skip to main |
skip to sidebar
In 2018, there are more electric cars and plug-in hybrid vehicles for sale in the US than ever before. Some examples include: the Nissan Leaf, Chevrolet Volt, Chevrolet Bolt, Tesla Model S, Tesla Model X, and Tesla Model 3.
But there is one big problem holding these vehicles back from widespread adoption.
It's not the cost.
It's not the range.
It's not a lack of consumer information or confidence in the technology.
The problem is that electric cars are for homeowners, not renters.
Take a big step back and think about the concept of a car. People store cars at their homes, but the process of refueling takes place away from the home - at a gas station usually located a short distance away.
The move to electric cars also changes the way in which we use cars. With an electric car, the refueling is now shifted away from the corner store to your home. A high-voltage home charger is an essential part of owning this type of vehicle.
But therein lies a huge problem: not everyone is able to install an EV charger in their home, because millions of American households are renters.
Whether you are renting a single-family detached home or live in a multi-family unit like an apartment, condo, or townhouse, many rental properties have outdoor parking for their tenants with no possible way to install a high-voltage charger to support electric vehicle ownership.
The percentage of American households that are renters has been climbing steadily over the last decade, and is now at record high levels.
I bet there are plenty of people who would consider owning an electric or plug-in hybrid vehicle, but are forced to rule them out simply because they are not able to install a charger at their home. Either the landlord or rental company will not allow it, or they park in a covered/uncovered space or parking garage with no access to a 240-volt outlet.
If someone can solve this problem, I think it would greatly increase the potential of electric vehicle ownership for a significant number of households.
I was recently filling up my car at the gas station when I noticed the vehicle on the other side of the pump. It was a third-gen Acura Integra, dark green, produced between 1994 to 2001. On the windshield there was a black and white sticker that read "No Airbags, We Die Like Real Men."
Let's analyze this statement by breaking it down into its elements: cars, death, and honor.
First, let's talk about the car.
In the United States, the safety of automobile passengers has historically taken a backseat compared to other vehicle innovations in design, power, and fuel economy. Seat belts were required on all new vehicles sold starting in 1968, which was 75 years after the first practical American automobile was produced in 1893. Later still were airbags, which were required on all new vehicles sold after September 1, 1998 per a law passed in 1991. This was nearly 50 years after the first airbags were developed in the early 1950s.
When the 3rd generation Integra debuted in 1994, it featured dual front airbags to protect the occupants in the event of a crash. Like many other auto manufacturers, Acura was compliant with the 1991 law well before it was fully enforced in 1998. The only cars on the road today that do not have airbags as standard equipment are vintage/classic cars, such as those built in the 1950s-1980s which are mostly driven by collectors to car shows. The Integra next to me at the gas station was certainly not a classic car.
Next, we will talk about death.
On a long enough timeline, no one escapes death. But there is a difference between dying from an unpreventable situation versus dying early from a preventable cause. Dying before reaching your full life expectancy is often a tragic affair for one's family and friends.
The grief-stricken family will be especially upset if they learn that the death of their friend or family member could have been avoided through some small amount of caution like wearing a helmet, looking both ways, living a healthy lifestyle, wearing a seat belt, or driving a car equipped with functioning air bags. Each of these choices have been proven to significantly reduce the risk of dying early from a preventable cause or accident.
Finally, we come to the last topic which is honor.
When a person dies, their friends and family must deal with the situation. In their grief, they may evaluate the circumstances of the deceased person's passing. The death of a person can be dishonorable, like when a terrorist injures or kills other people and then kills themselves. Death can be neutral, like when a person passes away quietly in their sleep. And death can also be honorable, like a soldier who dies from injuries sustained while performing a heroic deed, like saving fellow soldiers from a dangerous situation.
All this is to say that modern cars come equipped with airbags to help save lives in the event of a survivable accident. The idea that making a reckless decision and dying in a survivable crash is somehow honorable or something to be proud of is absolutely absurd. The idea that this makes you a "real man" is so stupid, it's almost beyond comprehension.
If the sticker was a joke, it's not very funny or clever. If the sticker was completely serious, then it is no great loss to the human race if you should die unnecessarily as a result of your own ignorance.
Like it or not, the new age of electric cars is upon us. The Nissan Leaf, Ford Focus Electric, and Tesla Model S are the latest generation of pure electric vehicles to go on sale in the US.
Now I am not against the idea of electric cars. As a motoring enthusiast, my curiosity is piqued by anything with wheels and and engine, regardless of whether it runs on gasoline, diesel, propane, biofuel, electricity, or expensive champagne. However, there is one glaring inaccuracy about electric vehicles that I feel the need to correct.
I have read a great deal of news articles extolling the benefits of electric vehicles. Indeed, if you live in a city and primarily use your car for commuting, an electric car is a smart, environmentally sound, and efficient way to get around.
The part that gets me flustered is when a reporter claims that electric vehicles are "maintenance free." I can't tell you how many articles I've read that mention how the drivetrain in the Tesla Model S is so simple, it only has 3 moving parts. Buy one and all you will ever have to do is plug in the charger, right? Wrong.
While it's true that an electric car will never need to have its oil changed or a muffler replaced, there is still plenty of maintenance to be done.
Because it is still a vehicle that travels on the road, electric cars rely on rubber tires which must be rotated and kept at the proper pressure. By virtue of the fact that it has wheels, electric cars also need wheel bearings to help the car roll smoothly and brake pads to help the car stop - two more components which have a finite service life.
Electric cars have moving parts in the suspension and steering that use bushings which will, over long periods of time, wear out just like a fossil-fuel powered vehicle. Electric cars also have traditional car parts which are prone to breaking such as power windows, hinges, handles, and latches. Many of them have cabin air filters for the air conditioning system - another user-replaceable part.
Besides that, there are a number of specialty systems on an electric car which may need to be serviced. A pure electric vehicle will often rely on an electric powered blower motor for the heat and air conditioning. In the case of the Tesla Roadster, the battery pack is cooled with liquid, much like antifreeze/coolant in a traditional engine.
Again, I am not saying any of this to put down electric cars. Yes, I am aware that electric car owners will never have to get their hands dirty to change spark plugs and wires, an air filter, or engine oil. The traditional "tune up" will be a thing of the past. What I want to do is disspell the myth that by buying an electric car, you will be driving a magical "maintenance free" machine. There's still a lot to keep track of as a safe and responsible driver.
When a car manufacturer decides to introduce a new vehicle, it takes dozens of people and many thousands of hours of work before the first completed vehicle rolls off the assembly line. These people work in teams to design the exterior, the interior, the engine, the chassis, and the suspension down to the finest detail.
Part of the automotive design process includes continuous peer review and design changes to make the vehicle look and operate as perfectly as possible. However, I have to question the designers who put their stamp of approval on the following designs, because these vehicles have to be some of the worst automotive design disasters in recent history!
The 2007-present Scion xB has one glaring design error. Can you spot it? This vehicle has just one reverse lamp, positioned off-center on the left side of the bumper. Would you wear a pair of pants with only one back pocket? Would you listen to a stereo with only one speaker? Absolutely not! So why on earth would you make a car with only one backup light? I suppose this might look good if you are a cyclops or that chick from Futurama.
Holy taillights, Batman! The taillights on this Mitsubishi Lancer Wagon are only slightly shorter than the Sears Tower. Not only will they make other drivers extremely aware of when you're coming to a stop, but if you live near the coast you can park this car up on a cliff and use its towering red lights to direct incoming ships safely to the harbor!
The Nissan Cube is neither hip nor square. It's not a van and it's not a sport-utility vehicle. It's not fast or sporty, nor is it intended for towing or going off road. I'm not really sure what it's purpose is, but this much I do know: it is hideously ugly from every angle!
