Zeeny has lived in places that don't get much snow in NY, then.
Where your main roads have 3 inches of snow on them about half an hour after plowing, but the slush stage before that was frightening. Good luck battleing it out with the Ford BigAss Truck that just plowed into your compact and compacted it.
bowen on
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
Zeeny has lived in places that don't get much snow in NY, then.
Where your main roads have 3 inches of snow on them about half an hour after plowing, but the slush stage before that was frightening. Good luck battleing it out with the Ford BigAss Truck that just plowed into your compact and compacted it.
And there are plenty of rural areas in this country where snow plows won't show up for days after a major storm.
Ithaca was quite an experience after a snow storm.
Modern Man on
Aetian Jupiter - 41 Gunslinger - The Old Republic
Rigorous Scholarship
And why are we only assuming that it'll be a gas tax?
You could easily just add extra taxes onto SUV purchases.
Then you're just taxing a vehicle based on aesthetics. Who cares if a vehicle falls into a certain category? If you're worried about environmental issues, the problem really comes down to fuel efficiency.
Vehicle weight and size are relevant factors for road construction, maintenance, and (the big one) parking. Fuel efficiency is probably the easiest and least subjective area of a vehicle's impact to measure (and therefore tax), but there's also a less obvious but still quite serious level of public interest simply related to vehicle size. Twenty compacts and twenty hummers not only use different amounts of fuel, but take up different distances on a highway and require substantially different spacing for parking and reasonable road access.
Again, fuel is the easiest to measure so that makes it an obviously attractive criteria to measure a vehicle's impact and tax level by. Size and weight are still pretty relevant. Luckily fuel efficiency tends to favor small, light vehicles over large, heavy ones, so you can accomplish quite a bit only adjusting taxes on fuel and fuel efficiency standards.
Zeeny has lived in places that don't get much snow in NY, then.
Where your main roads have 3 inches of snow on them about half an hour after plowing, but the slush stage before that was frightening. Good luck battleing it out with the Ford BigAss Truck that just plowed into your compact and compacted it.
And there are plenty of rural areas in this country where snow plows won't show up for days after a major storm.
Ithaca was quite an experience after a snow storm.
Given the levels of SUV ownership in the United States and the population numbers for "rural areas in this country where snow plows won't show up for days after a major storm," I don't think you can argue in good faith that any significant number of SUV owners are reliant upon the vehicle's ability to push through a deep level of snow.
I suppose if you want some kind of public policy solution you can have some limited tax break for people who need SUVs in areas with terrible weather and who live out in the boonies. I wonder if maybe just giving road maintenance crews enough of a budget to deal with snowstorms wouldn't be better in the long run.
Either way, its a realistic scenario but also a particularly rare one.
Zeeny has lived in places that don't get much snow in NY, then.
Where your main roads have 3 inches of snow on them about half an hour after plowing, but the slush stage before that was frightening. Good luck battleing it out with the Ford BigAss Truck that just plowed into your compact and compacted it.
Boo-Fucking-Hoo.
There's tons of places in Canada with more snowfall then that. By a large margin. And less plowing.
You don't need an SUV. You just need snow tires. I know this first hand.
Zeeny has lived in places that don't get much snow in NY, then.
Where your main roads have 3 inches of snow on them about half an hour after plowing, but the slush stage before that was frightening. Good luck battleing it out with the Ford BigAss Truck that just plowed into your compact and compacted it.
And there are plenty of rural areas in this country where snow plows won't show up for days after a major storm.
Ithaca was quite an experience after a snow storm.
Given the levels of SUV ownership in the United States and the population numbers for "rural areas in this country where snow plows won't show up for days after a major storm," I don't think you can argue in good faith that any significant number of SUV owners are reliant upon the vehicle's ability to push through a deep level of snow.
I suppose if you want some kind of public policy solution you can have some limited tax break for people who need SUVs in areas with terrible weather and who live out in the boonies. I wonder if maybe just giving road maintenance crews enough of a budget to deal with snowstorms wouldn't be better in the long run.
Either way, its a realistic scenario but also a particularly rare one.
A Subaru Outback is going to deal with snow way better than the vast majority of SUVs.
Zeeny has lived in places that don't get much snow in NY, then.
