| |
Main
Date: 27 Aug 2007 03:34:06
From:
Subject: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
I may have to revise my opinion of SUV drivers. Today I felt a
definite need to go out for a ride. (This may have had something to do
with having taken my son away to college yesterday, and returning to an
empty nest.) I headed out along a favorite route, and stopped briefly at
the top of a hill with a great view.
The view upward was less inviting. There was a big, black cloud moving
in, with mammatus structures on its underside. I don't mind rain, but I'm
no fan of lightning at all, so I cut the ride short and headed home via
lower terrain.
A couple of miles further, and it had started raining. Anticipating a
hard but brief shower, I pulled up under the first available shelter, a
small copse of willow trees.
The shelter was enough at first, but then the hail came. At first I
heard cracking sounds, and noticed hailstones out in the street. Then the
larger stones started coming down, with enough momentum to make it through
the willow branches. I got as close to the trunk of the largest tree as I
could, trying to get some shelter from the larger limbs. (There was a
high tension power line near with steel towers that I figured would
conduct any lightning harmlessly by.) It wasn't really enough. I picked
up one hailstone that was about the size of a quarter. Those things can
hurt!
That's when the SUV pulled up. The driver sensibly didn't want to try
to drive in the downpour, and when he pulled alongside me he reached over,
unlocked his passenger side door, and invited me to share the shelter of
his steel roof. We spent an amiable five minutes together, and then the
hail eased up and we went our separate ways.
My thanks to the gentleman in the F-150. I guess I'll have to revise
my stereotype of SUV drivers, too.
Bill
-------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
| |
Date: 13 Sep 2007 13:40:27
From:
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
On Sep 14, 12:57 am, Dana Myers <dana.my...@gmail.com > wrote:
> idomybestworkonab...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > That's very noble of you, Dana. It's nice of you to use your large car
> > to help out others on this very worthy cause. I'm interested in
> > whether this is the main reason you have the SUV, or whether you do
> > the SAGging because you have the SUV and therefore can help out (I
> > think you said you do it once a year?). If the former, why do you have
> > the SUV? My Jazz can carry three large sons to school in relative
> > comfort, with all their bags, but many others seem to think they need
> > a three ton truck to do that.
>
> We have a family of 5; we selected a vehicle which is large enough
> to contain all of us (and a friend, usually) along with gear on road
> trips, but wasn't too large. We didn't load it with frivolous options
> such as 4WD or the somewhat more powerful V-8. Loaded to the gills,
> we use about 11.8l/100km on the highway.
>
> We've also driven many times for school events, such as marching-band
> trips, and the room for 6 passengers and instruments helps considerably.
> It's not a commute car.
>
> > Do you think I'm trolling you? Actually, I'm really interested in
> > whether SUV drivers think about the consequences of their car choice
> > on others now and future, or whether they just don't give a shit. Do
> > fill me in.
>
> Well, I really don't speak for "SUV drivers" as a class. We (my wife
> and I) just looked at the variety of choices we had when replacing an
> aging mini-van, and this particular vehicle struck a balance between
> a somewhat divergent set of requirements. Did I think about the
> consequences of the vehicle choice? Of course.
>
> Cheers,
> Dana
OK, thanks for that. You did give the impression in your first post
that you were justifying SUVs across the board. One useful bike rack
or friendly driver doesn't change the fact that my riding on roads
(not to mention air quality, oil resources etc) is threatened by
people in landbarges that are mostly empty bar the driver, who is
often fat and should be walking, riding or on a bus.
Donga
|
| |
Date: 13 Sep 2007 01:26:09
From:
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
On Sep 13, 12:02 pm, Dana Myers <dana.my...@gmail.com > wrote:
> jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> > Dana Myers writes:
>
> >>>>> I may have to revise my opinion of SUV drivers.
>
> >>>> I've been driving SAG the last few years for a Century in the East
> >>>> SF Bay Area. I find it amusing every year how at least one rider
> >>>> will comment "I don't normally like SUVs but I'm sure glad to see
> >>>> you" when I pull up in an SUV with a bike rack on the back...
>
> >>>> P.S. Anyone riding Bike Against The Odds this weekend?
>
> >>> I've got a bike rack on my Honda Jazz, which uses around half the
> >>> fuel, space and other resources than an SUV. What's the
> >>> significance of an SUV in your case?
>
> >> It's the SAG wagon, pal. If you don't approve, you can *push* your
> >> bike back to start/finish. I'd rather run SAG in a vehicle that
> >> comfortably seats 6 (driver, assistant, and 4 riders) and securely
> >> carries 4 bikes on a firm, hitch-mounted rack. I *do* fill the
> >> vehicle up every year while sweeping the course.
>
> >> I suppose being really small is an advantage to vehicles driven by
> >> trolls; I'm sure there's not much space under your bridge for
> >> parking.
>
> > Oops! You seem sensitive about your use of an oversized sag wagon to
> > carry spare bicycles and in so many words validate negative comments
> > about your choice of vehicle.
>
> Those aren't *spare* bicycles, those are rider's bicycles that have
> broken-down on-course, or riders that have dropped-out of the ride.
