Gas prices falling, I can keep my SUV! [Archive] (2024)

MX-5 Miata Forum > Shifting Gears > Car Talk > Gas prices falling, I can keep my SUV!

PDA

View Full Version : Gas prices falling, I can keep my SUV!

toddwcarpenter

11th December 2004, 02:55

WAAAAHOOOO!!! I just paid 1.76 for gas today. The price is falling every time I fill up. That means I can keep my SUV and snowmobiles! All you SUV haters can go hug a tree for all I care, I got me a full tank of unleaded and I'm fixin to burn it up! :p

chuckerants

11th December 2004, 03:09

Damn, and I JUST got rid of my F150. :)

96 M-editon

11th December 2004, 03:20

Time to park the Miata (that evil gas miser) and drive around aimlessly in my SUV :cool:

Ford Prefect

11th December 2004, 04:39

:D :D :D

Enjoy! :cool:

92yella

11th December 2004, 07:34

Can you belive that you are really happy about gas that cost $1.75 a gallon? who would of thought we would say that is cheap?

ps, I am only 25 So I am used to <$1.00/gal gas, Anyone that bought gas before the late 70's can remeber how cheap it was.

Baston-Rob

11th December 2004, 07:38

All the gas I saved driving the 25MPG Miata all summer I can burn up in my 12MPG Crown Vic now.

Hey....that is about 18MPG average, not bad. ;)

sajack

11th December 2004, 07:43

I pay no attention to gas prices.

MX-5.0

11th December 2004, 07:50

I can just drive my Explorer around in 2nd gear now!

Crashton

11th December 2004, 08:03

While I try not to pay too much attention to gas prices I have noticed the trend is up. Everyone has a point where they say enough. You & I haven't reached it yet. Enjoy your suv & snow machines. :D

K.Adams

11th December 2004, 09:23

Yeah, I mean how high do you guys think gas needs to be before everyone starts to really freak out? My guess would be around 4 bucks a gallon before everyone started to ride the bus or something-What do you think?
k.a.

jpre

11th December 2004, 09:43

Originally posted by Ford Prefect:
:D :D :D

Enjoy! :cool: while it lasts...
-John

Stealth97

11th December 2004, 09:44

I ride my bike as much as possible, and it gets 40 mpg. If gas wnt up to $4 a gallon, I'd prolly ride it exclusiveley.

MilesA

11th December 2004, 09:48

Originally posted by 92yella:
Can you belive that you are really happy about gas that cost $1.75 a gallon? who would of thought we would say that is cheap?

ps, I am only 25 So I am used to <$1.00/gal gas, Anyone that bought gas before the late 70's can remeber how cheap it was. $1.75 is cheap. It's just that the value of our dollar has been driven into the ground, so maybe people don't realize quite how cheap that is.

What cost $1.75 in 2004 would cost about $0.44 in 1974. Adjusting for inflation.

Consider also currency devaluation. One Euro was worth $0.80 when they first started using them. Now one Euro is worth $1.32! Our currency is being devalued to an unbelievable extent.

TheNev

11th December 2004, 09:56

Regarding gas prices, I don't usually pay attention to gas prices either, because hey, we need it right? Here in Springfield Missouri, gas was down to 1.62. So I put $10 in. I remember when I was younger, my dad was angry because gas was up to $.74 a gal. :eek: . I also remember when I headed off to my first semester at the University of Missouri-Rolla, I filled up my 15mpg 89 Jimmy @ $1.23 a gallon, and I remember complaining about that too. Times, they are a-changin.

toddwcarpenter

11th December 2004, 12:40

My 180 hp 2-stroke sled will suck through a full tank of gas (14 gallons) in the better part of an afternoon. The two hour drive to and from our riding area also contributes to the gas bill. For everyday driving, I could care less about the price, but when the price is high and your running super premium just for entertainment, the price becomes a factor. Same goes for Sunday drives in the Miata.

[ 11. December 2004, 11:52: Message edited by: toddwcarpenter ]

tom10167

11th December 2004, 12:48

Originally posted by sajack:
I pay no attention to gas prices. Second that. I look, and think. "Oh, it's this price."

What's the difference between filling up for $21 and filling up for $24?

dkap

11th December 2004, 13:13

I am only 25 So I am used to <$1.00/gal gas, Anyone that bought gas before the late 70's can remeber how cheap it was.You lost me on the math... 25 and you're referring to remembering stuff going back to 24-25 years ago? I've got you by 5 years, and gas prices here were less than $1.00/gal for like 1 day when I started driving at age 15 or 16.

Dan

Rich Wilkman

11th December 2004, 13:41

If a drop of ~$.25 cents in gas is the difference between keeping and not keeping your SUV, you can't afford your SUV.

-Rich

IFGD

11th December 2004, 13:51

Originally posted by Rich Wilkman:
If a drop of ~$.25 cents in gas is the difference between keeping and not keeping your SUV, you can't afford your SUV.

-Rich Amen.

-IFGD

MX-5.0

11th December 2004, 14:28

Originally posted by Rich Wilkman:
If a drop of ~$.25 cents in gas is the difference between keeping and not keeping your SUV, you can't afford your SUV.I have got to agree with that. Or you are driving waaaay too much!

MX5/XJ6

11th December 2004, 15:25

Originally posted by 92yella:
Can you belive that you are really happy about gas that cost $1.75 a gallon? who would of thought we would say that is cheap?

I started driving in the mid-80s, and that's how many pennies per gallon I remember gas costing, too :(

Billy

11th December 2004, 15:32

Originally posted by toddwcarpenter:
WAAAAHOOOO!!! .... The price is falling every time I fill up........Don't get used to it, or think it's a long term trend.

jambo101

11th December 2004, 15:42

Originally posted by Billy:
Originally posted by toddwcarpenter:
WAAAAHOOOO!!! .... The price is falling every time I fill up........Don't get used to it, or think it's a long term trend. i'll agree with that billy,the way we are using up this non renewable resource its all gonna be gone one day and whatever replaces gasoline aint gonna be cheap.

Decapotable

11th December 2004, 16:14

Just wait until OPEC switches the currency-of-sale from our plunging dollar to stable euros. It's going to happen, sooner or later. THEN you'll see the price of gas shoot up quite a bit around here. I personally can't wait. I'm willing to sacrifice a bit for the betterment of all.

chpsk8

11th December 2004, 17:54

So oil even THINKS about going up and gas prices rise. Oil goes down for a week, and it takes over a week for gas to go down a LITTLE BIT! Also, OPEC decides they better take a look at the amount of oil they are pumping and think about reducing it. Of course they are happy that there are people out there that don't even think about the price of gas. Thats good for them. I would hope that people would complain at least a little bit, the squeeky wheel gets the grease!

I read a great article in C&D a while back that brought up one of the main issues gas costs so much. Every community has their own erquirements for gas. So what happens is that the refinery must make boutique gasses for all the different areas. The south side of Atlanta has a different blend than the north side. The recomendation was to standardize the gas. The refinery wouldl be much more efficient if it could do that. Think about it, if they could just use the lowest common denomonator and make the same gas for me that they make for California, or New York. Pretty simple theory, I'm sure there's a lot of politics behind it, especially now with an oil man in charge fo the country. :(

ooby_dooby

11th December 2004, 18:08

I hate to burst your bubble but OPEC just decided to cut production 1mln. bbl. a day! You better keep that for sale sign! I think every American should run out of fuel in the middle of nowhere some dark winter night just to learn to appreciate how wonderful a gasoline/diesel powered car is. Maybe that would give people a taste of what the world would be like if they couldn't get fuel at any price. That world is coming and our grand children will be living in it thanks to our wasteful lifestyle of today. Many people today weren't around during the 73-74 oil embargo, let me tell ya, it sucked! Nixon lowered the national speed limit to 50 MPH (it was truckers doing rolling low speed convoys, blocking roads and striking that got the limit raised to 55 MPH ;) ) and police depts. saw their revenue go through the roof giving out speeding tickets. A gas station owner was arrested in NYC for charging $1.00 for a gallon of gas (regular was around 50 cents at the time). On the Jersey TPK you could only buy $1.00 worth of gas when you showed your toll ticket and people were taking the next exit so they could get a fresh toll ticket to buy another bucks worth of gas. How fuel efficient is that? :rolleyes: It was a sellers mkt for anybody with a VW Beetle but few people were selling. I tried to buy a used bug and the guy told me it sold sight unseen 10 minutes after the newspaper ad hit the streets. If Bush decides to rattle a sabre to Iran over nukes, they could turn off the spigot and it will be 1973 all over again! Sorry about the rant but some people need to wake up and smell the coffee.

Baston-Rob

11th December 2004, 18:42

Spring 1972, driving around in my just bought almost new 1970 $1500 Olds 442. Gas at $0.39 a gallon, $5.00 got you over 12 gallons.

Spring 1974, driving around in my brand NEW 1973 $2000 Civic. I pulled into my favorite gas station, gas at $0.50 ! I drove off, swore I'd never pay that much for gas.

Spring 1976, driving around in my brand NEW 1976 $3900 Accord. Still swearing...wishing gas was only $0.50 a gallon.

Today we're saying woohoo, gas down to $1.76 ;)

toddwcarpenter

11th December 2004, 19:01

Originally posted by IFGD:
Originally posted by Rich Wilkman:
If a drop of ~$.25 cents in gas is the difference between keeping and not keeping your SUV, you can't afford your SUV.

-Rich Amen.

-IFGD Ha ha. It's pretty much a tounge and cheek post. Yet, when gas goes up 25 cents, there's no shortage of SUV haters who think it will mark the end for us gas guzzlers.

toddwcarpenter

11th December 2004, 19:03

Originally posted by Baston-Rob:
Spring 1976, driving around in my brand NEW 1976 $3900 Accord. Still swearing...wishing gas was only $0.50 a gallon.
Winter of 2004, people working the greater job at Walmart, part time, are making more per month than you were in 1976 ;)

TonyC

11th December 2004, 19:09

Originally posted by ooby_dooby:
hate to burst your bubble but OPEC just decided to cut production 1mln. bbl. a day! what he said ;)

link here: http://www.cnn.com/2004/BUSINESS/12/10/opec.kuwait/

1 barrel of crude = 42 gal of gas. you do the math...

tom10167

11th December 2004, 19:26

The New York Times says that won't affect us(America) until February. So, if you have any family you were planning on visiting, do it soon. ;)

Rich Wilkman

11th December 2004, 20:46

Oh, I knew it was tongue in cheek but there are many SUV owners for whom it's almost a true statement. They're also probably underwater on their loan for it, too, so they're doubly stuck.

-Rich

11th December 2004, 20:50

I don't know about cheap, I filled up my deisel today, $2.18 didn't make my day.

