What made you choose the car you have?

What was the biggest reason for your car choice

  • its NCAP rating on safety

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • fuel economy and running costs (insurance, tax etc)

    Votes: 17 17.5%

  • style

    Votes: 16 16.5%

  • reliability

    Votes: 7 7.2%

  • its what you could afford

    Votes: 7 7.2%

  • Other

    Votes: 50 51.5%
  • Total voters
    97
That was precisely my point! The 90 is probably the best 4x4 available for the conditions over here but doesn't qualify under Garry's specifications.
 
Under one of Garrys qualifications.

But well done, you have somebody who has made an error on an internet forum.
 
Surely any vehicle that has 4wd is a 'proper' 4x4 by definition.
 
Nod said:
By those definitions a Landy 90 isn't a 'proper 4x4'!

Kerb weight, 1771kg...
Click to expand...

Other than the kerb weight it qualifies beautifully, possibly the best 'deep stuff' off roader, and of course I include the Series cars in that too.

OK, maybe kerb weight isn't the biggest factor... and of course it's far from the only factor, there are plenty of really heavy 4 x 4's that get stuck in the car park.

But personally I do feel that ground clearance, low transfer box and towing ability are major factors, but then we all have different requirements.
 
fracster said:
For goodness sake, how can anyone deem a LR 90 to be anything other than a proper 4x4?

OK, it does not fit exactly to Garrys criteria, but the best pedant in the world could not dismiss it as being anything other than a 4x4.They have sold pretty well to people who need them over the years.
Click to expand...

fracster said:
Under one of Garrys qualifications.

But well done, you have somebody who has made an error on an internet forum.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty certain Nod's comments were very much tongue in cheek ;)

Where's Joe when you need him :lol:
 
I completely agree Garry! I loved the Landies I've had and have offroaded them a fair bit (where they're at their best, especially the Series vehicles). The original reason for purchase was the towing ability - the first one was an S2a Diesel which started life as a 109" but was rotten (and cheap!) so was rebuilt on a new galvanised chassis as an 88 with the 109 brakes.

The only thing I don't like about them is the fuel economy consumption - 25MPG is just a bit too thirsty on a run and I no longer need to tow (the load was Dad's boat and he's no longer with us) so when I wrote it off (blowout and a roll...) I used the insurance to get a road car instead.
 
Nikon_Nick said:
Surely any vehicle that has 4wd is a 'proper' 4x4 by definition.
Click to expand...

It depends.
Last week, my youngest son had the 'clever' idea of planting a line of electric fencing posts along the side of the track running across one of his fields, so that he would know where the track was if the snow got any deeper.

Then it snowed, and covered the fencing posts, so he was driving blind, getting hay to the animals. One one trip, it was snowing so heavily that by the time he had seen to the animals, his outward bound tracks were invisible...

Don't know quite how deep that snow actually was, but his Series 2 landie managed OK, 2nd gear, low transfer box on tickover. There are a lot of 4WD cars that would have had no chance.
 
Toataly off topic now, but there is a vast difference between a 4wd vehicle and and "off roader"

Usually the term 4x4 is used for Off Roaders, not for 4wd cars (like a Celica GT4 for example, even though it is permanent 4wd)
 
I agrees that 4x4 and 4WD are different things, many cars are 4WD these days, they are not 4x4s though. Things like the Golf R32 come to mind, might not be full time 4WD but all 4 wheels get drive.
 
mine was bought because it was a cheap motor for travelling back and forward to work ..2002 astra 1.7dti for £300 with 80k on the clock and 5 months tax 4 months mot

2 and a bit years later just put it through its 2nd mot all that was wrong was a busted rear spring (bad road to work)

canny beat it :)
 
I like a car that's comfortable, quiet, can see over the hedge, superb radio, cd autochanger. So far not let me down in 6 years. Cheap servicing and parts, can be repaired by the owner if need be, 43,000 miles on a set of tyres (twice), sips oil like a nervous gazelle at a watering hole. Withtsood a 30mph rear shunt from a transit van only damage bashed in rear door, bent exhaust, rear door tyre took all the damage. Transit was a right off.

I love my Landrover Discovery TD5
 
I chose style, though really it's a combination of that, reliability, performance and insurance friendliness.

My current cars are OEM styled Civic coupe and a soon to be JDM styled Eunos Roadster (Mazda MX5 to you).

The civic was chosen because it would be ultra reliable and frugal without sacrificing too much performance or style and the MX5 was chosen because I wanted some more fun on my daily drive without going overboard in running costs and without losing reliability.

The last thing that's on my mind buying a car is how safe it is. The civic for example has no reinforcement in the front bumper at all - it's just the ABS bumper itself, held on by 2 self tapper in the corners and that's your lot. Any impact goes straight into the almost non existent slam panel and front wings. The MX5 has no roof. Safe as houses that!
 
The MX-5 does have roll protection in the screen surround - of a sort!
 
I was mainly dictated to be fuel costs because we get 14ppm for petrol allowance at work.

