[MARTINSR]

Of course I thought of this thread when I saw this cartoon in the paper yesterday.

Brian

[deckofficer]

Originally Posted by MARTINSR

Of course I thought of this thread when I saw this cartoon in the paper yesterday.

Brian

Rather apropos.

[lt1silverhawk]

I've been witnessing an interesting phenomenon around Los Angeles lately. I think it is a pretty well-known fact that, like any major city, pretty much everyone in LA is always in a rush and has no patience. With that said, I find it hilarious every time I see a frustrated Prius driver (there are tons of 'em here) speeding to get around all the large trucks and SUVs, whose drivers have suddenly begun driving the speed limit (if not slower) yet again.

[stich626]

Originally Posted by 35terraplane

Why are people against the volt or like cars, they are not they just don't care. Look at this thread over 6600 people have stopped and looked only 340 have posted, and most of them are just a handful of people that are posting.

People don't want small cars, it will take another generation before you get them to. They are down sizing the cars now, but they still make some bigger ones, for us old folk, when we are gone and our kids are gone then they will be ready for small cars.

This same thing happened in the 70's, when gas went up everyone started getting smaller cars, but US car makers were not ready for it, so they got Jap cars. Then they came out with the Pinto, Corvair and Colt. People soon got tired of them, gas went back down, they made big cars again and everyone was happy. Well this time gas won't go back down. And can someone tell me with gas at $4.50+ a gallon why the hell do we have to have cars that are pushing out 500 + HP from a company we bailed out, or any other car for that matter.

Bob

sorry I think you are way off base..
we want small cars.. I in fact would buy one today new if they built a 1980 sunbird hatchback like car with a echotech and stick.. reardrive.. and p/w,p/l,ac,cruise,tilt and a radio.. no nav. no gps, no abs,no traction control, no bazzion airbags, I loved my 80, the 151 iron duke was a powerless slug.. with todays 4cyl or a small 6 it get mid 30's easy..
people don'twant todays small cars because they are frontdrive,boring,and loaded down with more crap . thats not needed.. is costly to fix..

my 06 hhr was a ok car, never had an issue with it.. but was boring wrong wheel drive, and to get the good radio and 2.4ltr I had to get leather and moon roof bothI didn't want.. heated seats didn't need or use, power mirrors nice but set them forget them.. the info center. never used, learned to like the moon roof, but I could live without it..
and I don't need a car that has 200lb of sound deadner..

if they brought back a vega sided reardrive car. it sell.. loose all the safety crap. make it optional.. abs,stab control,traction control.. make it optional..
hell, I'll take a rubber mat.. wait. today they could use bedliner and kill two birds with one stone.. no carpet and sound deadner.. make it a 2 door..

[matt167]

Originally Posted by stich626

sorry I think you are way off base..
we want small cars.. I in fact would buy one today new if they built a 1980 sunbird hatchback like car with a echotech and stick.. reardrive.. and p/w,p/l,ac,cruise,tilt and a radio.. no nav. no gps, no abs,no traction control, no bazzion airbags, I loved my 80, the 151 iron duke was a powerless slug.. with todays 4cyl or a small 6 it get mid 30's easy..
people don'twant todays small cars because they are frontdrive,boring,and loaded down with more crap . thats not needed.. is costly to fix..

my 06 hhr was a ok car, never had an issue with it.. but was boring wrong wheel drive, and to get the good radio and 2.4ltr I had to get leather and moon roof bothI didn't want.. heated seats didn't need or use, power mirrors nice but set them forget them.. the info center. never used, learned to like the moon roof, but I could live without it..
and I don't need a car that has 200lb of sound deadner..

if they brought back a vega sided reardrive car. it sell.. loose all the safety crap. make it optional.. abs,stab control,traction control.. make it optional..
hell, I'll take a rubber mat.. wait. today they could use bedliner and kill two birds with one stone.. no carpet and sound deadner.. make it a 2 door..

