Are you in favor of SUV's

You are free to believe whatever you wish. The 'tendency' to
rollover scare and the impression SUV are inherently unsafe was
put forward by the anti SUV, global warming environuts, to scare
people away from buying them but it is contrary to the facts.
Talk to you agent and see for yourself, WBMA. Properly belted
passengers are safer riding in larger vehicles. The drop in the
number of injuries and death among children over the past five
years is attributed to the fact more children are riding in those
larger vehicles.


mike hunt



N8N wrote:
>
> I don't know where you're getting your info, but unless things have
> changed since the last time I had this conversation with my insurance
> agent, you're simply wrong. SUV's are about the highest rate possible,
> except maybe some sports cars.
>
> nate
>
> wrote:
> > Not so, talk to your agent, SUV rates are lower than small FWD
> > cars. SUV's are basicly car or truck based.
> >
> >
> > mike hunt
> >
> >
> >
> > Nate Nagel wrote:
> > >
> > > But not SUVs. Those are actually higher risk vehicles.
> > >
> > > nate
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Your information is not correct. The insurance industry KNOWS
> > > > that larger vehicles are the safest vehicles in which properly
> > > > belted passenger can ride. That is why the liability rates are
> > > > LOWER on larger vehicles. Check with your insurance agent and you
> > > > will find small FWD vehicles like the Focus cost as much or more
> > > > to insure than cars like the Ford Crown Vic.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > mike hunt
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Dick Boyd wrote:
> > > >
> > > >>Thank General Jerry Curry and Diane Steed more than Congress for
> the
> > > >>behemoths.
> > > >>
> > > >>One was head of NHTSA, the other the head of EPA. They staged
> crash
> > > >>photos of heavy vehicles crashing into lighter vehicles. After
> the
> > > >>public was convinced that heavier was better and after Congress
> > > >>approved SUVs as trucks there was a retraction, but never an
> apology.
> > > >>
> > > >>In the staged crashes, instrumentend crash dummies in the heavy
> > > >>vehicles fared much worse than the crash dummies in the lighter
> > > >>vehicles. But the still photos were very dramatic.
> > > >>
> > > >>Several years of real world crash experience bears out the
> testing. The
> > > >>heavier vehicles are killers. But General Jerry sings opera and
> drives
> > > >>his SUV down the mountain with impunity. Sadly, too many have
> wrapped
> > > >>themselves emotionally around the issue and never read the crash
> > > >>reports.
> > >
> > > --
> > > replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
> > > http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel

In >, on 12/22/2004
at 06:30 PM, said:

>You are free to believe whatever you wish. The 'tendency' to rollover
>scare and the impression SUV are inherently unsafe was put forward by the
>anti SUV, global warming environuts,


No -- it was the result of rollovers that should not have happened.





to scare people away from buying
>them but it is contrary to the facts. Talk to you agent and see for
>yourself, WBMA. Properly belted passengers are safer riding in larger
>vehicles. The drop in the number of injuries and death among children
>over the past five years is attributed to the fact more children are
>riding in those larger vehicles.


>mike hunt



>N8N wrote:
>>
>> I don't know where you're getting your info, but unless things have
>> changed since the last time I had this conversation with my insurance
>> agent, you're simply wrong. SUV's are about the highest rate possible,
>> except maybe some sports cars.
>>
>> nate
>>
>> wrote:
>> > Not so, talk to your agent, SUV rates are lower than small FWD
>> > cars. SUV's are basicly car or truck based.
>> >
>> >
>> > mike hunt
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Nate Nagel wrote:
>> > >
>> > > But not SUVs. Those are actually higher risk vehicles.
>> > >
>> > > nate
>> > >
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Your information is not correct. The insurance industry KNOWS
>> > > > that larger vehicles are the safest vehicles in which properly
>> > > > belted passenger can ride. That is why the liability rates are
>> > > > LOWER on larger vehicles. Check with your insurance agent and you
>> > > > will find small FWD vehicles like the Focus cost as much or more
>> > > > to insure than cars like the Ford Crown Vic.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > mike hunt
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Dick Boyd wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >>Thank General Jerry Curry and Diane Steed more than Congress for
>> the
>> > > >>behemoths.
>> > > >>
>> > > >>One was head of NHTSA, the other the head of EPA. They staged
>> crash
>> > > >>photos of heavy vehicles crashing into lighter vehicles. After
>> the
>> > > >>public was convinced that heavier was better and after Congress
>> > > >>approved SUVs as trucks there was a retraction, but never an
>> apology.
>> > > >>
>> > > >>In the staged crashes, instrumentend crash dummies in the heavy
>> > > >>vehicles fared much worse than the crash dummies in the lighter
>> > > >>vehicles. But the still photos were very dramatic.
>> > > >>
>> > > >>Several years of real world crash experience bears out the
>> testing. The
>> > > >>heavier vehicles are killers. But General Jerry sings opera and
>> drives
>> > > >>his SUV down the mountain with impunity. Sadly, too many have
>> wrapped
>> > > >>themselves emotionally around the issue and never read the crash
>> > > >>reports.
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
>> > > http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel

According to the NHTSA around 8% of ALL new vehicles, sold in the
US, will be involved in an accident sufficient to deploy the SRS
bags, IN THEIR LIFETIME! Less than 2% of ALL accident of ALL
types of vehicles result in a rollover. Records show that the
biggest majority of rollover accident are a result of striking or
being stuck by something, not from a vehicle maneuver. Hardly a
'tendency' to rollover. The fact is the laws of physics dictate
that even if a vehicle is lifted up to a 55% angle the 'tendency'
is to fall back upon it wheels. If height of the vehicle was a
cause of rollovers then one should expect to see six wheeled
trucks rolled over almost daily. I would suggest you do a bit of
research before you chose to comment on a subject of which you
apparently have little or no knowledge, or at least say in my
opinion


mike hunt



wrote:
>
> In >, on 12/22/2004
> at 06:30 PM, said:
>
> >You are free to believe whatever you wish. The 'tendency' to rollover
> >scare and the impression SUV are inherently unsafe was put forward by the
> >anti SUV, global warming environuts,
>
> No -- it was the result of rollovers that should not have happened.
>
> to scare people away from buying
> >them but it is contrary to the facts. Talk to you agent and see for
> >yourself, WBMA. Properly belted passengers are safer riding in larger
> >vehicles. The drop in the number of injuries and death among children
> >over the past five years is attributed to the fact more children are
> >riding in those larger vehicles.
>
> >mike hunt
>
> >N8N wrote:
> >>
> >> I don't know where you're getting your info, but unless things have
> >> changed since the last time I had this conversation with my insurance
> >> agent, you're simply wrong. SUV's are about the highest rate possible,
> >> except maybe some sports cars.
> >>
> >> nate
> >>
> >> wrote:
> >> > Not so, talk to your agent, SUV rates are lower than small FWD
> >> > cars. SUV's are basicly car or truck based.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > mike hunt
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Nate Nagel wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > But not SUVs. Those are actually higher risk vehicles.
> >> > >
> >> > > nate
> >> > >
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > Your information is not correct. The insurance industry KNOWS
> >> > > > that larger vehicles are the safest vehicles in which properly
> >> > > > belted passenger can ride. That is why the liability rates are
> >> > > > LOWER on larger vehicles. Check with your insurance agent and you
> >> > > > will find small FWD vehicles like the Focus cost as much or more
> >> > > > to insure than cars like the Ford Crown Vic.
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > mike hunt
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Dick Boyd wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > >>Thank General Jerry Curry and Diane Steed more than Congress for
> >> the
> >> > > >>behemoths.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >>One was head of NHTSA, the other the head of EPA. They staged
> >> crash
> >> > > >>photos of heavy vehicles crashing into lighter vehicles. After
> >> the
> >> > > >>public was convinced that heavier was better and after Congress
> >> > > >>approved SUVs as trucks there was a retraction, but never an
> >> apology.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >>In the staged crashes, instrumentend crash dummies in the heavy
> >> > > >>vehicles fared much worse than the crash dummies in the lighter
> >> > > >>vehicles. But the still photos were very dramatic.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >>Several years of real world crash experience bears out the
> >> testing. The
> >> > > >>heavier vehicles are killers. But General Jerry sings opera and
> >> drives
> >> > > >>his SUV down the mountain with impunity. Sadly, too many have
> >> wrapped
> >> > > >>themselves emotionally around the issue and never read the crash
> >> > > >>reports.
> >> > >
> >> > > --
> >> > > replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
> >> > > http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel

wrote:
> According to the NHTSA around 8% of ALL new vehicles, sold in the
> US, will be involved in an accident sufficient to deploy the SRS
> bags, IN THEIR LIFETIME! Less than 2% of ALL accident of ALL
> types of vehicles result in a rollover. Records show that the
> biggest majority of rollover accident are a result of striking or
> being stuck by something, not from a vehicle maneuver. Hardly a
> 'tendency' to rollover. The fact is the laws of physics dictate
> that even if a vehicle is lifted up to a 55% angle the 'tendency'
> is to fall back upon it wheels. If height of the vehicle was a
> cause of rollovers then one should expect to see six wheeled
> trucks rolled over almost daily.
Bid difference: they know how to drive, you don't.

