Author Topic: Why do we bash on trucks?  (Read 36119 times)

music lover

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 653
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #100 on: August 16, 2015, 06:53:59 AM »
unless you're spending 8+ hours a day in your car then i'd say you have crazy other antimustacian problems. 

lets do the math based on time used
say a 1 hour per day commute in a 30k car
vs a 12 hour day using your 300k house. 

im getting 12x the use fore 10x the price.  and its not a depreciating asset.  and i have to live somewhere so based on your 100k house price difference.  i'm getting 36x the use for 3x the price.

Try this:

Replace the 1 hour commute with 4-5 hours of bike riding. Over 12 years. 5 hours times 240 work days a year times 12 years = 15,000 hours. The equivalent car commute is about 3000 hours, a difference of 12,000 hours. 12,000 hours is equivalent to 6 years of full time work.

Would you work for 6 years for only $30k??

Interesting math.

Let me take this a little further:

15000 hours of bicycling in twelve years will save you 30k, could add five years to your life, will definitely turn you into an endurance athlete, and likely will improve your health related quality of life.

Commuting 3000 hours by car in twelve years will cost you 30k, is likely to result in shortened life expectancy, will result in increased BMI, will decrease health related quality of life as a consequence of a more sedentary lifestyle.

Just saying...

I'm already fit and get all the cardio I need in three or four 30 minute sessions a week. Why would I change that to 16-20 hours of bike riding for minimal gain?

Google the relevant research regarding bicycling and life expectancy, sedentary lifestyle and health related quality of life and you'll see what I'm talking about.

Hint: an extra 3000 hours sitting time cannot be compensated for in any way we currently know and four 30 minutes sessions/week of aerobic exercise may prevent premature death of the typical couch potato from cardiovascular disease but does not have anywhere near the effect of bicycle commuting which may add five years of quality life, by decreasing all cause mortality, to the average life expectancy.

I looked it up, so maybe you should, too?? Three or four 30 minute sessions of cardio a week is all one needs if it's done right. I'm interested in fitness and health, not endurance training.

The American Heart Association specifically states:

- At least 30 minutes of moderate-intensity aerobic activity at least 5 days per week for a total of 150

OR

- At least 25 minutes of vigorous aerobic activity at least 3 days per week for a total of 75 minutes; or a combination of moderate- and vigorous-intensity aerobic activity"

I'm aware of the recommendation and you are just repeating what I wrote in my last post. Your exercise regimen is what the American Heart Association recommends to the average couch potato to reduce their risk of succumbing to cardiovascular disease. Unfortunately, all cause mortality is much more important than lowering your risk for cardiovascular disease.

The most interesting thing about the recommendation is how little it is supposed to take to eliminate inactivity related risk factors from the cardiovascular risk profile. That alone makes it suspicious, but, I guess one can forgive the American Heart Association because all cause mortality is in large part outside their jurisdiction.

Here is my opinion: Two to three hours of moderate exercise a week as a way to counteract the effects of a sedentary lifestyle sounds way to good to be true. The underlying assumption is that it is possible to weigh a certain amount of exercise against a certain amount of inactivity and things will be fine. That idea is so 19th century that it makes me laugh. On a more serious note, there is no evidence that such a small amount of exercise can reduce all cause mortality and the American Heart Association has made no effort, that I know of, to publicize that.

Thanks, doctor.

Khan

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 616
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #101 on: August 16, 2015, 07:09:58 AM »
I just wanted to pull out two quotes from the last 3 pages...

Quote
Still won't make it [truck/rocket ownership] acceptable on these forums.
False. AFAICT, the essence of Mustachianism, which is all too often more like a religion as evangelized by some of the people in these forums, is "Conscious consumerism". If having a Miata gives you great pleasure in life, and you can afford to have it, then enjoy your life. If you think you need to step it up to owning a Corvette or a higher end sports car? Well, you're going to the extreme end, and you should really examine your choices, but again, it's your choice.

This is compared to unconscious, spendy and mindless consumerism, which is bad, especially if it causes you to completely miss the ideas of YMOYL/ERE/FIRE and live paycheck to paycheck, because that's stressful, short sighted, and objectively an inferior way to live if it's avoidable.

There's a difference between 1. people who buy fancy cars and trucks because they like to hang out with their friends and talk about them, or work on them, or go to drag races, or otherwise enjoy a subculture related to cars and 2. people who buy fancy cars and trucks because that's what they think they are supposed to do to be successful. The difference lies in belonging to a community versus being a mindless consumer sucka.

All of my this.

I drive a Focus ST, a decidedly un-mustachian(not >40 mpg, new, excessive horsepower), however even that could be considered mustachian on several levels for myself.
1. I -like- horsepower, and this is one of the cheapest, and most useable horsepower from an almost-econobox grade vehicle.
2. I tried the old used car thing for 2 years, it brought negative happiness value to my life because I didn't trust the vehicle
3. Even a new car can be mustachian if it's kept for many, many years, I do plan on keeping this into the 100k-200k mile range(or till it dies), I think ownership of it will mean I won't have that fear that my prior vehicle gave me.

Those in glass houses should not cast stones, and every single one of us, with our internet, our first world electricity, our washers and our dryers and dishwashers and appliances, none of us are without sin.

P.S. As a side note, I will admit that when I was shopping for vehicles, I failed to account for doc/sales tax even after all my research on vehicles and probably should've gone with the used model... but again, every mile put on this baby, and every quirk, I will have full knowledge of, and I do sleep better at night and enjoy my vehicle more because of that.

Edit: grammar
« Last Edit: August 16, 2015, 08:36:40 AM by Khanjar »

fa

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 233
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #102 on: August 16, 2015, 07:54:37 AM »
It is amusing to read these posts.  It goes to show what a marvelous job the automobile industry marketing departments have done.  People buy on emotion (big truck makes you feel powerful, important and intimidating..) and then rationalize the purchase (I need to haul stuff, need the space, drive on snow, etc...).  The marketing has worked its wonders, and made many of these truck owners into wage slaves.

No shame in this.  We all succumb to these marketing messages more often than we care to admit.  I used to have a truck but sold it when I started tracking my expenses on Mint.  I couldn't stomach those pie charts any longer.  After selling the truck and buying a very small sensible car, I no longer get a knot in my stomach when looking at  Mint.  I am very happy with the small car and realize that my ego really doesn't need to fed with a monster to impress the neighbors.  Thanks for opening my eyes MMM.

Tomacco

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 18
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #103 on: August 16, 2015, 08:31:29 AM »
I have a truck to haul stuff, which I do a lot as a landlord/ junk picker. I got it last year for $7500, it's a 2009 ford ranger, 4-cyl, rear wheel drive, manual, 95k miles. I average about 34 mpg, mostly city driving too.
I think it's a pretty mustacian vehicle. As far as trucks go, I couldn't find a better option.

fb132

  • Guest
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #104 on: August 16, 2015, 08:42:44 AM »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzP2yzrKl28
Most ridiculous truck add ever

daverobev

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3377
  • Location: France
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #105 on: August 16, 2015, 09:15:35 AM »
I have a truck to haul stuff, which I do a lot as a landlord/ junk picker. I got it last year for $7500, it's a 2009 ford ranger, 4-cyl, rear wheel drive, manual, 95k miles. I average about 34 mpg, mostly city driving too.
I think it's a pretty mustacian vehicle. As far as trucks go, I couldn't find a better option.

Your truck is absolutely NOT what is being discussed. Ford Rangers are awesome, especially the 2.3l version.

PeteD01

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 415
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #106 on: August 16, 2015, 09:17:17 AM »
unless you're spending 8+ hours a day in your car then i'd say you have crazy other antimustacian problems. 

lets do the math based on time used
say a 1 hour per day commute in a 30k car
vs a 12 hour day using your 300k house. 

im getting 12x the use fore 10x the price.  and its not a depreciating asset.  and i have to live somewhere so based on your 100k house price difference.  i'm getting 36x the use for 3x the price.

Try this:

Replace the 1 hour commute with 4-5 hours of bike riding. Over 12 years. 5 hours times 240 work days a year times 12 years = 15,000 hours. The equivalent car commute is about 3000 hours, a difference of 12,000 hours. 12,000 hours is equivalent to 6 years of full time work.

Would you work for 6 years for only $30k??

Interesting math.

Let me take this a little further:

15000 hours of bicycling in twelve years will save you 30k, could add five years to your life, will definitely turn you into an endurance athlete, and likely will improve your health related quality of life.

Commuting 3000 hours by car in twelve years will cost you 30k, is likely to result in shortened life expectancy, will result in increased BMI, will decrease health related quality of life as a consequence of a more sedentary lifestyle.

Just saying...

I'm already fit and get all the cardio I need in three or four 30 minute sessions a week. Why would I change that to 16-20 hours of bike riding for minimal gain?

Google the relevant research regarding bicycling and life expectancy, sedentary lifestyle and health related quality of life and you'll see what I'm talking about.

Hint: an extra 3000 hours sitting time cannot be compensated for in any way we currently know and four 30 minutes sessions/week of aerobic exercise may prevent premature death of the typical couch potato from cardiovascular disease but does not have anywhere near the effect of bicycle commuting which may add five years of quality life, by decreasing all cause mortality, to the average life expectancy.

I looked it up, so maybe you should, too?? Three or four 30 minute sessions of cardio a week is all one needs if it's done right. I'm interested in fitness and health, not endurance training.

The American Heart Association specifically states:

- At least 30 minutes of moderate-intensity aerobic activity at least 5 days per week for a total of 150

OR

- At least 25 minutes of vigorous aerobic activity at least 3 days per week for a total of 75 minutes; or a combination of moderate- and vigorous-intensity aerobic activity"

I'm aware of the recommendation and you are just repeating what I wrote in my last post. Your exercise regimen is what the American Heart Association recommends to the average couch potato to reduce their risk of succumbing to cardiovascular disease. Unfortunately, all cause mortality is much more important than lowering your risk for cardiovascular disease.

The most interesting thing about the recommendation is how little it is supposed to take to eliminate inactivity related risk factors from the cardiovascular risk profile. That alone makes it suspicious, but, I guess one can forgive the American Heart Association because all cause mortality is in large part outside their jurisdiction.

Here is my opinion: Two to three hours of moderate exercise a week as a way to counteract the effects of a sedentary lifestyle sounds way to good to be true. The underlying assumption is that it is possible to weigh a certain amount of exercise against a certain amount of inactivity and things will be fine. That idea is so 19th century that it makes me laugh. On a more serious note, there is no evidence that such a small amount of exercise can reduce all cause mortality and the American Heart Association has made no effort, that I know of, to publicize that.

Thanks, doctor.


I think this is an important subject but off topic in this thread.
I've started a new thread in the "off topic" section looking into the official recommendations regarding amount and intensity of exercise. Maybe some interesting discussion will come from it.


SwordGuy

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5777
  • Location: Fayetteville, NC
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #107 on: August 16, 2015, 09:08:46 PM »
2. I tried the old used car thing for 2 years, it brought negative happiness value to my life because I didn't trust the vehicle
3. Even a new car can be mustachian if it's kept for many, many years, I do plan on keeping this into the 100k-200k mile range(or till it dies), I think ownership of it will mean I won't have that fear that my prior vehicle gave me.

Those in glass houses should not cast stones,

Ok, I won't cast stones.

How about a healthy dose of LOGIC?

You don't trust used cars but will buy a new car and DRIVE IT USED for MANY, MANY YEARS.

That doesn't make a lick of sense!   No matter how new a car is when you buy it, after you've driven it for a while it's a used car.


darkhorse

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 22
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #108 on: August 16, 2015, 11:31:25 PM »
Fun thread! The following is not to justify my truck ownership, because from experience and research I already know what I need and want. Just consider it another case study or data point for the conversation.

