Edmunds Members - Cars and Conversations (Archived)

suydam

Yes, 72 hours is about the max.

cdnpinhead

jmonroe1 said:

. . . because I've learned to think a little more before I start yapping

Apparently that's something that you confine to your home life.

driver100

ruking1 said:

abacomike said:

driver100 said:

Mr_Shiftright said:

A man makes one mistake, and it follows him all his life.....poignant, really.

Here I am, taught school, got canned from 3 jobs in 4 years, built a successful business that did over $4 million in sales a year, vacation in Florida for 5 months, have a beautiful trophy wife, 3 good kids, 7 grandchildren.....and what am I remembered for?

Your toilet!

You all should take tours of your local sewer treatment, trash & recycling plants. They are literally the foundations of civilizations.

See, my Pfister is a monument to our men and women who work in the water treatment plants across this great nation.

jmonroe1

cdnpinhead said:

jmonroe1 said:

. . . because I've learned to think a little more before I start yapping

Apparently that's something that you confine to your home life.

Well, it's all about the consequences.

jmonroe

ruking1

driver100 said:

ruking1 said:

abacomike said:

driver100 said:

Mr_Shiftright said:

A man makes one mistake, and it follows him all his life.....poignant, really.

Here I am, taught school, got canned from 3 jobs in 4 years, built a successful business that did over $4 million in sales a year, vacation in Florida for 5 months, have a beautiful trophy wife, 3 good kids, 7 grandchildren.....and what am I remembered for?

Your toilet!

You all should take tours of your local sewer treatment, trash & recycling plants. They are literally the foundations of civilizations.

See, my Pfister is a monument to our men and women who work in the water treatment plants across this great nation.

Indeed, in another life time, I was charged with safety inspections on a water treatment plant located on/in a 320 sq mile “facility”. (204,000 acres)

[Deleted User]

ruking1 said:

You all should take tours of your local sewer treatment, trash & recycling plants. They are literally the foundations of civilizations.

Well said.

explorerx4

@driver100,
Nice story about business and family, but the only proof we have is of the gray striped shirt.

ruking1

tyguy said:

ruking1 said:

You all should take tours of your local sewer treatment, trash & recycling plants. They are literally the foundations of civilizations.

Well said.

Thank you.

The Berkeley, CA trash or recycling plant initially fought getting a fuel “processing” scheme. But wisdom & economics prevailed. They now processing app 40,000 or so gal of biodiesel. (from waste products) To put some sort of graphic/scale to it, if I get 36 mpg 40,000 gallons Will propel me around 1.44 M miles. @ 500 gal per yr consumption, that’s 80 cars per year

explorerx4

Speaking of parking, here is a classic.
https://www.wfsb.com/fire-department-shares-photos-of-what-can-happen-if-you/article_cdaff487-d58e-5d40-8b17-c08cd11cd5b6.html

[Deleted User]

ruking1 said:

tyguy said:

ruking1 said:

You all should take tours of your local sewer treatment, trash & recycling plants. They are literally the foundations of civilizations.

Well said.

Thank you.

The Berkeley, CA trash or recycling plant initially fought getting a fuel “processing” scheme. But wisdom & economics prevailed. They now processing app 40,000 or so gal of biodiesel. (from waste products) To put some sort of graphic/scale to it, if I get 36 mpg 40,000 gallons Will propel me around 1.44 M miles. @ 500 gal per yr consumption, that’s 80 cars per year

Very cool. A wastewater facility that's a customer of ours will soon start digesting food waste, diverting it from the landfill, and then produce usable gas as well as fertilizer.

oldfarmer50

suydam said:

Here’s how my Encore looks now. Not pretty.

Oh wow, that doesn’t look good. Hope there’s no underlying unibody damage or they’ll have a heck of a time getting it right.

ruking1

tyguy said:

ruking1 said:

tyguy said:

ruking1 said:

You all should take tours of your local sewer treatment, trash & recycling plants. They are literally the foundations of civilizations.

Well said.

Thank you.

The Berkeley, CA trash or recycling plant initially fought getting a fuel “processing” scheme. But wisdom & economics prevailed. They now processing app 40,000 or so gal of biodiesel. (from waste products) To put some sort of graphic/scale to it, if I get 36 mpg 40,000 gallons Will propel me around 1.44 M miles. @ 500 gal per yr consumption, that’s 80 cars per year

Very cool. A wastewater facility that's a customer of ours will soon start digesting food waste, diverting it from the landfill, and then produce usable gas as well as fertilizer.

Gas/fuel supply/s & fertizer production are good ways to go.

ruking1

explorerx4 said:

Speaking of parking, here is a classic.
https://www.wfsb.com/fire-department-shares-photos-of-what-can-happen-if-you/article_cdaff487-d58e-5d40-8b17-c08cd11cd5b6.html

Love it! Lots of self inflicted damage & I’m sure the ancilitory costs were high too!

abacomike

Fiat-Chrysler is doing some major expansion in Michigan - specifically in the Detroit metro area for the production of Jeep vehicles.  Some 8,000 jobs will be added in to plants.  Obviously, sales have been good enough for this expansion.

oldfarmer50

suydam said:

She contacted her insurance as mine told me to go through hers. They’ll send an adjuster out in the next day or so. She is a friend of mine so she is mortified. Nothing worse than hitting your neighbor as opposed to a stranger you won’t see again after you exchange insurance info. I know, because I did it myself many years ago. Had all 3 kids in the van, and youngest kept yelling! Drove me nuts and I told her to shut up. Next thing I know BAM! I’ve backed right into my neighbors car as they were passing by. My youngest said, “That’s what I was trying to tell you.” !!! Ah, life keeps us humble.

Did it go something like this:

https://youtu.be/ADRmQv6Z0uY

oldfarmer50

driver100 said:

My best friend sent me this photo. He got this CPO Volvo (car on the left) just a few months ago. He tries to park it so he isn't near other cars........which is what he did on this day.
When he came back....the red car was parked next to him.
How is he supposed to open his door to get in? Notice how the mirrors would have collided if the Ford wasn't taller.

I’d say a proper keying was in order.

oldfarmer50

28firefighter said:

abacomike said:

OK, I’ll let ‘er rip!

I was recently at a memorial service at a funeral home that specializes in Jewish Traditional funerals and burials.  I try to avoid going to these ritualistic final arrangements for many reasons - but most importantly due to the perfume aroma that permeates the entire funeral home.  I get sick to my stomach, as a rule.  Less importantly, I don’t own a sport jacket or a suit so I show up in slacks, black shoes and a short sleeved dress shirt - no tie because I don’t own one of those either.

As I entered the room where the coffin and remains were on display,  my nose became aware of a foul odor throughout the environs.  Even the perfume spray the funeral home circulates could not camouflage this odor.  I was determined to find out why the funeral home would allow this stench to permeate the room.

I approached the gentleman who seemed to be one of the funeral directors.  I asked him why the odor was so strong in the display room which was obviously caused by a decaying corpse.  He responded that the remains had been refrigerated for over 1 week awaiting the release of the body from the coroner after a required autopsy by the county due to a questionable cause of death.  The remains were not embalmed per Jewish Tradition and Law.  The funeral director was embarrassed and apologized for the situation but the funeral home’s hands were tied.  Personally, it was disgusting!

Traditional Jewish law requires burial within 24 hours of death because embalming is not permitted.  The only exception being that burials and services are not permitted on the sabbath.  In this case, because there were questions unanswered about the cause of death, the autopsy delayed the burial and was not performed in a timely manner due to a back-up of remains needing autopsies by the coroner’s office.

I blame the funeral home for allowing memorial services for the public knowing the condition of the remains was questionable.  Further, the coffin being used should have been hermetically sealed which it obviously was not.

This is why I hate funerals and memorial services.  It was an experience I will never forget!

 Now we’ve covered funerals and embalming - or the lack thereof. 

I don't want to derail this thread any further than we've gone. I can understand why this was troubling and a lot of traditions (not just Judaism) have rituals and practices that make little sense in a contemporary world. The 24 hour burial requirement for Jews would have mitigated much of what you experienced. Jewish tradition calls for the body to be allowed to decay, returning it to the earth fully - ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Embalming slows, if not completely stops that process (I'm not an expert). Some of our older traditions, such as this, have not accounted for the modern world of autopsies, investigations, etc. The remains do not pose a threat, but as you encountered, did not smell great.

In this particular circumstance, I would have requested a smaller graveside ceremony outdoors and then held a memorial service separately without the body for a larger group. Just my $.02.

Is someone required to sit with them body before burial? In this case that would be unreasonably difficult considering the length of time and the refrigeration.

driver100

explorerx4 said:

@driver100,
Nice story about business and family, but the only proof we have is of the gray striped shirt.

any person who can wear a skin tight horizontal striped T-shirt obviously has nothing to hide.

driver100

oldfarmer50 said:

driver100 said:

My best friend sent me this photo. He got this CPO Volvo (car on the left) just a few months ago. He tries to park it so he isn't near other cars........which is what he did on this day.
When he came back....the red car was parked next to him.
How is he supposed to open his door to get in? Notice how the mirrors would have collided if the Ford wasn't taller.

I’d say a proper keying was in order.

I asked him how he got into his car. Through the passenger seat and over the console. How aggravating is that...probably a good keying was in order.

explorerx4

@driver100,
Doesn't mean anyone wants to see it.

BTW, tell your friend to park half a car width away from the next car.

driver100

explorerx4 said:

@driver100,
Doesn't mean anyone wants to see it.

BTW, tell your friend to park half a car width away from the next car.

Explorer, you don't have to look.

It is a lot that has lines...how do you park half a car width over? And, he was there first, the other driver should have parked half a car over - especially because of the snow. Or moved one row over where there were lots of empty spaces.

snakeweasel

explorerx4 said:

@driver100,
Doesn't mean anyone wants to see it.

BTW, tell your friend to park half a car width away from the next car.

Not sure if I told this story or not but a few years ago we attended a dinner cruise on the Chicago river. We got to the place early and hung around the area stopping at the nearby shops and stuff. Anyway during the wait for the boat cars came and went and it ended up with our car a half a car width from both cars on either side. Since the cars next to them parked right next to them and so on down the line it looked like I was taking up two spaces. But I was the only car in that row that was between the well marked lines marking the parking spaces.

stickguy

I always like it when there is light snow on a parking lot and people just "free form" parking, then the snow melts off and you see how randomly all the cars are parked in relation to the lines.

roadburner

oldfarmer50 said:

I’d say a proper keying was in order.

In the days before keyless entry you could shoot a healthy amount of Super Glue into each lock- followed by a toothpick or paperclip.

suydam

No real keys either nowadays.

ruking1

suydam said:

No real keys either nowadays.

Indeed! There are too many systems and subsystems that draw current literally 24/7. This might be a partial explanation why batteries tend to last only 4 to 5 years. In the the older cars I’m used to battery/in between seven and 11 years.

andres3

In case anyone still believes the myth that the old 55 MPH speed limit saved lives, and repealing cost them, here is the NHTSA data equalized by miles traveled/driven over the whole nation.

I learned today that in 1987 or 1988 they actually amended the National 55 to 65 MPH. I didn't remember that tidbit. You'll notice the Fatality Rate (per VMT) went down in either year, including 1989 if they were slow to change signage in your State.

I also learned that although the deadly too low Federal Speed Limit was fully repealed in 1995, it was in December of 1995. Therefore, 1996 is of most interest, as Fatality Rates went down that year, but also in 1995, and in 1997 in case anyone argues. CA was actually quick to change the signage, I found an LA Times article that said they got it done in the same month of December 1995.

Virtually every year it has been going down in modern history except the last two on the chart. You'll be happy to know that the recent trend has been reversed, with another downturn in 2017 now recorded and published.

So if there are fellow forum member(s) telling you different, they are either deliberately misleading you, or have been misled themselves by some devious "fake news." I think Wikipedia might be part of the problem of misinformation on this, as their chart showing the same data seems to have been manipulated and either contains inaccuracies, or has been deliberately altered to be deceptive. I assume the PDF coming directly from the source is more accurate.

andres3

snakeweasel said:

andres3 said:

snakeweasel said:

berri said:

Heck, the country has become so divided that maybe it would be better to break into several separate countries. It just gets tiring listening to all the infighting these days.

Stick, all I'll say about the new tax code is that its reduction impacts are far greater for the wealthy and it certainly didn't eliminate any of the tax advantaged real estate developer loopholes - big surprise.

Well considering that as much as 40% or more of wage earners pay no income tax, the lower 50% pay less than 4% of all income taxes collected and the upper 1% pay more than the lower 90% it's hard to do a tax cut that doesn't impact the rich more than the middle and lower classes.

Tax cut to impact middle and lower classes more? Easy.

1) Eliminate sales tax.
2) Eliminate property tax for homes under $500,000.
3) Eliminate citation/ticket fines.
4) ELIMINATE ALL DMV FEES (LICENSE/REGISTRATION/DRIVER'S LICENSES)
5) Eliminate gas taxes.

Done!

Well we are discussing Federal income taxes and not the whole tax burden.

1 and 2 are local taxes and you need to talk to your state and local officials about that, but be aware that they need to raise the revenue in other ways or cut services.

3 isn't a tax it's a fine that can easily be avoided.

4 isn't a tax but a user fee.

5 is both federal and state but if eliminated be prepared for other revenue generation or having the roads go to rot.

Government is all about how resources are allocated and spent. It matters not whether it is local, State, or Federal, because they all mix. For instance, withholding Federal funding if the State didn't obey the asinine 55 MPH speed limit. It also matters not one iota whether you call the tax a fee, a fine, a user fee, or whatever other name you want to call the tax. It is a charge from the government to fund the government, that's a tax.

We could just as easily allocate our taxes to cover these "user fees" so that they were free, like some want to do with "healthcare." Another example is citation/ticket revenue. In fact, in CA, if you ask where your $350 speeding ticket money is going, only about a third of it is actually the so-called "fine" as you stated. The rest are labeled various "fees and penalties" such as night court costs (even if you don't elect to use night court so that's not a user fee), court construction fees, and various other taxes by any other name.

You are just playing a word game. It is pretty thinly veiled.

Lastly, regarding your bullet point 5, there's plenty of Government to CUT SPENDING so that Services are not cut from where I propose to not raise revenue from. It isn't spent on what it is supposed to be spent on anyway.

andres3

Mr_Shiftright said:

abacomike said:

dino001 said:

But rich people don’t get a SS payment proportional to what they pay in whereas very poor people get a minimum benefit beyond what they contribute. As a person on the lower end of the scale I certainly don’t mind that but you can reach a point where the tax just becomes a redistribution of wealth.

One thing to remember is that social security is levied on earned income only and if you look back at tax history you know that rich people are very adept at structuring income so it isn’t considered earned income. When federal tax rates were 70-90% the very wealthy paid about the same percentage of their total income as they do now.

I take exception against calling income "earned" or "unearned". I understand the genesis of this distinction, as the income is based on exchanging direct labor service to money, but I just hate the word "unearned". It's one step to "undeserved".
Regarding levying SS tax on income over $132.9K (2019), there is an "social solidarity" argument to be made, especially in face of its imminent insolvency of the system in the next decade or so. I'm not completely unsympathetic to it, as a practical matter we'll have to choose pretty soon, anyway, between cutting the benefits or raising this tax on more than just "the rich". However, my blood just boils every time I hear the "fair share" crap. It's one thing to say "I need more, please, and thank you by the way", completely another "pay your fair share, you freeloader, BTW you won't get any credit for amount over this", even if the final effect is the same.

Social Security deductions from payroll should be considered a “tax” rather than a contribution to the system for future benefits - isn’t that what it actually is - a TAX?  It used to be called OASI (Old Age and Survivors Insurance) or “insurance”,

If it is/was insurance, one would assume that the higher your premiums, the more you would receive as a benefit.  But what is “more”?  I know people and family members who paid hundreds of thousands of dollars into the system but will receive less than they and their employers paid into the system in their retirement years.

