317 mpg vw

[Arnold Walker]

Not my point at all.

In any case cannot the SUV possibly carry 6 ppl ?

Graham

Some like the suburban carry 9.....

 

[Arnold Walker]

Sounds like time to increase them in that case !

You could charge for road wear by axle weight for example. That'll bugger
the
cost of running an SUV !

Graham

Actually they already do charge by vehicle weight and heavy vehicles burn
more fuel ,so the fuel tax paid is heavier as well.
Now if we can include shoes and bicycles imagine how much more the burden of
road wear would be covered.
Many states like La. are corrupt as hell......the roads don't get fixed even
if you charged $5.00 tax for a gallon of the fuel.
Like the levee money, half of it will disappear in the government machinery.
One of the good aspects of Kitrina was showing up, some of the crooks.
Few will get prosecuted ,but that 's government.

 

[Arnold Walker]

I'm sure that'll make a great selling point.

Graham

Motorcycles and aircraft operaters learned how to use intercomms.
Car drivers may be different.....

 

[Nick Hull]

Airliners should _also_ be highly discouraged.

They are, homeland security makes it such a hassle to fly that I
drive everywhere

 

[Eeyore]

They are, homeland security makes it such a hassle to fly that I
drive everywhere

Which in fact uses more fuel !

Modern airliner fuel efficiency is much better than using a car for a single
person travelling long distances, never mind reducing the strain on the person.

Graham

 

[RW Salnick]

Vaughn Simon brought forth on stone tablets:

First of all, he has no point because both vehicles are perfectly capable
of carrying 2 passengers, so the comparison is illogical, and also had nothing
to do with the subject at hand. Why don't we compare 4 SUV's with one
passenger each to my Civic with 4 passengers aboard? That would be equally
illogical.

Second, check your math again. I can't give you an average for SUV's but your
17 sounds high. (Some of the new "mini SUVs may skew things downward a bit,

It is high... a little.

There seems to be a lot of FUD out there about SUVs. My 1988 3/4T
Suburban (8 passengers
+ luggage, + ski gear - that's what we use it for) gets 16 mpg, loaded
up with 5-6 skiers and their gear.

 

[Eeyore]

There seems to be a lot of FUD out there about SUVs. My 1988 3/4T
Suburban (8 passengers + luggage, + ski gear - that's what we use it for) gets 16
mpg, loaded up with 5-6 skiers and their gear.

That sounds like a sensible use for an SUV.

You might even actually need the 4WD in snowy places too !

Graham

 

[Derek Broughton]

I agree. Personally, I'm in favor of more toll roads (they're common in the
US, almost unheard of in Canada).

Actually they already do charge by vehicle weight and heavy vehicles burn
more fuel ,so the fuel tax paid is heavier as well.

BS. Nowhere that I know of in N. America - and certainly nowhere in
Canada - are personal vehicles charged by axle weight. And trucks are not
charged anything close to the actual cost of wear and tear on the roads.

In Canada, fuel taxes don't come close to paying for the roads, either, and
since the vast majority of the fuel taxes are fixed per liter, they don't
even increase with the cost of gas. T

 

[Derek Broughton]

It simply requires the mpg of the average SUV not be better than 50% of
the mpg of the average compact car. How simple is that ?

Simple - I don't think, however, that it's true, and in any case you forgot
to quote where I point out that there's a lot more than just the gas
mileage involved.

 

[Derek Broughton]

On what basis ?

On the basis of the part of the message you snipped...

 

[RW Salnick]

Derek Broughton brought forth on stone tablets:

Arnold Walker wrote:




I agree. Personally, I'm in favor of more toll roads (they're common in the
US, almost unheard of in Canada).




BS. Nowhere that I know of in N. America - and certainly nowhere in
Canada - are personal vehicles charged by axle weight. And trucks are not
charged anything close to the actual cost of wear and tear on the roads.

In Canada, fuel taxes don't come close to paying for the roads, either, and
since the vast majority of the fuel taxes are fixed per liter, they don't
even increase with the cost of gas. T

BS on your BS. In Washington, we pay an excise tax based on vehicle weight.

 

[Arnold Walker]

I agree. Personally, I'm in favor of more toll roads (they're common in
the
US, almost unheard of in Canada).


BS. Nowhere that I know of in N. America - and certainly nowhere in
Canada - are personal vehicles charged by axle weight.

Cars are charged by vehicle gross wieght in over half states in the US

And trucks are not

charged anything close to the actual cost of wear and tear on the roads.

Check out how of the roadway is destoryed by drunk car drivers and road
ragers.
Most truck are hard pressed to match car driver on the damage done.
And get back to me....

 

[Eeyore]

Simple - I don't think,

You don't understand mathematics ?

however, that it's true, and in any case you forgot to quote where I point out
that there's a lot more than just the gas mileage involved.

You're an idiot. All the costs are accountable very easily. No matter how
annoying SUVs may be, they have a valid target market.

If you object to how most ppl use them, and I'm behind you here, you need to fix
*human behaviour*, not the vehicle.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

On the basis of the part of the message you snipped...

Go **** yourself for being an idiot who won't or can't answer a simple direct
question.

You have nothing of interest or value to offer.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

Derek Broughton brought forth on stone tablets:

BS on your BS. In Washington, we pay an excise tax based on vehicle weight.

That much is fair since it relates to the true cost of maintaining the required
infrastructure.

Graham

 

[Richard P.]

I can hardly believe that. I can travel 900+ km on 50 litres of E10.
There's no way any jet (B737,757,767, A310 etc..) can do that assuming a
full load of occupants and dividing the fuel load per occupant let alone
cargo weight.


in message

 

[Derek Broughton]

Derek Broughton brought forth on stone tablets:

BS on your BS. In Washington, we pay an excise tax based on vehicle
weight.

That's fine, but I stated "not in Canada" and "nowhere I know of" in the US.
Arnold told me I was just plain wrong. So now we know there are places in
the US that do that, but it still doesn't happen in all parts of the US and
no parts of Canada.

 

[Derek Broughton]

Cars are charged by vehicle gross wieght in over half states in the US

That's better, but you earlier stated that I was flat out wrong, now you're
admitting that in half of the US I'm not - I didn't say it was everywhere.

And trucks are not
Check out how of the roadway is destoryed by drunk car drivers and road
ragers.
Most truck are hard pressed to match car driver on the damage done.

More BS. Trucks, by their nature, cause tens to hundreds of times the wear
and tear on the roads (depending on suspension - the air suspensions have
helped by an order of magnitude, or more).

 

[Derek Broughton]

You don't understand mathematics ?

Yes, but you haven't provided any. No numbers, no calculations. Nothing

You're an idiot.

Yeah, and you're an annoying git
<plonk>

 

[Eeyore]

in message

person > travelling long distances, never mind reducing the strain on the
person


I can hardly believe that.

Well, there you go. Now you can believe it !

I can travel 900+ km on 50 litres of E10.

So ?

There's no way any jet (B737,757,767, A310 etc..) can do that

Why not ? What law of physics says it can't be done ?

assuming a full load of occupants and dividing the fuel load per occupant let
alone
cargo weight.

Yes it can. The new A380 is particularly good.

Airbus A380 more fuel-efficient than a Toyota Prius

The A380 arrived in the U.S. today. The plane can carry 81,890 gallons of fuel
and flies 8000 nautical miles, i.e., it burns approximately 10 gallons of fuel
per nautical mile or 9 gallons per statute mile. The plane can seat 850 people
if configured as an all-economy ship, so the mpg per person is approximately 95
(assuming the plane is fully loaded, which most planes seem to be these days).
The Prius gets around 45 mpg in real-world driving and, though it can seat 5, is
typically occupied by one person.

http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2007/03/19/airbus-a380-more-fuel-efficient-than-a-toyota-prius/

Remember that 'common sense' is neither particularly common nor usually much
sense.


Graham