SL/R230: New 2007 SL550 50th is in.
04-23-2006, 07:24 AM
#77
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Originally Posted by Mean-Benz
tomd, could you post some more pics with the roll-over bar down? it doesnt make the sl look sleeker. (j/k 
)
)
10-12-2006, 12:11 PM
#78
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that all of the 50th Anniversary Editions are mono-spec, like the launch edition models that M-B seems to like so much lately. This lets them control costs and run them off the line faster.
As to the guzzler tax, tomd, how is it thievery? You don't *have to* buy a gas-guzzler in the first place, just as you don't have to buy alcohol or tobacco products (excellent examples of targeted taxes). If that's your choice as a purchase, then you accept that it's not an efficient vehicle. Obviously it would be better if the tax was pro-rated for mileage, but people would go bonkers about the big bad government inspecting their odometers, knowing how far they drive, and you'd have huge problems with odometer fraud.
The tax isn't even that substantial on most vehicles. It's a one-time-only charge, and it just is designed to encourage companies to make more efficient vehicles, and for people to buy more efficient models. It's a small nudge, to remind people of the cost of such vehicles, and to encourage them to more more ecologically sound choices. In a world where massive gas shortages in major oilfields are likely within my lifetime, I don't see anything wrong with even such token gestures as the gas tax. It's just meant to ask people...'Do you really need an E550? Wouldn't an E350 get you there in plenty of time?' In my book, it's negligence bordering on the criminal that fleet economy averages are stagnating while endless horsepower wars give 6-second 0-60 times for family sedans. Maybe that's what people want, or what car companies think they want, but wouldn't it be nice if the business folks showed a bit of social conscience from time to time? Perhaps admitted that their products help to put is in the position of supporting unsavory sorts around the globe in order to feed what even our beloved Current Occupant calls an "addition to oil?"
I think, in the end, that we should increase the guzzler tax, and then the government should earmark the revenue as part of a larger effort to develop greater energy efficiency, renewable energy sources, and long-term solutions like nuclear fusion. I do agree with tomd on one point: it's irrational that trucks, vans, and SUVs aren't subjected to the guzzler tax, since they're the worst mainstream offenders. It's even crazier that the H2 and the Suburban 2500 and the Ford Excretion, er Excursion, and the HD pickup trucks aren't event required to submit to fuel economy tests in the first place. That should be where we start. If you don't like the guzzler tax, tell M-B to get its act together and expand their hybrid and turbodiesel offerings. I thought that the SL400 Tri-Turbo concept sounded awesome. The future is coming; I just wish it would get here sooner.
As to the guzzler tax, tomd, how is it thievery? You don't *have to* buy a gas-guzzler in the first place, just as you don't have to buy alcohol or tobacco products (excellent examples of targeted taxes). If that's your choice as a purchase, then you accept that it's not an efficient vehicle. Obviously it would be better if the tax was pro-rated for mileage, but people would go bonkers about the big bad government inspecting their odometers, knowing how far they drive, and you'd have huge problems with odometer fraud.
The tax isn't even that substantial on most vehicles. It's a one-time-only charge, and it just is designed to encourage companies to make more efficient vehicles, and for people to buy more efficient models. It's a small nudge, to remind people of the cost of such vehicles, and to encourage them to more more ecologically sound choices. In a world where massive gas shortages in major oilfields are likely within my lifetime, I don't see anything wrong with even such token gestures as the gas tax. It's just meant to ask people...'Do you really need an E550? Wouldn't an E350 get you there in plenty of time?' In my book, it's negligence bordering on the criminal that fleet economy averages are stagnating while endless horsepower wars give 6-second 0-60 times for family sedans. Maybe that's what people want, or what car companies think they want, but wouldn't it be nice if the business folks showed a bit of social conscience from time to time? Perhaps admitted that their products help to put is in the position of supporting unsavory sorts around the globe in order to feed what even our beloved Current Occupant calls an "addition to oil?"
I think, in the end, that we should increase the guzzler tax, and then the government should earmark the revenue as part of a larger effort to develop greater energy efficiency, renewable energy sources, and long-term solutions like nuclear fusion. I do agree with tomd on one point: it's irrational that trucks, vans, and SUVs aren't subjected to the guzzler tax, since they're the worst mainstream offenders. It's even crazier that the H2 and the Suburban 2500 and the Ford Excretion, er Excursion, and the HD pickup trucks aren't event required to submit to fuel economy tests in the first place. That should be where we start. If you don't like the guzzler tax, tell M-B to get its act together and expand their hybrid and turbodiesel offerings. I thought that the SL400 Tri-Turbo concept sounded awesome. The future is coming; I just wish it would get here sooner.
