What I see is, is that once upon a time the family ride would pull a boat, a camper, trailer, but todays family rides will not do it, front wheel drive with overdrive kills transmissions..........
We sure throw away a lot...
- Thread starter CourierDriver
- Start date
- Status
Cars at 3:17 and 3:20 look restorable! Curious what van that is to the left at 2:20.
426 hemi @2:01. The van @2:20 is a Willys
Anyone know what song this is on the video?
I got it. Moby "Mistake".
"We sure throw away a lot..."
OT: Saw on TV few weeks ago, they said that we throw away on average 30-35% of all the foods we bought.
The amount of food we throw away every year can feed more than 100 millions hungry people in third world countries.
OT: Saw on TV few weeks ago, they said that we throw away on average 30-35% of all the foods we bought.
The amount of food we throw away every year can feed more than 100 millions hungry people in third world countries.
Originally Posted By: CourierDriver
What I see is, is that once upon a time the family ride would pull a boat, a camper, trailer, but todays family rides will not do it, front wheel drive with overdrive kills transmissions..........
Once upon a time gas was pennies and therefore v8 rwd was the norm.
You generalization about FWD is incorrect. 1984 Subaru GL. 1.8l 4 cylinder engine. 71 hp.
Towed a tent trailer (not recommended) also a rooftop carrier, 2 adults and 2 teenagers and did so without any issues. Car lasted 18 years. Todays fwd cars should have no problem towing. Unfortunately the reality is, is that rwd is no longer in. Ive never seen a 4 cyl rwd..it must be reason for that and not many people need larger vehicles. Gas prices are the problem.
Todays society is all about disposable..buy something cuz its cheap not because it will last.
What I see is, is that once upon a time the family ride would pull a boat, a camper, trailer, but todays family rides will not do it, front wheel drive with overdrive kills transmissions..........
Once upon a time gas was pennies and therefore v8 rwd was the norm.
You generalization about FWD is incorrect. 1984 Subaru GL. 1.8l 4 cylinder engine. 71 hp.
Towed a tent trailer (not recommended) also a rooftop carrier, 2 adults and 2 teenagers and did so without any issues. Car lasted 18 years. Todays fwd cars should have no problem towing. Unfortunately the reality is, is that rwd is no longer in. Ive never seen a 4 cyl rwd..it must be reason for that and not many people need larger vehicles. Gas prices are the problem.
Todays society is all about disposable..buy something cuz its cheap not because it will last.
re "We Sure Throw a Lot Away"...
I was getting frustrated once about the junk that was being bought, cluttering the place for days to weeks depending on how junky it was, and then thrown away.
I offered to place a bin at the door, and the household could throw cash in there, so that I could empty it straight into the bin rather than waste all that time and effort shopping, buying junk, then throwing it out.
I'd advise against anyone here making that same offer, as it was a VERY cold shoulder, for a VERY long time.
I was getting frustrated once about the junk that was being bought, cluttering the place for days to weeks depending on how junky it was, and then thrown away.
I offered to place a bin at the door, and the household could throw cash in there, so that I could empty it straight into the bin rather than waste all that time and effort shopping, buying junk, then throwing it out.
I'd advise against anyone here making that same offer, as it was a VERY cold shoulder, for a VERY long time.
Originally Posted By: Rolla07
Originally Posted By: CourierDriver
What I see is, is that once upon a time the family ride would pull a boat, a camper, trailer, but todays family rides will not do it, front wheel drive with overdrive kills transmissions..........
Once upon a time gas was pennies and therefore v8 rwd was the norm.
You generalization about FWD is incorrect. 1984 Subaru GL. 1.8l 4 cylinder engine. 71 hp.
Towed a tent trailer (not recommended) also a rooftop carrier, 2 adults and 2 teenagers and did so without any issues. Car lasted 18 years. Todays fwd cars should have no problem towing. Unfortunately the reality is, is that rwd is no longer in. Ive never seen a 4 cyl rwd..it must be reason for that and not many people need larger vehicles. Gas prices are the problem.