> So, there's nothing spare about them or their riders. Further, a
> vehicle with 7 seat-belts that comfortably fits 6 adults is not
> "over-sized" when it's filled with 6 people, bike helments, water,
> course safety gear, etc.
>
> Pointing out factual logic does nothing to validate unfounded
> negative comments.
>
> > I take it this is not a rental car used
> > only for the bicycle ride in question. How large is large enough? Do
> > I hear Peterbilt or Freightliner?
>
> Trailblazer, which is *plenty* large. No, it's not a rental, but it
> isn't a commute car, either.
>
> Dana
Trailblazer hey? Do you do a bit of trailblazing? That's another thing
I don't get about SUVs. Why the 4x4? (surely it's not a 2WD called a
Trailblazer?)
|
| |
Date: 13 Sep 2007 01:23:04
From:
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
On Sep 13, 12:02 pm, Dana Myers <dana.my...@gmail.com > wrote:
> jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> > Dana Myers writes:
>
> >>>>> I may have to revise my opinion of SUV drivers.
>
> >>>> I've been driving SAG the last few years for a Century in the East
> >>>> SF Bay Area. I find it amusing every year how at least one rider
> >>>> will comment "I don't normally like SUVs but I'm sure glad to see
> >>>> you" when I pull up in an SUV with a bike rack on the back...
>
> >>>> P.S. Anyone riding Bike Against The Odds this weekend?
>
> >>> I've got a bike rack on my Honda Jazz, which uses around half the
> >>> fuel, space and other resources than an SUV. What's the
> >>> significance of an SUV in your case?
>
> >> It's the SAG wagon, pal. If you don't approve, you can *push* your
> >> bike back to start/finish. I'd rather run SAG in a vehicle that
> >> comfortably seats 6 (driver, assistant, and 4 riders) and securely
> >> carries 4 bikes on a firm, hitch-mounted rack. I *do* fill the
> >> vehicle up every year while sweeping the course.
>
> >> I suppose being really small is an advantage to vehicles driven by
> >> trolls; I'm sure there's not much space under your bridge for
> >> parking.
>
> > Oops! You seem sensitive about your use of an oversized sag wagon to
> > carry spare bicycles and in so many words validate negative comments
> > about your choice of vehicle.
>
> Those aren't *spare* bicycles, those are rider's bicycles that have
> broken-down on-course, or riders that have dropped-out of the ride.
> So, there's nothing spare about them or their riders. Further, a
> vehicle with 7 seat-belts that comfortably fits 6 adults is not
> "over-sized" when it's filled with 6 people, bike helments, water,
> course safety gear, etc.
>
> Pointing out factual logic does nothing to validate unfounded
> negative comments.
>
> > I take it this is not a rental car used
> > only for the bicycle ride in question. How large is large enough? Do
> > I hear Peterbilt or Freightliner?
>
> Trailblazer, which is *plenty* large. No, it's not a rental, but it
> isn't a commute car, either.
>
> Dana
That's very noble of you, Dana. It's nice of you to use your large car
to help out others on this very worthy cause. I'm interested in
whether this is the main reason you have the SUV, or whether you do
the SAGging because you have the SUV and therefore can help out (I
think you said you do it once a year?). If the former, why do you have
the SUV? My Jazz can carry three large sons to school in relative
comfort, with all their bags, but many others seem to think they need
a three ton truck to do that.
Do you think I'm trolling you? Actually, I'm really interested in
whether SUV drivers think about the consequences of their car choice
on others now and future, or whether they just don't give a shit. Do
fill me in.
Donga
|
| | |
Date: 13 Sep 2007 08:22:43
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
idomybestworkonabike@hotmail.com wrote:
> Do you think I'm trolling you? Actually, I'm really interested in
> whether SUV drivers think about the consequences of their car choice
> on others now and future, or whether they just don't give a shit. Do
> fill me in.
Ask John Edwards and John Kerry. They own a whole bunch of 'em. HTH
(Al Gore usually rolls in a limo after he deplanes the '77 Gulfstream. At
least it isn't an SUV! LOL )
Bill "and yes, Smokey, it was /already/ political" S.
|
| | |
Date: 13 Sep 2007 07:57:56
From: Dana Myers
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
idomybestworkonabike@hotmail.com wrote:
> That's very noble of you, Dana. It's nice of you to use your large car
> to help out others on this very worthy cause. I'm interested in
> whether this is the main reason you have the SUV, or whether you do
> the SAGging because you have the SUV and therefore can help out (I
> think you said you do it once a year?). If the former, why do you have
> the SUV? My Jazz can carry three large sons to school in relative
> comfort, with all their bags, but many others seem to think they need
> a three ton truck to do that.
We have a family of 5; we selected a vehicle which is large enough
to contain all of us (and a friend, usually) along with gear on road
trips, but wasn't too large. We didn't load it with frivolous options
such as 4WD or the somewhat more powerful V-8. Loaded to the gills,
we use about 11.8l/100km on the highway.
