Hydrophobic parents

Bit of excitement near Richmond School with some much needed rain falling, and it brings out the parents that can’t be stuffed getting their nice clothes wet.

2013-04-03 14.58.44

2013-04-03 14.58.53



THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • I think you meant hydrophobic.

    • of course /facepalm

  • LionKing

    You’ve got to see the state of parking outside of St Cuth’s or King s Prep. People like Sally Ridge parking right across the traffic intersection in the Rangie.

    • Gazzaw

      Kings Prep is a nightmare in the mornings. Entitled women double parked in the rush hour dropping off kids who should be fucking walking to school – there’s so many Remuera tractors there it looks like the Panzers starting line on the German side of the Polish border in 1939. Haven’t seen a cop there in nine years.

  • Honcho

    Thats not even bad crazy soccor mum parking, used to live down the road from a busy high school … Catch 22, kids cant ride bikes or walk to school because crazy mums are on the road, crazy mum instead drives like a mad woman on a mission to drop the kids off as close as possible to the school gate or be damned, further adding to the problem.

    • niggly

      Sounds also like those drivers that after having dropped off their kids as close to the school crossing as possible, pull out into the traffic (when it is clear or when mugs like me allow them thru as a courtesy) then halt in front of the crossing, forcing the school patrol kids (with their signs down) after a few moments of confusion to put their signs up (after seeing the traffic bank up on one side of the road behind said plonker whilst traffic on the other side continues) to avoid a potential road safety incident! Meanwhile the little kids of plonker stroll across the crossing whilst Mr or Ms’s Plonker flashes them a cheery smile as they go past ….

  • unsol

    Looks fairly mild compared to what I have seen. Never ceases to amaze me how time poor parents apparently are. So much so that they dont have the time to walk their kids to school or at least park properly & walk them in.

    And I hate Toyota Highlanders. Big overpriced wannabe-ostentatious-but-too-ugly-to-pull-it-off gas guzzling pieces of crap.

    Mazadas arent so bad I suppose since they are essentially Fords….& I suppose at least both are better than loser cruisers…

    • Callum

      I think your car knowledge is severely lacking. Mazdas are not Fords, Fords are Mazdas. Toyota’s are no worse (most are better) than anything else on the market and a Highlander is not a large or gas guzzling vehicle compared to any others in it’s class.

      • unsol

        So you have highlander then?

        Mazada vs Ford – mere semantics

        Fuel efficiency on par? You might need to double check your facts – 3 l v6 petrol is gas guzzling. You can get far superior SUVs in terms of handling & fuel efficiency than a scrappy Toyota for a lot less….

        • Callum

          No I drive a 1992 Toyota Dyna van that would make a Hummer look economical. My main car was an 84 Toyota Starlet but it is off the road while I put a bigger engine in it.

          Mere semantics demonstrates your ill-informed comments, Mazda supplies vehicle to Ford to rebadge, Mazda in NZ does not rebadge and sell any Fords. As for Highlanders, engine size is not a direct reflection of fuel use. You might even find the Highlander runs basically the same platform as Camry’s and Estima’s, it is actually pretty damn efficient for the number of people you can fit in it. Beside which your 3L comment illustrates your lack of knowledge, have run bigger engines than that since around 2004.

          • unsol

            Engine size has no baring on fuel use? That has got to be a wind up!

            Comparable SUVs in terms of price, size & marketability are the Nissan Pathfinder, Mitsubishi Pajero, Jeep Grand Cherokee (Overland or Laredo) & maybe those godforsaken Hyundai or Holden bubbly things. All have diesel options & in terms of price, specs & handling I would put the Jeep Laredo above the lot!

            And no we dont have any of these. We have a diesel outback – have no desire to be an SUV family as if we get one it is for 4wd ( in which case Suzuki Jeep Tenacious 4×4 is our preference!!!! Haha)

            Yes there are varying engine sizes, but either way the Highlander’s fuel usage does not earn them any gold stars.

