| |
Main
Date: 21 Oct 2007 19:50:14
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Sad, sad story...
|
Absolutely tragic. Unquestionably criminal.
R.I.P.
(This link might be more direct:
http://www.idahostatesman.com/localnews/story/188765.html.)
Bill S.
----- Original Message -----
From: cbro77@yahoo.com
Newsgroups: alt.mountain-bike
Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2007 4:53 PM
Subject: Bike Commuters, Be Afraid, Be Very Afraid...
I know the Freak beat the reaper recently, but unfortunately, this
dear woman didn't. Hit by some gal driving a Hummer on the SIDEWALK!
You won't believe this story: and it happened about 2 miles from my
house where I occasionally ride when bike commuting:
http://voices.idahostatesman.com/idaho_story_188765?page=1
CDB
|
|
| |
Date: 27 Oct 2007 01:52:53
From: Tom Keats
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
In article <v23Ui.21774$kj1.14766@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net >,
"Leo Lichtman" <l.lichtman@worldnet.att.net > writes:
>
> "Tom Keats" wrote: (clip) they're kings of a world which is their personal
> oyster, (clip)
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Delightful mixed metaphor.
Yeah, I rather enjoy a good malapropism or mondegreen, too.
Speaking of mondegreens, my all-time favourite was when
The Rolling Stones had just released their Some Girls
album. A caller with a prepubescent, lispy, little-girl
voice on the local radio request line asked for the "I
Don't Want to be Your Pizza Burnin'" song to be played.
She was of course referring to the song: "Beast of Burden".
cheers,
Tom
--
"More spuds in Idaho"
-- Neil Jung
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca
|
| | |
Date: 27 Oct 2007 15:45:48
From: Leo Lichtman
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
"Tom Keats" wrote: (clip)my all-time favourite was (clip)"I
> Don't Want to be Your Pizza Burnin'" (clip)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Additional candidates:
"Our Father, Harold be thy name."
"Lead us not into Penn Station."
|
| |
Date: 26 Oct 2007 02:56:42
From: Tom Keats
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
In article <1193325947.633175.80760@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com >,
frkrygow@gmail.com writes:
> On Oct 25, 5:31 am, tkeats2...@hotmail.com (Tom Keats) wrote:
>>
>> Just because a car is designed to flip pedestrians into
>> the windshield or over the roof instead of mowing them down,
>> doesn't mean it's "safe". I know I don't wanna be flipped
>> into a windshield again.
>
> It's easy to argue that _no_ car is "safe." You just have to choose
> your definition of "safe" to fit your preconceptions.
Any car is safe, so long as it's parked.
Lemme put it this way -- I opine that high-performance cars
are more dangerous than SUV slugs, because there's a greater
temptation to their drivers to operate them in a dangerous
manner which exceeds any "saftey" features (read: obviated
harm) designed into them.
> But it's hard to argue that an SUV is as safe as, say, a Honda with
> regard to pedestrian harm. (Or is _should_ be hard to argue that. I
> guess on Usenet, it's easy to argue anything.)
It might be interesting to have hard numbers about pedestrians
killed/injured by respective vehicle types.
>
> The tall, squarish fronts of SUVs do a lot more damage to pedestrians
> than sloping hoods of ordinary cars.
Even getting hit by a 1.5 ton "ordinary car" is not a pillow fight.
An A-bomb ain't as bad as an H-bomb either. But neither
is a picnic in the park.
cheers,
Tom
--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca
|
| | |
Date: 27 Oct 2007 09:04:53
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
Tom Keats wrote:
> In article <1193325947.633175.80760@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com>,
> frkrygow@gmail.com writes:
>> On Oct 25, 5:31 am, tkeats2...@hotmail.com (Tom Keats) wrote:
>>> Just because a car is designed to flip pedestrians into
>>> the windshield or over the roof instead of mowing them down,
>>> doesn't mean it's "safe". I know I don't wanna be flipped
>>> into a windshield again.
>> It's easy to argue that _no_ car is "safe." You just have to choose
>> your definition of "safe" to fit your preconceptions.
>
> Any car is safe, so long as it's parked.
>
> Lemme put it this way -- I opine that high-performance cars
> are more dangerous than SUV slugs, because there's a greater
> temptation to their drivers to operate them in a dangerous
> manner which exceeds any "saftey" features (read: obviated
> harm) designed into them....
Around here it is the SUV drivers that are the worst offenders at
aggressively tailgating, passing to the right in the curb bus/parking
lane, running red lights, turning right on red without yielding to
pedestrians in the sidewalk, driving too fast in the rain and snow, etc.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
When did ignorance of biology become a "family value"?
|
| |
Date: 25 Oct 2007 15:25:47
From:
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
On Oct 25, 5:31 am, tkeats2...@hotmail.com (Tom Keats) wrote:
>
> Just because a car is designed to flip pedestrians into
> the windshield or over the roof instead of mowing them down,
> doesn't mean it's "safe". I know I don't wanna be flipped
> into a windshield again.
It's easy to argue that _no_ car is "safe." You just have to choose
your definition of "safe" to fit your preconceptions.
But it's hard to argue that an SUV is as safe as, say, a Honda with
regard to pedestrian harm. (Or is _should_ be hard to argue that. I
guess on Usenet, it's easy to argue anything.)
The tall, squarish fronts of SUVs do a lot more damage to pedestrians
than sloping hoods of ordinary cars. The impact with the body is much
more sudden. The forces are much higher. That's even without the SUV
"bull bars," which tend to act something like french fry cutters.
- Frank Krygowski
|
| |
Date: 25 Oct 2007 02:31:10
From: Tom Keats
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
In article <slrnfhrq7b.mp.usenet-mail@sed.homestarmy.net >,
Mark Shroyer <usenet-mail@markshroyer.com > writes:
> On 2007-10-23, Tom Keats <tkeat2005@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> In article <slrnfhqcop.mp.usenet-mail@sed.homestarmy.net>,
>> Mark Shroyer <usenet-mail@markshroyer.com> writes:
>>
>>> So are you really arguing that the decreased maneuverability and
>>> braking ability (not to mention visibility) of these stupidly
>>> oversized vehicles do not have any safety implications, turning
>>> dangerous drivers into even more dangerous ones? Or am I just
>>> misreading you?
>>
>> I'm saying street-racing cars (and their immature,
>> inexperienced drivers who think they know everything)
>> pose a greater danger to the public.
>>
>> Hummer drivers generally don't hurtle their vehicles
>> so much.
>
> Huh... it seems that we have quite different subspecies of Hummer
> drivers in our respective locales. Fortunately Hummers are
> relatively rare in my town, because the ones I do see are driven
> (and parked, but that's another rant) as by complete idiots.
From what I've seen, our local Hummer drivers tend to
tread somewhat carefully. They keep their vehicles
immaculately clean. They'd probably have a fit if you
climbed into it with a half-melted Klondike bar in
your hand. They certainly don't want to mess their
expensive vehicles up, especially with collisions.
Maybe it's an insurance thing.
>> It's not just about the vehicles -- it's also about
>> the drivers who hurtle them.
>>
>> Porsche 944 & Boxter drivers are especially scary.
>
> I guess it must be a regional thing again. Ricer drivers,
> certainly, but I can't say I've ever felt threatened by someone in a
> Porsche.
In my experience those people think they're kings of a
world which is their personal oyster, and everybody else
is just in their way. Maybe Porsches are our local
gangstas' bling du jour? I dunno.
> (And I have no idea what the underlying root of
> correlation might be, but they always seem to use their turn signals
> properly...)
>
> Anyway, what you originally said was:
>
>> Souped-up Civics, Lexuses, Maximas, Cavaliers, et al
>> are just as deadly.
>>
>> They don't even have to be souped-up.
>
> You're correct that you can't take the driver out of the equation.
> But idiotic, selfish drivers will be idiotic, selfish drivers no
> matter what vehicle you put them in. And an idiotic, selfish driver
> in a Civic, Lexus, Maxima, or Cavalier, while certainly dangerous,
> holds much less potential for harm than one in a Hummer.
There has been a lot of newsworthy deaths & injuries here
resulting from street racing, mostly by kids who have had
maybe two years of driving experience, haven't even yet
reached the age of 20, and think they know everything.
Then again, there's also been a lot of newsworthy deaths &
injuries here resulting from drivers just not looking out.
Just because a car is designed to flip pedestrians into
the windshield or over the roof instead of mowing them down,
doesn't mean it's "safe". I know I don't wanna be flipped
into a windshield again.
The WHO has some horrendous stats on traffic-related deaths.
I can look them up and give you a URL cite if you like, but
I'm afraid it'll take time as I'm working afternoon shift
and really can only access the WWW on weekends.
cheers,
Tom
--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca
|
| | |
Date: 25 Oct 2007 15:58:19
From: Leo Lichtman
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
"Tom Keats" wrote: (clip) they're kings of a world which is their personal
oyster, (clip)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Delightful mixed metaphor.
|
| |
Date: 24 Oct 2007 19:34:56
From: nmp
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
joseph.santaniello@gmail.com wrote:
> On Oct 24, 3:54 pm, nmp <addr...@is.invalid> wrote:
>> joseph.santanie...@gmail.com wrote:
>> > Just like it is of course true that not all Prius drivers are smug
>> > jerks, neither are all Hummer drivers asocial morons.
>>
>> If they are not, then why do they drive such a monstruous vehicle? :)
>
> Oh no, here we go again!
:P
> We are talking about H3's here, and they are not really that big.
I know. About the same as a Volvo luxury estate. But a fair bit higher
and a lot boxier. And uglier.
> But the reason they are not ALL morons is that some of them
> occasionally use the carrying capacity they have. Maybe just to haul
> the BMI challenged bodies of their family around, or maybe to haul tubs
> of hot soup to a homeless shelter. (Hey! It could happen!)
Yeah. Right. This is not what people buy Hummers for, and you know it.
|
| |
Date: 24 Oct 2007 08:56:42
From: joseph.santaniello@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
On Oct 24, 3:54 pm, nmp <addr...@is.invalid > wrote:
> joseph.santanie...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Just like it is of course true that not all Prius drivers are smug
> > jerks, neither are all Hummer drivers asocial morons.
>
> If they are not, then why do they drive such a monstruous vehicle? :)
Oh no, here we go again!
We are talking about H3's here, and they are not really that big. But
the reason they are not ALL morons is that some of them occasionally
use the carrying capacity they have. Maybe just to haul the BMI
challenged bodies of their family around, or maybe to haul tubs of hot
soup to a homeless shelter. (Hey! It could happen!)
Joseph
|
| | |
Date: 25 Oct 2007 03:40:22
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
joseph.santaniello@gmail.com aka Joseph Santaniello wrote:
> On Oct 24, 3:54 pm, nmp <addr...@is.invalid> wrote:
>> joseph.santanie...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> Just like it is of course true that not all Prius drivers are smug
>>> jerks, neither are all Hummer drivers asocial morons.
>> If they are not, then why do they drive such a monstruous vehicle? :)
>
> Oh no, here we go again!
>
> We are talking about H3's here, and they are not really that big. But
> the reason they are not ALL morons is that some of them occasionally
> use the carrying capacity they have. Maybe just to haul the BMI
> challenged bodies of their family around, or maybe to haul tubs of hot
> soup to a homeless shelter. (Hey! It could happen!)
For half the purchase price and half the fuel usage, a minivan would do
the aforementioned just as well, be a more pleasant vehicle to drive,
and would be the better choice for the 99.9% of people who do not need
off-road capability.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!
|
| |
Date: 24 Oct 2007 13:54:10
From: nmp
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
joseph.santaniello@gmail.com wrote:
> Just like it is of course true that not all Prius drivers are smug
> jerks, neither are all Hummer drivers asocial morons.
