Electric cars a bad idea?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marlin

My entire point to this thread was to allow people to recognize that we are angry at Big oil, yet we are going to replace it with someone else.

---

We don't need to be allowed to think by you or anyone else. We can do that ourselves, thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marlin

More smoke and mirrors for liberal douche hippie environmentalists. There will always be some Big 'xxxx' to be angry at for as long as we need to transport ourselves quickly over long distances.

---

Yes, but it doesn't take a liberal douchebag hippie to realize that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marlin

The government cramming hybrids and electrics down our throat is going to result in horrible repercussions.

---

Thank you for your considered opinion. Care for any facts to back that up? Research? Even any ideas at all? Spew accusations all you want, but without any ideas to fix the situation, you are just bitching to hear yourself bitch. Or has a teabag got stuck in your throat?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marlin

Remember that 10 years from now that I called it:) This is all smoke and mirrors to keep the masses happy that the government is actually doing something.:blab::blab: (president on red phone...sorry, it was the best I could do.)

---

Thank you Nostradamus. But I prefer criticism to be constructive. I do not dismiss alternatives as easily as you as you seem to. Any research to keep us from suckling the tit of foreign oil is fine by me personally, but your agenda seems to be to discredit all progressive thought on the matter in lieu of the status quo, which I think we all know is not sustainable over the next few decades.

well, talking hybrids fuel economy 2-3L per 100 km compared to same size sedan. so tell me how many kilometers I have to put on hybrid - just to cover up 6 grand difference in price for hybrid. Plus to maintain hybrids( electrics) cost more than regular car.
BUT! driving lexus 600h - is fun! )) Now I have to win lottery to buy one))

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IndianaVX

It's hard to type Full thoughts on this phone, but following on marlins line,
I haven't checked lately, but I don't think there are permits being allowed for any nuke plants in the U.S.

---

There are several nuke plants in construction right now, scheduled to come on line 2017-2020 time frame. I have a very high interest in this since its what I do for a living:) The plants are already scouting. They are hitting us up more than 1 year before our Navy contracts expire and hiring for plants not even up yet. Offer to buy our houses, pay for our moves, HUGE signing bonuses. Starting salary for a RO (reactor operator) is 80K plus overtime. They guarantee at least 10 hours overtime a week. We are starting in 6 figures without a degree! That is WAY more than I make in the Navy, and the civilian job is MUCH easier and they never ask you to leave your family for months at a time. Plus I don't have to live in San Diego or Norfolk, which are two of 4 choices I have in the Navy. Those places suck.
I will have my degree in a few months, so my salary will be even better. Right now, there are very few programs out there to drive high school graduates into the nuclear field, so a vast majority or ex-navy nukes.
So with all this job availability, maybe I can afford to buy some POS hybrid. :bgwb: Just to keep it on topic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dmitrikr

well, talking hybrids fuel economy 2-3L per 100 km compared to same size sedan. so tell me how many kilometers I have to put on hybrid - just to cover up 6 grand difference in price for hybrid. Plus to maintain hybrids( electrics) cost more than regular car.
BUT! driving lexus 600h - is fun! )) Now I have to win lottery to buy one))

---

Per edmunds, 4-6 years at 15k miles per year and 2.75 a gallon for fuel. Diesels pay for themselves in 1-3 years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marlin

Per edmunds, 4-6 years at 15k miles per year and 2.75 a gallon for fuel. Diesels pay for themselves in 1-3 years.

---

5years*15= 75k miles counting what? same price for fuel over 4-6years? No wear & tear on cars? Every one knows - battery getting old - discharges faster -needs to be recharged more often - more gas to use. gasoline engine - no wear and tear? SAME fuel consumption over 4-6 years?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grif

We don't need to be allowed to think by you or anyone else. We can do that ourselves, thanks.

Your damn right, God bless America.

Yes, but it doesn't take a liberal douchebag hippie to realize that.

Sure, but liberal douche hippies got one of the largest solar panel fields in America shutdown because of some stupid tortoise. This was not a photovoltaic field, but rather a mirror, boiling water type facility which is far more efficient. There is so much coddling of the specialist minority, that I thought I should give em a shout out and make em feel specialer:bwgy:.

If I offended any liberal douche hippies with my post, get over it, you drive a VX; A very environmentally unfriendly vehicle. Burns lots of oil, horrible mpg...I would put this akin to making fun of vegans on a hunting forum. Take your seemingly self righteousness to a forum that makes sense.

Thank you for your considered opinion. Care for any facts to back that up? Research? Even any ideas at all? Spew accusations all you want, but without any ideas to fix the situation, you are just bitching to hear yourself bitch. Or has a teabag got stuck in your throat?

Ideas, lets stick to technologies we know that work. There are lots of vehicles decades old (see Brian and Jack's posts about their old cars getting incredible mileage) We don't need to dump billions on new technology just for the sake of creating something new.

Thank you Nostradamus. But I prefer criticism to be constructive. I do not dismiss alternatives as easily as you as you seem to. Any research to keep us from suckling the tit of foreign oil is fine by me personally, but your agenda seems to be to discredit all progressive thought on the matter in lieu of the status quo, which I think we all know is not sustainable over the next few decades.

Did you even read my post?! There is nothing progressive about overpriced hybrid/electric cars. They were in mass production in the 30s. We are just trading one tit for another. I am happy with my current tit, no reason for me to throw down a fortune for an inferior tit that will put me in the same situation I am in now in twenty years. Take all the hybrid/electric money and throw it at something such as hydrogen or bio fuels that actually work rather than postponing the inevitable. (some promising fuels are being researched using algae, but if that stuff gets loose into the natural environment...) An electric/hybrid car is like wrapping electrical tape around an exposed conductor. Its just a temporary fix, we are better off taking the time and money and doing it right.

---

WTF man, where did all this anger come from? Too much tequila? It tends to make some people angry.
This chart is cut and pasted from 2010 data presented by the US geological survey group of the top 17 oil producers in the world, the years representation is for the respective country at current usage rates per country and located in land the respective country owns. Add all these together, it is many decades of oil use...

Country Reserve life in years

Saudi Arabia 66
Iraq 142
Canada 188
Iran 95
Kuwait 110
Venezuela 100
United Arab Emirates 93
Russia 17
Kazakhstan 93
Libya 66
Nigeria 41
United States 8
China 11
Qatar 46
Algeria 15
Brazil 14
Mexico 9

For the total of these 17 nations for the world, it is a worst case scenario of 54 years. This is based on only a 50% successful recovery of the known contents. Generally, they are closer to 70-80% but for the reserves,they use a standard 50%.
This is also based on known oil fields, does not include prospective oil fields that have not been surveyed and quantified.
This is just the reserve fields, not being actively pumped. So we have a long while before gas goes away out of necessity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dmitrikr

5years*15= 75k miles counting what? same price for fuel over 4-6years? No wear & tear on cars? Every one knows - battery getting old - discharges faster -needs to be recharged more often - more gas to use. gasoline engine - no wear and tear? SAME fuel consumption over 4-6 years?

---

That is assuming a constant fuel cost and mpg over the time period, and the recouping of the purchase price difference of the same model in a conventional gasoline model. It also did not include the depreciation cost, the insurance difference and so on. There just isn't enough usage data to go any further. I see where you are going with this, means more huge government sponsored facilities to recycle the fancy lithium hybrid battery packs. Instead of a tax credit on hybrids, they should have to pay a tax penalty for future recycling programs. LOL.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RickOKC

I have to call foul on the Prius vs. Deville comparison. :p Instead of talking about the weight of a new "eco-warrior" compact car vs. a 13-year-old large sized boat, I think comparing the 2010 Lotus Elise to the 2010 Tesla Roadster is much more fair and illustrates the spirit of the original comment. The Tesla's weight is 2,690 lbs and it is based on the 1,984 lb Lotus. Compare function-to-function fairly and, until technology catches up, which type of vehicle is really the heaviest? 2011 Ford Escape: 3,299 lbs / 2011 Ford Escape Hybrid: 3,669 lbs. Sorry, there may be other vehicles that confirm batteries make 'em heavier or could contradict that - I just picked the first two examples that came to mind.

(source: Edmunds.com; all weights listed above are curb weights)

---

rick-
interesting comparison. and yes, logically your comparison makes sense. I was simply working off chris' statement that there is no road damage difference between a prius and a 'gas guzzling V8'.... so, i was purely comparing vehicles with V8's.....
find me a 'commonly' used V8 vehicle that weighs less than a prius... or even better, my dads CRX (1,600 lb curb) (and he pulls over 42 mpg)

and yes, i completely agree with you, if we can compare any vehicle hybrid vs. conventional.
tahoe hybrid :p - 7,100 lbs
lotus elise - 2,562 lbs

I think the benifits are supposed to be for the environment arent they? and the short term fuel savings for the first wave of people buying them will be regularised with tax rises in other areas once more people have them..............Although its clear that current electric vehicles arent the way forward, hydrogen fuel cells will be powering electric cars the future. I guess its a way to get people to let go of their fossil fuel powered vehicles....

Not that i am going to get an electric car but as Jay Lenno said, if having an electric car means you can still run your petrol car on the weekends as a hobby then all the better than fazing fuel out all together

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crotchrocket

I think the benifits are supposed to be for the environment arent they? and the short term fuel savings for the first wave of people buying them will be regularised with tax rises in other areas once more people have them..............Although its clear that current electric vehicles arent the way forward, hydrogen fuel cells will be powering electric cars the future. I guess its a way to get people to let go of their fossil fuel powered vehicles....

Not that i am going to get an electric car but as Jay Lenno said, if having an electric car means you can still run your petrol car on the weekends as a hobby then all the better than fazing fuel out all together

---

1. The government allows hybrids to claim better MPG just because they are hybrids. They do not allow actual MPG
2. The cost to recharge and the enviromental damage done by the electric plants producing the electricity are not considered in government comparisons
3. If I need to make a long trip I have no desire to stop for hours to recharge when I can refuel in minutes
4. If electric cars are now as fast in real life as opposed to government allowances why do I always end of passing priuses and have never been passed by one?
5. The government allows Chevy to claim a higher trip distance than actual to push its hybrid and electric agenda. I am all for improving the performance and enviroment but you cant let the government choose winners and bias resuylts to push the agenda. Actual measurements must be used.
6. The government has yet to establish a method of handling the millions in old batteries from hybrids which beleive me are far more toxic and worse for the enviroment than gas exhaust.
7. You cant trust the enviromental protestors. They wanted Nuke power and now they protest against it. They are against pollution but burn brand new cars they do not own and cause far more enviromental damage than even a Hummer would cause in its lifetime.
8. If we are too switch to solar and wind power as the enviromental people want the entire country will need to be covered from end to end to produce enough power and god forbid we have rainy days or windless days we will have power outages all the time. And lets not forget while they want wind power they now protest that the windmills kill birds and disrupt the habitat of the animals.

Frankly we need to invent a power source that runs on the hot useless air produce by politicians and the enviromental movement. Plus Rush Limbaugh could probably power NYC on his own. We could actually just put Rush on one end of the US and Obama on the other end and Biden in the middle and never run out of power cause none of them ever shut the hell up.

Hmmmm seamed to miss "Although its clear that current electric vehicles arent the way forward" in your whole governent conspiracy theory attack hahaha

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by circmand

1. The government allows hybrids to claim better MPG just because they are hybrids. They do not allow actual MPG
2. The cost to recharge and the enviromental damage done by the electric plants producing the electricity are not considered in government comparisons
3. If I need to make a long trip I have no desire to stop for hours to recharge when I can refuel in minutes
4. If electric cars are now as fast in real life as opposed to government allowances why do I always end of passing priuses and have never been passed by one?
5. The government allows Chevy to claim a higher trip distance than actual to push its hybrid and electric agenda. I am all for improving the performance and enviroment but you cant let the government choose winners and bias resuylts to push the agenda. Actual measurements must be used.
6. The government has yet to establish a method of handling the millions in old batteries from hybrids which beleive me are far more toxic and worse for the enviroment than gas exhaust.
7. You cant trust the enviromental protestors. They wanted Nuke power and now they protest against it. They are against pollution but burn brand new cars they do not own and cause far more enviromental damage than even a Hummer would cause in its lifetime.
8. If we are too switch to solar and wind power as the enviromental people want the entire country will need to be covered from end to end to produce enough power and god forbid we have rainy days or windless days we will have power outages all the time. And lets not forget while they want wind power they now protest that the windmills kill birds and disrupt the habitat of the animals.

Frankly we need to invent a power source that runs on the hot useless air produce by politicians and the enviromental movement. Plus Rush Limbaugh could probably power NYC on his own. We could actually just put Rush on one end of the US and Obama on the other end and Biden in the middle and never run out of power cause none of them ever shut the hell up.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marlin

I digress, electric cars are silly, just like smart cars and mini coopers. There are old hondas and Riff's super rare fiesta that get far better mileage, at a teeny tiny fraction of the cost. Those cars are 15-20 years old, we had the technology with conventional engines 2 decades ago!!!

---

No we did not. You are comparing apples to oranges. 15-20 years ago cars were 500lbs+ lighter because they didn't have all of the safety engineering that is part of modern vehicles. For example:

Curb Weights
1990 Nissan Sentra Base Model: 2156 lbs 29/36MPG
2010 Nissan Sentra Base Model w/ CVT: 2972 lbs 26/34MPG

You put one of those 1990 engines in a modern car and you won't see anything like the MPG that it got in one of those light-weight chassis of 1990.

I had a smart car for a bit, lol. Thought it was the solution to London but it was uncomfortable, handled like a roller skate, too short to be stable on the motorway and the MPG wasnt all that great as you had to floor it to get anywhere!!!!

I see a few Tesla's here and there, i'd drive one of those!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stephen Biko

No we did not. You are comparing apples to oranges. 15-20 years ago cars were 500lbs+ lighter because they didn't have all of the safety engineering that is part of modern vehicles. For example:

Curb Weights
1990 Nissan Sentra Base Model: 2156 lbs 29/36MPG
2010 Nissan Sentra Base Model w/ CVT: 2972 lbs 26/34MPG

You put one of those 1990 engines in a modern car and you won't see anything like the MPG that it got in one of those light-weight chassis of 1990.

---

I think you are also missing some data. Sentras only came in a manual tranny up until about 8 years ago, the base model had no AC, power windows power locks, power trunk release and so on, things that are all standard even in the base model now. You can't compare the weight of a base model from 19 years ago to now and say its only because of safety stuff. With today's modern materials, there is no reason we can't get it down to that weight if you strip all the amenities out of it actually compare model to model.

Strange, I looked at the traffic fatalities numbers, from 94 (thats as far back as it went) to 2006, traffic deaths went up almost 10%!!! Went from 36,200 to 39,200! I wonder if that is due to speed limits going to 70mph?
Just wondering, since our vehicles got safer, yet fatalities went up.

Must just be the amount of vehicles increasing meaning more accidents ?