Originally posted by todras:
Originally posted by cheapest GL around:

Or maybe they're as big but they're so dwarfed by the enormous wheels that they look smaller.




Do ya think?


They're still pretty tiny. The same Escalade was there today, and this time I noticed it also had rear drums. I think it's an older model Escalade -- not as butt-ugly and not quite as enormous as the current ones.

Originally posted by cheapest GL around:

Originally posted by cheapest GL around:

Folding back seats make it possible to get bikes in the back, but they can't make it easy or convenient.



Well get a van then. I just take the front tire off. Who owns a bike w/o a quick release? I'm not arguing but some of your points are not valid.


To get my bike in I had to take both wheels off and it's still a wrestling match. I'd usually end up bungeeing the trunk lid down with the bike sticking out the back, which meant having to be real careful about bumps.

There's nothing "not valid" about mentioning that a moderate sized trunk with no folding seatback is inconvenient for large cargo. Not just bikes -- tomorrow I have plans to help a friend lug a big filing cabinet and a TV set. No problem with a compact hatch, hopeless with a (almost)midsize sedan. Plus, with the hatch I've got tie-down loops.

(By the way, the car that was the single most awkward bike hauler ever for me was an old 626 with a folding back seat. There was enough total room, but it was so cramped that the tolerances for fitting the bike through the seat hole needed to be measured with a micrometer.)

And what else are you claiming is "not valid"? That the car had dinky brakes?

. . . Two zetec Contours, two blown head gaskets... for some reason I have a Japanese car now. anybody in California want a Diehard Gold 100 month battery? inquire by PM.