You guys need more rain so that your entire state doesn't burn down. Or is it my imagination that recently you have had quite a few more large fires than in the past?

Way OT, but so was the quote above...:confused: ...

A simple solution: make the max speed limit on any road 45 mph,
make 5 point harnesses and DOT/Snell approved helmets mandatory
even in your cars, and = instant reduction of vehicle fatalities by half
or better, imo.

While we are being draconian, install alcohol detector interlock starters
on every vehicle...fatalities down another 50% of that 50%.

I must have forgotten DocKewl's original thread topic...:rofl:

Point well taken. But keep in mind that cars today are much safer than cars in 1974. I used to have an NSX and that sucker could stop quicker from 80 than my current car can probably stop from 60, and probably about the same distance it took a 1974 car to stop from 40. So obviously how well a car handles or brakes goes a long way into determining whether it is safe to drive at a certain speed.

Considering the change in the way cars drive over the past 35 years, I think 55 mph in 1974 was probably comparable to 75 or 80 mph today. It was a good idea at the time.

I think the original idea of the 55 mph speed limit was to reduce gas consumption -- a goal which it never achieved. I think they figured out that it reduced consumption by 0.5%.

But the 55 mph sure added to state revenues to the state budget due to all the speeding tickets written by the cops....BTW, I can see how California is trying to make up their budget with tons of CHP out there catching speeders!! Make sure you check your mirrors, keep yourself from speeding too fast and have your V1 or Escort on....(personally love my V1)

Nevertheless, bigger cars in general are safer, but need smaller cars for better fuel economy and better for environment.

I also find it ironic that anyone at xoutpost.com that drive a X5/X6/X3 (all of them 4000 lb+ trucks) is arguing about global warming since probably all of us are using more fuel and putting our more CO2 than an average sedan/Mini Cooper/Prius/Hybrid, etc. :bustingup

Two points in response to this:

1) We Americans love to live our lives by the philosophy "do as I say, not as I do". I guess we learn that from our leaders.

2) I traded in my X5 for a Mini Cooper last year. :nanana:

Safer is relative to some extent.......:D
Dollars to doughnuts I could crash
into 98% of todays cars with my 1976
Cadillac CoupeDeville and I'm sure
you know what the outcome would be.

Great! Just curious, is there an equivalent Mini Cooper forum that is as interactive as our xoutpost.com? I just smog checked the X5 and I passed with flying colors!! But, we did drive our more fuel economic BMW more often when gas was $4+/gallon....the M3...;)

Are you so sure?

I think the goal is more to avoid the accident. A 2008 Kia Rio has more powerful brakes than your 1976 Coupe Deville. I'd guess it probably handles better too.

How many airbags does that Couple Deville have? Safety windshield glass? Crumple zones? ABS?

Cars have come a long way in the past 30 years as far as safety goes.

I think we would all agree that the Kia would sustain more physical damage than the Coupe Deville. But I think we are more interested in which driver and passengers would sustain more damage, and the answer to that question may be very different.

There is the NAM forum, but it's not nearly as friendly or interesting as X5World. It's just about the car. No lounge forum or anything off topic. I see SuperGreg over there sometimes. He has a Mini Cooper as well.

its 10º out in South Carolina.... I think it would be a FANTASTIC time for Mr. Gore to come bloveate.