Quote:
Originally Posted by DGthe3
And yet statistically, aren't there fewer deaths per mile driven in most European nations than there are in America, thereby reducing the need to mandate excessive safety systems?
|
The roads are smaller, and there are several highway systems (similar to the Autobahn) that allow high speeds, so it's very easy to get your fix without being stupid. Also, most cities have very low speed limits such as 30-40k...and they are very heavy handed usually when it comes to tickets. They also have a MUCH better system of training people to drive. Most countries don't allow you to get a license before 18. Most require a 1 year driving course.
There's also a lot less roads to drive compared to here, as the abundance of good mass transit makes it easier to avoid the roads all together.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DGthe3
Can't argue with the roads, but mass transit can easily be expanded & improved in North America. However, unless it gets more expensive to drive a car, people probably won't take buses or trains very much.
|
You actually hit the nail on the head. Mass transit absolutely could be improved, and it should! The difference here is that most of those options for the average person in the US make it impossible to use. It would take me an hour to ride the bus 15 miles....and I'm sorry, but that's just not acceptable in this day and age. I can drive it in 20 minutes...the same exact route.
There's also a big limit for the range. I'm 3 miles away from the city bus line, and I would ride it if I could. I can't....and it would again be an hour ride to go what takes me about 30 minutes to drive, even in rush hour.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DGthe3
And most European nations tax gasoline more than diesel to encourage people to buy the more efficient diesel cars. They are also slightly more lax with regard to diesel emissions
|
Again, no disagreement here. I'm all for that if its a worthwhile measure. If you could put diesel engines in cars here, with the same level of performance or better, with better fuel economy...why wouldn't you? I mean you can use VW as a prime example. They have about a 10-14mpg difference between their gas/diesel powered cars just here in the US. Imagine if they would be a bit more lax on the diesel issues here, while stepping up on gas?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DGthe3
I have a completely different take on the article. People in the US do not want small cars.
|
Yet your comment basically echoes mine. People don't want to drive something the size of a toy. I'm almost 6'3" with a 15-16 shoe, making me the equivalent of someone 6'5"-6'6" in some cases trying to drive a car. There is hardly any room in some of the "midsize" cars, let alone trying to drive something like a Toyota Yaris or even an old MR2. Some people manage fine, some don't. Now try to carry a family of 4 in something the size of a Yaris.... it doesn't work. They're great for zipping around town but I wouldn't trust it doing anything over 40mph and I certainly wouldn't think of wanting to be in a car accident.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DGthe3
I'm not sure where you get the idea that Europeans all drive tiny death traps ... but from what I've seen there are a lot of compacts/subcompacts on the roads over there, usually in a wagon or hatchback style. They hate things like the Smart Fourtwo almost as much as people over here do.
|
I wasn't implying they were, I was referring to myself. Sorry if I didn't make that clear. Still, a compact or subcompact is awfully small. The smallest car I ever drove on a regular basis was a Chevy Beretta. That was with the seat all the way back, and me sitting basically on a portion of the top of the seat to be comfortable. Even then, it wasn't very comfortable.
The roads over there as well don't really provide for a lot of large vehicles. You will rarely ever see any American full size trucks over there, and even then, you will usually see the old SUV's more than an actual pickup.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DGthe3
Be careful when looking at the fuel economy for cars overseas. They don't use the US EPA test cycle, which is the least generous testing regime that I know of. Often there will be a 10-20% difference based solely on how the fuel economy gets measured while not a single thing is changed on the car.
|
Still, let's say that they have a vehicle stating it gets 50mpg. Over here, it gets say 43mpg....it's still better than the 32-34mpg its gasoline sister gets here. That's all I'm saying. They have better options, but due to in some cases, stupid/overbearing regulations, companies aren't able to bring them. The midsize/fullsize truck market has been BEGGING for a diesel engine in something under a 3/4 ton - 1 ton pickup. Even SUVs would benefit from these, as they could add an extra 4-8mpg easily. There are easily hundreds of modded Rangers/S10's that have added the favorite TDI out of a Golf or Jetta and are running 30-35mpg...in a pickup.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DGthe3
He did nothing of the sort. His point was that regardless of what people said in the poll, when they vote with their wallets they show their real preference, which is trucks & muscle cars.
|
The way I see it, he did. Why do I feel that way? Because he himself owns a muscle car. Granted, he has the luxury of also owning a smaller car, but the point is that he still voted with his wallet too. Maybe not 100%, but I feel that he did.
The other thing is this, and I kind of said this earlier, if there were more choices with slightly larger, fuel efficient cars, perhaps people would be more apt to buy them instead. Why buy a Prius when you really need a truck? You also have to look at the fuel economy on trucks/muscle cars. It's the highest it's ever been in terms of performance vs. efficiency. I've got a 426hp motor that gets relatively the same gas mileage that my previous 4dr Grand Prix GTP with 260hp(factory) got.