I have a late model mid-sized, crew cab, 4WD Nissan Frontier that I really enjoy. It has an overkill, inefficient but extremely reliable 4.0L V6. Maybe worth noting that in truck circles, this is not a "real truck". The reason I don't have a "real truck" because "real trucks" are a pain to park and negotiate in urban areas...and I still don't yet trust Big 3 reliability.

I bought it because my pastime is fishing and off-grid camping. Many of the places I go require high ground clearance and 4WD (in the winter especially). I also pull a drift boat and occasionally need to pull it out of steep, slippery boat ramps that absolutely require 4WD. We also rent a 2600# camp trailer a few times a year. My previous truck (same, but with 2WD and an anemic 4 cyl that powers the much lighter Altima), worked pretty well but I was limited in the places I could go and it struggled to pull the drift boat at speed, and wouldn't even attempt certain ramps with 2WD.

I looked at Subarus and decided that they could have achieved all of the above reasonably well except the drift boat and camper pulling. However, despite knowing that Subarus are reliable vehicles, it just came down to a truck vs car off-road durability. For what I'm doing with it, hands down, the truck is better designed for pounding into the dirt. For my needs, vehicles with similarly dismal operating costs such as another brand truck, a Jeep or an Xterra would suffice. A Forester, Odyssey, CRV, CX5, Impreza, Fit or yaris would not.

My truck has under 10k miles and already has serious gravel chips, a few dents and dings and has only been washed a few times. It's certainly not a status vehicle or else it would be gleaming. It's got no stupid accessories (huge off road jacks mounted to roof baskets), or special wheels. I simply upgraded to 10-ply tires because stock 4-ply have failed me more than once. Outside of it's intended use, I limit the miles.

I make an exception for my one pastime, and I'm conscious that it moves the needle out on my retirement date. My pastime is decidedly, unarguably unmustachian. My vehicle enables my pastime and is decidedly unmustachian too. But due to it's inherent capabilities, it allows me to pursue my hobby pretty much worry free, and that's where much of the enjoyment comes.


P.S. before I had the trucks I had a 90' Nissan Maxima with 250k miles. While it wasn't mustachian either, it was a super sleeper. I pushed it to it's off road limits when about 10 years ago, I bashed the transmission case while driving on a fire road looking for a fishing spot I had no business navigating to with a car! Still miss it.


« Last Edit: August 17, 2015, 12:36:02 AM by darkhorse »

darkhorse

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 22
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #109 on: August 16, 2015, 11:55:25 PM »
2. I tried the old used car thing for 2 years, it brought negative happiness value to my life because I didn't trust the vehicle
3. Even a new car can be mustachian if it's kept for many, many years, I do plan on keeping this into the 100k-200k mile range(or till it dies), I think ownership of it will mean I won't have that fear that my prior vehicle gave me.

Those in glass houses should not cast stones,

Ok, I won't cast stones.

How about a healthy dose of LOGIC?

You don't trust used cars but will buy a new car and DRIVE IT USED for MANY, MANY YEARS.

That doesn't make a lick of sense!   No matter how new a car is when you buy it, after you've driven it for a while it's a used car.

Guessing that Khanjar is uncomfortable not knowing the history of a used car if not purchased new.

Khan

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 616
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #110 on: August 17, 2015, 04:44:37 AM »
2. I tried the old used car thing for 2 years, it brought negative happiness value to my life because I didn't trust the vehicle
3. Even a new car can be mustachian if it's kept for many, many years, I do plan on keeping this into the 100k-200k mile range(or till it dies), I think ownership of it will mean I won't have that fear that my prior vehicle gave me.

Those in glass houses should not cast stones,

Ok, I won't cast stones.

How about a healthy dose of LOGIC?

You don't trust used cars but will buy a new car and DRIVE IT USED for MANY, MANY YEARS.

That doesn't make a lick of sense!   No matter how new a car is when you buy it, after you've driven it for a while it's a used car.

Guessing that Khanjar is uncomfortable not knowing the history of a used car if not purchased new.

Yeah, that. Having a vehicle that's at 130k miles prior to my ownership, with issues cropping up as I own it for a couple thousand miles, just wasn't working for me, mentally. I do motorcycle roadtrips to my parents house 5 hours away, and would like to visit other family between 9-14 hours away via car(TSA can suck my ****), but there was never a chance of me feeling up to doing it in an old truck, and 5 hours on my motorcycle hurts. Also, truck bed vs. enclosed hatch/trunk and other benefits for my peace of mind.

I'm fairly certain that I'll trust the devil I know, a vehicle that I have full knowledge of it's entire service history and every little rattle and ding, over my prior used foray. If I keep it for 15-20 years, you really couldn't call it an entirely non-mustachian decision.

Humans are emotional and stupid, and I view my decision as emotionally irrational in the same way I view people who pay off their mortgage in this interest environment as making a decent but sub-optimal solution... whatever floats your boat. Or, tows your boat, to wrap this back around to truck ownership.

Edit: The used truck I had was a 2003 Mazda B2300 regular cab with a 4 banger, what would probably be considered one of the most mustachian truck type vehicles around.
« Last Edit: August 17, 2015, 07:35:07 AM by Khanjar »

JLee

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5632
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #111 on: August 17, 2015, 08:21:07 AM »
In this case can it really be a "to each his own" kind of thing?

If too many people are thoughtlessly wasting resources it affects all of us. I think deep down this is what causes the negative reaction towards big truck drivers.

Sure we all produce waste, but at least be a little thoughtful about it. Some people see it as a badge of honor or something. "Yeah look at how big my truck is, it gets 8 mph hardy har, my peen must be hyooge, screw you hippies!"

One could stretch that same argument to those families with tons of kids. We're already over-utilizing the earth's resources, so why have two people create four or six more?

IMHO what causes the negative reaction towards (xyz) is that many people obtain joy from ridiculing others.  There's an entire section on this forum devoted to just that.

Slee_stack

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 854
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #112 on: August 17, 2015, 08:55:56 AM »
In this case can it really be a "to each his own" kind of thing?

If too many people are thoughtlessly wasting resources it affects all of us. I think deep down this is what causes the negative reaction towards big truck drivers.

