harddrivin1le vs. facts (2 of 3)

[thebullfrog]

He’s loaded with ‘em. He breathes them. He shoots them at us, rapid-fire like an automatic weapon.

Yet for some reason, all his data bounce off us. It’s the classic "I’m rubber. You’re glue." scenario.

Not because he’s not accurate. He certainly is. No, it’s that hard facts don’t always apply to cars. A car’s aesthetics or goodness is hugely objective. Yes there are some absolutes: an ’87 Yugo is as crappy as a Rolls is impeccable.

Ultimately the facts let down harddrivin.

For instance, take his mother. I’m sure there are many women who are more attractive or smarter or more talented or even just nicer than her. Or all of the above. I doubt he’d love any of them any more. Or want to trade his mom in for a better lease option.

So like him, we love who and what we love. Harddrivin telling us how wrong we are for it is getting REALLY tiring.

Anybody else feel the same way?

[sjlee]

Originally posted by thebullfrog
He’s loaded with ‘em. He breathes them. He shoots them at us, rapid-fire like an automatic weapon.

Yet for some reason, all his data bounce off us. It’s the classic "I’m rubber. You’re glue." scenario.

Not because he’s not accurate. He certainly is. No, it’s that hard facts don’t always apply to cars. A car’s aesthetics or goodness is hugely objective. Yes there are some absolutes: an ’87 Yugo is as crappy as a Rolls is impeccable.

Ultimately the facts let down harddrivin.

For instance, take his mother. I’m sure there are many women who are more attractive or smarter or more talented or even just nicer than her. Or all of the above. I doubt he’d love any of them any more. Or want to trade his mom in for a better lease option.

So like him, we love who and what we love. Harddrivin telling us how wrong we are for it is getting REALLY tiring.

Anybody else feel the same way?

Actually, he tends to "ignore" certain facts...

His only points are performance/acceleration and mileage. He neglects to include things like standard features, comfort and reliability.

He once asked why anyone would buy a car that gets "poor" mileage, has "poor" performance and costs more than a (Accord V6 coupe, Evo, TSX, SRT-4, Park Avenue, Camaro, etc.). The answer... because the car offers more standard features, has better reliability, can be driven in all seasons and has the convenience of four doors.

If his argument were valid, then there would be no market for cars like BMW, Mercedes, Infiniti, Acura and Lexus because are plenty of less expensive, faster and more fuel efficient cars available. Heck, Ferrari and Porsche would be doomed.

[johnej]

with that kind of thinking I agree, the upper class car manufacturers would not even exist, and we would all be driving a car that is not all that well built.

[larchmont]

Nice find, ej!
I hadn't seen this little thread before.

BTW...."The Bullfrog" was a great member who dropped by now and then, hasn't been around for a while.
I wondered "who" he was -- it seemed he had been a regular on some other Acura sites, but wanted to remain incognito here......

Hey Bullfrog, if you ever take a look -- you gotta get your butt on here!!! :nod:

[sjlee]

Wow, talk about resurrecting a long dead thread!

Yeah, harddrivin was on back when I first joined this site. He was one of these Camaro-driving guys who think that maximizing bang-for-your-buck was biggest importance when purchasing a car. Reliability, interior space and comfort all took a backseat in his book to what was under the hood.

If you look back at his posts, you'll see that every chance he got he hijack a thread and start spewing the same old thing... "Why buy a TSX when you can get a Neon SRT-4?"

It was entertaining at first, but eventually it got to be so annoying that he eventually got banned. We're all definitely better off without him.

[johnej]

I will agree with that, the same thing was exposed in the general topic forums... I just found this one and it was interesting...