[extropy-chat] Bike/Trike from hell....

[Spike]

Bike/Trike from hell....
> 
> 
> Spike and other motorcycle addicts:
> Try this puppy on for size:
> 
> http://go-t-rex.com/anglais.html
> 
...
> Mike Lorrey

Ja there is one of those cruising around Sunnyvale.  Its cool,
but it has the same problem as the Lotus super 7 which is referenced
on the t-rex site:

 <I wish a three-wheeler propelled by a motorcycle engine, echoing the
spirit of the much-acclaimed Lotus Super Seven would exist...> - Colin
Chapman, motorsport expert

The problem is that they sit so low, you are likely to get
run over by some yahoo in a Ford Exhibition who never even
saw you way down there.  One of the locals from Fremont has
a Lotus 7, drives it only on Sunday when the traffic is
low.  I can't blame him.  This t-rex would be fun toy,
but probably not a practical daily commuter.

Since you bring up cars, do suggest a course of action
for me.  My wife and I have been married 20 years.  In that
entire time we have always had only one four-wheeler.  We've
had always a stable-full of motorcycles, which serve as 
a second car in a pinch, but she has never gotten her
motorcycle license, so they really are only *my* second
car.  We haven't any wheels to loan friends and family
when they visit (if they do not ride motorcycles).
So having only one four-wheeler has presented occasional
inconveniences, which I now propose to rectify.

We recently were in a season of paradox here; I again
find myself deep in doubt.  Our only car now gets used about
10k miles per year.  A second car would get far fewer
miles, perhaps 3k to 5k.  If one makes up a matrix of
wants and needs vs cost, a low-usage second car should
be well-depreciated by age, probably more than 10 years.
If one plans to drive only 3k to 5k per year... here
is the paradoxical part... it matters very little what
gas mileage it returns.  The cost of the extra fuel to
run a gas-hog is small compared to other costs.

I went down to the used car lot and had a shock: the
prices of all the long cushy gas-hogs were slashed 
considerably, whereas the price of the little gas-sipping 
beer cans were all waaay up.  Perhaps because of the recent 
gas price run-up, one can now get a way-zooty land yacht, such 
as a BMW 750iL with its twelve big thirsty cylinders for 
about the same price as a comparably-aged Accord, Camry or 
equivalently boring, cramped snoozermobile.

Looks to me like the depreciation costs of the German 
pimpmobile would actually be lower than the beer can: in the 
past 15 years, the Accord's value has dropped from about $18k
to $5k, whereas the Beemer has dropped from $85k to $5k.
Surely the resale value of Bavaria's finest has nearly 
bottomed by now.

The greens might argue that the environmentally correct
thing to do is buy the econobox, saving some fuel even if 
not much.  But ironically, just the opposite seems true, 
for if I buy the guzzlemeister and don't drive it much, 
I keep it away from some other yahoo who would drive it a 
lot more.  If I buy the small, economic REO snorewagon, 
I save *a little* fuel but I keep that gas sipper away from
someone who would likely drive it more, causing them to
buy something else that would devour more fuel.  Total
fuel use is minimized if I drive the Bond-James-Bond-cruiser
and the other guy gets the Fudd-Elmer-Fudd-buggy.

Is that a paradox?  Where is the flaw in my logic?  

spike