car & driver gets first drive of new cobra
6/4/05, 01:44 PM
#61
Bullitt Member
Join Date: September 28, 2004
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wakerider,
Asbestos, Arsenic, Thallium, Uranium, Lead -- all toxic, and taken out of mother earth. And comparing one battery in a car (for mostly starting), with many dozens (or a huge pack of them) in an electric car is called denial. There's a huge INCREASE in toxic substances (pollution, danger to the environment) in Electric cars, just look at the mass (quantity) of lead and acid -- that was the point. Chew on some lead-paint flecks, or wait until it gets in your water supply, and tell me how good it is because it's from nature. In fact, since it causes insanity, maybe that's what happened.
No, we weren't comparing new to new. You were doing one Apple's to Oranges comparison, and so I did another. Then you cry foul because you didn't like common sense brought into the equation? The point is that if I have a 10 mile commute, drive infrequently, live in a small place next to my office, and have a car like a cobra, I can be doing a lot less damage to the environment than someone who lives in a bigger house, has triple the commute, or who happens to drive a more gas-efficient car, but still more polluting car (like an older or out-of-tune car, etc.). Those that are attacking other people's vices are doing so while often ignoring their own, and feeding on political correctness (bleating group-think).
Film by itself, is plastic. But the purpose of film making is to make films. (Buying undeveloped film to sit on it, seems sort of silly to me). So the purpose of film making, is not the plastic, but what you put on it. And THAT is what is hugely wasteful and probably a more toxic / energy-wasteful hobby/career than driving a gas-hog car. So one mans hobby/career, like making films, may cause FAR more ecological damage than another mans (like overpowered cars), it is just that the watermelons have clouded up the issue, and the sheep are following, making noise. Baaaa, Baaadd Caaaar. Baaaaa. Prius = Good Caaaar. But if you have two IQ points to rub together, it becomes obvious that they aren't exactly looking at the whole picture.
All things being equal, driving an econo-box is better than a gas hog. But all things aren't equal. And there are often other things we can do to make a far bigger difference than drive Smart cars. That's the point that the watermelons ignore. But nothing annoys a watermelon like pointing out that their kaka stinks as much as everyone else's. (Hypocrites hate getting caught).
Asbestos, Arsenic, Thallium, Uranium, Lead -- all toxic, and taken out of mother earth. And comparing one battery in a car (for mostly starting), with many dozens (or a huge pack of them) in an electric car is called denial. There's a huge INCREASE in toxic substances (pollution, danger to the environment) in Electric cars, just look at the mass (quantity) of lead and acid -- that was the point. Chew on some lead-paint flecks, or wait until it gets in your water supply, and tell me how good it is because it's from nature. In fact, since it causes insanity, maybe that's what happened.
No, we weren't comparing new to new. You were doing one Apple's to Oranges comparison, and so I did another. Then you cry foul because you didn't like common sense brought into the equation? The point is that if I have a 10 mile commute, drive infrequently, live in a small place next to my office, and have a car like a cobra, I can be doing a lot less damage to the environment than someone who lives in a bigger house, has triple the commute, or who happens to drive a more gas-efficient car, but still more polluting car (like an older or out-of-tune car, etc.). Those that are attacking other people's vices are doing so while often ignoring their own, and feeding on political correctness (bleating group-think).
Film by itself, is plastic. But the purpose of film making is to make films. (Buying undeveloped film to sit on it, seems sort of silly to me). So the purpose of film making, is not the plastic, but what you put on it. And THAT is what is hugely wasteful and probably a more toxic / energy-wasteful hobby/career than driving a gas-hog car. So one mans hobby/career, like making films, may cause FAR more ecological damage than another mans (like overpowered cars), it is just that the watermelons have clouded up the issue, and the sheep are following, making noise. Baaaa, Baaadd Caaaar. Baaaaa. Prius = Good Caaaar. But if you have two IQ points to rub together, it becomes obvious that they aren't exactly looking at the whole picture.
All things being equal, driving an econo-box is better than a gas hog. But all things aren't equal. And there are often other things we can do to make a far bigger difference than drive Smart cars. That's the point that the watermelons ignore. But nothing annoys a watermelon like pointing out that their kaka stinks as much as everyone else's. (Hypocrites hate getting caught).
6/4/05, 02:12 PM
#62
Banned
Join Date: January 2, 2005
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by dke@June 4, 2005, 1:47 PM
Wakerider,
Asbestos, Arsenic, Thallium, Uranium, Lead -- all toxic, and taken out of mother earth. And comparing one battery in a car (for mostly starting), with many dozens (or a huge pack of them) in an electric car is called denial. There's a huge INCREASE in toxic substances (pollution, danger to the environment) in Electric cars, just look at the mass (quantity) of lead and acid -- that was the point. Chew on some lead-paint flecks, or wait until it gets in your water supply, and tell me how good it is because it's from nature. In fact, since it causes insanity, maybe that's what happened.
No, we weren't comparing new to new. You were doing one Apple's to Oranges comparison, and so I did another. Then you cry foul because you didn't like common sense brought into the equation? The point is that if I have a 10 mile commute, drive infrequently, live in a small place next to my office, and have a car like a cobra, I can be doing a lot less damage to the environment than someone who lives in a bigger house, has triple the commute, or who happens to drive a more gas-efficient car, but still more polluting car (like an older or out-of-tune car, etc.). Those that are attacking other people's vices are doing so while often ignoring their own, and feeding on political correctness (bleating group-think).
Film by itself, is plastic. But the purpose of film making is to make films. (Buying undeveloped film to sit on it, seems sort of silly to me). So the purpose of film making, is not the plastic, but what you put on it. And THAT is what is hugely wasteful and probably a more toxic / energy-wasteful hobby/career than driving a gas-hog car. So one mans hobby/career, like making films, may cause FAR more ecological damage than another mans (like overpowered cars), it is just that the watermelons have clouded up the issue, and the sheep are following, making noise. Baaaa, Baaadd Caaaar. Baaaaa. Prius = Good Caaaar. But if you have two IQ points to rub together, it becomes obvious that they aren't exactly looking at the whole picture.
All things being equal, driving an econo-box is better than a gas hog. But all things aren't equal. And there are often other things we can do to make a far bigger difference than drive Smart cars. That's the point that the watermelons ignore. But nothing annoys a watermelon like pointing out that their kaka stinks as much as everyone else's. (Hypocrites hate getting caught).
Wakerider,
Asbestos, Arsenic, Thallium, Uranium, Lead -- all toxic, and taken out of mother earth. And comparing one battery in a car (for mostly starting), with many dozens (or a huge pack of them) in an electric car is called denial. There's a huge INCREASE in toxic substances (pollution, danger to the environment) in Electric cars, just look at the mass (quantity) of lead and acid -- that was the point. Chew on some lead-paint flecks, or wait until it gets in your water supply, and tell me how good it is because it's from nature. In fact, since it causes insanity, maybe that's what happened.
No, we weren't comparing new to new. You were doing one Apple's to Oranges comparison, and so I did another. Then you cry foul because you didn't like common sense brought into the equation? The point is that if I have a 10 mile commute, drive infrequently, live in a small place next to my office, and have a car like a cobra, I can be doing a lot less damage to the environment than someone who lives in a bigger house, has triple the commute, or who happens to drive a more gas-efficient car, but still more polluting car (like an older or out-of-tune car, etc.). Those that are attacking other people's vices are doing so while often ignoring their own, and feeding on political correctness (bleating group-think).
Film by itself, is plastic. But the purpose of film making is to make films. (Buying undeveloped film to sit on it, seems sort of silly to me). So the purpose of film making, is not the plastic, but what you put on it. And THAT is what is hugely wasteful and probably a more toxic / energy-wasteful hobby/career than driving a gas-hog car. So one mans hobby/career, like making films, may cause FAR more ecological damage than another mans (like overpowered cars), it is just that the watermelons have clouded up the issue, and the sheep are following, making noise. Baaaa, Baaadd Caaaar. Baaaaa. Prius = Good Caaaar. But if you have two IQ points to rub together, it becomes obvious that they aren't exactly looking at the whole picture.
