posted
Baby you can build my car How can you tell if a car was designed for women drivers? The seat covers are machine-washable but you can't open the hood! Ha!
Oh, wait, they're serious.
Next month Volvo will debut their new concept car (industry term meaning "car we'll never actually make but isn't it cool?") designed for and by women, a small and neglected demographic of car buyers that barely makes up half of the world's population. So what do women drivers want?
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'd actually be offended by that because I am remotely capable with a car. I've had enough things go wrong that I can change tires, oil, brakes, the battery and the alternator if I really needed to. I guess I agree that it's a very sexist concept and that gender shouldn't dictate how inept you are with a car.
Good column, btw. As always.
Posts: 1090 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
My wife is much better with car repairs than I am -- and no, I didn't exaggerate much. I can manage a few more things, I'm good at changing tires (when you go through a few years of buying $10 tires, you get good at changing them) and I can change my own oil, and that's about it. Teresa has gotten to where she can handle most anything that doesn't require removing the engine. We stil get her brother to do it, but the point is that she could.
Here's the article about the Volvo, by the way. I can't wait to hear what they call this thing.
[ February 18, 2004, 07:40 AM: Message edited by: Chris Bridges ]
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
:Ponders the obvious name for a female Volvo. Remembers what happened to Frisco on the revised hug thread. Thinks better of the idea:
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
so how long did you drive the car without oil? were you exaggerating or is that totally true? If so, that is awesome! Sigh, they just don't make cars like they used to.
By the way, I read an article that stated, though changing your oil every 3000 miles is best for most cars, if you factor in the odds of the oil change being done incorrectly, like the guy at the Jiffy Lube forgetting to tighten the oil plug correctly, odds are it is better for the car, and less expensive Not to change your oil that often.
PS. Great article. I don't say that about all your articles, but thats because I've become spoiled by them. Thanks.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
*laughing* Chris, my first car was a 1984 Chevette, and I had the exact same experience. That thing could run on nothing but hopes and the occasional makeout session in the back seat. It didn't go very fast, but apparently it attracted cops like nobody's business. I got more speeding tickets with it than any of my other cars combined, and was once detained for robbery while driving it through the drivethru at McDonalds.
I think they were just jealous that their cars needed actual fluids while mine did not. Posts: 5948 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
jeniwren: My Chevette was where I spent most of my non-school, non-work time, and it did indeed run on nothing. I even took off the dashboard so I could apply tiny white lettering on the fuel gauge under "E" that read "FUMES." When I got to the "m" I knew I had about five minutes of driving left.
It was the ideal all-terrain vehicle. I drove it through 2-foot-deep puddles, over rocky hills, and hit a shopping cart at 45 mph with only a crack to the plastic grill. I finally had to bounce it off municipal property (a garbage truck) and into a tree to kill it, and even then I drove it home.
The only drawback was the legroom, or lack of it. Fortunately my girlfriend (now wife) was only 4'11"...
Posts: 7790 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
They never should have stopped making those cars. *shakes head*
I grew up in Anchorage, and my Chevette had a lifesaving feature that caused it to be recalled -- you could shift the automatic transmission thingy without hitting the brake -- which when you're stuck in 3 feet of snow and high centered, is the only way you can get out without burly men to help you. I would slam in into Drive, then Reverse back and forth until I could rock my way out.
As far as I know that car is still running. I sold her in good working condition to a couple who loved her as much as I did.
Posts: 5948 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
I thought I'd post to this thread instead of starting a new one.
I'd just like to point out something in the article that frustrated me: the comment about how cars are only designed for "tall men." B-frickin'-S. There's no way that is true.
I'm 6'4 (193cm) and I have always had problems with fitting into cars. I'm not even all that tall, I'm just above average.
I remember when my old roommate got a new Eclipse and I couldn't even drive it because the seat didn't scoot back far enough and the roof was too low. I could lean the seat back to make more room, but then I was in an uncomfortable and dangerous driving position. Even then I had to tip my head a bit to see out the window.
This doesn't just happen with Japanese cars. I've had problems with American and European cars too. The only comfortable type of car I can really drive are cars with front bench seats. Only then does my leg actually fit next to the steering wheel and I'm not constantly hitting the brake because my feet are too wide for the gap between the side of the console and the brake pedal.
Even in cars that allow me to slide the seat back far enough that my legs fit comfortably under the wheel aren't good enough. The wheel doesn't telescope, so it's sitting really, really far away and makes hand-over-hand driving difficult. I don't want the wheel on my chin, but I would like to bend my arms a little bit.
Cars are designed with average men in mind. I'll concede to the male-oriented design aspect because it does make some sense and is probably traceable. However, don't even start with the crap about tall men. When I can fit easily into every single car, truck and van that I drive, I'll buy it.
On a somewhat unrelated note, people in this country need to realize that a car is not a toy but is a complicated and potentially dangerous piece of machinery. You're taking several tons of steel and hurling it down a street with nothing but a few square inches of rubber to stop it. It has thousands of parts that have to work in concert for the car to function healthily. Having a car is not a right but a privilege that stems from the opulence of this country. We seem to keep forgetting these things.
Posts: 4753 | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oooooh, cars developed for women by women. Ok, idea in and of itself is great. However, some of the ideas they had were just the stupidest things I have ever heard of. 1) No hood - Huh? I took 2 years of auto tech at Univ of Mich and half my class was female. They could no sh*t work on an engine. 2) Gull wing doors - (I think I read this) I just plain hate that idea. I agree on the leg room comment. Whatever vehicle I get, it has to have leg room. I'm only 5'11", but that still didn't keep me from getting my knees banged up when when I exited my Mom's JEEP. Especially when I borrowed it for prom night. I own two trucks now. A 2000 Dodge Dakota sport (barely enough legroom) and a 1964 Chevy C-10 P/U (which, when it gets in running condition, has plenty of leg room). oh and the 3000 miles issue on oil.....you can go up to 4000 miles (granted condition of car) and be ok , but any more than that....you might want to take the time to change the oil.
quote: Sigh, they just don't make cars like they used to.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[No No]](graemlins/nono.gif)
Actually that thought has crossed my mind to.
