safest vehicle to drive

[ozsamurai]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

You'd expect a certain amount of idiocy in a thread with such an open ended title... but four pictures of tanks, no one can do better than this? Sad...

Now, to the OP. GO VOLVO!

Having said that, I would be wary of anything like the V/S40 models of today. The Volvo reputation for 'solid' was forged in the 70's and 80's and some of those cars are still the best bet, if you an find a good one. I have personally rolled a 240DL 16 times along a highway and walked away from it. My father dropped his 164GL off a levy bank of 10 onto the roof and not only survived but drove the car home. I have owned an S40, I do not think much of them at all. They are a re-badged Mitsusbishi Magna with a few safety touches.

VW is also a solid craft, expensive, but since ou asked about 'safe' then they certainy qualify.

Oz

16 Times! Are you sure! Get a bump on the head? They could never go fast enough.

The cops counted the dents in the highway so thats what they told me.... I was doing 160, the back rear tire blew and gravel on the side of the road did the rest. btw, they then charged me with reckless driving... could have done without that, but young dumb and....

Oz

[lvr181]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

You'd expect a certain amount of idiocy in a thread with such an open ended title... but four pictures of tanks, no one can do better than this? Sad...

Now, to the OP. GO VOLVO!

Having said that, I would be wary of anything like the V/S40 models of today. The Volvo reputation for 'solid' was forged in the 70's and 80's and some of those cars are still the best bet, if you an find a good one. I have personally rolled a 240DL 16 times along a highway and walked away from it. My father dropped his 164GL off a levy bank of 10 onto the roof and not only survived but drove the car home. I have owned an S40, I do not think much of them at all. They are a re-badged Mitsusbishi Magna with a few safety touches.

VW is also a solid craft, expensive, but since ou asked about 'safe' then they certainy qualify.

Oz

16 Times! Are you sure! Get a bump on the head? They could never go fast enough.

The cops counted the dents in the highway so thats what they told me.... I was doing 160, the back rear tire blew and gravel on the side of the road did the rest. btw, they then charged me with reckless driving... could have done without that, but young dumb and....

Oz

Yeah, bit tough being charged with reckless driving

Now if that were in Thailand you may have been able to run away! Why not - everyone else does. When in Rome do as the Romans do, as the saying goes.

[Spoonman]

The best and safest car in Thailand, this would be my choice and I hope this link works

www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDoRmT0iRic&sns=em

I would just love one of these in Phuket,mor anywhere in Thailand for that matter. And it's bullet proof !

SDM

How is that the safest car in Thailand when nobody can buy one (except the Military) even if they were for sale here.

I think it's probably the safest car on the planet (Earth), and why can't anyone buy one ? Richard was quite clear when he said that as long as the buyer passes a background check, anyone can buy one if they have the 300 large. I'm pretty sure they are only for sale in SA so anyone would have to import one, unless they live in SA that is. The real question is could it possibly be classed as a luxury good and attract that tax here ? Don't see much luxury.

My post was what we English call " tongue in cheek", in another words a joke. But to answer such a serious retort that seems unaware of that, the fact remains that, anyone can in theory buy one and without doubt there is no safer car anywhere. Personally I prefer my old motor, a Cayenne Turbo, a 3 ton SUV that thinks it's really a racing car.

SDM

I build armoured vehicles for a living. I know who can and who cannot buy one.

[SDM0712]

Spoonman,are you saying that a normal person cannot buy a Marauder and the clip is wrong? I don't see what your occupation has to do with who can buy this vehicle, unless you work for the Marauders manufacturer.

Wikipedia says "

In June 2011, the civilian version of the Marauder was featured in British motoring program Top Gear,[9] with Richard Hammond."

Now unless I have forgotten it's meaning I'm pretty sure civilian means non-military.

