1 video is worth 1000 words - SUV rollover

In article >,
pws > wrote:

> Seriously, do you think that your former 240Z, your current miata, or
> your Accord might have stayed exhaust-side down in the situation
> shown in that video, even if the vehicle were driven by that same person?

Hard to say. WMV9 won't play on my old Mac.

--
Lanny Chambers
'94C, St. Louis
http://www.hummingbirds.net/alignment.html

Lanny Chambers > wrote in
:

> Hard to say. WMV9 won't play on my old Mac.

There's just dozens of places that will sell you a new computer, either
Mac or PC. Just gather up huge quantities of money and visit any one
of them.*


*You really don't need huge quantities of money to buy a new Mac or PC
but you'll need gas to get there! <sigh>

BTW, I paid under $3.00/gal yesterday at Sam's Club when I filled the
Miata, it seems to be dropping a cent or two per day here, it was $3.05
about 4 days ago....

"XS11E" > wrote in message
...
> "Christopher Muto" > wrote in
> news:u6Fdg.19$VL2.15@trnddc06:
>
> <snip>
> Now that's a totally wrong statement. People have SUVs for the same
> reason I do, because they're the only vehicles that can do the job that
> needs doing. If I could have only one vehicle it would be the SUV.
>
> <snip>

which job is that?
the job to intimate smaller cars (miata)?
the job of making an owner/driver feel more important than everyone else
arround them and give a false sense of safety and security?
or the job is to consume obscene amounts of gas to collect children from
school and to collect groceries?
the last one being the one i see most often employed.

"Christopher Muto" > wrote in
news:LQKdg.617$hv1.379@trnddc01:

> "XS11E" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Christopher Muto" > wrote in
>> news:u6Fdg.19$VL2.15@trnddc06:
>>
>> <snip>
>> Now that's a totally wrong statement. People have SUVs for the
>> same reason I do, because they're the only vehicles that can do
>> the job that needs doing. If I could have only one vehicle it
>> would be the SUV.
>>
>> <snip>
>
> which job is that?
> the job to intimate smaller cars (miata)?

My Jeep Grand Cherokee does that very well.

It also allows me to get around because it carries this:

http://www.worldwide-mobility.com/pa...cortultra.html

and this:

http://members.cox.net/xs11e/Celebrity.jpg

and the 4 Wheel Drive allows me to get out into the desert and explore
the back roads from time to time.

> or the job is to consume obscene amounts of gas.

It does that very well also.

How the hell are you going to carry two rifle cases, four 48 qt
coolers, tents, sleeping bags and food for three days in a Mata?

How about a set of sails?

Or a baby, baby seat, stroller, and diaper bag?



On Fri, 26 May 2006 21:56:59 GMT, "Christopher Muto"
> wrote:

>"XS11E" > wrote in message
.. .
>> "Christopher Muto" > wrote in
>> news:u6Fdg.19$VL2.15@trnddc06:
>>
>> <snip>
>> Now that's a totally wrong statement. People have SUVs for the same
>> reason I do, because they're the only vehicles that can do the job that
>> needs doing. If I could have only one vehicle it would be the SUV.
>>
>> <snip>
>
>which job is that?
>the job to intimate smaller cars (miata)?
>the job of making an owner/driver feel more important than everyone else
>arround them and give a false sense of safety and security?
>or the job is to consume obscene amounts of gas to collect children from
>school and to collect groceries?
>the last one being the one i see most often employed.
>
>
>

Now that's what I call playing nice!

When I was young, stupid and inexperienced, I totaled out my first car with
a move that must have looked very similar to this with the exception of
needing another driver as a 'catalyst'. No kidding, I did it all on my own!

When I was 16 (young / inexperienced) I was driving home sleepy one night
real late (stupid / inexperienced) after having just a bit to drink (STUPID
/ INEXPERIENCED) and fell asleep at the wheel. I think the sound of gravel
woke me up (could that happen over say, Ted Nugent?) and when I opened my
eyes I was half on pavement and half off with a guard rail right in front of
me! I probably hit the brakes hard cause I immediately shot off across the
road at a 45 degree angle, went nose first down into the center ditch and
flipped 2 or 3 times end over end before coming to rest sitting on the
inside roof of my upside-down Vega GT. Seatbelts? who needed friggin'
seatbelts in those days right?

That wasn't a fun call to Dad! This event was an early and clear message to
me that I've never had to relearn, thank God.

Chris
middleageandslightlylessstupidIhope
99BBB

"XS11E" > wrote in message
...
> pws > wrote in
> :
>
>> The two of us would not agree that the sky is blue on a clear day.
>
> We could if you'd just stop being wrong about everything. ;-)
>
>

In article >,
XS11E > wrote:

> There's just dozens of places that will sell you a new computer, either
> Mac or PC. Just gather up huge quantities of money and visit any one
> of them.

It's not the money, it's the OS. My preferred professional software
requires OS 9, which new Macs can't run, or even emulate. If the new
MacBook could boot into OS 9, I'd buy one in a heartbeat. As it is, I'd
have to buy current versions of all my software (about $6k worth), and
tolerate an OS that's long on eye candy but short on real function.

Obviously, I'm not too keen on that (or on buying a PC and 200 virus
checkers) just to play Windoze movies. OS X is not my cup of tea,
anyway--the prospect of maintaining a bug-filled unix system gives me
the willies. I have no desire to learn another OS, when there's no
functional advantage to it. I don't find that sort of thing as much fun
as I used to.

--
Lanny Chambers
'94C, St. Louis
http://www.hummingbirds.net/alignment.html

In article >,
Lanny Chambers > wrote:

> In article >,
> XS11E > wrote:
>
> > There's just dozens of places that will sell you a new computer, either
> > Mac or PC. Just gather up huge quantities of money and visit any one
> > of them.
>
> It's not the money, it's the OS. My preferred professional software
> requires OS 9, which new Macs can't run, or even emulate. If the new
> MacBook could boot into OS 9, I'd buy one in a heartbeat. As it is, I'd
> have to buy current versions of all my software (about $6k worth), and
> tolerate an OS that's long on eye candy but short on real function.
>
> Obviously, I'm not too keen on that (or on buying a PC and 200 virus
> checkers) just to play Windoze movies. OS X is not my cup of tea,
> anyway--the prospect of maintaining a bug-filled unix system gives me
> the willies. I have no desire to learn another OS, when there's no
> functional advantage to it. I don't find that sort of thing as much fun
> as I used to.

I'm a Mac guy by preference and profession, Lanny. What software are you
using?

And believe me, as much as I disagreed (and to some extent, still
disagree) with the interface changes, I would never go back to Mac OS 9.

In article >,
pws > wrote:

> XS11E wrote:
>
> > Like almost all rollovers, that had nothing to do with the SUV, it was
> > driver error. He/she/it apparently jerked the wheel back to the right.
> > Had he/she/it stayed on the median and slowed way down before trying to
> > get back onto the highway there would have been no rollover.
>
>
> The two of us would not agree that the sky is blue on a clear day.
>
> If you don't think that a ridiculously high center of gravity along with
> an awful suspension had anything to do with this rollover, then you are

The high centre of *mass* (people make that mistake all the time) played
a roll, of course, but unless there's an SUV out there using a swing arm
suspension, the suspension didn't play any role at all.

> simply wrong. Physics can prove that for anyone to see.
> You see, SUV's are more prone to rollovers than cars, in case you
> haven't seen the news for the last 15 years or so.
>
> You are correct about what the driver should have done, but what I am
> pointing out is what did happen in this "oh ****" case where the driver
> did the wrong thing.
> I also did the same wrong move in my 70's technology Z-car, I was an
> inexperienced driver. The fact that I was driving a vehicle that was
> suited for driv9ing on the road kept me alive.
> If I had been in that SUV, I would have been seriously injured or
> killed, along with my passenger.

SUVs are suited for driving on the road. They just have different limits.

mini van. the mini van being much more versatile, safer, and more fuel
efficient than other options for hauling large things. of course you do
have to overcome insecurities of what other people think of you before you
buy one, but owning a miata means having already done that (most everyone
thinks the car is a toy you know). once you do i bet you will be convinced
that the only possible reason to drive a suv is to go off road but in
reality few ever do, and because of environmental concerns there are ever
fewer places off road to take them.

"M. Cantera" > wrote in message
...
> How the hell are you going to carry two rifle cases, four 48 qt
> coolers, tents, sleeping bags and food for three days in a Mata?
>
> How about a set of sails?
>
> Or a baby, baby seat, stroller, and diaper bag?
>
>
>
> On Fri, 26 May 2006 21:56:59 GMT, "Christopher Muto"
> > wrote:
>
>>"XS11E" > wrote in message
. ..
>>> "Christopher Muto" > wrote in
>>> news:u6Fdg.19$VL2.15@trnddc06:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>> Now that's a totally wrong statement. People have SUVs for the same
>>> reason I do, because they're the only vehicles that can do the job that
>>> needs doing. If I could have only one vehicle it would be the SUV.
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>
>>which job is that?
>>the job to intimate smaller cars (miata)?
>>the job of making an owner/driver feel more important than everyone else
>>arround them and give a false sense of safety and security?
>>or the job is to consume obscene amounts of gas to collect children from
>>school and to collect groceries?
>>the last one being the one i see most often employed.
>>
>>
>>
>