Although the theft rate is considerably higher for the 2004 Sebring LXi I have now compared to the 2003 Malibu LS it replaced, I pay about $105 a year *less* for the insurance on the Sebring than I did on the Malibu. The Malibu had these DRL and ABS safety features you seem to love so much that the Sebring doesn't have. Coverage is identical for both. "Garaging" and commute distance is identical for both. Annual mileage estimate is identical for both. Yet the Malibu's insurance was higher. Care to tell me why the insurance cost was higher for the vehicle that supposedly had the better safety features? I asked my insurance company. The response what that the average loss was higher for the Malibu. Since the Malibu is stolen less frequently, the higher loss must be for other reasons (either higher accident rates, or more costly to repair when damaged...dunno). Again you're apparently flat out wrong making buttumptions that one saves money because a car has DRL's...it ain't necessarily so.
No one wins when there is a self-proclaimed big brother (GM) imposing their will on the customer by telling them how they *must* use their cars in a otherwise legal manner. Is GM the government now?
Doesn't seem to be a problem for GM's compebreastors to accommodate the customer in this regard. GM should try it...maybe they wouldn't need so many gimmicks to sell their cars.
The dangers of DRLs 4633And your source for the demographic information? Last I read, the demographics were similar for both models. But, I'll defer to...
Hmmm.... Thern you go agiin. Let's see, Ford, Chrysler, Toyota all offer DRLs as no-cost options...they're free for the asking (last I checked). Less than 5% of Ford and Chrysler cars on the road have them. Less than 20% of Toyota vehicles do (after 2000 model year when they realized they had made a significant mistake from customer feedback after mandating them on certain 1998 & 1999 models). That tells me that, given the choice, the majority of car buyers choose not to have DRL's. I would say that that is a majority number, NOT a "tiny number" as you seem to think it is.
The dangers of DRLs 4632On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 00:12:40 +0000, 223rem My condolences... You must be truly ancient, because Renault stopped making these in the 60s (Dauphine-Floride-4CV). Renault F1 and Renault...
Why is it only bad for GM and not bad for everybody else that makes cars. Doesn't make sense. Seems like most everyone else is able to sell their cars better than GM can. Perhaps GM should give customers what they want...and they will sell cars again! If a customer doesn't want DRLs, turn them off. Seems simple enough to do rather than loose sales, doesn't it? Must be simple, their compebreastors manage to find a way.