SDM

[Spoonman]

Spoonman,are you saying that a normal person cannot buy a Marauder and the clip is wrong? I don't see what your occupation has to do with who can buy this vehicle, unless you work for the Marauders manufacturer. Wikipedia says " In June 2011, the civilian version of the Marauder was featured in British motoring program Top Gear,[9] with Richard Hammond." Now unless I have forgotten it's meaning I'm pretty sure civilian means non-military. SDM

Civilian does not mean the average joe off the street can buy one unless they can satisfy the licensing and permit requirements of their respective countries, upon which time they will be issued with an end user certificate which will allow the purchase.

Good luck getting the license and permits.

[transam]

The best and safest car in Thailand, this would be my choice and I hope this link works

www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDoRmT0iRic&sns=em

I would just love one of these in Phuket,mor anywhere in Thailand for that matter. And it's bullet proof !

SDM

How is that the safest car in Thailand when nobody can buy one (except the Military) even if they were for sale here.

I think it's probably the safest car on the planet (Earth), and why can't anyone buy one ? Richard was quite clear when he said that as long as the buyer passes a background check, anyone can buy one if they have the 300 large. I'm pretty sure they are only for sale in SA so anyone would have to import one, unless they live in SA that is. The real question is could it possibly be classed as a luxury good and attract that tax here ? Don't see much luxury.

My post was what we English call " tongue in cheek", in another words a joke. But to answer such a serious retort that seems unaware of that, the fact remains that, anyone can in theory buy one and without doubt there is no safer car anywhere. Personally I prefer my old motor, a Cayenne Turbo, a 3 ton SUV that thinks it's really a racing car.

SDM

2 Ton

[dominique355]

For a head-on collision one might want to consider some basic laws of physics such as e = 1/2 mv2 or the energy is equal the the mass (in kg) multiplied by the speed (in m/sec) to the square, divided by 2.

From this follows that the higher the mass the more energy you carry, compared to a vehicle at the same speed but weighing less. The lighter car is pushed backwards while the heavier car has less g-forces to absorb.

So: now this energy must be somehow transformed when the two cars hit each other. Most energy will be used to deform the front end (crumple zone) of the car. That's roughly 0.5 meters of deformation. So, traveling at 50 km/h, after 0.5 meters yours truly will hit the steering wheel, still traveling at the initial speed minus the negative acceleration due to deformation. Hopefully you are using the safety belts and your car has air-bags.

Conclusion: a heavier vehicle equipped with a good crumple zone, air-bags, safety belts, pre-tensioning of the belts, proper head rests etc will protect its passengers better than the vehicle lacking all or any of these features.

Result: a Mercedes-Benz S-Class with a well designed crumple zone, seat belts with pre-tensioning, etc is probably the best protection you can get.

Sure, a pick-up truck might be heavier but the chassis/body has no or only a poor crumple zone design, so no energy is used through deformation.

Remember: Always wear safety belts, even for a short trip.

[BSJ]

You'd expect a certain amount of idiocy in a thread with such an open ended title... but four pictures of tanks, no one can do better than this? Sad...

Now, to the OP. GO VOLVO!

Having said that, I would be wary of anything like the V/S40 models of today. The Volvo reputation for 'solid' was forged in the 70's and 80's and some of those cars are still the best bet, if you an find a good one. I have personally rolled a 240DL 16 times along a highway and walked away from it. My father dropped his 164GL off a levy bank of 10 onto the roof and not only survived but drove the car home. I have owned an S40, I do not think much of them at all. They are a re-badged Mitsusbishi Magna with a few safety touches.

VW is also a solid craft, expensive, but since ou asked about 'safe' then they certainy qualify.

Oz

"I read another topic about a horrible front end collision accident. I was wondering if there was a vehicle type sold in Thailand that could have saved its passengers lives in an identical accident. " He said vehicle (none specific) and save the passengers in same sort of accident.

Rather vague I thought so that opened up the tank proposal! In reality a ten wheel truck would be the easiest to obtain but I doubt Land Transport would give a farang a 10 wheel license.

[avander]

You'd expect a certain amount of idiocy in a thread with such an open ended title... but four pictures of tanks, no one can do better than this? Sad...

Now, to the OP. GO VOLVO!

