UK and Europe · Public discussion

Good grief....

Started by Tony Raven · · Last activity · 62 posts · 2,278 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
UK and Europe
Published
7 October 2004
Last activity
12 October 2004
Original author
Tony Raven
Posts
62
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
2,278
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 21–40 of 62
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Helen Deborah Vecht quoted:

    Quoted message said:

    Mr Guy King (October 1) is right that, in an ideal world,drivers should
    not use mirrors to reverse, but I am not able to see through the rear
    window when my boys are leaping around in the back.

    The writers 4x4 probably isn't more than a couple of years old and is
    bound to have rear seat belts. I wonder how her boys can be leaping
    around in the back if they are strapped in as required by law.

    --
    Danny Colyer (the UK company has been laughed out of my reply address)
    <URL:http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/danny/>
    "He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine

  2. Danny Colyer <[email hidden]>typed

    Quoted message said:

    Helen Deborah Vecht quoted:

    Quoted message said:

    Mr Guy King (October 1) is right that, in an ideal world,drivers should
    not use mirrors to reverse, but I am not able to see through the rear
    window when my boys are leaping around in the back.

    Quoted message said:

    The writers 4x4 probably isn't more than a couple of years old and is
    bound to have rear seat belts. I wonder how her boys can be leaping
    around in the back if they are strapped in as required by law.

    Even if they can undo their belts, it says little for her powers to
    discipline them. We weren't allowed out of our seats as nippers.

    --
    Helen D. Vecht: [email hidden]
    Edgware.

  3. Paul - censored said:


    Heheheh .. my 'Kensington tractor' is a little different to those, I guess
    .... It does actually get used, and abused, off-road a _lot_ ... 😉

    http://groups.msn.com/LosiPaulsPictures/shoebox.msnw?Page=3

    The pics on pages 1 and 2 are a little 'tamer' .. 😉

    That's not deep, this is deep - http://www.muddy4x4.com/90wet.htm

    Tony

  4. Peter B vaguely muttered something like ...

    Quoted message said:

    "Paul - [censored]" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Peter B vaguely muttered something like ...

    Quoted message said:

    <1> The worst offenders for tailgating with lights on full beam were,
    yes you guessed, Kensington Tractors. To watch these looneys overtaking
    on the hairpins of the Carpathians was interesting, unless they were
    approaching head-on of course.

    Heheheh .. my 'Kensington tractor' is a little different to those, I
    guess ... It does actually get used, and abused, off-road a _lot_ ... 😉

    Imagine how quickly I stopped laughing after stereotyping 4 x 4 drivers
    and Paul posted pictures of his :-)

    Heheheh, thought it'd make you laugh.

    ....and to further add to the stereotype, yes, it has been used to take the
    kids to school, but not since February this year.

    --
    Paul ...

    (8(|) Homer Rules !!!

    "A [censored] is a [censored], no matter what mode of transport they're using."

  5. Tony Raven vaguely muttered something like ...

    Quoted message said:
    Paul - censored said:


    Heheheh .. my 'Kensington tractor' is a little different to those, I
    guess .... It does actually get used, and abused, off-road a _lot_ ... 😉

    http://groups.msn.com/LosiPaulsPictures/shoebox.msnw?Page=3

    The pics on pages 1 and 2 are a little 'tamer' .. 😉

    That's not deep, this is deep - http://www.muddy4x4.com/90wet.htm

    It is when you realise it's a slurry pond, and it's sinking .. slowly, but
    still sinking ... and the depth in that particular pond is around 30 feet
    .... 😉

    It took the S2 and the Disco in one of the photo's in tandem to pull us out.

    --
    Paul ...

    (8(|) Homer Rules !!!

    "A [censored] is a [censored], no matter what mode of transport they're using."

  6. Monkey Hanger said:

    Not "Shoot them and burn the bodies"?


    And hit them with a paving slab. They might grow up to wear b*bshorts,
    you know.

  7. "Helen Deborah Vecht" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Ahbut have you read this gem from today's Ham & High...?

    --------------------

    WHIFF OF HYPOCRISY ON 4X4S

    <snipped>

    Blimey, it reads like something from the Framley Examiner, please tell me
    it's a spoof.

    Pete

  8. Paul - censored said:


    It is when you realise it's a slurry pond, and it's sinking .. slowly, but
    still sinking ... and the depth in that particular pond is around 30 feet
    .... 😉

    What's that rule in off-roading about inspecting and walking it first?

    Tony

  9. On Fri, 8 Oct 2004 21:55:51 +0100, Helen Deborah Vecht
    <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:

    Mr Guy King (October 1) is right that, in an ideal world,drivers should
    not use mirrors to reverse, but I am not able to see through the rear
    window when my boys are leaping around in the back.

    Heh! ArGooey gets everywhere.

    So, what this person is saying is, she would rather reverse unsafely
    than control the behaviour of her (evidently unrestrained) children.
    What an excellent example she sets to the next generation.