We've also driven many times for school events, such as marching-band
trips, and the room for 6 passengers and instruments helps considerably.
It's not a commute car.
> Do you think I'm trolling you? Actually, I'm really interested in
> whether SUV drivers think about the consequences of their car choice
> on others now and future, or whether they just don't give a shit. Do
> fill me in.
Well, I really don't speak for "SUV drivers" as a class. We (my wife
and I) just looked at the variety of choices we had when replacing an
aging mini-van, and this particular vehicle struck a balance between
a somewhat divergent set of requirements. Did I think about the
consequences of the vehicle choice? Of course.
Cheers,
Dana
|
| |
Date: 12 Sep 2007 14:15:04
From:
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
On Sep 13, 1:33 am, Dana Myers <dana.my...@gmail.com > wrote:
> D_Frumiou...@ndersnat.ch wrote:
> > I may have to revise my opinion of SUV drivers.
>
> I've been driving SAG the last few years for a Century in
> the East SF Bay Area. I find it amusing every year how at
> least one rider will comment "I don't normally like SUVs but
> I'm sure glad to see you" when I pull up in an SUV with a
> bike rack on the back...
>
> Dana
> P.S. Anyone riding Bike Against The Odds this weekend?
I've got a bike rack on my Honda Jazz, which uses around half the
fuel, space and other resources than an SUV. What's the significance
of an SUV in your case?
Donga
|
| | |
Date: 12 Sep 2007 15:23:18
From: Dana Myers
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
idomybestworkonabike@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Sep 13, 1:33 am, Dana Myers <dana.my...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> D_Frumiou...@ndersnat.ch wrote:
>>> I may have to revise my opinion of SUV drivers.
>> I've been driving SAG the last few years for a Century in
>> the East SF Bay Area. I find it amusing every year how at
>> least one rider will comment "I don't normally like SUVs but
>> I'm sure glad to see you" when I pull up in an SUV with a
>> bike rack on the back...
>>
>> Dana
>> P.S. Anyone riding Bike Against The Odds this weekend?
>
> I've got a bike rack on my Honda Jazz, which uses around half the
> fuel, space and other resources than an SUV. What's the significance
> of an SUV in your case?
It's the SAG wagon, pal. If you don't approve, you can *push* your
bike back to start/finish. I'd rather run SAG in a vehicle that
comfortably seats 6 (driver, assistant, and 4 riders) and securely
carries 4 bikes on a firm, hitch-mounted rack. I *do* fill the
vehicle up every year while sweeping the course.
I suppose being really small is an advantage to vehicles driven
by trolls; I'm sure there's not much space under your bridge
for parking.
Cheers!
Dana
|
| | | |
Date: 13 Sep 2007 01:26:59
From:
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
Dana Myers writes:
>>>> I may have to revise my opinion of SUV drivers.
>>> I've been driving SAG the last few years for a Century in the East
>>> SF Bay Area. I find it amusing every year how at least one rider
>>> will comment "I don't normally like SUVs but I'm sure glad to see
>>> you" when I pull up in an SUV with a bike rack on the back...
>>> P.S. Anyone riding Bike Against The Odds this weekend?
>> I've got a bike rack on my Honda Jazz, which uses around half the
>> fuel, space and other resources than an SUV. What's the
>> significance of an SUV in your case?
> It's the SAG wagon, pal. If you don't approve, you can *push* your
> bike back to start/finish. I'd rather run SAG in a vehicle that
> comfortably seats 6 (driver, assistant, and 4 riders) and securely
> carries 4 bikes on a firm, hitch-mounted rack. I *do* fill the
> vehicle up every year while sweeping the course.
> I suppose being really small is an advantage to vehicles driven by
> trolls; I'm sure there's not much space under your bridge for
> parking.
Oops! You seem sensitive about your use of an oversized sag wagon to
carry spare bicycles and in so many words validate negative comments
about your choice of vehicle. I take it this is not a rental car used
only for the bicycle ride in question. How large is large enough? Do
I hear Peterbilt or Freightliner?
Jobst Brandt
|
| | | | |
Date: 13 Sep 2007 02:42:41
From: Steve Gravrock
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
On 2007-09-13, jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org <jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org > wrote:
> Oops! You seem sensitive about your use of an oversized sag wagon to
> carry spare bicycles and in so many words validate negative comments
> about your choice of vehicle. I take it this is not a rental car used
> only for the bicycle ride in question. How large is large enough? Do
> I hear Peterbilt or Freightliner?
International, actually: <http://preview.tinyurl.com/ydlog9 >
Apparently they're popular on the horse show circuit.
|
| | | | |
Date: 12 Sep 2007 19:02:52
From: Dana Myers
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote:
> Dana Myers writes:
>
>>>>> I may have to revise my opinion of SUV drivers.
>
>>>> I've been driving SAG the last few years for a Century in the East
>>>> SF Bay Area. I find it amusing every year how at least one rider
>>>> will comment "I don't normally like SUVs but I'm sure glad to see
>>>> you" when I pull up in an SUV with a bike rack on the back...
