Lisa Horton is One Smart Woman: SUVs Stink

This site contains affiliate links for which LandyZone may be compensated if you make a purchase.


"C.R. Krieger" wrote:

> If you got that thing to 170K on the original rotors in WV, you must
> drive slower than my grandma - and she's dead.
> --
> C.R. Krieger
> (Been there; done that)


It has been years since I replaced a rotor. Last time was a 1986 Sable. Replaced the original rotors at
15K miles beacause they warped - the replacements were still on the car when the friend I sold it to ran
it into a tree at over 200K. My 1997 Expedition made 149,000 on the original rotors. I doubt if I drive as
slowly as your granmother, but I don't consider myself a menace to society. I do keep my rotors as far
away from lathes as possible.

Ed

 
On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 01:00:03 +0200 (CEST), the following
appeared in rec.autos.makers.jeep+willys, posted by Nomen
Nescio <[email protected]>:

>>Not being an SUV driver, I'd simply steer out of the way, knowing that I
>>can actually turn sharply without rolling over.


Gee, so can I. Imagine that...

> With any luck, it would
>>be rainy, or on a curve, and I could see evolution in action as a bonus.


Only if you missed the curve.

>>Lisa

>
>Lisa, you scored with me.


She had to be told? Not very proficient, are you? ("Put it
back in the sand...")

> Taking on hundreds of redneck bozos takes guts.


Especially for anonymous posters.

>You must have been reading my posts,


Why? Did you see her puke?

> because I have said the same thing
>over and over and over again, almost to the point of ad infinitum & ad
>nauseum.


Leave out the "almost", moron.

Bye, now...

<CrapSnip>

--

Bob C.

Reply to Bob-Casanova @ worldnet.att.net
(without the spaces, of course)

"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"
- Isaac Asimov
 

"Mike Borkhuis" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:GnUkb.6967$%[email protected]...
> > Same damn thing happens with tractor trailers. The drivers can't
> > control the things so they just barrell right on thru any problem and
> > don't care who they kill.

>
> You ever drive a tractor trailer?? You ever see how many stupid

drivers
> there are out there???
>
> I was riding in a buddy's semi last week on a run... We were

aproaching
> a split in the interstate. 2 lanes go straight, 2 lanes exit to the

right.
> We were in the right hand lane for the straight pair. When we get to the
> split a person in a car that was in the far right lane of the right split
> realized that they were going the wrong way. They slammed on their brakes
> and swerved sharply over into our lane.
> When you're driving a 80,000 truck that's doing 60MPH and a car pulls

in
> front of you doing 20 you do not have many choices. There's no way you

can
> stop quick.... If you swerve sharply, you can jacknife the trailer or

worse
> yet roll the thing on it's side both of which would cause a major accident
> and block the road for hours.
> Fortunatly, in this case, there was no one on our left and the guy

driving
> was able to gently swerve around the offending car.....
>
> It's not that semi drivers do not care... All that I've met are
> courtous and professional drivers. The bigger issue is that people

driving
> smaller vehicles do not know or understand that a tractor trailer does not
> react or handle like their car.
>
> Mike
>


Amen to that. 80% of all accidents between cars and large trucks are caused
by the car drivers, that is a statistical fact. Anyone who doubts it can
look up the stats themselves.


 
On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 20:19:19 -0300, Chris Phillipo
<[email protected]> wrote:

>It never ceases to amaze me the ignorance on a subject that can be
>propagated by the media. My jacked up redneck SUV with big tires can
>take any corner on any road at the posted speed limit. Explain to me
>why that is not enough to be safe.


Wow. You can here the rocks rattling around in his head from here.
What logic.

 
C.R. Krieger wrote:

> Eugene Nine <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
>
>> Driven no different than my S-10 with the original clutch and rotors at
>> 170,000 miles, I'd still be driving it if it weren't for rust.

>
> If you got that thing to 170K on the original rotors in WV, you must
> drive slower than my grandma - and she's dead.
> --
> C.R. Krieger
> (Been there; done that)

It was a 4cyl :)
Seriously though it was a manual transmission, engine brakeing makes a big
difference, the auto in my 2000 S-10 will engine brake some but not nearly
as much as a manual transmission. I did turn the rotors a few years ago
and they went down close to the min thickness so I need to replace them
next time.
 
