So no bail out, no loans, let the big 3 die? I think it is too late for keeping gov't out of the car business.


So higher fuel prices, no parking, and more traffic are your thing. Good Mass transit means less cars on the road and less fuel consumed. Amtrak is probably the most pleasant form of transportation for longer trips I've ever taken. Big seats, lots of leg room, smooth ride, safe. They just need to make them run faster and on time. Good mass transit would also raise standards of living for non car people. No insurance, no car payment, no maintenance, and best of all no chance for DWI. :)

Mass transit is a great thing! More trains means fewer trucks on the road, which means less congestion, better pavement, and cheaper diesel.

And I'd like to see how someone gets around a major airport without the evils of mass transist. Wouldn't it be better if the necessary buses were built by GMC with Detroit Diesel engines and Allison transmissions instead of by foreign companies like BAE and Bombardier?

Shockingly enough, GM used to own the market in locomotives, trains, and heavy trucks while still building some kick-ass cars. The two activities are not mutually-exclusive except in the brains of the feeble-minded (that covers both certain members of this board, as well as the GM management that decided to sell off so much of the company in the name of dividends and fat bonuses).

You're leaving out one important factor in that generalization, it is sometimes more cost effective for transit vehicle manufacturers to do the final assembly in plants close to the delivery site. Therefore it doesn't necessarily mean that if a foreign manufacturer gets the contract, the work will go overseas. Typically our cars have been assembled in plants within 60 miles of the system, regardless of who the manufacturer was. Thus a lot of local people were employed for several years while the cars were being built.

People should move closer to their work. Cheap gas made it possible to migrate to the suburbs. Cheap gas, as we can all agree, is a matter of demand and not finite qualities.

Now is when you could drill and maximize what we have in our grasp, as far as resource within our own borders.

< Parentheticly, I fear the government will find the present low prices of gasoline an opportunity to add $.80 to $1.00 in tax to the pump price.>

Between a reverse migration to urban as opposed to suburban living spaces, combined with aggressive utilization of cheap fuel in our own realm of influence, we could actually explore the viability of alternative energy.

When I hear the words "Detroit Diesel" I get lofted off to a special place in my memory.

Nothing is quite as sexy to my ears as the the song of the Detroit Diesel 2 cycle engine... The Ferrari of the truck world!:yes:

Fast S.O.B.. The real monster Detroit Diesel's would weep oil at every seam, but my Lord did they make the "juice".:usa:

I think they sold it a few years ago to concentrate more on its core business. Electromotive was actually a profitable business for them.

Btw, didn't GM, Ford etc.. rip out the rail lines in Detroit so that more commuters relied on car transport?

They did that in a lot of cities along with Firestone, Mobil, Chevron and other Standard Oil companies.

thats enough reason to sell your cars.


When you go to a country with good mass transit and come back home to the US.. you kinda feel like you just entered a 2nd world country. I LOVE GOOD MASS TRANSIT. i really really really hate that about this country

- and for everyone in this thread that is bashing it is because they have never been anywhere where it WORKS and is widely used!

Exactly, and at the moment, most major cities are far from dense.

Even if we're just talking buses, the longer the routes get and the lower the amount of passengers on each one the less sense it makes. Without a large migration back to the city, it's a losing game.

That's the conspiracy theory, but reality was a little more complicated.

GM wanted to sell buses to the transit companies, and the transit companies were looking for a way to make a quick buck by selling the tracks for scrap. Within a few years, most of private transit companies had folded and were socialized.

Also in the 1970s, the government encouraged Boeing to go into the transit market to make up for the decline in war contracts. Many cities, including Boston and San Francisco, decided to "Buy American" and use Boeing trains.

The result was a disaster -- the trains were terribly unreliable and expensive to operate.

It would probably be very difficult for a new company to be successful in the transit market. There's so many other companies around the world with expertise and proven products.

It's a chicken and egg problem. If you can't have access to good transportation and living in the city just means sitting in congestion, then there is no reason to migrate back to the city. That being said, I think buses just seem like they cause more congestion than they prevent, due to the constant stopping in the middle of busy thoroughfares. I'd rather spend the money on rail. Lots of it.

The best sounding V8 is an 8V71. The best sounding V6 is a 6V92.

More rail would be cool, but without "railways" what the **** would building more trains solve?

They've long ripped up most of the railways around here. The only one I know of that is relatively close (if I have to drive anymore then 20 miles i'll just drive to the city myself) will only send me east or west. That's it!

Sad things is I don't see the Govt ever being able to buy that land back; overhead rail might be an option, but all the idiots will protest that because it ruins their scenic environment (ie: the windmill problem).

The only solution I see is to get back to more efficient "smaller towns". When the Walmarts of the world have dried up all the small places that I used to be able to go shopping and now have no choice but to drive 25 miles to Indianapolis; what did they expect would happen?

That is expected to be a future trend
http://www.cnuflorida.org/resources/...er_article.pdf