Are MLs that bad?

[nickg]

Gutted that I missed this lively discussion.
Did anyone see Fifth Gear's face off between X5 and Cayenne?
Both very agile and sporty machines.................

 

[peterchurch]

It's nonsense like this that gives Greenpeace a bad name and generally undermines the 'Greens' ethos....
"Making cars like this for urban use is crazy when 150,000 people are dying every year from climate change," said Greenpeace's Ben Stewart. - and how many of these good folk have choked on the exhaust of a 4x4?

"Range Rover do less (sic) miles to the gallon than the model T Ford." ...and your point is, caller?????

Until there is an attempt to curtail the proliferation of air travel, folk will jump up and down casting blame on on any soft target - stop driving 4x4s, compost your newspapers and drink your own pee...

BTW, I'm no fan of urban 4x4s - I had a smile at someone executing a 3 point turn at the end of our street just now, in a BMW X5, and - oooooh, he had to bump o-h-h s-s-s-o-o-o c-a-r-e-f-u-l-l-l-l-y onto the kerb to complete this tricky manoevre

Go read State of Fear and its references then come back and talk about "global warming"

 

[nickg]

Peter. No offence mate but you are a miserable sod!!!!

You hate high maintenance costs, prefer slow cars because you got nicked a few years ago and you seem very concerned with the environment.
So you went and got yourself an SL320 - potentially v high maint costs, 140mph top speed, not exactly frugal on petrol.......why??

Get yourself a 50cc scooter and a travelcard.

 

[KLP 92]

Peter. No offence mate but you are a miserable sod!!!!

You hate high maintenance costs, prefer slow cars because you got nicked a few years ago and you seem very concerned with the environment.
So you went and got yourself an SL320 - potentially v high maint costs, 140mph top speed, not exactly frugal on petrol.......why??

Get yourself a 50cc scooter and a travelcard.

Nick, you are a joker!
Couldn't agree more, the Sl320 is the wrong car if you are eco friendly!

 

[jgevers]

My 2 pennies worth.

My ML270 has just cracked 80k miles. The things I have had to do include: ball joints (over £100 each!!), rear spring, turbo, 2 injectors, diesel filter housing, exhaust manifold studs, aircon condensor, rear links etc.

Handling when standard was not as good as the latest crop of SUVs. But after changing to Bilstein shocks and fitting a bigger rear anti roll bar it can live with an X5 on the twisties with better comfort. The X5 is too much of a footballer's wife car for mean anyway (and from what I can see in my garage, still goes wrong a fair bit as well) and the X3 is just horrible in my opinion.

Would I recommend the ML? Only if you are aware that the maintenance budget can be high once out of warranty. Oh, and I would buy a 2nd hand ML55 instead of the diesel. If you drive the ML270 hard you won't get much better than 20 mpg. I used average approx. 17mpg with a ML55 I used to drive.

regards,

Job

 

[glojo]

If you drive the ML270 hard you won't get much better than 20 mpg. I used average approx. 17mpg with a ML55 I used to drive.

That is amazing. The noise the 55AMG makes is well worth the difference with those sort of figures.

Regards,
John

 

[jgevers]

From all these replies, no one has said why they bought a 4x4, or why they support their sale. The only sane answer is off road/very poor track use most of the time.

You lot c'mon! I've spent years in this space - you think I'd say something like this without being able to back it up?

Even Fifth Gear did a demo about bumper mis-match the other day...

Perhaps you would like to see some pictures of 4x4 'incidents'?

Matt

Yes, I have a 4x4. Yes, I live in the sticks (darkest Perthshire) at the end of a farm track. Yes, I like the high driving position. Yes, I like to come of best in case of an accident.

As for the 'pedestrian' argument, what about pedestrians looking where they are going? Why not spend more time educating people about road safety, rather then trying to regulate people's choice? In the current climate of never ending rules and regulations resulting in a low personal responsibilty society, I think, at least I can decide what car I drive. But some people even want to regulate that now. B*ll*cks to that!

Anyway, as an 'expert', you might be able to explain to me. As far as I was aware, the cost price for 1 m3 per km for rail transport should be a lot less then for road transport. How come there are so many trucks running around? See what a mess they make of a pedestrian who decides to step out in front of one. I think there are a lot more trucks in this country then 4x4s. Why not start shouting about rail freight costs so that the number of trucks can be reduced?

As for transport planners in this country. Their training can't have been very good or there must be a 2nd agenda. The infrastructure and traffic regulation in this country must be just about the worst in the world.

Just my opinion........

regards,

Job

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

I've really enjoyed reading this thread!!

My wife has a 53 ML270CDi. Had it about 7 months. I'm a rational human being so here's my two penneth...

WHY BUY IT?

