"me@here.com" <no@no.com> wrote in message
news:ru9sgvsl8r8r1t155cbu9o1q7vk5ofrept@4ax.com...
>
> >So how do you "total" a vehicle and still drive it away from the scene?
> >Something tells me that car was far from totaled, and with some parts
from a
> >junkyard Civic it woulda been good as new.
>
> It was only totaled for insurance purposes. We could have fixed it up
> a bit and kept driving it, but the accident drove home the point that
> the car wouldn't be very safe in an accident. If the SUV had hit it
> from the side instead of head-on, the chances for survival would be
> slim to none.

Most people would feel safer in an accident in a '68 Ford than a '90 Civic.
They feel that way because the car is so big, weighs nearly 2 tons, and has
a frame. If I were to be hit hard in the side by a truck the armrests in
these old cars are notorious for taking out kidneys in side impact
collisions. That's assuming it doesn't penetrate far enough to kill me. From
and rear collision are a lot safer in such a vehicle, but I'd doubt it's
really any better than a '90 Civic. If you want a safe car you need a big
car. My cars larger size helps make up for its dated safety features... I
wouldn't wanna be in an accident in something like a '60s Mustang, as those
things are weak as hell, they have a unibody and crumble in a collision.
Your best bet is a large modern car like the Crown Vic, which has lots of
modern safety features. It's probably as heavy as many SUVs/pickups but is
still a car.

> >A cars longevity is _directly_ related to how it is cared for. My '67
lasted
> >200,000 miles before a major failure... Which was likely the result of
abuse
> >and lack of maintenance by previous owners. My '68 has 95,000 miles and
is
> >still going strong. Starts up every time and gets me where I need to go.
> >Both of my old Fords have been very reliable cars. As for your previous
> >comment about reliability in relation to cost of repairs, that's
ridiculous.
> >It's the type of repair that says things about the car. If you spend
those
> >couple hundred bucks on normal maintenance or parts that typically wear
out
> >in that amount of time then sure, it's a reliable car. If that money was
> >spend on unforeseeable things that should not have failed, then it's not
a
> >reliable car.
>
> Good point. No matter what car I drive, I'm going to take care of it,
> do regular maintenance, etc. I'm interested in how well the car is
> built though, and how often the unforseeable failures you mentioned
> happen. With our old Civic they DIDN'T happen, which is more than I
> can say for any other car I've driven before or since.

Again, I would say a Crown Vic is probably a good choice for reliability.
Police use them and put them under extreme conditions (i.e. high speed road
racing to Dunkin Donuts, etc.) often enough. They wouldn't choose a vehicle
which was not reliable, simply due to the amount of money involved in
maintaining an unreliable fleet.

> >You must be delusional. How do lots of trucks/SUVs on the road make it
"even
> >harder and more dangerous to drive a reasonably sized vehicle"? I drive a
> >reasonably sized vehicle (full-size passenger car) and have no trouble
> >whatsoever with regards to trucks/SUVs. I don't see how the type of
vehicles
> >you share the road with will make the road more dangerous. So long as
they
> >can move with traffic (i.e. not tractors and such) there is no increased
> >danger.
> >
>
> By danger, I'm not talking about the chances of getting into an
> accident. I'm talking about the chances of surving the random
> accident that WILL happen eventually if you spend enough time on the
> road. If you have the best skills in the world and the fastest and
> most nimble car on the road, that won't help you a bit when some drunk
> swerves into your lane with no warning

That's the sort of thing you should plan ahead for so you can react quickly
and get out of teh way or increase your chance of survival.

> or some kid changing CD's
> rear-ends you at a red light.

All the rear enders anyone I know have been involved in ahve been with
middle aged people. Though one was a 'front ender' by some woman who didn't
know where first was and put the car into reverse, slamming into my
girlfriend's father's car not once, but again after the police came and she
was allowed to leave. My particular accident was a 'side ender' in which a
77 year old bag blew through a stop sign at 5 MPH and crushed my passenger
side door in.

