Just drove 650 miles (running the AC the whole way, at an average speed of 75MPH) on one tank of gas this weekend- in a Suburban.  It usually goes around 500-550 miles per tank, so this is a God-sent. {edited to say: it's a 4WD, 350 cid, with towing gears}
 Here is what I did:
 1) K&N air filter, removed stock airbox and hose assembly, flipped air-cleaner lid to make an open filter element.  (engine now runs about 5-10 degrees cooler thanks to this)
 2) Bosch Platinum +4 sparkplugs
 3) Bosch Premium plug wires
 4) New fuel filter
Edited to say that this thing now gets 15.4 MPG on the highway-
Everything else is stock, but I am now considering working on the exhaust to get even better mileage.  

 Long live the Suburban!  

ha... I average 57mpg ALL THE TIME, without doing anything special.  My 10.6 gallon tank takes me 600+ miles no sweat.

here come the hybrids...

:)

And you know what?  You can't carry squat from Point A to Point B.

Some people put more demands on their vehicles than just basic transportation.

not true.  A guy in California with the same hybrid took his girlfriend camping, and the car comfortably fit ALL of their gear.  (two full packs, a cooler, a tent, two sleeping bags and various sundry items.)

Hybrids are coming.  Ford's working on an Escape hybrid.  Eventually, SUV's will double their fuel economy without loss to power.  It's feasible, the auto industry just has to step up.

Not to throw cold water on your new found happiness, but that K&N will let a lot of very fine small particulates through into your engine.

It shows up as glycerin (sand) in your oil during sample testing.

I used to run a K&N in my supercharged 4Runner, but switched to an Amsoil air filter.

The K&N, Amsoil and stock paper filter were tested using the SAE J726C Test Method, and the rusults are listed below:

[img]http://128.83.80.200/taco/filter3.gif[/img]

The K&N and Amsoil filter both allow maximum air through, but the Amsoil filters as well as the restricted paper filter.

I have a friend who dyno'ed his supercharged 4Runner, and picked up 10 hp with the K&N, but picked up 20 with the Amsoil.  

And the Amsoil filter is less expensive that the K&N.

I did start off with a K&N, but I switched to a Amsoil filter 3 years ago:
Still going strong.

Just my opinion.

Jay
[img]http://www.commspeed.net/jmurray/images/iroc-cop.gif[/img]

The technology used in hybrids would be just as applicable to trucks.  I'd love to get 25-30 mpg out of a suburban, and that would be quite feasable with current technology.  Ever go down a steep hill and have to hit the brakes to avoid speeding excessively?  Brakes work by friction, turning energy (speed) into heat.  On hybrids, they use the wheels to run the electric motor, which generates electricity.  Among several other things, these are just modifications that use instead of waste large amounts of energy.

The Insight is a small car, aimed at those who don't need to haul a bunch of stuff or large group of people.  There's a Civic hybrid now that gets good gas mileage without giving up the space of a conventional car.  It's only a matter of time before someone realizes that a 30mpg SUV would have a real market.  Though, it may be a bit longer before we see a 4WD, meant for more than dirt roads, hybrid truck.

AZCop,

I have heard the same thing... I WAS going to put a K&N filter in my Insight, but figured a couple more MPGs wasn't worth all the extra crap going into the engine.  I'm gonna check into whether AMSOIL has one for my car.

I have no problem with hybrid technology, with a caveat:  It is not here yet.  It has seen some success with *very* small cars.

Trucks and 4x4s that are affordable, reliable, powerful, and practical don't have a hybrid powertrain.  They all use gas only.
If it would be so easy for carmakers to create a 4x4 with the above mentioned qualities, they would, and they would make a bundle of money.

The problem is that they are not ready yet for primetime.  It is as simple as that.

Until the technology has matured a little, and such cars are widely available, don't beat us about the head and shoulders with your Insight.

As to the K&N:  My Jeep Grand Cherokee has one.  It works great, but I wouldn't go over 3000 miles before an oil change.  The oil gets dark pretty fast.

where the hell does one find an AMSOIL filter??? Never heard of it!

BTW, forgot to mention the fact that I rescued a late-model Chevy Impala from a canal bank along the way.  Try towing a car out with your little sissy hybrid econo-box!  flame on

Hybrid technology has been around for DECADES.  It's been IMMENSELY successful, in fact, it's probably the ONLY power source for a particular means of transportation.  It is responsible for moving TONS upon TONS of cargo.  What am I talking about, you ask?  Locomotives.  Trains.  Ever hear of deisel electric?  

