Disgusting Trucks

February 7, 2005 5:48 PM

Disgusting TrucksCan you identify any worse? Yeah and Yeah.
posted by nj_subgenius (49 comments total)

Wow, this thread totally rules.
posted by keswick at 8:12 PM on February 7, 2005

SUVs are bad? Huh.
posted by margarita at 8:13 PM on February 7, 2005

(Braces self for yet another Mefi SUV go-round.)
posted by pmurray63 at 8:23 PM on February 7, 2005

Reposted repost of the CXT.

How did you come up with the Unimog being worse than the CXT? The Unimog is clearly a commercial/military vehicles, and almost unusable as a daily driver (top speed is around 40-50 mph, but it has six forward *and* reverse gears).

I would call you out in the gray, but this post isn't worth wasting the one-post-per-week quota on.
posted by b1tr0t at 8:25 PM on February 7, 2005

shoulda googled but the SITE was DOWN.
The filthiest word in modern language.
posted by nj_subgenius at 8:30 PM on February 7, 2005

HAHAhahaah. Oh my goodness. There's a hydrogen Hummer.

*head explodes*

Now at least I have the answer to the question: "Once we've spent a huge amount of money and time to convert our vehicles to hydrogen, who'll step in and make a mockery of the process, wasting the new resources and generally being absurd?"
posted by SteelyDuran at 8:38 PM on February 7, 2005

A++++ WOULD CIRCLEJERK AGAIN.
posted by Krrrlson at 8:39 PM on February 7, 2005

Pinzgauer
Stryker
Bradley
posted by b1tr0t at 8:41 PM on February 7, 2005

Krrrlson, did quonsar say you could play with that?
posted by Ptrin at 8:47 PM on February 7, 2005

leave me out of this...
posted by nj_subgenius at 8:48 PM on February 7, 2005

The NY Times link describes the Esuvee as "a cross between the Star Wars characters Chewbacca and Jabba the Hutt." Silly paper-of-record! The Esuvee is clearly a baby Bantha!
posted by Guy Smiley at 8:57 PM on February 7, 2005

the Pinzgauer reminds me of the RV from Stripes.
posted by bashos_frog at 9:01 PM on February 7, 2005

Don't mess with the pedant mob, nj. They'll mess you up real good.
posted by AlexReynolds at 9:04 PM on February 7, 2005

I've said it before, I'll say it again.

Pinzgauer
Stryker
Bradley

...are all just different names for Wussburger.

And you'll say, "The hell they are!"

But they are too, you boys. Real men, like George Peppard and Jan-Michael Vincent before he looked like Methuselah, drive the Landmaster.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 9:05 PM on February 7, 2005

Yep, bantha, bantha, bantha, bantha, hmmm, banthammer?

b1tr0t, that's a bad side effect of the once a week MeTas.
posted by fenriq at 9:08 PM on February 7, 2005

I guess maybe the poster should go back to being a hunter-gatherer, huh?
posted by mr_crash_davis at 9:18 PM on February 7, 2005

effing break please
posted by nj_subgenius at 9:29 PM on February 7, 2005

I once saw a Mefi poster cite her "right by God" to drive an SUV. I thought that was pretty funny.

b1tr0t: Uh...
posted by DuoJet at 9:34 PM on February 7, 2005

If you want a real sport utility vehicle, and you live in the snow, you need one of these 1953 Bombardier Snowbus (scroll down).
posted by garethspor at 9:58 PM on February 7, 2005

Oh yeah, the Maxi Mog, comes with its own surveillance aircraft and jet boat.
posted by Mr_Zero at 10:07 PM on February 7, 2005

I'm sorry, I'm no fan of the SUV's, but I think its intellectually lazy.

There was recently an agreement between Eliot Spitzer and a few coal fired power plants in New York State to reduce emissions by a couple of percent.

That couple of percent reduction equaled the carbon output of all the passenger vehicles in the United States.

This SUV thing is just another way for neo-hippies to feel superior to the yokels.
posted by PissOnYourParade at 10:08 PM on February 7, 2005

Lightweights, all. The T282B perhaps not suitable for city driving, parking is complicated, but for those who like to be able to carry 350 tons of cargo, you know, just in case you ever have to.. it gets the job done.
posted by sfenders at 10:15 PM on February 7, 2005

Holy freaking crap, sfenders.
posted by spaghetti at 11:34 PM on February 7, 2005

DuoJet: I think you have been duped by an NPR snark. Take a look at the Freightliner Unimog site. Doesn't look very soccer-mom friendly to me. If I wanted to scare the suburbans, I'd probably go with the mil-spec 6x6 Unimog.

