35s5 vs Express 30
 

Well let's see how the tally is going.....

The 35s5 has a big proper racing wheel. The Express 30 has a small
wheel that is hard to reach from the high side.
The 35s5 has ports that stay in place. Express 30 has famed pop-outs
that are glued in place!
The 35s5 is the faster boat!
The 35s5 has a far nicer cabin with air conditioning. The Depress 30
cabin looks like something from the 70's!
The 35s5 has a swim platform with hidden ladder, while the Express 30
has a exposed ladder! Oh boy.
The 35s5 has a larger cockpit and better deckspace!
The 35s5 has an aft cabin! Some Depress 30's didn't even have a quarter
berth!
The 35s5 has a large head. The Depress 30 often has a porta potti and
barely room for the knees. Some heads were wide open to the V-berth,
like Sloco's boat! Yikes!
The 35s5 is a pretty boat with lines. The Express 30 is blocky and hard
looking, a fairly ugly boat under sail.
The 35s5 won boat of the year design awards and was featured in MOMA
Magazine for it's inovative interior. The Express 30 won no awards and
there are fewer wins online for it.
The 35s5 has won many races and sold over 400 hulls worldwide. The
Express 30 sold an embarassing 100 hulls or less!
The 35s5 features Whitlock steering. The Depress 30 relies on coat
hangers!
The 35s5 features good ventalation via opening ports. The Depress 30 is
a floating microwave.

Of course there's much more, but I have a 102 fever! I'm going back to
bed.


RB
35s5...the best boat on ASA
NY

35s5 vs Express 30
 

Go check out the windshield in your Tribeca, Rob! It is heavily
depended upon
for supporting the roof in a rollover. See how it's fastened?


Actually, the B9 frame can support twice it's weight in a rollover due
to circular members incorporated into the chassis. The for and aft
windows are designed to pop out.
Maybe it's a safety feature on the Express 30. In the event of a
unrecoverable knockdown you can try to squeeze out the ports! One
things for certain, some flexing and serious waves will pop them out.

RB
35s5
NY

35s5 vs Express 30
 

"Swab Rob" wrote


Actually, the B9 frame can support twice MY weight


Doubt it.



The for and aft
windows


''for and aft windows'', of a car??? BWaHahahahahah




..

RB
Tribecky...built for lesbians, bi lesbians
NY

35s5 vs Express 30
 

This guy buys a newer bigger boat than mine and he's still jealous of
my lifestyle. Has to be to go through all that typing which is mostly
innaccurate. Seems like he's on the ropes mentally. Maybe I'll finish
him off with one true factoid. The Express 30 has been High Point
Champion on the Chesapeake 4 times. Oh, and it wasn't the same boat.
The semi planing 35s5 has never even been in the running. Bam!

35s5 .......... semi-planing at the back of the pack.

35s5 vs Express 30
 

The Express 30 has been High Point
Champion on the Chesapeake 4 times.


You're not refering to silly PHRF where Catalina's and Coronado's can
win any race, right?
That's the difference, Sloco, I've actually RACED. Same boats, same
amount of crew and so on. My boat is faster than your boat and that's
the bottom line.
Uhhh...BAM!!!!

RB
35s5
NY

35s5 vs Express 30
 

Capt. Rob wrote:

That's the difference, Sloco, I've actually RACED.

Wow!!!!

Was that a *whole* race, or did you just join in on one leg?


--
Capt Scumbalino

35s5 vs Express 30
 

My boat is faster than your boat and that's the bottom line.

Do you realize how much of a ****** you make yourself look. Anybody
reading this newsgroup must get a kick out of your ******ness. I hope
your boat is faster than mine. It's 5 1/2 feet longer. Chomp on this:
What's more telling is that a Olson 911S which is a 30 footer that's
only a little bit newer than mine and has a beautiful interior that
makes it a great dual purpose boat HAS THE SAME PHRF RATING AS YOUR
BOAT.

35s5 ................ semi planing at the back of the pack. Might even
be 3 packs back.

35s5 vs Express 30
 

Wow!!!!

Was that a *whole* race, or did you just join in on one leg?