wrote:
> According to the NHTSA around 8% of ALL new vehicles, sold in the
> US, will be involved in an accident sufficient to deploy the SRS
> bags, IN THEIR LIFETIME! Less than 2% of ALL accident of ALL
> types of vehicles result in a rollover. Records show that the
> biggest majority of rollover accident are a result of striking or
> being stuck by something, not from a vehicle maneuver. Hardly a
> 'tendency' to rollover. The fact is the laws of physics dictate
> that even if a vehicle is lifted up to a 55% angle the 'tendency'
> is to fall back upon it wheels. If height of the vehicle was a
> cause of rollovers then one should expect to see six wheeled
> trucks rolled over almost daily.
Bid difference: they know how to drive, you don't.

in article , at
wrote on 12/22/04 5:42 PM:

> According to the NHTSA around 8% of ALL new vehicles, sold in the
> US, will be involved in an accident sufficient to deploy the SRS
> bags, IN THEIR LIFETIME! Less than 2% of ALL accident of ALL
> types of vehicles result in a rollover. Records show that the
> biggest majority of rollover accident are a result of striking or
> being stuck by something, not from a vehicle maneuver. Hardly a
> 'tendency' to rollover. The fact is the laws of physics dictate
> that even if a vehicle is lifted up to a 55% angle the 'tendency'
> is to fall back upon it wheels. If height of the vehicle was a
> cause of rollovers then one should expect to see six wheeled
> trucks rolled over almost daily. I would suggest you do a bit of
> research before you chose to comment on a subject of which you
> apparently have little or no knowledge, or at least say in my
> opinion

At no point in here did you say word one about SUV rollover
statistics vs. the same stats for all other passenger vehicles.
Strange how that works out.

"william lynch" > wrote in message ...
> in article , at
> wrote on 12/22/04 5:42 PM:
>
> > According to the NHTSA around 8% of ALL new vehicles, sold in the
> > US, will be involved in an accident sufficient to deploy the SRS
> > bags, IN THEIR LIFETIME! Less than 2% of ALL accident of ALL
> > types of vehicles result in a rollover. Records show that the
> > biggest majority of rollover accident are a result of striking or
> > being stuck by something, not from a vehicle maneuver. Hardly a
> > 'tendency' to rollover. The fact is the laws of physics dictate
> > that even if a vehicle is lifted up to a 55% angle the 'tendency'
> > is to fall back upon it wheels. If height of the vehicle was a
> > cause of rollovers then one should expect to see six wheeled
> > trucks rolled over almost daily. I would suggest you do a bit of
> > research before you chose to comment on a subject of which you
> > apparently have little or no knowledge, or at least say in my
> > opinion
>
> At no point in here did you say word one about SUV rollover
> statistics vs. the same stats for all other passenger vehicles.
> Strange how that works out.
>

I find that sedans hang up on the driveway. Even the 2-wheel drive
Suburban has its bumpers bent from the road. Thus not only a 2-wheel but a
4x4 meets my needs to get onto the road.

George Conklin wrote:

> "william lynch" > wrote in message ...
>
>>in article , at
wrote on 12/22/04 5:42 PM:
>>
>>
>>>According to the NHTSA around 8% of ALL new vehicles, sold in the
>>>US, will be involved in an accident sufficient to deploy the SRS
>>>bags, IN THEIR LIFETIME! Less than 2% of ALL accident of ALL
>>>types of vehicles result in a rollover. Records show that the
>>>biggest majority of rollover accident are a result of striking or
>>>being stuck by something, not from a vehicle maneuver. Hardly a
>>>'tendency' to rollover. The fact is the laws of physics dictate
>>>that even if a vehicle is lifted up to a 55% angle the 'tendency'
>>>is to fall back upon it wheels. If height of the vehicle was a
>>>cause of rollovers then one should expect to see six wheeled
>>>trucks rolled over almost daily. I would suggest you do a bit of
>>>research before you chose to comment on a subject of which you
>>>apparently have little or no knowledge, or at least say in my
>>>opinion
>>
>>At no point in here did you say word one about SUV rollover
>>statistics vs. the same stats for all other passenger vehicles.
>>Strange how that works out.
>>
>
>
> I find that sedans hang up on the driveway. Even the 2-wheel drive
> Suburban has its bumpers bent from the road. Thus not only a 2-wheel but a
> 4x4 meets my needs to get onto the road.
>

