More fool you for taking what I wrote extremely literally, rather than largely tongue-in-cheek. Indeed, even your first reply to me seemed to make light of my comment, but since then you've decided that I think anyone buying something bigger than a Jetta is an uncontrollably breeding moron with a lawnmower obsession. Or so it seems...
Yes, that was silly of me. I thought you might say what you mean, and mean what you say. I also thought I could have an interesting debate without having to step through a bunch of smarmy remarks, revisionist backpedaling and self-conscious posturing. Looks like I gave you too much credit. Won't happen again, though.
Because that's human nature, believe it or not.
I tell them to keep their back to the wall if they're going to make comments like that around me...
Pot, meet kettle.
Er, at least reasonably often otherwise there is no justification in buying such a vehicle. You wouldn't buy a Semi unless you wanted to haul stuff so why would you buy a multi-purpose vehicle unless you planned to use it for multiple purposes?...
Do you own a screwdriver? Or a torch?
Are you using them right now? Probably not.
But tools have value even when they're not being used --they're convenient to have when you DO need them. An empty minivan, like a screwdriver, a toilet, a spare tire, an insurance policy, a 'friend with benefits' or nuclear weapons, is STILL performing it's function: to be available when the need arises.
You make a tool belt analogy later on. I cover this in my reply to that.
More realistic than your last comment but equally obtuse and not particularly relevant to the discussion. Owning any car is limited by the laws in the region in which you drive it... Chances are that if I'm not driving my sports car enthusiastically, it's because I don't really feel like bombing through a city crowded with pedestrians and other cars...
Then why do you need a car that can not be legally driven the way it was designed to be driven? Don't you think that is wasteful? Overkill?
You say you enjoy driving it normally, but then why not buy a car without all the sports car compromises?
And my last comment is absolutely the point of the issue.
So why drive a minivan unless you had to? Because I sure as hell can't see why people would want to.
Many people simply don't enjoy the act of driving any car. Or at least, don't gain so much pleasure from the act that they are willing to trade the positive aspects of a large, comfortable, utility oriented car for the positive aspects of a small, performance oriented car.
Say you get 1000 fun pts from a sports car. Some people get only 10 pts from a sports car. Driving dynamics are inconsequential for these people. For their money, they would rather get 1000 useful pts from their minivan or SUV. The opportunity cost of the 10 fun pts doesn't matter to them. It's that simple.
A Murano isn't necessarily excessive though, and it certainly has qualities above and beyond the average minivan. The 350Z engine is one such quality, the looks are another.
I've not stopped justifying my comments with logic, and indeed the only proper comments stronger than repeatedly saying "a Jetta would do for most situations" are the ones you blew out of proportion...
Or they were overstated to begin with.
"A Jetta would do for
most situations"
What if people would like to be prepared for "the
vast majority of situations"? And the
total cost (taking into account the fun they WON'T have driving a sporty car) of this was, in their minds, minimal?
It didn't take much reading between the lines to work out I was referring to minivans and the like rather than something with a few more inches legroom and a slightly bigger boot...
My reading between the lines is
exactly what you were just complaining about.
So you need to either express your points more precisely or quit your complaining when people draw conclusions you don't happen to like.
But how often do they? Really? That's the point I'm making. I still maintain: Most people could probably get by pretty well with less. I'm not saying they have to, I'm not saying that I'll point a gun towards the next Renault Espace I see driving down the road with one person out of seven seats, I'm saying that if people used a bit of common sense, many would realise that something like a minivan is essentially just a waste of metal, fuel and space.
To
you, they are a waste. But as I've already pointed out, many people don't feel that way.
Maybe you should realize and accept that not everyone has the same priorities in a car that you do.
And when you say "common sense", it sounds suspiciously like "my priorities".
And yes, before you go off and complain about my "overblowing" your comments, I
am aware that you aren't running around menacing soccer moms with a 9 mill.
You disagree with their choices, saying they don't make sense. I am defending their choices, saying FOR THEM, it does make sense. There's nothing more to it than that.
Not really. Like I said, multifaceted vs. non-multifaceted. I can drive as slowly as I like but if the roof is down then the journey will still be fun. Even to the point where I get a buzz just knowing what I'm driving.
Sports cars can be enjoyed near their limits, but they can also be enjoyed nowhere near their limits. A minivan can carry lots of people, but when it's empty it's just carrying it's own ass about. It's like being a builder and wearing your toolbelt away from work too. It's great when you need your hammer to hand, but when you're sitting on the bog or trying to get cosy with the 'Missus it becomes a literal and metaphorical pain in the ass.
Your Miata has a friction circle. The car's raison d'etre is accessing the outer limits of that circle easily, in an entertaining manner.
If you don't do that, then you are not using the car for it's primary purpose. You may be enjoying other aspects of the car, but not the main one. Much like an empty minivan.
If you just want to cruise around, any number of limp boulevard cruisers will do.
Your toolbelt analogy is interesting (and indeed your best argument so far), but flawed. Most minivans these days drive like cars. And like I mentioned earlier, driving dynamics is of no consequence to their owners.
So while you paint the minivan out to be a pain the arse, the day to day practical considerations of owning and driving one is not any different than any passenger car.
At least, not where I live.
Congratulations on again taking my comment completely literally, rather than understanding it as a vehicle to carry my point...
Congratulations on failing to differentiate between understanding a point and agreeing with a point.
And well done for buying into your own red herring argument. The issue has always been around potential vs. actual use. How you choose to enjoy anything is a subjective issue I'm not interested in debating. But I guess you love making sure everyone knows what an enlightened connoisseur of fine motoring you must be.
Very clever. But also fallacious, as your "penis extention" jab is quite close to the bone (pun intended). Though it's not the reason I bought one (honest), a large part of owning a sports car is the appeal of the way it makes you feel, and if that's to make up for a lack in other personal areas then it's still fulfilling it's purpose.
A large part of even wanting a sports car is also
caring how it makes you feel. Once again --not everyone gets a thrill out of driving like you (and I for that matter) do.
An MPV has one, at most two purposes. To carry people, and stuff. When it is doing those things it is literally no better than the aforementioned toolbelt, that loses it's worth the second it isn't being used to complete a job.
I've addressed this above.
I've already explained why you're wide of the mark in interpreting my comments, but if you must know, the scorn, mockery and criticism are the most entertaining way for me to get my point across.
I find it tends to work better than being deeply offended on others' behalf, or interpreting every word someone types literally.
Don't give yourself to much credit either, champ; I don't know you well enough to get upset over anything you write.
Like I said earlier, this is an intellectual pursuit for me. You can call it arrogance if you want to, but all I want is to convince you that your POV is wrong based on your own unwritten rules. I have a great appreciation for intellectual consistency.
If you really meant this whole thing in a semi-serious tongue in cheek sort of way, then why all the clicks of the REPLY button? When I started to seriously probe for serious answers many posts ago, why not a: "eh, I'm just playin' brah"?
Hell, all I wanted
originally was confirmation that a Jetta was a "family car" in Europe. This whole business with the minivans was something
you brought up.
And making or breaking friendships is the least of my worries, thanks. However much M-Spec and I disagree, our discussions have always been in hushed voices as it were, and I expect they'll continue to do so.
They have been as far as I recall. But this recent attitude of yours really doesn't add anything useful to the discussion.
What attitude, you might ask?
It's of little consequence to me if I'm rocking the boat occasionally and people are getting their poor little toes wet.
That one.
This need you have to belittle speaks more about yourself than it does about others.
So why don't you just check the ego at the door, and this topic can be much more pleasant to read? If you don't feel like being nice, at least be useful.
M
)) on the road a few months ago, possibly a test car. I admit, I could have been mistaken...
-- Randy