On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 16:50:46 GMT, "Mike Borkhuis" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>> Same damn thing happens with tractor trailers. The drivers can't
>> control the things so they just barrell right on thru any problem and
>> don't care who they kill.

>
> You ever drive a tractor trailer?? You ever see how many stupid drivers
>there are out there???
>
> I was riding in a buddy's semi last week on a run... We were aproaching
>a split in the interstate. 2 lanes go straight, 2 lanes exit to the right.
>We were in the right hand lane for the straight pair. When we get to the
>split a person in a car that was in the far right lane of the right split
>realized that they were going the wrong way. They slammed on their brakes
>and swerved sharply over into our lane.
> When you're driving a 80,000 truck that's doing 60MPH and a car pulls in
>front of you doing 20 you do not have many choices. There's no way you can
>stop quick.... If you swerve sharply, you can jacknife the trailer or worse
>yet roll the thing on it's side both of which would cause a major accident
>and block the road for hours.
> Fortunatly, in this case, there was no one on our left and the guy driving
>was able to gently swerve around the offending car.....
>
> It's not that semi drivers do not care... All that I've met are
>courtous and professional drivers. The bigger issue is that people driving
>smaller vehicles do not know or understand that a tractor trailer does not
>react or handle like their car.
>
>Mike
>


Fine, but that wasn't my point. I'm talking about truck drivers that
speed or drive drunk or when tired. If caught they should be punished
much more severely than a traffic criminal in a cavalier.

 
aunt wrote:

> On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 16:50:46 GMT, "Mike Borkhuis" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>>>Same damn thing happens with tractor trailers. The drivers can't
>>>control the things so they just barrell right on thru any problem and
>>>don't care who they kill.

>>
>> You ever drive a tractor trailer?? You ever see how many stupid drivers
>>there are out there???
>>
>> I was riding in a buddy's semi last week on a run... We were aproaching
>>a split in the interstate. 2 lanes go straight, 2 lanes exit to the right.
>>We were in the right hand lane for the straight pair. When we get to the
>>split a person in a car that was in the far right lane of the right split
>>realized that they were going the wrong way. They slammed on their brakes
>>and swerved sharply over into our lane.
>> When you're driving a 80,000 truck that's doing 60MPH and a car pulls in
>>front of you doing 20 you do not have many choices. There's no way you can
>>stop quick.... If you swerve sharply, you can jacknife the trailer or worse
>>yet roll the thing on it's side both of which would cause a major accident
>>and block the road for hours.
>> Fortunatly, in this case, there was no one on our left and the guy driving
>>was able to gently swerve around the offending car.....
>>
>> It's not that semi drivers do not care... All that I've met are
>>courtous and professional drivers. The bigger issue is that people driving
>>smaller vehicles do not know or understand that a tractor trailer does not
>>react or handle like their car.
>>
>>Mike
>>

>
>
> Fine, but that wasn't my point. I'm talking about truck drivers that
> speed or drive drunk or when tired. If caught they should be punished
> much more severely than a traffic criminal in a cavalier.
>

Does this have anything to do with Jeeps? No? ramjw snecked.

 
> I'm talking about truck drivers that speed or drive drunk
> or when tired.


You should have mentioned that up front rather than making a blanket
statement.....

> If caught they should be punished much more severely
> than a traffic criminal in a cavalier.


Have you ever looked into comercial lisencing??? Truck drivers ARE
punished with higher fines for traffic violations. Not to mention that
you'll loose your commercial lisence before your regular one when you start
racking up points.

Mike


 
[email protected] (C.R. Krieger) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Eugene Nine <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
> > Driven no different than my S-10 with the original clutch and rotors at
> > 170,000 miles, I'd still be driving it if it weren't for rust.

>
> If you got that thing to 170K on the original rotors in WV, you must
> drive slower than my grandma - and she's dead.



I love WV.
 
