IKEA founder worth $28B and his daily driver is a
04-28-12, 07:53 PM
#16
Lexus Champion
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: WA
Posts: 1,746
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But wouldn't you at least want a reliable, safe, and comfortable mode of transportation even if you're not into cars? Instead of one that could break down at any moment, likely has some non-working features, and is probably unpleasant to drive.
I'd have nothing to say if a billionaire drove a current Camry, but a 20 year old wagon? C'mon.
I'd have nothing to say if a billionaire drove a current Camry, but a 20 year old wagon? C'mon.
Not everyone cares about what they drive, but if you have that much money, you should be more concern about your safety.
04-28-12, 09:42 PM
#17
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
Instead of one that could break down at any moment, likely has some non-working features, and is probably unpleasant to drive.
04-28-12, 10:36 PM
#18
Lexus Champion
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: WA
Posts: 1,746
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, it's not. The car is like a tank, that's why it's not safe. New car structures allow modern cars to absorb more impact even though it's lighter and less tanklike. Think about wearing hard shell/steel helmet and thin carbon kevlar helmet with shock absorption ESP and foam, which one do you think is more durable? I think steel helmet, but which one is safer?
04-28-12, 10:49 PM
#20
No, it's not. The car is like a tank, that's why it's not safe. New car structures allow modern cars to absorb more impact even though it's lighter and less tanklike. Think about wearing hard shell/steel helmet and thin carbon kevlar helmet with shock absorption ESP and foam, which one do you think is more durable? I think steel helmet, but which one is safer?
04-28-12, 10:49 PM
#22
Lexus Champion
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: WA
Posts: 1,746
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And What I replied earlier is just to give the fact that newer car is safer, it has nothing to do with what he drives.
I don't know if your post is directed at me or not. If not, then think it as clarification to what I posted.
04-28-12, 10:53 PM
#23
Lexus Champion
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: WA
Posts: 1,746
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
04-28-12, 11:48 PM
#25
Racer
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: CA
Posts: 1,935
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Worst mistake he ever made is to drive that pos. He died in a car accident and had he be driving a Benz or something German he would have surived and still be doing what he love.
04-28-12, 11:56 PM
#26
No, it's not. The car is like a tank, that's why it's not safe. New car structures allow modern cars to absorb more impact even though it's lighter and less tanklike. Think about wearing hard shell/steel helmet and thin carbon kevlar helmet with shock absorption ESP and foam, which one do you think is more durable? I think steel helmet, but which one is safer?
Volvo was way ahead of most other manufacturers in safety features until about the early '90s when consumers started demanding more safety.
I have personal experience having been broadsided while driving a 1975 MY Volvo 145 Wagon in 1975. A drunk driving on a 25 MPH side street ran a red light going about 70 MPH (from behind a building on the corner blocking my view) and broadsided the right rear panel. The Volvo rolled twice and landed on its wheels. Every single body panel on the Volvo was smashed. I opened the door and stepped out with only a very minor scratch on my ankle. I became a believer right then and there. It took a 2003 Lexus LS430 to lure me away from the Volvo brand.
And the 1993 Volvo wagon shown in this thread has more safety features than the '75 wagon.
Also, Volvo at the time was not a low-end brand. The cars were nicer and more comfortable than most. In 1975, Volvo was not quiet in the same league as Mercedes, but much better than most American and Japanese cars of the day in quality, luxury and especially safety.
That said, If I had that kind of money, a 240 wagon would not be my first choice today.
Edit: Volvo invented the crumple zone.
Last edited by TerrySmith; 04-29-12 at 12:17 AM.
04-29-12, 12:13 AM
#27
04-29-12, 12:14 AM
#28
Well, my richest client who just spend over 40 millions for buying properties this year ( one he lives at for 3.9 mil ), still ride around in his 2000 maxima with 200k miles. I always tell him to buy something nicer. Come on, he lives in a million dollar home and drives a 3000 dollar car! Well, at least he listened and is shopping for a Benz. 
Last edited by blacksc400; 04-29-12 at 12:17 AM.
04-29-12, 01:13 AM
#30
Lexus Champion
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: WA
Posts: 1,746
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not correct. That vintage Volvo and those several years older have crumple zones and get progressively harder as you get closer to the passenger cage thereby absorbing the impact and protecting the passengers. That 1993 vintage also has air bags and ABS.
Volvo was way ahead of most other manufacturers in safety features until about the early '90s when consumers started demanding more safety.
I have personal experience having been broadsided while driving a 1975 MY Volvo 145 Wagon in 1975. A drunk driving on a 25 MPH side street ran a red light going about 70 MPH (from behind a building on the corner blocking my view) and broadsided the right rear panel. The Volvo rolled twice and landed on its wheels. Every single body panel on the Volvo was smashed. I opened the door and stepped out with only a very minor scratch on my ankle. I became a believer right then and there. It took a 2003 Lexus LS430 to lure me away from the Volvo brand.
And the 1993 Volvo wagon shown in this thread has more safety features than the '75 wagon.
Also, Volvo at the time was not a low-end brand. The cars were nicer and more comfortable than most. In 1975, Volvo was not quiet in the same league as Mercedes, but much better than most American and Japanese cars of the day in quality, luxury and especially safety.
That said, If I had that kind of money, a 240 wagon would not be my first choice today.
Edit: Volvo invented the crumple zone.
Volvo was way ahead of most other manufacturers in safety features until about the early '90s when consumers started demanding more safety.
I have personal experience having been broadsided while driving a 1975 MY Volvo 145 Wagon in 1975. A drunk driving on a 25 MPH side street ran a red light going about 70 MPH (from behind a building on the corner blocking my view) and broadsided the right rear panel. The Volvo rolled twice and landed on its wheels. Every single body panel on the Volvo was smashed. I opened the door and stepped out with only a very minor scratch on my ankle. I became a believer right then and there. It took a 2003 Lexus LS430 to lure me away from the Volvo brand.
And the 1993 Volvo wagon shown in this thread has more safety features than the '75 wagon.
Also, Volvo at the time was not a low-end brand. The cars were nicer and more comfortable than most. In 1975, Volvo was not quiet in the same league as Mercedes, but much better than most American and Japanese cars of the day in quality, luxury and especially safety.
That said, If I had that kind of money, a 240 wagon would not be my first choice today.
Edit: Volvo invented the crumple zone.
At the end of the day, it's his money, he can get whatever he wants.