Daniel A Posted August 10, 2005 Report Share Posted August 10, 2005 The gas price in the US is still way lower than in most of the industrialized western world. Taken into account the long-term damage on the environment it probably should be a lot higher, as to prevent the use of excessively thirsty cars. I'm not even sure the price here in Sweden (similar to the major part of Europe, and about 2.5 times the US price) is enough. We're facing pretty serious climate issues during the next decades, and not even bio fuel is a permanent solution to that. In the end, we (the whole world) could expect dramatical changes which will affect the entire living standard more than a higher gas price would right now. I know that in large parts of America you're much more dependent on a car to get around, compared to some European urban areas. What I'm saying is that the majority of car engines is just unnecessarily big (both in Europe, and even more so in the US), and still higher gas prices would encourage the use of more economical vehicles. There is simply no rational need for a V8, or even a 6-cylindre engine in a car or a minivan. But I'd dare to say that the average European car cosumes less fuel than the average US car. Partly this is because we have a tradition of building small to medium sized cars, rather than big ones. But I think even if you're comparing cars of corresponding size the European (or Japanese for that matter) one will have a smaller engine. To have a V8 motor in a family car is vary rare here (except for the recent, unfortunate increase of SUV:s), while it's still not uncommon in the US, from what I've heard (please correct me if I'm wrong). I think the higher gas price in Europe is partly to thank for this, but there is still so much to be done. For the last decades the typical fuel consumption of a car has not decreased much at all, while top speed has doubled and acceleration become twice as fast. And the average highway speed limits are still just getting lower! This is an unnecessary, and very unfortunate development in my view. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Alfredson Posted August 10, 2005 Report Share Posted August 10, 2005 If we would've stuck with the long-range goals for fuel economy that Carter set (and Reagan subsequently killed) we would've been completely independant of foreign oil over 10 years ago. But who wants that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
connoisseur series500 Posted August 10, 2005 Report Share Posted August 10, 2005 (edited) BTW, I apologize in advance to any posters from China. You are equally free to mock the places of my birth and residence... ← Open season on posters from Ohio. ← and inmates from Rahway Maximum Security... Edited August 10, 2005 by connoisseur series500 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jazzypaul Posted August 11, 2005 Report Share Posted August 11, 2005 You confuse me, jazzypaul. You send me mixed signals -- you offer me hugs and baked goods delivered to my door, but then you tell me that I have the choice to be the girl? I give and give... If this relationship is going to continue, I need to know who wears the pants. [Or elegant and assertive yet tasteful pantsuit...] ← the three tap hug is a mainstay of guy culture, and I became a good cook so that I wouldn't have to suffer through the really bad cooking of a few ex-girlfriends. Such talents as this have enabled me to offer baked goods as olive branches throughout the internet community. My spinach-mushroom-bacon quiche is a delectable treat, so I've been told, and I merely wanted to restart this relationship on a better note. As for who wears the pants, I would prefer to, but I am glad that the one picture that existed of me playing the lead in "Baby with the Bathwater" was destroyed in a move a few years ago... My worldview as it pertains to automobiles, is this: we all have a responsibility to the environment [via fuel economy] and to the safety of those around us on the roadways. Heavy, inefficient vehicles that are harder to control [stopping, cornering] should be avoided when there are reasonable alternatives available. It is also in my worldview that automobile marketing can mask both good and bad vehicles. they make appeals to both college girls and tough guys -- no difference. Following the marketing of one and dismissing the other might be hiding the vehicle that is just right for your needs. It is not in my worldview that I should be able to, with a clear conscience, jump in my large SUV and inform anyone in a smaller vehicle with whom I have an accident with that they "had it coming." That is not responsible in my worldview.