Erroneous Assumptions?

Discussions about the devices that supply a means for movement of people and goods.

Moderator: ZS Global Moderators

User avatar
Big Gulp
*
Posts: 57
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2011 10:41 pm
Favorite Zombie Movies: Shaun of the dead, Zombie land
Location: Utah

Re: Erroneous Assumptions?

Post by Big Gulp » Sat Dec 17, 2011 9:54 pm

MacAttack wrote:The worst thing about this whole thread is the OP's theory that he can come to a forum with stats like this " Total posts 1822420 • Total topics 84304 • Total members 32959" and thought he was the first to make those points and observations.

This is THE Zombie Squad forum not just some run of the mill internet forum.
This is the place the pro's roam.
This is the place all the others lurk in before posting in those other forums in order to sound smart.


Stick around and look around. Read a lot.



Your whole post could have been started out a bit simpler by just asking if anyone planned on driving out of their disaster area.
You would have instantly found out that most of the attitudes you wrote about doesn't exist around here.

Have fun though.


LOL
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid."
- General Dwight D. Eisenhower

User avatar
jamoni
ZS Member
ZS Member
Posts: 14985
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:50 pm
Location: st louis

Re: Erroneous Assumptions?

Post by jamoni » Sat Dec 17, 2011 10:00 pm

Big Gulp wrote:
MacAttack wrote:The worst thing about this whole thread is the OP's theory that he can come to a forum with stats like this " Total posts 1822420 • Total topics 84304 • Total members 32959" and thought he was the first to make those points and observations.

This is THE Zombie Squad forum not just some run of the mill internet forum.
This is the place the pro's roam.
This is the place all the others lurk in before posting in those other forums in order to sound smart.


Stick around and look around. Read a lot.



Your whole post could have been started out a bit simpler by just asking if anyone planned on driving out of their disaster area.
You would have instantly found out that most of the attitudes you wrote about doesn't exist around here.

Have fun though.


LOL
Relax. We're PROFESSIONALS.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVACbEHkV2Q" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
JoergS wrote:Realistically, I think I can launch a nine pound chain saw at 50 fps from a shoulder mounted rubber powered bazooka...
squinty wrote:I reserve the right to yell "Dookyhole!" - or it's Hebrew equivalent if such a thing exists - whilst dispensing a barrage of palm strikes at my opponent.

User avatar
Coal-Cracker
* * * * *
Posts: 2526
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 1:02 pm
Location: Shenandoah Heights, PA

Re: Erroneous Assumptions?

Post by Coal-Cracker » Sun Dec 18, 2011 7:24 am

DarkAxel wrote:...
I agree. BUT, 4WD may not be a necessity to do all of the above. For example, I can get around pretty well in the worst of what my AO has to offer with my current daily driver, a 94 GMC Sierra (2WD). When I have gotten stuck, the guys in the 4x4s that came to pull me out got stuck too. I agree with the OP when he says I'd rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it (wrt 4x4s), but in my case it's not needed, and since my vehicle meets all of the requirements mentioned in Paladin1's post, I think I am right in saying that my Daily driver could be considered a BOV. Now, if I lived in an area where 4x4 was required to overcome the worst that my AO had to offer, then it wouldn't be considered a BOV.

Jeez, I hope I got my logic across well enough.
Your post made sense to me. I may not agree with you totally, but it made sense.
If you can honestly state that there will never be a situation where 4WD would make the difference between driving/riding in a vehicle and being forced to walk because forward vehicle progress in no longer possible, then your point is valid. If you can also state that you'll never have to travel to an area outside of your AO that would require 4wd, then your point is valid.

(And to be fair, a 2WD Sierra is considerably more capable vehicle in adverse conditions (terrain) than a compact sedan.)

Personally, I can't make the same claim, so my wife and I both have 4WD vehicles. I will admit that in the course of a year, I may only actually need to engage 4WD 2 or 3 times at most, and it is weather, not terrain related. (Obviously, weekend offroading doesn't count.)
My last vehicle was a smaller sedan because my job entailed considerable distances driven. I bought this vehicle because of better gas mileage. On several occasions I had to borrow my wife's 4WD (how emasculating :lol: ) so I could get to work as my 2WD sedan couldn't make it. I've since went back to owning a 4WD and I've vowed to never be without one.



Oh, and Paladin, that was an excellent post.
ZS Fleet Vehicle # ZS 0020

User avatar
bigmattdaddywack
* * * * *
Posts: 1607
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2009 4:00 pm
Favorite Zombie Movies: Zombieland, Shaun of the dead, dawn of the dead, 28 days later,Hide and Creep, Night of the living dead, Undead, Return of the Living Dead.
Not truly zombie movies but, Evil Dead I and II, Army of darkness
Location: St. Louis, Missouri

Re: Erroneous Assumptions?

Post by bigmattdaddywack » Sun Dec 18, 2011 9:14 am

Too much to read and I am too tired.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ejd2rsXoQSI" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

:)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grq0rhtbtAw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
TDW586
* * * * *
Posts: 8844
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 8:03 pm
Location: Here, unless I'm not, in which case, somewhere else

Re: Erroneous Assumptions?

Post by TDW586 » Sun Dec 18, 2011 9:18 am

It's already sort of been covered, but 4WD is not a magic, off-road powerup. When it comes to the capability of a vehicle to navigate a given trail or terrain, there are a lot of factors more important than 4WD, like ground clearance, tires, gearing, and driver skill.

A 2WD pickup with M/T tires and a good driver is capable of handling extremely rough trails, and will go a lot more places than a 4WD with a poor driver.
Image

User avatar
squinty
* * * * *
Posts: 5753
Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2009 11:11 am
Favorite Zombie Movies: night of the living dead, shaun of the dead, pre-opening credit scenes from 28 weeks later and dawn of the dead remake

Re: Erroneous Assumptions?

Post by squinty » Sun Dec 18, 2011 3:49 pm

TDW586 wrote:It's already sort of been covered, but 4WD is not a magic, off-road powerup. When it comes to the capability of a vehicle to navigate a given trail or terrain, there are a lot of factors more important than 4WD, like ground clearance, tires, gearing, and driver skill.

A 2WD pickup with M/T tires and a good driver is capable of handling extremely rough trails, and will go a lot more places than a 4WD with a poor driver.
Like everything else, skill > gear, even though gear is 90% of what we talk about. Gear is usually easier to acquire than skill, for one thing, and it's more tangible and quantifiable so it's easier to talk about...
Still. 4wd is useful, or to put it another way - all else being equal you'd rather have 4wd than not.
George Orwell wrote:Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power.

