>
> I wouldn't call that cheap, I would call it economical. Think about it,
> those cars that you are referring to weighed quite a bit more than the
> unibody cars of today. These lighter cars require smaller engines to do
> the same jobs as previous engines, which means better gas mileage, which
> leads to less money spent and better emissions (thus saving the
> environment). Smaller cars can also stop quicker. This is certainly a
> safety concern. The same applies to SUV's and Trucks also: the lighter
> the vehicle, the quicker it can stop. You have to remember that a lot of
> car v. SUV wrecks probably occur when a car makes a sudden stop, but the
> SUV can't quite get slowed enough or maneuver around the car. So, it slams
> into the back of it and does very severe damage because of its size and
> weight advantages over the car. I don't think trying to reduce the weight
> of SUVs and trucks is a really bad thing. It'll happen sooner or later
> anyway, so we might as well get used to it now.
>
> Andy Callahan
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> Andy Callahan University of Kentucky quasideedle@uky.campus.mci.net
>
> '97 Mustang GT, Laser Red/Medium Graphite Leather, 5-speed, 3.27 axle,
> 17" wheels, Keyless Entry, ABS, Mach 460, K&N Off Road Aircharger,
> Cobra Leather Shift Knob
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>
Seems pretty cheap to me, personally I'll take the hit in MPG for the
peace of mind I have steel around me and will come out on top in a wreck.
To me it is a bad thing to weaken the SUV's and trucks, their supposed to
be strong, that's what makes them trucks, if they get it to the point
where trucks are as weak as cars, I'll never buy another new truck, I'll
just keep buying old trucks and fixing them up...
Bruce
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:08:16 EDT