OT - personal choices - SUV and gas consumption

[Howard Rosenberg]

Hi all -

Zooming around on the net made me think -

What are YOUR thoughts/opinions on fuel consumption and (per-gallon) pricing and your big vehicle - SUV and pickup.

Do you intend to change out your thirstier vehicle for something more frugal?
Drive less?
Not let foreign governments tell us how to live our lives and just keep doing what we've been doing?
Do you get heat from strangers about your choice of vehicles?

Not trying to start anything heated.
But I AM interested in starting a debate,
And I am curious about how we as REGULAR people feel.
Not the sensationalist garbage in the newspapers.

Are we where we are where were in the mid-70's?

Thank you - I look forward to hearing back.

Howard (who defintely doesn't think 1.37$C a litre makes ANY sense ay all)

[Ronald Kellison]

It's even more troubling when you think of it as $ 5.25 a gallon! My wife would probably kick me out of the house if I told her we had to get rid of her Acura MDX :eek:, and I love driving my 4.2L German hot rod too much to part with it unless Armageddon arrives. Perhaps I'll address the childhood obesity issue that's getting so much press lately and just cut back on food for the kids! :rolleyes:

Regards,


Ron

[Pat Germain]

As I see it, if a driver really needs a large vehicle for hauling kids, hauling supplies or towing trailers, it makes sense to stay with it.

For a lone driver who just likes being behind the wheel of a big SUV, I think it makes no sense whatsoever. It's wasteful and foolish. I also think it's none of my business if people want to be wasteful and foolish.

[Alex Carrera]

S4 Ron? So about 14mpg? Well worth it if you ask me...

I don't drive anything big unless I need to, and at this point I just borrower a friend's truck. However, I'm addicted to power, so I still get poor mileage, and the current price hasn't detered me yet.

[Chuck Wintle]

Hi all -

Zooming around on the net made me think -

Are we where we are where were in the mid-70's?

Thank you - I look forward to hearing back.

Howard (who defintely doesn't think 1.37$C a litre makes ANY sense ay all)

Howard,
I think it boils down to what the market will bear. If we get used to paying a$1.50/liter then it means the consumer has made the mental adjustment and our world continues as it once was. If more efficient vehicles are needed they will be bought. I foresee $2.00/liter next summer and so on. There is no end to the greediness of big oil and the government. The only way to fight back is to consume less gas. :)

[glenn bradley]

Even though I drive a Civic, I was looking into scooters or an electric vehicle for my grueling 4-mile-drive-on-surface-streets to work. If you play with the math I think you'll find you can buy a lot of gas for what it costs to buy a motorcycle and insure it. YMMV (pun intended). Besides where would I keep another vehicle? I don't care if its a Segway . . . no vehicles in my gara . . . er, shop!

I would have to drive something that gets 10 mpg or less to even think about it at this point.

[Scott Vigder]

I bought an 08 Buick Enclave in August 07 and opted for FWD vs AWD because the FWD was advertised to get 2 mpg better on the highway (22 vs. 24).

In real life I'm eking out 25-26mpg if I drive like granny on the freeway. For a 5000lb vehicle hauling four folks and their gear, I think 25mpg is remarkable.

We have the Enclave for hauling people and an Avalance for hauling stuff. Were not changing anything except to be more cautious about frivolous trips that can be combined into one.

[Jason Beam]

Even though I drive a Civic, I was looking into scooters or an electric vehicle for my grueling 4-mile-drive-on-surface-streets to work. If you play with the math I think you'll find you can buy a lot of gas for what it costs to buy a motorcycle and insure it. YMMV (pun intended). Besides where would I keep another vehicle? I don't care if its a Segway . . . no vehicles in my gara . . . er, shop!

I would have to drive something that gets 10 mpg or less to even think about it at this point.

I went ahead with this same thing. Ordered my scooter a couple weeks and hopefully will be getting it soon. I start the MSF course this friday. You're right, though, it'll take a good few years to come out ahead. Especially since I started hypermiling in the car and am up to a solid 22mpg in the car.

But, I'm not doing it to only save money so much as I am to be more responsible. Why am I pushing 2500lbs of steel around just to move my body? Of course, I have my own limits - I'm not quite to the point of riding a bicycle yet ... heh. Plus, a scooter's much more fun than a '05 Stratus.

It WILL pay for itself in the end. And faster than some may think. The costs of upkeep go down dramatically if 80% of my driving is shifted to a less-costly machine. Maintaining the car is quite a bit more costly than maintaining a scooter, too. So I think in the end, I was able to swallow a little up-front cost in favor of longer term savings.

[Curt Harms]

As I see it, if a driver really needs a large vehicle for hauling kids, hauling supplies or towing trailers, it makes sense to stay with it.

For a lone driver who just likes being behind the wheel of a big SUV, I think it makes no sense whatsoever. It's wasteful and foolish. I also think it's none of my business if people want to be wasteful and foolish.

It seems like a change beyond hybrids--i.e. better batteries, fuel cells, real ethanol, biofuel, synfuel etc. might be in order. The problem would be to assure those investing megabucks in such things that oil isn't going to drop to $30/barrel (wasn't it there recently?:() and render those megabuck investments impractical. I did hear where the air force flew an aircraft (B-1? not sure) on synthetic fuel with no surprises. I think they figured that if the fuel were produced in quantity, it'd cost $1.25/gal. No sure of the feedstock but I think it might have been coal.

[Montgomery Scott]

There are several people around here who bicycle to work up to ten miles each way. You get to save on gas, wear on your car and get lots of exercise. I would probably get mowed down on any route I took so I don't.

I belong to a van pool but I rarely ride it now. I figured working an extra hour a day to make an extra $25,000 a year trumps saving $1600 in gas each year.

[Sean Kinn]

Yeah, I used to be an SUV guy (2 Jeep Cherokees, 1 Wrangler, 1 Grand Cherokee, 1 Isuzu Trooper) but four years ago I came to the conclusion that a commuter in the DC suburbs doesn't need an SUV. I purchased a diesel VW Jetta (42mpg lifetime average over 60k miles...reall world driving, not babying it for mileage. On long trips I hit 50 mpg driving at 70-75mph) I haul two 18 foot kayaks on a roof rack and have stuffed 100 bf of lumber in there several times. My next purchase will be a hitch and small aluminum trailer to haul bigger items.

Right now with Diesel being so expensive it's really coming out to be a wash against the wifes Focus that gets about 27mpg. But, it's paid for so I'll be keeping it for a long time. Some folks do need SUVs for kids and what not, but I don't have much sympathy for the ones that don't have a real need yet gripe about the gas prices.

[Mike DeHart]

I opted for a car instead of truck suv the last vehicle purchase. Bought a Toyata avalon mostly for the interior size (big guy, head bangs into friends Jeep roof at entry exit if not careful). Put a trailer hitch onto it for tool gloat runs.....

I'm averaging 26mpg, and have gotten as high as 33 on a highway only trip doing about 70-75.

The motorcycle sees a lot of the commuting these days, but that won't work too well in the Buffalo winters ;).

Mike

[Ron Kanter]

There is another piece of this topic that should be factored into the discussion. In addition to the personal cost of driving an unnecessarily big, gas guzzler, there is the cost to our society and planet. (Sorry if that sounds to grand, but I don't know how else to say it.:))

Cars are a major contributor to:
Pollution
Global warmng
Dependence on foreign oil/balance of payments.

Big cars are bigger contributors to the problem than small cars.

It might not make economic sense to buy a Prius if you don't drive a lot of miles, but it would still be a good thing. Framing the discussion only in terms of our personal willingness to pay for the gas doesn't address what burning all that gas means for our future.

Just my $.02 which won't do much to fill the tank on my motorcycle, let alone either of my two cars.
Ron

[Travis Rassat]

I've tried to do a few things to offset the costs:

1. I try to bike to work as much as possible - just over 14 miles each way. Considering my daily driver (a 98 Acura Integra) gets about 27-28 mpg, it saves me a gallon of fuel each day I ride. In my case, because of scheduling, my family, and my level of fitness, I usually can only manage to ride 1 or 2 days a week. But, every little bit helps.

2. My wife drives a Camry hybrid, which has been great for our situation. With her route to work, she can average over 40 mpg. If I take it to work, by choosing the right route I can get over 55 mpg.

3. As someone else mentioned, I try to be a lot smarter about being efficient with my trips. I do all my errands on the way home from work, and it's getting to be quite rare that I leave our house/yard on weekends.

We had also recently looked into replacing the Acura with a new vehicle, since it's starting to show its age, and isn't the most family-friendly (not so much the size, as it is the 2 door coupe is hard to get our small kids in and out). After looking at cars that got decent mileage and were in our price range, we didn't anything that we both liked and felt was a good buy. I think now that the manufacturers are now starting to respond to the consumer demand for more efficient cars, we'll probably have some better choices if we can wait another year and a half or so.

[David Axmann]

I've found that, in general, being too reactionary ultimately comes back to bite you, sort of like chasing returns in the stock market.

I'd have to guess that the economics of switching vehicles or adding a more efficient vehicle to one's fleet don't usually make sense. Every day, the value of poor MPG vehicles drop more and more. For every dollar the value drops that's more efficiency you need to gain in another vehicle to break even.

I can't even pretend to understand scooters:confused:. Are scooter buyers ones who were never had a car with ABS, airbags or seatbelts? Fuel prices go up so MPG trumps all other factors in a vehicle? Hate to tell you but no matter how high fuel prices get I'm not riding a 45mph scooter and my son's not riding in a tin can econobox.

As far as the impact on society and the environment, that's a separate issue, and probably not one that can be discussed without arguments. Why didn't I see scooters out and about 5 years ago? How come folks only want to 'save the planet' when gas prices go up? I feel that it always comes down to personal economics, unless you are a Hollywood type or politician who says one thing but does another.

[Sean Kinn]

It might not make economic sense to buy a Prius if you don't drive a lot of miles, but it would still be a good thing. Framing the discussion only in terms of our personal willingness to pay for the gas doesn't address what burning all that gas means for our future.

Ron

I agree with you, but the unfortunate fact now is that a lot of the SUV folks are upside down in their loans, or their vehicles are worth next to nothing on a trade. Between that and the huge price premium that the hybrids have up front, they simply aren't even an option for a lot of people. $21K is still a lot of money for a base Prius. I'm really hoping more folks start buying smaller efficient run-around cars like the Yaris, Fit, Corolla, Civic, etc. I know a lot of people I work with that have a real need for an SUV are parking them during the week, and buying used civics or something similar to commute in. This way they have the SUV when they really need it, but can commute to work in something more efficient.

There are simply too many variables in this issue to have a solution that fits all folks. Everyone just needs to evaluate their own needs/finances and do the best they can to get by. Heck, I'm just sort of happy knowing that some peopel are at least trying to cut down on unnecessary errands and such. This is here for good, and the fact is people don't like to change their habits. So, any sign of people changing is encouraging to me.

[Clifford Mescher]

As I see it, if a driver really needs a large vehicle for hauling kids, hauling supplies or towing trailers, it makes sense to stay with it.

For a lone driver who just likes being behind the wheel of a big SUV, I think it makes no sense whatsoever. It's wasteful and foolish. I also think it's none of my business if people want to be wasteful and foolish.
That is my sentiments.Clifford

[Ronald Kellison]

[quote=Alex Carrera;890164]S4 Ron? So about 14mpg? Well worth it if you ask me...

A6 4-door. On my last road trip down to WVa I got around 24-25 mpg at Interstate speeds. Noticeably less around town, which is why I ride the bus to/from work. . . about 8 miles each way and a ton of lights and stop signs. The 21.5 gallon tank puts a noticeable dent in the wallet when filled with 91 octane! However, the joy of driving something that is so much fun to drive offsets the pain of fill-ups. Gotta have SOME joy in life, right?

Ron

[Keith Marben]

scooters have been around since the dawn of internal combustion. They have always had their place. Its not like they have to be death machines. Maybe if drivers across the nation wake up from their dream state and pay more attention and respect to people who chose to ride a vehicle that gets over 100mpg. Then scooters wont be viewed as a fad, or seen as dangerous. the smaller ones only go 40mph hardly mach instant death speeds.

In reality a scooter could pay for itself with in like 2-3 years. If you factor everything in. Like cost of not having to buy a new car perhaps for an extra few years (minus off $30k) a scooter that costs $2k and has a resale value of like $1,200 or $1,300 after a few years. = actual cost of maybe $1000 give or take after maintainence, etc. plus you could drive 5,000 miles at $4 a gal for a fuel cost of around $200

Where as a car that gets 20mpg (lets say city driving) at $4 a gallon for the same 5,000 miles will cost $1000. now think about how that difference accellerates when gas prices go up, and they are going to go up.

$1000-$200 = $800 saved in fuel over the same
so in reality if you put 5,000 miles on a scooter instead of a car over a 3 year period you will pay aprox $1000 but save $800 so really its not nearly as a bad investment as people make it out to be.

But good luck finding one as scooter sales are up like 50% while Suv and pickup truck sales are down the same #s. Scooters are selling fast so its hard to deny that there is finally something to push americans into actually thinking about their "global impact" or whatever you choose to call it.

Granted, cant tow a trailer, bobcat, logs, tools etc with a scooter, so a truck is still utility/industrially viable for many people.

[Matt Day]

I just hope the rising gas prices are a blessing in disguise: that there is enough pressure from the American people to encourage the development of technologies for automotive transportation that are less harmful to our planet than internal combustion engines, as well as lessen our dependence on foreign oil supplies.

Personally I ride my bicycle to work 4/5 days a week and run my errands the other day and combine them with my roommates when I can. I love my Subaru forester as it can do just about anything, but it's the turbo model and I usually get about 20 mpg because I'm constantly hauling people around, usually with bikes on the roof.

[Alan Trout]

For me being an inspector a truck at this time makes the most sense. It is paid for and when I figure the cost of a more fuel efficient vehicle it still makes no fiscal sense to change. However if I have to drive any long distance and or I don't need the capabilities of a truck. I take my 05 diesel VW Jetta, I get 42 in town and close to 50MPG on the highway. The Truck gets parked for those trips.

Good Luck

Alan

[Warren Clemans]

I parked my car about 18 months ago and have been biking to work year-round. Once you get in the habit, it's not inconvenient at all. It doesn't work for everyone, of course. My route is 4 miles each way, I can dress business casual in the office (so can bring clothes in a shoulder bag), and rarely have to go anywhere during the day. Also, I live in a mild climate where the worst weather involves a bit of rain. On the one day when it snowed last winter, I took the bus (but could have made it to work faster if I had walked).

I've noticed a huge increase in bike commuting this summer. It's not uncommon to pull up to an intersection and have 10 or 12 bikes gather by the time the light turns green.

I'm now in the process of selling my car and will buy a nice italian bandsaw, among other things, with the proceeds. So see, this is a woodworking thread after all!

[David Axmann]

But good luck finding one as scooter sales are up like 50% while Suv and pickup truck sales are down the same #s. Scooters are selling fast so its hard to deny that there is finally something to push americans into actually thinking about their "global impact" or whatever you choose to call it.

I don't think a 50% increase in scooter sales has anything to do with people rethinking their 'global impact'. It's all about a sudden rise in gas prices. A gradual price increase over the past few years wasn't enough to spur a large increase in scooter sales and large decrease in SUV/truck sales. It's all about more money coming out of folk's pockets in a rapid, therefore more noticeable manner.

[Charles Wiggins]

Howard,

Interesting question.

To give you the background on my answer, I have to tell you that currently we have three vehicles - two rice-burners and a small beater pickup that I only use to haul stuff around. Up until a couple of months ago I was commuting 50 miles a day for work while my wife worked only half a mile from home, but always had tons of errands to run - so we had to have two cars. Recently, we have both changed jobs and now work at the same institution and roughly the same schedule so we ride together most of the time (there have only been four exceptions since May 1st).

We were talking the other day about getting rid of the little truck and the older car and buying one, newer, more reliable truck for our second vehicle and we are actually considering SCALING UP because it will be driven infrequently and having a larger truck would be more utilitarian. Let's face facts, you can just haul more stuff in a bigger truck. And if gas prices stay up there will be tons of them on the market, so we should be able to find a good one at well below standard "market" price.

I've driven large vehicles in the past and never been accosted by anyone because of it. But they always had a purpose. I actually use a truck as a truck. I guess I get a little annoyed by people who buy a big gas-guzzling vehicle like an over-sized pickup or SUV as some sort of trophy or toy - you know the ones - they've never hauled a stick of wood or been off-road - they just want it because it's cool, or whatever.

But I would never walk up and berate someone I didn't know because they had a big vehicle. You never know what their circumstances are. I have a friend who drives a big conversion van - because he's a paraplegic and the vehicle had to be large enough to allow him to remain in his wheelchair while he drives. He doesn't have the strength to hoist himself in and out of the chair without special equipment.

We will probably always look at fuel efficiency as a major factor when choosing our primary vehicle, even if gas drops back down to something we would now consider cheap like $1/gallon. After all, "a penny saved is a penny earned." Why use 20 gallons to get there when 10 will do it?

[Bruce Benjamin]

Cars are a major contributor to:
Pollution

So are volcanoes and forest fires. Worse than cars, actually.

Global warmng

Yeah? Sorry, but I don't buy it.

Dependence on foreign oil/balance of payments.

If we started drilling here in the U.S. we would all enjoy lower fuel prices.


Big cars are bigger contributors to the problem than small cars.
Ron

It depends on what the, "Problem" is. If the problem is being able to haul a load of tools/supplies or pull a large trailer or haul a bunch of kids then the small cars are bigger contributors to the problem. I don't like the 10mpg my Suburban gets but tell me how any car or small truck is going to pull a large trailer safely or haul what I sometimes haul.

Another question that people should ask is how much energy does it take to build a car? How much energy is a person saving by getting rid of their gas hog and paying a manufacturer to extract the raw materials, haul them to the various factories, haul the completed parts to the assembly factories, build the product, then haul it to your local dealer. It ain't free!

Bruce

[Eric DeSilva]

Not let foreign governments tell us how to live our lives and just keep doing what we've been doing?

Not sure I understand that one. I'm quite sure that the foreign governments setting oil prices would be happiest if our consumer culture rolled along indifferent to the price at the pump.

[Ken Garlock]

Last August I bought a 2007 demonstrator Mercedes Benz E-320 Bluetec diesel sedan. The only difference between a gasoline E-class, and the diesel is the engine, i.e. it is a full size 4-door sedan. The engine is a 208 hp, V-6, with a whopping 394 pound-feet of torque. (0-60 in 6.6 sec. and top end of 140 mph.) My point is that this is not a little can-hardly-get-in peanut whistle.

On an average day driving in moderate traffic, I get around 28 mpg, and on the expressway around 33 mpg. What I have noticed is that being hung up in stop and go traffic just kills your mileage. After all sitting still at a traffic light yields ZERO mpg.

The Bluetec diesel is emissions approved in over 40 states, and the 2009 model will be approved in ALL 50 states. My 2007 does NOT stink, blow smoke, and make noise. It starts as fast as you can turn the ignition key. Oh yes, oil change cycle is every 13,000 miles (Mobil-1 or equivalent.)

Somewhere I read that on average, a diesel engine gets about 30% better mileage than the corresponding gasoline engine. As I see it, if the cost of diesel fuel is less than 30% higher than gasoline, the diesel is ahead of the game. If you think 30% is too high, then try some other percentage....

NO, I am not suggesting that everyone run out and buy a German car. But M/B has shown that the technology is available to make clean running diesel vehicles. I fail to understand why more manufacturer don't jump on the diesel band wagon.

Diesel makes more sense than ethanol for two major reasons. First, ethanol contains only 2/3 the energy of gasoline. Second, the farmers get a bonus for growing corn for ethanol production. This means that land that would have been used for food crops like wheat are now growing ethanol corn. For the first time in US history, this country will be importing wheat. That is plainly bad thinking/planning on the part of the brain dead authorizing the corn bonus/subsidy.

[Brian Kent]

Lots if incremental changes.

Last job change 5 years ago I found a house 3 blocks from where I work.

Switched from driving 80 on the freeway (20-22 mpg) to driving 65 with cruise control (26-30 mpg).

Finding ways to drive less, combine trips, went from 1,400 miles per month to 777 miles per month over the last 4 years.

My car is a 6 cylinder (200 hp). I'll do just fine if the next one I buy is the same car with a 4 cylinder (190 hp) and much better mileage.

I do this because caring for creation, my nation, and my budget all line up the same direction.

[Ed Costello]

Ford F-550 crew cab with an 11 foot utility body and a new Land Rover LR-3 HSE V-8 I won't sell either of them. I will not feel guilty about it either. Both are nice and they serve my purpose. In the past my six man crew would have had to take two trucks the the job instead of the F-550 I drive now. I have changed my driving habits a bit but I am just gonna keep on paying. I will not moan about the price of fuel. I will just wait until an alternative comes along that will serve my purpose equally. I have a feeling I am in for a bit of a wait. I will not blame other countries for our plight. Our problems are our problems. Our government has to make some changes. Are people turning their thermostats down in the winter and up in the summer? Have they all asked their bosses to do the same at the office? My point is that I do my part to try to save the planet. I am an environmental remediation contractor. I just won't give up my trucks.

Best regards,
Ed Costello

[Peter Quinn]

My car is an AWD Chevy Express van, gets around 22MPG highway if I drive a moderate speed, gets around 13 MPG City. Actually very efficient considering the volume of stuff it can move. You would need to drive several vehicles at once to give you that much space, and that doesn't make sense. But if its not hauling tools and materials, its parked. No more casual trips in the van for me. My commuter is a 95 Nissan that gets better than 30MPG city or highway. Its a bit cranky and not as comfortable but fun to sport around in and cheap to operate.

My wife works from home. She bought a Dodge magnum with the 340HP multi-cylinder displacement Hemi. It gets between 24MPG highway to much less depending on how hard you push the pedal. She wanted a big safe car with AWD, lots of air bags and MASS for our new son to ride in. 5 days a week it uses NO fuel, even a hybrid can't beat that. And when I feel like being an over consuming fat bloated stupid American, as many of our world neighbors describe us, I push that pedal on the right and feel my but slide back into the seat.

Oh, and to that poky guy in the Explorer who speed up when I went to pass him on that back road last week, If your listening, did you really think that SUV stood a chance against the HEMI? Next time don't embarrass your self and just pull over or slow down. I used a lot of gas showing you how quickly my tail lights could disappear from the horizon.:D Plus that sort of stunt is discourteous and unsafe.

[Art Mulder]

I went ahead with this same thing. Ordered my scooter a couple weeks and hopefully will be getting it soon. I start the MSF course this friday. You're right, though, it'll take a good few years to come out ahead. ....
Of course, I have my own limits - I'm not quite to the point of riding a bicycle yet ... heh. Plus, a scooter's much more fun than a '05 Stratus.


I parked my car about 18 months ago and have been biking to work year-round. Once you get in the habit, it's not inconvenient at all. It doesn't work for everyone, of course. My route is 4 miles each way, I can dress business casual in the office (so can bring clothes in a shoulder bag), and rarely have to go anywhere during the day.

I'm with Warren.

Jason, I think you should have done a bit more math, and then you might have considered a bike... ;)

I could buy a BRAND NEW bike EVERY year just for what I save in parking charges. :eek: Forget about gas. Forget about insurance. Forget about payments/depreciation. Just parking charges. (It costs about $55/mth here to park the car near work.)

...art

[Peter Quadarella]

I won't go into all the details and arguments for or against stuff. I will just point out that cars are more than just utilitarian. If the money isn't a deterent I see no reason why someone shouldn't enjoy whatever type of vehicle they feel like driving. I mean, I'm not giving up my oil based finishes, or the plastic housing on my computer just yet ;).

[Greg Almeida]

Here, here Ben, I agree totally.Global warming is a farce. I'm 51 and I remember in the 70's it was global cooling.It is just the politically correct fad right now.15 years ago Ted Danson was crying about our oceans would be gone in 10 years.I think they are still here.Who are we to think we can destroy this planet anyway.The planet is cleaner then it has been in 30 years.I'm all for not polluting the earth but we as Americans are doing a pretty good job now.Countries like India and China are the big polluters now and they dont care.Drill now ,Drill here,Pay less.Sorry for the rant.

[Lee DeRaud]

I did hear where the air force flew an aircraft (B-1? not sure) on synthetic fuel with no surprises. I think they figured that if the fuel were produced in quantity, it'd cost $1.25/gal. No sure of the feedstock but I think it might have been coal.Last I heard, the test-bed was a B52, running two engines (out of 8 total) on the synthetic fuel. The thing to remember about this is that a gas-turbine engine can be set up to run on pretty much any flammable liquid, and the Air Force isn't subject to EPA emission regulations. So this is not necessarily a technology that will adapt easily (or at all) to car engines.

[Bob Kassmeyer]

In the 70's the embargo caused fuel prices to rise unnaturally. In today's society we are faced with an ever-increasing global economy. I am sure there is a great deal of profit taking on all sides, but mostly it is a result of supply and demand. If we were totally self sufficient then the price would be set only by our market, and probably be just as high. I have not yet changed my habits but believe I will soon have to. Just my opinion.

[Dan Lee]

Why is this thread in the General WWing forum :confused::confused:

[John Cooper2]

Not telling anyone else to do anything that they don't want to.
This is a few things that our family has done in the last two months.

Mar 1st this year. 2004 Dodge magnum ( I used it for work)
2001 Dodge Diesel 2500 (Parked 90% of the time, would use it for odd jobs I do, haul the 5th wheel for camping, and other work things.)
2003 Dodge minivan. Wifes car, (drove to work 2 days a week)
1989 Dodge minivan. Daughters car.

