I'm just gonna go ahead and say that it doesn't work very well at all. It pretty much says that the fleet average for all car manufacturers must be 35mpg. Translation: you can still have big SUVs and trucks, but you will also need to build little fuel efficient cars to offset their horrible fuel economy. The bill doesn't even state that customers have to buy any set number of the econoboxes for it to be considered a part of the fleet average. The car's on the roster, it gets great mileage, but few people buy it, unless they're self-conscious about the environment and feel they must do something to make it better. But hey! It's still on the roster, so it counts, regardless of how many people actually buy it! Whoooo!!!
The greenies will still buy their fuel sippers. The majority of the public will still buy their SUVs and Pickups that they don't need (over 52% of the vehicles on our roads today are SUVs and Pickups, wtf?!?!).
Personally, I think some better solutions would be to raise gas prices to $5-$6 dollars a gallon, or have large pick-ups get licensed as only for commercial use. But that's just me. What do you think of it?
they have a purpose but are rarely used for that purpose...purpose not being 'safety' which is bullshit anyway since trucks and suv's flip/roll far more frequently than cars. you dont need a pickup to commute to an office job or an suv because you might have to drive in the snow like 4 times a year.
__________________
"Sell crazy someplace else. We're all stocked up here."
yes i thought i clearly implied that in my o.p.
the point was that most people driving pickups are not hauling lumber, dirt, tools, parts, or anything else which requires a flatbed. in fact most seem to have brand spankin new pickups without so much as a blemish on the bed, which seems pretty ghey and poser-ish to me
__________________
"Sell crazy someplace else. We're all stocked up here."
Concerning the idea of pick-ups being commercialized, you could rent one from a Uhaul or something similar. Or you can buy one if your job requires it. Pick-ups and SUVs aren't a necessity for at least 98% (statistic pulled from my ass) of the people that own them.
Prime example: A guy living in a condo in the city, works at a law firm, but drives a Ford F-450 King Ranch edition.
__________________
Designed by Germans, and driven by tosses.
Last edited by AngryManatee on Mar 25th, 2008 at 10:47 PM
Fuel will be $5.00 in the near future, so it's a moot point. But the price of fuel does directly translate to better mileage cars. If people can't afford to drive 12-15mpg 3 ton SUVs, the car manufacturers won't make them.
Licensing pickups for only certain duties is undemocratic, if some tool whats a Ford F250, just so he can lower it and put on 22's, as to look 'bling" while getting shitty mpg, then he should have the right to do so.
__________________ "The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents. We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity; and it was not meant that we should voyage far." -CoC
I have to agree there, especially with the H2 & H3. The military hummer, does/can serve a purpose, but I don't thing a large number of the people who own them go wading through 5 feet of mud.
The H2 & H3 serve no purpose, besides the "look, I have a wannabe military vehicle". Sit inside either of those, they barely sit 4 people; yet they're some of the largest most fuel-sucking shitboxes on the road.
__________________ "The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents. We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity; and it was not meant that we should voyage far." -CoC
KMC Community Forums
Mar 25th, 2008 10:24 PM
