ELF :: Car Dealer attacks [SUVs]

[badtz]

http://www.earthliberationfront.com/news/2003/082203.shtml

All somewhat nearby where I am.

I don't necessarily condone this type of extreme action, but something inside me is rooting for ELF :p

[Argento]

Originally posted by badtz
http://www.earthliberationfront.com/news/2003/082203.shtml

All somewhat nearby where I am.

I don't necessarily condone this type of extreme action, but something inside me is rooting for ELF :p

Eh tell me where your car is then, and after I'm done with it we'll see if you're still rooting for them.:rolleyes:

[Wagnerite]

i dont have a gas guzzler. i dont need a big a$$ Hummer to drive myself around.

i somehow dont think ELF will target my car.

parts of me think it's kind of extreme. also, like the person who started this thread, some parts of me also root for ELF as well.

[Scott]

Rooting for what? I'm sure ELF's endpoint is not what you have in mind. Give up your Tyler Derden fantasies while you can.

[SDW2001]

Rooting for them? I ask you to believe me that I am not trying to insult you...but are you certifiably insane? The ELF has a .pdf on their website showing people how to start fires with electrical timers. They advocate extreme environmental terrorism.

Maybe you haven't seen this picture on their page? (www.earthliberationfront.com). They advocate and claim responsibility for burning down housing developments.

This is terrorism. Pure and simple. They will not stop or even slow urban sprawl this way. They risk lives. They destroy personal property. I cannot respect any person who "roots for" them.



Let me post it one more time:

"SDW, the board doesn't lean Left". :lol:

[Moogs]

Tyler does not support ELF and its crunchy, granola-loving members. In point of fact he would kick all of their vegetarian asses if only he had enough time. He does note however, that his soap sells extremely well with rabid tree huggers.

Tyler does not spray-paint car dealerships, instead he uses creative methods to enlighten the world about excess want and wealth accumulation. Tyler... is evolved.



That said, the fact that Detroit continues to make and market bigger and bigger Suburban Utility Vehicles, and refuses to make concessions on gas mileage targets for all vehicles, makes me hope for a new invention that puts them out of business. H2s are just... laughable. How small does your penis (or brain if you're a woman) have to be in order to covet one of these things?

[Eugene]

ELF's actions are probably going to have no effect on the demand for SUVs. Maybe a few people will have a change of heart, but there are going to be intentionally defiant purchases too.

They just end up increasing the production at the automakers and raising insurance rates for all of us. Great. More natural resources wasted.

[Powerdoc]

These people are stupid and ridiculous.

The augmentation of the number of big cars who pollute the atmosphere is a serious issue, but the individuals freedoom are important also. I don't want to have a censor behind me, who explain me all day and all night what is good and bad.
Let's imagine some similars actions :
- paint on the face of any smoker : pollute, kill himself and his neigbours
- paint beans cans : don't eat them or you will produce methane

...

[Eugene]

How small does your penis (or brain if you're a woman) have to be in order to covet one of these things?
Pfft. H2s are bought by rich guys with trophy wives and beach houses... not by insecure dot-com nerds. Not anymore at least.

I'm just waiting for some arsonists, firefighters or miscellaneous random people to get seriously hurt.

[tmp]

Kind of funny that they decry pollution by setting fire to an oil-filled, plastic laden SUV.

[Placebo]

Originally posted by tmp
Kind of funny that they decry pollution by setting fire to an oil-filled, plastic laden SUV.
Ironic, huh? And the last time this happened, the guy smoked a cig before they blew the SUV lot sky-high...I hate SUVs, but why not slash their tires instead?

[Moogs]

Originally posted by Eugene
Pfft. H2s are bought by rich guys with trophy wives and beach houses... not by insecure dot-com nerds. Not anymore at least.

Yah, because there are no rich guys who have both trophy wives and small penii. A guy can have all the trophies in christendom and still feel awful insecure about that little wiener of his. That's why they like H2's -- makes them feel like they can run over the big-peckered guy in the beat up Oldsmobile.

:lol:


Hint: trophy wives seek out money before all else. So after they get married to the rich guy, they fuk the pool boy when [the husband with the small pecker] is at work.
;)

[Moogs]

delete me.

