SUV's

A number of auto reviewers noted that the standard tires on the Echo were too narrow. My friend
simply upgraded them with good results. .

"Carl Sundquist" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Brian Lafferty" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

106,000 on a KIA must be a record of some sort. A friend of mine just bought an Echo--he tells
me that if you put on a slighly wider set of

tires

Quoted message said:

the milage gets even better along with the handling.

Brian

If he just bought it, why is he already putting wider tires on it? Is he

in

Quoted message said:

high school?

"Kiem Madvanen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Danny Callen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I now drive an Acura MDX which gets 25 MPG and is an "Ultra Low Emission Vehicle".

17/23 MPG EPA (from Acura web site)

I have yet to meet an SUV owner who doesn't overstate MPG.

Zub

Would you like to try to explain how those numbers are calculated and maybe give us all a class on
statistics? I assume the statiscal yield for the Acura MDX gives an average of 23/17 as listed on
the specs and stricker. However, I can get 23 MPG on the interstate at 85 MPH. I average about 22
combined including stop and go traffic, city driving, and highway. How do I know? I have an on board
computer which calculates the MPG and have checked it more than once with hand calculations. My wife
has a Mini Van and I blow her away on MPG. It's called an excellent design.

The bottom line is that the article is written by an ignorant liberal who has an agenda. (No I'm not
saying all liberals are ignorant). People who buy into emotional feelings by those that manipulate
data to drive a cause are ignorant of the real facts. If you care to be one of the manipulated,
enjoy. I will continue to use fact in my decsions.

BTW, I can't help that there are a large majority of SUV's in the US. It's called "choice". I chose
to spend the extra $$ to get an SUV that has incredible specifications including MPG. Your beat up
old untuned jalopy has a much greater environmental impact than my clean running SUV. When the
statistical numbers are high (ie: large number of SUV's on the road), the attention by those
against them is drawn. The large numbers of SUVs sold in the US also disproves the idiotic article.
I guess a large percentage of Americans are just as the article states. It makes no sense folks..

Danny Callen

"Ken Papai" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<h6pT9.3689$%n.603@sccrnsc02>...

Quoted message said:

Like my current '84 Jetta with roof racks already been ripped off by a low motel overhang after a
mind-numbing personal finish at Pine Flats RR.

This seems to be a recurring theme and I've had my run-in with a low hanging garage and a roof rack.
I came to a stop and sneezed. took my foot off f the brake and coasted into the overhang at 1 mph.
$2K damage to the bike, rack and BMW that belonged to someone else.

I noticed that the pros are a bit smarter. They seem to have these racks that are fork-lock racks
but mount on the trunk instead of the roof. I can't figure out why no one is making these things for
the unwashed masses. One I saw easily carried three bikes though you had to put the front wheels in
the trunk.

In article <[email hidden]>, Howard Kveck

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden]

(McCoughan) said:

lol.. "www.trafficshool.com" - I'm sure I'll be there soon enough!

I understand his feeling - I became really interested in a WRX after driving in a friends. I was
amazed when I switched to the sporty WRX from a Nissan Pathfinder- I actually enjoy driving now.
While I dont drive too dangerously, its great to drive a responsive and fast car..

I've really gotten into my subaru - I've turned into a bit of a WRC rally geek now!! I wont
stray from the thread too much, but you may like these: wrc.comwrc.comOpen ↗
rally.racing-live.comenOpen ↗ i-club.comi-club.comOpen ↗

A friend told me that there are versions of the WRX in Japan that have different engines and
transmissions, which are far more sport oriented than the ones we can get in the USA. He knows
someone in Milpitas, Calif. who could get one of the engine/tranny sets for him...

Sounds like he is referring to the "276 hp" (probably a deceptively _low_ rating) STi (not STI)
version of the WRX. STi is Subaru's equivalent of Honda's "Type-R" or Nissan's "Nismo" division.

