Thanks GWB

[Strk]

Originally posted by: mc6809e

My Quattro is in 4 wheel drive all the time and I get near 30MPG on the open highway.

People that say such things rarely actually check their mileage. They often end up just guessing (and being overly optimistic about it).

So, have you actually measured your mileage. How did you do it?

Probably not, since a Quattro is rated at around 20mpg.

 

[TravisT]

Originally posted by: GamerExpress
I live in an area where gas prices are not too high, I paid $2.79 a gallon this morning, which is up about $.30 a gallon from last time I got gas on Monday.

I feel sorry for the people that try and stand up for the wasted vote spent on this evil man.

I am also sorry for the children of my generation who will bear the burden of this man, the worst environmental president in history. I really wish he wasn't so busy spending on fighting, and he would actually invest some money into the research and development programs for renewable resources and efficient alternative fuel sources.

I could go on and on, but why bother when it will only fall onto deaf ears.....

An obvious tree hugger.

 

[conjur]

2002 Audi A4 Quattro
http://www.edmunds.com/used/2002/audi/a...d=edmunds.u.prices.leftsidenav..6.Audi*

EPA Mileage Estimates: (City/Highway)
Manual: 18 mpg / 25 mpg Automatic: : 17 mpg / 25 mpg

1.8t Quattro

EPA Mileage Estimates: (City/Highway)
Manual: 21 mpg / 29 mpg Automatic: : 19 mpg / 28 mpg

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: mc6809e

My Quattro is in 4 wheel drive all the time and I get near 30MPG on the open highway.

People that say such things rarely actually check their mileage. They often end up just guessing (and being overly optimistic about it).

So, have you actually measured your mileage. How did you do it?

I fill the tank up, set the tripometer to zero and start driving. When I get close to running out of fuel I fill it back up and note how many gallons I put in and divide the miles driven by the amout of fuel purchased.

It isnt 100% fool proof but I am within 5% IMO.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Strk

Originally posted by: mc6809e

My Quattro is in 4 wheel drive all the time and I get near 30MPG on the open highway.

People that say such things rarely actually check their mileage. They often end up just guessing (and being overly optimistic about it).

So, have you actually measured your mileage. How did you do it?

Probably not, since a Quattro is rated at around 20mpg.

http://www.audiusa.com/features_specifi...l?bodystyle=a4sedan&tab=specifications

EPA fuel economy estimates (city/highway)²:
multitronic: 24/32
manual, FrontTrak: 22/34
manual, quattro: 22/31
Tiptronic: 22/30

 

[BBond]

Originally posted by: mc6809e

My Quattro is in 4 wheel drive all the time and I get near 30MPG on the open highway.

People that say such things rarely actually check their mileage. They often end up just guessing (and being overly optimistic about it).

So, have you actually measured your mileage. How did you do it?

You fill up your tank. Then you record your mileage either by your odometer or by resetting your trip set. The next time you fill up you divide the number of miles you drove by the number of gallons it takes to refill your tank.

My car gets 25 MPG city and 28 MPG highway. It's a compact four cylinder that I only drive when necessary. I walk whenever possible.

I'm sure we'll all be walking more now.

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: ExpertNovice
You're welcome. After liberals wanted gasoline prices to be over $5 a gallon in the 70's and they supported Al Gore who wanted gasoline to cost so much that Americans would be forced to stop driving cars and after they supported John Kerry who the year before he ran again tried to raise taxes on gasoline another fifty cents....

I'm glad we have had this opportunity to see liberals complain about $3 per gallon gasoline with a "conservative" president when the proclaim that the sky is the limit under a liberal president.

It shows the hypocrisy so clearly.

Thank you.

That $0.50 Kerry gas tax was investigated and summarily debunked.

 

[EatSpam]

Originally posted by: GamerExpress

Originally posted by: HardWarrior

Originally posted by: GamerExpressWhat's wrong Bush people....no response, I got some more for you where this came from.

Only a fool would try to defend the indefensible. Speaking of which, I think I?ll listen to some Limbaugh now.

