Oct 8, 2001 12:03 PM
|by far the Pontiac Aztek. YuK!|
|And this has to with road cycling how?? (nm)||Cima Coppi|
Oct 8, 2001 12:49 PM
|Ruins the aesthetic peace of the ride (nm)||Rich Clark|
Oct 8, 2001 1:14 PM
|But ALL cars do that!! (nm)||Cima|
Oct 8, 2001 2:12 PM
|But ALL cars do that!! (nm)||Ray Sachs|
Oct 9, 2001 5:03 AM
|But only the Aztek has the ability to make an entire paceline pull over the side of the road and Ralph up lunch. That's some seriously ugly metal!|
|Toyota Echo (nm)||Starliner|
Oct 8, 2001 1:19 PM
|Toyota Echo (nm)||Bart S.|
Oct 9, 2001 10:27 AM
|I agree. You have to wonder what they were thinking when they approved the design.
For old timers like me, SAAB sold a sports car called the Sonnet (sp?) in the early seventys that is right up there on the all time ugly list.
|ugly is as ugly does||Dog|
Oct 8, 2001 1:20 PM
|*The one that hits you.
*The one with no bike rack.
*The one with driver yelling obscenities out the window.
*The one belching smoke and fumes.
|A CLOSE second: Chevy Avalanche||Tig|
Oct 8, 2001 1:22 PM
|I saw another one of these fugly "trucks" today. 35 grand for this? I haven't seen so much plastic since the last Academy Awards!|
|I'm convinced that these vehicles||Jules|
Oct 8, 2001 2:01 PM
|were designed by drunks. The question is, what genius thought it would be a good idea to go ahead and build them?|
|Yeah, but people buy them!||look271|
Oct 8, 2001 4:16 PM
|So are the designers idiots, or geniuses? (If we build it, they will buy it.....)|
|Now we know what the BioPace engineers are doing! -nm||Tig|
Oct 8, 2001 6:18 PM
|Geniuses? I think not...||Jules|
Oct 9, 2001 6:32 AM
|I don't see too many Azteks or Avalanches on the road so I would have to vote: idiots!
Yes, some people buy them but I know for a fact that GM is really taking it in the shorts trying to sell them. I've heard of 0% financing and all sorts of other incentives to move these chunks off the lot. Still, you would have to put a gun to my head to get me to buy one.
|The entire story here||Kristin|
Oct 9, 2001 7:42 AM
|During a recent threat of recession, Pontiac decided to take a chance on Johan--a graphic arts graduate from Mudson Community College with a dream of launching his own line of corrigated clothing. As Pontiacs' Concept and Design Manager for New Products, Johan was responsible for two new vehicles. Experiencing creative block, Johan turned to his long time hero Cleo. Cleo turned with confidence to her cards and fortold of a beautiful creation that would surely sky rocket Johan to stardom. Pontiac senior management, fearing legal retalliation and being eager to support employee religious activity, embraced Cleo...I mean...Johans' designs. And the Caruck was born.|
|A historical perspective||PaulCL|
Oct 8, 2001 6:05 PM
|The ugliest cars ever made:
3. The AMC Pacer
2. The Gremlin
1. and the winner...er...loser: the Volkswagon Karmen Gia! Yuck!
OK, OK...an acquaintance of mine, nicknamed "Jay the A**hole", who lived up to his nickname, drove a Karmen Gia (spelling??), so I'm biased. But imagine that car in lemon yellow...arfchunk.
|Re: the Pacer||Starliner|
Oct 8, 2001 8:35 PM
|That Pacer was a mini-hit when it came out. AMC showed it at car shows in Europe and the Euros thought it was pretty cool. So cool that AMC saw a market for them there to be sold.
Take a look at the Porsche 928 side glass/roofline/tailend and you'll see a racier version of the Pacer.
|re: Ugliest car||I Love Shimano|
Oct 8, 2001 7:00 PM
BTW, any American made car is ugly.
|You and Osama think alike||Starliner|
Oct 8, 2001 8:29 PM
|I'm sure he'd agree with you.|
|Is there anything wrong with my opinion?||I Love Shimano|
Oct 8, 2001 9:18 PM
|Do not compare me with Bin Laden if you do not even know who I am. What ever happened to free speech? If I want to say American cars suck, then AMERICAN CARS SUCK. BUT, I am not saying that the workmen or the country that built the cars suck. I see you're quite sensitive and immature to take criticism lake an adult should. Besides, how many of the cars mentioned in this thread are non-america? The Echo, and the Volks....2 cars out of so many.
I rest my case.
|The only patriotic car is the one...||nova|
Oct 9, 2001 6:33 AM
|that gets high MPG - like the Toyota Echo or that new Honda that gets over 70MPH on the highway.
German and Japanese car makers actually employ thousands of Americans in the US, AND they make a better product than the so-called "American" car manufacturers. (over 70% of my last "American" car was fabricated overseas, while my new import was made in Ohio)
The problem is the amount of crude oil we consume, NOT the number of Volkswagens we buy. Where do the Saudi fortunes originate? Exportation of crude oil. Who is a Saudi millionaire? bin Laden.
Reconsider your SUVs or any passenger vehicle that gets less than 30MPG. And lets outlaw NASCAR while we're at it! Talk about a waste of fuel!
|The only patriotic car is the one...||Dog|
Oct 9, 2001 6:45 AM
|that saves my or my family's life in a crash. Lives are more important than fuel, IMHO.
Oct 9, 2001 7:33 AM
|That is a very selfish statement.
Your family, my family, thousands of families across this country aren't as important as the well being of the nation itself. Without national security, your family doesn't have a future.
Our consumption of crude oil is a matter of national security. Incontrovertable evidence is the Gulf War (I'm not anti-gulf war, in case anyone is wondering.) Our involvement in the middle east is a matter of our addiction to oil.
Anyone driving an SUV (I am a former owner) should seriously consider why they need to burn so much fuel. The decision to drive an SUV is truly a matter of ego and self-image (I think Dog illustrates that point) for most. I contend that it is time to wake up and stop being selfish.
I know a short guy who drives a Yukon XL 'cause it makes him bigger while he is out in public. He has no other need for the vehicle.
Now back to the age-old debate: I can't count how many times I've climbed icy, twisting mountain passes in PA during sleet storms where I've passed SUVs in my front wheel drive sedan. I drove the same roads in my Jeep and felt less in control. I can stop faster, accelerate faster, and have a more stable center of gravity in the sedan. (The car has a 212HP 3.2 liter engine, as much as some V-8 SUV engines, it gets over 30MPG highway, and qualifies as an ultra-low emissions vehicle)
Who is safer? Next time you are in a head-on collision Dog, let us know how your SUV performs. (It is very unlikely) Likewise, next time you need to take evasive or defensive manuevers in your SUV (very likely) let us know how it goes. It's not like SUV's don't flip over evey day in this country.
Oct 9, 2001 7:42 AM
|What do you think I drive now?
I well know you are entitled to your opinion. That's one great thing about this country. But, others are entitled to theirs, too. Freedom of choice. It's a wonderful thing. You start calling every American who drives something you dislike "unpatriotic", and you might get a little backlash.
Oct 9, 2001 8:53 AM
|Freedom is a wonderful thing. You are free to be selfish. History is begining to show that it is a trait common to your generation, just as self-sacrifice was a trait of your parents' generation.
If some of us want to sacrifice a little 'luxury' (more like 'self gratification') with an eye toward what is right for the country as a whole, then we are free to do it, and you can think what you like. If what you are doing doesn't have the best interests of our country in mind, then I'm free to spell it out for you.
And yes, NASCAR is unpatriotic. It is an inexcuseable waste of fossil fuel.
What do you drive? Let's see: what does an ego-centric materialistic middle-aged lawyer drive? Either a Lexus or a BMW. Probably one of their "sport utes".
And I bet you think I'm a tree-hugging low income community college-type. Be honest, that is what's in the back of your mind, isn't it?
|labels don't work||Dog|
Oct 9, 2001 9:44 AM
|I don't think you told us what you drive, other than to imply that it gets over 30 mpg and is front wheel drive (I may have missed it).
"Selfish". That's a label that people often put on others when they are doing something they don't like. If I were out of work, homeless, and destitute I suppose anyone with a home, working in an office with air conditioning, comfortable, clean clothes, and a working car might be selfish. Hey, they have more than I do, and more than they "need".
Anyone who takes extra steps to protect the lives of themselves or their family is selfish, too. Was Ralph Nader promoting selfishness when he demanded safer cars? Hmm.
I once drove nothing but motorcycles. For 4 years I owned a Chevrolet Sprint, made by Suzuki. It averaged around 55 mpg, city and highway combined. I dented the car permanently just leaning up against it while waxing it one time. About one step up from a motorcycle in safety. The thing was a deathtrap. Am I selfish for wanting more safety than that? I suppose I technically am. Self preservation is selfish. Wanting my loved ones to live is selfish. Not wanting to see my wife's brains spilled on the highway because some drunk driver crossed the centerline and hit us head on is selfish.
I have no idea who you are. I don't recall you introducing yourself here. You may well be just one of those semi-anonymous lurkers who just likes stirring things up a bit. For all I know you are one of those Hillary Clinton supporter types, worth a billion dollars, decry SUV's, and then get chauffered around in one yourself. Or, you might be 18 years old and finishing high school. I'm not labelling you. Point is, see, I don't label you or attack you. I address what you have to say, I don't attack *you*. You can call names and label all you want, it does not mean anything to me. I put my name and reputation right out here for everyone to know. I don't hide anything. How many opinionated people here do that? Not very many.
I drive what I do for very reasonable and specific purposes. I used to have a GMC Suburban, but yes, it was too much for me. I just about kept it forever when someone not paying attention on the freeway rear-ended my wife and me in it, and we did not even feel it. According to your reasoning, that was selfish of us - we should have been laid up in a hospital in the name of unselfishness. I have a hard time accepting that, for pretty obvious reasons.
Your reasoning carried too far, I doubt many could tolerate. While you label auto racing unpatriotic, then I suppose any type of racing or competition that utilized fuel is unpatriotic, or for that matter, any leisure activity that uses fuel is that same. Getting in your car and driving to the beach is unpatriotic. Driving to a bike race, mountain bike trail, to a bike shop, to a ski mountain, to a book store, to a movie, all unpatriotic.
People with your opinions seem to be motivated more by class envy than anything else. They just can't stand anyone having or using more than they do. They arrogantly believe that they alone know what's best for everyone else, that they are selfless, and anyone who disagrees is "selfish, ego-centic and materialistic".
Sacrificing for our Country is a good thing. That does not mean sacrificing the lives of our family in the sake of saving fuel, though, in my opinion.
|labels don't work||atomicwedgie|
Oct 9, 2001 9:56 AM
|beautifully said Doug|
|labels don't work||nova|
Oct 9, 2001 12:26 PM
|Your logic is flawed, your argument is defensive rather than impartial. Nader was serving a greater good. You are serving your own (misguided) priorities when you choose to drive a truck as your family vehicle for "safety" reasons. If you can point me to any tests or statistics anywhere in the world which illustrate that SUVs are "safer" than cars, I'd like to see them. I can point you to many resources which demonstrate that cars burn less fuel than SUVs, but I suspect I don't need to do that because you don't disagree.
We also agree that fossil fuels are an issue of national security. We will fight and die (and spend billions of $) to maintain access to crude oil, but is it our RIGHT as Americans to frivolously burn fossil fuels? No. If we need to fight and die for crude oil, we should treat it with a bit more respect.
There is a greater good than your family. There is a greater good than my family. The time has come to recognize that fact, and start living OUR lives (we Americans) in accordance with the greater good. Yours is the 'me' generation. Yours is the generation with all the consumer debt and the disposible mentality. Yours is the generation which mine will support in the coming years - because of your ingrained, wasteful ways. It affects ME and MY generation so I'm calling you on it.
I'm a 35 year old (former) Internet millionaire who owns an Acura TL. I'm from Detroit, I lived in NYC for 10 car-free years (like millions of other people), and DC for 9 years. I have an MS in Telecommunications. I've been on this board ever since you had a Chevy Suburban (we argued about it back then), and I called you an idiot when you said all dogs should be killed at random (how ironic now that your handle is Dog). In fact, I just WALKED home for lunch and scratched my dog behind the ear. So I've been on this board for some time. (Walking to and from work?! How radical! Especially in a cycling forum!) I buy a middle-eastern product (gasoline) on average of less than once per month. How about you?
Face it; you come to this board to talk about yourself - your posessions, your riding plans, and your law degree. That's fine - that is what this board is here for I suppose.
But in doing so you reveal a lot about yourself - and it is my opinion that you are self-centered/selfish. It has nothing to do with class envy (want to compare brokerage statements? My portfolio is a little off of it's former high, but I do better than most) What kind of bikes do I have? A Raleigh hybrid, a Gunnar Crosshairs which I built myself, and an Airborne. I could own any bikes, any vehicle, and travel anywhere I like. But I don't. I live well below my means, unlike the baby boom generation.