Make mine a 4-door wagon, all the better to sneak around with.

Everything I needed to know I learned from Gran Turismo,

--
Ryan Cousineau, [email hidden] sfu.ca~rcousineOpen ↗ President, Fabrizio Mazzoleni Fan Club

Hi, Howard. Check out the January, 2003 issue of Road & Track, page 80.

Howard Kveck said:

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden]

(McCoughan) said:

lol.. "www.trafficshool.com" - I'm sure I'll be there soon enough!

I understand his feeling - I became really interested in a WRX after driving in a friends. I was
amazed when I switched to the sporty WRX from a Nissan Pathfinder- I actually enjoy driving now.
While I dont drive too dangerously, its great to drive a responsive and fast car..

I've really gotten into my subaru - I've turned into a bit of a WRC rally geek now!! I wont stray
from the thread too much, but you may like these: wrc.comwrc.comOpen ↗
rally.racing-live.comenOpen ↗ i-club.comi-club.comOpen ↗

A friend told me that there are versions of the WRX in Japan that have different engines and
transmissions, which are far more sport oriented than the ones we can get in the USA. He knows
someone in Milpitas, Calif. who could get one of the engine/tranny sets for him...

"Ken Papai" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:h6pT9.3689$%n.603@sccrnsc02...

Quoted message said:

"Bob Schwartz" <[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Adam Hodges Myerson said:

It died at 106,000 miles. Overheated, blown engine. We just got a Toyota Echo, so now I can be
really self-righteous. (I do still have the '84

diesel

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Merc.)

First off, I have to complement the original poster on an exceptional troll. Well done!!

A friend in the auto industry once told me that the environmentally responsible thing to do with
respect to cars was to drive whatever you had into the ground rather than create the demand for
another

Like my current '84 Jetta with roof racks already been ripped off by a low motel overhang after a
mind-numbing personal finish at Pine Flats RR.

192,000 miles (192K!) and still 30 miles/gallon.

I just laid my 1991 Mazda 323 Hatchback to rest after 203,400 miles with a blown head gasket. still
got over 30 miles to the gallon with a 4 carrier bike rack on top. Dave

Danny Callen said:

Would you like to try to explain how those numbers are calculated and maybe give us all a class on
statistics? I assume the statiscal yield for the Acura MDX gives an average of 23/17 as listed on
the specs and stricker. However, I can get 23 MPG on the interstate at 85 MPH. I average about 22
combined including stop and go traffic, city driving, and highway. How do I know? I have an on
board computer which calculates the MPG and have checked it more than once with hand calculations.
My wife has a Mini Van and I blow her away on MPG. It's called an excellent design.

Sure, I believe you as much as I believe your perceived "need" to drive an SUV.

Quoted message said:

The bottom line is that the article is written by an ignorant liberal who has an agenda.

Seemed to me to be a fairly accurate picture of 99% of SUV buyers, liberal author or not.

Quoted message said:

BTW, I can't help that there are a large majority of SUV's in the US. It's called "choice". I
chose to spend the extra $$ to get an SUV that has incredible specifications including MPG. Your
beat up old untuned jalopy has a much greater environmental impact than my clean running SUV.

That's pretty lame resorting to the old "Your beat up old untuned jalopy has a much greater
environmental impact than my clean running SUV" argument. How do you know he drives a jalopy?

Quoted message said:

When the statistical numbers are high (ie: large number of SUV's on the road), the attention by
those against them is drawn. The large numbers of SUVs sold in the US also disproves the idiotic
article.

No, it proves that most US citizens are slaves to the "keep up with the Joneses" marketing of SUVs,
and for that matter many other things.

Greg

--
"Destroy your safe and happy lives before it is too late, the battles we fought were long and hard,
just not to be consumed by rock n' roll..." - The Mekons

In article said:

"Kiem Madvanen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Danny Callen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I now drive an Acura MDX which gets 25 MPG and is an "Ultra Low Emission Vehicle".