Where your main roads have 3 inches of snow on them about half an hour after plowing, but the slush stage before that was frightening. Good luck battleing it out with the Ford BigAss Truck that just plowed into your compact and compacted it.
Boo-Fucking-Hoo.
There's tons of places in Canada with more snowfall then that. By a large margin. And less plowing.
You don't need an SUV. You just need snow tires. I know this first hand.
Your concerns are just ridiculous hyperbole.
Good news everyone, there is different types of snow.
bowen on
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
Zeeny has lived in places that don't get much snow in NY, then.
Where your main roads have 3 inches of snow on them about half an hour after plowing, but the slush stage before that was frightening. Good luck battleing it out with the Ford BigAss Truck that just plowed into your compact and compacted it.
Boo-Fucking-Hoo.
There's tons of places in Canada with more snowfall then that. By a large margin. And less plowing.
You don't need an SUV. You just need snow tires. I know this first hand.
Your concerns are just ridiculous hyperbole.
Good news everyone, there is different types of snow.
Yes, there is real snow and there is special-magical-SUV snow that falls only where Bowen lives.
You know what I'd do if I was god-king of automobile design and advertisement?
Simple. I'd include an adult-scaled folding kick-scooter in the trunk of every car I sold, or a folding bicycle instead for a small increase to the charge. I'd have commercials aired emphasizing the whole "last mile" concept(that is, getting from your major transportation method to places just far enough away to be a pain in the ass to walk), and how by using this free human-powered transport for even the occasional small sub-trip can lead to major savings in gas, better health, and so on and so on. Once you have people open to the idea of using non-car transportation for at least those little trips, encouraging them to expand beyond that gets easier.
Snow tires are not allowed in a number of places as well because they tear the shit out of roads, roads which already get the shit torn out of them due to the environment they're in. This is only certain areas though.
That said we get a fuckload of snow here and the biggest argument I've seen against SUVs in the winter is the large number of them seen in the ditches after a decent snow/ice storm. My theory is that many people seem to have a tendancy to get extremely overconfident because they think 4 wheel drive makes them immune to ice which is laughably not the case.
The trick to driving in the snow and ice is to be careful, not what vehicle you're behind the wheel of.
Zeeny has lived in places that don't get much snow in NY, then.
Where your main roads have 3 inches of snow on them about half an hour after plowing, but the slush stage before that was frightening. Good luck battleing it out with the Ford BigAss Truck that just plowed into your compact and compacted it.
Boo-Fucking-Hoo.
There's tons of places in Canada with more snowfall then that. By a large margin. And less plowing.
You don't need an SUV. You just need snow tires. I know this first hand.
Your concerns are just ridiculous hyperbole.
Good news everyone, there is different types of snow.
Yes, there is real snow and there is special-magical-SUV snow that falls only where Bowen lives.
Yeah, it is different actually.
I've seen snowflakes the size of my palm, how about you?
bowen on
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
Zeeny has lived in places that don't get much snow in NY, then.
Where your main roads have 3 inches of snow on them about half an hour after plowing, but the slush stage before that was frightening. Good luck battleing it out with the Ford BigAss Truck that just plowed into your compact and compacted it.
Boo-Fucking-Hoo.
There's tons of places in Canada with more snowfall then that. By a large margin. And less plowing.
You don't need an SUV. You just need snow tires. I know this first hand.
Your concerns are just ridiculous hyperbole.
Good news everyone, there is different types of snow.
Yes, there is real snow and there is special-magical-SUV snow that falls only where Bowen lives.
Yeah, it is different actually.
I've seen snowflakes the size of my palm, how about you?
Snow tires are not allowed in a number of places as well because they tear the shit out of roads, roads which already get the shit torn out of them due to the environment they're in. This is only certain areas though.
You are probably thinking of studded tires. Those are generally regulated.
Snow Tires don't do anything to the road.
That said we get a fuckload of snow here and the biggest argument I've seen against SUVs in the winter is the large number of them seen in the ditches after a decent snow/ice storm. My theory is that many people seem to have a tendancy to get extremely overconfident because they think 4 wheel drive makes them immune to ice which is laughably not the case.
They trick to driving in the snow and ice is to be careful, not what vehicle you're behind the wheel of.
Pretty much. SUVs and 4-Wheel Drive and "Rugged Outdoorsy" Car Commercials engender a degree of confidence in your vehicle that is completely bullshit. It's marketing, not fact.
I'm not saying it's required, but the generally fact is the road conditions are poor here in the winter and a large part of why I bought an SUV was the safety it entails should the dumbfuck in the H3 decide he wants to go 70 in the 35 during the blizzard with 0 visibility.
There are a lot of trucks around here, mainly because it's a pretty rural area and everyone uses them for transportation/work.
bowen on
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
Well, my suv will stand up slightly better than a compact honda. That's not perception, that's physics.
Edit:
Unless all that voodoo about them having more mass and material is all bullshit. Let me know. Thanks.
IIRC, its also significantly more likely to turn what would be a slide or fishtail into a rollover. Regardless of what type of specific accidents are more or less common, overall SUVs are not safer than compacts. You believe they are safer, but that doesn't actually make them safer.
The trick to driving on snowy roads is careful control of your vehicle and cautious acceleration and deceleration. Yes, this is a field I have some personal experience in.
Risk is pretty much the same between SUVs and Cars. It also says that quality rather then weight seems to be the determining factor.
Regardless, your initial comments that you NEED the SUV are still bullshit. If you wanna buy it cause it makes you feel all safe and shit, fine. We'll just charge you more fees for needlessly buying an inefficient gas guzzler with a much higher environmental impact.
Well, I'm coming from the fact that if someone decides to plow into me, the SUV will definitely protect better than the compact. We could go all day back and forth with stupid statistics that prove both cases probably. Or we could highlight that maybe that one time I got rear-ended I wouldn't have rolled over, but short of those weird cases, I don't see how something with more mass wouldn't fare substantially better than something with less mass.
But yes, driving in snowy conditions is pretty easy. It's not my skills I'm worried about.
bowen on
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
Risk is pretty much the same between SUVs and Cars. It also says that quality rather then weight seems to be the determining factor.
Regardless, your initial comments that you NEED the SUV are still bullshit. If you wanna buy it cause it makes you feel all safe and shit, fine. We'll just charge you more fees for needlessly buying an inefficient gas guzzler with a much higher environmental impact.
Except that it's not a gas guzzler. Durpdedur.
bowen on
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
And a cursory glance at the statistics and graphs leads me to believe my actual point all the more, the numbers seemed to be stacked more towards "other drivers" if you're in an SUV and "yourself" if you're in a compact.
bowen on
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
Risk is pretty much the same between SUVs and Cars. It also says that quality rather then weight seems to be the determining factor.
Regardless, your initial comments that you NEED the SUV are still bullshit. If you wanna buy it cause it makes you feel all safe and shit, fine. We'll just charge you more fees for needlessly buying an inefficient gas guzzler with a much higher environmental impact.
Except that it's not a gas guzzler. Durpdedur.
The most fuel efficient SUVs (Hybrids fyi) are still less fuel efficient then a decent non-hybrid car.
Well, I'm coming from the fact that if someone decides to plow into me, the SUV will definitely protect better than the compact. We could go all day back and forth with stupid statistics that prove both cases probably. Or we could highlight that maybe that one time I got rear-ended I wouldn't have rolled over, but short of those weird cases, I don't see how something with more mass wouldn't fare substantially better than something with less mass.
But yes, driving in snowy conditions is pretty easy. It's not my skills I'm worried about.
You mean we could go back and forth with me and others giving statistics and anecdotes as to why you are wrong and you can give no statistics and just go "Hurpderp, no I is rite!!!!", yes?
And a cursory glance at the statistics and graphs leads me to believe my actual point all the more, the numbers seemed to be stacked more towards "other drivers" if you're in an SUV and "yourself" if you're in a compact.
So it's okay for you to select your vehicle because you believe that its properties make you more likely to kill someone else than yourself, but if those other people want to take your money in the form of an SUV tax, that's a terrible and unfair thing?
And a cursory glance at the statistics and graphs leads me to believe my actual point all the more, the numbers seemed to be stacked more towards "other drivers" if you're in an SUV and "yourself" if you're in a compact.
So it's okay for you to select your vehicle because you believe that its properties make you more likely to kill someone else than yourself, but if those other people want to take your money in the form of an SUV tax, that's a terrible and unfair thing?
I never said that. Just countering the perceived "it's not less safe...!" Looking at those statistics they're roughly on the same line. Damages be damages.
