zoony Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 He makes up for it. Research it and you'll see exactly how. how? As for the truck, that thing is ugly as hell. I don't care what the fuel consumption it - it's just plain stupid looking. I'd much rather enjoy poor fuel economy in an Aston Martin I agree... that truck is hideous. But the correct answer to the second part is not an Aston Martin... it's a 911 Turbo And it's only $120 -vs- $202 for the Truck. You can spend the remaining $80,00 on fast women. ..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjah Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 I hope you all give the same amount of criticism to celebrities that own Lamborghinis, Ferraris, Bentleys, and Aston Martins. Uh-huh. And how many celebrity Lambos are billed as "eco-friendly?" :laugh: The fact that 12 mpg is considered "good" for that wangmobile says it all. Besides, Optimus Prime would completely destroy that thing in about two seconds. And he gets probably thirty thousand miles per Energon cube. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradeTheBeal! Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 I hope you all give the same amount of criticism to celebrities that own Lamborghinis, Ferraris, Bentleys, and Aston Martins.http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/best/bestworstNF.shtml They all get about the same if not worse. Why? What do the cars you listed have in common with the F-600 besides similar mpg? Nothing. All the vehicles you listed have world-class handling, performance and safety features. They feature cutting-edge technology that eventually filters down and benefits nearly all modes of transportation. Your boy is just driving a big, dumb truck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 oh yah, I forgot to mention... the Porsche gets 25mpg on the highway .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 Why? What do the cars you listed have in common with the F-600 besides similar mpg? Nothing. All the vehicles you listed have world-class handling, performance and safety features. They feature cutting-edge technology that eventually filters down and benefits nearly all modes of transportation.Your boy is just driving a big, dumb truck. :laugh: he's not my boy. WHY IN THE **** is everyone getting their panties in a bunch over that comment? Looks like I really struck a nerve. It's unfair to also call out owners of gas-guzzling sports cars. It's only fair to call out owners of big trucks. Got it. IMO, they're both arrogant and wasteful. .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradeTheBeal! Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 :laugh: he's not my boy. WHY IN THE **** is everyone getting their panties in a bunch over that comment? Looks like I really struck a nerve. It's unfair to also call out owners of gas-guzzling sports cars. It's only fair to call out owners of big trucks. Got it. IMO, they're both arrogant and wasteful. .... Nonsense! Without sports cars and the racing programs that spawn them, we might still be driving a version of the Model T. As a point of reference, check out some Soviet-Bloc automotive technology from 1950-1990 and compare it to our free-market vehicles. Sports cars most definitely bring something to the table. Utilizing a tractor-trailer as a personal conveyance does not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen-like Todd Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 Buy one of these and call it a day. http://teslamotors.com/index.php?js_enabled=1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 Nonsense! Without sports cars and the racing programs that spawn them, we might still be driving a version of the Model T. As a point of reference, check out some Soviet-Bloc automotive technology from 1950-1990 and compare it to our free-market vehicles. Sports cars most definitely bring something to the table. Utilizing a tractor-trailer as a personal conveyance does not. You're not talking about the race programs though... you're talking about the vehicles that manufacturers sell in order to finance their racing efforts. Ferrari never sold cars to be in the car business... they sold them to finance their racing efforts. Porsche did the same thing. Except the flagship Porsche vehicle delivers 25 MPG, while the flagship Ferrari is 9 MPG. The vehicles I'm referencing aren't pushing any envelopes whatsoever... they're merely financing those efforts. Ford, Honda, Toyota, etc. also have made incredible advances in racing... but they've balanced that by offering a wide range of fuel efficient cars to the public. As for tractor trailers, and technology surrounding towing/hauling/etc... they serve a purpose as well... most consumer goods in this country spend time in a tractor-trailer. Advances made in fuel economy on big-rig diesel engines have saved this country billions over the past few decades in transportation costs. Not to mention the trickle-down effect that this has when manufacturers build smaller diesel engines to fit into consumer vehicles... borrowing on that same technology used in the larger engines. (Diesel engines are the future imo. They've already taken over Europe. With fuel prices the way they are, this country won't be far behind) Actually, in terms of economic impact, which is what I think you're talking about here, I would bet that technology developed from tractor trailers / trucks out-weighs that given to us by sports cars. .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradeTheBeal! Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 ^^ So you stand by the assertion that high-performance road cars are as, if not more, wasteful as the use of an unencumbered tractor-trailer cab as a means of personal transportation. Really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karmacop Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 how? I've already answered this bogus criticism of Gore before on this board - here's the link: http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2588643#post2588643 Somehow I doubt that Lieber does the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 ^^ So you stand by the assertion that high-performance road cars are as, if not more, wasteful as the use of an unencumbered tractor-trailer cab as a means of personal transportation.Really? In terms of MPG and maintenance costs, I would imagine they're about the same. The only thing I think the land-barge might be worse on is that it holds more oil and fluids, i.e. transmission... Although I reserve the right to be mistaken. But to be clear, you were originally talking about the spill-over economic contributions & benefits that sports cars give us. Now you're talking about pure waste... which I'll refer to MY original statement, which was that both are arrogant and wasteful, and both deserve criticism. ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooper Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 It's not about oil. It's about some idiot with a incredibly tiny johnson buying a ridiculously big truck to make up for it. It's actually kinda sad -- he spent all that money and yet his underoos still hang loose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drums and skins Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 a Ford F650 SuperTruck? Meh. The CXT from International is a bit more pimp. Leno has one (for the record, I hate Leno). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.