| sport |
Ultimatecarpage.com
> Cars by brand
> United States
> Hummer
> H1
 Racing cars
> Other Sportscars Comments
|
| Hummer H1 |
| Article | Image gallery (6) | Specifications | User Comments (67) |
|
|
Add your comments on the Hummer H1
| only comment if u have experience!!!!! |
| tony 24-5-2003 |
YOU WANT THE TRUTH HERE IT IS!!!! This beast takes the cake both on and off road. Why u might ask, well ill tell, and how do i know? I was a platoon seargent driver for 1 week shy of a full 2 years. I drove the beast and drove the hell out of it. Both on and off road this vehicle is awsome. I had many many experience off road both in day time and at night with NVG's. Once on a night mission with some scouts we were slowly in 2wheel drive going down a relative steep grade. When suddenly we came to a thump of a halt. The seargent with me was concerened about getting out of the perdicument. I told him to hang on threw it in 4 low then reverse and climbed back up the steep grade with only 1 minor slip at the begining of the crawl, no prob,and continued on mission. That was only one of my many tortures i put it through, but on to on road. Why do i say it has great on road capabilities, my answer 30 days driving in korea. U think LA or New York is bad try korea or south korea i should say. busses always have right of way along with bikes, motor and pedal. Crazy is the best i can say for it if u slack off the guy in front of u more than a foot a korean will stick his car in there as if u gave him a mile. but seriuosly i had no trouble manuvering the hummer there or here (Ft. Lewis). Ive parked it many times in regular spots both forward and back. Took the beast on many off road adventures both water and land 45 cross dessert terrain because the Lt. was late for a meeting. and the only bad thing i found was the engine holding back. I had a 6.2 diesel i heard a 6.5 was better but honestly i believe the Duramax and allison combo could be quite adequate for the job of unleashing the monster. After all my experience with this 4x4 god thats probably how i would take one, military style w/ canvas tops, cargo, command, and pick-up. with the heart of a Duramax and braun of the allison which for fact is the tranny company in our M1A1 main battle tank. so there u have it truth from experience, p.s. anotheer great reason why its so capable on road is that people see u coming and get the hell out of the way, which for that only reason id get one |
| Let's think outside the bubble people |
| BoondockSaint21 11-5-2003 |
"People, people, people people. When are you going to learn that there are others out there with differnent tastes than you? I've read all the comments on this car and have to say that I agree 100% with B.S. People have different tastes. Just as you may prefer a car to do 0-60 in under 5 seconds, other people prefer to have a gas guzzeling SUV. Why do people like these cars? Why the hell do you like cars that go 200 mph? It's personl preference people!! Stating opinions on a car is one thing, but bashing people that have other opinions other than yours is another. I respect the fact that some people might not like this car, and that's fine. But hate it for the right reasons. This car represents the pinicle of off-road adventure. I personally don't have 1, but 2 of my friends do and we all go 4 wheeling almost every weekend. We go 4 wheeling to get AWAY from the city, away from the stres of ""city life"". We all own SUV's of varying degrees. Just like Texas is the land of the pickup, Colorado and Utah represent the land of the SUV. Noone can touch this car in overall performance off road, cept maybe my jeep(LOL). So it has a top speed of like 90, who cares. I would agree with some people's point of view that a large number of people only buy this car to offset their lack of d#@k size. But honestly, that's why a majority of 40+ year old people buy cars like the Ferrari Enzo. It's a car, maybe not your car of choice, but hey, don't knock SUV's just cause their not your car of choice." |
| We're Due |
| ds_carfan 11-4-2003 |
"Although the traditional H1 comes with only 195hp (six less than that of a new Ford Freestar minivan) and 430lb-ft of torque (nearly 80 less than what is available in a Suburban), everyone has got to love a Hummer. But I do have a couple of questions about the future of the Hummer. First, now that General Motors has taken power of the AM General Company, will they produce America's next military ""Jeep""? As of right now there really is not any pressure on General Motors to produce the next military vehicle, since America waited 45 years for the original Jeep replacement, but will General Motors create the next beast? Perhaps Daimlier Chrysler will produce the next Jeep, not with a Jeep though, but rather a Mercedes-Benz G-wagen replacement. Hey, it could happen! Either way, I believe the next military vehicle for America is overdue, and to wait 25 more years and follow history, 195hp and 430lb-ft will be a joke! Second, for right now, everyone knows that the Hummer H1 is king...of the offroad world. On land, I would rather just stick with my CRX. With the Bohemeth curbweight the Hummer portrays, 195hp is extremely lame, especially when the thing costs over 100k. Thanks, but I will just stick with the triplet H2 (triplets: H2, Escalade, Yukon Danali), loaded with more horsepower and less weight, all while holding very similar measurments, and that rugged style. So, General Motors, what I propose is this: stick the 8.1L Suburban engine under the hood of the 6.5L, giving the Hummer a more refined (and powerful) engine, while still keeping the diesel feature. No matter what though, the Hummer is a great part of American History, and it always will be." |
| to pay hommage |
| henk4 10-1-2003 |
Although I realise that this part should be a comment on the Hummer, just let me dwell again on the Spyker.I have been told that pictures of the car will be added to this site pretty soon, but for those who can't wait, buy the February issue of the (British) magazine Classic and Sports Car. For those in the US who want to pay hommage to this Dutch invention, the Spyker will be shown on the next Pebble Beach event in August and will get special coverage. |
| really |
| BlackSunshine 9-1-2003 |
hmmm... I stand corrected. Your right. |
| yes, in 1904 |
| henk4 9-1-2003 |
Somebody was so kind to tell me the existence of the site www.riztsite.net/spyker/02_spyker.htm. There you will find all kinds of interesting facts and details, a.o. that the car was commercially available in 1904. You will also read that the car was not successful in road racing, but was in hillclimbs, due to its unparallel traction. Unfortunately we have very few hills in Holland. It was one of the most expensive cars of its time. |
| could you buy em? |
| BlackSunshine 8-1-2003 |
I didn't think spyker actually sold cars like that. I know back then most companies sold the cars the raced basically. But I know several companies did not offer the exact car. I read about that car but I didn't think you could purchase one with the AWD. Besides, it still wouldn't go off road for crap ( |
| timing |
| henk4 8-1-2003 |
1903 is three years ahead/earlier/before 1906, you moron. |
| FIRST 4WD!! |
| BlackSunshine 7-1-2003 |
The first viable, and usefull 4 wheel drive vehicle came from the Pensylvania based, Duplex car company in 1906!!! Then in 1908 two Wisconsin brothers developed an even more reliable 4WD system, and called the first truck the Badger FWD, the company later became known as 4WD. As I stated several postings ago, American's invented 4WD. |
| Sucks by association |
| IBrake4Rainbows 16-12-2002 |
