MEN! Still not happy with yourself? The Chrysler FIREPOWER!!!!

Members of the media take a close look at the Chrysler Firepower concept car made by DaimlerChrysler 09 January 2005 during the North American International Auto Show at Cobo Hall in Detroit, MI.(AFP/Stan Honda)



The 2005 Chrysler Group concept design Firepower at the 2005 North American International Auto show in Detroit, Michigan, January 9, 2005. Firepower's SRT-developed engine is a 5-speed automatic transmission with an estimated 0-60 in 4.5 seconds and a top speed of 175 mph. REUTERS/Gregory Shamus

does it come in red? :D

:scared:

Exactly

Is a blower and fuel injection scoop sticking out of the hood. ;-)

I haven't seen you in awhile Underpants, how is your wife doing?

My wife is too.

Ironically bought mostly by women... :shrug:

overcompensating!!!

he must be overcompensating.

When a woman puts on lots of makeup,

she ____________

:shrug:
I don't wear a lot of makeup. I have nothing to overcompensate for facially.

But it's not very nice to generalize about the reasons men buy cars.

I own an SUV and I didn't do it to compensate for the lack of something else. I bought it because I like having it in the snow and for towing stuff.

chill!

(This is just the Lounge. Sorry to have offended your manhood.)

:)

If I was mad I would be using caps and stuff but I am just saying that this joke is getting quite old and it can be insulting to a lot of people.

It also makes no sense because I see many more women driving SUvs than I do men.

.... you'll get used to it. There are a lot of folks here who possess the same utter lack of intellectual rigor as the right.

For example, the SUV thing. It never occurs to some of these sanctimonious jerks that some people actually need an SUV. In their book, a Ford Explorer or a Nissan Pathfinder is equivalent to a Hummer or a Yukon. They are just that ignorant. They like making the jokes, and the righteous indignation is fun for them, but they never think past square one. If you bought a big station wagon with the same shitty gas mileage, that would be just allright with them.

I don't bother with them, they can't help it if they don't have 3 kids and travel to places where they actually have to haul stuff. They love to have something to rail against, and SUVs are an easy target for a lazy mind. Don't waste your time arguing, just look for the brighter folks who have something serious to impart.

Do not objec to the occiaisional SUV for those that have a valid need for it. But driving on the roads today is like driving in a permenant valley. The vast majority of SUVs will never see a dirt road let alone be used for anything other than taking the top off another vehicle in an accident.

.... buy SUVs because they intend to go off road. The vast majority of them are 2WD. They buy them because they are big and can comfortably handle a family and luggage/whatever.

I have a pickup truck (big one) that I use when I need it. I usually drive a small Japanese car with a 1.5 liter engine. Yes, I hate being stuck behind a behemoth and will usually try to get in a position with better visibility. But blaming the SUV for that is crazy.

The problem of overly large vehicles will solve itself over the coming years as gas gets expensive. Americans never solve any problem until it is a crisis, why should this be any different?

Americans don't like folks telling them what to drive any more than you like someone telling you what to read or watch on TV. You either believe in freedom or you don't.

nt

a Durango and I hated it. It got terrible gas mileage, had a truck like feel to it and couldn't carry nearly as much as my van. I couldn't wait to get rid of it. My only objection to SUVs is that sometimes the bigger ones are driven by people who could barely handle a Mazda Miata. Frankly, for hauling kids and stuff, the vans are much better. Easier to maneuver, fit well into parking spaces and easy for the kids to get in and out of. JMO.

"They buy them because they are big and can comfortably handle a family and luggage/whatever." -- There are better choices for carrying family and luggage than an SUV; vehicles with a lower center of gravity, better crush zones, less wind resistance, etc. Almost all SUV's are 4WD... so, if as you say, most people don't use this function, why should they buy them?

"The problem of overly large vehicles will solve itself over the coming years as gas gets expensive. Americans never solve any problem until it is a crisis, why should this be any different?" -- As we've seen over the years, gas is kept artificially low in the market, encouraging its use. Consequently we have built a transportation system based on "freedom," rather than on the public good. Along with freedom of movement comes freedom to pollute, use dwindling resources and endanger others with poorly-designed vehicles. How is the market going to improve this?


"Americans don't like folks telling them what to drive any more than you like someone telling you what to read or watch on TV. You either believe in freedom or you don't." -- This sounds like Bush saying, "You're with us or you're with the terrorists." Freedom is not a black/white thing; you don't have the freedom to own Plutonium or drive an Abrams tank down the street, so why must you have the freedom to drive any dangerous piece of garbage that Detroit decides to market? You're right that Americans don't like folks telling them what to drive, but the overall judgment of Americans has been somewhat in question lately.

