US needs to do something about SUV's and trucks

> If all Americans drove real cars with as few trucks as possible, with
> good airbags, and we all buckled up, we'd all be safer. An SUV might be
> safer in a pure vehicular collision for the driver, but it also starts
> from
> the assumption that a collision is inevitable and that an individual has
> no
> social responsability (I could make myself safe from burglarly, for
> instance, by mounting chainguns that are hooked up to a motion sensor on
> my
> property, but when the mailman gets chewed to pieces by a thousand
> bullets,
> I don't think that's too socially responsable, right?). It also focuses
> too
> much on frontal collisions- in a side collision with another SUV the SUV
> is
> going to be just as vulnerable as the car to car collision. So the arms
> race for a bigger car nedes to stop. All the soccer moms need to put
> their sprogs in a station wagon and exercise some common sense.

Perhaps if some one actually made a "real car" but the CAFE rules took car
of all those nice 20 plus foot family station wagons. The crap that's
produced today as station wagons (except for the new Dodge Magnum) can
barely fit, two adults + 3 or 4 kids, ever think this is why your so called
soccer mom's or other people with large families drive SUV's and mini
vans????

If you don't like suv's and large vehicles then don't buy one or drive on.
Don't bash them.. I hate small little imports from Asian countries, but I
have yet to post about how dangerous and retarded they are (the vehicles not
the people), I have also refrained from claiming blindly (like you have with
your soccer mom comments) that "everyone who drives a Toyota, Honda, vw or
any other import are just street racing crazed lunatics who should be
ticketed just for owning one."

Whoops I just said that... oh well

Snow .. My JEEP is not a SUVEE and YOUR SUVEE isn't a JEEP.

Magnulus wrote:

> "Paul" <Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend is@the league of ****ing idiots
> and welfare bums.org> wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Getting rid of that CAFE nonsense - or atleast modifying it so that
>>manufacturers are given a better incentive to produce cars - would be a
>>good start.
>
>
> CAFE serves the goal, though, of improving fuel efficiency.

No it doesn't. Fleet economy is actually more or less holding steady
with a slight downward trend due to the increased use of trucks and SUVs.

> I don't see
> how you can completely eliminate it without sacrificing fuel efficiency,
> without levying a tax on gasoline (perhaps not a bad idea, if the funds go
> to paying for public transit).

No, that would have been the sensible thing to do in the first place,
once the crisis of the 70s was over.

> Either that, or reclassify SUV's as cars or
> a new category altogether. People are clearly using SUV's in place of
> cars, so they should be governed under similar regulations.
>

That's true safety-wise, but there's still a tradeoff between vehicle
size and economy. The people driving SUVs will want large cars again.
So yes, tax gasoline - just eliminate CAFE and be done with it. Let
market forces take care of the problem instead of trying to legislate a
solution.

nate


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

Magnulus wrote:

> "Paul" <Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend is@the league of ****ing idiots
> and welfare bums.org> wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Getting rid of that CAFE nonsense - or atleast modifying it so that
>>manufacturers are given a better incentive to produce cars - would be a
>>good start.
>
>
> CAFE serves the goal, though, of improving fuel efficiency.

No it doesn't. Fleet economy is actually more or less holding steady
with a slight downward trend due to the increased use of trucks and SUVs.

> I don't see
> how you can completely eliminate it without sacrificing fuel efficiency,
> without levying a tax on gasoline (perhaps not a bad idea, if the funds go
> to paying for public transit).

No, that would have been the sensible thing to do in the first place,
once the crisis of the 70s was over.

> Either that, or reclassify SUV's as cars or
> a new category altogether. People are clearly using SUV's in place of
> cars, so they should be governed under similar regulations.
>

That's true safety-wise, but there's still a tradeoff between vehicle
size and economy. The people driving SUVs will want large cars again.
So yes, tax gasoline - just eliminate CAFE and be done with it. Let
market forces take care of the problem instead of trying to legislate a
solution.

nate


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

On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 12:36:39 -0500, "Magnulus" >
wrote:

> OH, and SUV's also tend to block the view of car drivers- you can't see
>traffick lights or things ahead because there's a big SUV in front.
>

I think a fiber optic solution that would allow you to see "through"
an SUV would be a cool idea.

On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 12:36:39 -0500, "Magnulus" >
wrote:

> OH, and SUV's also tend to block the view of car drivers- you can't see
>traffick lights or things ahead because there's a big SUV in front.
>

I think a fiber optic solution that would allow you to see "through"
an SUV would be a cool idea.

Magnulus a écrit :
> Too many people are buying them. It's getting out of hand. If you are in
> an accident with one of these things, your chances of dying go up alot. The
> worst part is when the suspension is all jacked up on them- then the bumper
> will go through a window or over a hood. They need to, at the minimum,
> mandate that all SUV's not have their bumpers over a certain height, and not
> have suspensions over a certain height. That goes for trucks too. People
> could also get new springs and suspensions for their SUV's so they would
> ride lower, and that would help alot too. Using a low unibody construction
> on the part of manufacturers, would also help.
>
> OH, and SUV's also tend to block the view of car drivers- you can't see
> traffick lights or things ahead because there's a big SUV in front.
>
>

What? This is stupid.

--
----------------------
http://www.saab-900.tk
The Saab Tech Resource
----------------------

Magnulus a écrit :
> Too many people are buying them. It's getting out of hand. If you are in
> an accident with one of these things, your chances of dying go up alot. The
> worst part is when the suspension is all jacked up on them- then the bumper
> will go through a window or over a hood. They need to, at the minimum,
> mandate that all SUV's not have their bumpers over a certain height, and not
> have suspensions over a certain height. That goes for trucks too. People
> could also get new springs and suspensions for their SUV's so they would
> ride lower, and that would help alot too. Using a low unibody construction
> on the part of manufacturers, would also help.
>
> OH, and SUV's also tend to block the view of car drivers- you can't see
> traffick lights or things ahead because there's a big SUV in front.
>
>

What? This is stupid.

--
----------------------
http://www.saab-900.tk
The Saab Tech Resource
----------------------

"Magnulus" > wrote in message
news
> Too many people are buying them. It's getting out of hand. If you are
> in
> an accident with one of these things, your chances of dying go up alot.
> The
> worst part is when the suspension is all jacked up on them- then the
> bumper
> will go through a window or over a hood. They need to, at the minimum,
> mandate that all SUV's not have their bumpers over a certain height, and
> not
> have suspensions over a certain height. That goes for trucks too. People
> could also get new springs and suspensions for their SUV's so they would
> ride lower, and that would help alot too. Using a low unibody
> construction
> on the part of manufacturers, would also help.
>
> OH, and SUV's also tend to block the view of car drivers- you can't see
> traffick lights or things ahead because there's a big SUV in front.

Easy, buy one yourself. If everyone does that then you'll all be on the same
level. Untill someone starts buying big rigs as their daily drivers...

"Magnulus" > wrote in message
news
> Too many people are buying them. It's getting out of hand. If you are
> in
> an accident with one of these things, your chances of dying go up alot.
> The
> worst part is when the suspension is all jacked up on them- then the
> bumper
> will go through a window or over a hood. They need to, at the minimum,
> mandate that all SUV's not have their bumpers over a certain height, and
> not
> have suspensions over a certain height. That goes for trucks too. People
> could also get new springs and suspensions for their SUV's so they would
> ride lower, and that would help alot too. Using a low unibody
> construction
> on the part of manufacturers, would also help.
>
> OH, and SUV's also tend to block the view of car drivers- you can't see
> traffick lights or things ahead because there's a big SUV in front.

Easy, buy one yourself. If everyone does that then you'll all be on the same
level. Untill someone starts buying big rigs as their daily drivers...

Magnulus wrote:
> Too many people are buying them. It's getting out of hand.

Repeal the deadly CAFE rules that created the SUV, and watch people
switch back to station wagons. www.vehiclechoice.org.