Nissan aren't the only ones who can make an ugly, box-like vehicle. Take a gander at this Pontiac Aztek crossover! From its double-nostril front end to its plastic-clad sides and depressing roofline, this vehicle is an absolute monster that no doubt incorporates every single idea the design committee came up with. I cannot imagine why they stopped production after just 4 years...
Cadillac may be "The standard of the world" when it comes to luxury, but even the world-famous luxury car maker has had its share of design disasters. Take this Cadillac Seville for example. Its "bustleback" design looks less sophisticated and more like the car got rear-ended in a crash.
Speaking of ugly rear ends, check out the exhaust on this Porsche Boxster! That's right, a single pipe, dead center. Pardon my French, but the design and location of the exhaust pipe on this car looks just like an arsehole. I'm sorry, but there is just no nice way to call this one.
Hey, is that a pipe organ on wheels? Nope, it's just the rear end of a Lexus IS-F. The designers of this sporty sedan went more than a little overboard with the number four. Four doors? Check. Four wheels? Check. Four exhaust tips? "Oh what the hell, let's do that too!" they must have said. This is one design that should have been four-bidden!
A modern car is a complex system of electronic and mechanical systems working together in perfect harmony. In fact everything under the hood is so perfectly set in place that drivers are discouraged from ever knowing what really goes on thanks to the prevalence of plastic engine covers. These pieces of injection-molded junk are used excessively today in an attempt to limit access to your own car and to cover up the fact that today's engines look extremely lame.
The dashboard of the Toyota Echo may be one of the most visually unappealing designs I have ever seen. From its center-mounted instrument cluster to its shapely glove compartment, this thing looks like there was even less thought put into it than the movie "Gigli." How did they not realize how bad this looks?
Whether you're going to the moon or to the grocery store, the dashboard of this Nissan Quest minivan will make every trip and adventure! Its bizarre spaceship-like layout throws decades of intuitive and ergonomic designs out the window in favor of something that looks like a busy-box toy for adults.
Good God Almighty! The mother of all speedometers may be the single biggest thing about the Mini Cooper. The gauge is almost as large as the steering wheel, and is so ridiculously large that even blind people can see it. What an awful, awful design!
Look, I understand that designing cars is hard work - but we're not talking about putting a man on the moon, here. We're talking about shaping steel and glass into pleasing and practical shapes that people can feel good about buying. The majority of automakers have got this down pat - but as we can see here, some of them still need help when it comes to producing cars that are not disasters of design.
I am not the only one who feels this way:
http://blog.cargurus.com/2009/07/17/the-ugliest-cars-of-2009-and-2010
http://www.scottbradford.us/2010/01/12/the-ugliest-cars-of-the-2010-model-year/
The Automotive Gossip industry is almost as big and competitive as the Automotive industry itself. On the newsstand you have magazines such as Car and Driver, Road and Track, Motor Trend, and AutoWeek. On the web you have AutoBlog, and Jalopnik. There are no shortage of publications claiming to have the most authentic and most current industry news about the car industry.
For the longest time, I enjoyed keeping up with the news in the automotive industry through magazines and periodicals. After a while though, the magazines all started to sound the same to me.
One problem with car magazines is that the reviewers are always so snobbish about the vehicles they test drive. They expected the Cadillac to be more luxurious or the Mustang to be faster. They complain about the suspension being too stiff or the engine not powerful enough. They gripe about automatic transmissions being slushy or a steering wheel that feels too small.
These automotive pundits have forgotten that the majority of their readers do not get behind the wheel of a high-performance or exotic car every day. Most drivers have very boring cars, and we would be happy to have a vehicle that works without breaking down on us.
For example, the 14-year old economy car that I drive has been nothing but one expensive repair after another during the six years I have owned it. I would gladly take home any new car featured in a magazine, even if the reviewer thinks the leather trim is the wrong color.
After a while, the things that reviewers dislike about cars start to sound petty, insignificant, and downright ridiculous. It's almost as though they approach every vehicle with a magnifying glass rather than looking at the bigger picture, which is this: car manufacturing has come a LONG way over the past few decades. New vehicles are dramatically safer, more comfortable, and more efficient than ever before. There's almost nothing to complain about, so they magnify the smallest quirks in a vehicle to write an article.
What car magazines should focus on is helping people find the right car for their needs. How fun it is to drive, how well it performs in everyday situations, and how much it costs to maintain. These are things that average drivers would like to know before purchasing a new vehicle.
Instead, car magazines love to bombard you with useless facts, like how fast it goes around some fucking racetrack in Germany or how the new Mercedes has 0.006 inches more legroom than the BMW. They blast you with statistics that really aren't that important or relevant to how the vehicle will be driven in the real world.
They claim one car is superior to another because it has six more horsepower or is a fraction of a second faster down the dragstrip. Honestly, I would be happy to have a car with a zero-to-sixty time that's not measured in minutes! The automotive gossip industry is so wrapped up in cramming data down your throat that they've lost touch with the people who truly enjoy the experience of driving.
In spite of all this, the automotive gossip industry stronger than ever. An entire subculture of people now post their thoughts about every new make and model to be announced. Log on to any automotive news forum or message board to find out what Joe from Philadelphia thinks of the newest Kia crossover. Seriously, who gives a crap? These armchair experts probably drive around in a 1992 Toyota Corolla and yet trumpet their opinions about the newest generation of muscle cars like they're the freaking world experts.
As a whole, the automotive gossip industry is full of self-absorbed know-it-alls and "experts" who quote arbitrary facts out of context to try and seem smart. Headlines that are of paramount importance one day are discarded and forgotten the next day. Everyone's looking for the next big thing and living in the "now" with no thought to the past or future. I'm sorry, but car magazines just aren't fun to read anymore.
I'm not the only one who feels this way:
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/car-and-driver-road-track-motor-trend-automobile-americas-buff-books-laid-low/
http://autosnob.blogspot.com/2009/10/power-of-preconceptions.html
Mind blowing performance. Impressive specifications. Sexy styling. Limited production. Some say that supercars are the ultimate driving machines, but I've got a hunch that many of today's top performance automobiles are not being used to their full potential...or even being used at all.
The supercar industry has seen some of its most groundbreaking innovations in recent years, thanks to advances in technology. Everything from crash testing to aerodynamic modeling can now be perfected in the lab using computer modeling and simulations before the first vehicle rolls off the production line.
Not only does this cut down the amount of time required to bring a new vehicle to market, but it has also led to the development of some of the wildest and most unique vehicles ever produced. Computer-aided design allows engineers to explore new concepts and ideas that just were not possible a decade ago.
From paddle-shifters mounted on the steering column to heavy-duty carbon ceramic brakes, modern supercars are dripping with innovation. Carbon fiber body panels stay rigid and strong as advanced traction control systems help channel massive amounts of power to the pavement. Hand-assembled engines pump out huge horsepower at high RPMs and will run for years without needing a rebuild.
Yes, it's safe to say that supercars are some of the most over-engineered vehicles on the road today. A design team at Ferrari or Lamborghini may spend more time perfecting the suspension of one vehicle than it would take for a mass-production automaker to revise its entire lineup. The amount of effort that goes into developing a true road-raping machine is often reflected in its six or seven figure price tag.
But how often do you see supercars like Ferraris and Lamborghinis on the road? When was the last time you saw a Koenigsegg at the corner store or an F430 at the movie theater? Unless you live in South Florida, probably never.
The truth is that in spite of their incredible engineering, supercars do not make good daily drivers. Many exotic car owners also have an ordinary car for driving to the post office and the grocery store. The supercar is kept in the garage most of its life and will be driven perhaps a few hundred miles a year to car shows and around the block on sunny days.
Although a supercar can accelerate to 60 mph in the blink of an eye, its driver must still obey the speed limit. While the limited production makes them highly desirable, it also makes them difficult to get parts for. Because of the expensive price tag, a fender bender or theft would be disastrous.
Supercars also have high maintenance costs including premium fuel, synthetic oil, and special order tires. They gulp fuel and have no room for passengers or cargo. Insurance is expensive and so are speeding tickets. When you get right down to it, supercars are a lot like ordinary cars, only less useful and more expensive.
That's not to say we shouldn't have supercars. It is through the development of such exotic, high-performance vehicles that our regular cars become more advanced. What I am saying is that it's an absolute shame to see the fastest and best engineered vehicles sitting around all the time, being pampered instead of being driven!
It is a shame to see a classic Ferrari on the auction block at Barrett Jackson with 6,000 original miles on the clock. It is a shame to see today's most obsessively engineered vehicles hiding under car covers and being trailered to shows. It's a shame that supercars are priced well out of range of plenty of people who would love to drive them regularly.
What's the point of spending thousands of hours designing and testing a vehicle so it can sit on the grass at Pebble Beach? What is the point of engineering a vehicle that can travel at 250mph, only to have it spend the majority of its life sitting still?
The vehicles that are built to go the fastest are the ones that are driven the least. Rather than be driven and enjoyed as the designers intended, they spend their days covered up in garages, museums, and trailers at car shows. Now, where's the sense in that?
I am not the only one who feels this way:
http://www.supraforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=463108
In today's consumer-driven society, the market is full of all kinds of products to buy. In order to differentiate similar products from one another, manufacturers often give their products names instead of going by model numbers. Of course, some companies put vastly more effort into their product names than others.
Take a look at American car companies for example, which have historically given their vehicles real names. Cars like the Mustang, Thunderbird, Camaro, and Impala deliver strong visual images of power, speed, and strength. They just roll off the tongue. They may even influence the styling of the vehicle they adorn.
On the other hand, German and Japanese cars are seriously lacking in the imagination department. Rather than come up with clever or sexy names, they use esoteric combinations of letters and numbers to distinguish their vehicles. What comes to mind when you hear the name QX56, 740iL, and CLS-55? What does GS300 make you think of? They make me think of nothing. They make me picture hard-nosed designers who lack the human emotion that should go into building a car.
Before you go and point out that some automakers use these jumbled names to distinguish engine displacement, number of cylinders, or trim levels, I'm already ahead of you. Yes, a BMW 330 indicates an entry-level coupe with a 3.0-liter engine. And yet, the BMW 325 also has a 3.0-liter engine, not a 2.5-liter engine as the naming convention would indicate. It's completely meaningless when companies don't even adhere to their own rules.
Car manufacturers: start using the alphabet to make words.
I am not the only one who feels this way:
http://www.forbes.com/2006/01/09/lincoln-ford-names-cz_jf_0110flint.html
http://www.xanga.com/milkchug/447068233/item/
In these uncertain economic times, it seems that change is the only certainty. Wild fluctuations in gas prices over the last few years are taking their toll on American drivers, who are once again demanding smaller and more fuel-efficient vehicles. It's almost as though we had forgotten everything we went through in the 1970s! The news media reports that the era of gas-guzzling Sport-Utility Vehicles has come to an end. But is the growing demand for shrinking cars really all it's cracked up to be?
Let's look at some of the hottest selling compact and subcompact cars of today, such as the Honda Fit, the Toyota Yaris, and the Chevrolet Aveo. Compared to their mid-size and full-size counterparts which emphasize things like power, comfort, and performance, this new generation of super small vehicles sacrifices all of these attributes for the sake of economy.
