Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Wagons Station Wagon vs SUV
1426 messages, Last post on Feb 21, 2007 at 8:37 AM
You are in the Wagons Forum. Your Host is kcram
|
boaz47 writes "and then we could tell who the very wealthy were every day. All the managers and bosses would drive big cars to work and the employees could drive Kia Reos. Cold I know, but that is just how things are. We could develop a cast system that makes India look like a democracy." A token sense of social responsibility among millions of gas-guzzler buyers would, of course, make these sorts of horrific (in your view) outcomes utterly unnecessary." "People will work two jobs and decide not to have kids simply to afford what they want in life, be that a big car or a big house." Let me get this straight: You think smaller families, or even <gasp> more people choosing to be childless, is a terrible thing? Spare me the 'it's my god-given right to consume conspicuously, no matter what I want and no matter how grave the consequence' rhetoric. It's folks with that mindset who will accelerate the scenario you just described. Time to move into the 21st century. - jack |
|
|
nippononly says, "I love your gas pricing scheme! That is just like how the electric company charges for excessive use." That pricing model will (and should!)increasingly become reality, for more and more commodities that are derived from nonrenewable resources. There are altogether too many neanderthals who blindly refuse to recognize that times, and resource availabilities, are changing. All too often, the attitude is "it's a free country, so I demand my right to buy anything I want, no matter how extravagantly I might waste finite resources - I can afford it, so nothing else matters. Least of all the negative impacts my profligate consumption has on others." It is precisely that obnoxious, unbridled, hedonistic attitude - not my objection to it - that will bring down upon all of us the exact kind of heavy-handed governmental restraints on our freedoms that so horrify the consumption-uber-alles crowd. - jack |
|
|
right ballistic. You and I both know that people buy what they can afford, period. You have indicated a desire for a Audi RS-6. What 450 horses with a fuel rating somewhat less than many SUVs or at best on par with them? Morals strike both ways. Americans get the house, car, whatever based on what they feel they can afford. You may have pointed out already, or someone has, that SUVs and light trucks, represent 50 percent of the vehicles that sold last year. For the sake of Nippon we can include Crossovers. Now living where we do tell me how you expect to change the american buying habits? Do you believe appealing to them to accept someone elses moral judgment will have one slight effect on what they want of feel they need? I like your idealism even if from a realistic point of view I know it won't happen. Maybe I have been around long enough to know that we as a society aren't willing to give up what we can afford as long as we can afford it. Poll your friends and see how many would vote to charge themselves more so someone else can have what they want. People just aren't that way. I can commute to work in my wife's car and get an average of 33 MPG. With that I would still need way more than 400 gallons a year. If I could afford it would I still live far enough away from the big city and pay $2000.00 a year? Yes I am afraid I would. Do I see any moral implication in that? Sorry, I don't and I doubt the majority of my fellow drivers will either, does anyone? |
|
|
Why not just import the dual-range tranny, through some 3rd party? Bob |
|
|
boaz47 says "You and I both know that people buy what they can afford, period. Americans get the house, car, whatever based on what they feel they can afford." Or, more often, how much they can borrow, often on 19% plastic, just to keep feeding that good ol' overconsumption frenzy. Delayed gratification? What's that? Why wait until tomorrow (when I might have actually saved enough to buy a sensible vehicle outright) when I can borrow enough for an Expedition or Escalade today? Won't it be grand, driving along (by myself) in it, or maybe with the wife and two kids rattling around in all nine seats, flaunting our freedom to behave irresponsibly. $40 to fill the tank? No problemo. Just pull out the plastic again. Smog makes sunsets look better anyhow - right? If OPEC tightens the screws again, or I get in over my head, I'll just let the bankruptcy court tell my creditors where to go, and then start the whole process all over again. "You may have pointed out already, or someone has, that SUVs and light trucks, represent 50 percent of the vehicles that sold last year." Thank you for making my point better than I could ever have done. "Now living where we do tell me how you expect to change the american buying habits?" It begins with better education . It includes, if necessary, ostracizing those stubborn recalcitrants who refuse to get the message that free markets depend for their very existence on some minimal degree of responsible decision-making on the part of consumers. It ends, if large enough numbers of people continue to flagrantly disregard what should be obvious, with government-mandated incremental pricing for most resource-based commodities. Prices will no longer rise linearly with the amount you want, but rather rise exponentially. You want a McMansion or Escalade or 80' Cigarette boat? Go right ahead. Use ten times more gasoline or electricity or heating oil than your neighbor, pay 100 times as much. If you don't like that differential, change your behavior. If you refuse to change your wastrel ways, pay the piper. "Maybe I have been around long enough to know that we as a society aren't willing to give up what we can afford as long as we can afford it." The ominous writing on the wall is plainly visible, but apparently only to those who're willing to open their eyes and exercise a little self-restraint. Unfortunately, a not-so-distant future of real deprivation (or draconian restrictions on freedom, or both) will be brought on much faster - for all of us - by the thoughtless, selfish, ego-stroking excesses of those who cannot be persuaded to voluntarily moderate their wasteful ways. Escalades, Expeditions, H2 Hummers and Suburbans (and S-Class Mercedes and other over-5,000-pound gargantuan gashogs), being bought maily for daily commutes by millions of faddish lemmings, simply happen to be the to be the clearest evidence of a grotesque, unsustainable binge. It's time to go on the wagon. - jack Those of us who |
|
|
Bob suggests, "Why not just import the dual-range tranny, through some 3rd party?" I'd think it would be pretty expensive on a onsies-twosies basis. Plus, somebody with expertise needs to discover whether it'll install onto the U.S. versions, and what peripheral components need to be replaced. Not an easy thing for any individual owner, but perhaps do-able by a Subaru specialty shop someplace. - jack |
|
|
because the dual range Subaru tranny does not have a separate transfer case, as we know it. It's all in the main tranny, with no add-ons. I would think that's simpler and easier than to develop, engineer and manufacture a separate transfer case to add to the existing transmission. If you're talking about an automatic, then that's what you would have to do, as Subaru only offers the dual range tranny in a 5-speed manual. Bob |
|
|
Whoa, guys, go drive an XT. I drove one yesterday, and then a Saturn V6 back-to-back. I was actually looking for a Redline, but the dealer said they won't be here until next spring. The regular Forester outran a V6 XTerra and V6 Grand Vitara. V6 Santa Fe, too. Check C&D's last cute-ute test. The XT will outrun the Pathfinder easily. Torque is about the same, but you've got about half a ton less mass to haul in the Subie. In fact I'd say the XT was as quick as the Altima 3.5 SE 5 speed I drove a while ago. The Vue felt downright sloth-like after the Forester, and yes it was the V6. Noisier and less smooth, too. The XT that fast. Felt like maybe 0-60 in the 6s. Low 6s. If Subaru puts the premium package option on a 5 speed, I'm buying one. And BTW, the no-haggle price with a few options was just $23.9k, freight included. -juice |
|
|
Once again, where would that leave your dream car, the Rs6? Nice idealism by the way but in reality who decides what is wasteful? I did like the statement,: "It begins with better education . It includes, if necessary, ostracizing those stubborn recalcitrants who refuse to get the message that free markets depend for their very existence on some minimal degree of responsible decision-making on the part of consumers." I just tried to ask myself when the last time I saw the minority ostracizing the majority? I can't remember the last time the majority voted for someone that promised to tax, punish or ostracize them. Maybe I just happen to believe that long before they run out of oil they will develop another fuel source. I don't live that far from San Onofre power plant and I do believe their fuel source used to produce electricity has a useful half life of several hundreds of thousands of years. Not that I want the fuel source under my hood. I am not sure how that relates to wagons verses SUVs however? Credit cards, large families, bankrupcy? Is there a reason to assume that more SUV drivers are facing bankruptcy than wagon drivers? Will both our fuel usage and fiscal responsibility improve if we all decided to switch to wagons? Once the vehicle police re-educate us where and who will draw the line? Someone from the Hybrid forum maybe. They could assess our needs at nothing more than a Prius. I am sure they would be as equally passionate about what they felt was a responsible need. I hear your frustration but somehow it seems misdirected. The conditions of our society make it possible for us to strive for more. As long as those conditions stay the same then people will look at their wants and see what they can afford. Will some go bankrupt? Yes I am sure they will. Many large corporations with whole staffs of CPAs have gone bankrupt even with the best of advice. Do we make bad decisions on what we drive? Yes again but that is what makes this society so much more fun than so many others, we are free to make our own mistakes. for now at least I don't see the SUV drivers being ostracized by the wagon or Hybrid drivers. after all even if they were, who would notice? |
|
|
Boaz47 replies, "Once again, where would that leave your dream car, the Rs6?" It leaves it exactly where it belongs - as a dream, not a reality. I could readily afford to buy an RS6 today, but I don't. Other, far less costly vehicles (like the practical, multi-talented Forester XT I'll bring home next week) meet all of my transportation requirements without consuming so much fuel and without requiring me to invest so large a sum in a mere car, even if it is a magnificent one. "Maybe I just happen to believe that long before they run out of oil they will develop another fuel source." Well, then, you and I share an abiding faith in the ability of human ingenuity and technology to find solutions to major problems - but who knows how long that will take, and how much oil will remain? Oil has value and usefulness to all of us far beyond merely burning it for energy: Fertilizers, chemicals, plastics, pharmaceuticals, lubricants - the list goes on. What we burn, we cannot use - now or ever - for any of these other competing uses. Why doesn't it make sense for each of us to burn as little as necessary to get our basic energy needs met, and conserve more of this precious, non-renewable resource for all of these other important uses and others we haven't even yet discovered? And if that doesn't resonate with you, why doesn't it make sense for more people to carefully and deliberately choose NOT the largest, heaviest vehicle they can afford, but rather the most fuel-efficient vehicle that can still readily meet all of their actual transportation requirements? I am not suggesting that every single purchase of every gas-guzzling, CAFE-exempt SUV is unwarranted by that particular buyer's actual, demonstrable transportation requirements - but it seems to me that an awfully lot of them are. "I wouldn't be caught dead in a (take your choice: hatchback, minivan, wagon - practical vehicles all), so instead I'll go with the fad and go in hock to buy a 6- or 7,000 pound Expedition for my family of 3 or 4 that will never tow anything big and will never venture farther off-road than the nearest gas pump." These are the people who are going to wreck things for all of us, and you know as well as I do that there are plenty of them. Buying what you want with zero concern for adverse social impactson others, merely because you can or because your neighbor just did, is no excuse for buying more than you actually, reasonably need. - jack |
|
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