>
> Fine, but that wasn't my point. I'm talking about truck drivers that
> speed or drive drunk or when tired. If caught they should be punished
> much more severely than a traffic criminal in a cavalier.
>


OK, you advocate death penalty for 56 in a 55. What do you advocate for 56
in a 55 with a truck? -Dave


 
Nomen Nescio <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> >Not being an SUV driver, I'd simply steer out of the way, knowing that I
> >can actually turn sharply without rolling over. With any luck, it would
> >be rainy, or on a curve, and I could see evolution in action as a bonus.
> >
> >Lisa

>
> Lisa, you scored with me. Taking on hundreds of redneck bozos takes guts.
>
> You must have been reading my posts, because I have said the same thing
> over and over and over again, almost to the point of ad infinitum & ad
> nauseum.
>
> Building cars in the 2000's with the balance (or lack of) of cars discarded
> to the rubbish bin in the 1920's is the epitomy of hilarity. I never cease
> to be amazed that so many fools are blowing their wads on those tipsy SUVs.
>
> The problem with SUVs isn't fuel consumption. Its your gas. You can burn
> it with a match for all I care. The problem is you SUV owners are going to
> kill somebody with it because you are scared ****less to whip that steering
> wheel back and forth to do a collision advoidance. You have no alternative
> but to plow at full speed directly into some defenseless car full of kids
> because if you try anything like steering around an emergency situation you
> will flip and kill yourself first, before continuing your death slide into
> your victims' car and taking them out as well.
>
> There is a way. If it can be reasonably demonstrated (51%) that you could
> have prevented a fatal by manuevering, but you didn't, I would charge you
> with frustrated manslaughter. Even though its really your SUV's fault
> because it steers like a battleship. I would also hold the manufacturer
> accountable for peddling off an accident waiting to happen. Prosecute some
> of those executives for conspiracy to commit unmitigated manslaughter.
> Don't fine them...they've already made monetary allowances for fines and
> judgments in the overcharges. Don't those trash heaps cost $30,000 and up?
>
> One more thing for you out there that don't read my posts regularly. You
> already know how tipsy SUVs are. But its worse than you think. When they
> are loaded to maximum gross weight, including the roof rack load, they are
> MORE TIPSY. And when fuel is minimum, they are MORE TIPSY YET. All things
> considered, they are much much worse than you thought and worse than
> CONSUMER REPORTS THINK ALSO. I suggest all you SUV owners organize and
> launch a class-action suit to recover all the unused value (as if they had
> any to start with) left in your SUVs, based on a straight-lin 10 year
> depreciation. It will bankrupt the lenders, dealers, and manufacturers!
> Take the money and run before you flip and kill yourself or ram somebody
> and go to prison penniless.
>
> Federal Government: In between wars, set up the DOT so it regulates and
> certifies cars for roadworthiness just like you did private airplanes back
> in the '30s. Don't let any cars be sold for the road unless they are
> triple safe.


How about if everyone hangs up the damn cell phone, stops playing with
the radio, and slows down to the posted speed limit? Keep a 4 second
gap between vehicles and pay attention to what you're doing, and all
cars and trucks are safe. OK, all except the ones with morons,
drunks, and selfish bastards at the wheel. By morons, I mean the ones
who literally don't know how to handle their vehicle properly, and
according to the laws of physics.
 
eddie wilson did pass the time by typing:

> How about if everyone hangs up the damn cell phone, stops playing with
> the radio, and slows down to the posted speed limit? Keep a 4 second
> gap between vehicles and pay attention to what you're doing, and all
> cars and trucks are safe. OK, all except the ones with morons,
> drunks, and selfish bastards at the wheel. By morons, I mean the ones
> who literally don't know how to handle their vehicle properly, and
> according to the laws of physics.


My pet peeve, driving without all glass clear of snow/ice.
Runner up is eating, drinking, using the phone, putting on makeup, etc.

Vehicles don't kill people. Stupid people driving vehicles
kill people. An idiot behind the wheel of any vehicle is one
idiot too many.

--
DougW


 
I would like to see your evidence that the amount of fuel in the tank has
anything to do with how tipsy a vehicle is.

