Chelsea Tractors. W...
 

  You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more

[Closed] Chelsea Tractors. Whats the point?

133 Posts
67 Users
0 Reactions
661 Views
Posts: 1127
Free Member
Topic starter
 

Should a Chelsea Tractor found abandoned in the snow be towed away and destroyed?

Should the driver also be imprisoned on the grounds of offering nothing to society?

Discuss.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 10:43 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Obvious troll is obvious...


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 10:43 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

What is the point of a Chealsea tractor? It's a penis substitute.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 10:44 am
Posts: 30656
Free Member
 

Discuss

[img] [/img]


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 10:44 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Forgetting the practicalities a Chelsea tractor is a simple statement of wealth. So I suppose it's all down to how you feel about the wealthy. People are free to buy what they like and largely to do what they want.

Does the Range Rover owner who runs a business employing 100 people really offer nothing to society or are they helping drive the economy despite their taste for ostentatious cars?

Big questions you've asked.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 10:46 am
Posts: 6382
Free Member
 

What is the point of a Chealsea tractor? It's a penis substitute.

I thought they were usually driven by women on the school/supermarket run?

Oh. 😆


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 10:48 am
Posts: 33980
Full Member
 


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 10:52 am
Posts: 56564
Full Member
 

What I can never understand is why they slow right down for speedbumps?


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 10:54 am
Posts: 1442
Free Member
 

Forgetting the practicalities a Chelsea tractor is a simple statement of wealth

Really? Often it's a symbol of skewed fiscal priorities and debt. I find it odd that many people on 'average' salaries borrow to buy depreciating assets that cost more than their yearly income, but then it's their money and if it makes them feel good about themselves as they sit in traffic then I guess it's a harmless pursuit of vanity.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 10:58 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I like the elevated seating position.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 11:00 am
Posts: 20561
Free Member
 

a Chelsea tractor is a simple statement of wealth

I tend to agree. My annoying sister in law wants a Q7 because [i]'sometimes I might need to drive some of my kids friends around'.[/i]

I suggested an old Espace or a Transit mini-bus.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 11:01 am
Posts: 1127
Free Member
Topic starter
 

I like the elevated seating position.

So do I. I drive a van!


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 11:02 am
Posts: 5299
Free Member
 

Forgetting the practicalities a Chelsea tractor is a simple statement of wealth. So I suppose it's all down to how you feel about the wealthy. People are free to buy what they like and largely to do what they want.

Does the Range Rover owner who runs a business employing 100 people really offer nothing to society or are they helping drive the economy despite their taste for ostentatious cars?

Big questions you've asked.

Spot on.

Really? Often it's a symbol of skewed fiscal priorities and a symbol of debt. I find it odd that many people on 'average' salaries borrow to buy depreciating assets that cost more than their yearly income, but then it's their money and if it makes them feel good about themselves as they sit in traffic then I guess it's a harmless pursuit of vanity.

Nice sweeping statement, well done!


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 11:03 am
Posts: 13594
Free Member
 

It's a symbol that we live in a status obsessed society and chose to judge each other and ourselves by our possessions / material wealth. 4x4s stuck in the snow are just a minor side show....


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 11:03 am
Posts: 5
Free Member
 

easy question: to make the driver feel superior. often they'll say it makes them feel safer, but I think most safer = superior.

can we have harder questions now? I used to be dead good in a pub quiz.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 11:04 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

What else am I going to drop off Tarquin and Tabitha at their private school in?


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 11:04 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

It's a symbol that we live in a status obsessed society and chose to judge each other and ourselves by our possessions / material wealth. 4x4s stuck in the snow are just a minor side show...

Surely a symbol of pseudo wealth, proper wealthy winter in St Tropez.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 11:06 am
Posts: 5
Free Member
 

They are a choice of motor vehicle; nothing more, nothing less.

People make choices whether it be a bike, a holiday, a house, a magazine, to troll, whatever.

Other people choose to judge those choices.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 11:09 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

On a more serious note, my in-laws' neighbours bought a Q7 (most likely, leased it) for the 'image', as their son went to a private school. It's a nice 'average' housing estate, with most cars on the drive pre-2008. His Q7 really looked out of place...

Since his firm went under (don't know exact details, but I assume so) his son now goes to the local comp (changed schools aged 14), and their only car is an old Citreon banger.

I feel most sorry for the son...


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 11:12 am
Posts: 2
Free Member
 

A friend has recently bought a LR Discovery, must admit it's the nicest and most "grown up" car I've ever been in and would almost certainly get one if I had the disposable to do so. I don't so I've got a Renault Scenic which is also overkill for 90% of the journeys I make.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 11:13 am
Posts: 1343
Free Member
 

I'd be interested in what you guys drive as a view to peoples impression of you ..me? a right proper boring old zafira... which makes me the bloke with kids who goes to the tip a lot... 🙂


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 11:14 am
Posts: 6382
Free Member
 

XC90 is the popular vehicle around here, probably because it's changed so little over the years, and with a suitable vanity plate you can't really tell how old it is.

Funny old mix this place- normally it's full of people lauding the benefits of owning a Defender, despite being infinitely less practical, safe or comfortable than a Rangerover/Discovery.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 11:16 am
Posts: 145
Free Member
 

I settled on a Skoda Yeti 4x4, maninly because I couldn't live with the image of a range rover or cayenne. Too many ignorant proles judging me.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 11:18 am
Posts: 6382
Free Member
 

maninly because I couldn't live with the image of a range rover or cayenne. Too many ignorant proles judging me.

😆


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 11:18 am
Posts: 13594
Free Member
 

I live in central Cambridge with very limited on street parking. Half my neighbours don't own cars (mainly academics at the University). I scrapped my V6 Golf last year. OH has a company car (which she needs for her job). As we have no drives and you just park where you can, we are saved the whole 'car on the drive' status symbol opportunity as anyone can park in front of any house (if you can find a space).


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 11:24 am
Posts: 17
Free Member
 

Fashion.

It's a statement based on what somebody else phones richer better looking and more successful has.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 11:26 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Chelsea Tractor's seem to be purchased by those poor people suffering from the delusion that other people notice/care what they drive, thus they are a hugely important lifestyle/fashion statement.

In reality, people mostly secretly think you're an idiot if you have one.

It can't be envy/jealousy - why would anyone be envious of being a massive idiot?


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 11:27 am
Posts: 4143
Free Member
 

When driving bores you to tears and is simply a means to an end, I want it to be as "painless" as possible.

When getting into a tractor, you get up into it and down from it. Much easier than getting into and out of a normal car. The added height makes strapping the kids in easy too.

Lucky me we've got a Honda CRV 🙄 ... so not only you can hate me for having a 4x4 but you can also laugh at me for having a grandad's car and pity me because I can't afford a proper tractor... 😀

But I dont care it's the most comfortable and easy car I've ever owned.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 11:35 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

It's invidious consumption - the deliberate conspicuous consumption of goods and services intended to provoke the envy of other people, as a means of displaying the buyer’s superior socio-economic status, be it real or perceived.
It is possible to talk about it without appearing envious, as long as you make up sociological terms in the process. Except where the goods are Apple products - they're off limits, as we all know.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 11:47 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I had what some may class as a Chelsea tractor...

[IMG] [/IMG]

Mainly so I could do this...

[IMG] [/IMG]

As much as people say its snobby, Chelsea tractor etc... It was the most comfortable and capable car I've ever owned and only sold it as I got fed up with the horrific running costs.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 11:49 am
Posts: 30656
Free Member
 

Mainly so I could do this...

Take photos of it?


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 11:50 am
Posts: 5299
Free Member
 

Chelsea Tractor's seem to be purchased by those poor people suffering from the delusion that other people notice/care what they drive, thus they are a hugely important lifestyle/fashion statement.

In reality, people mostly secretly think you're an idiot if you have one.

It can't be envy/jealousy - why would anyone be envious of being a massive idiot?

