Dodge Ram Vs Hummer

Off Topic
81

[quote]Testy1 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Headhunter wrote:

Study after study has shown you are more likely to get killed in a truck or SUV than in a car.

This is because cars handle better and can avoid accidents.

Insurance went down because it is one of the most stolen cars, not because it is unsafe.

Drive what you want but get all the facts straight before you make a decision.

That is only true in single car accidents. If those two vehicles meet on the street you had better be the one in the truck. You can’t rewrite the laws of Physics.

My truck was rear ended by a drunk driver in a corolla. The impact bent my frame but I could still drive away. His engine was sitting in the front seat of his vehicle. If I had been in my sisters sunfire like we had planned, I would be dead.

I agree that many people driving SUV’s don’t know how, but that doesn’t make
them unsafe in the right hands.[/quote]

SUV’s and pickups are more prone to roll over and more likely to kill their drivers than cars overall.

This takes into account single vehicle and multiple vehicle accidents.

They are statistically less safe than cars.

You can pretend that your superior driving skills will save you just like everyone else does.

I often ride a motorcycle so I put myself at risk, but I recognize it.

82

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
…
If we ever ‘meet by accident’, you be in one of those little toy pseudo-cars; I’ll be in my new Ram truck. I’ll bring the spatula.

[/quote]

You will probaly flip your truck before that happens.

83

[quote]ZEB wrote:
orion wrote:
ZEB wrote:

Lol…that is very funny stuff!

I don’t need an SUV and I drive one. I drive one because I can afford to drive one and I wanted one.

Since when does anyone have to justify their purchase of any vehicle?

You could try to explain that to an American soldier who was killed in a conflict that in part began because of Americas “need” for oil.

Oh, that?s right…

You can?t.

He?s dead.

How long have you been separated from reality?

You have tried on other political threads to say that Iraq is about oil, yet you have never been able to offer up any proof of this.

You are just another wacky liberal…Thanks for the entertainment!

:slight_smile:

[/quote]

You mean spreading democracy in the Middle East would be very high up the US governments agenda if there was no oil in the Middle East?

It takes a wacky liberal to see a connection there?

Why does the US not spread democracy in Africa?

Or in former SU states?

It is because you like the landscape and the people living in the Middle East, right?

84

[quote]tfrench wrote:

I didn’t think what he said was really funny at all.[/quote]

That’s because you are slow witted. :slight_smile:

You think it’s alright for someone to tell me what to drive…and that’s not arrogant?

But…when I tell that person I’ll drive what I can afford to drive…that’s arrogant.

You nut!

And I’ve read your posts before and I am yet to be impressed!

85

[quote]orion wrote:
It doesn?t work with you the same way it would with Zeb because he constantly reminds us that all our lifes are connected and that the choices we make have consequences for other people.[/quote]

Oh my…one of my political debating opponents wants to carry his anger over into this thread…

Let’s see if he is telling the truth or lying.

[quote]That is why, according to him:

Gay people are not allowed to marry.[/quote]

According to “me”? Hmm…there are currently 35 states with laws on the books specifically denying gays the right to marry. Most public opinion polls also claim wide margins for those opposed to gay marrige. And there is also a constitutional ammendment pending with similar language.

Do I agree with this? I sure do!

Yet, my little Austrian friend left out something very important, I feel that homosexuals should have the right to live any way that they want! This is America and I say let freedom rein! If two men want to live together and have sex it’s none of my business. I just don’t think the state should sanction it.

Now if someone wants to buy an SUV (Odd how he tried to tie this all in, but I can work with it :slight_smile: it is their right to make that purchase. However, I don’t think the state should give them tax incentives to do it.

Clear?

Oh my…this one is a complete lie! Never in all of my many thousands of posts have I ever stated such a thing.

You can apologize now, or prove me wrong somehow.

I’ll wait.

“Nipplegate”? I’m sorry but I’m not sure what you are talkig about here. Um…I’m basically “pro nipples.” I think everyone should have two. :slight_smile:

I am consistent in my views. I want less government interference in peoples private lives.

That’s easy to understand.

You are the one who wants more government control in peoples lives! You somehow even want to control what people drive. Do you want to have MPH caps per vehicle?

How senseless.

[quote]As to the SUVs itself, if you have to spend that amount of money, see picture above, Aston Martin DB7, page 2 of this thread…

Burn gas with STYLE…[/quote]

So it’s not burning gas that bothers you as long as it’s done with “style.”

At least you’re constitent …consistently wrong.