...first of all you are factually incorrect in your assertion that most SUVs are 4WD. It's probably somewhere around 25% at most.

Secondly, who woke up and made you god of the world? Should YOU get to decide what the best vehicle for me is? Really? You are full of it.

No I meant what I said - either you believe in freedom or you don't. The fact that YOU don't like SUVs and the fact that YOU think they are a bad choice and the fact that YOU apparently think they should be illegal or something doesn't mean JACK SHIT.

You are free to lobby your legislators, free to buy public service ads and free to try to sway weak-minded bots to your way of thinking - what you are NOT FREE to do is compare me to Bush because you disagree.

on edit: You and people like you are what is REALLY killing the Dem party. You wish to impose your vision of the world, cars, guns, you name it, on everyone.

"Government interference" should folks like you have the reins of power would be a nightmare to most people. What's next, outlawing ramen noodles because they make people fat?

Accept THIS: people do not like to be told what to do. This is what will eventually bring down the pukes, becuase they can't help themselves. I believe in FREEDOM, in NOT HAVING THE GOVERNMENT CONTROL MY DAY TO DAY LIFE.

You seem to believe that the freedom to drive as dangerous and destructive a vehicle as you wish is some sort of God-given right. However, in any society there are rules made, some by the market and some by the state (and if you've been keeping track you know that the large market forces are pretty much controlling the state lately).

My point is that, given the overall harm caused by the massive sales of these SUV's, it's in the interest of our country's health and safety to encourage, through legal means, people to drive what they really need rather than what they want. I don't know what your attachment to the SUV involves, but I have owned them and grew out of it and have learned to make do with more sensible vehicles. We all can learn to do better, and to make better choices. The free market will not encourage these better choices; nevertheless they must be made if we are to start to solve the energy and environment issues of the next few decades.

Thanks for taking out the personal reference to me, since you don't know me. However, you're still talking about "people like me," which is always risky since we don't really know what that means.

You seem to be a libertarian in that you don't want government doing anything. I recommend the book "One Market Under God" by Thomas Frank, the author of "What's the Matter with Kansas." The free market is a wonderful thing, but if it's completely free it causes harm. Here is a thought for you to ponder: We are all children at some level, and we want what feels good even if it causes harm to ourselves and others. Should we be allowed to choose freely? Of course, this is a free country. Should there be some limits? Also yes, that's what laws are for. So how can government most effectively encourage us to be adults, and to make the best decisions? It used to be the family, the church, the community, right? And now, according to you, the government is keeping us from being adults. However, I suggest that the unfettered market is not interested in helping us toward good decisions, and under the guise of "freedom" is simply encouraging more and more people to consume, to fill the hole in the soul with crap. And the whole SUV/McMansion boom is just symptomatic of this trend, and ought to be reversed.

It's not black and white. I'm not your enemy. And yes, I can lobby Congress to pass better laws about these issues, just as GM and Ford and Chrysler do. I'm just saying that we have slid so far along the path toward bad transportation in the name of "freedom" that changes ought to be made.

..... I've read the first sentence of your post and that's all I need.

You are a FLAMING HYPOCRITE - you started by comparing me to Bush*. You have no credibility on the subject of "you don't know me".

Next time, make your arguments without ad-hominem attacks, and I will do so also.

I didn't say anything about you. I said that YOUR STATEMENT about "either freedom or not" is like Bush's statement about the terrorists. That's not an ad hominem attack, and I haven't called you any names.....even "dude."

... using technicalities and wordplay imply things without saying them directly (as Bush** does repeatedly) does not change a thing.

wrong. Your claim that there is "either freedom or no freedom" is not true, because we limit our freedoms to some extent to live in a society. You obviously disagree, and argue that we should have total freedom to anything we like. Is that a fair statement of your position? If not, where do you draw the line when it comes to what we can buy and own? Remember, some stuff that's legal is still harmful.

... but we choose CAREFULLY those freedoms we allow the government to restrict. Those restrictions must be agreed upon by a large majority of the population.

The fact that maybe 10% of the population doesn't like SUVs doesn't make it a good idea to legislate the issue.