All things being equal, driving an econo-box is better than a gas hog. But all things aren't equal. And there are often other things we can do to make a far bigger difference than drive Smart cars. That's the point that the watermelons ignore. But nothing annoys a watermelon like pointing out that their kaka stinks as much as everyone else's. (Hypocrites hate getting caught).
YES, we do have to look at the big picture like you said....
Imagine if everyone was driving around 5-6L engines. What kinda shape would we be in then? We have over 250 million people in the USA. Its all about how much something occurs. The gas guzzler tax is to prevent people from being able to afford gas guzzling cars. It does not ban these cars just limits them with the cost of the tax.
Dont get me wrong, I am a supporter of throwing out the tax. But we all know a 4 banger is better for the envirement than a BIG hiney 8. You are trying to compare 2 very unlike things. Compare a new 8 to a new 4. you know which come out on top enviremental wise.
I love Muscle cars and I say "so what if they pollute a little more." I would rather have 1 polluter than 2 little ricers anyday.
(Also Muscle cars do burn rubber which is a pollutant
)And I also agree that if muscle cars should have to pay a tax wht do H2's not have to pay. Thats plain old bs. Talk about wasting gas!
EDIT: Bypassing language filters, AND Cursing
6/4/05, 02:43 PM
#64
Bullitt Member
Join Date: February 3, 2004
Posts: 240
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whoa, these are"estimated" milage figures, in a real life situation based on how I drive and how you drive(romp on that mother) expect abiut 8 to 10 mpg with this bad boy. Based on what all my friends are getting with their GT's(they all get on it hard) and get 14 to 15 in their 300 hp rides. Imagine flogging a 450+ hp car and feeding it Premo gas too!! My pockets aren't that deep to keep feeding those ponies. And you know there will be big ADM's on this. Don't kid yourself, demand drives the market price and these will be in BIG demand. 
6/4/05, 03:18 PM
#65
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: August 30, 2004
Location: NJ
Posts: 690
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by wakerider017@June 4, 2005, 12:54 PM
I must of missed the meaning too. That was a terrible analogy.
The emissions of a Shelby GT500 will hurt the environment more than a Toyota Corolla.
Film does not hurt the environment....
Gas is in limited supply, Film is not.
Your comment was just stupid. I don’t like the tax anymore than you do, but please don't be ignorant.
I must of missed the meaning too. That was a terrible analogy.
The emissions of a Shelby GT500 will hurt the environment more than a Toyota Corolla.
Film does not hurt the environment....
Gas is in limited supply, Film is not.
Your comment was just stupid. I don’t like the tax anymore than you do, but please don't be ignorant.
I will repeat what I wrote in my second post in this thread: the analogy had to do with restricting access to something THEY love. To see how long they would put up with a ridiculously high tax on film, and how easy it is to find an excuse to tax it (or anything... I'm sure I could make a case for a battery tax as well), as dke pointed out.
It had nothing to do with film actually polluting the air as much as a performance vehicle, just with taking something away they love. I don't see what's so hard to understand about that, or why you would call me "ignorant." There's plenty of evidence that global warming DOES NOT exist. It just depends on who you want to believe.
6/4/05, 03:43 PM
#66
Bullitt Member
Join Date: September 28, 2004
Posts: 431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wakerider; The big picture is not an ad absurdium attack, where you take something to a ridiculous extreme to make a point that is as invalid as it is absurd. Of course not everyone would drive with 5.6L engines. Some want economy, some want sport, trucks, some want something easier to park. Variety is the spice of life. So no one is advocating forcing 8-bangers down everyone's throats. Some do advocating micromanaging others vices (like powerful cars), and put punitive hate-taxes on anything they don't approve of -- that's the topic of discussion. Along with the hypocrisy of those same people, that may be doing things more polluting, while whining about other people's vices, or making excuses to attack them. Speaking of hypocrisy and attacks, you, (Wakerider) came along and got snotty in tone to OBleeding's post that stated basically the same thing. I got it, I'm sure others did. But you called his comment stupid and ignorant? I reflected a fraction of that uncivility back, and you got offended? Why is that?
OBleeding, you're welcome. Your point wasn't that hard to see (for those that wanted to). And I happen to agreed with it. And I even think the pollution of film making was a valid point (intended or not). If everyone drove cobras it wouldn't be great for the environment -- but of course not everyone would, and it probably would not as bad for the environment as if everyone made movies as a hobby. ;-)
OBleeding, you're welcome. Your point wasn't that hard to see (for those that wanted to). And I happen to agreed with it. And I even think the pollution of film making was a valid point (intended or not). If everyone drove cobras it wouldn't be great for the environment -- but of course not everyone would, and it probably would not as bad for the environment as if everyone made movies as a hobby. ;-)
6/4/05, 04:32 PM
#67
Bullitt Member
Join Date: October 12, 2004
Posts: 450
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by dke@June 4, 2005, 4:46 PM
But you called his comment stupid and ignorant? I reflected a fraction of that uncivility back, and you got offended? Why is that?
But you called his comment stupid and ignorant? I reflected a fraction of that uncivility back, and you got offended? Why is that?
6/4/05, 08:42 PM
#69
I don't think crazy people should be allowed to post. Who in their right mind would think the GT500 would get good gas mileage, would be environmentally friendly or have an option to spay and neuter all the stray dogs and cats in North America. I will just buy the issue when it hits the newstands, since any actual info from the article obviously won't make it onto this forum. :bang:
6/4/05, 08:48 PM
#70
Bullitt Member
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Posts: 304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Webba@June 3, 2005, 3:19 PM
And all this time I thought Iceman was the first to drive it the way he is always rigth and all
With a 16 gal fuel tank you will be stopping at the gas station more than a woman nine months pregnant having to pee! I would have thought it would have a higher top speed than 160 if the GT is 150 or a little under. A limiter deinstallation may be in order?
And all this time I thought Iceman was the first to drive it the way he is always rigth and all
With a 16 gal fuel tank you will be stopping at the gas station more than a woman nine months pregnant having to pee! I would have thought it would have a higher top speed than 160 if the GT is 150 or a little under. A limiter deinstallation may be in order?top speed is not a big concern of mine - i rarely drive my cars constantly at top speed
6/4/05, 08:49 PM
#71
Bullitt Member
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Posts: 304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by PeterPienaar@June 4, 2005, 6:26 PM
Only a 12.5 quarter m? The '03 Cobra can do that.
But then, wasn't it C&D who ran the Terminator at 13.3 or something like that? I'll wait for the production car, I think.
Only a 12.5 quarter m? The '03 Cobra can do that.
But then, wasn't it C&D who ran the Terminator at 13.3 or something like that? I'll wait for the production car, I think.
6/4/05, 10:09 PM
#72
Bullitt Member
Join Date: May 10, 2005
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
People like i said before this is not the production car this is the concept that they test drove the production one might be faster and wiegh less and have more hp. The did say that they would change a few stuff on the production car they may make it wiegh less and more hp and that could mean a big difference in the quarter mile time.
6/4/05, 10:15 PM
#74
Bullitt Member
Join Date: May 10, 2005
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now if you show me times for the production shelby then that would make sence but times for the concept one why do we need to know what the times are for the concept one is noone in this chatroom is going to buy or even drive a concept one so it makes no sence to know the times for the concept. Me i want to see some times for the production car that would make more sence since that is what everyone is going to be driving who buys one.
6/4/05, 10:39 PM
#75
Bullitt Member
Join Date: May 10, 2005
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Arboc if MM&FF gets 11.5 with the production shelby look out new Z06 like i told everyone here the new z06 will have competition when the GT500 but keep laughing at me you wont be laughing when the times come in.
6/5/05, 02:55 AM
#76
GT Member
Join Date: September 16, 2004
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by holderca1@June 3, 2005, 11:56 AM
It has nothing to do with gas prices, it has been around since the 70's. It is a measure the government started using to deter the production and purchase of cars that have low gas mileage. Just another measure to encourage the use of fuel efficient cars and lessen our dependence on overseas oil.
It has nothing to do with gas prices, it has been around since the 70's. It is a measure the government started using to deter the production and purchase of cars that have low gas mileage. Just another measure to encourage the use of fuel efficient cars and lessen our dependence on overseas oil.
I say get rid of the stupid thing altogether, let people drive what they want to drive, now that near-zero emissions is available on many powertrains, and 15 years ahead of schedule. Not to mention the fact that even the biggest gas-eaters people drive today pale in comparison to those of yesteryear (a co-worker's '79 Firebird Trans-Am gets approximately 8 miles to the gallon... highway).
In the end, the gas-guzzler tax exists for the same reason speeding tickets exist- to allow the government to pocket more of our money.
6/5/05, 04:53 AM
#77
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: August 30, 2004
Location: NJ
Posts: 690
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by grabbergreen@June 5, 2005, 4:58 AM
Unless, of course, you drive a Cadillac Escalade EXT or Ford Excursion, both of which get worse gas mileage than the Shelby, but are both exempt from the gas guzzler tax.
I say get rid of the stupid thing altogether, let people drive what they want to drive, now that near-zero emissions is available on many powertrains, and 15 years ahead of schedule. Not to mention the fact that even the biggest gas-eaters people drive today pale in comparison to those of yesteryear (a co-worker's '79 Firebird Trans-Am gets approximately 8 miles to the gallon... highway).
In the end, the gas-guzzler tax exists for the same reason speeding tickets exist- to allow the government to pocket more of our money.
Unless, of course, you drive a Cadillac Escalade EXT or Ford Excursion, both of which get worse gas mileage than the Shelby, but are both exempt from the gas guzzler tax.
I say get rid of the stupid thing altogether, let people drive what they want to drive, now that near-zero emissions is available on many powertrains, and 15 years ahead of schedule. Not to mention the fact that even the biggest gas-eaters people drive today pale in comparison to those of yesteryear (a co-worker's '79 Firebird Trans-Am gets approximately 8 miles to the gallon... highway).
In the end, the gas-guzzler tax exists for the same reason speeding tickets exist- to allow the government to pocket more of our money.
6/5/05, 09:39 AM
#78
Legacy TMS Member
Originally posted by SigMachi@June 3, 2005, 11:48 PM
That makes a lot of sense because there is a horrible environmental threat from film. Moron. At least come up with a sensible analogy.
That makes a lot of sense because there is a horrible environmental threat from film. Moron. At least come up with a sensible analogy.
Ohhhh.... somebody called out the film student or liberal or liberal film student and I don't think he was drawing an analogy, just citing that more than likely if the feds were to stick a tax on film, there would be a huge outcry on such a tax.
More importantly, what is the deal with everybody calling somebody an idiot or a moron or some descriptor of low intelligence lately? almost 100% of the forums I visit and almost 100% of the threads I read invariably have at least one "your a moron" or "your an idiot" post. Its enough to make you wanna give up on them (intelligent discourse or not)
6/5/05, 11:32 AM
#80
Bullitt Member
Join Date: September 25, 2004
Posts: 319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gas mileage is overrated. I figure if the media would shut up it wouldn't be an issue.
Yeah, drive a hybrid. Fine. Enjoy the savings. But let me spend my money having fun if I want to.
Anyway. Back to topic, what?
Yeah, drive a hybrid. Fine. Enjoy the savings. But let me spend my money having fun if I want to.
Anyway. Back to topic, what?