Automotive Technologies and Alternate Power

[n0Mad]

You fucking geek

Still love ya tho

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Since everybody thought it was for argon gas, I followed the theme and his horse was named Cobalt and his cat Galena.

[Msterbeau]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060811/ap_on_..._hydrogen_car_2

[sinmantyx]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060811/ap_on_..._hydrogen_car_2

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Neat!

I still want the thing to be able to be plugged in! I'm so picky!

[gorfgirl]

Someone already did the math.. in fact many people have...

http://www.omninerd.com/2005/11/11/articles/41

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4930471

http://www.iwillteachyoutoberich.com/archi...d_cars_don.html

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/hybrids_math.html

and non of that takes into account the recent admission that hybrids don't actually get anywhere near what the EPA stickers says for milage in the real world.

[sinmantyx]

Someone already did the math.. in fact many people have...

http://www.omninerd.com/2005/11/11/articles/41

and non of that takes into account the recent admission that hybrids don't actually get anywhere near what the EPA stickers says for milage in the real world.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I skimmed through the first link you gave.

Here is the gist of the some of the comparison:

"Let's investigate by continuing our example of looking to replace a paid-off 1999 Honda Accord with something more economical. We've already looked at the possibility of buying a 2006 Toyota Prius and found that it could save $70.7 per month in gas but would add $387 a month for the car payment."

So, the article is comparing the expense of a PAID OFF car with a BRAND NEW car?! Of course it's going to cost more!! DAH!

*bashes head against something*

It does go on to make more apple-apple comparisons however; but all that red is how much money you aren't saving by keeping your old car. Also, he only mentions the monthly costs over the life of the loan, which I think is really short-sighted. You continue to save money with fuel efficiency after you've paid the thing off. He just glazed over that part.

Even with his assumptions though, he concludes:

"Hybrid technology is just entering the mainstream, however. As gas prices rise and hybrid technology improves and cheapens, don't be surprised to find hybrid owners in the green."

Again, not many people are saying that hybrids are the immediate answer to current high-gas prices. Buying a little tiny used car for $2,000 is still probably going to give you a lower monthly cost than buying a car with extremely high gas mileage. However, an '88 car-boat doesn't help lessen our country's dependence on foreign oil.

I also don't know why you keep harping on the whole "not actually the realistic mileage" thing. Unless of course you have some specific information about how various types of cars perform under realistic conditions, mileage wise.

[sinmantyx]

Someone already did the math.. in fact many people have...

http://www.iwillteachyoutoberich.com/archi...d_cars_don.html

anywhere near what the EPA stickers says for milage in the real world.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The second link was audio, so I didn't bother. The third link bases comparisons on apples-apples and is much more straight forward. It does however make the assumption that gas is $2/gal and that you only put 15,000 miles on your car every year. Even with those assumptions, the hybrid would pay for itself (in relation to the same model non-hybrid which is about $3,000 cheaper) in about 12 years. (If you drive much more, as one commuter responded, it would pay for itself in a little over 5 years.)

Now, if you get a $2,000 rebate through the federal government, it brings the pay-for-itself down to 4 years even with the original assumptions. After that, you are saving hundreds of dollars every year by owning the hybrid instead of the non-hybrid version of a Honda Civic. (With the heavy commuter's assumptions, it would pay for itself after about 2 years.)

Of course, as you pointed out, the mileage is not under realistic conditions. Depending on what conditions YOU specifically drive in...it may be more or less economical.

[sinmantyx]

Someone already did the math.. in fact many people have...

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/hybrids_math.html

and non of that takes into account the recent admission that hybrids don't actually get anywhere near what the EPA stickers says for milage in the real world.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The last link was a bit crazy. It was pretty straight forward, giving information about various types of cars and how, because hybrids are in high-demand and therefor more expensive than low-mileage cars (that many car dealers are trying to get rid of) that buying a hybrid will probably not save you money. That makes sense. As I said, hybrids are new and COOL and the developement of them costs $$$. It's like buying a DVD player 10 years ago or something.

The article also started to skirt off into other issues (needed a certain number of words or something) to mention that if people really wanted to save the environment that we need better infrastructure that supports walking, biking and public transportation. Well..dah.

[sinmantyx]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060811/ap_on_..._hydrogen_car_2

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The one thing that worries me though is the idea that hydrogen cars have "no" emissions. Water vapor is *something* and we really don't know exactly how tons of water vapor going into the air will effect things. My guess is: more rain.

That's why I want my car to plug in. So most of my driving will not having ANY emissions...not even water vapor.

I'm just worried that when people actually bother asking environmental scientists....hey what happens when you put tons of water-vapor into the air?....and they have a chance to publically respond, the public won't get bent out of shape that they were LIED to by scientists when in fact, they just made their own assumptions and didn't bother asking.

...but I'm not bitter.

[Msterbeau]

Someone already did the math.. in fact many people have...

http://www.omninerd.com/2005/11/11/articles/41

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4930471

http://www.iwillteachyoutoberich.com/archi...d_cars_don.html

http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/hybrids_math.html

and non of that takes into account the recent admission that hybrids don't actually get anywhere near what the EPA stickers says for milage in the real world.

Did you have a point or are you just going to complain about hybrids? Fossil fuels are running out... Hybrids get far better milage then the 3 ton SUV's people have been buying for the past 15 years. it's not a strictly economic question. It can't be.

[Msterbeau]

The one thing that worries me though is the idea that hydrogen cars have "no" emissions.  Water vapor is *something* and we really don't know exactly how tons of water vapor going into the air will effect things.  My guess is: more rain.

That's why I want my car to plug in.  So most of my driving will not having ANY emissions...not even water vapor.

I'm just worried that when people actually bother asking environmental scientists....hey what happens when you put tons of water-vapor into the air?....and they have a chance to publically respond, the public won't get bent out of shape that they were LIED to by scientists when in fact, they just made their own assumptions and didn't bother asking.

...but I'm not bitter.

I read an editorial in the latest Car and Driver magazine about this very issue. He was ranting that global warming can't be influenced very much by emmisions reductions alone. He used data about water vapor being a much larger influence and something we have very little ability to control. I didn't buy his argument nor his data... but it was something I hadn't heard of and bears investigation...

[sinmantyx]

I read an editorial in the latest Car and Driver magazine about this very issue.  He was ranting that global warming can't be influenced very much by emmisions reductions alone.  He used data about water vapor being a much larger influence and something we have very little ability to control.  I didn't buy his argument nor his data...  but it was something I hadn't heard of and bears investigation...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Who was the author and what was the article titled? I do know that luminosity has gone down and therefor evaporation rates have actually gone down due to particulate pollution (which has also helped control global warming --- imagine that --- some types of pollution actually blot out the sun enough to lower global temperatures). However, carbon dioxide and other green-house levles has increased both due to natural and artificial reasons, which would tend to raise the absolute humidity (since warm air can hold more water vapor than colder air). I'd imagine that the actually amount of water vapor IN THE AIR has more to do with wind, nucleation sites (read this as particulate pollution) and temperature than how much is actually PRODUCED because the air can only hold so much before ---- it rains. However, better safe than sorry and dealing with "unintended consequence".

Global climate change WILL happen reguardless of what we do. We shouldn't be helping the rock roll down the hill obviously, but we cannot control natural global climate change. At some point we have to realize that we WILL have to deal with climate change. That's why I think hydrogen fuel/electricity is so important (more than ethanol or biomass, etc). Because in many different climates, there are various means to generate electricity. The less we need to depend on specific natural resources to survive, the better. Because exactly WHAT those resources are, can change more than I think people realize.

[Msterbeau]

Pat Bedard is the author.

[sinmantyx]

Pat Bedard is the author.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeah, hate to be blunt...but I'm probably better qualified to write an article about global warming than this guy. Bless his heart. The actual article isn't up yet though, so I can't really speak to the specific article itself. Apparently, he did talk to a climatologist. I think I would have rather read an article by the climatologist himself that wasn't run through the Pat Bedard anti-Gore filter. Pat Bedard looks like a pundit, not a scientist.

This was an interesting find when I goggled his name.

[sinmantyx]

This is a pretty awesome idea, dontcha think?

It even has 4-point belts!!!

Of course, the only ones in production right now are $108,000, but they have plans for an $18,000 version.

[BrassFusion]

This is a pretty awesome idea, dontcha think?

It even has 4-point belts!!!

Of course, the only ones in production right now are $108,000, but they have plans for an $18,000 version.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

hella sexy little beast... you'd need two cars for the family, just so you could pick up groceries and have one to drive the kids around in... but i'd always want to drive the tango

only thing i don't like is the lines on the front. i'm more into the little bug-eyed space alien things like on an izetta or a minicoop.

[sinmantyx]

hella sexy little beast... you'd need two cars for the family, just so you could pick up groceries and have one to drive the kids around in... but i'd always want to drive the tango

only thing i don't like is the lines on the front. i'm more into the little bug-eyed space alien things like on an izetta or a minicoop.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Me too. I'm envisioning my little commuter car custom painted with daiseys or those cute sun/moon things. I'll just have to wish them luck, maybe in five years there will be more variety.

[BrassFusion]

Me too.  I'm envisioning my little commuter car custom painted with daiseys or those cute sun/moon things.  I'll just have to wish them luck, maybe in five years there will be more variety.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

you could always custom paint it yourself. or put bumper stickers literally all over it. I personally can't wait to see ghetto/beater EVs. Then we'll KNOW it's the future.

[Msterbeau]

This is a pretty awesome idea, dontcha think?

It even has 4-point belts!!!

Of course, the only ones in production right now are $108,000, but they have plans for an $18,000 version.

As the resident DGN auto design expert (It's my profession) I have to shoot this one down. The styling is 1/2 width, 10 year-old compact car rather then something more contemporary and original. We did some proposals of cars like this at GM's California studio back in 1991.. Nothing very serious, but a lot cooler looking even then. With four wheels and the narrow/tall proportion, it's never going to be that great a handling car. I don't care what the video shows... physics are physics. width = stability and better handling. Height raises the center of gravity.

A better idea, in my opinion is the Lean Machine from GM back in the 80's.

[BrassFusion]

As the resident DGN auto design expert (It's my profession) I have to shoot this one down.  The styling is 1/2 width, 10 year-old compact car rather then something more contemporary and original.  We did some proposals of cars like this at GM's California studio back in 1991..  Nothing very serious, but a lot cooler looking even then.  With four wheels and the narrow/tall proportion, it's never going to be that great a handling car.  I don't care what the video shows...  physics are physics.  width = stability and better handling.  Height raises the center of gravity. 

A better idea, in my opinion is the Lean Machine from GM back in the 80's.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

what if they put it on two wheels with gyroscopes?

[torn asunder]

what if they put it on two wheels with gyroscopes?

why not just get a fucking motorcycle!?!? :blink

:laughing

[Msterbeau]

why not just get a fucking motorcycle!?!?  :blink

:laughing   

It'd be like that Segway gizmo... you can't fall over. Which is not to say you can't crash.... :whistling

[Gauge]

why not just get a fucking motorcycle!?!?  :blink

:laughing   

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

or a moped!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :grin

[sinmantyx]

As the resident DGN auto design expert (It's my profession) I have to shoot this one down.  The styling is 1/2 width, 10 year-old compact car rather then something more contemporary and original.  We did some proposals of cars like this at GM's California studio back in 1991..  Nothing very serious, but a lot cooler looking even then.  With four wheels and the narrow/tall proportion, it's never going to be that great a handling car.  I don't care what the video shows...  physics are physics.  width = stability and better handling.  Height raises the center of gravity. 

A better idea, in my opinion is the Lean Machine from GM back in the 80's.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

C'mon, the geometric center is not neccesarily the CoM or CoG (as you engineer types call it)...maybe that heavier than shit battery came in handy.

The Lean Machine has 3 wheels...it is not CUTE. People buy stuff because it's CUTE! They can understand cute. If someone marketed a Hello Kitty "Tango", it would totally sell.

...and to answer the person who asked why don't we just get a motorcycle...it's because I like to sit while I drive, comfortably, within an enclosed area free from weather, bugs in my teeth and wind tangling my hair.

[Msterbeau]

It's ugly ugly ugly ugly ugly. And I bet I could get everyone one of my peers to agree. UGLY!!

And the CG can't be that low. Look how high up the seat is mounted. And all that nice safe roll cage? That's a bunch of mass up high. Further.. without a bunch of padding around those bars... if you hit one with your bare head, you're toast.

In concluesion, It's ugly and it's going to fall over. :-P

The Lean Machine is sweet. It's cool looking, sleek and highly functional. You don't want 200 mpg PLUS decent performance??? It gives you a nice little cacoon with that bubble canopy too...

[sinmantyx]

It's ugly ugly ugly ugly ugly.  And I bet I could get everyone one of my peers to agree.  UGLY!!

And the CG can't be that low.  Look how high up the seat is mounted.  And all that nice safe roll cage?  That's a bunch of mass up high.  Further..  without a bunch of padding around those bars...  if you hit one with your bare head, you're toast. 

In concluesion, It's ugly and it's going to fall over.  :-P

The Lean Machine is sweet.  It's cool looking, sleek and highly functional.  You don't want 200 mpg PLUS decent performance???  It gives you a nice little cacoon with that bubble canopy too...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

UGLY?! Are most of your peers boys or something?

:laughing

Chibby is in....not sleek. Sleek is last week.

I'm not certain how they got the type of handling/lack of rolling possibility they claim either. I would definitely have to look closer at it and actually drive it for a while to truely make up my mind.

Aparently, the only person who owns one of these at the moment is George Clooney.