Chris L

5th Gear - **** me!! Not good

Chris

Stevie

Missed it, what did they say?

47 NAT

Have never been a fan of them...look too much like a black MetroCab!

Nath

Luke

Wasnt the last series the biggest problem the RAC / AA had ever dealt with ??

Avi

The RAC had to pay for labour when ours blew up in France... cost them a fortune , only had to pay for parts!!

Stevie

Metrocab? That is the P38, not the current version.

I assume it wasn't good, but am just a little curious.

Flyboy-F33

Used to have a 535i (current shape) was the least reliable I ever owned. Had to get towed homw twice in two months. Greta cars though! The new model is almost as ugly as a scoob...! On second thoughts...the scoob is prettier!

Stevie

Flyboy,

I could be wrong, but what car are you on about?

Sennadog 93

Personally, I've never bought into the whole "Safety Issue" of 4x4s. People who've justified their vehicle on these grounds have just compounded their ignorance in my opinion.

It doesn't take Einstein to realise that a car that has a higher CG and weighs twice as much as the average saloon is more likely to roll and the breaking distance is obviously going to be greater.

I think they've confused a feeling of safety with a feeling of invincibility.

Chris L

Stevie

They were showing how easy it was to make a 4x4 tip over and lose control. Basically they had a Jag following a BMW. BM does an emergency stop and Tiff demonstrates what happens in the Jag. I.e. he eventually loses it and spins the car attempting to change direction at high speed and then applying the brakes etc etc. He demonstrates this upto speeds in excess of 70mph. The worst that happens is that the Jag spins out.

So they get a Range Rover (old style version, but probably no more than 5 years old) and repeat the test with a stunt driver. As a precaution they put in a roll cage, safety fuel tank - just in case.

Repeat the test - RR following BMW at 45mph. BM does an emergency stop. Bloke in RR trys to avoid the BM by braking and pulling round the BM. It lost stability almost immeadiately and ended up on its roof It really was very easy Very sobering thought for anyone driving a 4x4. If it wasn't for the roll cage, there would have been nothing left of the cabin. I doubt you would escape without serious injury - quite probably you would be dead.

Enough to put you off for life.

Chris

NotoriousREV

Actually, looking carefully at the in car footage, the driver didn't try to avoid the other car, he deliberately provoked a roll.

First he swerved hard right to avoid the car, then he spun the wheel to full lock left as hard as he could. Not exactly what would happen in an avoidance situation, but fair point, an ordinary saloon car would not have behaved the same.

tiggers

I own a US Jeep Grand Cherokee which I use when I'm working in the US (spend 4 months a year out there on average).

I bought it as it was cheap (secondhand) and because I need plenty of room for transporting equipment.

In the handbook and on both sunvisors is the following legend (this is paraphrased, but you'll get the drift):-

"This sports utility vehicle has a higher center of gravity and a more compliant suspension than other vehicles as it has been designed for off-road as well as on-road use. As such it handles and drives differently on the road compared to other vehicles. It should be noted that extreme braking combined with sharp manouvers could cause the vehicle to overturn hence more care should be exercised when driving this vehicle on the road"

At first I was a little disturbed by this, but thinking about it it is just common sense. What a pity 99% of 4x4 drivers in Britian don't get to read and understand soemthing like this - may be that way I wouldn't see Land Rover Discoveries 2 inches from my rear bumper on the motorway.

tiggers.

Avi

The range rover was about 10 years old.. it was one of these:

chameleon

Didn't Richard Branson overturn his on the M40 a few years back?

[Edited by chameleon - 5/15/2003 12:59:25 PM]

Chris L

Avi - doubt it would make any difference what you used - I guess they didn't really want to write off a 50 grand X5 (and I doubt BMW would be willing for them to try either).

The situation is not so unrealistic in the sense that they were trying to simulate driving on a motorway. The idea being to avoid the vehicle in front and then regain your position on the road - i.e. in front of the vehicle that has stopped or braked heavily. This is exactly how we were taught on a Subaru handling course a few years back at the Transport Research Labs. At the TRL they were teaching us how to use ABS properly and the effect that weight distribution has on braking and the control of the car.

Braking and avoiding the car in front would not have resulted in the loss of control and subsequent flip. It was the attempt to regain the position on the road that caused the instability - showed all you needed to know about high centres of gravity...

Chris


[Edited by Chris L - 5/15/2003 1:14:13 PM]

Stevie

Thanks for the reply Chris.

Personally, I'm not at all worried.

The classic shape and P38 (metrocab) do have live axles, so if you do try a slalom, it gets a little messy after the third swerve. Not defending the way 4x4's are driven, but you should be able to see a good few cars down the road so can start to avoid/ anticipate well in advance of problem.

I drive 2 Land Rover 110's, woman has just swapped our P38 for a new shape (no live axles!) Range Rover, and personally have no problems about the handling issues.

We had the Accord Type R and STi7 for swerving around

andym172

I didn't see the programme but form what I've heard it sounds like their intended result was to try to get it to overturn.

My family's had a total of 5 RR's now: 2 mk1's, 2 mk2's and a current version Vogue. As with any vehicle with a high centre of gravity there is a change that it is going to roll but I've only heard of 2 cases where a RR has overturned (Branson being one of them).

There's even footage that's appeared on the tv (I think it was Police Camera Action) of my family and I travelling to the Lakes on the M6 when an old Audi A6 flipped directly in front of us, my dad who was driving us had to violently steer our car away from the Audi (at 70mphish ) and we had no problems at all.

