price of gas

[str8line]

The VW Lupo gets 78mpg (us, diesel) but probably can't make it up the hill: Review.
It's not available in the us, and can't fit any long skis.

Here's a 1992 Honda Civic CX getting 65-83 mpg, on gasoline:

And looks great doing it.

[powdork]

Neither the Lupo nor the stunning Honda Civic (looks like the prius stole their design) are still in production.
The fact is, even in Europe, 50 mpg (us) or greater is damn good. 70 mpg is on the fringes and damn near useless for where we drive.

[danimal's dead]

America bashing, so hot right now.

Comparing the US to Europe is like comparing Rhode Island to Montana. Europe is full of tiny little countries with populations mostly concentrated into cities. The good ol USA is spread out, people drive long distances on dangerous highways. People in bigger cities should be using mass transportation and fule efficient cars, ever been to LA, but they don't.

[HikeforTurns]

Real 4wd roads or maybe not super-well-maintained dirt roads? I may not go as fast in a fwd low-clearance car, but I have never once been turned back by a road in such poor condition I couldn't get through. Once it probably took me an extra hour in each direction to get to a trailhead where the road needed some serious work, oh well. I think if people tried driving mountain/dirt/rocky roads in a small car they'd realize that it isn't a big deal. Besides, do you head out to the backcountry.com to see how far in you can drive and not walk any further than needed, kind of like looking for front-row parking at the gym?

A lot of people tend to buy vehicles thinking of what they might theoretically use them for at some point during their lifetime, not what they're actually used for 99% of the time.

Yea, nothing new here. Sorry for being so unoriginal. I wish I had my old Mazda back that got 35-40mpg and liked snowy roads... but I guess I don't need a car at all 99% of the time now so it's smart not to have one.

Now back to conservation models in the amazon basin...

In the winter, I could get by with something besides my vehicle (tacoma) no doubt. But in the summer, I drive on lots of roads that are not doable in a car (beleive me, I tried it for several years in a camry). As far as the parking lot at the gym analogy, Im not really willing to add ten miles both ways to my summer hiking and climbing trips, but thats just me I guess, Im mostly a weekend warrior so my 2 or 3 days off are spent in the areas I like to be in. And colorado may be different then other areas, ie: the sierras. Due to the instense mining done not so long ago, we have lots of these types of roads, and to get to the TH, it often involves rough roads, a lot of the time too rough for a subaru, unless you enjoy destroying your car. Where as a lot of sierra peaks are accessible from TH's that are easier to reach, but involve many, many more miles of approach hiking (which is cool too, keeps these areas more pristine).

Maybe that makes me selfish, but I guess I can live with that. Life is too short.

[mr_gyptian]

Rail is inefficient and costly compared to long-haul trucking. If it wasn't the market would have corrected for this.

Rail is efficient, however for transporting large bulk items like coal, chemicals, commodities such as wheat etc. Not consumer goods, which the market demands fast delivery.

trucking and rail are complimentary. an example would be transporting cars to denver via rail from their respective assembly plants. then from denver they go to the dealers.

Simply making heavy trucks adhere to emissions standards of other over the road vehicles would make a huge inroad towards lowering our polutants.

anyone see China will pass us in Carbon emissions?

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1

[hop]

anyone see China will pass us in Carbon emissions?

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1

You're lucky if you can see the tops of the hills a couple miles away through the smog over here. It's truly disgusting. I've only been able to wear contact lenses for 5 hours in the past five days and my eyes and nose are probably never going to be the same, or at least that's what it feels like now.

I feel much better about the shrinking glaciers and expanding deserts since at least I know the heavy industry of development is prospering.

[Blurred]

You're lucky if you can see the tops of the hills a couple miles away through the smog over here. It's truly disgusting. I've only been able to wear contact lenses for 5 hours in the past five days and my eyes and nose are probably never going to be the same, or at least that's what it feels like now.

I feel much better about the shrinking glaciers and expanding deserts since at least I know the heavy industry of development is prospering.

Overpopulating is the problem, nothing else.

[Blurred]

***deleted... it was stupid so i got rid of it

This post is really good. Glad you kept it.

[bakers_dozen]

This post is really good. Glad you kept it.

heh i didn't see the delete button at first... fine it's gone now be happy yay

[skimasterflex]

I agree 100% with Iride on this one. Tax the hell out of it. Crisis is the only way to make our lazy population change.

You have to realize that this would be a blatantly class based discriminatory action equivalent to a genuine poor tax. The rich folk who are getting 12 miles to the gallon will continue to do so no matter what the price of gas goes to. Who suffers are the poor and we all know that our country won't suddenly make up for that by improving public transpotation for them.

What we really need is minimum fuel economy standards on all new cars, that or a fuel rationing system that forces carpooling and conservation. This Lassiez Faire crap has to end.

[MeatPuppet]

You're lucky if you can see the tops of the hills a couple miles away through the smog over here. It's truly disgusting. I've only been able to wear contact lenses for 5 hours in the past five days and my eyes and nose are probably never going to be the same, or at least that's what it feels like now.

I spent 3 1/2 weeks in China in 02'. If we were anywhere near a major city and spent more than 30 min outside, you could blow your nose and the tissue would come away black. It was amazing how dirty everything was. I probably lost months off my life just the short time I was there. I can't imagine what it is like for the people who live there and breath that stuff every day.

[cj001f]

You have to realize that this would be a blatantly class based discriminatory action equivalent to a genuine poor tax. The rich folk who are getting 12 miles to the gallon will continue to do so no matter what the price of gas goes to. Who suffers are the poor and we all know that our country won't suddenly make up for that by improving public transpotation for them.

I didn't realize driving cars was a right. Yes, not everyone will be able to drive a car in the future. Perhaps they will then learn to deal with it like the rest of the world does. By walking, taking the bus, sharing cars, riding bicycles, or other means.

If it wasn't the market would have corrected for this.

I'm so glad they pay for the interstate system and the damage they do to it.


But for the dumbest quote on the entire thread:

Yeah, you can use chains, but they don't do much to improve mileage.

Here's a hint: they improve the mileage every other fucking time you use the vehicle, dipshit.

[DamRepublican]

move to europe and quit fucking complaining about america's problems on the internet

[skimasterflex]

I didn't realize driving cars was a right. Yes, not everyone will be able to drive a car in the future. Perhaps they will then learn to deal with it like the rest of the world does. By walking, taking the bus, sharing cars, riding bicycles, or other means.



I'm so glad they pay for the interstate system and the damage they do to it.

I guess you didn't get my main underlying point which is that we lack the transportation infrastructure to accomidate this fact of your future of truly class based driving privalages. The problem with that is that the infrastructure we do have will prevent most people from working if that is the case that they will simply have to fend for themselves like your vague conception of "the rest of the world" has to. Too bad the rest of the world isn't reverting from an independent transportation system to a public one like we will have to shortly. Taking away peoples cars is much different than them never having had one, especially when you aren't giving them good affordable trains and buses in return like most of the rest in the global north enjoy.

It is unaffordable for most to live where jobs are plentiful, hence the average 45 minute commute in the US. Make it unaffordable to commute and see what happens. If the SF Bay Area's Bart extended to Sacramento for instance thousands of people would take it to and from the city each day instead of a 2+ hour commute (one of those that raises the national average) in their cars. That would decrease demand and lower gas prices. The only way to reduce our countries oil dependency is to increase our public trans spending, but the oil companies pay a lot of money to prevent that. Look at the LA case in which oil companies completely restructured public transportation and purposely ran it into the ground.

[cj001f]

I guess you didn't get my main underlying point

Nobody has to commute. That's a chosen lifestyle - as the millions of CA immigrants show. They could live in shared housing or other solutions near work if they so chose. Or they could work a job in the Central Valley Instead they choose an air conditioned single family home in Stockton and an hour long commute.

People will never give up their cars until they can't afford them. Period. Public transport will come when people are pissed they can't get to work, school etc, not beforehand - because there will never be the public will to spend the money.

"vague conception" - that made me chuckle.

[Cliff Huckable]

Ridiculous idea.

If demand is the same, why would the price go down?

Buy a hybrid, ffs!

...and Americans cities could try some decent PUBLIC FUCKING TRANSPORTATION as the rest of the civilized world does.
(I know, I know NYC has good public transit and some other cities on the East Coast, and some rich college towns, too...but there is nothing in the South or the West. Public transit there is a complete joke - a dangerous, dirty, crime-infested joke.)

[Cliff Huckable]

America bashing, so hot right now.

Comparing the US to Europe is like comparing Rhode Island to Montana. Europe is full of tiny little countries with populations mostly concentrated into cities. The good ol USA is spread out, people drive long distances on dangerous highways. People in bigger cities should be using mass transportation and fule efficient cars, ever been to LA, but they don't.

Because most mass transportation in big cities - that aren't New York - in this country is INCONVENIENT, OLD, DIRTY, DANGEROUS, WHATEVER ELSE.

It's a disgrace that a 1st world country should have such a fucked-up problem.

[powdork]

But for the dumbest quote on the entire thread:

Quote:
Originally Posted by powdork
Yeah, you can use chains, but they don't do much to improve mileage.
Here's a hint: they improve the mileage every other fucking time you use the vehicle, dipshit.

Gee cj, you're giving me the warm fuzzees. If you're head wasn't so far up your dark hole you'd know that was said with tongue in cheek.
While I agree that we're fucking the world with pollution, over consumption, and horrible policies I still understand that it isn't the end all and be all of every decision. In an area that in the winters of 2005 and 2006 received over 800 inches of snowfall, I choose the safety, reliability and comfort of a Subaru to transport myself and my three daughters to and from school, skiing, and other activities. I do this even though I realize it takes more gas to turn 4 wheels than 2, and seriously fucks up your world. beeeeaaatch!

[MeatPuppet]

Because most mass transportation in big cities - that aren't New York - in this country is INCONVENIENT, OLD, DIRTY, DANGEROUS, WHATEVER ELSE.

It's a disgrace that a 1st world country should have such a fucked-up problem.

I don't know the answer to this. Are there any public transportation systems in America that were started after automobiles became commonplace, that are worth a damn?

My thought was that the public transportation systems that actually work, both here and in Europe, were created before automobiles took hold. After automobiles became commonplace, cities began to be laid out differently, making public transportation less efficient/feasible.

[hemas]

My thought was that the public transportation systems that actually work, both here and in Europe, were created before automobiles took hold. After automobiles became commonplace, cities began to be laid out differently, making public transportation less efficient/feasible.

Not really, Helsinki got it's Tube (subway, you dweebs) in mid 70's and car were common. And many cities are either building tram (or monorail) lines or expanding the network...

One thing that has at least partially diminished traffic in downtown Stockholm, was the fact that they imposed a tax for those that want to drive into the town (of course, if you live inside the perimeter, you'll get a free pass). Sadly the taxed area is pretty small (think on Manhattan in the whole New York-Jersey metropolitan area), it should be be bigger the have a greater effect.

The big problem is to get people change the opinions that public transport actually CAN work and it is often faster and easier than driving with your own car (well, I'm naturally talking about the cities now).

Hey, would someone living in Suisse clarify the decission that was made there last year, regarding on banning SUV's.

[wildstyle]

Got to call BS here. Show me one production automobile that gets over 70 mpg (us) and I'll start to take you seriously.

These cars do the best, and these are Imperial Gallons
Honda Insight 2 seater (petrol) 80.0 mpg
Citroen C1 1398 M5 (diesel) 68.9 mpg
Toyota Aygo 1.4 D-4D 3 & 5 door (diesel) 68.9 mpg
Citroen C2 1398 M5 (diesel) 65.7 mpg
Citroen C3 1398 A5 (diesel) 65.7 mpg
FIAT Panda 1248 M5 (diesel) 65.7 mpg
Toyota Prius 1.5 VVT-i Hybrid (petrol) 65.7 mpg

That Honda Insight 2 seater gets 67 mpg (us) and can't carry your skis.

renault megane 1.4 dci 86 estate 70.6mpg extra urban/freeway, 50.1 urban, 60.1 combined.

You can get your skis into that one. This car is one of the most popular cars in europe.

The only reason we have these cars are because of taxation and legislation and tax breaks for low C02 emitting cars.

http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/eu/ghg.html

this will explain most of it.

[cj001f]

I choose the safety, reliability and comfort of a Subaru to transport myself and my three daughters to and from school, skiing, and other activities.

you forgot "perceived" an insight can carry skis, just not in the manner to which you've become accustomed. Which applies to every other moron on the thread. It's not going to be easy and painless. No, mass transit isn't as nice as a car (but it does work in plenty of US cities, even those post car). And no you might not be able to drive your Suburban alone to the mountain every weekend to go skiing.

[hairy]

My daily vehicles are Suubs. Having said that I'm going to do something absurd today. I'm going to bike to the Earth Day celibrations at Squaw. Squaw hosting Earth Day ? The hypocracy. 99% of celebrants driving to Squaw, 95% in SUVs and the like, to observe Earth Day ? The hypocracy. Me whining about it while living somewhere that couldn't naturally sustain year-round habitation ? The hypocracy. But a hypocrite on a bicycle. Today anyway

at first I thought you wer'e an idiot with the no chains thing, but you redeemed yourself with the above insight about self sustainability.....keep after it....

[truckeelocal]

at first I thought you wer'e an idiot with the no chains thing, but you redeemed yourself with the above insight about self sustainability.....keep after it....

I'm not sure that precludes me being an idiot though

[Blurred]

While the global warming "sky is falling" campaign has you all under a spell, oil companies continue to make record breaking profits. They're very happy you support their high prices/profits, "cuz it's better for the Earth", which is better for them. Like I said, it's all a sham.

Why focus on making cars more fuel efficient? We're still going to run out of fossil fuels in 100 years.

Also, even though the vehicles will be less pollutant, as China and several other countries begin to have more gas powered vehicles, the CO2 emissions will keep rising.

The best solution is electric power. Why isn't there more focus on that?
Why aren't the tax dollars from gasoline being used to develope a practical electric car/truck? I'll tell you why. The global warming scare has you all happy to pay higher gas prices, and they've got you right where they want you. Why would they change? Like most things in life, it's all about the dollars.