What car should I buy?

[Griff]

Its a very fun speed racer.

[xoxoxoBruce]

But, but... 4 wheel drive... you could be killed... and maimed... and hurt.

[Griff]

Gee, I heard that somewhere...

If you really want to hate me, my favorite vehicle ever was a 1986 CJ-7.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Oh no, not hate... just pity for your inability to think as an adult, and making childish choices endangering your family and the planet. I weep for mankind.

[Nirvana]

So my PT Cruiser is a Hemi? Vrooooooooooom LOL My tractor's hydraulic pump took a crap so I hooked a chain to my PT Cruiser and dragged a 700 bale of hay out to my cows the other day...

Heee I need another truck What do you all think of FORDs?

[Griff]

I don't know much about Fords (my peekup is a Toyota) but my Dad's Farmall 460 is a hemi.

[Big Sarge]

TW - You seem like a learned man, possibly an engineer? Simply curious. I've noticed you are quite disagreeable, anti-authoritarian, and quick to "put down" others. I wonder if your anger stems from sexual frustration or perhaps your mother didn't breast feed you?

[Lamplighter]

...

[tw]

Originally Posted by jimhelm

I reply to you with insults because you are nearly impossible to communicate with. You don't listen to what people say, you just keep repeating yourself. I've said multiple times in this very thread that I have a 2006 Jeep Commander that has a 5.7 ltr V8.

GM had executives with 30 and 40 years of experience. So why did GM sell cars so bad as to even cost $200 more than their selling price? 30 and 40 years of experience in the auto industry resulted in almost car knowledge. Years of employment do not define knowledge. Especially when it comes from working in finance. You can be insulted or you can read a fact based in corporate history. Be emotional or logical.

Posted facts are unpopular and unknown because so many believe propaganda (ie advertising and hearsay). I have a nasty habit of mostly exposing such myths. As you remember from 2003, I accurately defined Mission Accomplished as deceit. Lies were exposed even using concepts proven 2000 years before Columbus existed. Only the fewer saw or agreed. That conclusion was extremely unpopular. And it was based in facts with total disregard for anyone's emotions. Since emotions are disingenuous.

Defined was another simple and irrefutable fact. A 2006 Chrysler 5.7 liter (Hemi) V-8 is a lowest performance engine. Reasons why were provided: Dodge Charger was only 44 Hp/liter. Even most Pontiac, Oldsmobile, and Chevy (and high failure) engines from 10 years earlier were superior - 52 Hp/liter. A 2006 Hemi in a Dodge Challenger was inferior even to low performance and high failure rate GM engines. But many know otherwise due to hype, hearsay, and emotion. Sorry if that makes you angry. But reality means adults swallow and ignore their emotions. Reality means learning how easily hype and lies created a Hemi myth. Demonstrated is the honesty that more concerns fewer adults. And the reasons why with numbers that accompany honesty.

To communicate, post facts with numbers. Don't post feelings. Or another popular myth is, “I do this therefore it must be better.” Chrysler’s 1960s Hemi was a standard performance engine. A Chrysler Hemi thirty years later was one of the worst engines in 2006. Thirty years later, Hemi was associated with crap and obsolete technology - when one learns numbers and ignores propaganda.

Nothing here or in my other posts are "disagreeable, anti-authoritarian, and quick to "put down" others." Only facts were stated as facts; without emotions or 'put downs'. Reality remains reality no matter how it makes one feel. Adults deal with reality. Lying to someone to only make them feel good - that is what children want.

A greatest respect for any adult is honesty. Insults, cheapshots, or rhetoric are not communication. Honest facts with reasons makes communication useful. That means perspective - the numbers. Where were any numbers that justify respect for a 2006 Chrysler V-8? None were provided. And so ignored numbers were reposted – ie 44 Hp/liter. When you did not reply with facts, I simply reposted ignored facts that you did not even challenge.

Return to why many adults did not want to learn reality. For example, no reason existed to believe Saddam had WMDs. Most adults unfortunately wanted to hear what made them feel good - rather than learn they had been deceived. You know the so many here in 2003 who disliked only because I posted reality. Even provided numbers that exposed George Jr's lies. One could have learned in 2003 why reality is "disagreeable". Today we know George Jr was lying. How many learned why his lies were obvious? How many still want to 'kill the messenger'? I am always amazed how many get angry rather than reply with facts framed in the reasons why and numbers. And how many do not apologize for entertaining their emotions rather than see George Jr lies that exposed a WMD myth.

Posts encourage Lola Bunny to buy a car that is actually best for her as well as for American workers. The Camry says to the 'powers that be', "Innovate". Unfortunately many only want obsolete and crappy products such a low performance 2006 Dodge Charger. Or four wheel drive because advertising spins myths about safety.

How many kids change mufflers to increase noise? Why would anyone want to reduce horsepower, reduce mileage, increase valve wear, and increase pollution? Hearsay, propaganda, advertising, and myths must be true?

Numbers say why 2006 Jeeps were so crappy as to destroy American jobs. Jeep Grand Cherokee with a V-8 was only 50 or 58 Hp/liter. Or Jeep Wrangler engines that were only 61 or 47 Hp/liter. Crap.

Communicate with honesty; ignore emotions. Better communication means you could have posted this to move a conversation forward. Facts you could have posted. In Chrysler, some innovation happened after government targeted the reason for crap - top management. A 2012 Grand Cherokee now has 80, 63, or 73 Hp/liter engines. Useful communication notes a best Cherokee engine is its V-6. Facts with numbers and without emotion say why. How anyone feels is irrelevant. Adults get greatest pleasure from learning truth and reality. And by exposing myths, lies, and spin. This paragraph demonstrates what you could have posted.

Lola Bunny is considering a Camry. For example, a 4 cylinder Camry is a 71 Hp/liter engine. With as much or more horsepower than American 1970s big block V-8s that moved much heavier cars. More than enough horsepower and sufficient performance meaning it will also be more reliable. Numbers define it as a best product.

Why would anyone make a 2006 'muscle car' with a pathetic 44 Hp/liter engine? It makes much noise. That low performance V-8 Dodge Charger even appeared in Consumer Report's "Used Cars to Avoid". Doing numbers in 2006 predicted same. That is not "disagreeable, anti-authoritarian, and quick to "put down" others." It is reality - what adults need. This paragraph simply demonstrates how adults expose lies and inferior products. But some will feel it is a “put down”.

Communicate by facts. If facts make you angry, then you know you (not facts) have a problem. You could have said why that low performance Hemi was really not low performance. You could have said why tightly interlocked wheels (ie all-wheel drive) do not reduce safety. But you did not. Instead you posted disparaging remarks because facts contradicted your beliefs. You even ignored numbers and did not dispute numbers that define reality.

Why do manufacturers not tightly interlock wheels to work (in that video) on ice? Tighter interlocking reduces safety - as explained previously. If you know otherwise, then state why so many vehicles (in your video) do not tightly interlock the wheels. Not once did you do that. So reasons why tighter interlocking decreases safety were repeated. Because you did not read it the first time and only posted denials without facts.

I do not post popular beliefs. When reality contradicts popular feelings and beliefs, well, those are my best posts. You know it because others responded with emotional outbursts rather than logically with facts and numbers. Others can learn from their outbursts. Emotion and insult is a first indication that 'he' is easily brainwashed by propaganda and hearsay. ‘He’ is only citing rhetoric he was ordered to believe.

How many back in 2003 (when you first joined) hated me for accurately defining George Jr as a liar? Not a rhetorical question. Many forget how facts that exposed WMD myths made them angry. Many forget they were advocating a useless massacre of thousands of American servicemen. None apologized to being so wrong and naive. Should I be upset? Of course not. Their anger then and now tell me how easily people such as Rush Limbaugh can brainwash them. That is not a “put down”. The fewer who never post insults and disparaging remarks deserve attention. Because they are using what adults need BEFORE knowing anything - facts with reasons why and numbers.

Another example: in a previous discussion, another got nasty because I defined stock brokers as some of the worst stock investors. That reality is appreciated by fewer who know by first learning facts. And still, that reality makes some angry. I don't care. They are entertaining their emotions rather than posting hard facts and numbers to dispute that reality. Their emotions only confirm that stock brokers are poor investors; typically underperform the market. Another example of how to communicate with honestly. If stock brokers make helpful investment recommendations, then post numbers that say so. Instead, another got angry rather than prove what contradicted reality.

Defined, with numerous examples and reasons why, is how to communicate. The question has no sound byte answer. Ignoring facts and numbers to post a feeling and no 'reasons why' means facts and numbers are reposted. To say, stop ignoring these damning facts. That 2006 Chrysler V-8 is a pathetic 44 Hp/liter - reposted because the fact cannot be ignored. Also posted are numbers that say what happened once Obama all but fired scumbag Chrysler management. Who then eliminated that low performance 44 Hp/liter engine. Damning numbers.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Nirvana

What do you all think of FORDs?

Do numbers for your PT Cruiser. Hemi is a V-8. Yours has how many cylinders? Salesmen use words to promote myths and lies. PT Cruiser used a higher performance engine originally developed for the Neon.

Appreciate what happened in Ford AND a critical number: 70 Hp/liter. William Clay Ford (an executive who actually had a driver's license) took control in 2000. He discovered bean counters (Petersen and Nasser) played money games and even had no products in development - to cut costs. William Clay in 2000 ordered Ford to design an engine that was developed in GM in the early 1970s - which GM still does not offer in all their cars.

In 2007, Ford losses were at record levels. How can that be if William Clay started designing in 2000? Because informed consumers know it takes four to ten years to design new products. Economics 101. Products started in 2000 would not appear until after 2008.

Chrysler and GM needed government money in part due to no new products and due to obsolete technology six and eight cylinder engines. Management was lying about the only reason for massive losses - even blaming unions. Ford knew work done in 2000 would soon appear as profits after 2008. It takes how long for an innovator to create profits? Ford (while suffering record losses) took no government money. Because William Clay had a driver's license. He understood basic Economics (how long it takes to design anything). And knew record profits were coming due to products designed by engineers (not by finance people).

In a meeting, Mulally said that next year, all Ford products would have a four cylinder option. Because engineers in 2000 were finally permitted to design an engine that GM could have been producing 30 years previously. Because best cars use four cylinders; obsolete technology needs more cylinders. Ford's are superior because four cylinder engines doing more than 70 Hp/liter are available in all Ford cars. Because engineers (not bean-counters) designed those products.

Today's standard technology four cylinder engines do as much or more than a 1970s big block V-8. Today's engines will also be anti-American obsolete in 20 years. Well understood to people who appreciate the product. And problematic to anti-innovation finance people.

But again, don't take my word for it. Get Consumer Reports and do the numbers yourself. Those numbers are in every April issue. Any layman can do this arithmetic. And learn what happens when engineers replace business school graduates as designers.

[Nirvana]

My PT Cruiser was bought so that I could remove the seats to fit dog crates and because it had heated seats. But the primary reasons were one owner who 'order bought' this Dream Cruiser and she was selling it for $2500 under book price. I usually pay cash for cars/trucks. I never buy New.

I have a 1986 Ford truck with a 351 Windsor engine. [4 speed] I can probably move a house with it but the mechanical parts are outliving the body. {I love that it is 4wD} I love that I can see the ground when peering down from the top of the engine. That means I can fit my hands in there while working on it. I love that parts are cheap.

[xoxoxoBruce]

I miss my PT Cruiser, Nirvana, comfortable, easy in & out, good visibility, good power and mileage. You could use tw at your place, make the crops grow fast.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Nirvana

My PT Cruiser ...
I have a 1986 Ford truck with a 351 Windsor engine.

These two vehicles demonstrate innovation. A mid-1980 351 Windsor (carbureted V-8)) engine found in Ford Trucks and Mustang was typically 160 horsepower. A four cylinder engine in a typical PT Cruiser was 150 horsepower.

[sexobon]

My '86 Ford Crown Vic LX with 302 cu. in. ("5.0 L" - 4,942 cc) Windsor was the first year they put a sequential fire electronic fuel injector on each cylinder in the Crown Vic and I had it for 21 years. The 351 cu. in. (5.8 L) Windsor went into the police car version.

[jimhelm]

I'm not angry at all tw. I didn't buy the jeep for its HP/ltr ratio. Or for how much noise it makes. I bought it for partially emotional reasons. It's cool as shit. Looks awesome, great four wheel drive, comfortable, loaded with convenience features, gobs of low end torque. I think you've missed my point about 4wd, too. I posted the video about jeep because you said they use expensive computer systems to control them. They don't. The Subaru video was to highlight the difference between actual 4wd vs all wheel drive.

I didn't recommend the Jeep to Lola, either.

In a 4x4, low end torque is more important than horses, in my opinion. The 4ltr straight 6 jeep used to make was excellent in this category. In 2000, I had a 99 Cherokee back then. Loved it. Too small for 2 kids though.

What car would you recommend for Lola, tw?

What do you drive?