The H2 is meant to be the Smaller, more people friendly version of the H1. It tries to cash in on the Hummer name, and the Hummer way of life, Ie: being able to go everywhere, anywhere, anytime. The H1 is the first, the H2 is the Worst. The H2 was actually desgined to be more City friendly, how retarded. |
| hey henk4 |
| BlackSunshine 15-12-2002 |
that's because the H2 is a peice of crap. The only thing the H1 & H2 have in common is the Hummer name, that's all. The H2 is based on a 3/4 ton fullsize chevy pick up chasi and drive train (mostly). The H2 sucks, I know that, so what's your point? This is the H1. |
| The good old Hummer! |
| HellSpawn 15-12-2002 |
The HMMWV (High Military Mobiled Wheeled Vehicle) or Hummer is the best truck ever built.What i like the most about this truck is it's unique suspension system.If you love doing offroad in the woods or in the desert or even in snow,that's the perfect truck for that. On the road this truck is not very good because we wasn't made for that.It's like when your buying a bike you have the ones with thin wheel made for speed and you got the other one with large tires who got lots of grip who's made for offroad, well that truck is made for offroad not for the road. Don't forget that this truck was made for the US army, so when your buying a Hummer don't forget about that. I like more the H1 than the H2. The H2 is a road version if you like of the H1. But hey don't get me wrong here i'm a offroad guy so for me the Hummer H1 is the best offroad truck ever built. |
| relevance |
| henk4 10-12-2002 |
It is at the discretion of a car magazine what they want to compare. I just noted that in terms of their stated purpose both vehicles are capable of the same performance. For Sensible people therefore who really need such performance, like when working in remote areas in Africa or Asia either be it development aid workers or Exxon oil explorers, the choice of car is obvious. |
| I disagree |
| IBrake4Rainbows 10-12-2002 |
I do not agree that the test between the Defender and the H2 was indeed relevent or even fair! The Hummer is in a different class, and granted, it's intentions may be the same, but they are ifferent classes of vehicle. it's almost safe to say that the defender is an SUV in comparison! |
| comparison with Defender |
| henk4 10-12-2002 |
I just glanced, out of curiosity at a comparison test between the Hummer H2 and the Land Rover Defender in a Dutch magazine. It turned out that both cars could eventually get virtually anywhere, with no advantage for either of them. Considering that the H2 costs a whopping 150,000 US over here, the more sensible people will subsequently ignore it, also for the reasons that are given elsewhere on this site. |
| Spyker |
| henk4 10-12-2002 |
The Spyker I mentioned is in the Private Collection of the Toyota importer in Holland. Evert Louwman. His collection is on show to the public in a very nice museum. The car will be featured in the coming issue (February) of the British magazine Classic and Sportscars. Spyker was a top maruqe in it's days but disappeared in the 20ties, like so many others. The new Spyker only took the name out of a sense of tradition. (In the same way the Bugatti name was revived with the EB110). On pictures it can be clearly seen that the car has four wheels, so to me it has four wheel drive. It may have lack all kinds of devices to spread the power over the four wheels individually, so to me it counts as the pioneer. Where you put the line between road and off road is clearly arbitrary. 100 years ago all roads could be considered, as off-road anyway if we apply modern standards.BS sounds like the Russians who rewrote history to prove the superiority of the communist system. All major inventions were subsequently done by them. Having been there recently quite a number of times I can also confirm that the driving style of the modern Russian is very close to what BS is describing about Texas, the bigger and the blacker, the most right of priority, other traffic participants being considered as non-existent. This is what we normally refer to as a primitive society. |
| It's not the spyker... |
| IBrake4Rainbows 10-12-2002 |
That we see now with the C8 Laviolette or Spyder, it is a different company, after all, it is like almost 100 years differece between the two companies. |
| same purposes? |
| BlackSunshine 10-12-2002 |
one's for road racing, the other's for off-roading. How in the world is that the same purpose? |
| Same Difference |
| IBrake4Rainbows 10-12-2002 |
It was still gonna be used for the same purpose, and hence it can be considered the first 4X4. Still, where the hell do you come up with this stuff Henk4? |
| missed the point |
| BlackSunshine 9-12-2002 |
Your referring to All Wheal Drive, not 4 Wheal Drive. There's a differance. I was refering to 4 wheal drive, as in an off road nature. The first dependable off road 4WD system were developed in america my friend. |
| 100 years ago |
| henk4 9-12-2002 |
On the Paris Salon of 1903 Spyker, from the Netherlands introduced the first ever 6 cylinder engine, combined with permanent FourWD. Who invented what? |
| My Bad |
| IBrake4Rainbows 7-12-2002 |
I am not familiar with the old style of measurements, still, a bridge that is only about 1.9 metres wide and one lane in a Freeway situation is still retarded. |
| 4 feet? |
| BlackSunshine 6-12-2002 |
Are you serious? The roads are only 4 feet wide? I can't think of any car, cept those tiny things they use in europe (I think they're called Smart?) that's less than 4 feet wide. Ok, so SUV's aren't appropriate there. But you can't blame drivers for that. Yeah yeah yeah, I know they choose to buy them, but still... 4 ft? I'm sorry but that's ludicrus. And for future notice, You might wanna mention little things like the fact that your roads are only 4 feet wide before we get into an argument like this. |
| Different cultures... |
| IBrake4Rainbows 6-12-2002 |
"In Australia, or maybe even the Southern Hemisphere, we call a so called sidewalk a Footpath. This is another example of the attitude that many Americans have of them somehow being superior to other kinds of people. No, i am not from New Zealand, I live there however, and the Footpath/Sidewalk(Just to plz u,BS) is only about 1 1/2 Metres ( Maybe about 4 foot) across, and the roads sometimes are even narrower! Think one lane bridge as a major Motorway (Freeway) and you'll get the picture. And of course People drive on the footpath here! where else can they drive their precious SUV without scratching duco or even to avoid speed bumps (which they call judder bars here). This sort of attitude is somehow reminiscant of the american way of ""If i say it's alright, it is"" attitude that plagues U.S. drivers and gives them a bad name the world over. As for the Iguana, it probably has more intelligence than the driver, drunk or not.""" |
| footpath? |
| BlackSunshine 6-12-2002 |
"I think you meen sidewalk. The bumber sticker ""if you don't like my driving stay of the sidewalk"" is a joke. Now, I think you said you were from New Zealand? or someplace down there or something. Well, I don't know about you, but I have NEVER seen an H1 on the sidewalk, I've never seen ANY car drive on the side walk (or even heard about some one getting hit by a car) on the side walk, and that includes such beasts as the Excursion or a full-ton, crew-cab, long wheal-base, duelly pick-up truck. With the one exception of some drunk guy who put his iguana on his lap and let it stear his '98 BMW 3-series convertable; that was rather enteresting. Anyways, if your serious about that being a problem there, then it sounds to me like the real problem with SUV's there is who's driving them. Cause that's just jacked up. """ |
| Fine... |
