By DiscoFever on Thursday, May 24, 2001 - 10:56 am: Edit

What are the opinions of the audience out here in Discoweb about the latest talk about fuel conservation and Americans needing to cut back on driving S.U.V's......
I was watching Bill O'Reily last night, and at the end of his chit chat, he decided to argue with some guy out in Richmond CA about S.U.V's and the total arrognant attitude of Americans needing to operate these"wasteful fuel burners"

Blah, blah, blah.....
What do you all think about the Bush plan to focus on gas guzzlers......

I drive a 94RR, and a 95Disco.....the move out of my driveway daily.......and I also forgot to mention my 740il, it too is a gas guzzler

By Ron on Thursday, May 24, 2001 - 11:02 am: Edit

maybe this will finally propt LR to bring Diesel to the US.

29mpg on a 5000lbs truck sound pretty good to me.

Ron

By wisker on Thursday, May 24, 2001 - 11:11 am: Edit

DiscoFever,
I've got questions about your 740. Please email me.

Thanks,
wisker
swisker@peavey.com

By Mike W. on Thursday, May 24, 2001 - 12:38 pm: Edit

geez guns and rovers, what the hell else do they want me to give up...

By Rob Davison (Pokerob) on Thursday, May 24, 2001 - 12:45 pm: Edit

i think we need to quit trying to use oil. there are plenty of other fuels out there, we just need a reason to change to them and make them more affordable.

if we used hydrogen we'd never have to worry about running out, and it's clean.

rd

By DiscoFever on Thursday, May 24, 2001 - 01:02 pm: Edit

Hey Mike,
Your morale, ethics, beliefs, and anything that you share with your neighbors....
Get this, they will continue to classify anything that gets anything under 15mpg's as a gas guzzler. Combined with weight, and non commercial vehicles. Who's really to blame. John Q Public who chooses to buy S.U.V's or auto manufactures, who continue to think that bigger is better? It totally sickens me to see the over size S.U.V's that have know purpose other than hauling someones ass to and from short distance trips, but it really disturbs me to see how Ford and GM continue to provide these BIG-DUMB- wehicles to satisfy the average citizen that only wants to intimidate others on the road by driving like total jerks, thinking that the power is in height.
Think back ten years when nobody wanted to drive Ford Bronco's, or Chevy Full size Blazers. Then Rover introduced the Range and boom, every other auto manufacture was making (back then they weren't called S.U.V's) them tiny to compete with small ego's remember the Jimmy's, the Suzuki's, all the tiny called back then- j**ps? Do you guys remember that? The only brute on the road was the Burban, even back then Ford didn't have a Big-Dumb-off roader. Dodge also had a largest of them all with the Ramcharger, but I really can't remember seeing to many of those, it was a competitor of the Blazer. Sure you could buy a Land Crusier F-J80 but wasn't everyone trying to get the smallest car or truck that they could find. Notice how Land Rover continues to offer the same truck, and really doesn't need to identify with the American view of Bigger and Dumber..(well with the exception of the soon to be released small Freelander) Purpose is what should seperate the SUV, and not bandwagon sales....I continue to shake my head at the Stupid BMW X.....what is that all about....I do however commend Volvo for staying true to form and giving us something different with the X70 Cross Country, but I disagree with Audi on their off roader wagon.......I am losing intrest in this topic already so I'll stop here....please continue everyone

By Blue Gill (Bluegill) on Thursday, May 24, 2001 - 01:33 pm: Edit

Way back when, big trucks were for cowboys or construction workers only, or for that small group of weirdos who'd rather sleep outdoors on the weekends. The fashionable vehicle for soccer moms and mallrats was a nice little Mercedes - diesel or convertable if they were risqué. Now Mrs. Smith needs a Ford Excursion to keep up with Mrs. Jones, and Mr. Johns had damn well better lift that Excursion to keep up with Mr. Jones...

That BMW X5 looks cool and drives cool, but then again, so does a 540i...why stretch the vertical dimension just to make a little sport ute or whatever the hell they term it? Obviously the "why" is to meet consumer demand - cash is king, but really, WHY? Agree with you on the excellent Volvo X70 - a little lift, protective moldings, and 4WD to get you where you need to go, but still looks like all Volvo's other wagons. Volvo didn't sell out.

By Jon on Thursday, May 24, 2001 - 01:41 pm: Edit

I agree. The Discovery is all the size that's necessary. Anything bigger is automotive excess. I think Ford realized with the Excursion that biggest wasn't always bestest, as sales trickled and money was lost on the launch. The only people who buy them are ranchers in Texas or out west somewhere... oh, and the occasional soccer mom who thinks the Expedition isn't already big enough. For people who continue to buy these mammoth vehicles and then complain about it costing over $50.00 for a fill-up, I say let 'em have it. If they're so insistant on getting the biggest vehicle on the road, then they deserve to pay the price for gas in it. I think it would be a great opportunity for Land Rover to sell diesels in America, but there's probably only about 10 people in the whole country who'd buy one, because every other buyer thinks he has a hot-rod under his foot and isn't willing to sacrafice a little acceleration for twice the gas mileage or more. But here's something I found interesting. The Td5 in the Series II Discovery runs 0-60 in about 10.9 seconds. The gas V8 in the same truck - 10.4 seconds. Man, what a difference... If you want a hot-rod utility vehicle, I'll sell you my '97 Volvo 850R wagon, and you can punch-off to 60 in 6.3 seconds all you want and still get 30 mpg.

By garrett on Thursday, May 24, 2001 - 03:06 pm: Edit

I would rather have a diesel Disco if I could have the extra mpg. The performance from what I have seen is right along those of the gas V-8. I am no earth-biscuit, but think we should be looking to cut down on the size and girth of these overly sized and priced SUV's. Everyone thinks the Disco is a huge truck......maybe taller, but that is it. My friend has a Mazda Tribute and it is just about the same size as my Disco. Yes of course it is no Disco and he gets like 28 mpg too. I know that our trucks weigh 1500 pounds more, have small v-8's, full time 4wd and the aerodynamics of a school bus. And yes of course he could not come close to following me through some rock crawls here in central PA. But I think for the most part we do need a little attitude adjustment here in the US. We should be able to drive and carry whatever we want on the roads and on our hips, but we should be exploring other options. I am not in favor of Bush and what he always stands for as I am not always a huge fan of Nader. But we do need to find other options.......we are a country of excess and we should feel somewhat obligated to others and future generations of people to find those solutions before we have an oil refinery in every neighborhood. I am the last person that wants to see trucks like LR's and RR's to go away. We need to make some concessions though and having a diesel slapped in every single one would not be a horrible start.

By tsiegwart on Friday, May 25, 2001 - 09:38 am: Edit

I don't get these aurguments of "excess". Why is it less responsible to spend money on gas than it is to spend it on an expensive car that's more fuel effecient.

Is it cheaper to buy and drive a 94 Suburban for 5 years or a new Volvo 850 turbo wagon. Do the math.

Some of these soccer mom Excursions are pulling a boat on the weekend. Dad is driving the Camary during the week because he puts more miles on the car.

Jon, what car does your wife drive during the week? Do you guys have three cars, or are you single driving 2 cars. Show me the math on how cost effective that is. SUV's are so popular because it is one vehicle that can perform multiple tasks.

Sorry for the rant, Todd 95 Dsco

ps. Not trying to take a shot at you Jon, I was looking at getting a Volvo as a commuter myself (great cars), but once I got out the calculator, I realized gas would have to hit $4 or $5 a gallon before I could cost justify it

By Blue Gill (Bluegill) on Friday, May 25, 2001 - 11:36 am: Edit

Yeah Capitalism! If you have the cash, do what you want and everyone else is left with their opinions.

Todd, I think that the logical response to "Why is it less responsible to spend money on gas than it is to spend it on an expensive car that's more fuel effecient." is the opinion that you are wastefull and abusive to the environment if you use all that gas, and you are more responsible if you use all your money to buy an expensive car that doesn't need to use all that gas.

Of course, what about someone who drives a gas-guzzling Disco 200 miles per week vs. someone who drives a hyper-efficient, 3-cylinder, cardboard box 2,000 miles per week? Who's the irresponsible sot then?

I ususally drive my wife's little 4-cyl Infiniti during the week because of my routine commute, but, more importantly, the Disco is a hell of a lot safer for my wife and child.

By tsiegwart on Friday, May 25, 2001 - 12:00 pm: Edit

Blue Gill,

Exactly!! The natural resources argument is sketchy at best when you consider the resources required to build that 2nd or third commuter car that people would own.

It's true, they wouldn't have to drive that SUV as much and would save 500 gal. per/year (15,000 mpy, 15mpg vs 30mpg). However, this is discoweb.org not geometroweb.org. How can anyone on this board complain about other people driving SUV's.

Todd, 95 Disco (Beretta 390 12ga, skeet and SC shooter, loved the Glock thread)

By Blue Gill (Bluegill) on Friday, May 25, 2001 - 12:30 pm: Edit

All the non-thinkers of the world are too quick to whine about "excess", "waste", "pollution", etc. when they haven't truly analyzed the issue at hand. These are the people addicted to the warm fuzzy feeling they get when the complain about something. Your truck guzzles gas and I can't see around it in traffic, you are bad. My car company donates money to save dolphins from evil tuna killers, I am good. Let's go hug a tree, eat some vegetables, spit on people with fur coats, and throw rocks at people who use guns

I haven't quite figured these people out yet...personal feelings of inadequacy? Jealousy? Simply misinformed? Too much time on their hands and no serious responsibilities? Forced to spend their childhoods in the back of a big truck chained to the cargo tie-downs? I try to spend as little time as possible with morons, which may be why they remain an enigma to me...

By Bud on Friday, May 25, 2001 - 02:16 pm: Edit

Gotta go after somebody. Might as well be those that can afford (or not) to purchase and fuel SUVs. You don't necessarily have to kill anybody to get charged with murder. BTW, anybody know what kind of mileage the bullet-proofed limo gets that the President rides in??????

By Blue Gill (Bluegill) on Friday, May 25, 2001 - 03:12 pm: Edit

ha ha very funny point on the eco-limo, Bud! Maybe it's powered by Washington red tape, or just plain old bullshit

By DiscoFever on Friday, May 25, 2001 - 04:13 pm: Edit

I don't know about the ass mileage on the prezi limo, but I'm sure all those tinted up Black Surburbans, and bullet proof Ford Club Wagons are getting about 2MPG's.....And those Police escort Harley's about 1/2MPG. I see about one or two of the outfitted secret service Burbans every hour over here where I work. The interesting thing about these Burbans is the 5.6LV8 engine rumble..wasting gas and polluting the air....they let them idle whenever there is some kind of meeting or event happening.....and check this, whenever there is a motorcade....how many Burbans and Limo's do you guys think it takes to get from Capitol Hill to Pennsy Ave?.....

By Blue Gill (Bluegill) on Friday, May 25, 2001 - 04:25 pm: Edit

Awwww come on DiscoFever - that's DIFFERENT, we're talking about the President, here. His circumstances are an exception. The President is Royalty and we're just his subjects...oh, wait a minute, that's the philosophy across the pond that we seceded from...

I'd guess it takes at least 3 limos and 9 Burbs, not including fore and aft scouters (1 real limo plus Burb entourage and 2 dummies groups)

By Ron on Friday, May 25, 2001 - 04:29 pm: Edit

The burban consistently gets between 18-20 mpg running on 87. 4x4 5.7l V8 gas and 3.42 (i think) gears on 245 75 R16 BFGs Long trails. WAY better than the disco or rangie as far as MPG.

Ron

It is black too, just like the Secret service

By Gil Stevens (Gil) on Friday, May 25, 2001 - 05:04 pm: Edit

i met a guy the other day who is building an 88 Rangie that runs on potatoes and vegetables.....no lie.....

By DiscoFever on Friday, May 25, 2001 - 05:23 pm: Edit

It takes 5 Burbans.....2 up front in both lanes or one in front and one tailing the right rear....another directly behind the prezi...after that one, two more behind the motorcade.....
Hey wait,,,,,I here sirens now.....must be a chase to get Jeffords back....

By Jeff Bieler (Mrbieler) on Friday, May 25, 2001 - 05:24 pm: Edit

My folks leased a Mercury Mountaineer a few years back when they first came out and you could get a 2 year lease for $2k down and $299 a month for leather, loaded V8, AWD version. If that thing ever got over 15MPG, my dad would dance a jig. They were glad when the lease ended.

The 1995 4WD Suburban I used as a company vehicle was lucky if it ever got 16MPG and I never hot rodded it.

By DiscoFever on Friday, May 25, 2001 - 05:36 pm: Edit

Gil, Potatoes and vegatables? Sheeeee I wish I could get my 94Range to run off of Bass Ale, and recycled Bass Ale....