Infinite recursion. Stop it before this thread collapses into a black hole and swallows the whole board!
No. He called Scylla a self-absorbed prick. And considering that Hamlet made that assertion in the context of calling Scylla on a rather blatant double standard (i.e., that Scylla enjoys dictating proper modes of behavior to the everyone else, but freaks right the fuck out as soon as somebody criticizes his preferred means of transportation), it seems inappropriate for you to extend that observation to all SUV owners.
Pardon me, but I don’t think he’s even addressed you. You may or may not be a wasteful, self-absorbed prick. Further data seems warranted.
Uke: YMMV.
Hamlet’s thread made me laugh. The “SUV driver” line was a punchline, fer crissakes. I doubt it was meant for all SUV drivers to make martyrs of themselves over. Can we tone the drama down a notch?
Scylla, I do not know about how the used-car market works everywhere. However, I was surprised to learn that the market around here seems segmented. Our local car-selling rag caters to trucks and american-made cars. The market for imports was different. We tried listing our Honda Civic a couple of different ways (although we avoided the car-selling rag because it was apparent to me that our sort of car was not sold that way). Some listings and venues got few serious inquires. But when we found the right place, we had multiple calls daily and sold the car for our asking price.
In our area, anyway, one could not look in one venue/paper and be confident the ads represented a fair cross-section of the used-vehicle marketplace.
No. You sincerely pissed me off. Disapointed me too.
That’s just blatantly shitty.
I appreciate the concern about my parenting skills but for the record; fuck off.
No, he addressed Scylla in the first paragraph of the post. He then went on to compare all SUV owners (including me, as I both own an SUV and have posted in this thread) to people who order too much food then throw it away. He then says that these people are wasteful, self absorbed pricks. “Kinda like SUV owners”, to use his words. He didn’t say “Kinda like Scylla”.
There is a tendency to put opposition to one’s own viewpoint in the extreme way of thinking from one’s own, i.e. “You hate SUV’s so you’re a tree-hugging liberal” or “You drive an SUV to work over baby seal heads and spill oil on seagulls all along the way.”
I don’t do that. I’m pretty moderate. I drive a regular-sized truck, and see no need for Expedition/Excursion-sized vehicles. I don’t cackle with derision at Kia drivers. I don’t feel a need to key every BMW I lay eyes on. I realize that I am more of a danger to cars around me, and I try to drive safely.
Everyone has the right to judge my choice of purchase. Everyone has the right to judge me BECAUSE of my purchase. What no one has the right to do is state their own opinion as fact.YOU think I’m an asshole for driving a certain kind of vehicle. To quote Chris Penn in Resevoir Dogs, “That don’t necessarily make it fuckin’ so!”
Assholes drive all kinds of vehicles. Again, I ask the question - why is okay to use stereotypes when referring to SUV drivers? If someone came here stating that all blacks are on welfare and using up the nations resources, that person would be(and has been) beat down verbally. Why then are the generalizations about this one thing allowed?
Ace0Spades - my truck cost less to buy than a fully loaded Camry. Of course, it’ll cost more to maintain and run, but I knew that going in. I really can’t see where I’m broadcasting that I’m loaded, so damn you little people. This seems like a little of that pushing of extreme viewpoints thing again.
Cheesesteak, this point has been made several times, but apparently it needs to be said again:
When purchasing a vehicle, it is NOT necessary to prove “need”.
Vanity purchasing is what drives the automobile market. There are more than enough used cars out there to go around, so why should anyone buy a new one?
That’s right, they like what it looks like and the features the vehicle offers. Right now SUVs are in vogue. Maybe one day that will change. Maybe not. I could really care less. But the point is, there is no requirement on the showroom floor to show your “need”.
Hey all, I know this is the pit but I thought I’d throw a fact or two in.
