a person driving a suburban by themselves is getting less passenger-mpg than a concorde

[funboy6942]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
I think punishing people through taxation for buying SUV's is seriously immoral.

At times, when I'm driving, I feel like there's no need for big vehicles to be driven. The restaurant I work at gets filled up in the parking lot during lunch time, with only a very small percentage of them being cars. Most are Vans, SUV's, and Full-size trucks with 1 or 2 people in them. The quick way to judge would be to say "WHAT A WASTE!" But you have to think deeper than that. What if the person driving that truck actually needs it? Hauling boats, trailors, wood, supplies, etc is something that a huge majority of americans do at some point...thus the need for them. Should we expect them to buy a smaller car in addition to save money on gas? No, because even with the amount of gas saved per year, it will still be much more costly to a person to own an additional car. Think outside the box, folks.

We had a full-size truck growing up because we went camping and hauled a trailor. At hard financial times and with my sister and I getting our licenses, my mom started driving the truck by herself everyday to work so my sister could drive the car.

Think outside the box are you crazy??? Most people would never do that. Its abundant here on ATOT with alot of comments not only in this thread but many others that if your not with the "in" croud, think like the "in" croud and they dont see a need or why "they" would own one then it is bad for everyone no matter what because "they" find no use for it.

"I" dont see the need for a suv. "I" only see one person in it but didnt see the mass of people they just droped off. It sucks more gas then my electric car does as well as my close friends so if it is useless to me and my firends it is useless all together for everyone so they should pay for using up more gas or be taxed up the ass. Love where the world and american people are going with its not cool with a group and all should follow or loose your freedom that seperates you from the masses to be able to do, say, use, that made living in the USA more special then any other country.

You think taxing people who actually buy this is goign to curb them from driving it? You think someone on min wage can lay down $50K on a suv? If you tax more really where is that money going to go other then uncle sams pocket and once he gets a taste of that extra cash it wont be long till were taxed even more for what ever it is you drive. If they can afford the damn suv they can afford the gas and what ever taxes come with it for most. Taxing it to "show them" something is alot of bull sh!t because if your rich and can afford the damn thingg and your going to be "taxed" it would mean one meal knocked out at your favorite eatery. Sure you may stop a few people from changing to a different car but for the ones that can afford it most likly have horses, a trailer, a boat other amenities(sp) they can afford along with your stupid proposed "lets tax them to makem stop driving it."

And while your at it better attack the ones with sports cars that get crappy MPG as well because even though they are smaller suck up just as much and hold alot less people and that "in your eyes" is really wasting gas 😛

So you want to save the earth go right ahead and I am sure you will ahve alot of followers along with you but when you start to tell others whats good for them and force them to change thier ways IMO that is un-American and not what this country has stood for that we are slowly loosing and predict in 20 years will no longer be a free socity just a bunch a tree hugging rich asshats in office that want to keep the poor, poor and the rich, rich with crazy ass taxes and laws that if you cant afford wont be able to leave the confines of your own home keeping you in place. Think the welfair and unemployment is bad now just wait if this is the trend that keeps on going.

Now where did I misplace my tinfoil hat at 🙁

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: rh71

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
I won't own another SUV because I don't have any need for one. I prefer a car that handles well and brakes well to a lumbering gas guzzling SUV. That's my preference. I wish more people would really take a good look at their needs when buying a vehicle instead of just buying an SUV because everyone else has one and because they look cool with those 20" wheels and 4 wheel drive.

Fortunately, higher gas prices are forcing people to do this for the most part. I welcome high gas prices and the death of the SUV. :thumbsup:

Ok, so it comes back to the same thing - you bought an STi because you needed it. Nevermind all the other more affordable sedans or minivans which are more practical for your family - that get more than 18mpg. You needed that sports car with the awesome braking and cornering. Got it. :roll: See bold.

