[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

I don't know... is your time worth paying $25,000 for a vehicle that you'll use to its full purpose maybe 2-3 times a year, versus paying $17,000 for a vehicle you'll use to its full purpose 98% of the year, plus an extra $200 or so for 2-3 vehicle rentals? If that math works for you, then by all means, spend the extra $7,800 for the big vehicle. (After all, the payment is spread out over 5 years... you'll hardly miss that cash...)

These numbers, BTW, are not pulled "out of a hat"... they are based on 2000 dollars and vehicle costs, and were exactly the numbers I faced when shopping for my car.

I bluntly don't agree with your economics. In 2000, a top of the line stretch P/U cost that. A bottom of the line non-stretch (2 seater) P/U could be had here in Texas for around $10,000 less. I bought (in 2001) a 2001 PT cruiser at $19,000 (and overpaid). Furthermore, I get at least 8 years out of a car. My PT Cruiser won't handle 4'x'8' plywood sheets, but will handle 8 foot 4"x4"s. (the passenger seat folds down and the rear seat both folds down and is easily removeable.) So instead of $8,000 over 5 years, we're talking $2,000 over 8 years, or $250 a year. The Cruiser handles 90 pct of my u-haul needs. even at a 17 MPG differential, the cost (at $3 a gallon) of gas is still cheaper than buying a Starbuck every day at work. (I don't drink coffee)

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

You know, it's entirely possible that a rouge meteor could hit the Atlantic Ocean and cause a giant tsunami... I'd better buy a boat to live in. The "Murphy's law" bit is just an excuse for bad planning and/or not accepting that, occasionally, one gets caught unprepared. Sometimes you just have to say, "What the ****"... I don't have a problem putting something off if it is not convenient to do so right now, but that's something that a lot of Americans don't like to have to settle for. In the future, however, I suspect that Americans will have to start settling for a lot of things that they'd rather not, which is why we find ourselves discussing Smart cars in the first place.

I disagree velhemently with your evaluation. The American people won't settle for limitations. They'll invent their way out of them. They always have, and always will. They don't tolerate being to told to do without.

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

Sure... but ask any mechanic if he'd rather have an adjustable wrench, or a 3/4" box wrench, to turn a 3/4" nut... or a Swiss army knife instead of a full-handled screwdriver. He'll tell you that the specialized tool will outperform the multi-tool every time. That's why the best mechanics have the biggest tool boxes. (Insert sexist comment here.).

And all of those tools are readily at hand, almost instantly swappable. If the mechanics had to wait 30 minite for every tool change, you'd see a completely different tool usage.

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

As I indicated above, about 2-3 times a year. And versus the almost $8,000 savings for not owning my own truck... I'll take a few hours' inconvenience every time. And I'm pretty sure that if more Americans did that math, there'd be a lot more small cars on the road today.



I can relate, I've lost loved ones in auto accidents, too. But without challenging you, I can only say that that's one vehicle: Different cars have different safety aspects; and small cars aren't as "dangerous" as they're depicted, nor are trucks as "safe." Always be mindful of the quality and safety of your ride. You might find that some cars like the Smart are safer than you'd imagine.

I'm concerned about the Smart individually. I have no problem with, say, The Honda Civic. I judge on a car-by-car basis.

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

How about if you live and work in Dallas? You can conceivably drive from home to work without touching the highway. And a lot of city dwellers are in exactly that situation... not everybody commutes on Lake Superior. I never said the Smart was the best highway car, especially if you are surrounded by lunatics that drive 20 MPH over the limit. (Being a DC resident, I can relate to that, too.)

I reiterate... it's not for everyone. It may well not be for you. But it is well-suited for a LOT of people. And if most of those lot drove a Smart, we could be talking about significant fuel savings and less pollution in America. Again, what's wrong with that?

You could conceivable live in Dallas a commute to work without using a freeway. I do, occasionally. But with the job flux of today, I wouldn't want to make an 8 year bet on it. Shucks, you could ever live in Dallas without a car, but it'd be a real limited lifestyle. (We call those lunatics slowpokes in Texas.)

If people make individual choices on their own, without coercion, fine. If somebody decides to make the choices for them, without their consent. then - evil, evil.