1st couple of years I started sailing again I got into J24 racing on
several boats. It taught me that the only race that matters is between
boats of the same specs. A lot of folks don't want to hear that of
course. I have a lot of friends who race. The PHRF is for fun and
that's it. The only race I'll win that will matter is against another
35s5 or boats that have similar performance to my boat.
I have no doubt that I'd beat Sloco in a race handily with my 35s5. And
be more comfortable doing it.

RB
35s5
NY

35s5 vs Express 30
 

Capt. Rob wrote:

1st couple of years I started sailing again I got into J24 racing on
several boats. It taught me that the only race that matters is between
boats of the same specs. A lot of folks don't want to hear that of
course. I have a lot of friends who race. The PHRF is for fun and
that's it.

It's ALL just for fun unless you're paid to do it.


The only race I'll win that will matter is against another
35s5 or boats that have similar performance to my boat.
I have no doubt that I'd beat Sloco in a race handily with my 35s5.
And be more comfortable doing it.

Your boat is faster than his. So what? There are boats faster than yours. So
what?

You know the one thing that makes me wonder about your 'trolls'? The sheer
volume - the non-stop flood of pointless, banal knob waving tripe that you
post in here day after day. The content and the entertainment factor are
fine, but the not-inconsiderable typing time leaves me wondering if there
really is something awry...


--
Capt Scumbalino

35s5 vs Express 30
 

Your boat is faster than his. So what?


You're only seeing a little bit of history here. For years, Sloco has
been going on about his Express 30 being faster or newer or god knows
what. We just went out and bought a nice boat for our family and it
just happens to be faster than his. The chickens came home to roost. If
he wasn't tortured by it he wouldn't bother responding to every post!!!

but the not-inconsiderable typing time leaves me wondering if there
really is something awry...

It's winter, or nearly so. I work four hours per day on average.
Finishing off my book, playing with my beatiful son, spending time with
by sexy wife.....and beating poor Sloco from ringpost to
ringpost...good times!
Between you and me...I could care less that my boat is faster. There's
always a faster bigger nicer boat. Only Sloco cares....he really really
cares!


RB
35s5
NY

35s5 vs Express 30
 

"Commodore Joe Redcloud" wrote in message

SNIP TIRADE OF IDIOCY

My 1986 C&C has the original glued in windows and they have never leaked.
I've
had two knockdowns onto the starboard side.

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAhahahahahahahahaha......

You're a complete Goofball....

CM

35s5 vs Express 30
 

"Capt. Rob" wrote in message
oups.com...

Well let's see how the tally is going.....

The 35s5 has a big proper racing wheel.

The 35s5 has floorboards that creak!!!


Regards


Donal
--

35s5 vs Express 30
 

Nonsense. Car marketing departments always claim their cars have "roll
cage
construction". It's essentially puffery.


I'm afraid you're wrong about this. Not only does the Subaru have
integral roll members, it has more than one. It also has a frame much
stronger than the original Outback chassis, since they plan to add a
lot more HP down the road.

My 1986 C&C has the original glued in windows and they have never
leaked. I've
had two knockdowns onto the starboard side.

My C&C 32 required all new windows. The buyer (when we sold her) had
looked at a lot of boats at many had window issues. Fixing those
windows, which have no external flange on bracing, was a common topic
on Sailnet for years. Steve's Express also required new windows. It's a
common issue on the C&C boats and one I'm happy to leave behind.
BTW, aprox 70% of cars and SUV's in production can support 2 times
their weight or better on the roof.

RB
35s5
NY

35s5 vs Express 30
 

The 35s5 has a big proper racing wheel.

The 35s5 has floorboards that creak!!!


They are about as well fit as my old C&C 32 and better fit than any of
the new Beneteau's I've been aboard over the last few years.


RB
35s5
NY

35s5 vs Express 30
 

Commodore Joe Redcloud wrote:
On 10 Dec 2005 07:02:22 -0800, "Capt. Rob" wrote:

Go check out the windshield in your Tribeca, Rob! It is heavily
depended upon
for supporting the roof in a rollover. See how it's fastened?


Actually, the B9 frame can support twice it's weight in a rollover due
to circular members incorporated into the chassis. The for and aft
windows are designed to pop out.

