I think I'll rant for a second, here.
First off, can we open a nice gulag for the idiots who designed &
marketed any "Hummer" within the last 3 years for crimes against basic
human intelligence? America could utterly stop producing new cars for
10 years, and it would simply not be a problem. We are awash with the
things. Every day, cars with minor dents or hail damage are hauled off
to the junkyard because the insurance claims the repairs will cost
more than the bluebook value of the vehicle. New cars are sold at
inflated prices, then the value declines precipitously as soon you
drive them off the lot, because suddenly, they're "used," despite
having maybe 50 miles on them. If we didn't have such a glut of new
vehicles, I suspect the older ones would retain their values -- a
vehicle with 75,000 miles on it still has an intrinsic value, yet that
value isn't perceived by the car-owning and buying public any more,
because we're having new cars crammed down our throats at an alarming
rate. I think it's telling that GM's sales are off by 45%. People are
beginning to figure out "Hey, I've already got one, and it's good for
another 100,000 miles, if I take care of it." I think so-called
bluebook values are skewed in favor of the insurance companies getting
out of having to pay for even semi-reasonable repairs, and to push the
owner towards purchasing a new vehicle at twice its value. I'm curious
as to how a person can justify paying $25,000.00 for something that
will be worth $15,000.00 ten days later, if it's damaged in a hail
storm. Yet somehow, the auto companies are failing, despite selling
these things at at least 1.5 times their actual value. My heart bleeds
for them. Really. I bet a lot of GM's problems stem from their
financial wing making bad loans to people who could ill-afford new
cars, then having to repossess them, and sell them used for half the
price. Oh, the humanity.
When considering the potential longevity of you average vehicle, it
seems doubly so for soundly-constructed vehicles designed specifically
for the rigors of off-road driving, like the older 4-Runners,
Pathfinders, and the classic 70's & 80's era Toyota pickups and Land
Cruisers. Of course, Gill would have me include long-wheel-based
pickups in this category, and he'd be right. (the list could go on --
I don't feel like writing a dissertation on International Harvester)
Some of you may recall the Grey Pendejo. It was a 1979 Chevy pickup
with full-time 4WD. It had no air con, no radio, no satellite hookup,
no onstar, no GPS, -- I had 4 big-ass tires, a heavy-duty suspension,
an engine and a steering wheel. It still had plenty of intrinsic value
when I sold it in 2003 because it was sensibly engineered, easily
repaired, and built to last. There's no reason on earth why a vehicle
like that can't be made to run for 50 years or more, by an industrious
owner. One need only to look at Cuba to see how well a vehicle can be
made to continue running long past the day its "bluebook value" has
expired. I find it disheartening that society as a whole attached so
little perceived value to used vehicles, and that we're constantly
mining & harvesting all the goods it takes to build brand new ones,
while perfectly serviceable vehicles are being crushed & recycled due
to cosmetic flaws, or the difference between the cost of repairs and
an insurance companies' willingness to part with the necessary funding
to effect same. "Oh, I'll have to take a salvage title if I choose to
take the 'totalled' value and pay the difference out of pocket if I
choose to repair my bumper, fender & right headlight assembly. Better
to have it crushed & buy brand new." WTF, Humans?
And now, back to LED headlamp reviews -- I want a Stenlight for Xmas,
please.
Chris.
PS. Bonnie, Pete & Lee Jay: sure enjoyed caving with y'all at Punkin a
couple weeks ago. I felt privileged to be in the company of such a
fine group, and it was awesome racking up some virgin cave. Pics are
slowly being edited, and I'l post them to Flickr one of these days.
On Nov 25, 2008, at 12:30 PM, David wrote:
Have you seen the 2009 Hummer Truck yet?
How does $ 46,000 sound? That was the sticker
price for the "Alpha version" that I saw sitting on the lot.
( The Alpha version has front and rear lockers )
It is slightly bigger than a mid-size truck.
The 4x4 version has good ground clearance, but skid plates
are not included. A front chrome grill is one of the options,
but I didn't see the cost of that.
After taxes, and adding a few caver modifications,
this truck would be well over $ 50,000.
I don't think it is a very appealing looking truck, but
I guess the Hummer fans will like it.
It has a flatter roof than most trucks. I presume there
will be some sort of roof rack option.
It has a small glass window on the roof, but I don't know if it
opens.
http://www.4wheeloffroad.com/roadtests/131_0804_2009_hummer_h3t_review/photo_02.html
How many Americans does GM think have both the
money and the desire to own such a vehicle? Apparently,
they think there are thousands of people, as there are at
least 10 collecting dust on the lot I was at.
It has leaf springs on the back which are attached beneath
the axle.
Would you go to a remote area of Mexico in a $ 50,000 vehicle?
For that amount of money, I think a person would be better off with
a 2006 Dodge Powerwagon. Jeep should have come out with a
similar
product about 10 years ago. I think it would be a mistake for
Chrysler
to try to do it now.
I don't believe this new Hummer has any fuel saving gizmos, like
cylinder
deactivation or VVT, etc. It looks like a real gas guzzler.
Too be continued ....
David Locklear
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Visit our website: http://texascavers.com
To unsubscribe, e-mail: texascavers-unsubscr...@texascavers.com
For additional commands, e-mail: texascavers-h...@texascavers.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Visit our website: http://texascavers.com
To unsubscribe, e-mail: texascavers-unsubscr...@texascavers.com
For additional commands, e-mail: texascavers-h...@texascavers.com
