It is currently Fri Sep 19, 2014 6:33 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 86 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: How to silence your car
PostPosted: Fri Nov 15, 2013 6:02 am 
Offline
Friend of SPCR

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2008 4:53 am
Posts: 1314
Location: CT
flyingsherpa wrote:
Buy an electric! I bought a Volt two months ago [snip]

I'll be very interested to see how it drives in the snow, and what the fuel economy is.

Diesel fuel is more expensive than regular in the US : $3.194 a gallon for regular gas, $3.832 for diesel (source http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_pri_gnd_dcus_nus_w.htm). And not all gas stations sell diesel fuel (on the highway, they do, but my little town, only one station does - out of 3 that I would go to)
The cost per mile is still better for diesel though...
I have to say that some of the offerings for diesel cars are very tempting... I'd love one of those quattros or xdrive cars...
Another 3 or 4 years and my car will out of warranty. I look forward to see what's available then !

_________________
Main/gamming : Antec Solo|X-650|Asus P5Q-E|Intel Q9550@3.4GHz|HR-01 Plus 120mm Nexus @6V|Corsair 2x2Go XMS2 DHX cas 4 @4-4-4-12|Exhaust Nexus 120mm @9V|Intel X25M G2 160Gb|Samsung 1TB in SQD|2xGigabyte GTS450 OC (@900/1900/3800)|GPU fan 120mm Nexus @6V
HTPC/folder/Storage : Silverstone|E5300 with Samurai-Z|2Go RAM|GTX460@800|2x1To WD EARS|Intel X25M G2 80Go

Fold with SPCR


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: How to silence your car
PostPosted: Fri Nov 15, 2013 9:22 am 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 7:11 pm
Posts: 7369
Location: Maynard, MA, Eaarth
The Tesla Model S trounces all its competition - in performance and economy and price.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUW0l7bZn1s

The Model S is about TWICE as efficient as a Prius, and the *conservative* 0-60MPH acceleration time of the standard version is 5.6s, and the performance version (again very conservatively) goes 0-60MPH in 4.4s.

The Cg of the Model S is ~16" above the ground - it handles *very* well.

It is also possibly the safest car ever tested by the US government. It has no large lump of metal up front (i.e. the engine) and the entire structure can be used to protect the occupants.

It is better *because* it is electric. And it is the most significant car since the Ford Model T, and possibly ever.

_________________
Sincerely, Neil
http://neilblanchard.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: How to silence your car
PostPosted: Sat Nov 16, 2013 4:34 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 1:49 pm
Posts: 1196
Location: UK
NeilBlanchard wrote:
The Tesla Model S trounces all its competition - in performance and economy and price.

I disagree Neil. It is however funny to notice the level of fanboyism that so often comes into Internet discussions about cars. Now all we need is someone to say how a new model isn't as good as the existing model which they just happen to own and for someone to state that 'it is a well known fact amongst enthusiasts that the performance of x is in fact highly underrated and it can it fact output at least 10 billion horsepower and in the hands of a skilled driver can lap Silverstone, Laguna Seca, Spa, Suzuka and the Nordscleife all at the same time in less than a minute. It also has been known to cure leprosy and bring world peace'.

NeilBlanchard wrote:

A few points on this review:
- They are looking at the top model and that is £80k in the UK as they quote. That's a lot of money.
- They compare it's US sales to the S-class, 7-series and A8 but these cars are in a larger class. It's obvious it'll outsell these as they're pretty low sellers. Compare it to the E-class, 5-series and A6 and it's sales will be dwarfed. The only reason why they compare it to cars above it's size is because of it's higher cost.
- The race against the Aston martin Rapide is a foregone conclusion. Aston uses a 6-litre naturally aspirated V12 which is substantially behind the times especially ecologically, hence why they are teeming up with Mercedes and they will start to use AMG engines in future. In a rolling start a naturally aspirated petrol is pretty much the last thing you'd want to use. A big turbo diesel would beat it easily and I would expect the M550d (another car which you don't get in the US and sadly we don't get it in the UK as we don't get 4 wheel drive 5-series models) to outdrag the Tesla in that race. You don't buy the Aston for logical reasons so it's a bad car for such a comparison.
- They couldn't match the 0-60mph time of the manufacturer.

NeilBlanchard wrote:
The Model S is about TWICE as efficient as a Prius

The Toyota Prius is crap. On top of that the models you get in the US are purposefully crippled as they disable the ability for the engine to cut out completely, thus they are less efficient. This can be reenabled in software but is left disabled for the US market because the EPA fuel economy tests prohibit use of stop-start systems as I have already mentioned. For the same reason many cars that come fitted with stop start systems in the rest of the world don't have them fitted in the US as they are not able to advertise any advantage, given the EPA testing rules. They save very little money per car sold doing this and the owner then has to pay more in fuel - lobby car manufacturers to offer stop-start by default in the US!

Again, I should reinforce the point that the reason why it's so popular in the US is because you don't have the diesel cars that are most likely to compete with it.

NeilBlanchard wrote:
and the *conservative* 0-60MPH acceleration time of the standard version is 5.6s, and the performance version (again very conservatively) goes 0-60MPH in 4.4s.

:lol: This is again like what you see in car forums all across the Internet. It partly stems from the fact that many American car magazines don't know how to measure 0-60mph, as I have already alluded to some posts ago. It's also quite common for cars to perform either better than or worse than specificed. Look up any car and you'll find different measurements in different places and the ones that receive the most attention (naturally) are the fastest times.

NeilBlanchard wrote:
The Cg of the Model S is ~16" above the ground - it handles *very* well.

I can only find one lap time for it and that's Laguna Seca:
http://fastestlaps.com/tracks/laguna_seca.html
There's not much competition there unfortunately of anything comparable so it will be interesting to see it on other tracks in time. It does show up as substantially slower than the E63AMG and XFR but I'm not sure they're really competition for it as they are more powerful. I would however doubt that it will be able to lap faster than some of the high powered diesels which you don't get in the US which are it's most obvious competition. It does weight 2112kg so it has at least a 300kg weight penalty though.

NeilBlanchard wrote:
It is better *because* it is electric.

It's still made of heavy steel, this is the major problem for efficiency due to it's weight. They've only gone part of the way by making the drive electric as they have not used a truly 21st century material for the chassis. A carbon fibre one would have been substantially lighter and allowed use of lower powered components and a lighter battery pack for the same range. Then it would be a better replacement for a conventional internal combustion car.

NeilBlanchard wrote:
And it is the most significant car since the Ford Model T, and possibly ever.

I disagree here on so many levels. The Model T was significant as a product of mass production but as a car itself, it's not very significant. There was never any breakthrough technology on the car itself. Also if you were to go back to a Model T you would be unable to drive it as it's controls are totally incomprehensible. This seems counterintuitive perhaps that such a mass produced vehicle did not set the de facto layout for car controls but they were just insanely laid out things and it's a really good thing the control layout didn't catch on. Instead a slightly later model that perhaps better defines the modern car is the Austin 7 from 1922. It was the first car with the engine at the front, driving the rear wheels, a steering wheel infront of the driver, accelerator, brake and clutch peddles on the floor in the footwell, dials in front of the driver and an H-pattern gear lever in the middle of the car. While separately many of these ideas were implemented elsewhere, this is the first time they were brought together and at a sensible price. Anyone now could get in an Austin 7 and drive it. It's no wonder than both BMW and Nissan's first cars were copies of the Austin 7.

Similarly to the Model T being a major feat of mass production but not as a car is the original Volkswagen Beetle. Enormous production numbers over many decades but a terrible car.

If I was to define truly significant cars as cars themselves, not items of mass production, there's quite a few that come to mind:
Mercedes S-class - Over many generations it has pioneered new technology which then trickles down over the years to lower price points. Look at the latest S-class and it has technology that we'll all have in 10 years.
The original Mini - Redefining small car design and handling. It wasn't the first transverse front wheel drive car but not first massively successful one. The packaging is incredible. It also got controversially disqualified from the Monte Carlo Rally on a technicality having been beating Ferrari, Porsche and others due to it's front wheel drive and tiny size being such an advantage on snow.
Land Rover (Defender) - Definitive 4x4, two thirds of which are still running today.
Lamborghini Miura - The first real supercar.
Mclaren F1 - Brought F1 technology and even technology that had been banned from F1 on to a road car yet it was usable on a daily basis. A huge leap in carbon fibre construction. Led to a slump in supercars for some years as it just made everything else obsolete.
Bugatti Veyron - Lots of big numbers.
VW Golf GTi - although it's been through some bad variants at times, the original basically defined the hot hatch.

If I had to pick cars that are coming out now, I certainly wouldn't pick the Tesla, however the two I would pick can drive on electricity:
BMW i3 - Bringing carbon fibre construction to an affordable price point.
Mclaren P1 - For being totally mind bendingly fast. Still has a silent electric mode which might be useful for commuting:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddU4tcGIF6k

_________________
Silverstone SG03B: E8200, Asus P5E-VM HDMI, 2Gb RAM, Leadtek 9600GT+S1 rev. 2, Samsung 500Gb, Seasonic X-400, 2x Akasa 120mm, Scythe Zipang 2 fanless


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: How to silence your car
PostPosted: Sun Nov 17, 2013 6:16 pm 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 7:11 pm
Posts: 7369
Location: Maynard, MA, Eaarth
The Model S is a majority aluminum chassis. Your claim that it is steel is not correct. It is heavy mainly because of the battery, but it is in the floor, so the Cg is low. It is not really that heavy for this class of car. And it gets close to 100MPGe, and a range close to 300 miles.

Name a quicker car that seats 5 (with an option for a 5+2) and costs less, or even the same as the Tesla Model S. It has a Cd of 0.24, which is near the top (a couple of Mercedes models have as good or better Cd). Can you name a better car, and why?

The Prius is the best FE of any car currently sold in the USA. Whatever you think about the car otherwise, this is the point of comparison I was making.

_________________
Sincerely, Neil
http://neilblanchard.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: How to silence your car
PostPosted: Sun Nov 17, 2013 6:38 pm 
Offline
Patron of SPCR

Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 12:00 pm
Posts: 3302
Location: Essex, England
Quote:
The Model S is about TWICE as efficient as a Prius, and the *conservative* 0-60MPH acceleration time of the standard version is 5.6s, and the performance version (again very conservatively) goes 0-60MPH in 4.4s.

The Cg of the Model S is ~16" above the ground - it handles *very* well.

It is also possibly the safest car ever tested by the US government. It has no large lump of metal up front (i.e. the engine) and the entire structure can be used to protect the occupants.

It is better *because* it is electric. And it is the most significant car since the Ford Model T, and possibly ever.


Acceleration is under-rated by the standard ill-educated public, but I totally agree that it is far more important than (potential) top speed. What I would like to know are the relative speed increases of electric, hybrid and petrol/diesel cars from 30-40, 40-50 etc as these are very important moving in and around busy traffic and overtaking.

The "Cg" must have been one of the original design points of the Model S, and when I have ever mentioned this to car-fanatic friends they usually make noises like, oooo...., really...., that must go like its on rails, how much do the battery's weigh vs the rest of the car and so on. Modern science and engineering has made the Model S possible, it IMO is at the top of my list of £60K-ish (if I were a millionaire) cars I would own, and would likely be my standard "go-to" car.

As far as the most "significant" car built since the model T, I am no car fanatic but there are many cars that would rank above the Model S in general terms of "significance" to the vast majority of car users. I could name a few and detail my reasons, but for now I shall stay silent as I am a computer geek and not a car geek.


Andy

_________________
Main PC, P180, CM Silent Pro 500M, i5 3570k @ 4.2Ghz, 8-GB @ 2,000MHz, 256 GB Samsung 830, 500-GB 7K500, MSI 660Ti Twin Frozr, PC is super quiet :o
Server, 6-TB RAID-5 array, + 2 x 2-TB backup drives, 380W Enermax Pro82+, 4x very quiet fans, positive pressure only, no exhaust fans
Living Room PC, 3500+, 2-GB RAM, HD501LJ


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: How to silence your car
PostPosted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 3:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 1:49 pm
Posts: 1196
Location: UK
NeilBlanchard wrote:
The Model S is a majority aluminum chassis. Your claim that it is steel is not correct.

I stand corrected.
NeilBlanchard wrote:
It is heavy mainly because of the battery, but it is in the floor, so the Cg is low.

A few things on 'Cg'. Firstly as a technicality (as a Physicist I have to remind all of my engineering friends this) it is NOT the centre of gravity but the centre of mass. I really wish the term centre of gravity would die a death as it is both not constant in position within a rigid body (gravity is not a uniform force acting from an infinitely distant point but an acceleration acting towards a finitely spaced point and hence it's acceleration upon different points of a rigid body is different, thus the 'centre of gravity' of an object depends upon how far you are from the centre of the earth) and also gravity is not relevant as you are looking at other forces. Anyway, beyond that, you consider through a trun that the mass of the car when modelled as a rigid body acts from the centre of mass, as the mass itself is larger, it doesn't matter that the centre of the mass is a little bit lower, the moment exerted upon the tyres on the outer edge of a turn would be the same.
NeilBlanchard wrote:
It is not really that heavy for this class of car.

It's 2112kg according to the numbers I have. Considering it alongside other cars of around 4.9m in length it is heavy, especially as these are EU numbers so have to include an 80% fuel tank and all fluids filled:
BMW 535d (EU spec) 1735kg
BMW 640d Gran Coupe 1810kg
Audi A6 3.0 BiTDi 1790kg
Audi A7 3.0 BiTDI 1850kg
Jaguar XF 3.0d V6 S 1810kg
Mercedes E350CDI 1835kg
Mercedes CLS350CDI 1815kg

Versus the 535d (the logical competitor), it is 377kg heavier. Even accepting that there's 454kg of batteries, the BMW has to have 64 litres of fuel plus the fuel tank itself, thus on weight they're equal, despite the aluminium construction used on the Tesla, so it's still not a light car. Next generation use of CFRP will make a far greater difference of course.
NeilBlanchard wrote:
And it gets close to 100MPGe, and a range close to 300 miles.

I've already mentioned in this thread my dislike of the MPGe rating. The whole point of electric drive is that you do not burn fuel (for that matter, no chemical process burns fuel by volume but by mass) and having to have some equivalency scale is silly as there simply is no equivalent, the whole process is entirely different and it's sooo 20th century to talk about miles per gallon. They should rate it in distance per Kilowatt Hour as that would actually mean something.

300 mile range, as I have also already said, just isn't good enough for many users. I'm sure it's fine for a rollneck jumper and designer spectacle wearing marketing executive who just drives around the same town all of the time but for a serious business man who has to drive a lot for work (as many potential customers in this category will be) that's just not enough. I average about 680 miles to a tank (57 litres) and then it's less than 5 minutes to refill. I work in the medical sector and the kind of work I do in the field means that telling a doctor that they're going to have to cancel a patient because 'I'm having to recharge my car' isn't acceptable.

NeilBlanchard wrote:
Name a quicker car that seats 5 (with an option for a 5+2)

The 2 rear seats is a niche area. Avoiding people carriers and big 4x4's which are naturally inefficient, there are a few cars I can think of that offer it as an option such as the Mercedes E-class estate and the Volvo V70. There are also a few bespoke options and coachbuilt conversions for things like hearses. One of the big restrictions is regulation in some countries and what the seats can therefore be used for. Some of them therefore have seats that are only rated for children OR only rated for adults as children would need a specific child seat and no ISO mounts are included! Would be interesting to check how the Tesla's rear seats are approved. So the extra 2 seats is certainly an option elsewhere, but lets stick to 5 as the practical number.

NeilBlanchard wrote:
and costs less, or even the same as the Tesla Model S.

The 7 cars I listed above are a good start versus the medium powered Model S. The 640d GC is a little outside the budget perhaps but it is a stunning car and has a far higher spec. The A7 is a bit ugly for my liking, I wouldn't buy it but some people might. The Jag is a little down on performance but a huge amount cheaper, the Mercs are both very different cars from each other but each have their place in this comparison. I would however in this sector stick to the 535d (not the US model, you only get a rebadged 530d). In the UK you can buy one for under £50k with a high spec. This is over £10k less than the middle of the Tesla Model S range will be once it goes on sale but quicker. I'm sure you'd like to consider running costs and with the money you'll have left over you could fuel it for over 80000 miles. So even if electricity was free it would still take some years to pay it off and by then are you going to need new batteries?

Personally I'd go with a smaller car though and get a 330d... oh... wait... that's what I did. :roll: Very few people need a car that big. If I was the rollneck jumper and designer spectacle wearing marketing executive then I'd get a BMW i3, saving a huge amount of space on tight city streets, thus saving electricity, reducing costs on things like tyres, reducing costs of road repairs caused by weight of traffic, reducing congestion just by taking up less road and making parking easier.
NeilBlanchard wrote:
It has a Cd of 0.24, which is near the top (a couple of Mercedes models have as good or better Cd).

The lowest Cd of any production vehicle was a Tatra from the 1930s at 0.212, proof that time does not always equal progress as this was only recently beaten. The new Volkswagen XL1 has a Cd of 0.189 in production spec, now that is a fuel efficient design! There are a few cars with a Cd of 0.24 or 0.25 available however frontal area is also important.

NeilBlanchard wrote:
The Prius is the best FE of any car currently sold in the USA. Whatever you think about the car otherwise, this is the point of comparison I was making.

And this is the problem I've been getting at. Fuel economy (independent from car design itself so we can leave out the Ford F150 et al) in the US is worse than the rest of the world for a few reasons:
- Historically very cheap fuel so fuel economy wasn't considered important and only with price rises does everyone get hit hard and think they need to change. In parts of the world where fuel is heavily taxed we don't notice so much of a proportional difference plus we use less fuel anyway.
- Distrust and regulatory restriction of diesel means that you don't have many diesel models available.
- Fuel has higher sulphur content as restriction on SOx was placed at the point of production (the vehicle) and not the source (sulphur in the fuel). As the fuel is more 'sour' (higher Sulphur content) choice of materials that can be used in an engine are more limited as some lighter weight, lower friction, softer materials are more prone to acid erosion. A side effect is therefore lower fuel consumption. An example that I know is that BMW carried on using the N52 in the US even when the magnalium blocked N53 was released about 7 years ago in the EU.
- Automatic transmissions are pretty much de facto in the US and are generally less efficient.
- You run lower RON in your fuel although the scales on each side of the Atlantic are not identical so the numbers can't be directly compared. This means engines tend to be less powerful for the same capacity.
- Your cars are built cheaper and far more to a cost. Engines tend to be made of cheaper materials (related to the previous point as well) and not as well balanced or dampened. Therefore 4 cylinder engines are seen as coarse and people want bigger engines because of the previous points, for more power and because dominance of torque convertor automatics emphasise coarseness of engine. Only now are 4 cylinder turbo engines starting to become widespread, replacing 6 cylinder engines and offering better economy and performance.
- EPA figures don't include usage of Stop-Start systems in cars, even though many cars come with them as default and they are an accepted part of economy driving.

So because of reasons like these, and many others, for you in the US, electricity really does seem to be a magic bullet. If however you had the choice of diesels that we had then you wouldn't be so fussed about electric cars until things have progressed further. No reason why these diesels can't be sold in the US now as EU6 emissions regulations are very stringent also.

_________________
Silverstone SG03B: E8200, Asus P5E-VM HDMI, 2Gb RAM, Leadtek 9600GT+S1 rev. 2, Samsung 500Gb, Seasonic X-400, 2x Akasa 120mm, Scythe Zipang 2 fanless


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: How to silence your car
PostPosted: Thu Nov 21, 2013 9:36 am 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 7:11 pm
Posts: 7369
Location: Maynard, MA, Eaarth
The Tesla Model S competes with the BMW 7 Series and the Mercedes S Class and Audi A8, etc.

I agree that MPGe is imperfect, but it is the best way to compare gas (E10) to E15 or E85 or diesel or electricity, or to CNG for that matter. If you add in the electricity generation and grid losses, then you should also add in the exploration, drilling, extraction, transportation, refinement, storage, more transportation, and even the pumping into the tank, for all fossil fuels.

It takes 7.5-8.5kWh of electricity PER GALLON of gasoline from "conventional" oil, and up to 13kWh per gallon from tar sands bitumen. If you just take that electricity and use it to power an EV, you totally negate the "long tailpipe" argument.

In addition, electricity *can* come from one of several renewable sources, which also largely negates the argument.

If we ran all our computers on gasoline up until now, the Model S is like we can now run all our computers on electricity. This is HUGE, and it is groundbreaking, and it changes the rules.

_________________
Sincerely, Neil
http://neilblanchard.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: How to silence your car
PostPosted: Thu Nov 21, 2013 10:09 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 4:29 am
Posts: 47
Location: Oslo
a big +1

_________________
Creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: How to silence your car
PostPosted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 3:54 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 1:49 pm
Posts: 1196
Location: UK
NeilBlanchard wrote:
The Tesla Model S competes with the BMW 7 Series and the Mercedes S Class and Audi A8, etc.

No it doesn't. As I've already said it is smaller than those cars, even taking the standard wheelbase models and not the extended wheelbase models:
W222 S-class: 5.116m
F01 7-series: 5.075m
4H A8: 5.131m
X351 XJ: 5.123m

Compare these to the lengths of those cars in the category below:

W212 E-class: 4.869m
W218 CLS: 4.940m
F10 5-series 4.899m
F06 6-series GC: 5.007m
4F A6: 4.915m
4G A7: 4.970m
X250 XF: 4.961m

The Model S is 4.976m. It's obvious which category it fits in.

From a technological and comfort perspective it is miles off the S-class et al. It's poverty spec in comparison. Just look through the spec of the Model S and nothing jumps out of it which puts it anywhere near the S-class. Where's the infrared night vision? Automatic parking? Radar guided cruise control? Lane control? Automatic high beam? The wing mirrors don't even fold themselves and the apholstery never said "Moo" - it's Syntho-cow plastic.

Spec wise it's basically like a basic 5-series with 19" wheels, the sun protection glass option, Xenon headlights, electric seats, split fold rear seat, reversing camera and an iPad nailed to the dash... Minus a whole load of stuff as well. Compare it to the other cars in it's category and you'll find a similar thing and at a price substantially less. Compare it to cars in the category above and you'll find it VERY lacking. As however no one here seems familiar with these cars, it's somewhat of a difficult point for me to get across...

NeilBlanchard wrote:
If you just take that electricity and use it to power an EV, you totally negate the "long tailpipe" argument.

This forgets the batteries. Mining the materials for making batteries is both resource intensive and has an enormous ecological impact, both locally and macroenvironmentally. The worst example of course is the Lexus LS600h. The Nickel is mined in Canada, then it all gets shipped to Japan to be put in a big Toyota which is then shipped across the world to misguided customers. Hypocritically Toyota gave Sir Paul McCartney an LS600h as a present for his environmental work and delivered it by air freight, thus offsetting 60000 miles of CO2 saving.... :roll:

With a train powered by overhead cabling, the advantages of electricity are clearer as electricity is used instantly. The moment you charge a battery you waste some electricity, in the case of the Tesla they say that charging is 94% efficient. You've got to factor this in even if it pales in camparison to the resultant efficiency losses of dragging 454kg of batteries around with you. That 454kg means that you also need to uprate the suspension, drivetrain, chassis, power steering, brakes, wheels, tyres (thus adding to rolling resistance and cost of tyres for the owner) amongst other things. The packaging implications also mean that you've got to make the car bigger, adding more again. So by designing for 454kg of batteries instead of 50 litres of diesel you're probably adding over 600kg to the weight of the car. You and I both know that has a massive efficiency impact.

NeilBlanchard wrote:
If we ran all our computers on gasoline up until now, the Model S is like we can now run all our computers on electricity.

That's a really poor argument Neil. Most computers are stationery so electricity has always been the obvious choice as there is no requirment for a battery. With a laptop however it might have advantages to have internal combustion! Imagine a 2-stroke diesel powered laptop that could run for days at a time and could be refilled with only a hundred millilitres of diesel! Perhaps not for SPCR but more some applications this would be better. :lol:

On another note, on Tuesday I drove 400 miles to Glasgow. Yesterday I drove home again. Only one stop for fuel during the whole trip and only a 15 minute stop for lunch on the way South. Good luck doing that in an electric car with current battery technology. What struck me though while I was stopped for lunch is why other people at the Motorway services were sitting there with their engines running. I've seen a lot of this before too and it always surpirses me. Why complain about fuel being so expensive when you sit for maybe an hour in a car park with your engine running wasting perhaps up to a litre of fuel? Where do these people come from and where did they learn about economics? I know some might be driving on business and expensing fuel but still that's a big hit on their managers PnL. I'm tempted to go up to these people in future and just ask WHY they are doing it.

_________________
Silverstone SG03B: E8200, Asus P5E-VM HDMI, 2Gb RAM, Leadtek 9600GT+S1 rev. 2, Samsung 500Gb, Seasonic X-400, 2x Akasa 120mm, Scythe Zipang 2 fanless


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: How to silence your car
PostPosted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 9:50 am 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 7:11 pm
Posts: 7369
Location: Maynard, MA, Eaarth
The Model S is quite large inside, because it has a flat floor, and there is no engine in the front. It has TWO trunks. One in the front and one in the back. It has an option for 2 additional seats, that face back; essentially modern rumble seats. So, it can have 5+2 seating. It has a 17" touch screen. It has the highest performance available in any sedan.

Say what you want, but the Tesla Model S competes with the top of the line models in the highest performance sedans. But no, it doesn't have a perfumed air system like the S Class...

The batteries do not represent any more energy than any other material used in automobiles. Also, the batteries will be recycled. It uses FAR less energy over it's lifetime than any fossil fueled car. It requires far less regular maintenance - and the oil changes and other related items that are required to run an ICE - add even more to the carbon footprint for a fossil fueled car.

The Tesla Supercharger system is being built up - in a couple of years, you will be able to drive coast to coast - for free. Those stations can charge it to 80% (I think?) in under 30 minutes, and they use solar PV arrays to (more than) offset the energy used.

You can put a solar PV system on your house, and generate enough energy to offset most (or all) of what you use in your house *and* in your EV. My brother and his wife are doing this - they each drive an EV, and the 6.37kW solar PV system on their little ranch house is generating at least 75% of the electricity they use.

Electric cars are the best way to go; because they will make us truly energy independent, and they will be a key part of us stop changing the climate. The climate that all life depends on.

_________________
Sincerely, Neil
http://neilblanchard.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: How to silence your car
PostPosted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 11:48 am 
Offline
Patron of SPCR

Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 12:00 pm
Posts: 3302
Location: Essex, England
There are only 2 things that I dislike about the Model S

Its £60,000 more than I can afford.

The fake grill on the front, there is no need for it at all and IMO it spoils the look of the car.


Andy

_________________
Main PC, P180, CM Silent Pro 500M, i5 3570k @ 4.2Ghz, 8-GB @ 2,000MHz, 256 GB Samsung 830, 500-GB 7K500, MSI 660Ti Twin Frozr, PC is super quiet :o
Server, 6-TB RAID-5 array, + 2 x 2-TB backup drives, 380W Enermax Pro82+, 4x very quiet fans, positive pressure only, no exhaust fans
Living Room PC, 3500+, 2-GB RAM, HD501LJ


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: How to silence your car
PostPosted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 3:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 1:49 pm
Posts: 1196
Location: UK
NeilBlanchard wrote:
The Model S is quite large inside, because it has a flat floor, and there is no engine in the front.

Very nice. Shall we look at facts instead?

Head room (front/rear): 986/897.2 mm
Leg room (front/rear): 1083.7/899.9 mm
Shoulder room (front/rear): 1465/1396.8 mm
Hip room (front/rear): 1397.4/1390.4 mm

Compare this to the Jaguar XF, I cite this example as it is a coupe like shape:
Internal width - Front (mm) 1,444
Internal width - Rear (mm) 1,432
Internal headroom - Front (mm) 991
Internal headroom - Rear (mm) 956

So the XF is better than the Tesla despite also having a sloping roofline which limits passenger space.

And a more traditional (and practical) F10 5-series:
Internal width - Front (mm) 1,518
Internal width - Rear (mm) 1,485
Internal headroom - Front (mm) 1036
Internal headroom - Rear (mm) 973

That's a lot more spacious. So again, it's not even as spacious inside as the cars in the category which it competes against so will be tiny compared to those like the S-class, in the category which you insist it competes with. It MAY have a flat floor but that flat floor has to encompase a whole load of electrical systems which takes up space, plus there's no way the packaging efforts of a new company will come close to those of an established marque.

NeilBlanchard wrote:
It has TWO trunks. One in the front and one in the back.

The front one adds only an additonal 150 litres. Handy to be able to carry around the power cable that you'll need plus a few other things. The boot at the rear is difficult to ascertain how big exactly it is. I simply don't believe Tesla's volume measurements are in line with the standardisd VDA measurement method. There is simply no way it is 745 litres. 500 litres perhaps, like it's rivals but they are clearly overriding the load height restrictions that are supposed to be in place for VDA measurements. It is a hatch, but VDA load height restriction also applies to hatches. There are a number of hatches that approach 600 litres but given that with the Tesla loses so much internal space, you'd need the boot to make it up. Look at the Skoda Superb for a car that makes LOTS of space available for the passengers and luggage.

NeilBlanchard wrote:
It has an option for 2 additional seats, that face back; essentially modern rumble seats. So, it can have 5+2 seating.

After my previous query on how the rear most seats are approved, I've found the relevant info. They are approved for children between the ages of 3 and 12 and 15-36kg in weight. As previously stated it's not alone in this offering but it is pretty niche and not as usable as cars that offer a full 7 seats. As they are restircted for use by only 10% of the population (or less perhaps, there's a worrying number of overweight children) the market is small. In addition when it is appropropriate to use them is also difficult. Means you can't put a dog in the back at the same time. Also I wouldn't want to leave children in the boot with a load of shopping - you'd get home and find either they'd eaten it or covered the inside of the car in yoghurt! You can kind of see why sales of these optional seats are small for Volvo and Mercedes.

NeilBlanchard wrote:
It has a 17" touch screen.

Your point? I'm sure that's lovely for the aforementioned rollneck jumper and designer spectacle wearing junior marketing executives. A touch screen is not so suitable for use in a car as a controller with knobs and buttons. Any kind of helmsmithlike driving and you won't be able to touch the screen in the right place. On the other hand I'm frequently switching between navigation, media, power/torque displays and fuel economy on the iDrive whilst giving it a dab of oppo. Good luck keeping your eyes on the road.

NeilBlanchard wrote:
It has the highest performance available in any sedan.

Science fiction and fantasy. Even the top model diesels (or the top petrol models for that matter) will beat it in acceleration and oblitterate it in handling so how on earth do you possibly think it's going to outperform the BMW M5, Mercedes E63 AMG, Jaguar XFR and Audi RS6? As I stated before I can only find a Tesla Model S 85+ Performance laptime for Laguna Seca on fastestlaps.com and it's a long way down on the AMG and XFR with the M5 having not being tested on this track but as its generally regarded as the best of the lot, expect it to be faster again.

NeilBlanchard wrote:
Say what you want, but the Tesla Model S competes with the top of the line models in the highest performance sedans.

No it doesn't as I continue to point out by logical conjecture based upon overwhelming observable evidence. Tesla Model S competing with the M5... :lol: My 330d Touring could beat the 85kWH performance model I would expect on many tracks.

NeilBlanchard wrote:
But no, it doesn't have a perfumed air system like the S Class...

Or for that matter quite a lot of things, here's a few of the things in the S-class has:
AirMATIC air suspension with level adjustment and Adaptive Damping System
Closing aid for doors and boot lid
Headlamps – LED Intelligent Light System LED headlamps with variable light distribution for country roads and motorways, Active Light System, cornering light function, extended fog light function and Adaptive High Beam Assist
Magic Vision Control – adaptive windscreen wiper system, heated
Parking Package Parktronic with Active Park Assist and reversing camera
Front seats – full electric adjustment Fore and aft, height, inclination and seat cushion length adjustment, electric head restraint height adjustment and four-way electric lumbar support
Luxury automatic climate control – two-zone Three climate modes: Focused, Medium and Diffuse
Steering column – electrically adjustable with Easy-Entry function
Active Bonnet – pedestrian safety measure
Attention Assist Monitors steering behaviour and can help alert to long journey fatigue
Automatic child seat recognition sensor Works in conjunction with Mercedes-Benz child seats fitted with transponder
Collision Prevention Assist
Crosswind Assist
ESP® Curve Dynamic Assist
Front passenger seat with Pre-Safe® positioning function
Head restraints, rear (3) – electrically lowering
Pre-Safe® anticipatory safety system
Pre-Safe® Impulse
Seat belt pre-tensioners, belt force limiters and automatic belt height adjustment – front and outer rear seats
Traffic Sign Assist Speed Limit Assist with wrong-way warning function and display of speed limit in instrument cluster

Compare that to the Tesla feature lost where you actually have to fold the mirrors and close the bootlid by hand. Plus you have to sit on plastic seats. :lol: There's no way you can logically think it competes with the S-class in any sense, hence why I keep pointing out that the 5-series, E-class, A6, XF et al are it's nearest competitors and even then it looks a bit peasant spec despite the higher asking price.

NeilBlanchard wrote:
The batteries do not represent any more energy than any other material used in automobiles. Also, the batteries will be recycled.

454kg is a lot of material. A lot of material which won't last the lifetime of the car. Other materials will also be recycled but recycling has it's own wastage.

NeilBlanchard wrote:
It uses FAR less energy over it's lifetime than any fossil fueled car.

What, compared to a Toyota Prius or similar? It has previously been shown that a Land Rover Defender has a better overall environmental impact than a Toyota Prius, simply because the thing really can be used for decades rather than having to be thrown away after 10. Then again, really long term reliability doesn't add anything for marketing men. They want you to buy something that you'll need to replace. :roll:

NeilBlanchard wrote:
It requires far less regular maintenance - and the oil changes and other related items that are required to run an ICE - add even more to the carbon footprint for a fossil fueled car.

We've already been through this point. Servicing costs related to internal combustion engines are minor unless you are dealing with something old and at the point of failure. My car does 19000 miles between service intervals and even then it's not especially expensive. Modern cars don't burn oil unless there is something very wrong and old oil is recycled. Tyres are far more of a cost on any car and by adding all of that weight of the batteries you're going to need higher load rated tyres, thus adding cost and rolling resistance.

NeilBlanchard wrote:
The Tesla Supercharger system is being built up - in a couple of years, you will be able to drive coast to coast - for free. Those stations can charge it to 80% (I think?) in under 30 minutes, and they use solar PV arrays to (more than) offset the energy used.

While I support a national electric car charging scheme, it's annoying that it's a single manufacturer. Will other manufacturers cars be able to use these stations or is it locked down to a single manufacturer?

NeilBlanchard wrote:
You can put a solar PV system on your house, and generate enough energy to offset most (or all) of what you use in your house *and* in your EV.

We have solar panels too. The problem I see to using them to charge an electric car is about time of generation and cost/selling price of electricity. When you have solar panels you can sell to the grid or you can use the electricity yourself and it generally works out better than you use the electricity while you are generating it rather than selling it to the grid. With solar this is fine if you keep your car parked at your house all day but how many people do that? Maybe electric cars are perfect if you want to go out for a drive at night time, sneaking up on prostitutes and murdering them.

NeilBlanchard wrote:
Electric cars are the best way to go; because they will make us truly energy independent, and they will be a key part of us stop changing the climate. The climate that all life depends on.

Big closing point there but not adding anything. I'm not against electric cars. As stated I really do like some electric cars and have looked at this in great detail before, I was even toying with the idea of getting an electric car for business, making a killing on the mileage payments I get given and just accepting that I'd have to stop often to recharge. Some electric cars make more sense than others and the Model S to me, just doesn''t. It misses the target market where electric cars are most applicable, is hardly affordable yet doesn't measure up to conventional competitors in that price bracket, and they've fallen for the mistake of trying to overcompensate for range and giving it massive batteries.

On a lighter note, in relevant, well thought out, good value electric car news the BMW i3 is now starting to arrive with buyers. The McLaren P1 hybrid has sold out. Plus Gordon Murray's T27 concept is being implemented by Yamaha as the MOTIV.e. The internal combustion based T25 remains unimplemented at this stage. I have the absolute greatest of respect for Gordon Murray and what he did for several decades in F1, then designing the McLaren F1 and SLR, plus he is game enough to have shaved his moustache for charity but I'm a little upset that Yamaha ditched the 1+2 seating arrangement for a more conventional 2 seat arrangement!

andyb wrote:
Its £60,000 more than I can afford.

If you could afford it you would be more likely to take a logical decision instead and work out that it wasn't worth it. Dream cars are one thing but people who buy their dream cars generally end up dissappointed. This also goes hand in hand with why if you're wealthy you don't buy a supercar despite the fact that all people who can't afford one would if they could

andyb wrote:
The fake grill on the front, there is no need for it at all and IMO it spoils the look of the car.

Quite common on cars, they generally don't need as much ventilation as the designer might lead you to believe. Just look at the lower grilles on many cars and you notice they're simply plastic mouldings with no function. Some also have small aerodynamic purposes like deflecting air through to the outer leading edge of the wheel arch. For styling purposes it might be preferable as otherwise the car doesn't have a 'nose'.

There seems to be a lot of ideas here of 'dream' cars without substantiation with facts. I've brought a lot of facts to this topic and do so with a lot of knoweldge of cars having driven literally hundreds of models from about 40 manufacturers. I do have a lot of knowledge of the kind of cars this competes with price wise and having had the option of buying a car in that market area, have already been through the logical sides of the arguments for and against. I know some of you might happen to like a car, but that's no substitute for having knowledge of it's competitors.

_________________
Silverstone SG03B: E8200, Asus P5E-VM HDMI, 2Gb RAM, Leadtek 9600GT+S1 rev. 2, Samsung 500Gb, Seasonic X-400, 2x Akasa 120mm, Scythe Zipang 2 fanless


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: How to silence your car
PostPosted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 4:34 pm 
Offline
*Lifetime Patron*

Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 9:09 am
Posts: 1857
Location: Northern California.
what i find amazing is how much energy is being wasted to bag on and criticize any nontraditional combustion engine cars. I say the more options there are to get around efficiently, the better.

_________________
“USA is not America, America is a continent!”


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: How to silence your car
PostPosted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 6:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 6:50 am
Posts: 28
edh, you sir/madam are an idiot, you can copy and paste from datasheets well but you clearly have no bloody idea about the real world, a prius is thrown away after 10 years is it, Land Rover Defender has a better overall environmental impact, care to elaborate? Do you work for big oil?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: How to silence your car
PostPosted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 11:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 11:23 am
Posts: 644
Location: Germany
rthorntn wrote:
edh, you sir/madam are an idiot, you can copy and paste from datasheets well but you clearly have no bloody idea about the real world, a prius is thrown away after 10 years is it, Land Rover Defender has a better overall environmental impact, care to elaborate? Do you work for big oil?


Does the term environmental balance mean something to you?

The point edh was making (i won't dig into wether the Tesla competes with top modells, because it costs as much i think it should be compared to any car at equal or cheaper price range) was:

From scratch to dead car, how much strain does the making, usage and repair of the specific car to our environment? If you assume a Land Rover Defender lasting anything from 15-40 years of service and compare it to the environmental strain a single battery unit for any given electric car causes, results are astonishing to say the least.

The main reason for the bad results of the battery unit are the hard to get materials used insinde modern electronics. If need be, google for the environmental impact of nickel mining in Ontario, CA as an example for the problems with the materials used in modern batteries.

The Defender used to be a purely mechanical car, where materials are rather non problematic and the environmental impact of the fuel used over 40 years is still less severe than that of a single battery unit.

Edit: On a side note, this thread clearly shows the stupidity of the non standard unit systems in the US, UK & rest of the world. It would be far easier to understand each other if a Megabyte is a Megabyte, regardless if you happen to live in San Fran, Glasgow or Cologne. :P


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: How to silence your car
PostPosted: Sat Nov 23, 2013 4:33 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 1:49 pm
Posts: 1196
Location: UK
xan_user wrote:
what i find amazing is how much energy is being wasted to bag on and criticize any nontraditional combustion engine cars. I say the more options there are to get around efficiently, the better.

I'm not sure if this is meant against me but to clarify, throughout I have said that I am NOT against electric cars. They have their place and there are certainly some good ones which I have spoken about. The Tesla Model S however misses the point as it's a car for a target market where it is not most logically appropriate and is instead only a materialistic want, hidden under the subdefuge of being seen to be environmentally friendly. If the batteries were smaller, I'd like it more. If the company hadn't sued Top Gear and lost, I might even like the company. The only reason why in the US you see it as magical is because you don't have the kind of diesels that we do which you so easily could do.

rthorntn wrote:
edh, you sir/madam are an idiot, you can copy and paste from datasheets well but you clearly have no bloody idea about the real world

Firstly there's no need for this. You haven't even posted in this thread before so why get all personal about it? It's somewhat of a sweeping assumption to say I have no idea about the real world and perhaps you would care to enlighten us as to how you are more experienced? What car do you drive?

rthorntn wrote:
a prius is thrown away after 10 years is it, Land Rover Defender has a better overall environmental impact, care to elaborate?

I don't need to so much as Pappnass has already covered this point well. There was a contraversial report in the US that showed the Hummer H3 to have a lower lifetime CO2 impact than a Prius however that was somewhat flawed in it's analysis and I certainly recommend the H3 to anyone. The Defender is way more fuel efficient than the H3 obviously but it's purpose in this argument is that it's design life is so long that it will outlive other vehicles with minimal resources put into maintaining it. The diesel engines are incredibly rugged and will run on pretty much anything so you can also run it on biodiesel without modification. It's an extreme example to give of course as there are plenty of small diesel cars which have 10-20% better fuel economy than the Prius and beat it by a long way on lifetime environmental impact as they don't have the extra mechanicals and electricals of a Prius.

Toyota has had a massive marketing/PR campaign behind their hybrid models from the beginning yet despite this have never been able to provide a detailed breakdown of the manufacturing impact of the vehicle, even though they claim to have done this internally. Something to hide perhaps? Here is a nice article that covers the Prius:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/gre ... dding.html

rthorntn wrote:
Do you work for big oil?

No, I work in the medical sector. If you don't mind me asking, what do you do?

Pappnaas wrote:
On a side note, this thread clearly shows the stupidity of the non standard unit systems in the US, UK & rest of the world.

I agree. The UK is officially a metric country with the only legal exceptions being the roads which are a mix - roads are designed, built and operated in metric, only the distances and speedlimits that road users see are Imperial.

As for non-standard, the Imperial system of measures is very much a standard although now increasingly deprecated and there are variations in the US system. I would normally use materic for such a discussion but because this discussion has mostly been with Americans I have used miles in some places, for example it is more convenient to say its 400 miles from my my house to Glasgow than 644km but it is easier to say 1000km than 621 miles. :lol: Weights and dimensions of cars should always be in metric as that is what they have been designed in unless they're really old.

_________________
Silverstone SG03B: E8200, Asus P5E-VM HDMI, 2Gb RAM, Leadtek 9600GT+S1 rev. 2, Samsung 500Gb, Seasonic X-400, 2x Akasa 120mm, Scythe Zipang 2 fanless


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: How to silence your car
PostPosted: Sat Nov 23, 2013 5:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 6:50 am
Posts: 28
Edh, you mention Glasgow are you Scottish?

http://oecdinsights.org/2013/06/19/avoi ... by-diesel/ I didn't buy a deisel because diesel is shit.

I drive a brand new Prius V, it doesn't get marketed here in Oz, 5.2l/100km average right now, its petrol and has a pretty small ICE, I had my last car for 15 years and see no reason why I won't have the Prius just as long, I hear there are working Prius cabs in California that are older than 10 years?

Ah the hummer report, you say it's flawed and yet you extrapolate on it?

I work in IT Security.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: How to silence your car
PostPosted: Sun Nov 24, 2013 3:57 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 1:49 pm
Posts: 1196
Location: UK
rthorntn wrote:
Edh, you mention Glasgow are you Scottish?

No, I just happened to be in Glasgow on business last week. If you have to drive long distance for work (and I do have to, it's impractical/impossible taking medical equipment on the train or plane) then diesel is the way to go.

rthorntn wrote:
http://oecdinsights.org/2013/06/19/avoiding-death-by-diesel/

First let's go through Simon Upton's piece there. He is a politician, not a scientist and like most politicians has no scientific education. His piece is mostly Euro-centric despite being from NZ so I will handle this from an EU standpoint.
- The claim that diesel causes 40000 deaths in France is only a claim, not proven. Plus the particulates and NOx that are being blamed are only from older diesels. Modern diesels have DPFs and there are very strict European restrictions on particulates. If you have an older diesel you can't even drive it into London now and it's similar with other large cities in Europe. To say that modern diesels cause this problem is wrong.
- Picking Beijing as an example shows he doesn't know about international car markets. China is dominated by petrol and the problems in China are not caused by diesel. Photochemical smog is caused by unburnt hydrocarbons, mostly from petrol. As for particulates, a lot of that is from Chinese industry, not road transport. They have put restrictions in place on SOx however the best way of preventing the impact from vehicles is to get rid of sulphur from the fuel, this is not hard to do and is mandatory in the EU.
- His assertions on taxation are mostly already implemented. Whilst there are some countries like France where diesel traditionally is taxed lower than petrol, in most EU countries that is not the case, taxes have already increased and diesel certainly costs more than petrol. At the moment it tends to be about £1.33 a litre here for petrol and £1.38 for diesel. So we're using it because the fuel is cheaper and he can give up that argument.
- Saying that NO2 ppm from diesels has increased since the mid-1990s as regulation has changed is out of date. The latest Euro IV standards deal with this point and for a long time now the CO restiction on diesels is HALF that for petrols. Not worried about CO then?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_e ... enger_cars
Quote:
On the CO2 score, diesel is also more polluting, causing higher emissions per litre fuel than petrol.

- That's because diesel is denser than petrol. You burn fuel by mass, not by volume which goes part of the way to explain better fuel economy as well.

So the only points of his that were even correct are out of date anyway.

rthorntn wrote:
I didn't buy a deisel because diesel is shit.

Any logical reason? I will accept that diesel is not for everyone as it is not appropriate for very short journeys but for those journey's you should be looking at other forms of transport, like walking. If however you are doing long distances, cross country, with a mixture of locations that are not easily covered by alternative forms of transport, diesel is the way to go. Why do you think the road haulage industry uses diesel? ...and when was the last time you saw a petrol powered container ship?!?

rthorntn wrote:
I drive a brand new Prius V

Wow, a Prius driver acting like a sanctimonious, holier-than-thou arse! This is my main problem with the Toyota Prius. I see them all of the time and it's amazing to see them sometimes in the outside lane of the motorway, open-toed sandle shod foot to the boards, with an empty roof rack wasting fuel for no particularly well explained reason - but it's OK, they're driving a Prius so it MUST be more fuel efficient right? I'lll be getting better fuel economy than they will over that kind of mileage at speed.

Ever seen the Top gear episode where a BMW E90 M3 lapped Dunsfold at the same speed as a Prius? Guess which got better fuel economy?

rthorntn wrote:
it doesn't get marketed here in Oz

Maybe because there isn't a ute version? :lol: Does this mean you've had it imported especially? If so, that's a big environmental no-no as the impact of doing so is big even by container ship as it won't be handled in as direct and streamlined way as when delivered en masse by the manufacturer.

rthorntn wrote:
5.2l/100km average right now

You know what? I'm getting 5.2l/100km right now. Slightly down on the official 5.1l/100km but then it is winter here which does hit fuel economy for all cars. Diesels tend to perform far closer to official figures than hybrids as they are not setup specifically to run the test cycles without the engine starting. Manufacturers know the test cycles and design hybrids such that the electric range is just enough to do the initial part of the EU urban cycle where there are stops, thus making it seem more efficient than it will be in typical usage.

I am driving an estate which does make a bit of a difference anyway given slightly higher weight and Cd, the saloon is rated at 4.9l/100km. Plus it's a far more comofortable, better handling, better specced car than the Prius. Main difference though is you have 100kW and 142Nm which gets you to 100km/h in 10.4 seconds and on to 180km/h. I have 190kW and 560Nm which gets me to 100km/h in 5.4 seconds and on to an electronically limited 250km/h or with the limiter removed probably about 270km/h. So same fuel economy in the real world despite being better in so many ways. :D

rthorntn wrote:
I had my last car for 15 years and see no reason why I won't have the Prius just as long, I hear there are working Prius cabs in California that are older than 10 years?

Battery failures on hyrbids do happen in time and are expensive. For this reason there are some which just end up being scrapped when it happens as it just isn't worth fixing. The taxis might well be supported under a commerical cotnract and it is very much in Toyota's marketing interests to have somewhere like California using hybrids as taxis. They'll be getting preferential pricing.

My 10 year number that you keep jumping on is perhaps not something you are so familiar with. In many European countries cars do have shorter lives than in the rest of the world. Some of this is mandated by stricter testing in some countries. For example in the UK you can buy old cars for £1 sometimes. Why are they so cheap? Well because they are due for their MOT test and they're almost certainly going to fail and isn't worth the money required to repair it. A lot of the time they have scrap value and that's it. It's not 'always' 10 years but for a basic car like a Prius I would be very surprised to see many 20 year old ones on the road. You hardly ever see one of the original 1997 ones now and even the 2002 vintage ones seem to be scarcer than they used to be. It could fail it's MOT for any number of reasons just as a normal car could, then the owner would think 'hmm, might only be £200 to put right this time but the battery could be next, I'll get rid of it now'.

rthorntn wrote:
Ah the hummer report, you say it's flawed and yet you extrapolate on it?

I said it's analysis was somewhat flawed however there was NO counter data issued by Toyota. Lots of aggressive PR refuting it but no proper lifetime CO2 data. Neither have they presented this data to UK public bodies who also requested it when looking into environmentally conscience vehicle purchases. If they can't release the data either they don't know or they chose not to publish it, whichever way you can not trust Toyota either. The Hummer H3 will not live as long as the Land Rover, a car so simple you can fix it with a brick. It's body panels are aluminium so do not rust either and it is way more fuel efficient than the Hummer. Even if the Hummer data was out by a factor of 2, the Land Rover Defender would still have a better whole life CO2 than the Prius, that's my whole point!

rthorntn wrote:
I work in IT Security.

Do you do 50000km a year by road on business? Of course you don't, if you did then you wouldn't have a Prius.

This thread is fantastic. Would anyone like to propose the existance of the Loch Ness monster, aliens landing in the Roswell Incident or assassination of Princess Diana? I'll be happy to disprove that too.

_________________
Silverstone SG03B: E8200, Asus P5E-VM HDMI, 2Gb RAM, Leadtek 9600GT+S1 rev. 2, Samsung 500Gb, Seasonic X-400, 2x Akasa 120mm, Scythe Zipang 2 fanless


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: How to silence your car
PostPosted: Sun Nov 24, 2013 1:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 6:50 am
Posts: 28
edh, it's almost as if you're arguing that diesel undeservedly has a bad rap, it is a less refined form of fuel compared to petrol therefore it's dirtier, you can put lipstick on a pig but it's still a f#c*ing pig:

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ ... ate-change

"It is also becoming clear that the technologies to control some types of pollution from diesels are not effective during real-world driving"

"Wow, a Prius driver acting like a sanctimonious, holier-than-thou arse!"

Haha, you got all that from me calling you an idiot, the car is only a month old, nowhere near long enough for me to become an arse surely!

It only has 1200km on it, my guess is the economy will creep down to around 4.5l/100km. I do a lot of city driving and EV mode in traffic is good, the Prius teaches you to drive more economically, if there are no other cars around you can accelerate slowly to keep it in EV for a lot of the very fuel expensive standing start.

The Prius V is pretty much an estate, it has 7 seats for a pub emergency but they are usually collapsed giving an estate size boot.

I think you are having a laugh, the Prius battery is around four grand, so 10% of the cost of the car after 10 years, I will save that in fuel, haven't you heard fuel is only going to go massively up in price, oh and in 2023 battery technology will probably be cheaper, you think I am going to dump it for that reason?

The hummer report is flawed because it completely relies on the bullshit "fact" that you dump a Prius after 10 years, you can't just cherry pick parts of the report, the whole report is bull, a land rover is a fricking brick on wheels and has a big engine, it's an uneconomical car mostly driven by halfwits that will never take it off-road for fear of chipping the paint, you really do have no common sense if you can't glance at a Land Rover then a Prius and tell me which one is better for the environment, blah, blah, blah it has a battery and lots of funky electronics which means it's bad, whatever, I can only speak for myself and my lifestyle, I won't be dumping this car after 10 years so my Prius is way more economical than a bloody land rover, oh and my car pollutes less than your diesel, wake up to yourself!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: How to silence your car
PostPosted: Sun Nov 24, 2013 3:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 1:49 pm
Posts: 1196
Location: UK
rthorntn wrote:
it is a less refined form of fuel compared to petrol therefore is dirtier

Hold on, you do know what a fractionation column is right? RIGHT? You do know how it works? No single fraction is any more or less 'refined' than another. It separates hydrocarbons by their viscosity and as a fellow scientist (I assume you are, otherwise you wouldn't be entering into this argument) you should understand this. Heavier grades of fuel have their advantage and this is why cargo ships which have the worlds most efficient engines run on fuel oil which is simply a heavier grade of diesel. There are different numbers of bonds involved and as a result each fuel has a different level of CO2 output per unit energy:
Gasoline: 73.38 g/MJ
Diesel: 73.25g/MJ

As a fellow scientist of course you would be aware of this and therefore I'd really love to know how you feel diesel is a 'less refined form of fuel' and 'therefore is dirtier'?

rthorntn wrote:
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/nov/10/pollutionwatch-petrol-diesel-climate-change

Already covered by the introduction of Euro II, III, IV, V and VI as I have already discussed in some depth. Why are people writing obsolete articles? :roll: As for diesel particulates being carcinogenic, most things in the wrong particulate size are, like the particles you get out of a petrol car which can actually be higher. Even if it is the case, there is no reason not to buy a new diesel vehicle as all of this information no longer applies due to new regulations.

rthorntn wrote:
Haha you got all that from me slagging you off

Let's face it, you did come straight into a thread and launch into a personal attack. That's not the done thing and you really should try to be more civil. At no point during this thread before did anyone resort to name calling so why choose to and lower the tone?

rthorntn wrote:
I do a lot of city driving and sitting in EV mode in traffic is nice.

You're in the wrong form of transport for that situation if you're spending so much time sitting still. Walk, cycle, take the bus, take the train, carshare, all of those things would make more of a difference than you driving one car or another. Plus (as already covered) many modern cars have Stop-Start systems so it is not reserved for hybrid owners to be able to cut their engines when stationery.

rthorntn wrote:
The Prius V is pretty much an estate, it has 7 seats for a pub emergency but they are usually collapsed giving an estate size boot.

Do you really need those extra seats? The 7 seater version is over 13% less fuel efficient and puts out 101g/km of CO2 instead of 89g/km so you really, really should be using those extra seats. If not, you're unncessarily carrying far more weight and aerodynamic drag around with you than you need to. A normal estate bodyshell might make 4% difference but not 13%. It also makes the car even slower. Over 12 seconds to 100km/h and a top speed of only 110km/h.

rthorntn wrote:
I think you are having a laugh, the Prius battery is around four grand, so 10% of the cost of the car after 10 years

I know used car prices vary from country to country. In the UK I can find a 9 year old Prius for only £4400 and that's one in excellent condition, low mileage with a recent service. A 10 year old one with high mileage and a bit of wear and tear will be less than £2000. If you're talking battery costs in AUD then that's around £2250. Are you really going to pay more than the value of the vehicle to put it right? If it was in a crash an insurer would write the car off given such repair circumtances. I have looked up some data and ~4% of the mark 1 and 2 Toyota Prii registered in the UK are now declared SORN (Statutory Off Road Notice), in addition a further 10% are no longer registered. 14% for cars made between 2001 and 2009 that are only 4-12 years old is a lot:
http://www.howmanyleft.co.uk/vehicle/to ... ius_hybrid

I stand by my claim that people WILL throw the whole car away, because some people must be, the data shows it. I'm not saying that every car here is a battery failure as obviously some might be written off in a crash, moved abroad, a few people might forget to buy their tax disc, but those reasons go nowhere to explain there being 14% of old model Prii missing.

I wouldn't be too surprised if Toyota takes some in part exchange for new models then has them chopped for parts as being not economically viable as a running car. All car dealers do this a certain amount.

rthorntn wrote:
oh and in 2023 battery technology will probably be cheaper

There is no way car manufacturers will choose to make newer battery technology available for models that go out of production. It's not in their interests to as they'd rather you bought the new model. Car manufacturers don't for example routinely make new engine upgrades available to purchase for existing cars so why any different for batteries?

You can expect to be able to buy a like-for-like replacement battery as they will legally be required to supply one to you I suspect - don't know about Australian law but in the EU I know car manufacturers are legally required to provide parts for 5 years after end of production so you should get one. Price for a like-for-like replacement will not decrease by any real amount though, you'd be naive to think that they'd have a reason to do this as they'd rather end of life your car and get you to buy a new one. They don't greatly reduce prices of other parts as production methods rarely change greatly once a vehicle starts its production run.

rthorntn wrote:
The hummer report is flawed because it completely relies on the bullshit "fact" that you dump a Prius after 10 years, you can't just cherry pick parts of the report, the whole report is bull, a land rover is a fricking brick on wheels and has a big engine it's an uneconomical car, you really do have no common sense if you can't glance at a land rover then a prius and tell me which one is better for the environment, blah, blah, blah it has a battery and lots of funky electronics which means it's bad, whatever, I can only speak for myself and my lifestyle, I won't be dumping this car after 10 years so my Prius is way more economical than a bloody land rover, oh and my car pollutes less than your diesel, wake up to yourself!

Please come up for breath occasionally. There's a '.' on your keyboard to denote this.

To split your arguments up here, the fact some Prii last less than 10 years is real - I've shown you both the economical and registration data for this. There are plenty of other cars that have short lifespans too and it is perhaps this that the Prii aligns to rather than it being something inherent with hybrids. The Land Rover on the other hand just goes on and on and on. Still Toyota have no data to refute this.

As for a brick on wheels, you do know the drag coefficient of a brick right? Of course as you're entering into this argument you are very familiar with the Navier-Stoke's equation? A Defender is far more aerodynamic than a brick, it's actually got a lower drag coefficient than an F1 car come to mention it but that's another point entirely. No, it isn't the most aerodynamic vehicle either, I for one know that and I am more than aware of it's fuel economy lacking, but thats what makes the point. It's still over it's life got a lower environmental impact than a whole succession of Toyota Prii or for that matter, most cars that have a short design life. The fact however that it goes on for so long and is made from environmentally friendly materials are the redeeming factors.

As for a 'big' engine, it's a 2.2 litre diesel, plus as already stated, it is setup to run on environmentally friendly biodiesel. You could find any number of carbon neutral, low polluting, cheap, renewable fuels to run it on without modification. I know you can put E10 in your Prius but that makes little difference overall. If you were to try a purer form of bioethanol then you would run into problems as the fuel would gradually destroy the engine internals of your Prius. Plus there's the issue with bioethanol that it generally comes from foodcrops, thus pushing up food prices in the third world, something diesel from waste vegetable and animal oil doesn't do. So yes, a Land Rover can be MANY times less polluting than a Prius and without causing mass starvation.

rthorntn wrote:
oh and my car pollutes less than your diesel, wake up to yourself!

Not over the full life of the vehicle and not over the kind of journeys I do. The Prius is not good at high speed motorway journeys when it basically just functions like any other 1.8 litre, naturally aspirated petrol engine with the inherent inefficiencies of a CVT. In addition I didn't buy this car to specifically be kind to the environment. I have the money, I want something nice and comfortable, highly specced, bloody fast yet fuel efficient. Fuel economy and pollution levels is not everything to me but does have it's cost implications in tax and fuel cost, that's my personal financial choice. If I had wanted to go with fuel economy and pollution above all then I'd have gone for the 320d Efficient Dynamics. If I didn't have to carry anything with me and therefore a smaller car was OK, then a Mini Cooper D would be the way to go. Whichever, over long motorway journeys they'd both be far better than a Prius.

Now please leave engineering and science concepts to those who understand them - just because you don't understand doesn't mean you have to resort to personal attacks. Take my advice and stick to IT security. You've got to be better at playing 'script kiddie whack-a-mole' than trying to have a logical discussion about cars.

_________________
Silverstone SG03B: E8200, Asus P5E-VM HDMI, 2Gb RAM, Leadtek 9600GT+S1 rev. 2, Samsung 500Gb, Seasonic X-400, 2x Akasa 120mm, Scythe Zipang 2 fanless


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: How to silence your car
PostPosted: Sun Nov 24, 2013 4:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 6:50 am
Posts: 28
I think you must be confused, I never at any point stated I am a scientist and I am not throwing scientific numbers about, frankly I am a bit confused as to why a scientist appears to be doing the job of a delivery driver, surely your impressive brain could get you a nice cushy desk job, all the driving can't be doing your body that much good?

We got the Prius V because we wanted the space, for our mountain bikes to go inside so we didn't have to use roof racks. The fuel efficiency is what it is, I think I can get it down to below 5l/100km and for me that's good for a petrol estate.

I walk most places and take the bus a lot but Sydney is a large city and certain areas are not well connected by public transport, plus all the decent mountain biking is a few hours out of the city.

I am going to stick to my point that diesel is worse for the environment than petrol, it's a position that is relatively easy to defend, mainly because it's the type of sense that's generally common, throw all the numbers around that you like, you can call all the articles I link old and incorrect till the cows come home that's your prerogative, mine is to lower my carbon footprint, as an example since moving in to my house last year I put 4KW of solar panels on the roof and started collecting rainwater in a 5000L tank, my power bills are a quarter of my friends. Just doing my bit for the children.


Last edited by rthorntn on Sun Nov 24, 2013 9:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: How to silence your car
PostPosted: Sun Nov 24, 2013 5:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 5:18 am
Posts: 491
Location: London, UK
rthorntn wrote:
I think you must be confused, I never at any point stated I am a scientist and I am not throwing scientific numbers about, frankly I am a bit confused as to why a scientist appears to be doing the job of a delivery driver, surely your impressive brain could get you a nice cushy desk job, all the driving can't be doing your body that much good?
My guess is he's a field scientist and complex medical machinery requires clever brains to get them installed, maintained and working. Not to mention explaining its intricacies to the people using them - surprisingly also known as training others.

Hat-tip to edh for being so patient with rthorntn. I can only repeat his advice in on punctuation. It really helps getting arguments across. On the upside you'd also sound less like an overly excited four year old gasping for air.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: How to silence your car
PostPosted: Sun Nov 24, 2013 5:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 6:50 am
Posts: 28
It's not a novel, it's a forum post, use your imagination to insert full-stops, or don't, I don't care ;)

His job sounds like an awesome opportunity for couriers, documentation and teleconferencing, technology is amazing, you can do surgery remotely, make a plane or car that can operate autonomously, there is really no reason to have medical equipment that's complex to operate, unless it's done to justify the cost, all the travel is probably because people aren't going to be happily ass-raped by his prices if he doesn't make loads of trips to see them :)

http://classic.slashdot.org/story/13/11/17/1427220

I must admit now it seems to have gone more off-topic and got a bit silly, my fault.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: How to silence your car
PostPosted: Mon Nov 25, 2013 2:35 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2008 1:49 pm
Posts: 1196
Location: UK
rthorntn wrote:
I think you must be confused, I never at any point stated I am a scientist

I know you're not a scientist, it's obvious as you don't know the scientific background. I was being sarcastic as you keep stating things about which fuel is 'more refined' as if you know what you're talking about.

rthorntn wrote:
frankly I am a bit confused as to why a scientist appears to be doing the job of a delivery driver, surely your impressive brain could get you a nice cushy desk job, all the driving can't be doing your body that much good?

So there's another personal insult. Desk jobs don't interest me. I like to be out doing things and I'm in a very customer facing field so I spend a lot of my time face to face with customers. Driving is fine for me as I spend far less time sitting down than you do at your desk.

rthorntn wrote:
I am going to stick to my point that diesel is worse for the environment than petrol, it's a position that is relatively easy to defend

OK, stick to it all you want but it clearly isn't a position that's easy to defend as you have backed up your argument with no real facts, even if you do think something is 'common sense'.

rthorntn wrote:
His job sounds like an awesome opportunity for couriers, documentation and teleconferencing, technology is amazing, you can do surgery remotely, make a plane or car that can operate autonomously, there is really no reason to have medical equipment that's complex to operate, unless it's done to justify the cost, all the travel is probably because people aren't going to be happily ass-raped by his prices if he doesn't make loads of trips to see them

Right, another topic which you seem to think that you know everything about. As you didn't get my sarcasm before about you not be a scientist, I won't do this by sarcasm but merely with fact.
- Medical devices that require installation have to signed off in the field before use
- Medical devices that need repair need to be tested and certified by someone who is themselves certified to do so
- Medical staff need training both before clinical cases and support during initial cases by someone who is certified to do so, such that they can be signed off to use the equipment safely.

Maybe documentation and teleconferencing is OK in IT security but when you've got someone's head open you'd really hope the guy doing it is doing more than just reading the manual as he goes.

As for remote surgery, this is something of a myth as making things easy. You still have to have everything onsite and a clinician there in person to prep the patient, open the patient up, close up at the end and intervene to continue the case in the event of a loss of connection. No, you can't just dial into a hospital and do surgery, it doesn't work like that!

rthorntn wrote:
http://classic.slashdot.org/story/13/11/17/1427220

As it states it is not CE marked, FDA approved or any other other regulatory marks so is not legally allowed in most of the world for medical use. I do not expect you to understand this or any of the other medical things which you've decided to start arguing on but I do expect you to at least show some respect to those that do.

Now, back to the order of business at hand - the noise that cars make. Within the car this can be categorised in a few main groups:
- engine noise
- road noise
- wind noise
- squeaks and rattles
- anything else

Engine noise is largely dependant upon two factors, revs and engine load. Low revs is generally better to a point so using high gears keeps noise down. Manual transmissions will help here as you can both choose gears yourself and use a bigger and therefore quieter gear. Engine noise here generally goes hand in hand with fuel efficiency and therefore CO2 footprint. Engine noise can also vary as the car warms up although it is extremely inefficient to let a car warm up before driving it, it's far better to just get in and drive and this is what the manuals for modern cars specifically say. Automatic gear boxes bring other disadvantages if they have torque convertors or CVT as it leaves the engine often slurring away at medium revs without much progress being made. Both noisy and slow.

I'm not fussed about engine noise at high revs and high power as if you're going for an overtake lets say, it's only for a short time. The noise the car makes when you're cruising along is what really drags so this is when you want to have things quiet.

Most of these facts are set in car design but you can certainly make sure your car is as quiet as possible by using the higher gears more, choosing quieter tyres which generally tend to be more energy efficient too, removing any external disruptions to the airflow like roofracks, flags, aerial decorations etc, keeping the car serviced, hunting for squeaks and rattles and dealing with them by dismantling bits of the dash and applying foam where required. Anything else to make your car quieter?

_________________
Silverstone SG03B: E8200, Asus P5E-VM HDMI, 2Gb RAM, Leadtek 9600GT+S1 rev. 2, Samsung 500Gb, Seasonic X-400, 2x Akasa 120mm, Scythe Zipang 2 fanless


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: How to silence your car
PostPosted: Mon Nov 25, 2013 8:36 am 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 4:36 am
Posts: 4609
Location: Monterey Bay, CA
To everyone on this thread: Please be civil.

_________________
1080p Gaming build: i5-4670K, Mugen 4, MSI Z87-G45, MSI GTX 760 2GB Gaming, 8GB 1866 RAM, Samsung Evo 250GB, WD Red 2TB, Samsung DVD burner, Fractal Define R4, Antec True Quiet 140 (2 front + rear) case fans, Seasonic X-560. 35-40W idle, 45-55W video streaming, 170-200W WoW, 200-230W Rift, 318W stress test (Prime95 + Furmark)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: How to silence your car
PostPosted: Mon Nov 25, 2013 1:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 6:50 am
Posts: 28
Apologies from me.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: How to silence your car
PostPosted: Tue Nov 26, 2013 10:08 am 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 7:11 pm
Posts: 7369
Location: Maynard, MA, Eaarth
The Model S does have active suspension. You seem to conveniently get things wrong; like that is uses steel.

Can you name any other 5+2 sedan?

Can you name a quieter, smoother car?

Can you name a higher performance sedan?

Can you name a higher efficiency sedan?

Can you name a car that has less regular maintenance?

Can you produce the fuel to power any other sedan?

Can you name a large high performance sedan that costs less per mile to drive?

I doubt you can. The Tesla Model S is in a class by itself, and it redefines the automobile.

_________________
Sincerely, Neil
http://neilblanchard.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: How to silence your car
PostPosted: Tue Nov 26, 2013 8:52 pm 
Offline
*Lifetime Patron*

Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 9:09 am
Posts: 1857
Location: Northern California.
NeilBlanchard wrote:
and it redefines the automobile.

AND that truly scares the crap out of the 'car' industry and most of its fervent petrol-head supporters.

_________________
“USA is not America, America is a continent!”


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: How to silence your car
PostPosted: Wed Nov 27, 2013 9:21 am 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 7:11 pm
Posts: 7369
Location: Maynard, MA, Eaarth
xan_user wrote:
NeilBlanchard wrote:
and it redefines the automobile.

AND that truly scares the crap out of the 'car' industry and most of its fervent petrol-head supporters.


AND they have done it without any paid advertising, AND without any dealerships.

If we all drive an EV, then we can stop buying foreign oil. Can you imagine that?

AND we can transition to renewable energy - and take a big chunk out of our carbon footprint and greatly reduce our contribution to global warming.

CAN YOU IMAGINE THAT?

_________________
Sincerely, Neil
http://neilblanchard.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: How to silence your car
PostPosted: Wed Nov 27, 2013 2:58 pm 
Offline
*Lifetime Patron*

Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 9:09 am
Posts: 1857
Location: Northern California.
NeilBlanchard wrote:
xan_user wrote:
NeilBlanchard wrote:
and it redefines the automobile.

AND that truly scares the crap out of the 'car' industry and most of its fervent petrol-head supporters.


AND they have done it without any paid advertising, AND without any dealerships.

If we all drive an EV, then we can stop buying foreign oil. Can you imagine that?

AND we can transition to renewable energy - and take a big chunk out of our carbon footprint and greatly reduce our contribution to global warming.

CAN YOU IMAGINE THAT?

What is really needed now, is a federal renewable producer bill, that would guarantee homeowners be paid fair market value for the green power they put back into the grid.

_________________
“USA is not America, America is a continent!”


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 86 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group