Fair warnin' to y'all

Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Absurd vehicles to use for transportation, thankfully killed by the peak in US oil production of the early 1970's. They were too big to perform well no matter what engine was in them.

Alas, only to be replaced by the equally stupid SUV's and full sized trucks that I see every day on my commute to work - with one passenger. Often I blast past the 4WD vehicles in the snow with my tiny 1500cc front wheel drive car, while their terrified drivers crawl along at walking speed.
BUT,they had a big back seat.;) :happybanana:
 
Often I blast past the 4WD vehicles in the snow with my tiny 1500cc front wheel drive car, while their terrified drivers crawl along at walking speed.
Maybe in Pennsylvania... :D ...but any good Iowa boy can drive the bias tire equipped '73 family truckster at 80 MPH, in 8 inches of snow, at night during a raging blizzard, on a narrow gravel road, without flinching, and only one hand on the wheel... 'cause the other hand is needed for holdin' the beer :ices_rofl: (headlamps optional)
*
 
Today's SUVs are mostly not 4WD...
For example, even the 8-cylinder Ford Explorer is a "one-wheel-wonder" front-wheel drive with on demand rear wheel assist. No matter how you advertize it... it ain't no better than front-wheel-drive with a couple drunks sittin' in the back seat ready to push when needed. Friggin' stupid‼
I put my daughter in a '93 rear-wheel-drive Crown Victoria and told her to learn how to drive... even in winter, damnit‼
She learned fast... and actually knows how to drive.
*
 
....With the duct tape covered Airstream severely hindering their gas mileage they pushed on through the foreign mountainous terrain (which was still inky), ever aware that the box o' beer was emptying nearly as fast as the gas tank, and desperately searching for the nearest Toyota dealership.....
 
I can't vouch for many AWD vehicles but I did drive a AWD gmc safari for a time and I gotta say I was rather impressed with it's ability in the snow.
 
The Obama Administration "Cash for Clunkers" program in 2009 sounded the death knell for rat row. A program that cost the American tax pay payer $3 billion and only improved the average fuel economy of all vehicles sold in that year by a mere 0.7 MPG, not even saving us one days worth of fuel. CO2 emissions were cut less than 1%... and that doesn't allow for building and shipping the new cars. Some studies claim the costs outweighed the benefits by nearly $1.5 billion. (No, I'm not gonna' post links to references, 'cause someone will just post a link that says the opposite... do your own research, make your own decision.)

The program required the trade-in be destroyed... which took nearly nearly a million "clunkers" off the roads and dealer lots. The balance of supply and demand was thrown completely askew... it drove up the price of used cars, and forever removed the $100 (or even $1000) rat row. What was a $1500 used car became a $3000 used car overnight... and the $3000 car became a $5000 car... etc...
I was in the business at the time...
Before 2009 we always had 6-12 runners sittin' on "rat row"... as is, no warranty, priced from $100 (or going scrap price) to $1500. If they didn't sell in a week or two (usually any offer would buy it), we called the salvage yard. And heck, the salvage yard would set them out front for a month or so and sell half of 'em or better. If'n I had to guess, all said and done... at least 85% of 'em were sold and re-licensed.
After 2009, rat row was where we piled the snow in winter... what few "rats" that did come in weren't worth messin' with... complete unsaleable junk.

The "poor" fella' was screwed again... and so was the middle class fella' looking for a good, cheap used third car for the kid to drive (like the $1995.00 special... they were gone also). Now-a-days, what was a $500 rat is the $1995.00 special... thanks tree-huggers.
*


I agree with all the aforementioned and would add that the one of the driving forces behind this debacle was the deal made with China by the State Department and Mrs. Clinton that we would supply China with a source of scrap metal (our beaters) to drive their infrastructure expansion in 2008 and 2009 and in return they would loan us money against our debt to try and bail our economy out. Seems like we got the short end of the stick again :buttkick: thanks to our wonderful administration looking out for our best interests...again...
 
...I did drive a AWD gmc safari for a time and I gotta say I was rather impressed...
True AWD is not the same as AWD Assist. The transfer case or transmission of true AWD vehicles is evenly distributing power to both axles at all times. There ain't nothin' new or innovative about (true) AWD... 50 years ago it was called "Full-Time 4WD". A transfer case that could be shifted in and out of 4WD via user input (i.e., a shift lever or even a bush button) was called "On-Demand 4WD".

In 1990 Ford put an Electronic AWD system in their rear drive Aerostar mini-van; when the system detected rear wheel spin it automatically engaged the front axle... this was essentially a rear wheel drive with front assist. The system used a unique center differential transfer case controlled by electronics... meaning the system regulated power between the axles, power was not necessarily distributed equally to the front and rear. The system made it possible for soccer mom to drive up the inclined driveway in a snow storm... it was never intended to be 4WD. When cruising down an icy roadway it was still a rear drive vehicle, the fronts were not pulling... you could "lose" the front end on ice and snow just as easily as you would with the rear wheel drive only.

The original SUVs were either "Full-Time 4WD" or rear drive with (manually engaged) "On-Demand 4WD" and designed with off-road capability... such as the Bronco, Blazer, Suburban and the like. The next generation of SUVs, such as the Explorer, S-10 Blazer, and such, were still designed with at least some limited off-road capability in mind. But what we have now is not intended for any sort of off-road use... they are front wheel drive vehicles with rear assist. They may be marketed as AWD, or even as "Electronically Controlled On-Demand AWD"... but they ain't really "On-Demand" 'cause the user cannot "demand" engagement, and they ain't 4WD either. Heck, most of 'em ain't really even a SUV, they're actually a CUV (Crossover Utility Vehicle)... the Tahoe and Expedition are SUVs. The CUV is not 4WD, they are not designed or intended for any sort of off-road use... they are designed for soccer mom to drive up the inclined driveway in a snow storm.
*
 
In 1990 Ford put an Electronic AWD system in their rear drive Aerostar mini-van; ................ The system made it possible for soccer mom to drive up the inclined driveway in a snow storm... ...

Oh yeah why because she was so dumb? What are you twelve. Arrested development sheesh......



I put my daughter in a '93 rear-wheel-drive Crown Victoria and told her to learn how to drive... even in winter, damnit‼
She learned fast... and actually knows how to drive.

If you want an omelet you have to break a few eggs. haha. I put my kid in a '78 V8 Monte and we ran over a pregnant raccoon on her first drive making her first curve. Pounded it lol. She was scared shirtless and I just laughed, "Hun why do you think I got ya one of these instead of an '04 Malibu."
 
Absurd vehicles to use for transportation, thankfully killed by the peak in US oil production of the early 1970's. They were too big to perform well no matter what engine was in them.

Alas, only to be replaced by the equally stupid SUV's and full sized trucks that I see every day on my commute to work - with one passenger. Often I blast past the 4WD vehicles in the snow with my tiny 1500cc front wheel drive car, while their terrified drivers crawl along at walking speed.
Arrogant self impotent geeks in shoebox cars piss me off, especially when they're driving too fast for conditions.

Think I'll take the truck today, just for you. Stick that in your fart can pipe, or wherever makes you happy...
 
Arrogant self impotent geeks in shoebox cars piss me off, especially when they're driving too fast for conditions.

Think I'll take the truck today, just for you. Stick that in your fart can pipe, or wherever makes you happy...
Lol - I've never been called "self impotent" before!

So I'm arrogant because my driving skills exceed those of the typical SUV driver? How do you know I was driving too fast for conditions - what were the conditions? Were you there? Of course not, you're just blowing crap out your pipe.

I have a '94 F250 4WD, what became the Super Duty in '95 - I drive it for hauling stuff and when I must drive in more serious snow. I used to be into full-sized Jeeps and know what a good 4WD system is and how to drive one in the snow. Here in PA we used to get more regular snow, and people were generally competent driving in it, although few drove 4WD vehicles. Not any more. Now an inch or two of snow will bring traffic to a crawl - long parades of 4WD vehicles with terrified drivers. Cars are stuck all over the place. Heck, a little rain is enough to make the commute 50% longer. So why drive those things?.

Reality check: You don't need 4WD to get around in a couple of inches of snow. A little front wheel drive vehicle with decent tires is fine, especially if it has a manual trans.

Have fun driving your truck - I don't care. After all, fuel is cheap and will be forever.
 
Back
Top