[Eugene]

Originally posted by Moogs
Yah, because there are no rich guys who have both trophy wives and small penii.
Pretty much. Most of the rich guys here were captains of their rowing or lacrosse teams in high school and college and were probably fed nothing but prime cut porterhouses as children. Plus, they come from old money, where generations of hot and fit chicks mated to hot and fit dudes have stacked the family gene pool.

[badtz]

I'm not actually rooting for ELF themselves [as environmental extremists] ... but I'm [quiet but consciously] rooting for the act they did.

My rooting basically equates to "hate SUVs = blowing them up".

I really don't think peoples "right to freedom" means the right to own a big oversized everyday vehicle that gets 10mpg! There's SO many cons to driving a SUV it's rediculous. Our freedom stems from taking advantage of other countries, and giving our citizens the pseudo-reality that you can do whatever you choose to do.

I already feel bad driving a car that gets 25-30, let alone 10 or less mpg!

Of course, this is all imo. :\

[1seaside1]

Well badtz, if you feel so bad about the gas milage your car gets, then don't drive.

What you don't realize is that your comment is the exact reason car makers produce bigger and bigger SUV's--because even though everyone complains about them, massive amounts of consumers still buy them. Car makers are a business, here on this planet to provide a product and make a profit. As long as they make a profit they will keep producing SUV's. The marketplace produces results.

[Eugene]

Originally posted by badtz

My rooting basically equates to "hate SUVs = blowing them up".
I hate kittens. Let's blow them up. Don't be stupid. Burning down car dealerships isn't going to do anything but take money out of insurers (and out of your pocket subsequently), inflate Detroit's production numbers, ruin a businessman's life, seriously injure people, create a lot of toxic smoke.

[Scott]

Originally posted by badtz
I'm not actually rooting for ELF themselves [as environmental extremists] ... but I'm [quiet but consciously] rooting for the act they did.

My rooting basically equates to "hate SUVs = blowing them up".

So you just blow up things you don't like? How intelligent of you.

Originally posted by badtz
I really don't think peoples "right to freedom" means the right to own a big oversized everyday vehicle that gets 10mpg!

Bill of Rights. Read it. Love it.

Originally posted by badtz
There's SO many cons to driving a SUV it's rediculous. Our freedom stems from taking advantage of other countries,

So let's see. We give them money for their oil and therefor because we pay the price they set we are taking advantage of them? Some would say that OPEC takes advantage of every country that guys oil from them? Maybe we should blow them up?

Originally posted by badtz
and giving our citizens the pseudo-reality that you can do whatever you choose to do.

It's never been a reality (or even a "pseduo-reality") that you can do what ever you choose to do.

Originally posted by badtz
I already feel bad driving a car that gets 25-30, let alone 10 or less mpg!

Of course, this is all imo. :\

Yea but when you support actions like the ELF you opinion aint just another opinion anymore. You need to recommit yourself to individual rights and respect for other people, even the one's you don't agree with.

[LoCash]

Originally posted by badtz

I really don't think peoples "right to freedom" means the right to own a big oversized everyday vehicle that gets 10mpg!

Actually, that's exactly what it means. It also means that we are free to buy an electric vehicle, or a motorcycle, or take public transit.

[Eugene]

Originally posted by Eugene
I hate kittens. Let's blow them up.
Incidentally, I just stumbled upon this:
http://www.mrandmrswheatley.co.uk/catbang.html

[badtz]

Originally posted by 1seaside1
Well badtz, if you feel so bad about the gas milage your car gets, then don't drive.

What you don't realize is that your comment is the exact reason car makers produce bigger and bigger SUV's--because even though everyone complains about them, massive amounts of consumers still buy them. Car makers are a business, here on this planet to provide a product and make a profit. As long as they make a profit they will keep producing SUV's. The marketplace produces results.

Unfortunately, most major metropolitan cities in the US aren't designed to be pedestrian friendly and more or less require you to own a vehicle. I feel bad because of the fact we don't have a more efficient solution to our gas guzzling methods to get around.

I do realize that their is a "market" for SUVs, hence why [unfortunately] there's so many of them around. :\

[badtz]

Originally posted by Eugene
I hate kittens. Let's blow them up. Don't be stupid. Burning down car dealerships isn't going to do anything but take money out of insurers (and out of your pocket subsequently), inflate Detroit's production numbers, ruin a businessman's life, seriously injure people, create a lot of toxic smoke.

Hey, I hate kittens too! Let's blow them up!

As you've misunderstood, I never stated that blowing things up is the answer! My statement was referring to my own thoughts about the incident (semi-sub-consciouly). Internally I don't disprove of the incident as much as I should be, and that's just being honest. I'm not rooting for extremists to express themselves in extreme manners.

Isn't it obvious theres economic consequences on many people from such events?

[badtz]

Originally posted by LoCash
Actually, that's exactly what it means. It also means that we are free to buy an electric vehicle, or a motorcycle, or take public transit.

But does that mean we're free to polute the environment in excess?

I guess if that's what you want to do ...... :\

[Eugene]

Originally posted by badtz
Hey, I hate kittens too! Let's blow them up!

As you've misunderstood, I never stated that blowing things up is the answer! My statement was referring to my own thoughts about the incident (semi-sub-consciouly). Internally I don't disprove of the incident as much as I should be, and that's just being honest. I'm not rooting for extremists to express themselves in extreme manners.

Isn't it obvious theres economic consequences on many people from such events?
And let me be honest. You're a retard for even semi-fantastical-subconsciously aligning yourself with those thoughts.

[Longhorn]

My work was attacked by these jokers a few years back. They used superglue, spray paint, glass etcher and the like.

The results?

We bought replacement vehicles with the insurance money, toxic chemicals were sprayed all over the place, and we sent a pile of stuff to the junkyard.

Morons.

[Eugene]

Originally posted by badtz
But does that mean we're free to polute the environment in excess?

I guess if that's what you want to do ...... :\
Well since you recently got a Sony-Ericsson T616, which is brand new, you should realize that they come from smoke billowing factories in Taiwan. All that so you could yammer on in a restaurant or someplace...and take pics of the Ivory Toad of Shanghai or freckled kids standing next to Dip road signs.

[Longhorn]

Reminds me of the ****wits who attacked the research labs around here and "released" the rats/other test animals into the wild to be free.

When they found them the animals were all dead from either exposure or predation.

Stupid tree hugger morons.

[badtz]

Originally posted by Scott
So you just blow up things you don't like? How intelligent of you.


obviously you didn't understand precisely what I meant by my statement?


Bill of Rights. Read it. Love it.


Gas guzzling = polution = right ?


So let's see. We give them money for their oil and therefor because we pay the price they set we are taking advantage of them? Some would say that OPEC takes advantage of every country that guys oil from them? Maybe we should blow them up?


We buy oil from them to deplete their supply before we use our own, when the day comes where oil is less abundant. Smart of us ehh? We take advantage of other countries because we have the power to. It still doesn't mean we should me using gas inefficiently and pollute our own envionment? Is it necessary to drive a car that gets 10mpg? Please!



It's never been a reality (or even a "pseduo-reality") that you can do what ever you choose to do.


Sure you can, unfortunately we take advantage of that when we can also.


Yea but when you support actions like the ELF you opinion aint just another opinion anymore. You need to recommit yourself to individual rights and respect for other people, even the one's you don't agree with.

I never directly agreed with the actions of the ELF. I stated specifically that I don't necessarily support extreme actions. I just stated what I felt internally that I quasi don't despise their [elf] actions as much as I would usually like to. Because of it's relation to SUVs.

:\

[badtz]

Originally posted by Eugene
Well since you recently got a Sony-Ericsson T616, which is brand new, you should realize that they come from smoke billowing factories in Taiwan. All that so you could yammer on in a restaurant or someplace...and take pics of the Ivory Toad of Shanghai or freckled kids standing next to Dip road signs.

I never stated that all things pollutant are bad [even though they are] did I?

For somewhat necessary items [house, car, cell phone] I personally can deal with.

Carbon Monoxide is easily a high polluter to this earth, and buying an unnecessary high-polluting vehicle isn't a very efficient way of dealing with this problem.

[badtz]

Originally posted by Eugene
And let me be honest. You're a retard for even semi-fantastical-subconsciously aligning yourself with those thoughts.

Well I'm sorry you feel like that... you're entitled to your opinion.

Hopefully you'll be able to get your Suburban past 110mph someday.

[Eugene]

Originally posted by badtz
I never stated that all things pollutant are bad
Oh.
even though they are] did I?
Gosh, and now have. How convenient for me.

For somewhat necessary items [house, car, cell phone] I personally can deal with.
Live in a cave. Use your feet. Talk to people in person.

Carbon Monoxide is easily a high polluter to this earth, and buying an unnecessary high-polluting vehicle isn't a very efficient way of dealing with this problem.
So are detergents, batteries, plastics, etc.

[Eugene]

Originally posted by badtz
Well I'm sorry you feel like that... you're entitled to your opinion.

Hopefully you'll be able to get your Suburban past 110mph someday.
I've gotten it up to 115 on I5 actually. Just remember your position on pollutants and wastefulness when your T616 becomes passé in two months and you go out phone shopping again, buy legumes grown with the aid of pesticides (or even worse, organically), wash your dishes, wash your clothes, etc.

[Argento]

here are a list of things I don't like that other people have.

Cats
Annoying Children
Window Chimes
Compost piles
Furnaces
Wells
Houses

So now I'm going to go beat, smash and destroy the hell out of them. Who's with me?!?!?!

[Wagnerite]

Originally posted by Argento
here are a list of things I don't like that other people have.

Cats
Annoying Children
Window Chimes
Compost piles
Furnaces
Wells
Houses

So now I'm going to go beat, smash and destroy the hell out of them. Who's with me?!?!?!

i will, we'll start with your cats, annoying children, window chimes and so on

[Argento]

Also, all houses that don't have solar panels on their roofs to provide for at least 25% of the power consumption, are going to get burnt to the ground, because that is just selfish of you.

[KingOfSomewhereHot]

<--- I drive a Ford Excursion

What the hell else am I supposed to use to haul around myself, my wife and four small kids, 2 strollers and all the other crap that goes along with children ?

Oh wait ... I could get a fooking Toyota Prius ... that'd work !

(not that I care if someone ELSE want's to drive a Prius ... neat technology)

[SDW2001]

Originally posted by badtz
I'm not actually rooting for ELF themselves [as environmental extremists] ... but I'm [quiet but consciously] rooting for the act they did.

My rooting basically equates to "hate SUVs = blowing them up".

I really don't think peoples "right to freedom" means the right to own a big oversized everyday vehicle that gets 10mpg! There's SO many cons to driving a SUV it's rediculous. Our freedom stems from taking advantage of other countries, and giving our citizens the pseudo-reality that you can do whatever you choose to do.

I already feel bad driving a car that gets 25-30, let alone 10 or less mpg!

Of course, this is all imo. :\

I'm so sick of this line of thinking. not all SUVs get 10MPG. My Envoy has an inline six and gets 21 on the highway. That's not bad. It's about as much (or close) to what a minivan would get. They almost all have big V6's now.

Secondly, SUV's may burn more gas...but no one has posted anything on EMISSIONS. Depsite gas prices, there is no shortage. I'd like some links on SUV's destroying the envirnonment. It's pure rhetoric.



Our freedom stems from taking advantage of other countries, and giving our citizens the pseudo-reality that you can do whatever you choose to do.

There it is. Blame America! I'd like to know what you're talking about. "Taking advantage of"....how? By buying they're oil at artifically high prices?

And BTW, I CAN choose to do what I'd like...especially in my choice of vehicle.

[SDW2001]

Originally posted by LoCash
Actually, that's exactly what it means. It also means that we are free to buy an electric vehicle, or a motorcycle, or take public transit.

Bingo!

[SDW2001]

Originally posted by badtz
Unfortunately, most major metropolitan cities in the US aren't designed to be pedestrian friendly and more or less require you to own a vehicle. I feel bad because of the fact we don't have a more efficient solution to our gas guzzling methods to get around.

I do realize that their is a "market" for SUVs, hence why [unfortunately] there's so many of them around. :\

Wrong. It's the suburbs that are the problem.

But does that mean we're free to polute the environment in excess?



Proof. Show me how SUV's pollute more. You're just spewing more rhetoric and don't even know it. At least you're not being disingenuous and you actually believe it. Though, I'm not sure that's any better.

[SDW2001]

Pardon yet another reply:

Badtz

We buy oil from them to deplete their supply before we use our own, when the day comes where oil is less abundant. Smart of us ehh? We take advantage of other countries because we have the power to. It still doesn't mean we should me using gas inefficiently and pollute our own envionment? Is it necessary to drive a car that gets 10mpg? Please!



Why would we do that? It's all a secret plan to deplete their supply before ours? No, one of the main reasons is that special interest environmental groups have seen to it that WE CAN'T DRILL OR EXPLORE HERE. Hmmm.

Again...I want pollution numbers.

BTW, I don't hear you ripping up construction workers for driving Dodge Rams.


Carbon Monoxide is easily a high polluter to this earth, and buying an unnecessary high-polluting vehicle isn't a very efficient way of dealing with this problem.

And it's our choice. Some of us don't believe that the Earth is quite that fragile. ONE MORE TIME: Show me the emissions numbers on SUVS

[Willoughby]

Originally posted by Moogs

Hint: trophy wives seek out money before all else. So after they get married to the rich guy, they fuk the pool boy when [the husband with the small pecker] is at work.
;)


So the moral here is:

be the pool boy
:D

[Powerdoc]

The pollution of a car depends on two group of factors : - the car itself
- the motor itself

For the car :
- the weight (especially for accelerations, and for climbing : not important for constant speed with no slope)
- the sCX (CX multipied by the frontal surface)
- the Resistance of the tires, wich is the surface in contact multiplied by the resistance of the material
- the resistance of all the transmission system and the wheels

For the motor :
- the inner friction of the motor
- the efficiently of the combustion
These two parameters vary with the rpm and also with the charge.

This show that a small aerodynamic car with a modern small motor, heat less fuel, than a giant cube car with a monster big low efficiency motor.
This is quite an evidence.

Anyway, if i want a huge car for me and my family it's my right. I will note for example that the Touareg with the R5 tdi, do not eat more fuel than the average V6 gazoline US car.
For me what "heat" a car is very important, because the price of the fuel is very important in Europe and is a real issue (one liter in france equal the price of one gallon in US).

[Moogs]

Sorry Powerdoc, but I'm just trying to envision a scenario where something like the H2 or Ford Expedition is "right for your family", but a slightly smaller vehicle like the Explorer or Xterra isn't. They basically seat the same number of people, allow for similar amounts of rear cargo and have the same "off road" capabilities.

The reality is, vehicles like the H2, Navigator, Sequoia, Expedition, et al, are simply "bigger" but carry no extra utility. They're show-off vehicles, period. If you REALLY need that cargo space for your 6 kids, you own a Suburban, not one of the afore-mentioned SUVanity products.

There's just no excuse short of having an inferiority complex or just wanting to have the biggest vehicle on the block.

[Powerdoc]

Originally posted by Moogs
Sorry Powerdoc, but I'm just trying to envision a scenario where something like the H2 or Ford Expedition is "right for your family", but a slightly smaller vehicle like the Explorer or Xterra isn't. They basically seat the same number of people, allow for similar amounts of rear cargo and have the same "off road" capabilities.

The reality is, vehicles like the H2, Navigator, Sequoia, Expedition, et al, are simply "bigger" but carry no extra utility. They're show-off vehicles, period. If you REALLY need that cargo space for your 6 kids, you own a Suburban, not one of the afore-mentioned SUVanity products.

There's just no excuse short of having an inferiority complex or just wanting to have the biggest vehicle on the block.

