which is pretty much the first thing people think of when they see one on the road..but never badmouth Ferraris/Lamborghinis/Vipers when they see one? Cars which get even worse gas mileage than Hummers do?
Why do people rag on Hummers for being horrible in fuel economy..
- Thread starter Syringer
- Start date
AgaBoogaBoo
Lifer
- Feb 16, 2003
- 26,108
- 5
- 81
Well, you don't exactly drive a Lamborghini back and forth everyday on smooth pavement everyday, but I know people who do that with hummers.
Because people who buy hummers are largely just moron conformists trying to look cool to their friends and family. People who buy lambos and ferraris are usually true enthusiasts who have an appreciation for the car and may actually be intelligent people.
Sorry about the poor english, I'm really tried =\
Sorry about the poor english, I'm really tried =\
Well, all the high performance sports cars I have ever seen drove only on smooth pavement. I have never seen a Lambo offroad!
Hummer is veiwed as inefficient due to their size and their market positioning. They are being marketed (and used) as everyday vehicles. Sports cars on the other hand seem to have a sort of understanding in the market as alternative, weekend vehicles....and therefore not subject to as much criticism.
Siddhartha
Lifer
- Oct 17, 1999
- 12,505
- 3
- 81
Originally posted by: Sundog
Well, all the high performance sports cars I have ever seen drove only on smooth pavement. I have never seen a Lambo offroad!
I think the issue trying to be focused on is that most people buy hummers have them as daily drivers, thus making them consume an exorbitant amount of gas. People that buy exotic sports cars like lamborghini's or ferrari's have them as weekend fun cars that won't eat up nearly as much gas over the course of a year as a daily driven hummer.
AgaBoogaBoo
Lifer
- Feb 16, 2003
- 26,108
- 5
- 81
Originally posted by: Sundog
Well, all the high performance sports cars I have ever seen drove only on smooth pavement. I have never seen a Lambo offroad!
Hehe, I mean the same for the Hummer. I have yet to see one off road! Except when I saw one go on a curb once and it almost flipped... lol
AgaBoogaBoo
Lifer
- Feb 16, 2003
- 26,108
- 5
- 81
Siddhartha
Lifer
- Oct 17, 1999
- 12,505
- 3
- 81
UglyCasanova
Lifer
- Mar 25, 2001
- 19,275
- 1,361
- 126
Originally posted by: Sundog
Well, all the high performance sports cars I have ever seen drove only on smooth pavement. I have never seen a Lambo offroad!
I have,
Because the Hummer sells in more volume and is typically used as a daily driver.
Who drives a Ferrarri/Lambo to/from work?
One question. What the hell does a yuppy that lives in the middle of a city gonna do with a hummer. They do eat alot of gas, they are to wide for the road, and jesus is it Wubuwa Wubuwa Three?
AgaBoogaBoo
Lifer
- Feb 16, 2003
- 26,108
- 5
- 81
Originally posted by: no0b
Originally posted by: Sundog
Well, all the high performance sports cars I have ever seen drove only on smooth pavement. I have never seen a Lambo offroad!
I have,
lol
Because city yuppies have too much pride to have a messed up super sports car after an accident. They buy hummers...so when they get into accidents their hummer is fine...and the person they hit is dead.
this is why
SUVs Go To War
What Would Arnold Drive?
What kind of world would it be if someone set your car ablaze because it guzzled too much fuel? A better one, argues the Earth Liberation Front, a loosely-organized ecoterrorist organization that spray-painted environmentalist graffiti such as "gross polluter "and "fat, lazy Americans" on 30 sport utility vehicles at two car dealerships and set fire to a third on Aug. 22. Several SUVs and 20 Hummer H2s were destroyed. On Fire.
On Sept. 2, 22 more SUVs were trashed at a Houston car dealership. (Police have arrested a man in connection with the California incident.)
Ecoterrorism expert Bron Taylor of the University of Wisconsin at Oshkosh, says that ELF believes "that ecosystems have an inherent worth that cannot be judged in relation to human needs, that human actions are bringing the earth toward mass extinctions, and that political action is insufficient to bring about the wholesale changes needed."
Taken at face value, most Americans agree with the "elves." A Los Angeles Times survey found that, even among conservative Republicans, two out of three people believe that the environment is more important than property rights, corporate profits or even creating jobs. Virtually everyone acknowledges that human-generated pollution is affecting the environment: only eight percent of Americans think that global warming is a myth. (The United States produces more greenhouse gases, both per capita and overall, than any other nation, making it largely responsible for climate change.)
The environmental crisis is, hands down, the most important matter facing humanity today. Who cares about peace in the Middle East if the region is under water, stricken by famine or choked by dust storms? Weather systems are becoming increasingly violent and unpredictable, species are going extinct and virgin-growth forests are vanishing at an alarming rate. While smog has diminished somewhat in places like Denver and Los Angeles, air pollution is getting worse nationally. Ohio's EPA, for example, announced that 2002 was the most toxic summer on record in 14 years.
The main reason: SUVs.
What should we do about this long-ignored crisis? Writing letters to the editor and joining The Sierra Club are admirable, but working within the system hasn't stopped the polluters.
Burning SUVs isn't the answer, argues the Sport Utility Vehicle Owners Association of America: "All told, the vandalism will not make any company think twice about producing more SUVs and other light trucks, nor will it shake the tremendous consumer confidence in the vehicles. Instead, the blaze destroyed the property of a small business owner, and put the lives of innocent civil servants in harm's way."
But SUVs are a national blight, burning 33 percent more gas, generating 30 percent more carbon monoxide and 75 percent more nitrogen oxide than regular cars. SUVs are so popular - they account for more than half of new car sales - that average fuel efficiency reversed a long-term trend by starting to drop beginning in 1987. Since 1990, SUVs have wasted an extra 70 billion gallons of gasoline, costing even more than the war on Iraq. They're the sole reason we dropped out of the Kyoto Protocol to reduce greenhouse gases. SUVs have got to go.
The SUV phenomenon is the creation of an unholy alliance of Congress, Detroit automakers and consumers. The big four automakers have convinced even the legislators they don't own outright that eliminating SUVs would hurt the economy. SUV owners think the 9,000-pound leviathans make them safer than passenger cars (though studies have proven they're not), are better at handling snow (untrue), drive off-road (very few SUVs ever leave the pavement), offer extra room for big families (get a minivan instead, dope) and let them see ahead of smaller cars (while blocking the vehicles behind them). The Republican-controlled Congress has no intention of closing the fuel emissions loophole that lets SUVs pass as "light trucks." And the SUV craze is making Detroit more profitable than ever.
That leaves consumers and dealers as the principal targets of radical environmentalists like the ELF. The idea is to make SUVs as unfashionable, and as scary to own, as fur became after the PETA-inspired spray-paint attacks of the '80s. In an ideal world, American consumers could be convinced to do the right thing through an appeal to logic with public service messages like the "What Would Jesus Drive?" TV campaign, but the kind of people who would buy a car that increases the risk to other motorists in an accident can't be reasoned with. They're selfish and stupid. It's unfortunate that drivers must worry that their SUVs are being targeted by insulting stickers and Molotov cocktails, but one thing's for sure: it couldn't be happening to a more deserving group of people.
Ted Rall
SUVs Go To War
What Would Arnold Drive?
What kind of world would it be if someone set your car ablaze because it guzzled too much fuel? A better one, argues the Earth Liberation Front, a loosely-organized ecoterrorist organization that spray-painted environmentalist graffiti such as "gross polluter "and "fat, lazy Americans" on 30 sport utility vehicles at two car dealerships and set fire to a third on Aug. 22. Several SUVs and 20 Hummer H2s were destroyed. On Fire.
On Sept. 2, 22 more SUVs were trashed at a Houston car dealership. (Police have arrested a man in connection with the California incident.)
Ecoterrorism expert Bron Taylor of the University of Wisconsin at Oshkosh, says that ELF believes "that ecosystems have an inherent worth that cannot be judged in relation to human needs, that human actions are bringing the earth toward mass extinctions, and that political action is insufficient to bring about the wholesale changes needed."
Taken at face value, most Americans agree with the "elves." A Los Angeles Times survey found that, even among conservative Republicans, two out of three people believe that the environment is more important than property rights, corporate profits or even creating jobs. Virtually everyone acknowledges that human-generated pollution is affecting the environment: only eight percent of Americans think that global warming is a myth. (The United States produces more greenhouse gases, both per capita and overall, than any other nation, making it largely responsible for climate change.)
The environmental crisis is, hands down, the most important matter facing humanity today. Who cares about peace in the Middle East if the region is under water, stricken by famine or choked by dust storms? Weather systems are becoming increasingly violent and unpredictable, species are going extinct and virgin-growth forests are vanishing at an alarming rate. While smog has diminished somewhat in places like Denver and Los Angeles, air pollution is getting worse nationally. Ohio's EPA, for example, announced that 2002 was the most toxic summer on record in 14 years.
The main reason: SUVs.
What should we do about this long-ignored crisis? Writing letters to the editor and joining The Sierra Club are admirable, but working within the system hasn't stopped the polluters.
Burning SUVs isn't the answer, argues the Sport Utility Vehicle Owners Association of America: "All told, the vandalism will not make any company think twice about producing more SUVs and other light trucks, nor will it shake the tremendous consumer confidence in the vehicles. Instead, the blaze destroyed the property of a small business owner, and put the lives of innocent civil servants in harm's way."
But SUVs are a national blight, burning 33 percent more gas, generating 30 percent more carbon monoxide and 75 percent more nitrogen oxide than regular cars. SUVs are so popular - they account for more than half of new car sales - that average fuel efficiency reversed a long-term trend by starting to drop beginning in 1987. Since 1990, SUVs have wasted an extra 70 billion gallons of gasoline, costing even more than the war on Iraq. They're the sole reason we dropped out of the Kyoto Protocol to reduce greenhouse gases. SUVs have got to go.
The SUV phenomenon is the creation of an unholy alliance of Congress, Detroit automakers and consumers. The big four automakers have convinced even the legislators they don't own outright that eliminating SUVs would hurt the economy. SUV owners think the 9,000-pound leviathans make them safer than passenger cars (though studies have proven they're not), are better at handling snow (untrue), drive off-road (very few SUVs ever leave the pavement), offer extra room for big families (get a minivan instead, dope) and let them see ahead of smaller cars (while blocking the vehicles behind them). The Republican-controlled Congress has no intention of closing the fuel emissions loophole that lets SUVs pass as "light trucks." And the SUV craze is making Detroit more profitable than ever.
That leaves consumers and dealers as the principal targets of radical environmentalists like the ELF. The idea is to make SUVs as unfashionable, and as scary to own, as fur became after the PETA-inspired spray-paint attacks of the '80s. In an ideal world, American consumers could be convinced to do the right thing through an appeal to logic with public service messages like the "What Would Jesus Drive?" TV campaign, but the kind of people who would buy a car that increases the risk to other motorists in an accident can't be reasoned with. They're selfish and stupid. It's unfortunate that drivers must worry that their SUVs are being targeted by insulting stickers and Molotov cocktails, but one thing's for sure: it couldn't be happening to a more deserving group of people.
Ted Rall
AgaBoogaBoo
Lifer
- Feb 16, 2003
- 26,108
- 5
- 81
Cliff Notes
But SUVs are a national blight, burning 33 percent more gas, generating 30 percent more carbon monoxide and 75 percent more nitrogen oxide than regular cars. SUVs are so popular - they account for more than half of new car sales - that average fuel efficiency reversed a long-term trend by starting to drop beginning in 1987. Since 1990, SUVs have wasted an extra 70 billion gallons of gasoline, costing even more than the war on Iraq. They're the sole reason we dropped out of the Kyoto Protocol to reduce greenhouse gases. SUVs have got to go
But SUVs are a national blight, burning 33 percent more gas, generating 30 percent more carbon monoxide and 75 percent more nitrogen oxide than regular cars. SUVs are so popular - they account for more than half of new car sales - that average fuel efficiency reversed a long-term trend by starting to drop beginning in 1987. Since 1990, SUVs have wasted an extra 70 billion gallons of gasoline, costing even more than the war on Iraq. They're the sole reason we dropped out of the Kyoto Protocol to reduce greenhouse gases. SUVs have got to go
how many of those do you see on the road on a daily basis? I see the new Hummer daily, not to mention the 100's of SUVs you see on a 2 mile trip to the store
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter