Same old tired reply about the benefits vs. costs of higher fuel prices. I think we beat that horse to death last time, didn't we?

Notice that I'm not particularly excited about ethanol and I've explained the numerous problems with it. I was just pointing out that higher crude oil prices do encourage interest in alternatives which is definitely a good thing.

The Jetta has one of the best side crash ratings. But of course you won't be as safe in it as in a tank. It's your choice, but I'd rather drive a lighter car and take a slightly higher risk. I personally think it's silly to drive a tank and waste money and the environment on fuel when most likely something else will kill you.

I don't think crude prices alone will do it. Even when it was not an issue, there was always someone coming up with a better mousetrap since he who can trap mice better than the other man gets the job. The Japs are kicking out ass out of manufacturing because they have found a way to do it better. More efficiently too. So far, efficiency seems to be the proven way to get things done seeing as the alternatives tend to have their own share of problems that come with it.

While you can't eliminate risk altogether, you can minimize it for yourself. That girl hit me in the driver side door head on at 55+ and I came out better. I was a 99 C280 and she was an 04 Civic. Her strongest part against my weakest part. Mass does play a role in the game. Death is not really the issue. I'd rather be dead than crippled and if it takes a few bucks more a week to stack the odds a little more in my favor, I'll go for it. Of course, there are limitations. That is why I go with a car that is between 3000-4000#.

Of course crude oil prices alone won't do it, but they do help, there's no doubt about it. Like you said it's about efficiency, and if crude oil gets more expensive, the alternatives may no longer seem so bad.

Yes, mass makes a difference like I said. That's why you'd be safest on the road driving in a M1A1 tank unless a lot of other people were driving them too.;) And like you I see it as a compromise, except that I'd be willing to go a little under 3000 pounds. You were lucky that you got hit by a lighter car like the Civic. If you were hit by a Suburban you wouldn't fare so well, even in your 3000+ pound MB. But then again, the Suburban occupants wouldn't necessarily fare well either, especially if their vehicle rolled over which is quite likely.

Also they will have new technology to get oil from previously dry wells. Now, if they could design a car from the ground up to run ethanol and it runs well, I might be interested provided the infrastructure supports it.

No thanx. I'd rather drive the Merkava MK III. You are right about being hit by a burb. However, 3000 puts me in the upper class compared with all the engines with beer cans wrapped around them. Anyways, I don't think the Burb is that bad as far as rollovers. I used to have one and didn't have an issue with it. Never felt unsafe in it. It even has better suspension than my Excursion with the heavier 7.3L Powerstroke engine.

An ethanol-only car would probably run better than one of the gas/ethanol hybrids or aftermarket ones but probably at the expense of fuel economy. There's no escaping the fact that ethanol has a lot less energy than gasoline, so to have the same power you'd spend more fuel, or you could spend the same amount of fuel and have less power which is probably what you experienced.

Statistically, SUV's are twice as likely to roll over than cars and overall they're no safer than cars as a result. There was an article in the news about this recently.

Actually the vast majority of passenger cars weigh in the 3000-4000 range, at least in this country. Even the new Jetta is over 3000 pounds and the old one is a little under. Your C280 was about average weight and not anywhere close to "upper class". If you want a heavy passenger car that doesn't roll over easily, I'd recommend an S-class.

Well, you can pay me now or pay me later. If you want home grown renewable then you have to spend more to make it equivalent to the gas car that is so popular.

Actually, I am more concerned with collision than roll over. Like I said before, I have driven a truck and an SUV is little more than a truck with a cover on the bed, AFAIK.

Dunno. Seems like a lot of the rice burners are in the sub-3000 pound area and that is a lot of what I see kids driving. A heavier passenger car, yes. I moved up to the E class because that was the cheapest diesel they had. I wasn't sure and didn't want to bother look in the S-class cars to see if they even had a diesel. In future, I don't know. Depending on what my needs are, I might go to an diesel or gas vehicle depending on whether we make a lot of longer distance trips where the diesel pays off or maybe the gas will be better. Time will tell. Although the S-class is a nice car tho. Not sure if they offer it in a diesel. Rollover is not so much of an issue with me. I want the mass.

Usually rollovers with SUV's and trucks happen during collisions or when aggressively trying to avoid an obstacle. They don't just happen out of the blue, maybe only if you blow a tire.

True, a lot of the rice burners are under 3000 lbs but usually over 2500. Only in rare cases are there lighter cars, like the Insight which I believe weighs 1800 lbs.

As far as the S-class is concerned the last diesel MB imported to the US is the W140 diesel but that one has an engine design flaw. Maybe MB will bring their S-class diesels back like the ones they sell in Europe such as the S400 CDI. For now if you want a newer S-class you'd have to go with a gasser. I personally would go with the S320 which has the best economy, albeit weakest acceleration, but if economy isn't a big issue, the S420 and higher should provide plenty of power.