> If they're driving a car smaller than
> or equal to the size of yours you'll probably survive. If they're
> driving an SUV and you're in a compact car 1/8th as heavy as theirs,
> you're screwed.

You are ignoring all the safety features in modern cars. Small cars do
pretty darned well in collisions. That is to say, protecting the
occupants... The car may be totaled but the passengers will often live
through it with no permanent damage.

> Since SUVs have been outselling cars for some time
> now, the proportion of SUVs relative to cars on the roads is
> increasing, and therefore the chance that the random person who hits
> you is driving an SUV instead of a car is also increasing.

Agreed, but still, I see more compact sedans than SUVs/pickups. Regardless,
if you are the type to be paranoid about such things just get a lerger
modern vehicle. If you get a modern 'full-size' car there will be twice as
much length of car in front of and behind you to protect you.

> >Careless driving is found in drivers of all types of vehicles and is
evenly
> >distributed between them. I suggest you stop being so paranoid about
dying
> >in an accident and just accept the risk involved in driving. Start
learning
> >to drive better, and how to avoid accidents. Play a game with yourself
> >whenever your alone in the car... Imagine other vehicles or circumstances
> >putting you in harms way, and then think of the various ways to get
yourself
> >out of harms way. Do this enough and you will get fast at it, so if it
were
> >to really happen you would know what to do in time to do it.
> >
>
> I do accept that there is risk involved in driving. But I'll be
> damned if I'm not going to do everything possible to minimize that
> risk. I probably am paranoid, but these days when the average person
> drives a vehicle 5x as large as they need, you'd better be paranoid if
> you're driving a small car.

So we should all be driving Geo Metros now, eh? You say I don't need to
drive a Galaxie 500 every day, as I'm usually driving alone, or with one
passenger. Why do I need a car that comfortable seats 7 and has enough trunk
space for 5 corpses, tools, and luggage? Because it's comfortable. I'm 6'3",
most new cars are too small, they don't have the leg or head room I need. I
could go with a minivan, but they are just as 'dangerous' to other motorists
in a collision as a SUV/pickup due to their size and weight. Hell, plenty of
minivans are built with the same frame used in pickups. When driving my
dad's '93 Geo Prizm I feel about as safe as I do in my Galaxies should there
be a collision. I feel trapped though, like I'm strapping on the car it's so
small. I feel less safe driving it as it has no power whatsoever, I'm
cramped and uncomfortable, and I have to be a contortionist to see anything
as the post is right next to my head and eliminates any peripheral vision. I
don't feel safe driving like that.

> People are driving offroad, industrial,
> and even military grade vehicles to commute and go between their
> houses and the K-Mart parking lot because the advertisers tell them
> they have to in order to fit the right image. Me- I just want a car
> that gets me from point A to point B and will do so EVERY time with no
> bullshit status symbols or image related expenses.

I just want a nice, comfortable, reasonably powerful and stylish car that
will get me from point A to point B every time. I have that, but my car is
what some would call 'excessively big', or '5x as large as I need'. I agree
that people who do it for the status symbol are dorky posers. I personalyl
don't view having an overpriced vehicle that handles like crap as a status
symbol. I'd much rather have a car, which handles well and can get me out of
a hairy situation should I need it to.

> Like you said, careless driving is found in drivers of all types of
> vehicle- but today the chances are greater that Joe Careless will be
> driving a Suburban when he starts driving like an asshole and hits me.
> Not because of anything about SUV's that attracts this kind of person,
> but just because they are popular vehicles and more of them are on the
> road today.

Agreed. The way I figure it though is that there isn't much I can do about
it except drive safely and prudently. Admittedly though, I do enjoy the
luxury of a shoulder belt when I'm in my '68, whereas my '67 has no shoulder
belts. Be that as it may, the whiplash froma high speed collision and no
head restraint would probably snap my neck and perhaps paralyze me. Oh
well... I don't bother worrying about such things because if it ahppens it
happens, there isn't much I can do about it.