Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncements
Discussion Groups
By Brand
BMWChevroletDodgeFordGMHondaLexusMercedes-BenzNissanPeugeotToyotaVolkswagenOther Brands
By Topic
4x4 CarsRVsDrivingMaintenance & RepairCar AudioCollectible Cars
Country Specific
Australian ForumsUK Forums
ArticlesAuto InsuranceBuyingCars & TechnologyMaintenanceMiscellaneousSafety
DMV Resources
Related Topics
MotorcyclesBoatsMore Topics ...

Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Maintenance and Repair / July 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

stupidest or silliest 4x4 product you have seen...

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
JJ) (jj - 05 Jul 2005 16:55 GMT
For me, http://www.sprayonmud.com/ but I know there has to be
something that tops it...
mst - 05 Jul 2005 17:24 GMT
(jayjayjpg@nadasppam-yahoo.com (JJ) (jj)) scribbled:

> For me, http://www.sprayonmud.com/ but I know there has to be
> something that tops it...

For me, it's not an aftermarket "product", but the
4x4 itself - these days they are *not* purchased for
their intended use, but rather as a status symbol.
Here in Houston, we have a number of Hummer dealers
and I can [just about] guarantee that 99% of those
vehicles sold never see the dirt. The same goes for
Yukons, Suburbans, LandRovers, Benz "Jeep", ad nauseum

Signature

remove MYSHOES to email

tom_murphy@comcast.net - 05 Jul 2005 21:52 GMT
Well, for the common SUV's, the ones under say $40,000, they're really
the station wagon of our time without the station wagon stigma. One of
my old girlfriends actually thought my SUV was cool! That would NOT
have happend in a station wagon.(Of course, that one was a 4x4...)

It's true that most of the very expensive 4x4's in Texas don't see alot
of offroad action. I wonder why those people don't just get the 2WD
version (when available). I'd be interested to see the statistics on
the number of SUV's that are sold in 2WD configurations in areas like
Texas where there are not mountains and very little snow.

Heck, I drive a 2WD Grand Cherokee and I chose that vehicle because
it's convenient and I like it, no other reason. I don't care if
everyone knows that it never goes off-road. I don't consider myself a
poseur because I have no brush guards, headlight grills, mud tires or
other off-road gear (and I WON'T be ordering the fake mud). It's bone
stock and hauls my boat and all types of sporting gear along with four
to five passengers so it serves my purpose.

It's a whole different ball game in Colorado for example. I had a
friend who moved there from Texas and decided to sell her 2WD Cherokee
to get a 4x4 pickup for the mountain roads in winter. Well, she put it
in the paper and when she told callers that the Jeep was 2WD, they
replied "They make those?"  She drove it back to Texas and left it with
me so I could sell it for her here because it was NOT going to happen
up there!

I really don't get the luxury SUV's. Porsche?! What's the world comin'
to?

Tom
Steve - 05 Jul 2005 23:51 GMT
>  One of
> my old girlfriends actually thought my SUV was cool! That would NOT
> have happend in a station wagon.

It would have if the station wagon in question was a Magnum R/T.... ;-)

SUV's held an appeal to me for a number of years, simply because for a
long time they were the ONLY available domestic v8 rear-wheel drive
non-pickups except for the Crown Victoria. That's all changed now. I
still would rather have an SUV than a minivan (I'd rather have a chronic
wasting disease than a minivan) but there are now a number of cars that
would suit me fine.
mst - 06 Jul 2005 02:13 GMT
(tom_murphy@comcast.net) scribbled:

> Well, for the common SUV's, the ones under say $40,000, they're really
> the station wagon of our time without the station wagon stigma. One of
> my old girlfriends actually thought my SUV was cool! That would NOT
> have happend in a station wagon.(Of course, that one was a 4x4...)

... Point taken. Personally, I see the COVs (Cross-Over Vehicles)
more in tune with what a station wagon should be. Which reminds me,
as a young child in the 60's, we had a Vista Cruiser that had two
"moon roofs" between the front/second seats. I used to sit in the
back at night, gazing up through the roof glass, pretending I was
in a rocket ship.

> It's true that most of the very expensive 4x4's in Texas don't see alot
> of offroad action. I wonder why those people don't just get the 2WD
> version (when available). I'd be interested to see the statistics on
> the number of SUV's that are sold in 2WD configurations in areas like
> Texas where there are not mountains and very little snow.
[snip]

I dont know either. I admit I have an SUV (Trooper), but I use it
for deep-woods camping, weekends on the beach, for hauling, and
getting off the freeway when the traffic is backed up :)   What
bothers me most is the fact that most of the SUV's you see on the
road around here (Houston, TX) are the *BIG* ones, ones that
surely NOT getting over 10MPG.

> It's a whole different ball game in Colorado for example.

Understandably - and it makes sense in that terrain.

[snip]
> I really don't get the luxury SUV's. Porsche?! What's the world comin'
> to?

Agreed. I really dont get it, except that the manufacturers are
cashing in on what consumers think they need.

Signature

remove MYSHOES to email

James C. Reeves - 06 Jul 2005 02:31 GMT
> (tom_murphy@comcast.net) scribbled:
>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> back at night, gazing up through the roof glass, pretending I was
> in a rocket ship.

I remember those!  While pretending you were in your rocket ship, what were
the streetlight objects that passed by the window?
HLS@nospam.nix - 05 Jul 2005 23:28 GMT
> (jayjayjpg@nadasppam-yahoo.com (JJ) (jj)) scribbled:
>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> 4x4 itself - these days they are *not* purchased for
> their intended use, but rather as a status symbol.

I agree.  The people who buy these like them because they are 'cute', not
because
they are a smart purchase.  It is a fad.. I have tried to talk my
stepdaughter out of it
because they are (1) inherently not too safe, (2) not too economical, and
(3) not too
roomy.

She thinks they are 'cute'.

OK by me.
Nate Nagel - 05 Jul 2005 22:32 GMT
JJ jj wrote:
> For me, http://www.sprayonmud.com/ but I know there has to be
> something that tops it...

not sure how they stack up, but this is close:

http://www.nutsfortrucks.com/

nate

Signature

replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel

JJ) (jj - 06 Jul 2005 15:43 GMT
Thanks Nate, that is a good lame one!  :-)

>JJ jj wrote:
>> For me, http://www.sprayonmud.com/ but I know there has to be
>> something that tops it...
>not sure how they stack up, but this is close:
>http://www.nutsfortrucks.com/
>nate
Nate Nagel - 05 Jul 2005 22:34 GMT
JJ jj wrote:
> For me, http://www.sprayonmud.com/ but I know there has to be
> something that tops it...

not sure how they stack up, but this is close:

http://www.nutsfortrucks.com/

nate

Signature

replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel

Mike Romain - 06 Jul 2005 01:19 GMT
Ya gonna spam all the newsgroups or just the auto ones?

Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's

JJ jj wrote:

<spam snipped>

> something that tops it...
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.