>
>>>> P.S. Anyone riding Bike Against The Odds this weekend?
>
>>> I've got a bike rack on my Honda Jazz, which uses around half the
>>> fuel, space and other resources than an SUV. What's the
>>> significance of an SUV in your case?
>
>> It's the SAG wagon, pal. If you don't approve, you can *push* your
>> bike back to start/finish. I'd rather run SAG in a vehicle that
>> comfortably seats 6 (driver, assistant, and 4 riders) and securely
>> carries 4 bikes on a firm, hitch-mounted rack. I *do* fill the
>> vehicle up every year while sweeping the course.
>
>> I suppose being really small is an advantage to vehicles driven by
>> trolls; I'm sure there's not much space under your bridge for
>> parking.
>
> Oops! You seem sensitive about your use of an oversized sag wagon to
> carry spare bicycles and in so many words validate negative comments
> about your choice of vehicle.
Those aren't *spare* bicycles, those are rider's bicycles that have
broken-down on-course, or riders that have dropped-out of the ride.
So, there's nothing spare about them or their riders. Further, a
vehicle with 7 seat-belts that comfortably fits 6 adults is not
"over-sized" when it's filled with 6 people, bike helments, water,
course safety gear, etc.
Pointing out factual logic does nothing to validate unfounded
negative comments.
> I take it this is not a rental car used
> only for the bicycle ride in question. How large is large enough? Do
> I hear Peterbilt or Freightliner?
Trailblazer, which is *plenty* large. No, it's not a rental, but it
isn't a commute car, either.
Dana
|
| |
Date: 12 Sep 2007 08:33:53
From: Dana Myers
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
D_Frumious_B@ndersnat.ch wrote:
> I may have to revise my opinion of SUV drivers.
I've been driving SAG the last few years for a Century in
the East SF Bay Area. I find it amusing every year how at
least one rider will comment "I don't normally like SUVs but
I'm sure glad to see you" when I pull up in an SUV with a
bike rack on the back...
Dana
P.S. Anyone riding Bike Against The Odds this weekend?
|
| | |
Date: 13 Sep 2007 15:10:12
From: John Thompson
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
On 2007-09-12, Dana Myers <dana.myers@gmail.com > wrote:
> I've been driving SAG the last few years for a Century in
> the East SF Bay Area. I find it amusing every year how at
> least one rider will comment "I don't normally like SUVs but
> I'm sure glad to see you" when I pull up in an SUV with a
> bike rack on the back...
It's not SUVs that are the problem; it's inappropriate use of SUVs.
Driving sag so you can carry 6 people and their bikes is proper use of a
large vehicle. Driving your SUV 3 blocks to the Express station to pick
up a pack of Twinkies is not.
--
John (john@os2.dhs.org)
|
| |
Date: 10 Sep 2007 21:02:53
From:
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
On Aug 27, 3:42 pm, "Bellsouth Ijit 2.0 - Global Warming Edition =AE"
<b...@bellsouth.net > wrote:
> "Roger Zoul" <rogerzo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:13d4mcpo4kfn827@news.supernews.com...
>
> > D_Frumiou...@ndersnat.ch wrote:
> > :: separate ways. My thanks to the gentleman in the F-150. I guess
> > :: I'll have to revise
> > :: my stereotype of SUV drivers, too.
>
> > Wow...interesting story...I've not been caught out in a hailstorm befor=
e=2E
>
> > Is an F-150 an SUV?
>
> No. It's a full size pick up truck. Truck drivers drive theirs for work,
> SUV drivers drive theirs because they need to compensate for a) lack of
> driving skills, or b) lack of something else more innate. It's like a
> novice mountain biker who slaps on a ton of body amour because a) they ca=
n't
> ride without crashing into a tree, or b) they think it looks cool. Just =
my
> two cents. Flame away.
We have an SUV to haul the products we sell in our business and also
our personal things. I can drive just fine and do not have a lack of
something more "innate".
Smokey
|
| |
Date: 09 Sep 2007 16:24:54
From:
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
On Aug 31, 4:27 am, Camilo <campasc...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> On Aug 28, 10:06 pm, idomybestworkonab...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > On Aug 29, 3:27 pm, Camilo <campasc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 27, 12:42 pm, "Bellsouth Ijit 2.0 - Global Warming Edition =AE"
>
> > > <b...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > > > SUV drivers drive theirs because they need to compensate for
> > > > a) lack of driving skills, or
> > > > b) lack of something else more innate.
>
> > > OK, since you seem to have it pegged, why do I drive one? Come on,
> > > let me know so I'll understand myself.
>
> > ... or you could tell us why you drive one. Why? That would be a good
> > exercise for you to understand yourself.
>
> Well, I never claimed to know the motivations of people I've never
> met. Thus my question.
OK, he might answer that for you. But I'm still interested in why you
drive one?
|
| |
Date: 30 Aug 2007 11:27:38
From: Camilo
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
On Aug 28, 10:06 pm, idomybestworkonab...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Aug 29, 3:27 pm, Camilo <campasc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Aug 27, 12:42 pm, "Bellsouth Ijit 2.0 - Global Warming Edition =AE"
>
> > <b...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > > SUV drivers drive theirs because they need to compensate for
> > > a) lack of driving skills, or
> > > b) lack of something else more innate.
