billvon 2,400 #51 June 29, 2006 >but no one will buy them. It's a big conspiracy! The government must be secretly paying people not to buy Insights. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #52 June 29, 2006 QuoteIt's a big conspiracy! The government must be secretly paying people not to buy Insights. Yup. My check was in 4 easy payments of $29.99. I got a Ronco pocket fisherman as a free gift too.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,122 #53 June 29, 2006 QuoteMy check was in 4 easy payments of $29.99. I got a Ronco pocket fisherman as a free gift too.Man. All I can say is it must be because you own a big gas-guzzlin' truck. I got 35 cents and a packet of gummy fish Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #54 June 29, 2006 QuoteMan. All I can say is it must be because you own a big gas-guzzlin' truck. Right. I didn't tell them about the fuel efficent M/C I have...--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
justinb138 0 #55 June 29, 2006 QuoteQuoteMan. All I can say is it must be because you own a big gas-guzzlin' truck. Right. I didn't tell them about the fuel efficent M/C I have... I've always wondered how efficient people could make motorcycles. My 2800lb car with a 1.8L engine can get 35mpg on the highway, so why shouldn't my 400lb motorcycle with an 800cc engine be able to get 3-4 times as many miles/gallon? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrewEckhardt 0 #56 June 29, 2006 Quote My 2800lb car with a 1.8L engine can get 35mpg on the highway, so why shouldn't my 400lb motorcycle with an 800cc engine be able to get 3-4 times as many miles/gallon? Aerodynamics. While a conventional bike + rider don't have much frontal area they do have a lousy Cd. A funky recumbant fully-enclosed Anime style bike would be able to do a lot better than 3-4X what your car gets. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
justinb138 0 #57 June 29, 2006 QuoteQuote My 2800lb car with a 1.8L engine can get 35mpg on the highway, so why shouldn't my 400lb motorcycle with an 800cc engine be able to get 3-4 times as many miles/gallon? Aerodynamics. While a conventional bike + rider don't have much frontal area they do have a lousy Cd. A funky recumbant fully-enclosed Anime style bike would be able to do a lot better than 3-4X what your car gets. Ah.. ok. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jimbo 0 #58 June 30, 2006 QuoteSo you think GM is keeping secret gas saving technology to themselves to force themselves out of business? Cause Toyota and Honda sure aren't. You can get 60mpg cars today. Of course they are, they're crafty like that. You would just never understand. Can't trust nobody, can't trust them dirty bastards! BASTARDS! - Jim"Like" - The modern day comma Good bye, my friends. You are missed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydemon2 0 #59 June 30, 2006 Its all about money...... You know For used to go to the junkyard and look at his wrecked cars and he found the U joint didnt fail...... so he made them weaker so he could sell more.Beauty is only skin deep, but ugly goes clean to the bone! I like to start my day off with a little Ray of Soulshine™!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #60 June 30, 2006 >so he made them weaker so he could sell more. Well, no. He made them weaker because it's pointless to have a 500,000 mile U-joint on a car that only lasts 200,000 miles. Heck, I suspect most people would rather have a 200,000 mile CV joint than spend an extra $200 on a 500,000 mile one. We do the same thing. We use FLASH parts that are only good for 100,000 erase/write cycles because we don't think our products are going to last 100 years. Sure, we could get a 500 year FLASH part, but what's the point? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydemon2 0 #61 June 30, 2006 the sky is blue!Beauty is only skin deep, but ugly goes clean to the bone! I like to start my day off with a little Ray of Soulshine™!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #62 June 30, 2006 QuoteIts all about money...... You know For used to go to the junkyard and look at his wrecked cars and he found the U joint didnt fail...... so he made them weaker so he could sell more. With your position on engineering, parachutes would have steel girders for lines. Over-engineering is also a mistake. That's why the all-or-nothing types aren't allowed to build things. That's why "just a little more" arguments are only taken seriously in politics and not the real world of design. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #63 June 30, 2006 Let's take a swag at what the above-mentioned 100mpg, four passenger car might look like. First off, it would probably have a diesel hybrid system. It would be a very strong hybrid, with a 50kW electric motor and a 10kW diesel engine. To achieve 100mpg, weight and drag would have to be minimized; we're talking weights under 1000 pounds and Cd's around .2. This would likely mean: -full underbody pan -faired rear wheels -low rolling resistance high pressure tires -blended seamless body -carbon fiber construction -no rear view mirrors, or retractable rear view mirrors (video cameras could provide rear vision) -lithium ion or lipo batteries for traction battery -teardrop shape (think Insight or the picture below) -air ducting to reduce underpan pressure -engine ventilation tunnel to exhaust heat out the back -minimum cargo weight (i.e. the 100mpg is only achievable with one driver, no cargo.) Since height above road has a significant effect on drag, the car would likely have a somewhat adaptive suspension that would lower the car a few inches once it got onto the road. (Alternatively just lower it to begin with and be careful over potholes and curbs; would save some money.) At those power levels you could hit 95-100mph for passing and cruise at a steady 60mph. The diesel engine would be operated stochiometrically, using something like a Toyota PSD to modulate power by changing its operating point. (In other words, it would run with injectors going full blast all the time; power would be regulated by effectively 'upshifting' the engine.) Emissions would be handled by a more-or-less standard catalytic converter. Stochiometric operation solves a lot of problems with such converters. All accessories would be electric, from A/C to steering. Brakes would be brake-by-wire like the current Prius. The hybrid system would have about 5KWh worth of power storage, or about 4x what the Prius uses. It would be chargeable from an outlet for short trips around town. You'd get about 10 miles at 35mph from the electric-only system, or about a mile of full power (95mph) driving. With the above-mentioned hybrid system, it would cost about $40K using the same model Toyota did (i.e subsidizing it until mass-production efficiencies caught up with the cost.) You could produce a non-hybrid $15K version of the car that would get just slightly worse mileage, but would take a few minutes to get to 60mph and would not be able to pass above that speed. No one in the US would buy one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mirage62 0 #64 June 30, 2006 So it can't be done now.............. but it could be done with motivation $$ Plus it seems that a lot of people are just positive that Americans won't buy it if it is made. I go back to the VW. It was ugly but people bought them.Kevin Keenan is my hero, a double FUP, he does so much with so little Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #65 June 30, 2006 QuoteI go back to the VW. It was ugly but people bought them. But they only sold a few of them, right? And it wasn't in production from 1945-1979 as basically the same product, upgraded a bit each year, right? Yeah, everyone hates ugly fuel efficent cars just because their ugly. Fuel efficent + ugly + inexpensive still sold in great numbers. They still sell today, and there's an entire industry built around those Kaferwagens. Even this Texas redneck loves the VW Beetle and owns a Super Beetle 1302.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #66 July 6, 2006 QuoteThen they'd produce the car and no one would buy it because it "looked funny" or something. A few years back Toyota was selling an electric SUV. Range of about 120 miles, went 80mph on highways. It got the equivalent of about 110 miles per gallon. It sold for about $30,000 after rebates. Very few people bought them. People also don't want to buy the new thing all the time. For example what was the Hybrid that got pulled out of production a few years ago? QuoteA Corbin Sparrow (now named the Myers NmG) gets the equivalent of about 150mpg, carries one person, parks anywhere (it can park straight in in parallel-parking spots) has a top speed over 70mph and costs under $25,000. They won't sell because they look funny and they don't use gas, and their range is about 30 miles. (which is shorter than 90% of the trips people take.) The range might be the kicker. And the fact it can only take one person. You saying they look funny is the reason does not sound very logical. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #67 July 6, 2006 How does this electric rate expense wise? How much will it cost to charge, and an additional 12000 dollars would mean it would have to be driven a ton to make up for the fuel economy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #68 July 6, 2006 Quote> A Corbin Sparrow (now named the Myers NmG) gets the equivalent of about 150mpg, carries one person, parks anywhere (it can park straight in in parallel-parking spots) has a top speed over 70mph and costs under $25,000. They won't sell because they look funny and they don't use gas, and their range is about 30 miles. (which is shorter than 90% of the trips people take.) and they also can't carry a one-pound coconut. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #69 July 6, 2006 >How much will it cost to charge . . . At 10 cents/kwhr, it will cost about 4 cents/mile to charge the car. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinci 0 #70 July 6, 2006 QuoteHow much will it cost to charge . . . At 10 cents/kwhr, it will cost about 4 cents/mile to charge the car. OK, how about the second part. How much would you have to drive to make up the 12,000 difference? I am thinking a ton. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #71 July 6, 2006 Compared to what? Your average US car? That costs about 16 cents/mile to operate in fuel; that's 12 cents savings per mile. So you'd have to drive about 100K miles to break even. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #72 July 7, 2006 QuoteThe real American question over buying a car: "Will I get laid?" Okay here's the commercial... full scene shot: guy pulls up to pump in new super-efficient vehicle cut to shot zoomed in on pump sticking out of the car and tripping off indicating he's filled the tank cut to guy walking up to counter and reaching for wallet zoomed in shot of wallet shows he's got a $30: a 20 and a 10, he starts to pull out both bills (out of habit) but then stops, slides the 20 back in place and pays with just the 10 repeat scene with shorter cuts two more times, the second time he's got two 20s and a 10, and pays with just the 10 more quickly. The third time he's got three 20s and a ten and pays with just the 10 cut to full scene shot of shady motel with neon light that advertises "hourly rate: $10" cut to dude sitting up against the headboard in bed under the covers with a shit-eating grin on his face while a woman walks out of the room conspicuously putting $50 in her purse cut to black screen with auto-maker's logo Think we could get it down to a 30 second spot? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
