Thread: My Death Trap
View Single Post
Old 11-15-2010, 09:08 PM   #18 (permalink)
Frank Lee
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
That ain't how odds work and you know it. Do I need to preface a simple "odds" statement with 3 paragraphs of lawyer-speak in order for it to be relevant?

No I didn't take it the wrong way. My Tempo is not me and Tempos get dissed all the time, which I really don't care about because I know how worthless many people's opinions are. The point I made then and the point I make now is that a vehicle needn't weigh 3500 lbs in order to be safe, and the reason we have engineers doing B.S. like reducing a 2mm spot weld down to 1 mm, saving 4 ounces, then bragging about it and making a 3500 lb small car sound like a breakthrough, is that stupid govt regulations mandate that every vehicle be burdened with all this crap. Suzuki/GM COULD NOT put the Metro dies back in the presses today and crank out more Metros if they wanted to because of all the re-engineering and additional **** that is required now. As I've been attempting to illustrate, there is a point at which a level of safety features becomes more of an onerous burden than a benefit i.e. taken to the extreme, for ultimate safety perhaps the only legal vehicle on U.S. roads should be a Sherman tank?

I'm not anti-safety but I think a line has been crossed as far as the law of diminishing returns is concerned. And as someone alluded to, when the motorists get the mindset that they no longer need to have/develop any decent defensive driving skills because they think the vehicle will do it all for them, what have we achieved???
__________________


  Reply With Quote