STUPID UNNECESSARY VEHICLES

Discussion in 'Road Cycling' started by Don Quijote, Apr 3, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. [email protected] wrote:
    >
    > Can we assume that is why you haven't bought a new car since 1975, don't have the cash? ;)
    >

    Your assumptions are zero for zero so far.

    --
    Frank Krygowski [email protected]
     


  2. W K wrote:
    >
    > "Frank Krygowski" <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >
    > > If WK is claiming better than 35 mpg at 85 mph with a tandem on the roof, I'm thinking WK
    > > doesn't know how to calculate miles per gallon.
    >
    > I wasn't actually. There were different claims there, and I was being deliberately economical with
    > the truth.

    IOW you were lying? I'm not surprised.

    > Also, I do not spend my life working out fuel economy.

    IOW you don't even know what gas mileage you really get? Again, given your claims, I'm not at all
    surprised.

    >
    > However, recently a long trip+business with hours at 80-90mph I did manage to get 40mpg.

    Bullshit.

    --
    Frank Krygowski [email protected]
     
  3. David Kerber

    David Kerber Guest

    In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...

    ...

    > > In my 1984 Escort Diesel, I was still getting a measured 55 mpg on the highway at 60 mph when it
    > > had more than 100,000 miles. When it was new, it got around 58 mpg. Commuting back and forth to
    > > work (only 12 mi each way, so it was seldom fully warmed up) I averaged between 40 and 45 mpg.
    > >
    >
    > But who would want to drive that thing? I understand the early Escorts were kinda crappy. How
    > would you rate your "incidence of repairs" on that car?

    That was several years into the reign of the Escort as the best-selling car in the world. I never
    had to do anything except scheduled maintenance, as listed in the manual, except that I changed the
    oil at approx 2/3 of the recommended interval. It had the most comfortable seats of any car I've
    ever owned, and in one stretch between duty stations, I put 6000 miles on it in 3 weeks. What
    finally killed it was my wife putting gasoline into it. It ran for a few more weeks, then I
    discovered it had a cracked cylinder head. At that point, it had 120,000 miles on it and was 8 years
    old, so I put it out of its misery.

    --
    Dave Kerber Fight spam: remove the ns_ from the return address before replying!

    REAL programmers write self-modifying code.
     
  4. madbomber

    madbomber Guest

    On Thu, 03 Apr 2003 22:19:55 GMT, [email protected] (Road Glidin' Don) wrote:

    >On 3 Apr 2003 13:48:20 -0800, [email protected] (Don Quijote) wrote:
    >
    ><snipped same old, subject, spammed widely as possible>
    >

    >SUV shit, already. Or keep it to an automobile forum.
    >
    >With the war threads, we have more than enough off-topic traffic already.

    I just got one of those 2 ton missle bombs they are using in Iraq. The next SUV is see, gets it !!!!
     
  5. Tom Sherman

    Tom Sherman Guest

    "Mike S." wrote:
    >
    > Talk to the snowbirds in Yuma that drive their Peterbuit 5th wheel tow vehicles down from the
    > north... Sometimes that is all they have to drive to the store. That wasteful? What is the
    > alternative? Starving? Oh wait, I know, mass transit in the desert!....

    Riding a bicycle to the store?

    Tom Sherman - Quad Cities USA (Illinois side)
     
  6. [email protected] wrote:
    >
    > Isn't it strange that all the people that can afford to buy an SUV never seem to complain they are
    > unnecessary?

    As if you've done a study; haw haw haw.

    I can afford one, and I think they're worse than unnecessary. They're a ridiculous fashion statement
    for people with no imagination; they're a menace to safe driving; and they're an incitement to war.

    > Only those that can't afford one seem to think they are unnecessary.

    False.

    > Let them vent if it keeps them from going nuts, after all there is nothing they can do to stop
    > people from buying what they want. LOL

    Insurance rates began to rise for the things some time ago, due to their being inherently unsafe for
    other drivers not in them. Now, they'll probably begin to rise now that it has been shown they're
    more unsafe to their occupants. And if the good guys

    skyrocket.

    In a perfect world, the things would be legal, but the states would (legitimately) make the cost of
    owning one prohibitive.

    >
    > mike hunt
    >
    > Robin Hubert wrote:
    > >
    > > You got it wrong. They're not all that unecessary, to anyone, at all times. But they are Stupid
    > > Urban Vehicles.
    > >
    > > "Don Quijote" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > news:[email protected]...
    > > > STUPID UNNECESSARY VEHICLES
    > > >
    > > > This is an interview with Brutus Maximus, who drives an SUV...
    > > >
    > > > Reporter: What do you need that for?
    > > >
    > > > Brutus: I wanna be noticed...
    > > >
    > > > Reporter: Do you realize that you threaten the environment, others on the road as well as make
    > > > wars for oil necessary?
    > > >
    > > > Brutus: Listen, I pay taxes so I don't care. Besides the war makes a nice TV show. It goes
    > > > well with beer...
    > > >
    > > > Reporter: What do you think of a place like Holland where people get around by bicycle?
    > > >
    > > > Brutus: I take my bicycles in the back of my SUV, so what's the point?
    > > >
    > > > Reporter: What do you do with your spare time?
    > > >
    > > > Brutus: I drive the SUV...
    > > >
    > > > Reporter: Do you ever read?
    > > >
    > > > Brutus: Nah, I don't like to waste my time...
    > > >
    > > > Reporter: What do you think of the future of the world?
    > > >
    > > > Brutus: I never think about it...
    > > >
    > > > Reporter: Why do you fly an oversized American flag on your vehicle?
    > > >
    > > > Brutus: It makes me feel like a patriot...
    > > >
    > > > Reporter: Do you know that the whole world opposes the war?
    > > >
    > > > Brutus: Remember, they are a bunch of anti-Americans losers...
    > > >
    > > > Reporter: Any message for the troops?
    > > >
    > > > Brutus: Yeah, I want more shots of the Hummers hunting the enemy. Hit 'em hard!God Bless
    > > > America!!!
    > > >
    > > > http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote
    >
     
  7. Frank Krygowski wrote:

    > "Mike S." wrote:
    > >
    > > Just don't bitch about the SUVs that you didn't buy just because you don't need one.
    >
    > Hmm. And just because you heat your home with natural gas, don't complain if your next door
    > neighbor chooses to heat his by burning smelly chicken manure.
    >
    > Is that how this stuff works?

    No that's not really how it works, and you know it.

    Do you get upset if your neighbor owns a larger home than he really needs? That excess size cost
    trees, pollution in production of the lumber, nails, roofing; higher fuel costs heating; higher
    fuel/pollution costs in transporting; blah, blah, blah.

    Yet it doesn't concern you that your neighbor has 3000 sq ft for just he and wifey and
    junior and fido?

    How much chicken shit are you willing to tolerate from that guy??!!

    SMH
     
  8. Dizzy

    Dizzy Guest

    On Fri, 04 Apr 2003 18:28:32 GMT, "Bob" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >I can easily afford one. Instead, I bought a Saab 9-3 Viggen.

    Figures a stupid top poster would buy that car...
     
  9. Tim McTeague

    Tim McTeague Guest

    After skimming the many posts on this thread I noticed that the main objection for SUVs is the poor
    mileage. To me, this misses SUVs MANY other bad points. At the outset, let me agree that some people
    truly need large vehicles but HALF? Don't think so. Many people buy them thinking they are safer. In
    a head on collision with a smaller car that may be the case, but any extra margin of safety is
    gained on the backs, and lives, of the drivers of normal size cars. The high bumpers easily pass
    over those of standard vehicles thus making a slow speed "encounter" life threatening to the driver
    of a car. SUVs are so tall that they block the view of passenger cars, making normal maneuvers more
    dangerous. How often do you see an SUV with a full load, of people or gear? See any mud around the
    wheel wells? Didn't think so. There are few justifications for these monsters, other than fashion.
    Back to safety, any gain in protection from having a massive vehicle seems to be more than balanced
    out by their tendency to roll over. While on the way to work the other day, traffic was held up by
    an accident. When I passed the two vehicles being towed I saw a Toyota Tercel with it's hood
    smashed, windshield busted and air bags deployed. It seemed as if the passengers could easily have
    walked away. The SUV, on the other hand had it's roof crushed and one side pushed in. How
    embarrassing! A massive SUV taken out by a lowly Tercel.

    Tim McTeague
     
  10. Stephen Harding wrote:
    >
    > Frank Krygowski wrote:
    >
    > > "Mike S." wrote:
    > > >
    > > > Just don't bitch about the SUVs that you didn't buy just because you don't need one.
    > >
    > > Hmm. And just because you heat your home with natural gas, don't complain if your next door
    > > neighbor chooses to heat his by burning smelly chicken manure.
    > >
    > > Is that how this stuff works?
    >
    > No that's not really how it works, and you know it.
    >
    > Do you get upset if your neighbor owns a larger home than he really needs? That excess size cost
    > trees, pollution in production of the lumber, nails, roofing; higher fuel costs heating; higher
    > fuel/pollution costs in transporting; blah, blah, blah.
    >
    > Yet it doesn't concern you that your neighbor has 3000 sq ft for just he and wifey and junior
    > and fido?
    >
    > How much chicken shit are you willing to tolerate from that guy??!!

    None of my neighbor's homes have any likelihood of crashing into me as I drive. They don't have
    bumpers that aim at my driver's window. They don't have headlights that are so high they tend to
    blind me, nor driving lights or fog lights that are nearly at the same height. They don't take up
    two parking spaces due to their size, or because their owners can't maneuver them properly. They
    don't block my view in traffic. None of them have super-knobby tires that make excessive road noise.
    And the owners of those bigger houses don't display aggressive tendencies while moving them around,
    like tailgating. Finally, those houses have to meet exactly the same safety and pollution standards
    that my house does.

    IOW, the negatives of SUVs are much more than the fact that they waste gas.

    --
    Frank Krygowski [email protected]
     
  11. "Tim McTeague" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    | After skimming the many posts on this thread I noticed that the main objection for SUVs is the
    | poor mileage.

    Back to safety, any gain in protection from having a massive
    | vehicle seems to be more than balanced out by their tendency to roll over. While on the way to
    | work the other day, traffic was held up by an accident. When I passed the two vehicles being towed
    | I saw a Toyota Tercel with it's hood smashed, windshield busted and air bags deployed. It seemed
    | as if the passengers could easily have walked away. The SUV, on the other hand had it's roof
    | crushed and one side pushed in. How embarrassing! A massive SUV taken out by a lowly Tercel.

    As long as we're sharing anecdotes, here's why your observations could certainly be way, way off
    of the mark:

    Dodge Neon runs a stop signal at 35+ mph and hits an SUV obliquely as it is turning left across the
    intersection:

    http://www.petefagerlin.com/images/ML_accident/images/idiot.jpg

    Neon occupents get a face full of airbag and Neon passenger is taken away in an ambulance with
    sever whiplash.

    The SUV was rolled:

    http://www.petefagerlin.com/images/ML_accident/images/ouch2.jpg

    ...and the driver walked away without injury:

    http://www.petefagerlin.com/images/ML_accident/images/ouch3.jpg

    It's a good thing that she wasn't driving another small passenger car like another Neon.
     
  12. Mayor2

    Mayor2 Guest

    That would most likely not be legal under several laws but buying an SUV is legal. You next
    irrelevant point?

    mike hunt

    Frank Krygowski wrote:
    >
    > "Mike S." wrote:
    > >
    > > Just don't bitch about the SUVs that you didn't buy just because you don't need one.
    >
    > Hmm. And just because you heat your home with natural gas, don't complain if your next door
    > neighbor chooses to heat his by burning smelly chicken manure.
    >
    > Is that how this stuff works?
    >
    > --
    > Frank Krygowski [email protected]
     