I did not consider buying in the future (let's say late 2006) any of these cars, and especially an H2. This car is a real beast for off road, but a disaster for my wallet (both in term of money to buy it, and for the appetite of the motor). I consider to replace two of my cars : my Coupe 406 and The espace ( a sort of Chrysler Voyager but a little smaller) for a vehicle like the Touareg, or like the XC 90 from volvo. Because my vanity found they have a good looking, both inside and outside, are confartables on the road, and can go offroad if i want (more the touareg, than the volvo). My vanity is not happy with car like the Voyager and consorts. Both of this car are selled in europe with diesel, that do not eat much fuel : 9 liters on highway per 100 km, and 12 liters on town. I do not consider that it's excessive at all, and let's say much less than any normal V8 or even V6 cars.

I will add that i have not an inferiority complex, especially for my penis, not because he is that big, but because i have not the habit to show it in public. I just want to have funs with my car; Cars are more than something that bring me to point A to point B, it's a pleasure to drive good cars.

[jimmac]

Originally posted by SDW2001
Pardon yet another reply:

Badtz



Why would we do that? It's all a secret plan to deplete their supply before ours? No, one of the main reasons is that special interest environmental groups have seen to it that WE CAN'T DRILL OR EXPLORE HERE. Hmmm.

Again...I want pollution numbers.

BTW, I don't hear you ripping up construction workers for driving Dodge Rams.




And it's our choice. Some of us don't believe that the Earth is quite that fragile. ONE MORE TIME: Show me the emissions numbers on SUVS


Yeah, yeah, yeah and there are more trees now than in colonial times, Saddam had WOMD, and Dubbya is a nice man who just wants to help us. You know I like your way of thinking. Your " facts ".

I just don't buy them.

[Eugene]

Originally posted by Moogs

The reality is, vehicles like the H2, Navigator, Sequoia, Expedition, et al, are simply "bigger" but carry no extra utility. They're show-off vehicles, period. If you REALLY need that cargo space for your 6 kids, you own a Suburban, not one of the afore-mentioned SUVanity products.

There's just no excuse short of having an inferiority complex or just wanting to have the biggest vehicle on the block.
There is of course no reason for the existence of Ferrari, Mercedes-Benz, Lexus, Jaguar, and any sports/luxury car on the road. The luxury features creates no extra utility. Everyone should be driving Chevy Aveos or Dodge Caravans.

[Mr Beardsley]

Here's a scenario. Person A drives 40 miles a week in their Ford Excursion. Person B dirves 200 miles a week in their Toyota Echo. Who pollutes more? Personally I like small cars, but if someone wants to drive a tank around its their choice.

The poster who said that Detroit produces SUVs because there's demand for them had it right. If everyone was buy hybrids or very fuel efficient cars the automakers would concentrate on them. However, sales demand is for SUVs. Why would a business stop producing a product that sells well and has high demand to start producing a car that doesn't have much demand? Doesn't make sense to me.

[Argento]

Originally posted by Mr Beardsley
Here's a scenario. Person A drives 40 miles a week in their Ford Excursion. Person B dirves 200 miles a week in their Toyota Echo. Who pollutes more? Personally I like small cars, but if someone wants to drive a tank around its their choice.

The poster who said that Detroit produces SUVs because there's demand for them had it right. If everyone was buy hybrids or very fuel efficient cars the automakers would concentrate on them. However, sales demand is for SUVs. Why would a business stop producing a product that sells well and has high demand to start producing a car that doesn't have much demand? Doesn't make sense to me.


Behold!!! Capitalisim!!

[Moogs]

The demand is driven by advertising. If Detroit starts advertising Hyrdogen fuel cell vehicles (or - God forbid - moderately smaller SUVs), guess what the consumers will demand? Unfortunately, Detroit has no plans to start advertising alternative vehicle styles or engine types because that would require them to retool their factories / take some responsibility.

I agree, btw, that most luxury sports cars are purchased by the same type of ego-maniac that most (not all, most) SUVs are purchased by.

I'm not trying to say there should only be one type of vehicle on the road, I'm saying there is no need to go to the unbelievably excessive levels of something like the Expedition or Sequoia or Navigator. Just MO.

[trumptman]

I don't understand the conspiracy theories here regarding teh car companies. GM has been showcasing a hydrogen fuel cell car for a while. They are making a huge bet on it and believe it will revolutionize the industry.

They have also used it to demonstrate that they can use the same platform for multiple vehicles to save money, etc.

Also, and I know I have mentioned this before, the reason everyone who I know wants or drives an SUV isn't to fulfill some strange obsession, it is to hold all the car seats they have to carry around for their children.

In California the law is 6 years old or 60 lbs. Two car seats make taking 5 people in a passenger car impossible. If you have three young children, they simply won't fit in a regular passenger car. Also there are states in which the car seat laws now extend up to 8 years old.

The second reason I see people owning SUV's is because they own some toy that requires towing. Passenger cars are nice but they really can't tow a large boat, camping trailer, or things of that nature well.

My wife and I own an SUV (Jeep Cherokee) and a passenger car. (Honda Accord) When we go to Lake Havasu (as we just got back from) and tow the boat, we have to take the Jeep. There is no way the Honda would tow a 3,000 lb+ boat.

Nick

[Placebo]

We have a Toyota Matrix that gets over 35 miles to the gallon, has tons of cargo space, has a sporty engine and very cool look, and has very good emissions. And from the inside, I can't see how an SUV is 'more capacious'. An SUV is just a poor excuse to feel like Godzilla.

[Moogs]

the reason everyone who I know wants or drives an SUV isn't to fulfill some strange obsession, it is to hold all the car seats they have to carry around for their children.

:lol:

:)

Mmm. Not really. Not in my neck of the woods. In my neck of the woods, most people have 2 maybe 3 kids. And I'm sorry to be a ball buster but giant SUVs are NOT the only vehicles capable of holding that many car seats. Not by a long shot.

First you have the more moderate sized SUVs like the ones you're talking about:

Explorer
Cherokee
Liberty
Xterra
Etc

Then you have the goofy hybrid looking SUVs

RAV4
Turano
The Lexis thing
The Acura thing
etc

Then you have the wagons

Volvo
Subaru
Volkswagen
Honda (?)


Then you have standard mid-sized cars with large back seats

(take your pick, there are probably over a dozen)

My main point is, people do NOT buy mammoth SUVs because it's the only viable solution for baby seats and diaper bags. Sorry but they just aren't. Not even close.


Now, if you're TOWING a boat. OK. I get it. No big deal. If you have to tow a boat, a couple of jet skis, or some other 1500lb+ object then it is somewhat more reasonable that you want a big SUV to do it.

There are still smaller, more efficient vehicles that can do small towing jobs without trouble

Outback
Forrester
etc

but I can't say someone is "crazy" for buying a huge SUV as an alternative, should they be towing things on a frequent basis. Same deal with those huge shiny trucks I see tooling around with chrome wheels and fancy detail work. Dollars to doughnuts most of them never see an ounce of mud or tow a boat.

People buy the biggest, baddest looking thing out there because they want to be perceived as powerful, wealthy, big, whatever. Truth hurts.

;)

[trumptman]

Originally posted by Placebo
We have a Toyota Matrix that gets over 35 miles to the gallon, has tons of cargo space, has a sporty engine and very cool look, and has very good emissions. And from the inside, I can't see how an SUV is 'more capacious'. An SUV is just a poor excuse to feel like Godzilla.

I can't find the spec for cubic feet of cargo space for that Matrix but it looks to be about 2/3's the size of my 1994 Cherokee.

Edit: Found them Matrix: 53 cu. ft. of cargo space. Cherokee (not even the largest SUV) 69 cu. ft.

Originally posted by Moogs
:lol:

:)

Mmm. Not really. Not in my neck of the woods. In my neck of the woods, most people have 2 maybe 3 kids. And I'm sorry to be a ball buster but giant SUVs are NOT the only vehicles capable of holding that many car seats. Not by a long shot.


I didn't say anything about giant SUV's being better than mid-size SUV's with car seats. I mentioned that I have a Cherokee (definately mid-size) and that many people want room for car seats and have to buy a bigger vehicle. If they have any sort of towing needs it just raises the justification more. Likewise in numerous "discussions" with SDW, I have argued that minivans are just as nice as SUV's. However they do fall short in the towing area again.

My main point is, people do NOT buy mammoth SUVs because it's the only viable solution for baby seats and diaper bags. Sorry but they just aren't. Not even close.

I know they aren't the only option but when you look at large passenger vans, minivans with more powerful engines or even larger sedans, much of the "improved" fuel mileage also disappears. Our Accord gets like 30 mpg which is very nice on the wallet. However it can't haul anything back from Home Depot, I can't toss a door on the roof rack, etc. I can't tow ANYTHING with it.

The other issue is that vehicles are increasingly expensive financial propositions for people with the average loan term being five years. I think people would rather buy too much than grow out of a vehicle and have to head back to the dealer to be screwed over again. So maybe they don't the Explorer with the V8 and the third seat. However since it is taking them 5 years to pay who knows if they won't have a boat, quads, travel trailer, more kids, cousins along by then?

but I can't say someone is "crazy" for buying a huge SUV as an alternative, should they be towing things on a frequent basis. Same deal with those huge shiny trucks I see tooling around with chrome wheels and fancy detail work. Dollars to doughnuts most of them never see an ounce of mud or tow a boat.

This could be true but since people have to own their vehicles for so long and have them do so much, I guess they likely want the option available rather than being stuck without.

The huge 1 ton clubcab trucks you are talking about are a bit ridiculous. Yet I see people towing huge $30,000 boats to the river with them, often at about 80 mph.

I could be off because I live in a more rural area now. However I couldn't imagine driving being enjoyable in the city in some Excursion or thing of that nature anyway. When I am down in Long Beach/Orange County/etc. by Cherokee is able to flip a u turn on a two lane street 9 out of 10 times. Driving something bigger and with a huge turn radius would just be unenjoyable.

Nick

[nwhysee]

Is there anything wrong about liking an h2? So im not thrilled about its gas consumption, but i really like the design. Reminds me of a tonka truck, and in white it looks like something a stormtrooper would drive. But do i have a small penis, just because i like the design of a car?

[Longhorn]

But do i have a small penis, just because i like the design of a car?


Yes.

[audiopollution]

Originally posted by Longhorn
Yes.

Stop projecting onto others. ;)

[Argento]

Not only can you judge people's dick size by the size of their car, you can also tell that if your hispanic you must have jumped the border, or if your black you must shoot people. Amazing how sterotypes are so right?!

[burningwheel]

Originally posted by trumptman

Also, and I know I have mentioned this before, the reason everyone who I know wants or drives an SUV isn't to fulfill some strange obsession, it is to hold all the car seats they have to carry around for their children.


what did people do before SUVs? station wagons what a concept!

pick-ups should be banned too unless they actually use them in their lineof work :mad:

[trumptman]

Originally posted by burningwheel
what did people do before SUVs? station wagons what a concept!

pick-ups should be banned too unless they actually use them in their lineof work :mad:

Yes but those station wagons didn't require the use of car seats. Plus every station wagon my family ever owned while I was growing up had a V-8. How is that saving on gas?

Not only did the not require carseats when I was growing up, they didn't even require a seat. Most families I knew had a car and a pickup. The kids would just ride around in the back of the pickup with no seatbelts and no seats.

In fact, speaking of cargo room, if we were carrying around furniture or things of that nature, not only did you have ride in the back with it, you were often used to hold it down or keep it from damage. "Nick, dammit, don't you let that coffee table slid into that new 8 foot long stereo and scratch it."

Ah yes, ahem, the "good old days," when chain smoking moms were driving station wagons with their children crawling between the seats, and babies laying on the seats.:rolleyes:

Nick

[Moogs]

Originally posted by Argento
Not only can you judge people's dick size by the size of their car, you can also tell that if your hispanic you must have jumped the border, or if your black you must shoot people. Amazing how sterotypes are so right?!


Please, unless you have something to add to the auto-specific conversation, stfu. Don't twist my words into something they're not. Do you really think I believe everyone with an SUV has a small dick, or maybe, I am trying to get the message across that it's an insecurity / best-the-neighbors / ego-trip kind of thing?

I.E: most people who drive them have no practical need for them beyond getting themselves from point A to point B. Yah there's really no difference in the "stereotype" I used and the two you mentioned (Blacks and Hispanics). I must be a bigot....

:mad: :rolleyes: :err: