Hummercide

http://www.stlimc.org/front.php3?article_id=7584&group=webcast

 

Robert J. Matter writes:

> http://www.stlimc.org/front.php3?article_id=7584&group=webcast

I'm not sure which is worse, the statement th owner of the vehicle seems to be making or the
response he got.

By the way, all SUV owners listen up. The color of the day is black with blackened windows, so if
you have another color you ain't with the program!

Jobst Brandt [email protected] Palo Alto CA

 

Robert J. Matter writes:

> http://www.stlimc.org/front.php3?article_id=7584&group=webcast

I'm not sure which is worse, the statement the owner of the vehicle seems to be making or the
response he got.

By the way, all SUV owners listen up. The color of the day is black with blackened windows, so if
you have another color you ain't with the program!

Jobst Brandt [email protected] Palo Alto CA

 

"Robert J. Matter" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> http://www.stlimc.org/front.php3?article_id=7584&group=webcast

Well, when you can't control the vehicle well enough to keep the tires off the curb, what do
you expect?



-Buck

P.S. For those of you who don't get it, check out where the front tire is planted.

 

Actually I am thinking the front tire was not on the curb before somebody knifed it. It was probably
just like the rear, right next to the curb. If it was true at least that driver knows how to
parallel park.

"Buck" <j u n k m a i l @ g a l a x y c o r p . c o m> wrote in message news:TKMia.32281
>
> Well, when you can't control the vehicle well enough to keep the tires off the curb, what do
> you expect?
>
>
>
> -Buck
>
>
>
> P.S. For those of you who don't get it, check out where the front tire is planted.

 

Robert J. Matter <[email protected]> wrote:
: http://www.stlimc.org/front.php3?article_id=7584&group=webcast

wtf, i was under the impression they had run-flat tires. hope that option works better in iraq.
--
david reuteler [email protected]

 

> I've got a hint for you SUV-haters out there. If you ignore them, they'll go away faster. SUVs are
> a fad, just like anything else.

=v= I disagree. SUVs broke into the market by a ridiculous doublethink campaign promoting them as
having something to do with loving nature, which is irretrievably idiotic, but it worked: people
lined up to buy them and slap their Sierra Club decals and "Keep Tahoe Blue" stickers on the
bumpers. Now the doublethink selling point is that they're safer (they're not) and make you freer
(just ignore those gas and insurance bills).

=v= The triumph of SUV sales simply proves that millions of people out there just don't think things
through. Yeah, it's a fad, so creating an anti-SUV buzz may be the only way to get through to these
people to redirect their faddish behavior.

> You'll notice that the new crop of SUVs are more and more car-like, smaller, more efficient. See
> a trend?

=v= Yeah, another doublethink trend. They're "more efficient" on a scale set by absurdly-low
expectations.

> The more y'all bash SUVs, the more I like driving my F150 just to prove that I can.

=v= All you're proving is my point. Reasoning, clearly, has not swayed you. SUV-bashing makes
more people aware that SUV driving is a sign of short-sighted stupidity, makes one smell like
exhaust, causes wars, and (according to the SUV makers' own market research) appeals to paranoid
sociopaths who feel

about what others think of you, so perhaps this anti-SUV buzz will make yours a bit less
lemming-like. <_Jym_

 

Raymo CC? writes:

> Actually I am thinking the front tire was not on the curb before somebody knifed it. It was
> probably just like the rear, right next to the curb. If it was true at least that driver knows how
> to parallel park.

If the tire was knifed, then it would be sitting flat on the rim. What you see is a tire compressed
by having only a small overlap with the curb. This guy didn't need to park carefully, he has a
tactical vehicle!

Jobst Brandt [email protected] Palo Alto CA

 

"Jym Dyer" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> > I've got a hint for you SUV-haters out there. If you ignore them, they'll go away faster. SUVs
> > are a fad, just like anything else.
>
Remember BMWs in the 80s? That was a fad that was replaced by the minivan, which has been replaced
by the SUV, which will be replaced with whatever the next trend is. I'm thinking its a trip back to
station wagons, or tall wagons like the PT Cruiser, etc.

> =v= I disagree. SUVs broke into the market by a ridiculous doublethink campaign promoting them as
> having something to do with loving nature, which is irretrievably idiotic, but it worked: people
> lined up to buy them and slap their Sierra Club decals and "Keep Tahoe Blue" stickers on the
> bumpers. Now the doublethink selling point is that they're safer (they're not) and make you freer
> (just ignore those gas and insurance bills).
>
The first "new" SUVs, the Toyota 4Runner and Nissan Pathfinder were both pickup based, appealing to
young males that wanted an enclosed cab for their outdoor gear. The rest of the breed is driven by
marketing, capitalizing on the original idea and mass marketing it for the yuppies. The Suburbans,
Grand Cherokees, Cherokee Cheifs, and even the Ford Bronco had been around for a loooooong time in
smaller numbers than today, but the big American Station wagon was also available for those families
that needed the space and better gas mileage. Since the big station wagon died, there had to be
something to take over, enter SUVs for the everyman.

My insurance on my truck is less than that on any of my previous cars. Not by much, but still less.

> =v= The triumph of SUV sales simply proves that millions of people out there just don't think
> things through. Yeah, it's a fad, so creating an anti-SUV buzz may be the only way to get through
> to these people to redirect their faddish behavior.
>
> > You'll notice that the new crop of SUVs are more and more car-like, smaller, more efficient. See
> > a trend?
>
> =v= Yeah, another doublethink trend. They're "more efficient" on a scale set by absurdly-low
> expectations.

More efficient is still more efficient regardless of the expectations. I've also noticed a trend
from Detroit (and to a lesser extent Europe) to stuff big ole V8s in cars again. Talk about less
efficient! Less space AND the same size or bigger engine.

>
> > The more y'all bash SUVs, the more I like driving my F150 just to prove that I can.
>
> =v= All you're proving is my point. Reasoning, clearly, has not swayed you.

Explain what reasoning you're talking about. I've owned a VW Golf, a Sentra, a Volvo 142, and
several other cars that are much more efficient than my truck, but I still like the bed/cargo
capacity, the size, and the fact that in an accident, you lose by the fact that the truck I'm
driving weighs twice as much as your compact.

SUV-bashing makes more people aware that SUV
> driving is a sign of short-sighted stupidity, makes one smell like exhaust,

Funny, I don't smell of gasoline when I'm driving my truck. Maybe if you weren't at the level of my
tailpipe, you wouldn't either. Short sighted to me means involving the government with regulations
designed to limit freedom of choice, but then that's my opinion.

causes wars,

I don't remember any SUVs invading Kuwait, or firing Scud missiles, or oppressing a population. You
know of any?

and (according to the SUV makers'
> own market research) appeals to paranoid sociopaths who feel

> about what others think of you,

Funny, I could care less what you think of me. There are a very limited number of people in this
world whose opinions matter to me. Yours isn't one of them.

so perhaps this anti-SUV buzz will make yours a bit less lemming-like.
> <_Jym_>

Nope, all the anti-SUV buzz is to prove that America is a great place, where we have choices in the
vehicles we drive. Where there is the freedom to be an asshole as long as it doesn't infringe on
anyone else's right to be an asshole either.

 

"Mike S." <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...

> Explain what reasoning you're talking about. I've owned a
VW Golf, a
> Sentra, a Volvo 142, and several other cars that are much
more efficient
> than my truck, but I still like the bed/cargo capacity,
the size, and the
> fact that in an accident, you lose by the fact that the
truck I'm driving
> weighs twice as much as your compact.

That's not true. Crash safety has to do with the strength of the passenger compartment, and how well
that structure is designed to collapse and absorb energy. This is how Indy cars weighing only 1500
LB can crash into a wall (infinite mass) at 200 MPH, and the driver walk away. You don't make it
safer by making it bigger and heavier. It's a lot more complicated than that. SUV's don't address
these "complications" because they're not required to by law, as cars are.

Drive what you want, just know the facts.

Matt O.

 

"Matt O'Toole" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Mike S." <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> > Explain what reasoning you're talking about. I've owned a
> VW Golf, a
> > Sentra, a Volvo 142, and several other cars that are much
> more efficient
> > than my truck, but I still like the bed/cargo capacity,
> the size, and the
> > fact that in an accident, you lose by the fact that the
> truck I'm driving
> > weighs twice as much as your compact.
>
> That's not true. Crash safety has to do with the strength of the passenger compartment, and how
> well that structure is designed to collapse and absorb energy. This is how Indy cars weighing only
> 1500 LB can crash into a wall (infinite mass) at 200 MPH, and the driver walk away. You don't make
> it safer by making it bigger and heavier. It's a lot more complicated than that. SUV's don't
> address these "complications" because they're not required to by law, as cars are.
>
> Drive what you want, just know the facts.
>
> Matt O.
>

Ain't America great? We can drive gas-guzzling road hogs if we choose to pay the penalties, or drive
compact cars if we don't. Sure beats a lot of other countries in the world that don't have a choice!

I can't wait till the hybrid electric cars are far enough along. For the kind of driving I do, a
hybrid SUV would be a good thing. Till then, I'll either ride a bike or motorcycle when I'm not
driving my truck.

Mike

 

Mike S. <[email protected]> wrote:

> Ain't America great? We can drive gas-guzzling road hogs if we choose to pay the penalties, or
> drive compact cars if we don't. Sure beats a lot of other countries in the world that don't have
> a choice!

Just out of interest, can you name those countries where such choice isn't available? I've been
to about thirty countries, and people drove everything from a Fiat 500 to Hummer in every single
one of them.

-as

 

No one should be driving a Hummer unless they're wearing dog tags, fatigues, and a flak jacket!

Diana B., LPN Diva Nurse

The JerZ Fox

Money doesn't buy happiness. Poverty doesn't buy anything.

 

"JerZ Fox" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> No one should be driving a Hummer unless they're wearing dog tags,
fatigues,
> and a flak jacket!

I saw a "new" Hummer (GM truck platform) recently while riding my bike. There was a guy with his
10yr old kid with him. The driver had the stiff-arm-on-the-top-of-the-steering wheel "cool" look. I
was cracking up laughing (really, not mocking), the dad looked pissed-off, the kid, embarrassed. He
lead-footed himself from the stop just to prove himself. Funny, eh?

 

"Mike S." wrote:
>
> The funny thing is that most of the people bashing SUVs haven't even owned one. Just like green
> eggs and ham... Go figure.

It's easy to figure! Let's try an analogy, if you will.

If my neighbor began riding around town on a diseased mule that had constant diarrhea and brayed
loudly 24 hours a day, many people would complain. Few people would think they needed to try
owning one!

--
Frank Krygowski [email protected]

 

JerZ Fox wrote:
>
> No one should be driving a Hummer unless they're wearing dog tags, fatigues, and a flak jacket!

You mean those guys have to stop playing "Let's pretend"? :-(

--
Frank Krygowski [email protected]

 

>The funny thing is that most of the people bashing SUVs haven't even owned one. Just like green
>eggs and ham... Go figure.

I drive SUVs often for my work, which requires me to go on ranch lands or fireroads to access
the jobsites.

Cherokees, 'burbans, Broncos, Explorers - I've driven them all and can state authoritatively their
on-road handling characteristics leave *a lot* to be desired.

I wouldn't trade our mini-van for any of the conventional body-on-frame SUVs. Compared to them it
handles like a sports car, carries more (ever try to stuff a tandem in an SUV?), while being more
comfortable and getting better mileage.

Unless you need to tow something or have serious off-road capability , you're just buying hype.

Chris Neary [email protected]

"Science, freedom, beauty, adventure: what more could you ask of life? Bicycling combined all the
elements I loved" - Adapted from a quotation by Charles Lindbergh

 

Chris Neary writes:

> Unless you need to tow something or have serious off-road capability, you're just buying hype.

So what else is new! What do you think these people with flashy wheels and low profile tires and air
foils on the back of their cars are doing at great expense. At least they are not intruding on
parking or road spaces and threatening others with a bumper designed to smash windshields in the
event of a collision.

I find cars with trunk lids that open automatically at speeds above 50mph about as silly an ego
statement as can be found on cars. The super snow shovels on the turbo Porsches imply that the car
can somehow travel faster than all others on civilized highways. In fact the people who drive these
cars practically never find a place or reason to exceed 100mph. Racers who do so do not use these
props but have distinctly different wings on their cars.

Jobst Brandt [email protected] Palo Alto CA

 

"Antti Salonen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Mike S. <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Ain't America great? We can drive gas-guzzling road hogs if we choose
to
> > pay the penalties, or drive compact cars if we don't. Sure beats a lot
of
> > other countries in the world that don't have a choice!
>
> Just out of interest, can you name those countries where such choice isn't available? I've been to
> about thirty countries, and people drove everything from a Fiat 500 to Hummer in every single one
> of them.

Perhaps north Korea? But thats because they haven't got the money. Albania? You cannot buy them
there but you can get them shipped from germany (where you don't buy them either).

Its another interesting thing I've noticed since the start of this war. Apparantly America is also
the only nation in the world where one is allowed to openly criticise the government.

 

W. K. wrote:

> Its another interesting thing I've noticed since the start of this war. Apparantly America is also
> the only nation in the world where one is allowed to openly criticise the government.

Huh? It's one of the national pastimes here in Canada.

--
Benjamin Lewis

Gravity is a myth, the Earth sucks.