The fact that most of the SUV hater's arguments are basically a bunch of emotional nonsense doesn't help. The typical smaller SUV is nothing more than a later version of the station wagon. There was even one argument here suggesting that minivans are better. Why? They use as much gas as an SUV. There is just a nutty aversion to SUVs around here that I find at once amusing and irritating. As if a RAV4 and a Hummer are the same thing. Many of the people making these arguments just really don't know jack shit about automobiles and should shut up lest everyone find out.

Look - I think a person driving a Hummer has a 90% probability of being a fool. Folks actually think they are driving some kind of military vehicle. It's hard to understand under just what driving scenario a Hummer has any advantage - it is an absurd vehicle for civilian use. But I don't want to outlaw it. That would be the height of abuse of governmental power.

I lament, as you do, the fact that Americans and perhaps people in general tend to not correct a problem until it is a crisis. There is no doubt in my mind that over the next 5-10-15 years there will be a serious energy (oil) crisis. Yes, if everyone switched to 1.5 liter Japanese cars tomorrow, it would help. A little. Might delay the onset a few months. But the fact is that the left owns plenty of the blame for the attitude of the public - owing to the numerous and vocal predictions of catastrophe made back in the 70s that "didn't pan out".

Wolf has been cried too often on this issue and now folks will have to actually see a wolf at the door before they change their ways. That is just the way it is.

Let's agree to disagree at this time. Peace :)

itself is that I believe if everyone drove a 1.5 liter car, including the SUV "posers" who really don't need them, there would be an ENORMOUS difference in our energy picture, rather than a modest one. I used to drive a Suburban with a 454 c.i. engine, and for a while I thought I needed it to do the stuff I was doing. Looking back, I see that I also had a macho thing going on that I have since (mostly) grown out of. I'm sorry if I have come off as self-righteous in this thread, but I DO know a lot about cars and when I look around and see mostly who's driving these things, I get somewhat steamed, knowing that we can all do a better job for our future and our children.

Peace to you, too.
:toast:

the vans on the market get roughly 26-28 mpg highway (according to Edmunds) and seat six to eight (okay, they're all rated for seven, but at least one, the Kia Sedona, has a lap belt in the rear center so that position is only safe for carseat installation.) Some models offer an AWD option and the saafety is generally much better than large SUVs.

Large SUVs range from the 10 mpg range for Hummers to 17 for the Expedition and 18 for the Escalade. The largest of these are rated for eight passengers but almost all have the unsafe lap belt problem.

Even small SUVs are no milage improvement over my seven year old american wagon. Well, the Scion xB gers 35 mpg highway, but other than that, even the best mini-utes, the Subaru Forester and the Ford Escape Hybrid do no better than my wagon at 31 mpg highway.

I don't really have an aversion to SUVs (we rented an Expedition once to help my Grandmother move and I did like the smoothness of the ride), I just think they're not the best choice for many of the people who own them. Moms who use them as a grocery getter and kid hauler would save a ton of money with a van and thier kids would be a hell of a lot safer to boot. Thjose who need a vehicle that can carry a family, tow a boat and go offroad definitely need an SUV. Those who don't need to go offroad but do need towing capacity might be able to meet thier needs with a van. (I helped a friend who needed all of those options car shop. She didn't want a big SUV but wound up with an Expedition since smaller vehicles and vans didn't really do everything she needed.)

n/t

You had better not be referring to me. First of all, I made no remark about SUVs period. Guess what? I have kids too and a minivan- if I went camping more, I'd probably get an SUV. :wow: (For single people who don't need it to haul stuff, yeah, it pretty much is a waste though, right?)

Second of all, other people made similar comments as I did, but let's see, I had an obviously female user name, so let's jump all over her, right. You don't know me, nor does your newbie buddy. Go be sanctimonious somewhere else.

.... why you think I was talking to you. Did I reply to your post?

FYI - if anything I'm likely to go easier on a female here than a man on a subject such as this. Call me a chauvinist.

And I was not talking to anyone in particular. I'm talking to everyone here who gets their knickers in a twist over the bugaboo of "SUVs".

you were agreeing with the poster who singled me out in terms of my original statement when several other people made statements in jest along similar lines. If not, I beg your pardon (as well as understand your point).

.... it sure looks like I was talking to you, but to be honest I was mostly replying to the gentleman who seemed bewildered at the SUV madness around here. It didn't really do much but skim the preceeding posts.

Since he had a low post count, I assumed it was his first experience on the topic and I just wanted to vent and tell him that even though it might not seem like it, he is not alone in thinking the SUV hatred around here is a bit over the top to say the least.

In any event, no disrespect intended to anyone really, I just get hot under the collar sometimes at what I consider basically hypocrisy. Not everyone in the country has the same ideas of how to get on with life and as much as possible I believe in leaving people alone.

And I know for a fact that there are times when I need a larger vehicle, and when I do, I drive one and I don't feel like an earth-raper when I do.

And I still have my "evil" mini-van as well that I use for my contribution to overpopulation. Brainy liberals are a dying breed. Someone had to take a few for the team. :D

Show me where.

Did you notice others made similar comments as me about it being a showy vehicle or did you decide to single me out because I had a female username? Just wondering.

who made the overcompensating comment.

Don't flatter yourself.

You only been here 3 days.

Anyway, I made an my "overcompensating" comment, yes, but what about the others? Single-out? Yes, I flatter myself. :eyes: Here's the proof, though, I'm right in being singled out.

SemiCharmedQuark: "How long before they just come out with a car called "The Phallus" "

burythehatchet: "175 MPH top speed?
hell, mine's is bigger 'en that"

meegbear: "No one will ever know I have small genetailia driving this baby!"

whoisalhedges: "Sorry about your penis!" (in reply to hedges- underpants: "Thanks you
It says.........yes it SPEAKS!!!!!!!"

noshenanigans: "these mid-life crisis guys are ruining my car shopping.
I think that car's really, really cool- but I don't have a penis, so I can drive it and no one thinks I'm trying to make up for anything, right? "

jmowreader: "DaimlerChrysler's newest penis extension has a V-8 Hemi engine in it (obviously they couldn't stand all the potential penis-extension customers looking at the Viper and going "but it doesn't have a Hemi!") but is in most respects a reworking of the Viper.
But if you REALLY want a penis extension, try this:"

Never assume I don't know how to debate. Never!

And failed to disprove my argument. Have fun assuming things. :7

A guy jumps on all you sexist women. ;)

I am a true lover of men. Ask any of the men I've loved. :P

Let's be fair--men aren't the only ones who overcompensate when it comes to buying cars. The majority of SUV buyers are female.

..who are going to date a guy they normally wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole just because he gets one of these?

What's their beef?

:)

Women secure with themselves wouldn't do something like that. There's a name for women whose affections you have to buy. If that's what a man wants, there's more direct (and probably ultimately cheaper) ways of doing it.

Sorry. Non-Sequitor. It's just that lately it seems like that is people's response to every post around here so I wanted to feel included.

:)

Yes, there ARE other things that matter besides the fucking voting machines!!!!

hell, mine's is bigger 'en that

:)

Thank you Chrysler!

with the dancing condom!! :D

It's like a 17-inch penis. Looks as impressive as hell, but just what exactly are you gonna *DO* with it?

last time I talked to my Bro, he said they take your driver's license away for much over a hundred...He should know.

Good point.

:hi:

It says.........yes it SPEAKS!!!!!!!

Chrysler would charge you top dollar for a Supercar and STILL pack it with the cheapest and cheesiest plastic molding available.

I think that car's really, really cool- but I don't have a penis, so I can drive it and no one thinks I'm trying to make up for anything, right?

I'm looking for a new car right now, and was thinking of getting one of those BMW Z4s. However, when I see them around it's *always* got this old white guy in it, and that's just depressing.

... the crux of the biscuit, either knowingly or not.

The fact is, unless you got an inheritance or got really lucky in business - most folks cannot afford these "sports cars" until middle age. They cost a lot of money, and most 25 year-olds trying to start a family can't afford them.

Around here, 90% of the people you see driving a Corvette or a Viper or any other high-dollar car is middle aged. People say it's "mid life crisis" but my guess is that most of the time it is "I can finally afford this" :)

The only time I've seen it that I can recollect (and I was in a really rural part of North Carolina at the time, so it was memorable). The woman driving it looked probably early 40s, and the license plate on the Z4 said "WASHIS". Heh.

... that's just vindictive :)

Sometimes it's something else red.... :-)

especially from the side.

or

nt

I heard about the FIREPOWER on the way into work. I found the photos at yahoo news photos. No real article on it.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/usautoshow

their "Corvette fighter" so I guess that puts it in the $60,000-$80,000 range.

I took this pic a couple of weeks ago.



How many of these things are out there?

an asspile of money to prove it, the Lamborghini Gallardo (which would make small work of said Firepower)...



Actually, I'd like to see any average driver try to launch one of these things at a stoplight. Anything over 1500 rpms or even 3/4 throttle is gonna send those tires to smokin...

The specs on this car are absolutely nuts. a 7.3 V12 with 555HP. 0-60 in a very quick 3.7 sec. I've seen it beat the gallardo's big brother around a track (the Murciélago). The drawbacks are it's obscenely expensive and the wait to take delivery will be very, very long.

http://www.paganiautomobili.it/

I'll take the Vector W2 Twinturbo. It's drawbacks are...hmmmm. Well, small, nonexistant company, but if you can get one, one of your local mechanics can probably fix it.



0-60 in just over 3 seconds. I still don't know a car that would beat it.

...I certainly wouldn't mind trying to launch one of those from a stoplight!

I tried to race an NSX from a stoplight once in my friend's Mustang. I got smoked...but it was fun anyway...

It's an Ariel Atom. They've got a new one out with a supercharged 300hp Honda engine that goes from 0-60 in 2.9 seconds, seeing as they car weights less than 50 kilos. It's actually a car, even though it looks like an over sized go-cart. Street legal in the EU at least, and probably in the US as well with some modifications. The top of the line one goes for something around 60k. Not suited for bad weather, but sometimes that's the price you pay for performance.

http://www.arielmotor.co.uk/

Women over 16, that is. I've never heard any woman say "I have a date with so-and-so because I like his car". Doesn't happen, even though Chrysler wants you to think so.

and how much jewelery he buys his girlfriend, however. Unless he's a prick or a cheapskate, of course.

Some of us with uteruses like driving fast and changing our own oil. And if a man didn't maintain his car (no matter what it is) I wouldn't date him, as it shows lack of foresight.

I should have had one of these, instead of the 'ol Benzo

ain't no way this baby'll see the showroom. No one is going to buy this car with a Chrysler badge.

and Chrysler is having a hard time building enough of them.

I guess I'm just a Ferrari-kinda gal :-)

DaimlerChrysler's newest penis extension has a V-8 Hemi engine in it (obviously they couldn't stand all the potential penis-extension customers looking at the Viper and going "but it doesn't have a Hemi!") but is in most respects a reworking of the Viper.

But if you REALLY want a penis extension, try this:



The Lamborghini Murcielago is named after a fighting bull, carries a V-12 engine, has all-wheel drive and has little winglets that come out behind the B-pillars when the car reaches a certain speed, to deflect more air into the upper air intakes.

"...has all-wheel drive and has little winglets that come out behind the B-pillars when the car reaches a certain speed, to deflect more air into the upper air intakes."




That's freakin' awesome.

top speed in first is 65MPH.

I have been told that one of the problems with all Lamborghinis is that you can't see the roof of a police car through the back window--a very important thing, because cops will pull your ass over just to look at it. (Very long war story about the guy who told me this--this guy was the drug counselor at Fort Drum, was a civilian, and had a combination of family money and investment income that enabled him to buy fast cars without worrying about not having money for cat food at the end of the week. Jerry was his name, and when he was living in Florida he heard about a guy in Boston who was trying to sell his Lamborghini because you can drive one for three weeks a year in Boston. Jerry says he flew to Boston in an airplane and flew back to Fort Lauderdale in a car. He stopped for gas and food in Virginia and a cop pulled up beside him. "Sir, do you know how fast you were going out there?" Jerry didn't, why do you ask, sir? "Because I was chasing a guy at 110MPH and you passed both of us like we were standing still.")

I would much rather see cars like these catch on over those monster Osamamobiles that are clogging the freeways right now.

I'd still like to take that thing out for an extended test drive.

0-60 in 4.4 seconds, Four Cylinder Toyota Engine, 23/27 mileage, about $40K.

I hate the new 'mack truck' look that auto designers are going for lately. Naaaasty.

http://www.musclecars.net/showcardetail.php?c=m&o=3085

or one of these



or one of these

http://www.musclecars.net/showcardetail.php?c=m&o=4031

:)

um, does it come w/AWD?

This...



Yes. I'll buy a pristine, 1987 Buick GNX for $40,000. Then, with $5000 worth of simple, reliable mods, I'll beat every single one of you in a straight line (I'll see what Duttweiler is doing these days). AND, I'll do it with groceries in the trunk and room for a wife and 3 kids.

Plus, my ride, will never depreciate. AND my local Buick dealer can replace the tranny when I blow it. Lastly, from personal experience, I can hit another car at 40mph, then hit a concrete pole, and walk away completely unscathed.

I'd rather have a 1947 Indian Chief (red of course)

I've got at least one motorcycle that accelerates faster than that car.

...but could I get one with a big gun mounted on it?