Nonsense. Car marketing departments always claim their cars have "roll cage
construction". It's essentially puffery. When I bought a brand new Pontiac
Firebird 400 H.O. convertible in 1969, the salesman told me that the frame
around the windshield was an effective rollbar! A meaningful roll cage would
not fit in the space allowed between the skin and the headliner. All they are
saying, is that the roof is supported by ribs - just like every other car with a
hardtop. Supporting twice it's weight is really nothing in the context of a
rollover, where the force exerted will likely be many, many times that.

The idea that your car's windshield is "designed" to pop out is laughable in the
age of airbags. It's like yelling "Sit" at a dog who is already sitting, to make
it look like it was your idea. If your windshield is prone to popping out in
accidents, it is a serious design flaw. It was not intentional! In the 60's and
70's, Saab and a handful of others designed windshields that would pop out if
your head struck them hard enough. Saab also designed engine mounts so that in a
front end collision, the engine would go up over you, and kill your kids in the
back seat instead. Nobody does pop-out windshields any longer, as shoulder belts
and airbags completely eliminate the need. Meanwhile, windshields are
universally part of the design of cars for integral rollover protection. Not
just some cars. ALL cars legal for sale in the US.

Your Beneteau makes use of a lot of modern adhesives for structural integrity.
So do more and more boats and cars. Welding and bolting are passe, and no longer
cost effective in many applications where the right adhesive is far superior and
cheaper to use than mechanical fasteners. If you could brag that your new boat
had "All modern adhesive construction with no mechanical fasteners", now, THAT
would be noteworthy.

If you ever have the windshield in your Tribeca replaced, you will be told that
you cannot drive the car for an hour or more. If you ask why, they will say it
is purely due to the fact that if you were to pull out of the parking lot and
get into an accident resulting in a rollover, you would not be properly
protected, and the installer does not want to be responsible. Other than that
factor, you could drive away immediately with no ill effect on the windshield or
its installation.

Your windshield is a vital structural element of your Tribeca, and it is glued
in place, with essentially the same system used on the old C&C's and Expresses.

My 1986 C&C has the original glued in windows and they have never leaked. I've
had two knockdowns onto the starboard side.


Commodore Joe Redcloud

CJR:

You are exactly correct about the rollover protection. According to
this:

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news0...standards.html

Capt. Rob's Tribeca does not have adequate roll over protection and
would not meet the new standard of 2.5 times car weight. The Tribeca is
not a Volvo and it's pretty ugly too.

Bret

35s5 vs Express 30
 

You're only seeing a little bit of history here. For years, Sloco
has
been going on about his Express 30 being faster or newer or god knows
what.

Absolute balderdash.

35s5 vs Express 30
 

Your Beneteau makes use of a lot of modern adhesives for structural
integrity.

Crap they used to use rivets. Yes, Beneteau was slammed for years for
using rivets on the deck to hull joint. What a builder.

35s5 vs Express 30
 

"Commode Joe " wrote in message
My 1986 C&C has the original glued in windows and they have
never leaked. I've
had two knockdowns onto the starboard side.

Were you 'snapping a tack' at the time?

SV

35s5 vs Express 30
 

"Swab Rob" wrote ...

Finishing off my book, playing with my beatiful son, spending
time with
by sexy wife.....

It's spelled, ''bi-sexual''.

Scotty

35s5 vs Express 30
 

What's more telling is that a Olson 911S which is a 30 footer that's
only a little bit newer than mine and has a beautiful interior that
makes it a great dual purpose boat HAS THE SAME PHRF RATING AS YOUR
BOAT.


I assume you mean the failed boat picked up by Ericson after Pacific
went under. The interior is nicer than yours, but it's still nowhere
near what we have now. The 911s looks to be a better pick for you. Why
didn't you buy one instead of the depress 30. It's also a better
looking boat than yours by a wide mile!


RB
35s5
NY

35s5 vs Express 30
 

It's really a shame that some immature idiots use this news group to
brag about their boats rather than contributing anything of any real
note or use to anyone other than their own egos.

One would have to wonder why you need to brag so much and what you're
trying to compensate for...

