jalalski
Date Registered: 02-2004
Location: SUTHERLAND, SYDNEY
TOTAL POSTS: 29100
|
|
|
|
Re: "The cars that ate suburbia"
Never mind the article
Look at the chrome on that thing LOL
|
11/May/2005, 6:34 pm
|
|
Cantum
Date Registered: 05-2005
TOTAL POSTS: 7
|
|
|
|
Re: "The cars that ate suburbia"
God, I love these articles, especially since I'm a convert from sport compact cars. I'm actually gonna take some time to rip this one apart, and throw a bit of humor into it. Just a bit though.
BTW: Since I'm Canadian, and I live so close to the states, I must live in a state of perpetual fear that my world will come crashing down around me, and so the only safe place must be behind the wheel of the biggest piece of steel I can find- that of the mighty SUV. Because of that, my views must be biased. After all, I can see the United States of America from my house, which makes me half American
I feel a rant coming on: I do this from time-to-time, so don't put much stock in it.....
I'd love to see the stats on how often owners of four-wheel drive cars use a cell-phone.
I love these little arguments:
1) SUVs ruin the environment because of their bad gas mileage
- My XTrail gets roughly the same gas mileage (27/35) as my last car: a 2000 Chevrolet Cavalier Z24 (28/34)
2) SUVs are easier to roll
- Why yes, they are, if you drive like a moron. If you happen to be a moron, use your judgement, and drive a SMART car.
3) Bull Bars are designed to minimize damage to your car, and maximize damage to those around you
- If I'm in the truck with the bars, and I'm the one paying insurance, do you think I care how much your car gets damaged??
4) "SUV drivers are seen as exhibitionists, would-be's and wankers".
- What's a wanker??
- "Would-be" what??
5) "Not a single SUV driver or passenger died, at the expense of 66 lives of the 110 occupants that they T-boned."
- So, what you're saying is that my X is safer than your car, so long as I'm the one doing the T-boning?? SWEET!
6) The world's first suv was launched by General Motors in 1935. It was, ironically enough, called the Suburban. Initially marketed as a "carry-all" for passengers or deliveries, it eventually found a niche ferrying the dead for funeral homes.
- TRUE
Similar vehicles came and went. It wasn't until the late '60s, when the Jeep's military heritage and four-wheel-drive function found some macho appeal, that people started to think of these canopied pick-up trucks as anything other than workhorses.
- OPINION, NOT FACT
America's auto industry began dressing them up as cars, in the vain hope they might sell.
- Jeep was considered a purely recreational and work vehicle until the launch of the Grand Cherokee in the 80s, NOT the 1960s. Before that, there was- at least here in Canada/USA- only some variations on the "real" Jeep (TJ, YJ, longbox, etc), the Jeep Eagle 4WD car, and the Comanche Truck. The Chevy Suburban, Ford Bronco, Dodge Ram Charger, etc were used primarily as haulers and cargo carriers for small business and farmers.
"The Expedition was expected to be a niche product. Instead sales went ballistic. So Ford jazzed it up a little more, named it the Lincoln Navigator, and charged a whole lot more. Within two years the factory, one of 53 owned by Ford worldwide, had become the most lucrative plant of any industry in the world."
- First, how many other vehicles were being built at that plant?? I'm sure if you do the research, you'll find that there were several different vehicles being built at that plant, not just the Expedition/Navigator. As well, numbers-wise, I'd imagine that Chrysler's mini-van plant, right here in Windsor,Ontario, Canada would be willing to challenge the "most lucrative" figure, at least back in time around 1999-2000. Of course, the Chrysler minivan didn't have 75% mark-up, so who knows?
7) "In Australia, mammoth American SUVs such as Hummers have proved unpopular with all but the likes of Rene Rivkin and Mark Philippoussis."
- Who???
8) In the mid-'90s, senior executives at Ford's Melbourne plant, in Broadmeadows, were keeping a watchful eye on this explosion of small to medium-sized crossover vehicles, or so-called soft-roaders, such as the Toyota Rav4, the Honda CR-V and the Subaru Forester.
- Umm, here in Canada, the Rav4 and the CRV are in direct competition with the XTrail (The Xtrail and the CRV, size/GVW, performance and handling wise, are almost identical, but the CRV's interior is ugly), and all fit into the same class. How is it that one vehicle can be mentioned early in the article as "bad" (at the scholl demonstration), yet a similar vehicle is "good"??
Anyway, sorry to rant, but I'm bored, and slightly hungover (Love that Canadian Club Whiskey), so this seemed like a good idea when I started.
|
14/May/2005, 9:03 pm
|
|
|