Get ready for the BMW 3-series GT

[rh71]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: rh71
Congratulations, by your definition, the X5 is a crossover vehicle too. You've wasted your precious time proving yourself wrong. Glad I can help.

and your buddy KIA wrote:
except for the X3/X5 and Q5/Q6. Those are built around their respective sedans shouldn't even qualify as a SUV...

You're like the guy who argues because nobody listens to you otherwise.

What sedan body is the X5 based on again? Oh yeah, nothing. FAIL.

Body? I guess I gave you more credit than you deserve... I thought you meant to say chassis. We all know crossovers are not true truck frames... they are a car chassis... agree? So you're actually saying these car chassis are moved to... car bodies? :laugh:

I mean think about it, people are buying crossovers instead of traditional SUVs because they didn't like how they handled (but liked the utility, height, etc.)... hence the car chassis. And now on these car chassis, you're throwing on a... sedan body. Wow, you're going places. Have you contacted Detroit, maybe people will buy these... sedans.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: rh71

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: rh71
Congratulations, by your definition, the X5 is a crossover vehicle too. You've wasted your precious time proving yourself wrong. Glad I can help.

and your buddy KIA wrote:
except for the X3/X5 and Q5/Q6. Those are built around their respective sedans shouldn't even qualify as a SUV...

You're like the guy who argues because nobody listens to you otherwise.

What sedan body is the X5 based on again? Oh yeah, nothing. FAIL.

Body? I guess I gave you more credit than you deserve... I thought you meant to say chassis. We all know crossovers are not true truck frames... they are a car chassis... agree? So you're actually saying these car chassis are moved to... car bodies? :laugh:

I mean think about it, people are buying crossovers instead of traditional SUVs because they didn't like how they handled (but liked the utility, height, etc.)... hence the car chassis. And now on these car chassis, you're throwing on a... sedan body. Wow, you're going places. Have you contacted Detroit, maybe people will buy these... sedans.

I think it's more like you give yourself more credit than your feeble mind can handle. Unibody construction means the body IS the chassis. Nice try at failing again.

I'm going to quote the Rules of Debating on the internet for you, as you've used roughly 6 of the 7 so far in your daft responses.

1. Turn someone?s generality into an absolute. For example, if someone makes a general statement that Americans celebrate Christmas, point out that some people are Jewish and so anyone who thinks that ALL Americans celebrate Christmas is stupid. (Bonus points for accusing the person of being anti-Semitic.)

2. Turn someone?s factual statements into implied preferences. For example, if someone mentions that not all Catholic priests are pedophiles, accuse the person who said it of siding with pedophiles.

3. Turn factual statements into implied equivalents. For example, if someone says that Ghandi didn?t eat cows, accuse the person of stupidly implying that cows deserve equal billing with Gandhi.

4. Omit key words. For example, if someone says that people can?t eat rocks, accuse the person of being stupid for suggesting that people can?t eat. Bonus points for arguing that some people CAN eat pebbles if they try hard enough.

5. Assume the dumbest interpretation. For example, if someone says that he can run a mile in 12 minutes, assume he means it happens underwater and argue that no one can hold his breath that long.

6. Hallucinate entirely different points. For example, if someone says apples grow on trees, accuse him of saying snakes have arms and then point out how stupid that is.

7. Use the intellectual laziness card. For example, if someone says that ice is cold, recommend that he take graduate courses in chemistry and meteorology before jumping to stupid conclusions that display a complete ignorance of the complexity of ice

Pretty much sums up your debating skills.