07-24-2008, 11:12 AM
|
#21 (permalink)
|
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: california
Posts: 1,329
Thanks: 24
Thanked 161 Times in 107 Posts
|
The only way I can see getting one of these cars into the US under the noses of the Feds, assuming your local authorities will cooperate, is to have a foreigner buy the car in their home country, drive it over to the US on vacation and then sell it to you while they are here. I've seen plenty of campers, motorcycles and a handful of cars here in California with european plates both on the front and back. Mostly diesels. Of course this is still highly illegal and you shouldn't do it.
|
|
|
Today
|
|
|
Other popular topics in this forum...
|
|
|
07-24-2008, 02:57 PM
|
#22 (permalink)
|
Recycling Nazi
Join Date: May 2008
Location: People's Republic of Albany
Posts: 234
Thanks: 2
Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts
|
This is simple.
Most Americans hate small, efficient cars and laughed at Europeans for decades for driving those little P.O.S scooter-cars.
Those of that like these tiny cars (obviously, because we are very secure with our own masculinity) have always been in the minority.
__________________
--- Bror Jace
|
|
|
07-24-2008, 03:22 PM
|
#23 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: NorCal
Posts: 451
Thanks: 1
Thanked 40 Times in 26 Posts
|
Psychology and ecomonics...
If I had a nickle for everytime I heard and SUV driver say "I just feel safer..." I could retire. Particularly when it comes to women drivers, who wind up driving the 14mpg family truckster (Suburban, Yukon, Escalate, etc) taking two kids to soccer practice and school. Sitting higher in the saddle for a better view of traffic is part of it, but having this big massive SUV is an ego trip for many drivers "get out of my way or I'll run you over" kind of thing. I've always asked "Safer than what? A 45mpg Diesel Jetta with anti-lock brakes, front and side curtain airbags and advanced crumple zones?" then I get this glazed-over stare... another favorite of mine, to ask a California SUV driver "Have you ever actually put that thing into 4 wheel drive? Do you know how?" the answer usually goes something like this "No, but if we ever go up skiing I could figure it out, hahaha..." Just think of the fuel wasted by heavy 4wd SUV-type vehicles that have never so much as seen ice, snow, or mud. The last time I checked, 4wd doesn't help you stop, where most traffic accidents happen. Sure, there's parts of the country where 4wd is very useful, just not where I live, the land of D&G sunglass wearing, cell phone gabbing soccer moms traveling from the school drop off to Starbucks, then the nail salon and back home in a leased 3 ton 4wd.
On the economic side, fuel has been relatively cheap in the US until recently. Forget dollars per gallon for a moment, think dollars per annual income as a ratio. If you spent half your income on fuel, you'd be looking for a cheaper mode of transportation.
Last edited by metromizer; 07-24-2008 at 03:31 PM..
|
|
|
07-24-2008, 04:33 PM
|
#24 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,209
Thanks: 225
Thanked 811 Times in 594 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Dave
Another huge people consideration: Small, low, slow cars make people feel more vulnerable than big ol’ SUVs with a 7 second 0-60 time.
|
But small, low cars do sell. I just made a rough count of the part of the parking lot I go through on my lunch walk, and out of about 150-200 cars I noticed 5 Porsches, 7 other 2-seaters of various kinds, and 4 Minis. (Plus 5 Priuses.) I didn't count the small 4-seaters like Honda Fits, but there were some, plus several motorcycles. So in a place where most people make over $100K/yr, and so can presumably afford to drive whatever they choose, a significant number do choose small cars.
The problem, I think, is that the US auto industry has come to believe its own advertising. Because of the loophole that let them put car bodies on truck chassis and call them trucks, they started heavily selling the SUV - and now they think that's what everyone wants.
|
|
|
07-24-2008, 04:55 PM
|
#25 (permalink)
|
Box Dreamer
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Pittsburg, CA
Posts: 154
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by metromizer
Psychology and ecomonics...
ask a California SUV driver "Have you ever actually put that thing into 4 wheel drive? Do you know how?" the answer usually goes something like this "No, but if we ever go up skiing I could figure it out, hahaha..." Just think of the fuel wasted by heavy 4wd SUV-type vehicles that have never so much as seen ice, snow, or mud. The last time I checked, 4wd doesn't help you stop, where most traffic accidents happen. .
|
Somehow, many people don't know a common sense. We stop the car by using BRAKE!!! 4WD won't help you stop the car no matter where you drive. Anti-lock brakes do the magic!! That is very simple logic, but many people still think 4WD brake the car better on ice.