Sure we all produce waste, but at least be a little thoughtful about it. Some people see it as a badge of honor or something. "Yeah look at how big my truck is, it gets 8 mph hardy har, my peen must be hyooge, screw you hippies!"

One could stretch that same argument to those families with tons of kids. We're already over-utilizing the earth's resources, so why have two people create four or six more?

IMHO what causes the negative reaction towards (xyz) is that many people obtain joy from ridiculing others.  There's an entire section on this forum devoted to just that.
Not even tons of kids...even one.  Population does not need to go up or stay the same.  It is arguable it should go down.

Can anyone think of a more environmentally irresponsible action then adding another person to the planet?

Khan

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 616
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #113 on: August 17, 2015, 09:23:35 AM »
In this case can it really be a "to each his own" kind of thing?

If too many people are thoughtlessly wasting resources it affects all of us. I think deep down this is what causes the negative reaction towards big truck drivers.

Sure we all produce waste, but at least be a little thoughtful about it. Some people see it as a badge of honor or something. "Yeah look at how big my truck is, it gets 8 mph hardy har, my peen must be hyooge, screw you hippies!"

One could stretch that same argument to those families with tons of kids. We're already over-utilizing the earth's resources, so why have two people create four or six more?

IMHO what causes the negative reaction towards (xyz) is that many people obtain joy from ridiculing others.  There's an entire section on this forum devoted to just that.
Not even tons of kids...even one.  Population does not need to go up or stay the same.  It is arguable it should go down.

Can anyone think of a more environmentally irresponsible action then adding another person to the planet?

Yes, failing to have a next generation while the current population gets older and older. Nobody should hope for a complete collapse in the birthrate and population, a gentle slope downwards would be better.

Kaspian

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1536
  • Location: Canada
    • My Necronomicon of Badassity
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #114 on: August 17, 2015, 09:36:51 AM »
Wow, the "my truck is more eco-conscious than your kids" argument.  Well done!!  Right up there with, "biking isn't doing you that much good in the health department compared to my truck" presentation.  ...So I'm guessing you folks also go to a Batman forum and say the Batcave sort of sucks and Spiderman is the coolest? 

sixup

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 123
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #115 on: August 17, 2015, 11:13:28 AM »
In this case can it really be a "to each his own" kind of thing?

If too many people are thoughtlessly wasting resources it affects all of us. I think deep down this is what causes the negative reaction towards big truck drivers.

Sure we all produce waste, but at least be a little thoughtful about it. Some people see it as a badge of honor or something. "Yeah look at how big my truck is, it gets 8 mph hardy har, my peen must be hyooge, screw you hippies!"

One could stretch that same argument to those families with tons of kids. We're already over-utilizing the earth's resources, so why have two people create four or six more?

IMHO what causes the negative reaction towards (xyz) is that many people obtain joy from ridiculing others.  There's an entire section on this forum devoted to just that.
Not even tons of kids...even one.  Population does not need to go up or stay the same.  It is arguable it should go down.

Can anyone think of a more environmentally irresponsible action then adding another person to the planet?

I think this is incorrect. Smart people (such as the people on this forum <3) should have more kids to increase the chances of long term human success. Since we know dumb people won't think or care about that.

catccc

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1684
  • Location: SE PA
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #116 on: August 17, 2015, 11:34:46 AM »
I think we bash them because so many people that own trucks don't need them.

My family owns a truck, but I do think we need it because my husband is a beekeeper.  It is not really feasible to move live bees and smokers with lingering fuel in the interior of a car.  We have considered a trailer attachment for our matrix, but that kind of a hassle.

I will admit that I bought the truck for myself before I was married and long before he kept bees.  The rationale at the time was that I did a lot of gardening and it seemed we were always borrowing someone's truck to haul mulch or some other task.

I bought our 2004 dodge dakota new for near or possibly under $15K.  I financed it as a formality to score a cash back promo, but paid off the loan in a matter of a few months.  It now has about 112K miles on it and we expect it to get to double that without much trouble.  Fingers crossed!

It is rear wheel drive (we just don't go out in snow) and has manual everything.  You crank to put the windows down, you stick a key in a keyhole to unlock the thing.  Bare bones, it's limited features include a rear sliding window and a CD player.  Fuel efficiency is kinda meh, but I have squeezed maybe 24-25 mpg out of it with highway driving.

I was in an accident with it once, v. a kia sportage, and I'm pretty convinced I walked away unscathed due to it's size.  Even though it is a small-mid sized truck, it is solid.  I'm not sure I would have been so lucky in the matrix.  the kia was a mess. 

daverobev

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3377
  • Location: France
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #117 on: August 17, 2015, 05:48:06 PM »
I think we bash them because so many people that own trucks don't need them.

My family owns a truck, but I do think we need it because my husband is a beekeeper.  It is not really feasible to move live bees and smokers with lingering fuel in the interior of a car.  We have considered a trailer attachment for our matrix, but that kind of a hassle.

I will admit that I bought the truck for myself before I was married and long before he kept bees.  The rationale at the time was that I did a lot of gardening and it seemed we were always borrowing someone's truck to haul mulch or some other task.

I bought our 2004 dodge dakota new for near or possibly under $15K.  I financed it as a formality to score a cash back promo, but paid off the loan in a matter of a few months.  It now has about 112K miles on it and we expect it to get to double that without much trouble.  Fingers crossed!

It is rear wheel drive (we just don't go out in snow) and has manual everything.  You crank to put the windows down, you stick a key in a keyhole to unlock the thing.  Bare bones, it's limited features include a rear sliding window and a CD player.  Fuel efficiency is kinda meh, but I have squeezed maybe 24-25 mpg out of it with highway driving.

I was in an accident with it once, v. a kia sportage, and I'm pretty convinced I walked away unscathed due to it's size.  Even though it is a small-mid sized truck, it is solid.  I'm not sure I would have been so lucky in the matrix.  the kia was a mess.

Trailer.

I'm currently debating replacing my Crown Vic with a Prius. CV has a hitch, and can do most things a small truck can do, but was much cheaper and is more flexible. Pretty much any car can have a smaller hitch and pull a little trailer.

I mean, whatever, it's one extra thing to own, reversing a trailer is harder...

Syonyk

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3875
    • Syonyk's Project Blog
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #118 on: August 17, 2015, 07:40:46 PM »
And insurance may give you some problems if you get into a crash with a vehicle that has no tow rating while towing...

I guess, don't crash?

MoonShadow

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2542
  • Location: Louisville, Ky.
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #119 on: August 17, 2015, 08:13:33 PM »
And insurance may give you some problems if you get into a crash with a vehicle that has no tow rating while towing...

Such a thing doesn't exist that can actually get onto a freeway.  Every vehicle has a 'tow rating', even if it's the lowest possible.

JLee

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5632
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #120 on: August 17, 2015, 09:32:19 PM »
And insurance may give you some problems if you get into a crash with a vehicle that has no tow rating while towing...

Such a thing doesn't exist that can actually get onto a freeway.  Every vehicle has a 'tow rating', even if it's the lowest possible.

If by 'lowest possible' you mean zero, then yes. :)

http://priuschat.com/threads/prius-as-a-tow-car.91176/
Quote
http://priuschat.com/threads/prius-as-a-tow-car.91176/

Syonyk

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3875
    • Syonyk's Project Blog
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #121 on: August 17, 2015, 09:59:01 PM »
The Prius has no tow rating.

For that matter, even the much loved Honda Fit isn't designed for towing.

http://www.edmunds.com/honda/fit/2009/long-term-road-test/2009-honda-fit-sport-what-the-manual-says-about-towing.html
Quote
Here is what the 2009 Honda Fit owner's manual has to say about that: "Your vehicle is not designed to tow a trailer. Attempting to do so can void your warranties."

You can stick a hitch on, mostly designed for bike racks & such, but if you do tow a trailer, you're outside the manufacturer recommendations, and if you have an accident while towing, your insurance company might pay attention.  The warranty issue is probably less of a problem since most people here don't own new enough vehicles for it to really matter, but it's worth considering that a vehicle not designed to tow isn't going to have brakes or transmission coolers suited to towing.

And, a lot of it depends on what you're towing where.  Iowa?  Illinois?  Kansas?  Yeah, you'll probably be fine towing something from Home Depot to your house.  New Mexico?  Colorado?  Northern Idaho?  Touring with a camper?  The mountains make it a whole lot more demanding, and you probably don't want to tow up at or above the vehicle's tow rating without some serious thought or modifications.

That's not even getting into the big stuff.  5th wheel setups exist for a variety of reasons, most of them very good.  Towing a 10k lb trailer on a Class 2 hitch can be done, but you're really better off with a 5th wheel setup at that point.  And if you are towing that heavy, it's a good time to consider your transmission cooler (and temp gauges), your brakes, engine brakes, etc.  Speaking of, I need to order some cryo treated rotors...

BeerBeard

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 31
  • Age: 30
  • Location: WI
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #122 on: August 18, 2015, 11:53:56 AM »
I traded a firearm for my truck, it's a 2000 Chevy 1500 4x4 single cab with an 8ft bed and a cap. I used blood sweat and cuss words to replace the starter, fuel pump, every single brake line, plugs/wires, door hinges, door handle, hood pop cable, trans shift cable, shift solenoids, rear differential cover, shocks,  mass air flow sensor....   I'm sure I'm missing a few. Parts on this thing are cheap as hell. I'm a little over $2200 into it.

I use it only when I need to, but I have four siblings and a lot of friends, when they need to use it they know where it's at. It hasn't saved me money, but it's saved my extended family money as a whole.

I had another gun I got for $190 cause it was broke, I fixed it and traded it for a 8ft truck bed camper. At lest now I'll save about $80 every time I go hunting, which will cover the minimal insurance cost and the $84 a year to keep it registered.

And every-time someone borrows it, they fill the near 40 gallon tank for me, not that I even ask them to.

Guses

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 917
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #123 on: August 19, 2015, 10:58:38 AM »
I was in an accident with it once, v. a kia sportage, and I'm pretty convinced I walked away unscathed due to it's size.  Even though it is a small-mid sized truck, it is solid.  I'm not sure I would have been so lucky in the matrix.  the kia was a mess.

Do you ever think that maybe the kia looked the way it did because it hit (or vice versa; irrelevant) a 4,000 lbs behemoth instead of a cute little Smart? Imagine how it would have been if the other person had been driving a dump truck. Makes you wonder if you really should be advocating bigger vehicles for "safety".

Also, smaller cars are made with a bunch of crumple zones so that they get dismantled from even a fairly low speed collision. This, in turn, protects the occupants.

sixup

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 123
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #124 on: August 19, 2015, 11:23:46 AM »
I drive a bulldozer, for safety. Gets 4mpg but I need the safety. Worth it!

JLee

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5632
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #125 on: August 19, 2015, 03:52:48 PM »
I was in an accident with it once, v. a kia sportage, and I'm pretty convinced I walked away unscathed due to it's size.  Even though it is a small-mid sized truck, it is solid.  I'm not sure I would have been so lucky in the matrix.  the kia was a mess.

Do you ever think that maybe the kia looked the way it did because it hit (or vice versa; irrelevant) a 4,000 lbs behemoth instead of a cute little Smart? Imagine how it would have been if the other person had been driving a dump truck. Makes you wonder if you really should be advocating bigger vehicles for "safety".

Also, smaller cars are made with a bunch of crumple zones so that they get dismantled from even a fairly low speed collision. This, in turn, protects the occupants.

So are trucks - absorbing energy within the vehicle chassis is a huge factor in keeping the occupants safe. I understand that weight differential is also a factor, but don't imply that trucks don't have crumple zones. That's factually incorrect.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8VVyGgsExs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CytDEWE8XqY

I like watching crash test videos...I might be odd. :P

BCBiker

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 187
  • Location: Colorado
    • Business Casual Biker - Health, Wealth, and Mental Stealth BTYB Bicycle Commuting
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #126 on: August 19, 2015, 04:04:56 PM »
I drive a bulldozer, for safety. Gets 4mpg but I need the safety. Worth it!

I prefer a freight train or an oil tanker, depending on my mood...

sixup

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 123
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #127 on: August 19, 2015, 05:21:46 PM »
I drive a bulldozer, for safety. Gets 4mpg but I need the safety. Worth it!

I prefer a freight train or an oil tanker, depending on my mood...

Hey if that's what makes you happy. We all have our thing. Some of us have Gym Memberships!

Retire-Canada

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6752
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #128 on: August 19, 2015, 05:23:44 PM »

Not even tons of kids...even one.  Population does not need to go up or stay the same.  It is arguable it should go down.

Can anyone think of a more environmentally irresponsible action then adding another person to the planet?

Nope. The worst thing you can ever do for this planet is have a baby human. I'm not joking or trolling. It's simply a fact.

If someone pedalling a cargo bike hauling their 3 kids drives by a guy in an F150 and feels environmentally superior they really have no clue.

ender

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4864
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #129 on: August 19, 2015, 06:51:52 PM »

Not even tons of kids...even one.  Population does not need to go up or stay the same.  It is arguable it should go down.

Can anyone think of a more environmentally irresponsible action then adding another person to the planet?

Nope. The worst thing you can ever do for this planet is have a baby human. I'm not joking or trolling. It's simply a fact.

If someone pedalling a cargo bike hauling their 3 kids drives by a guy in an F150 and feels environmentally superior they really have no clue.


citation needed?

daverobev

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3377
  • Location: France
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #130 on: August 19, 2015, 07:09:44 PM »

Not even tons of kids...even one.  Population does not need to go up or stay the same.  It is arguable it should go down.

Can anyone think of a more environmentally irresponsible action then adding another person to the planet?

Nope. The worst thing you can ever do for this planet is have a baby human. I'm not joking or trolling. It's simply a fact.

If someone pedalling a cargo bike hauling their 3 kids drives by a guy in an F150 and feels environmentally superior they really have no clue.


citation needed?

Check the various reports on ice loss, extinction rate in the last couple of hundred years, etc.

Sad but true, I think. My wife justifies it with 'we need more people like us' but actually I think pop needs to halve or more. And yes, I have a child, and yes she's wonderful (and yes, I'm biased), and no in the grand scheme of things I don't think, environmentally, it was wise having her.

Sigh.

sixup

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 123
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #131 on: August 19, 2015, 08:04:26 PM »
Meh. Humans are probably going to be here for a while. So might as well make good ones that are going to have potential to make things overall better for everyone.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 14042
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #132 on: August 20, 2015, 06:26:15 AM »

Not even tons of kids...even one.  Population does not need to go up or stay the same.  It is arguable it should go down.

Can anyone think of a more environmentally irresponsible action then adding another person to the planet?

Nope. The worst thing you can ever do for this planet is have a baby human. I'm not joking or trolling. It's simply a fact.

If someone pedalling a cargo bike hauling their 3 kids drives by a guy in an F150 and feels environmentally superior they really have no clue.


citation needed?

Check the various reports on ice loss, extinction rate in the last couple of hundred years, etc.

Sad but true, I think. My wife justifies it with 'we need more people like us' but actually I think pop needs to halve or more. And yes, I have a child, and yes she's wonderful (and yes, I'm biased), and no in the grand scheme of things I don't think, environmentally, it was wise having her.

Sigh.

When each couple has a single child, that's a pretty effective way to halve a population in a single generation.

bsmith

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 164
  • Location: Texas
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #133 on: August 20, 2015, 07:28:49 AM »
Quote
When each couple has a single child, that's a pretty effective way to halve a population in a single generation.

No. That's not how demography works. Parents don't die when children are born, and neither do grandparents or great grandparents.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 14042
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #134 on: August 20, 2015, 09:12:03 AM »
Sure, but they do die.  Any many couples will be unable to conceive.  And many people will die from accidental causes.  I bet that if you convinced every woman in the US to conceive only a single child, within 60 years the population (excluding immigration) would be about halved.

Syonyk

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3875
    • Syonyk's Project Blog
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #135 on: August 20, 2015, 10:09:22 AM »
That's not a great idea given our current economic system and assumptions.

boarder42

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7849
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #136 on: August 20, 2015, 10:22:29 AM »
it is how demographics work over time.  If everyone for the next 1MM years only had one child population would decrease til it didnt exist anymore.  doesnt matter how many older people are alive....

100k people make 50k kids... those 50k kids make 25k kids... those 25k kids make 12.5k kids.  lets say everyone is still alive in this situation = 187.5k

now lets kill off the oldest with the creation of the next generation

87.5k + 6.25K leaves 93.75 humans left alive.  after 4 generations of controlled births there are less humans alive than started the next generation will leave less than half

37.5k +3.125 ~40k

it works you just have to start with the child bearing generation and not care about the older ones.

Guses

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 917
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #137 on: August 20, 2015, 11:18:46 AM »

Not even tons of kids...even one.  Population does not need to go up or stay the same.  It is arguable it should go down.

Can anyone think of a more environmentally irresponsible action then adding another person to the planet?

Nope. The worst thing you can ever do for this planet is have a baby human. I'm not joking or trolling. It's simply a fact.

If someone pedalling a cargo bike hauling their 3 kids drives by a guy in an F150 and feels environmentally superior they really have no clue.

Let's push this "fact" to it's logical conclusion:

Having a baby is bad for the environment.
A baby is a human being.
Removing a human being from the planet is good for the environment.
...

You don't have the moral high ground here, by virtue of your simple "fact", you would need to stop being alive in order to be good to the environment.

