Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Gas might be going back down to $1.15 a gallon

Gas might be going back down to $1.15 a gallon (Page 2)
Thread Tools
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Working. What about you?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2006, 10:20 PM
 
The fact is that people can buy a used SUV for the same price as a used car.

Stop with the "poor little person who can only afford a car and not an SUV" theme, please.



The fact is that if an SUV and a car get in a crash the people in the SUV are safer. If an SUV hits another SUV the risk for bodily damage to both persons is still lessened compared to two cars hitting each other. The moral? Buy an SUV, used or new! BE EQUAL.

I think it's funny that there are people in the world who are such fascists that they would take away a person's right to drive the vehicle that they want.

How about if I take away your cigarettes? Or your beer? Or junk food? Those things are all a hazard to EVERYONE'S health also - ESPECIALLY SECONDHAND SMOKE.



The Godfather

I subscribe to the "arms race" metaphor, and would agree to the unilateral disarming of SUV owners.
How about:

I subscribe to the "arms race" metaphor, and would agree to the unilateral disarming of CIGARETTE SMOKERS.
Fixed™.

     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Tampa, Florida
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2006, 10:28 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cody Dawg
If an SUV hits another SUV the risk for bodily damage to both persons is still lessened compared to two cars hitting each other.
Source?

Originally Posted by Cody Dawg
I subscribe to the "arms race" metaphor, and would agree to the unilateral disarming of CIGARETTE SMOKERS.
The logic of this "Fixed" is flawed. If everyone smoked equally, they wouldn't be safer collectivelly, like you claim is the case with SUVs.

I have no problem, personally, with the erradication of tobacco.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Working. What about you?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2006, 10:33 PM
 
But you apparently think it's okay to have the mentality that everyone should go without because one person goes without? Or that all things should be equal - forcibly so?

Typical liberal mentality.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Tampa, Florida
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2006, 10:40 PM
 
We all have a little liberal within. Aren't you a "liberal" when discussing smokers?
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Urbandale, IA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2006, 10:40 PM
 
$2.03 for 89 octane on the way home from work here in West Des Moines.
"Yields a falsehood when preceded by its quotation" yields a falsehood when preceded by its quotation.
     
Baninated
Join Date: Mar 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2006, 10:56 PM
 
...
( Last edited by porieux; Oct 2, 2006 at 03:12 AM. )
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Working. What about you?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2006, 11:14 PM
 
And you're criticizing The Godfather?

Puh-leeze.

     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: In the South
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 12:56 AM
 
Down from 2.99 to 2.49 in Ga. saves me $6 a week.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: "Working"
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 01:53 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cody Dawg
If an SUV hits another SUV the risk for bodily damage to both persons is still lessened compared to two cars hitting each other.
I'd also like a source here...trucks and the SUVs that are based on them generally have larger, stiffer frames that are not as well suited for absorbing energy in a collision. I was taught that there are three collisions in a car crash: car to car, body to car, internal organs to body. So if a lot of energy is dispersed in the car to car impact, then there's less force when the person hits the steering wheel/airbag/seatback with their forehead and the body gets jerked by the seatbelt, and less impact when the brain smashes the skull. Sure, in the early 70s all the cars were huge and could smash into anything without sustaining much, if any, damage, but fatalities were huge. It takes proper disbursement of energy to have a safer collision, and that's something SUVs and trucks don't have over cars. I'd be willing to bet that the occupants of two Civics going head on would be more likely to be safe than two Suburbans going head on from the same speed. Anyone care to prove otherwise? I'm totally open to real data.
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jan 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 02:02 AM
 
Ahh still better than paying $60 for a gas fill in this part of the world. How the hell is India so darn poor when millions of people can afford gas so expensive compared to the rest of the world.
     
Forum Regular
Join Date: Apr 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 02:15 AM
 
Originally Posted by porieux
That's a pathetic thing to say. They actually look like a smart person.

People who drive SUVs are morons.
the smartest thing is to buy a wagon. decent room, great mileage all for so less!
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Feb 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 03:25 AM
 
One word....(or maybe 4)














OPEC.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Working. What about you?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 08:30 AM
 
Gossamer: You do realize that most modern SUVs have airbags, right?

Just to let you know, the Chevy Suburban (which is what I drive) got 5 stars out of 5 stars for crash tests via the government.

Now, as far as filling it up, at about $3 a gallon, it was costing us $80 to fill the mother up.

     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Working. What about you?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 08:34 AM
 
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Working. What about you?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 08:38 AM
 
Oh, and as far as rollover ratings go?

An SUV came in at the very top as the best.

     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Pretentiously Retired.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 09:21 AM
 
SUVs are safer than cars because they adhere to different set of standards.

People in cars are also more likely to get injured when hit by an SUV because of the way the SUV rides, not because the car is 'unsafe'
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Working. What about you?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 10:08 AM
 
I think that there are a lot of misconceptions about SUVs, to be honest. Maybe SUVs got a bad rap before because they didn't have as many safety features. Now they have rollover strengthening, airbags, and other safety options. I drive one because I hate minivans with a passion. I don't like their small wheel base and I feel like I'm a loser in one, to be honest. I've got my Suburban and I have nice big wheels and beautiful rims on it, tricked out stereo inside, and it's roomy and comfy. Plus, if I ever go off the road because I'm visiting a horse farm I know that it can handle being in ruts and potholes without a problem. Not the same with a minivan. Lastly, when it flooded in our neighborhood because of hurricanes it was able to get through the water without a problem. A minivan or car would have flooded or gotten stuck.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seaford, Virginia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 10:10 AM
 
Don't SUV's only rollover when they're driven too fast around a corner? I've had about 4 SUV's over the past 12 years and not one has rolled over.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Pretentiously Retired.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 10:11 AM
 
Yeah I think common perception is this:

Minivan - loser
SUV - asshole
Buick - elderly
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Working. What about you?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 10:20 AM
 
Yeah, who REALLY wants to drive a minivan?

Any self-respecting man wouldn't be caught dead in one. I'd rather be an "asshole" in an SUV than drive a minivan.

Now, Dakar, I disagree about one thing: The Buick and being elderly. I'd love to have a Buick Rendevous SUV. They're really nice.

     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Pretentiously Retired.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 10:22 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cody Dawg
Yeah, who REALLY wants to drive a minivan?

Any self-respecting man wouldn't be caught dead in one. I'd rather be an "asshole" in an SUV than drive a minivan.

Now, Dakar, I disagree about one thing: The Buick and being elderly. I'd love to have a Buick Rendevous SUV. They're really nice.

I'll give you this, a Buick SUV seems to be an exception. Elderly + Asshole = Weird.
     
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: The midwest...
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 11:04 AM
 
Was in Missouri yesterday (middle of no where) and gas was 2.09 a gallon!

The guy I was driving with was complaning it was too expensive still!
Joe
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Salt Lake City, UT USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 11:34 AM
 
some people won't be happy until gas is free.
2008 iMac 3.06 Ghz, 2GB Memory, GeForce 8800, 500GB HD, SuperDrive
8gb iPhone on Tmobile
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Second star to the right, and straight on till morning
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 12:17 PM
 
I got AV Gas for $3.28/gallon last night.
I was paying $4.15.
I can't wait until it's below $3/gallon.
All men are created equal, but what they do after that point puts them on a sliding scale.
     
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Springfield, MO
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 12:31 PM
 
$2.08 here in Springfield, Missouri. It has been dropping about .04 a day for the last week or so. Loving it I am
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Brantford, ON. Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 01:11 PM
 
Gas has dropped about $0.30 in the past few weeks here, it's $082.1/l right now.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: "Working"
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 01:13 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cody Dawg
I've got my Suburban and I have nice big wheels and beautiful rims on it, tricked out stereo inside, and it's roomy and comfy.
As in not-stock rims? Uh...two words: Rotational Inertia. Look them up. You have no idea what those do to your vehicle dynamics. Besides adding tons of unsprung weight (bad bad bad), they GREATLY reduce braking and turning power. So your Suburban is no longer able to stop as quickly (as if it could stop "quickly" before). What happens when a little kid runs out in front of you and you hit him because those rims increased your stopping distance by a few feet? Not so safe now is it?

And about This rollover rating link. You need to learn to read a tad better. The 'winner' would be the Mazda RX-8 with a 7% rollover chance. The 'SUV' you claimed won is the Dodge Magnum...that's a wagon (and it still had a 10% chance of rollover, which is higher than about 23 of the cars listed). It's in the SUV category simply because it's got a liftgate. It's built on a car frame, has car ground clearance, etc, it's just got some extra cargo capacity. Our resident SUV expert, Ca$h, claims it's not an SUV unless it's on a truck frame. The first 'truck frame' SUV on there is the Trailblazer at a 19% chance, and your Suburban (pre-huge rims) sits at either 21 or 23% (they didn't differentiate between data points).
edit: I see now that the 21% rollover rate is the 4 wheel drive, and 23% is two wheel

You're not as safe as you think.
( Last edited by Gossamer; Sep 15, 2006 at 01:51 PM. )
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: "Working"
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 01:16 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cody Dawg
Just to let you know, the Chevy Suburban (which is what I drive) got 5 stars out of 5 stars for crash tests via the government.
According to your link here, the '06 Suburban got a 4 star driver and 3 star passenger frontal crash rating. I'm not sure where the 5 stars comes from. Again, not as safe as you think.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Pretentiously Retired.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 01:21 PM
 
Wow, Gossamer tore that shˇt up.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: "Working"
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 01:50 PM
 
Don't get me wrong, I've argued for SUVs against Rob. Cody's saying they're all good and everyone should get them, Rob says they're all bad and no one should have them. I hold that there's a happy medium somewhere.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Pretentiously Retired.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 02:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by Gossamer
I hold that there's a happy medium somewhere.
How rational of you.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Cupertino, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 02:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cody Dawg
The fact is that people can buy a used SUV for the same price as a used car.

[snip]

The fact is that if an SUV and a car get in a crash the people in the SUV are safer.

[snip]

I think it's funny that there are people in the world who are such fascists that they would take away a person's right to drive the vehicle that they want.
Cost is the main factor here. People can do what they want, within limits of the law, but they should pay for the cost they impose on society. You admit SUVs cost the same as cars, but are more dangerous for other drivers on the road. Thus, SUV drivers should pay, in dollars, the true cost of their choice. Either the market can set that price, which it hasn't, or the government can.

You are right that it's not unlike the argument about smoking. People should be able to smoke all they want in places where they don't affect others and they should have to pay the price for the effect their choice to smoke has on the rest of society.
( Last edited by itai195; Sep 15, 2006 at 02:23 PM. )
     
ink
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Utah
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 02:20 PM
 
Originally Posted by Gossamer
Yeah, I know the TDI's a diesel, but I wondered what regular gas was in his area if it's $2.79 for diesel.
Ahh, that was for 85 gasoline. Diesel was at $2.95, which is silly because it takes less energy to refine than gasoline does (but a lot more people are buying diesel now, so I suppose that increases demand). Still, you come out way ahead on cost. The 45mpg I get is at 80mph on the freeway. Now, if they would only make a TDI hybrid...
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Second star to the right, and straight on till morning
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 02:24 PM
 
I'm sure it's on it's way.
Ot an anyfuel hybrid.

There's replacement diesel engines for my airplane in the works.
All men are created equal, but what they do after that point puts them on a sliding scale.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Seattle, WA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 02:35 PM
 
Originally Posted by Dakar
How rational of you.
Rational? In the LOUNGE?

*craps self*

Seriously, though, I've been driving a small car for a while now, and I just don't understand why so many people in America are infatuated with giant SUVs. They're just so awkward to drive, at least for me. I much prefer a smaller car with better braking, tighter turning, and a feel of "hugging" the road. Whenever I drive an SUV, I feel like I'm barely in control of the vehicle.

Then again, I also drive manual, so maybe its just me.

Any ramblings are entirely my own, and do not represent those of my employers, coworkers, friends, or species
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Working. What about you?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 02:38 PM
 
How about five stars here, Gossamer?

As far as my rims go, got them from Chevrolet so I'm not worried. They're meant to fit properly on the vehicle. They're just very nice and an upgrade.

As far as being safe, I'm still safer than anyone in a car that plows into me/us.



TheoCryst: I also drive a manual turbo Saab and I love it. But you can't fit a three little boys and a baby in that car at all. It's definitely not as safe as the SUV.
     
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Dayton, OH
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 02:40 PM
 
$2.95 isnt a terrible price for diesel, its higher than that at more than a few places hereabouts. However, it's important to remember that there are quite a few flavors of diesel, not all of which is produced as cheaply as gasoline.

Buy farm diesel for your car, now THATS savin money.
     
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 02:42 PM
 
Back on topic, crude fell again today. $63 a barrel. WOOT.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Working. What about you?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 02:48 PM
 
Just saw $62 and the stocks are a flying high today.

     
ink
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Utah
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 02:49 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cody Dawg
As far as being safe, I'm still safer than anyone in a car that plows into me/us.
The corollary being that it's easier for you to injure/kill someone else in an SUV.

Tradeoffs.

I own a 1996 Ford Explorer, which I mainly use as a cargo/ski vehicle. We don't use it for much else with gas prices being what they are.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: somewhere
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 02:52 PM
 
On safety, they're not consistently safer, just bigger. If your safety comes from size, then you are putting the rest of at risk, which is rather selfish and arrogant. The other thing about safety is that SUVs cause visual difficulty for people in cars - they're big as crap and you can't see around them.

On cost, they're generally more expensive. To buy a used vehicle requires that someone bought it when it was new, so an argument about used prices is a waste. The only thing the used price means is that they don't hold their value for crap, which means it's even more expensive since you'll get less for it when you're done with it.

On off roading, get real. A fractional percent of people drive one off of a road. My in laws live in an area with no road that is quite torn up, and I have driven several cars and a minivan there with no issue (the area is remote enough that they get no trash service, no mail service, no UPS/FedEx and so on).

On "image", screw that. That's the most pathetic excuse in any discussion. Do you really care what other people think? A minivan has more room than an SUV and gets better gas mileage.

We should be more like some asian countries and tax vehicles based on engine size. If you want your pollution machine, that's fine, but be willing to pony up when it comes time to clean up the environment.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: "Working"
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 03:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cody Dawg
You have the '07 already?
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Working. What about you?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 03:13 PM
 
Ordered, yes.

wallingbl

then you are putting the rest of at risk, which is rather selfish and arrogant.
Oh, like smokers do with secondhand smoke?

Why aren't you trying to make smoking unlawful?

The fact is that your argument about not being able to see around SUVs is lame. Routinely you're going to have to share streets and freeways with vehicles MUCH bigger than SUVs. Like semi trucks for example.

As far as SUV drivers being taxed more, get real. We buy more gas and that means that we spend more supporting the economy so you should be thanking us.

     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Cupertino, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 03:18 PM
 
Inefficient use of resources does not help the economy, Cody. Especially not when those resources are imported from unfriendly countries. SUV owners should be taxed to pay for the additional costs their choices impose on society.
     
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Second star to the right, and straight on till morning
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 03:40 PM
 
Kinda like choices other people make that tax the helthcare system. But don't pay into it.
All men are created equal, but what they do after that point puts them on a sliding scale.
     
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Pretentiously Retired.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 03:45 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cody Dawg
We buy more gas and that means that we spend more supporting the economy so you should be thanking us.
Nah, I'd like to see more than the oil companies get your money.
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Cupertino, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 03:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by Sky Captain
Kinda like choices other people make that tax the helthcare system. But don't pay into it.
Yeah, same thing.
     
ink
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Utah
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 03:49 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cody Dawg
As far as SUV drivers being taxed more, get real. We buy more gas and that means that we spend more supporting the economy so you should be thanking us.
Iran's economy.

And, they do thank you.
     
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: May 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 03:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by ink
Iran's economy.

And, they do thank you.

Of course that ignores the public knowledge of where our oil comes from

Canada should be thanking us
     
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Cupertino, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2006, 04:08 PM
 
And yet Cody posted a couple months ago that illegal immigrants are ruining our economy by sending $18 billion a year to Mexico. I guess Canada, Venezuela, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, and Iran are better destinations for our money.
     
 
Thread Tools
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:04 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2015 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2