If they are not, then why do they drive such a monstruous vehicle? :)
|
| |
Date: 24 Oct 2007 05:59:43
From: joseph.santaniello@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
On Oct 24, 2:01 pm, "DI" <di9...@cox.net > wrote:
> <joseph.santanie...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1193205381.028433.132560@e34g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Oct 23, 11:42 pm, Mark Shroyer <usenet-m...@markshroyer.com> wrote:
> >> On 2007-10-23, <joseph.santanie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Not that I'm aware of. VW makes some cars that are just as good (but
> > not as cool IMO) and since they already have a whole distribution
> > setup in the US it would be easier to deal with to get them to bring
> > them to the US.
>
> > Joseph
>
> VW's good as what???? I had a 2001 VW New Beetle, that nearly bankrupted
> me on maintenance and repair costs.. It's my last VW, now a Honda and/or
> Ford driver.
By "good" I meant in terms of fuel economy and driving feel. I had a
2000 Jetta that was fine, and a 2000 Beetle that sucked in terms of
quality and problems. It'll be a long time until I get a new VW too.
The dealers were no good either.
Joseph
|
| |
Date: 24 Oct 2007 03:58:38
From: joseph.santaniello@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
On Oct 24, 10:06 am, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> joseph.santanie...@gmail.com aka Joseph Santaniello wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 23, 11:42 pm, Mark Shroyer <usenet-m...@markshroyer.com> wrote:
> >> On 2007-10-23, <joseph.santanie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> As I said, this was based on my observation. That's my only data.
> >>> Do these people you know who drive a Prius, do they have kids?
> >>> While I don't doubt they are socially conscious people, the only
> >>> thing that really matters is how much utility they get in terms
> >>> number of people and amount of cargo actually transported for the
> >>> amount of fuel they use. The same goes for any car, H3's included.
> >>> I think anyone who thinks that an H3 doesn't spend more of it's
> >>> miles with more people in it than a Prius does with it's miles is
> >>> mistaken.
> >> While H3s and especially H2s are thankfully rare in this town, I do
> >> spot them from time to time and I have yet to see one of either
> >> model carrying more than two occupants (including the driver). So
> >> no, I don't think the average H3 spends more of its miles with more
> >> people in it than a Prius; in fact, I'd venture it's probably the
> >> other way around. That's based on my personal observation, which is
> >> no more and no less valid than your own.
>
> >>> I agree that car choices say quite a bit about someone. But I also
> >>> think that applying one's own set of criteria for what constitutes
> >>> a wise car choice for one's own needs to others and their perhaps
> >>> other needs makes everyone else appear an asocial moron. They may
> >>> indeed be asocial morons, but it is probably because they have
> >>> different needs that they have chosen differently, and for them
> >>> the decision isn't that stupid, not because they may or may not be
> >>> asocial morons.
> >>> I personally think Prius drivers come off as a smug bunch of self-
> >>> righteous folks who are fooling themselves about how much good
> >>> they are accomplishing. I drive a 10 year old Fiat with a 1.4
> >>> liter gas engine. A Bravo 3 door hatchback, sort of a Honda Civic
> >>> sized vehicle. Without any particular care paid to how I drive in
> >>> terms of frugality, I get a real-world 38+mpg. If I paid half as
> >>> much attention to coasting on hills, and other tricks Prius owners
> >>> use to try to get anywhere near the advertised mpg claims, I'd
> >>> easy be over 40mpg. A Prius using all the tricks in the book
> >>> doesn't get much better than that. My current "dream car" is a
> >>> 2008 Fiat Grande Punto which (really) gets 50mpg. I want one
> >>> because it would reduce my fuel expenditures and emissions. The
> >>> same reasons Prius owners buy their cars, but I don't wear it like
> >>> a badge on my arm.
> >> Cool... I've always had a thing for Fiat. From your headers it
> >> looks like you're in the US; does anyone currently import Fiats into
> >> the States?
>
> > Not that I'm aware of. VW makes some cars that are just as good (but
> > not as cool IMO) and since they already have a whole distribution
> > setup in the US it would be easier to deal with to get them to bring
> > them to the US.
>
> I doubt that Fiat could compete on both cost AND quality with
> domestically produced vehicles by Honda, Toyota, Nissan, etc. There is a
> reason that the only European made cars available in the US [1] are
> those that have "European Heritage and Mystique" prestige value.
>
> [1] The VWs available in the US are either upmarket models, or made in
> low labor cost Mexico and Brasil.
>
> --
> Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
> Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!
Probably true. But quality has made huge strides since the disaster
years of the 70's. Fiat is the most common foreign make in Germany,
and the Germans are tough customers.
But since Fiat goes for the low end, the weak dollar would make it
even more difficult. They might be able to swing it with some of the
more expensive upscale marques like Alfa Romeo or Lancia, but those
have such bad reps in the US, I doubt they would try. Or maybe with
cult cars like the Panda 4x4 or the 500.
Joseph
|
| | |
Date: 25 Oct 2007 03:21:42
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
joseph.santaniello@gmail.com aka Joseph Santaniello wrote:
> On Oct 24, 10:06 am, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> ...
>> I doubt that Fiat could compete on both cost AND quality with
>> domestically produced vehicles by Honda, Toyota, Nissan, etc. There is a
>> reason that the only European made cars available in the US [1] are
>> those that have "European Heritage and Mystique" prestige value.
>>
>> [1] The VWs available in the US are either upmarket models, or made in
>> low labor cost Mexico and Brasil.
>
> Probably true. But quality has made huge strides since the disaster
> years of the 70's. Fiat is the most common foreign make in Germany,
> and the Germans are tough customers.
>
> But since Fiat goes for the low end, the weak dollar would make it
> even more difficult. They might be able to swing it with some of the
> more expensive upscale marques like Alfa Romeo or Lancia, but those
> have such bad reps in the US, I doubt they would try. Or maybe with
> cult cars like the Panda 4x4 or the 500.
When the cost of trans-Atlantic shipping is added, non-luxury European
cars are not going to be competitive with US made, Japanese brand cars
in the US, even if quality and manufacturing costs are the same.
Just like bicycles - those from Europe are generally high end or
specialty bikes, with the low to midrange generally being from
democratic China or fascist China.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!
|
| |
Date: 24 Oct 2007 03:53:57
From: joseph.santaniello@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
On Oct 24, 3:11 am, Tom Sherman <sunsetss0...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> joseph.santanie...@gmail.com aka Joseph Santaniello wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 22, 8:09 pm, "Leo Lichtman" <l.licht...@worldnet.att.net>
> > wrote:
> >> "Gooserider" wrote: Well, that's not exactly true. The H3 is based on the
>
> >> Chevy Colorado pickup.> It has nothing at all in common with a true Humvee.
>
> >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >> Isn't that what "pseudo" means?
>
> >> On topic, and not in response to Gooserider: When I see people driving
> >> those pseudo-military vehicles I form a low opinion of them for several
> >> reasons. 1.) The vehicle is impractical--as big as it is, it holds only
> >> five people. 2.) It is unnecessarily large and heavy so it causes more
> >> crowding uses more fuel and pollutes more. 3.) All the things that make me
> >> like Prious owners are the things that weigh against Hummer owners.
>
> > Just based on my observations, I'd say there is a big difference in
> > the usage patterns of H3's vs Prius's (Prii?). I'd bet the average
> > Prius is used mostly for long commutes with one person in the car.
> > H3's probably also spend most of their time with only one person too,
> > but I'd bet they also generally are not driven as far, and more often
> > than a Prius have more than one person aboard (kids) and more often
> > carry cargo (suitcases, crap from Ikea, etc). So if you look at fuel
> > spent per person/kilometer or fuel per cargo/km the H3 doesn't look so
> > bad. Sure there are other big(ger) cars that offer even more utility,
> > but I'm just saying that an H3 isn't as dumb as many would like to
> > think.
>
> I pretty much see H3s with a single occupant. As for carrying cargo, the
> H3 is rather small inside - I could likely get almost as much stuff in
> my Honda Civic.
>
> A minivan will use less gas and haul a whole lot more than a H3, and
> will handle better in the bargain.
>
> > Reading a book by it's cover is something everyone does. I'm sure lots
> > of Prius owners and other people who think poorly of Hummer owners
> > wouldn't have such a dim view of someone driving along a VW Multivan.
> > If they saw such a car on the freeway headed to SF from San Jose, they
> > might even think highly of the driver. The funny thing is the Syncro
> > Multivan weighs more than an H3 and uses more gas.
>
> The VW Multivan is in a whole different different class when it comes to
> passenger and cargo space.
>
Sure the Multivan has more capacity, but is the presence of (probably
unused) capacity to carry a few more golf bags the difference between
being an ascocial moron or not?
Consider this scenario:
A Prius driver (could be other cars too of course) is driving alone in
the carpool lane on I-580 near San Jose. Traffic bogs down and they
find themselves stopped next to an H3 in a normal lane also with a
lone driver.
The Prius driver might think to themselves, that person is probably a
jerk, why do they think they have a right to waste gas and threaten
people with their outsized vehicle?
Later the same driver is stopped next to a Multivan also with one
driver. Does the Prius driver automatically have a similarly dim view
of the Multivan driver? Probably not, because they are not prejudiced
against such cars even though it this context it is just as wasteful
and threatening. They might even think they were some kind of
enlightened sophisticate. Whatever it is that they think differently
about them, it isn't because the Multivan has more interior space,
it's because it looks different.
The point is you can't have any idea about how somebody uses their car
when it is out of your view, yet people (myself included) make huge
assumptions about people they don't even know based entirely on the
appearance of their car.
Here's what a Multivan is for those not familiar with them:
http://www.volkswagen-vans.co.uk/index.php?action=caravelle.main
Joseph
|
| | |
Date: 25 Oct 2007 16:08:26
From: Leo Lichtman
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
<joseph.santaniello@gmail.com > wrote:
(clip)
Consider this scenario:
>
> A Prius driver (could be other cars too of course) is driving alone in
> the carpool lane on I-580 near San Jose. Traffic bogs down and they
> find themselves stopped next to an H3 in a normal lane also with a
> lone driver. (clip)
Later the same driver is stopped next to a Multivan also with one
> driver. (clip)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
What he is probably thinking is, "My engine is off. Those around me are
running. I'm not wasting gas, wearing my engine or creating fumes. I guess
I have a right to be a little smug."
|
| | |
Date: 25 Oct 2007 03:31:17
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
joseph.santaniello@gmail.com aka Joseph Santaniello wrote:
>
> Consider this scenario:
>
> A Prius driver (could be other cars too of course) is driving alone in
> the carpool lane on I-580 near San Jose. Traffic bogs down and they
> find themselves stopped next to an H3 in a normal lane also with a
> lone driver.
>
> The Prius driver might think to themselves, that person is probably a
> jerk, why do they think they have a right to waste gas and threaten
> people with their outsized vehicle?
>
> Later the same driver is stopped next to a Multivan also with one
> driver. Does the Prius driver automatically have a similarly dim view
> of the Multivan driver? Probably not, because they are not prejudiced
> against such cars even though it this context it is just as wasteful
> and threatening. They might even think they were some kind of
> enlightened sophisticate. Whatever it is that they think differently
> about them, it isn't because the Multivan has more interior space,
> it's because it looks different.
>
> The point is you can't have any idea about how somebody uses their car
> when it is out of your view, yet people (myself included) make huge
> assumptions about people they don't even know based entirely on the
> appearance of their car.
You are missing the point. Vehicles are marketed to project a certain
image, and what one chooses makes a statement. A Mercedes-Benz S-Class
or BMW 7-Series yells, "look at me, I can afford this car and you can't,
so stay the hell out of my way." A Hummer says "I'm a bad-ass driving a
bad-ass vehicle, so stay the hell out of my way." A minivan says "I have
a lot of stuff to haul around."
