On Dec 9, 2009, at 9:16 AM, Dave Mcneely wrote:

> I don't know if you are crazy, but the idea of using a 14 mpg,  
> expensive to maintain vehicle for regular driving around a metro  
> area is crazy. If the capacity is needed for regularly hauling  
> stuff, or people, some other vehicles that get much better miileage  
> are available.  If the capacity is needed for just occasional  
> jaunts, then rental when needed is a real, and effective, option.   
> Just my judgement, since you asked us.  I have a '91 Vanagon GL  
> Campmobile (commonly called a Westphalia or "Westy," though neither   
> is the name of the vehicle).  I use it for camping only, and have a  
> Prius and an old Honda Accord for day to day driving about and for  
> road trips (the Prius) when the special attributes of the camper are  
> not needed.

i wonder about the environmental costs of owning three cars as opposed  
to one that gets bad gas milage.  i have read that by the time a car  
is built it has created around a quarter of the pollution it will  
create in it's lifetime.  since i have no idea where i read that it  
may be totally incorrect.

here is an article that has some mention of this: www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/mar/10/car-scrappage-payments
"A paper published in 2000 by the journal Transportation Research  
comes to even grimmer conclusions: that replacing old cars with new  
ones increases carbon pollution. Because between 15% and 20% of a  
car's emissions are produced during its manufacture, the optimal age  
for a car, the paper says, is 19 years."

> The choice of any vehicle because it is "more fun to drive" would  
> be, for me, a foolish idea period.  Practicality and environmental  
> responsibility are more fun for me, in the long run.  Just  
> sayin'............. .

fun to drive and environmental responsibility are not incompatible  
goals.  for example i own a mini clubman.  according to  
greenercars.org it has the seventh best "greenest car" rating of any  
car sold in the USA and is a blast to drive.

> And if you are dead set on a Vanagon for the purposes described, why  
> a Synchro?  You don't seem to have an application that takes  
> advantage of 4WD.

again, i would say that having one car that serves all of your auto  
needs may be a more environmentally responsibility solution than  
owning several cars for different functions.  at any rate, i don't  
think it is a simple problem.

r

>
> David McNeely
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 6:28 PM, Chris S wrote:
>
>> There are a lot of ideas bouncing around the inside air space of that
>> large head of mine and one of them is procuring a passenger Syncro as
>> a daily driver.  It seems like a decent idea as it would keep me from
>> buying newer, more expensive and possibly less entertaining modes of
>> transportation.  It will hold my whole family plus luggage on our  
>> long
>> trips.  With an engine conversion it should reasonably swift,
>> efficient and dependable.  Plus I know how to fix just about anything
>> on one since I have had Vanagon Westies for 9 years now (first one  
>> was
>> my primary transport).
>>
>> I come to you asking for a sanity check.  I live and commute around
>> Atlanta.  Am I crazy?
>>
>> -- 
>> Wysłane z mojego urządzenia przenośnego
>>
>> Chris S.
>> Disclaimer: "Death and serious injury may occur"

I remain, as always
YrLyl&ObdntSrvnt,

r