Larry

mx5rush

11th December 2004, 21:10

Saw two places with regular for $1.59 yesterday. One in Tomball and another in Spring Tx. I might even punch it in the Suburban a time or two in celebration! :p

Nah. Not really... and I don't expect it to stay down at all. Just as long as it stays a little lower for a x-mas trip up to Missouri of about 750 miles one way and I'll be plenty happy.

LWW

11th December 2004, 21:23

i'll agree with that billy,the way we are using up this non renewable resource its all gonna be gone one dayI know. The experts have been able to demonstrate that the world supply will be dried up within the next 10 years....every year for the lat 30 years.

PEACE

rednumbersix

11th December 2004, 21:26

2.24 and holding... I think regular is 2.05... once they raise gas prices here, they never go back down, regardless of the price of gas... :(

rx7gslse

11th December 2004, 22:00

Originally posted by TheNev:
I also remember when I headed off to my first semester at the University of Missouri-Rolla, I filled up my 15mpg 89 Jimmy @ $1.23 a gallon, and I remember complaining about that too. Heh... I went to Rolla too... I rember seeing the gas station across the cafeteria at $0.89/gal

and I'm not that old!

Needless to say... My suburban rarely gets driven anymore. about 2000 miles in 6 months, most to the lake ;) I finally filled the tank again this week 42 gallons @$1.69 = ouchy.

Rich Wilkman

12th December 2004, 01:04

As soon as you come up with a statistical constant that can factor into normal math models to account for technology, you get back to us. 'Till then, well, you're no better than the experts. A great deal of what we're (re)drilling and pumping today was considered "impossible" 30 years ago. Just like a computer the size of the one on your wrist if you have a digital watch.

-Rich

Originally posted by LWW:
i'll agree with that billy,the way we are using up this non renewable resource its all gonna be gone one dayI know. The experts have been able to demonstrate that the world supply will be dried up within the next 10 years....every year for the lat 30 years.

PEACE

bobmunob

12th December 2004, 03:01

Better to be prepared to run out of gas than to be caught with your pants down. No matter how long it will take.

toddwcarpenter

12th December 2004, 03:13

Everyone here that's talking about saving gas, sounds good. The more you save, the more that's left for us gas hogs!

RodneyR

12th December 2004, 05:48

Suppose your SUV gets 17miles per gallon.
Suppose gas costs $2.20/gallon.
Suppose you drive average 15,000 miles per year (ie. you Mainland folks).
Suppose your SUV is paid off.

You'd pay $162/month in SUV gas bills.

Suppose you want a new hybrid Prius to save on fuel costs.
Suppose you borrow $18,000.00 at 6%, 5year equals $350/month for the car loan.
If the Prius happens to get 45mpg you still add $55/month in gas bills.

You'd pay $405/month Prius car loan and gas.

Suppose you trade-in/sell the SUV. So you only fiance $8,000 at 6% for 5 years for the Prius equals $212/month for the car loan.
If the Prius happens to get 45mpg you still add $55/month in gas bills.

You'd still pay $267/month Prius car loan and gas.

Conclusion: I would still keep and drive my 4Runner because it's economically viable and I need the utility.

My 4Runner has "saved the day" many times... family, friends, events because you can just haul a bunch of wider, taller, stuff like my sister's apartment, furniture, surfboards, windsurf gear, bikes, lawnmower, yard stuff, new TV, or friend's boxes, or it can bring you to the hospital when the snow wasn't plowed, or if your wife needs to breast feed baby and thankfully SUV has extremely dark tinted privacy glass, tailgate picnic party, new picnic table, garage lockers/shelves, a hit at your local Costco... Your tourists visitors now have a commanding view over the highway railings to see the blue ocean instead of staring at the jersey barriers. And, four wheel drive offroading was a different kind of fun ... a recreational attribute even my beloved Miata cannot enjoy. Same thing... It ain't nothing but a toy.

But when it blows up, it will be the last SUV we own. I'll get a station wagon hatch type passenger vehicle. True too many people own them for the wrong reasons (maybe me). They use up too much fuel. But they are very convenient to own.

Baston-Rob

12th December 2004, 07:16

QUOTE Todd - "Winter of 2004, people working the greater job at Walmart, part time, are making more per month than you were in 1976"
__________________________________________________

Yep, bought my first house in 1975. I was making around $6.00 an hour. Gas just seemed like a lot of money going up in cost so fast

That hourly rate and 10 hours a week OT, second job another 10 hours a week. My wife stayed home with the kids, some how it worked. ;)

BTW, that house (sold years ago) 25 miles from Boston in '75 cost $36K, now worth close to $400K, and thats a basic ranch. A 12 family apartment house near Boston then $65K, now worth about $3 million!!

Good thing gas didn't inflate as fast. :eek:

rudyr

12th December 2004, 10:10

Screw SUV's, now that gas prices are falling it's time to go test drive an RX-8!

Stealth97

12th December 2004, 10:22

Originally posted by rudyr:
Screw SUV's, now that gas prices are falling it's time to go test drive an RX-8! :D

ALP2

12th December 2004, 14:33

Read this book (The End of Oil by Paul Roberts)...

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0618239774/qid=1102876320/sr=8-1/ref=pd_csp_1/103-3161322-0922233?v=glance &s=books&n=507846 (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0618239774/qid=1102876320/sr=8-1/ref=pd_csp_1/103-3161322-0922233?v=glance&s=books&n=507846)

Then you might realize the stupidity of being happy at $1.75 gas prices.

Bob Boyer

12th December 2004, 15:28

Originally posted by RodneyR:
Suppose your SUV gets 17miles per gallon.
Suppose gas costs $2.20/gallon.
Suppose you drive average 15,000 miles per year (ie. you Mainland folks).
Suppose your SUV is paid off.

You'd pay $162/month in SUV gas bills.

You'd pay $405/month Prius car loan and gas.

You'd still pay $267/month Prius car loan and gas.

Conclusion: I would still keep and drive my 4Runner because it's economically viable and I need the utility. While I agree with your basic premise, I think there's one more factor you've got to consider - maintenance costs on higher mileage, paid for vehicles.

I've still got my 1995 Tahoe, it still takes me fishing and hauls stuff regularly and I'm glad I've got it, but I'm also glad it's not being fed more than about a tank of gas per month, which translates into 3600 miles of driving per year now.

Why?

Because I'd been averaging over $400 per month in maintenance costs on the vehicle for the three years previous to buying my Miata when I was posting 30,000 miles per year of use. For awhile, it helped that it was a business deduction, but even after that, it became basically untenable. At 180,000 plus miles, I've rebuilt the front suspension twice, lost track of the sets of tires ($650 per set/year), brakes, three A/C compressors and one full system overhaul, water pumps, radiator (once so far) and the list goes on.

And it's been reliable over a ten year life span...I'm still not scared to pull my Miata across country with it right now. But that reliability has come at a price and for me to ignore that price in the calculus of buying a more fuel efficient vehicle (my Miata - efficiency with style :) would not have been smart.

Using the Tahoe as a daily driver, right now my monthly numbers would be (approximately): $160(gas) + $400(maintenance) + $30(insurance - liability only), or $590 per month.

Using the Miata as a primary driver and the Tahoe as backup/fishing, my numbers are about: $80(gas) + $375 (payment) + $80 insurance + $50 (maintenance), or $585 per month.

The maintenance number will eventually go up on the Miata, but shouldn't hit the stratospheric levels required by the Tahoe to keep it on the road daily.

And it's a lot more fun to drive. That in itself is worth some payment. :D

Bob Boyer

12th December 2004, 15:31

Please insert a "close parenthesis" of your own making after the first smiley face in the above post...it'll make a bit more sense that way.

Bob

MRGTX

12th December 2004, 16:39

RodneyR, Your analysis is only useful if:

a) Like Bob Boyer said, you dont have to worry about the age of your current vehicle (and that you never have to replace it anyway)

b) You ignore any benefit from the updated technology, reliability and the warranty of the new vehicle

c)you dont give a crap about anyone else on the planet other than yourself

RodneyR

12th December 2004, 17:50

Mr.Boyer and Mr.MRGTX,

You have good points. But, we've been actually getting a little over 19 real world mpg and only put just over 3,000miles on the 4Runner since last March. So fuel costs are maybe $48.00/month (~gas $2.17/gallon at Costco, $2.27/gallon other places on oahu).

In the mainland we were actually getting around 21 real world mpg in the 4Runner. One particular trip from VaBeach to UVA to pick up my sister we got 23mpg (big 3.4L 4wd off)! I think it's because I don't have the big fat 31" tires everyone dons (they were 225 wide Firestones. Now still skinny 235 wide Michelin's)...

Some Miata's only get 22-24 real world mpg I read posted - Go figure... My sister's all wheel drive Highlander gets 22-23mpg on the highway, I proved it on a drive down to Orlando from Virginia last August.

Chevy maintenance issues? Toyota's cost less to own... I can swear up and down on Toyota reliability. There are literally no reliability maintenance costs on our '96 (We bought it used 1998 almost $6,000 below blue book value). The oil I put in it last March is still full, bright and clear.

Our third vehicle (99 Corolla) has been getting 31 to 36 real world mpg depending on how/where driven. My family isn't a gas hog. All three cars combined maybe a total of 17,000 miles total and 80% of the time using a vehicle getting over 30mpg.

It's okay to own an SUV. Depends how you use it. A Humvee on the other hand is senseless but top notch on the pimp scale.

RodneyR

12th December 2004, 17:55

I forgot to add.... the 1996 4Runner was probably the first rated Light Emissions Vehicle SUV on the market.

Bob Boyer

12th December 2004, 18:46

Rodney,

I looked pretty hard at that era of 4-Runners at the time. They actually had the cargo space I needed, but gained it at the expense of back-seat legroom. With the kids still living at home at the time, I ended up going with the Tahoe.

But back to the subject at hand - I think I may be an extreme example. For years, the truck doubled as an office. 30,000 miles per year was the average. Things wear out. Keeping them in good shape takes money.

I'm just glad I'm not on that pace anymore. Like film for my photographs, gasoline was the least of my expenses for transportation. When you're not putting 20,000 plus miles per year on a vehicle, as is now the case for both of us, transportation costs of all kinds go down pretty quickly.

To my way of thinking, that is the single most important issue this auto-centric society faces as fuel costs continue to go up.

Bob Boyer

toddwcarpenter

12th December 2004, 23:25

Closing your ears to the insanity of eviro whacko's is ignorance? Do you get your news from Michael Moore?

purewhite95

13th December 2004, 00:35

Actually, I just did a report on petroleum prices and oil consumption. According to government sources, there are approcimately 1,025 billion barrels of oil left in the entire planet's viable reserves. That is enough oil to feed the world, at the present oil consumtion rate of 2.3% every year, for a smudge over 100 more years.
However, Mr. Todd, I would try to incorporate the very Japanese ethic of avoiding wastefulness. Maybe you could let it seep out onto you next time you drive that fuel-efficient, much more fun than an SUV, Japanese car of yours. Ya know, the Miata?

toddwcarpenter

13th December 2004, 00:50

Originally posted by purewhite95:
Maybe you could let it seep out onto you next time you drive that fuel-efficient, much more fun than an SUV, Japanese car of yours. Ya know, the Miata? My SUV gets better gas milage than my Miata :eek: and, every drop of fuel used in my Miata is consumed solely for entertainment, driving from Point A to Point A. If I don't burn that gas, it's just going to end up in the tank of some shmoe in China. No thanks.