  13. Mayor2

    Mayor2 Guest

    To begin with you assumption are not correct. Light trucks which, includes SUV's, must meet the
    exact same safety and pollution standards as automobiles. Some SUV actually get better fuel mileage
    than some cars, so that comparison is useless. According to government figures available on the net,
    SUV's as a group exceed their CAFE standard by a greater amount than cars as a group. They cost
    money but there are driving school that you can attend that will teach you how to overcome you
    driving deficiencies. There are free public health services that can help you with your paranoia. In
    any event your opinions are noted, but in the real world they will not chance anything, get over it
    and get a life WBMA

    mike hunt

    Frank Krygowski wrote:

    Finally, those
    > houses have to meet exactly the same safety and pollution standards that my house does.
    >
    > IOW, the negatives of SUVs are much more than the fact that they waste gas.
    >
    > --
    > Frank Krygowski [email protected]
     
  14. Don Quijote

    Don Quijote Guest

    [email protected] wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > Don't you get it? I's not what you want or need or can afford, It is all about what other think
    > you need and should buy. In any event what they think is immaterial. People will continue to buy
    > what they want and all of the ranting in the NG will not make a bit of difference. That is what
    > pisses him off as he chases HIS windmills. LOL

    You must have the 'old version' of Don Quixote...

    HOW CERVANTES WAS FOOLED

    One day the Lie, which inhabits in the most unbelievable places such as the government and the
    pulpit, decided that such Don Quixote was a very dangerous enemy because many others could follow
    his example... This way in the famous occasion when the noble knight was about to attack the Bad
    Giants, the Lie revealed himself to Cervantes as windmills...

    And that's how from then on more than one revolutionary was frustrated for fear of being
    called crazy...

    http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote
     
  15. Brent P

    Brent P Guest

    In article <[email protected]>, Tim McTeague wrote:
    > After skimming the many posts on this thread I noticed that the main objection for SUVs is the
    > poor mileage.

    It's the least of mine, and then only with regards to regulations such as CAFE that punish cars with
    the same mpg ratings.
     
  16. Tim McTeague

    Tim McTeague Guest

    Could be, but I saw both vehicles and you did not. No intersection involved, although it could have
    happened at the on/off ramp for the highway. It's true I do not know the fate of each driver but the
    SUV clearly seemed to get the worst of it. Most studies, of which I am aware, rate rollover as one
    of the most deadly accidents a vehicle can have. Anecdotal evidence is seldom reliable, I just added
    the story as a relevant point that seems to fly in the face of most assumptions about SUV vs. car
    collisions.

    BTW, what is "sever" whiplash? Is that where the driver's head is torn clean off?

    Tim

    >
    > As long as we're sharing anecdotes, here's why your observations could
    certainly be way,
    > way off of the mark:
    >
    > Dodge Neon runs a stop signal at 35+ mph and hits an SUV obliquely as it
    is turning left
    > across the intersection:
    >
    > http://www.petefagerlin.com/images/ML_accident/images/idiot.jpg
    >
    > Neon occupents get a face full of airbag and Neon passenger is taken away
    in an ambulance
    > with sever whiplash.
    >
    > The SUV was rolled:
    >
    > http://www.petefagerlin.com/images/ML_accident/images/ouch2.jpg
    >
    > ...and the driver walked away without injury:
    >
    > http://www.petefagerlin.com/images/ML_accident/images/ouch3.jpg
    >
    > It's a good thing that she wasn't driving another small passenger car like
    another Neon.
    >
    >
     
  17. Mike S.

    Mike S. Guest

    <snip>
    >
    > Insurance rates began to rise for the things some time ago, due to their being inherently unsafe
    > for other drivers not in them. Now, they'll probably begin to rise now that it has been shown
    > they're more unsafe to their occupants. And if the good guys

    > skyrocket.
    >
    > In a perfect world, the things would be legal, but the states would (legitimately) make the cost
    > of owning one prohibitive.
    >
    So where does that line of reasoning stop?

    Limiting the horsepower of all cars because cars with big engines/high horsepower pollute more?

    Limit the size of cars, because cars over a certain size take more material to build? because
    they're "more dangerous" to smaller cars because they outweigh them?

    How 'bout racing? No more racing because it wastes fuel? Regardless of what engineering comes out
    of racing.