See, the point you are missing is that people haven't been replacing relatively economical sedans and minivans with sports cars over the past 15 years, they've been replacing them with SUVs. That has driven our thirst for oil as a nation way up and our air quality down. I'd be surprised if the sports car market has changed all that much in the past 15 years. High performance tuner business is up but I don't think that most people are trading in their minivans for EVOs.

Besides, I only drive to work 3 days out of the week. The other 2 days I ride a bicycle to work. Oh and BTW, I don't own the STI anymore. We sold it and bought my wife a Lexus that gets 24/30mpg.

 

[BlancoNino]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
See, the point you are missing is that people haven't been replacing relatively economical sedans and minivans with sports cars over the past 15 years, they've been replacing them with SUVs. That has driven our thirst for oil as a nation way up and our air quality down. I'd be surprised if the sports car market has changed all that much in the past 15 years. High performance tuner business is up but I don't think that most people are trading in their minivans for EVOs.

Besides, I only drive to work 3 days out of the week. The other 2 days I ride a bicycle to work. Oh and BTW, I don't own the STI anymore. We sold it and bought my wife a Lexus that gets 24/30mpg.

Translation: "Do as I say, not as I do."

What does the current trend have to do with anything? The argument is about MPG. You were driving something that got poor mileage because you wanted something fast and cool. Compare that with somebody who drives and SUV because it's big and roomy. The only difference is that big and roomy are useful for certain things while fast and good handling are good only for leisure. I have nothing against sports cars or SUV's, but I do have a problem with your double-standard.

 

[funboy6942]

Oh yeah and if you think for one second the government really cares think again. They all have thier dirty little hands in the energy pool and could care less if you used more or less. In fact they are sitting back with huge smiles on thier faces because not only are they raking in the bucks with the higher cost for fuel and taxes but if all the tree hugging nuts win and they get the support of the masses can rake in even more with the extra "SUV" taxes and sit back and laugh all the way to the bank. Meanwhile all the tree huggers are like "yea we win look at them suffer now" while the majority just said "sure stick it right up my ass 10 feet deep, no no no no dont worry Ill be quiet as a mouse and you wont even have to use any lube and I will take it with a smile 😀"

If you tree huggers spent as much time pissing and moaning and bitching you want suvs gone because its the only thing sucking up too much gas and put that effort towads trying to get healthcare, feel the homeless and poor, or find homes for homeless starving or abused children they woudl be taken care of by now. There is soooo much more worse in the world today then a soccer mom in a SUV you can put all this pent up using my oil bs waste of energy and time into. Think suv's are the reason for polution hey lets geet rid of Luxury and commercial boats. How much pollution you think one of them big ass no exhaust regualting diesel chugger spew out and you know what like a suv its big, its roomy, and for most is a waste and uses a crap load more fuel. Oh but wait you cant do that because only the really well off people use them and GOD forbid something they liked to do is taken from them. Damn bull sh!@t double standards piss me off. Lets get rid of trains too, or hey the personal planes got to go and why not personal boats as well. Youd be lucky to see 5 mpg out of a boat engine and it spits its Straight exhaust right from a straight pipe from the head into the water, no cat converter. Full pure smelly suck up more gas then most anything with wheels right into the body of water its flaoting in. Anyone bitching about that, shoot theres got to be thousands of them boats where ever there is a body of water near and the big suv's that brought them to the water. OH and make sure to go after thoes really long boats with 4 big block engines and get, if your lucky, 1/8th of a gallon per mile and holds less people then a suv. So why not go after that too, its much worse for the enviroment and would guess it spews out more polution then 4-5 suvs so there may not be as many boats to suv's but make up for it with gas used and exhaust spat out.

And personal planes. Lots of them, like boats, have no emmision controls (that i know about) and spat its fumes right into the air and use up alot of fuel and hell your going to fit like 2-8 people in one of them.

So why are you just stopping with SUV's Ive given you examples of much worse things to go after so do it or your bitching is for not and is worthless IMO.

 

[Eli]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: rh71
I think the Suburban can do a little more than the Concorde. At any rate, you pay for its practicality and the mpg is the tradeoff. A single bachelor-guy living in the city is not going to purchase a Suburban while a family with kids is more likely to.

