944Play

[quote]Originally posted by SidViscous:
<strong>
The whole SUV argument confuses me anyways.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I would have NO PROBLEM with SUVs/light trucks if they had to meet the same specifications as passenger cars.
They don't have to meet passenger car safety requirements, bumper and headlight height requirements, or CAFE standards, and that goads me.

Take the PT Cruiser (please). It has a unibody, front-wheel drive, and a transverse four-cylinder engine. Kindly tell me what part of that leads it to be classified as a truck? Whoops, it's so DCX can sell more Durangos and still meet CAFE.

SidViscous

<a href="http://www.jmu.edu/safetyplan/vehicle/steeringcolumn.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.jmu.edu/safetyplan/vehicle/steeringcolumn.shtml</a>

<a href="http://www.uctc.net/access/access21lighter.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.uctc.net/access/access21lighter.pdf</a>

<a href="http://www.curtrich.com/july2000.html" target="_blank">http://www.curtrich.com/july2000.html</a>

SidViscous

So 944Play. You think a Ford expidition should have the same bunmper height requirements as a corvette?

Your right about the PT cruiser. But the fact is that the rules are as broad and convuleted as the tax code, so the automakers find loopholes. I say more power to them. The goverment has ruined the production of decent cars, and the reason the large engine options are so exspensive is that the carmakers have to pay penalties, and consumers have to pay gas guzzler taxes and all that.

Skwerl

Sid, what are some reasons you like SUVs?

944Play

[quote]Originally posted by SidViscous:
<strong>So 944Play. You think a Ford expidition should have the same bunmper height requirements as a corvette?
</strong><hr></blockquote>

As long as both are being operated on the same public roads, yes.

SidViscous

Large mass, comfortable, 4wd, high view, Large capacity, power, off-roading, large engine compartment for working on. Able to work underneath without even jacking it up.

And for some reason I like large dashboards &lt;shrug&gt;

SidViscous

"As long as both are being operated on the same public roads, yes."

Okay then set the Corvette bumper height at 3 feet. That should solve the problem right.

944Play

[quote]Originally posted by SidViscous:
[QBOkay then set the Corvette bumper height at 3 feet.[/QB]<hr></blockquote>

The issue is not the bumper height, it's the double standard.

SidViscous

Skwerl

To give an anology.

I have a variety of computers.

A desktop at hom configured for speed and large display for everyday use.

Another configured with nice sound equipment for playing Mp3's

A laptop for when I'm on the road.

and when neccesarry when doing field data-acq and testing one of these.

<a href="http://www.dewamerica.com/" target="_blank">http://www.dewamerica.com/</a>

They are all good at what they do, but they are all different and have different strengths and weaknesses.

SidViscous

Exactly. However your biased towards the sports car. Instead of saying "How come sports cars are allowed to have a much lower bumper height" You say "How come trucks are allowed to have a much higher bumper height."

It's because they are two different vehicles, designed for different tasks. Just because SUV's are popular with people who don't use them for their intended use doesn't mean we should cripple them.

Nor would I recomend de-tuning a vettes engine because he shouldn't be able to do 190 mph on public roads.

Of course we all drive Porsches which while being low slung and all, are still safer because they are built so strong

triscadek

All that this comes down to is a consumer driven market and many people don't want high mpg crackerboxes shoved down their throats, some might not mind but I sure as hell don't want one, no matter what the government or these environmentalist whack jobs think.

944Play

Passenger cars all have to have the same height bumpers because they travel the same roads, correct? If light trucks are to travel the same roads, what makes them magically exemt from the bumper height standards?

It's the double standard that gets to me. A vehicle sold to be driven on public roads should adhere to uniform standards. You can't drive a Lotus 340R on the streets, but you only need a class C license to drive a Humvee!

WTF? <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

SidViscous

Okay then by your logic we should ban Tractor trailers too. Though I'm geussing the teamsters might have something to say about that.

The fact of the matter we all share the roads, bumper height is mostly irrelevant. In a high speed crash it means almost nothing. In a low speed crash if it's my fault I have to pay the damages to the other car, if it's their fault they have to pay the damages. And really, it's not low speed accidents anyone should be caring about. That's just some sheet metal damage.

As to tractor trailers, busses and the like. Bumper hieght is irrelevant at any speed. You won't care how high the bumper is if they're parked on your head.

The only thing we need is more common sense in driving, try to avoid accidents all together.

Do to my youth I've been involved in a number of accidents. And more recently in a truck with high bumpers, against another truck with higher bumpers and it tore my trucks fenders right up. In none of mine, and few of other accidents have I ever seen an instance where bumper height was a signifigant factor.

944Play

Like I said before, it's not the bumper height, it's the double standard. Less superficial disparities are the emissions, economy, and safety standards. The light truck is the automakers' golden loophole to huge profit margins, and it's a disservice to the public that they are allowed to exploit it.

You're right, common sense should prevail. I'd personally like to see a the disparity lessened from BOTH ends; restrict light truck headlight height while easing passenger car economy requirements, for example.

[quote]Originally posted by SidViscous:
Okay then by your logic we should ban Tractor trailers too.<hr></blockquote>

They constitute a truly separate class of vehicle with a separate class of driver. One must earn a commercial driver's license to operate a semi on public roads. A truck driver is in that cab to earn a living, not to cruise the mall parking lot.
<img src="graemlins/a_smil17.gif" border="0" alt="[blabla]" />

SidViscous

"They constitute a truly separate class of vehicle with a separate class of driver."

Say that while headed out of NY City in 1984 civic hatchback in the pouring rain while surrounded by semi trailers. Or for that matter head North out of atlanta in the early evening any weekday. And they may be trained better intitially, but then try to get away with anything they can.

It's their loophole to higher profits.

That's how the world turns. The best way to stay safe in an accident is to be in a bigger car than the other guy. When I drive Gomorah I just try to stay out of any chance of an accident, and bless the sturdy frame everyday. The only thing you can do is protect yourself, if your waiting for the govermnet to protect you don't hold your breath.

I don't agree with toughining safety standards for trucks, mass is always going to be the best defense. But I agree they should allow more for cars.

Remember that head on crash studies are not a good indicator. Because your only using the mass of the car against itself. In a match with a bigger vehicle it will always loose, no matter how safe the NHTSA says it is.