    Hell, I don't think that the majority of the people that own SUVs need them, but I'll defend their
    right to own one because the alternative scares the shit out of me! Just where do the laws that
    limit freedom stop?

    Mike
     
  18. Mike S.

    Mike S. Guest

    "Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    >
    > "Mike S." wrote:
    > >
    > > Talk to the snowbirds in Yuma that drive their Peterbuit 5th wheel tow vehicles down from the
    > > north... Sometimes that is all they have to
    drive to
    > > the store. That wasteful? What is the alternative? Starving? Oh
    wait, I
    > > know, mass transit in the desert!....
    >
    > Riding a bicycle to the store?

    Not when its 15-20 miles to the store and its 90+ out. Not really an option. Even for me, and I'm
    a cyclist!

    Mike
     
  19. Mike S.

    Mike S. Guest

    "Frank Krygowski" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:3E904601.505DF2B[email protected]...
    > Stephen Harding wrote:
    > >
    > > Frank Krygowski wrote:
    > >
    > > > "Mike S." wrote:
    > > > >
    > > > > Just don't bitch about the SUVs that you didn't buy just because you don't need one.
    > > >
    > > > Hmm. And just because you heat your home with natural gas, don't complain if your next door
    > > > neighbor chooses to heat his by burning smelly chicken manure.
    > > >
    > > > Is that how this stuff works?
    > >
    > > No that's not really how it works, and you know it.
    > >
    > > Do you get upset if your neighbor owns a larger home than he really needs? That excess size cost
    > > trees, pollution in production of the lumber, nails, roofing; higher fuel costs heating; higher
    > > fuel/pollution costs in transporting; blah, blah, blah.
    > >
    > > Yet it doesn't concern you that your neighbor has 3000 sq ft for just he and wifey and junior
    > > and fido?
    > >
    > > How much chicken shit are you willing to tolerate from that guy??!!
    >
    > None of my neighbor's homes have any likelihood of crashing into me as I drive. They don't have
    > bumpers that aim at my driver's window. They don't have headlights that are so high they tend to
    > blind me, nor driving lights or fog lights that are nearly at the same height. They don't take up
    > two parking spaces due to their size, or because their owners can't maneuver them properly. They
    > don't block my view in traffic. None of them have super-knobby tires that make excessive road
    > noise. And the owners of those bigger houses don't display aggressive tendencies while moving them
    > around, like tailgating. Finally, those houses have to meet exactly the same safety and pollution
    > standards that my house does.
    >

    Ahh, so EVERY car driver doesn't tailgate, doesn't have those nifty blue high intensity
    discharge lights (that blind even me in my full size P/U), that don't have idiots behind the
    wheel weaving in and out of traffic with only inches to spare, or anything else that you just
    ascribed to SUV drivers.

    The way around someone blocking your view of the road ahead is to follow at a safe distance. Works
    for me, you should try it. The only time I follow closer than safe is when I'm looking through the
    back window of the vehicle in front of me, watching the taillights of the car in front of them. I
    know that people driving little cars think that they stop faster than my truck, but I see so many
    people driving up behind me and following so closely that I can't see their headlights in my rear
    view mirror, that it makes me wonder how hard they're gonna clock me if something happens.

    I've seen studies that show at highway speeds, having the AC on is more efficient than opening the
    windows. If you're so darn environmentally conscious, why are you wasting fuel with your windows
    open at highway speeds? If you've got the windows closed, you don't hear the tires nearly as much.

    By the sheer dint of bigger size, it takes more energy to heat a bigger house, more materials to
    build it, and yet, noone complains about bigger houses being environmentally less friendly.
    Funny, that.

    > IOW, the negatives of SUVs are much more than the fact that they waste gas.

    ...and those grapes are probably sour too...

    Mike
     
  20. "Tim McTeague" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...

    | Anecdotal evidence is seldom reliable, I just added the story as a relevant point that seems to
    | fly in the face of most assumptions about SUV vs. car collisions.

    As I added my story as a relevant point that seems to fly in the fac of most assumptions about SUV
    rollovers.

    | BTW, what is "sever" whiplash? Is that where the driver's head is torn clean off?

    Oh, a typo funny.

    Good one.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...