It's my personal opinion that there may be a touch of sensationalism going on...

Andy.

Dracoro

Yeah, instead of trying to avoid the car in front and end up rolling, the typical 4X4 driver will just smash up the back of you in full knowledge that you'll be worse off and they'll be ok.

ultimately it's down to physics. A 4x4 WILL have a higher centre of gravity and IS a lot heavier so will roll far more easily. All it means is that the drivers of 4X4's have to adjust their driving to suit the vehicle. The ones that don't run a higher risk of rolling.

Chris L

I think that was the ultimate point. Manufacturers market these vehicles as cars - not off roaders. After all - very few actually go off road. Excluding maybe the high end X5s and Cayennes, they don't handle like cars. As Stevie has said - if you are used to them and understand the different vehicle dynamics - then it is not a problem. Unfortunatley that doesn't seem to be the case with many drivers.

You could argue that there was an element of sensationalism in the article (after all it is TV), but they were attempting similar extreme moves in both the RR and the Jag. The results were very different and the apparent ease with which they managed to flip the RR was very sobering.

Chris

NotoriousREV

Chris, I know what you're saying, but watch the repeat of 5th Gear (Sunday?) and watch what the guy does with the steering wheel, he deliberately provokes the roll by snapping the steering from a quarter turn right to full lock left as hard as he can, he actually spins the wheel with a lot of force, you can see him lift his arms and shoulders to put in the extra force. You simply wouldn't drive that way in an avoidance situation, unless your first manouvre headed you towards something else to hit

TRIGGER

Sorry but he did the same as Tiff did in the Jag. All they were recreating was a severe swerve - i.e. first one way then the other. That's why the Jag span so quickly - but he could keep some control and safety. The RR was treated the same (and yes I agree it is unlikely to happen like that in real life), but it was toppling over straight away. He could have steered out of it but that wouldnt have shown so dramatically the radical difference between the 2 types of cars.

andym172

Going off on a bit of a tangent, but you have to ask yourself how any short wheel base car would act in that situation - for example a mini metro. I had a ride in one of these the other day and the handling was awful! If you were to swerve violently at anything above 30mph I'm firmly of the opinion that it would be on its side in no time.

I wonder how that Bowler 4x4 that was shown on Topgear would react in the same situation as that on 5th Gear?

Andy.

[Edited by andym172 - 5/15/2003 3:40:17 PM]

NotoriousREV

No, he was much more aggressive, he basically flicked it into the roll. If you're avoiding another car, you'll most likely steer 1/4 turn right, 1/4 left then any corrective manouvres, you would never apply 1/4 turn right, 1 1/2 turns left, or do I drive differently to everyone else?

tiggers

This argument is getting a little silly - bad handling and a car's tendency to roll are not absolutely connected. The real point is where the centre of gravity lies and the how much compliancy there is in the suspension . The higher the COG and the greater the suspension compliancy the more likelihood there is of the vehicle turning over.

4x4/SUV drivers just need to face facts - their vehicles are going to roll far easier than a car mainly due to the above factors. They also need to take into account other things such as increased braking distances due to the extra weight.

If you remember about 3 years ago Top Gear tested the braking performance of various vehicles. The Land Rover Discovery was frightening yet many drivers of such vehicles still drive 2 inches from your rear bumper.

I own and drive an SUV whenever I'm in the US so I know a little bit about how they behave and I drive accordingly. Much as I enjoy driving it for what it is I'm not going to try and convince anyone that it is no more likely to overturn than a car - the simple laws of physics dictate otherwise.

tiggers.

Sennadog 93

Whether you believe he was being more aggressive or not (with the steering) many people kid themselves that they are buying these vehicles because they are safer.

Regardless of the type of 4x4, they all have a higher CG and are heavier than a standard saloon, thus they are going to be more prone to rolling and have inferior breaking abilities.

In a crash situation, their extra bulk may well offer more protection but for my money I'm more interested in crash avoidance. This was the point that the programme was attempting to make.

Black Cat

My two p worth
I think the test was a little weighted in the direction of rolling the 4 x 4 - and agree it was driven just that little bit harder than the other two. Also they used brand new Jag and brand new Beamer and older RR - I would think given all the problems in recent years with centre of gravity issues on some of these cars that there have been significant improves on this type of roll problem. Therefore I would like to see the test again with a new RR.

However, given that I have an X type I was actually very impressed with how it performed.
P

NotoriousREV

I agree that 4x4's are more likely to roll, but I think a fairer representation of the problem would have worked better than sensationalist reporting.

I mean, is this so serious a problem that 4x4's are falling over in Sainsbury's car park? I don't think so.

Anyone who buys a vehicle with large ride height, balloon tyres and soft suspension must realise they handle differently, if not, Darwin will sort them out

Stevie

Cant do the quote thing, sorry.

"Thats why the Jag span so quickly- but he could keep some control and safety".

I'm not defending 4x4's, and didn't see the programme, and not having a go at Jag's. BUT, how on earth do you get a car to spin quickly, whilst simultaneously keep control and safety?

Sounds f**king impressive, I have to admit

Stevie

Oops, re the Bowler, Drew Bowler's latest incarnation is fantastic.

The previous Tomcats had seperate chassis, ie weight, and a skeleton/cage bolted to it.

The Wildcat is spaceframe, so whilst it may look heavy, it only weighs 1340kg, or lighter than most of the cars owned by us lot

NotoriousREV

Just to resurrect this (because I'm like that ) did anyone watch the repeat on sunday and care to comment on the driving style of the stuntman?