why people drive large vehicles.

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 7 2005 @ 10:57 PM
link   
this is one topic that has a habbit of comeing up within any discussion about oil and consevation as well as enviroment discussions. i feel that it is deserving of it's own discussion. that is suv's, trucks, and vans vs more efficiant, smaller vehicles. the idea is to take a look at the differances, uses and efficiancy between them.

the main point of contention about these bigger vehicles is both their lack of fuel efficiancy as well as their equil extent of createing more polutants. i will say that both are perfactly valid points. next we have a concrn about the safety of smaller vehicle when they collide with these more massive vehicles. also a somewhat valid point. then there is also the contention that many drive these bigger vehicles where a smaller vehicle would be fine. especialy when these bigger vehicles tend to contain only a driver, and are only seen to be used as "from point a to point b" driveing. well lets talk about some of the reasoning. i apologize ahead of time as this will be a rather long post to start.

first off lets talk a bit about how vehicles are designed and why. first off lets go back to the beginnings of the mainstay gas powered autos. well to begine with at one time autos were sold being just a frame and moter. the "coachwork" (body) was custum built for the requirements of the owner, to meet their spacific needs. then henry ford came along with the assembly line production. at this time and into the future cars and trucks were not much differant. both started with a basic frame to which everything was attached. the moter, drivetrain, body and cargo areas were all bolted onto these "full" frames. in this regaurd they were very simmiler to each other. this being true from a point safety and efficiancy/pollution they were all prety much the same. of note at this time the only real safety devices were breaking systoms. no lights except for oil lamps, no seatbelts or airbags. nothing. at one point runners were even required in many places to warn of the aproching vehicals. this was to be the same for many years with safety and emmisions equipment brought in along the way.

things devoloped over the years untill there was a growing differance between vehicle designs. trucks were built for hauling and general use, cars were made more comfortable and safe for the ocupants. the realy big differances started to come about around the early 70's. there was a fuel "shortage" (we all know now that this was a big pile of BS). suddenly fuel efficancy became something that was strived for. the japanese cars became sought ofter in north america as they tended to be more efficant that north american cars, not to mention cheeper. how was this achived? the cars were smaller and lighter therefore they used less fuel. as the weight that they needed to move was cut down. this started the way cars are designed today.

how other than size does one reduce weight? well as we are seeing today more and more you use lighter materials. even in cars that are built with metal the same sized car of today is continuasly getting lighter. one of the first things that was done was to get rid of that heavy full frame. this is the uni-body frame of today. before where the supporting structure was a frame underneith the car, today the stucture is provided by the body. this is why cars have becoime more suceptable to collisins "writeing off" the car. as well as car not "feeling"the same after an accident and going down the road at a bit of an angle. at one time if a car was put enough off true you could just install a new frame onto it. not so any more. now you straighten it as best you can or just "total" it. this has actualy made cars far more disposable then they were before. body panels and parts are easy to replace but the frame is the sticking point. also if you look under a convertable car you will see that they have had to add extra reinforcement as there is no body to take the stress, yes the roof of a modern car is very important to the structure of it.

now that the frame is gone what else lightens the car? well you just use thinner metals for body pannels or use things such as fiberglass or plastics to replace it. the thinness of the metals is evident just by pressing on it. to dent a 1970's car for example it takes quite a lot of force. like a kick for example. to dent a car made of metal today you just have to press on it with a finger. this in itself again makes a car more suceptable to damage. enough so that we now have "safety cages" needed to try to protect ocupants. a safety cage is basicaly reinforcement of the passenger compartment. this is now needed when it was not before. of course there was always some reinforcement but not to the same degree. reinforcement is also more needed with non-metal body parts.

ok we have now lightened the body what else can be done to lighten a car? well you can get rid of all that heavy steel and iron still in a car. this is done by useing inferior "white metals" such as aluminum. the engine had many iron and steel componants that have been replaced by aluminum.and even now some ceramics. this is why such care must now be taken doing engine work. aluminum is extreemly soft compared to iron and steel. it is realy easy to destroy an aluminum engine block just by crossthreading spark plugs. or over tightening things.

we have begun to see steel rims replaced by aluminum rims. i have worked with tire for well over ten years and would not by choice have aluminum rims for many reasons. to start with tires have a habit of "slipping off the bead" that is looseing the airtight seal that is what keeps the air in tires. ever notice that aluminum rimmed tires leak more than a steel rim? when one does a lot of tire work it becomes evident that this is true. rims made of both steel and aluminum both corrode. rust takes years to form a leak but aluminum corrosion is a white powder and if used especialy in winter needs to be cleaned every year or two if not more often. aluminum rim corrosion is very comman for causeing tire leaks. and low tires can cause both bad controll as well as fuel innoficancy. not to menton of couse that they can and do break when hitting cubs instad of just warping. btw a steel rim may only cost 40-100 bucks to replace where aluminum rims cost between 100-500 bucks each (dealer rims are typicaly about $300 up for aliuminum).

so now that cars are lightened and weaker what about trucks and suv's? well just as cars have had body pannels lightened and thus weakened so have trucks, but not quite as much. a truck is made to be used a little more roughly so tends to be built a little bit stronger. also trucks typicaly still have full frames, again they have been made lighter by useing thinner metals but it is still there. this is one reason that a suv or truck ends up in better shape than a car involved in the same collision, simply put a truck has better framework to support it. also do to a trucks possible useage they tend to be heavyer so in a collision they have more mass to add to the situation causeing even more damage. also blaimed for problems in a collision between a truck and a car is the fact that since trucks are built higher so that they don't need roads it means that you have a truck missing a car's bumper instead hitting a weak structure such as the trunk or in the case of a new "smart car" type vehicle the back of the front seats. this is not a fault in the design of the truck but a faulty design of the car in question. after all manufacturers KNOW about this crittical problem so it should be designed for it.

now when it comes to fuel efficancy, due to a car being smaller and lighter they can use much less powerfull and therefore more efficant engins. a truck being bigger and heavyer needs more power and therefore use more fuel. compareing the efficancy between both is like compareing an apple to an orange. both vehicles are designed for much diffarant purposes. a car is desined primaraly for moveing people arround. trucks and suv's are designed for mutiple uses. moveing people arround is the least of these. a truck is desined to move cargo as well as to be able to go where a road may not exist. they are UTILITY vehicles. they have many possible uses while a car has only one real use.

now why do people insist on driveing a truck or suv? well for one thing many considder a truck safer to a car. they are frankly built tougher. then you have those that even though a vehicle is mainly used to go to work also have the need of room for a family. most cars do not have room. sure you can sit two adults in the front seat, but back seats are even crampted for children. so most families if they can afford it go with a roomier mini van. now a mini van though most are built like cars, they are still bigger, and therefore heavyer. so they require more power than a small car. they also have the ability to haul some cargo makeing it a good desicion to buy. ever watch people try to load things like simple chairs into a car? it is good for a laugh. a van makes far more sence for most people than a car. even if not used often when you need it, you need it.

now some people insist on driveing a suv or pick up truck. well you still have the ability to haul things when you need it. some people prefer to drive a rear wheel drive vehicle and those are only available on pick ups, suv's and sports cars. a rear wheel drive is much more forgiveing in bad weather especialy snow.it also has a much smoother ride in mud or snow. now dodge has come out with a couple rear wheel drives includeing a station wagon. why not drive them? well for starters these "cars" have bigger engions then even many trucks.a big powerfull 350. they are realy sports cars that can actualy be used to haul some stuff. if manufacturers would come out with regular rear wheel drive cars then many who drive trucks might buy one of these cars. but a car still isn't very practical for a lot of people.

then we have those that choose to drive an suv because of things like all wheel and 4x4. peronaly there is a need for these types of vehicles, if one goes off road for example. but they by their nature are not very efficiant and only realy usefull at slow speeds and starting off. once you are going it dosn't do anything for you. but manufacturers are pushing these as very usefull for everyday driveing.something that needs to change. there is a joke up here."how do the opp (ontario proventual police, in charge of highways amonst others),know there is a winter storm? all the 4x4's are off road" (in the ditches). this is a humarous way of describeing the phonominum that 4x4 driver's seem to think that 4x4 means that you can go faster in bad conditions. personaly from what i have seen rear wheel drives followed by 4x4 types are far superior to front wheel drives in snow. many bad days i have watched pick ups and other rear wheel drive vehicles cruiseing by front wheel drives that are brely able to stay in controll or their cars.

