Quote:
Originally Posted by jsimon7777
Depending on how you want to play the statistics, you could say that the Impala gets 150% of the Silverado's rated city mileage and 143% of its highway mileage. Any way you cut it, it's a big difference.
|
Statistically you are correct. From a practical standpoint, I'm not sure how much the difference matters. Real example, I went from driving a daily driver that averaged 18MPG to the FRS averaging 32.6MPG over 66000 miles. I happened to be tracking the difference in cost. I have saved an average of $119 a month over 41 months in fuel costs. At the same time, I've had to purchase and maintain a second vehicle for those times when I needed a truck, which is once or twice a week. In my case its a net loss.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsimon7777
As for motorcycles, they're deathtraps. Fun, fun deathtraps.
|
Again, statistically I can't argue with that, and I've been riding for 30 years, had my own set of scares (and a couple of scars). The DOT says the fatality rate per mile driven is about 26x that of cars. What it also shows is that 26% of those are unlicensed drivers, and another large percentage were not wearing adequate protective clothing, including helmets.
The real issue with motorcycles is, even more so then cars, the required training to get a license is non-existent in the US. In some states you can literally purchase a bike with no driver's license and no training, tow it to the DMV (or drive it) take a very simple skills and written test, and get a license to kill yourself. Some states, like Georgia, at least encourage you to take training by waiving the DMV test if you take an approved multi-week training course.
In this case, you are most likely only endangering yourself, so I have mixed emotions on it. But, if one of my sons wanted to get a bike, it would be my recommendation they take at least 3 levels of training before they ever get on the road.