MRGTX

13th December 2004, 01:26

Originally posted by purewhite95:
Actually, I just did a report on petroleum prices and oil consumption. According to government sources, there are approcimately 1,025 billion barrels of oil left in the entire planet's viable reserves. Yes... and government sources are never wrong *coughWMDsinIraqcough* and no one in the government has an interest in protecting the oil industry. :rolleyes: Atleast they are admitting that the amount of oil is finite. I hope your report did make note that China's consumption is exploding, and ours is on the rise too. So maybe that "30 years" is actually reasonable now.

Originally posted by toddwcarpenter:
My SUV gets better gas milage than my Miata :eek: and, every drop of fuel used in my Miata is consumed solely for entertainment, driving from Point A to Point A. If I don't burn that gas, it's just going to end up in the tank of some shmoe in China. No thanks. Yeah... don't you just hate those shmoes in China? They are so undeserving of gasoline. And this is due to the fact that they are Chinese.. right?

tom10167

13th December 2004, 02:01

Maybe his tank is leaking?? :)

Anyways, everyone calm down, this thread is headed for a closing. Everyone just calm down, and remember, we're just talking abou gas prices.

With that said, it really is too hard to make an estimate as to how much there is left. We can kind of guess how much we'll get, but then there's the theoretical amount. Whatever that means.

In short, don't bother speculating on gas abundance, scientists are usually wrong about everything the first 1,000 times. We'll know we're out when there's no more left.

toddwcarpenter

13th December 2004, 02:10

Originally posted by MRGTX:
]And this is due to the fact that they are Chinese.. right?Wrong. It's due to the fact that they will use the gas if I (we) don't. Don't kid yourself into thinking that the world gives a whit about saving fuel, unless the policy is only for Americans.

]
or you desperately need to tune your "bone stock" engine. Some people have told me that driving the car in gears higher than third will help. They have no idea how to correctly drive this car. ;)

toddwcarpenter

13th December 2004, 02:13

Originally posted by MRGTX:
If your SUV gets 28-30 mpg like just about everyone's (NA) Miata on here, then I don't think your SUV is relevant to the discussion. LOL! Not relevant? Look again, I started this discussion. :p :p :p

altiain

13th December 2004, 02:31

Originally posted by ALP2:
Read this book (The End of Oil by Paul Roberts)...

Then you might realize the stupidity of being happy at $1.75 gas prices. Or better yet, you might realize the stupidity of being scared by yet another Chicken Little. :rolleyes:

Iain

MRGTX

13th December 2004, 11:08

Originally posted by toddwcarpenter:
Originally posted by MRGTX:
If your SUV gets 28-30 mpg like just about everyone's (NA) Miata on here, then I don't think your SUV is relevant to the discussion. LOL! Not relevant? Look again, I started this discussion. :p :p :p I see. Your SUV is super fuel efficient by comparison because you cant help but thrash the Miata every time you drive it.

The fact that you started this thread- and this piece of information comes out now-- well, that's just aggressive stupidity. So if fuel prices are higher you are going to drive the car in which you get worse mileage? So you were just jerking us around?

As for China's fuel consumption being a reason to use as much as you can- that is the most pathetic self serving argument I have heard in quite a while. :rolleyes:

Bob Boyer

13th December 2004, 11:40

Heh - looks like I got more folks fired up than at that Pistons/Pacers game. Sorry to open up the can o'worms, if I'm the one who did it. :)

I'm not against anyone owning/using any vehicle. I'm glad Todd, Rodney, and myself can run either a Miata or an SUV...especially where we live. I find myself in a similar, though maybe not as extreme, situation in the Appalachian foothills and wouldn't trade either of my vehicles for anything...they each have an intended purpose.

But the businessman in me likes to see rational decisions based on all the factors involved in operating any particular vehicle...including the extremely valid emotional factors. As long as any of us knows exactly what all the costs (and resulting benefits) are, I'm pretty cool with whatever.

That being said, what I would be very interested in seeing...and this is not something that should ever be mandated by government (though unfortunately, they'd find a way to meddle in it)...is an intelligent discussion which leads to a consensus on how we can improve urban living to again attract a majority of people who don't mind living in closer proximity to each other. To me, this is a marketing question, not a policy issue: how do we create better educational systems, more cultural activities, better job opportunities, lower crime rates, cheaper mass transit options, etc. and advertise them so people who value these things would be more interested in gathering in more dense clusters than we currently do...thereby cutting down on transportation and other energy-related wastes.

This is not something that is done with disincentives, either. People who still hold different values or appreciate different amenities available from living in small towns or out in rural areas must be able to do so at no penalty. There would obviously be a tradeoff of amenities some of us would intelligently make regarding what we value most for our lives...but that's what this country is (hopefully) still about. But there should be no penalties for making the decision either way.

In short, I guess I'm saying we could start thinking a little harder before we just go out and add another ten lanes to the road from Denver to Morrison just so we can build some more subdivisions. Sometimes that may be the proper solution; but I think there may be other development opportunities that will make folks just as much money and be smarter and more efficient for all of us.

And then, we all get to continue using our Miatas for nothing more than enjoying a great ride from point A to point A, or using our Tahoes to haul whatever we need while creating less of an impact with either activity - or any activity we pursue with the help of whatever vehicle we think is best.

Diving for cover from the soapbox... :D

Regards,

Bob

toddwcarpenter

13th December 2004, 12:30

Originally posted by MRGTX:
So you were just jerking us around? Yes! :p

I started the thread to show the absurdity of all those anti-SUV threads this summer. The ones that had SUV haters spouting off about how owners like me must be feeling stupid for the vehicle we purchased and how we'll all be driving hybrid boxes soon. That was a silly argument, so is this.

Also, I feel sorry for your Miata if it's relegated to getting a boring 28 MPG. That's sad to here.

90RedinFL

13th December 2004, 12:47

Gas prices go way up, and some speculate that it must be economically painful for SUV-heads to continue to pour fuel into a guzzler at high prices ... and that's an "absurd" argument? Perhaps you think it absurd, because you have limitless gas money or just love your guzzler so much that you'll pay *anything* in order to keep it, but to working people on a budget, remarking on increased gas costs for an inefficient vehicle is not an absurdity.

Similarly, starting a thread to rejoice at falling gasoline prices - because it allows one to feed one's guzzler for less - does not seem absurd at all. I'd use other adjectives to describe that argument - like self-centered, short-sited, sociopathic, and shrill (as in, you sound like you have a chip on your shoulder b/c not everyone in the world approves of your vehicle choice)...but not absurd. Selfish, but completely logical.

And if you're skin isn't thick enough to "here" the reply, then don't start the thread. Even if gas was free, there are still plenty reasons for some of us to be anti-SUV. The SUV-hating threads are NOT going to disappear with falling gas prices. So sorry.

toddwcarpenter

13th December 2004, 12:52

Originally posted by 90RedinFL:
Gas prices go way up, and some speculate that it must be economically painful for SUV-heads to continue to pour fuel into a guzzler at high prices ... and that's an "absurd" argument? It's absurd because gas prices did not go "way up".

[ 13. December 2004, 11:57: Message edited by: toddwcarpenter ]

MRGTX

13th December 2004, 14:08

Originally posted by toddwcarpenter:
Originally posted by 90RedinFL:
Gas prices go way up, and some speculate that it must be economically painful for SUV-heads to continue to pour fuel into a guzzler at high prices ... and that's an "absurd" argument? It's absurd because gas prices did not go "way up".

And, my skin is plenty thick, otherwise I would have never started this thread. ;) I don't give a whit if anyone approves of my choice of vehicle. I posted about my SUV (instead of my gas guzzling Miata) to insight responses like yours. I've found the thread quite amusing. Good enough for me. You proved that you can make a idiotic statement based on your misunderstanding of the interests and concerns of others and some people would take the bait. Its annoying but don't see too much harm there.

I have to ask how hard you drive your Miata on the street to get such presumably bad mileage. When was the last time you checked it? How do you do it?

I suspect that this element was necessary component of your stupidity revealing "Jedi mind trick," and that its actually fiction. In other words, you lied to make your "point." If you really drove it like that and did it purely for entertainment, I doubt you would bother to check it.

Or... maybe Im wrong and you did check it. That 28mpg figure (for me atleast) involves regular 7k shifts and plenty of WOT corner exits.. but
Maybe keeping it nigh-legal and out of the range of abuse is where the gas savings come in?

purewhite95

13th December 2004, 14:38

Originally posted by MRGTX:
Originally posted by purewhite95:
Actually, I just did a report on petroleum prices and oil consumption. According to government sources, there are approcimately 1,025 billion barrels of oil left in the entire planet's viable reserves. Yes... and government sources are never wrong *coughWMDsinIraqcough* and no one in the government has an interest in protecting the oil industry. :rolleyes: Atleast they are admitting that the amount of oil is finite. I hope your report did make note that China's consumption is exploding, and ours is on the rise too. So maybe that "30 years" is actually reasonable now.

If your SUV gets 28-30 mpg like just about everyone's (NA) Miata on here, then I don't think your SUV is relevant to the discussion. Or...If your Miata gets the SUV-like 15 mpg, then you are either being a wise guy.. or you desperately need to tune your "bone stock" engine. Well, this information is according to the Energy Information Administration, a sub-division of the Department Of Energy. According to them, the U.S energy demand is growing at a rate of 1.5% every year from the previous year. Also, fuel prices are going to go up again, unfortunately, because the dangers and risks associated with buying into Saudi Arabia's promise for an up in oil production (from terrorism of petroleum plants) is causing traders to push oil prices higher, and OPEC to lower their quatas on oil importation.

toddwcarpenter

13th December 2004, 15:34

Originally posted by MRGTX:
I suspect that this element was necessary component of your stupidity revealing "Jedi mind trick," and that its actually fiction. MRGTX, is it possible for you to make a single post without intimating that I'm racist or calling me stupid, a liar or an arrogant... (you know what, it's already been edited once in this thread)? It reveals more about you than me with this kind of language and attacks.

[ 13. December 2004, 15:03: Message edited by: toddwcarpenter ]

toddwcarpenter

13th December 2004, 16:17

One other thing, my Suzuki SUV gets an average of 24 MPG. Achieved by driving at ridiculously low highway speeds thanks to Denver's ever increasing HWY traffic.

90RedinFL

13th December 2004, 16:24

And, my skin is plenty thick, otherwise I would have never started this thread. ;) I don't give a whit if anyone approves of my choice of vehicle. I posted about my SUV (instead of my gas guzzling Miata) to insight responses like yours. I've found the thread quite amusing. Arguing semantics now ? Lame. I call the price doubling in a few years 'way up.' Call it whatever you'd like, it doesnt alter the argument.

I really don't believe that you don't care about other's approval. Perhaps you're not aware of it. Who knows. (And for that matter, who cares)... BUT, if you really were secure in your position, you wouldn't be an instigator and you wouldn't be amused by any of this. I can see the chip on your shoulder from here.

Its one step away from gun-toters that get "amused" by "Buy a Gun - Piss off a Liberal" bumperstickers. They are just weak individuals who care more about provoking a reaction, and others' viewpoints on their actions, than they care about civil rights or the 2nd Amendment. Its not about the issue at hand, its about being an instigator.

Fill your SUV tank, load your gun, and get on with your life. "Amusing" yourself by waving such actions in the face of others merely to provoke a reaction is immature at best. Its not enough for some to live freely, they have to antagonize others with their freedoms in order to be "amused." Pathetic, sociopathic, and self-centered.

Thanks for "insight"ing this response. And thanks for the pithy "incite," too. :p

MRGTX

13th December 2004, 16:27

Originally posted by toddwcarpenter:
Originally posted by MRGTX:
I suspect that this element was necessary component of your stupidity revealing "Jedi mind trick," and that its actually fiction. MRGTX, is it possible for you to make a single post without intimating that I'm racist or calling me stupid, a liar or an arrogant... (you know what, it's already been edited once in this thread)? It reveals more about you than me with this kind of language and attacks.

I admitted that this thread was in jest way back on page one, long before any of the current squabblers got involved. But , yes, my Miata gets an average of 21 MPG. When I commented about it's relative milage to my SUV, I also noted HOW I drive it. I meant no deception, but then, I can see how someone could be deceived if they wanted to. Click on my house. I live 5-20 minutes away from, Deer Creek Canyon, South Turkey Creek Canyon, North Turkey Creek Canyon, Bear Creek Canyon, My Vernon Canyon, Look Out Mt Rd, Clear Creek Canyon, Golden Gate Canyon, Coal Creek Canyon, Parmalee Gulch, Squaw Pass, Mt Evans Road and some others that will remain secret. These are drivers roads, mostly 2nd & 3rd gear driving that climb nearly three miles into the sky. Go drive your car wide open for a couple hours on these roads and see what kind of milage you get. Again, my Miata does not suffer the indignity of commuting to work, so YMMV. You are right. My comments were out of line. I did sense that you had something against Chinese people but I can see that might nt be the case... and I did call the thread "aggressively stupid" but that was not intended as a label for you as a person. Still, it wasn't cool. Sorry. I do want to clarify though, in that last post what I meant was that this thread was intended to reveal "OUR" stupidity... you were trying to make fools out of "SUV haters."

I can see how your Miata might get comparable mileage to the *highway* mileage of a medium SUV when the miata is being *thrashed*.. (and it sounds like its worth every penny) but what kind of mileage would your SUV get if you thrashed it as hard as you could (without rolling) over these same roads? I am guessing much, much worse than the Miata. So to say that your Miata gets worse mileage than your SUV is absurd.. but then again, you were joking this whole time.

Originally posted by toddwcarpenter:
Ha ha. It's pretty much a tounge and cheek post. Yet, when gas goes up 25 cents, there's no shortage of SUV haters who think it will mark the end for us gas guzzlers. You say its a "pretty much" a joke... then you take another whack at the hornets' nest. :confused:

toddwcarpenter

13th December 2004, 16:41

Originally posted by 90RedinFL:
Thanks for "insight"ing this response. And thanks for the pithy "incite," too. :p Yea, I hate my spell checker :O However the argument is still sound. Gas, as a portion of MY BUDGET, only increased by about 2 dollars a day (this Summer). I can skip the Supersize or brew my own morning coffee and save that much. Gas FOR ME, has not gone "way up". I'll bet my economic profile is similar to most SUV owners as well.

But again, I admitted this thread was in jest long before you came along. It's your own fault to comment without reading the rest of the story if you were somehow offended.

toddwcarpenter

13th December 2004, 16:47

Originally posted by MRGTX:
but what kind of mileage would your SUV get if you thrashed it as hard as you could (without rolling) over these same roads? I am guessing much, much worse than the Miata. So to say that your Miata gets worse mileage than your SUV is absurd.. but then again, you were joking this whole time. I have two cars for a reason. One is for boring stuff, one is for fun. It would be absurd to swap their use. As it is, the mileage is the mileage and I do check it. On the Miata, I like to see how low I can get it. ;)

90RedinFL

13th December 2004, 17:03

But again, I admitted this thread was in jest long before you came along. It's your own fault to comment without reading the rest of the story if you were somehow offended.

If you read my post, it is quite clear that I understood your post to be for your own self-serving amusem*nt.

What you see as an "amusing" post in jest, I see as sour and somewhat misinformed instigation. I explained that quite clearly in my previous post.

I'm certainly not offended, but am just calling it as I see it. Part of freedom of speech is the freedom of others to respond in kind.

If you don't want responses, don't be an instigator. A post in jest to goad others to react might be interpreted as something that is best left to trolls. I trust you don't live under a bridge, and are not a troll, so I'll just take your word that its all "in jest" for your "amusem*nt." :ohno:

IM4FOOT11

13th December 2004, 17:17

gas price=1.63 here.

I've never spent over 17$ at a time in the miata... 30mpg is nice :)

toddwcarpenter

13th December 2004, 18:35

Originally posted by 90RedinFL:
What you see as an "amusing" post in jest, I see as sour and somewhat misinformed instigation. I explained that quite clearly in my previous post. First of all, nothing in my posts are misinformed.

All those flat roads in Florida, and you drive a Miata? Come on man, that means you've got to have some sort of a sense of humor right? :p Look at the tone of responses on page one and lighten up!

90RedinFL

13th December 2004, 19:02

Originally posted by toddwcarpenter:
[QUOTE]All those flat roads in Florida, and you drive a Miata? Come on man, that means you've got to have some sort of a sense of humor right? :p Look at the tone of responses on page one and lighten up! OK, fair enough, I do indeed have a sense of humor...top down on my top-secret loop, on a perfect January day does indeed put a smile on my face, regardless of what kind of mileage I'm getting... :cool:

Phil Osborne

14th December 2004, 01:15

So, I suppose in the interest of saving fuel, I should not use the RV to haul my Miata from Dallas to Florida to play on an autox course, and that trip I was planning in April to do the Miata drive in Utah is out of the question...And hauling it with my Diesel pickup will create a further guzzling of fuel, PLUS added pollution. Damn, the wifes Honda Pilot SUV won't even pull the trailer, so perhaps I should just stay home...Sure, I can stay home, save some money,reduce my impact on polution, and leave the fuel for others to gobble up. Of course, those gobbling up the fuel are having fun, AND adding to the economy. What impact would our economy suffer if we ALL just stayed home and used our little fuel sipping sports cars for trips to work and the grocery store? Most of us have a purpose for the vehicles we buy, so who cares if it is a sports car, family sedan, SUV, pickup truck, or even an RV? That's what I love about this country, freedom to be a free thinker and spend MY money MY way. You can bet your ass that were it not for those who are willing to spend money, our economy would be further in the toilet than it is now. And ya know, that tax I pay on every gallon of gas I burn aids in keeping highways in decent condition and allows me to enjoy driving the Miata, or whatever vehicle I choose to take out of the driveway. Plus, those who keep the highways in decent condition for me to enjoy actually have a job. What a concept!

altiain

14th December 2004, 01:49

Don't waste your time, Phil. The anti-SUV zealots on this board won't stop spouting the same pathetic self-righteous indignation until we all get rid of our gas-hogging tools of the devil and buy up GM's surplus of electric cars.

Of course, they'll continue to drive their impractical, not particularly efficient, two-seat sports cars, because... well, because they aren't SUVs. And as long as it isn't an SUV, it's okay in their eyes, no matter how you use it or what you do with it. Because you see, SUV owners are the only ones who should have their vehicular choices dicatated to them. Sports car owners, on the other hand, have the God-given right to drive whatever - and wherever - they damn well please. :rolleyes:

Iain

MX-5.0

14th December 2004, 09:51

Driving habits aside, my Miata gets worse mileage (city) than my SUV. But I have other issues, such as more cyliders, higher displacement and about 120 more horsepower than my Explorer.

The Miata will run around 14-15 mpg city, and 26 highway, where as Ive been seeing an average 17 MPG city in the Explorer.

I still can't figure out how to roll the thing though. After a wicked cutt-off I received on I95 Sat night, I got as close as I ever have! I actually got the right rear wheel to lock up before the ABS kicked in. It got unsettled, but I am amazed that people manage to roll these things. They must be doing really STUPID stuff!

MRGTX

14th December 2004, 11:39

Originally posted by Phil Osborne:
So, I suppose in the interest of saving fuel, I should not use the RV to haul my Miata from Dallas to Florida to play on an autox course, and that trip I was planning in April to do the Miata drive in Utah is out of the question...And hauling it with my Diesel pickup will create a further guzzling of fuel, PLUS added pollution. Damn, the wifes Honda Pilot SUV won't even pull the trailer, so perhaps I should just stay home...Sure, I can stay home, save some money,reduce my impact on polution, and leave the fuel for others to gobble up. Of course, those gobbling up the fuel are having fun, AND adding to the economy. What impact would our economy suffer if we ALL just stayed home and used our little fuel sipping sports cars for trips to work and the grocery store? Most of us have a purpose for the vehicles we buy, so who cares if it is a sports car, family sedan, SUV, pickup truck, or even an RV? That's what I love about this country, freedom to be a free thinker and spend MY money MY way. You can bet your ass that were it not for those who are willing to spend money, our economy would be further in the toilet than it is now. And ya know, that tax I pay on every gallon of gas I burn aids in keeping highways in decent condition and allows me to enjoy driving the Miata, or whatever vehicle I choose to take out of the driveway. Plus, those who keep the highways in decent condition for me to enjoy actually have a job. What a concept! Your rant just illustrated that some people (mostly us Americans) live incredibly luxurious, plush and gluttonous lives.
Whatever the reasons for our privelage, our lifestyle is not sustainable. As more and more people (like China) latch on to these values and gain the wealth to partake in it, this will become evident.

So many people see this lifestyle as a right which makes them automatically feel resistance to anyone suggesting that its not the best way to live. "How dare they infrindge on my rights!?!"

So the argument for so many SUV'ers is not about the consequences of their actions, but about their rights.

I think this is why the two "sides" never meet in the middle. The SUVers see criticism as being "self rightous," the anti-SUVers see all this "rights" talk as selfish myopia.

Its an up hill battle.