            And they are ugly

            And have poor handling

            And are most commonly driven by people who wouldn’t know a mud plug if it bit them on the ass

            But a 1984 Toyota Starlet on the other hand is reasonably fuel efficient & good looking…

          • Callum

            You might actually note I said engine size is not a direct reflection of fuel usage, not that it has no impact.

            Nearly every option you listed is a full chassis vehicle that generally weighs a lot more and uses a lot more fuel even in diesel form, whilest not having to meet the same crash impact rules. You hassle handling while most Jeeps have a bult in rollover function from factory.

            As for the type of driver, anything remotely close to 4WD/off road pretend vehicle attracts more retard drivers than should be physically possible.

          • Dave

            Callum you make some very good points! We went for a drive over easter, 300 km each way, 100km cruising around our destination in a 2 litre (relatively high performance) VW diesel, we achieved 4.7 litres per 100 km. Not bad for a medium to large car with excellent handling. Even in traffic we usually achieve around 5L/100km. And no, it does not have a full chassis, yet still handles far better than my previous Calais V (and costs less than half as much to run)

          • unsol

            VW – no comparison to a Toyota! 4.7l per 100kmfor a 2litre – were you driving quite slow or smaller car like a TD1?

            We did 3500km over Christmas in the outback (2l diesel) & got 1300km out of our 65l tank. I think it put the fuel economy down to about 5.4l. Pretty good for a larger Awd car. Normally we get 1100 which is also below the factory specs of 6.4l per 100k. And we dont drive like nanas either.

          • Dave

            Exact details. 100km of city running in traffic the rest on the motorway, Cruise control was set using GPS at 113KM/h (speedo showed 115 km/h) in a Passat with 4 adults. The auto coupled with the Torque is bloody amazing. Boot is bigger than the Calais as well. My Wife has had it as low as 4.5 L/100km driving Auckland to Wellington and return

          • unsol

            113km……isnt that breaking the law?!!!

            Very impressive. Is it a wagon or sedan – we liked the look of the passats but needed space, preferred a wagon & wanted good ground clearance (multi sport events so tend to go off road).

            What kind of torque does it have? Ours is around 350 Nm I think & kicks in around 1600 rpm which is quite good for the kind of car that it is.

            It’s great finding a classy fuel saver though eh – best of both worlds.

          • Dave

            Car was new in NZ then exported to Aussie. Speed on the motorway is 110km/h with a 4 to 5 % allowance so within the margin for error, and set by GPS. I was reluctant to move away from my Calais, but have absolutely no regrets now. 125kw, 350Nm at 1700 rpm, but the torque is very progressive from 1200.

          • unsol

            Your comment about Jeeps suggests you are not familiar with brand differentiations within it – the laredo & overland are in a category all of their own. Designed by ex mercedes & handling that reflects that of a large car rather than an SUV. The pathfinder is like the Navara but in SUV form. Pajero somewhere in between but both are comparable in price.

            The diesel option also means 8.4km per 100l rather than the 11l per 100km in the highlander (which is more like 15l given they way most tend to drive them – hard acceleration & hard braking) or 11.6 if 4wd.

            But tell me, what do you think is a comparable vehicle? The highlander is generally classed as a mid-sized SUV so perhaps a Mitsi outlander, Great Wall or a Honda then? All are significantly cheaper from the outset & the new mtisis use about 7.5l per 100km.

            So yes I think you will find my comment still stands – the highlander is ugly, overpriced & gas guzzling….

  • Guest

    Try Kadimah School in the city. Parents who think that their money puts them beyond the law and don’t give a f*** about other kids safety park on the yellow lines right on the pedestrian crossing.

  • Dave

    Maybe there is a line here for WOBH. improving NZ’s school zone parking by the army posting poor parking pictures and exposing the parkers. Of course notifying the school BOT and principle will help, might add a few more regular readers as well.