personaly instead of "cheating" and lightening/ makeing vehicles smaller, there needs to be a concerted effort to make bigger vehicles more efficiant. a small car is fine for some but patheticaly useless for most. don't complain about seeing one person driveing their big vehicle to work. you do not know what else they do that requires them to own a big vehicle. even that ocasional thing makes a big vehicle worth while. most can not afford to own and operate both a small car for one person trips and a second for anything else. we have a choice for one vehicle that can do anything we need. it is time that manufacturers took this into account and designed vehicles that are both fuel efficant and able to be used for families and hauling stuff. the small car has only one use where as larger vehicles have many worthwhile uses. a small car may be fuel efficiant, but it is the most inefficant vehicle when it comes to the ability to actualy do anything.

i will even agree that vehicles like the hummers or this new semmi turned into a pick up truck are not needed by most. but hey if they can afford to run them more power to them. as for hybreds, yup they are a good thing except that we only see tiny hybreads. if they were to make a realisticaly sized hybread i am sure that many people would get one if for nothing else then to save on fuel. also the price would need to be prety much the same as a non-hybread. personaly i have high hopes for the use of hydrogen usage for vehicles. electric at this point should not even be considdered we have more than enough things that need this power as it is we don't need to add even more strain to that power source. unfortunately we must also keep it in mind that anything that we do to concerve fuel will take over 20 years to reach everyone. this is because many can only afford to buy old vehicles for their use. unless of course someone comes up with things to replace older engions at a realistic price for those without money, or has a equil trade in type setup.(trade in your guzzler for an equil efficiant vehicle).




posted on May, 8 2005 @ 09:28 PM
link   
the bigger the tire, the smaller the ***Can you guess why I edited this? Can you believe that the poster thinks that it'll be allowed because he circumvented the censor by placing spaces between the letters?***

[edit on 11-5-2005 by Thomas Crowne]



posted on May, 8 2005 @ 10:18 PM
link   
ummmmmmm....... ya kinda fell apart at the end. Front wheel drive is better for snow than rearis , but All or 4 wheel drive is still the best.



posted on May, 8 2005 @ 10:44 PM
link   
Its only here in America where everyones driving oversized SUVs and Hummers




posted on May, 11 2005 @ 10:49 AM
link   
hmm well first off you can also put a giant engine in a tiny car and that would be even worse than a truck. also fuel injection has a lot to do with things with it youll always get better mileage than a vehichle with the same engine thats carburated. anyway... I like driving my 72 chevelle with my carburated 572 ci V8 because I can blow past people on the highway. sure the cops might chase me but where I live they arent allowed to give chase over 100 mph for safety reasons. and I started driving when I was 8 i have full racing framework, seats, and sometimes i even wear a helmet to keep safe. basicly the thing a person drives is based on their personality



posted on May, 11 2005 @ 11:21 AM
link   
still going to be a crap car for anything other than going in a straight line though



posted on May, 11 2005 @ 11:23 AM
link   
Hmm whats the use of having gigantic cars like that when u cant even drive quicker than something like 130 km the hour ?



over here in germany weve got smaller cars that drive a lot quicker than that and dont waste that much fuel either , anyone ever driven at 260km the hour on a highway ?



posted on May, 11 2005 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by omega1
ummmmmmm....... ya kinda fell apart at the end. Front wheel drive is better for snow than rearis , but All or 4 wheel drive is still the best.


Yes and no. Front wheel drive can be better in the snow than rear wheel drive. The problem is if you don't know how to correct a slide it becomes much more dangerous than a rear wheel drive vehicle.

If you have a front wheel drive vehicle read this web page.

www.angelfire.com...

especially if you don't know the differences between how fwd and rwd vehicles react in different situations.