It IS a feasible technology, and it IS here.  Honda and Toyota are just the first companies to actually STEP UP and make a hybrid vehicle.  With all the space in SUVs, a larger electric power supply and larger electric motors would work nicely, and would perform quite well.  It's just NOBODY would make one until someone stepped up and showed them it could be done.  The reason Honda did a small, efficient car, is because that's what Honda does.  If Chevy were to put a team on it, you'd have an awesome hybrid Tahoe or Suburban.

I think in 20 years or so, the vehicles we drive will be different.  Fuel Cells will probably be cheap, and will contribute a lot to power sources.  We will probably still be using fossil fuels in many applications, but we'll be more efficient with it's usage.

Diss,

Hey, it's great that you got good gas mileage out of your gas-guzzler, but noone called your vehicle any names, or put it down.  Sure, your vehicle will be better for some things, there's no doubt.  Mine will outperform yours in other areas.  

if I had to tow cars, carry 15 children, 30 cubic feet of junk, etc, your car would be better.  Given that I only drive myself to work and back, my car is better for me.  To each his own.

I AM NOT KNOCKING YOUR CHOICE OF VEHICLE, so don't knock mine.  They each PERFORM better in different aspects.   Eventually, YOUR choice of type of vehicle will be much more efficient, as far as fuel goes.  That's what I'm pointing out.

(Personally, I think driving an SUV just as transportation, is like hunting squirrels with a .50BMG.  For certain other things, they're fine.  The preceding was an OPINION, and only and OPINION)

How's the math on all this?  Just curious...

What'd it cost for all those improvements, compared to what you saved in fuel costs?

What's it going to look like when you factor in the exhaust cost?

What's the max. fuel efficiency you could expect with all possible improvements?

Any long term maintenance cost estimates with and without your improvements?

And how much is all that in ammo-equivalents?   [:D]

I'm all for technology to improve fuel efficiency but I gotta say I'm having way too much fun with my 300+ horsepower Z28 to even consider hybrid stuff.  When they build an affordable hybrid with a REAL (meaning powerful) motor in it, I'll sit up and take notice.

BBURN

Dude, you jacked this guys thread to stroke yourself over your hybrid car. You called his truck a "Gas-guzzler in the first sentence here & claim to have not called it names. I have seen you do the same in at least one other auto realated thread. Give it a rest & or start another thread about your wonderful 2 passenger econo-box. Folks that want to move things or people are interested in this truck or ones like them. I'm glad you get great mileage. There is more to life than that. If not, we wouldn't have so many choices. And when you need to pick up something from the home improvement store, make sure it's just a small project.
Scott

BTW, I have a '92 GMC Suburban. Customized nicely. 126,000 miles. Stock as the day is long as far as plugs, wires, airfilter exhaust etc... Just finished a trip from SC to mid-Tenn. Including crossing the smokies twice & running the A/C 75% of the time, I got between 16 & 18 mpg. I think you just needed a good tuneup.

Good deal.  I have this habit of getting terrible gas hogs and then trying to make them more efficient.  In fact, this winter I am looking at a 350 conversion for my CJ and picking up a 454 GMC for my "parts runner".  Big honkin engines are cool.[:D]

Doing the math- one gallon of 87 octane regular unleaded goes for approx $1.50 per gallon here in my neck of the woods.  

average mileage gains- ~100 more miles per 42 gallons of gas

This is a savings of around 7 gallons of fuel per 42 gallon tank, conservatively speaking.  
This equals $10.50 saved, per tank-

I spent ~35 bucks for the filter, ~45 for the wires, and another ~40 for the plugs, ~10 bucks for the fuel filter, plus a Saturday morning and two beers for installation costs.  
 This brings the grand total to around $130 bucks for all of these mods.  
 $130 divided by $10.50=approx 12.  So, after around 12 tanks of gas, all of these mods will have payed for themselves, not to mention the increased power and throttle response that my Suburban was sorely lacking.  
 
 Now, I need to find myself an AMSOIL filter so I can ditch the K&N- although the air quality where I live and drive is very good, and the truck is never operated in dusty conditions- I will continue to inspect the oil for sediment, just to be sure.  
 

to all of those who want to hijack my thread with talk of econobox/hybrid crap and nonsense... [stick]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gun-Fan - I am skeptical of your mechanically stock 92 GMC with 126K miles that gets 16-18MPG, since a NEW '03 Suburban is barely capable of that kind of mileage!