Having said that, I would be wary of anything like the V/S40 models of today. The Volvo reputation for 'solid' was forged in the 70's and 80's and some of those cars are still the best bet, if you an find a good one. I have personally rolled a 240DL 16 times along a highway and walked away from it. My father dropped his 164GL off a levy bank of 10 onto the roof and not only survived but drove the car home. I have owned an S40, I do not think much of them at all. They are a re-badged Mitsusbishi Magna with a few safety touches.

VW is also a solid craft, expensive, but since ou asked about 'safe' then they certainy qualify.

Oz

If you were referring to mine being a Tank you're wrong. A straight out tank is probably a little too confrontational for Thailand to my mind; particularly at the moment as survival I reckon may still be an issue.

I'm no expert and may be corrected here but mine was no tank. Rather, a briefly considered response of amphibious APC I believe?

Perfect as a people mover, armored for safety as well as a little deterrent property and perfect for the floods too.

And yes, an open ended question from the OP. A little more detail may avoid a little idiocy. A reasonable answer would need to consider total needs and budget and while safety is very important it's only one.

I see the OP has received a load of useful responses also so please pardon my attempts at humor.

[WarpSpeed]

In some ways I agree that an aware, defensive and skilled driver, with a good accelerating and braking machine can avoid many dangerous situations. On the other hand, when that sh*t hits you from out of nowhere, by the most unexpected set of circumstances, no amount of great skill will save you. The car has to be safe for that..., and then there is also the wife who might drive your car....

Yeah there's plenty of proof of that safety already on here in numerous truck and SUV videos crashing with deaths and serious injuries.. Very few of them have been cars mind, and most others are big trucks, buses etc. A motocy now, that's another topic, it goes to the other extreme. What people have forgotten is that is has been proven decades ago that size is not necessarily safer due to the impact forces behind the crash which translate to the passengers in most cases. That's what happens in large vehicles besides that fact that there is little chance to avoid the accident and NOT lose control anyway. If you have enough impact to get crushed in a reasonably sized car, your'e just as likely to get crushed in a larger vehicle under similar circumstances but hey besides my 25 years of on track experience there's only my more than 35 years daily driving experience and more miles driven than I can even document, to go on..

You might agree with me that years of driving in Thailand, contending with the multitude of motorbike threats from any direction, conveyances of any sort and speed suddenly appearing, unsafe big rig drivers, and general idiots, that an already excellent driver becomes even better because of this training. I'm not a professional race driver as you, but did my fair share of hobby racing and have driven all over the world. I have become a better driver because of the conditions in Thailand.

Yes, I do agree..As they say if you can drive in Thailand you can drive anywhere, I might also add that most of my driving except for a few years in Phuket was in Bangkok.

[Phuketboy]

A vehicle is only as safe as its driver

Spot on...

see above - a totally facile comment (par for the course?)

See above, a completely sensible comment, one can wrap themselves in bubble wrap for safety and if you can't drive capably no amount of "safety" features or vehicle size is going to help you or the others around you on the road. I drove a small SEAT Cordoba there for years and guess what? No reason to feel unsafe, in fact felt/feel VERY safe as did/does my family, because of WHO was/is driving the car they ride in..

I would be more concerned about the other drivers on the road, especially here. You could be the best driver in the world, but if your surrounded by idiots who can't drive to save themselves then the chances of having an accident rise considerably. The only thing one can do is buy the safest car possible and drive with caution.

[WarpSpeed]

Has been stated already. It depends on the crash involved. If rolling over, i'd prefer to be in a swift than a ranger or similar. If head-on then the opposite. If we are comparing Japanese cars there really is no safest in my opinion. The crash type, impact point are very different. Motorcycle helmets vary but may win the same safety rating award. a 5 star sharp helmet may receive 5 stars for side impact while the other the front.

Yep truth in this though the physics involved in a head on collision still say that the body inside the vehicle is going to suffer higher impact forces due to the mass of the vehicle, something often over looked while listening to the salesman.. And as you mention not only are you likely to have less injury in a rollover in a car but you're also less likely to even have a roll over in the first place.

