Yes, it very well could. My old 1985 BMW 325e routinely turned in 35mpg @> 65-70mph. Bimmers have great engines. The "e" engine was designed to sip> fuel.

If we all drove gas-sipping cars and drove 10mph slower, we would greatly> reduce our dependence upon foreign oil and prolong the existence of all> first world nations, which will collapse when oil runs out in 20 years (at> current projected demand).

Driving an SUV isn't a statement of your American freedom. It's a

In article <E8e3e.17013$NW5.26­34@attbi_s02>, Rocketman wrote:>> If we all drove gas-sipping cars and drove 10mph slower, we would greatly >> reduce our dependence upon foreign oil and prolong the existence of all >> first world nations, which will collapse when oil runs out in 20 years (at >> current projected demand).>

If you want people to conserve fuel, eliminate CAFE, reduce/eliminate >income taxes, increase fuel/sales taxes. Tax consumption. That will get >people to conserve. Anything else is bound to fail and cause more >problems. >

I'd rather have no speed limit and drive less than have idioticly low >speed limits determined by the fuel economy of vehicles with carburators >that never saw the inside of a wind tunnel. >

You have so many sweeping generalities here that it's laughable. For>starters, Iraq isn't a war for oil. If it was we'd have our troops>protecting the oil fields and pipelines, not the cities. We'd have>Haliburton out there ripping every drop of oil out of the Iraqi sand as fast>as they could. We don't have either of those situations and oil production>in Iraq is actually LOWER than it was under Saddam.

Rocketman wrote:>>

Yup - every time i see a SUV with a flag on it, i want to scream. Gas> guzzler owners hate american soldiers.>

Well then, you're a psychopath. Lowering speed limits in the 70s> saved 9,000 lives a year and you call that idiotic.!!!

Well, I have hauled antique high-boy dressers and a complete dining set with >it (two separate trips).

Not a problem.>

But you were wrong.

Can you drive an SUV ~600 miles without refueling?

Can you fill the tank of an SUV for a shade over $20, today?

Can you park an SUV in any parking space, anywhere?

Translation: "Sparing myself from minor inconveniences is much more >important than doing my patriotic duty to preserve national security.

In article <WEg3e.125355$r55.3­6444@attbi_s52>,> Rocketman <rocketman@bikeride­r.com> wrote:>>

You think you could put two nighttables and a queen sized bed> (disassembled) in your Civic VX? No? Then lets not hear about how it> can swallow cargo like a station wagon. How about several 55" x 40"> pieces of framed artwork? Didn't think so.>

~9,000 MORE people die violently EACH YEAR so you can get to work 5 minutes >faster, and nobody cares.

DTJ wrote:>

minutes>

HUH.!! Of course it saves lives, you idiot. Go to this website and> look what happened in 1974.>

http://www.publicpu­rpose.com/hwy-fatal5­7+.htm>

"Nate Nagel" <njnagel@flycast.ne­t> wrote in message> news:O_adncZZEOnWUd­DfRVn-vg@comcast.com­...>

They have continued to make wagons despites SUV's and CAFE. They just> aren't as popular as they once were. Station wagons for a long while had a> bad image, then the minivan got the same image.>

Driving an SUV isn't a statement of your American freedom. It's a statement >of your childish irresponsibility.

They also got a lot smaller and less useful.>

nate>

-- > replace "fly" with "com" to reply.> http://home.comcast­.net/~njnagel

Yeah every time I see a tennis mom using an H2 to buy a pair of shoes at the>mall, I see the reason the world hates America.

russotto@grace.spe­akeasy.net (Matthew Russotto) wrote in>news:NaOdncnjPrN­GPdDfRVn-3Q@speakeas­y.net: >

Here's a thought. Buy a truck and use it when you need it and otherwise >drive a regular car. I've got a 1970 f150 4x4 that gets about 10 MPG, but >I only use it when I need to haul something, or get somewhere that requires >four wheel drive. I'd be foolish to use that for anything else.>

On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 10:05:27 -0800, "Danny Wall"><dannyw_NOSPA­M@wolfdatasystems.co­m> wrote:>

Well of course it's lower, you idiot. Bush has effedup iraq. This war>was all about oi. Problem is bush has fought an inempt war and just>made things worse.

You are very free with OPM.>

Is she supposed to own two cars to assuage your sensibilities?

I've rented large pickups and SUVs myself when moving.