What you think of me in my car does not influence my choice one little bit.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 11:50 am
Posts: 145
Free Member
 

The psycology of this is facinating actually. Big premium brand fast saloons (RS4, Jag XFR etc) and supercars are generally admired, but as soon as the topic turns to 4x4, even though the are often slower, cheaper, less poluting than the saloons, everyone gets annoyed.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 11:53 am
Posts: 770
Free Member
 

They're for people who can't reverse park.
Drive into space, bounce up kerb, hit small child,turn, drop of kerb, done.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 11:54 am
Posts: 16025
Free Member
 

I like the elevated seating position.

Me too. I drive a c-max.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 11:57 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Go on.. admit it.. Your just jealous cos you dont have one. 😆


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 12:00 pm
Posts: 6382
Free Member
 

Mainly so I could do this...


[img] [/img]

[url= http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2005/jun/14/uknews ]Like many of the best ideas, spray-on mud was dreamed up over a couple of drinks down at the local. "We were in the pub talking about how people drive these huge, pristine vehicles around cities and never have any intention of going near the countryside," said Colin Dowse, a business consultant in Shropshire who markets the product.

"With spray-on mud, they can make it look like they've been off-road instead of just driving to the shops and back."[/url]


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 12:03 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

If you had a gazillion pounds and a family you would likely seriously consider a 4x4 maybe you wouldn't but they are safe, luxurious and comfortable etc . I wonder how much of the ire directed at their owners is down to pure envy and how much is actually anything to do with a genuine rational thought process.

Some of the comments here are quite telling..


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 12:03 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Jamie - Member
Mainly so I could do this...
Take photos of it?

Close. That was the aftermath of a day on Salisbury plain. Surprising what a Chelsea tractor is capable of with some proper all terrain tyres fitted.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 12:10 pm
Posts: 770
Free Member
 

Joolsburger,
I'd have a chauffer and a maybach instead.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 12:14 pm
Posts: 16025
Free Member
 

I wonder how much of the ire directed at their owners is down to pure envy and how much is actually anything to do with a genuine rational thought process.

If I wanted a 4x4, I would buy one, but I prefer to drive something a little less dangerous and polluting.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 12:16 pm
Posts: 41642
Free Member
 

I want one, does that make me a bad person?

It's like having XTR (or any singlespeed costing more than a basic halfords BSO for that matter) on a singlespeed.

Having a nice bike doesn't actualy enrich your life in any meaningfull way other than making you feel better about your bike. You could do laps of a tail center just as quickly on a bike from Decathlon as you could from the top shelf of the Speciaized 'Concept Store'. The brakes are no safer, the transmission no more eficcent, but it's just (to your eyes) 'better' and nicer to ride.

Mahoosive 4x4's with leather seats, a better stereo than most houses and enough computing power to launch the north korean space program sucessfully and shagpile carpets are just mid range MTB's for people who don't ride MTB's (the really rich would buy a Rolls obviously). A normal car would be just as good in every practical measurable way, but the big luxury 4x4 is 'better'.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 12:16 pm
Posts: 21016
Full Member
 

I fancy a CRV.
Pass the Werthers.

No what did I come in here for...........?


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 12:26 pm
Posts: 14
Free Member
 

I fancy a CRV.

I've got one, they're good.
Pass the Werthers.

Here, have one of mine
No what did I come in here for...........?

Common topic of discussion amongst CRV drivers


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 12:33 pm
Posts: 50252
Free Member
 

[img] [/img]


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 12:38 pm
Posts: 13916
Free Member
 

I wonder how much of the ire directed at their owners is down to pure envy and how much is actually anything to do with a genuine rational thought process.

