Why is the Hummer hated?!

I hate the look of the H2 and H3. I like the H1 but would hate the fuel bill. Since I have to ride in a HMMWV at work I guess I do not need one at home.

As far as what other people drive, if you are willing to pay for the gas you can drive whatever you want. That is the great thing about living in the US (or most other places) is you get to choose. Although I think the price of gas should be increased and the extra given to programs for fuel cell, hydrogen, biodisel, etc research or subsidize truckers (since their gas guzzler actually has a purpose other than recreation). At $5 a gallon people will think twice about driving their hummer as a soccer mom transport.

How is burning veg oil cleaner? Does not burning stuff still put waste into the air? Or is it the carbon neutral aspect?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(PriusOwner004 @ Sep 12 2007, 09:53 PM) [snapback]511662[/snapback]</div>

No Diesel, even the new technology ones due out next year in the US are as clean as the Prius. What I think you meant to say is that the waste SVO powered vehicle has less net green house gas emissions. Because the CO2 went into the oil from the air, and is going out again into the air, in a continuous cycle.

Present Diesels still exhaust allot more NOX and Particulate , than if the waste SVO was reprocessed into gasoline and burned in a Prius. Living next to a railroad line, I cannot wait till the low sulphur fuel is used by trains, which happens next year. And afterward more stringent train emissions are put in place. NOX makes smog in basin communities (LA and Denver particularly) and acid rain on the east coast.

I read someplace that the hydrongenated oils are difficult to recycle, and end up going to refineries. But the natural oils, while not as long lasting in a fryer, recycle to an oil that can go back in the fryer. This has made the switch to these oils much more palatable to the fast food places. And will cut down on the amount of waste SVO.

If you saw last weeks NOVA PBS show, another importance (besides lung disease) of lowering particulates has been discovered. They cause droughts. Downwind regions from high polution zones have experienced droughts. The atmospheric scientist believe that airborne particulates from Europe were mostly responsible for the unnatural droughts in Ethiopia in the 1990's. Since the implementation of DPF (Diesel Particulate Filters) and other EU industrial emissions regulations, the Sahel has returned to normal rain fall.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(PriusOwner004 @ Sep 12 2007, 09:53 PM) [snapback]511662[/snapback]</div>

No Diesel, even the new technology ones due out next year in the US are as clean as the Prius. What I think you meant to say is that the waste SVO powered vehicle has less net green house gas emissions. Because the CO2 went into the oil from the air, and is going out again into the air, in a continuous cycle.

Present Diesels still exhaust allot more NOX and Particulate , than if the waste SVO was reprocessed into gasoline and burned in a Prius. Living next to a railroad line, I cannot wait till the low sulphur fuel is used by trains, which happens next year. And afterward more stringent train emissions are put in place. NOX makes smog in basin communities (LA and Denver particularly) and acid rain on the east coast.

I read someplace that the hydrongenated oils are difficult to recycle, and end up going to refineries. But the natural oils, while not as long lasting in a fryer, recycle to an oil that can go back in the fryer. This has made the switch to these oils much more palatable to the fast food places. And will cut down on the amount of waste SVO.

If you saw last weeks NOVA PBS show, another importance (besides lung disease) of lowering particulates has been discovered. They cause droughts. Downwind regions from high polution zones have experienced droughts. The atmospheric scientist believe that airborne particulates from Europe were mostly responsible for the unnatural droughts in Ethiopia in the 1990's. Since the implementation of DPF (Diesel Particulate Filters) and other EU industrial emissions regulations, the Sahel has returned to normal rain fall.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(richard schumacher @ Sep 12 2007, 08:03 AM) [snapback]511278[/snapback]</div>

Be v-e-r-y careful about calling someone a "merkin"!!! :lol:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/merkin

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(richard schumacher @ Sep 12 2007, 08:03 AM) [snapback]511278[/snapback]</div>

Be v-e-r-y careful about calling someone a "merkin"!!! :lol:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/merkin

 

It's a hairy map of Tassie!

 

It's a hairy map of Tassie!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(viking31 @ Sep 13 2007, 02:50 AM) [snapback]511397[/snapback]</div>

Why would I be jealous? If I wanted a truck I would have bought an old Mack or Isuzu.
Australia buys the best military hardware from what they consider the best sources in the world, we don't need to artificially bolster our local industry by restricting out military to buying second or third best. By the way, most of our ground vehicles are built here or modified here to Australian military specification. The US military have to buy their harware locally but do the citizens?
If they don't feel inadequate why do they drive around in a truck that seats 4?
Because "normal" 4x4s follow in the same wheel tracks as the last 4x4 along the track they don't squash any additional rare native plants. H1 are wider so do more damage by driving over virgin ground. There is more to the environment than air you know.
Your taste is in your arse, I think the Prius has style, the Hummer has the style of a cardboard box. And so it should, it wasn't designed to win a fashion show but to win battles. Don't mix up big with atractive or you could think you're in bed with Kylie Minogue and Brad Pitt and it's actually Roseanne Barr and John Goodman !! :huh:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(viking31 @ Sep 13 2007, 02:50 AM) [snapback]511397[/snapback]</div>

Why would I be jealous? If I wanted a truck I would have bought an old Mack or Isuzu.
Australia buys the best military hardware from what they consider the best sources in the world, we don't need to artificially bolster our local industry by restricting out military to buying second or third best. By the way, most of our ground vehicles are built here or modified here to Australian military specification. The US military have to buy their harware locally but do the citizens?
If they don't feel inadequate why do they drive around in a truck that seats 4?
Because "normal" 4x4s follow in the same wheel tracks as the last 4x4 along the track they don't squash any additional rare native plants. H1 are wider so do more damage by driving over virgin ground. There is more to the environment than air you know.
Your taste is in your arse, I think the Prius has style, the Hummer has the style of a cardboard box. And so it should, it wasn't designed to win a fashion show but to win battles. Don't mix up big with atractive or you could think you're in bed with Kylie Minogue and Brad Pitt and it's actually Roseanne Barr and John Goodman !! :huh:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(PriusOwner004 @ Sep 12 2007, 03:27 AM) [snapback]511133[/snapback]</div>

total BS.

your saying a full sized truck hit you hard enough to total the front end and u didn’t feel it. I was a Corpsman in the navy assigned with the Marines we used real Hummers. I have been deployed to combat zones 3 times. i have seen hummers scratched, dented, and destroyed. Contrary to the movies a tree can stops a hummer from 60MPH to 0mph in a hart beat. so I want see this video and see if u are that oblivious.

don’t get me wrong they can take a beating and keep rolling that is what they were made for. They were not designed to be the worlds best off road vehicle they were designed to be used in combat zones. so yeah rock climbing, mudding , and other sport type activities there are better vehicles. now if u want to run through some mud hit a rock get shot and drive through a brick wall the hummer is still gona be working but its gona look like you just did all that. they are not tanks even though people think they look like they should be indestructible.

I hate seeing hummers in traffic when I commute and then the owner complains about gas expense. It’s the same as the kid with the 502 big block in his lifted Chevy that gets 2-4 mpg saying “dude gas prices suckâ€


also SUV’s are involved in only 3% of accidents but make up over 30% of the lethal ones. But not in that they kill the people they hit but the people in the SUV die. they are not safe.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(PriusOwner004 @ Sep 12 2007, 03:27 AM) [snapback]511133[/snapback]</div>

total BS.

your saying a full sized truck hit you hard enough to total the front end and u didn’t feel it. I was a Corpsman in the navy assigned with the Marines we used real Hummers. I have been deployed to combat zones 3 times. i have seen hummers scratched, dented, and destroyed. Contrary to the movies a tree can stops a hummer from 60MPH to 0mph in a hart beat. so I want see this video and see if u are that oblivious.

don’t get me wrong they can take a beating and keep rolling that is what they were made for. They were not designed to be the worlds best off road vehicle they were designed to be used in combat zones. so yeah rock climbing, mudding , and other sport type activities there are better vehicles. now if u want to run through some mud hit a rock get shot and drive through a brick wall the hummer is still gona be working but its gona look like you just did all that. they are not tanks even though people think they look like they should be indestructible.

