2008 Smart commuter car gets 40 mpg and will selling in USA for $12k.
#46
Guest
Posts: n/a
MIKE HUNTER SPEWS AGAIN
LOL, poor Mike Hunter...
Everytime he hears about a fuel efficent vehicle it makes his stomach turn
and then he goes into this "safety first bit" when his real embarassment is
that he is running around in gas hog.
Truth is small cars are no more dangerous...than roll-overs
"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:rMCdnRTkqfsNyxjbnZ2dnUVZ_s2vnZ2d@ptd.net...
> At the price of $16,000 for that midget two passenger car, to drive on
> American highways, to save a relative few hundred dollars a year, one
> would be better off just buying a actual
> coffin for $5,000
>
> mike
>
>
> "Useful Info" <useful_inf@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1183136367.519154.19160@k79g2000hse.googlegro ups.com...
>> Read all about it, here: http://Muvy.org
>>
>
>
Everytime he hears about a fuel efficent vehicle it makes his stomach turn
and then he goes into this "safety first bit" when his real embarassment is
that he is running around in gas hog.
Truth is small cars are no more dangerous...than roll-overs
"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:rMCdnRTkqfsNyxjbnZ2dnUVZ_s2vnZ2d@ptd.net...
> At the price of $16,000 for that midget two passenger car, to drive on
> American highways, to save a relative few hundred dollars a year, one
> would be better off just buying a actual
> coffin for $5,000
>
> mike
>
>
> "Useful Info" <useful_inf@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1183136367.519154.19160@k79g2000hse.googlegro ups.com...
>> Read all about it, here: http://Muvy.org
>>
>
>
#47
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2008 Smart commuter car gets 40 mpg and will selling in USA for $12k.
Have you been to London. There are tons there.
"Graybeard" <graybeard32@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message
news:4685b3c5$0$31224$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> Those little "Smart" cars have been running around in Europe for 7 or 8
> years, but the times that I have been there, we never saw very many of
> them on the road. The Mercedes name sells them to some people, but there
> are much better buys for better transportation in Europe, the same as
> there is here.
> If they could get the price down to $10,000, they might make a good
> substitute for a golf cart.
> (Yes, I know, the model sold here is a little different).
>
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:rMCdnRTkqfsNyxjbnZ2dnUVZ_s2vnZ2d@ptd.net...
>> At the price of $16,000 for that midget two passenger car, to drive on
>> American highways, to save a relative few hundred dollars a year, one
>> would be better off just buying a actual
>> coffin for $5,000
>>
>> mike
>>
>>
>> "Useful Info" <useful_inf@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1183136367.519154.19160@k79g2000hse.googlegro ups.com...
>>> Read all about it, here: http://Muvy.org
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
"Graybeard" <graybeard32@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message
news:4685b3c5$0$31224$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> Those little "Smart" cars have been running around in Europe for 7 or 8
> years, but the times that I have been there, we never saw very many of
> them on the road. The Mercedes name sells them to some people, but there
> are much better buys for better transportation in Europe, the same as
> there is here.
> If they could get the price down to $10,000, they might make a good
> substitute for a golf cart.
> (Yes, I know, the model sold here is a little different).
>
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:rMCdnRTkqfsNyxjbnZ2dnUVZ_s2vnZ2d@ptd.net...
>> At the price of $16,000 for that midget two passenger car, to drive on
>> American highways, to save a relative few hundred dollars a year, one
>> would be better off just buying a actual
>> coffin for $5,000
>>
>> mike
>>
>>
>> "Useful Info" <useful_inf@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1183136367.519154.19160@k79g2000hse.googlegro ups.com...
>>> Read all about it, here: http://Muvy.org
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
#48
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2008 Smart commuter car gets 40 mpg and will selling in USA for $12k.
Have you been to London. There are tons there.
"Graybeard" <graybeard32@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message
news:4685b3c5$0$31224$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> Those little "Smart" cars have been running around in Europe for 7 or 8
> years, but the times that I have been there, we never saw very many of
> them on the road. The Mercedes name sells them to some people, but there
> are much better buys for better transportation in Europe, the same as
> there is here.
> If they could get the price down to $10,000, they might make a good
> substitute for a golf cart.
> (Yes, I know, the model sold here is a little different).
>
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:rMCdnRTkqfsNyxjbnZ2dnUVZ_s2vnZ2d@ptd.net...
>> At the price of $16,000 for that midget two passenger car, to drive on
>> American highways, to save a relative few hundred dollars a year, one
>> would be better off just buying a actual
>> coffin for $5,000
>>
>> mike
>>
>>
>> "Useful Info" <useful_inf@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1183136367.519154.19160@k79g2000hse.googlegro ups.com...
>>> Read all about it, here: http://Muvy.org
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
"Graybeard" <graybeard32@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message
news:4685b3c5$0$31224$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> Those little "Smart" cars have been running around in Europe for 7 or 8
> years, but the times that I have been there, we never saw very many of
> them on the road. The Mercedes name sells them to some people, but there
> are much better buys for better transportation in Europe, the same as
> there is here.
> If they could get the price down to $10,000, they might make a good
> substitute for a golf cart.
> (Yes, I know, the model sold here is a little different).
>
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:rMCdnRTkqfsNyxjbnZ2dnUVZ_s2vnZ2d@ptd.net...
>> At the price of $16,000 for that midget two passenger car, to drive on
>> American highways, to save a relative few hundred dollars a year, one
>> would be better off just buying a actual
>> coffin for $5,000
>>
>> mike
>>
>>
>> "Useful Info" <useful_inf@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1183136367.519154.19160@k79g2000hse.googlegro ups.com...
>>> Read all about it, here: http://Muvy.org
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
#49
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2008 Smart commuter car gets 40 mpg and will selling in USA for $12k.
Have you been to London. There are tons there.
"Graybeard" <graybeard32@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message
news:4685b3c5$0$31224$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> Those little "Smart" cars have been running around in Europe for 7 or 8
> years, but the times that I have been there, we never saw very many of
> them on the road. The Mercedes name sells them to some people, but there
> are much better buys for better transportation in Europe, the same as
> there is here.
> If they could get the price down to $10,000, they might make a good
> substitute for a golf cart.
> (Yes, I know, the model sold here is a little different).
>
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:rMCdnRTkqfsNyxjbnZ2dnUVZ_s2vnZ2d@ptd.net...
>> At the price of $16,000 for that midget two passenger car, to drive on
>> American highways, to save a relative few hundred dollars a year, one
>> would be better off just buying a actual
>> coffin for $5,000
>>
>> mike
>>
>>
>> "Useful Info" <useful_inf@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1183136367.519154.19160@k79g2000hse.googlegro ups.com...
>>> Read all about it, here: http://Muvy.org
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
"Graybeard" <graybeard32@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message
news:4685b3c5$0$31224$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> Those little "Smart" cars have been running around in Europe for 7 or 8
> years, but the times that I have been there, we never saw very many of
> them on the road. The Mercedes name sells them to some people, but there
> are much better buys for better transportation in Europe, the same as
> there is here.
> If they could get the price down to $10,000, they might make a good
> substitute for a golf cart.
> (Yes, I know, the model sold here is a little different).
>
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:rMCdnRTkqfsNyxjbnZ2dnUVZ_s2vnZ2d@ptd.net...
>> At the price of $16,000 for that midget two passenger car, to drive on
>> American highways, to save a relative few hundred dollars a year, one
>> would be better off just buying a actual
>> coffin for $5,000
>>
>> mike
>>
>>
>> "Useful Info" <useful_inf@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1183136367.519154.19160@k79g2000hse.googlegro ups.com...
>>> Read all about it, here: http://Muvy.org
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
#50
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2008 Smart commuter car gets 40 mpg and will selling in USA for $12k.
"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
news:V96dnac-_aOERBjbnZ2dnUVZ_tyinZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> Jeff wrote:
>> Michael Pardee wrote:
>>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>>> news:rMCdnRTkqfsNyxjbnZ2dnUVZ_s2vnZ2d@ptd.net...
>>>> At the price of $16,000 for that midget two passenger car, to drive on
>>>> American highways, to save a relative few hundred dollars a year, one
>>>> would be better off just buying a actual
>>>> coffin for $5,000
>>>>
>>>> mike
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Okay, Mike - I have to give you a gold star for that!
>>>
>>> Mike
>>
>> Except that it has not been shown that the Smart is actually less
>> dangerous than an SUV that throws its occupants as it rolls over.
>>
> suv's don't throw their occupants, they crush them as the roof collapses.
>
> in the past, there's been no legal roof collapse requirement on suv's, so
> domestic manufacturers never bothered to address this issue - they just
> did the math on the savings, put their calculated payout into a lawsuit
> settlement fund, and netted the profit. worse than enron if you ask me.
>
SUVs and pickups historically (I haven't kept up) have not had the same
requirements as passenger vehicles. About 20 years ago I got embroiled in
the struggle to have head restraints installed in our company pickup trucks.
The cost was reasonable enough - that wasn't the problem. The problem was
that there was no federal regulation concerning head restraints in pickup
trucks, so if a driver or passenger suffered injury that could involve head
restraints in any respect liability would attach.
IMO, it is driven by CAFE. Passenger cars are one category, light trucks and
buses (including SUVs by GVWR) are another. CAFE made large passenger cars
scarce so people who wanted large vehicles started loading themselves into
trucks or buses. The market responded with large vehicles that - from a
regulatory standpoint - were not passenger vehicles but were nevertheless
fitted with creature comforts. Put the blame where you will: activists, law
makers, lawyers, manufacturers, consumers... the situation isn't changing
very quickly.
Mike
news:V96dnac-_aOERBjbnZ2dnUVZ_tyinZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> Jeff wrote:
>> Michael Pardee wrote:
>>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>>> news:rMCdnRTkqfsNyxjbnZ2dnUVZ_s2vnZ2d@ptd.net...
>>>> At the price of $16,000 for that midget two passenger car, to drive on
>>>> American highways, to save a relative few hundred dollars a year, one
>>>> would be better off just buying a actual
>>>> coffin for $5,000
>>>>
>>>> mike
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Okay, Mike - I have to give you a gold star for that!
>>>
>>> Mike
>>
>> Except that it has not been shown that the Smart is actually less
>> dangerous than an SUV that throws its occupants as it rolls over.
>>
> suv's don't throw their occupants, they crush them as the roof collapses.
>
> in the past, there's been no legal roof collapse requirement on suv's, so
> domestic manufacturers never bothered to address this issue - they just
> did the math on the savings, put their calculated payout into a lawsuit
> settlement fund, and netted the profit. worse than enron if you ask me.
>
SUVs and pickups historically (I haven't kept up) have not had the same
requirements as passenger vehicles. About 20 years ago I got embroiled in
the struggle to have head restraints installed in our company pickup trucks.
The cost was reasonable enough - that wasn't the problem. The problem was
that there was no federal regulation concerning head restraints in pickup
trucks, so if a driver or passenger suffered injury that could involve head
restraints in any respect liability would attach.
IMO, it is driven by CAFE. Passenger cars are one category, light trucks and
buses (including SUVs by GVWR) are another. CAFE made large passenger cars
scarce so people who wanted large vehicles started loading themselves into
trucks or buses. The market responded with large vehicles that - from a
regulatory standpoint - were not passenger vehicles but were nevertheless
fitted with creature comforts. Put the blame where you will: activists, law
makers, lawyers, manufacturers, consumers... the situation isn't changing
very quickly.
Mike
#51
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2008 Smart commuter car gets 40 mpg and will selling in USA for $12k.
"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
news:V96dnac-_aOERBjbnZ2dnUVZ_tyinZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> Jeff wrote:
>> Michael Pardee wrote:
>>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>>> news:rMCdnRTkqfsNyxjbnZ2dnUVZ_s2vnZ2d@ptd.net...
>>>> At the price of $16,000 for that midget two passenger car, to drive on
>>>> American highways, to save a relative few hundred dollars a year, one
>>>> would be better off just buying a actual
>>>> coffin for $5,000
>>>>
>>>> mike
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Okay, Mike - I have to give you a gold star for that!
>>>
>>> Mike
>>
>> Except that it has not been shown that the Smart is actually less
>> dangerous than an SUV that throws its occupants as it rolls over.
>>
> suv's don't throw their occupants, they crush them as the roof collapses.
>
> in the past, there's been no legal roof collapse requirement on suv's, so
> domestic manufacturers never bothered to address this issue - they just
> did the math on the savings, put their calculated payout into a lawsuit
> settlement fund, and netted the profit. worse than enron if you ask me.