Hammer, meet nail.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 12:40 pm
Posts: 8904
Free Member
 

I don't think the Disco quite qualifies as a Chelsea tractor.
.
There are 'proper' 4x4s:
Defenders
Old Troopers
Fourtracks
Unimogs
Discos
Old Range Rovers
Old G Wagons
New Range Rovers. Maybe?
Landcruisers?
Wranglers?
.
and there are silly SUVs, X3, X5, Q5, Q7 Cayenne, Vitara, CRV, M-Class, etc, etc.
.
Interesting to note different repsonses to different ones. X5 = ****hole, Defender doesn't, and yet Defenders are also expensive and thirsty
.
My own opinion is that some just scream tasteless (and probably chav) like X5s and Q7, you can sure 99% of the time the driver will be a [expletive deleted], people who think an X5 with silly wheels and a silly number plate is cool generally are.
.
And if you really want to make a statement, there is nothing quite like an X5 for shouting, very loudly, 'Hey everyone, look at me! I can't afford a Range Rover.'
.
.
Posted by a former 110 driver (never went off-road in it, but it was fantastic for towing boats out of lakes)


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 12:43 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Forgetting the practicalities a Chelsea tractor is a simple statement of wealth

Or debt.

I like the elevated seating position.

I have to admit, I like the elevated seated position in my camper.

I wonder how much of the ire directed at their owners is down to pure envy and how much is actually anything to do with a genuine rational thought process.

If Chelsea Tractor = 110 Defender, then yes: paint me green and call me a monster. 😉


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 12:43 pm
 kcr
Posts: 2949
Free Member
 

Remember those TV ads a few years ago, filmed from the point of view of a well spoken couple in a Range Rover, voicing their innner thoughts? They moved in a bubble of comfort and effortless progress, carefully insulted from the urban landscape that lay far below them.
At one point, they drew up behind a group of cyclists, one of whom was riding a Chas Roberts. The woman passenger peered down from her elevated seating positiong and condescendingly announced "Don't fancy yours much, Chas..."

Can't argue with Range Rover - they're a successful company, so I assume they know their target market pretty well...


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 12:48 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I used to have a range rover,it was a great car all in. Comfortable, safe, very fast (V8 turbodiesel), I used to regularly drive it across Europe fully loaded, it was brilliant off road too. One of the best cars I ever owned; I could drive from London to Italy in a day and be fresh as a daisy on arrival. The high seating position made me feel very safe and unstressed on the road.

Downsides were the horrendous running costs, it wasn't very reliable and almost everyone thought I was a plonker which led to not being let out at roundabouts or junctions, the paint being keyed and general aggressive driving towards me, which sucked.

I think big 4X4s get a bad rep - perceptions are a funny thing; I also had an S65 Merc which cost twice what the range rover did, took up as much if not more space on the road, had worse emissions and was a much less practical car; hardly anyone ever noticed me in it.

Anyway I had a mental breakdown and quit my job, and now I drive a crappy old Vectra. It's worse in every way apart from being so anonymous that I notice people tend to treat me better on the road 🙂


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 12:50 pm
Posts: 8849
Free Member
 

Are pickups considered a Harrogate shopping trolley or not? Need to know sharpish please.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 12:50 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

If you have to ask...


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 12:53 pm
Posts: 8904
Free Member
 

Are pickups considered a Harrogate shopping trolley or not? Need to know sharpish please.

.
Acceptable ones:
Old Hilux
130/110/90
Vauxhall Bravo
Transit tipper
Nissan Cabstar
.
Not acceptable:
New Hilux
L200
Navara
F-150
(all a bit chav)


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 12:53 pm
Posts: 91000
Free Member
 

I guess it's a harmless pursuit of vanity.

Not really harmless. There is an environmental cost, per mile.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 12:57 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Can't beat a bit of reverse snobbery. A 4X4 like a RR or Q7 is a statement of wealth, the same as a big house or a holiday home in the sun. People are entitled to send their wealth as they see fit. And I'm pretty sure (although I have't checked) that the environmental argument doesn't stack up.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 1:03 pm
Posts: 8904
Free Member
 

And I'm pretty sure (although I have't checked) that the environmental argument doesn't stack up.


Land Rover claim to be one of the best environmentaly. Something like 60% of the cars they have ever made are still running. Once you factor in the polution from making the things they have a point. Even Friends of the Earth say it's better to keep old cars running longer, than buy new, lower emmission ones.
It's new cars which are more of a problem, not big cars.
.
A 4X4 like a RR or Q7 is a statement of wealth

RR is more likely to be old money though, the Q7 is just a bit tatseless


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 1:07 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

They're awesome!

they look great,

they provide a confidence inspiring driving position for shit drivers who shouldnt be on the road,

they are a great vehicle for making sure the best kids in the world (your own) get to school safely.

if you run over an adult or a lesser kid (someone else's) then they'll definitely be killed rather than badly maimed (this is a good thing right?)

they keep oil companies in business

they have incredible small bump sensitivity

Theres probably loads more reasons to own one


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 1:10 pm
Posts: 14
Free Member
 

Remember those TV ads a few years ago, filmed from the point of view of a well spoken couple in a Range Rover, voicing their innner thoughts? They moved in a bubble of comfort and effortless progress, carefully [b]insulted [/b]from the urban landscape that lay far below them.

can't say i recall the ad, but sounds interesting.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 1:14 pm
Posts: 16025
Free Member
 

Land Rover claim to be one of the best environmentaly. Something like 60% of the cars they have ever made are still running

Except that the bulk of a vehicle's emissions are during its use, not manufacture or disposal. I guess the Land Rovers still running are mainly the ones built for utility.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 1:14 pm
Posts: 91000
Free Member
 

And I'm pretty sure (although I have't checked) that the environmental argument doesn't stack up.

Please explain that.

Something like 60% of the cars they have ever made are still running.

That's not because they are 4x4 gas guzzlers, are they? Or are you trying to say that Landrover make reliable vehicles? Lolz 🙂


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 1:19 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Early rule of marketing....

...no one buys a Rolex to tell the time!


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 1:20 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I needed one when on ones estate, now I've moved no longer need one 😀

[img] [/img]


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 1:21 pm
Posts: 13594
Free Member
 

Early rule of Rolex wearers.. they always have to tell you they have one.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 1:23 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I quite fancy an Audi Q7. You can pick them up for reasonable money once the arse had dropped out of them in depreciation.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 1:24 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

FF - I wasnt implying that (!) just repeating an early lesson in marketing. I think its applicable to this debate!


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 1:24 pm
Posts: 14
Free Member
 

Not acceptable:
New Hilux
L200
Navara
F-150
(all a bit chav)

Posted by a former 110 driver ([b]never went off-road[/b] in it, but it was fantastic for towing boats out of lakes)

[img] [/img]


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 1:25 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

andrewh - Member
I don't think the Disco quite qualifies as a Chelsea tractor.

Isn't the Disco the definitive Chelsea tractor?


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 1:27 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Surely the environmental thing is dependent on your mileage?

I find it amazing that anyone who lives in the UK has the front to pretend they are in some way helping the environment. There may be a few people that live frugally and sustainably here but one lot of polluters berating another group for driving a slightly larger car is just sour grapes.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 1:27 pm
Posts: 3826
Full Member
 

Big premium brand fast saloons (RS4, Jag XFR etc) and supercars are generally admired, but as soon as the topic turns to 4x4, even though the are often slower, cheaper, less poluting than the saloons, everyone gets annoyed.

This is so right. Really if people want to spend their money on big 4X4 or any other form of luxury goods then it's their choice. There are plenty of cars that take up as much road space or use as much fuel that no-one gives a hell about.

The two richest guys I know, one drives a Golf (new thought :)) and the other a Ferrari FF. It just down to their personal choice.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 1:32 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I bought one specifically to piss off the 4x4,Tesco,Daily Mail,Anything that is fashionable to hate at the moment, haters on here 🙂


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 1:38 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I owned a Q7 up until recently. It was comfy, quite economical for what it was and fast enough. It was (dare I say it) much more environmentally friendly than the Porsche and RS4 it replaced (35mpg vs 22/23 mpg for the Audi and Porker). When I had those I had to have two cars so I could carry my bikes about. In fact, the 3-series I've replaced the Q7 with gets much worse MPG yet I never get any hate directed at me in that compared to the aggression you'd see driving the Q7.

On another note, I'd drive the Q7 much more sensibly than I did the others, there just wasn't the need to hammer about everywhere. The only downsides to owning it were the cost of tyres and parking it, which was a total ballache.

It was comfy, had lots of nice toys and space to carry my bikes, had a nice driving position and on the odd occasion I had to take it off road, it fared much better than I thought it would (see bike race car parks). I don't understand this hatred towards people who drive a certain type of car. Seems a bit like sour grapes to me.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 1:44 pm
Posts: 91000
Free Member
 

Surely the environmental thing is dependent on your mileage?

Yes of course, but however many miles you drive in a 4x4, you're going to use more fuel than in a more economical car, aren't you? I can't believe people have trouble with this concept.

Buying an estate doesn't mean your travel needs are suddenly double.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 1:48 pm
Posts: 8904
Free Member
 

Except that the bulk of a vehicle's emissions are during its use, not manufacture or disposal.

.
Takes about 200,000 miles worth of energy to build one. Can't remember the source so waits to be corrected...
.
.
Please explain that.

Something like 60% of the cars they have ever made are still running.

That's not because they are 4x4 gas guzzlers, are they? Or are you trying to say that Landrover make reliable vehicles? Lolz

LR's figures, not mine. I expect it's down to easy parts availablity and ease of repair on Series vehicles, nothig to do with whether it's a 4x4 or not. Just saying that ones which last longest are least bad for the environment.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 1:50 pm
Posts: 16025
Free Member
 

Takes about 200,000 miles worth of energy to build one. Can't remember the source so waits to be corrected...

Most life cycle analyses put the use phase at 70-80% of a vehicle's total lifetime impact. And let's not forget that a large vehicle such as a 4x4 requires more resources to make.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 1:54 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

teamhurtmore - Member

andrewh - Member
I don't think the Disco quite qualifies as a Chelsea tractor.

Isn't the Disco the definitive Chelsea tractor?

Its not what it is its how much more it costs in comparison to the car next to you.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 1:56 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Often it's a symbol of skewed fiscal priorities and debt. I find it odd that many people on 'average' salaries borrow to buy depreciating assets that cost more than their yearly income, but then it's their money and if it makes them feel good about themselves as they sit in traffic then I guess it's a harmless pursuit of vanity.

yep


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 1:56 pm
Posts: 16025
Free Member
 

This is so right. Really if people want to spend their money on big 4X4 or any other form of luxury goods then it's their choice.

And if people choose to spend their money on making life a tiny bit less pleasant for everyone else, it's my choice to call them names.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 1:56 pm
Posts: 8904
Free Member
 

I owned a Q7 up until recently. It was comfy, quite economical for what it was and fast enough. It was (dare I say it) much more environmentally friendly than the Porsche and RS4 it replaced (35mpg vs 22/23 mpg for the Audi and Porker).

Assuming all bought new and the figure of 200,000miles above is correct the new Q7 would have to cover just over 400,000 miles before the total environmental damage done by buying and running a new 'more efficient' car was less than that caused by keeping the other car going for the same distance...
.
.
Dales_rider - Member

teamhurtmore - Member

andrewh - Member
I don't think the Disco quite qualifies as a Chelsea tractor.

Isn't the Disco the definitive Chelsea tractor?

Its not what it is its how much more it costs in comparison to the car next to you.

But unlike Q7s X5s etc a Disco isn't writing cheques it can't cash, it can do what it says it can. Obviously if it has road tyres and those silly side steps which take all the ground clearence away that's another matter...


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 2:09 pm
Posts: 2
Free Member
 

Not this one,AGAIN ??????

I have the answer/s................

Inbred .....................

Conti Vert Pro's.................


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 2:14 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

andrewh - Member

"And I'm pretty sure (although I have't checked) that the environmental argument doesn't stack up."

Land Rover claim to be one of the best environmentaly. Something like 60% of the cars they have ever made are still running

Something like? Very scientific.

andrewh - Member
It's new cars which are more of a problem, not big cars.

Small old cars > Big old cars though.


 
Posted : 28/01/2013 2:31 pm
Page 1 / 2

6 DAYS LEFT
We are currently at 95% of our target!