I love living and participating in a capitalistic society, but that doesn't mean that I don't recognize wastefulness and indifference are DETRIMENTAL to MY society. Your argument has been (especially when you had the Suburban) that it is your right to be wasteful. Well, it is my right to drive a Ford Expedition down your street after being awake for 72 consecutive hours while talking on a cell phone, smoking a cigarette, and eating a cheesburger.
Should I do that? No, because it endangers my fellow citizens. But it is still my right.
I don't own a gas-powered lawn mower. I own an electric lawn mower BUT I DON'T HAVE A LAWN. And yes, I own my own home. I made a concious decision that it wasn't worth my time to have a lawn. If you have 2+ acres of grass (like my brother) and spend the better part of a Saturday riding around burning gas and cutting grass, you really should rethink your priorities. Talk about getting a life!
I suppose I did attack you - but it doesn't roll off your back because it is TRUE. You are ego centric and materialistic. That hurts you, but I'm not going to apologize for it. Take pride in your athletic accomplishments, not your "right" to frivolously burn something so important to our national security. Point me to favorable safety statistics concerning SUVs and I'll rethink my position on the 'frivolously burn' thing. Until then, driving an SUV is a detriment to our society.
In fact, I'm not going to tolerate the apologists in OUR society who insist that being an apathetic, wasteful consumer is their right as an American. Which is why this whole thing started I suppose.
|it's simple physics||Doghead|
Oct 9, 2001 1:26 PM
|the bigger car/truck will always win in a crash. how do you refute that? you come off as a sanctimonious know it all. good for you that you walk to work...want a medal? get the car/truck that serves your needs. for some this could be an SUV, minivan, truck...whatever. i agree that it's overkill for a single commuter to drive a ford expedition, but this is america and you take the good with the bad. sounds to me like you are painting every SUV driver with a pretty broad brush and accusing them of every crime to the environment under the sun. you reveal a lot about yourself by what you have said too. look at your own actions before you start accusing others you don't even know of things. i own an suv and i used to ride my bike to work every day. now i take the bus. i rarely drive except weekends when i have to cart stuff and people around.|
|it's simple physics||nova|
Oct 9, 2001 1:53 PM
|Yeah, I state my position clearly and I'm a sanctimonious know it all. I don't refute the physics of car-versus-truck collisions. I've been rear ended a couple of times over the years, and so was my wife. (I was in my Jeep, she was in her Corolla). No one is disputing the laws of physics.
What I am disputing is the real-world, common sense notion that that sitting up high in a truck is inherently safer than driving in a sedan, wagon, or coupe. Most of my driving is cross country. DC to Chicago, DC to Detroit, DC to Philadelphia, etc. I estimate that 98% of those drives are on DIVIDED HIGHWAYS, meaning there is LITTLE CHANCE that I will have a head on collision with another vehicle at speed.
However, there is a high probablilty that I will need to stop suddenly (better to be in a car), swerve suddenly (better to be in a car) or accelerate suddenly (better to be in a car). And on those occasions when I drive around DC during rush hour? How is that dangerous? Traffic is CRAWLING for dozens of miles in every direction. It is better to be in a car because it burns less fuel. (See my post titled $78 Billion below) I know that it is nice to sit up high in an SUV through heavy traffic because you have a nice view of everything. Aside from that, give me a break. And if you think that a modern full sized sedan (with over 200HP and over 30MPG) can't take a serious rear-ending, think again.
Let's not forget the http://www.iihs.org tests which show most SUVs are UNSAFE for their passengers during a frontal offset collision because the passenger compartment deforms.
Yes, a head on collision between my car and your truck puts you at an advantage, but you are preparing for the WRONG kind of eventuality. Statistically, you are more likely to need to take evasive action when travelling with the flow of traffic, which puts you at a disadvantage.
I'll say it again: If we are going to fight and die for crude oil, we need to treat it with more respect. If that notion upsets you: good.
Oct 9, 2001 1:32 PM
|You do think you know more than everyone else, don't you?
So, you have been around here for a while. I thought I recognized the same arguments.
If you have been paying attention, you might have noted, despite my "self-centeredness", that 9 times out of 10 my posts are to help other people, to offer some bit of information, a suggestion, and sometimes, yes, that information comes with examples of how I did it, what I have that works or doesn't work for me, in other words, I back it up with experience or references, not just talking out my rear. And what's this about talking about my law degree? Are you refering to times when I help people by looking up vehicle codes as they pertain to bicycles? I can't believe this.
Sometimes people ask me about what I'm doing or what I have, and I usually respond. Something wrong with that? I don't see you jumping all over each person who announces, proudly, a bike purchase, what they do for a living, or rides they have done. Geez, give me a break.
What possible relevance is it that you are a (former?) dot come millionaire, or have a whatever porfolio? Is that supposed to make you more knowledgeable? Heck, I know of custodians in San Jose driving Ferrari's. Maybe you're Forrest Gump for all we know.
You think you and I are from separate generations. Hmm. Six years apart makes an entire generation?
Factoid: I lived in downtown Kansas City and walked to work for a few years, too. That's a romantic notion that gets old really quick anywhere there is humidity, rain, or snow.
An Acura TL, huh? Wow, that gets great mileage (unpatriotic by your standard):
Recommended Fuel - Premium unleaded; 92 octane
EPA estimated mileage, city/highway 19/29
Sure, being "wasteful" is generally a bad thing. Seems like you want to define what is and what is not wasteful, though. To many people, safety and having room to haul their family and things (bikes) around for the cost of a little extra gas is not wasteful.
Your statements reflect an arrogant, intolerant, and vindictive attitude. Someone has to call you on it, and unfortunately I wasted my time doing so.
|Like I said||Nova|
Oct 9, 2001 4:30 PM
|the fact that you brought up a person's net worth as an indication of their ability to have a reasonable, respectible point of view says a lot about you. First you say that if I don't have a high income, I am jealous of those who do. (Which is why I told in some explicit detail about myself) Then I indicate that I'm not middle-class, (to counter your argument that my perspective is brought on by class envy) and you argue; "so what? I know a lot of janitors in expensive cars" Which suggests that even if a person does have a lot of money, they are somehow not as 'valuable' a person as you. So which is it Doug?
I live in Northern Virginia, home to AOL, WorldCom (UUNET) and dozens of other tech companies which had IPOs in recent years. I have over 130,000 options in my employer. I've been with the same company for nearly 7 years. Draw your own conclusions, but cut the "class envy" crap.
I worked in the General Counsel's office for many years in NYC at one of the former Big 6 firms, so my loathing of attorneys isn't entirely ill-informed. :-) What gets me is the hours those (you) people put in to make a living, when a bunch of techies like myself leapfrog you in terms of accumulation of wealth. God bless America!
My car gets over 30MPG. How many does yours get? I was right on the money with my guess as to what your drive, wasn't I? How many dollars do you spend on middle-eastern crude oil each month? I contend that your position on this topic is an apology for your penchant for conspicuous consumption. And I contend that conspicuous consumption in the form of gasoline is detrimental to my country.
I'm surprised that a rugged cyclist like yourself is so disadvantaged by humidity or other elements. I know a dozen people personally who don't own cars in NYC and Chicago, and their lives are better because of it. There are MILLIONS of people in this country who live productive lives with lucrative careers that don't own cars, including lots of attorneys throughout this nation's big cities. The fact that you need to encase yourself in a vehicle to escape the elements and make a living is ridiculous.
And once you get past your self-rightousness, I'm sure that you'll remember those many posts on this board from persons other than myself have pointed out that you appear to have an ego problem.
You are from another generation. You are in my parents' generation. You share the values of a generation that is self-absorbed, through no fault of your own. But as a sentient being, if you are aware of it and still insist on being self-absorbed, you are a collective weight around this country's neck.
See my post below about the $78 billion that gets wasted in traffic jams each year. It is astonshing that a cycling forum has so many apologists for a car-centric society. (and no, I don't beleive in critical mass as an effective means to promote cycling) You aren't a cyclist, you are a bike and bike riding enthusiast.
Oct 9, 2001 7:54 PM
|You are so full of it that I can't even begin to respond. Talk about arrogant, self-rightous, ego centric - just read your own spewings. I get the impression that you really do think that you have the universe figured out, all by yourself, and that all of us other 5 billion heathen idiots are hardly worthy of your teachings. It's knowing that warped minds like yours exist that inspire decent rational people to vote, work, and participate in government to keep things on a somewhat sane track.
You even have the arrogance to define me away as a "cyclist." Thanks, I was almost confused that my riding hundreds of miles per week would make me one. What a fool I am. Next time I want to know what label to put on myself, I'll be sure to consult you, Mr. Judgmental.
One of these days maybe reality will become more clear to you. As much as people would like to, we can't all ride or walk to work, to recreational events, to visit family, or whatever. This country is too big and too spread out, as you well know. Traffic jams are not good, but I can't see too many people commuting 60 miles each way to work in Los Angeles.
Finally, thank you. Again, you are an inspiration, an inspiration to make darn sure I do what I can politically to oppose your types, not get complacent, as well a bit of exasperation to work off on the bike. Heck, just thinking about you might even get me through my next long ride. Really, thanks.
Oct 9, 2001 9:17 PM
|As an educated man, surely you realize that the more one knows, the more one realizes how much they don't know. What gets under your skin is the degree of my conviction and the fact that I'm not off base. And if thinking that we as Americans have a responsibility to consider our consumption of fossil fuels as a matter of national security is "warped", then I'm astonished at how obtuse you are. The automobile provides an important level of personal freedom in this country, it shouldn't be taken away.
If you were a cyclist, then cycling as a viable means of transportation wouldn't be such an alien concept to you. Instead, it is ONLY a badge of honor for you, something you do to separate yourself from the little people. (like me, for instance)
I'm not for an instant saying that cars should be abolished. I'm saying it is time (as in; Post Attack. or is it; The Beginning of the Attacks?) to think about not sending our money to the middle east when we can avoid doing so. If opposing that point of view in a political forum is what I've inspired you to do, then you need to become a lobbiest for Mobil or perhaps OPEC.
As for your inspiration to become a better citizen, you do that, and I'll be sure to run right out and purchase a Lincoln Navigator so that I'm "Safe" while driving to get a gallon of milk. My bike needs a safe place to ride as well. I'll even get a vanity plate: "5 MPG" And really, who cares? It's my right as an American to not only burn as much gasoline as I wish with no thought to where it comes from or where my gas money goes, but I'm also entitled as an American to purchase fuel at less than $2 per gallon. (That's the 28th Amendment to the Constitution, isn't it?) Now hurry up and get your son to enlist, someone has to fight to protect those rights.
Thanks for showing me The Way.
|ROCK ON, Nova!||nm|
Oct 10, 2001 5:02 AM
Oct 9, 2001 1:57 PM
|You know, the fact that you brought up our relative net worths as even being relavent to the discussion says a lot about you. But I'll put mine up to yours anytime.
I'm really looking forward to positive change in this country, which is why I'm so adamant about these topics. Positive change equates to less wastefulness and conspcuous consumption. (which appears to be anathama to your world view)
Oct 9, 2001 10:10 AM
|What do you want us to do? Go back to the frontier days and have no electricity? I'm betting some of those BMW sport utes give off less emission than older cars that get better mileage because they don't require all those emission controls new cars have. Drive what you want, but I think SUVs are getting demonized for no reason. What about pickups? Minivans? Basically the same thing. Better sell your lawn mower too as they pollute way more than cars. Where does it end? Easy to point fingers when all you have to target is SUV drivers. Much harder to fins a solution...and it isn't as simple as getting rid of SUVs.|
Oct 9, 2001 12:47 PM
|I read in Forbes recently that $78B is wasted annually in traffic jams. That cost is an aggregate of fuel wasted in
stop and go traffic, engine idling, and lost wages and productivity. This doesn't take into account the loss of quality of life of those stuck in traffic or the suburban and urban environments which cater to so many cars.
If we spent $78 billion per year on alternative fuels research or improving public transportation, we wouldn't be subsidizing the middle east by purchasing its _only_ significant export, crude oil.
While I do like cars and understand their appeal, I don't delude myself into thinking that life needs to revolve around them in order to be happy. (see my previous post where I admit that I'm from Detroit) The internal combustion engine is a bad thing in the long run. I find it astonishing to think that my views are perceived as radical and unworkable on a *cycling* forum of all places.
Oct 9, 2001 9:20 AM
|You just gladly suck in everything ABC tells you to feel, don't you? If you want to drive a yugo that's fine with me. But don't come down on someone because they want to drive a V8 4wd. You don't know and should not care about the reasons they choose to drive what they drive. I am sure you have some sort of utopian society in mind, where everyone who wants to be a productive person puts their hard earned money into a big pot controlled by the person or YOUR choice and give it to the causes of YOUR choice. But that sounds very dangerous to me. I'll drive what I want to. Also most Japanese cars still rely on 80's technology and are not as good a American cars anymore. If you can't get 250,000 miles out of an American 4X4 pick up now days, you aren't taking care of it at all. Everyone should know by now that SUV's don't handle like sports car and should be driven with that in mind. But SUV's handle as well a the larger luxury cars in skid pad test. But even if you are in a wreck in a SUV, rollover or head-on; you are much more likely to survive or even be unhurt than any other type vehicle. I know, I work on a rescue team. Cars don't do well in big wrecks. People in trucks and SUV's usually walk over and sign a release form. As far a fuel usage goes, who cares. If you can afford the gas use as much as you want. No one has even proven that global warming exist. In fact there are as many studies that say the opposite. I think the earth has been warming ever since the last ice age. Just as it was before the evil internal combustion engine.
Get you own life before you start running mine.
|everything you've said||nova|
Oct 9, 2001 3:47 PM
|is an apology for this:
"As far a fuel usage goes, who cares. If you can afford the gas use as much as you want."
This position is contrary to American security going forward. I am a capitalist, and I beleive we are and should continue to be free to pursue our fortunes. I don't want to control any other American's life or destiny, but it is time for people like you to re-evaluate your frivolous consumption of oil. Instead, you apologize (make excuses) for being a pig with no regard for what oil REALLY costs us.
I'll admit that every time this SUV topic comes up here, I jump in and make waves. Now I don't care if I'm using this forum as a soap box. You need to think long and hard about this country's (my country's) future and the impact your lifestyle has on that future. People who burn excessive quantities of fuel and then make excuses for it are parasites on my country's future.
It helps people like you to think that I am some new-age communist groupie tree-hugger. I say: drill for oil in Alaska, build more nuclear power plants, and INVEST IN ALTERNATIVE FUEL SOURCES for personal transportation. And in the meantime, STOP PUTTING MONEY IN THE HANDS OF ENEMIES OF THE STATE BY PURCHASING GASOLINE. Suck it up, you'll get over it, and the country will be a better place because of it.
|something to agree upon||Dog|
Oct 10, 2001 8:01 AM
|"I say: drill for oil in Alaska, build more nuclear power plants, and INVEST IN ALTERNATIVE FUEL SOURCES for personal transportation."
This, I agree with 100%. One thing I'd really like to see is high speed rail - bullet trains. California is ripe for them. Would be sort of hard to hijack one and run it into a building, too.
|something to agree upon||MJ|
Oct 10, 2001 8:26 AM
|there's nothing like the good old fashioned fun of destroying a pristine wilderness for the fuel consumption equivalentto a few years worth of use - it makes alot of sense - particularly when energy companies have so thorouhgly demonstrated their commtiment to minimising their impact on the environment over the years - after all look at Bush's good work in Texas when he was governor - no he's not sucking on the corporate lollipop at all is he? no he's asking for more |
and as for nuclear power - haven't you ever seen the Simpsons? things are always going wrong - they could build it next to your home (they're really pretty all those interesting lights and what not)
trains rock, cars suck
|YOU GOTTA BE KIDDIN 30MPG?||Another Courier|
Oct 9, 2001 8:25 AM
|Try carring around 5 people in any car or truck that gets 30MPG. Maybe upper 20s, but that's pushing it. Drive what you need. If you need a bigger car then get it. If all you need is to get yourself back and forth to work then get one of those tiny hybrid cars that seats 2 comfortably.|
|Tiny, Hybrid and comfortable...||Kristin|
Oct 9, 2001 8:42 AM
|...should not be used in the same sentence. There is no such thing! I have a habit of buying 22MPG, V6 automobiles, because I like the wider bucket seats, center arm rest and extra headroom. (Though I often use the excuse that because they're wider the bike will fit inside.) Does my bike count as a passenger?
I recently scoped the Honda Civic in a valiant attempt at prudent consumerism. But I just can't bring myself to it. American cars may guzzle gasoline and fall apart at 84,000 miles...but the ones in my price range are nice inside too! Sigh...I'm just a slave to comfort. Sadly, I believe that too much comfort is the primary disease that infects American driving culture. Hypocrosy in the extreme.
|Just once I would love to see NASCAR drivers racing bicycles||MB1|
Oct 9, 2001 10:31 AM
|around those big ovals with playing cards in the spokes. And a zillion drunk fans watching in person and on TV. Phil could provide commentary.
On the other hand one of the important ideals of America is freedom. The freedom to choose how to spend you own hard earned (or not) money. I may not like how you spend it but I will support to death your right to do so. It is your choice.
Now, please extend the same courtesy to us.
|The only patriotic car is the one...||Pave|
Oct 9, 2001 10:52 AM
|I don't really want to argue about it, because I don't necessarily disagree re: NASCAR and wasting fuel, but have you ever seen a professional bike race in Europe? Now there's some fuel consumption...|
|Here's a few questions for you folks||Lazy|
Oct 10, 2001 9:26 AM
|What is your position on other petroleum based products such as plastics, nylon, etc?
Will cutting petroleum really solve the problem? What effect would it have on the economy (considering Wall St., unemployment, current products becoming obsolete etc...)?
How would a dramatic reduction in petroleum consumption effect the world economy? What would be the backlash of the OPEC countries becoming economically unstable?
What percentage of imported crude oil is actually made into gasoline? What percentage of gasoline is used by personal vehicles?
Which is a bigger waste of fuel: a NASCAR race or the TdF? As someone mentioned earlier there are at least as many cars in a bike race as there are in a car race. What about the helicopters? Also, consider all the spectators getting there.
Any petroleum engineers economists around here?
|Is there anything wrong with my opinion?-YES!||Starliner|
Nov 22, 2001 7:13 PM
|Absolute statements such as "any american-made car is ugly" or "nuke all arabs" or "black people can't swim" are ignorant. They attempt to create a false truth, which is potentially very dangerous if and when anybody buys into them. The real truth is, beauty and ugliness are concepts that have no nationalistic boundaries, which you have attempted to distort.
You made the statement; I called you on it. If you want to defend it, then you'll have to explain why an american-made Toyota, Nissan, Mitsubishi, BMW, or Mercedes is uglier than a mexican-made or canadian-made Dodge or Ford.
|Hey I once drove a Karmann Ghia!||Tig|
Oct 9, 2001 7:14 AM
|It was my Dad's that he bought from my grandfather. It was a red '69 that we had in the late 70's and I drove it to school and around town. Sure, it was ugly, but a fun car to drive. It shared a bunch of parts and frame with the VW Bug.
One day when the throttle cable broke at the pedal while driving to the beach to surf. I took the arm off some cheap wire sunglasses and threaded the cable through the screw hole and wrapped it to the pedal arm. It worked so well that I could drive at 85 MPH after the fix!
But we digress…
|MERCURY MOUNTAINEERS - during OLN coverage!!||dupe|
Oct 8, 2001 7:10 PM
|MERCURY MOUNTAINEERS - during OLN coverage!!||Real Man|
Oct 9, 2001 8:42 AM
|What's wrong with the Mountaineer?|
|should only be driven with a moustache !!!||dupe|
Oct 9, 2001 10:51 AM
|should only be driven with a moustache !!!||dupe|
Oct 9, 2001 10:56 AM
Oct 10, 2001 3:23 AM
|I live in the UK. A big car here is 2.3 litres. Average is probably 1.6-1.8. We have hills, families of 5, posessions, and fuel at an astounding price. Most SUVs come in at about 2.5, and many are diesel. We seem to get by....|
|Muncher you forget||MJ|
Oct 10, 2001 3:35 AM
|that there is no 'world' outside of America to most Americans - what percentage of the world's population uses how much percentage of the world's energy? Kyoto... the list is long and expansive |
having your head in the sand is a perennial problem - and it shows that you're just an ass
|I came back to this thread||nova|
Oct 10, 2001 11:26 AM
|To see if there were any additions (I wasn't going to continue the argument, honest) and yours by far is the BEST!
Doug's remarks about high speed trains were refreshing as well.
I've only been to the UK once; London for five days. After being in France for over a week, London felt more like home. My cousin and her husband live in France, and they have little Ford automobile (the Ka'?) Two grown men could pick that thing up and throw it ten feet, that is how small it is. It certainly isn't the smallest vehicle on the roads there. And you know what? they do just fine too.
|By the by...||muncher|
Oct 11, 2001 12:36 AM
|Just to amusme (mebbe?) you. Ford, makers of the Ka, were, at the time it came out, badging all their "sportier" versions "Si", as in sports injection.
Regrettably, the Ka Si never materialised - it being (phonetically) the Zulu word for toilet....
|I came back to this thread||MJ|
Oct 11, 2001 1:14 AM
|see - it's good not to be exclusively self-referential when arguing a point|| |