> Here's what a Multivan is for those not familiar with them:
>
> http://www.volkswagen-vans.co.uk/index.php?action=caravelle.main
Sold as the "Eurovan" in the US.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 22:56:21
From: joseph.santaniello@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
On Oct 23, 11:42 pm, Mark Shroyer <usenet-m...@markshroyer.com > wrote:
> On 2007-10-23, <joseph.santanie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > As I said, this was based on my observation. That's my only data.
> > Do these people you know who drive a Prius, do they have kids?
> > While I don't doubt they are socially conscious people, the only
> > thing that really matters is how much utility they get in terms
> > number of people and amount of cargo actually transported for the
> > amount of fuel they use. The same goes for any car, H3's included.
> > I think anyone who thinks that an H3 doesn't spend more of it's
> > miles with more people in it than a Prius does with it's miles is
> > mistaken.
>
> While H3s and especially H2s are thankfully rare in this town, I do
> spot them from time to time and I have yet to see one of either
> model carrying more than two occupants (including the driver). So
> no, I don't think the average H3 spends more of its miles with more
> people in it than a Prius; in fact, I'd venture it's probably the
> other way around. That's based on my personal observation, which is
> no more and no less valid than your own.
>
>
>
> > I agree that car choices say quite a bit about someone. But I also
> > think that applying one's own set of criteria for what constitutes
> > a wise car choice for one's own needs to others and their perhaps
> > other needs makes everyone else appear an asocial moron. They may
> > indeed be asocial morons, but it is probably because they have
> > different needs that they have chosen differently, and for them
> > the decision isn't that stupid, not because they may or may not be
> > asocial morons.
>
> > I personally think Prius drivers come off as a smug bunch of self-
> > righteous folks who are fooling themselves about how much good
> > they are accomplishing. I drive a 10 year old Fiat with a 1.4
> > liter gas engine. A Bravo 3 door hatchback, sort of a Honda Civic
> > sized vehicle. Without any particular care paid to how I drive in
> > terms of frugality, I get a real-world 38+mpg. If I paid half as
> > much attention to coasting on hills, and other tricks Prius owners
> > use to try to get anywhere near the advertised mpg claims, I'd
> > easy be over 40mpg. A Prius using all the tricks in the book
> > doesn't get much better than that. My current "dream car" is a
> > 2008 Fiat Grande Punto which (really) gets 50mpg. I want one
> > because it would reduce my fuel expenditures and emissions. The
> > same reasons Prius owners buy their cars, but I don't wear it like
> > a badge on my arm.
>
> Cool... I've always had a thing for Fiat. From your headers it
> looks like you're in the US; does anyone currently import Fiats into
> the States?
>
Not that I'm aware of. VW makes some cars that are just as good (but
not as cool IMO) and since they already have a whole distribution
setup in the US it would be easier to deal with to get them to bring
them to the US.
Joseph
|
| | |
Date: 24 Oct 2007 07:01:44
From: DI
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
<joseph.santaniello@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1193205381.028433.132560@e34g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
> On Oct 23, 11:42 pm, Mark Shroyer <usenet-m...@markshroyer.com> wrote:
>> On 2007-10-23, <joseph.santanie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Not that I'm aware of. VW makes some cars that are just as good (but
> not as cool IMO) and since they already have a whole distribution
> setup in the US it would be easier to deal with to get them to bring
> them to the US.
>
> Joseph
>
VW's good as what???? I had a 2001 VW New Beetle, that nearly bankrupted
me on maintenance and repair costs.. It's my last VW, now a Honda and/or
Ford driver.
|
| | |
Date: 24 Oct 2007 03:06:40
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
joseph.santaniello@gmail.com aka Joseph Santaniello wrote:
> On Oct 23, 11:42 pm, Mark Shroyer <usenet-m...@markshroyer.com> wrote:
>> On 2007-10-23, <joseph.santanie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> As I said, this was based on my observation. That's my only data.
>>> Do these people you know who drive a Prius, do they have kids?
>>> While I don't doubt they are socially conscious people, the only
>>> thing that really matters is how much utility they get in terms
>>> number of people and amount of cargo actually transported for the
>>> amount of fuel they use. The same goes for any car, H3's included.
>>> I think anyone who thinks that an H3 doesn't spend more of it's
>>> miles with more people in it than a Prius does with it's miles is
>>> mistaken.
>> While H3s and especially H2s are thankfully rare in this town, I do
>> spot them from time to time and I have yet to see one of either
>> model carrying more than two occupants (including the driver). So
>> no, I don't think the average H3 spends more of its miles with more
>> people in it than a Prius; in fact, I'd venture it's probably the
>> other way around. That's based on my personal observation, which is
>> no more and no less valid than your own.
>>
>>
>>
>>> I agree that car choices say quite a bit about someone. But I also
>>> think that applying one's own set of criteria for what constitutes
>>> a wise car choice for one's own needs to others and their perhaps
>>> other needs makes everyone else appear an asocial moron. They may
>>> indeed be asocial morons, but it is probably because they have
>>> different needs that they have chosen differently, and for them
>>> the decision isn't that stupid, not because they may or may not be
>>> asocial morons.
>>> I personally think Prius drivers come off as a smug bunch of self-
>>> righteous folks who are fooling themselves about how much good
>>> they are accomplishing. I drive a 10 year old Fiat with a 1.4
>>> liter gas engine. A Bravo 3 door hatchback, sort of a Honda Civic
>>> sized vehicle. Without any particular care paid to how I drive in
>>> terms of frugality, I get a real-world 38+mpg. If I paid half as
>>> much attention to coasting on hills, and other tricks Prius owners
>>> use to try to get anywhere near the advertised mpg claims, I'd
>>> easy be over 40mpg. A Prius using all the tricks in the book
>>> doesn't get much better than that. My current "dream car" is a
>>> 2008 Fiat Grande Punto which (really) gets 50mpg. I want one
>>> because it would reduce my fuel expenditures and emissions. The
>>> same reasons Prius owners buy their cars, but I don't wear it like
>>> a badge on my arm.
>> Cool... I've always had a thing for Fiat. From your headers it
>> looks like you're in the US; does anyone currently import Fiats into
>> the States?
>>
>
> Not that I'm aware of. VW makes some cars that are just as good (but
> not as cool IMO) and since they already have a whole distribution
> setup in the US it would be easier to deal with to get them to bring
> them to the US.
I doubt that Fiat could compete on both cost AND quality with
domestically produced vehicles by Honda, Toyota, Nissan, etc. There is a
reason that the only European made cars available in the US [1] are
those that have "European Heritage and Mystique" prestige value.
[1] The VWs available in the US are either upmarket models, or made in
low labor cost Mexico and Brasil.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 22:53:36
From: joseph.santaniello@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
On Oct 24, 12:43 am, frkry...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Oct 23, 3:14 pm, "joseph.santanie...@gmail.com"
>
> <joseph.santanie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Oct 23, 7:41 pm, frkry...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > IOW, got data?
>
> > As I said, this was based on my observation. That's my only data.
>
> OK, I thought so. That's why I listed my observations, which differ
> from yours. I suppose the person who actually posts data will
> contribute more than either of us!
>
> > Do
> > these people you know who drive a Prius, do they have kids?
>
> Yep.
>
> > While I
> > don't doubt they are socially conscious people, the only thing that
> > really matters is how much utility they get in terms number of people
> > and amount of cargo actually transported for the amount of fuel they
> > use. The same goes for any car, H3's included. I think anyone who
> > thinks that an H3 doesn't spend more of it's miles with more people in
> > it than a Prius does with it's miles is mistaken.
>
> And, of course, I think differently!
>
> I've spent a few minutes, from time to time, standing on a pedestrian
> bridge over a busy downtown street where I work. I was counting the
> people in cars that passed by. The count goes like this: 1; 1; 1; 1;
> 1; 1; 1; 1; 1; 1; 2; 1; 1; 1; 1; and so on.
>
> Americans, by and large, drive alone. It doesn't matter if they're in
> Miatas or Escalades. I'll agree that moving more people per gallon is
> a good idea. I just don't believe the total number of people per
> gallon is greater for SUVs. In fact, I'd be astounded if it were.
Around here the passenger counts are pretty much the same as you
observe. When I suggest that SUV's have a higher number of people
miles, I suspect it is only by a super slim margin. An SUV could have
2x as many double occupancy miles as a Prius and still spend 95% of
it's miles with only one person. But of course as you pointed out
that's just speculation.
> And someone pointed out, the H3 has a seating capacity of five - the
> same as my ancient Civic wagon, or my relative's Taurus.
While smaller cars like that can seat 5 people, it's often cramped.
People who regularly (or even more than just occasionally) carry that
many people I suspect get bigger cars. The cars end up getting driven
around with only one person most of the time, but sometimes not.
>
> > > What you're saying is that Hummers are not the _only_ irresponsible
> > > choice. And sure, that's true. But that doesn't make the Hummer a
> > > responsible choice!
>
> > Who ever said it was a responsible choice? I just said it wasn't
> > necessarily AS dumb as you guys seem to think. I also said that you
> > guys show a prejudice toward cars like the H3 based on it's looks that
> > you don't show for other cars that are just as bad.
>
> I'm not willing to concede that my dislike of SUVs is prejudicial. I
> believe it's observational. I've previously listed many specific
> reasons I don't like SUVs, and I suppose I can do it again. They're
> certainly not all related to fuel economy. (BTW, the only person who
> aggressively tailgated me today was driving an SUV.)
>
>
>
>
>
> > > Yes, I know that somewhere out there is a person whose legitimate
> > > needs can only be met by an aggressive looking, irresponsibly marketed
> > > SUV. But I think car choices do indicate a person's values, and I
> > > think a person's values do influence their behavior. And the people
> > > that buy a "war games" vehicle aren't likely to be courteously
> > > deferential on the road, or take pains to use it in a responsible
> > > manner.
>
> > I agree that car choices say quite a bit about someone. But I also
> > think that applying one's own set of criteria for what constitutes a
> > wise car choice for one's own needs to others and their perhaps other
> > needs makes everyone else appear an asocial moron. They may indeed be
> > asocial morons, but it is probably because they have different needs
> > that they have chosen differently, and for them the decision isn't
> > that stupid, not because they may or may not be asocial morons.
>
> Well, it sounds a little as if you're saying "Everything is just a
> personal choice, there is no right or wrong." That's too fluffy and
> liberal for me. I think there _are_ moronic choices, and that they're
> made every day. Especially regarding cars!
If it sounds like I was giving everyone a free pass to be stupid with
"I'm ok, you're ok", I was not clear.
> > I personally think Prius drivers come off as a smug bunch of self-
> > righteous folks who are fooling themselves about how much good they
> > are accomplishing. I drive a 10 year old Fiat with a 1.4 liter gas
> > engine. A Bravo 3 door hatchback, sort of a Honda Civic sized vehicle.
> > Without any particular care paid to how I drive in terms of frugality,
> > I get a real-world 38+mpg. If I paid half as much attention to
> > coasting on hills, and other tricks Prius owners use to try to get
> > anywhere near the advertised mpg claims, I'd easy be over 40mpg.
>
> And, interestingly, I'm in the same camp as you (except that my Prius
> and other hybrid-driving friends are not smug or self righteous, from
> what I can tell.)*
>
> But I do agree that the Prius, or its hybrid competitors, aren't that
> great for the environment. In fact, when my daughter and her husband
> were shopping for a new car, I sent them an article from one of my
> engineering magazines describing that, and describing the
> environmental costs of the mining of ores for the batteries, the
> around-the-world shipping of the same, and other factors that make the
> Prius a questionable choice.
>
> The kids ended up getting a Honda Fit - which, coincidentally, is a
> near twin of my 1990 Honda Civic station wagon. Which hit 42 mpg on
> its last tank.
>
> - Frank Krygowski
>
> * For a better example of smug and self righteous, you'd have to see
> me when I'm loading groceries into my bike baskets! ;-)
;-)
Joseph
|
| | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 23:50:28
From: Zoot Katz
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 22:53:36 -0700, "joseph.santaniello@gmail.com"
<joseph.santaniello@gmail.com > wrote:
>> And someone pointed out, the H3 has a seating capacity of five - the
>> same as my ancient Civic wagon, or my relative's Taurus.
>
>While smaller cars like that can seat 5 people, it's often cramped.
>People who regularly (or even more than just occasionally) carry that
>many people I suspect get bigger cars. The cars end up getting driven
>around with only one person most of the time, but sometimes not.
Obesity numbers partly feed the market for monster scuds.
Along with fear addled wussies needing the security of a rolling
fortress and the Walter Mitty Rambo types who'd rather have a tank,
you've got a sizeable part of the population who can't comfortably
fit into cars designed for people with a normal BMI.
They do really need a truck for hauling their family to KFC.
--
zk
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 22:44:24
From: joseph.santaniello@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
On Oct 23, 11:57 pm, catzz66 <catz...@threeletterservice.com > wrote:
> joseph.santanie...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > On Oct 23, 9:59 pm, "Leo Lichtman" <l.licht...@worldnet.att.net> > wrote:
>
> > >> <joseph.santanie...@gmail.com> wrote: (clip) Do
>
> >>
> >>> these people you know who drive a Prius, do they have kids?
> >>
> >>
> >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >> Some do and some don't. Some Hummer drivers have kids and some
> don't. When
> >> you can come up with some comparative figures on gallons per
> passenger mile,
> >> I'll be willing to listen. In the meantime, why don't you stop
> trying to
> >> control the argument with your imagination?
> >
> >
> >
> > Ok, I may be wrong about the usage pattern of these cars. Do you
> > conceed that I may actually be right?
> >
> >
>
> If my cycling turf is representative of all Hummer usage, I would not
> concede that you are very likely to be right. Hummers seem to be more
> of a "bigger is better" status vehicle, sort of like owning an Escalade
> or Navigator because a Suburban or Explorer is not fancy enough. I know
> there may be some practical use for a Hummer in some parts of the world,
> but not here in the southwest US.
I recently was on 2 trips to California where I drove around quite a
bit. I was there for almost 4 weeks and drove a huge number of miles.
The trip was for the purpose of researching potential places to move
to, so I was making a point of observing as much as I could. This is
essentially what my Hummer observations are based on.
Again, I don't think they are by any means a reasonable car choice,
but I do think that they do occasionally get used in a way that does
take at least some advantage of their capacity.
Joseph
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 22:38:58
From: joseph.santaniello@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
On Oct 24, 12:05 am, Mark Shroyer <usenet-m...@markshroyer.com > wrote:
> On 2007-10-23, Mark Shroyer <usenet-m...@markshroyer.com> wrote:
>
> > The car itself is not equipped with asshole environmentalist
> > attitude. You're projecting that image onto Prius drivers yourself.
> > As you pointed out earlier in this thread, one shouldn't judge a
> > book by its cover.
>
> Scratch that... in hindsight, that metaphor doesn't really work
> here. I (figuratively) suck at metaphors.
>
> --
> Mark Shroyerhttp://markshroyer.com/
I know what you meant, but I didn't mean that folks shouldn't judge a
book by it's cover, just that folks need to be aware that thay do
that. Just like it is of course true that not all Prius drivers are
smug jerks, neither are all Hummer drivers asocial morons.
Joseph
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 22:43:25
From:
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
On Oct 23, 3:14 pm, "joseph.santanie...@gmail.com"
<joseph.santanie...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Oct 23, 7:41 pm, frkry...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > IOW, got data?
>
> As I said, this was based on my observation. That's my only data.
OK, I thought so. That's why I listed my observations, which differ
from yours. I suppose the person who actually posts data will
contribute more than either of us!
> Do
> these people you know who drive a Prius, do they have kids?
Yep.
> While I
> don't doubt they are socially conscious people, the only thing that
> really matters is how much utility they get in terms number of people
> and amount of cargo actually transported for the amount of fuel they
> use. The same goes for any car, H3's included. I think anyone who
> thinks that an H3 doesn't spend more of it's miles with more people in
> it than a Prius does with it's miles is mistaken.
And, of course, I think differently!
I've spent a few minutes, from time to time, standing on a pedestrian
bridge over a busy downtown street where I work. I was counting the
people in cars that passed by. The count goes like this: 1; 1; 1; 1;
1; 1; 1; 1; 1; 1; 2; 1; 1; 1; 1; and so on.
Americans, by and large, drive alone. It doesn't matter if they're in
Miatas or Escalades. I'll agree that moving more people per gallon is
a good idea. I just don't believe the total number of people per
gallon is greater for SUVs. In fact, I'd be astounded if it were.
And someone pointed out, the H3 has a seating capacity of five - the
same as my ancient Civic wagon, or my relative's Taurus.
> > What you're saying is that Hummers are not the _only_ irresponsible
> > choice. And sure, that's true. But that doesn't make the Hummer a
> > responsible choice!
>
> Who ever said it was a responsible choice? I just said it wasn't
> necessarily AS dumb as you guys seem to think. I also said that you
> guys show a prejudice toward cars like the H3 based on it's looks that
> you don't show for other cars that are just as bad.
I'm not willing to concede that my dislike of SUVs is prejudicial. I
believe it's observational. I've previously listed many specific
reasons I don't like SUVs, and I suppose I can do it again. They're
certainly not all related to fuel economy. (BTW, the only person who
aggressively tailgated me today was driving an SUV.)
>
> > Yes, I know that somewhere out there is a person whose legitimate
> > needs can only be met by an aggressive looking, irresponsibly marketed
> > SUV. But I think car choices do indicate a person's values, and I
> > think a person's values do influence their behavior. And the people
> > that buy a "war games" vehicle aren't likely to be courteously
> > deferential on the road, or take pains to use it in a responsible
> > manner.
>
> I agree that car choices say quite a bit about someone. But I also
> think that applying one's own set of criteria for what constitutes a
> wise car choice for one's own needs to others and their perhaps other
> needs makes everyone else appear an asocial moron. They may indeed be
> asocial morons, but it is probably because they have different needs
> that they have chosen differently, and for them the decision isn't
> that stupid, not because they may or may not be asocial morons.
Well, it sounds a little as if you're saying "Everything is just a
personal choice, there is no right or wrong." That's too fluffy and
liberal for me. I think there _are_ moronic choices, and that they're
made every day. Especially regarding cars!
> I personally think Prius drivers come off as a smug bunch of self-
> righteous folks who are fooling themselves about how much good they
> are accomplishing. I drive a 10 year old Fiat with a 1.4 liter gas
> engine. A Bravo 3 door hatchback, sort of a Honda Civic sized vehicle.
> Without any particular care paid to how I drive in terms of frugality,
> I get a real-world 38+mpg. If I paid half as much attention to
> coasting on hills, and other tricks Prius owners use to try to get
> anywhere near the advertised mpg claims, I'd easy be over 40mpg.
And, interestingly, I'm in the same camp as you (except that my Prius
and other hybrid-driving friends are not smug or self righteous, from
what I can tell.)*
But I do agree that the Prius, or its hybrid competitors, aren't that
great for the environment. In fact, when my daughter and her husband
were shopping for a new car, I sent them an article from one of my
engineering magazines describing that, and describing the
environmental costs of the mining of ores for the batteries, the
around-the-world shipping of the same, and other factors that make the
Prius a questionable choice.
The kids ended up getting a Honda Fit - which, coincidentally, is a
near twin of my 1990 Honda Civic station wagon. Which hit 42 mpg on
its last tank.
- Frank Krygowski
* For a better example of smug and self righteous, you'd have to see
me when I'm loading groceries into my bike baskets! ;-)
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 14:09:16
From: joseph.santaniello@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
On Oct 23, 9:59 pm, "Leo Lichtman" <l.licht...@worldnet.att.net >
wrote:
> <joseph.santanie...@gmail.com> wrote: (clip) Do
> I personally think Prius drivers come off as a smug bunch of self-> righteous folks who are fooling themselves about how much good they
> > are accomplishing.
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> What you think personally has no weight with me. Your biases are coming
> through so clearly that you've lost credibility.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Time-out:
My comment about "smug and self-righteous" was obvioulsy an exagerated
generalization. There is really only a tendency toward that sentiment.
I can see how that would anger you since your son has one of these and
in a sense I was calling him names. I'm sorry if I offended you, that
was not my intention.
Now back to the argument...
Joseph
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 13:45:56
From: joseph.santaniello@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
On Oct 23, 9:59 pm, "Leo Lichtman" <l.licht...@worldnet.att.net >
wrote:
> <joseph.santanie...@gmail.com> wrote: (clip) Do
> > these people you know who drive a Prius, do they have kids?
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Some do and some don't. Some Hummer drivers have kids and some don't. When
> you can come up with some comparative figures on gallons per passenger mile,
> I'll be willing to listen. In the meantime, why don't you stop trying to
> control the argument with your imagination?
Ok, I may be wrong about the usage pattern of these cars. Do you
conceed that I may actually be right?
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> (clip) They may indeed be> asocial morons, but it is probably because they have different needs
> > that they have chosen differently, and for them the decision isn't
> > that stupid, not because they may or may not be asocial morons.
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> What your personal "needs" are, and how you satisfy them, is part of what
> makes you a socially conscious person or an asocial moron.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Correct. But you just assume all these "needs" are not valid because
you are the arbitrator of such things, and thus anyone who choses a
car other than what you would chose for them is a moron.
> I personally think Prius drivers come off as a smug bunch of self-> righteous folks who are fooling themselves about how much good they
> > are accomplishing.
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> What you think personally has no weight with me. Your biases are coming
> through so clearly that you've lost credibility.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Sure a Prius is a very fuel efficient car, and it has other plusses
like reduced particulate emissions, etc. There are few reasons NOT to
have one. The problem is the attitude. That a small minority thinks
the vast majority of people are morons because they do not think
exactly like they do is a reflection of my bias is an interesting way
to look at it.
> If I paid half as much attention to> coasting on hills, and other tricks Prius owners use to try to get
> > anywhere near the advertised mpg claims, I'd easy be over 40mpg.
>
> A Prius using all the tricks in the book doesn't get much better than> that.
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> My son gets closer to 50 mpg in his Prius without resorting to ANY tricks.
Good for him. I reset my trip-odometer at each refuel and do the math
to see what my latest tank resulted in. Is that the sort of 50pmg he
gets? It doesn't really matter, he clearly gets very good fuel economy
either way which is a good thing. My point is that there are other
cars that get just as good mileage, but don't come with the attitude.
Prius owners are not just interested in saving gas, they are
interested in being Prius owners and having others know it. Kind of
like clapping at un-funny political jokes to show that they are "with
it". When I get my new car next year that will get 55mpg on the
highway, 50mpg combined, do I get as many "socially consious" points
as a Prius owner? Or are they negated because I don't think everyone
else is a moron?
Joseph
|
| | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 21:59:53
From: Mark Shroyer
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
On 2007-10-23, <joseph.santaniello@gmail.com > wrote:
> Sure a Prius is a very fuel efficient car, and it has other
> plusses like reduced particulate emissions, etc. There are few
> reasons NOT to have one. The problem is the attitude. That a small
> minority thinks the vast majority of people are morons because
> they do not think exactly like they do is a reflection of my bias
> is an interesting way to look at it.
>
> [...]
>
> Good for him. I reset my trip-odometer at each refuel and do the
> math to see what my latest tank resulted in. Is that the sort of
> 50pmg he gets? It doesn't really matter, he clearly gets very good
> fuel economy either way which is a good thing. My point is that
> there are other cars that get just as good mileage, but don't come
> with the attitude. Prius owners are not just interested in saving
> gas, they are interested in being Prius owners and having others
> know it. Kind of like clapping at un-funny political jokes to show
> that they are "with it". When I get my new car next year that will
> get 55mpg on the highway, 50mpg combined, do I get as many
> "socially consious" points as a Prius owner? Or are they negated
> because I don't think everyone else is a moron?
A small minority of cyclists ride like irresponsible assholes. Does
that mean it's fair for the general, non-cyclist public to
characterize all bicyclists in this manner? Likewise, that a small
minority of Prius owners are self-righteous pricks about their cars
doesn't give you license to cast that stereotype on everyone who
drives a Prius.
The car itself is not equipped with asshole environmentalist
attitude. You're projecting that image onto Prius drivers yourself.
As you pointed out earlier in this thread, one shouldn't judge a
book by its cover.
--
Mark Shroyer
http://markshroyer.com/
|
| | | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 22:05:43
From: Mark Shroyer
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
On 2007-10-23, Mark Shroyer <usenet-mail@markshroyer.com > wrote:
> The car itself is not equipped with asshole environmentalist
> attitude. You're projecting that image onto Prius drivers yourself.
> As you pointed out earlier in this thread, one shouldn't judge a
> book by its cover.
Scratch that... in hindsight, that metaphor doesn't really work
here. I (figuratively) suck at metaphors.
--
Mark Shroyer
http://markshroyer.com/
|
| | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 16:55:34
From: catzz66
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
joseph.santaniello@gmail.com wrote:
> On Oct 23, 9:59 pm, "Leo Lichtman" <l.licht...@worldnet.att.net>
> wrote:
>
>><joseph.santanie...@gmail.com> wrote: (clip) Do
>>
>>>these people you know who drive a Prius, do they have kids?
>>
>>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>Some do and some don't. Some Hummer drivers have kids and some don't. When
>>you can come up with some comparative figures on gallons per passenger mile,
>>I'll be willing to listen. In the meantime, why don't you stop trying to
>>control the argument with your imagination?
>
>
> Ok, I may be wrong about the usage pattern of these cars. Do you
> conceed that I may actually be right?
>
>
If my cycling turf is representative of all Hummer usage, I would not
concede that you are not very likely to be right. Hummers seem to be
more of a "bigger is better" status vehicle, sort of like owning an
Escalade or Navigator because a Suburban or Explorer is not fancy
enough. I know there may be some practical use for a Hummer in some
parts of the world, but not here in the southwest US.
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 13:26:30
From: joseph.santaniello@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
On Oct 23, 9:52 pm, neil0...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Oct 23, 12:14 pm, "joseph.santanie...@gmail.com"
>
> <joseph.santanie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I personally think Prius drivers come off as a smug bunch of self-
> > righteous folks who are fooling themselves about how much good they
> > are accomplishing. I drive a 10 year old Fiat with a 1.4 liter gas
> > engine. A Bravo 3 door hatchback, sort of a Honda Civic sized vehicle.
> > Without any particular care paid to how I drive in terms of frugality,
> > I get a real-world 38+mpg. If I paid half as much attention to
> > coasting on hills, and other tricks Prius owners use to try to get
> > anywhere near the advertised mpg claims, I'd easy be over 40mpg. A
> > Prius using all the tricks in the book doesn't get much better than
> > that. My current "dream car" is a 2008 Fiat Grande Punto which
> > (really) gets 50mpg. I want one because it would reduce my fuel
> > expenditures and emissions.
> > The same reasons Prius owners buy their
> > cars, but I don't wear it like a badge on my arm.
>
> Spoken exactly like somebody who does NOT own a Prius.
I have a car that gets almost as good milage as a Prius and plan to
get one that gets just as good, but that apparently doesn't count.
What counts is being "socially conscious" and letting everybody know
it. And of course operating under the assumption that everyone else is
a jerk.
Joseph
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 13:22:08
From:
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
On Oct 23, 12:59 pm, "Leo Lichtman" <l.licht...@worldnet.att.net >
wrote:
> <joseph.santanie...@gmail.com> wrote: (clip) Do
Joseph Santaniello wrote:
> They may indeed be asocial morons, but it is
> probably because they have different needs
> that they have chosen differently, and for
> them the decision isn't that stupid, not
> because they may or may not be asocial morons.
And Leo Lichtman responded:
> What your personal "needs" are, and how you
> satisfy them, is part of what makes you a socially
> conscious person or an asocial moron.
To which I say:
Ayyyyyyy-men, Leo!
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 12:53:43
From:
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
On Oct 23, 12:14 pm, "joseph.santanie...@gmail.com"
<joseph.santanie...@gmail.com > wrote:
> I personally think Prius drivers come off as a smug bunch of self-
> righteous folks who are fooling themselves about how much good they
> are accomplishing. I drive a 10 year old Fiat with a 1.4 liter gas
> engine. A Bravo 3 door hatchback, sort of a Honda Civic sized vehicle.
> Without any particular care paid to how I drive in terms of frugality,
> I get a real-world 38+mpg. If I paid half as much attention to
> coasting on hills, and other tricks Prius owners use to try to get
> anywhere near the advertised mpg claims, I'd easy be over 40mpg. A
> Prius using all the tricks in the book doesn't get much better than
> that. My current "dream car" is a 2008 Fiat Grande Punto which
> (really) gets 50mpg. I want one because it would reduce my fuel
> expenditures and emissions.
> The same reasons Prius owners buy their
> cars, but I don't wear it like a badge on my arm.
Spoken exactly like somebody who does NOT own a Prius.
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 12:52:33
From:
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
On Oct 23, 12:14 pm, "joseph.santanie...@gmail.com"
<joseph.santanie...@gmail.com > wrote:
> I personally think Prius drivers come off as a smug bunch of self-
> righteous folks who are fooling themselves about how much good they
> are accomplishing. I drive a 10 year old Fiat with a 1.4 liter gas
> engine. A Bravo 3 door hatchback, sort of a Honda Civic sized vehicle.
> Without any particular care paid to how I drive in terms of frugality,
> I get a real-world 38+mpg. If I paid half as much attention to
> coasting on hills, and other tricks Prius owners use to try to get
> anywhere near the advertised mpg claims, I'd easy be over 40mpg. A
> Prius using all the tricks in the book doesn't get much better than
> that. My current "dream car" is a 2008 Fiat Grande Punto which
> (really) gets 50mpg. I want one because it would reduce my fuel
> expenditures and emissions.
> The same reasons Prius owners buy their
> cars, but I don't wear it like a badge on my arm.
Spoken exactly like somebody who does NOT own a Prius.
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 12:14:13
From: joseph.santaniello@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
On Oct 23, 7:41 pm, frkry...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Oct 23, 8:17 am, "joseph.santanie...@gmail.com"
>
> <joseph.santanie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Just based on my observations, I'd say there is a big difference in
> > the usage patterns of H3's vs Prius's (Prii?). I'd bet the average
> > Prius is used mostly for long commutes with one person in the car.
> > H3's probably also spend most of their time with only one person too,
> > but I'd bet they also generally are not driven as far, and more often
> > than a Prius have more than one person aboard (kids) and more often
> > carry cargo (suitcases, crap from Ikea, etc). So if you look at fuel
> > spent per person/kilometer or fuel per cargo/km the H3 doesn't look so
> > bad. Sure there are other big(ger) cars that offer even more utility,
> > but I'm just saying that an H3 isn't as dumb as many would like to
> > think.
>
> Your defense of the H3 is based solely on your "I'd bet" postulates.
> That makes your conclusions pretty weak.
>
> IOW, got data?
As I said, this was based on my observation. That's my only data. Do
these people you know who drive a Prius, do they have kids? While I
don't doubt they are socially conscious people, the only thing that
really matters is how much utility they get in terms number of people
and amount of cargo actually transported for the amount of fuel they
use. The same goes for any car, H3's included. I think anyone who
thinks that an H3 doesn't spend more of it's miles with more people in
it than a Prius does with it's miles is mistaken.
> In my area, I don't see the various Hummers being used the way you
> describe - loaded with cargo or kids. I see them loaded with bash
> bars and driving lights, driven fast and tailgating. And the folks I
> know who own hybrids (two Toyotas, one Honda) are all very ... how
> would you say it... socially conscious? They minimize trips, drive to
> save gas, and don't have an aggressive bone in their body. One such
> couple almost never drives if they can reasonably get places by
> bicycle.
>
> > Reading a book by it's cover is something everyone does. I'm sure lots
> > of Prius owners and other people who think poorly of Hummer owners
> > wouldn't have such a dim view of someone driving along a VW Multivan.
> > If they saw such a car on the freeway headed to SF from San Jose, they
> > might even think highly of the driver. The funny thing is the Syncro
> > Multivan weighs more than an H3 and uses more gas.
>
> What you're saying is that Hummers are not the only irresponsible
> choice. And sure, that's true. But that doesn't make the Hummer a
> responsible choice!
Who ever said it was a responsible choice? I just said it wasn't
necessarily AS dumb as you guys seem to think. I also said that you
guys show a prejudice toward cars like the H3 based on it's looks that
you don't show for other cars that are just as bad.
> Yes, I know that somewhere out there is a person whose legitimate
> needs can only be met by an aggressive looking, irresponsibly marketed
> SUV. But I think car choices do indicate a person's values, and I
> think a person's values do influence their behavior. And the people
> that buy a "war games" vehicle aren't likely to be courteously
> deferential on the road, or take pains to use it in a responsible
> manner.
I agree that car choices say quite a bit about someone. But I also
think that applying one's own set of criteria for what constitutes a
wise car choice for one's own needs to others and their perhaps other
needs makes everyone else appear an asocial moron. They may indeed be
asocial morons, but it is probably because they have different needs
that they have chosen differently, and for them the decision isn't
that stupid, not because they may or may not be asocial morons.
I personally think Prius drivers come off as a smug bunch of self-
righteous folks who are fooling themselves about how much good they
are accomplishing. I drive a 10 year old Fiat with a 1.4 liter gas
engine. A Bravo 3 door hatchback, sort of a Honda Civic sized vehicle.
Without any particular care paid to how I drive in terms of frugality,
I get a real-world 38+mpg. If I paid half as much attention to
coasting on hills, and other tricks Prius owners use to try to get
anywhere near the advertised mpg claims, I'd easy be over 40mpg. A
Prius using all the tricks in the book doesn't get much better than
that. My current "dream car" is a 2008 Fiat Grande Punto which
(really) gets 50mpg. I want one because it would reduce my fuel
expenditures and emissions. The same reasons Prius owners buy their
cars, but I don't wear it like a badge on my arm.
Joseph
|
| | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 21:42:03
From: Mark Shroyer
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
On 2007-10-23, <joseph.santaniello@gmail.com > wrote:
> As I said, this was based on my observation. That's my only data.
> Do these people you know who drive a Prius, do they have kids?
> While I don't doubt they are socially conscious people, the only
> thing that really matters is how much utility they get in terms
> number of people and amount of cargo actually transported for the
> amount of fuel they use. The same goes for any car, H3's included.
> I think anyone who thinks that an H3 doesn't spend more of it's
> miles with more people in it than a Prius does with it's miles is
> mistaken.
While H3s and especially H2s are thankfully rare in this town, I do
spot them from time to time and I have yet to see one of either
model carrying more than two occupants (including the driver). So
no, I don't think the average H3 spends more of its miles with more
people in it than a Prius; in fact, I'd venture it's probably the
other way around. That's based on my personal observation, which is
no more and no less valid than your own.
> I agree that car choices say quite a bit about someone. But I also
> think that applying one's own set of criteria for what constitutes
> a wise car choice for one's own needs to others and their perhaps
> other needs makes everyone else appear an asocial moron. They may
> indeed be asocial morons, but it is probably because they have
> different needs that they have chosen differently, and for them
> the decision isn't that stupid, not because they may or may not be
> asocial morons.
