No Fat Trucks
 

The subconscious mind, once sold on the idea that bigger things are
better, will often override our best intentions. We, in turn, find
ourselves along for the ride, and as the things around us grow bigger,
so do we.

Check out this article http://www.NoFatTrucks.com/suvfat07.htm

site of my dreams!

No Fat Trucks
 

(Joe Pig) wrote:

The subconscious mind, once sold on the idea that bigger things are
better, will often override our best intentions. We, in turn, find
ourselves along for the ride, and as the things around us grow bigger,
so do we.

Check out this article http://www.NoFatTrucks.com/suvfat07.htm

site of my dreams!

There is a name for the mindset that says, "smaller is better". That
name is stinginess. If you were a big person trying to find a
comfortable fit in a stingy world, sizeist crap like that you are
shoveling would just be more of a dreadfully familiar irritant.

I grew too big for most cars (6'7") before I was allowed to drive one.
Now at 6'8" and about 400 lbs., I am constantly presented with "one
size" public accomodations that are not, in fact, accomodations to me.
I cope with the transportation ramifications of stingy design by
using a specially equipped motorcycle (and, of course, bicycles), but
if I wanted to drive a car, I would have a very short list of vehicles
from which to choose.

Some of those few vehicles would be full-sized trucks.

So before you go suggesting that SUV gluttony makes one fat, consider
that one who is fat for reasons other than gluttony might choose a
large, truck-based vehicle simply in order to fit into his or her own
car. That is the fault of the manufacturers and the sizeist society
at large, not of the big person who is making do.

Being big-- fat, tall, wide, heavy, or whatever-- is not wrong. You
should thank your lucky stars that most big folks have gentle and
patient dispositions when you insult them.

Chalo Colina

No Fat Trucks
 

On 25 Feb 2004 17:22:28 -0800, (Chalo) wrote:

(Joe Pig) wrote:

[snip stuff about SUV's & the "Do you want to super-size your order
sir?" culture...]

I grew too big for most cars (6'7") before I was allowed to drive one.
Now at 6'8" and about 400 lbs., I am constantly presented with "one
size" public accomodations that are not, in fact, accomodations to me.
I cope with the transportation ramifications of stingy design by
using a specially equipped motorcycle (and, of course, bicycles), but
if I wanted to drive a car, I would have a very short list of vehicles
from which to choose.

The latest stats I could find say that 99% of US adult males
lie in the height range 5' 2" - 6' 3".

You are way up the top end of the curve for height
(along with about 1 in 10,000 of the population) , so it's not
surprising that you have had a hard time fitting in cars designed
for the majority.

It's poor economcs for general automotive manufacturers
to design their vehicles to accomodate the very top and tail of the
height curve: The middling majority would be forced to pay
for the extra metal and glass (plus the associated vehicle mass
and wind resistance), while gaining no real benefit from the
increased size.

Vic.

No Fat Trucks
 

"Chalo" wrote in message
om...
(Joe Pig) wrote:

The subconscious mind, once sold on the idea that bigger things are
better, will often override our best intentions. We, in turn, find
ourselves along for the ride, and as the things around us grow bigger,
so do we.

Check out this article http://www.NoFatTrucks.com/suvfat07.htm

site of my dreams!

There is a name for the mindset that says, "smaller is better". That
name is stinginess. If you were a big person trying to find a
comfortable fit in a stingy world, sizeist crap like that you are
shoveling would just be more of a dreadfully familiar irritant.

I grew too big for most cars (6'7") before I was allowed to drive one.
Now at 6'8" and about 400 lbs., I am constantly presented with "one
size" public accomodations that are not, in fact, accomodations to me.


400 pounds? So you eat 4000 calories a day, right? You're 6 inches shorter
than Shaquille O'Neal, and weigh 80 pounds more? Sure.....

No Fat Trucks
 

On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 10:26:22 GMT, "Gooserider" wrote:


"Chalo" wrote in message
. com...
(Joe Pig) wrote:

The subconscious mind, once sold on the idea that bigger things are
better, will often override our best intentions. We, in turn, find
ourselves along for the ride, and as the things around us grow bigger,
so do we.

Check out this article http://www.NoFatTrucks.com/suvfat07.htm

site of my dreams!

There is a name for the mindset that says, "smaller is better". That
name is stinginess. If you were a big person trying to find a
comfortable fit in a stingy world, sizeist crap like that you are
shoveling would just be more of a dreadfully familiar irritant.

I grew too big for most cars (6'7") before I was allowed to drive one.
Now at 6'8" and about 400 lbs., I am constantly presented with "one
size" public accomodations that are not, in fact, accomodations to me.


400 pounds? So you eat 4000 calories a day, right? You're 6 inches shorter
than Shaquille O'Neal, and weigh 80 pounds more? Sure.....

Dude, Imagine the kind of BIKE he rides! It's gotta be the Hummer of
bicycles, eh? lol

http://www.recordholders.org/en/records/didi.html

-B

No Fat Trucks
 

In article ,
says...
On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 10:26:22 GMT, "Gooserider" wrote:


"Chalo" wrote in message
. com...
(Joe Pig) wrote:

The subconscious mind, once sold on the idea that bigger things are
better, will often override our best intentions. We, in turn, find
ourselves along for the ride, and as the things around us grow bigger,
so do we.

Check out this article http://www.NoFatTrucks.com/suvfat07.htm

site of my dreams!

There is a name for the mindset that says, "smaller is better". That
name is stinginess. If you were a big person trying to find a
comfortable fit in a stingy world, sizeist crap like that you are
shoveling would just be more of a dreadfully familiar irritant.

I grew too big for most cars (6'7") before I was allowed to drive one.
Now at 6'8" and about 400 lbs., I am constantly presented with "one
size" public accomodations that are not, in fact, accomodations to me.


400 pounds? So you eat 4000 calories a day, right? You're 6 inches shorter
than Shaquille O'Neal, and weigh 80 pounds more? Sure.....

Dude, Imagine the kind of BIKE he rides! It's gotta be the Hummer of
bicycles, eh? lol

Did you see the custom frame that Cannondale made for Shaq in the
current issue of Bicycling mag? They didn't give the size (at least I
didn't see it), but when they put one of the three copies of the frame
through their destructive test routine, they couldn't break it; the
machine was at its max output, and still couldn't break the frame.


--
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the
newsgroups if possible).

No Fat Trucks
 

"vic" wrote

The latest stats I could find say that 99% of US adult males
lie in the height range 5' 2" - 6' 3".

You are way up the top end of the curve for height
(along with about 1 in 10,000 of the population) , so it's not
surprising that you have had a hard time fitting in cars designed
for the majority.

It's poor economcs for general automotive manufacturers
to design their vehicles to accomodate the very top and tail of the
height curve: The middling majority would be forced to pay
for the extra metal and glass (plus the associated vehicle mass
and wind resistance), while gaining no real benefit from the
increased size.

All I can say is that I'm grateful for claustrophobics.

Peter (6'10") Cole

No Fat Trucks
 

On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 06:20:00 -0500, Badger_South
wrote:

On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 10:26:22 GMT, "Gooserider" wrote:


"Chalo" wrote in message
.com...
(Joe Pig) wrote:

The subconscious mind, once sold on the idea that bigger things are
better, will often override our best intentions. We, in turn, find
ourselves along for the ride, and as the things around us grow bigger,
so do we.

Check out this article http://www.NoFatTrucks.com/suvfat07.htm

site of my dreams!

There is a name for the mindset that says, "smaller is better". That
name is stinginess. If you were a big person trying to find a
comfortable fit in a stingy world, sizeist crap like that you are
shoveling would just be more of a dreadfully familiar irritant.

I grew too big for most cars (6'7") before I was allowed to drive one.
Now at 6'8" and about 400 lbs., I am constantly presented with "one
size" public accomodations that are not, in fact, accomodations to me.


400 pounds? So you eat 4000 calories a day, right? You're 6 inches shorter
than Shaquille O'Neal, and weigh 80 pounds more? Sure.....

Dude, Imagine the kind of BIKE he rides! It's gotta be the Hummer of
bicycles, eh? lol

Chalo is our resident destructive-testing expert. When he speaks of
the durability of frames, wheels, cranks, etc, I listen. The sorts of
loads he's capable of putting on stressed parts of the
bicycle--especially when he's pushing hard--really test the outer
limits.

-Luigi

No Fat Trucks
 

On 25 Feb 2004 17:22:28 -0800, (Chalo) wrote:

So before you go suggesting that SUV gluttony makes one fat, consider
that one who is fat for reasons other than gluttony might choose a
large, truck-based vehicle simply in order to fit into his or her own
car. That is the fault of the manufacturers and the sizeist society
at large, not of the big person who is making do.

A valid point, Chalo, but it doesn't explain why it seems that a vast
number of SUV drivers (especially 'luxury' SUV drivers) seem to be
diminuitive white women. They certainly don't need all the extra
space, and sometimes I wonder if they can see properly.


Being big-- fat, tall, wide, heavy, or whatever-- is not wrong. You
should thank your lucky stars that most big folks have gentle and
patient dispositions when you insult them.

Being tall or heavy isnt' in dispute here; if you've got the frame
that was built to carry the weight, then there's not much to be done
about it. "Fat" in this context is people who, as a result of
overconsumption an inactivity, are far heavier than they would
normally be, with the resulting health complications which, in the
end, cost everybody. I include myself in the latter category.

-Luigi


Chalo Colina

No Fat Trucks
 

On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 08:03:49 -0500, Luigi de Guzman
wrote:

On 25 Feb 2004 17:22:28 -0800, (Chalo) wrote:

So before you go suggesting that SUV gluttony makes one fat, consider
that one who is fat for reasons other than gluttony might choose a
large, truck-based vehicle simply in order to fit into his or her own
car. That is the fault of the manufacturers and the sizeist society
at large, not of the big person who is making do.

A valid point, Chalo, but it doesn't explain why it seems that a vast
number of SUV drivers (especially 'luxury' SUV drivers) seem to be
diminuitive white women. They certainly don't need all the extra
space, and sometimes I wonder if they can see properly.

Are you suggesting rich trophy wives, with no day job? g

I'm just askin'...

-B
They also use those giant suburban-like SUVs as battery rams. I had one cut
me off by inches in my car the other day like 'I'm in a Tank, get used to
it.
I suspect these same ppl use their baby carriages in a similar manner,
thrusting them out into the street without really looking to stop traffic
and gain safe passage. Even at crosswalks, pause a freakin' second and look
will ya?
I'm just sayin'...