Protect your truck/SUV from government regulations!

Discussion in 'OT Driven' started by SycoPhant, Jan 19, 2004.

  1. SycoPhant

    SycoPhant Get out my way

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2001
    Messages:
    17,759
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Erie, PA
    Act Now to Protect Your Right to Vehicle Choice!
    Under The Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE), the feds at the Department of Transportation (DOT) have decided to "reform" fuel economy rules to save gas and decrease dependence on imported oil. Everyone supports that goal. However, you may well get better fuel economy but in the process, lose your V-8 engine or towing capacity and the size and safety of SUVs you need for family, work or leisure. Caution the DOT to take care that any new CAFE rules don't do anything to compromise the excellent safety and usefulness of SUVs or jeopardize your vehicle choices.

    http://www.suvoa.com/cafe/

    IBClean97GTI
     
  2. SycoPhant

    SycoPhant Get out my way

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2001
    Messages:
    17,759
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Erie, PA
    I knew you'd be in ;)
     
  3. Penguin Man

    Penguin Man Protect Your Digital Liberties

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2002
    Messages:
    21,696
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Edmonton, AB
    :werd: It's stupid when people buy a big SUV (or even a small SUV) just for driving to work and taking their kids to school. My family owns an SUV ('98 Pathfinder) only because I'm a ski racer and need to fit skis and luggage in every weekend. If I wasn't skiing, I guarantee you we would own a normal car instead.
     
  4. Wolvrin704

    Wolvrin704 Guest

    I agree people should drive what they want but suffer the consequences. However I disagree about writing congressmen to make the automakers use diesel engines. First off not everyone wants diesel engines. Secondly I believe in letting the market dictate what we are offered. If enough people want the diesel the automakers will make them. I don't like having Washington dictate what a consumer must buy outside of safety considerations.
     
  5. dragon1976

    dragon1976 Guest

  6. flynfrog

    flynfrog Cool isnt Cheap

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2001
    Messages:
    6,621
    Likes Received:
    6
    Location:
    Utah

    2: you are so wrong i know we have aruged this a million times

    but i desing build test and race low mass vehicles light vehicles simply declerate to fast and most run out of (crush zone) at any thing over 25 then you have an engine sitting in your lap. Put modern air bags in a mid sixties car and its 3 times as safe as a modern car. Im not making this up smokey yunick long time racer and genral go to guy for the big three has stated this many time more mass=safer look at semi crashes damn near every thing they hit they go threw leaving the driving un harmed. :rant2:


    wow no one has seen that before :rolleyes:
     
  7. flynfrog

    flynfrog Cool isnt Cheap

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2001
    Messages:
    6,621
    Likes Received:
    6
    Location:
    Utah
    :insert of indy car with drivers legs mangled here: Nascar is realy starting to skimp on safety they always have. i agree that crumple zones area good idea i am looking at using aluminum hony comb to absorbe energy in a soalr car crash but as stated many times before the heavier vehicle is safer. And nascar baja irc kart dont realy have crush zones at all look at how close the driver in an open wheel car sits to the outside of the body what they do have is an extremely stiff cage around the driver and lets the suspension shearing its mounts absorb the enrgy of the crash but once thats gone there is not much left. nascar i cant see where you are geting any sort of a crush zone its a solid cage fornt to rear plus or minus a few sheet of tin foil. baja same thing.

    i will state is agin a 1960s car with air bags and modern seat belts will be safer than you modern car with crush zones.

    for on eseat belts are made to strech and spread the load in an accident the stiff frame will give not as fast as a crumple zone but in a 25 mph crash the impact realy isnt that strong. but at 50+ your crumple zone might as well be an open hole its done absorbing energy way to early so now its contuing to crumple on to its passengers. where as the steel frame is now starting give. and absorbing energy and slowing down slower than the car that weigs half as much thus lessing the impact.

    ever noice most crash testing is done at 25 yet most crashes are way above that?

    and yes you can argue that one car is safer than another all day long but in the end a heavy car is much safer than a light one given equal safty equipment.
     
  8. flynfrog

    flynfrog Cool isnt Cheap

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2001
    Messages:
    6,621
    Likes Received:
    6
    Location:
    Utah
    a metro has crumple zones too and its not safe.

    you also forget we have new contraptions such as air bags energy absorbing bumpers ect to slow the driver down slowly also unless you are hitting a solid rock wall the hevier object is going to be more likley to make whatever you hit give

    also correct me if im wrong volvos are heavy


    low mass vehicles (lmv) are some of the most unsafe things reguardless of curumple zones ect do to strait physics

    i agree crumple zones are good ideas they jsut dont do anythign once you are over 25 mph above that on most cars you are out of crumpple zone

    even ladder frame trucks are using them now ie. f150 is now one of the safest vehicles after they fixed the crumple zone that failed the entire driver compartment.


    we will never agree on this basicly we have two differnt philosphys on saftey you want your car to absorb the impact i want whatever i hit to absorb it
     

Share This Page