86

[quote]orion wrote:
You mean spreading democracy in the Middle East would be very high up the US governments agenda if there was no oil in the Middle East?[/quote]

I have a question for you:

Why didn’t we spread democracy in the middle east prior to 9-11? Didn’t we burn enough oil prior to Septemeber 2001?

Answer that one.

87

[quote]borks wrote:
Testy1 wrote:

That is only true in single car accidents. If those two vehicles meet on the street you had better be the one in the truck. You can’t rewrite the laws of Physics.

My truck was rear ended by a drunk driver in a corolla. The impact bent my frame but I could still drive away. His engine was sitting in the front seat of his vehicle. If I had been in my sisters sunfire like we had planned, I would be dead.

I agree that many people driving SUV’s don’t know how, but that doesn’t make them unsafe in the right hands.

Why would you be dead? Was the guy in the corolla dead?? If he wasn’t dead why should you die in an accident where two equal masses (small cars)meet?

[/quote]

Because he had four feet of engine compartment and a good portion of the the vehicles mass seperating him from the accident. I would of had two feet of trunk space protecting me. It bent my ladder frame and sent the truck 15 feet forward from a dead stop. Maybe I wouldn’t have been dead, but I don’t believe I would have walked away unscathed.

88

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Testy1 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Headhunter wrote:

They are statistically less safe than cars.

You can pretend that your superior driving skills will save you just like everyone else does.

I often ride a motorcycle so I put myself at risk, but I recognize it.[/quote]

You know what they say about statistics.

Truck drivers are also statistically less likely to wear their seat belts.

I have driven trucks for close to 30 years and have yet to come close to rolling one ( except while four wheeling). Am I an anomaly, no I don’t think so.

I am not saying I am any better or any worse at driving.
However, with that being said, I was the third vehicle into a 300 yard patch of black ice this winter. The CAR ahead of me ROLLED, I went sideways avoiding her, controlled the skid then came to a safe stop. Turned into a 7 car pileup.
I was lucky for sure, but you can’t attribute it all to luck.

89

[quote]ZEB wrote:
orion wrote:
You mean spreading democracy in the Middle East would be very high up the US governments agenda if there was no oil in the Middle East?

I have a question for you:

Why didn’t we spread democracy in the middle east prior to 9-11? Didn’t we burn enough oil prior to Septemeber 2001?

Answer that one.
[/quote]

If you want my serious answer, because you did not have enough cheap soundbites to sell to the unwashed masses.

You know, 9-11, al Quaeda, Saddam Hussein, WMDs, mushroom cloud over Manhattan…

I have no idea how all of this belongs together, but apparently there is still a significant part of the American population that believe that

a) the highjackers were Iraquis

and

b) that somehow Saddam was involved.

Since I have seen the administration selling the war and those soundbites are still in the heads of lot of Americans I can only come to the conclusion that bullshitting works.

Now the underlying reason for this pro-war bullshitting, I don?t know, but I am pretty sure oil was an important part of it.

Since important members of the Bush administration have strong ties to the oil industry I am also not surprised that said industry gets a major tax break though they also have record profits.

That could have been handled smoother though.

So, who knows, but my two favorite tools when it comes to questions like this is “cui bono” and " follow the money". That works, most of the time.

90

You could just send a check directly to the Saudis . . . .

c/o King Abdullah
1 Palace of Got Them by the Balls
100 Corruption Way
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
00000-00

91

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
…
If we ever ‘meet by accident’, you be in one of those little toy pseudo-cars; I’ll be in my new Ram truck. I’ll bring the spatula.

You will probaly flip your truck before that happens.

[/quote]

Yeah, probably trying to avoid crushing you in your soapbubble.

92

Memo to the President:

Never attack any country that has oil. It doesn’t matter that they violate all the rules (18 resolutions), kill their neighbors and minorities, and are a threat to a vital region of the world (a great depression ensues if Saddam gets the oil). Every wacko will accuse you of trading blodd for oil.

End of memo.

93

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Memo to the President:

Never attack any country that has oil. It doesn’t matter that they violate all the rules (18 resolutions), kill their neighbors and minorities, and are a threat to a vital region of the world (a great depression ensues if Saddam gets the oil). Every wacko will accuse you of trading blodd for oil.

End of memo.[/quote]

See, now you get it!

All of this does not matter, except if you are an oil rich country or near to one.

Was it that difficult?

And nice job conceding that oil was at least one reason…

World-wide recession, oil being relatively important and all…

94

My friend just traded in his H1 for a Ram SRT10. I didnt like his decision, although he didnt maintanance the H1 very well. Basically, I think the Hummers are great for style and off-roading, but they are hard to park and can get old since so many people hate you for driving one (haters). But, in my friend’s case, he went from a H1 to a Viper engine truck. pretty good trade. I dont really know what to say.

Women defifnitely love the Hummers though, and a truck is just a truck, everybody has trucks and many people including myslef think weaker “pussy” guys buy jacked up trucks to make them look manlier, go for the Hummer! Its a machine and you will get a lot of good looks!

95

[quote]orion wrote:

Since important members of the Bush administration have strong ties to the oil industry… So, who knows, but my two favorite tools when it comes to questions like this is “cui bono” and " follow the money". That works, most of the time.[/quote]

Please show proof that any (even one) of the Bush administration officials who you say have “strong ties to the oil industry” has somehow profited by the invasion of Iraq.

Show me a money trail that leads to President Bush or any of the administration officials.

You have imputed the intelligence of the American public, yet it appears that it’s YOU who is buying into worthless left wind “Michael Moore type” propaganda.

I think you’re smarter than that.

Again, it’s easy to spout off on the Internet over certain politicians or policies that you don’t like. It’s quite another to actually back up those ludicrous charges with proof.

96

[quote]mightyjuppe wrote:
My friend just traded in his H1 for a Ram SRT10. I didnt like his decision, although he didnt maintanance the H1 very well. Basically, I think the Hummers are great for style and off-roading, but they are hard to park and can get old since so many people hate you for driving one (haters). But, in my friend’s case, he went from a H1 to a Viper engine truck. pretty good trade. I dont really know what to say.

Women defifnitely love the Hummers though, and a truck is just a truck, everybody has trucks and many people including myslef think weaker “pussy” guys buy jacked up trucks to make them look manlier, go for the Hummer! Its a machine and you will get a lot of good looks![/quote]

How does a Hummer ride?

I mean I know there’s a bit of a trade off, but with my SUV (Caddy) I float down the street.

97

I hate little cars (insert faggiest car you know). Men who drive them are clearly metrosexual. Not to metion they are death-traps.

I’d rather get 10mpg in my 1993 chevy caprice classic retired Onatiro Provincial Police car with a 5.7 high output, then get good gas milage any day or be environmentaly friendly any day . And yes, that was a shamless self plug cause I love my car.

Besides their are studies that show even entering a compact car reduce your testosterone levels by 12.59%.

Big trucks= manly
Classic cars= manly
Sleepers= manly
compact cars= forced castration

98

[quote]KiloSprinter wrote:
I hate all H2 drivers by default. Most of the time I see a teenage girl or soccer mom driving it around town. I want to punch them in their face. Especially since they drive like idiots and the last one I saw made a right turn on red right at me while I was on my bike. ‘Fuct you and your H2’

I bet they are proud of their 6 mpg they get too.

[/quote]

I concur.

The people with H2’s, it seems to me, rarely have ever needed anything larger a Toyota. The people that drive them do so for the attention it brings to them.

Being as its GM, it’s probably built like garbage also.

So I say also, “Fuck you and your H2”

99

[quote]orion wrote:
People driving BIIIIIG cars are doing their share of putting American troops into harms way.
[/quote]

Um…no. Anyone with a car that runs on a petroleum based fuel is relying on foreign oil. It doesn’t matter the size and that goes for the whole world. The world relies on oil, period.

100

[quote]4est wrote:
Mikeyali wrote:
… I am converting over to biodiesel anyways. You want to know satisfaction? Try telling some little hippie that your biodiesel uses less oil than his crappy love bug after he tells you how heartless you are toward “mother earth.”

Mike

Awesome. I used to have an old Mercedes 240D and always wanted to get a greasle kit for it. The idea of getting free fuel from chinese restaurants and having exhaust that smells like the food was just too tempting.

[/quote]

Yep, older Mercedes are the best cars to use vegtable oil fuels, because you don’t even have to convert it fully to biodiesel. It will run on clean waste vegtable oil.

But for biodiesel, it costs about $500 for a homemade setup (if you get a used hotwater heater for free), and a couple weekends to build it.

You need:

  1. waste vegtable oil from restraunts, which they usually give away for free
  2. lye
  3. methanol (from race suply stores etc)

you get glycerine out and either methanol or lye at the end (i forget)

you can use the glycerine as a shop cleaner or sell it to soap shops

So, if you want to buy a big truck or SUV, you can run on %100 domestic agricultrual fuels and save lots of money in the long run, if you buy a diesel.

Hell, you can even buy a used generator and power your home for free too.