I agree with those who believe this is another form of wealth distribution - a socialist term.  But that is how it was initially set up - to redistribute wealth - during the FDR years.

We live in a “Mixed Capitalism Economy” meaning part social programs, part governmental regulations to keep capitalism from running amok, and capitalism which enables members of society to earn whatever they can (corporations as well).

It’s been like this in our beloved USA since the crash of 1929.  Before that, the barons of industry did what they wanted and earned what they could almost unchecked.  

It it is what it is! 

P.S.  This is not a political statement - just a set of facts to better understand our existing economy.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Of course, all that presumes that the wealth was "distributed" fairly in the first place, which is an argument certainly up for grabs.

I think what we are seeing is a correlation between decline of the middle class and decline of the unions.

I think the 700 Billion TARP bailout program of White Collar Welfare was extremely Socialist, and certainly wealth redistribution to the extreme. And they sort of did it twice so it was arguably more like 1.4 Trillion.

andres3

tyguy said:

driver100 said:

ruking1 said:

Are the “no speed limits” American states’ autobahns coming ? https://www.yahoo.com/news/american-autobahn-next-states-pushing-111617225.html

But, in Germany it can take years to get a license and most drivers know how to drive. Try driving on I-75 with a speed limit of 75, and tell me those people could drive on the Autobahn - it would look like a Russian Dash Cam video.

And Germany is more aggressive in vehicle inspection to help insure vehicle degradation is not a liability. So, poor driver ed + poor vehicle maintenance + low driver discipline + high center of gravity SUVs and trucks + unlimited speed = winning. That's a math I don't understand.

Ever heard of Darwin? The dead can't cause further accidents, congestion, and road blocks.

andres3

tjc78 said:

stickguy said:

I would be happy with 80 on rural interstates. Maybe 85, max.

Can’t think of many roads near us that could support those speeds.  RT 55 between Glassboro and Vineland, maybe the stretch of the A.C. expressway that’s three lanes. 

Turnpike is pretty much the autobahn anyway so not sure it matters... but 85 SL would mean left lane moving at near 100.  It moves at 90 now anyway.  

Common fallacy. When speed limits have changes, real world speeds driven barely move. So no, you won't see cars with a mechanical and or "limited" top speed of 118 suddenly driving 155.

Unlimited speed limits might move the needle noticeably though.

andres3

berri said:

If Interstates are going to be 75-80, I think they need to raise the minimum speed limits too to narrow the differences between vehicle speeds.

Lane law enforcement would provide the same, if not even more benefit. Speed differentials are a lot less hazardous with proper lane discipline.

tjc78

andres3 said:

stickguy said:

I would be happy with 80 on rural interstates. Maybe 85, max.

Can’t think of many roads near us that could support those speeds.  RT 55 between Glassboro and Vineland, maybe the stretch of the A.C. expressway that’s three lanes. 

Turnpike is pretty much the autobahn anyway so not sure it matters... but 85 SL would mean left lane moving at near 100.  It moves at 90 now anyway.  

Common fallacy. When speed limits have changes, real world speeds driven barely move. So no, you won't see cars with a mechanical and or "limited" top speed of 118 suddenly driving 155. Unlimited speed limits might move the needle noticeably though.

Montana had unlimited speeds for a while and repealed them.   Guess they shouldn’t have as no one was driving too fast?

I don’t have a problem with speed.   I certainly push it myself... (and in my younger years spent many a day in court) but speed combined with the inattentive drivers on the road is the problem. 

driver100

snakeweasel said:

explorerx4 said:

@driver100,
Doesn't mean anyone wants to see it.

BTW, tell your friend to park half a car width away from the next car.

Not sure if I told this story or not but a few years ago we attended a dinner cruise on the Chicago river. We got to the place early and hung around the area stopping at the nearby shops and stuff. Anyway during the wait for the boat cars came and went and it ended up with our car a half a car width from both cars on either side. Since the cars next to them parked right next to them and so on down the line it looked like I was taking up two spaces. But I was the only car in that row that was between the well marked lines marking the parking spaces.