>
> I personally think Prius drivers come off as a smug bunch of self-
> righteous folks who are fooling themselves about how much good
> they are accomplishing. I drive a 10 year old Fiat with a 1.4
> liter gas engine. A Bravo 3 door hatchback, sort of a Honda Civic
> sized vehicle. Without any particular care paid to how I drive in
> terms of frugality, I get a real-world 38+mpg. If I paid half as
> much attention to coasting on hills, and other tricks Prius owners
> use to try to get anywhere near the advertised mpg claims, I'd
> easy be over 40mpg. A Prius using all the tricks in the book
> doesn't get much better than that. My current "dream car" is a
> 2008 Fiat Grande Punto which (really) gets 50mpg. I want one
> because it would reduce my fuel expenditures and emissions. The
> same reasons Prius owners buy their cars, but I don't wear it like
> a badge on my arm.
Cool... I've always had a thing for Fiat. From your headers it
looks like you're in the US; does anyone currently import Fiats into
the States?
--
Mark Shroyer
http://markshroyer.com/
|
| | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 19:59:34
From: Leo Lichtman
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
<joseph.santaniello@gmail.com > wrote: (clip) Do
> these people you know who drive a Prius, do they have kids?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Some do and some don't. Some Hummer drivers have kids and some don't. When
you can come up with some comparative figures on gallons per passenger mile,
I'll be willing to listen. In the meantime, why don't you stop trying to
control the argument with your imagination?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
(clip) They may indeed be
> asocial morons, but it is probably because they have different needs
> that they have chosen differently, and for them the decision isn't
> that stupid, not because they may or may not be asocial morons.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
What your personal "needs" are, and how you satisfy them, is part of what
makes you a socially conscious person or an asocial moron.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I personally think Prius drivers come off as a smug bunch of self-
> righteous folks who are fooling themselves about how much good they
> are accomplishing.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
What you think personally has no weight with me. Your biases are coming
through so clearly that you've lost credibility.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
If I paid half as much attention to
> coasting on hills, and other tricks Prius owners use to try to get
> anywhere near the advertised mpg claims, I'd easy be over 40mpg.
A Prius using all the tricks in the book doesn't get much better than
> that.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
My son gets closer to 50 mpg in his Prius without resorting to ANY tricks.
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 17:41:36
From:
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
On Oct 23, 8:17 am, "joseph.santanie...@gmail.com"
<joseph.santanie...@gmail.com > wrote:
>
> Just based on my observations, I'd say there is a big difference in
> the usage patterns of H3's vs Prius's (Prii?). I'd bet the average
> Prius is used mostly for long commutes with one person in the car.
> H3's probably also spend most of their time with only one person too,
> but I'd bet they also generally are not driven as far, and more often
> than a Prius have more than one person aboard (kids) and more often
> carry cargo (suitcases, crap from Ikea, etc). So if you look at fuel
> spent per person/kilometer or fuel per cargo/km the H3 doesn't look so
> bad. Sure there are other big(ger) cars that offer even more utility,
> but I'm just saying that an H3 isn't as dumb as many would like to
> think.
Your defense of the H3 is based solely on your "I'd bet" postulates.
That makes your conclusions pretty weak.
IOW, got data?
In my area, I don't see the various Hummers being used the way you
describe - loaded with cargo or kids. I see them loaded with bash
bars and driving lights, driven fast and tailgating. And the folks I
know who own hybrids (two Toyotas, one Honda) are all very ... how
would you say it... socially conscious? They minimize trips, drive to
save gas, and don't have an aggressive bone in their body. One such
couple almost never drives if they can reasonably get places by
bicycle.
So if I were to bet, I'd be betting against you. Again, got data?
> Reading a book by it's cover is something everyone does. I'm sure lots
> of Prius owners and other people who think poorly of Hummer owners
> wouldn't have such a dim view of someone driving along a VW Multivan.
> If they saw such a car on the freeway headed to SF from San Jose, they
> might even think highly of the driver. The funny thing is the Syncro
> Multivan weighs more than an H3 and uses more gas.
What you're saying is that Hummers are not the only irresponsible
choice. And sure, that's true. But that doesn't make the Hummer a
responsible choice!
Yes, I know that somewhere out there is a person whose legitimate
needs can only be met by an aggressive looking, irresponsibly marketed
SUV. But I think car choices do indicate a person's values, and I
think a person's values do influence their behavior. And the people
that buy a "war games" vehicle aren't likely to be courteously
deferential on the road, or take pains to use it in a responsible
manner.
- Frank Krygowski
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 15:02:48
From: nmp
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
Frank Drackman wrote:
> "Mark Shroyer" <usenet-mail@markshroyer.com> wrote in message
> news:slrnfhrq7b.mp.usenet-mail@sed.homestarmy.net...
>
>
>> And an idiotic, selfish driver in a Civic, Lexus, Maxima, or Cavalier,
>> while certainly dangerous,
>> holds much less potential for harm than one in a Hummer.
>>
>>
> Why?
Because their vehicles aren't as deadly?
Well, up to a point of course.
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 05:17:30
From: joseph.santaniello@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
On Oct 22, 8:09 pm, "Leo Lichtman" <l.licht...@worldnet.att.net >
wrote:
> "Gooserider" wrote: Well, that's not exactly true. The H3 is based on the
>
> Chevy Colorado pickup.> It has nothing at all in common with a true Humvee.
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Isn't that what "pseudo" means?
>
> On topic, and not in response to Gooserider: When I see people driving
> those pseudo-military vehicles I form a low opinion of them for several
> reasons. 1.) The vehicle is impractical--as big as it is, it holds only
> five people. 2.) It is unnecessarily large and heavy so it causes more
> crowding uses more fuel and pollutes more. 3.) All the things that make me
> like Prious owners are the things that weigh against Hummer owners.
Just based on my observations, I'd say there is a big difference in
the usage patterns of H3's vs Prius's (Prii?). I'd bet the average
Prius is used mostly for long commutes with one person in the car.
H3's probably also spend most of their time with only one person too,
but I'd bet they also generally are not driven as far, and more often
than a Prius have more than one person aboard (kids) and more often
carry cargo (suitcases, crap from Ikea, etc). So if you look at fuel
spent per person/kilometer or fuel per cargo/km the H3 doesn't look so
bad. Sure there are other big(ger) cars that offer even more utility,
but I'm just saying that an H3 isn't as dumb as many would like to
think.
Reading a book by it's cover is something everyone does. I'm sure lots
of Prius owners and other people who think poorly of Hummer owners
wouldn't have such a dim view of someone driving along a VW Multivan.
If they saw such a car on the freeway headed to SF from San Jose, they
might even think highly of the driver. The funny thing is the Syncro
Multivan weighs more than an H3 and uses more gas.
> But, we don't really know what caused this tragic accident. It could have
> been driver error, or mechanical failure, or, as has been pointed out
> already, a health problem. Let's save our comments about criminality until
> there are supporting facts. Instant over-reaction results in loss of
> credibility.
That's true.
Joseph
|
| | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 20:11:56
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
joseph.santaniello@gmail.com aka Joseph Santaniello wrote:
> On Oct 22, 8:09 pm, "Leo Lichtman" <l.licht...@worldnet.att.net>
> wrote:
>> "Gooserider" wrote: Well, that's not exactly true. The H3 is based on the
>>
>> Chevy Colorado pickup.> It has nothing at all in common with a true Humvee.
>>
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> Isn't that what "pseudo" means?
>>
>> On topic, and not in response to Gooserider: When I see people driving
>> those pseudo-military vehicles I form a low opinion of them for several
>> reasons. 1.) The vehicle is impractical--as big as it is, it holds only
>> five people. 2.) It is unnecessarily large and heavy so it causes more
>> crowding uses more fuel and pollutes more. 3.) All the things that make me
>> like Prious owners are the things that weigh against Hummer owners.
>
> Just based on my observations, I'd say there is a big difference in
> the usage patterns of H3's vs Prius's (Prii?). I'd bet the average
> Prius is used mostly for long commutes with one person in the car.
> H3's probably also spend most of their time with only one person too,
> but I'd bet they also generally are not driven as far, and more often
> than a Prius have more than one person aboard (kids) and more often
> carry cargo (suitcases, crap from Ikea, etc). So if you look at fuel
> spent per person/kilometer or fuel per cargo/km the H3 doesn't look so
> bad. Sure there are other big(ger) cars that offer even more utility,
> but I'm just saying that an H3 isn't as dumb as many would like to
> think.
I pretty much see H3s with a single occupant. As for carrying cargo, the
H3 is rather small inside - I could likely get almost as much stuff in
my Honda Civic.
A minivan will use less gas and haul a whole lot more than a H3, and
will handle better in the bargain.
> Reading a book by it's cover is something everyone does. I'm sure lots
> of Prius owners and other people who think poorly of Hummer owners
> wouldn't have such a dim view of someone driving along a VW Multivan.
> If they saw such a car on the freeway headed to SF from San Jose, they
> might even think highly of the driver. The funny thing is the Syncro
> Multivan weighs more than an H3 and uses more gas.
The VW Multivan is in a whole different different class when it comes to
passenger and cargo space.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!
|
| |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 03:38:34
From: Tom Keats
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
In article <slrnfhqcop.mp.usenet-mail@sed.homestarmy.net >,
Mark Shroyer <usenet-mail@markshroyer.com > writes:
> So are you really arguing that the decreased maneuverability and
> braking ability (not to mention visibility) of these stupidly
> oversized vehicles do not have any safety implications, turning
> dangerous drivers into even more dangerous ones? Or am I just
> misreading you?
I'm saying street-racing cars (and their immature,
inexperienced drivers who think they know everything)
pose a greater danger to the public.
Hummer drivers generally don't hurtle their vehicles
so much.
It's not just about the vehicles -- it's also about
the drivers who hurtle them.
Porsche 944 & Boxter drivers are especially scary.
cheers,
Tom
--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca
|
| | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 19:43:30
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
Tom Keats wrote:
> In article <slrnfhqcop.mp.usenet-mail@sed.homestarmy.net>,
> Mark Shroyer <usenet-mail@markshroyer.com> writes:
>
>> So are you really arguing that the decreased maneuverability and
>> braking ability (not to mention visibility) of these stupidly
>> oversized vehicles do not have any safety implications, turning
>> dangerous drivers into even more dangerous ones? Or am I just
>> misreading you?
>
> I'm saying street-racing cars (and their immature,
> inexperienced drivers who think they know everything)
> pose a greater danger to the public.
>
> Hummer drivers generally don't hurtle their vehicles
> so much.
>
> It's not just about the vehicles -- it's also about
> the drivers who hurtle them.
>
> Porsche 944 & Boxter drivers are especially scary.
I find that the drivers of the larger and more expensive SUVs are
generally the worst for aggressive tailgating and cutting others off. "I
have a large expensive vehicle, so fuck the rest of you" attitude.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!
|
| | | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 18:09:44
From: Dana Myers
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
Tom Sherman wrote:
> I find that the drivers of the larger and more expensive SUVs are
> generally the worst for aggressive tailgating and cutting others off. "I
> have a large expensive vehicle, so fuck the rest of you" attitude.
I wouldn't be surprised if this varies on a regional basis
and as a result of prejudices.
I'm annoyed by aggressive drivers, regardless of the vehicle,
but I tend to recall mostly young males in so-called "tuner"
cars as being the worst offenders. This may be because such
bone-head drivers in my area are predominantly young males in
"tuner" cars, or it may be because I think poorly of most tuner
cars and just remember them more as a result.
As for the "entitlement" attitude you cite, I think I've seen
that, too, and it comes from a broad class of drivers, usually
in flashier models of luxury vehicles, which certainly includes
high-end SUVs but many other vehicles as well (a lot of smaller
Mercedes, for example).
The offensive driving I associate specifically with SUV drivers
is typically by women driving while distracted by a telephone
conversation, and/or unaware of how large/heavy their vehicle really
is.