But on the topic, We have two large vehicles.

The first is my pickup truck- a necessity when you are a contractor needing to haul tools and material almost everyday, and yes its an extended cab because you need somewhere to put the kids.

The other is an expedition, I feel it is also needed by our family.
Right now we have 3 kids with 2 of them in carseats and by the end of the year we will be adding at least one more in a carseat(my wife is pretty sure she is carrying twins which is why I say at least one more).

Its just not possible to put four(possibly five) kids with 3(possibly 4) of them in car or booster seats into a small vehicle.
Four wheel drive is also a requirement because my wife has a job that requires her to be there no matter what the weather is like.




mbkennel
the bigger the tire, the smaller the d i c k


I'm so glad that you have the capacity to add something constructive to the thread. You probably say the same thing about guns too.



posted on May, 11 2005 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fett Pinkus
Hmm whats the use of having gigantic cars like that when u cant even drive quicker than something like 130 km the hour ?



over here in germany weve got smaller cars that drive a lot quicker than that and dont waste that much fuel either , anyone ever driven at 260km the hour on a highway ?


It not always about getting there fast, and yes I have driven that fast on the highway(when I was younger) I don't feel the need to do it anymore.



posted on May, 11 2005 @ 12:33 PM
link   
.
A couple of reasons,

Gas is relatively cheap,
They have been seduced by the social adjuncts of advertising.

If your SUV doesn't have a rollbar in it, you are crazy.

If your really care about your family, demand a rollbar at purchase or get one installed.
SUVs are inherently less stable [higher center of gravity without a wider base].
Most models are much more prone to rollover.

Some tip over going 20mph around a corner.

If your front bumper is at the eyelevel of someone in a car, yes, you are safer than they are. That said, If and when you get in an accident you should also be held accountable for injuries and death you cause by driving a semi-tank.

Negligent homicide, via the vehicle you choose to drive puts the ball in your court.

We are a completely stupid species. All the more stupid because we think we are intelligent. Being individually devisive does not make you intelligent.

Like [real] lemmings, we race towards a precipice because we are blind to it. All the other people and our [trivial?] concerns about them, block our view to the big picture.
.



posted on May, 11 2005 @ 12:33 PM
link   
Glad to hear you take measures to insure you will be safe in case of a high speed accident. Remember something, though. When the unexpected happens and you lose control, you might strike another car; a car filled with a man's family. It might be a man like me. Trust me, you'd be better off dying of blunt force trauma in a high speed auto accident!

I've always been told that I take things personally (at least both ex-wives told me that) but I assumed people drive huge pick-ups carrying nothing or mountainous SUV's with nobody but one blonde with a cell phone welded to her skull, so that I can't see what is going on in front. I've followed a rolling roadblock in the left lane for miles just to pull over to the right and find out that there was nothing in front of them; they were simply too stupid to travel in the right lane.



posted on May, 11 2005 @ 12:56 PM
link   
As far as i know over here in Germany those rollbars as they seem to be called are actually forbidden due to the fact that if you hit some pedestrian with them , even at low speeds , they can cause a huge amout of injury or even death .



posted on May, 11 2005 @ 01:06 PM
link   
You're thinking of cow guards...different thing than roll bars...

Personally, I drive a van. Why? Because I often need the room. For one thing, I occassionally make some extra money delivering cakes. For another, I like to go places with friends/family, and we don't want to take a lot of vehicles. I also occassionally build things, need the room for supplies, etc. No small vehicle will fit these needs, so high gas prices or not, I use a large vehicle.



posted on May, 18 2005 @ 10:08 AM
link   
alright i have the solution to the question ''Why do people drive large vehichles" it seems to me that its just an expression of self. we all do what we want anyway regardless of laws we all have been speeding at one point and time we just do what we want and own what we want and theres your reason why people drive large vehichles



posted on May, 18 2005 @ 03:09 PM
link   
This is hillarious, I come to a Conspiracy forum to take a break from all of the car forums im on and my job, and to read some cool info, and what do I find. People arguing about gas mileage and what car is better. Nice!



posted on May, 18 2005 @ 07:23 PM
link   
I can understand people with big families, people that haul things etc. driving huge trucks and suvs ( My dad drives a big truck because we haul things) but these stupid "soccer moms" or men or women that are single and drive excursions and huge dodges make me angry



posted on May, 18 2005 @ 07:58 PM
link   
In most states you are required to have a "car seat" in place for each kid under 50 lbs.