>
> > OK, since you seem to have it pegged, why do I drive one? Come on,
> > let me know so I'll understand myself.
>
> ... or you could tell us why you drive one. Why? That would be a good
> exercise for you to understand yourself.
Well, I never claimed to know the motivations of people I've never
met. Thus my question.
|
| |
Date: 28 Aug 2007 23:06:50
From:
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
On Aug 29, 3:27 pm, Camilo <campasc...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> On Aug 27, 12:42 pm, "Bellsouth Ijit 2.0 - Global Warming Edition =AE"
>
> <b...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> > SUV drivers drive theirs because they need to compensate for
> > a) lack of driving skills, or
> > b) lack of something else more innate.
>
> OK, since you seem to have it pegged, why do I drive one? Come on,
> let me know so I'll understand myself.
.=2E. or you could tell us why you drive one. Why? That would be a good
exercise for you to understand yourself.
|
| |
Date: 28 Aug 2007 22:27:35
From: Camilo
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
On Aug 27, 12:42 pm, "Bellsouth Ijit 2.0 - Global Warming Edition =AE"
<b...@bellsouth.net > wrote:
> SUV drivers drive theirs because they need to compensate for
> a) lack of driving skills, or
> b) lack of something else more innate.
OK, since you seem to have it pegged, why do I drive one? Come on,
let me know so I'll understand myself.
|
| | |
Date: 30 Aug 2007 06:31:43
From: Mayor of Hooterville
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
"Camilo" <campascual@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1188365255.853072.97950@m37g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 27, 12:42 pm, "Bellsouth Ijit 2.0 - Global Warming Edition ®"
<b...@bellsouth.net > wrote:
> SUV drivers drive theirs because they need to compensate for
> a) lack of driving skills, or
> b) lack of something else more innate.
OK, since you seem to have it pegged, why do I drive one? Come on,
let me know so I'll understand myself.
I'm sure there are a great number of us that can't understand why ANTONE
would drive a Ford. ;)
|
| |
Date: 28 Aug 2007 22:22:55
From: Camilo
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
On Aug 27, 12:42 pm, "Bellsouth Ijit 2.0 - Global Warming Edition =AE"
<b...@bellsouth.net > wrote:
> SUV drivers drive theirs because they need to compensate for
> a) lack of driving skills, or
> b) lack of something else more innate.
OK, since you seem to have it pegged, why do I drive one? Come on,
let me know so I'll understand myself.
|
| |
Date: 27 Aug 2007 14:18:42
From:
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
On Aug 27, 10:48 pm, "J. Clarke" <jclarke.use...@cox.net > wrote:
> idomybestworkonab...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > On Aug 27, 3:34 pm, Michael Warner <m...@westnet.com.au> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 00:56:51 -0400, Roger Zoul wrote:
> >>> Wow...interesting story...I've not been caught out in a hailstorm
> >>> before.
>
> >> I have. It bloody hurts. Though I was more worried about my bike
> >> getting dented :-)
>
> > Yep, nice story, but the fact the driver was a nice guy doesn't
> > change
> > the fact that many/most SUV drivers have made an inappropriate and
> > antisocial choice of car.
>
> In my previous post I should have said "bicyclist" instead of
> "motorcyclist", wasn't paying attention to where I was posting.
>
> --
> --
> --John
> to email, dial "usenet" and validate
> (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
It was obvious you didn't know what you were talking about.
|
| |
Date: 27 Aug 2007 17:29:58
From: Jan Bijma
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
D_Frumious_B@ndersnat.ch wrote:
<cut >
> I got as close to the trunk of the largest tree as I
> could, trying to get some shelter from the larger limbs. (There was a
> high tension power line near with steel towers that I figured would
> conduct any lightning harmlessly by.)
<cut >
>
> Bill
>
Never seek shelter under a tree during a thunderstorm, not even when
there is a power line above it.
Keep away from ANY high or metal structure, because these attract
lightning strokes. When an object near you is hit by lightning, an
extremely high current seeks its way through the soil, generating
voltages as high as some thousands Volt between your feet. Therefore
avoid these structures, make yourself as little as possible, and keep
your feet together.
Jan
|
| | |
Date: 29 Aug 2007 20:39:06
From:
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
Jan Bijma <jan.bijmaLAATDITMAARWEG@100colsenditook.org > wrote:
> D_Frumious_B@ndersnat.ch wrote:
> <cut>
> > I got as close to the trunk of the largest tree as I
> > could, trying to get some shelter from the larger limbs. (There was a
> > high tension power line near with steel towers that I figured would
> > conduct any lightning harmlessly by.)
> <cut>
> >
> > Bill
> >
> Never seek shelter under a tree during a thunderstorm, not even when
> there is a power line above it.
