What happed to all the Hummers?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: ekpolk


Again, how many original Jeep luxo-knockoffs ever appeared in the 20 years or so after WW-II? I'll save you the trouble -- ZERO.


Not so sure on that. You see the Wrangler Unlimited? They have power windows, remote start, power locks, two-tone leather seats, Sirius radio, and uConnect navigation with 30gb hard drive. I do not have remote start, two-tone seats or Nav in the H2. I guess the Wrangler is more LUXO-knockoff then the Hummer.

Now for the comedy. The Wrangler EPA ratings show 15 city/19 hwy. That is horrible and only 2 mpg better then I get with the 2 and on par or worse then my wifes 3 with 320hp V8. bawawahahahahaha It must be a horrible horrible vehicle that no body should buy. Disclaimer: I would not mind a Wrangler.
 
Originally Posted By: Audi Junkie
I supposed "statistics" and charts make some people ~feel~ safe. What makes me feel safe is driving a vehicle that can stop and manouver. I guess that equates to my "gut" feeling verses statistics developed from accidents that quite literally have nothing to do with me. Sorry if I was misunderstood.


The thing is that if you are sitting at a stop light and an Excursion runs the light coming the other way and ends up on top of you, all the stopping and manoeuvring ability is moot. You have a 8000+lb SUV on your car. The occupants of that SUV are safer in this situation than you are in your car. And likely close to unharmed. Please see the results of the Accord vs F-250 for potential results.

If an accident CAN be avoided.... Yes, the vehicle with the ability to do so better (with an equally capable driver) has a greater chance of avoiding it. However, you can't anticipate being T-boned by a Suburban that runs a light or stop sign for example. You can't anticipate a drunk in an F-250 driving through the median and onto your car.

Reverse those roles; BEING the F-250 and getting a head-on by one of your cars, you would be safer in the F-250.

Your cited parameters are only important in accidents that CAN be avoided. Many accidents cannot. And that is why the statistics show what they do.
 
Originally Posted By: o2man98
Originally Posted By: ekpolk


Again, how many original Jeep luxo-knockoffs ever appeared in the 20 years or so after WW-II? I'll save you the trouble -- ZERO.


Not so sure on that. You see the Wrangler Unlimited? They have power windows, remote start, power locks, two-tone leather seats, Sirius radio, and uConnect navigation with 30gb hard drive. I do not have remote start, two-tone seats or Nav in the H2. I guess the Wrangler is more LUXO-knockoff then the Hummer.

Now for the comedy. The Wrangler EPA ratings show 15 city/19 hwy. That is horrible and only 2 mpg better then I get with the 2 and on par or worse then my wifes 3 with 320hp V8. bawawahahahahaha It must be a horrible horrible vehicle that no body should buy. Disclaimer: I would not mind a Wrangler.


He specifically stated in the last 20 years or so after WW2. That would put you square in the middle of the 60's. Did the Wrangler Unlimited exist in 1964? I'm thinking no.
 
Originally Posted By: o2man98
Originally Posted By: ekpolk


Again, how many original Jeep luxo-knockoffs ever appeared in the 20 years or so after WW-II? I'll save you the trouble -- ZERO.


Not so sure on that. You see the Wrangler Unlimited? They have power windows, remote start, power locks, two-tone leather seats, Sirius radio, and uConnect navigation with 30gb hard drive. I do not have remote start, two-tone seats or Nav in the H2. I guess the Wrangler is more LUXO-knockoff then the Hummer.
Well, had the Wrangler LTD appeared in 1960, it would be a different argument. Second, let's not forget the subject at hand -- what happened to all the HUMMERS? Are the current crop of "Jeeps" (let's not forget the origin of that name -- an expansion of the contraction of GP, which meant "General Purpose" -- GP became "GEEP". And now is Jeep. Anyway, feel free to start a Jeep evolution thread if you like. At least the brand has, like it or not, vastly outsurvived the Hummer brand. There is a reason for that.

Originally Posted By: o2man98
Now for the comedy. The Wrangler EPA ratings show 15 city/19 hwy. That is horrible and only 2 mpg better then I get with the 2 and on par or worse then my wifes 3 with 320hp V8. bawawahahahahaha It must be a horrible horrible vehicle that no body should buy. Disclaimer: I would not mind a Wrangler.
Let's try coming out with an argument that makes sense. This one doesn't, at all. If you have a transport mission that's met by the vehicle, and you can afford the gas, then buy. If you want the vehicle to soothe your ego, it's your right to execute that decision, but paying the freight is up to you...
 
One more thing that would help me out, since my interest level and skills are challenged...

What exactly is the difference, statistically, of the odds between being killed in a car and an SUV?

1:5000 vs 1:8000 or something?

Seems like an easy question for the experts, who wish to delve exclusively in probability anyway.


Another thing that's so far unsaid is, do we all really want to make our vehicle purchases exclusively...not even on the safety merits of the vehicle itself, but the once-removed theatre of crash studies? I'm not going out and purposely buying an unsafe vehicle, but it's not the one and only priority. It's different for everyone, driving styles and population density are two obvious factors to consider. Heck, people get around fine on motorcycles for Pete's sake! Applying the common-sense maxim, "the highest good lies in the mean", I'm not driving the most unsafe vehicle by a long shot, nor am I hobbling myself unnecessarily with some absurd "tank", in which people die in at a quite regular rate anyway!

Look at these people who have accident after accident and others who manage to stay clean. Statistics don't seem to apply to them...? Do they?
 
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
However, you can't anticipate being T-boned by a Suburban that runs a light or stop sign for example.


As most red-light running incidents happen within a few seconds of the light having changed to red, I always make it a habit to check that conflicting traffic is actually going to stop as I'm approaching an intersection where the light has just turned green. It's pretty easy to see the difference between a vehicle that's either not slowing down or speeding up and one that is actually slowing down.
 
Originally Posted By: brianl703
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
However, you can't anticipate being T-boned by a Suburban that runs a light or stop sign for example.


As most red-light running incidents happen within a few seconds of the light having changed to red, I always make it a habit to check that conflicting traffic is actually going to stop as I'm approaching an intersection where the light has just turned green. It's pretty easy to see the difference between a vehicle that's either not slowing down or speeding up and one that is actually slowing down.



True. I do the same. I was thinking of a particularly bad accident that happened about an hour from here about 15 years ago. There's a section of 80Km/h road (so everybody is doing at least 90) and it gets crossed (in many places) by lines that are also 80Km/h.

Well somebody blew one of those stop signs at speed, t-boning a van at about 90Km/h. I remember there were a number of deaths.
 
I can think of only a few intersections like that around here which are controlled only by stop signs, fewer than that which aren't "T" intersections, and most of them are in low-traffic rural areas..and I suspect that many of those will soon be replaced with traffic circles.
 
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Originally Posted By: brianl703
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
However, you can't anticipate being T-boned by a Suburban that runs a light or stop sign for example.


As most red-light running incidents happen within a few seconds of the light having changed to red, I always make it a habit to check that conflicting traffic is actually going to stop as I'm approaching an intersection where the light has just turned green. It's pretty easy to see the difference between a vehicle that's either not slowing down or speeding up and one that is actually slowing down.



True. I do the same. I was thinking of a particularly bad accident that happened about an hour from here about 15 years ago. There's a section of 80Km/h road (so everybody is doing at least 90) and it gets crossed (in many places) by lines that are also 80Km/h.

Well somebody blew one of those stop signs at speed, t-boning a van at about 90Km/h. I remember there were a number of deaths.



I saw a video years ago that was caught on tape only because it was being filmed by a reporter for some segment about a particularly dangerous intersection somewhere in the US (no idea where, again this was years ago). Anyway she's in mid spiel, and the camera is panned to show the her and the intersection she is describing, when a vehicle blew through it and was T-boned by a transport truck.

I remember almost nothing but the slow motion recap showing the impact and whatever it hit just blowing apart into fragments. It could have been a little hatchback, a pickup, or an SUV - I don't remember but I doubt the outcome would have been much different. This point isn't intended to negate any of the statistics brought up.

I know that for me safety is a factor, definitely, but not the only one. Just one of many. If we really want to get statistical, we could go zero sum and say that you are safest if you stay off the roads completely. Avoid all forms of transportation. As the statistics show, even the largest SUV doesn't give you an immunity pass to cheat death in an accident. Then you can continue along in that paranoid, zero risk mentally until the guys in the white coats come along to introduce you to ECT and quietapine.

The statistics are valid, but there is a certain validity to living life and accepting that there is always some small chance that your number will be called. The 21st century equivalent of a suit of armor won't do you much good if its called when you step out of it to cross the street and get mowed down by some kid joyriding his dad's 'vette.

Statistics have their uses. But context is important to. Out of all causes of death, natural, accidental, and intentional, where do vehicle accidents rate. Probably not too high, as if they were a routine thing in life they would not be so sensationalized and memorable.

-Spyder
 
Originally Posted By: Spyder7
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Originally Posted By: brianl703
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
However, you can't anticipate being T-boned by a Suburban that runs a light or stop sign for example.


As most red-light running incidents happen within a few seconds of the light having changed to red, I always make it a habit to check that conflicting traffic is actually going to stop as I'm approaching an intersection where the light has just turned green. It's pretty easy to see the difference between a vehicle that's either not slowing down or speeding up and one that is actually slowing down.



True. I do the same. I was thinking of a particularly bad accident that happened about an hour from here about 15 years ago. There's a section of 80Km/h road (so everybody is doing at least 90) and it gets crossed (in many places) by lines that are also 80Km/h.

Well somebody blew one of those stop signs at speed, t-boning a van at about 90Km/h. I remember there were a number of deaths.



I saw a video years ago that was caught on tape only because it was being filmed by a reporter for some segment about a particularly dangerous intersection somewhere in the US (no idea where, again this was years ago). Anyway she's in mid spiel, and the camera is panned to show the her and the intersection she is describing, when a vehicle blew through it and was T-boned by a transport truck.

I remember almost nothing but the slow motion recap showing the impact and whatever it hit just blowing apart into fragments. It could have been a little hatchback, a pickup, or an SUV - I don't remember but I doubt the outcome would have been much different. This point isn't intended to negate any of the statistics brought up.

I know that for me safety is a factor, definitely, but not the only one. Just one of many. If we really want to get statistical, we could go zero sum and say that you are safest if you stay off the roads completely. Avoid all forms of transportation. As the statistics show, even the largest SUV doesn't give you an immunity pass to cheat death in an accident. Then you can continue along in that paranoid, zero risk mentally until the guys in the white coats come along to introduce you to ECT and quietapine.

The statistics are valid, but there is a certain validity to living life and accepting that there is always some small chance that your number will be called. The 21st century equivalent of a suit of armor won't do you much good if its called when you step out of it to cross the street and get mowed down by some kid joyriding his dad's 'vette.

Statistics have their uses. But context is important to. Out of all causes of death, natural, accidental, and intentional, where do vehicle accidents rate. Probably not too high, as if they were a routine thing in life they would not be so sensationalized and memorable.

-Spyder


I remember that video. It was a 1/2-ton pick-up.
 
Originally Posted By: Spyder7

Statistics have their uses. But context is important to. Out of all causes of death, natural, accidental, and intentional, where do vehicle accidents rate. Probably not too high, as if they were a routine thing in life they would not be so sensationalized and memorable.

-Spyder


Spyder- here's one way to look at these statistics in context:

According to the most recent JAMA mortality data:

Motor vehicle accidents were listed as the 6th leading preventable cause of death, after tobacco, diet/physical inactivity, alcohol, and microbial/toxic agents.

(Granted, 2000 data is a bit old, but keep in mind it wasn't published until JAMA 2004, it was the most recent data I could locate, it is still considered a valid reference by current journal articles, and it's interesting to note that vehicle fatalities actually increased as a cause of death from 1990 to 2000).
 
NCAP says my vehicle did great...

thumb__testsplashtop.png


http://www.euroncap.com/tests/vw_tiguan_2007/301.aspx






End of story.
 
Originally Posted By: Audi Junkie
NCAP says my vehicle did great...

(edit: deleted video of VW Tiguan)

(edit: deleted video of Opel Astra)

End of story.


Audi Junkie- end of story? Try beginning of this thread. I'm not sure why bringing NCAP into this makes any difference- the Euro tests are more stringest vs. US tests, but they still prove nothing about the relative safety of your own car vs. an SUV. Both your vehicles may be highly rated in their respective classes, but the NCAP crash tests cannot be compared across vehicle weight classes, just like the NHTSA and IIHS tests. See the minicar vs. midsize car crash tests above for reference- both cars are 5-star rated, but the results ain't pretty for the smaller car.

So how do you think your highly-rated Astra would do in an accident with your highly-rated Tiguan, or more importantly, in an accident with someone else's highly-rated, and/or larger SUV (like an H2 that can't stop, maybe)?

Originally Posted By: moving2

1. IIHS: Given equivalent frontal ratings for heavier and lighter vehicles, the heavier vehicle typically will offer better protection in real-world crashes."


2. IIHS: "A really, really poorly designed or insufficiently designed large- or medium-sized car may be more or less protective than the best-designed small car, but that's something that you're not going to be able to tell just by looking at crash-test ratings," says David Zuby, senior vice president of vehicle research for IIHS. "So all things being equal, if you're concerned about safety, you want a bigger, heavier car."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

B
Changing Oil Every 2 Years?
2
Replies
37
Views
961
50yr Street Mech
robertfixit
e85 ethanol gas in 08 Pontiac Vibe
Replies
12
Views
415
robertfixit
G
Any engine upgrades available for the Buick Enclave?
2 3 4
Replies
62
Views
2K
Greyroom
O
What would you pay for this '97 GMC truck?
2
Replies
39
Views
1K
NormanBuntz
stchman
Magnetic Oil Drain PLugs.
2
Replies
32
Views
1K
CarlB
Back
Top Bottom