Safety stuff is mandated.. If you want a stripped down no nonsense car, Subaru Sells the Imprezza pretty bare bones.. No cruise, decent stereo. 5spd, AWD. power windows and mirrors are standard with a torquey 2.0L Boxer that gets 34 MPG rated, tho there reported up to 37 MPG. Very fun car to drive

[stich626]

Originally Posted by matt167

Safety stuff is mandated.. If you want a stripped down no nonsense car, Subaru Sells the Imprezza pretty bare bones.. No cruise, decent stereo. 5spd, AWD. power windows and mirrors are standard with a torquey 2.0L Boxer that gets 34 MPG rated, tho there reported up to 37 MPG. Very fun car to drive

sorry, no jap car for me,, I said rear wheel drive not all wheel drive.. if I want that I'll buy a truck..
safety stuff is not MANDATED, side air bags ,abs,stab control, traction controll,etc nope..
subaru boxers eat timing belts.. and rot like a 80's toyota pick up.. no thanks

[matt167]

Originally Posted by stich626

sorry, no jap car for me,, I said rear wheel drive not all wheel drive.. if I want that I'll buy a truck..
safety stuff is not MANDATED, side air bags ,abs,stab control, traction controll,etc nope..
subaru boxers eat timing belts.. and rot like a 80's toyota pick up.. no thanks

Traction control has been mandated to US safety standards as of 2008, ABS is a part of that. only 2 air bags are required... Timing belts are rated for 125k miles, average of any interference engine, and they havn't been real rot boxes since the mid 90's.. AWD is as close to RWD as were going to get in a small car. FWD not fun, but better in inclement road conditions than a RWD

[rsfyj]

You could buy a Ford Custom with out a radio, heater, cigarette lighter and many other extra junk parts not needed. Then you could go to a junk yard and add what you needed for El cheapo. The car was real cheap from the dealers. And yes I hate front wheel drive. and all the extra junk pieces that go bad as soon as you go down the road. electric windows. seats, antennae, mirrors vents etc. Abs brakes, cruise controls. all that stuff sucks we should be able to buy a bare bones car by listing what we want in the car and not what they want to sell you.

[stich626]

Originally Posted by matt167

Traction control has been mandated to US safety standards as of 2008, ABS is a part of that. only 2 air bags are required... Timing belts are rated for 125k miles, average of any interference engine, and they havn't been real rot boxes since the mid 90's.. AWD is as close to RWD as were going to get in a small car. FWD not fun, but better in inclement road conditions than a RWD

sorry, I've driven newer cars from rental fleets with no abs
2) the belts might be rated for that time, but working near a sub dealer I know better
3) the newer subs rot to dust.. at least here..
4) front drive is not better in the winter,, no way no how, the same contact patch has to move the vehicle AND turn thats forth and aft and side loading.. front drive IS better in inclement weather only when the driver can't drive. and with even econoboxs weight of 1.5tons+ and a 52/48 weight split the front tires don't have enough extra weight to say the extra weight helps with traction..

they can mandate, till the cows come home.. it not help the driver that is clueless

[1ownerT]

Originally Posted by stich626

sorry, no jap car for me,, I said rear wheel drive not all wheel drive.. if I want that I'll buy a truck..
safety stuff is not MANDATED, side air bags ,abs,stab control, traction controll,etc nope..
subaru boxers eat timing belts.. and rot like a 80's toyota pick up.. no thanks

There are multiple safety standards mandated.

[stich626]

Originally Posted by 1ownerT

There are multiple safety standards mandated.

yes front air bags(driver /pass)
crumple zones
soft interior parts
seat belts and tons of other crap..
but traction control/abs isn't one of them (go drive and try to stop a car on snow with the "smarter than you" abs pushing the brake pedal back at you..
adding to the stopping distance..
or the abs that as your in your suv and in a slide, desides to unlock the rear wheels and try to get traction and when it does, you're on your roof..
THIS IS PROVEN FACT,be the highwaysafety dept. but yet it still there and cars roll over more and more because of this..
I'll take locking up the rear wheels and sliding across the pavement with the chance of flat spotting the tires over being on my roof ,thank you..
and God help you if your in a slide on snow/ice with abs and traction control..
you might as well not be driving..

if they highway safety dept. wanted to keep you safe they'd require people learned how to drive.. not add junk that does nothing butsave the butt of a driver that shouldn't be behind the wheel in the first place..

today people can't even drive in the rain.. or remember to turn theirlights on.. I work 3rd shift. you'd be amazed at how many drive around with no lights on, because they've got used to the car doing it for them.. and the areas near the strip malls are so bright that the cars sensor thinks it's daytime..
I for one don't like air bags.. hit the first thing and now you can't stear the car, or see for that matter, to avoid the next few items you might hit.. a big concern in snowy and ice areas where you can bounce off one and keep going.. I'd rather the option to at least try to stear away from the next item. than have mehands blown off the wheel.. and a canvas ballon in front of my vision..
when I got hit in my '98 f-150 theair bag ripped my hands off the wheel so hard that my left hand smacked the door top(metal) and broke it,and my right hand went through the rear window.. f'n up my shoulder for weeks..
the crash was me stopped and a jeep hitting me at about 35mph.. ifI had no air bags my hands would not have been broken. and if it's to be believed that seatbelts work. I'd not eat the wheel either..
thanks you can keep all this safety garbage,,
wanna keep the humans safe in cars/trucks add 5 point harness and be done with it.. and seats that are not flimsy flyers.