    Guy
    --
    May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
    http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

    88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

  10. Tony Raven vaguely muttered something like ...

    Quoted message said:
    Paul - censored said:


    It is when you realise it's a slurry pond, and it's sinking .. slowly,
    but still sinking ... and the depth in that particular pond is around 30
    feet .... 😉

    What's that rule in off-roading about inspecting and walking it first?

    We'd gone there the day before and all was well .. Overnight the factory had
    started to pump slurry, we came along, following same tracks, saw 'same' 4'
    wide 'puddle' before a bank. yesterday it went up the bank fine, today the
    wheels spun even before getting to the bank and spun us round dumping us
    unceremoniously into the clarts ... We got deeper trying to get out. When
    reverse still goes forwards and deeper there's little option but get
    recovered .. 😉

    --
    Paul ...

    (8(|) Homer Rules !!!

    "A [censored] is a [censored], no matter what mode of transport they're using."

  11. Paul - censored said:

    Tony Raven vaguely muttered something like ...

    Quoted message said:
    Paul - censored said:

    It is when you realise it's a slurry pond, and it's sinking .. slowly,
    but still sinking ... and the depth in that particular pond is around 30
    feet .... 😉

    What's that rule in off-roading about inspecting and walking it first?

    We'd gone there the day before and all was well .. Overnight the factory had
    started to pump slurry, we came along, following same tracks, saw 'same' 4'
    wide 'puddle' before a bank. yesterday it went up the bank fine, today the
    wheels spun even before getting to the bank and spun us round dumping us
    unceremoniously into the clarts ... We got deeper trying to get out. When
    reverse still goes forwards and deeper there's little option but get
    recovered .. 😉

    Cumoffit ;-). Yesterday you drove through it. Today it was the same
    size but 30ft deep? I applaud your Land Rover's ability to scale the
    28ft vertical walls of that particular pit on the first day. Or is this
    the off-road equivalent of "the one that got away"

    Tony

  12. "Peter B" <[email hidden]>typed

    Quoted message said:

    "Helen Deborah Vecht" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Ahbut have you read this gem from today's Ham & High...?

    --------------------

    WHIFF OF HYPOCRISY ON 4X4S

    Quoted message said:

    <snipped>

    Quoted message said:

    Blimey, it reads like something from the Framley Examiner, please tell me
    it's a spoof.

    I really don't know! This bird got a letter in Ham & High 3 weeks ago.
    Following week several letters suggested she was spoofing, my letter got
    in last week.

    My reply will probably start:

    If MV is for real, she is commendably honest; if not, she has given me
    hours of harmless amusement, in itself commendable....

    --
    Helen D. Vecht: [email hidden]
    Edgware.

  13. "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email hidden]>typed

    Quoted message said:

    On Fri, 8 Oct 2004 21:55:51 +0100, Helen Deborah Vecht
    <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Mr Guy King (October 1) is right that, in an ideal world,drivers should
    not use mirrors to reverse, but I am not able to see through the rear
    window when my boys are leaping around in the back.

    Quoted message said:

    Heh! ArGooey gets everywhere.

    Yebbut I put him up to it...

    Quoted message said:

    So, what this person is saying is, she would rather reverse unsafely
    than control the behaviour of her (evidently unrestrained) children.
    What an excellent example she sets to the next generation.

    Yup! What a caring parent - not! ArGooey are prolly pondering a retort
    as I tripe...

    You could also contribute if you CBA.

    Emu to [email hidden] ...

    --
    Helen D. Vecht: [email hidden]
    Edgware.

  14. On 9/10/04 9:45 pm, in article [email hidden],

    Helen Deborah Vecht said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Mr Guy King (October 1) is right that, in an ideal world,drivers should
    not use mirrors to reverse, but I am not able to see through the rear
    window when my boys are leaping around in the back.

    I find I get a better view of what is behind me when using the mirrors. SO I
    use mirrors to reverse. Nothing wrong with using mirrors, as long as you
    ensure that you are taking proper observation.

    ...d

  15. Tony Raven vaguely muttered something like ...

    Quoted message said:
    Paul - censored said:

    Tony Raven vaguely muttered something like ...

    Quoted message said:

    Paul - [censored] wrote:

    > It is when you realise it's a slurry pond, and it's sinking .. slowly,
    > but still sinking ... and the depth in that particular pond is around
    > 30 feet .... 😉
    >

    What's that rule in off-roading about inspecting and walking it first?

    We'd gone there the day before and all was well .. Overnight the factory
    had started to pump slurry, we came along, following same tracks, saw
    'same' 4' wide 'puddle' before a bank. yesterday it went up the bank
    fine, today the wheels spun even before getting to the bank and spun us
    round dumping us unceremoniously into the clarts ... We got deeper
    trying to get out. When reverse still goes forwards and deeper there's
    little option but get recovered .. 😉

    Cumoffit ;-). Yesterday you drove through it. Today it was the same
    size but 30ft deep? I applaud your Land Rover's ability to scale the
    28ft vertical walls of that particular pit on the first day. Or is this
    the off-road equivalent of "the one that got away"

    Acksherlly you're right. looking back and at the pics, the stream feeding
    the sump hole is about 10' wide, not 4,
    but looked exactly the same both days. What had happened is that the slurry
    pumping had scoured it down somewhat, but the surface looked absolutely no
    different. If you look at this photo
    http://groups.msn.com/LosiPaulsPictures/shoebox.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=120
    (screen grab from analogue video) you can see our tracks leading iinto the
    water, the pic is taken from the top of the bank we would have gone up, and
    had done the day before. As the tyres entered the water they simply sank,
    and we couldn't get up the bank or reverse out ...

    The sandy area is actually very firm, the slurry sets like concrete,
    http://groups.msn.com/LosiPaulsPictures/shoebox.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=121 shows the two towing vehicles and one of the drivers, and the tracks
    of the rearmost towing vehicle almost at the edge of the water. The watery
    bits are absolutely slick.

    On a second outing we got stuck again, but differently. Having walked over
    a section, as we normally do and as you pointed out testing it, we drove
    out, when all wheels were out, the 'crust' gave way and we sank, with
    apparently just water under the tyres, and the chassis resting on the hard
    surface. Got out ourselves that time though .. 😉

    That's the trouble with this area, it's unpredictable and changes condition
    every time we go there. The time we sank shown in the pictures was only the
    second time we'd been there and didn't really know the local conditions.

    With hindsight, a wonderful thing, we'd not have got stuck at all .. and
    haven't got stuck there since, despite going back on numerous occasions with
    Landrovers, bikes, motorbikes, and a truck ... 😉

    --
    Paul ...

    (8(|) Homer Rules !!!

    "A [censored] is a [censored], no matter what mode of transport they're using."

  16. Paul - censored said:

    With hindsight, a wonderful thing, we'd not have got stuck at all .. and
    haven't got stuck there since, despite going back on numerous occasions with
    Landrovers, bikes, motorbikes, and a truck ... 😉

    Let me just check this - your off-roading fun consists of finding a
    slurry pit and driving into it as often as possible in a variety of
    vehicles?

    "Good grief"!

    James
    --
    If I have seen further than others, it is
    by treading on the toes of giants.
    http://www.ne.jp/asahi/julesandjames/home/

  17. James Annan vaguely muttered something like ...

    Quoted message said:
    Paul - censored said:

    With hindsight, a wonderful thing, we'd not have got stuck at all .. and
    haven't got stuck there since, despite going back on numerous occasions
    with Landrovers, bikes, motorbikes, and a truck ... 😉

    Let me just check this - your off-roading fun consists of finding a
    slurry pit and driving into it as often as possible in a variety of
    vehicles?

    Nope, there's a range of terrain available, deciduous woods, pine woods, mud
    tracks, steep hillsides, a tarmac surfaced area, gravel tracks, limestone
    areas, rocky bumpy areas, slippery hillsides, grassy areas etc etc ... 😉
    It's also used as a testing area for a local rally team and for many
    motorised and cycle off-road competitions. The area can't be described in a
    small post ...

    The slurry area is just one small part of the whole thing ...

    Why, do you want to come and 'play' ?

    --
    Paul ...

    (8(|) Homer Rules !!!

    "A [censored] is a [censored], no matter what mode of transport they're using."

  18. Julesh [email hidden] opined the following...

    Quoted message said:

    What did they do wrong? I realise it must have been descended from
    immigrant deer, as Muntjac are not a native British species, so I guess
    it was sponging off the state, planning too large a family and was a
    possibly a factor in deciduous woodland crime statistics but where do
    you stop?

    Thanks... new keyboard required!

    Jon

  19. Tony Raven [email hidden] opined the following...

    Quoted message said:
    Paul - censored said:


    Heheheh .. my 'Kensington tractor' is a little different to those, I guess
    .... It does actually get used, and abused, off-road a _lot_ ... 😉

    http://groups.msn.com/LosiPaulsPictures/shoebox.msnw?Page=3

    The pics on pages 1 and 2 are a little 'tamer' .. 😉

    That's not deep, this is deep - http://www.muddy4x4.com/90wet.htm

    A wonderful story from a FOAF. He works on an estate a little way from
    Bridge of Allan. The estate's owner has a 4x4, but has one of the plush,
    leather seat, carpetted interior not to be used in wet conditions ones.

    On a trip back to the house he (As he and others often do) forded the
    stream rather than drive the 1 mile round trip to the proper crossing
    and back. The water was a little deeper and faster than it had been.
    Testament to the car in that it made it through and up the other side.
    But witnesses then watched as he climbed out, opened the back door and
    the water poured out of the interior. The car was left open around the
    back of the house so that the carpets could dry out.

    The FOAF has a "real" 4x4. Kickplates on the bonnet and no rounded
    corners type. It has apparently been used to rescue a van from a field
    when some prat missed a corner and went straight through a hedge.

    Jon

  20. On Fri, 08 Oct 2004 08:48:21 GMT, Julesh
    <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    <[email hidden]>:

    Quoted message said:

    I realise it must have been descended from
    immigrant deer, as Muntjac are not a native British species, so I guess
    it was sponging off the state, planning too large a family and was a
    possibly a factor in deciduous woodland crime statistics

    Cloff!

    Guy
    --
    May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
    http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

    88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.