I want to save the planet/fight oil dependence, but I want a safe car too...

I'd like to get a car. Not just any car, but one that's not a gas
guzzler. But also one that's safe. I really like the concept of a hybrid
car. My only beef? There's really only 3 choices in hybrids. The Honda
Insight is too small, not enough seats. The Honda Civic Hybrid is OK, but
has a small torso side airbag. The Prius, at 27,000-32,000 dollars is
overpriced, and after test driving one, I am convinced it is too wierd,
especially in light of teh pricetag. But it does have curtain and side
airbags.

I also am looking at diesel cars, like a VW Jetta TDI, or possibly a
gasoline Jetta. I'd like to find one that was automatic, if possible. I
wouldn't be thrilled that it wasn't getting awesome mileage or it was
spewing out a bit of soot ,but it would be better than nothing, I suppose.
More than half the gas stations around here have diesel, but not every one
of them does. I could go for the gas version too, though the fuel will
cost more. A Volvo S40 would be another option, but they cost a good deal
more.

I really loved the Honda Civic Hybrid (I gave it a test drive), but it
doesn't really feel safe with big SUV's on the road in my area (orlando).
I'm a fairly new driver (I'm 28, going to get my license soon). THe SUV's
scare the crap out of me (not to mention, block the view ahead), especially
how badly most of the SUV drivers drive- oblivious to everybody around them
in their tanks. Frankly, I think they should be banned, but that's not
going to happen. So it seems I should be looking for a car that's going to
even the odds a bit in a worst case scenario. At the minimum, some kind of
head protection. Being as its illegal to ride around wearing a helmet in a
car, I want a car with side impact airbags for the head.

It really makes me ticked that most car companies think a torso airbag is
good enough (and that you have to buy a European car to get head protection
in an economy model), given that most fatalities in side-impacts involve
head injuries. It's like a bandaid on arterial bleeding. Add onto this
that about half the cars on the road in the US are SUV's or trucks, and you
end up with the NHTSA living in a fantasyland where the only impact test
they do doesn't even factor in head injuries (it's based on a car-to-car
collision model).

Maybe I'm just afraid of side impacts. In my life, as a passenger, I've
been in two side impact collisions. Both of them were very fast and over in
the blink of an eye, fortunately, nobody was seriously hurt (a car hit us
both times, and they hit the nose).

"Magnulus" > wrote in message
.. .
> I'd like to get a car. Not just any car, but one that's not a gas
> guzzler. But also one that's safe. I really like the concept of a hybrid
> car. My only beef? There's really only 3 choices in hybrids. The Honda
> Insight is too small, not enough seats. The Honda Civic Hybrid is OK, but
> has a small torso side airbag. The Prius, at 27,000-32,000 dollars is
> overpriced, and after test driving one, I am convinced it is too wierd,
> especially in light of teh pricetag. But it does have curtain and side
> airbags.
>

There are small SUVs coming out with hybrid drivetrains now. But then, it
will be just an efficient gas guzzler, as opposed to an inefficient gas
guzzler.

http://www.fordvehicles.com/suvs/escapehybrid/

"Magnulus" > wrote in message
.. .
> I'd like to get a car. Not just any car, but one that's not a gas
> guzzler. But also one that's safe. I really like the concept of a hybrid
> car. My only beef? There's really only 3 choices in hybrids. The Honda
> Insight is too small, not enough seats. The Honda Civic Hybrid is OK, but
> has a small torso side airbag. The Prius, at 27,000-32,000 dollars is
> overpriced, and after test driving one, I am convinced it is too wierd,
> especially in light of teh pricetag. But it does have curtain and side
> airbags.
>

There are small SUVs coming out with hybrid drivetrains now. But then, it
will be just an efficient gas guzzler, as opposed to an inefficient gas
guzzler.

http://www.fordvehicles.com/suvs/escapehybrid/

On Sat, 8 Jan 2005, Magnulus wrote:

> I really loved the Honda Civic Hybrid (I gave it a test drive), but it
> doesn't really feel safe with big SUV's on the road in my area
> (orlando). I'm a fairly new driver (I'm 28, going to get my license
> soon). THe SUV's scare the crap out of me (not to mention, block the
> view ahead), especially how badly most of the SUV drivers drive-
> oblivious to everybody around them in their tanks. Frankly, I think
> they should be banned, but that's not going to happen. So it seems I
> should be looking for a car that's going to even the odds a bit in a
> worst case scenario. At the minimum, some kind of head protection.
> Being as its illegal to ride around wearing a helmet in a car, I want a
> car with side impact airbags for the head.

If you're that scared, you do not belong behind the wheel. Problem solved,
and look how much money you saved!

> It really makes me ticked that most car companies think a torso airbag is
> good enough

I'll take my cars *without* airbags (front, side or head), thanks much.
I've read the primary data on vehicular injuries and fatalities. Have you?
No, I'm pretty sure you haven't. You've been whipped into a frenzy of
airbag lust and SUV hatred by, one can only guess, the likes of Consumer
Reports and your own ignorant, blind fear.

> Maybe I'm just afraid of side impacts. In my life, as a passenger, I've
> been in two side impact collisions. Both of them were very fast and over in
> the blink of an eye, fortunately, nobody was seriously hurt

And in how many of those crashes did you have all of the ninety-three
airbags for which you now clamor?

DS

On Sat, 8 Jan 2005, Magnulus wrote:

> I really loved the Honda Civic Hybrid (I gave it a test drive), but it
> doesn't really feel safe with big SUV's on the road in my area
> (orlando). I'm a fairly new driver (I'm 28, going to get my license
> soon). THe SUV's scare the crap out of me (not to mention, block the
> view ahead), especially how badly most of the SUV drivers drive-
> oblivious to everybody around them in their tanks. Frankly, I think
> they should be banned, but that's not going to happen. So it seems I
> should be looking for a car that's going to even the odds a bit in a
> worst case scenario. At the minimum, some kind of head protection.
> Being as its illegal to ride around wearing a helmet in a car, I want a
> car with side impact airbags for the head.

If you're that scared, you do not belong behind the wheel. Problem solved,
and look how much money you saved!

> It really makes me ticked that most car companies think a torso airbag is
> good enough

I'll take my cars *without* airbags (front, side or head), thanks much.
I've read the primary data on vehicular injuries and fatalities. Have you?
No, I'm pretty sure you haven't. You've been whipped into a frenzy of
airbag lust and SUV hatred by, one can only guess, the likes of Consumer
Reports and your own ignorant, blind fear.

> Maybe I'm just afraid of side impacts. In my life, as a passenger, I've
> been in two side impact collisions. Both of them were very fast and over in
> the blink of an eye, fortunately, nobody was seriously hurt

And in how many of those crashes did you have all of the ninety-three
airbags for which you now clamor?

DS

If you care about safety, you should be demanding prison time for
speeders and DUIs and RLRs. And a ban on cell phones in cars.

If you care about safety, you should be demanding prison time for
speeders and DUIs and RLRs. And a ban on cell phones in cars.

"Laura Bush murdered her boy friend" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> If you care about safety, you should be demanding prison time for
> speeders and DUIs and RLRs. And a ban on cell phones in cars.

The big problem with speeding is enforcement. In my area I see cops
setting up speed traps in neighborhoods, but just a few blocks away is a
busy thoroughfare and cops rarely patrol it, despite the fact that when I
usually drive it the majority is going 10-15 mph above the limit.
Automatic speed traps with cameras, like they have in Europe, would be far
more effective, IMO.

I try not to call anybody who might be on the road. IMO, the best thing
to do for cell phones would be to turn them off when you get in the car. I
don't care if it's hands free- it still looks distracting. My dad is a
businessman and at least he uses a hands free set, but I'm not sure I
totally trust it as a solution. It still seems like people are taking their
attention off the road.

For me, I have 20/40 vision and nystagmus/strabismus, and I only have
limited depth perception (but I'm working on that, thanks to some vision
training). I try and drive very carefully. What is sad is all the people
on the road, with obviously normal vision, who don't give a flying hoot-
they are taking their privilege for granted, even though I've had to
struggle with driving for years. The other day I was doing a left turn and
some idiots didn't signal and changed into the lane at the last minute and
it totally freaked out my mom (who was in the car, giving me more driving
lessons). I was a bit nervous but I saw what was happening but my mom was
shouting into my ear and confusing the hell out of me.

Driving is a privilege, not a right. And a car/SUV/truck can kill. The
scarriest statistic is 75 percent of Americans think they are above average
drivers, only 5 percent think they are below average. It's ultimately a
question of political will, and in the US it isn't there yet. Most
Americans think speeding is their right, just like it is their right to suck
up cheap oil or the right to say stupid stuff about foreign countries they
have never visited.

"Laura Bush murdered her boy friend" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> If you care about safety, you should be demanding prison time for
> speeders and DUIs and RLRs. And a ban on cell phones in cars.

The big problem with speeding is enforcement. In my area I see cops
setting up speed traps in neighborhoods, but just a few blocks away is a
busy thoroughfare and cops rarely patrol it, despite the fact that when I
usually drive it the majority is going 10-15 mph above the limit.
Automatic speed traps with cameras, like they have in Europe, would be far
more effective, IMO.

I try not to call anybody who might be on the road. IMO, the best thing
to do for cell phones would be to turn them off when you get in the car. I
don't care if it's hands free- it still looks distracting. My dad is a
businessman and at least he uses a hands free set, but I'm not sure I
totally trust it as a solution. It still seems like people are taking their
attention off the road.

For me, I have 20/40 vision and nystagmus/strabismus, and I only have
limited depth perception (but I'm working on that, thanks to some vision
training). I try and drive very carefully. What is sad is all the people
on the road, with obviously normal vision, who don't give a flying hoot-
they are taking their privilege for granted, even though I've had to
struggle with driving for years. The other day I was doing a left turn and
some idiots didn't signal and changed into the lane at the last minute and
it totally freaked out my mom (who was in the car, giving me more driving
lessons). I was a bit nervous but I saw what was happening but my mom was
shouting into my ear and confusing the hell out of me.

Driving is a privilege, not a right. And a car/SUV/truck can kill. The
scarriest statistic is 75 percent of Americans think they are above average
drivers, only 5 percent think they are below average. It's ultimately a
question of political will, and in the US it isn't there yet. Most
Americans think speeding is their right, just like it is their right to suck
up cheap oil or the right to say stupid stuff about foreign countries they
have never visited.

On 1/8/2005 4:49 PM, Magnulus wrote:

> "Aunt Judy (Pride of Diarrhea) <http://tinyurl.com/2s2nz>" > wrote in message
> ups.com...
>
>>If you care about safety, you should be demanding prison time for
>>speeders and DUIs and RLRs. And a ban on cell phones in cars.
>
>
> The big problem with speeding is enforcement.

I agree, there is *way* too much of that going around.

Don't you wish they'd find something better to enforce? Maybe something
that had a positive effect on safety like say tailgating, weaving,
failing to KRETP, and other reckless driving?

> Automatic speed traps with cameras, like they have in Europe, would be far
> more effective, IMO.

Only if the speed limits were appropriately set.

Which they're not, for the most part here in the US.


> Driving is a privilege, not a right.

It's also a necessity, for most Americans. Have you noticed how darn big
this country is? How much our public transportation systems suck? How
poorly planned many communities are, with nothing within walking distance?


--
~/Garth |"I believe that it is better to tell the truth than a lie.
Almgren | I believe it is better to be free than to be a slave.
******* | And I believe it is better to know than to be ignorant."
for secure mail info) --H.L. Mencken (1880-1956)