New of from Iraq OR better MPG! by SignyM

I didn't drive much in Europe, it's simply unnescessary, driving to work is unproductive time when you have a good rail and tube system. I could read my email, write, read a book every day in what would otherwise dead commuting time. As a student I got around by bicycle and as bikes can go on trains I could ride to one station, travel 100 miles and then ride the rest of the way at the other end.

When I moved to the US I had to get a car within weeks because my daily 20 mile commute was impossible any other way. It wasn't that public transport was expensive or time consuming, it was simply none existant.

If you tax fuel, which we do in Europe you have to have a practical alternative --- which to be honest you dont have.

As for taxing vehicles, we do that too both at time of sale and in road taxes.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 27, 2007 5:40 PM

Yeah, we definitely need to improve the mass transit.

Road tax... how is that charged?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 27, 2007 6:37 PM

VETERAN

Don't squat with your spurs on.

Quote:
Geezer wrote:
Thursday, August 23, 2007 14:19
...

aside from the Prius, with it's cachet as the car driven by earth-friendly celebs, even hybrids aren't selling well due to relatively high cost. The extra cost generally isn't amortized by gas savings in under 200,000 miles.

Isn't there a $2,000 income tax credit on "alternative fuel" vehicles and hybrids?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 27, 2007 7:19 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
In case you didn't realize it, GM is one of the American companies you've been ragging on for not improving gas mileage. Thanks for proving my point that US manufacturers are not lagging behine Europe and Japan in technological improvements.

WHAAAA???? Oh PUHLEEZ Geezer! 40-120 mpg hybrids? Came from Japan. 25-40 mpg turbodiesel? The EU. Show me the advanced car that the USA has put into production BEFORE it's competitors.

So now GM... and Chrysler... and Ford are getting into the fuel economy act by tinkering with the gasoline-powered engine???? If they can do it now why couldn't they do it before? The reason is... there is no reason. It's not a question of "can't" it's a question of "won't".

I'll reiterate my points: There was nothing technically impossible about creating a vehicle with "better" fuel mileage which still delivers the same power and safety that a certain American market is used to. It was all about avoiding risk and preserving profits.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, August 27, 2007 7:23 PM

FREMDFIRMA

Citizens and political leaders in Anne Arundel County expressed fears about "undesirable elements" coming into their area via the subway, and many transit buffs cite this as the origin of the term "LOOT rail", a takeoff of "light rail" meaning that criminals without cars who live in the city would take the subway to the suburbs, commit burglaries and robberies, and then take the subway back to the city; and that by building a subway to the suburbs, that such crimes would be greatly facilitated. Most people would think this line of thinking to be nonsense, since most people know how to drive and can borrow or steal a car if they have criminal intentions. Still, in some other cities as well, including the D.C. area, a significant number of suburbanites had these kind of general fears about having city subway lines extended out to the suburbs.

Alas, such thinking wasn't exactly nonsense, and the "Loot Rail" at one point was kinda so taken over by these goons, and their accomplices that even the pathetic transit cops were scared of the lil bastards, not to mention scoping their percentage for lookin the other way.

They take the loot rail to the burbs and get some loot, then back to the hood and fence it, then turn the money over into drugs, some of em - others would take the drugs into the burbs and sell em, often resorting to theft and burglary when they ran out of product, and catch the rails back into the city - several of the ghettos are bad enough that the police won't make a showing without a full tac-team or at least a minimum of 3-4 doubled up squaddies, so going over these guys for petty theft or small scale possession/distribution was suicidally useless, generally the only time any of the smaller guys got busted is when they became a threat to the bigger guys, who then sold em to the cops and agreed to look the other way when the bust went down.

You do NOT wanna ride the Loot Rail or MTA in B-more, the Loot Rail is fulla crooks and the MTA buses are fulla crazies and often medical/psych patients so stressed and desperate that any attempt to predict their behavior is a waste of time - since a favorite game of the social services and medicare schemes locally is to find some place to make you go that's as far away from YOU as possible, in an attempt to make you default on the game by not being able to show up, and having been a victim of it, I can assure you that they do this even to potentially-terminal medicare patients, many of whom are nearly psychotic with stress and have really nothing left to lose.. no one you'd wanna ride a city bus with, and many of whom would roll you in a heartbeat for enough dosh to grab a cab instead.

And as mentioned, thus bus stops themselves are free feeding zones for muggers, to the point where they, like pirahnas, start feeding on each other when the prey gets thin, and think little to nothing of roughing up someone for entertainment if they have no money to steal.

I guess it's a comment on the "personality" of the city that in the case of a failed mugging, very rarely does it see the police blotter, more often than not the would be victim rolls and robs the mugger in retaliation for the attempt.

Nasty city, leaving that hellhole was one of the best live choices I ever made - and ranting at the moment cause business and duty takes me back there for a while soon... grr

Anyhow, public transportation in the Baltimore City itself is suicidal... just so ya know.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, August 28, 2007 1:41 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Veteran:
Isn't there a $2,000 income tax credit on "alternative fuel" vehicles and hybrids?

Yes, though act soon, as most of the rebates are phasing out; check out
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/
for details. You can also see where the gas guzzler tax kicks in.

Still, when I looked 3 years ago when my wife was car shopping, feature for feature, taking the costs of gasoline, etc.; you were still financially better off buying a high MPG car of comparable nature than getting the Prius. Haven't done the math since, but I suspect it is still true because it wasn't even close at the time.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 29, 2007 4:38 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
40-120 mpg hybrids? Came from Japan. 25-40 mpg turbodiesel? The EU. Show me the advanced car that the USA has put into production BEFORE it's competitors.

First, please tell me where I can buy that 120mpg hybrid.

Second. Japanese and EU carmakers didn't go to these expensive ways to improve mileage out of the goodness of their hearts or any earth-friendly consciousness. They did so when, and only when, they were forced by government regulation.

So this whole deal boils down to you wanting more government regulation of a business you don't like. Why am I not surprised?

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 29, 2007 5:26 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
40-120 mpg hybrids? Came from Japan. 25-40 mpg turbodiesel? The EU. Show me the advanced car that the USA has put into production BEFORE it's competitors.

First, please tell me where I can buy that 120mpg hybrid.

Second. Japanese and EU carmakers didn't go to these expensive ways to improve mileage out of the goodness of their hearts or any earth-friendly consciousness. They did so when, and only when, they were forced by government regulation.

So this whole deal boils down to you wanting more government regulation of a business you don't like. Why am I not surprised?

"Keep the Shiny side up"

I thought that was the point of his argument? Fact is that there has been no reason to buy an "econobox" fuel prices have been low enough to ensure that the difference in mileage doesn't hit the wallet too hard and the difference in price between "bare metal" and something larger and more comfortable hasn't been that great. Obviously left to their own devices in a market without regulation people will buy the wrong kind of vehicle. Telling them that they are idiots is politically risky, putting up fuel taxes to a point where a similar market to Europe exists is political suicide the only answer is to force the industry to make the cars you want them to make and bypass the voting consumer all together.

Put $5 a gallon tax on fuel to back your belief and you wont be governing anything much longer it's the honest path but politically costly. Forcing the industry to make those changes and hoping that the public doesnt connect the discontinuation of their favorite models with your political meddling.... priceless.

I think in the long term it has to be done. The current US lifestyle is unsustainable long term getting more fuel efficient cars is actually going to be easy compared to the changes needed in building standards and new infrastructure. People won't like it though and true freedom means people have to be able to make their own choices, even if you dont like what they chose or those choices are not in their best interest.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 29, 2007 5:26 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
40-120 mpg hybrids? Came from Japan. 25-40 mpg turbodiesel? The EU. Show me the advanced car that the USA has put into production BEFORE it's competitors.

First, please tell me where I can buy that 120mpg hybrid.

Second. Japanese and EU carmakers didn't go to these expensive ways to improve mileage out of the goodness of their hearts or any earth-friendly consciousness. They did so when, and only when, they were forced by government regulation.

So this whole deal boils down to you wanting more government regulation of a business you don't like. Why am I not surprised?

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 29, 2007 6:34 AM

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Quote:
Originally posted by Fletch2:
I think in the long term it has to be done. The current US lifestyle is unsustainable long term getting more fuel efficient cars is actually going to be easy compared to the changes needed in building standards and new infrastructure. People won't like it though and true freedom means people have to be able to make their own choices, even if you dont like what they chose or those choices are not in their best interest.

I think people won’t like it if the ideologues heft it on them, but as gas prices increase, the consumer will shift more towards fuel economy. It’s already happening, actually. Anecdotally, my cousin’s family has never driven anything but 8-cylinder gas-guzzling trucks, but today, the only own one SUV, which they don’t drive a lot, opting instead for cost effective Volvos and Escorts. I’ve been telling them for a long time that they should shift to fuel economy, but they never listened to me and only did so when gas rose to three dollars a gallon. And I suspect that gas will continue to rise, as new deposits become more difficult to tap and China and India continue to expand. Eventually, the market will have to shift to newer technology.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 29, 2007 8:10 AM

I think that's true, but at $3 a gallon fuel prices are still low compared to the European level so I think it will take some time.

To my mind people buy the bigger cars because there is no economic reason for them not to. They are cheap enough to buy and cheap enough to run, further the big 3 can make money off of those models. There is nothing in the current market that on its own will change that. Now if market situation changes, if taxes or fuel costs upset that balance then we will see change. It's not that people buy these cars because that's what Detroit decides to sell them, these are the cars that people decide to buy and will continue to buy unless the underlying economics makes a different choice preferable.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 29, 2007 8:55 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
First, please tell me where I can buy that 120mpg hybrid.

That would be a plugin hybrid. More "electric" car, less gasoline engine.

Quote:
Second. Japanese and EU carmakers didn't go to these expensive ways to improve mileage out of the goodness of their hearts or any earth-friendly consciousness. They did so when, and only when, they were forced by government regulation.

Well, that's pretty much what I've been saying all along so it's nice to see you "get it"! Businesses with established infrastructure (like petrol companies, auto makers, electrical power generators etc.) like to keep things the same. Why? Because their infrastructural investments are already paid off and generate a higher profit. Why do they keep flogging a 40-year old vacuum distillation tower or a 100-year-old coal power generating station? Because it's cheaper! It's very short-term thinking because there ARE significant opportunities in advanced technology in the long run but publically traded companies are on a quarterly-report leash. (Which is why so many advances are made by startups and SMALL companies... I see it all the time. I also see big companies buy out small companies just to kill the technology.)

Quote:
So this whole deal boils down to you wanting more government regulation of a business you don't like.

It's not that I "don't like" a business... (And ONCE AGAIN you are misrepresenting my position!

) But "the market" sometimes doesn't handle certain issues very well, like big infrastructural investments that don't generate a profit (think sewage systems) or introducing new technologies into an established market. So in recognition that the (so-called) free market is not the appropriate model for EVERY transaction, other models come into play.

And BTW- it seems to me that our industries get a lot out of the deal with our government. Among other things, they get favorable treatment with tax, labor, and criminal law, and they get represented and supported internationally by our government and military (as opposed to labor and the environment which are not represented at all). If they don't want to be interfered with so much, maybe we should just cut them off the government teat and make them TRULY "private" enterprise.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 29, 2007 9:17 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Not sure how viable it is, but Desuenberg plans a mid-late 2008 release of a retro styled roadster using a CEM engine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cylindrical_Energy_Module

Their own estimates place anticipated MPG at around 70, which prolly means a real-world 50mpg, cause every MPG estimate i've ever seen was based on unrealistically perfect conditions, generally you get maybe 70-80% of that, on a good day.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 29, 2007 9:27 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Huh. Elegant design!

There are lots of options "out there" for those companies with balls enuf to invest in them.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 29, 2007 9:35 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Huh. Elegant design!

There are lots of options "out there" for those companies with balls enuf to invest in them.

.

Nice but as far as I can tell they dont actually make anything. All the pages have "coming in..." messages in them some of which are still for 2006.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 29, 2007 10:28 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Oh, I wasn't refering to the Duesenburg specifically, but I was doing some research for this thread and I found a lot of new engine designs out there that are in the prototype-to-production stage. Some of them are really VERY impressive and innovative.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 29, 2007 10:53 AM

That's a big jump though. I mean I remember when the Wankel engine was considered the cutting edge because in theory an engine with few moving parts is more efficient. Mazda went as far as making a couple of roadsters with Wankel engines but once you got them to production they proved disappointing. I also remember the ceramic gas turbine engines that everyone was convinced were going to make the piston engine obsolete in cars and nothing came of that either.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 29, 2007 11:07 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Well, nobody is guaranteeing that everything proposed will work. That's the risk part, which is why it takes balls to invest. But some of this technology is just downright whiz-bang pretty.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 29, 2007 11:20 AM

Oh I agree, I mean if this cylindrical engine works you could get some major weight savings (air cooled engines should be very light) but the big question is will they push a car around day after day for 5 years, could you run an engine like this under load for 8 or 12 hours a day for a week or more?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 29, 2007 2:30 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Not sure how viable it is, but Desuenberg plans a mid-late 2008 release of a retro styled roadster using a CEM engine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cylindrical_Energy_Module

Their own estimates place anticipated MPG at around 70, which prolly means a real-world 50mpg, cause every MPG estimate i've ever seen was based on unrealistically perfect conditions, generally you get maybe 70-80% of that, on a good day.

-F

Dunno, bought a scion xb 3 years ago. 30/34 rated. Being AC gluttons, we typically get 29/33; that's really not a bad estimate; I bet we'd get the 30/34 if we didn't use the AC as much.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, August 29, 2007 3:14 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

My 12year old car was rated 26/36, I've gotten 33.5 in real life since day one.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, September 7, 2007 10:03 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Battery-like device could power electric cars
Quote:
AUSTIN, Texas (AP)... An Austin-based startup called EEStor promised "technologies for replacement of electrochemical batteries," meaning a motorist could plug in a car for five minutes and drive 500 miles roundtrip between Dallas and Houston without gasoline.

By contrast, some plug-in hybrids on the horizon would require motorists to charge their cars in a wall outlet overnight and promise only 50 miles of gasoline-free commute. And the popular hybrids on the road today still depend heavily on fossil fuels.

"It's a paradigm shift," said Ian Clifford, chief executive of Toronto-based ZENN Motor Co., which has licensed EEStor's invention. "The Achilles' heel to the electric car industry has been energy storage. By all rights, this would make internal combustion engines unnecessary."

www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/09/07/electric.car.batteries.ap/index.html

They're talking about a big capacitor.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, September 7, 2007 10:34 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Yeah I saw that

"Previous attempts to improve ultracapacitors have focused on improving the metal sheets by increasing the surface area where charges can attach.

EEStor is instead creating better nonconductive material for use between the metal sheets, using a chemical compound called barium titanate. The question is whether the company can mass-produce it."

Assuming they can manufacture the insulator, I hope they can maufacture the insulating case ... otherwise, one wrong move and you're toast. :pile of char: But hot damn! If they can do this, I'm in line ...

***************************************************************
Fuel cell vehicles are, like, soooo yesterday ...

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, September 7, 2007 1:56 PM