Anti 4x4

Can probably be manoevered more easily than my 109 though.

Reply to
Larry
Loading thread data ...

In article , Larry writes

[stuff that's hard to follow]

Please follow-up at the bottom, otherwise your sig separator means earlier postings are not properly visible.

Cheers,

Simonm.

Reply to
SpamTrapSeeSig

I'm a top poster always have been since I joined usenet in 99, not going to change now.

Reply to
Larry

In a dim and distant universe , Larry enlightened us thusly:

Then don't complain if people don't bother reading your posts!

Reply to
Paul Vigay

In article , Larry writes

Ah, one of _those_.

Duly noted.

Regards,

Simonm.

Reply to
SpamTrapSeeSig

Disco is in the top half - screen shot from the pdf here:

formatting link

Reply to
Allen

And it's got nothing to do with the transmission system

Reply to
hugh

The standard of truck driving in the UK is now appalling. Just listen to the traffic reports on the radio and you will hear that nine times out of ten accidents are due to lorries shedding their load.

Reply to
hugh

Ah now we have it. He want more regulations to drum up more business.

Reply to
hugh

Well this must apply equally to buses, vans people carriers. So if all the 4x4s which might be deemed to be non-essential suddenly disappeared what difference would it make? SFA

Reply to
hugh

I don't :)

You obviously did.

Reply to
Larry

I give up. If you can't see the woods then maybe the trees are in the way.

Reply to
SteveG

I do this as an unpaid volunteer. No money (or other form of payment) passes between myself and my pupil. I do it because I have the knowledge, skills, time and desire to do so.

Reply to
SteveG

Caused by the truck driver having to take evasive action to avoid some numpty in a car?

Only joking above, but having passed both C and C+E tests in 2007 I'd venture to say that if the level of driving skill of truck drivers is falling it's not due to the training or testing they get. Passing both tests was very hard.

Reply to
SteveG

You got me, Ian, I had a vague recollection of something like that but couldn't find it :-)

Reply to
SteveG

C'mon Ian, keep up :-))

Reply to
SteveG

SG: You have my sympathies then, Simon. It'll get worse when they give the go-ahead for LHA's (25.25m long and 60tonnes).

SG: As consumers, we're our own worst enemies really. We expect (or even demand) that stores have everything in-stock or available for next day delivery and that increases the number of delivery vehicles in use. Internet shopping has the same effect too. It is getting worse; I work with (but not for) an international parcel carrier that has seen the number of items they deliver each day increase by 21% in the past 12 months. The only practical solution for them is to increase the number of delivery vehicles they use and the biggest part of the increase comes from large towns and cities.

Reply to
SteveG

Didn't someone propose that the vehicle does affect the driver? This is more about the car itself, mainly assuming there will be good and bad drivers in any vehicle type. Most attitudes here are from the myopic point of view of the author driving along the road or crossing intersections. Little about the way their car itself affects conditions for others or pedestrians in other situations like car parks and what might be done to compensate.

Reply to
jg

No hard and fast rules of course, the wife of a friend was in a Toyota SmallCar (can't remember which, Yaris?) and got hit by a bus that crossed the white line and just swatted her and the car into a field like a bug, perhaps she was lucky and perhaps someone in a 2-tonne car might have been crushed rather than taking off!

Reply to
Ian Rawlings

|In article , Larry writes |>I'm a top poster always have been since I joined usenet in 99, not going to |>change now. | |Ah, one of _those_. | |Duly noted. | .. and duly kill-filed.

Reply to
Howie

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.