedestrian safe in crash-testing."

..but before I go, thank you for that. I just think there should be a proper debate based on facts not invective

HMc you're right to bring this evidence to our attention. The term 4x4 has been used indiscriminately and yes newer smaller 4x4s have a better safety profile than older small family cars. Probably due to adavnces in technology and testing standards.

However the OP called herself 4x4 and talks about driving her RR. THIS is what people are reacting to, and this is the image that springs to mind when people read her post. And as you've atated RRs are dangerous. I appreciate your attempts to pick apart the argument but I think you knew we were talking about big dangerous RRs and the like all along didn't you?

Piont taken tho, will be specific as to make and model from now on

I don't know HRoad - I'll just look it up and get back to you

HMC, I was talking about Blu's point about it not being just about how safe they are in accidents. It's about the frequency of accidents too.

Here

"Figures from Churchill Insurance show that urban 4x4s are involved in 25% more
accidents than saloon cars and do far more damage [quoted in ?Safe bet for a
bump?, Mail on Sunday, 10 October 2004]
Figures from Admiral Insurance also recently released figures showing that 4x4 drivers
are 27% more likely to be at fault in the event of an accident [Admiral Insurance, in
Sunday Times, 10 July 2005 ]
The RAC Foundation says, "You could blame some of the higher accident rate for
4x4s on size. Drivers who are new to these cars might not realise how wide they are.
There is also psychology involved - if you feel more secure inside a big 4x4, you might
drive with less care than you should."[2]

true Winey. i guess we could start a whole new thread on BULLBARS. Now even i can't argue for that one..any farmers out there??

Ok - neither! a 1999 vauxhall astra is zero stars and the current model is 1 star.

Must I be run over at all? I'd rather not

in answer to the op (this thread is vering way of track now so im sticking to the op) yanbu to be fed up of getting verbal abuse about the type of car you drive, whether they have a right or not, you will always get this from people because of the stigma that has become attached to 4x4's.

Unfortunately, the only option for you is to either, ignore the abuse, which is not very nice for your children, or change your car.

That's interesting Quattro - and I truly can't provide an answer, except to say I don't feel that I should be the subject of prejudice because some other 4x4 drivers are seemingly not as competent drivers.

Perhaps the answer should be an enhanced driving test for 4x4 drivers - they could perhaps be required to undertake a more rigourous test than other road users

By the way, the only research based on actual recorded personal injury accident statistics and 4x4s that I know of is regarding driver safety in a 2-vehicle collision.

Based on your bullbar comment but on a seperate note Microwaveonly I was in Florida earlier this year where they don't have MOT tests. Cars were driving around with no bonnets, no bumpers, jagged its of metal hanging off at the front, that kind of thing... I did wonder what the pedestrian injury accident stats were like over there!

YABU. Get your fuel-guzzling filth-belching bully-boy fuck-off Chelsea tractor off my road.

And I don't even drive.

Handlemecarefully, the secretary of EuroNCAP has himself said that it's difficult to justify driving a 4X4. If you look at the overall statistics comparing cars on the EuroNCAP test for pedestrian safety (rather than cherry picking specific models), you get a rather different picture:

Mean pedestrian
safety score
(max 36)

Large off-roaders 3.7
Large family cars 9.9
Small family cars 13.3
Small MPVs 11.4
Small off-roaders 9.3
Super Minis 11.5
MPVs 9.3

The EuroNCAP acknowledges that there's no way to replicate the effect that cars hitting pedestrians of different sizes would have, mainly as the dummy that can be 'injured' as opposed to 'killed' hasn't yet been invented. Mortality statistics give the facts of this, and they show conclusively that pedestrians are more likely to die if hit by a 4X4 than a normal car.

I can't say I feel demolished in the slightest, and I haven't even got started on how drivers in non 4X4s are 12 times more likely to die in a collision with a 4X4 than a non-4X4.