Cheers,
Dana
|
| | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 12:28:27
From: Mark Shroyer
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
On 2007-10-23, Tom Keats <tkeat2005@hotmail.com > wrote:
> In article <slrnfhqcop.mp.usenet-mail@sed.homestarmy.net>,
> Mark Shroyer <usenet-mail@markshroyer.com> writes:
>
>> So are you really arguing that the decreased maneuverability and
>> braking ability (not to mention visibility) of these stupidly
>> oversized vehicles do not have any safety implications, turning
>> dangerous drivers into even more dangerous ones? Or am I just
>> misreading you?
>
> I'm saying street-racing cars (and their immature,
> inexperienced drivers who think they know everything)
> pose a greater danger to the public.
>
> Hummer drivers generally don't hurtle their vehicles
> so much.
Huh... it seems that we have quite different subspecies of Hummer
drivers in our respective locales. Fortunately Hummers are
relatively rare in my town, because the ones I do see are driven
(and parked, but that's another rant) as by complete idiots.
> It's not just about the vehicles -- it's also about
> the drivers who hurtle them.
>
> Porsche 944 & Boxter drivers are especially scary.
I guess it must be a regional thing again. Ricer drivers,
certainly, but I can't say I've ever felt threatened by someone in a
Porsche. (And I have no idea what the underlying root of
correlation might be, but they always seem to use their turn signals
properly...)
Anyway, what you originally said was:
> Souped-up Civics, Lexuses, Maximas, Cavaliers, et al
> are just as deadly.
>
> They don't even have to be souped-up.
You're correct that you can't take the driver out of the equation.
But idiotic, selfish drivers will be idiotic, selfish drivers no
matter what vehicle you put them in. And an idiotic, selfish driver
in a Civic, Lexus, Maxima, or Cavalier, while certainly dangerous,
holds much less potential for harm than one in a Hummer.
--
Mark Shroyer
http://markshroyer.com/
|
| | | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 07:39:57
From: Frank Drackman
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
"Mark Shroyer" <usenet-mail@markshroyer.com > wrote in message
news:slrnfhrq7b.mp.usenet-mail@sed.homestarmy.net...
> And an idiotic, selfish driver in a Civic, Lexus, Maxima, or Cavalier,
> while certainly dangerous,
> holds much less potential for harm than one in a Hummer.
>
Why?
|
| | | | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 18:53:03
From: Mark Shroyer
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
On 2007-10-23, Frank Drackman <frankdrack@yahoo.com > wrote:
> "Mark Shroyer" <usenet-mail@markshroyer.com> wrote in message
> news:slrnfhrq7b.mp.usenet-mail@sed.homestarmy.net...
>> And an idiotic, selfish driver in a Civic, Lexus, Maxima, or
>> Cavalier, while certainly dangerous, holds much less potential
>> for harm than one in a Hummer.
>
> Why?
Because p=mv and k=mv^2. As I mentioned before, a Hummer is less
maneuverable and harder to stop, so a driver needs to be even more
conscientious in order to operate it safely. On top of that, as
someone else pointed out earlier in this thread, large SUVs like the
Hummer have been shown more likely to cause head injury to
pedestrians upon impact -- and are more likely to actually run over,
rather than toss onto the hood, an incapacitated pedestrian.
Smaller cars are inherently safer for pedestrians. And many sedans
and compact cars are now built with specific features for pedestrian
safety: for example, Honda's energy-absorbing hood, designed to
reduce the risk of head injury should a pedestrian be hit:
http://corporate.honda.com/safety/details.aspx?id=pedestrian
--
Mark Shroyer
http://markshroyer.com/
|
| |
Date: 22 Oct 2007 14:29:08
From:
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
On Oct 22, 11:09 am, "Leo Lichtman" wrote [basically, concerning
Hummer H3, and similar, vehicles]:
> On topic, and not in response to Gooserider: When I see people driving
> those pseudo-military vehicles I form a low opinion of them for several
> reasons. 1.) The vehicle is impractical--as big as it is, it holds only
> five people. 2.) It is unnecessarily large and heavy so it causes more
> crowding uses more fuel and pollutes more. 3.) All the things that make me
> like Prious owners are the things that weigh against Hummer owners.
=== > :-) <===
Neil
Prius driver
|
| |
Date: 22 Oct 2007 02:34:53
From: Tom Keats
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
In article <471c63d0$0$32561$4c368faf@roadrunner.com >,
"Gooserider" <Gooserider@mouse-potato.com > writes:
>
> "Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:ffh3hn$165$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>> Absolutely tragic. Unquestionably criminal.
>>>
>>> R.I.P.
>>>
>>> (This link might be more direct:
>>> http://www.idahostatesman.com/localnews/story/188765.html.)
>>
>> Driving a pseudo military vehicle on the street hardly shows a concern and
>> respect for others.
>
> Well, that's not exactly true. The H3 is based on the Chevy Colorado pickup.
> It has nothing at all in common with a true Humvee. It's like a Jeep
> Liberty, just a yupmobile.
Souped-up Civics, Lexuses, Maximas, Cavaliers, et al
are just as deadly.
They don't even have to be souped-up.
>> How does one lose control on dry pavement, unless one is driving near of
>> beyond one's limits?
>
> Because it's hard to maintain control when one's cranium is firmly lodged in
> one's rectum.
More to the point: a modern, motorized, horseless carriage
has just too much power & speed for the average human
being to be able to handle.
The current POV paradigm is stupid and wrong.
cheers,
Tom
--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca
|
| | |
Date: 22 Oct 2007 19:04:06
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
Tom Keats wrote:
> In article <471c63d0$0$32561$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>,
> "Gooserider" <Gooserider@mouse-potato.com> writes:
>> "Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:ffh3hn$165$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>>> Absolutely tragic. Unquestionably criminal.
>>>>
>>>> R.I.P.
>>>>
>>>> (This link might be more direct:
>>>> http://www.idahostatesman.com/localnews/story/188765.html.)
>>> Driving a pseudo military vehicle on the street hardly shows a concern and
>>> respect for others.
>> Well, that's not exactly true. The H3 is based on the Chevy Colorado pickup.
>> It has nothing at all in common with a true Humvee. It's like a Jeep
>> Liberty, just a yupmobile.
>
> Souped-up Civics, Lexuses, Maximas, Cavaliers, et al
> are just as deadly.
>
> They don't even have to be souped-up....
No, the vehicles with high and square front ends are more likely to
strike the cyclist's or pedestrian's head upon initial impact, and
furthermore are more likely to result in the hapless hominid being run
over by the vehicle. Adding steel "bull bars" makes a vehicle about
eight (8) times deadlier to a pedestrian in a collision according to one
study. In comparison, being hit by a car with a low sloping hood
increases survival chances significantly. Some manufactures (e.g. Honda)
have even designed their automobiles to attempt to do less harm to
pedestrians in collisions.
Here is likely the least pedestrian un-friendly motorized vehicle in a
collision: <http://www.spinopsys.com/wp-content/photos/twike.jpg >.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!
|
| | | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 14:43:39
From: Paul Myron Hobson
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
Tom Sherman wrote:
> Here is likely the least pedestrian un-friendly motorized vehicle in a
> collision: <http://www.spinopsys.com/wp-content/photos/twike.jpg>.
You gotta admit, that'd *really* hurt your shins. :)
\\paul
owww...hisss....owww....hisss.....ooofff....hisss...
|
| | | | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 16:57:16
From: catzz66
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
joseph.santaniello@gmail.com wrote:
> On Oct 23, 9:59 pm, "Leo Lichtman" <l.licht...@worldnet.att.net>
> wrote:
>
>> <joseph.santanie...@gmail.com> wrote: (clip) Do
>>
>>> these people you know who drive a Prius, do they have kids?
>>
>>
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> Some do and some don't. Some Hummer drivers have kids and some
don't. When
>> you can come up with some comparative figures on gallons per
passenger mile,
>> I'll be willing to listen. In the meantime, why don't you stop
trying to
>> control the argument with your imagination?
>
>
>
> Ok, I may be wrong about the usage pattern of these cars. Do you
> conceed that I may actually be right?
>
>
If my cycling turf is representative of all Hummer usage, I would not
concede that you are very likely to be right. Hummers seem to be more
of a "bigger is better" status vehicle, sort of like owning an Escalade
or Navigator because a Suburban or Explorer is not fancy enough. I know
there may be some practical use for a Hummer in some parts of the world,
but not here in the southwest US.
|
| | |
Date: 22 Oct 2007 23:32:41
From: Mark Shroyer
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
On 2007-10-22, Tom Keats <tkeats2005@hotmail.com > wrote:
>> Well, that's not exactly true. The H3 is based on the Chevy
>> Colorado pickup. It has nothing at all in common with a true
>> Humvee. It's like a Jeep Liberty, just a yupmobile.
>
> Souped-up Civics, Lexuses, Maximas, Cavaliers, et al are just as
> deadly.
>
> They don't even have to be souped-up.
>
> [...]
>
> More to the point: a modern, motorized, horseless carriage has
> just too much power & speed for the average human being to be able
> to handle.
>
> The current POV paradigm is stupid and wrong.
One of the reasons the power and speed of motor vehicles are so
deadly is inertia -- or kinetic energy, if you want to look at it
that way. Kinetic energy and inertia are increased with mass, and
have implications for braking distance and maneuverability. So
wouldn't it stand to reason that a heavier vehicle, such as an H2 or
H3, is more of a threat in city traffic at the same speed as a Civic
or Maxima?
According to Edmunds road tests, a stock Hummer H2 needs 163 feet to
come to a stop from 60 mph; my little, non-"souped-up" Integra can
do that in slightly over 100 feet. And this has real-life
consequences: a couple years ago I witnessed an accident just ahead
of me on I-75. I and the traffic all around me had to make an
emergency stop to avoid joining the pile-up, which most of us on the
road were able to do successfully; however, the driver of the H2
some 50 feet behind me, despite appearing to have hit the brakes as
quickly as I did, had to pull his vehicle off the road at around 40
mph to avoid rear-ending me.
So are you really arguing that the decreased maneuverability and
braking ability (not to mention visibility) of these stupidly
oversized vehicles do not have any safety implications, turning
dangerous drivers into even more dangerous ones? Or am I just
misreading you?
--
Mark Shroyer
http://markshroyer.com/
|
| | | |
Date: 22 Oct 2007 17:30:48
From: Frank Drackman
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
"Mark Shroyer" <usenet-mail@markshroyer.com > wrote in message
news:slrnfhqcop.mp.usenet-mail@sed.homestarmy.net...
> On 2007-10-22, Tom Keats <tkeats2005@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> Well, that's not exactly true. The H3 is based on the Chevy
>>> Colorado pickup. It has nothing at all in common with a true
>>> Humvee. It's like a Jeep Liberty, just a yupmobile.
>>
>> Souped-up Civics, Lexuses, Maximas, Cavaliers, et al are just as
>> deadly.
>>
>> They don't even have to be souped-up.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> More to the point: a modern, motorized, horseless carriage has
>> just too much power & speed for the average human being to be able
>> to handle.
>>
>> The current POV paradigm is stupid and wrong.
>
> One of the reasons the power and speed of motor vehicles are so
> deadly is inertia -- or kinetic energy, if you want to look at it
> that way. Kinetic energy and inertia are increased with mass, and
> have implications for braking distance and maneuverability. So
> wouldn't it stand to reason that a heavier vehicle, such as an H2 or
> H3, is more of a threat in city traffic at the same speed as a Civic
> or Maxima?
>
>
F=MA
|
| |
Date: 22 Oct 2007 15:49:23
From: Burr
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
"Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me > wrote in message
news:471c0ff0$0$15344$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> Absolutely tragic. Unquestionably criminal.
>
> R.I.P.
>
> (This link might be more direct:
> http://www.idahostatesman.com/localnews/story/188765.html.)
>
> Bill S.
SOB!!!
Burr
|
| |
Date: 21 Oct 2007 21:57:02
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
Bill Sornson wrote:
> Absolutely tragic. Unquestionably criminal.
>
> R.I.P.