They don't have to be using it to its fullest potential all the time... just like JulesMaximus doesn't do 0-60 in 5 secs with his WRX at every stoplight. Dang haters.

No, he'll be doing it in 5.7. 😛

😀

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
I think punishing people through taxation for buying SUV's is seriously immoral.

At times, when I'm driving, I feel like there's no need for big vehicles to be driven. The restaurant I work at gets filled up in the parking lot during lunch time, with only a very small percentage of them being cars. Most are Vans, SUV's, and Full-size trucks with 1 or 2 people in them. The quick way to judge would be to say "WHAT A WASTE!" But you have to think deeper than that. What if the person driving that truck actually needs it? Hauling boats, trailors, wood, supplies, etc is something that a huge majority of americans do at some point...thus the need for them. Should we expect them to buy a smaller car in addition to save money on gas? No, because even with the amount of gas saved per year, it will still be much more costly to a person to own an additional car. Think outside the box, folks.

We had a full-size truck growing up because we went camping and hauled a trailor. At hard financial times and with my sister and I getting our licenses, my mom started driving the truck by herself everyday to work so my sister could drive the car.

1. People who want to haul boats can get a beater truck and do it, drive that rarely and get a decent car. My brother has a nicer truck that he hauls his boat with but drives a car most of the time.

2. How is it immoral? Most guzzlers don't need them, those that drive don't always need to.

3. There's always another way around driving a guzzler for normal commutes.


Lets face it, America is the spoiled child of the world. We whine and bitch that we *MUST* drive this or that car for this or that reason, but in reality it's one big fekkin excuse. We CAN spur mass transit on, but it's "cheaper" to drive honking cars. Well, best way to do that is change the value proposition of a honking vehicle.

Somehow Europe and other countries survive with having higher prices. Anybody care to point out to me how their people get around? Why don't they make the same lame excuses?

Change has to start somewhere.

 

[topslop1]

Wow - that is impressive.

 

[bctbct]

Anybody object if I run my dodge truck in the morning to warm it up and melt the frost? 🙂

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
See, the point you are missing is that people haven't been replacing relatively economical sedans and minivans with sports cars over the past 15 years, they've been replacing them with SUVs. That has driven our thirst for oil as a nation way up and our air quality down. I'd be surprised if the sports car market has changed all that much in the past 15 years. High performance tuner business is up but I don't think that most people are trading in their minivans for EVOs.

Besides, I only drive to work 3 days out of the week. The other 2 days I ride a bicycle to work. Oh and BTW, I don't own the STI anymore. We sold it and bought my wife a Lexus that gets 24/30mpg.

Translation: "Do as I say, not as I do."

What does the current trend have to do with anything? The argument is about MPG. You were driving something that got poor mileage because you wanted something fast and cool. Compare that with somebody who drives and SUV because it's big and roomy. The only difference is that big and roomy are useful for certain things while fast and good handling are good only for leisure. I have nothing against sports cars or SUV's, but I do have a problem with your double-standard.

WTF are you talking about idiot? I don't own an SUV and I don't own a sports car. I explained why I'm happy that the current trend in gas guzzling SUVs is coming to an end so where's the double-standard?

Edit-I currently own a 2003 Nissan Maxima SE and a 2006 Lexus IS250. I live close to work and even when I didn't I carpooled 3 times a week and took the train and rode my bike one day...not like I need to explain myself to you. But hey, you go on about how personal choice PWNS everything else including reality keep going, it's really quite entertaining. Hell, if gas prices went to $20/gallon I could always ride my bike to work 5 days a week. I'm prepared for the future, how about you?

 

[xgsound]

Here's where you're wrong. The Concord now gets 0 MPG per person because it no longer goes any miles with any people.


To the people who never see an SUV with more than one person, how about every politician arriving with thier entourage to every event they attend on the news every day?


Jim

 

[KK]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: rh71

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: rh71

Originally posted by: Hammerhead

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
All the more reason to join the Anti-SUV Brigade!!!