Greg

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1449
  • Location: Olympia, WA, USA
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #138 on: August 20, 2015, 11:21:47 AM »
RE: the original question, I don't know but yesterday I saw the best example of a face-punch-worthy truck.  It was some sort of Ford I think, not sure on that.  It was tall, short and "off road" maybe in model name even but looked like it has never and would never actually go off road.  The cab was extra long, so it sat 4 or 6 people, the bed was super short, not even sure it was 5'.  The thing was so tall, and the nose so square, that the driver (who looked short) couldn't see the road for probably 20' in front of the truck.  Sitting in my Vanagon, I was eye-level with the center of the grill.

LoneWolfstache

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 11
  • The Dream is Reality...reality is the dream
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #139 on: August 20, 2015, 12:28:32 PM »
Here's the thing:

Many of us went to high school with those douchebags with the lifted trucks. Where are they now? Still in that same small town with nothing to show for their shitty lives of poor choices. As for me, yes I drive a truck...it's sentimental  waaah waaah yea ya i know. '95 chevy silerado, old truck with not so great fuel economy. I grew up on a farm, been working hard since I was 5 years old, I EARNED that farm truck, didn't pay for it; costs me fuel, registration, insurance and maintinance only. I use it to haul my dirt bike and quad I've been riding for 13 years .....waaaah waaaaahh oh im sooooo bad burning all that gas....on the rare occasion maybe like twice a year. Otherwise im biking to work, working out, doing parkour and enjoying the ambience of nature in my backyard most of the time...oh and of course making tomahawk style cleaving payments towards my students loans so I can invest into index funds so I can retire  in 5 years (optimistic) 7 years (realistic) 10 years (maximum working time or I'll kill muself cuz I've worked enough hours in my young life that most people never do in their whole lives). I'm over it. As for my truck?? I'm going to run that thing into the ground before I'm compelled to purchase an economical used car, manual-hatchback style, then tow the toys with a trailer. I gotta draw the line somewhere when it comes to getting my adrenaline fix MMM. One day I'll get into wingsuiting, then I'll no longer need the car or the bikes cuz I'll be flying around in the clouds searching for soulmate angel when I'm retired.

DeltaBond

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 526
  • Location: U.S.
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #140 on: August 20, 2015, 01:33:31 PM »
Check out this hyper-miler... do you think he's mustacian?  Using a truck the "proper" way? lol

http://www.instructables.com/id/Vehicle-efficiency-upgrades/?ALLSTEPS

forward

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 200
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #141 on: August 20, 2015, 02:02:42 PM »
Check out this hyper-miler... do you think he's mustacian?  Using a truck the "proper" way? lol

http://www.instructables.com/id/Vehicle-efficiency-upgrades/?ALLSTEPS

I think thats Bakari's rig, he's a long time contributor here.  He does know how to use a truck.

music lover

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 653
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #142 on: August 20, 2015, 05:10:12 PM »
Check the various reports on ice loss, extinction rate in the last couple of hundred years, etc.

"On Sept. 19 this year, for the first time ever since 1979, Antarctic sea ice extent exceeded 7.72 million square miles (20 million square kilometers), according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center. The ice extent stayed above this benchmark extent for several days. The average maximum extent between 1981 and 2010 was 7.23 million square miles (18.72 million square kilometers)."

https://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/antarctic-sea-ice-reaches-new-record-maximum

"Antarctic researchers ponder challenges posed by increasing sea ice"

http://news.sciencemag.org/climate/2015/05/antarctic-researchers-ponder-challenges-posed-increasing-sea-ice


daverobev

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3377
  • Location: France
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #143 on: August 20, 2015, 06:03:10 PM »
Check the various reports on ice loss, extinction rate in the last couple of hundred years, etc.

"On Sept. 19 this year, for the first time ever since 1979, Antarctic sea ice extent exceeded 7.72 million square miles (20 million square kilometers), according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center. The ice extent stayed above this benchmark extent for several days. The average maximum extent between 1981 and 2010 was 7.23 million square miles (18.72 million square kilometers)."

https://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/antarctic-sea-ice-reaches-new-record-maximum

"Antarctic researchers ponder challenges posed by increasing sea ice"

http://news.sciencemag.org/climate/2015/05/antarctic-researchers-ponder-challenges-posed-increasing-sea-ice

Thin, surface ice is not the same as thick glacial ice. The total volume of ice is decreasing.

music lover

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 653
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #144 on: August 20, 2015, 06:27:05 PM »
Check the various reports on ice loss, extinction rate in the last couple of hundred years, etc.

"On Sept. 19 this year, for the first time ever since 1979, Antarctic sea ice extent exceeded 7.72 million square miles (20 million square kilometers), according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center. The ice extent stayed above this benchmark extent for several days. The average maximum extent between 1981 and 2010 was 7.23 million square miles (18.72 million square kilometers)."

https://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/antarctic-sea-ice-reaches-new-record-maximum

"Antarctic researchers ponder challenges posed by increasing sea ice"

http://news.sciencemag.org/climate/2015/05/antarctic-researchers-ponder-challenges-posed-increasing-sea-ice

Thin, surface ice is not the same as thick glacial ice. The total volume of ice is decreasing.

No one knows that for sure. NASA is taking measurements and can't tell, so anyone who claims it's getting thinner is just making that up:

"We have a good handle of the extent of the Antarctic sea ice, but the thickness has been the missing piece to monitor the sea ice mass balance”

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/arctic-antarctic-ice.html

MoonShadow

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2542
  • Location: Louisville, Ky.
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #145 on: August 20, 2015, 06:40:38 PM »
Here's the thing:

Many of us went to high school with those douchebags with the lifted trucks. Where are they now? Still in that same small town with nothing to show for their shitty lives of poor choices.

That's not universally true.  The 'gearhead' I knew in school went on in life to make a profession out of collector car restorations.  He restored a wrecked '69 Dodge Charger Limited with a 440 big block that he found in a junkyard while going to high school, and sold it for $30K+ more than he had into it to pay for college, which he dropped out of to restore cars for a living.  He was also the only person I have ever met that owned his own car, with his own money, at the age of 14.