"eddie wilson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Nomen Nescio <[email protected]> wrote in message

news:<[email protected]>...
> > >Not being an SUV driver, I'd simply steer out of the way, knowing that

I
> > >can actually turn sharply without rolling over. With any luck, it

would
> > >be rainy, or on a curve, and I could see evolution in action as a

bonus.
> > >
> > >Lisa

> >
> > Lisa, you scored with me. Taking on hundreds of redneck bozos takes

guts.
> >
> > You must have been reading my posts, because I have said the same thing
> > over and over and over again, almost to the point of ad infinitum & ad
> > nauseum.
> >
> > Building cars in the 2000's with the balance (or lack of) of cars

discarded
> > to the rubbish bin in the 1920's is the epitomy of hilarity. I never

cease
> > to be amazed that so many fools are blowing their wads on those tipsy

SUVs.
> >
> > The problem with SUVs isn't fuel consumption. Its your gas. You can

burn
> > it with a match for all I care. The problem is you SUV owners are going

to
> > kill somebody with it because you are scared ****less to whip that

steering
> > wheel back and forth to do a collision advoidance. You have no

alternative
> > but to plow at full speed directly into some defenseless car full of

kids
> > because if you try anything like steering around an emergency situation

you
> > will flip and kill yourself first, before continuing your death slide

into
> > your victims' car and taking them out as well.
> >
> > There is a way. If it can be reasonably demonstrated (51%) that you

could
> > have prevented a fatal by manuevering, but you didn't, I would charge

you
> > with frustrated manslaughter. Even though its really your SUV's fault
> > because it steers like a battleship. I would also hold the manufacturer
> > accountable for peddling off an accident waiting to happen. Prosecute

some
> > of those executives for conspiracy to commit unmitigated manslaughter.
> > Don't fine them...they've already made monetary allowances for fines and
> > judgments in the overcharges. Don't those trash heaps cost $30,000 and

up?
> >
> > One more thing for you out there that don't read my posts regularly. You
> > already know how tipsy SUVs are. But its worse than you think. When

they
> > are loaded to maximum gross weight, including the roof rack load, they

are
> > MORE TIPSY. And when fuel is minimum, they are MORE TIPSY YET. All

things
> > considered, they are much much worse than you thought and worse than
> > CONSUMER REPORTS THINK ALSO. I suggest all you SUV owners organize and
> > launch a class-action suit to recover all the unused value (as if they

had
> > any to start with) left in your SUVs, based on a straight-lin 10 year
> > depreciation. It will bankrupt the lenders, dealers, and manufacturers!
> > Take the money and run before you flip and kill yourself or ram somebody
> > and go to prison penniless.
> >
> > Federal Government: In between wars, set up the DOT so it regulates and
> > certifies cars for roadworthiness just like you did private airplanes

back
> > in the '30s. Don't let any cars be sold for the road unless they are
> > triple safe.

>
> How about if everyone hangs up the damn cell phone, stops playing with
> the radio, and slows down to the posted speed limit? Keep a 4 second
> gap between vehicles and pay attention to what you're doing, and all
> cars and trucks are safe. OK, all except the ones with morons,
> drunks, and selfish bastards at the wheel. By morons, I mean the ones
> who literally don't know how to handle their vehicle properly, and
> according to the laws of physics.



 
> Nomen Nescio <[email protected]> wrote
>> One more thing for you out there that don't read my posts regularly. You
>> already know how tipsy SUVs are.


If your SUV is "tipsy", you must be feeding it booze. Switch to gas.

>> But its worse than you think. When they
>> are loaded to maximum gross weight, including the roof rack load, they are
>> MORE TIPSY. And when fuel is minimum, they are MORE TIPSY YET. All things
>> considered, they are much much worse than you thought and worse than
>> CONSUMER REPORTS THINK ALSO. I suggest all you SUV owners organize and
>> launch a class-action suit to recover all the unused value (as if they had
>> any to start with) left in your SUVs, based on a straight-lin 10 year
>> depreciation. It will bankrupt the lenders, dealers, and manufacturers!
>> Take the money and run before you flip and kill yourself or ram somebody
>> and go to prison penniless.


The proper target of this suit is the Environmental Protection Agency, whose
CAFE rules forced people into SUVs by taking station wagons off the market.
I'd be all for the suit if the EPA administrators have to pay for it out of
their own pocket, but they'd probably just rob taxpayers some more instead.

eddie wilson wrote:
> How about if everyone hangs up the damn cell phone, stops playing with
> the radio,


OK with me.

> and slows down to the posted speed limit? Keep a 4 second
> gap between vehicles


Both of those actions mean you're asking to be run off the road.

> and pay attention to what you're doing,


If you pay attention to what you're doing, you'd never slow to the speed
limit and you'd certainly never keep a huge gap in front of yourself,
causing people to cut in one after the other until you're rightly treated
by other drivers as a public nuisance for blocking the road.

> and all
> cars and trucks are safe. OK, all except the ones with morons,
> drunks, and selfish bastards at the wheel. By morons, I mean the ones
> who literally don't know how to handle their vehicle properly, and
> according to the laws of physics.


Anyone who would follow your advice is a moron.
 
How about everyone stop posting this bull**** in the Jeep forum and take
your anti-SUV PC opinions back to the Radical Greens & Democrat
Hand-Wringers Wine & Cheese Party forum, huh?

Oh, and by the way, Jeeps aren't SUVs, and SUVs aren't Jeeps.


"eddie wilson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Nomen Nescio <[email protected]> wrote in message

news:<[email protected]>...
> > >Not being an SUV driver, I'd simply steer out of the way, knowing that

I
> > >can actually turn sharply without rolling over. With any luck, it

would
> > >be rainy, or on a curve, and I could see evolution in action as a

bonus.
> > >
> > >Lisa

> >
> > Lisa, you scored with me. Taking on hundreds of redneck bozos takes

guts.
> >
> > You must have been reading my posts, because I have said the same thing
> > over and over and over again, almost to the point of ad infinitum & ad
> > nauseum.
> >
> > Building cars in the 2000's with the balance (or lack of) of cars

discarded
> > to the rubbish bin in the 1920's is the epitomy of hilarity. I never

cease
> > to be amazed that so many fools are blowing their wads on those tipsy

SUVs.
> >
> > The problem with SUVs isn't fuel consumption. Its your gas. You can

burn
> > it with a match for all I care. The problem is you SUV owners are going

to
> > kill somebody with it because you are scared ****less to whip that

steering
> > wheel back and forth to do a collision advoidance. You have no

alternative
> > but to plow at full speed directly into some defenseless car full of

kids
> > because if you try anything like steering around an emergency situation

you
> > will flip and kill yourself first, before continuing your death slide

into
> > your victims' car and taking them out as well.
> >
> > There is a way. If it can be reasonably demonstrated (51%) that you

could
> > have prevented a fatal by manuevering, but you didn't, I would charge

you
> > with frustrated manslaughter. Even though its really your SUV's fault
> > because it steers like a battleship. I would also hold the manufacturer
> > accountable for peddling off an accident waiting to happen. Prosecute

some
> > of those executives for conspiracy to commit unmitigated manslaughter.
> > Don't fine them...they've already made monetary allowances for fines and
> > judgments in the overcharges. Don't those trash heaps cost $30,000 and

up?
> >
> > One more thing for you out there that don't read my posts regularly. You
> > already know how tipsy SUVs are. But its worse than you think. When

they
> > are loaded to maximum gross weight, including the roof rack load, they

are
> > MORE TIPSY. And when fuel is minimum, they are MORE TIPSY YET. All

things
> > considered, they are much much worse than you thought and worse than
> > CONSUMER REPORTS THINK ALSO. I suggest all you SUV owners organize and
> > launch a class-action suit to recover all the unused value (as if they

had
> > any to start with) left in your SUVs, based on a straight-lin 10 year
> > depreciation. It will bankrupt the lenders, dealers, and manufacturers!
> > Take the money and run before you flip and kill yourself or ram somebody
> > and go to prison penniless.
> >
> > Federal Government: In between wars, set up the DOT so it regulates and
> > certifies cars for roadworthiness just like you did private airplanes

back
> > in the '30s. Don't let any cars be sold for the road unless they are
> > triple safe.