You could always re-grade the apron of your driveway. I think a lot of
people that "need" SUVs really just "want" SUVs. My parents live in the
kind of area where everyone "needs" an SUV, with a 1/4 mile long gravel
driveway that's all uphill. This is in fairly rural PA, where it is no
doubt already snowing. When they moved there, they bought an IH Scout,
but I believe its inspection lapsed something like 10 years ago and it's
been relegated to hauling firewood out of the woods, an old VW Golf is
sufficient to transport one in any kind of weather you'd want to be out in.

Of course, there's nothing wrong with "wanting" an SUV, I just suspect
that the use of the word "need" is unjustified in the majority of cases.

nate


--
replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel

George Conklin wrote:

> "william lynch" > wrote in message ...
>
>>in article , at
wrote on 12/22/04 5:42 PM:
>>
>>
>>>According to the NHTSA around 8% of ALL new vehicles, sold in the
>>>US, will be involved in an accident sufficient to deploy the SRS
>>>bags, IN THEIR LIFETIME! Less than 2% of ALL accident of ALL
>>>types of vehicles result in a rollover. Records show that the
>>>biggest majority of rollover accident are a result of striking or
>>>being stuck by something, not from a vehicle maneuver. Hardly a
>>>'tendency' to rollover. The fact is the laws of physics dictate
>>>that even if a vehicle is lifted up to a 55% angle the 'tendency'
>>>is to fall back upon it wheels. If height of the vehicle was a
>>>cause of rollovers then one should expect to see six wheeled
>>>trucks rolled over almost daily. I would suggest you do a bit of
>>>research before you chose to comment on a subject of which you
>>>apparently have little or no knowledge, or at least say in my
>>>opinion
>>
>>At no point in here did you say word one about SUV rollover
>>statistics vs. the same stats for all other passenger vehicles.
>>Strange how that works out.
>>
>
>
> I find that sedans hang up on the driveway. Even the 2-wheel drive
> Suburban has its bumpers bent from the road. Thus not only a 2-wheel but a
> 4x4 meets my needs to get onto the road.
>

You could always re-grade the apron of your driveway. I think a lot of
people that "need" SUVs really just "want" SUVs. My parents live in the
kind of area where everyone "needs" an SUV, with a 1/4 mile long gravel
driveway that's all uphill. This is in fairly rural PA, where it is no
doubt already snowing. When they moved there, they bought an IH Scout,
but I believe its inspection lapsed something like 10 years ago and it's
been relegated to hauling firewood out of the woods, an old VW Golf is
sufficient to transport one in any kind of weather you'd want to be out in.

Of course, there's nothing wrong with "wanting" an SUV, I just suspect
that the use of the word "need" is unjustified in the majority of cases.

nate


--
replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel

"william lynch" > wrote in message ...
> in article , at
> wrote on 12/22/04 5:42 PM:
>
> > According to the NHTSA around 8% of ALL new vehicles, sold in the
> > US, will be involved in an accident sufficient to deploy the SRS
> > bags, IN THEIR LIFETIME! Less than 2% of ALL accident of ALL
> > types of vehicles result in a rollover. Records show that the
> > biggest majority of rollover accident are a result of striking or
> > being stuck by something, not from a vehicle maneuver. Hardly a
> > 'tendency' to rollover. The fact is the laws of physics dictate
> > that even if a vehicle is lifted up to a 55% angle the 'tendency'
> > is to fall back upon it wheels. If height of the vehicle was a
> > cause of rollovers then one should expect to see six wheeled
> > trucks rolled over almost daily. I would suggest you do a bit of
> > research before you chose to comment on a subject of which you
> > apparently have little or no knowledge, or at least say in my
> > opinion
>
> At no point in here did you say word one about SUV rollover
> statistics vs. the same stats for all other passenger vehicles.
> Strange how that works out.
>

I find that sedans hang up on the driveway. Even the 2-wheel drive
Suburban has its bumpers bent from the road. Thus not only a 2-wheel but a
4x4 meets my needs to get onto the road.