I don't know about the rest of you, but this topic here sickens me:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/click/rss/0.91/public/-/2/hi/ business/3859133.stm
Not only are American car sales slowly declining, but so are the better European cars like Mercedes, and VW...it just sickens me at how people can buy cheaply made pieces of crap at the same price you'd pay for a MUCH better and SAFER car. Not to mention looks...
ID:275626
 Jul 4 2004, 11:38 am
|
|
|
Jul 4 2004, 12:38 pm
|
|
Garthor
 |
There are a lot more important things to be sickened about.
|
What do you mean cheaply made cars... Hondas are some of the most reliable cars you can find. My dad had an old Civic for 8 years and about 250,000 miles and it still ran fine. Origional clutch too, we sold it though and bought a new Civic and it's even better.
| |
What I want to see is for car makers to start making cars that look decent, and work... Without tons of luxurious features. It is sickening me to see freaken mini-vans costing 60,000 dollars! Alright, so that is a soccer-mom deal with the DVD, the folding seats, etc, but still, others cares are getting to be that way.
I would like a car with a decent body design, a pretty good crash test rating, ABS brakes, and a decently comfortable inside... But no. All the new cars now are for rich people. Instead of the basic features, I get a satilite radio system, flip-n-fold seats, secret storage areas, an engine that can make the car go over 100 miles over the US's maximum speed limit (Why the hell do normal cars need that?? What on earth is the point when it illegal to go that fast anywhere but a track??), an electrical system that controls everything about the car, and a security system that probably wouldn't even be needed if the cars didn't have luxurious radios inside and had better ways of starting them up. Because of all these features, half the population is stuck with buying cars that break down often, look crumby, and erode come winter-time, because they were made in 1980! Is it a rule that all cars from 2004 need to cost $50,000+? As for the article, it doesn't really bother me too much, considering I like foreign companies better mostly, since most american cars are made for farmers and people who go on trips alot and carry a lot of equipment. | |
Wow, 8 years? We've got a 1967 Impala that's still got the original motor on it and it still runs like the day we bought it. That, and it doesn't have all the extra crap. It retains it value (heck, it even went up WAY up). Tell me...in 40 years, how much is your 1988 Honda Civic going to be worth on the market?
| |
Teh Governator wrote:
We've got a 1967 Impala... Do cars that old have air bags, or even seat belts? And I wonder what kind of gas mileage and pollution there is with old cars. Talk about unsafe and disgusting. | |
OneFishDown wrote:
Teh Governator wrote: I don't need airbags, and yes they have seatbelts, and it gets about on average 18-22 MPG. And, it doesn't pollute no more than the newer ones. Any more questions? | |
Saying that you don't need airbags is like saying... well, if you think you don't need airbags, no analogy will really help.
| |
Teh Governator wrote:
OneFishDown wrote: What happens when someone runs into you? Instant death probably? | |
Garthor wrote:
Saying that you don't need airbags is like saying... well, if you think you don't need airbags, no analogy will really help. So, you're saying airbags are a necessity? What about the earlier days of automobiles, as I recall...there were less fatalities back in the 40s, 50s, and 60s related to car wrecks. Mainly, because the cars were actually well...more than plastic. Sorry, but an airbag isn't going to help you much when you've got a plastic body on your car. | |
Critical wrote:
What happens when someone runs into you? Instant death probably? No, I'll survive...because, it's not made out of cheap plastic or fiberglass, all steel. Unless of course, it's a much larger vehicle (like a truck, or semi)...then pretty much no people in ANY car would survive it. | |
Of course there were less fatalities, there was half as many people on the planet then and less cars per household (in the USA at least) than there are today.
| |
But, the percentages are still relevant. There were just as many crashes as there were back then as there are today (percentage wise). But, the people in the cars survived better because, the vehicles survived. Not torn into multiple pieces from a side collision at 45 MPH.
| |
I know it's not as easy as I make it sound, but if all of you are so upset at the way cars are being made, make one yourself that is specifically suited to you.
It is not illigal to make and drive your own car, so long as it determined to be safe by official inspectors. | |
Who on earth has the equipment for that other than car companies?
True, it wont be hard to do the interier, since many places sell stuff like that, but there is no way you'd be able to make the body without buying another car, you'd have to replace all of the other systems (not to mention you'd have to be a professional welder.), and build it machine-perfectly so it would work like a charm. I'd rather bike for 5 years and save up for the $50,000 car. | |
You do realize that it doesn't matter if your car is made out of some wonder metal and doesn't take a scratch, you're still being flung at your dashboard at 60 miles per hour.
| |
No, I'll survive...because, it's not made out of cheap plastic or fiberglass, all steel. Unless of course, it's a much larger vehicle (like a truck, or semi)...then pretty much no people in ANY car would survive it. No the car will survive and not you. Cars are meant to cave in to reduce the force on the driver by slowing the impact speed down. Try jumping from a few feet up and not letting your knees cave in. You'll notice it's more painful because none of the impact is absorbed. | |
That isn't anywhere near how much impact would be absorbed from the car's chasis crumpling.
Seriously, watch some crash test videos that don't have airbags. | |