I drove a Leon Cupra R for a few years, which was the car I'd wanted for ages. It was my farewell to performance, although for a quick car it was actually more frugal than I first imagined (35mpg), but that wasn't enough to counter our poor mileage allowance and rising fuel cost. The matter was compounded by the fact I went from 10,000 miles per year with work to nearly 40,000 overnight.

I plumped for a Volvo S60 D5. I've always like these, bit of an understated barge and super-comfortable and with a guaranteed 50mpg+. I'd originally wanted an estate but set myself a £5,000 limit including trade-in (my Cupra R traded in at £3500), as I didn't want to be burdened with owing loads on a car that was going to devalue horrendously. Found a 2005 S60 D5 Sport for £5000 with 80K on the clock; big 19" R alloys, leather, good stereo, nice body kit, just a really nice car. It ticked all the boxes - performance, economy, style, space, safety, comfort.

I've done 50,000 in it since September 2011 and aside from some tyres and an issue with the aftermarket HiD lamps (I've returned them to normal bulbs), plus servicing, it's been ultra-reliable, which was something I liked about the Volvo brand. The renowned safety of Volvos was a bonus in reality.

It's not a spring chicken anymore and is starting to get a few niggly squeeks and rattles, but it starts first time, every time, and remains the most comfortable car I've ever been in. I'll definitely get another one but I think I'l opt to spend that little bit more and get a V70 instead, just for the additional space for fishing, transporting the family and doing trips to the alps.

Most importantly, for work I no longer get deductions on fuel, which was a big deal to me as no employee should have to pay to do their job.
 
Last edited:
Other - performance (both power and handling) and the fact I came back from the test drive grinning like a loon :D
 
As it has gone off topic a bit - I once towed a very old landrover up out of a steep field it had got stuck in with my X-Trail - afterwards realised I had forgotten to put it in 4WD so it was still in normal mode. Did have a group of people pushing it as well which helped :). Not going to try that again though as I was, to put it mildly, somewhat nervous about it
 
We are a 2 car household as are many these days.

Car 1 - Little VW Fox 1.0 for commuting and nothing else. Wife loves it :(

Car 2 - Audi A6 Quattro 3.0 Sport for commuting, family trips and just driving for pleasure.

Bought because we liked them and no other reason ;)
 
MPG, nippiness (is there such a word?), low car tax (£20 a year), had to fit in my garage. Fell in love with yellow and black Mini Cooper D. . Although it's not always the most practical for carting camera equipment around at horse shows as it can collect quite a bit of grass and mud when driving through muddy fields and run flat tyres are bloomin expensive!
 
For me cars that are fit for purpose and big, hate small cars their so uncomfortable! and you have to rev them when I am used to sitting in the lower end.

Old Mitsubishi is a hell of a lot of fun to drive on a back road, neither sluggish nor Ferrari performance, fun and poised in bends without ripping your face off, and can go like stink on the motorway, the controls are easy to navigate, plenty of space, easy to work on, red, pretty damn comfy, understated, and pretty economical all round for a petrol.

Downsides: parts are a swine to get hold and always have been, get stuck with the dealer expect a huge bill, because of rarity of parts if you get one not fit for purpose (like a catalytic converter) it confuses the engine management (and fails and MOT), which makes you weary of certain Japanese Parts resellers.

Saab, its comfy in a way that I have done 500 miles none stop and got out with absolutely to strain, stress, numbness or otherwise (tried that in an Audi A4 S-Line, fell out in Agony!)

All the controls are again easy to navigate and within easy reach and view, driven with a slight concious its fairly frugal, exceeds official figures and then some and can pull all day long under weight, parts are readily available as is a community to guide you in repairs and comes with plenty of gadgets.

Downsides: it doesn't like sharp bends at speed, and it rolls going over dips with the Air Shocks, having an auto-box its a bit temperamental switching gears unnecessarily and could really do with the Manumatic from the Aero for a decent over-ride/manual input.

Also certain years are know to have engine failure (and guess what, all the parts that fail are,,,, GM) but this was corrected in 2004/5.

Volvo S40 is a shared Mitsubishi platform and lots of Mitsubishi parts too (some share with the old Mitsubishi), downside is Volvo electrics which tends to blow fuses, seats are far too stiff, leg room is OK but not record breaking, engine is also MEH and lacking in low end torque seen in older Mitsubishi's, but holds well on a motorway, fairly frugal, feels well built, controls are pretty well setup, parts are easy to get hold of and easy to fit, boot space is pretty surprising, pretty poised when being thrown about but feels overly stiff and probably contributes badly to the ride comfort, road noise is noticeable in the back but headroom is a slight problem with a baby seat banging either yours or the kids head trying to get in at a squiff angle.

Probably guessed, I notice quite a lot about each motor.

Ideally though if I was offered anything I would just get a mini-van were fuel not a bug bear, like the ride height and practicality, and never had any bug bears with comfort or practicality either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top