Jump to content
News
Reviews
Discussons
Activity
Create New...
Close

ccap41

New Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    11,605

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    83

 Content Type 

Everything posted by ccap41

  1. ccap41
  2. ccap41
    50k for a Wrangler?!?! When did this happen??
  3. ccap41
    I'd take one. Give me the one Casa pictured and I'd be one happy fella.
  4. ccap41
    Let me ask you some thing dfelt. What do you think they should use? Simple, having uncles and Aunts in local police forces here in washington I have had this chat with them many times and they all admit that they can easily us much smaller 4 door sedans than the huge purchase of police interceptor versions of SUV's, they only need a few motorcycles and should have at least 2 police interceptor models of high performance cars, could be mustangs or camaros. For bringing the equipment to a crash scene, there are many options for the vans or full size SUV to use. Usually a commercial van is best. With that said, as long as the state, county and cities give a wide open choice they are trying to give every officer on the force the same fully loaded SUVs. There is allot of waste in government and we all know it as many jobs can be done with much less auto or no auto. The problem is one department sees what another buys and wants the same toy. Perfect example is the Home Land Security office here in Seattle. The whole force is nothing but GM Tahoe police versions. Does HLS really need to have a full fleet of petro drinking SUVS when they spend the bulk of their time in cites? I bet most of the tax payers would be shocked at how much waste is spent on auto's and allowing the gov employee to drive said auto's home driving up the amount of fuel used by giving a perc to these workers that private workers do not have. Why should the cops, fire department, City Employee get to drive a taxpayer auto home every day putting on needless miles and gas costs when they could use mass transit or should be driving their own auto to work. Very good explanation and I can see the logic there. However, I have law enforcement in my family here in Arizona and they say that the larger vehicles are indespensible (for example, the sheer number of unmaintained dirt roads here demand a real SUV). The cops here hate the smaller sedans they are forced to use now. Most would love to have the Crown Vics in service again. Seems to me like the use of certain vehicles depends on where you live. But why do they hate the smaller vehicles? "just because" or are they worse for the job. Because just because somebody doesn't enjoy the smaller vehicle that doesn't make it worse for the job. It could just be that the driver wants to feel on top of the road.
  5. ccap41
    Let me ask you some thing dfelt. What do you think they should use? Simple, having uncles and Aunts in local police forces here in washington I have had this chat with them many times and they all admit that they can easily us much smaller 4 door sedans than the huge purchase of police interceptor versions of SUV's, they only need a few motorcycles and should have at least 2 police interceptor models of high performance cars, could be mustangs or camaros. For bringing the equipment to a crash scene, there are many options for the vans or full size SUV to use. Usually a commercial van is best. With that said, as long as the state, county and cities give a wide open choice they are trying to give every officer on the force the same fully loaded SUVs. There is allot of waste in government and we all know it as many jobs can be done with much less auto or no auto. The problem is one department sees what another buys and wants the same toy. Perfect example is the Home Land Security office here in Seattle. The whole force is nothing but GM Tahoe police versions. Does HLS really need to have a full fleet of petro drinking SUVS when they spend the bulk of their time in cites? I bet most of the tax payers would be shocked at how much waste is spent on auto's and allowing the gov employee to drive said auto's home driving up the amount of fuel used by giving a perc to these workers that private workers do not have. Why should the cops, fire department, City Employee get to drive a taxpayer auto home every day putting on needless miles and gas costs when they could use mass transit or should be driving their own auto to work. The only real question I have is why in the world would a police force actually need a Mustang or Camaro? If there is a high speed chase going on you don't get to decide which car flipped their lights on first and is in pursuit. In the unlikely scenario of the chase lasting a half hour then the Mustang/Camaro could catch up to the chase but that's a stretch.. The bottom 3 paragraphs I completely agree with.
  6. ccap41
    I agree, which only makes this more confusing. I would wager to believe some way or another that employment and/or money is a problem and you'd save a lot buying/leasing a smaller American made car than this tiny i3. Yes, LA has stated they will save on the fuel cost and help go greener, yet do they really need these auto's for the use they think they will apply them to. I am willing to bet they could find alternatives that would be better than this and some of it could be as simple as putting meter maids or Men on bicycles, having them walk, etc. Of course they will save on fuel cost if they eliminate the fuel being used for the smaller cars but how about a ridiculous payment on said small car that could be reduced by buying Volts? Stupid politicians. They just know how to word things to make people think what they did was right.
  7. ccap41
    Let me ask you some thing dfelt. What do you think they should use? I am not dfelt but I'll throw my opinion out there for $h!s. If the options aren't limited to vehicles already with police packages I think the cars should be a class smaller than the Charger/Taurus/Impala and be more like the Fusion/Malibu size and there would be savings in fuel which I think should not be overlooked with how much those engines are running. 1mpg improvement goes a long way w/ a fleet of vehicles. I also think the Explorer, for the most part, is larger than most actually need. Granted, I don't know all of the equipment that gets stuffed in them but it's hard to believe that they use the extra cargo space over an Edge and obviously they never use the 3rd row of seats. So I would go with vehicles in the Grand Cherokee/Edge/Equinox(I know it competes with a different class but it's kind of a tweener and large for its class). Oh and the new Acadia that's also a larger 2 row CUV. I think there should be plenty of additional space in those CUVs over the cars for whatever additional space is required from a larger vehicle in the first place yet they should save some in fuel costs. Oh, and obviously all American made. Same goes for the cars I listed. They aren't the small, tiny economy cars that some want. I don't feel like that is realistic yet the mid-size class is loaded w/ technology in the driveline and car itself to be fuel efficient and give the "at the limit" capability that law enforcement needs. The larger cars are just boaty in comparison to the modern mid-size sedans. Good reasoning there. Thanks ccap. Now, do you know why they prefer larger vehicles as opposed the ones you mentioned? I do not. Just assuming it is for extra carrying capacity with all the miscellaneous stuff they might need at any given point.
  8. ccap41
    Let me ask you some thing dfelt. What do you think they should use? I am not dfelt but I'll throw my opinion out there for $h!s. If the options aren't limited to vehicles already with police packages I think the cars should be a class smaller than the Charger/Taurus/Impala and be more like the Fusion/Malibu size and there would be savings in fuel which I think should not be overlooked with how much those engines are running. 1mpg improvement goes a long way w/ a fleet of vehicles. I also think the Explorer, for the most part, is larger than most actually need. Granted, I don't know all of the equipment that gets stuffed in them but it's hard to believe that they use the extra cargo space over an Edge and obviously they never use the 3rd row of seats. So I would go with vehicles in the Grand Cherokee/Edge/Equinox(I know it competes with a different class but it's kind of a tweener and large for its class). Oh and the new Acadia that's also a larger 2 row CUV. I think there should be plenty of additional space in those CUVs over the cars for whatever additional space is required from a larger vehicle in the first place yet they should save some in fuel costs. Oh, and obviously all American made. Same goes for the cars I listed. They aren't the small, tiny economy cars that some want. I don't feel like that is realistic yet the mid-size class is loaded w/ technology in the driveline and car itself to be fuel efficient and give the "at the limit" capability that law enforcement needs. The larger cars are just boaty in comparison to the modern mid-size sedans.
  9. ccap41
    I agree, which only makes this more confusing. I would wager to believe some way or another that employment and/or money is a problem and you'd save a lot buying/leasing a smaller American made car than this tiny i3.
  10. ccap41
    Damn, sub 3000lb vehicle..
  11. ccap41
    ONE percent of the market is not "convincing people". Every new market car started at less than one percent. Perspective. Mic. Drop. Drew, if you're reading through this... can we get a little mic-drop character????
  12. ccap41
    I think a lot of ignorant people(tax payers) just see that they bought small electric cars. They're too stupid to think, "those should be Ford or GM made, not Germany's BMW." Also, that's fckn outrageous to pay for...because: I just went to Chevy's site and a "bone stock" Volt's lease is $310, 36 month, 15,000miles/year. which those all electric bastards probably won't be able to touch 15,000 miles in a year when they're charging the whole time. Throw in an order of 100 Volts and I would have to believe they could bring that below $300/month. That right there would save the tax payers $8,700/month X 36 months = $313,200. STUPID. Also, why are they paying so damn much when there are lease options on BMW's site for way less? And/Or they mention nothing of mileage on BMW's site.. http://www.bmwusa.com/bmw/special-offers
  13. ccap41
  14. ccap41
    Holy $h! that's a lot of ugly vehicles. I hope this never happens.
  15. ccap41
    No one seems to have a problem with a $35K hi-po Focus and they would not have a problem with a $35K hi-po Cruze. Agreed. Focus, GTI/R, STI..
  16. ccap41
    Awesome, another BMW to add to the $h!-list alongside the 3 GranWhatever, X4 and X6.
  17. ccap41
    Not if this new one is all built and designed by FCA... I would have agreed hands-down two years ago.
  18. ccap41
    They have off-road kits for all sorts of SUVs. That doesn't mean they ever see off road duty and you know that for a fact and if you don't, you are fooling yourself because you are trying to justify owning one. That's all fine and dandy. If it works for you, great but no one outside of yourself would dare say that the Patriot and Compass are even close to competition overall. They are woefully behind as a matter of fact and rely on heavy fleet sales to keep their numbers up, just like the first gen Escape for so many years until the 2013 redesign. Check www.jeeppatriot.com. You will be shocked of the amount taken offroad and the modifications done. I actually owned one and have stated m case. i would own another, though I am looking really forward to the replacement. And there are a lot of people tuning and putting intakes and exhaust on escapes on the forums too but that doesn't mean they are race escapes now or that they would be good on a race track.. It doesn't mean that there are a few hundred people out of the hundred and hundreds of thousands of people buying these really matter. Owning one doesn't magically make it not dated and behind every other small CUV. I own an Escape but that doesn't mean it is the best small CUV. To me it is the most maneuverable, gets over 30mpg if I'm cruising, and w/ AWD it is surprisingly great off road all while being whisper quiet on-road. - sound like somebody else's opinion here?
  19. ccap41
    While I agree with the first statement above, unless manufacturers POINTEDLY install OBVIOUS obsolescence tech, the fact that the vehicle is powered electrically should not incite mass 'this is outdated, gotta get a new one' mentality in the market. Phones incorporate a LOT of fleeting tech & apps which yes, are subject to superficial judgement, but these types of features in vehicles are pretty much independent of the power plant propelling such. Phonesa re also a HELLUVA lot more affordable than cars- most people don't shoulder a loan to own one. Even subsequent generations of EVs that have improved range still should not see mass incentive to upgrade… this is in the same vein as IC vehicles' MPG improvement in subsequent gens. It's not usually enough to cause a trade- the costs are too steep for most consumers. Phones are cheaper but the way companies do their plans now...you basically are getting a loan out for a phone. Granted it's "interest free"(even though they are charging you one way or another). but it's still a loan, 2 years and then the phone is yours.
  20. ccap41
    To go alone with the maneuverability, there is more than just the turning radius that makes something maneuverable, right? What is the steering ratio, the resistance of the steering wheel, the time it takes a suspension to settle going from side to side to maintain its stability? All of those are characteristics of a very maneuverable vehicle, not just how tight it can drive in a circle. 1999 was obviously a jokingly exaggeration because of how dated they are... Odd that your choice vehicle dated back to 2007 seemed to drive better to you than a Honda.. If your patriot is so much better off road than a new CRV then it will also drive like it. It's super hard to believe that a much more car-based CRV built for 2016 has a worse drive than a 2007 Patriot that is off road capable.
  21. ccap41
    More than you think do. I did mine and always surprised at how capable it was even sans he off-road package. Maneuverability is more than an opinion. A Patriot is actually smaller and shorter than basically everything else in the class. it slots right between the Renegade and Cherokee in size. it also has a VERY tight turning circle. I am not even saying anything bad about any other CUV's, just stating that the Patriot does have it's perks. Oh, and the locking 4x4 system makes the thing basically unstoppable in the snow. How can one measure maneuverability? I understand it is more than an opinion but in this case you're just saying your opinion, unless you've taken all of the other CUVs out for test drives as well.. So it has ONE thing going for it, locking 4X4. I'm not saying it is a bad overall vehicle. I'm saying for 2016 it is dated and nothing is better than any competition, aside from locking 4X4 which has proven unnecessary by the competition. It was a good vehicle in 1999 when they came out. 2016, not so much. Things change and advance and the Patriot and Compass just haven't.
  22. ccap41
    Aaaaaaaaaand 0.1% of people take these CUVs off road so all that increased ride height and departure angles get you is worse mileage and worse driving characteristics..what people use that drive these. Maneuverability is completely your opinion unless you've driven all of the little CUVs to actually say it is better or worse. My Escape has reclining rear seats and a 12v outlet. I would assume with the Escape being one of the older CUVs the others have them as well as they're newer.
  23. ccap41
    That's been my point too. Yes, it is great that they have reduced their reliance on rental sales and such and focused on retail more. However, if you think an 18% drop is not a big deal, then you are just delusional and should remove yourself from the conversation entirely. I think this is similar to what we were talking about the other day. One fanboy saying it's okay to not make a sale as they lose money on the vehicle. HA. 18% drop at the average vehicle sale of about $35,000 at their current year to date sales of 1,183,705 vehicles would be roughly 213,067 vehicles at 35k per = $7,457,345,000 of revenue being missed. (That's 18% of their current year to date sales.) That's a lot of missing revenue. It was on the TPS reports. Did you not get those? You see, we are using the TPS reports now so if you could just go ahead and do that in the future, that'd be great mmmkay. Hahaha Yeah I'm just a little late to get my TPS reports finished.. I guess I'll have to come in Saturday to finish them..
  24. ccap41
    I didn't realize Wings changed his screen name..and jumped ship.. How was this not a bulletin somewhere?
  25. ccap41
    They just sell because they're dirt cheap because they don't do any one thing better than any of their competitors. Maybe something like ground clearance..
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

I've whitelisted
Continue without support

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search