| IBrake4Rainbows 6-12-2002 |
"I do apologise for my last comment, but since most of the abuse you have been dishing out has been directed @ me, you'll have to forgive me this one time. i do agree that pedestrians are in fact more manueverable than the H1, but i do also recognise that the H1, no matter how slow it is, can still outrun the fastest human on earth! and i do also acknowledge that many hummer drivers think the Footpath or sidewalk is in fact their territory too! ""don't like my driving? Keep off the footpath ""i believe is the bumper sticker, and never has it been more applicable.""" |
| display of enteligence |
| BlackSunshine 5-12-2002 |
Thanks for showing us how entelligent you are rainbow boy, that 1949 comments was for Henk4, not you. It's not a bigger is better philosophy, it's an equal responsability philosophy, or did you miss out on that? Seeing as how pedestrian can avoid a crash much swifter than any car OR truck, they should be EVERY BIT as aware of the motorist, as the motorist should be aware of them. I don't consider than unreasonable. Besides, in Texas, we don't walk all that far real often. It's just not logical, it's a long distance pretty much everywhere combined with sweltering heat 10 months out of the year. |
| I give up |
| henk4 5-12-2002 |
Most of the time I enjoyed the exchange of opinions with BS, but after his latest comments relating to the value of human life, I give up. I only hope that by the time he will have children of his own, the mentality of the US road users has profoundly changed. |
| Oh, BTW BlackSunshine... |
| IBrake4Rainbows 5-12-2002 |
"I was not born in 1949, or whenever, i am in fact one of those ""immature"" young boys that you were talking about, i was born in 1988, and as such am still going through puberty and therefore have an excuse to ""Belittle"" people like yourself with which i do not see eye to eye.""" |
| It's not their fault... |
| IBrake4Rainbows 4-12-2002 |
"It's rather sad that you think that B.S. Because Pedestrians are also motorists of the past, present or future. It's a typical adittude that you share of ""I am the better one coz i'm bigger""that makes your arguments invalid. Just because ur bigger means you have no more rights than the average person. GetOver it!""" |
| Here's an idea |
| BlackSunshine 4-12-2002 |
"WATCH WHERE YOUR WALKING. Besides, if it was me, I'd much rather get hit my a speeding SUV than a speeding van, light truck, or car. Why? Because you get hit by one of those speeding, there's a good chance you could spend the rest of your life as a vegitable in the hostpital, or you'll be using some special wheal chair cause you can't move from the neck down. But you get hit by a speading Hummer or any other fullsize SUV and your ass is dead, and probably pretty quickly. No bein in a hostpital in huge amounts of pain before you die due to enternal bleeding, no spending the rest of your life completely immobile, so burden placed on your loved one's to take care of you for god knows how long. You get hit, you die, there's a funeral, it's over. Yeah dying would suck, I'd rather not get hit at all. But that can be solved using the same advice I've been giving, WATCH WHERE YOUR WALKING!!!! But if I am ganna get hit, I'd rather an SUV. I have little simpathy for pedestrians and find no shame in saying so. I find that quite often I'm in the majority of people that pedestrians should simply learn to be more cautous. If they are going to share the road with fast moving machines weighing anywhere from just under a ton to just about 3 tons, then they should be willing to take as much responsebility and precatoun as the people he shares the road with. Kids? eh... kids dart in the street all the time, and some times they die, and it's encreadably trajic; but the sad fact of it is that if a kid gets hit by ANY fast moving vehicle, there's a good chance they're going to die. If SUV drivers overthere are such rude people then some one needs to relize that the driver in question would be just as dangerous behind the wheel of a mini-van or big station wagon. If these people are so worried about their cars as you say they are, then their intimidation is nothing but an act and there's nothing be scared of. As for rolling? I can gaurantee you that if some one rolls their SUV cause of wrecklace speed for the vehicle they're driving... it's more than likely that they'll only do it once; and sometimes learning things the hard way is the most effective way. BTW, the Cherokee I was driving was a 2000, before the Liberty debuted. Besides, with the hummer, if you mannage to roll this thing, that's actually kind of impressive. It's 8 bloody ft from fender to fender, how in the hell to you roll that? Unless your climbing a mountain. Oh, and one more, you really don't have to worry about speading hummers in the city. Cause they accelerate too slowly to gain serious speed before they get to the next stop light and have to hit the breaks. """ |
| O.K, heres some facts for you then... |
| IBrake4Rainbows 4-12-2002 |
Folksam, Swedens leading insurance agency, recently did a big study of car crashes in sweden, funnily enoguh. but they found SUV's to be 40% more dangerous than a normal car, and before you go off about lab conditions and all that, these results are compiled from real world crashes,as Folksam believe that they can get a better picture of actual crashes then. Oh, and Euro NCAP ( New Car Assesment Program) recently ranked such cars as the M-Class, Suzuki Grnad-Vitara, and Range rover to be safe vehicles when you're travelling in them, but have dire results for Pedestrian safety, and many actually were deemed reasonably unsafe, with such cars as your Liberty (new Cherokee, I believe) in which the Dummies suffered knee injuries because the cars had be optimised for an unseatbelted american Passenger. and it's not a Napolean complex, it's my inbuilt safety buzzer. |
| City Inhabitants |
| IBrake4Rainbows 4-12-2002 |
Should the people living in the city not be able to have a say in what goes on there roads, and if they do not agree with the Hummer, or any other vehicle over a certain weight or height (Maybach included) should be allowed in, then is that truly wrong? No, it becomes law. And i find it rather strange that the only reason you seemed to roll over was because you hit a pothole in the ROAD, it didn't seem as thought you were off the beaten track. And anyway, as far as i know, we have a guy in Oz called Rene Rifken, who drives a hummer through the streets of Sydney and NEVER Takes his precious $200,000 (Aus) off roader Off road because it costs waaaaay too much to fix up! thats the problem with premium SUV's such as the Hummer, the Parts are way too expensive and you'd be too worried about the cost of the thing to really put it through it's paces. Freedom is one thing, BS, But safety is another, and i do believe that the City should be able to protect it's citizens from harm anyway possible, it's not like you can drive a tank down mainstreet, hey? |
| drivers |
| henk4 4-12-2002 |
BS' latest contribution just shows that every car is as good as its driver. It appears that he is not in very good company if they are rolling their cars all the time or was that boy-racer bravado. I drive since 1967 (and we do not start driving here before you are 18) and I never ever came even close to rolling a car. By the way, the remark about the mine fighting capability should be passed on to Afghanistan. Currently the country is totally mineinfested, but the solution is simple, take a hummer, drive over it till it explodes and then go on to the next one. I know of a voluteer driver, he is living in Texas. |
| rolling |
| BlackSunshine 4-12-2002 |
I was driving the Jeep, I spun out around a blind turn after hitting a pot-whole that would swollow a Camry. When the tires hit the grass it rolled. Bit I would have rather rolled in an SUV than a car (a car would have rolled there too... or the suspension would have been ripped out by the pot-hole). Mostly because the offroad nature of SUV's gives them better streingth for roll overs, because it's a common danger in offroading. And because of the rollover risk possessed by SUV's. If you haven't noticed, I beleive that you shouldn't buy an SUV unless you need one. However, if you need one, and you also choose to drive said vehicle (Hummer's included) into the city that NO ONE, should be able to tell you no. Like I said. Look at the cars of old, or even the new Maybach. They're just as big as SUV's with the exception of hight. And I got news for you. NO BODY, spends the money on a H1, that doesn't go off road. It's one of those weird things. Mostly because the H1 isn't that comfortable and it's size does make it a bitch to drive in the city. So if they own a hummer, they bloody use it. And if they choose to drive that Hummer into the city, than oposers be damned. They use it as the logical vehicle of choice for their lifestyle. A life style that includes regular offroading, sometimes in rather extreme places, AND a rather normal urban/suburban life. Do I think soccer mom's should by excursions, and suburbans, other than minivans and station wagons? No I don't, I detest such irresponsable consumerism. Do I think that the people who choose to drive such vehicles because they are conducive to their life style. In america whe are about freedom. What the hell kind of freedom is it when the vehicle you need and use isn't allowed in the other 50% of places you need to go? |
| True, but... |
| IBrake4Rainbows 4-12-2002 |
Is it not also true that SUV's have a higher centre of gravity? The higher the weight mass is on top the higher the risk of Rolling over, and i apologise for sidetracking the argument by bringing in crash tests and Utilities. But the fact still remains. Things may be different in Texas than they are in Holland, or maybe even Australia, But the fact remains, SUV's are being used for the wrong purpose, and some of them are not even filling their purpose. Take a reasonably recent car chase involving J.Lo and her ex-rapper boyfriend P.Diddy, or Daddy, or whatever.. They sped off from a club after a shooting or incident, and were run off the road in their car. The car in Question was in fact a Lincoln Navigator, a car meant to be able to go offroad and stay mobile, which didn't happen due to it's on road bias. I do agree that a wider footprint for the SUV may be in fact Helpful in it's roadholding Capabilities, but the height certainly nullifies it. I freely admit cars that have an off-road focus, such as your mothers Cherokee, are made tougher than the average car to cope with the stresses offroad useage, but can you answer me one question, was your mother on the road at the time, or off the beaten track? SUVs,4WDs, come up with all the Abbreviations you want, they still spell W.R.O.N.G for city dwellers, and people in the city can tell you, these things hurt. I personally have no Problem with smaller SUV's, such as the Honda CR-V, or maybe even the Nissan X-Trail, but bigger ones such as the Hummer H1, and most certainly the Ford Excursion, belong working on the land, or being used as combat vehicles, using them exclusively on-road is a waste of these vehicles many talents. |
| doesn't have to be an SUV |
| BlackSunshine 4-12-2002 |
"I got news for you mr. Rainbow, I've been in SUV's that have rolled over. I've been in a 4WD pick-up that rolled over. Hell, my best friends dad is a parapalegic because his truck rolled. Here's some more info to choke down. Your just as likely to roll in a van (esp. old one's) or a little or cars. Nine months ago one of my best friends, a guy I've known since I was 6 years old, was in a SERIOUS car wreck in which a '92 Nissan Sentra rolled 4 times. He came loose from the seat belt and woke up covered in glass on the crushed room of the car. My other friend (the driver) had to wear a neck brace up untill late august because the roofed caved in and jacked up his spine. Don't inform me about rolling things. I have expeirience. But when my mom's Jeep rolled (a Cherokee) it was in a hell of a lot better shape than that Nissan was. They're built to with stand the event of a roll over (cept maybe the Explorer). And despite your personal expeirience (and mine) you have let to give me any explination as to why the FACTS are showing exactly the opposite of what you continue to rant about. And just so ya know. Here are some more facts about that congestion thing. Ever seen a 57 Chevy? That aint no small car. Hell, that's as big as about half (maybe more) of the soft road SUV's being made today, streets didn't suffer from congestion then. Hell I own a 62 Plymouth Valian (the compact car of the day) and it's longer and wider that my mom's Jeep Cherokee. Ever seen a '59 Cadicalic? Hell, look at the El Dorado, the two door convertable or coupe. As I stated earlier, the ford excursion is the biggest thing u can buy right now. Here's some REALLY enteresting; a 59 Caddilac El Dorado is about 3"" shorter, and only about 1.5"" narrower. Now incase you think that's a type-o I'm talking INCHES not feet. And it pretty much weighed the same. Now explain to me how SUV's are responsible for such horrid traffic. Oh, you say it's too big, you shouldn't be allowed to drive such large things in urban areas. So your tellin me I can't drive my '57 Chevy (this is hypothetical, I don't have one), or my '59 Caddy into the city? Cause it's too big? Not even my 62 Plymouth (that one I do have)? It was the compact car of it's day. My guitar player drives a '65 Impala SS, it's about 1.5 ft shorter than a suburban, is that too big for city traffic? But maybe that's just old yank tanks right? Here's a more modern example. The new Maybach. Now that's a BIG car. Hell the ""SMALL"" one, known as the 57 (for 5.7 meters) is just shorter that the previously mentioned Ford super-ute. And get this, the 62 (6.2m), is about 1.35ft longer than the excursion. That aint no yank tank buddy. That's european. Can I drive that in the City? Your arguements are week to say the least, and the meathods you propose to remedy the issue are by all means obsurd. Sounds to me that what your really angry about is the number of people driving PERIOD, and the fact that you can't see past them when their driving in front of you. Maybe that or your just scared. I have no problem driving next to big-rigs and SUV's in my friends Civic, why should you feal so intimidated? Traffic injuries are continueing to decline, so it's not safety. Sounds to me like an automotive napolean complex.""" |
| Uninformed? |
| IBrake4Rainbows 4-12-2002 |
? am all for the idea of the SUV being a Lifestylke vehicle, i never doubted that, but the fatc remains, these things are not made to go in the city, Period! Oh, and BTW, Alice Springs has a 70% 4WD per household Percentage, and i am if anything more qualified to talk of these things because i do know how dangerous they are, i have been in a 4WD which has carved up a roo, and have heard stories of how 2 of my dad's work collegues were brutally killed when their SUV rolled over and crashed into their little Civic, i am not ill informed, i am well informed, deal with it. |
| thank you |
| BlackSunshine 4-12-2002 |
"My point exactly DJ. Here are some more enteresting thing's you might wanna think about before you start complaining again about the SUV craze that comes from America. 1st off, individual American companies and firms where converting pick-up's to 4WD for farmers all the way back to the late 20's. BTW, I think it was henk4 that was talking about a book bashing SUV's, it's called ""High and Might"". It's basically a load of crap written by yet another self-ritous, pompus, imbecil (I can't spell) who's entire arguement it made bassed on generalizations and opinions with very few facts to back up his position on the issue. One of his arguments, and many others (escpecially people on here like henk and rainbow boy), conserning the safety issues related to these vehicles has recently be pointed out to me as a false and ignorant (at least un-informed) concern. Here are the cold hard facts my friends. Right now, automobile related fatalities and sevier injuries are at world wide low and continueing to spiral in that direction; at the same time, the use and abundance of SUV's and trucks is at a record high across the globe. Now maybe it's just me, but taking these statistics in mind, I don't see how your arguements about the emidiate dangers of these vehicles can be valid. Maybe it's just me, maybe it's not just me; after all, common sense has never been very common. Here's something else for you to consider when you spoke about congestion of urban areas and such large vehicles being banned from said places. The Ford Excursion is the largest non-comercial vehicle you can buy; in every way except width (fender to fender) where it gives the onners up to the hummer (8ft), and the Dodge Ram (woohoo Mopar), the widest pick-up truck on the market (but not by much). Now, you speak of recent congestion in heavily metropolitan aeras due to SUV's; I say the cause of the congestion has much less to do with WHAT people are driving and more to do with HOW MANY people are driving.""" |
| conclusion |
| henk4 3-12-2002 |
So first in texas everybody has a lot to carry around andsecond you have no paved roads.That explains everything, so settle down make some asphalt of that oil of yours and leave the trucks at home. |
| users and lovers |
| DJ AnCo 3-12-2002 |
I think that you people should just stop argue-ing about the size and purpose of these SUV or 4WD and just appreciate the fact that these cars excist for anybody who needs them or loves to drive them. All these cars are sellers all across the world,so why wouldn't the manufactures make them.... To each its own. By the way henk, wij als nederlanders moeten toch wel even zorgen dat de Spykers onder de aandacht worden gebracht, denk je niet?? |
| bullbars |
| henk4 3-12-2002 |
In Holland it is appropriateley called a bullbar, because the bulls are behind the bar. The cdescription that IB4R provides about trucks in NZ is completely applicabel overhere. Thanks for the list of inventions, although I doubt the FWD. I think in Jeep terms the German Volkswagen Kubelwagen was the pioneer, having been developed well before the war, and for a racing car you may find one of the Bugatti's (54/56??) being fitted with two parallel straight 8's and FWD. Probably there are much more examples from the beginning of last century, but mastering the principle of steering and traction was initially a serious problem. |
| Silverado's & Ram's |
| BlackSunshine 3-12-2002 |
Don't even get on the subject of trucks with me, as you may have realized by now I'm from Texas, where almost 80% of registered vehicles are trucks. Hell, EVERY, and I do mean EVERY person I know, has AT LEAST 1 truck in their drive way or garage. We drive Branco's, Blazers, Ram Chargers, and Suburbans EVERY day, because down here, we travel long distances and we need em. You try fitting 8 grown men in a station wago, or minivan comfortably for a 45 minute drive accross town, and my town aint that big (Texas doesn't have subways) so Suburbans come in handy. We drive trucks, cause yeah, we need em. And we drive em EVERYWHERE. Including down town houston, (4th largest city in the US with a population of 3-4 million excluding surrounding manicipalities) so don't give me the space isue you just need better and more considerate drivers. You can't ban some one from the streets just cause you don't like what they drive, that's just assinine. We drive trucks everywhere because we (people I know) live our lives by the second and aside from the ocasional and regular use of our trucks, we have rather spontaneous uses for them as well. Like spontaneous trips to the beach or just throwing a bunch of crap in the bed to keep it out of the cab. It's a shame that so many people are blind to the beauty and possabilities of such machines. |
| I Prefer to quote Darwin |
| IBrake4Rainbows 3-12-2002 |
Nothing is Foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool! 4wds are a great idea in thier element, which is like BS said, Ranches or places far away from the city streets that they drive on @ the moment. And the comment about bullbars is true, maybe they should call them Small animal Bars or summink. but anyways, I absolutely agree with the banning of SUV's in the Urban/Built up areas. I live in a reasonably small city with a large populous for space ratio, where every centimetre of room is worth so much to so many. and on the daily commute, many people dice with danger by trying to cros in front of oncominmg traffic, or, on the other side of the argument, muscle in on space using .... An suv! NZ gets a lot of japanese imports, including such cars as the Nissan Safari (Patrol) and Toyota Surf (4Runner). And these UV's are compltely covered in bullbars, nudgebars, towbars, roof roacks, light protectors and other chromed add-ons that these cars will never, ever need. They use these things as little more than intimidation pieces meant to scare the other dirver to allow them to pass. And being big and bulky, it certainly makes them feel safe... But the fact remains, Soft roaders like the Merc M-class or maybe the BMW X5 i can handle being in the city, thats where they are made to be, but cars such as Broncos, Silverados, Rams and most certainly Hummers belong on the Farm, Battlefied or rubbish dump (Place in order of preferance), not in the city. I do acknowledge that certain farming sorts may drive into the city for supplies and to see family, and i have no problem with these farm trucks in the country areas or towns, juts not in the big smoke pplz. |
| it's called a brush gaurd |
| BlackSunshine 2-12-2002 |
"You hit a bull with one of those and he'll seriously f*** up your truck. I do NOT beleive that SUV's and trucks should be banned from residential areas. Because if you live on a ranch, as many people I know do, you need the offroad capability and you might not have the cash for other cars just to go to town. What I beleive is that people as a whole, should use their common since when purchasing a vehicle. I have no problem with luxury SUV's, I'd kind of like one. I like going off road, and I have been known to do it on a day to day basis in the regular course of my activities. One of my ex-girl friends lived on a ranch/farm. When it got the slightest bit wet (and even when it's dry sometimes) you NEEDED 4WD and good ground clearance just to get to her front door. There are uses for these. I'm not aposed to people buying them and driving them where ever they please. Creating laws that would limit that would be an excersize in profound stupidity. Some say it's a safety issue. Well I quote Benjamin Franklin, ""he who gives up liberty for minimal safety, is worthy of neither liberty nor safety"". What I am aposed to is the use of SUV's in place of station wagons or mini-vans for people who have no need or desire to go offroad. And just to clear things up with Rainbow boy, it's true, the hummer is FULLY capable of driving over a land mind and not only remaining intact, but keeping the the driver and all passangers completely safe. It's a proovin fact; one of the side affects of it's military beginings. And for a number of american inventions that make life better: TV, telephones, enternet, PEANUT-BUTTER, CD's, 4 WHEEL DRIVE, burgers, barbeque, electric light bulbs, RECLINERS, bifocals, swimfins, the flushing toilet, etc...... who sais america aint good for anything?""" |