IM4FOOT11

14th December 2004, 12:07

Big cars= good for families, hauling stuff, and throwing wild parties in the back seat. In some instances, it's been nice in a big vehicle.

Miata= good for "single" drivers with no family to tote around. Great if you throroughly enjoy driving. The BEST for two people road trips.

regardless of what people say about it being impractical, you can almost fit an elephant in there if you try. Besides... i get much more storage room than most people, i have that huge space between the seat being pushed up all the way, and the deck. :)

RodneyR

14th December 2004, 12:37

There are a bunch of passenger vehicles (regular cars and station wagons) that get similar fuel mileage to SUV's because of their size / weight larger engine displacements, and the market's desire for more power.

If you consider this, the SUV craze is only a fraction of the consumer's fuel problem. I consider the RX-8, BMW 5 Series, BMW 7 Series, all Audi's, Chevy Malibu & Impala, Crysler 300, 500, Pacifica, Ford Crown Victoria, Mustang, Hyundai XG350, Infinity G35, I35 M45, Z45, all Jaguars, Lexus GS, IS, all Mercedes, Mercury Grand Marguis, Sable, Mitsubishi Diamate, Galant, Nissan 350Z, 6cyl Altima, Maxima, all Oldsmobiles, most Pontiacs and all Volvo's... cars lucky to get even 20 real world Miles Per Gallon .

toddwcarpenter

14th December 2004, 12:38

Originally posted by MRGTX:
So the argument for so many SUV'ers is not about the consequences of their actions, but about their rights. You misunderestimate us. ;)

90RedinFL

14th December 2004, 13:02

Originally posted by RodneyR:
There are a bunch of passenger vehicles (regular cars and station wagons) that get similar fuel mileage to SUV's because of their size / weight larger engine displacements, and the market's desire for more power.

The greedy unconcerned market is depicting what is designed and sold. The specific hate for gas guzzling SUV's is hypocritical. All of these cars are about as efficient than many SUV's but mainly lack utility. Fuel economy is but one knock against SUVs. Ideally all the cars you listed (and SUVs) would achieve better mileage.

In short then, I'd agree with you that carping about SUV fuel consumption would be hypocritical, were it the only problem SUVs impose on society. Unfortunately, there are other - worse - issues that SoccermomUrbanVanities present to others.

Yes, we live in a culture where it is socially acceptable (to some anyway) to ignore the consequences of one's actions, under the guise of 'individual rights.' Point being, just b/c you CAN do something doesn't mean you SHOULD, that is, if you care about the effects of your actions.

Clearly many people don't care what occurs outside their limited sphere of perception. Many SUV drivers fall into this category, and it is this callous attitude of entitlement that is the REAL problem -- SUVs have simply become the 'poster child' for these greater societal ills.

wales

14th December 2004, 14:39

Well said, 90redinFL.

Is there any SUV too big for the SUV apologists? How about a UniMog? I don't really care if it only gets 3 MPG (hey, the owner pays for all that extra gas after all), but what a nuisance/hazard to everyone else on the road.

LWW

14th December 2004, 14:53

The difference between SUVs and the guzzlers you listed is that SUVs also - take up more road spaceHow? They only take 1 lane same as any car and are shorter than other full size cars in some cases.
and add to congestionSame statement as above reworded.
take up more parking spaceSorry. They have to fit in 1 parking space just like anyone else.
block drivers' sightlinesI'm curious why the smaller car isn't at fault for being too close and too low?
emit more greenhouse gasesHow so? If the issue is fuel burned per mile then this will equal out. Don't forget that CARB considers a Cadillac Escalade as a ULEV while a Miata isn't.
are more likely to roll and kill their drivers in single car accidentsSorry but NHTSA admits that their own test has no resemblance to real world risks and reality. 1 of the major car mags just did a review on this. It appears that the gubmint mandated that NHTSA only must come up with a test...not that it be accurate.
are more likely to kill other drivers in multiple vehicle accidents,So if you by choice drive a less safe vehicle the answer is that I protect you by driving a less safe vehicle as well? Have we become so socialist minded that if one person makes a choice of their own free will that leads to their maiming that the operator of the other vehicle must be maimed as fair compensation regardless of fault?
etcetera...Perhaps if expounded upon etcetera will have a cogent point which can be backed up with empirical evidence rather than comments which which play to emotion but have been debunked whenever put under scrutiny.

Remember:

"Those who would trade the government personal freedom for personal security shall soon have neither."

PEACE

90RedinFL

14th December 2004, 15:49

How? They only take 1 lane same as any car and are shorter than other full size cars in some cases.

"and add to congestion" Same statement as above reworded.

No, its another *effect* of the same *fact* - that SUVs are larger than cars. Take a traffic jam of 100 Civics, replace each Civic with an Expedition. The length of the traffic column increases significantly, reducing the effective carrying capacity of a given road.

take up more parking space ... Sorry. They have to fit in 1 parking space just like anyone else.

block drivers' sightlines ... I'm curious why the smaller car isn't at fault for being too close and too low?

Why ? Because you need not be driving an Elise to have your entire forward view eclipsed by one of these glorified school-buses. A very average mid size sedan won't see the sun if within the gravitational field of one of these things.

Its not the smaller cars "fault", additionally, b/c its not blocking anyone else's view !! Clearly, the SUV driver blocking others view of the road - and thus impairing everyones safety - doesn't care if anyone else can see. The argument that you should expect everyone to just buy taller and taller cars simply to SEE is idiotic and absurd. A better solution would be to have passenger cars be *compatible* with one another.

emit more greenhouse gase How so? If the issue is fuel burned per mile then this will equal out. Don't forget that CARB considers a Cadillac Escalade as a ULEV while a Miata isn't.

This could be solved simply if the government chose to regulate all LLDTs, HLDTs, and passenger cars equally, but, well, the current administration doesn't really care. See a common thread here?

are more likely to roll and kill their drivers in single car accidents ... Sorry but NHTSA admits that their own test has no resemblance to real world risks and reality.

Forget NHTSA and its tests for a moment. Now go tell a family member of someone killed in a single-vehicle Ford Exploder accident that SUVs don't roll easily. Tell them that in reality, SUVs are no more likely to roll than Miatas. Tell them its Firestone's fault (though an Accord shod with the same rubber would likely NOT roll). Tell them the SUV center of gravity is really, really low. Tell them .... yep, you just don't care what happened, b/c your SUV doesn't / can't / wouldn't ever roll because its all a socialist lie and you're such a great driver.

are more likely to kill other drivers in multiple vehicle accidents, ... So if you by choice drive a less safe vehicle the answer is that I protect you by driving a less safe vehicle as well?

No, the answer is vehicle compatibility. You don't live in a vaccuum ... the height of your vehicles bumper affects other people. The government could mandate bumper height compatibility...but it doesnt care to. You argue that if your bumper rides over a Miata's doorsill in an accident and pops the drivers head like a balloon (wait for it)....you don't care, its his tough luck for choosing an 'unsafe' car.

Vehicle compatibility would go a long way to helping this problem. The playing field will never be entirely level, but clearly if your SUV flattens a family you just don't care b/c they couldn't afford the latest, tallest, heaviest care. Screw 'em, right ? Why should you care, afterall you're fine...why bother thinking about the effect of your actions if you're not the one dying...pathetic.

"Those who would trade the government personal freedom for personal security shall soon have neither."

Well, that's NOT what Ben Franklin said, and I'm quite sure he didn't have your Jesus-given "right" to drive a sociopathic truck in mind when he wrote..

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

The vehicle you drive is one of the most goverment regulated aspects of your daily life. Wake up. Extending regulations on SUVs to bring them in line with modern consumption, emissions, and safety standards is NOT giving up "essential liberty". For chrissake, you don't even have a "RIGHT" to have a driver's license...its a privilege, often abused, most often by those that obviously care only about themselves, dont consider the consequences of their actions, and equate any attempt to improve the welfare of society at large as a Communist revolution. To my previous label of "sociopaths" I would now add, "reactionary" and "paranoid / delusional."

Drive Safely !! :D

SRoss

14th December 2004, 15:58

Ah, memories of Easter Island: the trees lasted 500 years of human consumption and waste, but in the end all that was left was regret, clear hindsight and extermination. Sure, they could not see the future, but threw caution to the wind and trusted in God instead. At least an attempt at cautious, rational conservation might have helped them survive.

I'm as guilty as anyone here for owning guzzlers, and acknowledge that 'the things we don't know are not knowable now' (apologies to Rumsfeld), but I think that when it comes to oil conservation it is always better err on the side of caution - ie. I'm all for more, globally-applied conservation and alternative energy efforts. It's been barely a 100 years or so that we have relied on oil, and our predictions look barely 30 years into the future - so I don't think we can say with any certainty that we aren't in as dire a circ*mstance as the Easter Islanders, who made it for 500 years on one energy resource.

And, yes, I agree that many cars are as guzzling as some SUVs. The problem is that when large chunk of the market insists on an SUV for no reason other than lifestyle, this causes a demographic shift that precludes any conservation. At least some cars are miserly, unlike all SUVs.

Rand Race

14th December 2004, 16:59

"Those who would trade the government personal freedom for personal security shall soon have neither." The actual quote is They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Benjamin Franklin in a letter to Josiah Quincy; Sept 11, 1773

If driving a big honkin SUV is an "essential liberty" then we've become a truly degenrate people. But that's beside the point. Let me counter with another quote:

"Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it." - George Bernard Shaw in Man or Superman; 1903.

Yes you are free to drive what you want. But you are responsible not to abuse that freedom. I doubt many here do, most Miata drivers care about driving and do it well. Unfortunately the great mass of people neither care nor do it well. They are abusing their liberty and such abuse cries for redress. If it is not redressed by law it will be redressed, eventually, by fist and by gun.

The law need not be wholesale banning of such vehicles. In fact I think the situation could be adaquately addressed by more difficult - and perhaps more frequent - testing of drivers. ALL drivers... we can kill several birds with this stone.

davisinla

14th December 2004, 17:49

But you are responsible not to abuse that freedom. I doubt many here do, most Miata drivers care about driving and do it well. Unfortunately the great mass of people neither care nor do it well. They are abusing their liberty and such abuse cries for redress. This is kind of arrogant and another example of "What I do and think is right, what you do and think is wrong if I don't agree with it." The "great mass" of people? Please!!!!!

Why do you think that the Miata owners here are somehow different from other folks? The Miata is about the only common link between us all. As we have seen in many posts, we are VERY different peopole with VERY different attitudes.

Do you honestly think a Miata owner doing donuts in a parking lot is less "abusive" than someone driving an SUV to work?

[ 14. December 2004, 16:54: Message edited by: davisinla ]

Rand Race

14th December 2004, 18:36

Do you honestly think a Miata owner doing donuts in a parking lot is less "abusive" than someone driving an SUV to work?Actually I find it GLARINGLY OBVIOUS that an activity that endangers only the willing participant and his car is less abusive of one's freedoms than trying to drive a vehicle you're unqualified to handle through heavy traffic.