First, as far as “junked cars rotting in landfills”, as Coldie mentioned, car recycling has come a long way:
Site
Also, **Scylla{/b] that Durango your wife drives may not be as safe as you think it is, pre-2001 Durango’s only got 2 stars for driver saftey according to theNTSB. The rating for 2001-2 improved dramitically to 4stars. Also, no Durango has scored higher than 3 stars for roll resistance since they started testing for it. Of course few SUV’s received higher than 3, with the notable exception of the butt-ugly Pontiac Aztec with 4 stars. (2001)
Your Sebring, on the other hand recieves 5 stars for both front occupants and rollover resitamce.
(I know your argument is not based primarily on safety, but lot’s of people have been throwing it around and I thought some data might be nice. Of course, since this thread has largely degenerated into personal attacks, I doubt anyone will pay attention to it.
For what it’s worth.
Well, another reasonable interpretation is that gas prices have risen, the economy has gone to hell, and there are lots and lots of people desperate to unload their expensive SUVs.
The argument that 4-bangers are cheap and not meant to last doesn’t seem to stand up to scrutiny. Even a quick deja news search shows far too many examples of 4 cylinder engine cars with 250K+ miles. Even Ford Festivas! The engine simply doesn’t seem to be the determining factor in a car’s life expectancy – it’s more when the price of replacing an exhaust manifold or replacing a rotted fender exceeds the resale value of the car.
Do you think that this makes SUV’s immune from criticism on the basis that the owner has no demonstrable need for a land yacht?
You know, I wish I had the money to buy a big ol’ bad ass SUV. I wouldn’t, of course, I just wish I had the money.
But seriously, folks……
It would appear that Scylla would base an argument to the effect that SUV’s are environmentally friendly. This comes as an astonishment to me, brain-washed as I am by the juggernaut force of the liberal media.
He seems to base this argument around the quaint notion that the orginal “resources” are the vital issue. If the “resources” that go into making an SUV are preserved by the longevity of the vehicle itself, it is inferred, the a net gain in ecology is obtained.
Well, yes, as far as that goes. And it also may well be true that the SUV of today is less of a polluter than the vehicles of my childhood. However, the progress is from the ridiculous to the merely inadequate.
I am sure cites can be gathered to assure me that the effusions of the SUV are no more environmentally unsound than the fart of your local butterfly. Science, properly funded, can be of enormous value.
But that flies in that face of reason and common sense. We all know that what comes out of a cars ass is not nice. The bigger the engine, the more shit comes out the tailpipe.
I have some sympathy with the individualist point: I should be free to buy any kind of car I want. I agree entirely. Buy as many as you like, simply be so considerate as to operate it outside the Earth’s atmosphere. (This will require that you adjust your carburetor.)
The environment, being the Earth in its entirety, is by necessity and definition a collective concern. Anything that degrades the environment degrades us. If there is not sufficient evidence to convince us, there is clearly enough to concern us.
Scylla, it may be true that my environmental concerns are overblown, the ice caps not melting, the rivers in Europe not rising. If I’m wrong and we act accordingly, we only have smaller, wimpy cars rattling around. If you’re wrong, we have to explain to our grandchildren why they can’t breathe.
“We could have saved it [the Earth] but we were too stupid and lazy”
- Kurt Vonnegut
I apologize for including what I thought was a throw-away endline with the “Kinda like SUV drivers.” Not every SUV owner/driver is a wasteful , self absorbed prick, and I’m sorry if you were offended, Macro Man. It was a generalization that should not have been made, but as Cranky so kindly pointed out, it was merely a punchline.
I’m positive that every other person on these boards who owns an SUV really needs it, is a conscientious driver who takes extra precautions because he or she knows it is difficult for others to see around the vehicle, does care about how the choice of vehicle impacts the environment both by using natural resources (and increasing the US’s reliance on foreign oil), and polluting the environment, and is deeply concerned that in an accident, SUV’s are statistically more likely to cause more damage to anybody who doesn’t drive an SUV. The other kind of SUV owners are the ones that concern me. That, and I may have just been facetious.