Todays society is all about disposable..buy something cuz its cheap not because it will last.
Weren't there alot of little import trucks that were 4 cylinder rwd?
That snot green mustang fastback in the trees brought a tear to my eye. I think it came with a 390,and bias ply tires.
The horror.
Originally Posted By: CourierDriver
What I see is, is that once upon a time the family ride would pull a boat, a camper, trailer, but todays family rides will not do it, front wheel drive with overdrive kills transmissions..........
Once upon a time gas was pennies and therefore v8 rwd was the norm.
You generalization about FWD is incorrect. 1984 Subaru GL. 1.8l 4 cylinder engine. 71 hp.
Towed a tent trailer (not recommended) also a rooftop carrier, 2 adults and 2 teenagers and did so without any issues. Car lasted 18 years. Todays fwd cars should have no problem towing. Unfortunately the reality is, is that rwd is no longer in. Ive never seen a 4 cyl rwd..it must be reason for that and not many people need larger vehicles. Gas prices are the problem.
Todays society is all about disposable..buy something cuz its cheap not because it will last.
Weren't there alot of little import trucks that were 4 cylinder rwd?
That snot green mustang fastback in the trees brought a tear to my eye. I think it came with a 390,and bias ply tires.
The horror.
My shed is a good example of what happens if you don't throw stuff away - but I can't help it, I just hate to see good things thrown away. I'm often in the bins at work pulling stuff out and taking it home.
Here's an example of what I stoop too - sometime last year I was out for a ride, and stopped for a relief break at one of the freshwater dams. The rubbish bin at the toilet block was full of stuff....rotten food mainly, but I picked it out and pulled out this. It's French and dated 1975 - a clean up and leather dressing and it's good for another 35 years.
Here's an example of what I stoop too - sometime last year I was out for a ride, and stopped for a relief break at one of the freshwater dams. The rubbish bin at the toilet block was full of stuff....rotten food mainly, but I picked it out and pulled out this. It's French and dated 1975 - a clean up and leather dressing and it's good for another 35 years.
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
"We sure throw away a lot..."
OT: Saw on TV few weeks ago, they said that we throw away on average 30-35% of all the foods we bought.
The amount of food we throw away every year can feed more than 100 millions hungry people in third world countries.
most likely the food you throw out feeds the homeless who dig through the garbage. I saw a cheapskate show of an asian lady in NY going through garbage cans of a restaurants to save money.
"We sure throw away a lot..."
OT: Saw on TV few weeks ago, they said that we throw away on average 30-35% of all the foods we bought.
The amount of food we throw away every year can feed more than 100 millions hungry people in third world countries.
most likely the food you throw out feeds the homeless who dig through the garbage. I saw a cheapskate show of an asian lady in NY going through garbage cans of a restaurants to save money.
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
"We sure throw away a lot..."
OT: Saw on TV few weeks ago, they said that we throw away on average 30-35% of all the foods we bought.
The amount of food we throw away every year can feed more than 100 millions hungry people in third world countries.
I've been to most countries in the world. Many of those "poor and starving" are idiots and/or have awful governments. Our earth has 7 Billion people on it. The reason it supports so many is INDUSTRIAL AGRICULTURE. Those that choose to avoid this, and rely on the land to provide will end up in the same conditions our ancestors did.
Here in the States, we grow, harvest and raise more than we can use. That's the way it SHOULD be. Throwing out food is not a crime. Not growing enough is!
"We sure throw away a lot..."
OT: Saw on TV few weeks ago, they said that we throw away on average 30-35% of all the foods we bought.
The amount of food we throw away every year can feed more than 100 millions hungry people in third world countries.
I've been to most countries in the world. Many of those "poor and starving" are idiots and/or have awful governments. Our earth has 7 Billion people on it. The reason it supports so many is INDUSTRIAL AGRICULTURE. Those that choose to avoid this, and rely on the land to provide will end up in the same conditions our ancestors did.
Here in the States, we grow, harvest and raise more than we can use. That's the way it SHOULD be. Throwing out food is not a crime. Not growing enough is!
The US (subsidized) agricultural system undermines a poor country's ability to create its own agricultural base. Tomatoes flown in from Cali are cheaper than growing locally and employing ones neighbors. In some ways this contributes to the problem.
Originally Posted By: simple_gifts
The US (subsidized) agricultural system undermines a poor country's ability to create its own agricultural base. Tomatoes flown in from Cali are cheaper than growing locally and employing ones neighbors. In some ways this contributes to the problem.
I don't believe that for a second. Sub Saharan Africa is unlikely to get inexpensive veggies and fruit from Cali. Nor is labor cost likely to be a factor there.
The US (subsidized) agricultural system undermines a poor country's ability to create its own agricultural base. Tomatoes flown in from Cali are cheaper than growing locally and employing ones neighbors. In some ways this contributes to the problem.
I don't believe that for a second. Sub Saharan Africa is unlikely to get inexpensive veggies and fruit from Cali. Nor is labor cost likely to be a factor there.
Originally Posted By: Cujet
Originally Posted By: simple_gifts
The US (subsidized) agricultural system undermines a poor country's ability to create its own agricultural base. Tomatoes flown in from Cali are cheaper than growing locally and employing ones neighbors. In some ways this contributes to the problem.
I don't believe that for a second. Sub Saharan Africa is unlikely to get inexpensive veggies and fruit from Cali. Nor is labor cost likely to be a factor there.
It's not as simple as that.
US Wheat and Corn is subsidized and was subsidized partly to make it so cheap that it could be exported in order to feed the world. Additionally, US productivity is so high, it is cheaper for poorer countries to import highly nutritionally dense foods such as these.
A major consequences of this low cost is carbs taking a bigger and bigger proportion of the western diet and this has led to all the western diseases.
So not only are we eating the wrong food and giving ourselves these diseases, we're also exporting the same food and will be giving the rest of the world those same diseases.
Originally Posted By: simple_gifts
The US (subsidized) agricultural system undermines a poor country's ability to create its own agricultural base. Tomatoes flown in from Cali are cheaper than growing locally and employing ones neighbors. In some ways this contributes to the problem.
I don't believe that for a second. Sub Saharan Africa is unlikely to get inexpensive veggies and fruit from Cali. Nor is labor cost likely to be a factor there.
It's not as simple as that.
US Wheat and Corn is subsidized and was subsidized partly to make it so cheap that it could be exported in order to feed the world. Additionally, US productivity is so high, it is cheaper for poorer countries to import highly nutritionally dense foods such as these.
A major consequences of this low cost is carbs taking a bigger and bigger proportion of the western diet and this has led to all the western diseases.
So not only are we eating the wrong food and giving ourselves these diseases, we're also exporting the same food and will be giving the rest of the world those same diseases.
Originally Posted By: Cujet
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
"We sure throw away a lot..."
OT: Saw on TV few weeks ago, they said that we throw away on average 30-35% of all the foods we bought.
The amount of food we throw away every year can feed more than 100 millions hungry people in third world countries.
I've been to most countries in the world. Many of those "poor and starving" are idiots and/or have awful governments. Our earth has 7 Billion people on it. The reason it supports so many is INDUSTRIAL AGRICULTURE. Those that choose to avoid this, and rely on the land to provide will end up in the same conditions our ancestors did.
Here in the States, we grow, harvest and raise more than we can use. That's the way it SHOULD be. Throwing out food is not a crime. Not growing enough is!
Most of the food problem we have in the world is logistics and the ability to use machines, fuel, etc to increase production rate. i.e. If you pay 10x the price, you can grow 5x the food and throw away 4/5 of it. Poor nations cannot afford paying 10x the price so they only grow just enough, with a bull if they are lucky, instead of an air conditioned tractor.
The yield driven agriculture in US produce some of the worst tasting food I can find (non organic meat in particular). It is probably 2nd only to the fake and toxic food you'll find in China. Sure we are stuffed to the gill and waste 40% of them (grow enough so you can throw away the not so good looking one, or just in case you have a bad harvest), but they don't taste good.
Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
"We sure throw away a lot..."
OT: Saw on TV few weeks ago, they said that we throw away on average 30-35% of all the foods we bought.
The amount of food we throw away every year can feed more than 100 millions hungry people in third world countries.
I've been to most countries in the world. Many of those "poor and starving" are idiots and/or have awful governments. Our earth has 7 Billion people on it. The reason it supports so many is INDUSTRIAL AGRICULTURE. Those that choose to avoid this, and rely on the land to provide will end up in the same conditions our ancestors did.
Here in the States, we grow, harvest and raise more than we can use. That's the way it SHOULD be. Throwing out food is not a crime. Not growing enough is!
Most of the food problem we have in the world is logistics and the ability to use machines, fuel, etc to increase production rate. i.e. If you pay 10x the price, you can grow 5x the food and throw away 4/5 of it. Poor nations cannot afford paying 10x the price so they only grow just enough, with a bull if they are lucky, instead of an air conditioned tractor.
The yield driven agriculture in US produce some of the worst tasting food I can find (non organic meat in particular). It is probably 2nd only to the fake and toxic food you'll find in China. Sure we are stuffed to the gill and waste 40% of them (grow enough so you can throw away the not so good looking one, or just in case you have a bad harvest), but they don't taste good.
Originally Posted By: Rolla07
Ive never seen a 4 cyl rwd..it must be reason for that and not many people need larger vehicles.
Yes, you have, every single day of your life, I would bet.
Here's a quick list of vehicles that have 4 cylinder engines that are RWD, that not only do I bet you know about, but you have seen with your own eyes, either in person, or in a movie, or a post on an internet forum:
Lets go back to the Late 70's/early 80's:
How about the Chevette? Pinto? Vega?
How about pickup trucks?
Toyota Tacoma is still made today in RWD versions, and with a 4 cylinder engine.
Want a sports car?
Scion FRS/Subaru BRZ, made today.
Or even the Mazda Miata. Can you claim you've never heard of the Miata?
How about a mid engined RWD car?
Lotus Elise comes to mind immediately.
How about a luxury sports car?
BMW 3 series has a turbocharged 4 cylinder, and RWD.
Just because you can't think about a certain drivetrain layout, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
BC.
Ive never seen a 4 cyl rwd..it must be reason for that and not many people need larger vehicles.
Yes, you have, every single day of your life, I would bet.
Here's a quick list of vehicles that have 4 cylinder engines that are RWD, that not only do I bet you know about, but you have seen with your own eyes, either in person, or in a movie, or a post on an internet forum:
Lets go back to the Late 70's/early 80's:
How about the Chevette? Pinto? Vega?
How about pickup trucks?
Toyota Tacoma is still made today in RWD versions, and with a 4 cylinder engine.
Want a sports car?
Scion FRS/Subaru BRZ, made today.
Or even the Mazda Miata. Can you claim you've never heard of the Miata?
How about a mid engined RWD car?
Lotus Elise comes to mind immediately.
How about a luxury sports car?
BMW 3 series has a turbocharged 4 cylinder, and RWD.
Just because you can't think about a certain drivetrain layout, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
BC.
Originally Posted By: yonyon
Originally Posted By: Rolla07
Ive never seen a 4 cyl rwd..it must be reason for that
The reason is that you haven't looked. 4-cyl RWDs aren't as common as they used to be but they're still out there.
Ford Pinto, MustangII. Chevy Vega, Pontiac Sunbird. Toyota Corolla, Mazda B2200. And those are just what I've owned....
Originally Posted By: Rolla07
Ive never seen a 4 cyl rwd..it must be reason for that
The reason is that you haven't looked. 4-cyl RWDs aren't as common as they used to be but they're still out there.
Ford Pinto, MustangII. Chevy Vega, Pontiac Sunbird. Toyota Corolla, Mazda B2200. And those are just what I've owned....
- Status