>
SUVs and pickups historically (I haven't kept up) have not had the same
requirements as passenger vehicles. About 20 years ago I got embroiled in
the struggle to have head restraints installed in our company pickup trucks.
The cost was reasonable enough - that wasn't the problem. The problem was
that there was no federal regulation concerning head restraints in pickup
trucks, so if a driver or passenger suffered injury that could involve head
restraints in any respect liability would attach.
IMO, it is driven by CAFE. Passenger cars are one category, light trucks and
buses (including SUVs by GVWR) are another. CAFE made large passenger cars
scarce so people who wanted large vehicles started loading themselves into
trucks or buses. The market responded with large vehicles that - from a
regulatory standpoint - were not passenger vehicles but were nevertheless
fitted with creature comforts. Put the blame where you will: activists, law
makers, lawyers, manufacturers, consumers... the situation isn't changing
very quickly.
Mike
news:V96dnac-_aOERBjbnZ2dnUVZ_tyinZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> Jeff wrote:
>> Michael Pardee wrote:
>>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>>> news:rMCdnRTkqfsNyxjbnZ2dnUVZ_s2vnZ2d@ptd.net...
>>>> At the price of $16,000 for that midget two passenger car, to drive on
>>>> American highways, to save a relative few hundred dollars a year, one
>>>> would be better off just buying a actual
>>>> coffin for $5,000
>>>>
>>>> mike
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Okay, Mike - I have to give you a gold star for that!
>>>
>>> Mike
>>
>> Except that it has not been shown that the Smart is actually less
>> dangerous than an SUV that throws its occupants as it rolls over.
>>
> suv's don't throw their occupants, they crush them as the roof collapses.
>
> in the past, there's been no legal roof collapse requirement on suv's, so
> domestic manufacturers never bothered to address this issue - they just
> did the math on the savings, put their calculated payout into a lawsuit
> settlement fund, and netted the profit. worse than enron if you ask me.
>
SUVs and pickups historically (I haven't kept up) have not had the same
requirements as passenger vehicles. About 20 years ago I got embroiled in
the struggle to have head restraints installed in our company pickup trucks.
The cost was reasonable enough - that wasn't the problem. The problem was
that there was no federal regulation concerning head restraints in pickup
trucks, so if a driver or passenger suffered injury that could involve head
restraints in any respect liability would attach.
IMO, it is driven by CAFE. Passenger cars are one category, light trucks and
buses (including SUVs by GVWR) are another. CAFE made large passenger cars
scarce so people who wanted large vehicles started loading themselves into
trucks or buses. The market responded with large vehicles that - from a
regulatory standpoint - were not passenger vehicles but were nevertheless
fitted with creature comforts. Put the blame where you will: activists, law
makers, lawyers, manufacturers, consumers... the situation isn't changing
very quickly.
Mike
#52
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2008 Smart commuter car gets 40 mpg and will selling in USA for $12k.
"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
news:V96dnac-_aOERBjbnZ2dnUVZ_tyinZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> Jeff wrote:
>> Michael Pardee wrote:
>>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>>> news:rMCdnRTkqfsNyxjbnZ2dnUVZ_s2vnZ2d@ptd.net...
>>>> At the price of $16,000 for that midget two passenger car, to drive on
>>>> American highways, to save a relative few hundred dollars a year, one
>>>> would be better off just buying a actual
>>>> coffin for $5,000
>>>>
>>>> mike
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Okay, Mike - I have to give you a gold star for that!
>>>
>>> Mike
>>
>> Except that it has not been shown that the Smart is actually less
>> dangerous than an SUV that throws its occupants as it rolls over.
>>
> suv's don't throw their occupants, they crush them as the roof collapses.
>
> in the past, there's been no legal roof collapse requirement on suv's, so
> domestic manufacturers never bothered to address this issue - they just
> did the math on the savings, put their calculated payout into a lawsuit
> settlement fund, and netted the profit. worse than enron if you ask me.
>
SUVs and pickups historically (I haven't kept up) have not had the same
requirements as passenger vehicles. About 20 years ago I got embroiled in
the struggle to have head restraints installed in our company pickup trucks.
The cost was reasonable enough - that wasn't the problem. The problem was
that there was no federal regulation concerning head restraints in pickup
trucks, so if a driver or passenger suffered injury that could involve head
restraints in any respect liability would attach.
IMO, it is driven by CAFE. Passenger cars are one category, light trucks and
buses (including SUVs by GVWR) are another. CAFE made large passenger cars
scarce so people who wanted large vehicles started loading themselves into
trucks or buses. The market responded with large vehicles that - from a
regulatory standpoint - were not passenger vehicles but were nevertheless
fitted with creature comforts. Put the blame where you will: activists, law
makers, lawyers, manufacturers, consumers... the situation isn't changing
very quickly.
Mike
news:V96dnac-_aOERBjbnZ2dnUVZ_tyinZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> Jeff wrote:
>> Michael Pardee wrote:
>>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>>> news:rMCdnRTkqfsNyxjbnZ2dnUVZ_s2vnZ2d@ptd.net...
>>>> At the price of $16,000 for that midget two passenger car, to drive on
>>>> American highways, to save a relative few hundred dollars a year, one
>>>> would be better off just buying a actual
>>>> coffin for $5,000
>>>>
>>>> mike
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Okay, Mike - I have to give you a gold star for that!
>>>
>>> Mike
>>
>> Except that it has not been shown that the Smart is actually less
>> dangerous than an SUV that throws its occupants as it rolls over.
>>
> suv's don't throw their occupants, they crush them as the roof collapses.
>
> in the past, there's been no legal roof collapse requirement on suv's, so
> domestic manufacturers never bothered to address this issue - they just
> did the math on the savings, put their calculated payout into a lawsuit
> settlement fund, and netted the profit. worse than enron if you ask me.
>
SUVs and pickups historically (I haven't kept up) have not had the same
requirements as passenger vehicles. About 20 years ago I got embroiled in
the struggle to have head restraints installed in our company pickup trucks.
The cost was reasonable enough - that wasn't the problem. The problem was
that there was no federal regulation concerning head restraints in pickup
trucks, so if a driver or passenger suffered injury that could involve head
restraints in any respect liability would attach.
IMO, it is driven by CAFE. Passenger cars are one category, light trucks and
buses (including SUVs by GVWR) are another. CAFE made large passenger cars
scarce so people who wanted large vehicles started loading themselves into
trucks or buses. The market responded with large vehicles that - from a
regulatory standpoint - were not passenger vehicles but were nevertheless
fitted with creature comforts. Put the blame where you will: activists, law
makers, lawyers, manufacturers, consumers... the situation isn't changing
very quickly.
Mike
#59
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2008 Smart commuter car gets 40 mpg and will selling in USA for $12k.
Good point Mike, especially the legal issues involving manufacturing in this
country.
Years ago I worked for a company that manufactured electronic equipment for
airplanes. I was told that 70% of the cost for the equipment was for legal
insurance in case some lawyers sued them if their equipment was even on an
airplane involved in a crash. Contingency lawsuits are not allowed in most
of Europe!
BTW, the "Smart" car is a very interesting and attention-grabbing car.
Wonder how it compares to the Corolla?
Graybeard
"Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote in message
news:Ttmdne1q7u-xwhvbnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@sedona.net...
> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:V96dnac-_aOERBjbnZ2dnUVZ_tyinZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>> Jeff wrote:
>>> Michael Pardee wrote:
>>>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:rMCdnRTkqfsNyxjbnZ2dnUVZ_s2vnZ2d@ptd.net...
>>>>> At the price of $16,000 for that midget two passenger car, to drive on
>>>>> American highways, to save a relative few hundred dollars a year, one
>>>>> would be better off just buying a actual
>>>>> coffin for $5,000
>>>>>
>>>>> mike
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Okay, Mike - I have to give you a gold star for that!
>>>>
>>>> Mike
>>>
>>> Except that it has not been shown that the Smart is actually less
>>> dangerous than an SUV that throws its occupants as it rolls over.
>>>
>> suv's don't throw their occupants, they crush them as the roof collapses.
>>
>> in the past, there's been no legal roof collapse requirement on suv's, so
>> domestic manufacturers never bothered to address this issue - they just
>> did the math on the savings, put their calculated payout into a lawsuit
>> settlement fund, and netted the profit. worse than enron if you ask me.
>>
> SUVs and pickups historically (I haven't kept up) have not had the same
> requirements as passenger vehicles. About 20 years ago I got embroiled in
> the struggle to have head restraints installed in our company pickup
> trucks. The cost was reasonable enough - that wasn't the problem. The
> problem was that there was no federal regulation concerning head
> restraints in pickup trucks, so if a driver or passenger suffered injury
> that could involve head restraints in any respect liability would attach.
>
> IMO, it is driven by CAFE. Passenger cars are one category, light trucks
> and buses (including SUVs by GVWR) are another. CAFE made large passenger
> cars scarce so people who wanted large vehicles started loading themselves
> into trucks or buses. The market responded with large vehicles that - from
> a regulatory standpoint - were not passenger vehicles but were
> nevertheless fitted with creature comforts. Put the blame where you will:
> activists, law makers, lawyers, manufacturers, consumers... the situation
> isn't changing very quickly.
>
> Mike
>
>
country.
Years ago I worked for a company that manufactured electronic equipment for
airplanes. I was told that 70% of the cost for the equipment was for legal
insurance in case some lawyers sued them if their equipment was even on an
airplane involved in a crash. Contingency lawsuits are not allowed in most
of Europe!
BTW, the "Smart" car is a very interesting and attention-grabbing car.
Wonder how it compares to the Corolla?
Graybeard
"Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote in message
news:Ttmdne1q7u-xwhvbnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@sedona.net...
> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:V96dnac-_aOERBjbnZ2dnUVZ_tyinZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>> Jeff wrote:
>>> Michael Pardee wrote:
>>>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:rMCdnRTkqfsNyxjbnZ2dnUVZ_s2vnZ2d@ptd.net...
>>>>> At the price of $16,000 for that midget two passenger car, to drive on
>>>>> American highways, to save a relative few hundred dollars a year, one
>>>>> would be better off just buying a actual
>>>>> coffin for $5,000
>>>>>
>>>>> mike
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Okay, Mike - I have to give you a gold star for that!
>>>>
>>>> Mike
>>>
>>> Except that it has not been shown that the Smart is actually less
>>> dangerous than an SUV that throws its occupants as it rolls over.
>>>
>> suv's don't throw their occupants, they crush them as the roof collapses.
>>
>> in the past, there's been no legal roof collapse requirement on suv's, so
>> domestic manufacturers never bothered to address this issue - they just
>> did the math on the savings, put their calculated payout into a lawsuit
>> settlement fund, and netted the profit. worse than enron if you ask me.
>>
> SUVs and pickups historically (I haven't kept up) have not had the same
> requirements as passenger vehicles. About 20 years ago I got embroiled in
> the struggle to have head restraints installed in our company pickup
> trucks. The cost was reasonable enough - that wasn't the problem. The
> problem was that there was no federal regulation concerning head
> restraints in pickup trucks, so if a driver or passenger suffered injury
> that could involve head restraints in any respect liability would attach.
>
> IMO, it is driven by CAFE. Passenger cars are one category, light trucks
> and buses (including SUVs by GVWR) are another. CAFE made large passenger
> cars scarce so people who wanted large vehicles started loading themselves
> into trucks or buses. The market responded with large vehicles that - from
> a regulatory standpoint - were not passenger vehicles but were
> nevertheless fitted with creature comforts. Put the blame where you will:
> activists, law makers, lawyers, manufacturers, consumers... the situation
> isn't changing very quickly.
>
> Mike
>
>
#60
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 2008 Smart commuter car gets 40 mpg and will selling in USA for $12k.
Good point Mike, especially the legal issues involving manufacturing in this
country.
Years ago I worked for a company that manufactured electronic equipment for
airplanes. I was told that 70% of the cost for the equipment was for legal
insurance in case some lawyers sued them if their equipment was even on an
airplane involved in a crash. Contingency lawsuits are not allowed in most
of Europe!
BTW, the "Smart" car is a very interesting and attention-grabbing car.
Wonder how it compares to the Corolla?
Graybeard
"Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote in message
news:Ttmdne1q7u-xwhvbnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@sedona.net...
> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:V96dnac-_aOERBjbnZ2dnUVZ_tyinZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>> Jeff wrote:
>>> Michael Pardee wrote:
>>>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:rMCdnRTkqfsNyxjbnZ2dnUVZ_s2vnZ2d@ptd.net...
>>>>> At the price of $16,000 for that midget two passenger car, to drive on
>>>>> American highways, to save a relative few hundred dollars a year, one
>>>>> would be better off just buying a actual
>>>>> coffin for $5,000
>>>>>
>>>>> mike
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Okay, Mike - I have to give you a gold star for that!
>>>>
>>>> Mike
>>>
>>> Except that it has not been shown that the Smart is actually less
>>> dangerous than an SUV that throws its occupants as it rolls over.
>>>
>> suv's don't throw their occupants, they crush them as the roof collapses.
>>
>> in the past, there's been no legal roof collapse requirement on suv's, so
>> domestic manufacturers never bothered to address this issue - they just
>> did the math on the savings, put their calculated payout into a lawsuit
>> settlement fund, and netted the profit. worse than enron if you ask me.
>>
> SUVs and pickups historically (I haven't kept up) have not had the same
> requirements as passenger vehicles. About 20 years ago I got embroiled in
> the struggle to have head restraints installed in our company pickup
> trucks. The cost was reasonable enough - that wasn't the problem. The
> problem was that there was no federal regulation concerning head
> restraints in pickup trucks, so if a driver or passenger suffered injury
> that could involve head restraints in any respect liability would attach.
>
> IMO, it is driven by CAFE. Passenger cars are one category, light trucks
> and buses (including SUVs by GVWR) are another. CAFE made large passenger
> cars scarce so people who wanted large vehicles started loading themselves
> into trucks or buses. The market responded with large vehicles that - from
> a regulatory standpoint - were not passenger vehicles but were
> nevertheless fitted with creature comforts. Put the blame where you will:
> activists, law makers, lawyers, manufacturers, consumers... the situation
> isn't changing very quickly.
>
> Mike
>
>
country.
Years ago I worked for a company that manufactured electronic equipment for
airplanes. I was told that 70% of the cost for the equipment was for legal
insurance in case some lawyers sued them if their equipment was even on an
airplane involved in a crash. Contingency lawsuits are not allowed in most
of Europe!
BTW, the "Smart" car is a very interesting and attention-grabbing car.
Wonder how it compares to the Corolla?
Graybeard
"Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote in message
news:Ttmdne1q7u-xwhvbnZ2dnUVZ_hKdnZ2d@sedona.net...
> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:V96dnac-_aOERBjbnZ2dnUVZ_tyinZ2d@speakeasy.net...
>> Jeff wrote:
>>> Michael Pardee wrote:
>>>> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:rMCdnRTkqfsNyxjbnZ2dnUVZ_s2vnZ2d@ptd.net...
>>>>> At the price of $16,000 for that midget two passenger car, to drive on
>>>>> American highways, to save a relative few hundred dollars a year, one
>>>>> would be better off just buying a actual
>>>>> coffin for $5,000
>>>>>
>>>>> mike
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Okay, Mike - I have to give you a gold star for that!
>>>>
>>>> Mike
>>>
>>> Except that it has not been shown that the Smart is actually less
>>> dangerous than an SUV that throws its occupants as it rolls over.
>>>
>> suv's don't throw their occupants, they crush them as the roof collapses.
>>
>> in the past, there's been no legal roof collapse requirement on suv's, so
>> domestic manufacturers never bothered to address this issue - they just
>> did the math on the savings, put their calculated payout into a lawsuit
>> settlement fund, and netted the profit. worse than enron if you ask me.
>>
> SUVs and pickups historically (I haven't kept up) have not had the same
> requirements as passenger vehicles. About 20 years ago I got embroiled in
> the struggle to have head restraints installed in our company pickup
> trucks. The cost was reasonable enough - that wasn't the problem. The
> problem was that there was no federal regulation concerning head
> restraints in pickup trucks, so if a driver or passenger suffered injury
> that could involve head restraints in any respect liability would attach.
>
> IMO, it is driven by CAFE. Passenger cars are one category, light trucks
> and buses (including SUVs by GVWR) are another. CAFE made large passenger
> cars scarce so people who wanted large vehicles started loading themselves
> into trucks or buses. The market responded with large vehicles that - from
> a regulatory standpoint - were not passenger vehicles but were
> nevertheless fitted with creature comforts. Put the blame where you will:
> activists, law makers, lawyers, manufacturers, consumers... the situation
> isn't changing very quickly.
>
> Mike
>
>