LanceThrustington

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 11
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #146 on: August 20, 2015, 06:45:06 PM »
I made a huge post with facts and figures but it became a bit TLDR

to summarise. I bought a "truck" 4x4 dual cab diesel new in aus for  21k USD . it averages 26mpg in a super hilly area moslty in traffic :(
was an impusle decision and I wish I bought a 5 year old one for half the price. but I would certainly buy a truck again as I use the load capacity weekly

the main cost is depreciation atm, followed by rego insurance and maintenance. fuel cost for 10,000 mile per year is $1250 USD

if i bought an equivalently priced super efficient new car that got  36 mpg in stop start hilly traffic. I would save 5% of the total anual costs
(while depreciation is still high). or $347

buying an expensive new car is a bad choice. trucks are not always that much worse than more fuel efficient cars particularly when you get a smaller diesel one.

as a side note.  i have picked up about $700 worth of "free" wood from arborists in my ute in the last 3 weeks for next years heating.

Fuman

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 29
  • Location: Boulder, CO
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #147 on: August 21, 2015, 03:52:19 AM »
Check the various reports on ice loss, extinction rate in the last couple of hundred years, etc.

"On Sept. 19 this year, for the first time ever since 1979, Antarctic sea ice extent exceeded 7.72 million square miles (20 million square kilometers), according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center. The ice extent stayed above this benchmark extent for several days. The average maximum extent between 1981 and 2010 was 7.23 million square miles (18.72 million square kilometers)."

https://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/antarctic-sea-ice-reaches-new-record-maximum

"Antarctic researchers ponder challenges posed by increasing sea ice"

http://news.sciencemag.org/climate/2015/05/antarctic-researchers-ponder-challenges-posed-increasing-sea-ice

Thin, surface ice is not the same as thick glacial ice. The total volume of ice is decreasing.

No one knows that for sure. NASA is taking measurements and can't tell, so anyone who claims it's getting thinner is just making that up:

"We have a good handle of the extent of the Antarctic sea ice, but the thickness has been the missing piece to monitor the sea ice mass balance”

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/arctic-antarctic-ice.html

Hey Music Lover,
I've been working in Antarctica off-and-on for the last 20 years and I know for sure.  It's getting warmer.  The ice is thinning. 
I'm in Christchurch right now waiting on a plane to take me to the ice once again.  I'll let you know what I see when I get there.  However, every year since '94 when I first went down, it's been getting warmer.   McMurdo pot holes used to be ice just 20 years ago, now little creeks run down the roads in the summer time.  I don't expect that has changed since last year.
Wake up.  Look around you.  Forrest fires are burning hotter, temps are warming, droughts are getting more extreme. 
Pull your head out.

music lover

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 653
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #148 on: August 21, 2015, 06:46:15 AM »
Check the various reports on ice loss, extinction rate in the last couple of hundred years, etc.

"On Sept. 19 this year, for the first time ever since 1979, Antarctic sea ice extent exceeded 7.72 million square miles (20 million square kilometers), according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center. The ice extent stayed above this benchmark extent for several days. The average maximum extent between 1981 and 2010 was 7.23 million square miles (18.72 million square kilometers)."

https://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/antarctic-sea-ice-reaches-new-record-maximum

"Antarctic researchers ponder challenges posed by increasing sea ice"

http://news.sciencemag.org/climate/2015/05/antarctic-researchers-ponder-challenges-posed-increasing-sea-ice

Thin, surface ice is not the same as thick glacial ice. The total volume of ice is decreasing.

No one knows that for sure. NASA is taking measurements and can't tell, so anyone who claims it's getting thinner is just making that up:

"We have a good handle of the extent of the Antarctic sea ice, but the thickness has been the missing piece to monitor the sea ice mass balance”

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/arctic-antarctic-ice.html

Hey Music Lover,
I've been working in Antarctica off-and-on for the last 20 years and I know for sure.  It's getting warmer.  The ice is thinning. 
I'm in Christchurch right now waiting on a plane to take me to the ice once again.  I'll let you know what I see when I get there.  However, every year since '94 when I first went down, it's been getting warmer.   McMurdo pot holes used to be ice just 20 years ago, now little creeks run down the roads in the summer time.  I don't expect that has changed since last year.
Wake up.  Look around you.  Forrest fires are burning hotter, temps are warming, droughts are getting more extreme. 
Pull your head out.

The actual temperature data refutes your claims, so it's not my head that needs pulling out, it's yours:

"temperature trends in the McMurdo Dry Valleys of Antarctica over the period 1986 to 2000, reporting a phenomenal cooling rate of approximately 0.7°C per decade. This dramatic rate of cooling, as they describe it, "reflects longer term continental Antarctic cooling between 1966 and 2000."

"since 1979, finding that for all of Antarctica, temperatures had declined by 0.08°C and 0.42°C per decade, respectively. And in a contemporary study, Thompson and Solomon (2002) also reported a cooling trend for the interior of Antarctica."

https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2013/11/02/historical-temperature-trends-in-antarctica/

More here:

"Continental Antarctic cooling, especially the seasonality of cooling, poses challenges to models of climate and ecosystem change."

"The Vostok base shows light cooling from 1979-1998, while the Amundson-Scott station shows cooling in all seasons, with a decrease of 0.17C per decade"

"Of the 22 long-term stations on the continent, 13 showed temperature decreases, and only 9 showed increases"

"Conclusion: While climate models suggest that temperatures in Antarctica should have been warming in recent decades due to increased greenhouse gases, measurements show otherwise."

http://icecap.us/images/uploads/antarctica_white_paper_final.pdf
« Last Edit: August 21, 2015, 06:51:42 AM by music lover »

DeltaBond

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 526
  • Location: U.S.
Re: Why do we bash on trucks?
« Reply #149 on: August 21, 2015, 07:37:05 AM »
Check out this hyper-miler... do you think he's mustacian?  Using a truck the "proper" way? lol

http://www.instructables.com/id/Vehicle-efficiency-upgrades/?ALLSTEPS

I think thats Bakari's rig, he's a long time contributor here.  He does know how to use a truck.

Ha, my husband half expected him to be a Mustachian!