| your laws too |
| henk4 2-12-2002 |
It is almost too easy to make this point, but BS, it appears that US laws are protecting exactly the same people as you suppose European laws are doing. Anyway, in our country primary school children still going by bike and foot, and denouncing them as the most stupid members of society goes a bit too far. I forgot to mention in my previous comment that in certain parts of residential areas pedestrians have absolute priority over any means of transport, with speed for everybody being resticted to walking pace. I'am not saying that everybody is obeying these rules but the underlying thought is sound. I guess we agree that big trucks, SUV's and UV' and whatever breed you have should be banned from city/residential areas, thereby further limiting the already questionable usefulness of these things. If you want to travel offroad, (can't imagine that you would do this for long distance travelling anyway) you may use any kind of truck you want, but the charm of it all is to make it as spartan as possible, such as using a Russian jeep when crossing the Mongolian steps, like I did last year. We don't need these luxury versions that might lure people into using them in places where they were not intended for. By the way a bullbar is the inverse U-shaped peace of chromed steel that sits in front of the radiator of a jeep, even in front of the Suzuki Jimmy that our local hairdresser is driving. You may call it differently but I think we are talking about the same thing. I am curious to hear about other American inventions without which our world would now look totally different. |
| Granted |
| IBrake4Rainbows 1-12-2002 |
I do respect a car that has the ability to run over a landmine and still remain i one piece, but i don't think a hummer can do that! but all other things aside, i just want to point out that these features that blacksunshine mentioned can only be used offroad, where (unfortunately) most drivers of these things never venture. I recently heard a survey saying that only 10% of all soft roaders/ SUVs ever were taken moderately offroad, while the other 90% carried on life as soccer mum express, or man with large ego but little cranial capacity car. But it's nice to see that we see eye to eye on these matters, Blacksunshine. |
| missing my point |
| BlackSunshine 1-12-2002 |
Incase you missed it, I have repeatedly denounced the use of SUV's as station wagons and minivans, for those who don't need them. I on the other hand will take a truck, or an SUV off road when ever I can, it's a lot of fun. In places like NY, logic doesn't apply, and quite frankly neither do traffic laws. I've been there, and I'm thuroughly convinced that you could drive a sherman tank down the street and bike messangers, pedestrians, and people driving Yugo's will still procede to jump out infront of you like there was some kind of reward for it. Look, you don't like these things, ok, I can respect that. But some of us do use them, and regaurdless of what they more or may not be used for by most people (btw... as a general rule the hummer is not a vehicle embraced by soccer mom's... from what I understand soccer mom's are aposed to hummers of any kind), you still have to have some sort of respect for a vehicle such as this. This thing has the ability to climb a 60 degree incline. It can drive on 3 wheals, run over a land mine and keep you safe, tread through some of the most formidable turraine on earth, and is nearly impossible to get stuck. Durring desert storm, U.S. soldiers used to drive these into the sand pits in the desert and TRY to get them stuck for fun. They couldn't do it. Regaurdless of what the idiots of society have turned the SUV into, you gotta respect something with this kind of ability. Even if it's not for you, or your people. |
| Just coz u got the room.. |
| IBrake4Rainbows 1-12-2002 |
Don't mean u have 2 use it! plus, cities like N.Y.C are full to bursting point with SUVs, or even cars, and people still take the Subway, and buses, they really help. But neways, back to my topic. I (Or Henk4, i believe) do not agree that the SUV is a good idea anywhere urban,they are made to go offroad (X5 and Cayenne excepted) and should stay off the beaten track, rather than using their unwieldly bulk to muscle in on the best parking spot in the Mall carpark.And granted, it hurts if you get run over by a car, but an SUV hurts more because A) more frontal area. B) more girth and (I may be generalising here) C) some ditz driving the thing who can't properly reach the pedals and hence stop the truck. SUV's r good in places such as the desert or the Outback of Aussie (as stated in a previous comment) but not good in suburbs, where they r being used. However, I do not agree with the policy that it is automatically the drivers fault if someone gets run down. Here in NZ (New Zealand) pedestrians are like lemmings, they just randomly run out onto the road, and never even look for cars. Crosswalk, whats a crosswalk? Oh, the little man which flashes and we don't take any notice of. It's not always the drivers fault, plain and simple. |
| European streets |
| BlackSunshine 30-11-2002 |
"I'm sorry your streets are congested henk4, but that's not my problem. It's enteresting to see how your laws grant protection to the stupidist members of society. I'm not saying we should aim for pedestrians, that was a joke. What I'm saying is, that common sence dictates some one's chances for survival when they step infront of a car, or even stupider, an SUV. Law's arn't ganna save your ass if you get hit. And while the drivers should be more careful, the simple fact is that sometimes their not. And it's because of those times that people world over should use that grey matter to think twice before stepping infront of a car, weather or not they have the legal right of way. Your streets are too congested, take the subway, or a bus, or what ever you have. Here we have room; we have the space for the big trucks, SUVs, and vans. And no matter what the law sais, we have the common sence not to get in their way (unless you REALLY need the money). So bash the fools of europe who choose to drive such vehicles, but don't asume that all of them are neandertal men who don't take consideration for others. And don't go bashing american's either, cause with out us (and our enventions) the world would be a very dull place to live. P.S. WHAT THE HELL IS A BULLBAR?""" |
| pedestrians |
| henk4 29-11-2002 |
It is always good to see Black Sunshine getting engaged in philosophical debates. Assuming that he is trying to be serious and not trying to stir up things a little, his views always provide a sharp insight in American culture (strange, to see these two words together). Obviously he has no ideas about traffic densities in even the smallest of villages in Europe, and in Holland a law has been passed that in case of accidents involving pedestrians or cyclists and motorcars, the motorcar driver is always to blame, unless he can prove it was not his fault. This law has been introduced as we feel that a motorist and a pedestrian are both considered to be participating in the same traffic system, and therefore should basically have the same rights. It appears that in the US the rights of the strongest are more embedded in the law. We also have a thing called a zebra-crossing, where pedestrians have in theory absolute priority, but obtaining this priority from some drivers (I guess you know who I mean) is becoming increasingly difficult. Anyway, the type of Darwinism that BS is describing is revealing, he might even have added that once you are over breeding age, it is socially better to get driven over by a suv, a certain death indeed. |