17/23 MPG EPA (from Acura web site)

I have yet to meet an SUV owner who doesn't overstate MPG.

Zub

Would you like to try to explain how those numbers are calculated and maybe give us all a class on
statistics? I assume the statiscal yield for the Acura MDX gives an average of 23/17 as listed on
the specs and stricker. However, I can get 23 MPG on the interstate at 85 MPH. I average about 22
combined including stop and go traffic, city driving, and highway. How do I know? I have an on
board computer which calculates the MPG and have checked it more than once with hand calculations.
My wife has a Mini Van and I blow her away on MPG. It's called an excellent design.

Your MDX may get fairly decent mileage, but the majority of SUVs really don't. Certainly the
Expeditions, HumVees and the rest like them don't. Hondas have always been pretty well thought
out and gotten good mileage.

Quoted message said:

The bottom line is that the article is written by an ignorant liberal who has an agenda. (No I'm
not saying all liberals are ignorant). People who buy into emotional feelings by those that
manipulate data to drive a cause are ignorant of the real facts. If you care to be one of the
manipulated, enjoy. I will continue to use fact in my decsions.

Isn't "marketing" another way of saying "manipulation of data"? There is a book out on this (the
SUV thing, that is), and the author got info from the NHTSB and various states. It showed that
they are not safer to themselves or other vehicles. There are more roll-overs (many from what
they called "tripping" - hitting a curb or bump while turning, resulting in the SUV going over),
and also a far higher percentage of serious neck injuries. A car being hit by a heavier and
generally higher SUV reieved much more damage than if it was hit by another car.

Quoted message said:

BTW, I can't help that there are a large majority of SUV's in the US. It's called "choice". I
chose to spend the extra $$ to get an SUV that has incredible specifications including MPG. Your
beat up old untuned jalopy has a much greater environmental impact than my clean running SUV.
When the statistical numbers are high (ie: large number of SUV's on the road), the attention by
those against them is drawn. The large numbers of SUVs sold in the US also disproves the idiotic
article. I guess a large percentage of Americans are just as the article states. It makes no
sense folks..

Danny Callen

The large numbers of SUVs sold in the US certainly says that the manufacturers have learned their
marketing lessons. Most of the mid-size and large SUVs are based on an existing truck platform.
They add $2000 to $2500 of extra bodywork and interior bits, generally spruce the thing up and
then they can sell them for $5000 to $10000 more than the original platform. GM and Ford do make
a lot of money on their SUVs because of this. So it is in their interest to push them in the
market. Your MDX is an exception to the general rule re: SUVs. But it's based, I believe, on the
Honda Odysey minivan.

That is all...

--
tanx, Howard

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, k?

For some people, quantity IS quality...

"Danny Callen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

"Kiem Madvanen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Danny Callen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I now drive an Acura MDX which gets 25 MPG and is an "Ultra Low Emission Vehicle".

17/23 MPG EPA (from Acura web site)

I have yet to meet an SUV owner who doesn't overstate MPG.

Zub

Would you like to try to explain how those numbers are calculated and maybe give us all a class on
statistics? I assume the statiscal yield for the Acura MDX gives an average of 23/17 as listed on
the specs and stricker. However, I can get 23 MPG on the interstate at 85 MPH. I average about 22
combined including stop and go traffic, city driving, and highway.

Isn't 25 greater than 23 or 22? A class in inequalities seems more appropriate.

Zub

Quoted message said:

This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand

this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--B_3125063173_4263175 Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit

On 1/10/03 12:58 PM, in article

Quoted post said:

"Ken Papai" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<h6pT9.3689$%n.603@sccrnsc02>...

Quoted message said:

Like my current '84 Jetta with roof racks already been ripped off by a low motel overhang after a
mind-numbing personal finish at Pine Flats RR.

