SUV syndrome

[member#3]

umm by the way i'm not drom PA so could you kindly change that to Los Angeles, California
(yes i went to school there but like all good students who do their home work we do get to graduate and move away to get really good jobs that have to remain disclosed =)

[SpecOpsWarrior]

Obviously you slept through English 101!

[Darkwulfe]

One of the biggest reasons why insurance is higher on SUV's then passenger cars is because of the damage the SUV causes the other vehicle in an accident. In my mind I would rather be in the SUV that gets 12mpg any day then the mazda miata that gets 30mpg because I will survive the accident, the driver in the miata won't.

I feel safe in my SUV, do you feel safe in your car?

[Mike Tx]

Originally posted by member#3:
Pound for pound a volvo is safer than all of the above. But why good does a land rover or lincoln navigator do in manhattan or los angeles? [ 11-19-2001: Message edited by: member#3 ]

What data do you have to back up those statements? I'd be interested in seeing it. Thanks.

And what does location have to do with owning a vehicle?

[Legal Assistant]

Now I have to agree that the new Cadillac SUV is horrible! Yuck! Who would want such an expensive piece of, umm, machinery. *lol* I mean, if I was going to go with an SUV, it wouldn't be a Cadillac. If I'm gonna get a Cadillac, it's gonna be a REAL Caddy, not a trendy SUV. And if I'm gonna get an SUV it's gonna be a REAL SUV and not a Cadillac SUV! I don't have a problem with the overabundance of SUVs, but studies HAVE shown that they are not the safest vehicles out there and if I was hauling a bunch of kids around I would prefer to do so in the safest vehicle around (i.e. whatever SUV or Van or Jeep gets the best safety rating).

Anyway, that was my 2 cents.

[ 07-17-2002: Message edited by: Legal Assistant ]

[member#3]

wooo spec ops is all over the typos...you go with yourself.

and for all of you that need something to read here's a smaple from an article plus the article

While SUVs, pickup trucks, and minivans are certainly larger than cars, Lund says they are generally not as safe as medium or heavy passenger cars because they contain other risks, such as a higher likelihood to roll over. (For more on this, read Overloaded SUVs face increased rollover danger.) Also, many of these vehicles do not contain safety features that are found on sedans, such as side airbags.
http://www.insure.com/auto/safecar.html

[member#3]

as far as location ... and land rover is build for ... well roving over hard core land .. would you drive a an accord though the jungle?

[jellybean40]

Originally posted by member#3:
as far as location ... and land rover is build for ... well roving over hard core land .. would you drive a an accord though the jungle?

i dont care what people drive. people have always bought vehicles to impress or look cool. people dont buy sports cars so they can bank the curves at 110 either.

[SpecOpsWarrior]

We can take this whole mess to your site to if you want to handle it that way, member#3!

[blondie72]

Hmmm...member#3...

You seem so familiar. I feel like I've seen many of your posts....elsewhere.

[txinvestigator1]

Many cars don't have side airbags either. You missed that point too. Light Trucks and SUV's do not have to meet the same safety standards as passenger vehicles, but side air bags have nothing ot do with it.

And to answer your original question, no it is not necessary to own one of these. It is also not necessary to own a boat, motorcycle or any other type of motorized vehicle. But we have choice in this country and no one here gives a rats *** if you think they are a "nussance" (your spelling).

Anyone, regardless of the type of vehicle, can be a hazard when not paying attention to the road.

[FLLawdog]

He he he...he said "smaple"

however in tight streets time and time again i see the suv as causing a problem especially being hit from behind by one because the driver was more occupied with what was on the radio than slowing down to the red light.

I can say the same thing about the Boy Racer in his souped up Honda Civic. What's your point?

More so on the highway where being higher off the ground there is more room to be out of control and err at high speeds.

Same way with crotch rocket riders who more testosterone and horsepower than brain cells. What's your point?

I've seen Explorers and Tahoes blazing down the highway at 85+ mph ram into medians simply because the driver couln't control the vehilce.

Hell, I live in Florida. I see Mama and Papa Gus doint that all the time in their Geezermobile! What's your point?

I have no problem with people who need a vehicle of this sort because they need to haul equipment or need the power etc.

I feel the same way about pickups. The Lightning is designed to haul one thing...MUCH A**! But, I don't go around preaching that a person shouldn't buy one because they serve no utilitarian purpose.

but people who use them for flash and think that they have cars are a definate hazard.

How about these vehicles that have no definate purpose, but only serve to create an image of oneself or even compensate for a lack of manhood...

Corvette
Any Porsche
Any Ferrari
Miata(OK, not exactly a manly car)
Nissan 300ZX
Mitsubishi 3000GT
Motorcycles
Any car with 18 inch rims, Z rated tires(even though the car has speed capabilities of 90 mph), racing stripes(even though it's a 4 door, beige in color), a stereo system worth more than the individual parts of the car(let alone the whole car), clear taillights and a whale tail spoiler.

If you go by your terms as to what's a necessary and prudent mode of transportation, the only gas powered vehicles would be garbage trucks, delivery trucks, emergency vehicles and construction equipment. The rest of the "free world" would be walking, riding bikes, or kicking scooters.

It's not the vehicles that are the problems you mention, it's the people behind the wheel that do.

"SUV's don't kill people...PEOPLE kill people" or...SUV's don't drive like a**holes, PEOPLE drive like a**holes

[Fastie]

Originally posted by FLLawdog:
Z rated tires(even though the car has speed capabilities of 90 mph

Lawdog, is it OK to have "Z" rated tires on a car that often goes faster than 90 mph?? My BROTHER "made" me buy "Z" rated tires. They seem to grip the road better, giving me more control but other than that I really don't have a clue why he thought I needed them.

[member#3]

Ah dude don't get me wrong I'm not an advocate of the "rice rocket" or the "crotch rocket" either (181 mph on two wheels..i mean c'mon) and FL makes a fair argument. I guess no one in here see's them as a pain in the butt. Tis cool.

[Niteshift]

"umm by the way i'm not drom PA so could you kindly change that to Los Angeles, California"

That little problem has been fixed.