And that was the only bit of your whinging that even made sense.

MX-5.0

14th December 2004, 18:40

The simple answer is too send the SUV haters back to Nazi Germany. Seems like they'd be hapier with someone who tells them what to do, what to drive and what god to worship. After all, that is what they want for the rest of the country.

But this is funny. http://www.fuh2.com/
:D

purewhite95

14th December 2004, 18:46

From reading all of the above posts, and keeping in mind the information I researched, I think it all really comes down to this:

SUV's are gradually becoming more and more despised by the drivers of smaller, more purpose-oriented vehicles. This is because that, no matter which direction you throw it, SUV's DO use more gas than cars, on average. This is simply common knowledge, as well as the common sense that heavier vehicles require more gasoline to move, especially if they have energy-draining 4-wheel drivetrains. Although, yes, there are cars that guzzle as much gas as the average SUV, the SUV still has the characteristic of being a menace to smaller cars around it. It is bigger, heavier, and less responsive to its low-slung, featherweight counterparts. This DOES pose an increased danger to the driver of the smaller car who either has his field of vision blocked, or has to stop quickly, and the heavier SUV behind him cannot stop as fast. Besides that, there really isn't any reason to own a large SUV. Utility? Buy a lighter, smaller pick-up truck. Passenger space? Buy a more efficient minivan. Safety? Buy a Vovlo. All of the above? A station wagon does the job just fine. Off road? Yeah, right. :rolleyes: Making up for something? Obviously. :p

So here's a toast to all you SUV-fans. When gas prices continue to shoot up as you rush to buy your inflated Tonka toys, don't bitch. After all, you're the ones using almost twice what is neccesary. ;)

MRGTX

14th December 2004, 18:57

Originally posted by MX-5.0:
The simple answer is too send the SUV haters back to Nazi Germany. Seems like they'd be hapier with someone who tells them what to do, what to drive and what god to worship. After all, that is what they want for the rest of the country. I think its the other way around. Most of the SUV haters on here, agree or not, have logical reasons for their opinions, and these reasons mostly revolve around the consequences to other people. They are doing just fine without someone telling them what to do.

Advocating legislation is (perhaps indirectly), rule over one's self.

On the contrary people who are moved by purely selfish motives and are a detriment to society as a whole DO need someone to tell them what to do (or drive).

altiain

14th December 2004, 19:02

Originally posted by MRGTX:

I think this is why the two "sides" never meet in the middle. The SUVers see criticism as being "self rightous," the anti-SUVers see all this "rights" talk as selfish myopia.

Its an up hill battle. Yet the anti-SUVers (at least on this board) see no problem with driving impractical, not particularly fuel efficient sports cars. Anyone else see the double standard there?

Hey, if you want to take an anti-SUV stance because they represent an inefficient use of resources, then go ahead. But you might want to find a better platform (other than a Miata) from which to take that stand.

Iain

altiain

14th December 2004, 19:07

Originally posted by 90RedinFL:

The difference between SUVs and the guzzlers you listed is that SUVs also - take up more road space and add to congestion, take up more parking space, block drivers' sightlines, emit more greenhouse gases, are more likely to roll and kill their drivers in single car accidents, are more likely to kill other drivers in multiple vehicle accidents, etcetera...
Trucks aren't any more inherently dangerous than sports cars. In fact, if you look at the accident statistics, you'll often find that sports cars are more dangerous... and often more prone to the exact same accidents that people automatically assume that only SUVs are involved in.

Did you know that over 1/4 of all of the Vipers totalled in this country were totalled in rollovers? Obviously, a low CG doesn't automatically exempt you from this type of accident. And I'd be willing to bet that less than 1/4 of the SUVs totalled in this country were totalled in rollovers.

Yet while we get weekly calls from some members in this forum to ban SUVs because of their perceived dangers to society, I've yet to see a thread suggesting we ban sports cars because they have even higher accident rates, on average. I wonder why that is? :rolleyes:

Iain

MRGTX

14th December 2004, 19:14

Originally posted by altiain:
Originally posted by MRGTX:

I think this is why the two "sides" never meet in the middle. The SUVers see criticism as being "self rightous," the anti-SUVers see all this "rights" talk as selfish myopia.

Its an up hill battle. Yet the anti-SUVers (at least on this board) see no problem with driving impractical, not particularly fuel efficient sports cars. Anyone else see the double standard there?

Iain "Quick! We dont have a leg to stand on so make this about a particular person... and ignore half of the information and hope no one notices!"

altiain

14th December 2004, 19:21

Originally posted by purewhite95:
Besides that, there really isn't any reason to own a large SUV. Utility? Buy a lighter, smaller pick-up truck. Passenger space? Buy a more efficient minivan. Safety? Buy a Vovlo. All of the above? A station wagon does the job just fine. Off road? Yeah, right. :rolleyes: Making up for something? Obviously. :p
Towing? Whoops, no minivan or station wagon available on the market that will tow more than 3500 pounds. So if I want to tow 5000 pounds and keep the sports car driving anti-SUV Nazis happy, I've got to buy a full-size truck. A full size truck that gets similar or worse mileage than a mid-size SUV, takes up more space on the road and in the parking lot, and doesn't offer the versatility to carry my whole family with me. Otherwise, I'm apparently "making up for something". Did I understand your statement correctly? :rolleyes:

You people are idiots. Yes, I'm hoping this thread gets locked, as I for one am tired of listening to all of the self-righteous hyperbole you twits use to "justify" your desire to force other people to drive the vehicles you think they ought to. Be glad you live in a country where you have the freedon to indulge your stupidity to such a degree.

Iain

altiain

14th December 2004, 19:25

Originally posted by MRGTX:
Originally posted by altiain:
Originally posted by MRGTX:

I think this is why the two "sides" never meet in the middle. The SUVers see criticism as being "self rightous," the anti-SUVers see all this "rights" talk as selfish myopia.

Its an up hill battle. Yet the anti-SUVers (at least on this board) see no problem with driving impractical, not particularly fuel efficient sports cars. Anyone else see the double standard there?

Iain "Quick! We dont have a leg to stand on so make this about a particular person... and ignore half of the information and hope no one notices!" So what's your excuse then, MRGTX? It's OK to drive a vehicle whose capabilities you don't fully exploit, but only as long as it gets more than 20mpg? Is that city, highway, or combined? :rolleyes:

Please, explain to me how it's OK for one person to drive a sports car, while it isn't OK for another to drive an SUV. Neither are usually utilized to the full extent of their capabilities, neither are predominantly used at their full passenger carrying capability, both have - on average - much higher accident rates than typical mid-sized passenger cars, and neither are particularly fuel efficient. I'm all ears.

Iain

toddwcarpenter

14th December 2004, 19:32

LOL, this is like unleashing the "I love you" virus onto the forum. :p

Joe Doolittle

14th December 2004, 19:51

LOL. Relax folks - - the personal insults need to stop. As an SUV and Miata owner - I some of the anti-SUV sentiment embarrasing -

"Hey, if you want to take an anti-SUV stance because they represent an inefficient use of resources, then go ahead. But you might want to find a better platform (other than a Miata <forum>) from which to take that stand." <--- I like this post :)

MRGTX

14th December 2004, 19:56

Originally posted by altiain:
So what's your excuse then, MRGTX? It's OK to drive a vehicle whose capabilities you don't fully exploit, but only as long as it gets more than 20mpg? Is that city, highway, or combined? :rolleyes:

Iain Come on, man. Did you read the thread?

1st, finding a contradiction between what someone says and what they do does not "win" an argument. I think eating processed junk food is a terrible thing and I just finished with a handfull of M&M's (mmmmmmm...). Thankfully, eating junkfood doesn't hurt anyone else (unless an excessive junkfood eater happens to sit on somone...)

2nd, The Miata is not the most fuel efficient vehicle in the world but 30mpg is around twice as effecient as a typical SUV. Thats significant.

3rd, like you said, neither are used at their full passenger carrying capacity. All the more reason to drive the smallest car possible. The vast majority of cars on the road are carrying one person as we speak.

4th, If I slam into another car I have less of a chance of killing the people in that other car than I would in an SUV. I dont know about the comparable accident rates... but I would much rather be in a Miata than an Explorer in an evasion situation.

5th, there's the whole emission standard thing that you missed in the earlier posts so I wont bother rehashing it again because you will probably glaze over it anyway.

I really don't see what you are getting at by attacking me.

[ 14. December 2004, 19:01: Message edited by: MRGTX ]

MRGTX

14th December 2004, 20:11

Originally posted by altiain:
Towing? Whoops, no minivan or station wagon available on the market that will tow more than 3500 pounds. So if I want to tow 5000 pounds and keep the sports car driving anti-SUV Nazis happy, I've got to buy a full-size truck. A full size truck that gets similar or worse mileage than a mid-size SUV, takes up more space on the road and in the parking lot, and doesn't offer the versatility to carry my whole family with me. Otherwise, I'm apparently "making up for something". Did I understand your statement correctly? :rolleyes:

First off, just because you personally can't think of a reason to own an SUV doesn't mean that valid reasons don't exist for other people. Secondly, who the hell are you to determine what vehicle someone else is "justified" in driving or owning? Would you like someone to look over your lifestyle and see if you were "justified" in owning an impractical sports car?
I think you *actually* make a good point here. There may be a legitimate reason to own an SUV
and its a tough call where to draw that line. Thats why it needs to be talked about. No, the Miata forum is not the best place but its A place.. and most of the people on the forum are intelligent and worthwhile people. As pointed out earlier, a wide spectrum of "types" of people are represented here. One could do worse.

Originally posted by altiain:
You people are idiots. Yes, I'm hoping this thread gets locked, as I for one am tired of listening to all of the self-righteous hyperbole you twits use to "justify" your desire to force other people to drive the vehicles you think they ought to. Be glad you live in a country where you have the freedon to indulge your stupidity to such a degree.

Iain You acting in such a way as to get the thread locked because you are "tired of listening" is about as self righteous as it gets.

No one in this thread has said anything that can be boiled down into "I dont want people driving SUVs because I dont like them..." We all have specific reasons that can easily be detected once the reading glasses are put on.

Thankfully silencing the voices of others is a luxury that you dont have. You could close your eyes and stick your fingers in your ears and go "nanananananana"

redfishnc

14th December 2004, 20:13

what about the people with 'efficient' cars that think nothing of owning a house large enough for a third world country. three people in a 2500 sq ft house guzzling electricity and resources. is there really any difference??

