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
Off Topic Chatter OTC - Discussion Suggestions
13 messages, Last post on May 14, 2008 at 9:45 AM
You are in the Off Topic Chatter Forum. Your Host is KarenS
|
I wonder whether anyone would like to speculate on whether today's heavier vehicles may be contributing to more rapid deterioration of bridges and highways. This article says: "... the average vehicle today simply weighs a lot more than it did then. In 1981, the average passenger vehicle weighed about 3,200 pounds. Today, thanks mostly to more SUVs and vans, the average vehicle weighs almost 4,100 pounds." Surely, the engineers who designed the I-35 bridge in Minneapolis didn't anticipate such a load. Each traversal of a bridge by any vehicle has a microscopic effect proportional to its weight but that gets multiplied by 1 to 2 BILLION crossings over 40 years!
|
|
|
Replying to: tidester (Aug 03, 2007 2:30 am) I think this topic is auto related enough to live in Automotive News.
|
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Aug 03, 2007 5:49 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: pf_flyer (Aug 03, 2007 9:10 am) Heavy SUVs and trucks are destroying our bridges I changed Tides' wording from vehicles to "SUVs and trucks." That should guarantee some posts right off the bat, lol, but I may have to go back and correct the title. |
|
|
Could you please open up a Best Movie Ever Discussion forum? My arch nemesis, Snakeweasel, and I are having a discussion that I must finish or else I'll go insane. I don't want to pollute the particular board that we are on, so please open this up for me. Thanks, Moo Edit: Or can I just have the discussion here? |
|
|
analysis even further...not only did the designers of 40 years ago not think of that many heavy trucks (some with double tandem trailers) and SUVs, they also never dreamed that the automobile population would grow like it has, so cities that had anticipated growth to, say, 3/4 million, have grown to 1-2 million, and suburbs that now exist were wide open farmland 40 years ago, so the congestion that they anticipated is probably less than 1/2 the congestion we have today... They also probably never dreamed of rush hour lasting 2-3 hours, so all those heavy vehicles are sitting on the bridge for many minutes, more than they would if traffic flowed at 35 mph... Basically, EVERYTHING they planned on has increased beyond anything they could have imagined... And we wonder why they fall...heck, we ought to marvel at the fact that they are still standing 40 years and 2 generations after they were built... |
|
i would agree that growth has some value in the bridge issue but if an elephant is a mouse built to government specs are we not just once agian paying to much for to little. it is my understanding that taxes on fuel are designated funds for maintenance of roads and BRIDGES be they state , local or federal. i am not saying blame the government but for 80,000 a year that inspector better know his stuff. 
|
|
|
Not sure if this little board has passed away, but linked to all the political conversations...how about: What would your ideal 3rd party look like? Maybe a place for folks to go who aren't feeling good about the Democrats or the Republicans?
|
|
|
Replying to: bristol2 (May 13, 2008 11:57 am) |
|
You are here:
Forums
Off Topic Chatter OTC - Discussion Suggestions
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