Yes X5 is better overall proposition, as is new shape Range Rover, Cayenne, Touraeg (spelling??), XC90. Can't buy a sensible mileage nearly new example of any of these for anywhere near what I paid for the ML. Would need to spend possibly £10k more at least than I did to to get into X5, which offsets against slightly higher depreciation.

My wife wanted one since she first saw one. She also likes Cayenne Turbos but she'll have to wait.

Biggest reason is that it's the only car my two most treasured things ever go in, my wife and daughter, so I want them to be as safe, and feel as safe, as I can make them. Four-star NCAP is fairly good, not the best I'll grant you. Physics tells me though that I'd rather them be in the ML than in a five-star that has less brawn in an impact. Call me naive if you know better. I also like the fact that they have the ability, weight, and power to push other cars out of the way in an emergency situation, and drive up an embankment to get clear. Extreme situation, but if it's ever needed I'll be glad I had it.

Finally, I care about everyone, including pedestrians and other road users, but my life only revolves around two people at the moment, so they're the ones I'll be most interested in. You can call me what you like but when push comes to shove they come first for me.

QUALITY

It has been back to the dealers a few times - several times for a recall item, once for two new catalysts (now they were expensive, but under warranty, around £3k fitted I believe!!). Going back for a trim problem next week, as well as the new design brake pads to take away the squeak!!

Trim quality isn't the finest, but no worse than any other car that was launched in the late 90s. There are some rattles and squeaks, mainly due to an empty child seat though. Partly load cover rattle - never had a car with a load cover or parcel shelf that didn't rattle.

HANDLING

It's a tall heavy car, so I expect it to handle accordingly. There is always a car that will handle better, regardless of the reference point. Thing is, I would only notice at 8/10ths or above, and I don't do that. If I wanted to drive quickly I would buy a sports car. Normal driving, can't tell real difference.

OFF ROAD

Probably will never use the car to it's full potential, but I quite like the fact that it's there should I need it. Just like the fact that I'll never drive at 100mph in it, but again nice if I need it.

PERFORMANCE

More than adequate, deceptively quick when turbo kicks in. Kick-in back stuff (almost). Cruises nicely on the motorway.

ECONOMY

29.5mpg is average at moment, mainly shorter journeys. Not may large cars can do that.

MY RECOMMENDATION

If buying new, don't buy current shape ML - wouldn't make financial sense even if you loved them. There are better cars out there for the same money. If buying second hand, look carefully for a nice example, and buy the best you can afford. Try a recent one with a good chunk of warranty, or an older one and make sure you have a kitty for repairs.

CHALLENGE TO THOSE THAT PUT 4x4s DOWN

Do you need a car with a top speed as high as yours? How often do you use it?
Do you need a car with as many seats as yours? How often do you use them?
Do you need a car that has aircon, leather, soft-top, etc? How often do you use them?
Do you need a car with economy and environmental figures like yours? Could you find a more eco-friendly one?
Do you need a car as expensive to buy and run as yours? Could you find a cheaper one?

For me, answer to all of the above is no, but I still choose to drive what I choose. Maybe I'm selfish and thoughtless?

I suspect most of us buy a car that we want for our own reasons, and will never really need everything it can actually do. We pay our money and take our choices. So think before you criticise others ...stones and glass houses and all that.

What ever you drive enjoy it.

Crikey. That's one a BIIIIIIGGGGG two-penneth!!

 

[glojo]

Biggest reason is that it's the only car my two most treasured things ever go in, my wife and daughter,

People might call you selfish, but that is their opinion.

Well said and to me you are looking after what means everything to you. It is your money, your choice.

Kind regards,
John

 

[peterchurch]

Peter. No offence mate but you are a miserable sod!!!!

You hate high maintenance costs, prefer slow cars because you got nicked a few years ago and you seem very concerned with the environment.
So you went and got yourself an SL320 - potentially v high maint costs, 140mph top speed, not exactly frugal on petrol.......why??

Get yourself a 50cc scooter and a travelcard.

No you missed the point... Go and read the book then you can have a debate about it

I have tended to pick slower cars as I have a lead foot tendancy and I like my licence clear of points. So I bought the SL because I wanted a smooth cruiser after clocking up 70K in an MR2 that was much more fun but tiring to drive. I admit that I would have prefered a 911 or a tuskan but they were out of the question as I didn't trust myself to behave in either of them...

Running costs dont bother me because I can afford them. What bothers me is having to phone a client to cancel a meeting at the last minute coz my car is in for another impromptu and stupid stint in the garage for one thing or another...

The V6 is very economical actually unlike the previous 320 that went before it
after the cats were done I have the Sun readings showing my car is emmiting less than 0.006 parts per million for the harmful stuff and I get better fuel economy in the V6 SL than I have in my MR2, Saab, Volvo, and its about equal to the CRV...