By reducing everything from engine displacement to wheel size, subcompact vehicles can achieve more miles per gallon because they are significantly smaller and lighter than competing models. You cannot get something for nothing however, and there are some serious trade-offs to consider when purchasing a subcompact economy car.
While it is true that small, narrow tires offer reduced rolling resistance, they also have a smaller contact patch with the pavement which results in reduced grip and handling. Vehicles made of lightweight materials such as plastic and aluminum instead of steel may provide the benefit of weight reduction at the cost of occupant safety. Finally, vehicles with tiny, underpowered engines may cause drivers to ride the accelerator more aggressively in order to maintain speed. When looking at the trade-offs necessary to achieve fuel economy, I have to question whether those few extra miles per gallon are really worth it.
Take for example the Smart car. This darling of the media industry has been highly praised as the leader of the pack: it is the smallest, the lightest, and the most efficient gasoline-powered vehicle for sale in North America. From 2004 to 2006, Smart cars were available only as grey market imports which were sold through independent dealerships. These import models were modified to meet US DOT safety standards and were not affiliated with Daimler AG, the German parent company that owns Smart. In 2006, Daimler announced that the Smart car would be available for sale in the US starting in 2008.
The main difference between the grey market imports and the 2008 Smart Fortwo is the motor. The small, turbocharged engine has been replaced with a larger, 1.0-liter non-turbo engine. The new engine has just 3 cylinders and puts out about 70 HP. The Fortwo still holds just two occupants (one driver and one passenger), and it boasts an EPA estimated mileage of 33mpg city and 41mpg highway (see fueleconomy.gov). The 2009 Fortwo starts at $11,590 for the base model, $13,590 for the Passion Coupe, and $16,590 for the convertible model.
It seems the timing of the Smart car couldn't be better, with gas prices soaring and drivers desperate for an easy answer. A reservation program launched in 2007 offered interested customers a spot on Smart's waiting list, which now has an estimated wait time of 12 to 18 months for delivery. Clearly, thousands American drivers are eager to get their hands on the Smart car.
To me, the Smart car phenomenon is absolutely baffling. I am shocked that American car buyers really are gullible enough to fall for the Smart car. Eleven thousand dollars for an EPA-combined 36 miles per gallon? Surely they must be joking! The Smart car strikes me as a rip off as both a driver and a consumer. There are plenty of ways to get better mileage without getting into this pitiful econobox of a car.
If miles per gallon are your top priority, you are probably the kind of person who has a panic attack every time gas jumps from $3.25 a gallon to $3.75 per gallon. The idea of paying more money and receiving less product just boils your blood! Well, that's exactly what buying a Smart car boils down to. Eleven thousand dollars for a car with no cargo space to speak of, a two-person capacity, and an engine that's less powerful than your average motorcycle. Hah! If you have ever considered buying a Smart car to save on fuel costs, consider the facts:
The 2009 Honda Civic and 2009 Chevrolet Cobalt both offer 4-passenger seating, an honest-to-goodness trunk, and 4-cylinder engines that are more powerful than the Smart car by 30 to 50 HP. Oh, and they get comparable mileage at 33 and 36 mpg combined, respectively. If you're going to buy a brand new car, why not get something you can actually use? Where are you going to put your groceries in a Smart car, on your lap? Are you going to pile in and take a road trip in that thing? The point is that the Smart car is not significantly more fuel efficient than a normal car, but its miniature size, high cost, weak engine, and limited cargo space make it significantly less practical to own.
It is not at all necessary to buy a brand new car to get good mileage. On Internet message boards, drivers routinely brag about squeezing 50 to 80 miles per gallon out of conventional gasoline vehicles. How are they doing this? By pairing the most efficient vehicles on the used car market with special driving techniques in a combination known as hypermiling. All you have to do is pick up a used Geo Metro, Ford Festiva, or Honda CRX-HF in the AutoTrader, check your tire pressure, and just drive the speed limit. I'm not joking; it really is that simple!