| Just in reply to MotorHeads new comments... |
| IBrake4Rainbows 28-11-2002 |
"I would just like to point ou the terminology Motoerhead used during his 2cents, ""off roader"" not ""city car"". and it's unfortunate that these things are being used in the city more than the fields or mudbogs. Still, if your preparing for nuclear holocaust at least you have the vehicle to do it in when your foolish enough to buy this!""" |
| Didn't do squat... |
| IBrake4Rainbows 22-11-2002 |
Right-e-o, who made the 4X4 popular? range Rover, thats who. range rovers were the fashion icon during the big boom of the SUV market, they were the vehicle to be seen in. The Jeep name has some off road crad, but on Rodeo drive/High Street, that counts for jack squat. |
| Your premium market...... |
| BlackSunshine 20-11-2002 |
wouldn't be doing a damn thing if not for Jeep and other american companies. Before the mid level SUV's, your range rover's and other 'premium' SUV's didn't do squat in the market place. And while it was the first premium SUV, it was in no way a real landmark point in the evolution of the SUV market. A luxury SUV would have come sooner or later from some one, it's the natrual evolution of things. But the market wouldn't be there if not for the americans. By the way, there are those out there who drive SUV's and are also conciderate and safe on the streets. And don't make fun of Texas or Texan's cause when it comes down to it, yall seem pretty stupid to us too. |
| So what . . . |
| kudosdude 19-11-2002 |
"Am sure these things rock the muddy roads, but the main roads? No wonder people live in fear, ""I was on the sidewalk? Sorry ya honour, a thawt a was in texas"" I have no problems with people buying these, it is just the attitude the owners have of the ""Heck, a'll be alright in an accident"", and the ""No, I own the road!"". Please prove me wrong, has anyone ever seen a driver of one of these behaving politely? Come on, anyone?""" |
| But it was! |
| IBrake4Rainbows 19-11-2002 |
"The range rover started the ""premium Sector"" of 4WDs, not the 4WD genre. The Jeep Wagoneer doesn't have the premium badge, and thus could not ever be called a ""premium"" 4WD. The Range Rover actually started this sector of the market place and so we believe that the americans have no influence on this market, other than lapping it up with both arms and feet.""" |
| pedestrians |
| BlackSunshine 18-11-2002 |
"In Texas we have out own rules concerning pedestrians; they're 10 points each, 15 for children and old ladies. Look, if some one's not smart enough to get out of the way bigass truck, and let it go first, let em get hit, it's called natrual selection. If you arn't smart enough to move, you arn't smart enough to breed. I've never understood that about other places. In Texas, we look before we cross the freakin street. We're aware of the fact that the larger the vehicle the greater the stopping distance, and ultimately... it's bigger, it hits me, I go to the hostpital while it goes to the car wash. Maybe I'm more practical than most people, but for godsakes man... a law? Try looking BOTH ways before you walk. I don't know about other places but that's one of the first things we teach our kids. It's not rocket science, it's big, your small, get out of it's way. Yes traffic laws might give you the right, but ultimately the only laws that matter are the laws of physics.""" |
| yes but |
| BlackSunshine 18-11-2002 |
Yes the range rover was the first 4x4 built for luxury and transport as well as utilitarian. But the price was too high and the numbers were too small. The vehicle that really broke ground in that aera was the Jeep Wagoneer (mostly due to it's comparable affordablity and availability). The range rover was the first, but it wasn't enough to truely cause the break through in the market place that 4x4's are taking advantage of today. And no I don't know the name of that book. |
| bullbars |
| henk4 18-11-2002 |
In Holland bullbars have now been banned by law, because they are too dangerous for pedestrians and cyclists. All of our cattle is behind fences anyway, may be we should put the bullbar suv driver behind the same fences? |
| pioneers? |
| henk4 18-11-2002 |
Thanks for the lessons on truck development in the USA. The Range Rover, presented in 1969 can be considered as the first purposely built luxury vehicle, I have a feeling that all previous cars you mention are more of a utiliatarian nature, for people who actually have to carry lots of stuff in heavy terrain. The Range Rover appealed more to the type of people that are involved in fox hunting and are more biased to luxury than to practical requirements, which is so characteristic for the present SUV market. Last year I did some 5000 miles in the USA and Canada with a rental Pontiac Grand Prix, which I found quite acceptable for long distance driving, although the Volvo S70 which I used for the same purpose in 1996,was much the better car and could take 4 people and a nice amount of luggage without problems. By the way, do you know the book I was referring to? |
| Tanks are your firend |
| IBrake4Rainbows 16-11-2002 |
"Sorry for discounting americas dominance over a stupid area anyways. the point is 4WDs belong off the beaten track, and not in the urban areas where they have sprung up into recently. 4WDs hurt more when you run into them at 60K/ph, and true, the car still hurts too, but the added weight of the bullbar and the other chromed appendages that hang from the front/back of these beasts make them unmsafe for city life. I used to live in Alice Springs, a rural community ( i guess...) in the middle of the Simpson desert in Australia. This area had a higher number of 4WDs than other areas because people needed them to transport themselves over the great distances between other centres. These behemoths are covered in bullbars, towbars, winches, etc. because they need them, not because they are ""fashion"". plus, ehat are the majority os SUV drivers? women with kids, pull up outside a school and watch as mothers jockey for position around the school, bashing each others pride and joy with said cromed appendages, just to pick up there kid for the 2 minute ride back home, where they have to park it outside because the things so bloody tall that it scrapes the garage roof! it used tp be the wagon/estate, now it;'s the 4x4, what next, the sherman tank?""" |
| fu***ng slow!!!!!!!! but.............. |
| motorhead 15-11-2002 |
"This is the slowest thing on the planet. It is slower than a bloody sloth. Top speed is a miserable, very miserable 83mph and an even more miserable acceleration time of 18sec and a 12mpg(aaah!!!!!) because of the 6.5litre ""2km by 2km"" size engine. I know it is damn heavy butit is not far off the hummer h2 weight which is 2909kg and the h2 has a top speed of 100mph and acceleration time of 10.0sec(100km/h). It uses the same engine the 6.5l and i do not see why the H1 is so slow but.............. it is the best offroader in the world. Most hummer owners will be offroading not on tarmac. Hummer owners will deffinately have more than 1 car. SO THINK ABOUT THAT. THE CAR IS NOT SHIT!!!""" |
| but the title belongs to the yanks man |
| BlackSunshine 14-11-2002 |