This seems to be a recurring theme and I've had my run-in with a low hanging garage and a roof
rack. I came to a stop and sneezed. took my foot off f the brake and coasted into the overhang at
1 mph. $2K damage to the bike, rack and BMW that belonged to someone else.

I noticed that the pros are a bit smarter. They seem to have these racks that are fork-lock racks
but mount on the trunk instead of the roof.

That¹s for going through the drive-thru...................

I can't figure out why no one is making these things for the

Quoted message said:

unwashed masses. One I saw easily carried three bikes though you had to put the front wheels in
the trunk.

--B_3125063173_4263175 Content-type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding:
quoted-printable

<HTML> <HEAD> <TITLE>Re: SUV's</TITLE> </HEAD> <BODY> <FONT FACE=3D"Verdana">On 1/10/03 12:58
PM, in article 484e7721.0301101258.34= [email hidden], "Tom Kunich"
<[email hidden]&gt= ; wrote:<BR> <BR> <FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF">> "Ken
Papai" <[email hidden]> w= rote in message <BR> >
news:<h6pT9.3689$%n.603@sccrnsc02&gt;...<BR> </FONT><FONT COLOR=3D"#008000">>> <BR>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Like my current '84 Jetta with roof racks already been ripped off = by<BR> >> a

low motel overhang after a mind-numbing personal finish at Pine = Flats RR.<BR> </FONT><FONT
COLOR=3D"#0000FF">> <BR> > This seems to be a recurring theme and I've had my run-in
with a low<B=
R>

Quoted message said:

hanging garage and a roof rack. I came to a stop and sneezed. took my<=

BR>

Quoted message said:

foot off f the brake and coasted into the overhang at 1 mph. $2K<BR> > damage to the bike,

rack and BMW that belonged to someone else.<BR> > <BR> > I noticed that the pros are a bit
smarter. They seem to have these<BR> > racks that are fork-lock racks but mount on the trunk
instead of the<B=
R>

Quoted message said:

roof.<BR> </FONT><BR>

<H2>That’s for going through the drive-thru...................<BR> </H2><BR> <BR> <BR> <BR>
I can't figure out why no one is making these things for the<BR> <FONT
COLOR=3D"#0000FF">> unwashed masses. One I saw easily carried three = bikes though you
had<BR> > to put the front wheels in the trunk.<BR> </FONT></FONT> </BODY> </HTML>

--B_3125063173_4263175--

Here in the south, Volvos are up there with pickups on the public enemy list. I am not making this
up: Volvo drivers are among the most bike-hating people around. SUV's are in the middle somewhere.
But, SUV's and their drivers do suck, and they speed everywhere, and they do try to intimidate other
drivers. These observations are based on my 45,000 miles per year of driving (part of my job). I
have non-racing friends who have: an Excursion (Earth Destroyer 2000, according to a hilarious MadTV
skit), a Denali, a Suburban, and a bunch of rollover specials (aka Explorers). My brother has the
biggest suburban model, with a the huge Diesel. All of these people meet the stereotype
descriptions. Two of my racing friends driver the monsters (Expedition, and ford F250 X cab with 5.4
L V8), though. They bought em to haul all their bike stuff. Being Masters racers, they take a dozen
wheels and two bikes a piece to our weekend wars. Greg Miller Driver of Dodge Gr Caravan, gets 20-25
MPG, and company car, gets 30 mpg

Quoted message said:

What a bunch of total [censored]. What has this got to do with Bike Racing?

Danny Callen

Hmmm...The article had plenty of stats. that were probably right on. The auto industry loves these
"it's all about me" pea brains who buy these SUVs...I especially love the Hummer commercials. People
actually fall for that [censored].

