RLSH700

Thank you. Unfortunately it seems to be getting worse. What concerns me is companies like GE have virtually unchecked control on the flow of information. They own a news network that uses fear tactics to scare people in their news segments, then conveniently they have commercials for the "solution." I seriously want to throw my remote into the television and pull out a barf bag after I have to endure their pile of garbage commercials (but then I don't want to have to go out and pay them for a new one either so I just shout at it instead). I'm sure Edison would be as well if he saw what his company was doing today. And don't expect Uncle Sam to be a trust buster, Uncle Sam enjoys his donations from them too well.[:@] That's all I going to elaborate on that.

What I enjoy are cars that I believe are well balanced vehicles and serve a purpose in the market. I can see the merit and enjoy most product segments, even ones that culture tells us to loathe. I like minivans despite what others tells us about them because they are comfortable for long trips 8 hours or longer, they can reasonably sit 7 or 8 passengers comfortably, when design correctly they are safe, they get good fuel economy and current offerings aren't underpowered (they will never be mistaken as a muscle car, but that isn't why you buy a family hauler anyway), they offer a good room if you need it for business purposes, and they can have AWD if the manufacture decides to offer it. I'm not a fan of 7-passenger SUVs, not because of the reasons why many people do, but because they make them unbearable for final row passengers. My aunt and uncle have an Explorer and I have learned to hate that thing in just a few times riding in it. There is no leg room at all in the rear and the seats on the floor (translation: a return to the miserable state you were in riding in the back of station wagons, except I think those were more comfortable. To me, these are based on a person's vanity. They let these dumb images dictate what they should buy. What they get is a better image and 4-wheel drive if that is what they need, in exchange for a much higher price, lower fuel economy, slower acceleration in some cases, uncomfortable interior, more maintenance, and in some cases more reliability issues.

Muscle cars have their place as they have room for 4 or 5. They have lots of fun power and currently good interiors and options. The fuel economy is better than many cars with smaller engines and less room and they are safer than many other possible options.

As long as it gets better fuel economy and costs less than the next car larger, I like an economy car. What I don't like are types like the Aveo that gets worse fuel economy than the next larger car (the Cobalt) despite having a smaller engine, these beg the question of why they are even being produced.

I don't like hybrids as they are a distraction from the solution. They cost more than they save, they are NOT providing a true alternative fuel, and they do not resolve environmental "problems."

I like the idea Flex Fuel vehicles just not the way they are doing it. It should be done on Premium required vehicles as it can better reap the benefits than an ordinary vehicle. I also think that they should start to make E85 powered cars in selected markets. I also think it is stupid to make a requirement that all state or government vehicles should be flex fuel when they are NOT using E85 in the models. It's simply illogical.

I like FWD cars for their capabilities in snow. I like RWD for performance. I like AWD for weather and performance purposes but don't like the fuel consumption.

True trucks have their respective purposes

True SUVs in their respective sizes and built for the right purposes I like as well.

More than anything else, my primary concern is I get tired of snobby, know-it-all elitist like this guy who tares down a person who has done great things just because they don't like his views on a few things and chastises him for a few models they don't appreciate while ignoring all the models and ideas he contributed that the other company is now going to use. I also don't like are how little these snobs generally know. The memory length of these people is generally the length of their granola bar, if that long. They forget about failed ideas like the Probe and if you bring it up, they scoff and say it will work this time because they said so without having a underlying reason as to why. They write articles about vehicles you can tell they hate like Diesel trucks complaining non-stop about the noise and mock the fact that many of the owners enjoy the sound of a diesel. Every vehicle should have 3 or 4 valve per cylinder and be a DOHC configuration, and the smaller the better. They hate traditional pushrod engines. They ignore the significance of MDS systems as it doesn't fit their mold. People like this are too close minded to be objective and they lack the passion for a true diversity of vehicles as they only like certain types, and they are frankly out of touch. I may not like all types of vehicles, but I can appreciate a wider variety than these people do and frankly that's sad as I'm not being paid to be objective as they are.

Something else I would like to elaborate on, I have nothing against SOME of these ideas, I just don't like the premise being used here. I love the idea of this new Taurus SHO:

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...ook/index.html

I was never a fan of the last Taurus SHO as it never made sense to begin with (at a displacement of 3.4L why bother making it a V8? It costs more, uses more gas, will have higher insurance premiums, weighs more, etc.) as it never seemed to be a true extension of the first two SHOs. This lives up to it and I hope it is successful. I just don't want to see them ruin the Mustang is all. Even if I'm not crazy about the styling of these current ones inside or out, it is still part of the American Heritage that I want to see live on. I also want them to bring over the Falcon so then we can have a fun comparison between a Charger, G8, and Falcon.