Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Automotive
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 01-04-2018, 10:31 AM
 
Location: Ruidoso, NM
5,667 posts, read 6,594,347 times
Reputation: 4817

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nlambert View Post
Completely untrue. You'll need to back this up with statistical data instead of trying to use a scare tactic to convince someone that they're more dangerous than a car.
Physics.

Plus they are way more dangerous to occupants of a car in a collision.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-04-2018, 10:39 AM
 
Location: Ruidoso, NM
5,667 posts, read 6,594,347 times
Reputation: 4817
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nlambert View Post
Then those "some people" can drive whatever they choose. But trying to dictate that everyone should be forced to drive them is asinine.
These large vehicles are a danger to everyone on the road. Plus we all pay for roads, parking lots, and infrastructure designed for vehicles that are 10x as big as they need to be. What you "want" to commute in has an effect on everyone else.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2018, 11:16 AM
 
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,576 posts, read 81,167,557 times
Reputation: 57808
Quote:
Originally Posted by rruff View Post
Physics.

Plus they are way more dangerous to occupants of a car in a collision.

2018 Ford F-150


2017 Nissan Leaf

2017 Fiat 500
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2018, 11:40 AM
 
Location: Ruidoso, NM
5,667 posts, read 6,594,347 times
Reputation: 4817
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hemlock140 View Post
Nothing there about rollover or danger to other vehicles.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2018, 11:43 AM
 
1,380 posts, read 1,449,830 times
Reputation: 3471
Quote:
Originally Posted by rruff View Post
Believe it or not, some people feel that gratuitously increasing pollution and CO2 are environmentally irresponsible. Even if you don't care about that, higher consumption of resources that we import has a negative effect on the domestic economy.



Who said they get a pass? If you have a tall vehicle your visibility improves only until everyone else follows suit. Then I guess it's time to go even higher...



If you park places that accommodate large vehicles, then that is good for you. But in some areas space is at a high premium. Look at it this way, if people drove small cars, they could put a lot more of them in a lot, or make the lots smaller.



The 500 lb vehicle would be a good size for hauling a person around, and they'd take up a lot less space on the road and in the parking lot. They would be safe as well if the other vehicles on the road were the same size. Oversized vehicles are a danger to others.

I didn't say anything at all about new trucks being too big as trucks... except for the gratuitous height, which is done for style rather than function.

They are incredibly oversized however for 90% of what they are used for, which is
Quote:
hauling one person around.
If you occasionally need to haul stuff, then getting a trailer to pull behind your car (even a little economy car) will have a lot more utility and a higher payload than a 1/2 ton truck.

I own a double cab long bed Tundra BTW, which I bought because I needed a large truck. I also have a '86 truck. I would have preferred a bit larger version of that, but nothing similar exists. The Tundra is literally 2x the weight and 3x the horsepower, yet has a smaller payload. Does that seem crazy? The only utility the new trucks are made for is pulling trailers. But I'm sure the Tundra will be fine hauling more than it's designed for once I beef up the suspension. Hopefully the axle bearings will survive.

My biggest annoyance is the height. If it's going to be tall, I want good ground clearance at least! To get good ground clearance I need bigger tires and a lift, which makes the cab and bed silly-high. It's done for style. Sitting up high makes people feel "bigger" I guess. Bigger is better...

Not that long ago trucks were designed for work, with fancy options added for the luxury models. Now they are fancy metro-sexual big macho cowboy wannabe commuting rigs, with a few stripped down models offered for the few who actually want trucks.
On my way to work this morning I observed that many smaller cars: sedans, hatches, econoboxes etc. are designed to carry 4 to 5 people plus cargo in the trunk or hatch. Yet, almost 100% had only one person in them (the driver) and I'm almost positive their trunk / hatch wasn't full of stuff. So, I guess they are oversized for what they are used for, which is hauling one person around. Should we all switch to one-seat vehicles?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2018, 11:56 AM
 
Location: Ruidoso, NM
5,667 posts, read 6,594,347 times
Reputation: 4817
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtt99 View Post
Should we all switch to one-seat vehicles?
A tandem 2 seater would probably make the most sense for light weight, aerodynamics, and space utilization.

Your observation that even the smallest cars we currently have available are usually way underutilized, makes 6000 lb vehicles with one person in them look particularly silly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2018, 12:06 PM
 
29,483 posts, read 14,643,964 times
Reputation: 14443
Quote:
Originally Posted by rruff View Post
I can think of a few reasons. Fuel waste, reduces visibility for everyone else, takes up too much space, is a danger to other vehicles in a collision.

It *is* patently silly how big vehicles have become, which nominally carry a payload of 1 person. We *could* build reasonably comfortable vehicles for that purpose that weigh 500 lbs and get >200 mpge.



I'm doubtful that a top luxury car is the correct vehicle to compare to any pickup. What tech/comfort features does the F150 Platinum have that would be in excess of the Avalon? I know the Tundra Platinum doesn't have anything on the Avalon.

Fuel waste ? My old 140k mile 2500 Ram gets 22-23mpg in the summer on the freeway, and 17-18mpg in the winter. The new trucks are even better.


That mileage is probably better than whatever car I would have if I didn't have a truck, most likely a CTS-V, Camaro or SRT8 Challenger.


As far as visibility... I don't pick vehicles to help others to drive.


I do agree, prices have gotten crazy. $60k plus to replace my truck, and what I would much rather have ...an SUV is closer to $80k.
I think I missed the day they were giving Escalades , and Denali's away though. That seems to be all that I see around my area.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2018, 12:13 PM
 
Location: Hougary, Texberta
9,019 posts, read 14,289,364 times
Reputation: 11032
Quote:
Originally Posted by scarabchuck View Post
I think I missed the day they were giving Escalades , and Denali's away though. That seems to be all that I see around my area.
Wait for $4 gas. Everyone who floated a $90K nut to have an Escalade will be trying to decide between food and gas.


I remember when oil was up the last time, you could get an XLT Suburban for well under $40K new. There were so many of them sitting around aging out.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2018, 12:22 PM
 
1,380 posts, read 1,449,830 times
Reputation: 3471
Quote:
Originally Posted by rruff View Post
A tandem 2 seater would probably make the most sense for light weight, aerodynamics, and space utilization.

Your observation that even the smallest cars we currently have available are usually way underutilized, makes 6000 lb vehicles with one person in them look particularly silly.
I'm pretty sure even the two-seaters will be underutilized from my observations. Most days they will have only one person driving them and the second seat will be unoccupied. It makes a 500lb vehicle designed for two but carrying only one person look practically silly. I'm pushing for a 250lb one-seater.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2018, 12:26 PM
 
5,341 posts, read 14,139,506 times
Reputation: 4699
Quote:
Originally Posted by rruff View Post
A tandem 2 seater would probably make the most sense for light weight, aerodynamics, and space utilization.

Your observation that even the smallest cars we currently have available are usually way underutilized, makes 6000 lb vehicles with one person in them look particularly silly.
didn't you say that you own TWO PICK-UPS??
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Automotive
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:06 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top