Yes.  No one can fault trains for their efficiency in moving megatons of cargo.  The key word missing here is flexibility.  Trains go from 0-60 in about 5 minutes, and a few miles.  They carry kilotons of cargo, but can only go where there are tracks.  They can go long distances, but are fairly slow.

I am not denying the existence of these things, but their practicality in passenger vehicles has not matured yet.  It can't be denied.  I am sure that in 20 years, things will be different.



Good for them.  Seriously.  I hope they keep on improving them.  They do take a loss on each of these however, in order to keep the price reasonable.  That should tell you somthing about the practicality of these powertrains today.

Nobody buys a bigger car so they can haul around more generators, except the generator delivery guy.  Fit it under the hood, or not at all.  And don't make the car ugly.


Tahoe or Suburban owners tolerate far less than the Honda owner.  What I mean by that is this:  The Suburban owner doesn't care as much about mileage, as he does about towing, cargo space, durability, power, comfort, seating, and so on.  If any of these things aren't met, at a reasonable price, then people won't buy them.
The Honda driver doesn't need power to tow, extra seating, cargo space etc.  They care more about efficiency than utility.  They only drive themselves to work daily, so they don't care that most of the trunk is taken up by 500 lbs of new technology.  The suburban driver would rather pay lots in gas for a super reliable vehicle, than have to worry that 1 foot of water will fry major drivetrain components.  A commuter might not ever worry about these things.  They would simply skip work if there was flooding or snow.


I don't disagree at all with this.  I want the market and capitalism to decide when hybrids etc. are ready for the big time, and not some California Senator.

 

Gun-Fan- to be sure we are comparing apples to apples here:  mine is a 1500, 4-Wheel drive

 If yours is 2WD, you would realize better mileage.

[url]http://www.chevrolet.com/suburban/index.htm[/url]   click on "features/specs" on the left side of the page, then click on "fuel economy" in the middle of the page.

Gun fan- check here, and you will see that the 2002 Suburban (4WD) gets 14 MPG city, and 16 Highway.  
 Can I say again---I am very skeptical of your results with your '92

"It shows up as glycerin (sand) in your oil during sample testing."

AZcop, what the hell are you talking about?  Glycerin is a viscous, short chain poly alcohol used in making candy, dynamite and smokeless powder amongst other things.  Sand is silicon dioxide...  

Sorry about the thread crap.  I just believe in big cars so much that I have to defend them when they are attacked.

Long live the Suburban!

'Tis true my friend. I also have a 95 Silverado doing closer t0 20mpg. Same setup. Both have 350's in them & 4 speed auto trans. One thing may be driving style. I am no wuss, but don't stomp the gas for no reason. I let the trucks accelerate kinda easily if there is no reason not to. I will also draft trucks, van's or anything else on the road if I can. Not tailgating or NASCAR style, just use the other guys gas. I try to run with traffic. That can be up to 85mph. I will let them go after that. If you haven't tried this, just crack your window while following a truck, you will hear the wind noise change to a much calmer/lower sound when you are in the slipstream.
Scott

Long Live The Suburban Indeed, Torf!

 The only hybrids around here grow in gardens!

Gun-Fan- are your trucks 4WD or 2WD???

About the drafting thing...forgedaboudit where I drive- I'm not going to do 90MPH just to draft someone...
 You are calculating mileage as: miles traveled divided by gallons of fuel consumed, right???  
 Seriously, not even the fudged EPA numbers (we all know that these are inflated) come close to 20 MPG in ANY 'Burban.  
  I have to see it to believe it- you should tell Chevy too, since they would love to make a full-sized SUV that gets that sort of mileage.  

Gun-fan could also have 2WD half tons with 3.08 gears.

My 1994 GMC K2500 Suburban with a TBI 454 and 4.10 gears will NEVER get better than 13-14mpg. And that's just fine with me. I've owned it since it was brand new and I can tell you this much, I didn't buy it because I'm on welfare and have to worry about fuel economy. I wanted/needed a tough, durable truck that can pull like a mule.

And as a railroader myself, the locomotive vs. hybrid automobile comparison isn't always very apt. The primary aspects that continue to make rail an efficient mode of transportation are the ability to move extremely heavy loads at relatively constant speed and the comparatively low friction between steel wheel and steel rail. Note that on even the heaviest tonnage trains they typically only run a maximum of 4-5 horsepower per ton (HPT). See how well your 3,000 pound hybrid car does with a 7.5 horsepower prime mover. Briggs and Stratton, anyone?

All I'm pointing out is that hybrid technology is here, but it's in it's infancy, as far as the consumer market goes.

What Diss was saying his SUV did well, mine does immensely better.  When talking about gas mileage alone, I have him beat hands down.  I go as far on 1/3 the gas.  That's a fact.  My car is THE best available on the market as far as gas mileage goes.  That's a fact, too.

When it comes to towing cars out of ditches, he has me beat, hands down.  That's a fact.  I admit the shortcomings of my vehicle, but they are shortcomings I can live with.  

SUVs will be improved and will perform better.  You'll still have your power, but you'll get much better gas mileage, with lower emissions.  Heck, I'll probably get an SUV when I have need for one, but I hope they'll be more efficient by the time I need it.  

Thanks for ignoring my request, M1QJ

I do like your sig line, but may I suggest a nice hot cup of "SHUT THE FU#K UP" to go with your "bowl of stupid?"  
 
The fact that it would take four of your cars to haul the amount of people/cargo/pets that I do makes my point even more profound.  
Your econobox gets 3X better mileage than my gas-hog SUV, but it would take four (or more of them) to do the same job that mine accomplishes...hmmmmm
  BTW, did I mention that I don't appreciate having this happy thread hijacked by your crap and nonsense???

In order to calculate MPG accurately.

1. Record the odometer reading when the tank is full.

2. Consume 5 or more tanks of gas, recording the qty (gas) dispensed per sale.

3. When you get gas, subtract the original odometer reading from the current one.  This will give you miles driven.  Then add up the gallons used (from your log).  This will give you gallons consumed.

Divide miles driven by gallons consumed to calculate MPG.

The more tanks you figure in, the more accurate your MPG figure will be.  Use more than 1 tank to discount the effects of fluke gas, abnormal driving, weather, abnormal traffic etc.


EPA figures are a composite of different mixtures of hiway and city driving.  Their highway figures aren't going to be accurate for every situation.

Terrain also has an impact on large engines.

SUV's tend to get better mileage in Colorado than they do in Kansas for example.  I never get such good mileage than when I am driving I-70 through Colorado.  Beautiful drive BTW.

BaaaWHAHHHAHAAAAAAAAAAAA!

I still want to know if this fella (Gun-Fan) is running 3.08 gears in a 2WD- that would partially explain things, but then he is also giving up lots in off-road capabilities, towing, etc.

Preach on, Brother Boomer, preach on!
 Basically you restated the economic concept that I stated a post or two earlier, but great minds think alike I suppose! [:)]
 
I still want to know what Gun-Fan is doing to get such phenomenal mileage (besides drafting 18-wheelers)

As far as hybrid technology, you're fearing it more than you should, you're worrying about it being to fragile. I wouldn't hesitate to drive it if it got wet, or if it snowed... I'd drive it anywhere I'd drive a comparable ICE powered car.  It's not 'experimental' anymore, it's out there, it's out for consumers.

Sure, batteries and electric motors might be heavy, but so is 35 gallons of gas.  The powerplant in my car probably weighs about 60lb.  10 gallons of gas weighs as much or more.  Using a smaller ICE, in combination with electric motors, the displacement of the power train in a hybrid SUV might not be much more at all.  With space saved having a smaller gas tank, that's where the battery/power source could be.  

If you waited until it were 'demanded by consumers', it would only be when gas becomes so damn expensive (if that ever happens) that they simply couldn't afford to drive ANYTHING else.  We live in a society of access, and people won't demand anything else until conditions are SO horrible.  I'm glad other manufacturers are going to venture into the hybrid markets.  Estimates have put sales at about 500,000 hybrid vehicles per year in 2010, so I think they'll become more and more popular.

Someday you'll have an SUV that is just as big, pulls just as much, carries just as much, is just as powerful, but gets much better gas mileage.  I think it's inevitable.

Well, Diss, the thread topic was only about your gas mileage, right?  Did you post it thinking EVERYONE was gonna pat you on the back and say 'way to go!'?  (BTW, any improvement is good)  This is an open forum, so be prepared for someone to throw something in that causes some lively discussion... we've seen THAT happen many times! ;)

I have not made any personal attacks here.  Those are for the weak minded (take that as an attack if you want to, it's up to you)  Go ahead and keep belittling me.  I only laugh more.

On the subject of [b]GAS MILEAGE[/b], and gas mileage [b]ALONE[/b], I have you beat.  I probably have all of your cars beat.  My car DOES have shortcomings, though.  It has MANY shortcomings.  But for me, it's perfect.  