[wretched ratchet]

Don'tcha just love the parodies?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C___dP6aDOg

[unix]

The greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people



Cost to operate a Chevy Volt

Eric Bolling (Fox Business Channel's Follow the Money) test drove the Chevy
Volt at the invitation of General Motors.

For four days in a row, the fully charged battery lasted
only 25 miles before the Volt switched to the reserve gasoline engine.

Eric calculated the car got 30 mpg including the 25 miles
it ran on the battery. So, the range including the 9 gallon gas tank and the
16 kwh battery is approximately 270 miles. It will take you 4 1/2 hours to
drive 270 miles at 60 mph. Then add 10 hours to charge the battery and you
have a total trip time of 14.5 hours. In a typical road trip your average
speed (including charging time) would be 20 mph.

According to General Motors, the Volt battery hold 16 kwh
of electricity. It takes a full 10 hours to charge a drained battery.

The cost for the electricity to charge the Volt is never
mentioned so I looked up what I pay for electricity.

I pay approximately (it varies with amount used and the
seasons) $1.16 per kwh.

16 kwh x $1.16 per kwh = $18.56 to charge the battery.

$18.56 per charge divided by 25 miles = $0.74 per mile to
operate the Volt using the battery.

Compare this to a similar size car with a gasoline engine
only that gets 32 mpg.

$3.19 per gallon divided by 32 mpg = $0.10 per mile.

The gasoline powered car cost about $15,000 while the Volt
costs $46,000.

So Obama wants us to pay 3 times as much for a car that
costs more than 7 times as much to run and takes 3 times as long to drive
across country.

REALLY?
He's a real winner. You have to be a real dunce to be behind a dufus like
that.

[gow589]

This does not begin to address the money the government gives GM, the money the government gives individuals to buy these, the cost of the electrical charging station, a spot in a garage to charge these, and on and on...

Not to mention GM was set to put a hydrogen station in every major city and the government mandated stopped it!

Originally Posted by unix

The greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people



Cost to operate a Chevy Volt

Eric Bolling (Fox Business Channel's Follow the Money) test drove the Chevy
Volt at the invitation of General Motors.

For four days in a row, the fully charged battery lasted
only 25 miles before the Volt switched to the reserve gasoline engine.

Eric calculated the car got 30 mpg including the 25 miles
it ran on the battery. So, the range including the 9 gallon gas tank and the
16 kwh battery is approximately 270 miles. It will take you 4 1/2 hours to
drive 270 miles at 60 mph. Then add 10 hours to charge the battery and you
have a total trip time of 14.5 hours. In a typical road trip your average
speed (including charging time) would be 20 mph.

According to General Motors, the Volt battery hold 16 kwh
of electricity. It takes a full 10 hours to charge a drained battery.

The cost for the electricity to charge the Volt is never
mentioned so I looked up what I pay for electricity.

I pay approximately (it varies with amount used and the
seasons) $1.16 per kwh.

16 kwh x $1.16 per kwh = $18.56 to charge the battery.

$18.56 per charge divided by 25 miles = $0.74 per mile to
operate the Volt using the battery.

Compare this to a similar size car with a gasoline engine
only that gets 32 mpg.

$3.19 per gallon divided by 32 mpg = $0.10 per mile.

The gasoline powered car cost about $15,000 while the Volt
costs $46,000.

So Obama wants us to pay 3 times as much for a car that
costs more than 7 times as much to run and takes 3 times as long to drive
across country.

REALLY?
He's a real winner. You have to be a real dunce to be behind a dufus like
that.

[stich626]

Originally Posted by gow589

This does not begin to address the money the government gives GM, the money the government gives individuals to buy these, the cost of the electrical charging station, a spot in a garage to charge these, and on and on...

Not to mention GM was set to put a hydrogen station in every major city and the government mandated stopped it!

yes g.m. was big into fuelcell car testing when obama's zcars put it to bed..
now the imports arebringing the fuelcell here..
something we would've been ahead of..
I don't blame g.m. for the volt.. I blame the eba ,c.a.r.b.and washingtonfor forcing them to bring it to market.. g.m. lost 2c.e.o.'s because they flat out said ,the buyers don't want it.. funny. they where correct.. but still out of a job..