User avatar
fourway
* *
Posts: 251
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 3:41 pm
Favorite Zombie Movies: I'd have to go with Return.
It's pre-cgi, it's funny, the zombies are fast and they talk. Remember the half a corpse on the embalmer's table explaining why zombies eat brains?
Location: New York's Mid Hudson Valley

Re: Erroneous Assumptions?

Post by fourway » Sun Dec 18, 2011 5:05 pm

I've seen an unmodified 60s vintage VW microbus out crawl a lifted bronco.
The best vehicle for a given situation is by definition case dependent.
Shumway's Law: Bleeding will always stop on its own eventually

Doctorr Fabulous
ZS Lifetime Member
ZS Lifetime Member
Posts: 12210
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:06 pm
Favorite Zombie Movies: Evil Dead, Zombieland, 28 Days/Weeks Later

Re: Erroneous Assumptions?

Post by Doctorr Fabulous » Mon Dec 19, 2011 12:03 am

One point of contention: I actually drive a turbodiesel Jetta.

As I said in the other thread where the OP insisted I was going to die in my car:

Bugout is priority number eleventy-seven for me, both while I'm still living on base (which no 4x4 will leave when it's locked down, nor anything short of a helicopter) or when i have my own place. If it's bad enough for me to evac, I'm not running to the hills in wyoming or kentucky or any kind of apocalypse road-trip. I'll probably make my way to the nearest of several alternate BOLs. I've been noticing that in the area I'm moving to, there's not a lot of places that a 4x4 could get that my jetta couldn't (with a wheel-tire change) short of chopping down some real old-growth stuff, or a winch.

My mountain bike or my legs will probably get me where I need to go faster than my car, assuming everyone decides to clog the two-lane roads that wind all through the countryside. My legs will allow me to do with an INCH bag and carry the bike as well. Now, should I end up with some extra money, or fall into a good deal on a suitable upgrade vehicle, I would consider it. But at no time will I consider going back into debt on a vehicle that is mildly more capable than my car for a 5% scenario, when I could be paying off a house, and have a working car, motorcycle, bicycle, and legs.
Opinions subject to change in light of new information.
Image
http://i.imgur.com/wG6ZMjE.jpg

ZombieFred
Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2011 9:20 pm

Re: Erroneous Assumptions?

Post by ZombieFred » Mon Dec 19, 2011 7:59 pm

By reading through this discussion, I noticed a far drift from the points I was trying to make. Please let us all refrain from discussions about: how long I have been here, how new people are treated, my personal background, your personal background, my writing style, others writing style, what others wrote in previous threads, what I wrote in previous threads (I stand by what I wrote. If you would like to fact check what I wrote for yourself, you will see who wishes to win a “debate” at all costs), your home town, my home town, and other things that serve no purpose other than to distract. Let us please stick to the topic I started. I believe (and the arguments on this thread of some have re-enforced my position) that some have assumptions that I do not accept.

If you do not take these things for granted, then we are in agreement. If you do assume these things, tell me why. Change my mind.

1) “I will beat the traffic and get out of town before everyone else.” Please accept that this means that someone believes they will among the first 25% or so to leave. Other than being more prepared to evacuate than the average citizen, I have not read anyplace on this thread which supports this belief. I would not rely on information from the internet because the power may be down. If you are in the military, this is not your concern because your information and evacuation orders are provided by superior officers.

What I am reading is that many are planning to hunker down. With more food and preps in place, many feel confident that they can survive most emergencies. (Again, I am trying not to put words in your mouth or speak for every situation. You may be better off staying in place.) My friend moved to what he felt was a survival area. He had more preps and knowledge than anyone I ever met. (I considered him an excellent source of information and a very good friend.) When he was told to evacuate, he thought he could ride out the forest fire. He lived off grid with a self contained electrical system and well, he figured he could save his own house. He didn’t make it. Call me every rotten name in the book later if you want but please seriously consider evacuating when they tell you.

2) “I have several different routes planned so I will be OK.” So much was made of my choice of Modesto as an example that I feel a need to clear it up. I do not live in or close to Modesto. (Erroneous assumptions that it’s my hometown.) It was picked because it was a close enough match to the information provided by the US Census. http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/SAFFFacts" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; (I provided links to this at least a couple times in this thread. Any complaints about what is an average city should be addressed to the US Census). Also, it was a city I have driven to and through a bunch of times. Based on my observations, larger cities tend to have more routes out. If you live in a smaller place, you may have fewer people but you probably have fewer distinct passable roads during an evacuation.

It is also possible that your routes may take you past these larger cities. Let us not forget that your location or destination may be the bug-out destination for all those city dwellers. Please, do not assume your chosen paved route will be passable completely on the pavement. (I do not even assume the easy off-road trails will be clear.)

3) “The police, fire fighters, ambulances, and tow trucks will clear the roads and keep traffic moving.” http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/04/natio" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... olice.html . Again, if you believe the traffic will stay clear. Use the roads as much as possible but make certain your vehicle (and you) are able to go off-road when the roads are not passable.

4) “I can make it off road with 2 wheel drive as much as I will need to.” I ascribe to the philosophy that it is better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it. I never said you would die without 4wd. I said about 2wd, “It is possible and likely that you can get to where you want with no problems.” Here is another undistorted direct quote from me, “I do agree with you that it depends on terrain, experience, 2wd system, weather, and many other things. But, it is better to have capabilities and not need them than to need a capability you do not have.”

Do these sound like this distortions of what I said? “You know better than all of us, and I will die after being raped by Lebanese-Mexican banditos because I don't drive a lifted K-5 with a ramming bumper…” Or, “…the OP insisted I was going to die in my car.” Again, I maintain that you may be fine in a 2wd. I just believe 4x4 is a better option.

5) “I will just use a winch if I get stuck or have to move something.” A winch and jack are great tools in most situations when you are stuck. But there are too many situations than to list here that they won’t help (like nothing close to connect to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FE-UImlMKrU" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ).

I also used information on what is happening in northern Mexico. What I said was, “Banditos block the road with their car and then rob, kidnap, rape, and kill people who stop. In this situation, YOU SHOULD NOT STOP!” Unlike some have claimed, I never said banditos were coming to America but I do believe their tactics might. I think it is valuable to find out what is happening in other countries and learn how to protect ourselves.

BTW: This type of carjacking started in the USA during the 1960s when thugs would block off roads and alleys in Chicago and steal trucks loaded with goods. This was one of the first crimes Carlo Gambino used to start the Gambino crime family. Carjacking was invented here. It is realistic to believe it can come back during times of panic and lawlessness.

Also they claim I say you should ram into vehicles. Again without distortion, I stated, “…IF you can move a car a different way, do so. If you can go around, do so. (4x4 makes this easier.) If you can spot trouble in advance, do so. But even the best trained, most cautious people get caught in traps.” Here is a video from a company which prepares bodyguards and chauffeurs for diplomats and wealthy, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e9-Ba45mDpA" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; . Around minute three is a proper demonstration on how to push your way through a vehicular road block. It is not the first choice but if you need to do it you better have the vehicle that can survive. (If you notice, they used a bigger Volvo in that demo. A small car probably would not work as well.)

6) “I will just head to the mountains and live off the land.” and 8) “After I get there, I won’t be using my vehicle anyway.” can really be combined. I mention this because more than one said on this site that they weren’t going to need a car or go into town where they were going. I said, “A good vehicle will assist as more than just transportation but add as a survival tool. Think farm vehicle.” I continued in another post about not needing a vehicle after reaching a retreat, “Your range of supplies will be limited to the distance you can walk. You are choosing to live in the 19th century.” It is not necessary to be mobile and have mechanical help but as this http://www.naturalnews.com/034404_prepp ... g_out.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; author says, “It's no exaggeration to say that one gallon of diesel fuel can replace the labor of twelve men working twelve hours.” You can make your life more bearable with the help of a good machine.

7) “I will just head off-road and 4x4 my way there.” Please understand, this was meant as a warning to those who believe they don’t need the paved road. A highway is a wonderful thing. Use the asphalt all you can. “Maps are flat and fool a person into believing it’s not so difficult to get from this point to that point.” When I say get a 4x4, I don’t mean stay off-road. Stay on-road as much as possible. Have the ability (which means vehicle and experience) to be off-road.

9) “I don’t have that many people going with me.” Like I said before having greater utility in choice is a good thing. As stated, “… your vehicle should be flexible and adaptable to a new circumstance.” I have no crystal ball. I rather have the vehicle which gives me the greatest number of choices. One which can haul and go off-road and pull and push when needed is better than one which is limited.

10) “The perfect vehicle is XXXXXXX.” I said, “There is no perfect vehicle. What might work great for me will be a bust for the next person because their needs and evacuation experience will differ. Price and practicality play into the mix.” Yet some say things like, “I'm convinced. "Honey, I'm dropping out of college so we can afford a 4wd."” Or “I'll worry more about prepping than spending big money on a truck, then outfitting it like an A-team van…” Although humorous, it doesn’t represent what I wrote.

I also wrote, “Please use your own judgment and try not to buy into hype and over enthusiasm over a particular vehicle. I strongly advise a 4x4 over a 2wd. Also, I believe a larger vehicle will do more and offer better flexibility than a smaller vehicle.” I never said it was mandatory or you will die. I also didn’t say you had to have a lifted, full-size vehicle. I suggest a newer, larger 4x4 for evacuation and an older, simpler 4x4 for survival is the best combination.

BTW: As mentioned in a previous thread, I was given two running 4x4s in my life. One was inherited from my Uncle and the other had no brakes and needed other work (about $250 in parts). Getting into a 4x4 may not be as expensive as one might think.


Side show and comments to distractions:

Being shot at in a car.

It is not chiseled in stone that being shot at in a car = bullet penetrating with enough force to kill. Using the car’s materials to absorb some of the energy or to deflect a round fired at you may save your life. It is not as clear cut as one would think. More has to do with bullet caliber, grains of load, round weight and choice, distance, degree of angle while shooting, and gun choice (handgun vs rifle). As I stated, a .22 can be deflected with a side window under the right circumstances.

Bullet vs Car Penetration
Several Videos http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=quqXIxmi2jQ" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Website devoted to debunking gun myths http://www.theboxotruth.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
(Disclosure: I know the people who run this website but I am not involved with it.)

Bullet bouncing off other things (to prove that bullets do not always penetrate).
Man’s head – Story - http://www.ohio.com/community/summit_co ... 77884.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
An Officer’s Badge – story - http://www.myfoxmemphis.com/dpp/news/lo ... r-scrutiny" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
A lake – video - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWYDVOj9H7Q" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; (Please don’t do this. Very unsafe.)
Inside President Reagan – story -http://www.doctorzebra.com/prez/z_x40sh ... logy_g.htm
Inside President Kennedy – video - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbpF0AIt ... re=related" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
(First shot deflect into Governor Connally, not second)
(Please don't start into a Kennedy assassination debate. Start a new thread for it.)

I am just asking you to keep your car moving. It makes you a more difficult target to hit and less likely to be pulled out. Keep it moving even if you must push through another car.

About me

I have been called a troll, a know-nothing, an egomaniac, a salesman trying to trick you, and an unrealistic child on here and in personal messages from here. That's fine. Call me all the names you want. Please, take what I am saying and truly think about it. I am not trying to score brownie points or prove anything. I am trying to help you survive if things go bad.

Doctorr Fabulous
ZS Lifetime Member
ZS Lifetime Member
Posts: 12210
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:06 pm
Favorite Zombie Movies: Evil Dead, Zombieland, 28 Days/Weeks Later

Re: Erroneous Assumptions?

Post by Doctorr Fabulous » Mon Dec 19, 2011 9:00 pm

So, since you reposted your first post, do I repost all the things I posted about that i the last several pages? This thread is gonna get long real quick.

Anyhow, the other thread was brought up because you made many of the same arguments, with the same assumptions, and the same answers. Also, your background, writing style (especially if it's rude or condescending) DOES matter. Otherwise I could claim all kinds of crazy shit, including 2-wheeling my Jetta up a mountainside. Although I could still post the video of a mostly stock Crown Vic crawling Moab...

I will ignore most of the re-posted portion of this, save for one key point: It may be better to have it and not need it, but it also must be within the almighty budget, and it must pass the "Do I Honestly Need This More Than ____" test. Otherwise, We'd all be a million dollars in debt driving M35s to work.

Continuing....If you have nothing to winch to, tie a rope around your spare tire and bury it. I'm pretty sure that trick has been on this site for years, and in the off-roading community for decades (I could be wrong.)

On the farm truck: Who needs to do 12 men's worth of work on a one man farm? Or drive anywhere on a BOL, unless you just have a fuck-off-huge BOL. Horror of horrors, some of us might...not...want...machines???

It's funny because point 10 says there is no perfect BOV, but points 1-9 paint a very vivid picture of your ultimate BOV, and the last thread, and a few pages of this one were devoted to telling other people why their BOV was wrong.

