Petrol expected to hit $2 a Litre

[Jesterarts]

With fuel going up, maybe my daily commute to the city will be quicker. Whatever the price, we need it or people will just have to seek alternatives.

At the moment, public transport for me and the missus works out to $16 per day. Early bird parking in the city is $16.

We drive her XC Barina in - averages 6.5 L/100km. Pretty good, and at the moment its worth forking out the extra in fuel and Brisbane's public transport system is notoriously unreliable on the westside.

If may reduce congestion a small bit, but I think most people who use the roads are either in company vehicles so they don't care about fuel OR don't have an option.

Having said that, I don't think you can squeeze many more people onto public transport. It's getting stupid.

Petrol is becoming unaffordable, public transport is rooted AND getting more expensive too. Just easier to stop working on get on the dole really.

Then all of your trips will only need to be a 3min walk to the local shops.

Need smokes, local shops
Need grog, local shops
Need drugs, local shops
Need to take the missus out, local shops...

[Stressball]

...I think most people who use the roads are either in company vehicles so they don't care about fuel...

Like me! In 12 months, at a set value of $1.28/L (so it's being quite optimistic in it's total cost) my gps reckons I've spent over $4,000 in fuel. It's mounted in the dash and it's always plugged in, so whether I'm actually using it or not, it always records distance traveled etc.

[Full Spectrum]

What a lot of shit!

space cadet.

And not too long ago a corolla and holden collided in a head just out of Geelong. The holden driver deceased, corolla driver survived. Cars can only be so safe, it is all luck when it involves a head on.

did you hear of the silly women that drove her ssv down the wrong side of the highway straight into a car. I agree with what you've said. but ive seen to many small large car accidents and cringed. however i'd rather be in a 5 star smaller car than my own 3-4 star car in an accident today. however given the choice of 5 star cars I'd be much more content in a larger 5 star. that being said i'm officially a Suzuki Kizashi fan so my car taste buds are changing.

Yeah I've seen the exact same thing. Generally I agree that larger cars are safer in head ons especially. Of course there are exceptions, but bigger crumple zones does make it safer, in older cars more so.

It's true. but i think we might be getting a raw deal here. i think it might be believed we are saying large cars of any time 2 star 3 star 4 star are safer than any new 5 star small car. we are not. we are comparing large 5 star with small 5 star. and the crash test is done in a closed setup environment with the perfect outcome time and time again. cars are made to beat the test and don't take real world factors into account.. like the smart car. that's one strong little car. until 2 trucks sandwich it into a pancake. you can't fight the mass.

[kuzman89]

It's true. but i think we might be getting a raw deal here. i think it might be believed we are saying large cars of any time 2 star 3 star 4 star are safer than any new 5 star small car. we are not. we are comparing large 5 star with small 5 star. and the crash test is done in a closed setup environment with the perfect outcome time and time again. cars are made to beat the test and don't take real world factors into account.. like the smart car. that's one strong little car. until 2 trucks sandwich it into a pancake. you can't fight the mass.

Funny how those certain members saying we were full of sh**t and wrong haven't replied after reading torch's posts that the ANCAP tests aren't the exactly 100% applicable in the real world. They were WRONG Just like torch mentioned with head ons. The smaller car has a much less likelihood of passenger survival. I think it's flawed too, as mentioned above, seatbelt alarms and 'door not closed' signs help add to the ANCAP rating. So in many instances driving a commodore is safer. I'll gladly pay extra.

[minux]

Funny how those certain members saying we were full of sh**t and wrong haven't replied after reading torch's posts that the ANCAP tests aren't the exactly 100% applicable in the real world. They were WRONG Just like torch mentioned with head ons. The smaller car has a much less likelihood of passenger survival. I think it's flawed too, as mentioned above, seatbelt alarms and 'door not closed' signs help add to the ANCAP rating. So in many instances driving a commodore is safer. I'll gladly pay extra.

*sigh*

Who said you were full of shit? You claimed bigger cars were safer. I said they were not. Sure in a mass head on accident there may be an advantage of 100-200kg. The problem is, most accidents on our roads are not head on. In which case the argument is flawed. The commodore for example tests much lower for the more common accidents.

As I said earlier, no bigger cars are not safer, it is a myth. They are simply a little bit better off in a dead frontal impact. In the scheme of things with your theory, it is like taking out flood insurance living on top of mt kosiosko. You are happy to pay it based on something that MAY happen but in reality probably never will.

For me, I will stick to a car that costs less to run, to service, to insure and will try not to drive into a commodore head first.

[nathanVY]

will try not to drive into a commodore head first.

Always a good policy

[SweetWagon]

What are your insurance bills? just out of curiosity

$738 annually for comprehensive

[Full Spectrum]

Funny how those certain members saying we were full of sh**t and wrong haven't replied after reading torch's posts that the ANCAP tests aren't the exactly 100% applicable in the real world. They were WRONG Just like torch mentioned with head ons. The smaller car has a much less likelihood of passenger survival. I think it's flawed too, as mentioned above, seatbelt alarms and 'door not closed' signs help add to the ANCAP rating. So in many instances driving a commodore is safer. I'll gladly pay extra.

You know what hes like lol.. Id feel safer all round in a larger sedan. The side on test its the only one they still dont consider weight in the force if the impact. Sure all cars made today come with side curtain airbags. Like touch said only the pole test is real as out doesn't involve the pole coming to you. Its only about you and your car hitting it at any speed.. Also its not just front accidents, rear hits. And we they can't argue the larger area for crumple and impact reduction will take more force away from the driver occupants.
I wrote an email to ancap asking about the different factors in accidents. They said even different engines can impact on the cars crumple zones. There's that many different factors they simply can't take all into account.
This its why the test they do ares not true indications of real world crashes. The VE 4 star in 06. 5 start because holden added a warning for seat belts lol. A small thing such as that won't be the difference between life and death in a real accident. The car really always was a 5 star.

I've had 2 accidents both frontal. Insurance 700 per year, 12,000 agreed value. Parts are like air everyone can get. I dont see the down side owning a larger car.

[kuzman89]

*sigh*

Who said you were full of shit? You claimed bigger cars were safer. I said they were not. Sure in a mass head on accident there may be an advantage of 100-200kg. The problem is, most accidents on our roads are not head on. In which case the argument is flawed. The commodore for example tests much lower for the more common accidents.

For me, I will stick to a car that costs less to run, to service, to insure and will try not to drive into a commodore head first.

CSP

What a lot of shit!

I don't know your definition of safe, but having a large car does come into it. A relative of mine was rear ended by a truck on the freeway a few years ago in a BA sedan. Write off but if it wasn't for it being a larger car with bigger bootspace etc i'm sure his friends in the back would have died or been seriously injured. Car ploughed off the road and into railing without the airbags going off which he survived also. Doubt the ANCAP would take this into account.

Having two 5 star rated cars with similiar technology, the larger car will be safer.

End of story!!

And commodores are cheap to service and repair. The amount of them on the road ensures this.

You know what hes like lol.. Id feel safer all round in a larger sedan. The side on test its the only one they still dont consider weight in the force if the impact. Sure all cars made today come with side curtain airbags. Like touch said only the pole test is real as out doesn't involve the pole coming to you. Its only about you and your car hitting it at any speed.. Also its not just front accidents, rear hits. And we they can't argue the larger area for crumple and impact reduction will take more force away from the driver occupants.
I wrote an email to ancap asking about the different factors in accidents. They said even different engines can impact on the cars crumple zones. There's that many different factors they simply can't take all into account.
This its why the test they do ares not true indications of real world crashes. The VE 4 star in 06. 5 start because holden added a warning for seat belts lol. A small thing such as that won't be the difference between life and death in a real accident. The car really always was a 5 star.

I've had 2 accidents both frontal. Insurance 700 per year, 12,000 agreed value. Parts are like air everyone can get. I dont see the down side owning a larger car.

wow big post. Yeah I agree, ANCAP doesn't really take into account rear hits as per my example above. Or technology failing. Or even as torch said, front ons with different sized cars. It's beyond a doubt that size does make a huge impact on safety.

Good post otherwise.

[torch]

*sigh*

Who said you were full of shit? You claimed bigger cars were safer. I said they were not. Sure in a mass head on accident there may be an advantage of 100-200kg. The problem is, most accidents on our roads are not head on. In which case the argument is flawed. The commodore for example tests much lower for the more common accidents.

As I said earlier, no bigger cars are not safer, it is a myth. They are simply a little bit better off in a dead frontal impact..

I did post something to "offset" your claims earlier, you aren't going to now dispute that rear end collisions never happen.

Interestingly in the last day, I was talking to a friend who got liberaced at the lights by someone who fell asleep and went straight into the back of his car at an estimated 70km/h, the vehicles were of about equal mass, so that represents an equivalent 35km/h collision with a brick wall for both. The friend in the rear ended car gets their head rammed into the back of their own head rest giving them a slight concussion, if he'd been in a vehicle double the mass, he'd probably have avoided an ambo ride to hospital, yet on the other hand it would have just transferred the trauma to the person that hit him.

Whilsts headons perhaps are rare, being caught up in a Liberace shuffle or Rock Hudson rendezvous is a lot more common and here mass is also a big factor in survivability, also interestingly the ancap ratings dont factor in testing for if you are the "pillow" (rather than the rock) in such a collison.

[VS.5L]

my fuel saving method has been to buy my 250cc ninja.... little beast costs $$19 bucks to fill up on BP 98 oct and last me over a week with 300km to a tank.... and have the VX SS as the weekender.... always worth a thought??? license is easy to get, bikes are cheap as chips for brand newies even less for used, insurance is $1000 a year with $150 excess, cant complain really............

[Full Spectrum]

CSP


I don't know your definition of safe, but having a large car does come into it. A relative of mine was rear ended by a truck on the freeway a few years ago in a BA sedan. Write off but if it wasn't for it being a larger car with bigger bootspace etc i'm sure his friends in the back would have died or been seriously injured. Car ploughed off the road and into railing without the airbags going off which he survived also. Doubt the ANCAP would take this into account.

Having two 5 star rated cars with similiar technology, the larger car will be safer.

End of story!!

And commodores are cheap to service and repair. The amount of them on the road ensures this.




wow big post. Yeah I agree, ANCAP doesn't really take into account rear hits as per my example above. Or technology failing. Or even as torch said, front ons with different sized cars. It's beyond a doubt that size does make a huge impact on safety.

Good post otherwise.

and I wrote that on my phone lol.

Thats right the ancap crash test is as good as we can get. But in the end it's not real world. But it's an indication of safety under a controlled environment. Much like the way fuel economy is fine in controlled conditions.