Gillard's $2k offer
in [Aussie Drivers]
|
Prev: Trucks and right lanes (Vic)
Next: 88 Tarago
From: D Walford on 26 Jul 2010 06:03 On 26/07/2010 8:59 AM, Trevor Wilson wrote: > I was thinking about this over the weekend. > > Anyone know what the fuel consumption figures of the PM's Com-Car is? > > I assume it is a V8. Fuel consumption would be no better than 9L/100km. > Combined figures are going to be considerably worse. > > My 1992 6 cyl Dunny-dore returns around 7.5 L/100km. I reckong that figure > is probably superior to the PM's car. Driven on the same road at the same speed as yours the Com car which AFAIK is a Statesman could use less than 7.5lts/100klms, those Holden V8's are very economical when cruising at hwy speeds. What am I going to get (that has > similar load carrying capacity of my Dunny Dore) with better fuel economy? A > Diesel van? TD Hilux has about the same economy and when you drive one people don't point and shout "looser" as they do to old Holden drivers. Must be sad to be so desperately poor that you have to drive an old dunny:-) > > No thanks. > > Let's see the Pollys place themselves into Diesels or Prius' BEFORE I am > forced to trade up(?) to a new car. What makes you think you will be "forced" to trade up to a new car? Even if it is economical a 1992 Commodore is still a horrible POS that I wouldn't drive if you gave it to me for free. Daryl
From: Clocky on 26 Jul 2010 06:34 who where wrote: > On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 10:22:08 +1000, Sylvia Else > <sylvia(a)not.here.invalid> wrote: > >> All we need to do is correct the current impression in the minds of >> passengers that it's somehow wrong for them to gang up and kick the >> stuffing out of thugs on trains. Then there'll be no more need for >> transit guards. > > that assumes of course that the passengers outnumber the thugs rather > than the converse. Unsound assumption. Plus people should be able to go about their business without having to resort to thuggery to sort out other thugs.
From: John_H on 26 Jul 2010 07:25 Trevor Wilson wrote: >I was thinking about this over the weekend. > >Anyone know what the fuel consumption figures of the PM's Com-Car is? > >I assume it is a V8. Fuel consumption would be no better than 9L/100km. >Combined figures are going to be considerably worse. > >My 1992 6 cyl Dunny-dore returns around 7.5 L/100km. I reckong that figure >is probably superior to the PM's car. What am I going to get (that has >similar load carrying capacity of my Dunny Dore) with better fuel economy? A >Diesel van? > >No thanks. > >Let's see the Pollys place themselves into Diesels or Prius' BEFORE I am >forced to trade up(?) to a new car. Since it's election time they're not forcing anyone to do anything! Much better for the rest of us if the respective state governments simply taxed those dangerous old heaps of junk off the road well before their next election. ;-) -- John H
From: Sylvia Else on 26 Jul 2010 08:02 On 26/07/2010 8:34 PM, Clocky wrote: > who where wrote: >> On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 10:22:08 +1000, Sylvia Else >> <sylvia(a)not.here.invalid> wrote: >> >>> All we need to do is correct the current impression in the minds of >>> passengers that it's somehow wrong for them to gang up and kick the >>> stuffing out of thugs on trains. Then there'll be no more need for >>> transit guards. >> >> that assumes of course that the passengers outnumber the thugs rather >> than the converse. Unsound assumption. > > Plus people should be able to go about their business without having to > resort to thuggery to sort out other thugs. > > It's clearly a desirable state of affairs. But sadly it's not one we have. We've bred a society of victims. Sylvia.
From: Milton on 26 Jul 2010 08:02
"Noddy" <Mission.Control(a)NASA.com> wrote in message news:4c4cf6fc$0$12395$c30e37c6(a)exi-reader.telstra.net... > > "Trevor Wilson" <trevor(a)rageaudio.com.au> wrote in message > news:8b3tvvFn0tU1(a)mid.individual.net... > >> Let's see the Pollys place themselves into Diesels or Prius' BEFORE I am >> forced to trade up(?) to a new car. >> >> [Shakes head] > > As I understand it, Gillard's version of the "cash for clunkers" scheme is > an incentive, not compulsory, so I don't think anyone will be forcing you > to do anything. How dare she call my 180B a clunker. Clapper maybe, but no clunker. Regards Milton |