Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Anti- Sports- Utility- Vehicle (SUV) board. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MNI who wrote (8)	8/2/1999 3:30:00 PM
From: truedog	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 48

to: MNI from: truedog Yeah! And Monica is always sooooo careful about her actions. IMO, the most dangerous drivers on the road are 25 to 35 year old females in a Japanese car. They attack the freeways like Kamikaze pilots. I wouldn't say that SUVs attract a certain kind of people who are insecure about their own capabilities. SUVs are not a favorite of the affluent. They go in for the Lexus, Beamer, etc. BTW, I have driven a Jeep Grand Cherokee through many model years and have never had as much as a dent. It's the driver. Pure and simple. TD

To: MNI who wrote (8)	2/11/2000 8:57:00 AM
From: long-gone	Respond to of 48

Consumer Reports faces court challenge over SUV rollover tests By DAVID ROSENZWEIG - Los Angeles Times Date: 02/09/00 22:15 LOS ANGELES -- Consumer Reports, America's widely respected buyer's guide, is being forced to defend its credibility in a trial that got under way this week in federal court in Los Angeles. Isuzu Motors has accused the magazine and its nonprofit parent, Consumers Union, of rigging tests to show that the 1995-96 Trooper sport-utility vehicle tended to roll over when making emergency turns. The Japanese automaker contends it suffered more than $200 million in damages after Consumer Reports panned the Trooper in October 1996. Sales dropped 54 percent. The magazine, which does not take advertising and has been evaluating products for 64 years, denies that it skewed the tests. It says the lawsuit is a public relations gambit aimed at silencing a fiercely independent consumer watchdog. Both sides have poured millions of dollars into preparations for the product-disparagement and defamation trial.(cont) kcstar.com