On 2005-12-10 06:26:49 -0500, "Capt. Rob" said:


Well let's see how the tally is going.....

The 35s5 has a big proper racing wheel. The Express 30 has a small
wheel that is hard to reach from the high side.
The 35s5 has ports that stay in place. Express 30 has famed pop-outs
that are glued in place!
The 35s5 is the faster boat!
The 35s5 has a far nicer cabin with air conditioning. The Depress 30
cabin looks like something from the 70's!
The 35s5 has a swim platform with hidden ladder, while the Express 30
has a exposed ladder! Oh boy.
The 35s5 has a larger cockpit and better deckspace!
The 35s5 has an aft cabin! Some Depress 30's didn't even have a quarter
berth!
The 35s5 has a large head. The Depress 30 often has a porta potti and
barely room for the knees. Some heads were wide open to the V-berth,
like Sloco's boat! Yikes!
The 35s5 is a pretty boat with lines. The Express 30 is blocky and hard
looking, a fairly ugly boat under sail.
The 35s5 won boat of the year design awards and was featured in MOMA
Magazine for it's inovative interior. The Express 30 won no awards and
there are fewer wins online for it.
The 35s5 has won many races and sold over 400 hulls worldwide. The
Express 30 sold an embarassing 100 hulls or less!
The 35s5 features Whitlock steering. The Depress 30 relies on coat
hangers!
The 35s5 features good ventalation via opening ports. The Depress 30 is
a floating microwave.

Of course there's much more, but I have a 102 fever! I'm going back to
bed.


RB
35s5...the best boat on ASA
NY

35s5 vs Express 30
 

In article 2005121108543716807-dog@nomailcom, dog wrote:
It's really a shame that some immature idiots use this news group to
brag about their boats rather than contributing anything of any real
note or use to anyone other than their own egos.

Is it just me, or can someone else find the fault in the previous
statement? :-)

One would have to wonder why you need to brag so much and what you're
trying to compensate for...

You have to Wonder? Good one!!
--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

35s5 vs Express 30
 

assume you mean the failed boat picked up by Ericson after Pacific

went under. The interior is nicer than yours, but it's still nowhere
near what we have now..

That's right Boobie stay away from the point of the post. Just discuss
the interior. Forget the fact the really nice thirty foot 911S runs at
the same speed as your "semi planing 35 footer" You look stupid
knocking the 911S. Knowledgable people consider it a great boat. The
mid eighties were tough for smaller builders.

35s5 ......... not very fast for a 35 footer.

35s5 vs Express 30
 

That's right Boobie stay away from the point of the post. Just discuss

the interior.


It's hilarious that you continue to act as though a boat's interior is
in no way important. Why did you get a cruiser then? We should all have
crappy interiors because you do? I do like the 911s, certainly a lot
nicer than your boat, but too small for our needs. Why didn't you buy
one?

RB
35s5
NY

35s5 vs Express 30
 

"Commodore Joe Redcloud" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 08:59:30 +1100, OzOne wrote:

On Sun, 11 Dec 2005 00:58:40 GMT, Commodore Joe Redcloud
scribbled thusly:


I'm not wrong, Robert. Pull down the headliner and look at what is
actually
there. A real rollbar would be 2 to 3 inches in diameter. Where did they
hide
it?

Ummmm, you honestly believe that rollover protection needs to be made
from tube?
Bwaaahahhahahahhahahahhahahahhaaaa!


You are a fool. There's no way around that fact.

Here's one way: make the car a thin shelled sphere. Perfect roll over
protection with minimal metal. The point being, it's the design of the
integrated car that defines roll over protection, not some big
Nascar-greaser roll bar. Are you an old greaser?

Go back to the 1960's with your big metal tubular roll bars. Are there roll
bars in tanks? Humvees?

Amen!



Bwahaha all you want. You are still a low life.


Commodore Joe Redcloud

35s5 vs Express 30
 

"Commodore Joe Redcloud" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 01:37:55 GMT, "Bob Crantz"
wrote:


"Commodore Joe Redcloud" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 08:59:30 +1100, OzOne wrote:

On Sun, 11 Dec 2005 00:58:40 GMT, Commodore Joe Redcloud
scribbled thusly:


I'm not wrong, Robert. Pull down the headliner and look at what is
actually
there. A real rollbar would be 2 to 3 inches in diameter. Where did
they
hide
it?

Ummmm, you honestly believe that rollover protection needs to be made
from tube?
Bwaaahahhahahahhahahahhahahahhaaaa!


You are a fool. There's no way around that fact.

Here's one way: make the car a thin shelled sphere. Perfect roll over
protection with minimal metal. The point being, it's the design of the
integrated car that defines roll over protection, not some big
Nascar-greaser roll bar.

Which is essentially what I said, Babs.

Are you an old greaser?

Go back to the 1960's with your big metal tubular roll bars. Are there
roll
bars in tanks? Humvees?


Modern cars are made as light as possible to help them achieve better
mileage.
Despite the increasing use of electronics in cars, note the ever shrinking
batteries as an example of this. Bob's car does not have anything in it's
roof
that would eliminate the need for the windshield to be a vital part of the
roof
support system in a rollover.


Commodore Joe Redcloud

The windshield is raked at a good angle. If it was in a purely
compressionable mode, it would be part of the structure. However, since a
roll over is not controllable it would tend to experience tensile forces. In
other words, don't count on it.

The Tribeca is built like a tank.

35s5 vs Express 30
 

http://www.allpar.com/reviews/wrangler.html

Fold down windshield.





"Commodore Joe Redcloud©" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 17:19:38 GMT, "Bob Crantz"
wrote:


"Commodore Joe Redcloud" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 01:37:55 GMT, "Bob Crantz"
wrote:


"Commodore Joe Redcloud" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 08:59:30 +1100, OzOne wrote:

On Sun, 11 Dec 2005 00:58:40 GMT, Commodore Joe Redcloud
scribbled thusly:


I'm not wrong, Robert. Pull down the headliner and look at what is
actually
there. A real rollbar would be 2 to 3 inches in diameter. Where
did
they
hide
it?

Ummmm, you honestly believe that rollover protection needs to be
made
from tube?
Bwaaahahhahahahhahahahhahahahhaaaa!


You are a fool. There's no way around that fact.

Here's one way: make the car a thin shelled sphere. Perfect roll over
protection with minimal metal. The point being, it's the design of the
integrated car that defines roll over protection, not some big
Nascar-greaser roll bar.

Which is essentially what I said, Babs.

Are you an old greaser?

Go back to the 1960's with your big metal tubular roll bars. Are there
roll
bars in tanks? Humvees?


Modern cars are made as light as possible to help them achieve better
mileage.
Despite the increasing use of electronics in cars, note the ever
shrinking
batteries as an example of this. Bob's car does not have anything in
it's
roof
that would eliminate the need for the windshield to be a vital part of
the
roof
support system in a rollover.


Commodore Joe Redcloud

The windshield is raked at a good angle. If it was in a purely
compressionable mode, it would be part of the structure. However, since a
roll over is not controllable it would tend to experience tensile forces.
In
other words, don't count on it.

The Tribeca is built like a tank.


None of that matters. What matters is that you can't sell the car in
the U.S. unless the windshield is bonded to the car, and helps support
the roof. Of course it's not a guarantee that it will support the roof
no matter what happens. Seat belts and air bags are no gaurantee
either. The government still says they have to be there if you want to
sell the car.


Commodore Joe Redcloud©

35s5 vs Express 30
 

In article . net,
Bob Crantz wrote:
http://www.allpar.com/reviews/wrangler.html

Fold down windshield.

My CJ-7 had that. It was a nice feature when off-roading. You had to
be careful though..

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

35s5 vs Express 30
 

"Commodore Joe Redcloud©" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 19:50:29 GMT, "Bob Crantz"
wrote:

http://www.allpar.com/reviews/wrangler.html

Fold down windshield.



Yes, and not surprisingly, you cannot buy one without the mandatory
thick tubular steel padded roll bars!


KABLAM!


Commodore Joe Redcloud©

Obviously you are well versed in auto safety. What insurance company did you
work for?

I can still find many exceptions to your rule!

35s5 vs Express 30
 

JAX!!!!?????.... is that you? Bwahahahahahahahahahahahaahaaaaa!!

"Commodore Joe Redcloud©" wrote in message
None of that matters. What matters is that you can't sell the car in
the U.S. unless the windshield is bonded to the car, and helps support
the roof. Of course it's not a guarantee that it will support the roof
no matter what happens. Seat belts and air bags are no gaurantee
either. The government still says they have to be there if you want to
sell the car.


Commodore Joe Redcloud©

35s5 vs Express 30
 

"Commodore Joe Redcloud©" wrote in message
because my balls
are still firmly attached.

.......to the claws of the neighbour's Cat!!!

I think your depends are leaking.... you'd best check your head... it
appears you **** your brains out again.

CM

35s5 vs Express 30
 

"Commodore Joe Redcloud" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 22:07:11 GMT, "Bob Crantz"
wrote:


"Commodore Joe Redcloud©" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 19:50:29 GMT, "Bob Crantz"
wrote:

http://www.allpar.com/reviews/wrangler.html

Fold down windshield.



Yes, and not surprisingly, you cannot buy one without the mandatory
thick tubular steel padded roll bars!


KABLAM!


Commodore Joe Redcloud©

Obviously you are well versed in auto safety. What insurance company did
you
work for?

I can still find many exceptions to your rule!


No you can't! The Jeep Wrangler is classified as a "light truck" as far as
applicable safety standards. Even so, it could not be sold without proper
rollover protection. They HAVE to have a huge and bulky rollcage to be
legal.

Really?

http://www.kooblekar.com/






Commodore Joe Redcloud

35s5 vs Express 30
 

Kablam!!!

Wrong about convertibles!!

Dead wrong about the Wrangler!!!

Bwaahaahahahahaahahahahahahahahaa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ragtops escape roof-crush rules: NHTSA says convertibles can't share
standards with fixed-roof vehicles
HARRY STOFFER | Automotive News
RICK KRANZ | Automotive News
Posted Date: 11/9/05
Federal regulators want stronger vehicle roofs to protect people in rollover
crashes, but they have no plan to protect occupants of convertibles.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration says it cannot hold
convertibles, including retractable hardtops, to the same roof-crush
requirements as vehicles with fixed roofs. The agency also has decided
against convertible-specific rollover rules, such as requiring roll bars.

There has been a sharp increase in convertible offerings in the past decade,
and existing roof-strength rules exempt convertibles. Several import
automakers have added rollover safety equipment voluntarily. Although
concern has mounted over rollover deaths in SUVs, convertible rollover
deaths are a nonissue for NHTSA, the insurance industry and some automakers.
The 94 fatalities attributed to 87 convertibles that rolled over in 2004
accounted for fewer than 1 percent of about 10,000 U.S. rollover deaths last
year.

"We've been asked the convertible question many times, and we don't see a
higher pattern of injury losses," said Kim Hazelbaker, senior vice president
of the Highway Loss Data Institute, a research organization for auto
insurers.

Safety lobbyists and regulators say convertibles' low center of gravity
makes them less prone to rollover.

New standard

NHTSA's proposed overhaul of its standard for "roof-crush resistance" will
require increased roof strength for most vehicles. The rules are an effort
to reduce fatalities and serious injuries in rollovers. They are primarily
aimed at vehicles with a high center of gravity such as SUVs and pickups.

The agency is accepting comments until Nov. 21 for the new standard, the
first revision since 1971. As proposed, the standard will cover vehicles --
except convertibles -- with a gross vehicle weight of 10,000 pounds or less.
The rule would take effect no earlier than the 2010 model year.

Although federal rules do not affect convertibles, German and Swedish
automakers have taken the lead in protecting convertible occupants in a
rollover. While there is no vehicle standard in Europe regarding occupant
protection in convertibles, European automakers have been proactive over the
past 15 years.

They have addressed the rollover issue on two fronts. First, they have
strengthened the A-pillars and windshield frame to withstand a rollover.

Second, they have engineered one of two different roll bar systems into the
rear of the passenger compartment:

1. Stationary roll bars

2. Mechanically or electrically operated hoop-style roll bars that pop up
when the system senses a potential rollover.

The roll bars are positioned behind the front seat in two-passenger
convertibles and behind the rear seats in four-passenger convertibles. The
top of the bar can in some cases be 10 inches above the headrest.

Some protection

The roll bars would not meet the new rollover standards. But automakers
offering them say they offer some protection.

Volkswagen began offering roll bars in its convertible in 1980.
Mercedes-Benz followed in the 1990 model year. Audi, BMW, Porsche, Saab,
Volkswagen and Volvo offer such protection, as does Honda in the S2000
roadster.

One analyst believes other automakers who make convertibles should follow
their lead.

"This may be one of the times where the OEMs should take the lead and say
this is the right thing to do," said Michael Robinet, vice president for
global forecast services of CSM Worldwide in Farmington Hills, Mich.,
referring to automakers that fail to offer roll bars.

Convertibles without roll bars include the Toyota Solara, Chrysler Sebring,
Ford Mustang, Chevrolet Corvette, Pontiac Solstice and Lexus SC 430.

Chrysler's PT Cruiser has a "sport bar" positioned above the passenger
compartment, but it is there to provide structural integrity, not rollover
protection. The Nissan 350Z and Mazda MX-5 Miata appear to offer roll bar
hoops, but they are not engineered to provide protection in a rollover.

"It is not something that we can legally call a roll bar," says Jeremy
Barnes, a spokesman for Mazda North America Operations. "They are two
structures that sort of look like roll hoops behind the driver and
passenger's head. They do add to the structural integrity of the vehicle,
but they are not there specifically to protect the driver and passenger's
head in the event of a rollover."

A spokesman for Nissan North America offered a similar response.

Not too pricey

Such rollover safety equipment is not tied to premium-priced vehicles. The
least expensive of these European convertibles is the base 2006 Volkswagen
New Beetle convertible, which stickers for $22,535 including shipping. That
four-passenger vehicle features mechanically operated hoops behind the rear
seats that automatically pop up when the vehicle senses a rollover.

"It is something that we think is a selling point for the car," said Tony
Fouladpour, a spokesman for Volkswagen of America. "It is something that we
think the customer of a German-built car expects, a little bit extra,
especially in the area of safety."

Intuitively, convertibles look less safe in a rollover. But they are less
likely to be involved in rollovers, says Hazelbaker of the Highway Loss Data
Institute.

Aside from their low center of gravity, convertibles often are extra
vehicles in a household, used only on weekends and rarely taken out in bad
weather, he says.

So, for insurers, "from a risk standpoint, that's pretty good business,"
Hazelbaker says.

NHTSA intends to keep testing for roof strength by pressing a heavy metal
plate on the top of a vehicle directly behind the A-pillar. Under the NHTSA
proposal, the roof must resist a force equal to 2½ times the vehicle weight.
The current standard is 1½ times vehicle weight.

Legal roadblock

No traditional convertible can meet either the current or proposed standard.
Federal law says that NHTSA cannot regulate a vehicle type out of existence,
says NHTSA spokesman Rae Tyson. That means it cannot apply the standard to
convertibles.

A growing range of vehicles -- convertibles with a retractable hardtop --
will be treated as convertibles by NHTSA. That means they would be exempt
from the proposed roof-crush standard. The reason is that the A- and
B-pillars are not permanently connected. Among the vehicles that would be
exempted are the Cadillac XLR; Mercedes-Benz CLK, SLK and SL; Volvo C70; and
Pontiac G6 due early next year.

Gerald Donaldson, senior research director for Advocates for Highway and
Auto Safety, says his organization has never urged rollover protection in
convertibles because it never had a good opportunity -- until now.

The organization, a coalition of consumer groups and insurers, is analyzing
the roof-crush proposal but has not decided on its response, Donaldson says.
But simply requiring roll bars for convertibles would probably not be
sufficient because occupants' heads would likely still hit the ground, he
says.

Alan Shapey, a New York lawyer who has handled rollover cases, has sent
highly critical comments to NHTSA criticizing the roof-crush proposal.

Shapey said convertible rollovers have not been a hot topic because they
occur infrequently. But he supports convertible-specific rollover regulation
such as permanent or pop-up roll bars.

Roof edict could be called 'Wrangler rule'

The federal government wants to expand the reach of its roof-crush rules
aimed at protecting passengers in rollover crashes. But the move would cover
just one additional model: the Jeep Wrangler.

DaimlerChrysler AG spokesman Max Gates says the company does not believe the
Wrangler, as currently designed, would pass a roof-crush test.

************************************
Read this Crusty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
************************************

Gates said in an e-mail that Wrangler's "sports bar is not designed and
engineered as a protective device, such as roll bars on some sports cars and
racing vehicles."

A redesigned Wrangler is expected next year, while new roof-crush standards
will not take effect until the 2010 model year at the earliest. It is not
known whether the next-generation Wrangler would meet roof-crush resistance
standards.

In proposed roof-crush rules, "open-body type vehicles" with structures
between the A- and B-pillars no longer would be considered convertibles.
They no longer would qualify for the exemption that convertibles get from
roof-crush testing.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's proposal cites the
Wrangler as one example. But officials acknowledge they know of no other
that meets the same criteria.

Steve Kratzke, NHTSA's associate administrator for rule making, says the
purpose of the change was not to target the Wrangler. Other similar vehicles
could be introduced at any time, he adds.

Safety activist Gerald Donaldson predicts automakers will "go nuts" over
that provision. He is senior research director at Advocates for Highway and
Auto Safety, a coalition of consumer groups and insurers.

Barry Felrice, director of regulatory affairs in DaimlerChrysler's
Washington office, says his company has not decided how to respond.

Kratzke explains the rationale for extending roof-strength requirements to
Wrangler-like vehicles this way: "If a vehicle has a fixed, rigid,
structural member that's connected, it's not unreasonable for that vehicle
to meet roof-crush standards." -HARRY STOFFER


"Commodore Joe Redcloud" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 22:07:11 GMT, "Bob Crantz"
wrote:


"Commodore Joe Redcloud©" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 19:50:29 GMT, "Bob Crantz"
wrote:

http://www.allpar.com/reviews/wrangler.html

Fold down windshield.



Yes, and not surprisingly, you cannot buy one without the mandatory
thick tubular steel padded roll bars!


KABLAM!


Commodore Joe Redcloud©

Obviously you are well versed in auto safety. What insurance company did
you
work for?

I can still find many exceptions to your rule!


No you can't! The Jeep Wrangler is classified as a "light truck" as far as
applicable safety standards. Even so, it could not be sold without proper
rollover protection. They HAVE to have a huge and bulky rollcage to be
legal.


Commodore Joe Redcloud

35s5 vs Express 30
 

"Commodore Joe Redcloud" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 15:57:02 +1100, OzOne wrote:



Oh No, another butt kicking for Rusty Joe!

Bwaaahahahahahahhahahahhaaa..he must be sleeping face down by now.



Poor Ozpuss! The whole article is about the use of roll bars, which he
claims
are not used anymore. The last paragraph specifically singles out the Jeep
Wrangler as being the target of new rules because it can't pass a rollover
test.


Commodore Joe Redcloud

But you said:

On Mon, 12 Dec 2005 19:50:29 GMT, "Bob Crantz"
wrote:

http://www.allpar.com/reviews/wrangler.html

Fold down windshield.



Yes, and not surprisingly, you cannot buy one without the mandatory
thick tubular steel padded roll bars!


KABLAM!


Commodore Joe Redcloud©


And I say:

BWAAAHAAHAAAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAAA!!!!!

KAAAABLAAAAMMMMMMMMM!!!!!!!!!

AAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!!!!

SMACKDOWN!!!!!

35s5 vs Express 30
 

OzOne wrote in message ...


Oh No, another butt kicking for Rusty Joe!

Bwaaahahahahahahhahahahhaaa..he must be sleeping face down by now.


Crusty says:

"No you can't! The Jeep Wrangler is classified as a "light truck" as far as
applicable safety standards. Even so, it could not be sold without proper
rollover protection. They HAVE to have a huge and bulky rollcage to be
legal. "


Commodore Joe Redcloud



Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaa!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!

Proper roll over protection!

Aaahaaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!

SNORT!

Amen!