Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
#2031
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
On Fri, 24 Oct 03 16:05:50 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
wrote:
>In article <3F98118D.96748C1C@ptd.net>, Vic Klein <vhklein@ptd.net> wrote:
>>Why the reputations are better is likely due to advertising strategy,
>>but the facts tell a different story. Comparing actual death rates per
>>million registered vehicle years shows the following data (IIHS.ORG):
>>
>>Mercedes C class = 52
>>Volvo 850 - 39
>>Ford Expedition 4WD = 39
>>
>Great. You compare a Mercedes the size of an Escape to an SUV bigger than an
>S-class.
The the larger size *does* make the SUV safer?
wrote:
>In article <3F98118D.96748C1C@ptd.net>, Vic Klein <vhklein@ptd.net> wrote:
>>Why the reputations are better is likely due to advertising strategy,
>>but the facts tell a different story. Comparing actual death rates per
>>million registered vehicle years shows the following data (IIHS.ORG):
>>
>>Mercedes C class = 52
>>Volvo 850 - 39
>>Ford Expedition 4WD = 39
>>
>Great. You compare a Mercedes the size of an Escape to an SUV bigger than an
>S-class.
The the larger size *does* make the SUV safer?
#2032
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
On Fri, 24 Oct 03 16:05:50 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
wrote:
>In article <3F98118D.96748C1C@ptd.net>, Vic Klein <vhklein@ptd.net> wrote:
>>Why the reputations are better is likely due to advertising strategy,
>>but the facts tell a different story. Comparing actual death rates per
>>million registered vehicle years shows the following data (IIHS.ORG):
>>
>>Mercedes C class = 52
>>Volvo 850 - 39
>>Ford Expedition 4WD = 39
>>
>Great. You compare a Mercedes the size of an Escape to an SUV bigger than an
>S-class.
The the larger size *does* make the SUV safer?
wrote:
>In article <3F98118D.96748C1C@ptd.net>, Vic Klein <vhklein@ptd.net> wrote:
>>Why the reputations are better is likely due to advertising strategy,
>>but the facts tell a different story. Comparing actual death rates per
>>million registered vehicle years shows the following data (IIHS.ORG):
>>
>>Mercedes C class = 52
>>Volvo 850 - 39
>>Ford Expedition 4WD = 39
>>
>Great. You compare a Mercedes the size of an Escape to an SUV bigger than an
>S-class.
The the larger size *does* make the SUV safer?
#2033
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
> >
>
> How big of a car do you need? The Legacy is downright cavernous, at
> least from my small-car-loving perspective.
>
> nate
>
Holy crap, the forester is puny. I can't imagine driving a legacy. Think
Pontiac Grand Prix. That's a good starting point. Now think more
oom. -Dave
>
> How big of a car do you need? The Legacy is downright cavernous, at
> least from my small-car-loving perspective.
>
> nate
>
Holy crap, the forester is puny. I can't imagine driving a legacy. Think
Pontiac Grand Prix. That's a good starting point. Now think more
oom. -Dave
#2034
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
> >
>
> How big of a car do you need? The Legacy is downright cavernous, at
> least from my small-car-loving perspective.
>
> nate
>
Holy crap, the forester is puny. I can't imagine driving a legacy. Think
Pontiac Grand Prix. That's a good starting point. Now think more
oom. -Dave
>
> How big of a car do you need? The Legacy is downright cavernous, at
> least from my small-car-loving perspective.
>
> nate
>
Holy crap, the forester is puny. I can't imagine driving a legacy. Think
Pontiac Grand Prix. That's a good starting point. Now think more
oom. -Dave
#2035
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
> >
>
> How big of a car do you need? The Legacy is downright cavernous, at
> least from my small-car-loving perspective.
>
> nate
>
Holy crap, the forester is puny. I can't imagine driving a legacy. Think
Pontiac Grand Prix. That's a good starting point. Now think more
oom. -Dave
>
> How big of a car do you need? The Legacy is downright cavernous, at
> least from my small-car-loving perspective.
>
> nate
>
Holy crap, the forester is puny. I can't imagine driving a legacy. Think
Pontiac Grand Prix. That's a good starting point. Now think more
oom. -Dave
#2036
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
On Fri, 24 Oct 03 16:07:26 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
wrote:
>In article <bn94sb$u9r3o$1@ID-207166.news.uni-berlin.de>,
> "Joe" <me@privacy.net (jo_ratner@yahoo.com)> wrote:
>>"CO2 is produced by human activities"
>>and nothing else.
>
>Liar. Noone has ever said that.
>
>
>>So there was NO CO2 before humans evolved??
>
>There was around 280 ppm for hundreds of thousands of years, until the mid
>19th century. Now there's 350 ppm, over a 25% increase.
What test equipment did they use a hundred thousand years ago?
(i.e. How does anybody know what level it was that long ago?)
wrote:
>In article <bn94sb$u9r3o$1@ID-207166.news.uni-berlin.de>,
> "Joe" <me@privacy.net (jo_ratner@yahoo.com)> wrote:
>>"CO2 is produced by human activities"
>>and nothing else.
>
>Liar. Noone has ever said that.
>
>
>>So there was NO CO2 before humans evolved??
>
>There was around 280 ppm for hundreds of thousands of years, until the mid
>19th century. Now there's 350 ppm, over a 25% increase.
What test equipment did they use a hundred thousand years ago?
(i.e. How does anybody know what level it was that long ago?)
#2037
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
On Fri, 24 Oct 03 16:07:26 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
wrote:
>In article <bn94sb$u9r3o$1@ID-207166.news.uni-berlin.de>,
> "Joe" <me@privacy.net (jo_ratner@yahoo.com)> wrote:
>>"CO2 is produced by human activities"
>>and nothing else.
>
>Liar. Noone has ever said that.
>
>
>>So there was NO CO2 before humans evolved??
>
>There was around 280 ppm for hundreds of thousands of years, until the mid
>19th century. Now there's 350 ppm, over a 25% increase.
What test equipment did they use a hundred thousand years ago?
(i.e. How does anybody know what level it was that long ago?)
wrote:
>In article <bn94sb$u9r3o$1@ID-207166.news.uni-berlin.de>,
> "Joe" <me@privacy.net (jo_ratner@yahoo.com)> wrote:
>>"CO2 is produced by human activities"
>>and nothing else.
>
>Liar. Noone has ever said that.
>
>
>>So there was NO CO2 before humans evolved??
>
>There was around 280 ppm for hundreds of thousands of years, until the mid
>19th century. Now there's 350 ppm, over a 25% increase.
What test equipment did they use a hundred thousand years ago?
(i.e. How does anybody know what level it was that long ago?)
#2038
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
On Fri, 24 Oct 03 16:07:26 GMT, lparker@NOSPAMemory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
wrote:
>In article <bn94sb$u9r3o$1@ID-207166.news.uni-berlin.de>,
> "Joe" <me@privacy.net (jo_ratner@yahoo.com)> wrote:
>>"CO2 is produced by human activities"
>>and nothing else.
>
>Liar. Noone has ever said that.
>
>
>>So there was NO CO2 before humans evolved??
>
>There was around 280 ppm for hundreds of thousands of years, until the mid
>19th century. Now there's 350 ppm, over a 25% increase.
What test equipment did they use a hundred thousand years ago?
(i.e. How does anybody know what level it was that long ago?)
wrote:
>In article <bn94sb$u9r3o$1@ID-207166.news.uni-berlin.de>,
> "Joe" <me@privacy.net (jo_ratner@yahoo.com)> wrote:
>>"CO2 is produced by human activities"
>>and nothing else.
>
>Liar. Noone has ever said that.
>
>
>>So there was NO CO2 before humans evolved??
>
>There was around 280 ppm for hundreds of thousands of years, until the mid
>19th century. Now there's 350 ppm, over a 25% increase.
What test equipment did they use a hundred thousand years ago?
(i.e. How does anybody know what level it was that long ago?)
#2039
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
The forester is SMALLER than the Legacy. The Forester is built on the
Imprezza frame...
"Dave C." <spammersdie@slowlyandpainfully.com> wrote in message
news:hpgmb.850$RQ1.395@newsread3.news.pas.earthlin k.net...
> > >
> >
> > How big of a car do you need? The Legacy is downright cavernous, at
> > least from my small-car-loving perspective.
> >
> > nate
> >
>
> Holy crap, the forester is puny. I can't imagine driving a legacy. Think
> Pontiac Grand Prix. That's a good starting point. Now think more
> oom. -Dave
>
>
Imprezza frame...
"Dave C." <spammersdie@slowlyandpainfully.com> wrote in message
news:hpgmb.850$RQ1.395@newsread3.news.pas.earthlin k.net...
> > >
> >
> > How big of a car do you need? The Legacy is downright cavernous, at
> > least from my small-car-loving perspective.
> >
> > nate
> >
>
> Holy crap, the forester is puny. I can't imagine driving a legacy. Think
> Pontiac Grand Prix. That's a good starting point. Now think more
> oom. -Dave
>
>
#2040
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Huge study about safety can be misinterpreted by SUV drivers
The forester is SMALLER than the Legacy. The Forester is built on the
Imprezza frame...
"Dave C." <spammersdie@slowlyandpainfully.com> wrote in message
news:hpgmb.850$RQ1.395@newsread3.news.pas.earthlin k.net...
> > >
> >
> > How big of a car do you need? The Legacy is downright cavernous, at
> > least from my small-car-loving perspective.
> >
> > nate
> >
>
> Holy crap, the forester is puny. I can't imagine driving a legacy. Think
> Pontiac Grand Prix. That's a good starting point. Now think more
> oom. -Dave
>
>
Imprezza frame...
"Dave C." <spammersdie@slowlyandpainfully.com> wrote in message
news:hpgmb.850$RQ1.395@newsread3.news.pas.earthlin k.net...
> > >
> >
> > How big of a car do you need? The Legacy is downright cavernous, at
> > least from my small-car-loving perspective.
> >
> > nate
> >
>
> Holy crap, the forester is puny. I can't imagine driving a legacy. Think
> Pontiac Grand Prix. That's a good starting point. Now think more
> oom. -Dave
>
>