That said I was driving down the M4 this morning thinking how nice it was that all the silly stuff was sorted and I could look forward to a few thousand miles of SL pleasure when I got a drip on my foot from the shitty sub standard windscreen job that MB replaced last year I was just next to junction 12 so I popped into Porsche Reading and I am now in the process of booting out the SL, with any luck it will be in favour of a 996 cabrio

Travelcards dont exist round here...

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

People might call you selfish, but that is their opinion.

Well said and to me you are looking after what means everything to you. It is your money, your choice.

Cheers, John.

 

[Alfie]

Well said Bobby Dazzler and jgevers.

There seems once again to be a majority view on this topic that contradicts the minority who want to impose their prejudice on the rest. There have been some very good points raised (Dieter, Bobby jgevers and others) and some complete and utter testicular based words.

Last time we had this debate the spoil sports lost and it looks like its now 2 - 0

 

[glojo]

I am not here to keep score, but............................

This morning on Sky News they showed an American Police Officer being hit by a pick-up truck.

This truck was a similar size to our 4 x 4's and instead of a sterile test of a vehicle hitting a dummy, this truck drove straight into the officer who was stood by the roadside 'advising' a motorist who had driven their car off the road.

The truck hit the officer from behind, the back of his head crashed against the bonnet and then the vehicle carried the officer forward out of camera view.

The reporter stated the officer was NOT seriously injured!!! Unbelievable, the vehicle was not travelling at a crawl and the collision looked 'terminal'

All the footage we are shown of 4 x 4's hitting pedestrian dummies indicate that the collision would be far more severe than if they had been hit by a car. This incident involving a real person clearly disagree's with this opinion, and I am now confused and sadly long words or statistics will not replace the image of the Police officer being hit.

In this case pictures truly paint more than a thousand words.

Sorry,
John (Not the owner of a 4 x 4)

 

[prprandall51]

Well said Bobby Dazzler and jgevers.

There seems once again to be a majority view on this topic that contradicts the minority who want to impose their prejudice on the rest. There have been some very good points raised (Dieter, Bobby jgevers and others) and some complete and utter testicular based words.

Last time we had this debate the spoil sports lost and it looks like its now 2 - 0

Duh! No cohesive arguments have been put forward by the pro-4x4 side of this "discussion" except:
Freedom of choice
Protect No. 1

They are fine sentiments - ones with which I can fully sympathise - but they are not conclusive arguments.

To dismiss others' points of view as b@lls, whilst paising your own opinions and to call others "spoil-sports" suggests to me that the whole philosophy and ethos of discussion groups may have passed you by.

As I have already mentioned on this thread, when we had this thread-theme before and I put forward my viewpoint, I got abuse, derision and sarcasm to the point where I left you lot (the pro-4x4 side) to it; if I take time out to participate in a discussion forum I do it for enjoyment and mental stimulation, not so that I can be browbeaten into somebody else's opinion. Clearly you mistakenly interpreted that as "victory".

If you think that you have "won" again this time, you are confusing bombastic attack with articulate discussion.

Here's an idea: lets forget this is about MLs and imagine the government is going to legislate all 4x4s off the road (not so unbelievable, is it?). What would your arguments be to your MP to sway him to your case?

"Freedom of choice" is a fair sentiment, but that sentiment keeps the USA armed to the hilt and would have us all doing the same. The reality of today's society is that Freedom of Choice is not considered a valid argument on almost any issue ranging from I.D cards through to education.

Protect No. 1 is an interesting viewpoint but one that lends itself to the creation of a vicious circle. It doesn't ring true, either, since accident statistics do not indicate that you are necessarily safer in a 4x4 and the fundemental vehicle dynamics indicate you are more likely to get into an accident in one than an equivalent saloon in any given potential accident, anyway. Finally, whilst it's an understandable sentiment, it is also a very selfish one.

So what are your other arguments?

Philip

 

[glojo]

So what are your other arguments?

Philip

Hi Philip,
Sky are continually showing the footage of the incident I described and the more I watch it, the more graphic, sickening it looks. The officer was only detained in hospital for a few hours!!!

I accept that one example does not make a case, but by crikey to say this was a graphic incident is an understatement. Still pictures of crash scenes, or victims do not compare to the footage on Sky, the officer was so lucky that his head only travelled a short distance onto the bonnet of the vehicle. No doubt we can put forward the what if's and hte if only's, but this pedestrian was hit from behind at speed by a vehicle that is trying to be outlawed. The victim survived without any serious injury.
That is neither being bombastic nor sarcastic.

