Dumbest things you've heard non car people say

[Cudwieser]

Pretty much true, but... Bending the rules slightly the GTR (in the US) is only 110k approx for the base model. That is for the current gen. Since Dealers will often drop the price the longer a car sits It isn't unreasonable for older stock to lose significant value. A 'new' GTR for under 100k isn't unreasonable and I'd wager that what some of the commenters are gobbing off about are 2015 year and older models still being sold new while this years model is on offer.

[Misumi]

Those people are probably remembering the good ol days when the GTR was priced around $70-90K. That was back around 2007-2009 I think. Maybe they're too lazy to update their information. Nowadays, a new GTR easily breaks into $100K. Still a great car though.

[Gnocchi Flip Flops]

I'm sorry. It's like a trigger when I hear people say that cars are boring or claim that they're all the same. Especially the latter. It just screams 1) boring person and given other factors I've noticed about them 2) plain ignorance.

[DOUGL4S1]

"Why sould I waste money with new tires, these (bald) are fine!"

**About a month later his car hydroplaned into a ditch**

[Cudwieser]

"Why sould I waste money with new tires, these (bald) are fine!"

**About a month later his car hydroplaned into a ditch**

Lucky! He could have had a delamination and blowout causing a more significant problem.

[DOUGL4S1]

 

"Why sould I waste money with new tires, these (bald) are fine!"

**About a month later his car hydroplaned into a ditch**

Lucky! He could have had a delamination and blowout causing a more significant problem.

 

That's actually what he was told later.

[Misumi]

Hydroplaning into a ditch is pretty significant already.

[Cudwieser]

Hydroplaning into a ditch is pretty significant already.

True, but with bald tyres it can happen at pretty low speeds (under 50 mph). While a blowout can occur at low speeds it generally take the pressure to build up to those similar when a car is moving at about 50 or higher meaning the reaction is usually more rapid and painful.

[InstaNoodles]

I don't remeber where I saw this one. Maybe off of an old Top Gear episode on Youtube.

 

"Why do Americans call petrol, gas? It's a liquid, not a gas you dumb yanks."

[Cudwieser]

Technically true, but still missing the point.

 

Serious question now. Why do americans call it gasoline while others call it petrolium?

[SouthLand]

In my country, in the Region where i am from, in Spanish we call it "Gasolina" but in Catalan we call it "Benzina"

[InstaNoodles]

Technically true, but still missing the point.

 

Serious question now. Why do americans call it gasoline while others call it petrolium?

From what I read, petrol is the shortened word for refined petroleum. There is a problem though. Petroleum and refined petroleum aren't the same thing, because petroleum only refers to crude oil.

So here in the states, since gasoline is the technical term for refined petroleum, we say that instead, and it's been shortened to the word, gas.

That's my guess, and I might be wrong.

[Cudwieser]

 

Technically true, but still missing the point.

 

Serious question now. Why do americans call it gasoline while others call it petrolium?

From what I read, petrol is the shortened word for refined petroleum. There is a problem though. Petroleum and refined petroleum aren't the same thing, because petroleum only refers to crude oil.

So here in the states, since gasoline is the technical term for refined petroleum, we say that instead, and it's been shortened to the word, gas.

That's my guess, and I might be wrong.

 

Fair point. Petrol is used as an industry term here (even if it is generic) to refer to the refined oil (the original terms were distilate or ether iirc). Crude is sometimes used in reference to early Diesel engines due to their ability to run on pretty coarse fuel. As things currently stand the terms petrol, Diesel Crude, et al are used as reference to the level of distilation and refinment of crude.

[InstaNoodles]

"Vile polluting gas guzzlers why do you yanks still use them your known for being the worst greenhouse gas provider's on earth don't you think we're all suffering enough with out those monsters still being used come on yanks get with the plan"

 

Found this off of a saabkyle04 video. He was reviewing a 1979 Pontiac Bonneville Safari...

[Misumi]

^ Youtube?

 

Sounds like Youtube.

[InstaNoodles]

^ Youtube?

 

Sounds like Youtube.

Yeah. Saabkyle04 is a youtuber who posts car reviews. He used to do cool old farts and has-been cars like the Pontiac, but now he's moved on to modern sports and syper cars.

[Gnocchi Flip Flops]

Um, he does reviews more like modern cars in general, not just sports cars.

Edited May 27, 2017 by Scaglietti

[Average white guy]

"Vile polluting gas guzzlers why do you yanks still use them your known for being the worst greenhouse gas provider's on earth don't you think we're all suffering enough with out those monsters still being used come on yanks get with the plan"

 

Found this off of a saabkyle04 video. He was reviewing a 1979 Pontiac Bonneville Safari...

If they aren't trolling, they should understand that not everyone drives an "old, gas guzzling monster". They should also realize that pollution coming from classics is absolutely minuscule. There aren't enough of them driving around to cause catastrophic climate change.

Edited May 27, 2017 by Average white guy

[Cudwieser]

Also bear in mind a lot has to be said of how a car is driven and fuel used. Strictly speaking older cars use lead additives or should have be adapted for unleaded fuel (better a kick in the teeth now than a regular kick in the balls every time you service the car), but as AWG has said there aren't many older cars about. If the half of them are running unleaded and are cruised around the mpg and emissions (regular unleaded is 90 octane or less on average, so doesn't burn up as quick as 95 or rocket fuel 98 or 105) would be of less concern than the combined powerstation emissions used to power electrical devices such as charge points for electric vehicles. Drive a 5.7 litre pontiac at little more than 2500-3000 rpm (probably less) at 50mph on the open road and you could eke 30mpg or more at about 200g/km at worst (a fresh engine might even run cleaner).

 

At the end of the day the truth of cars is rarely known as more attention is placed on power, torque and point to point performance with little real world value being acknowledged. Very few publications acknowledge real world usage and all still focus on the fun factor. Don't get me wrong a Firebird was build with fun in mind, but if you are going to get into the minutae of emissions and other boring stuff then look at the competition and consider how you actually test the boring stuff.

[InstaNoodles]

So, these two guys at my school were talking about cars. They sit infront of me in my 2nd period, so I had a front row seat to their conversation. I know they're both car guys, and I hear one of them say, "Japanese cars are sh*t. They're all total crap."

A little backstory: my 2nd period is chemistry and we were studying moles and molar mass. We had a project, and for this project you had to find the moles of gasoline and carbon dioxide your dream car consumes and produces, and then we had to make a poster about it. So, the car I chose was a 1987 Nissan 200sx XE (aka the S12).

It's one of my favorite cars, so I had to put in my 2 cents. So I said, "Japanese cars aren't that bad." The guy who ragged on Japanese cars replied, "They're pretty bad." His friend then asked me, "What car are you doing, [my name]?" I tell him I was doing a Nissan 200sx, to which the guy who dissed Japanese cars said, "Nissan? Nissans are crap, bro. You should get a European car." I didn't say anything to them after that...

Edited June 13, 2017 by InstaNoodles

[Cudwieser]

Good Grief. They had you chasing Moles to weigh. What were those teachers thinking...

 

Seriously though what were your conclusions?

Edited June 13, 2017 by Cudwieser

[InstaNoodles]

Good Grief. They had you chasing Moles to weigh. What were those teachers thinking...

 

Seriously though what were your conclusions?

Well, I did a base model 200sx, so it has a 1.8 litre I4 with a 5-speed manual. On average, it gets 24 mpg. If I daily drove it about 15,000 miles a year, it would consume an average of 625 gallons of gas and would produce around 331 grams (1993.282×10^23 moles) of CO2 in the process.

 

 

My math MIGHT be off...

 

 

Edited June 14, 2017 by InstaNoodles

[DOUGL4S1]

Not really 'car' related, and happened a few years ago:

 

**discussing self-driving trucks with other friends and a teacher**

"Trucks should be banned!"

"So how will people do their deliveries then?"

"By plane".

[Cudwieser]

Not really 'car' related, and happened a few years ago:

 

**discussing self-driving trucks with other friends and a teacher**

"Trucks should be banned!"

"So how will people do their deliveries then?"

"By plane".

[Average white guy]

From the comment section of a video about self-driving cars:

 

"For me, driving is an excuse - laziness, and a sad reminder;this planet's being destroyed - RAPIDLY - by(amongst other things) gas guzzling vehicles, and the self-satisfied people in them."

[Cudwieser]

From the comment section of a video about self-driving cars:

 

"For me, driving is an excuse - laziness, and a sad reminder;this planet's being destroyed - RAPIDLY - by(amongst other things) gas guzzling vehicles, and the self-satisfied people in them."

 

Really! Pass me the jump cables so I can jump start that idiots reality. FFS some pricks really get to me (sanctamonious liars especially) LAZY! SELF DRIVING IS WHAT NOW!? Useless c**t (not you the guy you're talking about). Planet being destroyed by unhelpful regressivism coming from the pseudo socialists. If you know not of which you speak ffs wish not upon anyone what you preach. Idiot!.

[Average white guy]

Yeah and there are many more monumentally stupid comments on self-driving car videos. Such as:

 

"quit clinging to horse and buggy"

"You enjoy driving!?! what's wrong with you? You need help if you find enjoyment in driving."

"I don't care how good you are, everyone is a bad driver and therefore endangering many lives."

"Horse enthusiasts had to accept the car 100 yrs ago; and so will you with self-driving cars."

 

The asshats who think driving should be illegal act as if they're the most intelligent human beings alive, yet they say the dumbest sh*t.

[Cudwieser]

Yeah and there are many more monumentally stupid comments on self-driving car videos. Such as:

 

"quit clinging to horse and buggy"

"You enjoy driving!?! what's wrong with you? You need help if you find enjoyment in driving."

"I don't care how good you are, everyone is a bad driver and therefore endangering many lives."

"Horse enthusiasts had to accept the car 100 yrs ago; and so will you with self-driving cars."

 

The asshats who think driving should be illegal act as if they're the most intelligent human beings alive, yet they say the dumbest sh*t.

I could start riot right about now. Not here of course since we are dealing with sensible people here, but damn there is so much willful ignorance (calling the stupid is just too polite) on YT comments. Also the clown you spoke of the horse and buggy clearly doesn't live in Pennsylvania. They'll have a fit in Lancaster.

 

Self Driving has the potential to be safer, but equally has more potential for delay and congestion. Ultimately what makes driving dangerous is uncertainty and inability. Over confidence is certainly just as bad, but you still need confidence. With confidence you can make decisions more quickly and accurately that can solve a problem and ease congestion as you won't be affraid to try new routes to get to where you want. Since you are in control of a vehicle you can act as quick as think instead of thinking, then being too late to act. While self drivers will certainly keep distance and are unlikely to touch, ask yourself what will they do to counter the human factor such as the junction shuffle or the courteous driver (letting someone out of a side road).

 

Most of what I've spoken about is urban driving. That is because rural driving is no safer in a self driver than a driven car. In truth it is even safer on open road to drive the car yourself as you are able to react more effectively than a self driver that will get stumped by the likes of cyclists and tractors.

 

One thing seems evident are those making ridiculous comments against driving seem to be young non-driving urbanites who really haven't gone beyond the coffee shop in their local berg or borough. Horse enthunisasts still ride horses, they only use cars as a means of going further and protecting the horse (the car didn't kill the horse, it saved it). As for enjoying driving, it is evident many will never know the thrill of being able to go where you want, when you want with relative impunity instead of being stuck to a timetable or a very long walk. The thrill of driving doesn't mean driving like a tit, it means freedom and adventure (although a chance to test the car is fun).

 

I've had my rant and now know who not to listen to for the sake of my sanity. Thank you for listening

[Average white guy]

The comment sections of those videos are filled to the brim with ignorance and blind hatred. Someone leaves a comment: "Self-driving is cool, but I'd still prefer to drive myself." Then this happens: "If you chose to endanger lives by driving yourself, you will receive punishment." or: "No, you will have to adapt to the future. Driving is dangerous and cars are a public threat,welcome change you dinosaur."

 

Some top comments from the anti-driving:

 

"Driving will be viewed as a hobby just like horseback riding." "You will still be able to drive on race tracks." "You 'car people' will need to discover new hobbies. Maybe self-improving ones that won't endanger others lives."

 

First, they have no clue as to how big car culture is. Second, they have no idea how tracks work or what they're for. Third, they believe that self-driving cars will take over in just a few years.

 

You can't debate them because they resort to insults when challenged. Their stupid comments can produce a good laugh or two, but most will make you want to destroy the universe.

[Cudwieser]

The comment sections of those videos are filled to the brim with ignorance and blind hatred. Someone leaves a comment: "Self-driving is cool, but I'd still prefer to drive myself." Then this happens: "If you chose to endanger lives by driving yourself, you will receive punishment." or: "No, you will have to adapt to the future. Driving is dangerous and cars are a public threat,welcome change you dinosaur."

 

Some top comments from the anti-driving:

 

"Driving will be viewed as a hobby just like horseback riding." "You will still be able to drive on race tracks." "You 'car people' will need to discover new hobbies. Maybe self-improving ones that won't endanger others lives."

 

First, they have no clue as to how big car culture is. Second, they have no idea how tracks work or what they're for. Third, they believe that self-driving cars will take over in just a few years.

 

You can't debate them because they resort to insults when challenged. Their stupid comments can produce a good laugh or two, but most will make you want to destroy the universe.

The worst of it is that we are talking a social decline into idiocracy (to quote the film). Most commentors are young and lazy c**ts who will do nothing for themselves and demand you do everything for them. They are the desperate arseholes who would willfully starve before accepting a basic human need to react to need. I will say one thing though, the bidet industry will be in rude health in the next decade given no ones desire to wipe their own arse.

 

P.S Which is more dangerous. Sucking eggs or teaching your granny how to do it?

Edited June 18, 2017 by Cudwieser