No SUVs...it is a start

[Rouser]

People that like SUV's: Drive them.
People that don't like SUV's: Don't drive them.

Read all the posts to this (obvious) sensitive thread, and it all boils down to ... freedom.

Americans buy/own/drive what they want in spite of what any globalists/environmentalists/Naderites/P.C. Police try to force upon them; since "they" are not the ones making the payments, it's nobody's business but our own.

For our 25th anniversary I bought the wife a '01 Caravan after raising the kiddles in an '89 Caravan Turbo. I figured she didn't need a big ol' minivan anymore, so after looking at a PT Cruiser, an Explorer, a 318i, and an Accord, she kept leaning back to another Caravan. "I'm accustomed to it's face, I like the ride and the view, and you said whatever I wanted, right?" A silver Sport V6 with all the bells & whistles.

Folks are gettin' sick & tired of being put through a guilt trip whenever the big, bad S-U-V is mentioned, to the point that they're STILL big sellers. Better to let the fad whither away than to encourage it.

[red-beard]

Gimme Fuel - Gimme Fire
Gimmie that which I desire

Drive what ya want...we all do.

James



"On I burn - Fuel is pumping Engines -
Burning hard, loose and clean

And I burn - churning my direction -
Quench my thirst - with - Gas-o-line....."

[Kenny Powell]

" It's just knowing that your door is always open......and your path is free to walk" I forget who wrote that song......but very true! Freedom blessed Freedom

[mike95125]

SUV ownership is an extention of Darwinism. I let my girlfriend drive mine now because she wrecked her old Kia. She will probably survive the next collision. Drive the bigger car, live to hit many more smaller ones (Totaly wrapped in sarcasm).
The major long term problem with the oversized SUV is that they will make larger "artifacts", or junk piles when they are expended.

[sean_V8_914]

Yes James, I AM ashamed of my filth spewing 3/4 ton GMC. I only use it when I need to haul something. Perhaps I should post a picture of my shame

[sharper]

Styles of vehicles are like anything else - the trends come and go. Has anyone noticed over the last few years that sports cars have faded away while the SUV trend grew? The cycle will change again over time.

What I don't understand is while everyone complains about SUVs they do not have any complaints on the trucks they are built on. The trucks are as big and get the same gas mileage, the only difference is the back is open. My truck is actually a foot longer than the SUV that is built off of it.

Personally I drive an extended cab F-150 with the largest V-8 Ford offers. Mostly it is driven to and from the office so I guess any car would do but I do like the roominess and comfort that I would not have in a smaller car. I do occasionally tow a boat or car which was one of the main reasons for buying it. Why should I be expected to own, maintain, and insure a separate car for commuting?

[sharper]

By the way, if I caught anyone putting a sticker on my car there would be hell to pay. Cars today are not cheap and many of us work real hard to pay for them. It may not be much of a crime but I would ensure that any inconveince or fine that could be imposed against the person would be enforced.

[norustscott]

Sharper..." I do occasionally tow a boat or car" ... the MAIN reason?
Not trying to bust chops or take the SUV/Truck away. just trying to make small changes in the way we think. I doubt that is your real reason for the xtra large vehicle. It is more likly because you like the size, comfort and performance... why do we kid our selves? I do the same thing.

[LarryP]

It is sort of interesting that the thread meandered into the merits (vice?) of a 914 vs. the merits (vice?) of an SUV. That is really off-point folks, and using it as basis for saying that if you drive a dirty (which it plainly is, it is at best 1970s technology) 914 you have no footing to argue is disingenuous. The comparison is not a Suburban vs. a 914, it is not even an Explorer (the Suburban is just a straw man since it is so over-the-top) vs. a 914. The comparison is properly an Explorer vs. a Taurus wagon. And there is no comparison there. Aside from an extraordinarily miniscule portion of society, there is no place, need or defense for driving, owning or considering to drive an Explorer.

And that assessment is based on waste in production as well as fuel consumption. Not so much on pollution though, although it is (finally) starting to be recognized after so many years that the previously-considered "green" CO2 is anything but; and the SUV loses badly there too. If you want to fold 914s into a comparison, then we should be looking at Miatas (or MR2s and Minis, etc.) vs. 914s. There we likely lose on waste in production (since we have nearly all re-produced ours at home) and in pollutiopn as well. We do, however have the simple fact to roll into the equation that our 914s are a hobby, which is not likely of a new Miata.