K.Adams

14th December 2004, 20:50

Dudes, STOP using all of my gas!!!!
k.a.
:D :D

purewhite95

14th December 2004, 22:26

You have to understand, altain, that the vast, vast majority of SUV drivers didn't buy their SUVs for towing or off-roading purposes. It all comes down to the American psyche, which is, as The Washington Post so perfectly put it, that Americans as a whole tend to want to buy the biggest car they can afford. They feel like they are getting more for their money, and will buy SUVs even if the buyer is a single bachelor who lives in an apartment in the middle of New York City. This is the sort of blatent, stupifyingly horrendous wastefulness I am arguing against. This isn't about freedom, ladies and gentlemen, this is about resources, and a quickly diminshing but awefully critical resource specifically. We are all in this together, and if you cannot be responsible with your freedom, than what is the point?

And by the way, those who are arguing that the Miata isn't fuel-efficient need to have their engines checked. My Miata averages 28mpg city, 40mpg highway, and recently passed emissions so well that it practically could have qualified as a ULEV. That's plenty good enough.

96 M-editon

14th December 2004, 22:46

Originally posted by purewhite95:
From reading all of the above posts, and keeping in mind the information I researched, I think it all really comes down to this:

Truth of the matter is, there really is a limited, and quickly shrinking supply of oil. When a large majority of people buy SUVs, there is a significant increase in gasoline demand, and this raises gas prices.
I started to edit your post and decided to quite because of what it read. When I to replace the words the "SUVs" with "race (Asians/Indians/Hispanics/Jews)" and "cars" with "a majority race", it started to read like something from Nazi Germany... :eek:

davisinla

14th December 2004, 22:51

So it's ok to waste gas in a vehicle at 26mpg, but not use it to go to work at 21mpg. Are we all agreed on that one? Geez!

bobmunob

14th December 2004, 22:54

I miss station wagons, they were neat. I grew up in one. It was fun.

MRGTX

14th December 2004, 23:02

Originally posted by 96 M-editon:
Originally posted by purewhite95:
From reading all of the above posts, and keeping in mind the information I researched, I think it all really comes down to this:

MRGTX

14th December 2004, 23:07

Originally posted by davisinla:
[QUOTE]I just want to be clear...driving Miatas around going nowhere is ok because of some 25mpg rule, right?

So it's ok to waste gas in a vehicle at 26mpg, but not use it to go to work at 21mpg. Are we all agreed on that one? Geez! All vehicles will be used for in a variety of different capacities. Highway, city streets, traffic jams, passing, and yes, recreation. Ideally, people would choose the car that is as effecient as possible across the board while meeting the other criteria the owner has.

If you MUST go off road, and hardly anyone does, then a Miata might not be right for you, but also you alsmost certainly dont need an H2.

Really, the fuel effeciency issue, though emphasised in this thread, is not the only problem with SUVs.

[ 14. December 2004, 22:12: Message edited by: MRGTX ]

XKR-4

14th December 2004, 23:38

Originally posted by davisinla:
Truth of the matter is, there really is a limited, and quickly shrinking supply of oil. When a large majority of people buy SUVs, there is a significant increase in gasoline demand, and this raises gas prices.
I just want to be clear...driving Miatas around going nowhere is ok because of some 25mpg rule, right?

So it's ok to waste gas in a vehicle at 26mpg, but not use it to go to work at 21mpg. Are we all agreed on that one? Geez! Can we all agree that wasting 26mpg is better than wasting 21mpg, or 15mpg, or 10mpg?. You are accepting the mileage argument and debating degrees. A losing position.

Let's reaffirm the fact that it's O.K. to use a lion's share of the world's resources because we can afford it. I honestly think it is. Otherwise, I could't sleep at night. But, I can.

Americans debating about consuming resources makes about as much sense as a Hollywood star that lives in a 15,000 square foot mansion and travels by private jet buying a Precis to make a statement about global warming.

How much of your lifestyle are you really willing to give up for "World Justice". America uses 75% of the worlds current recources for 5% of the population. What are you willing to give up? Or, can we just talk?

RodneyR

14th December 2004, 23:42

Originally posted by redfishnc, 96 Red/Blk:
what about the people with 'efficient' cars that think nothing of owning a house large enough for a third world country. three people in a 2500 sq ft house guzzling electricity and resources. is there really any difference?? Interesting concept. Houses are getting really, really big lately on the mainland. Working class homes are exceeding 3,100 - 3,700 square foot living area average, now normal. And they're made cheap (ie. yellow pine framing with 24 inch centers on non-supporting walls, pvc piping, partical board cabinets, styrofoam sheathing, etc.) These homes are what they call "energy efficient" from an insulation standpoint (insulative R value), but the amount of electricity, oil and gas to keep the central HVAC systems running these BEHEMOTH homes are SUV-like in the winter and summer .

Big homes, big ass vehicles this, more horsepower that, computers left on at work around the clock (for updates), w/ AC on full blast to keep the offices & computers cool, more TV's on & all the TV's getting bigger too, lights on, bigger refrigerators, clothes dryers on, water heaters on, street lamps everywhere, surveylance camera's on everywhere, Christmas lights out & neighbors Jones-ing each other...

Did you know the Arctic polar caps melted and are literally 8% gone already, an Antarctic iceburg the size of Delaware broke off, the glaciers on Mount Kilimanjaro (highest mountain in Africa) disappeared this generation, Tibet melted down and is now blacked out,...

It's all over folks and it happened before the '90's SUV craze.

One more thing. I love this forum. You guys are freaks and I'm loving every second of this free entertainment :p Bravo! Bravo! :D

MX-5.0

14th December 2004, 23:51

Originally posted by RodneyR:
It's all over folks and it happened before the '90's SUV craze.

One more thing. I love this forum. You guys are freaks and I'm loving every second of this free entertainment :p Bravo! Bravo! :D I second the freakyness factor!!!

But its SUVs that we have to worry about, not some legislation that prevents us from doing everything we'd want to do! It is this same legislation mentality that will soon make it illegal, yes ILLEGAL to fast forward through that FCC info on your DVDs. Thats right! Someone out there wants legislation for that! Keep the G-ment out of my bedroom and outta my garage!

If you think SUV's are the root of the evils of this world, you are missing a whole lot.

96 M-editon

14th December 2004, 23:56

[QUOTE]Originally posted by 90RedinFL:
[QB] Yes a Suzuki Samari is shorter than an Accord. That's a pretty idiotic argument, however. There is no arguing that the average SUV is taller, wider, and longer than the average passenger car -- isn't that the appeal?

For the sake fo argument, I'll compare a average mid-sized SUV like Explorer to a average mid-sized sedan like the Taurus, both from Ford.

Explorer Taurus
L= 189.5 in 197.6 in
W= 72.1 in 73 in
H= 71.4 in 56.1 in

With the exception of some not-so-average SUVs like Excursions and H2, most SUVs are not that that big.

I think this is a driver's problem, not a vehicle type problem. To make a general statement like "SUV drivers apparently don't care that they often can't stay in a single lane." is similar to making a racist or prejudiced statement

<b> No, its another *effect* of the same *fact* - that SUVs are larger than cars. Take a traffic jam of 100 Civics, replace each Civic with an Expedition. The length of the traffic column increases significantly, reducing the effective carrying capacity of a given road.
</b>

If making a comparison between the Suzuki Samuri and Accord is idiotic (your words), than comparing one of the smallest car (civic) to one of the largest SUV (Excursion) is ???

So sorry, you can't fit a 200 inch truck into a space that can only accomodate a compact car.

See above comparision on the "almost" 200 inch "cars". In fact, many of the so called "minivans" are all 200+ inchs long

In fact, just today in downtown Orlando I saw an H2 parked in a parallel spot. The H2 protruded beyond the painted lines of the spot and into the road. The effective lane-width of that road was reduced b/c someone chose to park their pig on the street, even though the spot was NOT large enough for it. Apparently, the driver didn't care that this spot was insufficient to hold his compensator.

And your point here is? Suppose the driver of the H2 is black? Asian? Jewish? Female?

Clearly, the SUV driver blocking others view of the road - and thus impairing everyones safety - doesn't care if anyone else can see. The argument that you should expect everyone to just buy taller and taller cars simply to SEE is idiotic and absurd. A better solution would be to have passenger cars be *compatible* with one another.

You might want to check the height of the supposidly "PC" minivans. I'm getting too tired to look it up.

What is your point here??? :confused:

So should all vehicles weigh 2000 lbs to "even" the playing field for Miata drivers? How about even the playing field for the Motorcyclist (yes I have one and ride it, too).

I can't figure out what you're typing half the time. Please stick to the issue and not make any personal attacks as it adds no value to the post - wait, SUV bashing has no value to the post. Now please lock this thread...

[ 14. December 2004, 23:13: Message edited by: 96 M-editon ]

96 M-editon

15th December 2004, 00:02

[QUOTE]If you MUST go off road, and hardly anyone does, then a Miata might not be right for you, but also you alsmost certainly dont need an H2.

Really, the fuel effeciency issue, though emphasised in this thread, is not the only problem with SUVs. If you must go offroad, carrying the entire family of 5, and tow a trailer ALL AT THE SAME TIME, would that be satisfactory in your eyes :)

96 M-editon

15th December 2004, 00:10

huh :confused: I think you need to edit your post. It is full of confusing spelling errors and plenty of "the crazy." Wow, another personal attack! You're right, I should edit my posts before posting, but I fail see the relavence of that. English isn't my first language - so do you want to personally attack me on that, too :)

XKR-4

15th December 2004, 00:30

Originally posted by 96 M-editon:
In fact, just today in downtown Orlando I saw an H2 parked in a parallel spot. The H2 protruded beyond the painted lines of the spot and into the road. The effective lane-width of that road was reduced b/c someone chose to park their pig on the street, even though the spot was NOT large enough for it. Apparently, the driver didn't care that this spot was insufficient to hold his compensator.

And your point here is? Suppose the driver of the H2 is black? Asian? Jewish? FemaleUm, what? Are you trying to say that the obnoxous behaviour described here is different somehow because of the identity of the perpetrator? Can you please explain, so I can destroy your world view :D

altiain

15th December 2004, 00:38

You have to understand, purewhite95, that the vast, vast majority of sports car drivers didn't buy their sports cars for racing or competition purposes. It all comes down to the American psyche, which is, as The Washington Post so perfectly put it, that Americans as a whole tend to want to buy the fastest, most powerful, or sportiest car they can afford. They feel like they are getting more for their money, and will buy sports cars even if the buyer is a single bachelor who lives in an apartment in the middle of New York City. This is the sort of blatent, stupifyingly horrendous wastefulness I am arguing against. This isn't about freedom, ladies and gentlemen, this is about resources, and a quickly diminshing but awefully critical resource specifically. We are all in this together, and if you cannot be responsible with your freedom, than what is the point?Funny how different it reads if you just change a few key words.

Originally posted by purewhite95:
And by the way, those who are arguing that the Miata isn't fuel-efficient need to have their engines checked. My Miata averages 28mpg city, 40mpg highway, and recently passed emissions so well that it practically could have qualified as a ULEV. That's plenty good enough. I'm sorry, but I'm going to call complete and utter bull**** on this claim. You really expect me to believe that you average 40mpg on the freeway? In other words, you average forty-three percent more than the EPA's already somewhat optimistic claim? You get over 480 miles to the tank during highway use?