If you can't see what this has to do with bike racing or at least riding in general, maybe you
better step away from the tube and brush up a little on independent thinking...cheers

Just some more info on who I support:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Every time you fill up the car, you can avoid

putting more money into

Quoted message said:

the coffers of Saudi Arabia. Just buy from gas

companies that don't import

Quoted message said:

their oil from the Saudis. Nothing is more

frustrating than the feeling

Quoted message said:

that every time I fill-up the tank, I am sending my

money to people who

Quoted message said:

are trying to kill me, my family, and my friends. I

thought it might be

Quoted message said:

interesting for you to know which oil companies are

the best to buy gas

Quoted message said:

from.

Major companies that import Middle Eastern oil (f

or the period 9/1/00 -

8/31/01).

Shell................ 205,742,000 barrels

Chevron/Texaco....... 144,332,000 barrels

Exxon /Mobil......... 130,082,000 barrels

Marathon............. 117,740,000 barrels

Amoco................ 62,231,000 barrels

If you do the math at $30/barrel, these imports

amount to over $18

Quoted message said:

BILLION!

Here are some large companies that do not import

Middle Eastern oil:

Quoted message said:

Citgo 0 barrels

Sunoco 0 barrels

Conoco 0 barrels

Sinclair 0 barrels

BP/Phillips 0 barrels

Hess 0 barrels

All of this information is available from the

Department of Energy and

Quoted message said:

can be easily documented. Refineries located in the

U.S. are required to

Quoted message said:

state where they get their oil and how much they

are importing. They

Quoted message said:

report on a monthly basis.

Keep this list in your car; share it with friends.

Stop paying for

Quoted message said:

terrorism.............

But to have an impact.

we need to reach literally millions of gas buyers.

I buy my gas from Hess or BP

Bill C.

This is what we can do for Iraq too.

news.bbc.co.uk2448383.stmOpen ↗

Adam Hodges Myerson <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

when I finally get killed by a car on the road while I'm riding (and I'm quite certain it's
inevitable) it'll probably be by someone in an SUV. Adam

Jazzy, First let me say I hope that never happens to you, but lets be realistic, the likleyhood that
you'd total the car over the car totaling you is probably very good. I base this solely on the
amount of "hardware" you've had "installed" over the years. you're body probably has more metal than
the SUV. FOCKER

We Canadians (aka Mexicans in snowsuits) do not pay $1.35/ gallon. We pay $2/gallon. Therefore,
doing the math, you'll see that I get about 28 mpg. Combine that with my inconsequential 5000
k/year, and I consider my impact on the environment to be significantly less negative than that of
the typical North American.

--
--------------------------
Andre Charlebois BPE, MCSE4.0, CNA, A+ webmaster for Triathlon New Brunswick www.TriNB.com "G.T."
<[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Boyd Speerschneider said:

600k * 0.6mile/k / $25 * $1.35 / gallon = 19.44miles per gallon.

Exactly how is this an improvement over and SUV?

None over DC's Acura MDX. But twice that of the behemoths that get 8 to

10

Quoted message said:

mpg.

But my Escort got much better gas mileage than that. I don't know if there's a typo below but if
there isn't Andre should be taking his Escort in to see what the problem is.

Greg

Quoted message said:

"Andre Charlebois" <[email hidden]> wrote in
:"]news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

Here's my way to defy this bleak SUV trend: 5000 k / year driving, mainly to races; highway
driving - ford escort wagon $25 USD / 600 k at 90 kmh. 1997 model, with 40000 k on it. 20000 k /
year riding, with about 5000 k commuting

If more North Americans would follow this example, then we would have a very different society
than the sorry excuse of one that we have now.

--
"Destroy your safe and happy lives before it is too late, the battles we fought were long and
hard, just not to be consumed by rock n' roll..." - The Mekons

Andre Charlebois said:

We Canadians (aka Mexicans in snowsuits) do not pay $1.35/ gallon. We pay $2/gallon. Therefore,
doing the math, you'll see that I get about 28 mpg. Combine that with my inconsequential 5000
k/year, and I consider my impact on the environment to be significantly less negative than that of
the typical North American.

I consider my impact to be positive. If you feel all negative and stuff, you can just....
Well, you know.

"Top Sirloin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I'd buy an SUV if they were lower and met passenger car safety standards.

Too

Quoted message said:

bad Buick discontinued the Roadmaster wagon.

Funny, my sister sold hers to buy an Explorer. She still laments the switch...

...especially this week after suffering whiplash from being rear ended, in a vehicle that lacks
simple, impact-absorbing bumpers. All cars sold in the US have had these since the mid-70s, and
AFAIK, SUVs are still not required to.

Matt O.

Matt O'Toole said:

"Top Sirloin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I'd buy an SUV if they were lower and met passenger car safety standards.

Too

Quoted message said:

bad Buick discontinued the Roadmaster wagon.

Funny, my sister sold hers to buy an Explorer. She still laments the switch...

I always thought they were a little big until I had kids. :-) Now I want a Roadmaster sized
Subaru Legacy.

Quoted message said:

...especially this week after suffering whiplash from being rear ended, in a vehicle that lacks
simple, impact-absorbing bumpers. All cars sold in the US have had these since the mid-70s, and
AFAIK, SUVs are still not required to.

Another example.

-Scott Johnson "There is nothing, I think, more unfortunate than to have soft, chubby, fat-looking
children who go to watch their school play basketball every Saturday and regard that as their week's
exercise."
- John F. Kennedy, 1962

Nope, starting in June, the US (!) gets the best WRXs. 2.5L, 300 hp, 300 lb/ft, and it looks like
the WRC, save the dual cowled hood.

Click on "STI" at impreza.subaru.comimpreza.subaru.comOpen ↗

The US will receive the fastest production WRXs ever, and Japan will still be driving around the
2.0L versions. Weird, but for once, the US gets the good stuff.

They just need to tweak that torque figure up to 500 or so to match the WRC 🙂

-60 in the low 3s would be pretty nice.

I'm thinking this STI will break the 5 second barrier anyway. Who knows what will happen when you
chip it...

Anyhoo, this is an obvious pre-emptive strike at the Mitsu Evo VIII coming soon. The Japanese
version of that will be 320hp, but the US version is slated to be "only" 280hp. So, it will be less
comfortable, harder to drive, slower, and it's been beat with an ugly stick (not that the WRX is the
prettiest car around -- see the Z for that). I think Subaru will win this round.

I still can't wait to see what Toyota gives us for the next-gen Supra. I have a friend with a '97
putting 430hp TO THE GROUND (dyno'd). The Engine is probably near 500hp. He's about to replace
his twin turbos with one big monster, and he should have 650hp. Holy [censored] that car is tunable --
and he can drive it daily. His mechanic's Supra ("S.W." in Austin) pulls 9.28 in the quarter, and
it's a totally streetable car, and the (102,000 mile) engine's never been cracked open. All this
for < $40K.

It amazes me that anyone buys domestic cars.

-Mike

Dan Spisak <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Hi, Howard. Check out the January, 2003 issue of Road & Track, page 80.

Howard Kveck said:

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (McCoughan)

Quoted message said:

lol.. "www.trafficshool.com" - I'm sure I'll be there soon enough!

I understand his feeling - I became really interested in a WRX after driving in a friends. I was
amazed when I switched to the sporty WRX from a Nissan Pathfinder- I actually enjoy driving now.
While I dont drive too dangerously, its great to drive a responsive and fast car..

I've really gotten into my subaru - I've turned into a bit of a WRC rally geek now!! I wont
stray from the thread too much, but you may like these: wrc.comwrc.comOpen ↗
rally.racing-live.comenOpen ↗ i-club.comi-club.comOpen ↗

A friend told me that there are versions of the WRX in Japan that have different engines and
transmissions, which are far more sport oriented than the ones we can get in the USA. He knows
someone in Milpitas, Calif. who could get one of the engine/tranny sets for him...