What my intention here was to say [b]'looky what I got, what you got might be using the same technology someday'[/b]  ... but most of you take it as me saying 'looky what I got, what you got SUCKS'.  If you want to take it that way, such is not my intention.

We all know cars are like guns.  They are each different, and useful for different things.  We don't go callin people names because they got a .22 and say they can get more ammo for $10 than you can get for your .50BMG, do we?

of course, silly me--- I thought you were trying to brag about your econobox's excellent mileage...
   
 To continue on with your firearm analogy- trying to compare your car to my SUV is NOT like comparing a .22 short to a .50 BMG...it's more like a Red Ryder BB gun compared to a Howitzer.

This guy just doesn't get it. Applying his logic, I could sit back and say that my Suburban is ideal because it beats the example of a locomotive he raised as I get an impressive 10mpg vs. a new GE CW44-9 locomotive that only gets a miniscule 1/3 of a mile per gallon. Or maybe I could gloat about how much better fuel economy I get than a tractor-trailer rig. Nevermind that I fall far beind when calculating the actual cost of ton per mile moved.

So now we see your true colors, Red.  Consumers are stupid.  Companies are stupid.  Government must mobilize to "help" these two entities do what makes sense.

Rubbish.  Consumers want the best car they can possibly get.  What would be better than a Suburban that costs $30,000?  Why a Suburban that costs $30,000 and gets 45 MPG of course!  One problem.  It doesn't exist.  When it does, the consumer will buy it.

BTW - you can't ignore the fact that an Insight that takes 3 trips to haul everything that can go in one Suburban, has to drive empty all the way back to the start for another trip.

Example (for those of you who don't already get it):

1 100 mi. trip
8 people
4 suitcases

How much gas do I save by using hybrid technology?




Answer?

Nothing. In fact, you are out $7.50 in gas, and about 6 hours of your time.

Geez.  Talkin to you guyz is kinda like extolling the virtues of the wheel to neanderthals.

If I needed to move 8 people on a trip, I wouldn't use my car.  Simply put.  I [i]never[/i] hyped my vehicle on it's carrying capacity, nor claimed it was comparable or better in that aspect.  This thread was about GAS MILEAGE only.  NOT capacity, NOT size, NOT how many relatives got from point A to point B!

And your example, Torf, ignores that hybrid technology will one day be available, and heck, probably even mainstream in SUVs.  Imagine the same type of vehicle (as the suburban) that got 30-40mpg.  Put that in your comparison.

Right now, you could take the Toyota Prius, or the Civic Hybrid, get around 40-50mpg, and seat 5 people.  (trunk space lacking a little).

Consumers ARE buying hybrid vehicles, there just aren't that many.  Average Joe thinking "I wish I had a hybrid SUV" isn't just gonna make it appear.  The industry has to MAKE one first, then see if Joe Average wants to buy it.  Sink or swim from there.  Lots of consumer technologies have gone through the same trials and tribulations.  Remember BetaMax??

There are instances, like I mentioned, like you mentioned, that one vehicle will perform immensely better than the other.  Mine is a niche vehicle, I openly admit that.  I'm more trying to extoll the virtues of hybrid technology, not just the Insight.  I'm saying that someday, soon, SUVs like the Suburban will be capable of getting outstanding gas mileage compared to what they get today.  It is my OPINION that the industry could already HAVE something out, but pussyfoot it, pumping out to the masses who are generally ignorant or apathetic.

You need a Suburban to haul 8 people with their luggage, that's great.  Have at it.  (I also think 8 people WITH all of their luggage is stretching it, even in a full size suburban... my buddy's Expedition was pretty full with me, him, his wife, our luggage and three dogs.)

To sum up: On the merits of gas mileage ALONE, hybrid technology outperforms SUVs.  Hybrid technology will eventually be available in SUVs, and will probably even be mainstream.  If you want to ostricise me for holding this opinion, or if it is offensive to you, wait about 10 years and see if I'm right.  

Peace.

So can a Geo Metro powered exclusively by an old fashioned, gasoline fed internal combustion motor. What was your point again?

Again, to clarify for those who forget... ;)

The thread was about GAS MILEAGE

They say there are 3 things a man lies about.

Funny, the rest of us thought the thread was about improving the fuel economy of existing large utility vehicles.

You seem to be the only one suffering delusions that it is a springboard from which to launch your irrelevant ramblings about hybrid vehicles.

No electric motor, and especially no hybrid is 100% efficient.  So, you will have losses.  Compound that by the inability to tow or carry loads of any consequence.  Waste of time.  Can't argue with physics.  The little motor, no matter what (ok, unless dilithium crystals and matter/anti-matter reaction chambers) is pulling multi thousand pound loads.  

The trouble is, too many of the politicians who want to run our lives think they can just look at a toy that may work FOR THEM, and impose it on the rest of us.

BTW, since I no longer tow a boat (used an Expedition with 8000 lb. tow capacity for that) I now have a BMW X5 with the 3.0 six.  Really peppy and, gasp, pushes 30 mpg at highway speeds.  Who needs gadgets and gimmicks?  (OK, the dilithium crystals, etc.)

Boomer, then the topic should have been "mods to get more mileage out of an SUV"

If you don't want other views or types of input, well, tough.  This is an open forum, isn't it?  

I'm talking about an emerging technology, but it seems you good 'ol boys don't want to hear it.  You get defensive when someone says 'there's something better out there/on the way'  It's great that you want to squeeze a little more efficiency out of a vehicle with pathetically low mileage. Kudos and cheers for that.  But goddamn, attack me for illustrating the benefits of hybrid technology??  

I think it's great that Diss got some extra miles out of the gas he used.  I also feel that drivers of those cars sacrifice a bit to get the capacity/ability that they get, and that the auto industry has pulled the covers over their eyes.  SUVs as they are could get better gas mileage with IC engines, but the auto industry/oil industry see that people buy them regardless, so it's just good business to keep pumping out gas guzzling beasts.

oh well...  I think I'm through kicking a dead horse.    I'll just go on laughing at the guys pumping $50 worth of gas in their SUVs, and still go less distance than I go on $15 worth.  When I need to haul 8 people with luggage, I'll get an SUV.

For the flamer that favors the hybrid, I suggest you move to N. CA and charge that sucker up in the garage and pay the PG&E bills. Hybrids have done a remarkable nose dive off the deep end since we've had our FUBAR power problems in this state. Davis wants no electricity to go along with those no guns.

Christ, did you even read the topic header????



All totally irrelevant to the subject at hand. Go start your own thread if you want to discuss alternative energy technology. I'm not against hybrid vehicles, just you hijacking this thread for your own little purpose of demonstrating how politically correct and environmentally friendly you are.



Good for you, keep on doing that. And I'll go on laughing at the self-righteous, idiotic enviro-nazis cramped in their tinny little econoboxes as my family and I are stretched out in our big ol' Suburban, not having had to decide what to deprive ourselves of and leave home, both air conditioners blasting, and the kids happy and content watching the latest DVD is the back. And $50 for gas? Big deal. You on welfare or something?

Well, I hate to call you ignorant on the issue, but a hybrid doesn't need to be plugged in.  Your argument is bunk.  Pure electric vehicles need to be plugged in.  You just put gas in a hybrid, and there you go.  Self sustaining.

See, this is why I jump in threads like this.  Most people are ignorant (not neccessarily a bad thing, so don't take it as an insult) about hybrid technology, thus they don't care about it, and heck, even put it down.  Oh well.  It's a reality, and it will continue to be so.

If you've got the money to blow on $50 of gas every couple weeks, more power to you.  I choose to be more efficient with my hard earned money.  I don't have enough to be able to dump $100 or more a month into my car.  If you do, more power to you.   I'm not an enviro nazi, just like you're not some right wing crazy militia nut just because you own guns.  Prejudice and stereotyping at it's best, and you did it.  Good going.  Cramped?  I'm 6'1", 200lb and have PLENTY of leg and headroom in my Insight.  So did my 6'4" 280lb friend in the passenger seat.  Self righteous?  Since when did I say anything that put myself above anyone else?  NOWHERE.  I never said ANYTHING about 'saving the environment'.  I like the technology involved.  I like the gas mileage I get. I don't go out and hug trees like you must assume I do.  In many aspects, I'm just one of you, I just drive a different car.  Sheesh, get over it.

Damn guys, why don't you just line me up and shoot me or something??  I bring up hybrid technology and tout it's benefits, and you all go on the defensive!  Yeesh.  We'll never get anywhere as gun owners acting like this.  They'll call us yahoos, and you know what?  They'll be RIGHT.

Maybe someone should have just said: 'yeah, hybrid technology is nice, but we're wanting to discuss Suburbans here'

Maybe we should go find our own little car boards and hype our vehicles, and sing to our own choirs.