>
> How about if everyone hangs up the damn cell phone, stops playing with
> the radio, and slows down to the posted speed limit? Keep a 4 second
> gap between vehicles and pay attention to what you're doing, and all
> cars and trucks are safe. OK, all except the ones with morons,
> drunks, and selfish bastards at the wheel. By morons, I mean the ones
> who literally don't know how to handle their vehicle properly, and
> according to the laws of physics.




 
On Sat, 1 Nov 2003 17:09:40 -0700, "Gerald G. McGeorge"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>How about everyone stop posting this bull**** in the Jeep forum and

take
>your anti-SUV PC opinions back to the Radical Greens & Democrat
>Hand-Wringers Wine & Cheese Party forum, huh?
>
>Oh, and by the way, Jeeps aren't SUVs, and SUVs aren't Jeeps.


From OE Help:

To ignore a conversation

In both e-mail and newsgroups, you can ignore, and even hide,
conversations that don't interest you. A conversation is an original
message and all its replies.

In your Inbox or newsgroup message list, select the conversation you
want to ignore.
On the Message menu, click Ignore Conversation.
If your message list's Watch/Ignore column is turned on, an ignore
icon will appear next to all the messages of an ignored conversation.

Notes

To hide ignored messages so they don't clutter up your message lists,
click View, point to Current View, and then select Hide Read or
Ignored Messages.
Selecting Hide Read or Ignored Messages will hide messages you have
read, messages you have ignored, and messages you have both read and
ignored.

If you want to hide ignored messages, but want to keep your read
messages visible, click Hide Read or Ignored Messages as instructed
above, click View, point to Current View, and then select Define
Views. In the Define Views dialog box, click New. In box 1 of the View
Editor, select Where the message has been read. In box 2, click the
words Show/Hide and select Show messages. In box 3, give this view a
name, and then click OK.

end help.

If you can't figure that out, you could exercise some self-control and
just resist the apparently overwhelming urge that you have to read
threads that don't interest you.

HTH.

 

"Gerald G. McGeorge" <[email protected]> wrote

> Oh, and by the way, Jeeps aren't SUVs, and SUVs aren't Jeeps.
>


Jeeps are SUVs, the Grand Cherokee is a bloated joke of a SUV.

The Wrangler passes the grade of being usefull in hard work offroad
environments, but the Cherokee and GC don't they're too much the product of
being aimed at supermarket warriors.

rhys


 

> "P e t e F a g e r l i n" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> From OE Help:


> To ignore a conversation...... <


> If you can't figure that out, you could exercise some self-control and

just resist the apparently overwhelming urge that you have to read threads
that don't interest you. <

Frankly, I ignore the SOBs, but it's just too much fun to just annoy the
crap out of these pompous asses!
>
> HTH.
>



 
Get back in your Geo Metro and haul ass outa here.


In message <[email protected]>, "rnf2" wrote:

>
>"Gerald G. McGeorge" <[email protected]> wrote
>
>> Oh, and by the way, Jeeps aren't SUVs, and SUVs aren't Jeeps.
>>

>
>Jeeps are SUVs, the Grand Cherokee is a bloated joke of a SUV.
>
>The Wrangler passes the grade of being usefull in hard work offroad
>environments, but the Cherokee and GC don't they're too much the product of
>being aimed at supermarket warriors.
>
>rhys
>


 
LMAO!! Have you ever seen a Cherokee on the trail. They can be awesome!

--
Jim
--
98 TJ SE
90 SJ GW
http://www.delawareja.com/gallery/JDJeep98
"You can do any job in the world with the wrong tool if you try hard
enough..."
"4x4" in caps is "$X$"


"rnf2" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Gerald G. McGeorge" <[email protected]> wrote
>
> > Oh, and by the way, Jeeps aren't SUVs, and SUVs aren't Jeeps.
> >

>
> Jeeps are SUVs, the Grand Cherokee is a bloated joke of a SUV.
>
> The Wrangler passes the grade of being usefull in hard work offroad
> environments, but the Cherokee and GC don't they're too much the product

of
> being aimed at supermarket warriors.
>
> rhys
>
>



 
Back
Top