What 4WD do better is better traction when you move. So, you are easier to get out from mud without spinning the wheels. 4WD system also turns the car in neutral way, rather than over-steering or under-steering.
I never feel driving SUV safer than other cars. Indeed, I feel more dangerous.
1) worse handling than most sedans or other cars.
2) heavier, usually brake longer.
3) Rollover.... This term becomes famous since Explorer performs this trick!!
4) Climb over to the other side of the freeway!! That is what SUV for!!
__________________
|
|
|
07-24-2008, 05:02 PM
|
#26 (permalink)
|
Mr. Blue Tape
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 345
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
|
It's the width that bothers me the most. I nearly got clipped today because one was too wide for the country road we were on. I was going north and it was going south but it was riding the center divider. Gah! I used to drive delivery trucks so I'm no stranger to "wide load" but this was ridiculous.
I don't think people should drive cars too big for them to handle. If they can't see or know where the 4 corners of their vehicle are, they don't deserve to drive it.
__________________
My 5 pillars of fuel efficiency:- driving style
- aerodynamics
- tires
- weight reduction
- engine maintenance
|
|
|
07-24-2008, 07:54 PM
|
#27 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: NorCal
Posts: 451
Thanks: 1
Thanked 40 Times in 26 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesqf
The problem, I think, is that the US auto industry has come to believe its own advertising. Because of the loophole that let them put car bodies on truck chassis and call them trucks, they started heavily selling the SUV - and now they think that's what everyone wants.
|
I think you have something there. Add to that argument, the fact car builders make a lot more $$ on those high-line SUVs <4 fold down DVD screens, 3 cupholders per seat, 2 climate control zones, a navigation sys, and electric butt wipers> than they ever could/did on econoboxes.
|
|
|
07-24-2008, 09:54 PM
|
#28 (permalink)
|
EcoModding Apprentice
Join Date: May 2008
Location: North Texas
Posts: 112
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
|
Youda thunk back in 1977 when Jimmy Carter (D) made his 10 point comprehensive energy policy proposal on April 18, that it would have adopted by the US congress. <http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/carter/filmmore/ps_energy.html>
From 1977 thru 1981 the President was a Democrat, Robert Bryd, (D) WVA was the Senate Majority Leader & Jim Wright, (D), TX, was the Speaker of the House. The "PERFECT STORM"
At the end of the 95-99th Congresses had the perfect opportunity to pass a comprehensive energy policy. It never happened. In 1979 we had the fuel embargo and Jimmy instituted the national 55mph limit and no national energy policy.
The first two years Clinton was in office, he had a Democratic majority in the House & Senate and no national energy policy.
If we had a Male Bovine Feces (BS) Tax on members of congress, all the Senators and House Members would be in the poor house (Ob & Mc included)
T. Boone makes more sense than anyone on "The Hill" and he is putting his money where his mouth is!!!!!!!!
RE: Al Gore "FOLLOW THE MONEY"
|
|
|
07-24-2008, 10:44 PM
|
#29 (permalink)
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,209
Thanks: 225
Thanked 811 Times in 594 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by metromizer
...car builders make a lot more $$ on those high-line SUVs ... than they ever could/did on econoboxes.
|
But there's another reason the US automakers are going off the rails: a small car doesn't have to be an econobox. Priced a Porsche lately? Or the Honda S2000, BMW Z5 (?), etc? Even the Minis and the Miata could hardly be described as econoboxes.
Import car makers will build small cars that are quick, fun, and reasonably fuel-efficient (at least in comparison to American SUVs), and they can sell those cars at a profit. US automakers, when they need a small car to make their fleet average mpg, will rebadge the cheapest econobox they can find, and wonder why they don't sell.
|
|
|
07-24-2008, 11:08 PM
|
#30 (permalink)
|
Addicted
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Findlay,OH
Posts: 555
Thanks: 0
Thanked 11 Times in 7 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesqf
US automakers, when they need a small car to make their fleet average mpg, will rebadge the cheapest econobox they can find, and wonder why they don't sell.
|
Never realized until this statement, You my friend are absolutely correct. Geo metro= Suzuki Swift,,, Chevy Aveo= Daewoo ?,,, Ford festiva= Mazda ? Ford Probe= Mazda 626 drivetrain. Why is it every small car US automakers turns out to either A= designed and built by foreign automakers or B= Powered by foreign automakers. I am sure there are alot more cars than this, If Chevy can turn out a car that performs like the Vette, Dodge the Viper, Ford the GT why shouldn't they make a Good FE car for US soil.
__________________
|
|
|
|