"Land Rover responsible for SUV craze? I think not. That title goes to the americans, my friend. Lets look at automotive history for a second. The first ever civilian 4WD (from the factory) was the Dodge Power Wagon, originally built for military purposes durring WWII. In late 45 and 46 dodge received countless letters from farmers, ranchers, and others stating that they wanted ""a truck like they drove over in europe, durring the war"". Then came the civilain Jeeps (and jeep based trucks) from Willys Overland. Shortly after this came the Land Rovers. Also, around the late 40's early 50's, Chevorlet was producing large numbers of Suburbans for light duty comercial trucks (other company's were producing similiar trucks, collectively known as Cary-Alls). In the 60's Enternational introduced the Scout, swiftly followed by the Ford Bronco and Chevy Blazer. In the 70's the Bronco's and Blazers were placed on a full size truck platform and were met in the market place by the Dodge Ram Charger (& her sister truck the Plymouth Trail Duster), and lets not forget the classic Jeep Wagoneer (which I'm pretty sure came before the full size Blazers and Bronco's). These fullsize SUVS sold remarkably well and were infact the for-goers to modern SUVS. Then came the Jeep Cherokee in the 80's (the first unibody SUV), followed by the Bronco II. After the Cherokee, American Motors was split in half by a Chrysler buy out resulting in the AMC, and AM General (who later went on to build the Hummer for the US military) Both Eagle and Jeep (under AMC) became part of the Chrysler Corp. In the late 80's and early 90's Both ford and Chevy eventually abandoned the fullsize SUV's (except for the suburban), the Chevy Blaze (and GMC Jimmy) were switched an S-10 (and Sanomma) platformes. Ford introduced the explorer, a smaller and much more road friendly choice, before killing off the Bronco. Before the 90's forighn compatition held VERY little of the market share in SUV's, even your Land Rovers. So yeah, the SUV craze can be attributed to the Americans thank you, who else would be bold enough to give birth the a HUGE catagory of auto's that many people find obnoxious. And who else would be so blatantly proud of it? And since so many of you seem to bring up this topic all the time, I feal the need to adress it as well. That's safety. First off, the safety of a car is ultimately decided by the driver. Most people have no use for such vehicles and I too diplore them. Trust me, no one gets as pissed off as I do at soccer-mom's, who have no buisness behind the wheel of anything larger than a minivan, driving a Suburban, Tahoe, Expidition, or an Excursion. We should not boycot SUV's simply because some of the operators are incompitant. What we should do is promote the requirement of a special licence (or something) that certifies capable individuals (give them a test or something at no charge) to drive such vehicles. SUV's (except for the Ford Explorer) are infact very safe vehicles so long as your the one riding in them. And while the SUV boom have made the narrow streets of Europe more crouded, it's made the LONG drives for american's much more comfortable. If you don't like SUV's don't buy them people. I'll admit that if I lived in Europe I wouldn't bother with an SUV, there are few places to go offroading, shorter distances between destinations, not to mention an average road width much smaller than that of American roads. But here, he have a use for such vehicles, if they are a plague in your region, then perhaps the drivers OVER THERE need help. But the U.S. is still the single largest automotive market in the world, and for some of us, an midsize or compact SUV is perfect. Others require the capability of a fullsize SUV, why should American's be blamed for the descicions that your population is making?""" |
| Off road down town? |
| Outlaw 14-11-2002 |
"Stupid people buy stupid cars? I'd rather say stupid people buy a certain vehicle out of stupid motivations. I mean, if I'd live in the country with my boots in the mud most of the time, I'd buy a suv or an off-road and feel perfectly coherent with my decision. What I really can't understand is when people buy SUVs to drive them exclusively on asphalt. That's stupid people! Those who buy it because they think ""the bigger the better, especially if it comes with a trendy badge on it like MB, BMW, Porsche, Land Rover, Lexus or whatever (...and remember to add chromed rims)"". Unfortunately we're in the middle of a fashion craze for SUVs nowdays; and just like everything else based on fashion rather than functionality it's all about people's stupidity. Anyway the most absurd SUVs are those equipped with air-dams, sideskirts sportscar tyres and low-rider suspension (anybody said ""I've seen some X5 tuned just like that""?), they lost any off-road capabilities and finally succeeded in meeting the stupidity coefficient of their respective owners (really not an easy task, indeed). And rest assured that the H1 should remain where it belongs, that is to say the battlefield or, if you really can't do without, the country farms.""" |
| can't agree more |
| henk4 14-11-2002 |
"Thanks 1B4R, for being a supporter in my ongoing campaign against these stupid cars. (however, are stupid cars bought by stupid drivers, actually many of them appear to think that modern traffic is a battlefield, at least judging from the driving style of X5 owners in particular). ""Credits"" for starting the SUV hype though goes to the Range Rover, a luxurious version of the ubiqitous Land Rover. Recently in the USA a book appeared about the dangers of the SUV's, hopefully it will be as lethal for them as Ralph Nader's work on the Corvair (Unsafe at any speed, what an applicable title once more). Does anybody know the title? so we can promote this on this site!""" |
| This car is shit! |
| IBrake4Rainbows 14-11-2002 |
"my oh my, the car that started the craze, along with the explorer.This, ladies and gentlemen, is what forced such manufacturers in high esteem as BMW, Volvo, Mercedes benz, and Porshce, to design an SUV ( god, what an oxymoron) and go and trudge in the......shopping market carpark. These things are dangerous ladis and gentlemen, and i hope such menaces can be brought to justice ( god i sound like George dubya!) these things belong out on the battlefield, not in a schoolyard or chic resteraunt carpark. If you want a more ""commanding"" driving position hang oput your sunroof fercrissakes!""" |
| This car is the shit |
| navySEAL78 14-11-2002 |
"1)this car will out do any car, my friend and i have tried it. we took a 74 land cruiser and his 86 humvee and raced them off-road. the cruiser sucked it up so bad... and it was lifted 9 inches with big ass tired and ""all the good stuff"" that the land cruiser owners seem to think is soo good but my friends stock hummer killed it. 2) i was talking to this kid about his cruiser and he was like o ya it would kick its ass and stuff but he must not realize that when the hummer was designed it was only made for off-roading for military purpose, so i think that they knew what they were doing and he also doesnt realize that the cruiser was suped up and the hummer was stock, yet the hummers still rule! lastly 3) they hummer was created more than a decade ago not nearly... a decade is only 10 years and the hummer h1(when designed it was called the HMMWV M998)was produced in 1979 which now is 23 years. o and the hummer hasnt gone through really any ""upgrades"" its still the same car it was then just new suspension was added when it became available and stuff like that, but it hasnt faced any large changes like trucks and that have.""" |
| Article | Image gallery (6) | Specifications | User Comments (67) |
| All Cars - Contact us - Privacy Statement - Top | © 1998 - 2026 Ultimatecarpage.com |