"Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com> wrote in message
news:newscache$9qk3nh$xxt1$1@news.ipinc.net...
>
> "John David Galt" <jdg@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us> wrote in message
> news:3F931487.433F88FB@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us.. .
> >
> > The safest strategy overall would be to repeal CAFE so that people with
> > large families can go back to buying station wagons instead of SUVs.
>
> Back when station wagons were popular, there were no SUV's (at least not
> like they are known today with interior A/C and DVD player, etc.) If you
> could mandate that all SUV production be replaced by station wagon
> production, you might have something there. But given a choice between
> a large station wagon and a SUV I think your smoking weed if you seriously
> believe that a large market segment would give their SUV's up to go to
> station wagons.
>
> All that repeal of CAFE would do is allow the automakers to build bigger
> sedans. So, today's "full size" sedan would become tomorrow's mid-size,
> and todays mid-size would become tomorrow's economy sedan, and
> today's economy sedan would disappear.
>
> You might then get a small percentage of SUV buyers to buy the largest
> sedans that would become available, but that's about it.
>
> Ted
>
>

Mainly because most SUV drivers don't think a station wagon is "cool" enough
for them even though it could fulfill their needs just as well if not better
than an SUV.
I do find it interesting though that Porsche, VW, Chrysler and a few others
are marketing what amounts to an updated AMC Eagle as SUVs or "Sport
Tourers" now. Nothing but slightly taller station wagons for suckers.

 

"Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com> wrote in message
news:newscache$9qk3nh$xxt1$1@news.ipinc.net...
>
> "John David Galt" <jdg@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us> wrote in message
> news:3F931487.433F88FB@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us.. .
> >
> > The safest strategy overall would be to repeal CAFE so that people with
> > large families can go back to buying station wagons instead of SUVs.
>
> Back when station wagons were popular, there were no SUV's (at least not
> like they are known today with interior A/C and DVD player, etc.) If you
> could mandate that all SUV production be replaced by station wagon
> production, you might have something there. But given a choice between
> a large station wagon and a SUV I think your smoking weed if you seriously
> believe that a large market segment would give their SUV's up to go to
> station wagons.
>
> All that repeal of CAFE would do is allow the automakers to build bigger
> sedans. So, today's "full size" sedan would become tomorrow's mid-size,
> and todays mid-size would become tomorrow's economy sedan, and
> today's economy sedan would disappear.
>
> You might then get a small percentage of SUV buyers to buy the largest
> sedans that would become available, but that's about it.
>
> Ted
>
>

Mainly because most SUV drivers don't think a station wagon is "cool" enough
for them even though it could fulfill their needs just as well if not better
than an SUV.
I do find it interesting though that Porsche, VW, Chrysler and a few others
are marketing what amounts to an updated AMC Eagle as SUVs or "Sport
Tourers" now. Nothing but slightly taller station wagons for suckers.

 

"Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com> wrote in message
news:newscache$9qk3nh$xxt1$1@news.ipinc.net...
>
> "John David Galt" <jdg@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us> wrote in message
> news:3F931487.433F88FB@diogenes.sacramento.ca.us.. .
> >
> > The safest strategy overall would be to repeal CAFE so that people with
> > large families can go back to buying station wagons instead of SUVs.
>
> Back when station wagons were popular, there were no SUV's (at least not
> like they are known today with interior A/C and DVD player, etc.) If you
> could mandate that all SUV production be replaced by station wagon
> production, you might have something there. But given a choice between
> a large station wagon and a SUV I think your smoking weed if you seriously
> believe that a large market segment would give their SUV's up to go to
> station wagons.
>
> All that repeal of CAFE would do is allow the automakers to build bigger
> sedans. So, today's "full size" sedan would become tomorrow's mid-size,
> and todays mid-size would become tomorrow's economy sedan, and
> today's economy sedan would disappear.
>
> You might then get a small percentage of SUV buyers to buy the largest
> sedans that would become available, but that's about it.
>
> Ted
>
>

Mainly because most SUV drivers don't think a station wagon is "cool" enough
for them even though it could fulfill their needs just as well if not better
than an SUV.
I do find it interesting though that Porsche, VW, Chrysler and a few others
are marketing what amounts to an updated AMC Eagle as SUVs or "Sport
Tourers" now. Nothing but slightly taller station wagons for suckers.

 

I won't deny we have had a few run-ins in the past, but he hasn't called me
an idiot / claimed I haven't attended school / recommended I learn some
science yet, so no unpleasantness so far !

Dave Milne, Scotland
'99 TJ 4.0 Sahara

"FDRanger92" <richmay@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:5sglb.9963$W16.7834@newsread2.news.atl.earthl ink.net...
: If you had the audacity to disagree with him you sure did.
:
: "Dave Milne" <jeep@_nospam_milne.info> wrote in message
: news:dtflb.1657$jG7.15372499@news-text.cableinet.net...
: > Did I insult you Lloyd ?
: >
: > Dave Milne, Scotland
: > '99 TJ 4.0 Sahara
: >
: > "Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
: > news:bn3fu9$ipg$1@puck.cc.emory.edu...
: > : In article <KwXkb.760$qE5.7107783@news-text.cableinet.net>,
: > : "Dave Milne" <jeep@_nospam_milne.info> wrote:
: > : >Godwin's law - proposed addendum:
: > : >
: > : >"unfavourable reference to Saddaam Hussein or Bin Laden shall be
: treated
: > in
: > : >the same manner as if it were a reference to Hitler."
: > :
: > : Parker's law -- insult me and liberals, don't whine about getting
: insulted
: > : back. Stones, glass houses, and all that.
: > :
: > : >
: >
: >
:
:

 

I won't deny we have had a few run-ins in the past, but he hasn't called me
an idiot / claimed I haven't attended school / recommended I learn some
science yet, so no unpleasantness so far !

Dave Milne, Scotland
'99 TJ 4.0 Sahara

"FDRanger92" <richmay@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:5sglb.9963$W16.7834@newsread2.news.atl.earthl ink.net...
: If you had the audacity to disagree with him you sure did.
:
: "Dave Milne" <jeep@_nospam_milne.info> wrote in message
: news:dtflb.1657$jG7.15372499@news-text.cableinet.net...
: > Did I insult you Lloyd ?
: >
: > Dave Milne, Scotland
: > '99 TJ 4.0 Sahara
: >
: > "Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
: > news:bn3fu9$ipg$1@puck.cc.emory.edu...
: > : In article <KwXkb.760$qE5.7107783@news-text.cableinet.net>,
: > : "Dave Milne" <jeep@_nospam_milne.info> wrote:
: > : >Godwin's law - proposed addendum:
: > : >
: > : >"unfavourable reference to Saddaam Hussein or Bin Laden shall be
: treated
: > in
: > : >the same manner as if it were a reference to Hitler."
: > :
: > : Parker's law -- insult me and liberals, don't whine about getting
: insulted
: > : back. Stones, glass houses, and all that.
: > :
: > : >
: >
: >
:
:

 

I won't deny we have had a few run-ins in the past, but he hasn't called me
an idiot / claimed I haven't attended school / recommended I learn some
science yet, so no unpleasantness so far !

Dave Milne, Scotland
'99 TJ 4.0 Sahara

"FDRanger92" <richmay@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:5sglb.9963$W16.7834@newsread2.news.atl.earthl ink.net...
: If you had the audacity to disagree with him you sure did.
:
: "Dave Milne" <jeep@_nospam_milne.info> wrote in message
: news:dtflb.1657$jG7.15372499@news-text.cableinet.net...
: > Did I insult you Lloyd ?
: >
: > Dave Milne, Scotland
: > '99 TJ 4.0 Sahara
: >
: > "Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
: > news:bn3fu9$ipg$1@puck.cc.emory.edu...
: > : In article <KwXkb.760$qE5.7107783@news-text.cableinet.net>,
: > : "Dave Milne" <jeep@_nospam_milne.info> wrote:
: > : >Godwin's law - proposed addendum:
: > : >
: > : >"unfavourable reference to Saddaam Hussein or Bin Laden shall be
: treated
: > in
: > : >the same manner as if it were a reference to Hitler."
: > :
: > : Parker's law -- insult me and liberals, don't whine about getting
: insulted
: > : back. Stones, glass houses, and all that.
: > :
: > : >
: >
: >
:
:

 

"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
news:bn3g0b$ipg$2@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> In article <vp8o1d99dvrr64@corp.supernews.com>,
> "Douglas A. Shrader" <dshrader@nospam.com> wrote:
> >
> >"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
> >news:bn0uim$pdq$11@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> >> In article <MPG.19fbd425bcc7fbbb989e1c@news.eastlink.ca>,
> >> Chris Phillipo <Xcphillipo@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote:
> >> >In article <MVmkb.2269$np1.130@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.n et>,
> >> >spammersdie@slowlyandpainfully.com says...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > SUVs get 8mpg. Ya that's a good generalization. Keep'em coming.
> >> >>
> >> >> Actually, that's pretty accurate, if we're talking about the SUVs
that
> >SELL
> >> >> WELL. The ones that get good mileage are enough like cars that they
> >don't
> >> >> appeal to SUV buyers. -Dave
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >Wellt here's one that gets below 10mpg that I can think of it that one
> >> >just bearly sells at all.
> >> Suburban, Tahoe, Yukon, Hummer, Escalade, Escalade EXT, Escalade ESL,
> >Hummer
> >> H1, Hummer H2, Expedition, Excursion, Durango, Range Rover.
> >>
> >> Try looking at the real mpg reported in road tests.
> >
> >To borrow a phrase from you Lloyd, your lying.
> >And it isn't even a convincing lie.
> >
> >
> I seem to remember a C/D road test of a full-size Chevy pickup that got
below
> 10 mpg, as did the CR test of the Excursion.

Hell Lloyd, Dads old 1978 3/4 ton Chevy Pickup got 12 MPG. No way will you
ever convince me a modern SUV half the size gets lower milage than that.
Even the Full size Suburbans and Excursions have to be capable of better
milage than you think they get.
Now if you look hard, you MIGHT be able to find a SUV that gets 8 MPG,
though I seriously doubt it, but that still doesn't warrant ther blanket
statement that "SUV's get 8 MPG" that you made earlier.

 

"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
news:bn3g0b$ipg$2@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> In article <vp8o1d99dvrr64@corp.supernews.com>,
> "Douglas A. Shrader" <dshrader@nospam.com> wrote:
> >
> >"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
> >news:bn0uim$pdq$11@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> >> In article <MPG.19fbd425bcc7fbbb989e1c@news.eastlink.ca>,
> >> Chris Phillipo <Xcphillipo@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote:
> >> >In article <MVmkb.2269$np1.130@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.n et>,
> >> >spammersdie@slowlyandpainfully.com says...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > SUVs get 8mpg. Ya that's a good generalization. Keep'em coming.
> >> >>
> >> >> Actually, that's pretty accurate, if we're talking about the SUVs
that
> >SELL
> >> >> WELL. The ones that get good mileage are enough like cars that they
> >don't
> >> >> appeal to SUV buyers. -Dave
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >Wellt here's one that gets below 10mpg that I can think of it that one
> >> >just bearly sells at all.
> >> Suburban, Tahoe, Yukon, Hummer, Escalade, Escalade EXT, Escalade ESL,
> >Hummer
> >> H1, Hummer H2, Expedition, Excursion, Durango, Range Rover.
> >>
> >> Try looking at the real mpg reported in road tests.
> >
> >To borrow a phrase from you Lloyd, your lying.
> >And it isn't even a convincing lie.
> >
> >
> I seem to remember a C/D road test of a full-size Chevy pickup that got
below
> 10 mpg, as did the CR test of the Excursion.

Hell Lloyd, Dads old 1978 3/4 ton Chevy Pickup got 12 MPG. No way will you
ever convince me a modern SUV half the size gets lower milage than that.
Even the Full size Suburbans and Excursions have to be capable of better
milage than you think they get.
Now if you look hard, you MIGHT be able to find a SUV that gets 8 MPG,
though I seriously doubt it, but that still doesn't warrant ther blanket
statement that "SUV's get 8 MPG" that you made earlier.

 

"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
news:bn3g0b$ipg$2@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> In article <vp8o1d99dvrr64@corp.supernews.com>,
> "Douglas A. Shrader" <dshrader@nospam.com> wrote:
> >
> >"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu> wrote in message
> >news:bn0uim$pdq$11@puck.cc.emory.edu...
> >> In article <MPG.19fbd425bcc7fbbb989e1c@news.eastlink.ca>,
> >> Chris Phillipo <Xcphillipo@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote:
> >> >In article <MVmkb.2269$np1.130@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.n et>,
> >> >spammersdie@slowlyandpainfully.com says...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > SUVs get 8mpg. Ya that's a good generalization. Keep'em coming.
> >> >>
> >> >> Actually, that's pretty accurate, if we're talking about the SUVs
that
> >SELL
> >> >> WELL. The ones that get good mileage are enough like cars that they
> >don't
> >> >> appeal to SUV buyers. -Dave
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >Wellt here's one that gets below 10mpg that I can think of it that one
> >> >just bearly sells at all.
> >> Suburban, Tahoe, Yukon, Hummer, Escalade, Escalade EXT, Escalade ESL,
> >Hummer
> >> H1, Hummer H2, Expedition, Excursion, Durango, Range Rover.
> >>
> >> Try looking at the real mpg reported in road tests.
> >
> >To borrow a phrase from you Lloyd, your lying.
> >And it isn't even a convincing lie.
> >
> >
> I seem to remember a C/D road test of a full-size Chevy pickup that got
below
> 10 mpg, as did the CR test of the Excursion.

Hell Lloyd, Dads old 1978 3/4 ton Chevy Pickup got 12 MPG. No way will you
ever convince me a modern SUV half the size gets lower milage than that.
Even the Full size Suburbans and Excursions have to be capable of better
milage than you think they get.
Now if you look hard, you MIGHT be able to find a SUV that gets 8 MPG,
though I seriously doubt it, but that still doesn't warrant ther blanket
statement that "SUV's get 8 MPG" that you made earlier.

 

Lloyd Parker wrote:
> In article <3fjapvs1d2qrejkbqd74rkua3k15pfpfvg@4ax.com>,
> Bill Funk <bfunk33@qwest.net> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 21 Oct 03 10:41:33 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Your SUV uses more natural resources,
>>
>>Than what? Your MB?
>
>
> Than pretty much any CAR.
>
>
>>>increases our dependence on foreign oil,
>>
>>We don't depend on foreign oil; you should know that.
>
>
> Remember what happened the 2 times it was cut off?
>
>
>>We have made a choice, for economic reasons, to use oil that is
>>cheaper to buy than using our own.
>
>
> And we couldn't replace it tomorrow, could we?
>
>
>>Our own oil isn't intrinsically cheaper, but getting iot out of the
>>ground has been made much more expensive by government fiat.
>>
>>>forces us to spend more on defending those countries,
>>
>>Hardly; they can use their own oil profits to defend themselves.
>
>
> Why did we go to war in Gulf War I? Why do we maintain troops and ships in
> the Persian Gulf?
>
>
>>Our problem with them is that they want to govern themselves, and make
>>their own choices as to what friends they make. That we don't like
>>their choices shouldn't be used as an excuse for military action.
>>
>>>forces us to risk lives defending those countries,
>>
>>Where?
>>
>>>hurts our balance of payments,
>>
>>Brought on by government regulations, which in turn are brought on by
>>those who would rather see other countries use their oil rather than
>>our own, claiming that "it's for our children."
>>Tree huggers don't seem to have a problem with "raping" other
>>countries if it means our children are safe.
>>
>>>and increases global warming.
>>
>>That's truly laughable.
>>What did we do to bring the world out of the last big ice age? BBQ too
>>many mammoths?
>>Why do those who claim "global warming" is both unnatural and our
>>fault completely ignore the past?
>
>
> I suggest you learn some science; global warming is as established fact as
> evolution, relativity, quantum behavior, etc.
>
> global warming is a Joke ! A total enviro-wacko BS theory.