Don't forget the (previously posted to Mefi) Giant Bucket Wheel Excavator.
posted by b1tr0t at 11:43 PM on February 7, 2005

grrrr. brrrr.
posted by gorgor_balabala at 12:22 AM on February 8, 2005

You know, there's something to be said for being nice to the environment. But if I could drive this to work, just one day, I would, environment be damned.
posted by Bugbread at 12:26 AM on February 8, 2005

Unimogs are fantastic vehicles.

It'd be absurd to drive one day to day, but they are true work trucks, and extremely useful. Likewise, I'm sure I could find somebody at the horse races who could make legitimate use of the CCX.

But yah, SUVs suck.
posted by mosch at 12:29 AM on February 8, 2005

Unimog's are the only viable vehicles in many situations. Working on electric utilities in remote areas, ski area maintenance, and construction sites all are locations where the Unimog is the only truck that can get the materials to the jobsite. I would be sad to see the CCX or a Mog show up in the carpool lane at some kids elementary school, but we shouldn't be alarmist and reactionary about work trucks. I don't consider a Volvo A40D hauler an SUV (it's a dump truck) and I don't consider a U5000 Unimog an SUV either.
posted by tumble at 12:39 AM on February 8, 2005

HAHAhahaah. Oh my goodness. There's a hydrogen Hummer.

Soon we will be all out of these hydrogens of which you speak. Enjoy swimming while it lasts.

They should make a coal-fired Hummer, with seal-blubber lubricant and a paint job using manatee blood pigment. Option real snow leopard seat covers and rhino horn inlays in the dash and then they'd have something. Just using a bit more gas? Pfft. They should go all the way.
posted by jimmythefish at 1:13 AM on February 8, 2005

Wow, AND you have subgenius in your username. HOT. Could you do me a favor and you know, maybe hang yourself? Thanks.
posted by kavasa at 1:46 AM on February 8, 2005

Canyonero....
posted by fixedgear at 2:09 AM on February 8, 2005

PissOnYourParade said: This SUV thing is just another way for neo-hippies to feel superior to the yokels.

And justifications like yours are just another way for yokels to feel better about being yokels? Now they can be filthy without guilt because the government is forcing the energy industry to clean up a little?

Anyway, what the agreement did, according to Spitzer PR, is this:

Combined, the settlements represent the largest reduction in air pollution levels ever attained through settlement in New York. Together they will reduce NOx emissions by more than 18,000 tons annually – the equivalent of removing 2.5 million cars from New York’s roads. SO2 emissions will decrease by more than 123,000 tons per year – the equivalent of removing every diesel truck and bus operating in the United States.

They don't claim that it "equaled the carbon output of all the passenger vehicles in the United States," though I'm sure they would have if they could have. Was that the same agreement? Where did you get your numbers?
posted by pracowity at 3:17 AM on February 8, 2005

Odd that the Landmaster webpage gets the name of Zelazny's book wrong (it's the same as the movie), then shows the cover of the book with the correct title.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 3:23 AM on February 8, 2005

pracowity, is there a name for that kind of fallacious argument? You know, the one that goes, "X uses up way less of [some precious resource] than Y does, so there's no point to discontinuing X." I run into this a lot, and it always seems so transparently stupid, but I can never seem to get that across.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 5:54 AM on February 8, 2005

There are so many ways to be fallacious. I'll have to check the lists.

But I know what you mean. "The murder rate is down, so I think we don't need to worry about muggings and rapes anymore."
posted by pracowity at 6:09 AM on February 8, 2005

Unimogs are fantastic vehicles... It'd be absurd to drive one day to day, but they are true work trucks, and extremely useful.

I remember that after the Blizzard of '77, the City of Buffalo bought Unimogs from Germany to plow their city streets, since no American truck could maneuver the residential streets especially after a blizzard stranded lots of vehicles. I wonder if they have any of those original Unimogs kickin' around?
posted by Doohickie at 6:09 AM on February 8, 2005

I'm still waiting for the Kenworth Pilgrimage.
posted by SisterHavana at 6:30 AM on February 8, 2005

This SUV thing is just another way for neo-hippies to feel superior to the yokels.

Tell that to me after one of them runs you over in your Geo Metro.
posted by Dr_Johnson at 7:39 AM on February 8, 2005

PissonYourParade, yeah, it could be just a neohippy piss fest, or some of us could actually have legitimate complaints about being forced to share the road with obviously self absorbed dinkbags. I've very nearly been killed by SUV's on several dozens of occasions on my motorcycle because their blind spots are as big as a bus.

So yeah, you could make that stupid little statement and feel superior in your snideness, or you could recognize that some people are coming at the SUV issue from a practical perspective.

Oh yeah, a Hummer gets 8 miles a gallon? My V-Strom gets 45 miles a gallon, its also alot more fun to ride.
posted by fenriq at 8:25 AM on February 8, 2005

"I've very nearly been killed by SUV's on several dozens of occasions on my motorcycle because their blind spots are as big as a bus."

I've very nearly been killed by semis on several dozens of occasions on my motorcycle because their blind spots are as big as a bus.

I've very nearly been killed by buses on several dozens of occasions on my motorcycle because their blind spots are as big as a bus.

"My V-Strom gets 45 miles a gallon, its also alot more fun to ride."

My Chrysler Cordoba gets 8 miles per gallon. It's also a lot more fun to drive. And I can take five friends with me.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 9:22 AM on February 8, 2005

I tried re-finding an Aussie SUVish worktruckish thing. It had some killer photos of it descending sanddunes. Helluva vehicle.
posted by five fresh fish at 10:12 AM on February 8, 2005

If you guys can't see where reasonable discussion has given way to hateful stereotyping, there is nothing I can do to convince you otherwise.

I never said that SUV's were the perfect passenger vehicles. In fact, I think that they are inefficient and their weight and bumper clearance makes them marginally more dangerous to other drivers.

However, I still maintain that it is intellectually lazy to pile-on SUV's as the source of disease, famine and plague in the modern world.

(Oh and pracowity, your quote is correct, I misremembered and could not find the link. My original point remains though, the marginal effect of SUV's on the environment, compared to heavy industry, is not as great as implied here. I'm sticking to my guns that this is more about groupthink than genuine environmental and safety concern)
posted by PissOnYourParade at 11:55 AM on February 8, 2005

Personally, I don't have that much problem with SUVs if the person REALLY NEEDS ONE.

To me, figuring out what kind of vehicle to own is based on answering the following two questions:

1 - how much money do you want to spend?
2 - what do you expect the vehicle to do?

Answer those questions, and car shopping is easy.

I have semi-distant relatives who own a Unimog. They're wheat ranchers in Enterprise Oregon, and they said that until they bought the thing, there were sections of their property that they just could not get to during the winter months. As a matter of fact they stated, "It's the ONLY way we can get up into the North West section during the winter. Before that, we just hoped for the best and would check on things come Spring."

If you have to haul a bunch of workers and tools up a gravel road, then fine, buy an SUV. It's fine by me.

Got to haul Tiffany & Tyson & Tyler to soccer?

Get the fuck over yourself and get a mini van.

Sheesh!
posted by Relay at 12:31 PM on February 8, 2005

it is intellectually lazy to pile-on SUV's as the source of disease, famine and plague in the modern world.

Yeah, it would be. If anybody here had actually been doing so before you started it, you might have had a point there. What, did you have a brief affair with a Ford Explorer, and now feel so guilty about it that the slightest mention of SUVs induces your guilty conscience to rise up and defend the honor of big ugly vehicles everywhere? I can see where reasonable discussion has given way to hateful stereotyping, (and non-sequitur,) and it was right here:

"This SUV thing is just another way for neo-hippies to feel superior to the yokels."
posted by sfenders at 12:52 PM on February 8, 2005

"If you have to haul a bunch of workers and tools up a gravel road, then fine, buy an SUV. It's fine by me."

Wouldn't a 4WD club cab pickup be better here? I'm just sayin...
posted by fixedgear at 2:06 PM on February 8, 2005

fixedgear "Wouldn't a 4WD club cab pickup be better here? I'm just sayin..."

Yeah, most definitely. Depending on the tools.

This whole SUV thing has always baffled me, mainly cause it's based on perceptions and the possibilities of use.

"Well you MIGHT have ford a stream to rescue your children, and you couldn't do that in a mini van, now could you little lady?"

It's as if it's become fashionable for people to wear tools on their belts so they can look rough and ready.

"Say Bob, is that the new Craftsman Model 80 hammer ya got there?"

"Durn right! Hammer Fashion Magazine says it's THE one to have."

"Is that the solid gold model?"

"Sure is!"

"But what if you have to hit something with it?"

"Hit something? That's rich Dave!"
posted by Relay at 4:31 PM on February 8, 2005

Seems to me the Toyota Sienna and Honda Odyssey are getting about 18/24mpg with a 3.5L 250HP engine.

The Nissan Pathfinder is getting 15/21mpg with its 4L 270HP engine. The Lexus RX is 18/24 with 3.3 240HP.

And even the Cadillac Escalade monstrosity is getting 15/20mpg with a 5.3L 295HP V8.

The family vans are not much better than the SUVs.

The Acura TL is 20/29mpg with 3.2L 270HP. Mercedes-Benz E-class is 16/20 with 5L 302HP. Audi A4 is 18/26 with 3L 220HP.

The Honda Snivic, long the popular fuel-miser, is 26/31 with the 2L 160HP engine. The Volkswagon Golf turbo diesel can hit 38/46mpg with a 1.9L 100HP (but very torquey!) engine.

Except for the gas-sipping subcompact speedbumps, most cars have similar fuel efficiency ratings. If there's anything to be said, it's that bigger engines use more fuel; not a completely useful rationale for vehicle selection, as that would have to lead to everyone driving 50cc scooters that get 80+mpg.

Honda Odyssey and Cadillac Escalanche: similar sorts of gas mileage. Mercedes E-Class and Cadillac Avalcade: similar sorts of gas mileage.

Moral of the story: don't poop on Escalaunch owners for having gas-guzzlers. Instead, poop on them because they have teeny-tiny penises.
posted by five fresh fish at 4:36 PM on February 8, 2005

What bothers me about SUVs is NOT that they burn too much gas (or that they're big and cumbersome, or that they make up a disproportionately large fraction of the cars I see stuck in the ditch on any icy day, or that they rarely have any kind of serious off-road capability, or that they weigh three tons, or that they're over-priced, or that they're ugly).


No. What bothers me is that they're so damn popular. It worries me that so many people buy cars based on this "woo! It feels so *solid*, like I could drive through a brick wall!" thing. Surely when you're spending $50,000 it makes sense to think a little more rationally than that. It's not like a Ford Explorer is some kind of masterpiece of automotive engineering. Buying one when you don't need to just shows incredible bad taste. It undermines my faith in humanity in much the same way as the continued popularity of Britney Spears, John Travolta, and Scientology.

Oh, and while I'm all outraged and stuff, it's also sort of annoying when someone inevitably mentions penis size. Mine is sorta average in size, I guess. What the fuck that's supposed to mean about my opinion of SUVs is completely beyond me. Maybe it's something you have to have a "teeny-tiny weenie" to understand? Or is any mention of the word "penis" supposed to be funny and I just don't get the joke? Or is there some actual evidence that penis size correlates with ... well, anything? Anyway, I thought it was muscle cars that were supposed to be penis-related, 'cause a few of them sort of have the right shape. SUVs aren't even close.

It's as if it's become fashionable for people to wear tools on their belts so they can look rough and ready.

I often wear one of those little multi-tools on my belt, and it may well make me look quite manly when I find an excuse to use it, which is frequently. The rest of the time it would probably just make me look like a geek, so there's some incentive to use it often. I imagine that those drivers of SUVs who rarely do anything that would justify the extra two tons of weight they're driving around feel that same kind of incentive. Which is why I so often see them in the ditch. But that doesn't explain why they'd go out and buy another one. Everything tells me their popularity should be just a short-lived fad, but so far it's a short-lived fad with remarkable longevity. I predict that hybrid cars will be the next short-lived fad to take over the market, say about five years from now. After that, muscle cars are back! After that, we run out of oil.
posted by sfenders at 6:39 PM on February 8, 2005

Meh. My Ford Aspire gets about 35 mpg even after 110k miles.
posted by Doohickie at 9:25 AM on February 9, 2005