> Keep away from ANY high or metal structure, because these attract
> lightning strokes. When an object near you is hit by lightning, an
> extremely high current seeks its way through the soil, generating
> voltages as high as some thousands Volt between your feet. Therefore
> avoid these structures, make yourself as little as possible, and keep
> your feet together.
Excellent advice under most conditions, but I suspect that the TV
weatherman, journalist, or park ranger you got it from wasn't considering
the possibility of large hailstones, nor, I suspect, was he very
well-versed in Kirchoff's Law.
Bill
__o
|
| | | |
Date: 31 Aug 2007 10:49:23
From: Jan Bijma
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
D_Frumious_B@ndersnat.ch wrote:
> Jan Bijma <jan.bijmaLAATDITMAARWEG@100colsenditook.org> wrote:
>> D_Frumious_B@ndersnat.ch wrote:
>> <cut>
>
>> > I got as close to the trunk of the largest tree as I
>>> could, trying to get some shelter from the larger limbs. (There was a
>>> high tension power line near with steel towers that I figured would
>>> conduct any lightning harmlessly by.)
>
>> <cut>
>>> Bill
>>>
>
>> Never seek shelter under a tree during a thunderstorm, not even when
>> there is a power line above it.
>> Keep away from ANY high or metal structure, because these attract
>> lightning strokes. When an object near you is hit by lightning, an
>> extremely high current seeks its way through the soil, generating
>> voltages as high as some thousands Volt between your feet. Therefore
>> avoid these structures, make yourself as little as possible, and keep
>> your feet together.
>
>
> Excellent advice under most conditions, but I suspect that the TV
> weatherman, journalist, or park ranger you got it from wasn't considering
> the possibility of large hailstones, nor, I suspect, was he very
> well-versed in Kirchoff's Law.
>
>
> Bill
>
> __o
|
| | | | |
Date: 01 Sep 2007 16:43:17
From:
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
Jan Bijma <jan.bijmaLAATDITMAARWEG@100colsenditook.org > wrote:
> D_Frumious_B@ndersnat.ch wrote:
> > Jan Bijma <jan.bijmaLAATDITMAARWEG@100colsenditook.org> wrote:
> >> D_Frumious_B@ndersnat.ch wrote:
> >> <cut>
> >
> >> > I got as close to the trunk of the largest tree as I
> >>> could, trying to get some shelter from the larger limbs. (There was a
> >>> high tension power line near with steel towers that I figured would
> >>> conduct any lightning harmlessly by.)
> >
> >> <cut>
> >>> Bill
> >>>
> >
> >> Never seek shelter under a tree during a thunderstorm, not even when
> >> there is a power line above it.
> >> Keep away from ANY high or metal structure, because these attract
> >> lightning strokes. When an object near you is hit by lightning, an
> >> extremely high current seeks its way through the soil, generating
> >> voltages as high as some thousands Volt between your feet. Therefore
> >> avoid these structures, make yourself as little as possible, and keep
> >> your feet together.
> >
> >
> > Excellent advice under most conditions, but I suspect that the TV
> > weatherman, journalist, or park ranger you got it from wasn't considering
> > the possibility of large hailstones, nor, I suspect, was he very
> > well-versed in Kirchoff's Law.
> Please explain where Kirchhoff's Law is violated in my posting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Series_and_parallel_circuits#Parallel_circuits
Bill
__o
|
| | | | | |
Date: 09 Sep 2007 08:08:04
From: Doug Smith W9WI
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
On Sat, 01 Sep 2007 16:43:17 +0000, D_Frumious_B wrote:
>> >> Never seek shelter under a tree during a thunderstorm, not even when
>> >> there is a power line above it.
>> >> Keep away from ANY high or metal structure, because these attract
>> >> lightning strokes. When an object near you is hit by lightning, an
>> >> extremely high current seeks its way through the soil, generating
>> >> voltages as high as some thousands Volt between your feet. Therefore
>> >> avoid these structures, make yourself as little as possible, and keep
>> >> your feet together.
>> >
>> > Excellent advice under most conditions, but I suspect that the TV
>> > weatherman, journalist, or park ranger you got it from wasn't considering
>> > the possibility of large hailstones, nor, I suspect, was he very
>> > well-versed in Kirchoff's Law.
>
>> Please explain where Kirchhoff's Law is violated in my posting.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Series_and_parallel_circuits#Parallel_circuits
Kirchoff's Law says that when a parallel path (in this case, a
grounded steel high-voltage tower) offers a lower resistance to electric
current, most of the current will flow through that path.
*MOST*, not *all*.
Imagine two parallel paths. One, through the high-voltage tower, offers a
resistance of one ohm. The other, through the top of a tree - and your
body - offers a resistance of ten million ohms.
Apply a voltage of 10 million volts, from a lightning strike.
99.99999% of the current - ten million amps - will flow through the tower.
0.00001% of the current will flow through the tree, and through your head.
0.00001% of the current amounts to one amp. That's way more than enough
to kill you.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 09 Sep 2007 15:52:31
From:
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
Doug Smith W9WI <w9wi@invalid.nospam > wrote:
> On Sat, 01 Sep 2007 16:43:17 +0000, D_Frumious_B wrote:
> >> >> Never seek shelter under a tree during a thunderstorm, not even when
> >> >> there is a power line above it.
> >> >> Keep away from ANY high or metal structure, because these attract
> >> >> lightning strokes. When an object near you is hit by lightning, an
> >> >> extremely high current seeks its way through the soil, generating
> >> >> voltages as high as some thousands Volt between your feet. Therefore
> >> >> avoid these structures, make yourself as little as possible, and keep
> >> >> your feet together.
> >> >
> >> > Excellent advice under most conditions, but I suspect that the TV
> >> > weatherman, journalist, or park ranger you got it from wasn't considering
> >> > the possibility of large hailstones, nor, I suspect, was he very
> >> > well-versed in Kirchoff's Law.
> >
> >> Please explain where Kirchhoff's Law is violated in my posting.
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Series_and_parallel_circuits#Parallel_circuits
> Kirchoff's Law says that when a parallel path (in this case, a
> grounded steel high-voltage tower) offers a lower resistance to electric
> current, most of the current will flow through that path.
> *MOST*, not *all*.
> Imagine two parallel paths. One, through the high-voltage tower, offers a
> resistance of one ohm. The other, through the top of a tree - and your
> body - offers a resistance of ten million ohms.
> Apply a voltage of 10 million volts, from a lightning strike.
> 99.99999% of the current - ten million amps - will flow through the tower.
> 0.00001% of the current will flow through the tree, and through your head.
> 0.00001% of the current amounts to one amp. That's way more than enough
> to kill you.
I whole ohm in a five-foot diameter steel power tower?!?! Resistance
to ground in a conductor like that, also connected by the arrestor wire to
hundreds more towers up and down a hundred-mile line, would probably be
measured in nanoohms.
As it happens, I HAVE been that close (a bit closer, actually) to a
lightning strike on a power line before. I was inside a steel-framed
building at the time, but a coworker was outside unloading a truck. He
had an eight-foot-long piece of conduit in his hand, as it happened. The
bolt hit about 100' from him. The flash and boom came simultaneously, and
he came running through the door so fast I'm surprised he didn't make a
sonic boom. But apart from his jangled nerves, he was unharmed.
Since my OP was about the kindness of one driver, and I didn't realize
that I was letting myself in for a sophomoric lecture on outdoor safety, I
didn't mention that there was a second high-tension line a little farther
away (running at right angles to the first), a parking lot across the
street with a couple of dozen metal light poles, and numerous other
structures, trees and poles in the neighborhood. Also, the storm was
producing only cloud-to-cloud lightning--no ground strikes up to that
time.
I don't believe that I claimed I was in a situation of zero risk out
there, but I DID mention the quarter-size hail. I made a judgement call
based on the limited options available to me, and did just fine, thank you
for your concern.
Bill, with a certain Queen song suddenly running through his head
__o
|
| |
Date: 27 Aug 2007 02:19:35
From:
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
On Aug 27, 3:34 pm, Michael Warner <m...@westnet.com.au > wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 00:56:51 -0400, Roger Zoul wrote:
> > Wow...interesting story...I've not been caught out in a hailstorm before.
>
> I have. It bloody hurts. Though I was more worried about my bike getting
> dented :-)
Yep, nice story, but the fact the driver was a nice guy doesn't change
the fact that many/most SUV drivers have made an inappropriate and
antisocial choice of car.
|
| | |
Date: 27 Aug 2007 08:48:33
From: J. Clarke
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
idomybestworkonabike@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Aug 27, 3:34 pm, Michael Warner <m...@westnet.com.au> wrote:
>> On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 00:56:51 -0400, Roger Zoul wrote:
>>> Wow...interesting story...I've not been caught out in a hailstorm
>>> before.
>>
>> I have. It bloody hurts. Though I was more worried about my bike
>> getting dented :-)
>
> Yep, nice story, but the fact the driver was a nice guy doesn't
> change
> the fact that many/most SUV drivers have made an inappropriate and
> antisocial choice of car.
In my previous post I should have said "bicyclist" instead of
"motorcyclist", wasn't paying attention to where I was posting.
--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
|
| | |
Date: 27 Aug 2007 08:47:35
From: J. Clarke
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
idomybestworkonabike@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Aug 27, 3:34 pm, Michael Warner <m...@westnet.com.au> wrote:
>> On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 00:56:51 -0400, Roger Zoul wrote:
>>> Wow...interesting story...I've not been caught out in a hailstorm
>>> before.
>>
>> I have. It bloody hurts. Though I was more worried about my bike
>> getting dented :-)
>
> Yep, nice story, but the fact the driver was a nice guy doesn't
> change
> the fact that many/most SUV drivers have made an inappropriate and
> antisocial choice of car.
I'm sure that many SUV drivers have the same opinion of motorcyclists.
When you start saying that others who have different priorities from
yours have made "inappropriate and antisocial" choices you are making
an appeal to emotion and once emotions get involved logic goes out the
window.
--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
|
| |
Date: 27 Aug 2007 00:56:51
From: Roger Zoul
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
D_Frumious_B@ndersnat.ch wrote:
:: separate ways. My thanks to the gentleman in the F-150. I guess
:: I'll have to revise
:: my stereotype of SUV drivers, too.
Wow...interesting story...I've not been caught out in a hailstorm before.
Is an F-150 an SUV?
|
| | |
Date: 27 Aug 2007 16:42:34
From: Bellsouth Ijit 2.0 - Global Warming Edition ®
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
"Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:13d4mcpo4kfn827@news.supernews.com...
> D_Frumious_B@ndersnat.ch wrote:
> :: separate ways. My thanks to the gentleman in the F-150. I guess
> :: I'll have to revise
> :: my stereotype of SUV drivers, too.
>
> Wow...interesting story...I've not been caught out in a hailstorm before.
>
> Is an F-150 an SUV?
>
>
No. It's a full size pick up truck. Truck drivers drive theirs for work,
SUV drivers drive theirs because they need to compensate for a) lack of
driving skills, or b) lack of something else more innate. It's like a
novice mountain biker who slaps on a ton of body amour because a) they can't
ride without crashing into a tree, or b) they think it looks cool. Just my
two cents. Flame away.
|
| | | |
Date: 28 Aug 2007 22:18:19
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
Bellsouth Ijit 2.0 - Global Warming Edition ® wrote:
> ...It's like a novice mountain biker who slaps on a ton of body amour because a) they can't
> ride without crashing into a tree...
Hey! I resemble that remark! (Hit a tree coming up out of a dry gully.)
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
A Real Cyclist [TM] keeps at least one bicycle in the bedroom.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | |
Date: 28 Aug 2007 15:38:52
From: chuck
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
On 2007-08-27, Bellsouth Ijit 2.0 - Global Warming Edition ® <bjit@bellsouth.net > wrote:
>
> "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:13d4mcpo4kfn827@news.supernews.com...
>> D_Frumious_B@ndersnat.ch wrote:
>> :: separate ways. My thanks to the gentleman in the F-150. I guess
>> :: I'll have to revise
>> :: my stereotype of SUV drivers, too.
>>
>> Wow...interesting story...I've not been caught out in a hailstorm before.
>>
>> Is an F-150 an SUV?
>>
>>
>
> No. It's a full size pick up truck. Truck drivers drive theirs for work,
> SUV drivers drive theirs because they need to compensate for a) lack of
> driving skills, or b) lack of something else more innate. It's like a
> novice mountain biker who slaps on a ton of body amour because a) they can't
> ride without crashing into a tree, or b) they think it looks cool. Just my
> two cents. Flame away.
>
>
You take a f150 short bed crew cab with a cap and leather interior, and
compare it to a SUV and the difference is small.
|
| | | |
Date: 28 Aug 2007 09:13:56
From: Michael Warner
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 16:42:34 -0400, Bellsouth Ijit 2.0 - Global Warming
Edition ® wrote:
> No. It's a full size pick up truck. Truck drivers drive theirs for work,
> SUV drivers drive theirs because they need to compensate for a) lack of
> driving skills, or b) lack of something else more innate. It's like a
> novice mountain biker who slaps on a ton of body amour
Is Body Amour an aftershave?
|
| | |
Date: 27 Aug 2007 15:12:27
From: RBrickston
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
In article <13d4mcpo4kfn827@news.supernews.com >, rogerzoul2@hotmail.com
says...
> D_Frumious_B@ndersnat.ch wrote:
> :: separate ways. My thanks to the gentleman in the F-150. I guess
> :: I'll have to revise
> :: my stereotype of SUV drivers, too.
>
> Wow...interesting story...I've not been caught out in a hailstorm before.
>
> Is an F-150 an SUV?
No, it's a 1/2 ton pick-up.
|
| | |
Date: 27 Aug 2007 15:04:00
From: Michael Warner
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 00:56:51 -0400, Roger Zoul wrote:
> Wow...interesting story...I've not been caught out in a hailstorm before.
I have. It bloody hurts. Though I was more worried about my bike getting
dented :-)
|
| | | |
Date: 28 Aug 2007 22:16:15
From: Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
Michael Warner wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 00:56:51 -0400, Roger Zoul wrote:
>
>> Wow...interesting story...I've not been caught out in a hailstorm before.
>
> I have. It bloody hurts. Though I was more worried about my bike getting
> dented :-)
This might be an actual good use for a magic foam hat.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
A Real Cyclist [TM] keeps at least one bicycle in the bedroom.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 28 Aug 2007 21:53:20
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: Changing my Opinion of SUVers
|
Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> Michael Warner wrote:
>> On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 00:56:51 -0400, Roger Zoul wrote:
>>
>>> Wow...interesting story...I've not been caught out in a hailstorm
>>> before.
>>
>> I have. It bloody hurts. Though I was more worried about my bike
>> getting dented :-)
>
> This might be an actual good use for a magic foam hat.
Rocks get thrown, too, of course. And riders do fall and hit their heads on
pavement, curb edges, rr tracks, etc.
Bill "practical magic" S.
|
|
