![Thanks](https://www.renovateforums.com.au/dbtech/thanks/images/thanks.png)
![Likes](https://www.renovateforums.com.au/dbtech/thanks/images/likes.png)
![Needs Pictures](https://www.woodworkforums.com/images/smilies/happy/photo4.gif)
![Picture(s) thanks](https://www.ubeaut.biz/wave.gif)
Results 31 to 45 of 131
Thread: the price of fuel
-
11th September 2005, 01:52 PM #31
Originally Posted by shep
How the hell do you get that towing a boat?
My TD5 uses 9 - 10 litres per 100k's on the highway. (95 litre tank = 1000k's)
Cheers, Jack"There is no dark side of the moon really. Matter of fact it's all dark."
-
11th September 2005, 01:52 PM #32
SENIOR MEMBER
- Join Date
- Sep 2003
- Location
- Mid North Coast
- Age
- 71
- Posts
- 100
Why don't we all just drive goggomobiles?
I'm getting tired of people whining about 4x4s. If you are nervous about sharing the roads with large vehicles then get a bus because I don't want to have to share the roads with a bunch of nervous people.
I do a lot of country driving and I don't know whether it's just my own experience or whether other people have made the same observation but I think the quality of driving diminishes as the size of the car gets smaller.
As for the chance of injury when being t-boned by a four wheel drive, what happens when a commodore hits a mini or when a corolla hits a Messerschmitt three wheeler. It's all getting a bit ridiculous and is looking more and more like mass hysteria. If you want to quote the figures of deaths of people when being hit by 4x4s you are going to have to also quote the percentage of the accidents that were caused by the driver of the smaller vehicle. Statistics are useless unless all information is provided.
-
11th September 2005, 01:52 PM #33
Originally Posted by echnidna
Richard
-
11th September 2005, 02:41 PM #34
Originally Posted by adrian
Boring signature time again!
-
11th September 2005, 03:17 PM #35
Originally Posted by adrian
Originally Posted by adrian
Originally Posted by adrian
Originally Posted by adrian
Originally Posted by adrian
-
11th September 2005, 04:58 PM #36
Originally Posted by adrian
Originally Posted by Groggy
I am sure somebody will say that by law both vehicles should only be travelling at a maximum of 100k's anyway.
Yes that is true but if every vehicle on the road was driven abiding by every law governing them, how many accidents would there be?
Cheer, Jack."There is no dark side of the moon really. Matter of fact it's all dark."
-
11th September 2005, 05:04 PM #37
Intermediate Member
- Join Date
- Jul 2005
- Location
- Katherine N.T
- Age
- 54
- Posts
- 24
gday i found the best econ towing is in 4th gear (manual) and 80kph.
the other thing abought 4wds is that they last a lot longer then passenger cars my farm ute just failed to pass for rego 2 years ago so now stays on the farm i bought it new in 1989 and did 1.3 millon ks with the only major repairs being 2 gear box rebuilds and one transfer rebuild and that was only bearings and seals.
where most passenger cars are landfill after 10 years or 200,000 ks.
shep
oh and my bullbar is fully adr approved and air bag compatible
-
11th September 2005, 05:18 PM #38
Originally Posted by Jack E
Originally Posted by Jack E
ian
-
11th September 2005, 05:29 PM #39
Originally Posted by kiwigeo
-
11th September 2005, 05:31 PM #40
Originally Posted by ian
)
Originally Posted by ian
Or the fault of the car designer for not anticipating and designing for a possible scenario on the road?
Or the fault of the government for allowing these unsafe passenger cars to be driven at all?
BTW, my bullbar is factory fitted. The nudge bar on my ute is ADR approved and airbag compatible.
You may ask why a nudge bar on my ute?
It's not there for my safety or to injure others.
The front of an XR6 ute would be quite costly to replace or even repair, and SWMBO drives the ute sometimes
Cheers, Jack"There is no dark side of the moon really. Matter of fact it's all dark."
-
11th September 2005, 08:24 PM #41
What I love about people is their
"I don't believe in..... so you should not...."
It has stuff all to do with anyone else what some one chooses to drive providing it is legal. It is their decision and their cost.
The most dangerous thing on the road is not the vehicle type but the loose nut behind the wheel.
Let's get back to the subject which was the price of fuel.
It is getting crook when I could fill my tractor up cheaper inside Woollies at the vegi oil section than what I can at the Woollies garage. :eek:
-
11th September 2005, 08:44 PM #42
Originally Posted by Jack E
Originally Posted by Jack E
as a consumer I can buy any vehicle I want. If I buy a 4WD as a road vehicle 'cause I want to (as opposed to I need a 4WD to tow a boat, horse, etc) then I should acknowledge that my truck isn't a car and I should go and learn how to drive it properly. My personal rant is against people who justify the 4WD on the basis that they drive a couple of kms on gravel which gets a little slippery when it rains — to them I say go and learn how to drive. Drivers in Europe manage to drive 2WD cars on snow and soft ice so what's the big deal with an unsealed road?
You could blame the car designers for not being able to see into the future. The ADRs that most of today's cars conform to were developed and implemented at a time when there were very few 4WDs on the roads. It takes 15 to 20 years before an ADR applies across most cars on Australian roads.
we could also blame the Government for allowing people with a Class 1 licience to drive 4WDs — up until 10 years ago the mass of most 4WDs meant that a Class 3 licience was required — let's also blame the Government for applying a concessional tarrif to 4WDs and while we're at let's all take collective blame for not electing a Government that will ban 4WDs.
But hang on, I vote, and there's noway I'll vote for a party that thinks it can tell me what type of vehicle I should drive.
-
11th September 2005, 09:18 PM #43
Originally Posted by adrian
I'm not interested in how many driving wheels there are, or who can afford to pay for fuel and who can't, but I am interested in why we are allowed to waste so much of what is a non-renewable resource.
Oh yes, I know about oil company conspiracy theories, but why aren't the fuel efficient technologies that are here now not forced apon us, and why in this day and age to we have such a fixation on number of cylinders rather than efficiency???
It's not hard to find four cylinder cars which are a lot less efficient than eight, and so on... the simplest solution is to make the user pay. INCREASE the tax component on fuel I say, if you can't afford it, drive less or more efficiently!
Cheers,
P
-
11th September 2005, 09:51 PM #44
There was a post earlier saying that 4-wheel drives are safer than standard cars. I had heard the opposite but didn't want to say anything till I could back it up.
The stats show that 4-wheel drives are 20% more likely to be involved in a fatal accident. See the picture below for details, the last column has the accident ratios between vehicle types.
For the life of me I can't understand why a city driver wants a car that is 20% more likely to be involved in a fatal accident, costs heaps more to run and heaps more to maintain.
One quote:
"A more insidious problem is the lack of vision behind 4WDs. Almost ninety per cent of children killed in NSW driveways in 1998 were run over by 4WDs or large commercial vehicles.(2) Also, 4WD vehicles can be more difficult for other drivers to see past."
I got the info from the Australian Transport Safety Bureau - monograph 11, "Fatal Four Wheel Drive Crashes"
See: http://www.atsb.gov.au/road/mgraph/mgraph11/index.cfm for all the gory details.
-
11th September 2005, 10:50 PM #45
G'Day all,
I have been reading a lot of the posts here and I have just got to put in my say!.. (1) industry needs 4x4's be it farmers, maintenance workers, etc...(2) it's not the vehicle that is unsafe, it's the people that drive them, the average ford/holden weighs in around 1200/1400kgs, the average 4x4 starts at around 1500kgs up, people drive them like sedans, and a lot of the time that's fine till they get in a situation and momentum and inertia step into the picture and they are really in trouble, hence my next point...(3) 4x4 drivers should be a class of licence in it's self or be under the "M" or "H" class, as they are a heavy vehicle capable of speeds equal to or better than some sedans but the engines are designed to rev harder and longer than most sedans, not for top speed but for the ability to negotiate difficult terrain. I have had 3 4x4's all for different reasons, the last 2 mainly for towing my boat. Selfish, no, safely yes, the old VP commodor was legal to tow the boat but it was right on it's max tow limit, not a good idea, it had a tendancy to push and was always in the back of my mind that if I ever had to "stand" on the brakes I would be in trouble. I traded up to a Jackeroo man 5spd did the job fine and had plenty of pull, but due to a lot of luck and medical prob's I have just bought a new Musso 5cyl turbo diesel auto and will keep it for a long time to come, (I hope). So my point is it's not the 4x4 it's the manner in which the person drives and his/her experience and ability to handle a very comfortably deceptive vehicle. I was trained driving fire trucks at high speeds very safely and defensively and have seen all types of ignorance and stupidity on the roads.
savage.savage(Eric)
Never, under any circumstances, take a sleeping pill and a laxative on the same night.