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
Automotive News & Views What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts?
8696 messages, Last post on Dec 08, 2009 at 8:52 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: oregonboy (Dec 04, 2007 1:43 pm)  However the same thing happened after the fuel scare in the 70s. The same thing happened when CAFE caused the big three to start making smaller lighter cars. Between you and me if I was ever in an accident between a Fit and a Suburban I would rather be in the Suburban with no special circumstances. There are just some laws of Physics that are hard to ignore. Yes, in single accident it more than likely doesn't make a big difference and maybe a heavy truck would even suffer more damage. But knowing a Fit would hit my door with his windshield in a side impact just feels safer than a Truck hitting the Fit with a bumper in the door handle. Shifty, after long thought about what you posted about brush guards I still believe I will be adding a steel reinforced brush guard to my next truck. I already will have a large box built step bumper and tow package in the back but I that some extra body armor is needed in the front. |
|
|
Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (Dec 04, 2007 9:25 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: colloquor (Dec 04, 2007 3:52 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: texases (Dec 04, 2007 3:57 pm) |
|
|
Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (Dec 04, 2007 9:25 am) Hell, by today's standards, a 1953 Chrysler probably IS an SUV! Sits high off the ground, with an upright seating position. And sometimes, when you go off-roading, don't those tall, skinny bias ply tires actually work in your favor? My Granddad's first "pickup truck" was similar...a 1940 or so Plymouth with the back half removed and a homemade bed built on. |
|
|
Replying to: boaz47 (Dec 04, 2007 5:03 pm)  I didn't have to drive the 4 lane and it seemed that most of the rollovers were on the highway. That excessive speed for conditions thing. Plenty of sedans drove the highway with the SUVs though, and they would just tend to just plow into a snowbank when they spun out. |
|
|
Replying to: boaz47 (Dec 04, 2007 5:03 pm) No choice, everyone. My GTI never got stuck in 12 years, except once (high centered).
|
|
|
Replying to: texases (Dec 04, 2007 5:42 pm) Yup, same here, and I've never owned a 4wd vehicle in my life. I think what might happen though is that people with 4wd vehicles get cocky, thinking they're indestructible, so they get up to higher speeds so that when they do wipe out, it's much more catastrophic. There's no limit to how dumbed-down the human species can get. Make the vehicles more capable, and we just keep finding ways to turn that around. I remember back in late 1999, a friend of mine called me during a snow storm. He had bought a 1995 Grand Marquis that summer, and this was his first time driving it in the snow, and it was acting funny. He wanted me to ride along with him and see if I could diagnose it. Well, it turns out this car had ABS, and perhaps traction control, too. And what he was doing is driving much faster than he should have been doing, practically sending the ABS into mental overload trying to keep him from wiping out! Before the Grand Marquis he'd had a 1977 Cordoba, a 1978 Newport, and a 1982 Cutlass Supreme sedan...cars that aren't exactly known for their prowess in snowy weather, but cars that, as long as you behave yourself, shouldn't get you in too much trouble. This was the first time he'd experienced ABS. And basically, since the car wasn't losing control (yet) he just pushed it harder. In late 2003, he got that same car stuck in the snow in my yard. And damned if, a couple years later he didn't do it again with his '04 Crown Vic...again, with ABS and traction control. Instead of improving the cars, they need to improve the nut behind the wheel! 
|
|
|
Sarcasm Warning. If you can afford to drive around in a Ford Expedition because you and your gallon of milk feel safer, so be it. And if you ram into some poor schmo and his kid who can only afford a Ford Focus and you kill them with your tank, too bad for them. That's what they get for being poor. The problem with big battle tanks on the road is the idiot behind the wheel that can barely walk and chew gum. Driving anything bigger than a Honda CRV should require a defensive driving course. Maybe small car deaths are due to being run over by idiots in land yachts rather than them being inherently unsafe. You can turn the argument around and say big SUV's are dangerous. |
|
|
Replying to: texases (Dec 04, 2007 3:57 pm) are amazing in the snow with their little sub-compacts. It's amazing Americans think their fat, lumbering SUV is somehow better on the snow than a lighter, smaller car. I guess we can convince ourselves of anything if we want it badly enough.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Nissan Versa
2010 Toyota Yaris
2010 Honda Fit
2009 smart fortwo
2010 MINI Cooper
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