← we all DO have a responsibility to the environment. Fuel Economy may or may not play into it, but I can say that one of the best things about having a souped up car is that it burns just this side of completely clean. The more efficient your engine is, the less crap it pumps out of the exhaust, and at the same time, that efficiency allows your car to run cleaner. Talk to my brother about this one. His grand national gets about 325hp at the flywheel, and its emissions tests were ridiculously clean when we went for the last 2 year check up. I've looked at the smaller SUV's and found that I'd be just as well off getting a car. Which I don't want and really can't justify. So, for me, the reasonable alternatives are station wagon, minivan or SUV. Being that there's not a decently sized station wagon in my price range, and that I am completely unimpressed with minivans (especially given the reasons I've posted earlier), that leaves me with one viable option left: a mid-sized SUV. As for the "you had it coming" bit, I can only speak for me. But, in 14 years of driving so far, I have yet to get into an accident that was my fault at all. Add to this that I'm still kinda pissed at the kid who hit me in his daddy's Lexus last week because he wasn't paying attention on the road, and suddenly, my point might become a little more clear. If I'm going to get into accidents that aren't my fault, I don't want to see my car get damaged. And if the other guy's car gets totalled, well, sorry, but fuck him. And since I feel compelled to have a larger vehicle anyway, I might as well add my safety to the reasons to own one. I've proven my ability to drive safely on the road. At which point, I've also proven that I'm responsible enough to own and drive something which, among other things, can protect me from those who aren't responsible enough to be on the road beside me. But, just to quash your worries a bit, I just found out that my dream SUV did indeed come out this year: The Toyota Highlander Hybrid That's right. 31mpg combined city/highway. In a pretty decently sized SUV. My aunt has one (non-hybrid), and I was forced to drive it around for a week. I fell in love instantly with it. I figure, if used ones actually exist on the market in a couple of years, I might be very interested in one... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jazzmoose Posted August 11, 2005 Report Share Posted August 11, 2005 Screw this. I want a Harley. Damn; my midlife crisis is showing up three years early... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Berger Posted August 11, 2005 Report Share Posted August 11, 2005 If we would've stuck with the long-range goals for fuel economy that Carter set (and Reagan subsequently killed) we would've been completely independant of foreign oil over 10 years ago. I think the "completely independent of foreign oil" line is misleading -- as long as we consume any oil (or other substitute), our energy prices are affected by international petroleum markets. Guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randissimo Posted August 11, 2005 Report Share Posted August 11, 2005 Jazzy Paul.. Yeah, and all of us that are musicians (especially keyboardists and drummers) that need bigger vehicles can just go get fucked, right? Again, the argument that SUV's in and of themselves are evil is just asinine.Jim Alfredson.. I'm not telling you what to drive because I don't like SUVs, I'm suggesting that they might not be the best choice for a working musician who needs to be conscious of mileage. Then again, I have no idea how much you drive. Our average gig is about an hour away (one way), so I burn through a lot of gas. I drive a 2000 Saturn wagon. It gets 30 + mpg and there's plenty of room for my drumkit and even a sound system.. It is also a fairly low maintenance vehicle mechanically. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danasgoodstuff Posted August 11, 2005 Report Share Posted August 11, 2005 I drive a '59 Studebaker Lark with an automactic tranny, V-8 with a newly installed 4 barrel that needs some tuning so my mileage is nothing to write home about. But my wife drives a Mazda Protege which is what we take on trips and our child care arrangements allow me to catch a ride to and from work sometimes. If the long-promised library branch near my home ever gets built, I'll transfer, walk to work and save the Studebaker for fun. I understand the appeal of cars like my Studebaker (which gets good mpg compared to, say, a Packard, a supercharded Stude or a Hummer) but it's not 1959 anymore and maybe it never really was... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danasgoodstuff Posted August 11, 2005 Report Share Posted August 11, 2005 Lowriders with the back corner up always look like a dog pissing on a hydrant to me, esp'ly if the're next to a hydrant... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Bresnahan Posted August 11, 2005 Report Share Posted August 11, 2005 Screw this. I want a Harley. ← I'm talkin' lowrider! ← Ah man, they did that to a '65 Impala?? That was my car. I had two... one was a four door that I had in high school and college and the other was a cherry convertible that I bought as an investment. Both had the "you can't kill it" 283 V8. What an engine. What a car. BTW, the "investment" wound up losing $2K. The worst thing was I didn't even like driving it. Memories have a way of making you forget the bad shit about your young obsessions. After I got used to driving modern cars with tight handling and no yaw during turns, these beasts take some getting used to. The bias ply tires were the first to go. It was like driving on solid tires. The funniest thing was the steering. You could go down the highway and move the steering wheel back and forth about 2 inches and the car went straight. Mushy, mushy, mushy. Turn the wheel and the nose dives. Ah, give me a modern car any day. Kevin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BERIGAN Posted August 12, 2005 Report Share Posted August 12, 2005 (edited) Screw this. I want a Harley. ← I'm talkin' lowrider! ← Ah man, they did that to a '65 Impala?? That was my car. I had two... one was a four door that I had in high school and college and the other was a cherry convertible that I bought as an investment. Both had the "you can't kill it" 283 V8. What an engine. What a car. BTW, the "investment" wound up losing $2K. The worst thing was I didn't even like driving it. Memories have a way of making you forget the bad shit about your young obsessions. After I got used to driving modern cars with tight handling and no yaw during turns, these beasts take some getting used to. The bias ply tires were the first to go. It was like driving on solid tires. The funniest thing was the steering. You could go down the highway and move the steering wheel back and forth about 2 inches and the car went straight. Mushy, mushy, mushy. Turn the wheel and the nose dives. Ah, give me a modern car any day. Kevin ← Might be a 66, 65 had those coke bottle tail lights...can't see 'em well in this picture. Center link was no doubt shot to hell...they were a weak "link" in full size GM's Back in the day, the cars didn't have 2 inches of play back when they were brand new, unless they were Chryslers! My 69 Impala convertible with 7 inch rims, 70 series tires, gas shocks, and urethane bushings could keep up with most anything on curves, back in the 80's at least! Cars have most definitely improved since then, hell I could beat most new cars away from a light then, can't do that anymore. Bias tires we/are horrible, yet folks restoring a "classic" today will insist on crappy factory style tires... Edited August 12, 2005 by BERIGAN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BERIGAN Posted August 12, 2005 Report Share Posted August 12, 2005 Hey Kevin, this your old car??? http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Chevrolet-I...563893078QQrdZ1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Bresnahan Posted August 12, 2005 Report Share Posted August 12, 2005 Hey Kevin, this your old car??? http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Chevrolet-I...563893078QQrdZ1 ← No, mine wasn't a SuperSport (I don't like the 65 SS anyway... all they did was paint the trim black). Mine had the 283, which I liked better than the 327. The 327 was just a bored and stroked 283. Better gas mileage with the 283 and plenty of power. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jazzbo Posted August 12, 2005 Report Share Posted August 12, 2005 I had a number of sixties US cars that had that wobbly steering. . . they had old and tired front ends. One of them, a '67 Camaro, a friend and I (with expert guidance from his father) spent an entire summer day prone on a driveway and replaced the entire front end, ENTIRE front end. It was a chore and a HALF, but after it was done, that steering was tight tight tight tight tight and oh so right! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
king ubu Posted August 12, 2005 Report Share Posted August 12, 2005 This discussion is so weird... you should start working on a functioning public transport system, rather than building, buying and driving those insane SUVs! As for my own situation: I don't drive, I use public transport system, which is freakin' expensive... roughly 1200$ a year to commute a 25 km distance for one year (for comparison: a coffee: 3-3.5$, a beer: 3.5-5$, a nice-prize CD: 18$, a full-prized one: 25$ or more...). But then, the Zurich area has perfect public transport facilities, and there is really no need for a car - the situation that's described for Chicago's west in some post futher up in this thread, that's what the situation would be in those regions of Switzerland where close to nobody lives... a train an hour is minimun, in general, almost everywhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jazzbo Posted August 12, 2005 Report Share Posted August 12, 2005 A lot of America is set up differently. Cars are viewed as "feet." Buses and trains are sometimes viewed as if they were someone else's dirty, unmanicured, fungal-infested "feet." There is little support for expanding or even maintaining public transportation in many areas I've lived in, and there is little chance that there will be new systems implemented in many areas that have none now and historically. The thing that makes the most sense to little old consumer nonengineer nor economist nor capitalist billionaire given this aversion to public transportation is . . . an alternate energy source for personal vehicles. For a number of reasons there is finally a START to move in that direction by car manufacturers but man oh man is it so little so late, or what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
king ubu Posted August 12, 2005 Report Share Posted August 12, 2005 A lot of America is set up differently. Cars are viewed as "feet." Buses and trains are sometimes viewed as if they were someone else's dirty, unmanicured, fungal-infested "feet." There is little support for expanding or even maintaining public transportation in many areas I've lived in, and there is little chance that there will be new systems implemented in many areas that have none now and historically. ← I am aware of that, still... from a European (or say: wealthy western European) point of view, it just doesn't make much sense... The thing that makes the most sense to little old consumer nonengineer nor economist nor capitalist billionaire given this aversion to public transportation is . . . an alternate energy source for personal vehicles. For a number of reasons there is finally a START to move in that direction by car manufacturers but man oh man is it so little so late, or what? ← Nothing wrong with that, but it ain't gonna happen with the current administration (see - your own? - post about Carter/Reagan above), and probably, even if next time the Democrats win, latest 8 years after, it's all going to be the same again as today, no? That's probably the biggest drawback of those two-party countries... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WD45 Posted August 12, 2005 Report Share Posted August 12, 2005 Screw this. I want a Harley. ← I'm talkin' lowrider! ← Ah man, they did that to a '65 Impala?? That was my car. I had two... one was a four door that I had in high school and college and the other was a cherry convertible that I bought as an investment. Both had the "you can't kill it" 283 V8. What an engine. What a car. BTW, the "investment" wound up losing $2K. The worst thing was I didn't even like driving it. Memories have a way of making you forget the bad shit about your young obsessions. After I got used to driving modern cars with tight handling and no yaw during turns, these beasts take some getting used to. The bias ply tires were the first to go. It was like driving on solid tires. The funniest thing was the steering. You could go down the highway and move the steering wheel back and forth about 2 inches and the car went straight. Mushy, mushy, mushy. Turn the wheel and the nose dives. Ah, give me a modern car any day. Kevin ← I remember driving my father's 1967 Ford F100 pickup with bias ply tires only on the front. It kept you busy, anyway, trying to keep it going straight. Otherwise, I loved driving that thing. Three on the tree, the inline 6 engine, no power brakes or steering. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jazzbo Posted August 12, 2005 Report Share Posted August 12, 2005 Wasn't my post above I don't think, but little to argue with you about. I think the only way that alternate energy implementation in personal vehicles will take off is if it can be made incredibly profitable. . . . Profitable enough to be the new golden egg for those who are busy boredly reeling in the old golden eggs. It can be done, I'm sure. Will it be done? Not so sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wesbed Posted August 12, 2005 Report Share Posted August 12, 2005 It's finally happening. It was only a matter of time. News from Drudge's page... it appears the elevated gasoline price is affecting the thoughts of consumers and investors. http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050812/D8BUAHE00.html Look out so you don't get hit by those falling stocks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hardbopjazz Posted August 12, 2005 Report Share Posted August 12, 2005 (edited) Shit, I want a horse. Edited August 12, 2005 by Hardbopjazz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jazzmoose Posted August 12, 2005 Report Share Posted August 12, 2005 Shit, I want a horse. ← When are we going to deal with America's dependence on foreign sources of hay? As long as Canada controls our fuel markets.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hardbopjazz Posted August 12, 2005 Report Share Posted August 12, 2005 I read the other day, on their way are fuel cell cars getting 170 miles per gallon. Hopefully we can all weather the storm till then. My wife asked me, why am I spending about 20 dollars more a week for gas to get to work. Then I realized, I'm the one that fills up her her car when it need gas. She wasn't aware how much the pirce has jumped. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Larsen Posted August 13, 2005 Report Share Posted August 13, 2005 It's not clear to me that electric cars really solve any environmental problems. They just lead to a lot more coal being burned. Wasn't my post above I don't think, but little to argue with you about. I think the only way that alternate energy implementation in personal vehicles will take off is if it can be made incredibly profitable. . . . Profitable enough to be the new golden egg for those who are busy boredly reeling in the old golden eggs. It can be done, I'm sure. Will it be done? Not so sure. ← Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soulstation1 Posted August 13, 2005 Author Report Share Posted August 13, 2005 wtf i'm gonna have to sell my mosaics to buy gas i drive 32/33 miles to work and back 6 days a week i have a honda civic ss1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.