You should put a sign on your car "I was here first".

driver100

tjc78 said:

andres3 said:

tjc78 said:

stickguy said:

I would be happy with 80 on rural interstates. Maybe 85, max.

Can’t think of many roads near us that could support those speeds.  RT 55 between Glassboro and Vineland, maybe the stretch of the A.C. expressway that’s three lanes. 

Turnpike is pretty much the autobahn anyway so not sure it matters... but 85 SL would mean left lane moving at near 100.  It moves at 90 now anyway.  

Common fallacy. When speed limits have changes, real world speeds driven barely move. So no, you won't see cars with a mechanical and or "limited" top speed of 118 suddenly driving 155.

Unlimited speed limits might move the needle noticeably though.

Montana had unlimited speeds for a while and repealed them.   Guess they shouldn’t have as no one was driving too fast?

I don’t have a problem with speed.   I certainly push it myself... (and in my younger years spent many a day in court) but speed combined with the inattentive drivers on the road is the problem

. 





I agree, speed isn't a problem......if you are the only one on the road.

venture

The dealer body shop that has my Legacy called yesterday. After they dismantled it they discovered a few other things that need fixed. Now, instead of 3 or 4 days, it's going to be 2 weeks. He also said the estimate is up to $4,000. Great googally moogally!

Just for giggles I looked at the Nissan site to see what the Murano I am renting sells for (MSRP anyway). It starts at over $43,000. I'm absolutely amazed anyone would spend that much money for one of them...I don't care how much they can be bought for under retail. I can hardly wait to get my Legacy back.

berri

IIRC Montana posted speed limits to be in compliance with some federal stuff because otherwise it may have impacted getting federal highway monies. I don't think it was a safety issue driving the change.

jmonroe1

venture said:

The dealer body shop that has my Legacy called yesterday. After they dismantled it they discovered a few other things that need fixed. Now, instead of 3 or 4 days, it's going to be 2 weeks. He also said the estimate is up to $4,000. Great googally moogally!

Just for giggles I looked at the Nissan site to see what the Murano I am renting sells for (MSRP anyway). It starts at over $43,000. I'm absolutely amazed anyone would spend that much money for one of them...I don't care how much they can be bought for under retail. I can hardly wait to get my Legacy back.

When I saw the damage on your beloved Legacy, I didn't want to scare you but $2500 seemed low to me. As I mentioned before, when my Genny was tapped a little more than a month ago, it cost $1335 to repair and it was in the shop for 3 days. And I mean it was only tapped (no parts required). When I spoke to both shops about their estimated cost, they both said, "paint prices today are outrageous and that's before the labor cost to put it on". What does surprise me is your car will be in the shop for 2 weeks. Probably because of the wait time for a part or two.

There ain't nothin cheap about cars today.

jmonroe

snakeweasel

andres3 said:
 You are just playing a word game. It is pretty thinly veiled. 

If there are word games being played it's not by me. We were discussing income taxes and nothing else. But looking at total taxes I know people that pay more in federal income taxes than you make in a year. So their Federal income tax liability is much more than the total tax liability of any middle class family.

Taxes are not all mixed. Sure federal revenue is shared with state and local governments but an upward flow rarely happens. So your sales taxes, property taxes and so forth are not going to the Federal government.

Fines and penalties are not taxes as they are penalties for breaking the law. And they are treated differently for tax and accounting purposes.

While user fees are technically taxes they are called user fees because they are to allocate the cost of a service to the user of said service. This tends to be a more fair way to fund a merit good as those that directly benefit from it directly pay for the service. If we cut spending (and I think we should) we should cut other taxes and keep user fees such as registration and driver's license fees and gas taxes.

snakeweasel

andres3 said:
Common fallacy. When speed limits have changes, real world speeds driven barely move. So no, you won't see cars with a mechanical and or "limited" top speed of 118 suddenly driving 155. Unlimited speed limits might move the needle noticeably though.

Not really in the short term most drivers won't increase their speeds, but in the long term the average speeds do increase. So two weeks after increasing the speed limit you likely won't see a significant increase in average speed but in two years you will.

snakeweasel

driver100 said:

@driver100, Doesn't mean anyone wants to see it. BTW, tell your friend to park half a car width away from the next car.

