I am upset that most USA people buy expensive cars, large SUVs, large pickup trucks, and large vans instead of small cars, small trucks, and small vans. I found out that the Hummer H2 vehicle gets less than 10 MPG. I found out that the gas guzzler tax applies to cars only, not SUVs, trucks, and vans. There were two gasoline "shortages" in USA in the 1970s staged by oil companies because they were not allowed to raise prices of gasoline at that time. Jeffrey.

That was an interesting post... :sly: I guess.

But you're forgetting that majority of Americans are insecure stupid people. They need a big vehicle to feel "in control" and "safe" They need a rugged "off-road" vehicle to feel useful, and they have no common sense when buying these vehicles to factor in that a machine which gets 15mpg might not be wisest to own when gas is costing them $1.83 per gallon - especially when they have nothing but their own insecurities to justify ownership of such a vehicle.

I remember the tiny Honda and Subaru cars in the 1970s. I also remember the mopeds in the 1980s. Most USA people would rather drive where they want to go than to take buses and trains where they want to go. Jeffrey.

That was an interesting post... :sly: I guess.

But you're forgetting that majority of Americans are insecure stupid people. They need a big vehicle to feel "in control" and "safe" They need a rugged "off-road" vehicle to feel useful, and they have no common sense when buying these vehicles to factor in that a machine which gets 15mpg might not be wisest to own when gas is costing them $1.83 per gallon - especially when they have nothing but their own insecurities to justify ownership of such a vehicle.

The Honda 600 and Subaru 360 were the closest thing to automotive salvation this country has ever seen. Unforutunately, Consumer Reports threw a hissy fit over the Subaru 360 (would you believe that they lacked the common sense not to open rear hinged doors while the vehicle was moving?) and called it the most unsafe vehicle being sold in the U.S.
Honda, despite having done very well with the 600 series decided that Americans wanted larger cars.

The idea behind the Honda and Subaru seemed simple enough to the Japanese: Smaller cars = smaller traffic jams.
However, to American journalists, was another idea: Less gas burned = less polution. (something that was overlooked when tree-huggers began demanding cleaner air - actual volume of polution meant nothing to the government, just how dirty the pollution was all that was being regulated - but I'm not going to get into that again)

When one gets into the vehicle itself, one realises that the large vehicle not only wastes gas, but materials as well. Simply, a 4000lbs. machine is consituted of 4000lbs. of material. A 2000lbs. machine, uses half as much to build, and when it's useful working life is over, half as much is left rotting away at the junkyard.

I just wish people would think about their vehicle choices more carfully before making wasteful and badly thought out (if thought out at all, other than in the "That looks cool" sense) decisions.

Is that why rear-hinged doors on cars called "suicide doors"? Jeffrey.

Is that why rear-hinged doors on cars called "suicide doors"? Jeffrey.

Yep, if you open them while the car is moving, they'll fly open - and if you're not smart enough to let go, the door will fling you out of the vehicle.

There were three small cars made in 1970s. One looked like a VW Beetle with four doors, front engine, and front wheel drive. Other can run on water. A tiny car didn't have doors on the sides and had a door on the front. Jeffrey.

There were three small cars made in 1970s. One looked like a VW Beetle with four doors, front engine, and front wheel drive. Other can run on water. A tiny car didn't have doors on the sides and had a door on the front. Jeffrey.

The first one is the Citroen 2cv, the second (if you mean "run on" as in over water, or floating in water) is the "Amphicar" and the last one would be the BMW Isetta. The Amphicar was from the sixties (exclusively, they stopped making them in either '68 or '67) the Isetta is really more of a fifties car (though sales continued into the sixties) and the Citroen 2cv was actually a vehicle dating back to the forties, that continued in the U.S. until the early seventies, and in Europe until the early 1990's.

I found out from books that a few companies tried to make "flying" cars after World War II but I think that people won't buy them. When you wish to fly, you attach wings and engine with propeller to the car, fly to where you want to go, and take the parts off to drive the car. Jeffrey.

I find that small gas efficient cars are uncomfortable and have a hard time towing my boats. While I don't own a hummer - I also don't own luxury cars that get as bad gas mileage.

People can buy what they want for any reason they want. If they want a Hummer then good for them. If they want scooter then hooray for their choice. Getting bent out of shape over what other people do with there money is going to leave you frustrated for a long long time.

Getting bent out of shape over what other people do with there money is going to leave you frustrated for a long long time.

Not really frustrated, so much as irritable, if you're like me you keep a pitch-fork, torch, and half a dozen farmers ready for any event of vehicular stupidity...

I actually read an editorial in StreetTrucks yesterday that was discussing the demise of the Excursion. The editor had one for towing his various truck projects around and discovered that his diesal powered Excursion while cruising at 75mph was getting an astonishing 18 mpg. So to say that big SUV's can't get decent/good gas mileage is a lie, b/c its all in how you drive. My dads Tahoe averages 21mpg.

I actually read an editorial in StreetTrucks yesterday that was discussing the demise of the Excursion. The editor had one for towing his various truck projects around and discovered that his diesal powered Excursion while cruising at 75mph was getting an astonishing 18 mpg. So to say that big SUV's can't get decent/good gas mileage is a lie, b/c its all in how you drive. My dads Tahoe averages 21mpg.

First off, 18mpg ain't exactly good mileage(by anybody's standards), secondly that was the diesel (which was the only version of the excursion worth owning) the gas ones were horrible, and even more useless.
Thank God the excursion is no longer being produced, 'twas a waste of space and natural resources.

First off, 18mpg ain't exactly good mileage(by anybody's standards), secondly that was the diesel (which was the only version of the excursion worth owning) the gas ones were horrible, and even more useless.
Thank God the excursion is no longer being produced, 'twas a waste of space and natural resources.
Amen My friend, Amen.

First off, 18mpg ain't exactly good mileage(by anybody's standards), secondly that was the diesel (which was the only version of the excursion worth owning) the gas ones were horrible, and even more useless.
Thank God the excursion is no longer being produced, 'twas a waste of space and natural resources.
I never liked the excursion either and am not sad is gone. I was just saying I was surprised that that truck could get 18mpg.

I never liked the excursion either and am not sad is gone. I was just saying I was surprised that that truck could get 18mpg.

Diesel engines get very good mileage, an average sized compact can easily average 40 or mpg with a diesel engine, my Yugo which is smaller than your average compact gets a little better than that, and it has a gas engine - which goes to show just how efficient diesel power is, if you don't mind the noise, or the soot it leaves on the bodywork. Unfortunately, Americans have never really been big buyers of diesel vehicles. And it further goes to show how unintelligent the average Excursion buyer must've been - the idea that they even needed a gasoline version is mind numbing (after all, if you did in fact need it for heavy duty work, the diesel would be a far better choice, but face it most went into the hands of driving-inept soccer moms)

it further goes to show how unintelligent the average Excursion buyer must've been


I very much agree. Im not trying to bog down on ford so dont get that impression. I liked the way the Excursion looked and everything, but it was just too damn big. If you think about it, there arent too many places in the U.S. where someone would need such a large SUV unless it was serving a special purpose, know what I mean? Whoever bought one A. Wanted something HUGE so that people would think they were important B. Have money to burn on the thing or C. Are stupid.

I very much agree. Im not trying to bog down on ford so dont get that impression. I liked the way the Excursion looked and everything, but it was just too damn big. If you think about it, there arent too many places in the U.S. where someone would need such a large SUV unless it was serving a special purpose, know what I mean? Whoever bought one A. Wanted something HUGE so that people would think they were important B. Have money to burn on the thing or C. Are stupid.

I choose A. and C.

But you're forgetting that majority of Americans are insecure stupid people. They need a big vehicle to feel "in control" and "safe" They need a rugged "off-road" vehicle to feel useful, and they have no common sense when buying these vehicles to factor in that a machine which gets 15mpg might not be wisest to own when gas is costing them $1.83 per gallon - especially when they have nothing but their own insecurities to justify ownership of such a vehicle.

And did you do all this research on the American public your self?
:rolleyes:

How about being pissed off at people who buy high performance sports cars with no discernable purpose. Hmmm, nothing like a highly tuned engine like a 5.75L V12 that will inhale gas like Rosanne inhales Cheetos. "You people" (read: tree huggers) act like a pot calling the kettle black. I prefer freedom of choice in the marketplace.....people can make a dumb financial decision and buy a gas guzzling vehicle. Once again, it's called freedom of choice.

Freedom of chioce is an excellent thing IF people are responsible and considerate when making their choices. Buying a car that eats gas and needlessly pollutes affects everybody, and the choice ceases to be responsible. So what some call "freedom" (doing what they want, when they want) is really tyranny. It really is up to all of us to make responsible decisions about what we drive and how we drive, and Americans in particular have indicated they dont give a damn about fuel consumption.

How is buying a car which uses less gas over a car which uses more gas "responsible"? If anything, it's "morally" incorrect to limit someone's freedom of choice in order to reduce their use of a resource which is bought and sold on the open market.

How is buying a car which uses less gas over a car which uses more gas "responsible"? If anything, it's "morally" incorrect to limit someone's freedom of choice in order to reduce their use of a resource which is bought and sold on the open market.

I think it should be morally incorrect for somebody to be an idiot...
As for the sportscar side of the argument, when there are as many people driving Dodger Vipers and Ferraris as their are people driving Expeditions, Escalades, and Navigators - that might be a logical argument, but until then it ain't.

As to the statment about insecure Americans that I made, it was lightly informed by pyschology books (Is Your Volkswagen a Sex Symbol, is old, but still an interesting and entertaining read) but then again, I was having a sense of humor with the subject.

I am upset that most USA people buy expensive cars, large SUVs, large pickup trucks, and large vans instead of small cars, small trucks, and small vans. I found out that the Hummer H2 vehicle gets less than 10 MPG. I found out that the gas guzzler tax applies to cars only, not SUVs, trucks, and vans. There were two gasoline "shortages" in USA in the 1970s staged by oil companies because they were not allowed to raise prices of gasoline at that time. Jeffrey.


Well, thats just how Americans are.
This is the way of living, life with no restrictions.
It also means FREEDOM.

In the US, people are able to buy those big SUV / truck thats runs gallons per mile instead of miles per gallon,
because gas price in the US is one of the lowest in world,
especially when you put their earnings in consideration
So there is no need for a car with good mileage.
Also there is no need for a small car,
because the US is one of the biggest country in the world,
but the population is only close to 300 million.
Which leaves plenty of spaces for the HUGE cars.
But in crowded places like Europe or Asia,
people don't enjoy the benefits that Americans have.
So they have to live their life with restrictions.
They have to buy small cars, or they won't be able to fit their cars into those pin-hole sized parking spaces.
Gas is also expensive.
So the car's fuel consumption must be put into consideration.

The Americans are just enjoying the benefits they have.
They are able to buy any kind of car they want, without restrictions.
Not worrying about gas mileage and parking spaces.
People from other places might think Americans are wasting resources.
But what if all these benefits are available to people in Europe and Asia? Wouldn't they be the same ?
My guess is they would.
From my experience, people tend to use and then waste the resources that are easy to obtain.
People would only treasure the resources until it becomes not so easy to obtain.
Just like people throw away their food when they can't finish it.
Because they don't care about the food they are throwing away.
They can buy something else to eat when they are hungry again.
But as for the people in Africa suffering from starvation,
they would treasure and finish everything they have to eat.
Beucase they don't know when is the next time they'll have food.
This is just the same as Americans buy big cars that wastes gas.

So before there is another gas-shortage, Americans will continue to buy cars that wastes gas.
And that is when Americans will treasure what they have.
If they are lucky enough to live through another one,
in no time, history will repeat itself.

yea i agree with what MioCLK saids, but im sure there are people who just buy suvs cause a lot people drive them, or its the trend these days, those are the kind of people i hate. it might not be their only reason, but if it was a big role in making their decision, i think its just dumb. some might buy it thinking they re gonna have to go off roading with it one day, or they like the thought of looking like one that do, but never do, dumb again. but if you like it for the looks of it, hot rodding it, raising it, lowering it, the size of it, the power it has, the room it has, and best of all using it for what it was really designed for, along with and combined with couple of other good reasons, would be some of the not so dumb reasons.