Spacemonkey said:
(please, no antis here, this is not an arguement thread- we've done it all before.. and even on anti has joined the Dark Side...
)
Indeed I have ...and I know you've asked for no discussion, but if I may just for a wee moment, tell you what made me do a U-turn.
The whole issue surrounds carbon emmissions right?
We can all get evangelical about all sorts of things and the greenies do make some good points, but those points cannot be applied accross the board in all circumstances to all 4x4 drivers. This is what I learned. To judge each situation individually and apply a little reason and intelligence ...and maths!
I do approximately 4000 miles a year. In my old mazda 626 which did 32 to the gallon, I burned 125 gallonn of petrol a year. My landy does 28 mpg, so I burn 142 gallons of petrol a year. A difference of 17 gallons a year. The CO2 produced from 17 gallons in negligable, but I am concious of it, so I plan to find ways to save the same amount, or more in other ways, better loft insulation, double glazing etc - it wont take much.
If I did 30,000 miles a year, then in my mazda I would've burned 937 gallons and my landy, 1071 gallons. A difference of 134 gallons. That is much harder to offset and consequently, the eco-pressure is higher to use a vehicle that is more economical. If those miles are done in a vehicle which only does 18mpg, then the extra fuel is 729 gallons - a massive amount.
Of course, I may do more miles now those miles are so much fun, but if my lifestyle doesnt change at all, then I'm only using an extra 17 gallons a year for the cost of running a landy.
I also have to consider, I made two jet trips to the indian ocean last year, those two trips combined, are equivalent to about 10 years of running a smokey old landrover that does tons of miles. My carbon footprint last year was astronomical. I had no issue dumping all that carbon in the interests of my own pleasure then, so it is staggeringly hyppocritical to give someoner a hard time over dumping a helluva lot less for what is a much longer term pleasure of running a land rover.
It's all a question of perspective. Smokey old Land Rovers arent the most environmentally friendly of vehicles, true, but we all have to live and there are far, far worse offenders that really should be getting addressed first. To float all 4x4's right to the top of the eco-offender pile, shows a great deal of ignorance.
I showed my ignorance by joining that band wagon, all be it with good intentions. I have learned that sometimes I am wrong, even when I think I am right. That makes me a bit uncomfortable, but that's a good thing I think.
BTW, I'm sure you know already, but the 200tdi and the 300tdi are the most economical of all the landy engines and are good for 30mpg. The td5 is more powerful, but it's thirstier - especially if you have a heavy right foot.