[Will98D]

In an earlier thread I not only pointed out that the 914 was not clean and guessed at a comparison to a Suburban, but I also noted that the proper comparison was to 'an Accord or Malibu'. One might guess your desire is to limit others in their freedom of choice, brought to light in your rather bombastic statement: "And there is no comparison there. Aside from an extraordinarily miniscule portion of society, there is no place, need or defense for driving, owning or considering to drive an Explorer." Or, if you take it far enough, just about every vehicle you list as yours, so where do we draw the line?

[Serge914]

I find strange that nobody pointed out that most of the planet think that your country just went to war to get more oil. Why do they think that ? Probably because they know that you have so many SUV and Pick-Up trucks.

OK you can start firing at me .

[LarryP]

My Saab is the car I drive. It is a wagon and is the virtual equivalent of a Taurus. The bikes and the 914 are toys and get virtually no mileage. I owned two SUVs and would never own another. That is my choice; I did not say that what people drive should be mandated. I suppose that would be what YOU read into what I wrote.

But facts are annoying things, and the fact is that for the vast majority of people, an SUV is indefensible for transportation. The only reason people are allowed to make that choice is because, as was pointed out before me, the government permits (read "encourages") is by omitting them from CAFE ratings, so there is great incentive for auto manufacturers to shove them down our throats. And if you think people would "choose" to drive them absent that, you are kidding yourself.

Auto manufacturers respond to what is necessary and no more. Do you think we would have airbags based on consumer demand? Or environmental regulations? I am sure Mercedes would be making 400 hp vehiclles but do you really think they would be clean if not forced to be? Chevy and Ford et al could certainly make efficient SUVs (a different question than making them efficiently, but one thing at a time) but absolutely will not do so until forced. Educating consumers has never been effective against advertising given the disparities in the playing field.

[douglas robbins]

Originally posted by Rouser
Read all the posts to this (obvious) sensitive thread, and it all boils down to ... freedom. Americans buy/own/drive what they want in spite of what any globalists/environmentalists/Naderites/P.C. Police try to force upon them; since "they" are not the ones making the payments, it's nobody's business but our own.

To me, Rouser's opinion highlight's the great ideological divide between the pro- and anti-SUV camps. Pro-SUVers believe what they do is "nobody's business but [thier] own."

The pro-SUVers believe the pollution they make is "nobody's business but [their] own." Even though I have to breathe it.

The pro-SUVers believe the risk their large vehicles present to smaller, vehicles is "nobody's business but [their] own." Even though I drive a little car and would get completely destroyed if an SUV ran into me.

And the pro-SUVers believe that consuming as much gasoline as they can buy is "nobody's business but [their] own." Eventhough there is a strong relationship between our gasoline consumption and the sort of wars that my country has to fight, either with my money, my blood and/or the blood of my family.

If you drive an SUV, and by doing so, present risks to me, then it is my business.

Douglas

[Serge914]

20 years ago there was a big argument between the pro smokers ant the anti smokers. Some people are still smoking and it is still their own business but we don't have to sit beside them in the restaurants anymore.

[sammyg2]

Dpug,
I own an SUV. It is none of your business. I buy gas. I burn it in my SUV. Again, it is none of your business.
It burns cleaner and puts less polution into the air than your 914. It probably gets almost as good gas mileage as your 914.

The war was not fought for oil. Get over it. We were buying Iraqi oil before the war. Look it up.
Those who feel it was are simply not very well informed IMO.

Cars crash all the time. Some of them are SUVs, most are not,. If you feel that your life is in danger because other vehicles are bigger than yours, buy a big rig.

[Rouser]

Thank you, sammyg2!

It gets me when those who choose to drive "a little car" feel they have to vilify those of us who choose to drive something bigger.

The war had NOTHING to do with oil; ask the FREED Iraqis and their FREED imprisoned children. But guess what? Those same grateful Iraqis are going to want to sell that oil for FOOD and $$$. Everybody else; get in line.

Since the U.K. and the U.S. ALONE took the risk, the casualties, and slings & arrows from the rest of the so-called "civilized world" (KMA U.N.!), than the rest of the civilized world (and their "opinions") can ... just ... BITE ME!

That goes for the anti-smoking crowd, the anti-4-wheeling crowd, the anti-exotic-car crowd, and the next anti-soapbox-to-jump-on crowd.

Sheesh ...



No ... excuse me ... make that

[sammyg2]

My last post was much more harsh than I intended, but it struck a nerve.
I put 100 miles on my 911 today, it's basically as small as a 914. I watch out for larger vehicles and try to make sure i have an out just in case. I used to drive a motorcycle and learned that technique out of necessity. I relize that I have to share the road with bigger vehicles and deal with it.
My daily driver is a full sized pick up, but I'm still dwarfed by big rigs, I watch out for them just in case and just pay attention.
My wife drives a 2003 Honda pilot, it's not as big as an excursion or expedition but it is as big as a ford exploder. it has a V6 with 240 HP and gets around 18 mpg in the city and is classified as a low emission vehicle. It comes in real handy and at least 7 of the seats are filled often. it also comes in handy hauling the waverunners to the river. For our needs it makes sense. We had a mini-van before but it didn't do as good of a job hauling and handled like a sloppy pig.

My pick up is bigger than the pilot, has a V8, and gets lower mileage but I don't remember seeing any posts saying I shouldn't drive a truck. I don't get it.

[Will98D]

Originally posted by LarryP
The only reason people are allowed to make that choice is because, as was pointed out before me, the government permits (read "encourages") is by omitting them from CAFE ratings, so there is great incentive for auto manufacturers to shove them down our throats. And if you think people would "choose" to drive them absent that, you are kidding yourself.

Now that was laughable, and who knows, maybe you're trying to elicit a response; I know I try to have fun with these debates from time to time. People are "allowed to make that choice" because we are free to make a lot of choices here. That doesn't mean I'm in favor of an 'anything goes', rape and pillage mindset, but lets look at the vilified soccer mom in her ONE Envoy, 4Runner or Expedition: on the production side, how much more wasteful is it really than someone with two cars and two motorcycles?

Facts are annoying things, if only for the fact that when you (or I) point one finger at someone else, there are three pointing back at yourself. {go ahead, make the classic INDEX finger pointing gesture and you'll see}

And boo hoo, here come the Big, Bad Auto Manufacturers... no manufacturer is shoving SUVs down anyone's throats. Heck, up until a few years ago they didn't even need incentives. Here's a fact: most SUVs are not omitted from CAFE, but the Light Truck standard for them is more lenient than cars (about 21mpg vs. 27 IIRC), so you would be right to tell your gov't rep to raise it if that's the way you think things should go. However, while everyone was snapping up these trucks, there was no shortage of smaller, more efficient vehicles, and there was no conpiracy to keep them out of the public's hands, people just didn't want them. If you think the 0% and other incentives are a ploy to sell more SUVs, they're not... they're intended to keep the plants operating, because they'll really start to bleed red ink if they stop. And it won't take long for the spillover to other sectors of the economy.

BTW, I work in the auto components industry, so I know what we do to bring products to market to meet the buyer's needs and desires. Therefore I take issue with "Auto manufacturers respond to what is necessary and no more". To be sure, regulations have a valued place, they help and protect the consumer, and they also make sure no manufacturer can fake their way to compliance and get an undue economic advantage. And you are right about airbags: sounds like you knew that GM actually came out with airbags on the 1974 Toronado, well before they were mandated. With demand so low, it was reported that they lost so much on each car equipped with them that if they could have gotten the cost for the airbags it would have been a smaller loss just to give away the car. So, without the regs, probably no airbags. But to imply that that they will do the absolute minimum of benefit and loop-hole their way to hood-winking you into buying something you don't want or need discredits a lot of people who work pretty hard at making a good product, and further suggests that you find the consumer too stupid to know any different.

[LarryP]

Well, so much for a conversation anyway. I suppose it was hopeless ab initio. Douglas, whatever your disposition is, you summarized it correctly, I think.

And I would have agreed, by the way, that the "war" (if you can call it that) had nothing to do with oil until we took a permanent military base in the area, to compensate for the one we are losing in Saudi Arabia. If you believe it was to "free" Iraquis, we might as well argue about Who lyrics. I prefer Baba O'Reilly.

[douglas robbins]

To Sammyg2 and Rouser:

Instead of getting into a factual discsussion about whether the war had anything to do with our energy policy or whether a 914 is a greater polluter than a new SUV (these are factual issues that we will not ever agree about), I'd just like to make a more general point: I don't really care that much what you do with your own property, but some things, like our shared air and our shared roads, are not just your own property.

There are some people who believe that their actions have little or no effect on the rest of us, and for that reason these people think they can, basically, do whatever they want with impunity. But it turns out that because of the way in which we consume resources and the way in which we live very close to one another, everyone's actions has an effect on everyone else. I breathe the same air as you. I drive the same roads as you. In other words, we share the air, and we share the roads. And if you contribute in some way to making my air worse and my roads more dangerous then, yes, the things you do affect me, and thus the things you do are my business.

If you want me out of your business then don't do things with the resourses we share that messes up my business. I think this is the more general ideological point that the pro-and anti-
SUV camps disagree on. The pro-SUVers think the world is theirs to drive over; the anti-SUVers believe the world is to be shared.

Douglas