[WarpSpeed]

Anyone who says a ride is safe because of "their" driving ability is either crackers or delusional.........

Perhaps these folk can tell me why roll cages are put in race saloons or quick "street" drag cars when these drivers are meant to be the nuts....?

I don't know how someone can even dispute this fact with so many professional drivers on a race track that keep the cars on the track and don't crash for lap after lap at speeds no average Joe driver will ever see, could you do that? No way, they keep THEMSELVE'S safe it's irrefutable to anyone with any common sense..

[peterb17]

Had lunch with a couple of friends on Sunday- they arrived in new Audi Q3 - previous Audi had been totally written off with a slight altercation with several trees. Side impact aqua planing.

My friend was shaken up and had a small cut- the car had side air bag curtains and a tough safety cage.. The locals could not believe that anyone walked away alive from the car.

After seeing the pictures of the car, I would seriously think about buying an Audi- but expensive.

Am really pleased that he is OK- the car saved his life.

[WarpSpeed]

Spot on...

see above - a totally facile comment (par for the course?)

See above, a completely sensible comment, one can wrap themselves in bubble wrap for safety and if you can't drive capably no amount of "safety" features or vehicle size is going to help you or the others around you on the road. I drove a small SEAT Cordoba there for years and guess what? No reason to feel unsafe, in fact felt/feel VERY safe as did/does my family, because of WHO was/is driving the car they ride in..

I would be more concerned about the other drivers on the road, especially here. You could be the best driver in the world, but if your surrounded by idiots who can't drive to save themselves then the chances of having an accident rise considerably. The only thing one can do is buy the safest car possible and drive with caution.

Agreed, but as anywhere you drive and everywhere has idiot drivers one can make up the deficit for other incompetent drivers or just give up and let it happen, for me and other drivers that's not an option..

[WarpSpeed]

Heres a question for all those perfect drivers...Why do manufacturers now fit side impact air bags...?

Simple really (if you want to think about it) - the driver that hits you may not be so perfect!

Simply a really aware driver doesn't get hit in the first place..Unfortunately the air bags save the moron who hit you so they get another shot at you at some later date.

Edited August 26, 2014 by WarpSpeed

[connda]

An M2A3 Bradley or an MRAP. With the MRAP, even trucks would think twice before pulling out in front of you.

[richard_smith237]

There have been some fundamentally flawed arguments some backed up singularly by race track experience, road experience, engineers experience, vehicle size, crumple zones etc etc....

In essence a combination of all of the above makes a journey safer.... However, the question is: which vehicle is safest?

On a race track drivers are in similar sized cars, going in the same direction at similar speeds.... Race a GT car with Lorries and see who comes better off in an accident...

While accidents may be avoidable, many aren't, we do not all drive at the same level in similar sized vehicles. An argument could be made in favour of motorbikes being safer has they have an opportunity to avoid an accident as they are thinner / smaller.

So, while we are all safe, the other idiot isn't. What protects us from them? The argument that a fully aware driver can avoid all accident is arrogant, stupid and highly flawed. Thus, at the bare bones the answer comes down to choice of vehicle... The ops question...

My answer: mid and large size (not weight), modernity (technology)... I went mid range German this time with a 5 Series.

Next car may well be the new Volvo Xc90 equivalent if report are good.

Edited August 26, 2014 by richard_smith237

[SDM0712]

Spoonman,are you saying that a normal person cannot buy a Marauder and the clip is wrong? I don't see what your occupation has to do with who can buy this vehicle, unless you work for the Marauders manufacturer. Wikipedia says " In June 2011, the civilian version of the Marauder was featured in British motoring program Top Gear,[9] with Richard Hammond." Now unless I have forgotten it's meaning I'm pretty sure civilian means non-military. SDM

Civilian does not mean the average joe off the street can buy one unless they can satisfy the licensing and permit requirements of their respective countries, upon which time they will be issued with an end user certificate which will allow the purchase.