You simply cannot get more that one car seat i the back of a sedan any more.

So if you have more than one child, (or just provide care for more than one; like say, exchange babysitting with the neighbors) the you pretty much MUST have an SUV or van.

As far as the "monster trucks," they kill me (and you, too, probably). I take consolation in the fact that most macho types order them with 4-wheel drive. Then they never use it until they encounter ice. This is hilarious, since most quik-lube places never service the front drive, and the u-joints slowly rust into place. Then when someone actually uses it, it lands on the pavement.

And by the way, 4WD on ice looks like the winter scene in bambi. Hilarious.



posted on May, 18 2005 @ 09:01 PM
link   
Seems to me that Americans started migrating to trucks and SUV's in droves after 9/11. There is something about the "perception" of increased safety (read: invincibility) these things provide that a paniced public flocked to.

If the draw was truely practicality, we'd see a continuatiuon of the minivan craze that preceded 9/11. As for hauling "things" (tools, wood, etc) what ever happend to the mini-PU craze?

Now everyone seems to want to have their own personal, "Just Like the Soldier-Studs Drive But With Plush Leather AND Cup Holders", mobile bomb shelters.

Worst of all, they all seem to have an attitude of "I am a Citizen of the the New Empire! I can crush you from the safety of my armored cocoon...as long as you don't run too fast."



posted on May, 20 2005 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Fett Pinkus
As far as i know over here in Germany those rollbars as they seem to be called are actually forbidden due to the fact that if you hit some pedestrian with them , even at low speeds , they can cause a huge amout of injury or even death .


Rollbars are installed inside the vehicle.. All racecars have them.
All SUVs should have them because like the above poster said, SUVs have higher center of gravity, and are more likely to roll over. This happens a lot getting on and off a highway.

Few SUV owners understand that SUVs and cars drive different! You can't drive an SUV like you drive a car!



posted on May, 20 2005 @ 09:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bhadhidar
Seems to me that Americans started migrating to trucks and SUV's in droves after 9/11. There is something about the "perception" of increased safety (read: invincibility) these things provide that a paniced public flocked to.

Now everyone seems to want to have their own personal, "Just Like the Soldier-Studs Drive But With Plush Leather AND Cup Holders", mobile bomb shelters.

Worst of all, they all seem to have an attitude of "I am a Citizen of the the New Empire! I can crush you from the safety of my armored cocoon...as long as you don't run too fast."


1. The SUV craze started loooong before the WTC and 9/11.
Believe it or not, it started with the Black American Rap Music culture. It reached it's height when HUMMER started making "civilian hummers" to be sold to civilians. Before then, Hummer only sold its vehicles to the military. Sooo many rappers were buying military hummers to drive around town and the suburbs in.

2. The rest of American culture followed the rap culture. Just like they did with baggy pants. Wearing shoes with the laces untied. Everyone using the n***** word. Now everyone drives a SUV.

3. After 20% of the population started driving SUVs to follow the rappers. Other Americans started ordering SUVs to protect theirselves from the SUV drivers.. So now you got 40% or so people driving SUVs!

4. And then, finally, Bush and Republicans, passed a law forcing Americans to BUY SUVs !!!!!
It's cheaper to buy a SUV than a car! In fact, it's possible to get enough tax cuts for an SUV to be chaper to buy than a motorcycle!!!

www.detnews.com...

Why buy a fuel efficient car, when a gas guzzling SUV is cheaper to buy? Or at most costs the same as the car? (Most of the time SUVs are chaper to buy than cars though.)

www.taxpayer.net...

www.commondreams.org...

moneycentral.msn.com...



[edit on 20-5-2005 by OpenSecret2012]





new topics
top topics
 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join