I hate seeing hummers in traffic when I commute and then the owner complains about gas expense. It’s the same as the kid with the 502 big block in his lifted Chevy that gets 2-4 mpg saying “dude gas prices suckâ€


also SUV’s are involved in only 3% of accidents but make up over 30% of the lethal ones. But not in that they kill the people they hit but the people in the SUV die. they are not safe.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(IAO @ Sep 13 2007, 08:08 AM) [snapback]511858[/snapback]</div>

I'd love a reference for this. Just to make it clear, I am not being sarcastic....

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(IAO @ Sep 13 2007, 08:08 AM) [snapback]511858[/snapback]</div>

I'd love a reference for this. Just to make it clear, I am not being sarcastic....

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(PriusOwner004 @ Sep 13 2007, 02:53 AM) [snapback]511662[/snapback]</div>

For the moment, fuel based on vegetable oil is just an irrelevant joke, because there isn't nearly enough to keep the world rolling. It's nice to give a few greenies a warm feeling like they are saving the world.

But, right now, the production doesn't scale to a point where it becomes even remotely relevant. And if it would, that would create huge problems with food prices in the third world.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(PriusOwner004 @ Sep 13 2007, 02:53 AM) [snapback]511662[/snapback]</div>

For the moment, fuel based on vegetable oil is just an irrelevant joke, because there isn't nearly enough to keep the world rolling. It's nice to give a few greenies a warm feeling like they are saving the world.

But, right now, the production doesn't scale to a point where it becomes even remotely relevant. And if it would, that would create huge problems with food prices in the third world.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Alric @ Sep 13 2007, 09:52 AM) [snapback]511879[/snapback]</div>

Yeah, seriously... though I don't have any stats, I am sure SUV's make up far more than 3% of the vehicles on the road today, and they don't seem like the type to have a disproportionately low accident rate.

So, if 3% of accidents involve SUVs, and these represents 30% of fatalities, does mean that as a worst case people only die in about 10% of all vehicle accidents? (math: 0.03 / .3) IMHO, 10% seems pretty low, and that is assuming EVERY SUV accident is a fatality. :huh:

But I digress...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Alric @ Sep 13 2007, 09:52 AM) [snapback]511879[/snapback]</div>

Yeah, seriously... though I don't have any stats, I am sure SUV's make up far more than 3% of the vehicles on the road today, and they don't seem like the type to have a disproportionately low accident rate.

So, if 3% of accidents involve SUVs, and these represents 30% of fatalities, does mean that as a worst case people only die in about 10% of all vehicle accidents? (math: 0.03 / .3) IMHO, 10% seems pretty low, and that is assuming EVERY SUV accident is a fatality. :huh:

But I digress...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Sarge @ Sep 13 2007, 12:31 PM) [snapback]511964[/snapback]</div>

The 3% seems a slight paraphase of the source below:
April 20, 2004, WSJ
The Wall Street Journal, "U.S. May Set Criteria For Seat Belts in Rollovers"
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is looking at establishing a performance requirement for seat belts in rollover crashes. Currently there are none.
Mr. Tyson's comments came in response to a new report from Public Citizen charging that seat belts aren't adequately protecting people in rollovers. Some 2,000 belted occupants are dying in rollover crashes a year, with about half of them partially ejected from the vehicle, the report says. The primary benefit of a seat belt in rollovers is to prevent ejection. The report blames poorly designed and performing seat belts.
The Public Citizen report comes as it and other consumer-safety groups are trying to keep pressure on Congress to enact new auto-safety measures as part of the massive highway bill. The Senate version of the bill included numerous safety provisions, such as new standards for roof-crush and seat-belt performance in rollovers. Joan Claybrook, president of Public Citizen and a former NHTSA administrator, said rollovers should be highly survivable crashes, because the force is spread out over several seconds, compared with the quick smash in, say, a frontal collision. But because of antiquated roof-crush standards and poorly designed seat belts, they have become a particularly lethal type of crash. Rollovers account for 3% of accidents, but one-third of occupant fatalities.
reproduced at http://www.vehicle-injuries.com/suv-safety-news-2004.htm

Though my favorite article on the misperception of SUV safety (which I learned of from a Priuschat posting by NuShrike) is the Big and Bad article by Blink author Malcolm Gladwell
http://www.gladwell.com/2004/2004_01_12_a_suv.html