Moving on, I love the boxotruth. Did you see the bit he did where he shot up the car? No matter how slow a bullet is moving, if it opens a whole in you, you're having what I call a bad day.

Furthermore, no one doubts that ballistic projectiles do funny things. Physics is a bitch, and rotation with acceleration, deceleration, coriolis effect, drag, and odd strike angles do some interesting things. Not that a .22 is going to be the weapon of choice for a bandito of Mexican-Lebanese, or other descent, it'll probably be a 9mm or bigger if it's a pistol, or a common rifle-caliber. The Box O' Truth's Buick O Truth gives a great example of what different calibers will do to an old buick.

Lastly, please, nobody start an assassination thread, as per the politics rule.
Opinions subject to change in light of new information.
Image
http://i.imgur.com/wG6ZMjE.jpg

ZombieFred
Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2011 9:20 pm

Re: Erroneous Assumptions?

Post by ZombieFred » Mon Dec 19, 2011 10:39 pm

Doc Torr,

I don't know why your panties are all in a bunch over me. I am not certain why but others have noticed it too. Unless you have something real to add, keep your snide and rude comments to yourself.

So you know, it is not the same post. If you actually tried reading it before you commented, you might not look like foolish now.



For the others,

I am sorry this post is off topic but I honestly do not know Doc Torr. I never met him and I do not know him from any place else. I do not believe I did or said anything to upset him beyond giving you something to think about.

User avatar
fourway
* *
Posts: 251
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 3:41 pm
Favorite Zombie Movies: I'd have to go with Return.
It's pre-cgi, it's funny, the zombies are fast and they talk. Remember the half a corpse on the embalmer's table explaining why zombies eat brains?
Location: New York's Mid Hudson Valley

Re: Erroneous Assumptions?

Post by fourway » Mon Dec 19, 2011 10:45 pm

ZombieFred wrote: (bunch of high handed blather)
1) (Same as in the first vaguely insulting numbered list)
2) (ditto)
3)(ditto)
4) (ditto)
5) (ditto)
6) (ditto)
7) (ditto)
9) (ditto)
10) (ditto)

(Off the wall assertions with dubious citations)
(High handed condescending sign off)
What I can't understand is why you think showing up somewhere like this and saying: "Im just trying to help you people survive", right out of the box, (the implication being, "Boy are you sad sacks of know-nothing lucky I came along when I did to drop some knowledge on you, you might have choked to death trying to figure out how to drink out of your sippy cups") is going to get you any cred at all... or help anyone (seeing as folks dont take advice from people with no cred who just got done calling them stupid).
You can go ahead and front off all you like about how you aren't trying to score brownie points but guess what... in any form of knowledge exchange the only currency in circulation is the quality of your reputation for having good stuff to say. No matter how brilliant your content might be If you have zero cred (brownie points) and present your content in an abrasive insulting way, nobody's going to care.
Shumway's Law: Bleeding will always stop on its own eventually

williaty
* * * * *
Posts: 1634
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 1:50 am
Location: Midwest

Re: Erroneous Assumptions?

Post by williaty » Mon Dec 19, 2011 11:30 pm

ZombieFred wrote:Doc Torr,

I don't know why your panties are all in a bunch over me. I am not certain why but others have noticed it too. Unless you have something real to add, keep your snide and rude comments to yourself.

So you know, it is not the same post. If you actually tried reading it before you commented, you might not look like foolish now.



For the others,

I am sorry this post is off topic but I honestly do not know Doc Torr. I never met him and I do not know him from any place else. I do not believe I did or said anything to upset him beyond giving you something to think about.
Fred, I know neither you nor anyone else from this site with the exception of Paladin1 who was nice enough to give me some buckets. Without knowing either you or DocTorr, you're the one who's coming across as the rude, ignorant noob. I'm not trying to be offensive by saying that, I am trying to convey to you how you're appearing to others.

Also, I would point out that many of your arguments don't work out that way in reality or, at the very least, aren't valid without a whole host of other qualifiers and caveats. Most specifically, your arguments about what traits are absolutely necessary in a BOV are invalid. As a direct refutation of this, I have a sub-compact station wagon. It'll haul our gear through worse conditions on and off road while returning better gas mileage and better evasive maneuverability than most stock 4WD trucks and SUVs. The reason I make this assertion is that I have actually gone out and tested this. I know very specifically where the navigational limits of my car are and what sorts of things tend to get it into trouble. In testing, I didn't run into any situations through which I could not drive that the "control group" of stock 4WD SUVs/Jeeps and pickups could drive. I don't run into trouble until I get into a situation where only a highly modified Jeep with a lift, bigger tires, fancy articulation, and a ramp index that would make a trophy truck jealous is the only viable means of continuing. Again, I know this because I have put my money where my mouth is and have actually proven it.

User avatar
jamoni
ZS Member
ZS Member
Posts: 14985
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:50 pm
Location: st louis

Re: Erroneous Assumptions?

Post by jamoni » Mon Dec 19, 2011 11:43 pm

I am VERY seriously considering locking this trainwreck down.
Fred, either you never learned how to interact with people, or you are trolling. Either way, knock it off. We have done you the respect of examining your ideas critically and seriously. When people do that on the internet, you've won. Seriously. Further pedantry only weakens your case.
Also, learn to recognize when motherfuckers are doing you a favor instead of slapping them in the face.

To sum up:
About to lock down thread, grow some social skills, stop shitting where you eat.
JoergS wrote:Realistically, I think I can launch a nine pound chain saw at 50 fps from a shoulder mounted rubber powered bazooka...
squinty wrote:I reserve the right to yell "Dookyhole!" - or it's Hebrew equivalent if such a thing exists - whilst dispensing a barrage of palm strikes at my opponent.

ZombieFred
Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2011 9:20 pm

Re: Erroneous Assumptions?

Post by ZombieFred » Tue Dec 20, 2011 12:39 am

Doc Torr,

So, since you reposted your first post, do I repost all the things I posted about that i the last several pages? This thread is gonna get long real quick.

I re-introduced the topic because of all the off topic comments. I was trying to get us back onto the subject. I apologize if it was not appropriate.

Anyhow, the other thread was brought up because you made many of the same arguments, with the same assumptions, and the same answers. Also, your background, writing style (especially if it's rude or condescending) DOES matter. I am sorry if in any way I offended you. I am trying to get points across and I may come off as abrasive. Otherwise I could claim all kinds of crazy shit, including 2-wheeling my Jetta up a mountainside. Although I could still post the video of a mostly stock Crown Vic crawling Moab... For each video of the very skilled or reckless driver who is able to take a 2wd vehicle someplace like Moab, I can find over a thousand videos of people who took 4x4s up the same trails with less skill and /or with more care for their vehicle. BTW: I have been sourcing quite a bit on my posts.

I will ignore most of the re-posted portion of this, save for one key point: It may be better to have it and not need it, but it also must be within the almighty budget, and it must pass the "Do I Honestly Need This More Than ____" test. Otherwise, We'd all be a million dollars in debt driving M35s to work. Again, you do not need millions of dollars and you don’t need an M35. I am suggesting when buying another car, look at something more substantial and AWD. Price will be a little more but not millions more. Also I wrote, “As mentioned in a previous thread, I was given two running 4x4s in my life. One was inherited from my Uncle and the other had no brakes and needed other work (about $250 in parts). Getting into a 4x4 may not be as expensive as one might think.” That was not millions.

Continuing....If you have nothing to winch to, tie a rope around your spare tire and bury it. I'm pretty sure that trick has been on this site for years, and in the off-roading community for decades (I could be wrong.) That is a great trick in sand, mud, and loose soil. I heard it done in snow but I don't know for certain. Hard pan, rock, and hard gravel areas are a pain to near impossible to dig. It can work in a lot of areas. It may not work everyplace. I have used a highlift jack to raise and then push a vehicle out of a rut. (One tips the jack over.) It works also if your vehicle gets bottomed-out.

BTW: Have you ever tried the burying a tire trick? If you have a 10,000 lb winch and need to use about half of its capability, that means that you need to put (if you get a leverage advantage of 2 to 1 because of the angle of pull) 2500 lbs of force down on the tire. According to http://www.abe.psu.edu/extension/factsheets/h/H20.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; , average sand weighs about 2500 lbs to 2700 lbs per square yard. (Moisture and other variables are averaged.) In other words, someone would have to dig a hole over 3 feet deep for a 3 foot tall tire to lay flat to get about 2600 lbs of force down. (Again, this does count a 2 to 1 leverage advantage if one is present.) If your tire in not 3 foot tall, you may have to dig deeper. Then the person gets to dig their tire back out. In all, almost a large pickup load of sand needs to be moved.

On the farm truck: Who needs to do 12 men's worth of work on a one man farm? Or drive anywhere on a BOL, unless you just have a fuck-off-huge BOL. Most people don’t want to be a lone wolf survivor. Most want family and friends. This requires more work and production from our BOL. Also, I feel the pains of age and I can tell you that I can’t do what I use to do. I need to use my head more than my back. I need machines to help me. Horror of horrors, some of us might...not...want...machines??? If you wish to scratch out an existence using pre-industrial revolution tech, that is fine. Speaking just for myself, I do not want to hobble myself as some sort of martyr to survival living. I am more than willing to use an old truck or tractor or what ever machine I can get going to make my day easier and maybe help those that are less fortunate than me.

It's funny because point 10 says there is no perfect BOV, but points 1-9 paint a very vivid picture of your ultimate BOV, and the last thread, and a few pages of this one were devoted to telling other people why their BOV was wrong. I am pointing to characteristics that I believe will improve the utility of a vehicle. 4 wheel drive, safer, and more capacity are characteristics I believe will help. No single vehicle is perfect but I am hoping that as people replace their old vehicles they will consider looking at ones with more utility.

Moving on, I love the boxotruth. Did you see the bit he did where he shot up the car? No matter how slow a bullet is moving, if it opens a whole in you, you're having what I call a bad day. I agree that bullet holes hurt. I would rather be in a moving vehicle while being shot at than walking.

Furthermore, no one doubts that ballistic projectiles do funny things. Physics is a bitch, and rotation with acceleration, deceleration, coriolis effect, drag, and odd strike angles do some interesting things. Slight Coriolis Effect based on Earth's movement (or if you are on a merry-go-round) but its slight based on typical shooting distances and speed of bullets. Not that a .22 is going to be the weapon of choice for a bandito of Mexican-Lebanese, or other descent, it'll probably be a 9mm or bigger if it's a pistol, or a common rifle-caliber. They will use what they have ammo for. I believe in a bad situation, ammo might become very scarce. (Just my belief.) Even 9mm is not guaranteed to penetrate. Hollow tip and “safety” rounds are intended to try to release all their energy with the first impact. Lots of those round floating around. With rounds hitting you, much has to do with how much energy is released into your body. The less energy released into your body (absorbed by the car), the less damage you will take. The Box O' Truth's Buick O Truth gives a great example of what different calibers will do to an old buick. Yes it does. Dig into it a little. They talk a bunch about deflection and ricochet.

Lastly, please, nobody start an assassination thread, as per the politics rule.


Jamoni,

I apologize to you. I really do appreciate your edit of my original post.

True, my writing style is smooth as a cat's tongue but it's just one of many of my flaws. Out of respect for you, I will stop posting.

User avatar
mobilesuithomer
* *
Posts: 167
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 5:07 pm
Location: Eastern Indiana

Re: Erroneous Assumptions?

Post by mobilesuithomer » Tue Dec 20, 2011 12:50 am

OP: Listening to Katrina has a section on BOV's that is well worth reading. You might want to check it out, if only for a different perspective.

User avatar
MacAttack
* * * * *
Posts: 2992
Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 11:11 am

Re: Erroneous Assumptions?

Post by MacAttack » Tue Dec 20, 2011 1:01 am

I wonder what the OP's opinion of bugging out to WallMart is?

Or his idea on taking over a dump to scavenge for resources.


But that is just another thread I'm eagerly waiting to read.

User avatar
DarkAxel
* * * * *
Posts: 3821
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 2:25 am
Favorite Zombie Movies: The Evil Dead Series, Dawn of the Dead, Shawn of the Dead, NOTLD, Resident Evil Series
Location: Jackson, KY
Contact:

Re: Erroneous Assumptions?

Post by DarkAxel » Tue Dec 20, 2011 1:20 am

MacAttack wrote:I wonder what the OP's opinion of bugging out to WallMart is?

Or his idea on taking over a dump to scavenge for resources.


But that is just another thread I'm eagerly waiting to read.
[rant]
How, exactly, is this helpful? I know you think you are trying to be clever with a snarky comment about memes as dead as Kim Jong Il (too soon?), but if you don't have anything constructive to add, I'd suggest you shut the fuck up and quit shitting up a thread already knee-deep in bullshit posts and on the L&B list. By now I've decided that you either want to get this thread locked or that you have diarrhea of the fingers and can't control yourself.

