Chrysler refuses recall request

http://www.impomag.com/news/2013/06/chrysler-refuses-us-request-recall-vehicles
could not be worse than a crown vic or pinto i suppose..
bob
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

http://www.impomag.com/news/2013/06/chrysler-refuses-us-request-recall-vehicles

Hell the de Havilland DH 106 Comet was allowed to fly despite a massive structural defect resulting in catastrophic damage, so what's a little fuel tank defect.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/05/2013 07:33 PM, . wrote:

I'm not sure what the "defect" is. Yes a Cherokee's gas tank is between the bumper and rear axle as it is on many vehicles. But I don't see a whole lot of sharp pointy objects in the area to actually puncture the tank and why only 1993-up vehicles when the Cherokee was made for ages before that?
In any case I don't feel unsafe driving mine...
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload


You wouldn't have seen the issue with the plane either.

Nor would you have felt unsafe driving a vehicle with a non collapsible steering column.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/06/2013 09:45 AM, . wrote:

I actually have owned at least four of those that I can recall :)
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

n
And we all know that "feeling" safe = safe... -----
- gpsman
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/06/2013 07:44 AM, gpsman wrote:

or to put it another way, ignorance is bliss...
--
fact check required

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Or to use actual statistics on this particular issue, if you feel it will happen to you playing lotteries might be a good idea too.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/06/2013 10:44 AM, gpsman wrote:

In the grand scheme of things, the odds of me being rear ended hard enough to have something actually move the metal enough to affect the gas tank, AND it be punctured, AND there being an ignition source that causes a big fireball before I can exit the vehicle are small enough that I might as well worry about being abducted by aliens and anally probed.
This seems reminiscent of the same concerns re: the 73-up Chevy trucks (of which both my grandfather and my father owned one, dad still does and drives it regularly) and Crown Vics...
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/06/2013 08:43 AM, Nate Nagel wrote:

i had occurred to me that you might be so inclined.

--
fact check required

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

ed.
Oh. I did not know those were the only circumstances of fatal/serious injury crashes.
Operating a motor vehicle is dangerous; make and model is, of course, irrelevant. -----
- gpsman
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/06/2013 12:19 PM, gpsman wrote:

It's the only circumstances in which the specific hazard outlined by this recall would be pertinent.

So's stepping into the shower, what's your point? With a little care it is "relatively" safe in the grand scheme of things.
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

robed.

s
Which, of course, is irrelevant.

Well, a new point would be the manners in which people manage to hurt themselves performing innocuous tasks only punctuates the propensity of the human being to err.
The original point was emotions are a shitty way to evaluate anything, and I'll bet you can still miss both points...

"Relatively" it's the most dangerous thing people do.
"For the first time since 1981 (when data was first available), motor vehicle traffic crashes were not among the top 10 causes of death in the United States.
"In 2009, while ranked 11th overall, motor vehicle traffic crashes were ranked 8th among males and 14th among females as a cause of death." http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811620.pdf -----
- gpsman
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
In article

Sorry, but that's a specious definition of "most dangerous" from a relative perspective.
Lots of people die or are injured on the roads...
...because people spend a lot of time on the roads.
The latest figures for the US that I've found show that in 2011, vehicle-miles traveled were 2.93 trillion. And deaths per 100 million vehicle miles were 1.1.
To make the figure as unfavourable as possible, we'll assume that all vehicles had a single passenger (minimizing passenger-miles) and that all travel was at 60mph (minimizing) time.
With those assumptions the death rate per million person-hours is:
1.1 * 1,000,000 / (1 * (100,000,000/60)
= 0.66 deaths per million person-hours
That's 0.66 deaths per 114 person-YEARS of driving.
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
In article

Please show us figures comparing the danger per hour as compared to other activities...
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You can borrow my Google: http://google.com -----
- gpsman
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
In article

Nope.
YOUR claim: YOU support it.
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/06/2013 11:44 AM, gpsman wrote:

don't try to confuse the guy with fact checking - he's already decided what he thinks he knows and that's that.
--
fact check required

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

LOL
A guy offers up a standard evasion...
...pretty much coincident in time with telling me that I have to support my claims...
...and you eat it up!
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
In article

What /I/ know is that by far the largest component of being safe in a motor vehicle is driving well.
If one never has a collision, then the gas tank's location is moot.
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.