JoshK

The new Z roadster looks sweet...much better than BMW's Z4.

If you now think that a Forester and a circumcursion are in the same ball park, you need to take your head out of your ass and stick your thumb back in. They're in two totally separate ballparks (actually, the circumcursion isn't in the ballpark, it takes up the whole soccer field!) So, let me get this straight. Ursa and Josh weren't talking about SUVs per say. They were merely referring to specific models of SUVs. Is that the party line now? So, earlier when Ursa branded all SUV owners as having 2" cocks and threatened to sue me should my SUV Land Rover crash into him, he really meant a Navigator. Is that what you're saying now? You dug yourself in a big fucking hole spouting your holier than though mantra against the owners of SUVs and now that you're contemplating buying one, you're saying, "Well, it's ok to own certain models but not others." Whatever. I dont recall what Ursa said, that thread was too big, but if you feel like it you can go look at what I said. I generally believe there are better alternatives to most all SUVs, simply because they just aren't that great vehicles, but I could really care less about a 4runner or a jeep or an escrape. My problem all along has been the huge pieces of shit driven by yuppies for no reason. They have become the station wagon of the 90s and 2000s. Problem is station wagons were good vehicles, and these pieces of 1940s technology crap are not.

The local news did some piece about that piece of shit when it first came out. They drove it around for a week or so on the highways, around town, etc. The trip computer gave them an average of 8 MPG. Remmber that the EPA estimates come indirectly from the manufacture and represent best cases. Shit, I wonder what a tank gets? It can't be that much worse than 8mpg. Way to go ford, you've really outdone yourself. That is one quality vehicle.

Fine, you're right, you're really fucking smart. The point is you bash on ursa for wanting this thing when in reality it's a 3100 pound vehicle with good safey ratings, built on a car frame, has to meet car emissions standards and is quite resonably sized. Grouping it in with the other shit vehicles ursa bashed on is a pretty large stretch. And, like I said for the sake of that entire 500 page arguement the classifaction system that counts is the EPAs distiniction between cars the laugable classification of giant SUVs as light trucks or work vehicles. Whatever, bash on ursa all you want, I dont give a shit, but if you can't see the difference between a 3100lb forestor and 6000 pound yukon or suburban, you may want to look harder. BTW, the insurance institude for highway safety is just a way for your insurance company to charge you more money for insuring a particular car, their classifications have nothing to do with government regulations. take care.

I'm talking about actual EPA classifactions jgowans, not marketing classifications.

gmoney, I couldn't agree with you more. Paul allen is a piece of shit also and the construction of both of those stadiums is a travesty. Paying to house professional sports so rich owners can make more money is a complete sham. I'm sure the combined nearly 1 billion dollars for those piles of crap could have done a nice bit of work towards some mass transit or road construction.

tellin you, its safer to be in the big ole suv while smashing a little subaru. Thanks, but I'll take my chances in a vehicle that is actually capable of *avoiding* accidents (features such as brakes that work, low CG, and *gasp*, handling!) rather than simpy having to resort to crashing into shit and hoping for the bst.

Actually, the "classifaction" you speak of is bogus. The big distinction is the forester is *not* classified as a light truck by the EPA, meaning it meets standard car safety, fuel effeciency, and emissions standards. The same cannot be said about the larger gas guzzling POS SUVs.

Not to get involved in this crap (again), but the forester is built on a car frame, unlike the others you list. I'll point for the umptenth time that car frames are just plain better for 99.9% of real world driving. Niw that being said, all the other vehicles you list are reasonable size. I don't remember ursa's argument but the argument of me and others was that it was the absurdely large and stupid vehicles that suck, such as expeditions, suburbans, etc. A blurry line? maybe, but it seems easy enough for me to look at a suburban and realize it's moronic excess.

glacier peak via the sitkum is a trail run, nothing more.

Huh? What SUK? You buy one or something?

More importantly, I'd once again like to point out that the SEATTLE MARINERS SUCK ASS AND SHOULD PACK UP AND LEAVE TOWN. fuck, I just want to go home and get some dinner and not be at work, but traffic is screwed like usual.

http://autos.msn.com/advice/standardart.aspx?contentid=4021901&src=Home&pos=editlead BWAHAH...this cracks me up. The "pathfinder armada" What a completely fucking huge piece of shit this is. I dont care how much you like SUVs, you gotta laught at this thing with it's apparetnly 3" of ground clearance, tons of chrome and the name "armada". I Guess "stupidly large vehicle" wasn't catchy enough?

That certainly doesn't look like 70 degrees. Beats me tho,the guy still looks cool as hell.

that's what I run at the moment (although it's soon to belong to someone else cause of my STI) and it's been my most favorite of all the cars and trucks I've had over the years. Subaru really engineers shit and builds 'em to last. The boxer engine is tit. The STI is the *shit*. I shall be quite jealous.

Cobra is quite easily upset it seems.

iain, come up to seattle and we can team up to do some lightning fast ascents on mount si, so you can see what all the "hype" is about.

Sweet car man, I think you'll love it. That's defintely one of the best all around vehicles on the market right now. It'll have the power and handling needed to avoid the stuck/spun/flipped/crash SUVs that litter the mountain passes in winter.

A sammich quite possible. maybe some water?

Well, that's good for you, but it doesn't dismiss the fact that they are the latest and greatest trend, particularly so with the frat crowd. You're a bigger loser if you allow pop culture to determine a personal course of action, or in this case non-action. If you do it as a personal statement, who cares what other people are doing? I wasn't baggin on him man, I was just stating a fact. If people want tatoos, by al means get them, I was just pointing out it's a popular choice of frat guys and popular culture these days. Hell, frat guys drink beer, that doesn't mean I'm not gonna do it too

Still no reason to be a dick. Take care, man.

No, I was simply pointing out that you asked for advice, some people offered what they had and there was no reason to be a dick about it and sarcasticly thank them for their "useless advice."

I was mocking your "thanks for the useless advice" reply. My title is fecitious, btw.

Well, that's good for you, but it doesn't dismiss the fact that they are the latest and greatest trend, particularly so with the frat crowd.

Holy shit, you soloed Eldorado!? Damn bro, that's hardcore, now I see why you can cop an attitude.