doublegunshop.com - home Forums Is this where we're headed ?

Thanks for your opinion James. I'll consider it. I've personally been thankful that GLS has kept things going and kept the subject at the top of the page. I couldn't have done it without him.

By the way, you asked me a couple questions back on pg. 13 that helped to keep this thread running. I answered you with my comments and a question of my own for you. You didn't answer.

I must say, I myself was becoming a little bored with this discussion when it was getting taken off topic and turned into a discussion about semantics and the proper descriptive term for a Liberal Leftist. We never did reach a consensus. Thanks again for the link to the story about the Mao tse Tung ornament on the White House Christmas tree. More than anything, that symbolizes where we're headed as a nation... which was the original topic... if we are content to let it happen.

Merry Christmas to you too.

Keith, on my screen the thread displays as 7 pages. If I missed answering something it was inadvertent. I'll try finding what I missed. I've been working a lot this week and not getting to my DG forum as much as normal. Sorry about that.

James, that's strange. We're up to 20 pages on my computer. Maybe it has something to do with foreign exchange rates and hidden inflation under Obama.

Any way, our conversation ended with my reply to your post #387457 on 12/16/14 if that helps. But I need to go out and get some Christmas shopping done, so I'm outta here for now.

Pray for me as I deal with the holiday shopping madness. It was pretty good last night because we had freezing rain and the roads and stores were pretty empty. I love my studded snow tires at times like that.

Hahaha, now I see it Keith. Even though I read that post again in response to your query as I was searching, I still didn't see it. It seems so....what's the right word....rhetorical!

In a word, No!

Good luck with the shopping. One of the things I don't like about Ontario is studded tired are banned...even way in the north.

The idea was that studs degrade the roads, but the widespread and excessive use of salt coincided with the ban on studs. I'm pretty sure that salt does way more damage.

In fact studies in Sweden have proven that salt degrades road surfaces far more than studded tires, while salt does extreme damage to the surrounding environment.

Keith I see that we can choose how many posts per page in the user preferences. I have chosen 30, the default is 10. That might account for the different page counts.

No? Really?

Well, I guess I could agree that King doesn't give cover to his real beliefs. Mostly. He's been up front about his Leftist and Socialist beliefs, except that he still denies being anti-gun even while continuing to make anti-gun, anti 2nd Amendment, anti-NRA statements, and continuing to support the most vehement anti-gun politicians. How could he or anyone think you could have it both ways?

But when you intentionally post wildly inaccurate phony statistics as King did back on pg 4. (with the default number of posts per page), and totally refuse to acknowledge or retract your lies, then I believe you are being deceptive... to put it mildly. But he will say he never saw the true figures or the links I provided, because he pretends to ignore my posts... which constitutes another big fat lie. When you do the same thing repeatedly, and many other people call you out on it with proof, not just simple personal opinion, then it rises to the level of compulsive liar or even pathological liar.

I'm sorry, but not surprised to hear that Ontario will not allow you to use studded snow tires even though there is abundant data to support the Swedish findings you note. Another case of big government mixing in and actually making things worse by preventing you from using a safer tire and by dumping tons of expensive salt onto the environment. But hey, it creates jobs for those highway workers. And it could be worse. There could be a reverse discrimination where you were prohibited from using studs, but were taxed to redistribute studs to certain minorities.

I run studs on all of my vehicles, and I think they are the cheapest auto insurance one can buy. The small extra cost is amortized over their 3-4 year useful life, and you can only wear out one set of tires at a time. So while the studs are in use, the summer tires, mounted on their own wheels, are not accumulating any wear. Twice a year, I feel like a tire shop though, jacking up and replacing all 4 tires on 5 vehicles. I've been using Winterforce tires built by Firestone on the cars. They don't come big enough for my truck though, so I had to use another brand for it. I don't think you can find a better snow tire for the money here in the U.S., and many brands sold here aren't much better than All-Season radials. Anyone who thinks either summer tires or All_Season tires are as good as a good snow tire for snowy/icy winter driving is kidding themselves. You might want to give them a try without studs if you can find them in Canada. Tirerack.com carries them.

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?tireMake=Firestone&tireModel=Winterforce

How about you? is the question I answered with "No!"

Keith, other than that, what question is in your post. I don't see anything else?

Every time I have ever lived in a jurisdiction that allows studs, (Manitoba and Alberta)it's all four winter tires plus studs. IMHO given the carnage on the highways in Ontario in winter, four studded tires should be mandatory. Now there is a public safety initiative that infringes on our rights but that would actually have an effect in terms of reducing death and injury.

My favorite was four studded winter tires on my 1967 RS/SS Camaro Convertible when I lived in Banff Alberta for a few years. As good as any SUV and more fun in the summer!

This is what I was referring to when I said:



Rear wheel drive with studs is great, but front wheel drive is better yet when it comes to equaling or exceeding the winter traction of a four wheel drive vehicle that doesn't have studs.

I had an '86 Ford Tempo with a 2 liter Mercedes built diesel that was awesome. It had an unusually high ground clearance and a very smooth underside that had nothing to get hung up off road. I called it my hunting car, and took it back into some God awful places. I remember seeing guys with their Jeeps, etc., just shaking their heads as I went back in logging roads further than they dared. I did carry a 2 ton come-a-long, chains, tow straps, but can't recall ever using them... which is more than I can say for my truck.

Once, I stopped and talked to another grouse hunter way back in, and he asked me where I was parked. I pointed toward a log skidder turnaround about a half mile north, and he asked me if I saw the little purplish car some assh*le drove back in there. I said, "If you mean burgundy, you're looking at that assh*le." He apologized and asked me how in hell I got that thing back in there. "Carefully", I said, "but I do it all the time." It got 38-40 mpg no matter how easy or hard you ran it, and I usually ran the balls off of it. But its' non-turbo diesel only put out 60 HP. It did have typical diesel low end torque, and a genius must have designed the manual transmission. Not a drag racer, but you could wind it up to 90 mph plus, and it sounded like a sewing machine once it was warm.