Not to single you out Mr. Myth, but If I had a nickle for every time this tired dog got trotted out, I’d be the Franklin Mint. This particular dog don’t hunt – If you ask around, you’ll find I don’t mind a well applied generalization. If you want to bash Kia drivers and have as much anecdotal and statistical evidence as we do on the S.U.V. question, be my guest – I won’t bark.
Since neither of the SUV but-not-a-prick drivers could make it here today, I’d like to accept Hamlet’s apology on their behalf.
This is only true superficially. A well maintained V8 is so much cleaner than an old 4 that is poorly maintained. I won’t even get into new engine technologies and alternate fuel formulations. I see your point, but it is only true in a literal sense. Once you look at the real world, it collapses.
OK, one example, a propane V8 burns cleaner than a brand new gas 4, which practically pollutes not at all anyway. New cars are very clean no matter the engine configuration.
[biker jacket]Loud pipes save lives.[/biker jacket] It is true though. If you hear the pipes you don’t run over the poor defensless guy on the motorcycle. Unless you are a homocidal maniac I guess.
Ace0Spades -
I don’t feel singled out.
I understand you don’t mind a well applied generalization, but that still doesn’t answer the question. (unless of course, the answer is "because we can, and neener neener foo foo. " I can live with that.)
Ultimately people are going to get defensive about what they drive, no matter what it is, because to insult it is to insult a personal choice they have made. I guess my issue is that no one seems to be able to say “hey, I don’t like your choice” without adding “and therefore you are a fucking moron”.
::sigh::
Y’know, if I knew trading in a Plymouth Reliant for a Jeep Cherokee in the name of having space to haul my possessions to Texas when I move would magically turn me into an inconsiderate prick with no regard or concern for the welfare of others and the planet as a whole…
Do NOT move to Texas!!
Coldfire:
I hope you weren’t offended by my Europe comment. Anyway.
I doubt this. The Durango has proportionally bigger brakes. They seem not to be wearing especially fast. The larger transmission pushing more wieght is a maintenance boon. More cooling area, less torque per pound. I hope you’ll concede that your basic truck transmission (and my Durango shares Tranny’s with a Dakota) is meant for more serious duty than your average car’s. My Durango can pull about 8,000 pounds. It has a cooler on it. It has a huge operating margin. Similarly potholes aren’t going to kill the suspension the way they might with a more fragile vehicle.
It’s a pretty simple concept really. Great big diesel engines run forever, not because they are better engineered, but because they burn fuel cooler, and run at fewer rpms. They have a lot of operating margin. I won’t deny that Honda does wonderful engineering with their engines, but that engineering is overcoming an inherent disadvantage.
I agree that Subarus are excellent and versatile vehicles. I think they compare well to the Durango. We looked at them when we bought the Durango. We bought the car that we did because that was the one my wife wanted. We get around 20mpg. She likes the Durango because it is larger and sits higher, can carry more volume, has faster acceleration and can tow. I seriously doubt one would outlast our Durango, though Suburu makes a nice car.
I notice that the Outback only gets 1-2 mpg better mileage on the highway. That doesn’t seem like anything to get up in arms about.
RTF:
Fortunately I see that I haven’t gone insane, and that the Accord does indeed come in a v6. I attribute the stellar durability of your vehicle to my guess that you are a conservative driver who takes excellent care of his vehicle. Your habits may not be the norm. I certainly wouldn’t feel as comfortable with a four banger of uncertain service history as I would of a v8 powered suv. More forgiving.
Do you have a cite for that?
I thought this was one of the better rants I’ve seen lately.
Ukelele Ike, you’re the one that is making an ass of himself in front of thousands with the remarks you’ve made.
Yes! SUVs are now responsible for Dresden and Prague being flooded! Maybe file a lawsuit. Get in line behind that fuck suing McDonalds.
:rolleyes: