Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
can't tell you have many SUV's I've seen on their roofs but I CAN tell you the number of cars, it's zero.
Just going to respond factually to this part of the post...
Almost twice as many cars roll over annually than SUVs and trucks. There are many more cars than SUVs so the SUV RATE is slightly higher, but in total, more cars roll over than SUVS. As reported by the NHTSA and FARS.
Scroll to page 6. And I stand corrected, up until a year or two ago, car rollovers were nearly double the number of SUV rollovers, but cars, like vans, are coming down in number, as electronic aids are becoming more ubiquitous. SUVs are about the same number as they always have been, even though there are more SUVs on the road (so their rate is dropping as well).
But one thing has not changed: total number of rollovers per number of cars/SUVs/trucks registered is VERY small. On the order of a tiny fraction of 1% of all cars on the road.
One of the nice things about living in a fairly compact town is I'm not more than three miles from anywhere I want to go. And since I drive a truck for a living the last thing I want to do is get home and drive. So even at 12 mpg the tank of gas in my 79 Thunderbird lasts for about seven weeks! It also helps that I'm a homebody who enjoys my own company more than anybody elses (meaning I don't run around town all the time). So no, MPG's and gas prices don't affect me at all. Even have one better than that though. The car I leave in Ft Worth as the emergency car to get home in when my truck is due for service (which is approx. every three months) of course has to be filled up only every three months! If I did live in a large metropolitan area though, I would have to have something with better mileage. Although my 78 Pinto if driven frugally can get 29 MPG. That would work! Yeah!
When driving 10,000 miles a year, at current gas prices of $3.50, the difference between 18mpg and 36 mpg adds up to $81/month more in gas expense. For many people it's worth that to have more metal around them, comfort, and power. For me, it's the best of both worlds. I have an older 33 mpg little beater that I use to drive the few miles to the Park & Ride to catch my bus to work, and at home a 15 mpg 4x4 truck for other driving, hauling
and trips.
Yes and no. When I consider MPGs, I consider the cost of fuel over the life of the vehicle. To me, $81/month alone is still a decent amount of money, and over the course of 10 years, or more depending on how long you own it or other vehicles you get that get a similar fuel economy, that $81 turns into almost $10,000, and thats just the difference in the cost of fuel for the two different vehicle. You're really spending about $20,000 in gas for that car. And only if you drive 10,000 miles per year at $3.50/gallon. Gas prices are anything but stable.
What you have going on with the truck at home for occassional driving is ideal. I wish I have the room for a truck, and not just my daily driver. I hate seeing people with HUGE vehicles driving crazy miles per year, and then they have the nerve to b*tch about gas prices. Are you effin kidding me?
Get a big comfortable car and carpool. Even at 15 MPG with 4 people we are getting 60 MPG and everyone is safer and more comfortable than they would be in 4 seperate Yari. Parkign is cheaper too. Plus no one has to drive an ugly econobox.
One thing insteresting I nocited with my sons economical 4 banger. You put four people in it and the MPG drops dramatically. Put 4 people in my Camaro and the MPG does not change at all (although the Camaro is just as incomfortable with 4 people as a Yaris is, I was referring to something lieke an Impala or a G-8, or a suburban (put 6 people int he suburbabn and they will all be comfortable and you are getting 90 MPG!)).
Some people put emphasis on MPG because they are trying to live within a budget. The average family income in the US is $50K a year, and for those folks, $81 a month can be a big de545917119al. Why begrudge them that?
Anecdotal evidence for, or against the benefits of more economical cars is not necessarily indicative of overall results either.
Just going to respond factually to this part of the post...
Almost twice as many cars roll over annually than SUVs and trucks. There are many more cars than SUVs so the SUV RATE is slightly higher, but in total, more cars roll over than SUVS. As reported by the NHTSA and FARS.
Scroll to page 6. And I stand corrected, up until a year or two ago, car rollovers were nearly double the number of SUV rollovers, but cars, like vans, are coming down in number, as electronic aids are becoming more ubiquitous. SUVs are about the same number as they always have been, even though there are more SUVs on the road (so their rate is dropping as well).
But one thing has not changed: total number of rollovers per number of cars/SUVs/trucks registered is VERY small. On the order of a tiny fraction of 1% of all cars on the road.
You are not interpreting the rollover data correctly. Yes passenger cars have more fatalities due to rollovers, but that is a count, not a rate. Because there are many more passenger cars than trucks it isn't a surprise that there are more deaths. But the rollover RATE (per 100,000 vehicles) for passenger cars is less than half that for trucks or SUVs. Figure 5 in your report. A passenger car is less likely to rollover, and you are less likely to die.
One of the reasons I have a car is to go places - the less I spend on fuel the more often I can go places. With diesel 1,50 per Liter here it makes a diffrence.
If I did not have sports and hobbies that required me bringing along a lot of stuff I would buy a really small car, I bought my Renault Kangoo (1,5 liter Diesel) because it is almost as cheap to drive and holds a lot of stuff and I can camp in it if I need to.
You are not interpreting the rollover data correctly. Yes passenger cars have more fatalities due to rollovers, but that is a count, not a rate.
I talked about rate and that SUVs were higher. So you're not reading what I posted at all.
On top of that, I was responding to someone who said they had never seen a CAR roll over and was inferring that they didn't. Which is factually incorrect. More cars roll over every year than SUVs. PERIOD.
Simply put, regardless of what kind of car/truck/SUV you are in, less than .0001% of them roll over. So it's all a scare tactic that is hyped way beyond any sort of reality.
I talked about rate and that SUVs were higher. So you're not reading what I posted at all.
On top of that, I was responding to someone who said they had never seen a CAR roll over and was inferring that they didn't. Which is factually incorrect. More cars roll over every year than SUVs. PERIOD.
Simply put, regardless of what kind of car/truck/SUV you are in, less than .0001% of them roll over. So it's all a scare tactic that is hyped way beyond any sort of reality.
The speaker/writer implies. The listener/reader infers. Just an FYI.
The poster did say he had never seen a car rollover. That may be true.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
