| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#11
April 22nd 04, 07:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
"Dave Cole" wrote in message ... in article , Watson A.Name "Watt Sun - the Dark Remover" at wrote on 4/15/04 13:19: Charles W. Johnson Jr. wrote: [snip] While I'm all for using more renewable resources, and especially ones that are environmentally friendly, it doesn't make sense to cause yourself financial pain doing so. It makes sense to buy the must fuel efficient vehicle that fits your needs but not to overspend simply because it's a little better on the gas mileage. It's not a "little" better, it more than double - 50+ MPG compared to 25! [snip] Surprisingly enough some SUV owners actually need the SUV at the time of purchase, I personally drove through snow 70cm deep on a regular basis prior to my recent job change. Just because the people in southern California don't need it doesn't mean no one does. Charles Surprisingly enough, many of those people who bought a big Ford Expedition or GM Yukon could have got by with a lot smaller, and hence a lot more economical SUV. ALso, there are vans, too, with a much better gas mileage. Surprisingly enough, it's not about whether or not it's a SUV or a truck or whatever, it's whether or not it's a gas guzzler. And this becomes your decision or business exactly how? DC I did not write the above please be careful of your snips. Charles |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Amateur Radio Newsline(tm) Report 1420 - October 29, 2004 | Dx | |||
| Amateur Radio Newsline(tm) Report 1420 - October 29, 2004 | Dx | |||
| Cell Phone Hardline | Antenna | |||
| SOLAR constant voltage Xmfr question? | Equipment | |||
| SOLAR constant voltage Xmfr question? | Equipment | |||
Threaded Mode