The new rims on your car ain't saving gas either, homey!

don't mind him, he liked his Rodeo when he owned it.

The only reason I bought that pile of junk was because it was cheap and I was able to pay cash for it to get rid of an even bigger pile of junk (money pit) BMW my wife owned.

It served its purpose of cheap transportation for the year or so that I owned it...even though it averaged about 14mpg. It was still cheaper than having a car payment. I almost traded it at one point to buy a Honda Civic. I'm glad I don't have it anymore regardless.

I'll never own another SUV.

Ahh yes... "It wasn't a bad car but it certainly wasn't great either" were your words. Unfortunate but not surprising that you bought a used car that had so many problems while I have the same exact car (for nearly 12 years now) with none of those problems that you had gone on about. Things like that can happen to any used car buyer. Whoever buys my car used would deal with bad power locks - and that's it. I don't think any of it has anything to do with "never owning another SUV". I think our last thread on this subject had you arguing SUV owners never use their car for what they should right ?

Those power locks are easy to fix BTW. Just pop the door panel off and there's a little plastic clip that pops out of the door easily and the lock stops working. It's very easy to fix yourself. I replaced a power window motor too which wasn't difficult.

I won't own another SUV because I don't have any need for one. I prefer a car that handles well and brakes well to a lumbering gas guzzling SUV. That's my preference. I wish more people would really take a good look at their needs when buying a vehicle instead of just buying an SUV because everyone else has one and because they look cool with those 20" wheels and 4 wheel drive.

Fortunately, higher gas prices are forcing people to do this for the most part. I welcome high gas prices and the death of the SUV. :thumbsup:

Is your life that depressing that you actually care what other people are buying? Get a life and mind your own damn business.

 

[wetcat007]

Originally posted by: johngute

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
All the more reason to join the Anti-SUV Brigade!!!

where do i join up?

 

[rh71]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: BlancoNino

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
See, the point you are missing is that people haven't been replacing relatively economical sedans and minivans with sports cars over the past 15 years, they've been replacing them with SUVs. That has driven our thirst for oil as a nation way up and our air quality down. I'd be surprised if the sports car market has changed all that much in the past 15 years. High performance tuner business is up but I don't think that most people are trading in their minivans for EVOs.

Besides, I only drive to work 3 days out of the week. The other 2 days I ride a bicycle to work. Oh and BTW, I don't own the STI anymore. We sold it and bought my wife a Lexus that gets 24/30mpg.

Translation: "Do as I say, not as I do."

What does the current trend have to do with anything? The argument is about MPG. You were driving something that got poor mileage because you wanted something fast and cool. Compare that with somebody who drives and SUV because it's big and roomy. The only difference is that big and roomy are useful for certain things while fast and good handling are good only for leisure. I have nothing against sports cars or SUV's, but I do have a problem with your double-standard.

WTF are you talking about idiot? I don't own an SUV and I don't own a sports car. I explained why I'm happy that the current trend in gas guzzling SUVs is coming to an end so where's the double-standard?

Edit-I currently own a 2003 Nissan Maxima SE and a 2006 Lexus IS250. I live close to work and even when I didn't I carpooled 3 times a week and took the train and rode my bike one day...not like I need to explain myself to you. But hey, you go on about how personal choice PWNS everything else including reality keep going, it's really quite entertaining. Hell, if gas prices went to $20/gallon I could always ride my bike to work 5 days a week. I'm prepared for the future, how about you?

LOL, you have all these explanations / excuses for what you own. Ever think that you may not be the only one with reasons ? That includes "that's my preference".

You can be happy all you want about trends (less SUVs)... you keep repeating that line but that's not the point... we don't really care if YOU are HAPPY about it. The point is that your REASONING behind being happy about it is ridiculously laughable. Sure, as long as it doesn't apply to your current vehicle, it's ok. You have so little ground to stand on - and you probably know it. Your brigade needs a mission statement and you need to train your followers to get their opinions backed up.

 

[Turin39789]

Originally posted by: Hammerhead
Do anti-suv people have gas lawnmowers or the earth friendly alternative, electric lawnmowers.

Personally, I have a reel mower, no engine at all. And an electric weedeater.

Then again, my car isn't that effecient, but I ride my bike whenever possible. Buy what you need. If you arent hauling 6+ people on more than 60% of your trips you might not need a 10 passenger box. If you are , by all means go for it.

My dad drives a f250 as a commuter, and he doesnt haul that often. But he also carpools and rides his motorcycle every chance he gets. He's been an almost lifelong truck owner and even he is comsidering trading it in now that he doesnt haul stuff for a cheap commuter sedan.

 

[Hammerhead]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
I'm prepared for the future, how about you?

Prepared for the future? Let's say, in the future, you figure out how to reproduce and have 2, maybe even 3 kids. Your tiny IS250 ain't gonna cut it.

 

[mercanucaribe]

Originally posted by: Hammerhead

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
I'm prepared for the future, how about you?

Prepared for the future? Let's say, in the future, you figure out how to reproduce and have 2, maybe even 3 kids. Your tiny IS250 ain't gonna cut it.

His IS250 probably has as much usable storage space as my Grand Cherokee.

 

[mrzed]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
I think punishing people through taxation for buying SUV's is seriously immoral.

At times, when I'm driving, I feel like there's no need for big vehicles to be driven. The restaurant I work at gets filled up in the parking lot during lunch time, with only a very small percentage of them being cars. Most are Vans, SUV's, and Full-size trucks with 1 or 2 people in them. The quick way to judge would be to say "WHAT A WASTE!" But you have to think deeper than that. What if the person driving that truck actually needs it? Hauling boats, trailors, wood, supplies, etc is something that a huge majority of americans do at some point...thus the need for them. Should we expect them to buy a smaller car in addition to save money on gas? No, because even with the amount of gas saved per year, it will still be much more costly to a person to own an additional car. Think outside the box, folks.

We had a full-size truck growing up because we went camping and hauled a trailor. At hard financial times and with my sister and I getting our licenses, my mom started driving the truck by herself everyday to work so my sister could drive the car.

1. People who want to haul boats can get a beater truck and do it, drive that rarely and get a decent car. My brother has a nicer truck that he hauls his boat with but drives a car most of the time.

2. How is it immoral? Most guzzlers don't need them, those that drive don't always need to.

3. There's always another way around driving a guzzler for normal commutes.


Lets face it, America is the spoiled child of the world. We whine and bitch that we *MUST* drive this or that car for this or that reason, but in reality it's one big fekkin excuse. We CAN spur mass transit on, but it's "cheaper" to drive honking cars. Well, best way to do that is change the value proposition of a honking vehicle.

Somehow Europe and other countries survive with having higher prices. Anybody care to point out to me how their people get around? Why don't they make the same lame excuses?

Change has to start somewhere.

QFT.

First of all, how is taxing something that has a negative effect on others "punishment," I would consider it "fairness". I don't have the option of breathing different air than other people. We make concessions for our economy to allow people and organizations to pollute that air, and the water, and the soil. I'm OK with that. I do it too. We all do. But increasing taxes is the fairest way we have of balancing those externalities, as it is directly proportional to the use of the vehicle and the efficiency.

Second, like the above post nicely pointed out, the USA idea of "need" is just slightly skewed. What - you "need" a big truck to pull your trailer and boat that you also "need"? I am a homeowner. Currently renovating my kitchen and I suppose I also "need" a truck to haul the stuff. Strangely, I have managed to find a way around this, I do this strange thing called "borrowing" or "renting" a truck. I also have a wonderful option called "delivery" where people who already have a truck use it to bring large things that do not fit in my trunk to my house for me in exchange for a small amount of money.

If some trades/farmers need big trucks, so be it. Their prices will go up to reflect their costs. Isn't that how capitalism is supposed to work?

Originally posted by: Hammerhead
Do anti-suv people have gas lawnmowers or the earth friendly alternative, electric lawnmowers.

I also use a push mower. Works well for my modest lawn. Get a bit of exercise. But then I suppose some people "need" a riding mower for their 2 acre lawns that they also "need"

 

[Turin39789]

Originally posted by: mrzed


I also use a push mower. Works well for my modest lawn. Get a bit of exercise. But then I suppose some people "need" a riding mower for their 2 acre lawns that they also "need"

Also, you can mow in the middle of the night if so inclined as it is quiet. I find myself stopping for a glass of lemonade/beer whenever I want as I don't have to start up the engine every time I take a break.

 

[BlancoNino]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: BlancoNino
I think punishing people through taxation for buying SUV's is seriously immoral.

At times, when I'm driving, I feel like there's no need for big vehicles to be driven. The restaurant I work at gets filled up in the parking lot during lunch time, with only a very small percentage of them being cars. Most are Vans, SUV's, and Full-size trucks with 1 or 2 people in them. The quick way to judge would be to say "WHAT A WASTE!" But you have to think deeper than that. What if the person driving that truck actually needs it? Hauling boats, trailors, wood, supplies, etc is something that a huge majority of americans do at some point...thus the need for them. Should we expect them to buy a smaller car in addition to save money on gas? No, because even with the amount of gas saved per year, it will still be much more costly to a person to own an additional car. Think outside the box, folks.

We had a full-size truck growing up because we went camping and hauled a trailor. At hard financial times and with my sister and I getting our licenses, my mom started driving the truck by herself everyday to work so my sister could drive the car.

1. People who want to haul boats can get a beater truck and do it, drive that rarely and get a decent car. My brother has a nicer truck that he hauls his boat with but drives a car most of the time.

2. How is it immoral? Most guzzlers don't need them, those that drive don't always need to.

3. There's always another way around driving a guzzler for normal commutes.


Lets face it, America is the spoiled child of the world. We whine and bitch that we *MUST* drive this or that car for this or that reason, but in reality it's one big fekkin excuse. We CAN spur mass transit on, but it's "cheaper" to drive honking cars. Well, best way to do that is change the value proposition of a honking vehicle.

Somehow Europe and other countries survive with having higher prices. Anybody care to point out to me how their people get around? Why don't they make the same lame excuses?

Change has to start somewhere.

1. Some "beater" truck is going to get even worse mileage, cost money in repairs, and the cost of that second car generally isn't in most people's budget.

2. It's immoral because it's trying to legislate morality on consumers.

3. Yes that's true, but until it is out of the reach of our pocket books, we will choose to drive to work.

Sticking the government's fist into supply and demand isn't going to solve anything, either. Taxing a large vehicle because YOU don't think they should be driving them? Ha, the large vehicles are ALREADY taxed more through the purchase of more gasoline per mile (and gas is taxed).

 

[SampSon]

The ride in a concord is so much better than a suburban.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino


1. Some "beater" truck is going to get even worse mileage, cost money in repairs, and the cost of that second car generally isn't in most people's budget.

2. It's immoral because it's trying to legislate morality on consumers.

3. Yes that's true, but until it is out of the reach of our pocket books, we will choose to drive to work.

Sticking the government's fist into supply and demand isn't going to solve anything, either. Taxing a large vehicle because YOU don't think they should be driving them? Ha, the large vehicles are ALREADY taxed more through the purchase of more gasoline per mile (and gas is taxed).

You can get a decent truck for 10k that won't get horrible milage. Furthermore, you don't need to drive it all of the time. A "beater" truck driven 50mi every couple weekends compared to a "new" truck driven 500-600mi in the same timeframe would have to get 1/12 the mileage. Somehow your excuse doesn't add up.

We legislate morality everywhere. We do it with smoking because of the greater good. We do it for murder. We do it for a crap-ton of things because it's the correct thing to do.

Then I propose to not make it cheap anymore. I don't think we should be driving *ANY* cars as much as we do. Europe survives, we can too.