Good luck getting the license and permits.

It seems that you have gone from

“nobody can buy one (except the Military)”

because

“I build armoured vehicles for a living. I know who can and who cannot buy one”

to

“Civilian does not mean the average joe off the street can buy one unless they can satisfy the licensing and permit requirements of their respective countries.”

(I put the underline in)

So, if I understand your posts correctly, although you started of by saying that only military could buy this vehicle, you seem to go on to change your mind in that you then intimate that a civilian could buy this vehicle if they satisfy the regulations of where they live.

My original post was a bit of fun, humour, a laugh and not even sarcastic. Although the Paramount Group have made a civilian version of this vehicle available to the public on an order only basis, they have made less than 80 since 2007 and most if not all were for military use. It is unlikely in the extreme that anyone would spend 300, 000 GBP on such a monster, even if they would like to crush a few Tuk Tuks or Commuter Vans.

Actually your put-downs are typical of many of the threads I see on TV. I think its fair to say that the clip I posted was really quite funny but your curt retort pretty much took all the fun out of it and turned it into a debate on can you or can’t you buy one. It’s completely irrelevant since no one in their right mind would buy one, unless they are someone with far more money than sense. Perhaps I am the only one that had a good laugh at Richard Hammond showing us what it could do, perhaps its my odd British sense of humour, perhaps it’s not funny at all.

But I challenge anyone to find a stronger vehicle that’s not a tank (ex-military tanks are also available by the way to be purchased by a civilian, depending on manufacture date, model and country of residence)

Have a nice day.

SDM

Edited August 26, 2014 by SDM0712

[SDM0712]

.... Personally I prefer my old motor, a Cayenne Turbo, a 3 ton SUV that thinks it's really a racing car.......

SDM

2 Ton

You're quite correct its 2.185 metric tonnes. Those chaps at the Porsche Centre in Hatfield (formerly HR Owen) seem to have misled me. Why did it only do about 8 to the gallon then ?? (Joke, it was because of my heavy right foot)

SDM

Edited August 26, 2014 by SDM0712

[thairastawoman]

Maybe Mercedes Benz ? At least the bus ? 555+

[WarpSpeed]

Spot on...

see above - a totally facile comment (par for the course?)

See above, a completely sensible comment, one can wrap themselves in bubble wrap for safety and if you can't drive capably no amount of "safety" features or vehicle size is going to help you or the others around you on the road. I drove a small SEAT Cordoba there for years and guess what? No reason to feel unsafe, in fact felt/feel VERY safe as did/does my family, because of WHO was/is driving the car they ride in..

Here we go, he's off again! Moderators get ready.

Your recommendation to the OP's topic is what exactly? Mine would be a Tesla, if it so important, might as well go to the only car in the world that exceeded the 5 star crash rating and be environmentally conscious at the same time. Can be had in Thailand and comes with the same safety package regardless of location. Does the troll have a better contribution?

Edited August 26, 2014 by WarpSpeed

[WarpSpeed]

.... Personally I prefer my old motor, a Cayenne Turbo, a 3 ton SUV that thinks it's really a racing car.......

SDM

2 Ton

You're quite correct its 2.185 metric tonnes. Those chaps at the Porsche Centre in Hatfield (formerly HR Owen) seem to have misled me. Why did it only do about 8 to the gallon then ?? (Joke, it was because of my heavy right foot)

SDM

That would be a more reasonable suggestion though, at least it will likely give you the needed handling to avoid a collision and provide the crash safety as well. Priced off the planet in Thailand though I would think? Just like my Tesla suggestion but those at least check all the boxes which is the only way the question is going to get answered properly as it isn't any one thing that provides safety.

[WarpSpeed]

You'd expect a certain amount of idiocy in a thread with such an open ended title... but four pictures of tanks, no one can do better than this? Sad...

Now, to the OP. GO VOLVO!