"Big Bill" <bill@pipping.com> wrote in message >news:a9lt419igqcsa­o9577ssvantocrnn549f­4@4ax.com...>> On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 18:17:42 GMT, "Sammy Lavish" <slavish@ccc.com>>>­ wrote:>>

No soccer mom *needs* an oversized $50,000 GM pickup with reduced hauling >capacity, which is expressly designed as the ultimate suburban posing >vehicle. It is the most obscenely stupid consumer-oriented vehicle GM has >ever made, bar none. The "Hummer Lite" possesses none of the true grit of >the original, and has all of the disadvantages of the pickup frame upon >which it is built. It's not a pickup. It's not a van. It's not fast. It's >not safe. It's not practical in any way. It's not beautiful. It gets >rotten gas mileage. It's the ultimate poseur vehicle for those who think >bigger and more obscenely conspicuous is always better.>

But then, nobody ever lost money underestimating the intelligence of >American consumers.>

R >

Thanks for proving that you'd rather kill your fellow Americans than make a >careful decision about how and what you drive.>

Avoid responsibility and blame the victim - that's Bush-era mentality in a >nutshell.>

R

Another possibility, that could become a reality with the right incentives, >would be community-sponsored­ pools of hauling vehicles, specifically for the >purpose of providing temporary, convenient hauling capacity for those who >need it. Local rental companies where I live will rent you a pickup for >$30/day. And yes, they are open on weekends.>

So many options for those who wish to do their patriotic duty to their >country.

Big Bill <bill@pipping.com> wrote in>news:btlt41h1lmp­6049qe5iuj0nru1vskm1­cui@4ax.com: >

?

Rocketman wrote:>

incentives,>

for the>

their>

Scrap the "community-sponsore­d pools of hauling vehicles" idea. That's> never gonna work. But the rental companies are another story. I've> rented large pickups and SUVs myself when moving. Why buy a vehicle you> only need once every 2 years?>

Aunt Judy (Pride of Diarrhea) <http://tinyurl.com­/65nqz> wrote:>

Why wouldn't it? I borrow a friend's truck at least a couple times a > year. Why wouldn't it work with a larger pool of "friends?"

Patriotism. A great shelter for those who wish to control everyone> else.

"Big Bill" <bill@pipping.com> wrote in message >news:odut41ljr0kf0­fhn006lk5q50dmsnoege­m@4ax.com...>> On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 16:05:16 GMT, "Rocketman">> <rocketman@bikeride­r.com> wrote:>>

Think about that statement every time a Bush Republican opens his/her mouth.>

R >

It could get very, very ugly. Americans aren't ready for what is coming. >They can't say they weren't warned.>

R

On Sat, 02 Apr 2005 18:32:29 GMT, "Rocketman"><rocket­man@bikerider.com> wrote:>

How else am I going to pull my 850 hp speedboat around?

If we all drove gas-sipping cars

and drove 10mph slower,

we would greatly >reduce our dependence upon foreign oil

and prolong the existence of all >first world nations, which will collapse when oil runs out in 20 years (at >current projected demand).

R >

In article <E8e3e.17013$NW5.26­34@attbi_s02>, Rocketman wrote:>> If we all drove gas-sipping cars and drove 10mph slower, we would greatly >> reduce our dependence upon foreign oil and prolong the existence of all >> first world nations, which will collapse when oil runs out in 20 years (at >> current projected demand).>

If you want people to conserve fuel, eliminate CAFE, reduce/eliminate >income taxes, increase fuel/sales taxes. Tax consumption. That will get >people to conserve. Anything else is bound to fail and cause more >problems. >

I'd rather have no speed limit and drive less than have idioticly low >speed limits determined by the fuel economy of vehicles with carburators >that never saw the inside of a wind tunnel.

Here's a thought. Buy a truck and use it when you need it and otherwise >drive a regular car.

Some cities, such as Chicago, are actually trying like hell to change things >for the better. It may have been (and may still be) the most corrupt city >in the US; but it will be one of the few that will be ready for an explosion >of bicycle commuting, if Mayor Daley has his way. Chicago also has (or had) >offered $100 million in grant funding for alternative, sustainable energy >projects in and around Chicago. That's more money than any other city (and >most nations) have put up for alternative energy development. Chicago is >serious. They are at least beginning to understand the magnitude of the >problem. They just might survive the upheaval if they keep moving forward >apace.

The solution to running out of cheap oil is to start burning something else.>Nuclear power is the way to go - its just the problem of getting cars to run on>electricity generated by a fixed power plant.

Why do you need to carry your scooter? I thought those things had>wheels and zoomed around all over the place. Next you're going to tell>me you need an 18-wheeler to haul your SUV around.

Nope, but it has a fold down bed in the back...