 

[BlancoNino]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: BlancoNino


1. Some "beater" truck is going to get even worse mileage, cost money in repairs, and the cost of that second car generally isn't in most people's budget.

2. It's immoral because it's trying to legislate morality on consumers.

3. Yes that's true, but until it is out of the reach of our pocket books, we will choose to drive to work.

Sticking the government's fist into supply and demand isn't going to solve anything, either. Taxing a large vehicle because YOU don't think they should be driving them? Ha, the large vehicles are ALREADY taxed more through the purchase of more gasoline per mile (and gas is taxed).

You can get a decent truck for 10k that won't get horrible milage. Furthermore, you don't need to drive it all of the time. A "beater" truck driven 50mi every couple weekends compared to a "new" truck driven 500-600mi in the same timeframe would have to get 1/12 the mileage. Somehow your excuse doesn't add up.

We legislate morality everywhere. We do it with smoking because of the greater good. We do it for murder. We do it for a crap-ton of things because it's the correct thing to do.

Then I propose to not make it cheap anymore. I don't think we should be driving *ANY* cars as much as we do. Europe survives, we can too.

My excuse does add up because if somebody were to buy a truck for 10k, it would STILL be cheaper to just drive that truck around then it would be to pay for another daily-driver car (cost of car, tabs, insurance).

Another problem I have is that everone wants to draw the line for everyone exactly where they draw the line for themselves.

"I don't drive an SUV, I drive a V6 Sudan". Ok, so you get better gas mileage than the SUV, but somebody out there is going to be driving an I4 sudan...and then somebody else is going to be driving a hybrid...and then somebody else will ride his bike. Where do you draw the line?

 

[rh71]

^ I "studied" how much it costs to have 2 cars - spreadsheet and everything. An Accord and the SUV. Only the Accord was used everyday. It definitely costs more in gas alone to have both cars in that situation than having just the SUV. The reason we kept the SUV only (other than the Accord being older)... it's more practical - it can do more. It doesn't make any sense to have 2 cars for different purposes rather than 1 "do-it-all"... (unless you have more than 1 person driving of course). Spreadsheet available upon request.

 

[Journer]

(i read page 1)
why the hell do people care so much what everyone is driving...its their money...its a free country...you cant prove beyond reasonable doubt it is hurting anyone...so get your nose out of their ****** business >(

 

[tcsenter]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
All the more reason to join the Anti-SUV Brigade!!!

I'm sure the following vehicles, among all others with comparable fuel economy, though not SUVs, would make the grade for inclusion on any SUV-hater's Dishonorable Mention list. Oh...that's right, I forgot:

Gas-guzzling SUVs driven by low-life trailer trash = evil

Gas-guzzling imports with a prestigious nameplate driven by 'sophisticated intellectuals' = A-OK!


Mercedes SL550 Roadster
EPA estimate 14 MPG
Highway estimate(1) 22 MPG
(1) "Your actual highway mileage will probably be less than the highway estimate" - Mercedes

Mercedes SLK350 Roadster
EPA estimate 18 MPG (manual), 19 MPG (automatic)
Highway estimate(1) 25 MPG (manual), 25 MPG (automatic)
(1) "Your actual highway mileage will probably be less than the highway estimate" - Mercedes


BMW 325i (not more than 1MPG difference between Sedan and Coupe)
19.0 MPG City

BMW 335i (not more than 1MPG difference between Sedan and Coupe)
16.0 MPG City

BMW 525i
19.0 MPG City

BMW 540i
14.5 MPG City

BMW ZM4 Roadster
13.0 MPG City

BMW M3 Performance Coupe
11.5 MPG City
17.5 MPG Combined

BMW M5 Performance Sedan
10.5 MPG City
16.0 MPG Combined

Chevy Suburban with Vortec 5.3L V8 (half-ton)
2WD = 15/21 MPG
4x4 = 15/20 MPG

Chevy Tahoe with Vortec 5.3L V8
2WD = 16/22 MPG
4x4 = 15/21 MPG