Having said that, I would be wary of anything like the V/S40 models of today. The Volvo reputation for 'solid' was forged in the 70's and 80's and some of those cars are still the best bet, if you an find a good one. I have personally rolled a 240DL 16 times along a highway and walked away from it. My father dropped his 164GL off a levy bank of 10 onto the roof and not only survived but drove the car home. I have owned an S40, I do not think much of them at all. They are a re-badged Mitsusbishi Magna with a few safety touches.

VW is also a solid craft, expensive, but since ou asked about 'safe' then they certainy qualify.

Oz

16 Times! Are you sure! Get a bump on the head? They could never go fast enough.

I was thinking he meant 16 different times.......

[WarpSpeed]

The best and safest car in Thailand, this would be my choice and I hope this link works

www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDoRmT0iRic&sns=em

I would just love one of these in Phuket,mor anywhere in Thailand for that matter. And it's bullet proof !

SDM

Link doesn't work, try this..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDoRmT0iRic&sns=em

[WarpSpeed]

The best and safest car in Thailand, this would be my choice and I hope this link works

www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDoRmT0iRic&sns=em

I would just love one of these in Phuket,mor anywhere in Thailand for that matter. And it's bullet proof !

SDM

How is that the safest car in Thailand when nobody can buy one (except the Military) even if they were for sale here.

I think it's probably the safest car on the planet (Earth), and why can't anyone buy one ? Richard was quite clear when he said that as long as the buyer passes a background check, anyone can buy one if they have the 300 large. I'm pretty sure they are only for sale in SA so anyone would have to import one, unless they live in SA that is. The real question is could it possibly be classed as a luxury good and attract that tax here ? Don't see much luxury.

My post was what we English call " tongue in cheek", in another words a joke. But to answer such a serious retort that seems unaware of that, the fact remains that, anyone can in theory buy one and without doubt there is no safer car anywhere. Personally I prefer my old motor, a Cayenne Turbo, a 3 ton SUV that thinks it's really a racing car.

SDM

What Spoonman meant was it isn't offered IN Thailand for the Thailand market.

Edited August 26, 2014 by WarpSpeed

[WarpSpeed]

Spoonman,are you saying that a normal person cannot buy a Marauder and the clip is wrong? I don't see what your occupation has to do with who can buy this vehicle, unless you work for the Marauders manufacturer. Wikipedia says " In June 2011, the civilian version of the Marauder was featured in British motoring program Top Gear,[9] with Richard Hammond." Now unless I have forgotten it's meaning I'm pretty sure civilian means non-military. SDM

The clip is in South Africa..Different markets, different purchase restrictions.

[WarpSpeed]

For a head-on collision one might want to consider some basic laws of physics such as e = 1/2 mv2 or the energy is equal the the mass (in kg) multiplied by the speed (in m/sec) to the square, divided by 2.

From this follows that the higher the mass the more energy you carry, compared to a vehicle at the same speed but weighing less. The lighter car is pushed backwards while the heavier car has less g-forces to absorb.

So: now this energy must be somehow transformed when the two cars hit each other. Most energy will be used to deform the front end (crumple zone) of the car. That's roughly 0.5 meters of deformation. So, traveling at 50 km/h, after 0.5 meters yours truly will hit the steering wheel, still traveling at the initial speed minus the negative acceleration due to deformation. Hopefully you are using the safety belts and your car has air-bags.

Conclusion: a heavier vehicle equipped with a good crumple zone, air-bags, safety belts, pre-tensioning of the belts, proper head rests etc will protect its passengers better than the vehicle lacking all or any of these features.

Result: a Mercedes-Benz S-Class with a well designed crumple zone, seat belts with pre-tensioning, etc is probably the best protection you can get.

Sure, a pick-up truck might be heavier but the chassis/body has no or only a poor crumple zone design, so no energy is used through deformation.

Remember: Always wear safety belts, even for a short trip.

I was just ready to give you a like but then read further and saw the part about the heavier vehicle versus a smaller vehicle and leaving out the fact in your equation the odds in a place like Thailand of hitting another equal or heavier vehicle and the secondary impact of the passengers within said vehicle taking on more G forces versus a smaller vehicle and higher impact forces. I'll go with the odds of avoiding it entirely with a vehicle that is nimble enough to avoid the elephant..

[WarpSpeed]

There have been some fundamentally flawed arguments some backed up singularly by race track experience, road experience, engineers experience, vehicle size, crumple zones etc etc....

In essence a combination of all of the above makes a journey safer.... However, the question is: which vehicle is safest?

On a race track drivers are in similar sized cars, going in the same direction at similar speeds.... Race a GT car with Lorries and see who comes better off in an accident...

While accidents may be avoidable, many aren't, we do not all drive at the same level in similar sized vehicles. An argument could be made in favour of motorbikes being safer has they have an opportunity to avoid an accident as they are thinner / smaller.

So, while we are all safe, the other idiot isn't. What protects us from them? The argument that a fully aware driver can avoid all accident is arrogant, stupid and highly flawed. Thus, at the bare bones the answer comes down to choice of vehicle... The ops question...

My answer: mid and large size (not weight), modernity (technology)... I went mid range German this time with a 5 Series.

Next car may well be the new Volvo Xc90 equivalent if report are good.

Ok so where is the post that says a fully aware driver can avoid ALL accidents? Comprehension is required to post a reasonable response.. This is a major part of all of these discussions, people reading into posts something that's NOT there and putting their own twist on the actual post contents.. Essentially in the end you still supported my original opinion which was not to buy a cumbersome and top heavy SUV or truck with terrible tire heights and cow like reactions but to buy a more maneuverable car, that is ultimately the best package compromise and COMBINED with a capable driver is more safe than anything else one can buy but it is an irrefutable fact that driver awareness and skill is essential in ANY potential incident and will absolutely effect the outcome more favorably in EVERY case..

[Spoonman]

Spoonman,are you saying that a normal person cannot buy a Marauder and the clip is wrong? I don't see what your occupation has to do with who can buy this vehicle, unless you work for the Marauders manufacturer. Wikipedia says " In June 2011, the civilian version of the Marauder was featured in British motoring program Top Gear,[9] with Richard Hammond." Now unless I have forgotten it's meaning I'm pretty sure civilian means non-military. SDM

Civilian does not mean the average joe off the street can buy one unless they can satisfy the licensing and permit requirements of their respective countries, upon which time they will be issued with an end user certificate which will allow the purchase.

Good luck getting the license and permits.

It seems that you have gone from

nobody can buy one (except the Military)

because

I build armoured vehicles for a living. I know who can and who cannot buy one

to

Civilian does not mean the average joe off the street can buy one unless they can satisfy the licensing and permit requirements of their respective countries.

(I put the underline in)

So, if I understand your posts correctly, although you started of by saying that only military could buy this vehicle, you seem to go on to change your mind in that you then intimate that a civilian could buy this vehicle if they satisfy the regulations of where they live.

My original post was a bit of fun, humour, a laugh and not even sarcastic. Although the Paramount Group have made a civilian version of this vehicle available to the public on an order only basis, they have made less than 80 since 2007 and most if not all were for military use. It is unlikely in the extreme that anyone would spend 300, 000 GBP on such a monster, even if they would like to crush a few Tuk Tuks or Commuter Vans.

Actually your put-downs are typical of many of the threads I see on TV. I think its fair to say that the clip I posted was really quite funny but your curt retort pretty much took all the fun out of it and turned it into a debate on can you or cant you buy one. Its completely irrelevant since no one in their right mind would buy one, unless they are someone with far more money than sense. Perhaps I am the only one that had a good laugh at Richard Hammond showing us what it could do, perhaps its my odd British sense of humour, perhaps its not funny at all.

But I challenge anyone to find a stronger vehicle thats not a tank (ex-military tanks are also available by the way to be purchased by a civilian, depending on manufacture date, model and country of residence)

Have a nice day.

SDM

Good for you buddy. Go run along and purchase one.

Edited August 26, 2014 by Spoonman