I am not comfortable with the arguement though of putting my family into a 'tank' and blow everyone else. I would first of all considr convincing my partner to take an advanced driving course to teach them to be more aware, more defensive and dare I suggest a safer driver.

So I understand the arguement of buyiong what is best to protect the family, but i would very tactfully suggest that a driving course might be a more benficial investment.

'Meat in the sandwich' was always a favourite saying of mine. Motor cyclist as well as car drivers should always be aware of this. MOST accidents\collisions have both parties having varying degrees of blame. Just read all the roundabout incidents, good forward observation, and anticipation would avoid most if not all these incidents.

If someone solely bought a 4 x 4 to protect their family but then accidentally killed someone and it was proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that the death could have been avoided if htey were driving an ordinary car would they feel guilty???? Or would they say, "If I had left one minute later then theaccident would never have happened!" I don't know the answer to that and I truly believe no sensible person does.

I still belong to the freedom of choice corner, but am really enjoying the polite, constructive messages that are coming from both corners. 'Points de zéro' to the other messages

John

That is

 

[Alfie]

Duh! No cohesive arguments ............................................So what are your other arguments?

Philip

2 - 0
2 - 0
2 - 0

I have seen nothing and read nothing which convinces me that you are right. I have read everything you have written and learnt NOTHING.

Take your prejudices away with you. If you want to pick on a group of individuals based on their choices, pick certain extreme right wing groups. Or at the very least pick a group where there isnt other members with worse or more extreme views. You have been shown time and time again that lorries, vans, coaches etc are far more dangerous to other road users than 4x4's. cars themselvs pose a monumental risk to motorcyclists, shall we ban cars because of this? Still you pick on the middle classes. Are you jealous by chance.

As for selfish...you are partially correct. Lets face it, if you can drive around in a vehicle which makes you and your family feel and be safer than others, are you going to say 'Oh thats not fair, I'm being selfish. If I have an accident then I must come off at least as badly as the other driver or thats not fair' . Are you seriously suggesting that you wish for your family to be just as vulnerable as everybody else. I think not.

Finally, lets not forget one thing. 4x4's tend to be driven far more slowly than your average car.

 

[prprandall51]

2 - 0
Still you pick on the middle classes. Are you jealous by chance.

Alfie, just looked at your signature. It appears that I own two 4x4s whilst you own none. Therefore, I think that makes me much better qualified to participate in this debate than you.

I have examined the evidence and I am delighted to be able to inform you that I am not envious of you. Furthermore, I am not jealous of you either since I own nothing that (as far as I am aware) you covet.

Philip

PS: Just edited to add the smilies - don't want us ending up round the back of the bike sheds over this

 

[Alfie]

Alfie, just looked at your signature. It appears that I own two 4x4s whilst you own none. Therefore, I think that makes me much better qualified to participate in this debate than you.

I'm shocked. You own two 4x4's and yet you argue the point against them

Look at my signature again and you will see that I have owned a 4x4 until very recently in fact.

I have examined the evidence and I am delighted to be able to inform you that I am not envious of you. Furthermore, I am not jealous of you either since I own nothing that (as far as I am aware) you covet.

Last sentence doesnt make sense. Shouldnt it read '..since you own nothing that I covet'

Philip

PS: Just edited to add the smilies - don't want us ending up round the back of the bike sheds over this

Me neither.

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

As for selfish...you are partially correct. Lets face it, if you can drive around in a vehicle which makes you and your family feel and be safer than others, are you going to say 'Oh thats not fair, I'm being selfish. If I have an accident then I must come off at least as badly as the other driver or thats not fair' . Are you seriously suggesting that you wish for your family to be just as vulnerable as everybody else. I think not.

Well said Alfie.

For those that do think that 4x4 drivers are selfish, would you say the same about someone who has private healthcare, as it might put someone in a stronger position than someone without it should they need treatment? If I am fortunate enough to be able to do what I think is best for my family, why shouldn't I, or anyone else do it?

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

I am not comfortable with the arguement though of putting my family into a 'tank' and blow everyone else. I would first of all considr convincing my partner to take an advanced driving course to teach them to be more aware, more defensive and dare I suggest a safer driver.

So I understand the arguement of buyiong what is best to protect the family, but i would very tactfully suggest that a driving course might be a more benficial investment.

Glojo, a good point and one that many - me included - gloss over. Same can be said for making a car quicker - a good driver can make the best of the car's capabilities, and safely use more of the cars potential.

It's something I've meaning to look into for a while. However, in the heat of the moment and if it's been a while since you really stretched your 'improved' safer-driving skills, then you may not be as effective as you might have been. That's when it's nice to know that you have inherrant safety features of the car you drive to rely on.

Can't argue with the fact that it's best to avoid the situation altogether though!!