The only way a Miata would average 40mpg at realistic highway cruising speeds would be if you dropped it off a cliff. You can claim it's true on the internet all day long, but that doesn't make it true, nor does it make you look any less ridiculous for making such an outlandish claim.

Iain

[ 14. December 2004, 23:51: Message edited by: altiain ]

90RedinFL

15th December 2004, 01:02

Originally posted by 96 M-editon:

And your point here is? Suppose the driver of the H2 is black? Asian? Jewish? Female

What if they are ? What does that have to do with the fact the H2 was wider than that parking space ? Hello ?

Let's get this straight right now. Anti-SUV sentiment, particularly when expressed in a logical cogent manner, whether you agree with it or not, is NOT the same thing as racial or religious discrimination. SUVs are not a constitutionally protected population, they are not people, they don't have rights. To equate the advocacy of reasonable regulation of a vehicle with the blind, senseless hate of an entire group of human beings minimizes - and is an insult to - anyone that has ever suffered such discrimination.

To those libertarians that want the government out of your garage, you're a little late. There's scarcely a single element of vehicle design thats not affected by regulation.

Before you pull out your ruler or scale to cherry-pick examples of a few inches or pounds one way or another, I'll say it again (real slow this time): SUVs present many issues for society and the people around them. They are representative to many of a solipsistic, overconsumptive lifestyle. They engender our distaste not only for the problems they present, but also for the problems they represent.

LWW

15th December 2004, 01:06

Yes a Suzuki Samari is shorter than an Accord. That's a pretty idiotic argument, however. There is no arguing that the average SUV is taller, wider, and longer than the average passenger car -- isn't that the appeal? Don't twist your own statement as the original quote was in reference to SUV's versus other gas hogs.

All too often SUVs are so large (width) that on city streets the drivers stradle the centerline, pushing into other lanes. I see this every day. This is dangerous and forces others to make space and drive wide to accomodate the lane-hogging pigs. SUV drivers apparently don't care that they often can't stay in a single lane.Um sorry but I see Geos and Miatas do the same thing. If you want to talk about enforcing traffic laws and better driver training I'm with you brother.

So sorry, you can't fit a 200 inch truck into a space that can only accomodate a compact car. In fact, just today in downtown Orlando I saw an H2 parked in a parallel spot. The H2 protruded beyond the painted lines of the spot and into the road. The effective lane-width of that road was reduced b/c someone chose to park their pig on the street, even though the spot was NOT large enough for it. Apparently, the driver didn't care that this spot was insufficient to hold his compensator.Again irrelevant as your original indictment was SUVs vs other gas hogs. No a full size car shouldn't park in a space reserved for a compact car only. OTOH I've seen many a Miata parked in a parking space reserved only for a motorcycle and sticking out just the same. BAN THE MIATA??

And why do you feel a need to make snide personal remarks unless you have taken the time and effort to ascertain and verify whatever the driver was compensating for?

Time to do your homework. Read up on EPA tier 1 regs for LLDT and HLDT (not to mention vehicles exempt from such regulation b/c of their weight, like the H2). LLDTs and HLDTs are not held to the same standard as passenger cars. Under the regs, they are permitted to belch more fumes than other types of vehicles.Although not held to the same legal standards GM and others have taken steps to have their vehicles emit far less than what the law allows. Now look at pollutants per passenger mile and the Miata is a rolling ecological disaster. Forget the "most SUV's only have 1 person" argument because on other trips they can and do carry up to 8 where a Miata can never carry more than 2.

Also the Firestone debacle was tire related not vehicle related

Well, that's NOT what Ben Franklin said, and I'm quite sure he didn't have your Jesus-given "right" to drive a sociopathic truckPlease explain to me the difference between a sociopathic truck and a well balanced one?

To my previous label of "sociopaths" I would now add, "reactionary" and "paranoid / delusional."Don't be so hard on yourself dude.

PEACE

LWW

15th December 2004, 01:13

BTW I had a stereo stolen from my sociopathic truck yesterday and today I had it replaced.

While I waited I went to the station next door and paid $2.28 for a 1 liter bottle of water and 93 octane premium was $1.899 per gallon.

WHY isn't it in the news that, judging by the exorbitant price of this precious and finite resource, we will soon be completely devoid of water on planet Earth if something isn't done to stop the waste?

PEACE

96 M-editon

15th December 2004, 01:16

Originally posted by 90RedinFL:
Originally posted by 96 M-editon:

And your point here is? Suppose the driver of the H2 is black? Asian? Jewish? Female

What if they are ? What does that have to do with the fact the H2 was wider than that parking space ? Hello ?
The point is to stick to the debate and not attack the person.

The fact here is that the H2 driver decided to park a vehicle where it does not fit. It has nothing to do with the whatever justification of owning/not owning the SUV. So if I see a Miata parked in two parking spots, does that make all roadsters bad?

MRGTX

15th December 2004, 01:30

Originally posted by 96 M-editon:
huh :confused: I think you need to edit your post. It is full of confusing spelling errors and plenty of "the crazy." Wow, another personal attack! You're right, I should edit my posts before posting, but I fail see the relavence of that. English isn't my first language - so do you want to personally attack me on that, too :) Personal attack? Somebody's touchy. You shouldn't try to edit anyone elses post, no matter what language its in, and the post made absolutely no sense at all anyway.

Originally posted by 96 M-editon:
[QUOTE]If you MUST go off road, and hardly anyone does, then a Miata might not be right for you, but also you alsmost certainly dont need an H2. If you must go offroad, carrying the entire family of 5, and tow a trailer ALL AT THE SAME TIME, would that be satisfactory in your eyes :) Yes. So that justifies about three SUVs in the entire world... but how many could actually do this? How desperate would you have to be to go offroad and tow at the same time?

90RedinFL

15th December 2004, 01:51

The point is to stick to the debate and not attack the person.

Yeah, maybe I should just get myself a 100 inch wide SUV and then think about how and where I'm going to park it in the urban city center later. Or maybe not at all. Sorry, but if someone acts thoughtlessly, I reserve the right to call them on it. Was that your H2 or something ? Otherwise, I see no need to take it as a personal attack. If it WAS your H2, man you need to learn how to park. :D

Newsflash: water resource allocation and conservation is a *major* issue in many communities. (For instance, we have laws limiting how often you may water our lawns). In the near future it may limit growth - including economic growth. Perhaps you're willing to wait until the goverment has to do the same with gasoline and tells you how many miles you're allowed to drive. Or maybe you just don't care.

MRGTX

15th December 2004, 01:58

This has detereorated to the point where its just people trying to win an argument and any productive conversation ended a while ago.

There is no point in arguing with people hell-bent on coming up with reasons to excuse what can only be seen as gross excess.

There are legitimate and real reasons why SUVs ought to be regulated, their casual ownership discouraged and it has everything to do with rights. The rights of people to not be forced to share excessively dangerous streets and breathe excessively polluted air, and the rights of people to not live in a world where a precious resource is excessively wasted.

There are very few situations where the tasks asked of an SUV could not be accomplished by a lower, lighter, more effecient automobile. People who care about something beyond themselves ought to make decisions with this in mind.

Its not a black and white issue... but its also not merely a personal vendetta nor is it illogical.

Of course any laws should be made with extreme care so that they help more than they restrict.

toddwcarpenter

15th December 2004, 02:02

Originally posted by MRGTX:
This has detereorated to the point where its just people trying to win an argument and any productive conversation ended a while ago. Yep, back on page one, before you even entered the fray! :p I make a silly joke about the price of gas, and look what happens. :cool: :D :p ;)

MRGTX

15th December 2004, 02:12

Originally posted by toddwcarpenter:
Originally posted by MRGTX:
This has detereorated to the point where its just people trying to win an argument and any productive conversation ended a while ago. Yep, back on page one, before you even entered the fray! :p I make a silly joke about the price of gas, and look what happens. :cool: :D :p ;) Point taken.

I dont think you should have been surprised though. Forum members on both sides of this issue really care about it and have a lot to say.

Wanting the world to be a better place and wanting to protect your personal freedom are serious issues... if it comes up, its going to be big.

Phil Osborne

15th December 2004, 02:39

Way back in this thread, the SUV was accused of being dangerous, and was more likely to roll-over, and manufacturers claimed it was the tires, but the same brand of tires on a sports car did not cause such action, or words to that effect. Fact: Try loading an SUV like a pick-up truck. When is a pick-up truck full? When it won't hold another brick, stone, or stick of wood, that's when. Now take the fact that Ford recommended 26 lbs of air in the Explorer tires, and some idiot loads it like a pick-up...That is the most common cause of SUV roll-over, the fact that most drivers involved in roll-over single vehicle accidents failed to properly prep the SUV for the extra load they were carrying. That is not the fault of the vehicle, rather the fault of the driver, and possibly FMC due to the ridiculously low tire pressure recommended. Just this past weekend I happened to find myself traveling on the interstate at 65mph behind such a vehicle, loaded to the gills, tires half flat, and barely able to stay in his lane. SUVs get the bad rap, but a few stupid owners/drivers are the real problem, which reflects negativily on ALL SUV owners/drivers...

LWW

15th December 2004, 09:10

To those who justify condemning the actions of others I would like to ask:

Do you live in a home over 800 sq ft?

Do you drive somewhere that is within walking distance?

Do you leave the lights on when you leave the room?

Do you turn your themostat below 78 in the summer?

Do you turn it above 68 in the winter?

Do you ever go for a drive in your Miata solely for pleasure?

Do you ever have more than 1 TV in your home on at 1 time?

Do you shower more than once a week?

Do have a second home?

Do you fail to carpool?

Do you buy a new vehicle before your old one is absolutely beyond repair?

Do you replace any home appliance before it is absolutely beyond repair?

Do you stay up late with the lights on?

Do you have more than 2 children?

Do you consume more than 1,500 calorie per day diet?

If you do any of these things then you to are a willing accomplice in the rape of the planet.

Do you have either an electric dishwasher, clothes washer, or clothes dryer?

Doing so wastes resources and uses more fuel than is required for survival and makes you a willing participant in the rape of our planet.

"Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye."PEACE

IM4FOOT11

15th December 2004, 09:24

Yet the anti-SUVers (at least on this board) see no problem with driving impractical, not particularly fuel efficient sports cars. Anyone else see the double standard there? Last i checked, i was getting on average 30 mpg. I thought that was awesome gas mileage, considering my last car got 20.

bbirdwell

15th December 2004, 09:43

Goodnight, Ladies and Gentlemen. This thread is getting unwieldy and some are getting a mite excited about the subject. Please feel free to take a deep breath and begin a new topic where we all contribute to a thoughtful and polite discussion.

Cheers!
Barry

Gas prices falling, I can keep my SUV! [Archive] (2024)

References