According to the The Kelley Blue Book, you should be able to find a Honda Civic hatchback in good condition for about $2,000 bucks. If you were to buy one and spend maybe $4,000 dollars fixing it up on things like new tires, a new stereo, and maybe some body work or what have you, you would still save a pile of money compared to anyone who spent $12,000 dollars on a Smart car. Not only that, but you'll enjoy equal or greater mileage depending on your driving style.
Finally, if you really hate paying for gasoline SO much that you would sacrifice everything fun about driving (such as performance, handling, safety, and comfort) by purchasing a Smart car, then maybe driving is just not for you. Find a job closer to your home and ride a bike to work. You could also move to an area with a good mass transit system and take the bus, light rail, or subway to work. The idea that anyone can justify cramming themselves into a Smart car for a 30 mile daily commute and feel good about themselves is just preposterous.
You know, I think it's pretty ironic that they call them Smart cars, because based on the facts you'd have to be pretty freaking dumb to buy one (or just really poor at math).[Note: This article was originally written October 16, 2008 and revised February 6, 2009.]December 2009 Update: The Smart Car has been voted one of the ten worst cars of the decade by automotive review site Jalopnik.com.
Less than three miles from my house, there is a large trade school where men and women go to become certified motorcycle mechanics. It is such a well-known school that students move here from all over the country just to go to this particular campus.
As you might have guessed, many of the students and staff at this school own motorcycles. Many of the apartments and homes near the school are rented by students who commute to class. This results in a very high percentage of motorcycle riders in my part of town.Because the school is so close to my house, I see people riding motorcycles all the time. They're on the surface streets, on the freeways, at gas stations and stoplights and parking lots. They are everywhere!To tell you the truth, I think motorcycles are a real nuisance. I just don't get why anybody would ever own a motorcycle; to me they don't make sense. Motorcycles are inferior to cars in almost every way I can imagine. For example:- Cars have larger and more powerful engines
- Cars provide better grip and handling
- Cars offer better safety and occupant protection
- Cars can carry more than one passenger
- Cars have space for cargo
- Cars (and trucks) can tow trailers / other vehicles
- Cars are quieter and smoother
- Cars can be safely driven in bad weather
- Cars are easier to see at night
- Cars offer more amenities like air conditioning, heat, and a radio
From a practical standpoint, a motorcycle is not a very useful thing to have. It may get slightly better mileage and cost less than a car, but the benefits of owning one do not come close to offsetting the costs.The other thing that bothers me about motorcycles is the lifestyle and culture of riders. I'm sure there are plenty of safe and responsible riders out there, but there are also negative stereotypes associated with motorcyclists including: the "badass" rebel rider, the violent gang member, the mid-life crisis weekend rider, and the young punk on a street bike who does wheelies without a helmet and weaves in and out of freeway traffic at 100mph. If you ride a motorcycle, you will never be fairly judged by co-workers, police, juries, or insurance companies.
At the other end of the spectrum you have the explosive popularity of "custom choppers" such as those featured on American Chopper and Biker Build-Off. These TV shows feature custom-built bikes with even less practicality than regular motorcycles. Common modifications include fat rear tires, low ground clearance, stretched forks and handlebars, skulls, iron crosses, and way too much chrome.
The cost of these custom-built bikes can easily surpass that of a luxury passenger car. How can anyone think it's cool to own or ride one of these monstrosities? Especially one covered in skulls, flames, and other tacky motifs? Call it cheesy, cliche, or just plain silly.
And yet in spite of all this, motorcycle registrations in Arizona have jumped 51% from 2002 to 2009. There are now over 200,000 motorcycles registered in the state of Arizona.
I wouldn't have a problem with that if they didn't roar down my alley with no mufflers, weasel by in the shoulder lane during traffic jams, and if they could actually be seen at night.
Motorcycles: who needs them? Definitely not me.
Posts