Now, everyone should just drive luxury mid-sized sedans, honestly.
bowen on
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
And a cursory glance at the statistics and graphs leads me to believe my actual point all the more
You should read and comprehend them, because they don't support your point at all.
edit- I should clarify
The point that it disproves is that SUVs are safer than other types of passenger vehicles.
According to the findings, SUVs are only safer than the worst quality compact and subcompact cars. High-quality subcompact and compact cars are less risky than SUVs.
Or people that find out that size != snowworthiness.
Those vans the Salvation Army uses? Those things are worthless in the snow. "Can't you just drive the van up here" "No, because it's stuck at the bottom of the hill."
Snow tires are not allowed in a number of places as well because they tear the shit out of roads, roads which already get the shit torn out of them due to the environment they're in. This is only certain areas though.
You are probably thinking of studded tires. Those are generally regulated.
Snow Tires don't do anything to the road.
Someone earlier in the thread mentioned snow chains and studded tires, that's what I was specifically referring too. Shoulda quoted it I guess :P
Well, I'm coming from the fact that if someone decides to plow into me, the SUV will definitely protect better than the compact. We could go all day back and forth with stupid statistics that prove both cases probably. Or we could highlight that maybe that one time I got rear-ended I wouldn't have rolled over, but short of those weird cases, I don't see how something with more mass wouldn't fare substantially better than something with less mass.
But yes, driving in snowy conditions is pretty easy. It's not my skills I'm worried about.
And so you want more people with poor driving skills to be driving around in high-mass vehicles which are more likely to hurt you?
I live in Alaska. While it may only be Anchorage, we do know what snow and ice on the roads is about. I drive a 2001 FWD Chevy Cavalier and Malibu with snow tires during the winter. There is an over-abundance of monstrous SUV's and Trucks in this state. But, I have yet to see those vehicles outperform my dinky little cars on any road surface. It truly is how you drive, not what you drive.
As for road conditions..man, the studs and frost heaves do a number up here. There is constant road construction going on all over the city and the state due to damage. I would say many main roads only last a few years before the grooves, ruts, and holes become so deep that it is simply dangerous.
Posts
Where your main roads have 3 inches of snow on them about half an hour after plowing, but the slush stage before that was frightening. Good luck battleing it out with the Ford BigAss Truck that just plowed into your compact and compacted it.
Ithaca was quite an experience after a snow storm.
Rigorous Scholarship
Vehicle weight and size are relevant factors for road construction, maintenance, and (the big one) parking. Fuel efficiency is probably the easiest and least subjective area of a vehicle's impact to measure (and therefore tax), but there's also a less obvious but still quite serious level of public interest simply related to vehicle size. Twenty compacts and twenty hummers not only use different amounts of fuel, but take up different distances on a highway and require substantially different spacing for parking and reasonable road access.
Again, fuel is the easiest to measure so that makes it an obviously attractive criteria to measure a vehicle's impact and tax level by. Size and weight are still pretty relevant. Luckily fuel efficiency tends to favor small, light vehicles over large, heavy ones, so you can accomplish quite a bit only adjusting taxes on fuel and fuel efficiency standards.
Given the levels of SUV ownership in the United States and the population numbers for "rural areas in this country where snow plows won't show up for days after a major storm," I don't think you can argue in good faith that any significant number of SUV owners are reliant upon the vehicle's ability to push through a deep level of snow.
I suppose if you want some kind of public policy solution you can have some limited tax break for people who need SUVs in areas with terrible weather and who live out in the boonies. I wonder if maybe just giving road maintenance crews enough of a budget to deal with snowstorms wouldn't be better in the long run.
Either way, its a realistic scenario but also a particularly rare one.
Boo-Fucking-Hoo.
There's tons of places in Canada with more snowfall then that. By a large margin. And less plowing.
You don't need an SUV. You just need snow tires. I know this first hand.
Your concerns are just ridiculous hyperbole.
Rigorous Scholarship
Good news everyone, there is different types of snow.
Yes, there is real snow and there is special-magical-SUV snow that falls only where Bowen lives.
Simple. I'd include an adult-scaled folding kick-scooter in the trunk of every car I sold, or a folding bicycle instead for a small increase to the charge. I'd have commercials aired emphasizing the whole "last mile" concept(that is, getting from your major transportation method to places just far enough away to be a pain in the ass to walk), and how by using this free human-powered transport for even the occasional small sub-trip can lead to major savings in gas, better health, and so on and so on. Once you have people open to the idea of using non-car transportation for at least those little trips, encouraging them to expand beyond that gets easier.
That said we get a fuckload of snow here and the biggest argument I've seen against SUVs in the winter is the large number of them seen in the ditches after a decent snow/ice storm. My theory is that many people seem to have a tendancy to get extremely overconfident because they think 4 wheel drive makes them immune to ice which is laughably not the case.
The trick to driving in the snow and ice is to be careful, not what vehicle you're behind the wheel of.
Yeah, it is different actually.
I've seen snowflakes the size of my palm, how about you?
And this palm-sized-snow requires an SUV yes?
We can't use studded/chained tires here.
You are probably thinking of studded tires. Those are generally regulated.
Snow Tires don't do anything to the road.
Pretty much. SUVs and 4-Wheel Drive and "Rugged Outdoorsy" Car Commercials engender a degree of confidence in your vehicle that is completely bullshit. It's marketing, not fact.
There are a lot of trucks around here, mainly because it's a pretty rural area and everyone uses them for transportation/work.
You don't need the SUV to drive in those conditions and they aren't safer.
Your entire premise is not based on fact, but on your feelings.
Edit:
Unless all that voodoo about them having more mass and material is all bullshit. Let me know. Thanks.
IIRC, its also significantly more likely to turn what would be a slide or fishtail into a rollover. Regardless of what type of specific accidents are more or less common, overall SUVs are not safer than compacts. You believe they are safer, but that doesn't actually make them safer.
The trick to driving on snowy roads is careful control of your vehicle and cautious acceleration and deceleration. Yes, this is a field I have some personal experience in.
Except research doesn't support that (posted a page ago): http://eetd.lbl.gov/ea/teepa/pdf/TRB_Safety_1-03.pdf
Risk is pretty much the same between SUVs and Cars. It also says that quality rather then weight seems to be the determining factor.
Regardless, your initial comments that you NEED the SUV are still bullshit. If you wanna buy it cause it makes you feel all safe and shit, fine. We'll just charge you more fees for needlessly buying an inefficient gas guzzler with a much higher environmental impact.
But yes, driving in snowy conditions is pretty easy. It's not my skills I'm worried about.
Except that it's not a gas guzzler. Durpdedur.
The most fuel efficient SUVs (Hybrids fyi) are still less fuel efficient then a decent non-hybrid car.
You mean we could go back and forth with me and others giving statistics and anecdotes as to why you are wrong and you can give no statistics and just go "Hurpderp, no I is rite!!!!", yes?
Cause that's what's actually happening here.
Your entire argument is based on nothing.
So it's okay for you to select your vehicle because you believe that its properties make you more likely to kill someone else than yourself, but if those other people want to take your money in the form of an SUV tax, that's a terrible and unfair thing?
I never said that. Just countering the perceived "it's not less safe...!" Looking at those statistics they're roughly on the same line. Damages be damages.
Now, everyone should just drive luxury mid-sized sedans, honestly.
You should read and comprehend them, because they don't support your point at all.
edit- I should clarify
The point that it disproves is that SUVs are safer than other types of passenger vehicles.
According to the findings, SUVs are only safer than the worst quality compact and subcompact cars. High-quality subcompact and compact cars are less risky than SUVs.
Those vans the Salvation Army uses? Those things are worthless in the snow. "Can't you just drive the van up here" "No, because it's stuck at the bottom of the hill."
Someone earlier in the thread mentioned snow chains and studded tires, that's what I was specifically referring too. Shoulda quoted it I guess :P
That sounds dangerous, aren't there some sort of regulations in place to force them to switch?
But again, what you're driving is far less important than how you're driving it.
In some places, yes. In Quebec for instance (it caused a huge shortage of snow tires the first year too, was funny).
And all-seasons are fine if you don't get heavy snow often. They only really get bad in the winter after some years of wear.
As for road conditions..man, the studs and frost heaves do a number up here. There is constant road construction going on all over the city and the state due to damage. I would say many main roads only last a few years before the grooves, ruts, and holes become so deep that it is simply dangerous.