Not sure if I told this story or not but a few years ago we attended a dinner cruise on the Chicago river. We got to the place early and hung around the area stopping at the nearby shops and stuff. Anyway during the wait for the boat cars came and went and it ended up with our car a half a car width from both cars on either side. Since the cars next to them parked right next to them and so on down the line it looked like I was taking up two spaces. But I was the only car in that row that was between the well marked lines marking the parking spaces.

You should put a sign on your car "I was here first".

I should and add "I'm the only one not taking up two spaces".

snakeweasel

driver100 said:

andres3 said:

stickguy said:

I would be happy with 80 on rural interstates. Maybe 85, max.

Can’t think of many roads near us that could support those speeds.  RT 55 between Glassboro and Vineland, maybe the stretch of the A.C. expressway that’s three lanes. 

Turnpike is pretty much the autobahn anyway so not sure it matters... but 85 SL would mean left lane moving at near 100.  It moves at 90 now anyway.  

Common fallacy. When speed limits have changes, real world speeds driven barely move. So no, you won't see cars with a mechanical and or "limited" top speed of 118 suddenly driving 155. Unlimited speed limits might move the needle noticeably though.

Montana had unlimited speeds for a while and repealed them.   Guess they shouldn’t have as no one was driving too fast?

I don’t have a problem with speed.   I certainly push it myself... (and in my younger years spent many a day in court) but speed combined with the inattentive drivers on the road is the problem

. 

I agree, speed isn't a problem......if you are the only one on the road.

Try driving down I 70 east of Glenwood Springs, CO doing 65 MPH and come back and tell us that.

venture

jmonroe1 said:

venture said:

The dealer body shop that has my Legacy called yesterday. After they dismantled it they discovered a few other things that need fixed. Now, instead of 3 or 4 days, it's going to be 2 weeks. He also said the estimate is up to $4,000. Great googally moogally!

Just for giggles I looked at the Nissan site to see what the Murano I am renting sells for (MSRP anyway). It starts at over $43,000. I'm absolutely amazed anyone would spend that much money for one of them...I don't care how much they can be bought for under retail. I can hardly wait to get my Legacy back.

When I saw the damage on your beloved Legacy, I didn't want to scare you but $2500 seemed low to me. As I mentioned before, when my Genny was tapped a little more than a month ago, it cost $1335 to repair and it was in the shop for 3 days. And I mean it was only tapped (no parts required). When I spoke to both shops about their estimated cost, they both said, "paint prices today are outrageous and that's before the labor cost to put it on". What does surprise me is your car will be in the shop for 2 weeks. Probably because of the wait time for a part or two.

There ain't nothin cheap about cars today.

jmonroe

It's no wonder insurance rates are so high. The dealer would have rented me a car for, I think they said, $30 a day. Instead they made me get Enterprise and they supplied this Murano at $50 a day. The only reason it is "only" $50 a day is because I told them I was not going to pay any difference.

abacomike

driver100 said:

@driver100, Nice story about business and family, but the only proof we have is of the gray striped shirt.

any person who can wear a skin tight horizontal striped T-shirt obviously has nothing to hide.

Except his embarrassment! 

jmonroe1

snakeweasel said:

driver100 said:

snakeweasel said:

explorerx4 said:

@driver100,
Doesn't mean anyone wants to see it.

BTW, tell your friend to park half a car width away from the next car.

Not sure if I told this story or not but a few years ago we attended a dinner cruise on the Chicago river. We got to the place early and hung around the area stopping at the nearby shops and stuff. Anyway during the wait for the boat cars came and went and it ended up with our car a half a car width from both cars on either side. Since the cars next to them parked right next to them and so on down the line it looked like I was taking up two spaces. But I was the only car in that row that was between the well marked lines marking the parking spaces.

You should put a sign on your car "I was here first".

I should and add "I'm the only one not taking up two spaces".

When I see a car parked outside of the lines, I don't park next to them, thereby cauing me to be outside of the lines too because of what happened in your situation. So, I do my part in not propagating a bad situation.

jmonroe

snakeweasel

andres3 said:

In case anyone still believes the myth that the old 55 MPH speed limit saved lives, and repealing cost them, here is the NHTSA data equalized by miles traveled/driven over the whole nation. 

Not to engage you on this because I know you won't listen to anything that doesn't fit your narrative but there is a flaw in your logic. Can you spot it?

graphicguy

oldfarmer50 said:

suydam said:

She contacted her insurance as mine told me to go through hers. They’ll send an adjuster out in the next day or so. She is a friend of mine so she is mortified. Nothing worse than hitting your neighbor as opposed to a stranger you won’t see again after you exchange insurance info. I know, because I did it myself many years ago. Had all 3 kids in the van, and youngest kept yelling! Drove me nuts and I told her to shut up. Next thing I know BAM! I’ve backed right into my neighbors car as they were passing by. My youngest said, “That’s what I was trying to tell you.” !!! Ah, life keeps us humble.

Did it go something like this:

https://youtu.be/ADRmQv6Z0uY

I love me some Kristen Bell. I just finished binging her show with Don Cheadle (another good actor) in “House of Lies”. I like her current show, too (“The Good Place”).

Mr_Shiftright

Well if you want to call TARP socialist, you would have to call farm subsidies, corporate tax breaks, blah blah, "socialist" as well. Also the Chrysler bailouts, or even going way back to when small independent automobile companies were given first divs on steel and other critical materials after World War II.

So I think to avoid that collision, one would have to keep the term "socialist" to purely "social" realms, not to business. TARP was about business stimulation.

driver100

snakeweasel said:

driver100 said:

tjc78 said:

andres3 said:

tjc78 said:

stickguy said:

I would be happy with 80 on rural interstates. Maybe 85, max.

Can’t think of many roads near us that could support those speeds.  RT 55 between Glassboro and Vineland, maybe the stretch of the A.C. expressway that’s three lanes. 

Turnpike is pretty much the autobahn anyway so not sure it matters... but 85 SL would mean left lane moving at near 100.  It moves at 90 now anyway.  

Common fallacy. When speed limits have changes, real world speeds driven barely move. So no, you won't see cars with a mechanical and or "limited" top speed of 118 suddenly driving 155.

Unlimited speed limits might move the needle noticeably though.

Montana had unlimited speeds for a while and repealed them.   Guess they shouldn’t have as no one was driving too fast?

I don’t have a problem with speed.   I certainly push it myself... (and in my younger years spent many a day in court) but speed combined with the inattentive drivers on the road is the problem

. 

I agree, speed isn't a problem......if you are the only one on the road.

Try driving down I 70 east of Glenwood Springs, CO doing 65 MPH and come back and tell us that

.

What's the problem?

Michaell

snakeweasel said:

driver100 said:

tjc78 said:

andres3 said:

tjc78 said:

stickguy said:

I would be happy with 80 on rural interstates. Maybe 85, max.

Can’t think of many roads near us that could support those speeds.  RT 55 between Glassboro and Vineland, maybe the stretch of the A.C. expressway that’s three lanes. 

Turnpike is pretty much the autobahn anyway so not sure it matters... but 85 SL would mean left lane moving at near 100.  It moves at 90 now anyway.  

Common fallacy. When speed limits have changes, real world speeds driven barely move. So no, you won't see cars with a mechanical and or "limited" top speed of 118 suddenly driving 155.

Unlimited speed limits might move the needle noticeably though.

Montana had unlimited speeds for a while and repealed them.   Guess they shouldn’t have as no one was driving too fast?

I don’t have a problem with speed.   I certainly push it myself... (and in my younger years spent many a day in court) but speed combined with the inattentive drivers on the road is the problem

. 

I agree, speed isn't a problem......if you are the only one on the road.

Try driving down I 70 east of Glenwood Springs, CO doing 65 MPH and come back and tell us that.

Exactly! That is a gorgeous stretch of road, but 55 MPH is the limit, and I'm diligent about sticking to it.

Horrendously expensive to build, however. I think that was the most expensive piece of the interstate highway system, on a cost-per-mile basis.

Here is a representative picture:


The canyon is very narrow, so this happens from time to time: