Wouldn't Be Caught Dead Driving One

calidave

sounds like a great trip. And I'd want an SUV for it, as well. An extra inch of two of clearance would be useful, and it sounds like you may actually need the 4wd.

calidave

"oft ignored"??? The battery recycling issue is the only issue critics talk about, other than the claims about overstated mpg.

Continuing with the thread of your hypothetical, we would just wave the magic wand and the batteries would disappear

duh

if the market pushed hunmdreds of thousands of people to buy hybrids, the market will push sufficient battery recycling capacity. In fact, I am sure there is MORE than enough recycling capacity, today, for many many more batteries (100 times?) than are on the road today. I'd be willing to bet on it, actually.

How about you call a battery recylcing place and see if they would quote you a price on recylcing 10,000 Prius batteries. I bet you get a quote.

Battery recycling is not a real issue. It can be done safely. Not buying a hybrid because you are worried about the safety of battery recycling is like not buying a car because you are worried about tire recycling. Yes, waste tire handling can be hazardous. It can also be done perfectly safely, and IS done safely by probably 99% of the handlers.

snakeweasel

Battery recycling is not a real issue. It can be done safely.

While I am not worried about recycling the batteries I wonder how the 30 some batteries that a hybrid has would retain integrity in an accident.

calidave

I dunno. But probably less of an environmental risk than the 15 gallons of gasoline.

mrjjgittes

Hey, don't me wrong, I ain't no tree hugger from SF, far from it, but even I smirk when I see one of these bloated H2 pigs amble by on the way to the gas station. They almost seem like charicatures now. I especially love that video of the H2 that got high centered on a 10 inch tree stump at a jeep rally and had to be rescued by a CJ. Unbelievably pathetic. Wouldn't be caught dead in one.

carlisimo

There's a limit to how retro I'll go. And the Challenger concept is just too much for me.

Old school is one thing. Pretend old school is another. It's posing... you're in a modern car trying to look like you're in a classic. If it looked like the next generation Challenger that never happened (like the Camaro concept is), then great. But a faximile will always be in the original's shadow.

jefferyg

John, you need help! :P But again, it's the old beauty in the eyes...

Do you think there's anyone out there who likes the looks of the Aztek? :surprise:

jefferyg

Last time I checked all hybrids burn gas, SO you've got sparking batteries, plus gas, plus wiring harnesses that say, "DO NOT ATTEMPT TO DISCONNECT, YOU COULD BE KILLED" (it says something like that on the Accord Hybrid).

This hybrid madness must be stopped! Imagine the chaos:
It's a foggy morning on the freeway in Anytown, USA.
A construction worker in his Silverado hybrid spills coffee in his lap causing him to veer into a Lexus hybrid in the next lane! An Accord hybrid then slams into the back of the Lexus and spins into the HOV lane where it is immediately stuck by 5 priuses and an Escape Hybrid! All of this happens on a bridge over a river. The batteries are leaking into the city's water supply! Dead fish are everywhere. Call the department of Homeland Security! But wait - oh no - a hydrogen fuel celled city bus plows into the pile and explodes which begins a chain reaction that causes the earth's atmosphere to turn to carbon dioxide. AAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH! :sick:

I know it's a bit over the top, but the statement about the wiring harness is true. :P

geo9

GREAT POST !!!!!!!!!!!

carlisimo

Awesome post =]

I'd like to think that the wiring harness sticker is just part of the safety sticker industry conspiracy. The same guys who gave the Viper stickers that say such brilliant utterings as:

"The backseat is the safest place for children"
"Avoid contacting [the side exhaust] area and the exhaust tip"
"This vehicle may include mercury added devices installed by the manufacturer..." - and the first item on the list is a "rear seat video display"
"The support behind seats is not a roll bar. This is an open vehicle -- please drive carefully"

snakeweasel

Not as much worried about the environmental risk as much as the fact that getting gas on me in a minor problem while battery acid on me is a major pain.

I had a fireman or two tell me they worry about leaking acid on a hybrid especially in an overturned vehicle.

snakeweasel

Its not as much the safety sticker industry as much as our lawsuit crazy society. Come on now a million dollars for spilling coffee on yourself? really.

snakeweasel

For one thing, on the GM trucks the electric motor is more of a backup, and is there primarily to serve as a generator for construction sites.

I have been thinking about this but are you sure about this? You could always get a generator attached to a pickup, at least as an aftermarket accessory.

jefferyg

I was just thinking that the Viper is one of those high performance, fuel thirsty, drag racing, status symbol kinda cars that are often being slammed on this board, but it has seldom if ever been mentioned as a car that anyone wouldn't be caught dead driving.

What's the reason for that? I have my thoughts, but I'd like to hear what some of the rest of you think.

john_324

Well, Andre agrees with me anyway... :P And at least the Achieva was somewhat unique-looking compared to it's utterly forgetable replacement the Alero.

Re the Aztek, it's funny to me that there's a REALLY fine line between funky-ugly and ugly-ugly. The Aztek styling is pretty much universally reviled, but the Element styling has numerous admirers.

If you were trying to describe each to the proverbial Martian, you'd have a hard time convincing him that there's this huge difference between the two.

As for the hybrids, wow...I was willing to live with the fact that we're feeding the dead batteries to third-world children, but this doomsday scenario could affect my commute... :mad:

fintail

Well, someone out there likes the looks of the Prius

snakeweasel

maybe he or she thought it was so ugly that they decided to show their distaste at it by.... well you get the picture.

library1

Hybrid batteries- the 300+ volt pack- looks like dozens of D-cells- no acid.

The auxiliary 12 volt storage battery could leak acid- maybe.

jefferyg

Since we've been into these calculations I thought I'd take a stab at one.

300 volts divided by 1.5v per D-cell = 200 D-cell batteries x approximately 75 cents per battery (for the cheap ones at Wal-Mart) = $150.

Don't hybrid autos use NiMH batteries which are the same as what you buy for small electronics. NiMH for small electronics are only about 4 or 5 times the cost of Alkaline. If that's the case then why is a battery pack for a hybrid automobile so much more expensive? A 300 volt battery pack should cost about $750.

Again, until they can close the gap between the cost of owning a hybrid and a comparable gas-burner, I wouldn't be caught dead driving one.

nippononly

was right: it IS more fun to drive a slow car fast than a fast car slow (am I paraphrasing? I think I got the gist of it).

Anybody can build an amazing car for $50 grand. It is quite another thing to sell a car for $10K that will suffer all the abuse of the typical owner and keep right on chugging, in freezing or 110-degree weather, or with five riders, pulling 35 to the gallon...

bumpy

Don't hybrid autos use NiMH batteries which are the same as what you buy for small electronics. NiMH for small electronics are only about 4 or 5 times the cost of Alkaline. If that's the case then why is a battery pack for a hybrid automobile so much more expensive? A 300 volt battery pack should cost about $750.

Those Nimh batteries in the hybrid have a significantly higher amperage capacity than the D-cells you get at Wal-Mart.

calidave

no one got a million dollars for spilling hot coffee on them. The judge reduced the amount. And if you understood the facts of the case, especially McDonald's tactics before and during trial, you'd understand why the jury hit McD's hard. (too hard, according to the judge, but you should note that the judge did NOT reduce the award to a token amount - a judge and a jury agreed that McD's did something very wrong. From my reading of the case, McD's actions were borderline criminal. They knew they were selling coffee that was too hot to drink. McDonal's wsas lucky no employees got burned. They would have gotten hit even harder AND OSHA and state OSHA would have been all over them, so they would have paid fines on top of the lawsuit damages. Don't be fooled by the stuff that the insurance industry puts out to make you think that juries are out of control, etc.)

gsemike

Yes, it was too hot but they didn't do that just to mess with people. The reasoning was that coffee sold to go at the drive thru wouldn't be drank immediately and thus would cool down by the time that it was to be drank but would not be stone cold. That's not so crazy and hardly is "borderline criminal".

Yes... the warning on the cup is a good idea but so is not sticking a cup of coffee between your legs when you're driving.

carlisimo

"I was just thinking that the Viper is one of those high performance, fuel thirsty, drag racing, status symbol kinda cars that are often being slammed on this board, but it has seldom if ever been mentioned as a car that anyone wouldn't be caught dead driving."

It's a forum of car enthusiasts, duh =p. I'm not sure if I could live with one as a daily driver though. If I weren't about to move (big reduction in stop-and-go driving for me), I'd probably be very happy owning a Prius. And I like guppies, so I like its styling. Great interior. Quiet in stop-and-go. The Viper's clutch would kill me after a while.

But everyone here sees the coolness in the Viper.

snakeweasel

no one got a million dollars for spilling hot coffee on them.

I know the guy who managed the McDonalds Insurance carriers Inland Marine Division at that time. He had to sign off on the settlement. He tells me differently, thats all I will say for now. You only know up to the Judge reducing the settlement, you don't know what happened after that. Its not uncommon for the parties to negotiate after that point under the threat of appealing the judges ruling.

john_324

Owning a Viper seems like the automotive equivalent of having a pet tiger. The total impracticality of it all is what's so alluring to people.

With so much of our day-to-day lives rooted in useful if dull practical considerations, how could one not love (or at least respect) something so romantic (in the Shelley sort of way I mean) and passionate?

In fact, I personally don't like how the recent Vipers have toned down the hard-core, spartan nature of the originals. Roll-up side windows my [non-permissible content removed]! :P

snakeweasel

I agree the Viper would be one of the worse cars for a daily drive. However if I had the money it would be a fun car for summer drives in the country.

calidave

yes, that is true. I was only reporting what the judge did. Since the millo dollar payment was made as a result of a negotiation with McDonald's, your point is, then, that McDonald's was stupid, not that the women didn't deserve it, I think.

If McD's thought they had a good case, they could have paid the 400k and seen what happened to appeal.

But they didn't. My read is that they knew they had a terrible case.

The facts of the case were terrible for McDonalds. The witnesses were horrid. They completely alienated the jury.

gsemike

It's tough for a big corporation to get sympathy from a jury. All they see is deep pockets, so they figure "what is 400 grand to them?" Regardless of the merits of the case, the jury will go for the plaintiff just to give them some relief at a dollar amount that the company "will never miss".

How about a little personal responsibility when you drive with any drink between your legs? If you spilled cranberry juice because you had it between your legs, would Ocean Spray be on the hook for your sained pants?

calidave

Yes, it was too hot but they didn't do that just to mess with people. The reasoning was that coffee sold to go at the drive thru wouldn't be drank immediately and thus would cool down by the time that it was to be drank but would not be stone cold. That's not so crazy and hardly is "borderline criminal".

Yes... the warning on the cup is a good idea but so is not sticking a cup of coffee between your legs when you're driving.

um, no, that woudl be wrong. The reason for keeping the coffee hot was to save money on spoilage. And an industrial hygeniest informed McDs that the coffee was being kept an an unsafe temperature.

Let me guess - you don't really know how hot that coffee was, do you?

A manufacturer is responsible for all foreseeable damages that will ocur from all reasonably foreseeable acts. It is foreseeable that when giving coffee to a driver in a car, that the coffee will be spilled. If it is spilled, at the temperature provided, it will cause significant burns. If that had been the end of the story, there'd be no story.

Of course, it makes a great myth to use for firing up the anti-lawsuit crowd.

I believe people, including corporations, need to be responsible for what they do. McD's was lucky the person didn't take a sip and burn her mouth. Had she had facial disfigurement, the lady would OWN that McDonalds.

calidave

Mike: I completely hear you re no sympathy for corporate defendants, and I agree.

But when you buy a cranberry juice, you KNOW it will stain if spilled. When you buy coffee you do not expect it be hot enough to melt your skin.

snakeweasel

I don't know about you but when I buy coffee I expect it to be hot and would not even think of putting it between my legs.

FWIW if it were hot enough to melt skin it would be steam.

imidazol97

I thought I was on the cooking discussion for a minute here.

calidave

sorry - her skin didn't "melt" literally - just second-degree burns, if I recall

I also would not put coffee between my legs. But I sure would not expect to get more than a light scalding if I spilled it. I would not expect to need a hospital visit. I guess you expect less of what you pay for. I don't expect a product that will have any such "surprises."

fitguy

Although this thread is about "wouldn't be caught dead....." since you brought up the McD's coffee debacle I must say- what are you, a personal injury lawyer? The whole system is tainted by sleazy lawsuits brought on by stupid people, typically "gen Y", who feel they never make a mistake and everyone else is to blame for their mistakes. Only a retard would put steaming hot coffee between their legs, for god's sake. But because of the greed and "deep pockets" syndrome, a lawsuit ensues and worse yet prevails. Sure, there are defective products knowingly sold and doctors that make irresponsible mistakes, and they SHOULD be punished. But the frivolty of many lawsuits is laughable. I bought a winshield sunscreen awhile back and in bright red letters on the back (inside) side it was printed: DO NOT DRIVE VEHICLE WITH SUNSCREEN IN PLACE. What did that really say? Some moron did it, crashed his car, sued, and won. Sheer stupidity rewarded by our screwed-up system. There needs to be a checks & balances system to ferret out the frivolous personal injury lawsuits before they go to trial. We all pay for these in the end through higher prices and insurance rates.

Anyhow, in answer to the thread: I wouldn't be caught dead driving any car that Hillary Clinton drives.

andre1969

if something's too cold it can be a problem too. I remember years ago, we had this managerette at work who was real religious the way she talked, and was always bragging about her her husband..."Oh Joe Christian is so sweet", "Oh, my Joe Christian did this/that/whatever". And yes, that's how she'd refer to him, first and last name. Not "My husband", or "Joe", but "My Joe Christian" :confuse:

Well, it was a hot, summer day in 1993, and I rode with her to drop something off at another building. You could practically hear those beads of sweat popping out all over her body, despite the fact that her new Camry's a/c was going full blast.

Well, we ran over to the 7-11 and got some Slurpees. When we got back out to the car, she got behind the wheel, put the slurpee between her legs, and started to back out without her seatbelt on.

All of a sudden I hear this "It's COOOOOOOOLD DOWN THERE!! I'm not used to having anyting COLD down there!! That's not MY Joe Christian!" Well, I had a mouthful of slurpee at that time, and just about choked on that one. Ended up spraying it all over her passenger compartment. She got distracted and backed into an old dude with a walker who was crossing the parking lot...he got pinned between her Camry and an old Bronco II parked on the other side of the aisle. I ended up swallowing slurpee down the wrong tube, and had to go to the hospital.

In a nutshell, I got a $20,000 settlement, old dude got something like half a mil, the owner of the Bronco II got a new "real" Bronco (they didn't make Expeditions yet, and he wouldn't settle for an Explorer), and that managerette got a Lexus LS400. As for that particular 7-Eleven? Closed down. And this story is the reason that they don't make Slurpees as cold as they used to. Believe it...or NOT! :P

imidazol97

It is a full moon tonight? I just had my first belly laugh in two days. That's other than laughing at some posters, in other discussions, not this one of course.

calidave

fitguy: Actually, I work for the "other" side. The U.S. has a great system for getting rid of frivilous lawsuits. And it does work. I also know that MY side has been very successful in brainwashing the public about this whole issue. We've been making tremendous progress in limiting the public's ability to recover damages and punish my clients.

I don't think it's good policy, but that's just me.

No question the system has problems, but it is still the best system in the world, bar none. Go lose an arm in China and see what happens.

and, obviously, you don't know very much about the coffee case. But I'm GLAD you have the opinion you do, because it means MY side is winning!! HA!

imidazol97

>obviously, you don't know very much about the coffee case.

Since you have some superior knowledge, you need to share that with us who don't know.

calidave

I already did.

There are plenty of websites out there that have info.

And it's not appropriate to turn this thread into the "frivilous lawusuit" thread. We've already certainly put plenty of people off.

Let's leave it as: It's complicated. Nothing is as simple as you think, including this.

xrunner2

A manufacturer is responsible for all foreseeable damages that will ocur from all reasonably foreseeable acts. It is foreseeable that when giving coffee to a driver in a car, that the coffee will be spilled. If it is spilled, at the temperature provided, it will cause significant burns.

By this reasoning, tobacco companies are responsible when someone smoking, either sober or drunk, falls asleep in bed or on a couch and the smoker's house burns down and smoker dies. Have read stories on houses burned down, smokers dying, for decades, but never that the tobacco company was sued.

andre1969

there's just a fine line between a true accident and negligence, and that's where the difference lies. Perhaps they figure that if you spill hot coffee in your car it was an accident, but if you light up and then fall asleep, that's your own fault.

Or, maybe the tobacco companies just have better lobbyists and lawyers than McDonalds? :confuse:

Still, I do see a difference in the McDonald's case. I've spilled hot coffee on myself before, and it hurts. But McDonalds used to brew their coffee something like 20 degrees hotter than normal...supposedly that's why it tasted so good. So the average person would probably expect that if they spilled coffee on themselves, it would hurt, but not to the degree that the McDonald's coffee did with that one lady.

PF_Flyer

Let's get back to discussing the vehicels y9ou wouldn't be caught driving please.

Thanks

jlawrence01

But McDonalds used to brew their coffee something like 20 degrees hotter than normal...supposedly that's why it tasted so good.

Yes, the same temperature that they do in the US Army.

jefferyg

Andre we should get together and write a book. Actually I guess you could say I am Joe Christian since I am a pastor. But that is just too funny not to pass along.

stockmanjoe

These hybrid cars are supposed to be so environmentaly friendly but justthink of all the waste disposal problems these batteries they all have will present?

iluvmysephia1

dead driving a huge pick-em-up truck or huge American SUV. It would nearly as bad as seeing Karl Malone return to the NBA, dudes.

stockmanjoe

I think hybrids are at best a stop gap measure. The batteries are dangerous and expensive to recycle. They do not get the performance they promise. I see diesel as a far better alternative and get nearly the same performance. We need to think way ahead to hydrogen propelled cars.

calidave

yeah, and the reason they do that in the Army is to imrpve taste?

no, it's to decrease spoilage

profits, baby, profits

McD's experts admitted it. And that is one reason they got hit.

I would never drive a Mayor McCheese Wagon for that very reason.

calidave

danger Will Robinson

danger danger

is the sky falling where you live, too?
My god, I swear the sky is falling here.