4TehNguyen

iTrader: (1)

Formula Prius

Blackraven

Heaven forbid..........and I hear that sometime in the next few years, F1 might move to 4 cylinder engines.

I hope that never happens (heck, the move to 6 cylinder turbos is already a disaster)........but you never know what these eco-lunatics are up to.

And by the way, I'm not against environmentalists per se (personally as far as eco-organizations go, I like WWF - World Wild Life Fund For Nature)

But what I don't like are the radicalist and the extremist kind.........such as Greenpeace and Sierra Club and PETA. Those are the eco-terrorists that should be beaten up with a sledgehammer....

Mr Bond

I does not have to be a Tesla of course. I am focusing on the technology and its enormous potential, not the specific car. The diesel and petrol engines as we know them has been around and developed for about 100 years now , they have both reached very close to the limit in terms of technology .The hybrid or pure electric car has just been reborn, this is just the beginng. Nobody belived that a car like p85+ would even be possible 10 years ago.

FrankReynoldsCPA

I still intend at some point to own(not as my primary vehicle) a 3rd gen or older Pontiac Firebird with a carbuerated and cammed V8. Preferrably of the 350+ cubic inch range. That includes the smell. I don't care that they're less efficient and dirty...I just have too many fond memories of that loping, rumbling V8.

That's not to say that some of these modern cars aren't amazing though.

mmarshall

Half a century ago, on the American cars of 1960s vintage (I knew them well, and learned to drive on them), those cars did have a number of shortcomings, safety-problems, and unreliability. We do, in fact, owe a number of the improvements in modern cars to Nader and his original work with Congess.....particularly in the areas of safety, occupant-protection, and crash-worthiness.

But that was then....this is now. The average new car sold in America, today (even conventional gas-powered cars, apart from hybrids) emits only 1/100th of the tailpipe emissions of the typical pre-emissions car of the 1960s (even less than 1/100th for hybrids like your former GS460H). Today's TDI and Bluetec diesels, with low-sulfur fuel and urea-solutions, are only slightly dirtier than today's conventional gas engines. The highway injury death rate per mile is much lower today than it was back then...only the vast increase in the number of cars on the road has kept it from dropping even further, though part of that is also due to better/safer roads, not just safer cars. And new driving distractions today (cell phones, texting, GPS, etc...) that did not exist back then don't help.

But the point is that today, in general, we have probably passed the era where government regulations actually help instead of hurt. Today, government tends to mess up the auto industry more than it does good. I don't necessarily agree with all of bitkahuna's opinions here, but, IMO, he does raise some good points.

Hoovey689

iTrader: (16)

GS450h*

mmarshall

Keep in mind, though, that the 3Gen F-bodies, like a number of other GM products of that era, had a reputation for shoddy construction, El Cheapo interiors, and unreliability, though the 5.7L V8s, being low-RPM and low-stressed, were reliable if you took it easy, avoided burnouts, and took care of them.

mmarshall

Give me a break, Hoovey.

OK...I don't mind a typo-repair.

venom21

and yet....

http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/12/us/nas...html?hpt=hp_t2

FrankReynoldsCPA

Oh, don't worry. I've owned a 3rd gen and know about those issues. My ideal 3rd gen is not going to have a stock 5.7. Would also be installing subframe connectors, esp if it has t-tops.

Interior didn't bother me too much, although I couldn't really have a conversation at highway speeds.

gengar

Why is it the government's job to protect taxpayers from gas prices?

nipponbird

A real hard core, in-your-face statement, but music to the ears. If you have shuffled in behind the steering wheel of a car of that era, cranked up the engine to go for a spin, you have at least something to think about while sitting on the stoep of the old age home one day. Governments have seldom been car nuts and have a good record of spoiling our car fun. Politicians in any way don't care about clean air etc. It is not cars that cut the forests down in the Amazon basin, Despite blaming it on some phantom bad guys, it is mostly done by industries for the good money with full government backing and we all cry about it, but little is done about it. In fact if you really stop that kind of destruction and allow the forest to return to what was, it will probably generate more oxygen than what any number of Firebirds can destroy.

4TehNguyen

iTrader: (1)

funny thing is its state and federal govt's taxes that comprise 15% of the price of gasoline. And its the federal govt driving up commodity prices through inflation. The commodity price of crude being 75% of the price of gas. Yet they are the ones that are suppose to "protect" us from high gas prices.

nipponbird

Well, it's getting a jungle out there, we have speed trapping by camera, overhead gantry tolling, licencing fees and of course the government pockets a large chunk in taxes on fuel. Suppose it's better in the US. Thing is the motorist is a cash cow. Just not very entertaining to go for that good old school road trip anymore.
Does your president spends his Saturday afternoon with his head under the hood of his favourite ride? Well our's don't. My point is they don't care two continental sherbets about the motorist, they don't get there kicks from cars. Time we get guys in like Jay Leno in those positions.

Sheewwww, reminds me I must pay that camera speed fine I picked up on my way to Cape Town. Didn't see it when I gave the RX a bit of free reign when I came out of the tunnel. GPS warns you if there is one, but sometimes one switches it off if you know the road from childhood. Can spoil your memories of a good trip when you come home and find those fines in the mail.

Infra

iTrader: (1)

I didn't say that, I said "fuel consumption". You may be conflating the two, but that does not mean they are the same thing. The fact that gasoline is a (mostly) inelastic commodity allows you to do so.

It's the government's job to protect itself from compromised trade positions that can harm economic growth. Curbing fuel consumption allows a more elastic behavior of the commodity, meaning the economy can absorb price swings with less harm.

We could argue about economics, but let me just point to an easy, low hanging fruit to support my argument: hybrids like the Volt can pretty much travel your entire commute and not use a drop of gasoline. By reducing the amount of driving done during a period of high prices, a Volt owner could in theory completely eliminate any consumption of gasoline during said period. Thus, gasoline, for this hypothetical consumer, would be an elastic good.

Let's not let ourselves run away with the straw man argument from above, please.