Posted Tuesday, December 7, 2004 10:41 PM | Contributed by supermandl
Three people in their GMC Jimmy trying to get a free view of the Six Flags Great Adventure Wild Safari park spent five hours stuck in the soft sand along near by this weekend, finally calling police when it looked like a woman 33 weeks pregnant was about to go into labor, authorities said.
Read more from Asbury Park Press.
If they were driving a Hummer, everything would have been fine. :)
Yeah, right. That's assuming that the wheels don't fall off. :)
--Dave Althoff, Jr.
When driving on questionable roads, training and practice is vital. (Good tires don't hurt either.) In sand, mud, and deep snow, it's easy to get stuck if you don't know what you're doing. Years ago, I worked at a generating station and the engineering building was half-way up the hill from the main plant site. The site was continually dusted by flyash, and when it rained, it's as slick as 2" of slush on a layer of ice. When I navigated by 1989 Tempo past quagmired Ford F-150 4x4's, all I could do was smile and wave. :) Country Bumkins 1, City Slickers 0.
People that drive giant SUV's to get groceries and take the kids to soccer practice are the reason gas prices are so high. This country would use a third less gas if people drove normal cars. ?
Jeff, what are you talking about? I know lots of people with SUVs, and they all use them for off-roading or work related purposes! I think that number is up to.... uh... hmmmm.... zero. ;)
In a weird sort of way, I'm happy when gas prices rise. I mean, my corolla gets 39 mpg highway, doesn't bother me! The higher they go, the more people wil realize what a waste their SUV is, and (hopefully) start switching over to hybrid vehicles or other gas efficient cars. Then they'll pollute our air less and use less of the earth's limited supply of fossil fuels.
Now what should be interesting is when Toyota releases their hybrid SUV in 2005. I have a feeling we'll see plenty of those on the roads.
I do have a major problem with the SUVs though. Someone sold the public on the perception that they need them to get out of emergency situations, but as was mentioned, when are they used for that? I see ones occasionally making their own exit ramps when the Parkway backs up, but that's about the only time they stray from the pavement. Simply a marketing ploy that's gotten way out of control.
Really? So the instability in the Middle East has nothing to do with prices? OPEC? Scores of new vehicles sold in China and India? The simple concept of supply of demand is a neat thing. Go take Economics 101.
"This country would use a third less gas if people drove normal cars."
Really? Let's do an analysis, shall we?
The current U.S. vehicle market is approx. 16-17 million new vehicles a year. Let's assume that the sales mix accurately represents all vehicles in the country (this actually favors your view as SUVs are a recent phenomenon).
Large SUV (Suburban, Expedition, etc.) sales account for 1.0 million of that (approx 6%). While we're at it, let's count mid-size SUV's (Explorer/Trailblazer, etc.) too at 3.0 million (19%). Adding up, that makes only 25% of the US vehicle drivers in "larger" SUV's, not a third.
25% to 33% is splitting hairs, you might say? To achieve your 33% reduction in gas usage, you would have to ELIMINATE those drivers from the equation, not move them into "normal cars". But let's calculate your proposal's savings anyway.
CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) rules state that all of a company's car sales must average 27.5 mpg, while thier truck fleet must average 20.7 mpg (another handy 25% difference).
So, let's take the total gallons of fuel used in the US in a year, and call it TGF.
To get your desired reduction, you want to achieve .33*TGF.
The reality of your statement is this;
(TGF) * (% of SUV's) * (% mpg reduction from SUV to car) = outcome
(TGF) * (.25) * (.25) = .125*TGF, a 12% reduction in fuel used.
This of course, makes the assumption the NO ONE needs an SUV for such tasks as towing a boat or trailer along with several passengers, or buying ONE vehicle that can carry thier family for one trip, and a load of 2x4's another. No, no one does that!
People in this country are free to buy what they want to suit their needs and desires. If someone's foolish enough to buy a V8 Durango just for daily commuting, that's thier financial loss, and we all should care less.
One final way to look at it...
"All those people that buy Pentium IV's just to do word processing and play Solitaire are the reason that computers are so expensive."
"All those people that buy 10,000 sq. ft. houses to just shelter them, thier spouse, and their poodle are the reason that houses are so expensive."
Supply and demand, baby, supply and demand....
BTW, yes, we have an SUV, and you'd have to kill my wife (assuming you get through me) to take the keys from her.
"The Hummer H2 is the Crappiest car ever made."
Man, you don't get out much. Ever hear of the Yugo, Renault, Pacer, Pinto, etc.?
"The drive train and suspension CANNOT handle anything BUT going to the store to get groceries."
Bullsh**. I've personally driven some of the validation schedules that the H2 went through. I'd love to see any other vehicle than an H1 or a specially modified Jeep or FJ Land Cruiser go through those exact same tests without breaking anything.
"There was a video online a year or so back, with a hummer trying to drive up a rocky hill and the differential or drive train completely snapped."
A single incident caught on video proves nothing. The Kevin Sites video from Fallujah ring a bell?
Didn't think it would get this type of reaction.
You must be logged in to post