Hummers

I know this is probably a cliche, but i just hate these monsters. they have absolutely no purpose, seeing as to maybe 1% of owners ever take them offroad. they are ugly, horrible on the environment, slow, and dangerous to other drivers, just like all other SUV's. the hummer is just an extreme example of an SUV. and why would any sane person ever lower, put aftermarket rims, etc. on a hummer, or for that matter, an escalade or navigator or any other SUV? im glad in a way that this gas crisis is coming, because it will force SUV drivers to buy an economical, REAL car.


and while this is off topic, why is there the word "sport" in sport utility vehicle? i know im not the only one who knows these things aint exactly sporty.

I say if you have the money and want a toy and do those things to it, power to you.

My :2cents:

Bavarian Boy M3 the main reason that people will customose there SUV is the same reason that they if you had a normal car, but you have more of a variety on what to do. When you start of you do one thin at a time and on thing leads to another and you end up with a monster ot fit for the road.

With SUV's the fule economy is much cheaper than a normal car because the engine isnt woking to push the car (RWD) or to pull the car (FWD) it is desined to drive with all wheels moving the car this dosen't do anything to the fule economy.

Then why do Excursions and Hummers struggle to make up double digit MPG figures?


I say make it so that to drive an SUV (or Ute) of any sort you should need a special licence.

With SUV's the fule economy is much cheaper than a normal car because the engine isnt woking to push the car (RWD) or to pull the car (FWD) it is desined to drive with all wheels moving the car this dosen't do anything to the fule economy.

huh? Not all SUVs are 4WD, and even the AWDs aren't real off-road vehicles. And uh, hate to break it to ya, but most SUVs get less mileage than regular cars, it's just common sense. SUVs with off-road capabilities are real gas guzzlers, i.e. 4WD mode.

Not all SUVs are 4WD, and even the AWDs aren't real off-road vehicles.

car manufactures mark a vehicle as an AWD (All Wheel Drive) so if you were to take it off road they wont be blamed for any damaged because it is not marked as a 4WD.

SUVs with off-road capabilities are real gas guzzlers, i.e. 4WD mode.

you being a motorbike fan you wouldn't know that there are 3 modes 4WD can be in 2WD, High Range, and Low Range 4WD. 2WD is when you are in the city, High Range is when you are going over 70km/h so you don't wast alot of petrol, and Low Raing is when you realy want the strength out of the 4 wheels and that is when you waist the most amount of petrol. AWD only have 1 mode and that is and it is tecnical, they normully star of as RWD and when it detects a slight slip in the rear diferential then the front tyres get traction, this power to all wheels.

car manufactures mark a vehicle as an AWD (All Wheel Drive) so if you were to take it off road they wont be blamed for any damaged because it is not marked as a 4WD.



you being a motorbike fan you wouldn't know that there are 3 modes 4WD can be in 2WD, High Range, and Low Range 4WD. 2WD is when you are in the city, High Range is when you are going over 70km/h so you don't wast alot of petrol, and Low Raing is when you realy want the strength out of the 4 wheels and that is when you waist the most amount of petrol. AWD only have 1 mode and that is and it is tecnical, they normully star of as RWD and when it detects a slight slip in the rear diferential then the front tyres get traction, this power to all wheels.

how is that even relevant to what I said? it is a no-brainer that more fuel consumption when you have more tires spinning and more weight. figure it out. even if the SUV is FWD, the weight alone pushes down to 18-20 mpg, plus the power of the engine and the weight it's hauling are accountable variables. and those AWD systems are quite useless for off-roading in today's SUVs, they're different than real 4X4.

I test drove Land Rover Discovery during off-road demonstrations and almost bought one, so me being a motorbike fan... that made no sense at all.

Well I say screw functionality, you buy what you want. So many people act like you should just buy a vehicle for what you need; this is America, not the military. If you like big SUVs, then fine, buy 'em, if you can afford them is my motto.

With SUV's the fule economy is much cheaper than a normal car because the engine isnt woking to push the car (RWD) or to pull the car (FWD) it is desined to drive with all wheels moving the car this dosen't do anything to the fule economy.


Please don't tell you are actually trying to say that SUVs get better mileage because of AWD?


AWD only have 1 mode and that is and it is tecnical, they normully star of as RWD and when it detects a slight slip in the rear diferential then the front tyres get traction, this power to all wheels.


Do not lecture bavarian boy when you have no clue yourself. Most AWD cars nowadays are full time AWD generally with a 50/50 split that varies acording to tire slippage. And some AWD cars do have more than one mode, the 99+ Jeep Grand cherokees have a low transfer case for when the going gets tuff.

The system you described is present in only a few SUVs nowadays, FX series for example which employ the same system as the gtr skyline.

I thought "sport" in SUV was from the sportsmen who used them to hunt/camp/explore before SUVs were "in." Am i right?


The system you described is present in only a few SUVs nowadays, FX series for example which employ the same system as the gtr skyline.
Chevy suburbans have "auto 4wd" which also engages 4wd when there is slippage. It seems too complicated to be practical IMO.

@Bavarian Boy M3:
Yes some SUVs are large, but it is up to the driver to decide where to go/ not go. A smart person will stay out of small parking lots. Some do use their vehicles for what they were designed for (me :) ). As for the "bling" it is stupid IMO. I blame the rappers for starting the big rims on SUVs :disappoin

99+ Jeep Grand cherokees have a low transfer case for when the going gets tuff.

the 1999 Jeep Grand Chrokees were not named as a AWD it was named as a 4WD and when it gets tuff it certently dose .

Please don't tell you are actually trying to say that SUVs get better mileage because of AWD?quote]

The Toyota Rav4 has been marked as the mosed economical car in australia.

[quote]Do not lecture bavarian boy when you have no clue yourself. Most AWD cars nowadays are full time AWD generally with a 50/50 split that varies acording to tire slippage.

my old man owns a Rav4 befor he owned a Musso Turbo Diesel, the Musso was not constant 4WD but i will tell you one thing, that thing is that we only had to fill that beast 1 every 2 weeks. even though he used it every day doing about 100km. with the Rav4 which he purchesed 2 weeks ago he hasnt realy had time to check the economy. befor he had the musso he had a falcon and was forced to chaing it to gas because it was drinking petrol like water.

The system you described is present in only a few SUVs nowadays, FX series for example which employ the same system as the gtr skyline.

the system is simmelar but not the same. i was driving me old mans car on the weekend and yes it is a constant AWD car but not 50/50 it is most likely to be a 70/30 but it is constantly chainging sometimes 50/50 and sometimes 60/40 it is all done troungh a computer.

Do not lecture bavarian boy when you have no clue yourself.

i have had my head under the hood of a 4WD all my life if it was my old mans Musso, Or my cousins Jeep, or my uncles Land Cruser, and i have even worked on a R32 skyline GTSt

4WD is divided into 3 versions: Part-time 4WD, Full-time 4WD, and Automatic 4WD. Part-time means the vehicle operates in 2WD normally and you have to lock it into 4WD, which usually locks the center differential. Thus the front and rear axles are locked together, making it part-time since; even though such a system will ride okay on pavement when engaged, you'll wear the hell out of the transfer case since the axles should be able to turn at their own rate. Companies know most SUV owners are dumbos when it comes to 4WD systems, so they make sure the vehicle will still drive with the part-time system engaged, they just say not to do it in the vehicle's manual. But for idiots, it will still move along and not throw you out of control.

Full-time 4WD means power goes to all 4 wheels, but the front, center, and rear differentials are all open. Thus, yeah, power goes to all 4 wheels, but if one wheel starts slipping, all power goes to that wheel. Such a system is okay for like ice patches and stuff, but that is why all Jeep Cherokees that had full-time 4WD also had the part-time mode; cuz the part-time mode locks the center differential. Toyota Land Cruisers, which are full-time 4WD, allow you to lock the center and rear differentials, and on older models, the front differential.

Automatic 4WD is just what it sounds; it is automatic 4WD. NOT AWD. Automatic 4WD is when the vehicle operates in 2WD mode, then when wheel-slippage is detected, bam, it locks it into 4WD. Power does not go from this wheel to that wheel, etc....it just locks it into 4WD, probably a part-time 4WD mode.

AWD can operate in a lot of ways, but basically awd means the vehicle sends power "from the wheels that slip to the wheels that grip" as Subaru puts it. A lot of AWD vehicles may be labeled as full-time 4WD and vice-versa, but that is incorrect. Full-time 4WD is just that: full-time 4WD. It doesn't send power of varying amounts to different wheels. It is just plain 4WD that is for full-time use. With AWD the vehicle can operate in 2WD and then activate when wheels start slipping or power can be 50/50 or 35/65 and then activate if say the front needs more power than the rear. In the Ford Explorers, power in the older ones (like 1997) was split 35 front/65 rear (it might still be that; I don't know). Power could be varied around if wheels slipped. Jeep Grand Cherokees with the Quadra-Drive II(or is it Quadra-Trac II???)---the Jeep Grand Cherokee's AWD system---- operate in pure rear-wheel drive, then when wheel-slippage occurs, power is sent to the wheels that grip the best.

Remember, part-time 4WD, full-time 4WD, AWD, and automatic-4WD are separate things.

And also remember AWD just means that the power is sent from the wheels that slip to the wheels that grip. The vehicle can operate normally with power split 50/50, 35/65, or in 2WD until wheelspin occurs, or in other ways even. It depends on the manufacturer. Carlike SUVs with AWD usually operate in front wheel drive then activate AWD if needed. Truckl-ike ones are usually more rear-drive oriented until traction is needed.

gas guzzling

Ok lets look at the real type of ppl who would buy one

Nobody young could afford one, so it really leaves a few kids who get them as gifts and they dont matter.

You get the middle aged man. If he is single he wants something strong and brutish to impress everybody. Plus If he is married he wants to impress his friends and co workers and show everybody that his wife won't stop him from wasting money

Next is the middle aged women (almost no single middle aged woman would buy a hummer me thinks) who wants to keep her kids safe for the 3 minute trip to soccer practice

then theres the random old ppl who wanna look hip, and keep themselvs safe



Oh theres a new study that says you are 11% more likely to die in an SUV in an accident than a car...

Why is it that when an suv topic is started its always putting down the suv. :mad: It always starts with hating the big suvs but it seems that the tone of the message is applied to all types of suvs including the smaller ones, which I don't think are bad in fuel economy as oppose to the big ones. Regardless I think Broadsword2004 said it best.. Well I say screw functionality, you buy what you want. So many people act like you should just buy a vehicle for what you need; this is America, not the military. If you like big SUVs, then fine, buy 'em, if you can afford them is my motto.

my :2cents:

TS out

Oh theres a new study that says you are 11% more likely to die in an SUV in an accident than a car...

were did you hear this?? If they are talking about the Bronco well the Bronco was the worst SUV ever designed. Now they have safety features that some cars don’t have. With the high risk of a role over they have to take all the necessary percussions. I don’t know about in America but in Australia Ford have brought out a new SUV that is extremely safe.

I saw a few secs of good day live while I was working... There was a study on it. They said the reasons were easy rollover, and general aggressive, and careless driving from drivers who think they are secure in their SUV

It has been proven many times that SUVs are more dangerous because of their mass hurtling around at high speeds. If a larger car is safer then why is it that everyone isn't killed when they roll their ferrari at 100 mph. That would certainly kill the occupant of an SUV. However, in a head on collision the SUV would hold up better. But, it could kill the occupant of the other car who wouldn't have died had you been driving a miata.

If a larger car is safer then why is it that everyone isn't killed when they roll their ferrari at 100 mph.

i is highly difficult to roll over a car that is low to the ground, it is just basic physics. An SUV will roll over much easier than eny other car because they are high and they are not all that wide. this has been a major issue and car desingers are taking this into account.

There was a study on it. They said the reasons were easy rollover, and general aggressive, and careless driving from drivers who think they are secure in their SUV

once i was flicking through the channels, i was drawn to it (me being a 4WD fennatic) and they were talking about the roll over and the risks and what they do to solve them, and with the recent descovery that SUV can rollover at 50km/h. Car desingers were made to make the cars wider and lower. if you were to look at the new SUV's you will see how that has been acomplished. a major thing that the SUV's had to loose was ground clearence. VW and Porsche have brought out a brilient idea which makes the car lower at high speeds and rise when traveling at a slow speed.

I say if you have the money and want a toy and do those things to it, power to you.

My :2cents:

I agree 100%

i have had my head under the hood of a 4WD all my life if it was my old mans Musso, Or my cousins Jeep, or my uncles Land Cruser, and i have even worked on a R32 skyline GTSt

ummm if u are so smart u would know a r32 Gtst is a rwd

I'm all for people getting what they want.

I laugh at the communism style - get what you need and no more.













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

My pickup gets about 10 mpg, so am I "hurting the environment"?

My pickup gets about 10 mpg, so am I "hurting the environment"?
Depends on the Emissions, but you are draining fossil fuels, which pisses people like me off.....

I don't buy all this Greenhouse effect crap though, if anything it's getting colder, not warmer.

ummm if u are so smart u would know a r32 Gtst is a rwd

of course i knew that it was a rwd, i was just saying that i have worked on it.

of course i knew that it was a rwd, i was just saying that i have worked on it.

32 gtst isnt a great car.... unless its the one down here with the 400hp rb26 in it... drift monsta :)

drift monsta

it is especially with ist All Wheel Steering meaning that you can hold onto the drift for longer

it is especially with ist All Wheel Steering meaning that you can hold onto the drift for longer



or not...do you think nissan put those systems so you can oversteer?


and do you still belive that a RWD or AWD setups get better mileage than FWD, las time you did not answer directly so lets hear it

yes nissan did put them in the R32 not shure about the others but the set up isn't like the honda it is different
--------------------
\ \
Hnda Prleude
/ /
--------------------
\ \
Skyline R32
\ \
--------------------

with a FWD car they are pritty much the same as the AWD and the RWD are the ones that waist the most petrol, the main reason that you hear that the SUV's waisting petrol is because 1/2 of them are part time 4WD with a huge engine which makes it a part time RWD. you don't normally hear an AWD drinking petrol.

yes nissan did put them in the R32 not shure about the others but the set up isn't like the honda it is different
--------------------
\ \
Hnda Prleude
/ /
--------------------
\ \
Skyline R32
\ \
--------------------

with a FWD car they are pritty much the same as the AWD and the RWD are the ones that waist the most petrol, the main reason that you hear that the SUV's waisting petrol is because 1/2 of them are part time 4WD with a huge engine which makes it a part time RWD. you don't normally hear an AWD drinking petrol.
Yeah right..... So how do you explain the sudden increase in fuel consumption when I used to flick my dads Pajero (Quadcam 3.5 V6) from RWD to AWD??? Sorry, but that makes absoultely no sense whatsoever- The engine needs to work harder when in AWD- so how on earth does it consume less fuel?

with a FWD car they are pritty much the same as the AWD and the RWD are the ones that waist the most petrol, the main reason that you hear that the SUV's waisting petrol is because 1/2 of them are part time 4WD with a huge engine which makes it a part time RWD. you don't normally hear an AWD drinking petrol.


dude I'm sorry but as much as you claim to have worked on cars, you don't even know the basics.

FWD or mid engine RWD cars have the least parasitic loss at about 10%
RWD come second with around 15% loss
AWD cars have by far the most loss at around 20% sometimes as high as 25%

so yes AWD setup will cause the worse gas mileage with the same given engine, CD and gear ratios.

hmmm and extreemATV claims ot be a student of mechanical engineering when he doesnt seem 2 even have high school physics down....

you go and check it out at

http://www.gm.com/automotive/vehicle_shopping/suv_facts/300_env_emissions/3_fuel_economy.html

if you dont believe me

and why do i need to add physics to this

you go and check it out at

http://www.gm.com/automotive/vehicle_shopping/suv_facts/300_env_emissions/3_fuel_economy.html

if you dont believe me

and why do i need to add physics to this


WTF that proves absolutelly nothing, it just shows the gas mileages between brands. those are cars with completelly different engines, CDs and gear ratios the 3 other vital variables.

Anyway lets do this lets convert an EVO to FWD by removing the center and rear diff and lets compare its gas mileage to a regular AWD EVO. Yes the FWD evo will be by far more fuel efficient and it will put way more power to the wheels.

Dont belive me call Shiv at Vishnu tuning and ask him why the Buschur racing dyno reads more than his beside the differnce that one is a Dyno Dynamics Dyno and the other one is a Dynojet. I'll provide you with the phone numbers if you would like.



Ok and you claim to be a student of mechanical engineering so let me ask you this very simple questions:

1. How do you find which turbo compressor matches a given engine?
2. How does Af ratio affect the EGT?
3. If detonation is detected what is the first thing a car's ECU will do?

sounds like ExtreemATV isnt a mechanical engineer.

but i understand were he comes from.

my best mates GF ouns a Rav 4 which has great fule economy but not as much as a RWD car

yes nissan did put them in the R32 not shure about the others but the set up isn't like the honda it is different
--------------------
\ \
Hnda Prleude
/ /
--------------------
\ \
Skyline R32
\ \
--------------------

with a FWD car they are pritty much the same as the AWD and the RWD are the ones that waist the most petrol, the main reason that you hear that the SUV's waisting petrol is because 1/2 of them are part time 4WD with a huge engine which makes it a part time RWD. you don't normally hear an AWD drinking petrol.

NO HICAS and all 4ws (that i know of) turns the back wheels opposite to the front.... and hicas ruins drifting and hard cornering.... as a magazine once beautifully stated it.... "hicas comes in..... correcting ur steering inputs, in turn u correct its steering inputs, which inturn it corrects ur steering inputs which were correcting its steering inputs wich were correcting ur steering inputs in the first place...." (makes u think...)

people serious about performance have HICAS removed or disconnected....

I know this is probably a cliche, but i just hate these monsters. they have absolutely no purpose, seeing as to maybe 1% of owners ever take them offroad. they are ugly, horrible on the environment, slow, and dangerous to other drivers, just like all other SUV's. the hummer is just an extreme example of an SUV. and why would any sane person ever lower, put aftermarket rims, etc. on a hummer, or for that matter, an escalade or navigator or any other SUV? im glad in a way that this gas crisis is coming, because it will force SUV drivers to buy an economical, REAL car.


and while this is off topic, why is there the word "sport" in sport utility vehicle? i know im not the only one who knows these things aint exactly sporty.


People buy Hummers for the same reasons you bought your M3. It's name, price & look make it a status symbol. And (or) for its performance/capability.

If you really cared about the environment you'd be riding a 250cc motorcycle that gets 70MPG. Plus think how much safer someone driving a car would be hitting you riding a bike than if they hit your M3:D.

if you REALLY cared about the environement you would walk, compost, have a solar powered house, and go vegan! the point is most people want to help the environment to a certain extent, and an H2 doesn't help, it hurts; alot.

Then why do Excursions and Hummers struggle to make up double digit MPG figures?


I say make it so that to drive an SUV (or Ute) of any sort you should need a special licence.

I completely agree

if you REALLY cared about the environement you would walk, compost, have a solar powered house, and go vegan!

Ok all be more reasonable if he really cared about the environment he would have bought a Mini.

MPG
city/highway
H2 10/13
M3 16/24
Mini 25/37

i dont like most SUV's today because they have no capabilities at all... just big rolling mini-vans, except with less room than a station wagon...

Overpriced soccer mom mobiles.

NO HICAS and all 4ws (that i know of) turns the back wheels opposite to the front.... and hicas ruins drifting and hard cornering.... as a magazine once beautifully stated it.... "hicas comes in..... correcting ur steering inputs, in turn u correct its steering inputs, which inturn it corrects ur steering inputs which were correcting its steering inputs wich were correcting ur steering inputs in the first place...." (makes u think...)

people serious about performance have HICAS removed or disconnected....

i have seen the R32 with my own two eyes and the back tyres turn the same way as the front, maby it was an aftermarket job but just last week i overheard someone talking and they were talking about when chainging lanes in a R32 it is like the car is sliding left/right.

i know for a fact that the prelude turns the back wheels opposite to the front but the skyline dosen't.