Yep, that's why there are no more responses to try and justify Mr. Bush's actions.

Just wait a sec, maybe Limbaugh will tell him what to type!

 

[Strk]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Strk

Originally posted by: mc6809e

My Quattro is in 4 wheel drive all the time and I get near 30MPG on the open highway.

People that say such things rarely actually check their mileage. They often end up just guessing (and being overly optimistic about it).

So, have you actually measured your mileage. How did you do it?

Probably not, since a Quattro is rated at around 20mpg.

http://www.audiusa.com/features_specifi...l?bodystyle=a4sedan&tab=specifications

EPA fuel economy estimates (city/highway)²:
multitronic: 24/32
manual, FrontTrak: 22/34
manual, quattro: 22/31
Tiptronic: 22/30

Next time be more specific. Anyone who likes Audi will go to the only one that they actually call Quattro, not one that simply has the quattro system in it, since that really doesn't narrow it down at all.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Strk

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Strk

Originally posted by: mc6809e

My Quattro is in 4 wheel drive all the time and I get near 30MPG on the open highway.

People that say such things rarely actually check their mileage. They often end up just guessing (and being overly optimistic about it).

So, have you actually measured your mileage. How did you do it?

Probably not, since a Quattro is rated at around 20mpg.

http://www.audiusa.com/features_specifi...l?bodystyle=a4sedan&tab=specifications

EPA fuel economy estimates (city/highway)²:
multitronic: 24/32
manual, FrontTrak: 22/34
manual, quattro: 22/31
Tiptronic: 22/30

Next time be more specific. Anyone who likes Audi will go to the only one that they actually call Quattro, not one that simply has the quattro system in it, since that really doesn't narrow it down at all.

lmao

 

[Strk]

Originally posted by: Genx87
lmao

What's so funny? You said your "Quattro" gets 30mpg. The only car that actually has it in the title (You know, that thing they call a car) is the Allroad Quattro, which is what I went with instead of guessing which one of the 6 cars that have it available you might own. Yeah, logic, such comedy....

 

[Genx87]

Because the name of the car is actually "Allroad Quattro" kind of like an "A4 Quattro", "A6 Quattro", or "A8 Quattro".

The only reason you dont see a A4 with "Quattro" immediately after the name is because it has an option for front wheel drive. Something only an idiot would purchase.

But I can see how you would be confused. I have talked more than a few times about my A4 in here. Sorry for assuming you knew which model I was talking about.

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: Gaard
Genx87 - I don't know about anyone else, but I'm waiting for you to supply a link stating that the inspectors were denied access to any site. (and please, not from 10 years ago, ok? )

If, as I suspect, that you realize you're wrong on this, will it have any impact at all on your opinion?

 

[HardWarrior]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: HardWarrior

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: ExpertNovice
You're welcome. After liberals wanted gasoline prices to be over $5 a gallon in the 70's and they supported Al Gore who wanted gasoline to cost so much that Americans would be forced to stop driving cars and after they supported John Kerry who the year before he ran again tried to raise taxes on gasoline another fifty cents....

I'm glad we have had this opportunity to see liberals complain about $3 per gallon gasoline with a "conservative" president when the proclaim that the sky is the limit under a liberal president.

It shows the hypocrisy so clearly.

Thank you.

Yet what EN says is the truth. Liberal types have been trying to manipulate us out of driving for a very long time.

You show yourself to be an expert novice once again. Maybe one day you can move up to novice begineer?

I think not, they just wanted to make it more expensive. A tax used to explore and/or finance alternative energies makes sense to me. There are too many people driving around in SUV's that don't really need them. They're just making a "statement".

That's fine, but their "statement" is hurting the rest of us. I think we should charge more for gas for the "gas guzzlers". If they still want to drive it, then fine.

Do you have any idea how many people are driving around with 4 wheel drive that never use it?

Isn't making something more expensive, as a tactic of social engineering, akin to displaying dislike for and an urge to destroy that thing? In all the blather I've heard from liberals wanting to do away with cars, none of it mentioned using fuel taxes for anything other than feeding an immensely wasteful and arrogant government. As for what people drive, TBH, I couldn't care less. I'll never support bureaucracies that take it upon themselves to punish FREE people for their choices. That would be tantamount to aiding and abetting a monster because it acts out my jealousies.

"Gas guzzers" aren't the problem, our open and steadfast refusal to find alternate fuels is the problem.

 

[wildcat86]

Originally posted by: GamerExpress
Oh and don't forget also Bush's buddy Cheney, he likes to send money his way too.....

Cheney's Halliburton has received over $7 billion in contracts from the war in Iraq, many of them without bidding ? that's just the way things work inside Bush's beltway.

Hm, no one questioned Clinton granting Halliburton no bid contracts in Kosovo did they?

Halliburton is the only company with the logistics and resources capable of Iraqs reconstruction.

But, that has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

 

[imported_Condor]

Oh, don't have a dog in this race - moving on!

 

[farscape]

Bush's fault for high gas prices??????

Let's take a look.

The best was to lower a price on something is to have an abundant and adequate supply of the item.
In the case of gasoline you need the raw material - OIL.

Because of the NIMBY mentality, you "can't drill" on the west coast, on the east coast, around the Florida coast, and are severly limited in the Gulf of Mexico, Alaska or anywhere oil is found in and around this country.

Even IF unfettered oil drilling was to be allowed - just try to build a refinery. Because of environmental studies, NIMBY, regulations, and God knows whatever other blockade that can be thrown at it - it will never be built - and one hasen't been built since when - the 70s???

Damn, if 100 trillion barrels of the most environmentally perfect crude was ever found under Andarctica, the world environmental lobby would try to stop it because ice would be trampled on.

If you took all the vehicles in the US today, and replaced all of them today with hybrids, you would be be right back where we are today within 6 years.


We need energy - build a nuclear power plant - no can do. What will we do with the waste.
Build windmills - great idea, as long as you turn them all off because, darn it - birds fly into them.
Build a dam. Oops, some mudpuppy or other thing that inhabits 500 sq ft of area will stop it from happening. Or three canoers will never get to see a poopoo tree or something.

Yep - all Bush's fault.

Get your head out of your ass.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: wildcat86
Hm, no one questioned Clinton granting Halliburton no bid contracts in Kosovo did they?

Halliburton is the only company with the logistics and resources capable of Iraqs reconstruction.

But, that has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

:thumbsup:

I too always laugh when I see the idiots blaming Cheney and Bush and talking "no bid contracts" ... Clinton did this routinely, and not just in Kosovo. And not a word was said about it.

I guess everything looks different depending on the color of your spectacles (blue or red)...

 

[HardWarrior]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: wildcat86
Hm, no one questioned Clinton granting Halliburton no bid contracts in Kosovo did they?

Halliburton is the only company with the logistics and resources capable of Iraqs reconstruction.

But, that has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

:thumbsup:

I too always laugh when I see the idiots blaming Cheney and Bush and talking "no bid contracts" ... Clinton did this routinely, and not just in Kosovo. And not a word was said about it.

I guess everything looks different depending on the color of your spectacles (blue or red)...

"Clinton did it too!!!" is starting to wear pretty thin as a justification. It was wrong then and it's wrong now. Can we at least admit the the scale is different and that Clinton has been out of office long enough to be a bad memory?

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: HardWarrior
What the presidents of the fossil fuel era did or didn't do can't be used as an excuse for the Bush administrations mistakes, Pab. Isn't it at least possible that the feds unrelenting pressure and manipulation on the world?s foremost oil producing region at least partially responsible for pump prices? Iraq could have long since repaired and modernized their pumping facilities if we would have just left them the hell alone. In addition, as far as I'm concerned, the $2 billion a week we're spending on failed "nation building" would go a LONG way towards fuel cell technology, whether big oil liked it or not.

Buzz. Thanks for playing!

Yeah, I mean, you got to be right.

After all, the Feds had nothing to do with any of this until Bush 43 came along...

We should have just left old Saddam alone. He surely would have put those billions in oil-for-food revenues to good use, modernizing his oil infrastructure. Are you really THAT nieve?

Now, just to make matters worse, Mr. Bush is saying we have to remain in Iraq to stop bin Laden from gaining control of Iraqi oil." If was safe from that BEFORE we blundered in. But then again, why would reality matter to our malignant narcissist of a president?

You show me the quote where Bush said just that...Or are you paraphrasing and conveinently forgot to mention it?

GamerExpress: I believe I have "pw3nd" both of you

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: HardWarrior
"Clinton did it too!!!" is starting to wear pretty thin as a justification. It was wrong then and it's wrong now. Can we at least admit the the scale is different and that Clinton has been out of office long enough to be a bad memory?

Can we at least admit that the same idiots criticzing Bush/Cheney for these items refuse to admit their party did the same damn thing and that they never spoke a word about it until the other party did it?

How easy to say "It was wrong then and it's wrong now" when the THEN has so long ago passed with not a word spoken...

 

[HardWarrior]

Originally posted by: PabsterBuzz. Thanks for playing!

Yeah, I mean, you got to be right.

After all, the Feds had nothing to do with any of this until Bush 43 came along...

We should have just left old Saddam alone. He surely would have put those billions in oil-for-food revenues to good use, modernizing his oil infrastructure. Are you really THAT nieve?

Thanks for playing? Now there's a useless, obscure pop reference if I've ever heard one.

Bush has been president for 5-years. The buck stops with him, and that's the way it's always been and you know it.

Yes, we should have left Iraq alone from the start, and that goes back to the GODDAMN CIA helping to install Hussein and kissing his ass no matter what he did. The fed simply is NOT responsible for the rest of the world, in any shape, form or fashion. And please no insults or self-serving references to my supposed naivete, I've spoken to you in a calm, measured manner. As such, it's only fair to expect the same in return.

You show me the quote where Bush said just that...Or are you paraphrasing and conveinently forgot to mention it?

You'll have to find it for yourself, if you really need proof.

 

[HardWarrior]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: HardWarrior
"Clinton did it too!!!" is starting to wear pretty thin as a justification. It was wrong then and it's wrong now. Can we at least admit the the scale is different and that Clinton has been out of office long enough to be a bad memory?

Can we at least admit that the same idiots criticzing Bush/Cheney for these items refuse to admit their party did the same damn thing and that they never spoke a word about it until the other party did it?

How easy to say "It was wrong then and it's wrong now" when the THEN has so long ago passed with not a word spoken...

I despised Clinton, and I despise Bush. They're both pampered dandies who the American people should have been smart enough not to elect. TBH, I think your memories of the time are a bit tilted. Clinton took loads of heat for the BS he pulled and was, after all, impeached.

Indeed, it is easy, because my purpose in life is not to protect a piss-poor president like Mr. Bush from his own actions by frantically pouring over 229 years of history looking for excuse-friendly corollaries. By your frame of reference, when will Bush be responsible for what's happened on his watch, one term beyond his last day in office?

 

[GamerExpress]

Originally posted by: Genx87
Because the name of the car is actually "Allroad Quattro" kind of like an "A4 Quattro", "A6 Quattro", or "A8 Quattro".

The only reason you dont see a A4 with "Quattro" immediately after the name is because it has an option for front wheel drive. Something only an idiot would purchase.

But I can see how you would be confused. I have talked more than a few times about my A4 in here. Sorry for assuming you knew which model I was talking about.

OHHHH aren't you special.....lol

 

[HardWarrior]

Originally posted by: GamerExpress

Originally posted by: Genx87
Because the name of the car is actually "Allroad Quattro" kind of like an "A4 Quattro", "A6 Quattro", or "A8 Quattro".

The only reason you dont see a A4 with "Quattro" immediately after the name is because it has an option for front wheel drive. Something only an idiot would purchase.

But I can see how you would be confused. I have talked more than a few times about my A4 in here. Sorry for assuming you knew which model I was talking about.

OHHHH aren't you special.....lol