SUV's.................... - biggest peice of capitalist garb

[Brian]

It's sad how people buy those two tonne SUV's...


They're obviously irresponsible towards the environment as they often weigh over the two tonne mark (a regular passenger car is around 1400kg, work it out in pounds if you like), use high-torque, often grossly inefficient, large-capacity engines which terrible fuel economy and thus produce excessive greenhouse emissions compared to regular passenger cars.

They are irresponsible towards other road users for the simple fact that in a crash between a truck and a regular car, no matter what safety devices are fitted to the car (crumple zones, air-bags, collapsible steering columns) they will always come off second best through sheer economies of scale. Also, many of these passive safety devices fitted to these cars (crumple-zones etc.) are incompatible in a collision with a truck, which acts like a bulldozer ploughing through everything in it's path. This may very well protect it's occupants, but heaven help anyone they hit. Many SUVs are fitted with bull-bars or nudge-bars for no reason other than aesthetics. These are a blatant danger to pedestrians and other, smaller vehicles because they give absolutely no leeway in a collision, adding to the 'bull-dozer' factor.

Also, SUVs are a danger to their drivers as well. The basic shape is dynamically inefficient with a very large mass being jacked up into the air by wallowing, long suspension travel which does nothing for steering response, brake efficiency or handling, all of which lessen the drivers ability to avoid a dangerous situation on the road.

Finally, the vast, vast majority of SUVs bought and driven today are by people with absolutely no discernible need for such an excess. They're putting other road users and pedestrians at risk for the sake of fashion.





(Edited by Brian at 5:34 pm on Aug. 18, 2002)

[mujer revolucionaria]

I agree with you whole heartedly Brian.....

Some of my Critical Mass friends and I made some stickers and put them on gasoline pumps with a photo of Osama on it that said "please, fill up your SUV again and help fund my network"

We also did a tagging party where we would put stickers on SUVs that said "I am changing the environment, ask me how" and then it had directions to go to a website for info on how to get the sticker off, but first they would be innundated with information about how destructive their automobiles are. (the thing that cracks me up, is likely the amount of people who are so stupid that they would have to look up such a site to figure out how to take off a sticker......its not that hard haha)

Also, I ride a bike all over my city.....and there is nothing more threatening than those SUVs tailing you and passing you within inches everyday. I see my life flash before me many times.

www.critical-mass.org

[Xanderbeaux]

SUV´s are bad? um ok

[Nateddi]

Public Transportation. Moscow quality, not new york quality.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Mocow quality? Isn't that an oxymoron? They should have funneled a little more $$ into the bread lines.

Fuck you pussy-ass liberals and your attacks on SUV's, I'll never give mine up.

Who in the fuck are you to tell me what is and what is not acceptible to drive? I can't take my camping eq uipment, or haul a new bed or entertainment center, home in a fucking hona accord! How do you know what SUV owners are uning their units for?

If you don't like SUV's, don't drive them.

And safety canopies and cages are very effective protectors of cars even when the collide with an SUV

Sport Utility Vehicles are very versitile, and the operative word in the acronym is utility.

This is the land of the free, and I am free to choose what I drive.

And if I ever catch one of you tree-huggers trying to slap a sticker on my truck, you'll wear your ass for a hat.

[Moskitto]

I can't take my camping eq uipment, or haul a new bed or entertainment center, home in a fucking hona accord!

Hey, In July we drove from Linslade to Nottingham and back with the following

A C1 and a C2 (A Cheeta C2 is fucking massive) with boards.
A 4 man tent
2 nights worth of dinner
Lots of nutri-grain bars, bread, energy drinks, water tanks etc
Enough clothes for 3 people
Enough paddling kit for 1 person to do 8 races
A C1 paddle
A K1 paddle that had been left by someone who came to our race
3 knee blocks and a beanbag and knives to carve them
4 chairs
Camping stove
2 air matresses
3 sleeping bags
washing kits
Cutlary

Ok, and we carried this is a Honda Civic and I've seen people carry twice as much stuff, and have 5 people in their cars and a trailer and they were drving the same sized car. yeah, we could carry an entertainment system in it as well and If you want to buy a bed, GET IT DELIVERED. You don't need a massive car unless you want to do pretty major Fladbury or Barking and Dagenham style carpooling. A Honda Civic is big enough.

[RedCeltic]

Quote: from Nateddi on 9:12 pm on Aug. 18, 2002
Public Transportation. Moscow quality, not new york quality.




Um... I agree that people should use more public transportation... but what do you have against our subways? You can go anywhere you want in New York City on a buck fifty. New York City's subways are efficient, reliable, and the primary source of transportation for thousands of people every day. Sure they aren't very clean but heck... its New York! :)

In all seriousness, America has always been way too fond of large gas guzzling cars that clog up the highways and pollute the environment.


Rather than such promotion of the internal combustion engine, and the use of fossil fuels, the government should rather endorse government subsidized programs to expand safe routes for foot and bicycle paths.

They should build fully-funded high-speed rail transportation systems between cities, with fares set low enough to be a viable alternative to the use of the automobile.

They should promote pedestrian ways which exclude vehicles from the downtown area of cities and towns, accessible by mass transit.






(Edited by RedCeltic at 10:25 am on Aug. 20, 2002)

[Moskitto]

the government should rather endorse government subsidized programs to expand safe routes for foot and bicycle paths.

It's the same in Britain. The government says they want people cycling and using public transport more, what do they do.

They apparantly got Jason Quelley (Olympic Cycling Champion) to open a Cycle bridge. But no one at the time heard about it.

Then they open loads of "Cycle paths" as part of the "National cycle network" But none of them go anywhere useful, they just go to places of scenic interest, so cycling just becomes a passtime. Then they don't do anything to promote cycling as being socially acceptable (car drivers do not give cyclists enough space on roads so many of them get killed because they need to put their foot on the ground and can't without being mowed down.) Then they introduce penalties for cycling on the pavements even though the roads are so fucking dangerous. I ride on the pavements unless they're busy, and if a police officer stops me i'm going to tell them to hang themselves because that's basically what riding on roads is. Compare this with other countries in Europe where bikes have priority over cars.

[RedCeltic]

That's the way it is here too Moskitto. Cycling is considered to be just a past time. We do have Cycling paths, however as you said, they are for people to go to scenic areas, and not ment to be a reliable, safe alternitive to the automobile.

[Nateddi]

apparently ci has never been to an 80's moscow subway. i have.

[mujer revolucionaria]

Well, thats why there are groups like Critical Mass and bundles of Bike Federations to help educate and promote bicycles as transportation. NOt arguing though that our local/state and federal governments dont do ANYTHING to promote it themselves. That is SO true!!! Would you expect anything less with large handouts to keep fuel economy standards low, and emissions standards low as well, all for the almighty DOLLAR!! (or pound, etc)

Also yesterday I saw a prime example of SUVs prowess on the highways.....there was a 5 car pileup, 4 SUVs and 1 car.....the SUVs had fender benders, the car which was in the middle? TOTALLED.......

And CI you ARE free to drive what you want, but do you ever think of the environmental and political ramifications of driving such a monster? War, ozone, etc......the American drive to guzzle gas is quickly destroying SO much!

[mujer revolucionaria]

Ooooh sorry I forgot.....its likely another case of cappie DENIAL DENIAL DENIAL!!!

[Supermodel]

I'll never drive an SUV because I'm too careful with my money to waste it on gasoline. I have a nice little car that suits me just fine.

Anyway, SUV's are soon going out of style. Gas prices will see an end to it. Plus, they are a pain to drive.

[andresG]

"Anyway, SUV's are soon going out of style."
-Supermodel

Yes, that's the reason to stop driving them, because they are going out of style.

[RedCeltic]

One thing that I find funny in a way, is how during WWII, the government issued rations for gas. They also has slogans like, "If you ride alone, you ride with Hitler."

However today.. we are supposedly in a time of war. (war with who? No one knows. ) However Americans are driving larger vehicles than ever before, burning more gas... yet there are no rations or nifty campaign slogans about cutting down on consumption of fuel.

What are the implications of this? It can't be that gas is now as plentiful as water. It can't be that gas is extremly cheep.


(Edited by RedCeltic at 9:10 pm on Aug. 20, 2002)

[suffianr]

What's all this fuss about SUV's??

America, according to a recent article in Time Mag (yes, Western propaganda news source, I know), has enough oil reserves and alternative energy supplies to last the entire the war effort without importing oil from Arab nations.

Yes, I firmly disagree against the environmental impact and flamboyant bourgeois culture associated with owning those great big beasts, but if those toffee-nosed capitalists want to waste their own money on that sort of thing, then go ahead. I'd rather just jumpstart my Veedub every goddamned morning...

[kidicarus20]

Fuck suv's.

Capitalists always talk about "they have a right to drive them" well not really, that's just like saying you have a right to have a car that takes up two lanes. Well if you did d othat you should be arrested, and suv's should be banned as well, for the damage they do is a lot worse than taking up two lanes, they have actually went backwards in MPG standards.

Another thing that sucks about SUV's is that you can't see around them in left hand turn lanes when they are in the other left hand turn lane, now if a car was there, i could easily see around it, when an SUV is there, i can't see shit on who's coming from the other side.

What i like to do when an SUV behind me is og really fuckin slow, that pisses them off, they love to crusie around like the own the place, stop signs also apprently dont apply to them.

But yah i'd love to do that to capitalist imperial. What would he do? fuckin capitalist nerds i hate nerds.

[RedCeltic]

In New York, commerical vehicles take up the right two lanes and restricted from use of the left and HOV lanes. Also, Commerical vehicals, vans, pickups, buses etc are banned from parkways.
SUVs however can drive in all of these places and are sometimes the same size as commercial vans I've driven for companies.

When Parkways say "Cars Only" they should have an additional sign saying "SUVs are not Cars"

(Edited by RedCeltic at 6:32 am on Aug. 22, 2002)

[Capitalist Imperial]

SUV's are not as big as you people are making them out to be! they are for the most part about as big as a pickup truck!

Why has it been ok to have pickup trucks all these years, but now that big, bad SUV's are on the road, now the liberals jump up and cry: "ban them, ban them!"

Well, I have news for you, comrades, this is not cuba, the former soviet union, or the former east germany, We have freedom of choice, and that includes what we drive. SUV's are safe, reliable transportation, and they allow for utility that automobiles (cars) can't deliver.

It comes doewn to choice, and, as usual, the so-called "democratic" leftists who "believe in freedom" contradict themselves.

Apparenty their belief in freedom is not a concern when it runs contrary to their frivolous agenda.

Can anybody say "class envy"?

I think I'll go get a 2003 Ford Excursion, and put 33 inch tires and a 12 inch lift on it, maybe a bumper guard too.

Then I'll see if I can't find some VW's or civics with a greenpeace bumper sticker on them to mow over. I'm tired of figuratively crushing liberals in this forum, I think I'l do it literally now.

Ah, the joys of driving.

[Moskitto]

I'm not envious of anyone who has an SUV. There's no point in having a car that big. The last person I saw driving a pick-up truck was only driving it because his car was mangled (yeah, wheelspinning it and skidding it does that type of thing) and had to scrounge his dad's. And his own car could carry way more stuff than this pick-up truck he was drving.

And what kind of car needs 33inch tyres appart from a monster tuck? And what advantages do bull bars give you apart from giving a good old smashing to anything you drive into? A car is a transport utility, not a fashion accessory.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Quote: from Moskitto on 3:09 pm on Aug. 22, 2002
I'm not envious of anyone who has an SUV. There's no point in having a car that big. The last person I saw driving a pick-up truck was only driving it because his car was mangled (yeah, wheelspinning it and skidding it does that type of thing) and had to scrounge his dad's. And his own car could carry way more stuff than this pick-up truck he was drving.

And what kind of car needs 33inch tyres appart from a monster tuck? And what advantages do bull bars give you apart from giving a good old smashing to anything you drive into? A car is a transport utility, not a fashion accessory.

Come on, now, moskitto, how exactly could the car carry more than the pickup?

Be realistic

Take me, you, your friends car, and your friends dad's pickup, and I guarantee I could get more stuff in the truck than you could in the car.

[peaccenicked]

Moscow transport (http://www.russia.net/country/moscow_city_transport.html)

[Moskitto]

this guy had 5 people in his car each carrying a kit bag, 3 boats on the roof, a Big stereo in the boot.

The pick-up truck could only carry 2 people and to carry 3 boats he needed a trailer as well, and he didn't have a big stereo.

You don't need a pick-up truck. A Honda Civic is all you need.

[Moskitto]

BTW, Ian (the guy i'm talking about) doesn't drive a Honda Civic, he was driving one of those little cars that 17 year olds get second hand at the time, but now he's got one that's a bit bigger. And you hear him coming because there's this "THUMP THUMP THUMP THUMP THUMP THUMP" noise then SCREEEEEEECH and CRACK, then he goes "allright?" Yeah he's funny, he's the type of guy you'd like.

[Capitalist Imperial]

Quote: from Moskitto on 3:46 pm on Aug. 22, 2002
this guy had 5 people in his car each carrying a kit bag, 3 boats on the roof, a Big stereo in the boot.

The pick-up truck could only carry 2 people and to carry 3 boats he needed a trailer as well, and he didn't have a big stereo.

You don't need a pick-up truck. A Honda Civic is all you need.



give me the truck and all of that equipment and i'm confident that I could get twice as much stuff into the pickup as one could into a civic, it is simple math

[truthaddict11]

I saw this SUV the other day a Cadilac one shit it looked like a tank. i dont own a car yet or a license for that matter but when i do i am planning to buy my dads station wagon but for now its bicycling and public transportation for me. as for the oil try to eliminate our oil dependence all together i would rather have a car that ran off of fermented corn or urine than oil. but as long as the oil barons ru(i)n the world that wont happen.

[Moskitto]

It doesn't matter that it holds more. The point is, who the fuck needs a car that big.

[suffianr]

"The point is, who the fuck needs a car that big..."

lol, probably a great big fat bastard...But I could be wrong :)

[Capitalist Imperial]

well, who needs anything besides food and shelter?

no one

yet, we enjoy thi little luxuries in life, don't we?

and you leftists and your agendas are not going to decide for me what I drive

[Moskitto]

despite what you might think, I don't see a car as a luxury.

Sure, public transport can get you around if you just want to go to work, or go see your friend who lives the other side of town (well i'd walk but I live in a small town.) But for some stuff, such as sports which need lots of equipment, you actually need a car. I mean, sure you could just not do sport and be a lazy fucker who stays at home all the time and turn into a 58-stone guy who ends up having the skin and fat surgically removed from his stomach (http://uk.news.yahoo.com/020823/80/d84b2.html) but really is that a fate that anyone wants?

But on the other end of the scale, I don't see the point in owning a pick-up truck. I understand how there's a big car culture in the US, but I don't see how you use all that space. We manage to get most stuff that we could need into a Honda Civic and most people do the same with similar sized vechicles. Most people who have larger cars have something like a Ford Galaxy and they have large families (3 children.) Most people with pick-up trucks are normally into construction work and landy drivers (I won't diss landy drivers, My C2 partner's one) are either 1. Mad 2. Just want a car they can drive until it breaks totally and a Landy takes ages for that to happen 3. Drive them round dirt tracks.