They can be ugly without looking like shopping carts, apparently.Pubic wrote:
Electric cars don't have to be pansy shopping carts...
http://www.veva.bc.ca/images/lightning4.jpg
Some people tow and haul. My company won't be giving us hybrid commuters any time soon.Dilbert_X wrote:
31.6 MPG is a pathetic target. 50-60 MPG vehicles are on the market right now.
Why does anyone feel the need to own a humongous truck anyway?
Last edited by geNius (2008-04-23 09:43:51)
I don't like the idea of fitting into a car smaller than my bed.Dilbert_X wrote:
31.6 MPG is a pathetic target. 50-60 MPG vehicles are on the market right now.
Why does anyone feel the need to own a humongous truck anyway?
eg http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Dr … d=120687#8
First of all - disabled sign inside the car. Nothing wrong about that. Second of all, the experience of driving a Ferrari is, (and I can only assume with knowledge of others) far better than that of a minivan. People buy these cars with their hearts, not with their head. If you think it is fun to go and egg cars that are too "fancy" then frankly, I hope someone eggs your house. If given the choice of owning a minivan or a Ferrari? I sure hope you don't pick the minivan.IRONCHEF wrote:
Now I'm guessing it was some dude who got hit and sued and bought a ferrari, or just a regular scumbag from this "affluent and we KNOW it" city who got a handicapped placard so he can park his baby wherever he wants. Oh if I had an egg...but it's cool, he's getting a third of the mileage I get in my minivan! lol
Last edited by kylef (2008-04-23 10:14:48)
Larger families?Dilbert_X wrote:
31.6 MPG is a pathetic target. 50-60 MPG vehicles are on the market right now.
Why does anyone feel the need to own a humongous truck anyway?
eg http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Dr … d=120687#8
Well would you go and buy a civic hybrid if you had the money this guy has? And maybe he didn't just Sue someone, maybe he earned the money, properly.IRONCHEF wrote:
On my lunchtime walk today (30 mins ago) I see this at the curb outside my building...
http://i278.photobucket.com/albums/kk10 … hef/f1.jpg
Now I'm guessing it was some dude who got hit and sued and bought a ferrari, or just a regular scumbag from this "affluent and we KNOW it" city who got a handicapped placard so he can park his baby wherever he wants. Oh if I had an egg...but it's cool, he's getting a third of the mileage I get in my minivan! lol
Is it some sort of a geo?PuckMercury wrote:
Currently, I have an 11 year old domestic that gets 34 miles to the gallon. American cars can do it, but there are always those that will hunger for power which equals less efficiency traditionally. 31.6 mpg is at least a step toward some goal regardless of how small you feel the step is. As has already been stated but I'll echo anyway - better fuel economy is not a solution. Better fuel economy is a band-aid on a bullet hole at best. The only solution lies in becoming independent from oil either foreign or domestic. Whether that comes in electric, hydrogen or still another form matters not so long as it meets the criteria of range and quick/easy refueling.
There will always be a need for powerful vehicles to haul serious tonnage whether that is in the form of a personal boat, or a semi-truck. Like it or not, we are on the cusp of another paradigm shift. We became accustomed to cheap gas as a nation and built an infrastructure and lifestyle around it. It may simply be that you can't afford that boat anymore because you can't afford the gas to fuel it or the vehicle with enough power to pull it. We enjoy a ridiculously high standard of living when compared to just 50 years ago.
People that drive around other groups of people as part of their occupation.Dilbert_X wrote:
31.6 MPG is a pathetic target. 50-60 MPG vehicles are on the market right now.
Why does anyone feel the need to own a humongous truck anyway?
eg http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Dr … d=120687#8
and who does that anymoreKmarion wrote:
People that drive around other groups of people as part of their occupation.Dilbert_X wrote:
31.6 MPG is a pathetic target. 50-60 MPG vehicles are on the market right now.
Why does anyone feel the need to own a humongous truck anyway?
eg http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Dr … d=120687#8
Isn't it though...it got me all worked up...I was ready to write a strongly worded letter...lol...but I didn't...so goes things with me.Naturn wrote:
I just watched "Who Killed The Electric Car" very good movie. With todays batteries cars can go 300 miles before charging. On top of that a while back a thread about a guy inventing a battery that last 10x longer than the longest lasting batteries today. Imagine a car that can go 2000-3000 miles before charge! Of course we can only hope though.
Last edited by tuckergustav (2008-04-23 22:09:52)
And if you can buy an extra battery that can charge while you're using the other one, even better...Naturn wrote:
I just watched "Who Killed The Electric Car" very good movie. With todays batteries cars can go 300 miles before charging. On top of that a while back a thread about a guy inventing a battery that last 10x longer than the longest lasting batteries today. Imagine a car that can go 2000-3000 miles before charge! Of course we can only hope though.
Last edited by Poseidon (2008-04-23 22:43:20)
I don'tNaturn wrote:
I believe without a doubt that the pure electric car is the future of automobiles.
Any reason just curious?DrunkFace wrote:
I don'tNaturn wrote:
I believe without a doubt that the pure electric car is the future of automobiles.
I do.The#1Spot wrote:
and who does that anymoreKmarion wrote:
People that drive around other groups of people as part of their occupation.Dilbert_X wrote:
31.6 MPG is a pathetic target. 50-60 MPG vehicles are on the market right now.
Why does anyone feel the need to own a humongous truck anyway?
eg http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Dr … d=120687#8
If I recall, in the 70's, there were plenty of cars that got over 30 miles per gallon....so how come after almost 30 years we are at the same level and even less in most cases. Most cars built today are much lighter and supposed to be far more technically advanced than 30 years ago. I guess emission controls would be an excuse.liquix wrote:
good on Bush, 32 mpg is a good goal for 2015. Believe it or not, it is not difficult to achieve that goal...it wasn't difficult 20 years ago. The problem is marketability, and production costs (lithium anybody?.) Thankfully these can be overcome via new leadership. In America where demand of SUV's has slumped recently, there is are large opportunity for companies like Ford and Chrysler to produce high mileage vehicles that were developed several years ago that can achieve the new goal.
It's too bad that we were so eager to buy up stupid-ass vehicles with ludicrous gas mileage. The only thing American marketed SUV's are good at, is getting shitty mileage...And rolling on 26s like a f'n douche.
By 2015, I'd bet gas is 15 bucks a gallon. Place your best
A guy named Tucker did that once...didn't work out so well for him, unfortunately.DeathBecomesYu wrote:
If I recall, in the 70's, there were plenty of cars that got over 30 miles per gallon....so how come after almost 30 years we are at the same level and even less in most cases. Most cars built today are much lighter and supposed to be far more technically advanced than 30 years ago. I guess emission controls would be an excuse.liquix wrote:
good on Bush, 32 mpg is a good goal for 2015. Believe it or not, it is not difficult to achieve that goal...it wasn't difficult 20 years ago. The problem is marketability, and production costs (lithium anybody?.) Thankfully these can be overcome via new leadership. In America where demand of SUV's has slumped recently, there is are large opportunity for companies like Ford and Chrysler to produce high mileage vehicles that were developed several years ago that can achieve the new goal.
It's too bad that we were so eager to buy up stupid-ass vehicles with ludicrous gas mileage. The only thing American marketed SUV's are good at, is getting shitty mileage...And rolling on 26s like a f'n douche.
By 2015, I'd bet gas is 15 bucks a gallon. Place your best
The problem is the technology is there, has been there and yet we still sit stagnant hanging around the ridiculous mileages most cars get. Car companies and oil companies are in no hurry to change anything and are finding more ways to keep oil in the equation than to remove it. Somebody here needs to start its own car company....lol.
No, a Saturn actually.The#1Spot wrote:
Is it some sort of a geo?
People that drive around other groups of people as part of their occupation.
No need to panic, its a 'corporate average fuel economy' target.Larger families?
Every gain in economy is swallowed by people demanding more power and hence bigger engines.If I recall, in the 70's, there were plenty of cars that got over 30 miles per gallon....so how come after almost 30 years we are at the same level and even less in most cases. Most cars built today are much lighter and supposed to be far more technically advanced than 30 years ago. I guess emission controls would be an excuse.
You're right. Also, a van actually has more room than a bus, but the bus looks bigger.Dilbert_X wrote:
Most cars are actually roomier and more useful than the average SUV which just looks big.