[/rant]

The noise is drowning out the signal here. Are you a part of the signal, or are you a part of the noise?

OP: Stick around. ZS can be much better than this if you are willing to dull the barbs in your tongue.
vyadmirer wrote:Call me the paranoid type, but remember I'm on a post apocalyptic website prepared for zombies.
Fleet #: ZS 0180

Browncoat

Imma Fudd, and proud of it.

ZS Wiki

User avatar
Tater Raider
* * * * *
Posts: 6737
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 8:53 pm
Location: Meatworld

Re: Erroneous Assumptions?

Post by Tater Raider » Wed Dec 21, 2011 12:05 am

Disclaimer:

The following post is long. Bring no-doze.


Fred, we, that is to say Zombie Squad as a whole, are not telling you to stop posting. We are telling you that when you come on here or anywhere and start lecturing folk that you shouldn't be surprised at the negative responses. When you repost said lecture to bring folk back on topic from folk informing you of various erroneous assumptions you seem to have made you end up, well, looking less like someone anyone should listen to (to phrase it politely).

My point-by-point rebuttal, showing you the many erroneous assumptions you have made and doing so far less politely than the responses have been up to this point:
  1. Not all of us live in St. Louis, or NYC, or Modesto. Some of us live in flyover country in towns of less than 100,000, 10,000, or just flat out not in any city near any major roads. In fact, we have people who are members here that live in many different areas, each with their own issues, around the world.
  2. I do, in fact, have many different routes planned to several different BOL's along with GPS, maps, and more than a passing familiarity with driving not only my AO but most of the lower 48 including how to avoid major metropolitan areas and, something you didn't cover, bridges over major rivers and alternative routing through mountain passes including, but not limited to, routes that avoid roads maintained by the government altogether. Thus, my plans, alternate routes, alternate bug-out locations, and location I am bugging out from coupled with my willingness to be flexible and abandon a badly working plan in favor of something more likely to be successful mean that if I ain't fine with that level of planning then it ain't likely nobody gonna be fine in the same situation.
  3. They will do their best to keep traffic moving, but I have planned alternate routes to get around things when they aren't and my GPS also has the ability to do the same using current traffic conditions.

  4. 'Nuff said on that really.
  5. I don't have a winch and have gotten stuck up to the tops of the frame rails in much in my Jeep in what best could be described as a hidden mire, as documented on this very forum. A winch, another vehicle, a tree saver along with other winching accessories, a hi-lift jack, and, most importantly and something I do not have in a bug-out, partner vehicle would have made it so I didn't need a bulldozer to get unstuck. In a bug-out I could have, given the above, at the very least transferred what goods I could have and continued.
  6. I'm not heading to the mountains and despite my appearance and current living situation have more knowledge at self-sustainability than the simple statement of "I will live off the land" would indicate. I also have real-life experience in the matter and know that it will be no picnic but is doable. Furthermore, I was raised to think in these terms and with this ability and your assumption that I don't is insulting to the memory of the people who made sure I could look after me and mine.
  7. You don't need paved road or a 4x4 to navigate without a paved road. You do need to be able to read the lay of the land and get through, or around, obstacles without destroying your vehicle. Everyone can always improve on their ability to do so including me (obviously - see "stuck in mire to top of frame rails" above).
  8. You assume that a BOL is a permanent solution to a temporary problem, and even an apocalypse is a temporary problem to my way of thinking, just a long-term one. You also assume that I haven't made provision for this fact. You also assume that I would abandon one of the biggest joys in my life as part of my bug-out plan. In each and every case you are in error.
  9. I live alone and my children are grown or mostly grown living in a separate residence an hour's drive from my home. I've also discussed bug-out plans with them and my first ex much to their annoyance and what their own intentions are. My 4 passenger vehicle is more than adequate for the task of hauling folk involved over short distances involved and my tired, grumpy butt thousands of miles alone or with any number of people I am willing to provide for. Anyone else is out of luck and needs to look after their own butt because a lack of planning on their part isn't an emergency on mine. I not only have to plan for a bug-out with my vehicle but have to use it daily on poorly maintained roads and in town with plenty of parallel parking where a large vehicle able to haul more than 5 folk makes less than no sense.
  10. The perfect vehicle varies from one person to the next depending on their situation, finances, and area of operation. A bicycle may be the primary bug-out vehicle for most folk and perfect for the task while my Jeep is as close to perfection as I'm likely to own for my situation. Others have two feet, pickups, minivans, Honda Civics, sailboats, and airplanes.
Summation:

Your correction of erroneous assumptions makes many erroneous assumptions themselves. Most anyone who visits here more than twice knows that the proper answer to the BOV question and how to plan accordingly knows that the correct answer varies from one person to the next, and those of us that post regularly in Transportation take great pains to be helpful rather than condescending when addressing this matter. To be blunt, your tone was insulting and the information you put out is either flat-out wrong, incomplete, or taken as a matter of course here and you would know this if you really dug into the forums a bit. For you to act hurt or insulted in kind when the tone of replies was less than, "OMG, thank you! I never looked at things that way! Fred, I owe you my life and am naming my firstborn after you," shows that you aren't getting the point:

Research the forum, specifically the section of the forum, you are posting to before making yourself look the fool. This gem is not restricted to Zombie Squad either - apply liberally to any place you visit on 'teh interwebz' and you will be happier at the responses you get.

Not to be mean but it's that or get a tougher hide and get used to dealing with snarky replies.
Last edited by Tater Raider on Wed Dec 21, 2011 6:31 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Jeriah
ZS Lifetime Member
ZS Lifetime Member
Posts: 18722
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 4:12 pm
Favorite Zombie Movies: Original Night of the Living Dead, Dawn of the Dead 04, and 28 Days Later are my top three, in that order.
Location: Chicago, IL
Contact:

Re: Erroneous Assumptions?

Post by Jeriah » Wed Dec 21, 2011 1:05 am

I'm going to ignore the drama which is some junior high school shit and focus on the issues: are these in fact assumptions some people might make, and are they erroneous?
ZombieFred wrote:1) “I will beat the traffic and get out of town before everyone else.”
Half Fast, of "Lights Out" fame, wrote a story about a family on a bugout (I think it was called, "The Bugout") in which a family stops at WalMart, wasting valuable time, before attempting their bugout by vehicle. They get bogged down in traffic, attempt to offroad it, get stuck, and end up getting raped, robbed, and murdered by some baddies. OK. We can all agree that the family was dumb, but Half Fast's story confirms your concern in an unexpected way: by having the family stop at WalMart on the way out, he implies (post hoc ergo propter hoc, itself a fallacy) that it was this extra time expenditure that caused their problem. In other words, by including this element, he implies that if they hadn't stopped, it would have been smooth sailing. The implied moral is, "Don't stop at WalMart, and you'll get out of town before everyone else." So, yes, I think this IS an assumption some people make, and yes, it IS erroneous.

Your options are basically two or threefold: one is a muscle-bound truck with a heavy ram that can try to push its way through a roadblock. The other is a nimble motorcycle that can slip between stuck cars. Both have their drawbacks, and I wouldn't count on either one 100%. The third option is to use whatever vehicle you have (one of the above or not), and back it up with a secondary plan, whether that's a wheelbarrow or a bicycle or whatever. Bring it with you in your car (harder in a motorcycle) and if you get stuck, bug out on the bike.
2) “I have several different routes planned so I will be OK.” If one looks at a medium sized city like Modesto, CA, one sees a population of about 240,000 people with a limited number of exit routes. I counted 23 routes which do not share a road with another exit. This is down to the smallest paved roads I could find on my TomTom. This does not include the surrounding populations of Ripon, Salida, Ceres, and Turlock. Also, I am not including that most of the traffic may be headed one way, away from an oncoming threat. (Heading north or west is limited because of rivers.) This puts over 10,000 people per route. I don’t live in Modesto and I know three “old county roads” that don’t appear on Map-quest. I expect that many people there know them as well. Your vehicle should be able to be off-road. 4X4 is a minimum.
I am meh on the need for off-road capability. Yes, it's nice. But when I think about areas I've seen/lived/etc., I'm not sure it'd be all that useful. If you're leaving a civilized area, on or off road, you're going to hit certain bottlenecks, like canals or highways or whatever, perpindicular to your direction of travel. You're going to have to cross those, and that basically means using the roads. If they're choked, you're fucked. YES, off road capability is nice, good to have. I'd like my next vehicle to be 4x4 capable like my last one was (no car at present), but I don't think a person without should say, "Oh well I'm fucked" unless they get one. The abilities and limitations of each vehicle should be accounted for in one's plans. Not having 4x4 may mean you're breaking out the bikes a little sooner, is all.
3) “The police, fire fighters, ambulances, and tow trucks will clear the roads and keep traffic moving.”
I don't think any of us think this. I think most of us (by "us" I mean longtime readers and posters, who put real thought into things, as opposed to people who are here briefly/recently/just for fun) know that, at some point, if it's bad enough, the roads are fucked. This means having a backup plan, which could be trying to offroad it, or could mean breaking out the bikes, or at worst, going to backpack and boots.
4) “I can make it off road with 2 wheel drive as much as I will need to.”
This is delusional and I don't think many serious preppers with 2wd vehicles aren't aware of the limitation of their vehicles. 2wd isn't ideal. They'll get stuck sooner if forced to go off-road. This is a limitation. But having a 4wd doesn't automatically make you immune to getting stuck. I got stuck in a muddy parking lot at Knob Creek in my 4wd Jeep every time we camped there (okay, both times). So 4wd cars can get stuck too. Again, I agree 4wd is desirable, but it's not right for everybody. Some people have a daily driver that needs to be fuel efficient and compact, and if they bug out, that's what they've got. They need to be honest about what they've got (don't go mudding in a Prius) and plan accordingly.
5) “I will just use a winch if I get stuck or have to move something.” I have a winch (most are hand powered “come-alongs”) and jack in every car. When I was younger, I loaded a 25 foot container unit onto a flatbed trailer with a bunch of blocks, chains, a come-along, and 2 high-lift jacks. A winch and jacks work if you have time, leverage, and ability to use them. One example is what is currently happening in Mexico. Banditos block the road with their car and then rob, kidnap, rape, and kill people who stop. In this situation, YOU SHOULD NOT STOP! You do not have time to winch their vehicle out of the way. If you’re stuck in a place with nothing close to winch onto, ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FE-UImlMKrU" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ) then you just became a pedestrian. If you do not know how to use a winch or jack, get some experience from someone while being safe. Don’t be like these guys: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m1NnL83U ... re=related" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; . I believe a larger, all-wheel drive vehicle with a reinforced bumper is a definite plus in most situations.
I included your commentary on this because I like it. I'm not well versed in the uses and limitations of winches but I've certainly seen people overconfident in their abilities. Seems like something it's nice to have, IF you know how to use it, but also something with many limitations. Good call.
6) “I will just head to the mountains and live off the land.” <snip> If this is your plan, please rethink. A good vehicle will assist as more than just transportation but add as a survival tool. Think farm vehicle.
The "live off the land" assumption is widely held by people who haven't put a lot of thought into it, because it sounds nice and romantic, but unfortunately serious thought agrees with your conclusion: we can't all go be hunter-gatherers, no matter how fun it sounds in theory. However, I'm skeptical about the idea of setting up a farm, using your Land Rover as a tractor, and being a subsistence farmer forever. Where are you getting the fuel to keep doing this? It's nice while it lasts but I think by the time you're doing serious farming (measured in years, or at least seasons) you're going to be doing that work by hand or animal. Also, farming is easier than hunting and gathering (that's why it took over) but not by so much that it'll be smooth sailing. Farming is hard work and takes know-how. If this is your plan, set up your farm NOW, and start working it. After the disaster, there are no do-overs, and that's not the best time to be learning.
7) “I will just head off-road and 4x4 my way there.” Maps are flat and fool a person into believing it’s not so difficult to get from this point to that point. Beyond all the obstacles (rocks, rivers, trees, buildings, fences, inclines, declines, ditches, etc), your fuel economy drops like a rock. Going in low, low gear and crawling a few miles is like putting a 50 pound weight on your gas needle. A conservative mpg estimate from Pirate4x4.com is 1/6th your normal miles per gallon. Expect much worse. When choosing a vehicle, consider its total range over gas mileage.
I agree with all of this (more because it makes sense than on experience; I don't do any real off roading). However, a gas guzzler with deep tanks isn't a practical option for a lot of us, who have to use our vehicles to drive to work on a daily basis. Some kind of a compromise needs to be struck, and this varies from person to person. Right now I'm on transit, my next vehicle is likely to be another cheap, beat, older Jeep Cherokee, but others may choose smaller vehicles, and have good reason for doing so.
8) “After I get there, I won’t be using my vehicle anyway” Or “There won’t be any fuel afterwards so a car is useless.” Choosing a vehicle with limited abilities reduce its usefulness. If your evacuation vehicle is a bicycle, it will be limited to human powered transportation. This means you will only be able to move low weight and/or volume things. It will not be much good for firewood or road building or fence fixing. There was fuel available all during the Great Depression and World War II. No matter how broke and starving their people are every country I can think of (except Vatican City) has gas and diesel for sale. If you believe things will be worse than that then learn how to make your own fuel. People have been distilling ethanol / methanol and rendering oils for centuries. Gasification is used by some when they could not afford gas. (Currently, I know the basics of distilling and gasification but never tried them myself.) My understanding is that some auto computers (ECU) can not handle alternative fuels. Pick a vehicle that does not have these limitations. Buy extra wear parts like brakes, wiper blades, belts, hoses, and other things to keep your vehicle going.
My only comment on this is, if you think you're going to be making your own fuel THEN, start doing it NOW, because while it is possible, it isn't easy. Again, when the stakes are high, is no turn to be learning.
9) “I don’t have that many people going with me.” Plans change. Are you hard-hearted enough to drive off and leave a friend or family member? What if you are the bug-out destination and you must go and bring friends or family to you? I advocate flexibility. An evacuation vehicle should be able to carry your group and a number of tools and possessions needed to keep you alive. But most of all, your vehicle should be flexible and adaptable to a new circumstance.
No plan is better than it is flexible. This is true of vehicles and everything else.
10) “The perfect vehicle is XXXXXXX.” There is no perfect vehicle. What might work great for me will be a bust for the next person because their needs and evacuation experience will differ. Price and practicality play into the mix. Please use your own judgment and try not to buy into hype and over enthusiasm over a particular vehicle. I strongly advise a 4x4 over a 2wd. Also, I believe a larger vehicle will do more and offer better flexibility than a smaller vehicle.
I strongly agree with the first part (there is no perfect vehicle), and agree that a big 4x4 is a better choice than a small 2wd, when it comes to the bugout. Not practical for everyone's lifestyle in the present, however. That being said, I think that if you can set things up so you're NOT using your BOV as a daily driver, then you can optimize each for its intended role, which is of course ideal.

These are my thoughts. I'm happy to hear rebuttals. I know relatively little about cars, and even less about off-roading. My thoughts are based on reading and some limited experience. Also, I think this is a totally worthwhile topic and thread, and have no idea why so many people found it so inflammatory. But perhaps its this: Males, typically, don't like being told stuff about cars, because our culture says they're all supposed to be experts already. So when you come in here saying, "Let me tell you some stuff about cars that you've probably got all wrong," they get their Hello Kitty sequined thongs all tangled around their hairy apricots. Personally, I know just enough to know that I don't know dick (about cars), so I appreciated the insight. Thanks!
Image

Doctorr Fabulous
ZS Lifetime Member
ZS Lifetime Member
Posts: 12210
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:06 pm
Favorite Zombie Movies: Evil Dead, Zombieland, 28 Days/Weeks Later

Re: Erroneous Assumptions?

Post by Doctorr Fabulous » Wed Dec 21, 2011 1:31 am

I shave my apricot!

One point I did not elocute well was this:
Jeriah wrote:I strongly agree with the first part (there is no perfect vehicle), and agree that a big 4x4 is a better choice than a small 2wd, when it comes to the bugout. Not practical for everyone's lifestyle in the present, however. That being said, I think that if you can set things up so you're NOT using your BOV as a daily driver, then you can optimize each for its intended role, which is of course ideal.
Very few of us, outside those who are crawlers/mudders are going to have a dedicated BOV. Even fewer will have a vehicle given to us, or bought for $250.
Opinions subject to change in light of new information.
Image
http://i.imgur.com/wG6ZMjE.jpg

User avatar
Tater Raider
* * * * *
Posts: 6737
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 8:53 pm
Location: Meatworld

Re: Erroneous Assumptions?

Post by Tater Raider » Wed Dec 21, 2011 2:02 am

Doc Torr wrote:I shave my apricot!

One point I did not elocute well was this:
Jeriah wrote:I strongly agree with the first part (there is no perfect vehicle), and agree that a big 4x4 is a better choice than a small 2wd, when it comes to the bugout. Not practical for everyone's lifestyle in the present, however. That being said, I think that if you can set things up so you're NOT using your BOV as a daily driver, then you can optimize each for its intended role, which is of course ideal.
Very few of us, outside those who are crawlers/mudders are going to have a dedicated BOV. Even fewer will have a vehicle given to us, or bought for $250.
I completely agree with both statements and would like to add that if you have a daily driver that is functional as a BOV that you have more money to put into other preps, increasing the odds of survival in ZPAW far more than having a vehicle you rarely use.

Also, time to adjust my meds. :lol:
Last edited by Tater Raider on Wed Dec 21, 2011 6:57 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
scorpionsak47
* *
Posts: 153
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 10:15 pm
Favorite Zombie Movies: anything romero made ,dawn of the dead 2004, hell any zombie movie for that matter
Location: louisville ky
Contact:

Re: Erroneous Assumptions?

Post by scorpionsak47 » Wed Dec 21, 2011 6:56 am

wow very long thread lots of chest thumping and ball scratching.I sat here wondering as i was reading, if the title had simpley been: top ten neophyte prepper mistakes or some such would everyone have still felt inclined to nit pick the whole thread to death instead of staying on target. Im sure im gonna get pounced for this but ive lurked for years and only really recently begun to post so flame on. i dont think most here at Zs are that new to prepping but for someone new to planning this may be a starting point for there plan. with all the new people coming in from the history channel show we could guide the newer people on there path not pound them into submission. 8-)
Image

User avatar
Tater Raider
* * * * *
Posts: 6737
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 8:53 pm
Location: Meatworld

Re: Erroneous Assumptions?

Post by Tater Raider » Wed Dec 21, 2011 6:59 am

scorpionsak47 wrote:wow very long thread lots of chest thumping and ball scratching.I sat here wondering as i was reading, if the title had simpley been: top ten neophyte prepper mistakes or some such would everyone have still felt inclined to nit pick the whole thread to death instead of staying on target. Im sure im gonna get pounced for this but ive lurked for years and only really recently begun to post so flame on. i dont think most here at Zs are that new to prepping but for someone new to planning this may be a starting point for there plan. with all the new people coming in from the history channel show we could guide the newer people on there path not pound them into submission. 8-)
Might have helped, I agree, but how folk write doesn't carry across the tone of voice or body language or any of a number of ways we have of communicating what we are saying and how we are saying it. Just something to keep in mind, and something I forget now and then.

Post Reply

Return to “Transportation”