>
> (This link might be more direct:
> http://www.idahostatesman.com/localnews/story/188765.html.)
Driving a pseudo military vehicle on the street hardly shows a concern
and respect for others.
How does one lose control on dry pavement, unless one is driving near of
beyond one's limits?
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!
|
| | |
Date: 22 Oct 2007 04:48:19
From: Gooserider
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
"Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:ffh3hn$165$1@registered.motzarella.org...
> Bill Sornson wrote:
>> Absolutely tragic. Unquestionably criminal.
>>
>> R.I.P.
>>
>> (This link might be more direct:
>> http://www.idahostatesman.com/localnews/story/188765.html.)
>
> Driving a pseudo military vehicle on the street hardly shows a concern and
> respect for others.
Well, that's not exactly true. The H3 is based on the Chevy Colorado pickup.
It has nothing at all in common with a true Humvee. It's like a Jeep
Liberty, just a yupmobile.
> How does one lose control on dry pavement, unless one is driving near of
> beyond one's limits?
Because it's hard to maintain control when one's cranium is firmly lodged in
one's rectum.
|
| | | |
Date: 22 Oct 2007 18:54:33
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
Gooserider wrote:
> "Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:ffh3hn$165$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>> Absolutely tragic. Unquestionably criminal.
>>>
>>> R.I.P.
>>>
>>> (This link might be more direct:
>>> http://www.idahostatesman.com/localnews/story/188765.html.)
>> Driving a pseudo military vehicle on the street hardly shows a concern and
>> respect for others.
>
> Well, that's not exactly true. The H3 is based on the Chevy Colorado pickup.
> It has nothing at all in common with a true Humvee. It's like a Jeep
> Liberty, just a yupmobile.
The H3 takes its styling cues from the military Humvee, but is not an
actual military vehicle - appears to fit the definition of "pseudo
military", no?
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!
|
| | | | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 05:59:47
From: Gooserider
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
"Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:ffjd7i$6r3$5@registered.motzarella.org...
> Gooserider wrote:
>> "Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:ffh3hn$165$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>>> Absolutely tragic. Unquestionably criminal.
>>>>
>>>> R.I.P.
>>>>
>>>> (This link might be more direct:
>>>> http://www.idahostatesman.com/localnews/story/188765.html.)
>>> Driving a pseudo military vehicle on the street hardly shows a concern
>>> and respect for others.
>>
>> Well, that's not exactly true. The H3 is based on the Chevy Colorado
>> pickup. It has nothing at all in common with a true Humvee. It's like a
>> Jeep Liberty, just a yupmobile.
>
> The H3 takes its styling cues from the military Humvee, but is not an
> actual military vehicle - appears to fit the definition of "pseudo
> military", no?
Your comment that "Driving a pseudo military vehicle on the street hardly
shows a concern and respect for others." doesn't apply to the H3, because
it's not a huge vehicle like an H1 or H2. By your logic, would driving a
Jeep show the same lack of concern?
|
| | | | | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 20:23:40
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
Gooserider wrote:
> "Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:ffjd7i$6r3$5@registered.motzarella.org...
>> Gooserider wrote:
>>> "Tom Sherman" <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:ffh3hn$165$1@registered.motzarella.org...
>>>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>>>> Absolutely tragic. Unquestionably criminal.
>>>>>
>>>>> R.I.P.
>>>>>
>>>>> (This link might be more direct:
>>>>> http://www.idahostatesman.com/localnews/story/188765.html.)
>>>> Driving a pseudo military vehicle on the street hardly shows a concern
>>>> and respect for others.
>>> Well, that's not exactly true. The H3 is based on the Chevy Colorado
>>> pickup. It has nothing at all in common with a true Humvee. It's like a
>>> Jeep Liberty, just a yupmobile.
>> The H3 takes its styling cues from the military Humvee, but is not an
>> actual military vehicle - appears to fit the definition of "pseudo
>> military", no?
>
> Your comment that "Driving a pseudo military vehicle on the street hardly
> shows a concern and respect for others." doesn't apply to the H3, because
> it's not a huge vehicle like an H1 or H2. By your logic, would driving a
> Jeep show the same lack of concern?
The Jeep, although descended from a military vehicle, has lost most of
the connotation. The Wrangler in recent years has had about as much
military aspect as a VW based dune buggy (as opposed to a Thing).
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 24 Oct 2007 02:04:16
From: Leo Lichtman
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
"Tom Sherman" wrote: (clip) The Jeep, although descended from a military
vehicle, has lost most of the connotation.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Even when surplus military jeeps, with their olive drab paint, filtered into
the civilian market, I don't believe they were ever regarded by their owners
as "macho." They were small, practical cars that had proven themselves
reliable for off-road use, so they were in demand by hunters and ranchers.
I don't think anyone ever became a bully just by getting behind the wheel of
one.
|
| | | |
Date: 22 Oct 2007 18:09:00
From: Leo Lichtman
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
"Gooserider" wrote: Well, that's not exactly true. The H3 is based on the
Chevy Colorado pickup.
> It has nothing at all in common with a true Humvee.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Isn't that what "pseudo" means?
On topic, and not in response to Gooserider: When I see people driving
those pseudo-military vehicles I form a low opinion of them for several
reasons. 1.) The vehicle is impractical--as big as it is, it holds only
five people. 2.) It is unnecessarily large and heavy so it causes more
crowding uses more fuel and pollutes more. 3.) All the things that make me
like Prious owners are the things that weigh against Hummer owners.
But, we don't really know what caused this tragic accident. It could have
been driver error, or mechanical failure, or, as has been pointed out
already, a health problem. Let's save our comments about criminality until
there are supporting facts. Instant over-reaction results in loss of
credibility.
|
| | | | |
Date: 22 Oct 2007 19:09:21
From: Tom Sherman
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
Leo Lichtman wrote:
> "Gooserider" wrote: Well, that's not exactly true. The H3 is based on the
> Chevy Colorado pickup.
>> It has nothing at all in common with a true Humvee.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Isn't that what "pseudo" means?
>
> On topic, and not in response to Gooserider: When I see people driving
> those pseudo-military vehicles I form a low opinion of them for several
> reasons. 1.) The vehicle is impractical--as big as it is, it holds only
> five people. 2.) It is unnecessarily large and heavy so it causes more
> crowding uses more fuel and pollutes more. 3.) All the things that make me
> like Prious owners are the things that weigh against Hummer owners.
To me the vehicle a person chooses says something about them. A pseudo
military vehicle says "I am a bad-ass and stay the Hell out of my way".
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
Beer - It's not just for breakfast anymore!
|
| | | | |
Date: 22 Oct 2007 23:02:29
From: Mark Shroyer
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
On 2007-10-22, Leo Lichtman <l.lichtman@worldnet.att.net > wrote:
> 3.) All the things that make me like Prious owners are the things
> that weigh against Hummer owners.
Is "Prious" intended as a synthesis of "Prius" and "pious"? Because
if so, that's awesome and I think I'd like permission to use that
term myself from time to time. (And not in a sarcastic sense; I
hope to get a Prius myself some day, if Toyota is still making them
when my Integra eventually kicks the bucket.)
> But, we don't really know what caused this tragic accident. It
> could have been driver error, or mechanical failure, or, as has
> been pointed out already, a health problem. Let's save our
> comments about criminality until there are supporting facts.
> Instant over-reaction results in loss of credibility.
Yeah, you're right, of course. But the fact that she was driving an
H3 in the first place makes me hesitant to give her the benefit of
the doubt -- as though my personal opinion of this woman actually
matters at all, anyway.
--
Mark Shroyer
http://markshroyer.com/
|
| | |
Date: 22 Oct 2007 04:58:15
From: Ryan Cousineau
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
In article <ffh3hn$165$1@registered.motzarella.org >,
Tom Sherman <sunsetss0003@yahoo.com > wrote:
> Bill Sornson wrote:
> > Absolutely tragic. Unquestionably criminal.
> >
> > R.I.P.
> >
> > (This link might be more direct:
> > http://www.idahostatesman.com/localnews/story/188765.html.)
>
> Driving a pseudo military vehicle on the street hardly shows a concern
> and respect for others.
I'm not sure the late Ms. Howard would have been especially consoled by
being hit from behind by a compact car at speed.
> How does one lose control on dry pavement, unless one is driving near of
> beyond one's limits?
The details of this accident boggle the mind: "lost control of her
vehicle about 100' behind Howard," who was stopped in the bike lane at
an intersection; "tire marks on the sidewalk but no skid marks,
indicating the driver didn't use the brakes prior to the collision."
It's such an insane failure to control a vehicle that I don't know where
to start. It's a "lightning-strike" accident, inasmuch as I wouldn't be
likely to believe in such an improbable scenario if it hadn't happened.
I have no idea what was going on with the driver, but "petit mal
seizure" is about the most reasonable explanation I can come up with.
Witnesses claim she wasn't using her cell phone, and impairment wasn't
mentioned. The crash took place at 10 in the morning.
--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"My scenarios may give the impression I could be an excellent crook.
Not true - I am a talented lawyer." - Sandy in rec.bicycles.racing
|
| | | |
Date: 22 Oct 2007 23:27:00
From: Jonathan
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
"Ryan Cousineau" <rcousine@sfu.ca > wrote in message
news:rcousine-CC93A7.21582421102007@news.telus.net...
>
> The details of this accident boggle the mind: "lost control of her
> vehicle about 100' behind Howard," who was stopped in the bike lane at
> an intersection; "tire marks on the sidewalk but no skid marks,
> indicating the driver didn't use the brakes prior to the collision."
>
Trust me when I say I'm not defending the driver in any way, shape or
form...
But please don't read too much into the statement about tire marks, as skid
marks no longer are a determinant of braking in almost all situations due to
the prevalence of anti-lock braking systems on the majority of newer
vehicles. This almost always eliminates skid marks because the wheels no
longer skid. Any accident investigator will confirm this.
Also, this is not to open the proverbial can of worms about the ABS vs.
no-ABS argument. That one has been overdone many times before.
Jonathan
|
| | | | |
Date: 29 Oct 2007 23:45:40
From: dabac
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
Jonathan Wrote:
> But please don't read too much into the statement about tire marks, a
> skid marks no longer are a determinant of braking in almost al
> situations due to the prevalence of anti-lock braking systems on th
> majority of newer vehicles. This almost always eliminates skid mark
> because the wheels no longer skid.
Don't really know about that, last time I've checked the ABS wasn'
quite up to the job of completely preventing lock-up, it merely did
good job of interrupting it as soon as lock-up had occurred. Instead o
one long streak you get a dotted line instead
--
dabac
|
| | | | |
Date: 23 Oct 2007 06:22:06
From: Ryan Cousineau
Subject: Re: Sad, sad story...
|
In article <ffjpf1$nbp$1@aioe.org >,
"Jonathan" <Fire_Capt651@hotmail.com > wrote:
> "Ryan Cousineau" <rcousine@sfu.ca> wrote in message
> news:rcousine-CC93A7.21582421102007@news.telus.net...
> >
> > The details of this accident boggle the mind: "lost control of her
> > vehicle about 100' behind Howard," who was stopped in the bike lane at
> > an intersection; "tire marks on the sidewalk but no skid marks,
> > indicating the driver didn't use the brakes prior to the collision."
> >
> Trust me when I say I'm not defending the driver in any way, shape or
> form...
>
> But please don't read too much into the statement about tire marks, as skid
> marks no longer are a determinant of braking in almost all situations due to
> the prevalence of anti-lock braking systems on the majority of newer
> vehicles. This almost always eliminates skid marks because the wheels no
> longer skid. Any accident investigator will confirm this.
A good point. I'm virtually certain the H3 would have ABS stock.
Of course, it's still a really weird accident, but that suggests only
one (maybe two) obvious lapses in judgement by the driver.
--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"My scenarios may give the impression I could be an excellent crook.
Not true - I am a talented lawyer." - Sandy in rec.bicycles.racing
|
|