Today.

Sold the 2003 minivan, I now use a company car for work (cost about $120/mo) they buy the fuel.
Wife now drives the magnum and it's the family car. Has the v6 so it can get about 26 on the freeway, just under 20 around town. Much better than the van.
Still have the truck, but a tank of diesel will last more than a month now.
Bought an 88 BMW K100rs Motorcylce. Tons of fun and 45+ mpg. Do have a scooter that the son will ride to school come fall, 3 miles each way.

The biggest change has been planning trips better. No running to the store for one thing. We live in the country so most everything is 10-15 miles away. really try to think about when and what we do. Today had to go to the market and Sams Club. Timed trip to end when we could pick up our son from summer school. Before we would not have thought twice about it. Spend allot more time on the BMW for fun and for quick little trips. here in norther Ca you can ride a bike almost everyday of the year.

We still burn wood for heat in the winter and really try to minimize the AC.

I don't buy into the Global Warming BS at all. Theese changes for us have been all about the $$$$$.

It does make a difference and after you do it for awhile you don't even think about the changes you have made.

Other people I thing are doing the same. on my commute to work in the afternoon there has been a big decrease of traffic, I would say at least 25% less cars on the freeway compared to 6 months ago.

If someone wants to drive the Big Hummer, Have fun, don't bother me in the slightest. Want to drive a Prius, go ahead....... But don't tell me what I need to drive weather it's a Hummer or a Prius.....


Have a Great day

John

[Peter Quinn]

Why is this thread in the General WWing forum :confused::confused:

For myself and many wood workers I know my vehicle is the most expensive single tool I own, unless you have a big slider or a Felder base ball cap!:D Makes sense to, slow summer time and all.

[Phil Sanders]

I am a BIG person. I have a bad ankle which makes it hard (mildly painful) to get into and out of any vehicle.

Thus, 18 months ago I purchased an SUV, only because it fit me, the driver. Out of some 15 cars (sedans), SUVs and trucks, what I choose fit me.

I would be more than happy to drive a fuel efficient car.

But, I will not drive a vehicle that my head touches the interior roof of the car unless I lean the driver's seat back at a 30 degree angle.

I will not drive a car that my gas peddle leg is cramped and wedged between the seat and the driver's console.

When they make "cars" or sedans that fit me, I might change from an SUV. But until that happens, I remain over 6' tall, weigh more than 220 lbs, and the only thing that has changed in the last 15 years is the color of my hair.

(BTW: I had high hopes on the Chevy Malibu, but alas not the comfort of the SUV I bought. There were some sedans priced over $32.000.00, but since I cannot afford, why bother looking.)

Phil

[Bob Daniel]

It almost doesn't matter what we think... if I say I'm gonna drive my tank (OK, Astro Van) till the A-rabs pry it from my dead clutching fingers, and my wife says I should get a Honda Fit and be a responsible and green citizen like her, there's an argument to be made that we're both delusional.

What seems clear is that the oil will run out, eventually. Maybe the political turmoil is a bigger factor in the short run, but even if we all learn to live together in peace and harmony, unless something changes we'll be out of oil for casual personal use in our lifetime, or our kids' lifetimes...

And before THAT happens, the price will have tripled and the government will be doing fun stuff like restricting travel.

As a friend of mine is fond of saying:
"My advice to you: start drinking heavily..." :)

[Jason Beam]

I'm with Warren.

Jason, I think you should have done a bit more math, and then you might have considered a bike... ;)

I could buy a BRAND NEW bike EVERY year just for what I save in parking charges. :eek: Forget about gas. Forget about insurance. Forget about payments/depreciation. Just parking charges. (It costs about $55/mth here to park the car near work.)

...art

Sure ... but then i'd be in shape. One thing at a time!! :cool:

[Joe Jensen]

Fun topic :)
1) I think we need to preserve the right for choice in this country, let people drive what they want as long as they can afford it
2) Which is worse, driving a large SUV, daily commute 3 miles each way with no traffic, or a Civic 25 miles in rush hour traffic. I personally drive a big German luxury car 3 miles each way to work. But I think this again is a personal choice people should have the right to make.

I'm in the technology industry, and I have a very optimistic view of the future.
1) Much of the venture capital in the US is flowing into energy related companies. I've read that as much as 80% over the past 18 months.
2) With oil now at $150'ish per barrel, alternatives are now attractive.
3) The cost of new forms of energy is dropping rapidly. The cost of solar / kwh is dropping 40% every year.
4) Friends in this field tell me that bio diesel from seaweed is by far the most promising prospect. There are 10 or so problems to solve, and individual companies have found plausible solutions to 7 of them so far.

I predict that energy innovation will be yet another round of innovation from this country. We live in a great place.

[Michael Weber]

Biggest mystery to me is why this is still in the General Woodworking and power tools forum instead of the Off Topic area. Wednesday the moderators day off;)

[Paul Greathouse]

Coming to this thread kind of late in the game, it has been pretty entertaining to read everyones reasons for the actions they have taken.

I fit into alot of the situations that were discussed in one way or another but my story is simple. I own 3 vehicles that most people would call gas guzzlers. 1995 GMC 3/4 ton extended cab, 2003 GMC Yukon (Wifes truck)and just recently purchased my idea of a "fun to drive" vehicle, 1995 Chevy Tahoe 2 door 4WD, it will eventually get a lift kit and oversized tires. Like I said my idea of a "fun to drive" vehicle.

For my case, there is no gas saving vehicle I can find that would economically replace my paid off gas guzzlers. The Yukon gets just under 20mpg on Hwy trips. The new/old Tahoe gets 14mpg back and forth to work and the GMC pickup gets whatever it gets, I need a truck (country living, woodworking habit, ect).

I drive 44 miles round trip to work and have to cross a large bridge (100' tall would be a rough guess). I ain't doin that on a bicycle or a scooter. A motorcycle would be fun but I'm not sure if I can trust myself to be careful enough on it. Again, what I would consider a dependable car that would be good on gas is not economically feasable compared to my paid off trucks. I put gas in them and change the oil and they just keep going.

I work a 12 hour shift so I only make about 14 - 15 trips to work a month, so thats about a 220 mile savings/month over what a normal day worker would drive. Some days off, I spend all day in the shop and never leave the house, another gas savings. I also draw a better than average salary for the area that I live in, so that helps out too.

I'm 6'5" and 245lbs so I need a little more room than most people. Don't think I will be making many changes in the near future but if an electric plug in car is ever made that can cross the bridge I mentioned earlier and has the interior room I need, I'll be the first in line to buy one.

For all the "corn for fuel" critics, there is hope, there is a plant being constructed close by that will use what is being called bio-mass to make ethanol. As I understand it, bio-mass is any kind of waste vegatation. Anything from sugar cane refuse to certain types of wild grasses.

I ain't giving up my GM V8's yet. How in the world has this thread stayed in the general woodworking section this long?

[Stan Urbas]

For what I do now I bought what I thought was the minimum I could get by with. I have a small custom cabinet business, so if I am to stay in business I need some kind of capacity to haul. As far as I can see, that's either a pickup truck or a tow vehicle with a trailer. If I'm going to haul plywood and lumber, I need a full-size truck - not a mini.

Right now I have a Tundra with 76K miles on it. If I were to trade it in on anything new I'd have to shell out more money - it would take me quite a while to get it back regardless of the increased mileage. So my first conclusion is to keep the Tundra until I'd normally replace it.

There is a lot of talk about getting ethanol at around $1.25 to $1.50/gallon. If ethanol is quite a bit cheaper I'd need a way to burn it. So my next vehicle would have to be able to burn E85 as well as gasoline. Maybe I'll even convert my present one to dual-fuel. The other thing is I'll probably look to getting a smaller engine in my next pickup. I'm imagining a Tundra with a 6 or even a big 4. Anything to get better mileage.

Other than that, I'm whistling in the wind!

Howard, it's hard enough to figure out miles per dollar. Please don't expect me to think in terms of kilometers per Loonie!

[Steven DeMars]

I've found that, in general, being too reactionary ultimately comes back to bite you, sort of like chasing returns in the stock market.

I'd have to guess that the economics of switching vehicles or adding a more efficient vehicle to one's fleet don't usually make sense. Every day, the value of poor MPG vehicles drop more and more. For every dollar the value drops that's more efficiency you need to gain in another vehicle to break even.

I can't even pretend to understand scooters:confused:. Are scooter buyers ones who were never had a car with ABS, airbags or seatbelts? Fuel prices go up so MPG trumps all other factors in a vehicle? Hate to tell you but no matter how high fuel prices get I'm not riding a 45mph scooter and my son's not riding in a tin can econobox.

As far as the impact on society and the environment, that's a separate issue, and probably not one that can be discussed without arguments. Why didn't I see scooters out and about 5 years ago? How come folks only want to 'save the planet' when gas prices go up? I feel that it always comes down to personal economics, unless you are a Hollywood type or politician who says one thing but does another.

Although it is different for people based on where they live. If I lived in the central coast area of California as a friend of mine does, a bicycle would be really nice. Now for reality, I live in south Louisiana. My wife and I actually each have recumbent tadpole style trikes . . . hard to find a place to ride . .

1. Rain:mad:
2. 100% humidity ( would smell rather bad upon arriving at the office):mad:
3. unbelievable heat in the summer:mad:
4. very sub standard roads:mad:
5. very bicycle unfriendly drivers ( will curse you, throw things @ you, attempt to run you off the road, DUIs, dozens daily, etc . .):mad::mad::mad:
6. commute would be 50+ miles round trip.:(
7. can't live in the city, can not afford that many guns or burglar bars:rolleyes:

[Neal Clayton]

my rant...

a) in europe every car lot has a diesel sedan for sale that'll get upwards of 40+ miles per gallon. why? because they don't have the luxury of being lied into complacency by their politicians and auto makers. they don't get the prices we do because they produce none of their own, they had to solve the problem of fuel shortages and they have.

b) as close as mexico you can buy midsize trucks with 4 cylinder diesel engines that get 30+ miles per gallon. ford even makes them there, but not here..

c) rather than embracing the better technology and improving diesel distillation efficiency, ford and GM think their talent is in marketing 2 year gas guzzlers to people. to ensure this persists, the import duty on anything that might be considered a pickup truck is 25%. good thing our officials are looking out for our best interest and promoting competition eh? thanks for voting, your vote doesn't count.

d) despite all this, good thing we have the EPA looking out for environmental standards eh? oh those wacky environmentalists, it's all their fault! too bad no one has ever been able to explain to me how these environmentalists wield so much power with little or no money. funny how that works isn't it? maybe it's the fact that emissions standards that eliminate the use of diesel serve the purpose of artificially maintaining the demand for gasoline, which artificially maintains the margins on the refining business.

e) a simple solution to the above would be to remind the oil companies that we once broke up AT&T, and that similarly, they could also find themselves in time out from the refining business for about 20 years. but similar to the above mentioned environmentalists, we don't have any political pull (money contributed) so i don't think we need to be holding our breath on that one ;).

f) but hey, none of this really matters right? cause i hear they're making a hybrid Escalade that gets 19 and a half instead of 17. what a boon! and then there's always those prototype hydrogen and natural gas models that look real shiny in the rose garden when a president needs to make a speech about doing something regarding this mess. too bad the prototype doesn't work and will never be produced, but is a pretty good precursor to the federal pension buying another few million shares of GM and ford when the timing is right.

sadly, american industrial conquest died with henry ford, and henry villard was a german to start with to be honest. the countries we razed to the ground in WW2 have utterly defeated the american industry that henry ford created at its own game. the only thing keeping detroit solvent, nevermind profitable, is the above mentioned 25% import duty on trucks. and yes the unions have twisted the screws for many years so they have their share of the blame in it, but the deckhands didn't sink the titanic.

american ingenuity? haha! brazil is self sufficient on sugar cane diesel. brazil. american ingenuity is a fairy tale, sad as it may be.

and by far the best footnote to this sordid state of affairs is current pricing has nothing to do with supply or demand. it's bankrupt hedge funds trading oil futures on margins that they can't cover, thanks to enron's plan to turn out the lights in california with a basically anonymous playground for energy futures trading. gotta give it to ken lay, he's still screwing us from the grave. meanwhile republicans blame the mysterious and all powerful (and imaginary) environmental conspiracy, and democrats posture to blame republicans, and the only thing both sides agree on is fixing this fiasco by simply undoing what caused it would be bad (for them, not us).

fwiw, my two cars are a mercedes sedan and a toyota tacoma. and no i'll never own another detroit vehicle, they couldn't pay me to have one.

[Dave Stuve]

Gas at $4+ / gallon sucks because we've built so much of our society around cheap oil (and kept at it even after the 70s made it obvious that the cheap oil was going to vanish someday.) But there's an upside for me at least - I used high fuel prices to talk my boss into letting me work from home 3 days a week!

People can drive whatever they want, but I'm hoping people opt for smaller cars - I'd rather see that gas money rattling around my town keeping people employed than going up in smoke.

As for me, my 14-year old Subaru (used to be a ski bum) gets decent mileage, but I've cut way down on the little trips. (Except buying lumber of course!)

Dave

[Sean Kinn]

b) as close as mexico you can buy midsize trucks with 4 cylinder diesel engines that get 30+ miles per gallon. ford even makes them there, but not here..



EXACTLY... I just don't get it. A smallish diesel in a half ton truck would be perfect. They could still offer the gas engine for those folks that think their trucks are sports cars (you know the ones I mean...had one on my butt in the HOV lane last night doing 80+ mph...oh, and with only one person in it of course), the diesel would have more than enough umph with the proper gearing to haul a load and get the 30+ mpg. I'd love to see a Quad cab Toyota Tacoma sized 1/2 ton with about a 100-140hp diesel.

[Rob Luter]

I personally choose to do the work commute in an 11 year old VW Jetta (30 MPG avg) or a three year old Honda Motorcycle (45 MPG AVG). The thirsty lumber/firewood/dirt/landscape materials hauler (11 year old Dodge Ram) sits in the garage all but about 500 miles a year. I'm thinking of selling it and buying a utility trailer instead. My wife drives a fuel effecient car too (26 MPG avg). We both have a 12 mile one way commute and still spend a pot of money on gas. I really feel for the folks living out in the 'burbs around major metropolitan areas with hour long (or more) one way commutes.

I think that over the next few years we'll see a return to living closer to where you work and driving cars for reliable transportation rather than status. Cheap gas and low interest rates made it easy for many to build a huge house in the suburbs or out in the country and buy plush rides for the commute. The length of the commute could be rationalized because of the nice quality of life at home and the nice quality of the commute in the Lexus or Escalade. Now the cost of the commute is cutting in to the quality of life at home. For some, the cost of the commute has resulted in financial overextension.

[David G Baker]

I have an older heavy duty 3/4 ton Chevy that I keep in the garage and only use for trips to the Borg. Not going to get rid of it unless I can get something comparable that gets great gas mileage and doesn't cost an arm and a leg to purchase. This truck has a modified engine that is designed for serious towing and gets around 8 miles per gallon of gas. With the major slow down in truck sales this may be a good time to go shopping.

[Stephen Edwards]

In the 70's the embargo caused fuel prices to rise unnaturally. In today's society we are faced with an ever-increasing global economy. I am sure there is a great deal of profit taking on all sides, but mostly it is a result of supply and demand. If we were totally self sufficient then the price would be set only by our market, and probably be just as high. I have not yet changed my habits but believe I will soon have to. Just my opinion.

The ever-increasing global economy that you mention ensures that whatever amount of oil is extracted here is going to have very little impact on reducing gas prices here. If the price of "our" oil is to be determined by global market demand, that's where it will be sold, on the world market.

[Chris Kennedy]

I am lucky -- I live close to work (2.5 miles), so unless I have to take the boy in the morning, I usually bike to work. It's an option for me. My wife has a 60 mile round trip, and even when gas was considerably cheaper, we bought a small, reliable little Toyota echo. Bad mileage for her is 38 mpg. My car is considerably larger, because I'm 6'4". Like a lot of people, we are trying to conserve fuel whenever possible, but we are more inclined toward "greener" measures anyway.

I have no faith in biofuels/hydrogen fuel cells or a lot of these alternative fuels. There is a thermodynamic failing. Octane has long been known to be one of the most potent energy sources for combustion. Ethanol is nowhere even close. More to the point, the amount of biomass needed to generate ethanol for any sizable population of cars is ludicrous. Also, farming that much biomass requires considerable energy. The return is small.

The same is true for hydrogen fuel cells. Even if the system becomes viable, there is the issue of where are we going to get the hydrogen. The popular media seems to think that we will just hydrolize water. The only problem is that hydrolizing water requires significant energy.

I haven't read every post on this thread, so maybe somebody has mentioned it and I haven't seen it. But I haven't seen any one really mention the idea of public transportation. It seems ingrained in the American psyche that we must all have vehicles.

I know that a lot of public transportation networks are not very good, but that is generally a reflection of the fact that people won't use it. In areas where there is known to be a sizable population dependent on public transportation, the system is generally very good. Maybe some of the ethanol subsidies should go to light rails and better buses.

Of course, in rural areas, it isn't an option. But in any city of 100,000 or more, it really isn't that hard to make a decent, centralized system.

Cheers,

Chris

[Travis Rassat]

I haven't read every post on this thread, so maybe somebody has mentioned it and I haven't seen it. But I haven't seen any one really mention the idea of public transportation. It seems ingrained in the American psyche that we must all have vehicles.

I know that a lot of public transportation networks are not very good, but that is generally a reflection of the fact that people won't use it. In areas where there is known to be a sizable population dependent on public transportation, the system is generally very good. Maybe some of the ethanol subsidies should go to light rails and better buses.

Of course, in rural areas, it isn't an option. But in any city of 100,000 or more, it really isn't that hard to make a decent, centralized system.

Cheers,

Chris

That's a good point about public transportation. Where I'm at (in the Indianapolis, IN, area) it is not real well-developed, and also gets knocked because "that's what poor people use." Our love affair with our perceived status keeps us from doing the right thing. They've been talking about a light rail system since many years before I moved to the area, and I imagine that it will still continue to be just talk. The money's probably already been allocated to a new sports stadium or something...

[Neal Clayton]

EXACTLY... I just don't get it. A smallish diesel in a half ton truck would be perfect. They could still offer the gas engine for those folks that think their trucks are sports cars (you know the ones I mean...had one on my butt in the HOV lane last night doing 80+ mph...oh, and with only one person in it of course), the diesel would have more than enough umph with the proper gearing to haul a load and get the 30+ mpg. I'd love to see a Quad cab Toyota Tacoma sized 1/2 ton with about a 100-140hp diesel.


heh, yeah, i don't get those people at all. my truck goes to the lumber yard, the dump, and to my folks' farm to drop off bags full of sawdust they use for mulch. that's about it.

for the price some people pay for these trucks you can buy two cars, too.

i can understand people with construction businesses that have to haul their welders and bobcats around every day, or people with farms that have to haul horses and cattle. but the average person with that gigantic 3/4 ton truck just baffles me. i paid 17,000 for my 4 cylinder tacoma brand new. and on the off chance i need to haul something beyond its capacity, i'll just go to enterprise and rent a 3/4 ton truck for a day. that's a helluva lot more economical than filling up that hemi people drive around every two or three days.

[Bob Moyer]

http://www.fugly.com/media/IMAGES/Random/super-fat-man-on-a-scooter.jpg

Why a scooter is not in my furure.

[Bruce Benjamin]

EXACTLY... I just don't get it. A smallish diesel in a half ton truck would be perfect. They could still offer the gas engine for those folks that think their trucks are sports cars (you know the ones I mean...had one on my butt in the HOV lane last night doing 80+ mph...oh, and with only one person in it of course),

So, if he was on your butt doing 80+ doesn't that mean you were also doing 80+?

It doesn't take a gas engine to make a truck go fast. The most powerful trucks on the road these days, the ones that can smoke the tires for 50+ yards are diesel trucks. It's so easy to modify a modern diesel engine to pump out way more HP and torque than stock. Gas engines have never been so easy to modify and they've never displayed the same results as a diesel engine with relatively minor modifications. The bonus with the diesels is that you can make, (for example) a Dodge Cummins pump out well over 500 HP and over 1000 ftlbs of torque and actually get better fuel mileage under normal driving conditions. This is just one example from a friend of mine who's done this to his truck. This is done with a simple plug-in electronic box and an air intake. He hasn't even installed the new injectors yet. That is one fast and fun dually!:cool:

Bruce

[Bruce Benjamin]

The ever-increasing global economy that you mention ensures that whatever amount of oil is extracted here is going to have very little impact on reducing gas prices here. If the price of "our" oil is to be determined by global market demand, that's where it will be sold, on the world market.

I'm pretty sure there are a lot of people who would disagree with your logic on this one. I'm one of them.

Bruce

[Bruce Benjamin]

I am lucky -- I live close to work (2.5 miles), so unless I have to take the boy in the morning, I usually bike to work. It's an option for me. My wife has a 60 mile round trip, and even when gas was considerably cheaper, we bought a small, reliable little Toyota echo. Bad mileage for her is 38 mpg. My car is considerably larger, because I'm 6'4". Like a lot of people, we are trying to conserve fuel whenever possible, but we are more inclined toward "greener" measures anyway.Chris

I'm in the same situation regarding small cars versus my large frame. I rent a car about every 2 weeks and to save money I get the, "Intermediate" size. These are vehicles like the Ford Focus, Dodge Caliber, Chevy Cobalt, etc. I tried the, "Compact" class of cars a few times and it was torture. The worst was the Kia Rio. Who are these cars made for??? Midgets? Even the Intermediate cars are cramped and uncomfortable for me but I only have a 2 1/2 hour, (each way) trip so I suffer through it. I still usually end up with a bruised dent in my right leg and a sore left shoulder. Every Saturday when I return I am so looking forward to getting back into my big and comfy Suburban. I don't even care so much about the 10mpg after the beating my body takes in those econoboxes. I will NEVER buy a small car!




I have no faith in biofuels/hydrogen fuel cells or a lot of these alternative fuels. There is a thermodynamic failing. Octane has long been known to be one of the most potent energy sources for combustion. Ethanol is nowhere even close. More to the point, the amount of biomass needed to generate ethanol for any sizable population of cars is ludicrous. Also, farming that much biomass requires considerable energy. The return is small.

Currently it takes about 20% more energy to produce ethanol than the ethanol itself produces. Can you believe how many suckers believe that this is the answer? In addition to the energy deficit there is also the problem with farmers growing corn for fuel instead of growing wheat and corn for food. Then there's the problem with distributing it throughout the nation. There are no pipelines. It's taking diesel trucks to deliver the ethanol. America has so many suckers that buy whatever lies the people pushing ethanol are selling. It seems like such a great idea...Until you actually just spend a few minutes thinking it through.




The same is true for hydrogen fuel cells. Even if the system becomes viable, there is the issue of where are we going to get the hydrogen. The popular media seems to think that we will just hydrolize water. The only problem is that hydrolizing water requires significant energy.

I don't know too much about this but there are people working on more efficient methods of producing the hydrogen and doing it right at or near the, "Pump". Wind and/or solar generators right at the site is one direction they're thinking. As I said, I don't know too much about it but I do know enough to know that this won't work everywhere and it's not the ultimate answer. But it isn't a dead end, yet.




I haven't read every post on this thread, so maybe somebody has mentioned it and I haven't seen it. But I haven't seen any one really mention the idea of public transportation. It seems ingrained in the American psyche that we must all have vehicles.
I know that a lot of public transportation networks are not very good, but that is generally a reflection of the fact that people won't use it. In areas where there is known to be a sizable population dependent on public transportation, the system is generally very good. Maybe some of the ethanol subsidies should go to light rails and better buses.

Of course, in rural areas, it isn't an option. But in any city of 100,000 or more, it really isn't that hard to make a decent, centralized system.

Cheers,

Chris

Most of the U.S. doesn't have a decent public transportation system available and for most places it's not really practical. In major cities they can be a good idea for many people. But they certainly won't work for everyone. In my relatively small town of 90K the bus system is very impractical for most people. I live in a subdivision. It's a half mile walk to the bus stop and I think it only stops there once an hour, (at best). It's been between 100 and 115 degrees here for the past 3 weeks. In the winter it rains a lot. I have 2 kids that need rides to and from school everyday during the school year.(No bus service here) Have you ever gone grocery shopping for a family of 4 and taken the bus to do it? Yeah, that's practical. :rolleyes: I'm not saying that the bus doesn't work for some people but there is a reason why it's mostly poor people taking the bus around here. It's because it's so inconvenient that the majority of the people taking it are those who have no other choice.

Many years ago I lived in New York. I took the subway all the time. It was the filthiest part of the day. But it was cheap and it was usually pretty convenient. When my wife and I lived in the S.F. Bay Area and then in Portland, Or. I had a car and my wife took the bus. I was a chef and had a long commute and usually didn't leave work until after midnight. There were no buses at that time. My wife has so many stories ranging from scary to disgusting about the sights, sounds, and smells she encountered when riding those buses. Off the top of my head I remember her describing 2 different times where she had to punch people, knocking one of them out. She also had 2 different people arrested for harassing her. The bus driver helped her with that.

The point is that in many/most places public transportation is filthy and disgusting at best and downright dangerous at worst. I never had any problems on the NY subways because I always looked like the guy who was going to mug you.:eek::D

Bruce

[Bruce Benjamin]

That's a good point about public transportation. Where I'm at (in the Indianapolis, IN, area) it is not real well-developed, and also gets knocked because "that's what poor people use." Our love affair with our perceived status keeps us from doing the right thing. They've been talking about a light rail system since many years before I moved to the area, and I imagine that it will still continue to be just talk. The money's probably already been allocated to a new sports stadium or something...

In many places, such as in my town of 90K, the reason people view public transportation as, "What poor people use" is because it's the truth. Why? Because it's so inconvenient and impractical for most people it just doesn't work. If you absolutely have no choice other than to walk then it works for some people. Usually those people are poor. Yes, people other than poor people do use it here but you have to live in the right place and it has to fit your schedule. Or you better bring your bike, skateboard or walking shoes because the bus stops are usually few and far between.

Even in many big cities public transportation won't work for many people. I've lived in a few major cities. NY, San Francisco Bay Area, Portland. NY was the only place where I could pretty much get relatively close to where ever I wanted when ever I wanted. But I was also young and single at the time. I remember many times where I had to walk many blocks in very bad wheather to get to where I wanted to go. I don't recall the schedules in downtown SF but if you wanted to leave SF late at night and go to one of the nearby towns you were out of luck. Same with Portland. For both SF and Portland you had to do plenty of walking if you weren't right downtown.

Bruce

[Pete Simmons]

I have been holding off mentioning my new website but this thread seems just the place for it.

Take a look at

http://www.FuelFrenzy.com

There are no ads there and I am not selling anything. Just a site with a lot of (hopefully accurate) information about energy use and storage.

Agree or disagree with what is presented I do not care but if you see any blantant errors please let me know.

The site has alot of info on some of todays hot energy topics like hydrogen and electric cars.

As I say on the first page of FuelFrenzy.com

1. Gas is a deal at $10 or maybe even $20 per gallon because of the amount of energy a gallon conviently stores.

2. The real problem is 7 Billion people of the world using energy like it will always be cheap and comes from a limitless supply.


You might check out the sections on Battery Powered Cars and/or Energy Storage.

The Energy Storage area shows just how difficult is is to store and carry the amount of energy that is contained in 8 gallons of gas.

[Cliff Rohrabacher]

I'm waiting for fuel to hit $12.00 a gallon.
I'm going to let someone pay me to take their full size Hummer away.
Then I'll spend about $8-Gees and convert it to electrical.

[Bruce Benjamin]

heh, yeah, i don't get those people at all. my truck goes to the lumber yard, the dump, and to my folks' farm to drop off bags full of sawdust they use for mulch. that's about it.

for the price some people pay for these trucks you can buy two cars, too.

i can understand people with construction businesses that have to haul their welders and bobcats around every day, or people with farms that have to haul horses and cattle. but the average person with that gigantic 3/4 ton truck just baffles me. i paid 17,000 for my 4 cylinder tacoma brand new. and on the off chance i need to haul something beyond its capacity, i'll just go to enterprise and rent a 3/4 ton truck for a day. that's a helluva lot more economical than filling up that hemi people drive around every two or three days.

Well, where do you draw the line on what is acceptable? Where ever you stand? Do you need that pickup everyday? How about even every week? Couldn't you get by with something that got even better mileage and just buy a tiny trailer or rent from Enterprise more often? My point is that everyone has specific needs and requirements but it seems that their situation is their idea of the threshold between right and wrong.

I have a travel trailer that I pull a few times a year. I sometimes haul my wife and kids and several of their friends. I sometimes need to haul bulky tools and supplies for my work. I can only afford my 3/4 ton 98 Suburban with a 454 that I bought before gas prices really went nuts. It does all of the tasks I listed above and nothing smaller would do the job. Renting from Enterprise won't work because they don't want you to tow a trailer with their trucks. I don't need the extra space for work or hauling kids everyday or even every week. Sometimes not even every month. But renting a pickup is obviously not an option for hauling expensive, (easy to steal) tools or a bunch of kids. I know several other people with a very similar situation to mine.

I can't afford to buy a more fuel efficient car or truck right now. They ain't cheap and neither is the insurance and maintenance on two vehicles. My wife has a very old and tired Jeep Cherokee that just sits in the driveway. It's ok for occasional use but it's got way over 200K miles on it. She drives a company truck.

So obviously your standards of what people should be doing are fine for you but not for many other people. Everyone has their own situation and it's surprising how many people forget that.

Bruce

[Glen Gunderson]

I'm pretty sure there are a lot of people who would disagree with your logic on this one. I'm one of them.

Bruce

Seems pretty straightforward to me. I think it's a little foolish to think that drilling in ANWR (or other areas) is going to lower world energy prices to any significant degree. Even if the increased supply does have any effect on prices, OPEC could easily manipulate the price back up by adjusting their production. To think that drilling in ANWR is going to lower prices at the pump is extremely optimistic, and in my opinion, misguided.

There are, however, some good reasons to drill in ANWR:

-it may be required to maintain the viability of the Alaskan pipeline
-it gives the US slightly more control over its energy (it would reduce required imports by a few percent)
-barring a complete replacement of oil by some other resource or technology, it's going to get drilled eventually. It's ridiculous to think that a known source of oil will go untapped in the future as the resource becomes more and more scarce
-it could provide valuable jobs for Americans. See the oil sands in Alberta for an example of the wealth that can be generated by an oil project.

ANWR (as well as offshore sites) will be very valuable resources. However, there is little to suggest that the world market price of oil could be manipulated by US production. Simply put, it is too small to have much of an effect. The only way it could really lower prices is if the US government nationalized it and sold it to the country at below market prices, but I really don't think most Americans want to go down that road.

[Bruce Benjamin]

Seems pretty straightforward to me. I think it's a little foolish to think that drilling in ANWR (or other areas) is going to lower world energy prices to any significant degree. Even if the increased supply does have any effect on prices, OPEC could easily manipulate the price back up by adjusting their production. To think that drilling in ANWR is going to lower prices at the pump is extremely optimistic, and in my opinion, misguided.

There are, however, some good reasons to drill in ANWR:

-it may be required to maintain the viability of the Alaskan pipeline
-it gives the US slightly more control over its energy (it would reduce required imports by a few percent)
-barring a complete replacement of oil by some other resource or technology, it's going to get drilled eventually. It's ridiculous to think that a known source of oil will go untapped in the future as the resource becomes more and more scarce
-it could provide valuable jobs for Americans. See the oil sands in Alberta for an example of the wealth that can be generated by an oil project.

ANWR (as well as offshore sites) will be very valuable resources. However, there is little to suggest that the world market price of oil could be manipulated by US production. Simply put, it is too small to have much of an effect. The only way it could really lower prices is if the US government nationalized it and sold it to the country at below market prices, but I really don't think most Americans want to go down that road.

Sorry, Glenn, I'm still not buying it. I'm not sure who you are getting your ideas from and you seem to be pretty convinced that they are actually facts. You and I see this issue so differently that I think we should just agree to disagree. :)

Bruce

[Michael Schumacher]

I've got a Dodge 2500 Diesel truck - this beast is fun to drive, but not with price of diesel hitting $4.75 around here now. This last few months I've been popping it out of gear and coasting down the hills. This last tank my mileage has gained 2mpg - which when you are getting 16-18mpg, that is a good increase.

However, my bike, okay, bicycle gets pretty good mileage. Work is only 4.1 miles one way, and I can get there fairly safely - just have to watch out on crosswalks. The good thing is I get exercise and in the process, loose some weight. By riding the bike, it is actually helping our budget...as we just saw on the news that our power company will be rising rates since the new coal contract is a lot more than they were planning on. Don't know how much, but I sure hope that we can burn some firewood this year.

Michael

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Folks,

Political statements are against the TOSs of SMC. This thread is being watched closely. If it becomes political it will be closed and moved from public viewing.

[Glen Gunderson]

Sorry, Glenn, I'm still not buying it. I'm not sure who you are getting your ideas from and you seem to be pretty convinced that they are actually facts. You and I see this issue so differently that I think we should just agree to disagree. :)

Bruce

Would you care to rebut any of the "facts" I presented? I'm not really looking at this as a political issue. I'm from Canada, so I could care less about the political ramifications within the USA nor do I really care about US energy self sufficiency, except where it effects world stability or my own country.

I've seen no evidence that by adding between 0.5%-1% to the world's oil production that the US could drive the price of oil downwards. Within the next few years the Alberta tar sands will produce 5 times the number or barrels of oil per day that ANWR would ever be capable of, yet the price of oil has quadrupled since they stepped up production there. World oil prices are affected by factors much larger than whether or not the United States (or Canada) decides to drill for oil in certain areas or not (though recent actions by the White House seem to have calmed speculation down a little and led to lower oil prices over the past week).

I'm not trying to get people harangued into a political debate over the matter, I'm just taking issue with the notion that increased drilling is a panacea for high oil prices. There are many reasons to support increased drilling of oil, but I've yet to see any evidence that prices can be affected long term by the United States' fairly insignificant (on a world scale) increase in oil production.

Frankly, despite your backhanded jab that suggests the contrary, I do have a fairly open mind about this issue and I'd welcome any corrections you may have, as I am by no means an expert on the issue.

[Jim Becker]

Well, when I decided that an SUV was the right vehicle for us back in late 2005...I bought a Highlander Hybrid. So I have my "cake" and it doesn't eat as much, too. (I average 27 mpg in hot weather and 25 in cold weather)

[Ed Costello]

Hello,
I have been thinking about this for a while now and this is all I can come up with. My AAA membership gives me free towing.

I am going to try to get AAA to tow me to work in the morning and then tow me home in the afternoon. I wonder how long it will take for them to catch on!!!!

Cheers,
Ed Costello

[Rob Russell]

Hello,
I have been thinking about this for a while now and this is all I can come up with. My AAA membership gives me free towing.

I am going to try to get AAA to tow me to work in the morning and then tow me home in the afternoon. I wonder how long it will take for them to catch on!!!!

Cheers,
Ed Costello

We're AAA members too. It seems to me that there is an annual limit to the number of free tows you get. That, plus you're waiting for the tow.

Ride a bicycle to work instead. I did starting last year. I'm down more than 10 pounds and it's great for my heart (just not my wife's, who thinks I'm crazy).

[Michael Morgan]

And someone may have already said something similar but here is how I look at it. My neighbor has a 04 loaded suburban that gets 14mpg. She has been trying to sell it for months and has had no takers. It only has 30,000 miles on it. It's paid off and she wants a smaller car to get better mileage but look at this.

$40,000.00

Purchase price

$17,000.00

Selling Price

30000

Mileage

$0.77

Ownership Cost Per Mile

14

m.p.g.

2,142.86

Gas used (gallons)

$4.00

Cost per Gallon

$8,571.43

Total Gas Cost

$0.29

Gas Cost Per Mile

$0.02

Maintenance cost per Mile



$1.07

Total Vehicle Cost Per Mile


So her cost per mile was $1.07 for the 30,000 miles she drove it. If she could sell it now for $17,000
If she would just run it till it had 150,000 miles her cost per mile would be cut in half if she sold it for $8,000 then

$40,000.00

Purchase price

$8,000.00

Selling Price

150000

Mileage

$0.21

Ownership Cost Per Mile

14

m.p.g.

10,714.29

Gas used (gallons)

$4.00

Cost per Gallon

$42,857.14

Total Gas Cost

$0.29

Gas Cost Per Mile

$0.04

Maintenance cost per Mile



$0.54

Total Vehicle Cost Per Mile

[Jim Becker]

Mike, you do make a good point...just running out to buy a new, more fuel efficient vehicle, for the gas mileage may very well not make sense, especially when the current vehicle is paid off and not requiring a lot of maintenance. And this does include a family-sized SUV. The cost to buy/sell has to be factored into the total cost of ownership as you have done. I was actually speaking to my dad the other day about this...he loves our Prius, but his Cadillac is paid for and not generating much in the way of maintenance cost. It runs on regular and gets 26+ MPG on the highway. It would not make any sense at all for him to buy a new vehicle right now. However, when it IS time for the next one, a more fuel efficient choice begins to make sense.

That all said, we both drive hybrid vehicles. While we do enjoy the fuel economy, our decision was also predicated on our desire for lower emissions and to make our purchase help encourage technology change. And since I'll be paid off on my 2006 soon...and average only about 1000 miles a month (including vacation travel), my long-term cost per mile will be reasonable, too. Professor Dr. SWMBO was at the point that her 2002 Prius needed replaced as it was getting close to 100K miles...so she chose to stick with the line and buy an '08. There was pretty much no cost difference between it and something with comparable comfort, features and interior room that would appeal to us, so that was pretty much a wash.

[Ben Rafael]

A ford dealer near me has discounted new F150 trucks 33% off of list. Not bad if you need a truck, even with the price of fuel. The cost of flooring the trucks is costing so dealers are cutting their losses. If fuel goes up more the discounts could be quite large. Figure a $15,000 discount on a $45,000 truck, even at $5 a gallon that buys a lot of gas.

[Pete Simmons]

Jim - In my webpage FuelFrenzy.com I may sound like a Prius basher.

I am not.

Your quote as to your reason to buy the hybrid says it all and I agree -

"predicated on our desire for lower emissions and to make our purchase help encourage technology change".

You know the long term mileage you get. I hope it is well above average for an auto of that size.

I see the 2 mileage points of the Hybrids being Regen Braking and quick and efficient engine shut off and restart. I wonder if the regen braking is offset by the weight of the battery and motors you need to carry around but I am sure easy shut down and restart will save fuel.

Either way the awareness the hybrids have brought to the public and the boost to our need for technology change makes the hybrids well worth the investment.

I am anxious to see the next generation of Plug-in-Hybrids become available.

[Jim Becker]

Pete, I'd really like to see the auto engine shut down feature put on all vehicles...that alone would save some meaningful fuel. It just plain makes sense as so much fuel is burned sitting at lights and stop signs, especially for left turns. (One reason a major delivery service optimized their routes to favor right turns as much as possible)

[Bart Leetch]

I bought an 08 Buick Enclave in August 07 and opted for FWD vs AWD because the FWD was advertised to get 2 mpg better on the highway (22 vs. 24).

In real life I'm eking out 25-26mpg if I drive like granny on the freeway. For a 5000lb vehicle hauling four folks and their gear, I think 25mpg is remarkable.

We have the Enclave for hauling people and an Avalance for hauling stuff. Were not changing anything except to be more cautious about frivolous trips that can be combined into one.


Scott this is interesting in that Dad got 28 MPG in 1955 with a 1953 Willies car with a F head 6 cylinder motor half of the valves in the head the other half in the block)with 4 people & all their luggage going to Vancouver Canada from Vancouver Washington & back.

[Pete Simmons]

Yes, quick, easy and efficient engine shutdown and restart on all new cars would save huge amounts of fuel.

But - It would take some changes. Today's battery and starter system could never withstand the constant use and charging systems would need a boost to keep up with power draw.

[Jim Becker]

Well...I agree with you, Pete, but it's got to be doable since it's working great on the Toyota and Honda hybrids. (and I have to assume at least the Ford, too, since that's derived from Toyota's earlier design as far as I know) The investment/cost differential would still be a lot less than a full hybrid and reduce both fuel consumption and emissions.

[Bart Leetch]

Well...I agree with you, Pete, but it's got to be doable since it's working great on the Toyota and Honda hybrids. (and I have to assume at least the Ford, too, since that's derived from Toyota's earlier design as far as I know) The investment/cost differential would still be a lot less than a full hybrid and reduce both fuel consumption and emissions.


Interesting idea,but what happens if you see your going to get rear ended & need to punch it & get out of the way? I ask this because this is exactly what happened to my mother. She saw it coming & saw that the way was clear & punched her gas peddle & jumped across the intersection.

[Walt Nicholson]

Having been around the car business all my life I have seen some of this before back in the 70's. Before making any rash decisions about dumping what you have and buying small it is really important to do the math first.
The national average for driving is 15,000 miles per year. If your SUV or truck averages (overall in and out of town) only 15 mpg you'll use 1,000 gallons of fuel. At $4.00 per that's $4000. If you buy something that gets double the mileage and averages 30 overall. (there are a few that will do that but not as many as you think despite all the claims) the math says you will spend $2,000 for fuel. Now consider that you will get 3 to 8 thousand less for your trade than normal (it's a gas guzzler remember) and usually pay sticker or over for the "economy" car because of the great demand right now. That 5 to 9 thousand dollar "premium" to make the trade will take you 2 to 5 years of gas saving just to break even before you start "saving" money. Now factor in what comfort, room for the family, friends, ability to "haul butt" if you want to and see what that is worth to you after you reach your "break even" point. Assuming you don't get tired of being cramped, underpowered, etc. and trade the thing sooner. None of the above factors in the "save the planet, sky is falling, global warming panic but is just basic economics.

[Travis Rassat]

Well...I agree with you, Pete, but it's got to be doable since it's working great on the Toyota and Honda hybrids. (and I have to assume at least the Ford, too, since that's derived from Toyota's earlier design as far as I know) The investment/cost differential would still be a lot less than a full hybrid and reduce both fuel consumption and emissions.

Jim and Pete,

If I'm not mistaken, you are describing the Belt-Alternator-Starter system being used on the Saturn Vue, Saturn Aura, and Chevy Malibu mild hybrids. When my wife and I bought our Camry Hybrid about a year and half ago, I was skeptical of this system thinking it wasn't adding enough value. I've since changed my mind on it, especially considering generation 2 is coming out:

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/03/04/geneva-08-gm-announces-new-second-generation-mild-hybrid-syste/

I think the beauty is how easily it can be adapted to an existing vehicle design. It's probably a bit of a stop-gap technology, but as slowly as the automotive industry is moving on hybrids (probably more because of battery tech than anything), it could serve a useful purpose for quite some time. I believe this concept is being considered by BMW and Mercedes, as well as a few others.

[Dennis Peacock]

What I'd like to see is a way to "tele-transport" so I can go and visit all my Creeker Friends without spending any money on fuel cost. ;)

[Glenn Clabo]

What I'd like to see is a way to "tele-transport" so I can go and visit all my Creeker Friends without spending any money on fuel cost. ;)

Aye Captain...me thinks the Transporter has malfunctioned. The bibs are here...but there's no Dennis!!

http://www.aceuniforms.com/osCommerce/catalog/images/83294NB_LG.jpg

[Bruce Benjamin]

Having been around the car business all my life I have seen some of this before back in the 70's. Before making any rash decisions about dumping what you have and buying small it is really important to do the math first.
The national average for driving is 15,000 miles per year. If your SUV or truck averages (overall in and out of town) only 15 mpg you'll use 1,000 gallons of fuel. At $4.00 per that's $4000. If you buy something that gets double the mileage and averages 30 overall. (there are a few that will do that but not as many as you think despite all the claims) the math says you will spend $2,000 for fuel. Now consider that you will get 3 to 8 thousand less for your trade than normal (it's a gas guzzler remember) and usually pay sticker or over for the "economy" car because of the great demand right now. That 5 to 9 thousand dollar "premium" to make the trade will take you 2 to 5 years of gas saving just to break even before you start "saving" money. Now factor in what comfort, room for the family, friends, ability to "haul butt" if you want to and see what that is worth to you after you reach your "break even" point. Assuming you don't get tired of being cramped, underpowered, etc. and trade the thing sooner. None of the above factors in the "save the planet, sky is falling, global warming panic but is just basic economics.

Walt, I agree with you on this but there's more... Unless the gas-guzzler was ancient and worn out and you needed to buy a new car anyway, it doesn't necessarily save you money to buy a new car. Even then, sometimes it's cheaper to fix up an older car than buy a new one. However, some people want to buy new because they think they are going to save the planet or save the U.S. economy buy burning less gas. Well, that may or may not happen, (I suspect not). But another reason to keep the gas-guzzler is that it takes a lot of energy and raw materials to get that new car. It takes energy to mine the raw materials or recycle the same materials. It takes energy to transport and process those materials. It takes energy to transport the processed materials. It takes energy to build the parts, transport the parts, assemble the parts, and transport the assembled cars. I have no way of knowing what the net energy savings is when you compare the energy used by the old but reliable car versus the combined energy consumption required to get the new more fuel efficient car into your driveway. But it isn't as much as those people who paid a premium for their new Prius pretend it is.

Another thing is what happens to your old gas-guzzler when you sell it? If it is still a reliable car/truck then it's going to be sold to someone else. It's still going to be driven and it's still going to use a lot of fuel and produce more pollution. If you don't crush it then you're just passing on the problem, not eliminating it.

The green tree huggers are not only whining about saving energy and reducing pollution but they are also whining about not mining our other resources and not just throwing everything away. Buying a new car that's fuel efficient isn't quite as fuel efficient and clean as some people think.

Bruce

[Lee DeRaud]

Well...I agree with you, Pete, but it's got to be doable since it's working great on the Toyota and Honda hybrids. (and I have to assume at least the Ford, too, since that's derived from Toyota's earlier design as far as I know) The investment/cost differential would still be a lot less than a full hybrid and reduce both fuel consumption and emissions.It works fine on a hybrid because you've already got the battery "infrastructure" in place: a single 12V lead-acid battery isn't gonna cut it. Another issue in non-hybrids is keeping things like the A/C and lights going under stop-and-go conditions: I for one would not want want to be stuck in midsummer rush-hour in some place like Dallas with an engine that was only turning the A/C compressor when the car was moving.

I read an article awhile back (IEEE Spectrum magazine IIRC) where several companies were working on a complete rework of automotive electrical systems, something in the 45V range, so they could start powering major subsystems (power steering, A/C) electrically on conventional non-hybrid drivetrains. Don't know the current status though...I think BMW was one of them.

[JohnT Fitzgerald]

Having been around the car business all my life I have seen some of this before back in the 70's. Before making any rash decisions about dumping what you have and buying small it is really important to do the math first.
The national average for driving is 15,000 miles per year. If your SUV or truck averages (overall in and out of town) only 15 mpg you'll use 1,000 gallons of fuel. At $4.00 per that's $4000. If you buy something that gets double the mileage and averages 30 overall. (there are a few that will do that but not as many as you think despite all the claims) the math says you will spend $2,000 for fuel. Now consider that you will get 3 to 8 thousand less for your trade than normal (it's a gas guzzler remember) and usually pay sticker or over for the "economy" car because of the great demand right now. That 5 to 9 thousand dollar "premium" to make the trade will take you 2 to 5 years of gas saving just to break even before you start "saving" money. Now factor in what comfort, room for the family, friends, ability to "haul butt" if you want to and see what that is worth to you after you reach your "break even" point. Assuming you don't get tired of being cramped, underpowered, etc. and trade the thing sooner. None of the above factors in the "save the planet, sky is falling, global warming panic but is just basic economics.


OK, this is totally surreal....I used this EXACT example with a coworker the other day - the same numbers, everything. actually, I think I had a $2500 'ding' on your trade instead of 3K-8K, but otherwise - MPG, miles driven, premium for a new car...

spooky.

[Bruce Benjamin]

It works fine on a hybrid because you've already got the battery "infrastructure" in place: a single 12V lead-acid battery isn't gonna cut it. Another issue in non-hybrids is keeping things like the A/C and lights going under stop-and-go conditions: I for one would not want want to be stuck in midsummer rush-hour in some place like Dallas with an engine that was only turning the A/C compressor when the car was moving.

I read an article awhile back (IEEE Spectrum magazine IIRC) where several companies were working on a complete rework of automotive electrical systems, something in the 45V range, so they could start powering major subsystems (power steering, A/C) electrically on conventional non-hybrid drivetrains. Don't know the current status though...I think BMW was one of them.

Sort of along this line of thinking, what happens to the power brakes of one of the hybrids when the car shuts off at a stop? San Francisco has some seriously steep hills. I don't live there but I have lived near there and I still travel there sometimes. I know that even properly functioning brakes can be tested on some of those hills. I'm wondering how many cars go flying backwards or forwards down a hill when the engine shuts off at a stop. Even if the brakes hold initially, if the driver happens to release the brakes even momentarily they lose their hold. Maybe those types of hybrids have a different braking system.

Bruce

[Glenn Clabo]

Bruce,
They have an electro-hydraulic system...for brakes and power steering.

[Jerome Hanby]

I wonder how well a solid state cooling device would work to keep the air cool while you were stopped without the engine running...

[Ben Rafael]

Walt, I agree with you on this but there's more... Unless the gas-guzzler was ancient and worn out and you needed to buy a new car anyway, it doesn't necessarily save you money to buy a new car. Even then, sometimes it's cheaper to fix up an older car than buy a new one. However, some people want to buy new because they think they are going to save the planet or save the U.S. economy buy burning less gas. Well, that may or may not happen, (I suspect not). But another reason to keep the gas-guzzler is that it takes a lot of energy and raw materials to get that new car. It takes energy to mine the raw materials or recycle the same materials. It takes energy to transport and process those materials. It takes energy to transport the processed materials. It takes energy to build the parts, transport the parts, assemble the parts, and transport the assembled cars. I have no way of knowing what the net energy savings is when you compare the energy used by the old but reliable car versus the combined energy consumption required to get the new more fuel efficient car into your driveway. But it isn't as much as those people who paid a premium for their new Prius pretend it is.

Another thing is what happens to your old gas-guzzler when you sell it? If it is still a reliable car/truck then it's going to be sold to someone else. It's still going to be driven and it's still going to use a lot of fuel and produce more pollution. If you don't crush it then you're just passing on the problem, not eliminating it.

The green tree huggers are not only whining about saving energy and reducing pollution but they are also whining about not mining our other resources and not just throwing everything away. Buying a new car that's fuel efficient isn't quite as fuel efficient and clean as some people think.

Bruce

I've read that the energy necessary to produce and deliver the average new vehicle uses the equivalent of about 10,000 gallons of gasoline and produces pollution equal to about driving the average car 300,000 miles.

I dont know how accurate that is, but most people dont realize that they are substantial numbers anyway.

[Glen Gunderson]

I've read that the energy necessary to produce and deliver the average new vehicle uses the equivalent of about 10,000 gallons of gasoline and produces pollution equal to about driving the average car 300,000 miles.

I dont know how accurate that is, but most people dont realize that they are substantial numbers anyway.

I've read simliar things, but with much lower numbers. According to one article I read, it takes about 113,000 BTUs to produce a Toyota Prius. Converted to gallons of gas, thats about 1,000 gallons of gas. If you figure a Prius at 45 MPG has 30 MPG savings over a 15 MPG SUV, then it'd take about 30,000 miles to overcome the energy use of producing the car (though recouping dollar costs would probably take much longer). So really, from an economic standpoint, and to a lesser degree an environmental one, it doesn't make much sense to panic and sell off a larger, perfectly functional automobile to buy a new hybrid unless you're planning on getting a new car anyway.

Ultimately, the best thing to do for fuel economy, lowering resource consumption, and saving money would be to buy a used fuel efficient automobile when you need to replace your car, not a brand new hybrid. That's how I've decided to approach it. I drive an older Toyota Wagon that gets 33 MPG, can haul about 125 Bd ft. of lumber, and has enough room to pack things for travel or camping or a fair number of tools. It's certainly not the nicest car on the block, but it's extremely reliable, I can fix it myself, and replacement parts for it are very economical. The only real downside is that I can't haul a sheet of plywood with it, but I've managed to buy my sheet goods in bunches and enlist the help of others who have trucks or vans when the need arises. It's not ideal, but I only really buy full sheets once or twice a year so it's not too much of a burden.

For obvious reasons however, that's not an option for everyone, especially people who need the size of a larger automobile or who want or need a newer and nicer car. Really, the most sensible solution is to just understand your needs and weigh the positives and negatives. I'd personally like to see more people taking into account the amount of resources their choices use up, but ultimately everyone has to choose for themselves what is best for themselves and everyone else.

[Jim Becker]

Sort of along this line of thinking, what happens to the power brakes of one of the hybrids when the car shuts off at a stop? San Francisco has some seriously steep hills. I don't live there but I have lived near there and I still travel there sometimes. I know that even properly functioning brakes can be tested on some of those hills. I'm wondering how many cars go flying backwards or forwards down a hill when the engine shuts off at a stop. Even if the brakes hold initially, if the driver happens to release the brakes even momentarily they lose their hold. Maybe those types of hybrids have a different braking system.e

We are on our third hybrid, Bruce...and the brakes are better than any other vehicle I've every driven. In fact, they take some getting used to at first! The brakes "work" the same as any other passenger vehicle other than the fact that they use an electrical source of power. The difference is that they also provide power regeneration when stopping or slowing to help recharge the batteries. The gas engine being "off" is immaterial.

[Pete Simmons]

Maybe check some of those numbers

Gas is about 126,000 Btu/gallon

I would bet 113,000 BTU will not get you very far into making anything much less a new auto.

[Lee DeRaud]

Maybe check some of those numbers

Gas is about 126,000 Btu/gallon

I would bet 113,000 BTU will not get you very far into making anything much less a new auto.Looks like about three zeroes or an 'M') missing: 113MBTU is about 1000 gallons of gas (EPA figures). It takes about 100 gallons (12.5MBTU) to make a ton of raw steel, so the overall figure of 1000 gallons to produce a Prius is not unreasonable.

And 10000 gallons of gas is probably a decent ballpark number to produce an SUV and recycle the materials. (Apples and oranges, etc). Dunno what the cost is to recycle/dispose of the Prius battery pack though.

[Glen Gunderson]

Looks like about three zeroes or an 'M') missing: 113MBTU is about 1000 gallons of gas (EPA figures). It takes about 100 gallons (12.5MBTU) to make a ton of raw steel, so the overall figure of 1000 gallons to produce a Prius is not unreasonable.

And 10000 gallons of gas is probably a decent ballpark number to produce an SUV and recycle the materials. (Apples and oranges, etc). Dunno what the cost is to recycle/dispose of the Prius battery pack though.

You're correct Lee, my numbers were off, but only in terms of the decimal point. It's estimated that it takes 113.322 mmBTUs to make a Prius. A Hummer, by comparison, takes about 200.717 mmBTUs to be produced.

Over a 160,000 mile life span of the automobiles, it's estimated that a Hummer H2 will use about 1579 mmBTUs while a Prius would use about 327 mmBTUs. A Hummer uses more energy in its first 24,000 miles than a Prius does in its entire life span.

However, that completely neglects the environmental impact of having to dispose and/or recycle hybrid batteries within that span.

[Rod Sheridan]

Obviously this sort of discussion is going to raise many opinions on the fuel consumption issue.

This is my opinion;

1) whether or not you believe in global warming, fossil fuels are a finite resource, and a significant source of air pollution

2) fossil fuel prices in North America were traditionally low. In fact they were so low, and we were so affluent, that we never considered reducing our consumption

3) rising fuel prices will be the norm as other populations and areas increase their consumption of fossil fuels

The issue isn't whether you should sell your gas guzzling vehicle and take a financial loss on it, the issue is that you should develop a plan to reduce your fuel consumption over the next 5 to 10 years.

Reduced fuel consumption obviously is good for your wallet, the environment, and increases the lifespan of the finite fossil fuel on this planet.

We all have different needs for vehicles, and some of us can take public transit, or use more fuel efficient vehicles. We all can reduce consumption through better trip planning, walking or bicycling to the local store if possible, and changing our home heating/cooling settings.

As a Canadian, we have a fairly severe climate, yet we use more energy per capita than Sweden, yet less than the USA. (Sweden 5,000Kg/Canada 7,500Kg/USA 8,000Kg, all in oil equivalent measures, year 2001).

I often marvel at the concept of "Yankee Ingenuity", which as an outsider I take to mean that Americans are resourceful, inventive and frugal. Yet when it comes to energy Americans (and Canadians) seem more resource wasteful than frugal.

I guess I had better get working on more personal solutions myself, so that I'm part of the solution, not the problem.

Regards, Rod.

P.S. Living in Ontario, we have a mix of nuclear, fossil and hydraulic sources for electricity. I tossed out my second refrigerator last month to reduce electricity consumption. We don't seem to miss it.

[Lee DeRaud]

Over a 160,000 mile life span of the automobiles, it's estimated that a Hummer H2 will use about 1579 mmBTUs while a Prius would use about 327 mmBTUs.Methinks there is some serious axe-grinding in those numbers. That works out to 11.2MPG for the Hummer (which is about its worst-case mileage) and 55MPG for the Prius (which is about its best-case mileage). There's no doubt that the Prius is economical and ecologically sensitive, but the point isn't helped by cherry-picking the statistics.

There's also the matter of sheer numbers: there just aren't that many Prius' and H2s out there on the road. A comparison that better reflects real life would be something like Ford F150 pickups vs Toyota Camrys or Honda Accords, both using mixed-mode MPG figures.

[Ben Rafael]

IMO, 1000 gallons is absurdly low. It does not take mining and production of raw materials, nor delivery of materials, among myriad other things into consideration.
Also, comparing a Prius to a Hummer is deceptive. A Prius should be compared to a similar sized non-hybrid. I would bet that because of the batteries that the Prius would lose that argument. The dirty little secret of hybrids is that mining the nickel necessary for the batteries is an ecological disaster. Nothing is without cost, pick your poison.

Personally, I dont see the big deal about hybrids, I had a Datsun B210 back in the '70s that got high 30s mpg in the city and close to 50mpg on the highway. It was a cheap car too, I dont think it cost more than $2800 or so. Why aren't those made today? I'd bet it costs no more than 1/2 the price of a Prius to produce and since it isn't hybrid it would take far less energy to produce.
I have to laugh when I see the Smart cars on the road. They are about 1/2 the size of the Datsun and get worse mileage.

[Pete Simmons]

The reason you do not see the new equalivant to your old Datsun B210 is safety and environmental requirements.

Once all the structural and equipment mods are done to meet todays rerquired safety standards the old B210 has had another 1000 pounds added. - There goes your high gas mileage.

[Ben Rafael]

The reason you do not see the new equalivant to your old Datsun B210 is safety and environmental requirements.

Once all the structural and equipment mods are done to meet todays rerquired safety standards the old B210 has had another 1000 pounds added. - There goes your high gas mileage.

I dont buy it, there are cars made today that weigh less than the Datsun.

[Pete Simmons]

From a quick web search - You might be able to find better data.


1973 B210 Datsun Pick -up 1609 pounds curb weight


2008 Mazada B2300 Pick-up 2999 pounds curb weight

2008 Mazda 24 / 29 MPG


BTW - The SmartFor2 is about 1800 pounds

Does anybody know of a 2008 or 2009 production car 1600 lbs or less?

[Glen Gunderson]

Methinks there is some serious axe-grinding in those numbers. That works out to 11.2MPG for the Hummer (which is about its worst-case mileage) and 55MPG for the Prius (which is about its best-case mileage). There's no doubt that the Prius is economical and ecologically sensitive, but the point isn't helped by cherry-picking the statistics.

There's also the matter of sheer numbers: there just aren't that many Prius' and H2s out there on the road. A comparison that better reflects real life would be something like Ford F150 pickups vs Toyota Camrys or Honda Accords, both using mixed-mode MPG figures.

Yeah those numbers are off. Using the EPA estimates and doing the calculations myself, it looks like the 160,000 + manufacturing mmBTUs would be:

Prius: 403 mmBTUs (3554 gallons)

H2: 1780 mmBTUs (15,697 gallons)


For a more useful and apples to apples comparison, I've seen the numbers for the Toyota Highlander. Interestingly, the conventional version of it takes less energy to manufacture than a Prius, using 107 mmBTUs. So if you figure a Highlander over 160,000 (at 20MPG) it's lifetime energy usage would be 1014 mmBTUs.

The hybrid version of the Highlander, on the other hand, takes almost 50% more energy to manufacture using 155 mmBTUs during manufacture. Over it's lifetime, the better fuel economy would bring it a little lower than it's standard counterpart to 853 mmBTUs. However, there's really only a 16% total energy reduction in an apples to apples hybrid vs. traditional comparison due both to the increased energy used in manufacturing of a hybrid and the somewhat minimal increase in fuel economy when comparing engines within the same model.

[Ben Rafael]

From a quick web search - You might be able to find better data.


1973 B210 Datsun Pick -up 1609 pounds curb weight


2008 Mazada B2300 Pick-up 2999 pounds curb weight

2008 Mazda 24 / 29 MPG


BTW - The SmartFor2 is about 1800 pounds

Does anybody know of a 2008 or 2009 production car 1600 lbs or less?

A base b210 with manual transmission, no A/C or radio, or power anything had a curb weight of 2000 lbs. Mine had a radio and A/C

Cars like the Aveo, the Fit and similar start at 2300lbs with some options included.
Weight does not explain the drastic mileage difference.

[Lee DeRaud]

Does anybody know of a 2008 or 2009 production car 1600 lbs or less?Lotus Exige, maybe? I know it's well under 2000 lbs curb weight. Then again, I'm not sure "production" is a good word to describe the quantities they're built in.

[Clifford Mescher]

It is all moot fellows. I heard on the news that price of oil is plunging and we could see the price of gallon of gas below $3.00 before the end of the year. Clifford

[Rob Bodenschatz]

It is all moot fellows. I heard on the news that price of oil is plunging and we could see the price of gallon of gas below $3.00 before the end of the year. Clifford

I thought you paid little attention to the garbage in the media.

:rolleyes:

[Clifford Mescher]

I thought you paid little attention to the garbage in the media.

:rolleyes:
Actually, my wife came home and told me she heard that on radio. Also, thought I'd change the course of discussion a little. Clifford

[Ben Rafael]

It is all moot fellows. I heard on the news that price of oil is plunging and we could see the price of gallon of gas below $3.00 before the end of the year. Clifford

I'll bet you a gallon of gas that doesn't happen.

[Bruce Benjamin]

Gas prices have consistently been well above the national average here in Redding, Ca. The cheapest places in town were selling regular 87 octane, self serve for about $4.50 a gallon and more. Now the prices at the same places are down to $4.22 or less. Yesterday I got my 20 cent a gallon discount at Safeway and it was only $4.02 a gallon. Of course I still spent well over $150 to fill up my Suburban but at least it was a little cheaper. Let's hope the prices keep dropping everywhere.

Bruce

[Lee DeRaud]

Gee, I was enjoying this thread...too bad it's about to go bye-bye. :eek:

[Ben Rafael]

Doesn't need to go bye bye, just need to delete the poli posts.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Folks,

This has been a really interesting, entertaining, and educational thread.

There are a few folks who have shown they don't have the self discipline to keep their political views to themselves or keep it out of the thread.

I will reiterate, Political comments and/or discussions of politics are against the Terms Of Service of SawMillCreek.

Please refrain from making political statements or comments.

Keep in mind, we have members from all around the world and many different countries. International politics can't be discussed either.

I really would hate to have to close this thread.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Ben,

The Mods don't mind editing but if the political statements become too many, too quickly, we will just close the thread and move it from public viewing. We never deleted a thread. We move them to the Mod Forum and thus we have them should the need arise.

Keep in mind, the Mods and the Administrators here are volunteers. We do this in an effort to keep the Creek....the Creek. If it becomes too time consuming to delete posts, send a PM to the offending parties, we just close it and move it.

[Rob Russell]

I will add something to Ken's comments.

For the most part, moderating SMC is a matter of the mundane moving posts to the forums where they rightfully belong. What irks - and is difficult for all of the Moderators - is dealing with threads that step outside the bounds of the SMC Terms of Service.

Threads like this are DIFFICULT to moderate. We (the Mods) need to balance between allowing a thread to step slightly "over the line" and "come back to the original topic" with those threads that go blatantly out of control - and to deal with the out-of-control threads before feelings get hurt.

We have young kids who read - and post - at SMC. Per Keith's dictum (the SMC owner), SMC will be a 'family friendly' forum.

"Polictics", per se is a forbidden topic. Discussions around gasoline prices can easily go into the "politics" realm.

PLEASE keep your comments in this thread fact-based.

As Ken noted - this has been an interesting and (for the most part) - well-behaved thread.

Please don't make us yank it out of public view.

Rob

[Dennis Peacock]

Amen.!!! and I'll 2nd that on behaving.

[Pat Germain]

I just a read Chrysler is getting completely out of the leasing business. Apparently, they are really taking it in the shorts when their numerous truck and SUV leases end and they're stuck with vehicles suffering from plummeting value. Apparently, the bottom has fallen out of the used SUV and light truck market and Chrysler is losing money with leases.

Obviously, some people are still looking to buy used pickups and SUVs. However, I'll bet those people are those who really need them and not just those who think owning one would be nice or cool. It seems the people who actually need a full-size truck or SUV are a pretty small market these days.

[Clifford Mescher]

Paid under $4 a gallon of gasoline yesterday. Prices are going in the right direction. Clifford

[Joe Jensen]

I've read simliar things, but with much lower numbers. According to one article I read, it takes about 113,000 BTUs to produce a Toyota Prius. Converted to gallons of gas, thats about 1,000 gallons of gas. If you figure a Prius at 45 MPG has 30 MPG savings over a 15 MPG SUV, then it'd take about 30,000 miles to overcome the energy use of producing the car (though recouping dollar costs would probably take much longer). So really, from an economic standpoint, and to a lesser degree an environmental one, it doesn't make much sense to panic and sell off a larger, perfectly functional automobile to buy a new hybrid unless you're planning on getting a new car anyway.

Ultimately, the best thing to do for fuel economy, lowering resource consumption, and saving money would be to buy a used fuel efficient automobile when you need to replace your car, not a brand new hybrid. That's how I've decided to approach it. I drive an older Toyota Wagon that gets 33 MPG, can haul about 125 Bd ft. of lumber, and has enough room to pack things for travel or camping or a fair number of tools. It's certainly not the nicest car on the block, but it's extremely reliable, I can fix it myself, and replacement parts for it are very economical. The only real downside is that I can't haul a sheet of plywood with it, but I've managed to buy my sheet goods in bunches and enlist the help of others who have trucks or vans when the need arises. It's not ideal, but I only really buy full sheets once or twice a year so it's not too much of a burden.

For obvious reasons however, that's not an option for everyone, especially people who need the size of a larger automobile or who want or need a newer and nicer car. Really, the most sensible solution is to just understand your needs and weigh the positives and negatives. I'd personally like to see more people taking into account the amount of resources their choices use up, but ultimately everyone has to choose for themselves what is best for themselves and everyone else.


I think the ultimate solution will be for people to stop chosing to live 20 miles or more from their place of employment. At least here in Phoenix, there was a mad rush to the far flung suburbs to get an extra 1000 sq ft for the same price as living closer in. Now all these folks whine about their commute, and they whine about their gas spending.

MOVE CLOSER TO YOUR JOB

We've conciously chosen to live 3 miles from our jobs for 24 years. We made this choice to create more time for family. If I save an hour each way every day, that's 10 hours a week, or 500 hours a year. In family time, 10 hours a week of non-sleep time is like adding another day of weekend every week.

Now with gas higher, I think more and more folks will be living closer to their jobs.

From a green perspective, I wear out vehicles at 1/2 the national average, and I drive 1/2 the miles so I use 1/2 the gas. I'm super green even though I drive a large german sedan :)

[Bruce Benjamin]

Living closer to your job sounds great, in theory...I don't know the exact figures but I think most people change jobs often enough that your advice isn't really very practical or realistic. Change your job, buy a new house. Change your job again, buy another new house. I guess it depends on what sort of area you live in but there are a lot of parts of the country where people have a choice of several smaller towns or cities in a general area to work in and commuting from one house is way more practical than moving from town to town. When I lived in Portland, Or. I was a chef. I worked in several different restaurants in different areas within about a 20 or 30 mile radius. We lived in the same house. Do you actually suggest that we should've moved every few years just to save some gas??? That's absolutely ridiculous, in my opinion.

I know a lot of people who you would call professionals. Off the top of my head I can only think of maybe 3 or 4 that have worked at the same location for more than 8 or 10 years.

Bruce

[John Shuk]

Joe,
Living close to work is much easier said than done. I live pretty close to NYC. The cost of living within an hour are outrageous and pretty much difficult to deal with if you live within 2 hours.
There are a bunch of things we could do differently but I don't think folks like that they have to give up their wants for their needs.

[Mike Henderson]

I think the ultimate solution will be for people to stop chosing to live 20 miles or more from their place of employment. At least here in Phoenix, there was a mad rush to the far flung suburbs to get an extra 1000 sq ft for the same price as living closer in. Now all these folks whine about their commute, and they whine about their gas spending.

MOVE CLOSER TO YOUR JOB

We've conciously chosen to live 3 miles from our jobs for 24 years. We made this choice to create more time for family. If I save an hour each way every day, that's 10 hours a week, or 500 hours a year. In family time, 10 hours a week of non-sleep time is like adding another day of weekend every week.

Now with gas higher, I think more and more folks will be living closer to their jobs.

From a green perspective, I wear out vehicles at 1/2 the national average, and I drive 1/2 the miles so I use 1/2 the gas. I'm super green even though I drive a large german sedan :)
Living close to your job is good if you can do it. But there's a couple of problems.

If most of the jobs are in one area, and many people try to move to that area, the price of homes will go up until there's a cost equality between living close and commuting.

Also, many people change jobs (not always their choice) and the new job is some distance from their old job and their home. It's unreasonable to expect them to move - to pay the transaction cost of buying and selling and moving, to take the kids out of the school they've developed friends at, and go through all the issues of putting roots down in the new location (finding doctors, friends, etc.).

People will always commute, not always because they want to.

I'm most excited about the new plug-in hybrid technology that is being developed by several of the major car companies. GM is promising one that will go 40 miles on a charge, and there's an engine and generator on board if you need to go further. 80% of drivers drive 50 miles or less daily. And if there was a way to recharge at work, you could live 40 miles from work and not pay a penny for gas. The electricity for powering a car is about a quarter of the cost of gas (at $4/gallon) - varies by location and price of electricity and the user's electricity tier.

Mike

[Joe Jensen]

I live in the Phoenix area. Tons of people work downtown and live way out. Many of my neighbors sold their very nice and close 2500 sq ft homes so they could buy 4000 sq ft homes 20 miles further out. Now they have an extra hr plus each way, and a much larger auto expense and higher gas bills.

Did they really need an extra 1500 sq ft? I think not. Did they really want a McMansion, sure. I'm fine with them making their choice, but I am tired of hearing them whine about their commute. Now that gas is higher, demand for houses way out is down, and most at the fringes are selling for 35-45% off the peak. Most owners are upside down on their mortgages so they can't sell and move closer.

Rant on "It's all a choice. I chose to have a smaller home for the same price but I get a short commute. I'm not bitching all the time about my small house, so stop whine about the commute." Rant off.

Other markets have other dynamics, but here in Phx it's pretty universal. Buy the larger home far out and drive a long commute. At some level, everyone has this choice.

[Jim Becker]

Joe, you're correct that it is a choice where to live relative to your job...but there are often mitigating factors that come into play, such as schools and the effect of a second career in the house. There is also the lifestyle aspect...not every family is comfortable with urban living.

That all said, my commute is about, oh...25' from my side of the bed...or 50 miles to the airport, depending on the day. Professor Dr. SWMBO's is about 8 miles to her office or an hour and a half by train if she has to teach. Her old job was a 25 mile commute one way...so rather than moving closer to work, she moved her job closer to home. So we enjoy living in the country and have reasonable commutes. And one of the best school districts in the state.

[Pat Germain]

Since the cost of commuting is rising so sharply, I think people will be less likely to job hop in coming years. In the past, the minimal cost of a longer commute for a higher paying job would work out. Not so much anymore.

As I've pointed out previously, it would help if corporate areas weren't so far away from living areas. If I could live right next to where I worked, I'd be much less likely to move to another job which involved a long commute.

[Jeffrey Makiel]

In the Northeast, it's like one big city from Boston to Washington DC. The reason why many people have significant commutes (like me) is because affordable, modest housing near the workplace is essentially non-existant. It's always been that way but has gotten worse over the last decade.

I'm sure there are areas on the 'other' coast that share the same conditions.

-Jeff :)

[Dennis Peacock]

I have to agree with Joe...It's all about choices to satisfy our needs and not our wants. Don't believe me? Then look at all the mortgages that you and I get to help pay for via....oh never mind. :mad:

As the old saying goes?
"You chose to make your bed hard. Now you get to sleep in it". :D

But...as by today's standards?
"You chose to make you bed hard and dad blast it, now you're making me sleep in it too!!!!" :mad:

So there. :p :p :p

[Mike Henderson]

I have to agree with Joe...It's all about choices to satisfy our needs and not our wants. Don't believe me? Then look at all the mortgages that you and I get to help pay for via....oh never mind. :mad:

As the old saying goes?
"You chose to make your bed hard. Now you get to sleep in it". :D

But...as by today's standards?
"You chose to make you bed hard and dad blast it, now you're making me sleep in it too!!!!" :mad:

So there. :p :p :p
I don't think anyone has much sympathy for people who got into trouble by overpaying for a house, and taking a loan which they couldn't pay off.

But don't fault the fed for their rescue efforts. Back in 1930, we had a similar situation - a bubble in the stock market that deflated in 1929. But the government didn't do anything - the attitude back then was to let the market take its course. And the course was deflation and unemployment of 25%. It took a war to get us out of that.

Rather than direct your upset at the bail-out efforts, you should direct them at the lack of regulation that allowed the bubble in housing to happen in the first place. Fault the person who set the fire, and not the firefighters who rush in to help.

Mike

[Clifford Mescher]

Relatively small fire...Let it burn itself out and leave firemen at station. Clifford

[Mike Henderson]

Relatively small fire...Let it burn itself out and leave firemen at station. Clifford
I don't think you appreciate what could happen in a financial meltdown. And do you really want to take that chance? There's no way to put the genie back in the bottle if a collapse happens.

Mike

[Clifford Mescher]

I don't think you appreciate what could happen in a financial meltdown. And do you really want to take that chance? There's no way to put the genie back in the bottle if a collapse happens.

Mike
We are on the way to a breakdown already. Value of the dollar, fuel, deficit, banks going under, trade deficit, 70 million baby boomers to retire on no social security $$$$$, stock market decline, etc. etc. And please don't tell me about appreciation. Clifford

[Clifford Mescher]

I'll bet you a gallon of gas that doesn't happen.
My neighbor paid $3.56 a gallon yesterday.Clifford

Dollar Heads for Fifth Weekly Gain... (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=ae2cx7nf0VFY&refer=worldwide)
Oil $112... (http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080815/wall_street.html?.v=18)

[Clifford Mescher]

I guess people only post when price goes up. Clifford

[Greg Peterson]

I feel sorry for the diminishing profits the oil companies are experiencing. Better give 'em more breaks so they don't have to invest those record profits back into finding more oil.

[David G Baker]

I think we all have a little bit of a bitter taste in our mouths and pain in our wallets every time we fill up.

[Clifford Mescher]

I think we all have a little bit of a bitter taste in our mouths and pain in our wallets every time we fill up.
Well, the taste should be sweeter now that prices are going down. Clifford

[Clifford Mescher]

We live in capitalistic society. There are other countries that like this approach.Clifford

[Dennis Peacock]

Let's please not get "personal" in this discussion. This thread is subject to removal without notice if we can't keep it on topic and leave out personal stabs at each other.