So at lunch the other day....

[Jeff N.]

...my buddy wonders out loud if all these hurricane's in Florida isn't God's way of warning the state not to mess with the presidential elections this year.

Hmmm....interesting thought, no? :D

[Bill R.]

...my buddy wonders out loud if all these hurricane's in Florida isn't God's way of warning the state not to mess with the presidential elections this year.

Hmmm....interesting thought, no? :D

[ryan roopnarine]

...my buddy wonders out loud if all these hurricane's in Florida isn't God's way of warning the state not to mess with the presidential elections this year.

Hmmm....interesting thought, no? :D


um, the floridians already discussed this about a week ago, no need to hold your tongue....take a gander at the cartoon, here
http://www.alligator.org/edit/opinion/issues/04-fall/040902/opinion.html

[George M]

lol Bill...you putting words in my mouth? You won't find a single statement of mine to that end. I have studied both sides as eminent scientists are divided on global warming. With a background in thermodynamics and a scientific bend, I think there is an argument in favor of global warming but contribution so far due to the polution we have contributed is likely infinitesimally small and therefore not a factor....but perhaps a small contribution. Hurricane occurrence can easily be explained away as statistical noise...probably somewhere in between this position and the doomsday forecast. Oh and BTW...hybrid cars are tokenistic to the problem....what we should do is make smaller displacement IC engine cars with better emission controls...we don't need 270hp Hybrid SUV P.O.S from any mfr. As to voting in the next election....since school kids are fair game...unbelieveable....and today in Austraulia...their embassy was bombed...further Al Qaeda linkage....I know who I want at the controls. The counterpoint to this argument just isn't valid...its not our polices that have created disfavor....take inventory of what is happening to other countries....Europe is next.
Ironically, terrorism may end up galvanizing not separating the world.
Would love to chat further but have to run :-)
George

[Bill R.]

lol Bill...you putting words in my mouth? You won't find a single statement of mine to that end. I have studied both sides as eminent scientists are divided on global warming. With a background in thermodynamics and a scientific bend, I think there is an argument in favor of global warming but contribution so far due to the polution we have contributed is likely infinitesimally small and therefore not a factor....but perhaps a small contribution. Hurricane occurrence can easily be explained away as statistical noise...probably somewhere in between this position and the doomsday forecast. Oh and BTW...hybrid cars are tokenistic to the problem....what we should do is make smaller displacement IC engine cars with better emission controls...we don't need 270hp Hybrid SUV P.O.S from any mfr. As to voting in the next election....since school kids are fair game...unbelieveable....and today in Austraulia...their embassy was bombed...further Al Qaeda linkage....I know who I want at the controls. The counterpoint to this argument just isn't valid...its not our polices that have created disfavor....take inventory of what is happening to other countries....Europe is next.
Ironically, terrorism may end up galvanizing not separating the world.
Would love to chat further but have to run :-)
George

[632 Regal]

lol Bill...you putting words in my mouth? You won't find a single statement of mine to that end. I have studied both sides as eminent scientists are divided on global warming. With a background in thermodynamics and a scientific bend, I think there is an argument in favor of global warming but contribution so far due to the polution we have contributed is likely infinitesimally small and therefore not a factor....but perhaps a small contribution. Hurricane occurrence can easily be explained away as statistical noise...probably somewhere in between this position and the doomsday forecast. Oh and BTW...hybrid cars are tokenistic to the problem....what we should do is make smaller displacement IC engine cars with better emission controls...we don't need 270hp Hybrid SUV P.O.S from any mfr. As to voting in the next election....since school kids are fair game...unbelieveable....and today in Austraulia...their embassy was bombed...further Al Qaeda linkage....I know who I want at the controls. The counterpoint to this argument just isn't valid...its not our polices that have created disfavor....take inventory of what is happening to other countries....Europe is next.
Ironically, terrorism may end up galvanizing not separating the world.
Would love to chat further but have to run :-)
George

[G Feller]

Plenty of disagreement regarding politics will surface in these pages over the next seven weeks, and perhaps this thread will soon be moved to OT. . .

but are you saying that with a straight face like Cheney said in a recent campaign speech that we had we stopped Iran's nuke program--on the same day they publicly announced that they had achieved weapons-grade plutonium?

Our policies have incited great hatred among our friends--our enemies needed little incentive. The "galvanized" world will obviously not include the US as long as the current administration is in power. Was there ever a less convincing testament to the foreign policy acumen of a "world leader" than the phrase "coalition of the willing"?

Proof is in the pudding. Stakes are high. And the best man certainly may not win.

But let's all remember that our love of cars is what brings us together.


p.s. George, Bill, anyone--with regard to global warming, have you considered the role of the North Atlantic Current? Below is a quote I found in a quick search that summarizes the potential situation:

Research suggests that this circulation process [the North Atlantic Current] may have fluctuated or even stopped many times in Earth's distant past, and that it is sensitive to moderate increases in temperature or influxes of fresh water. The cold, salty water that sinks in the far North Atlantic Ocean will not sink if it becomes a little bit warmer or a little bit less salty - and the change could happen in a matter of decades.

"This system does not respond in what we call a linear manner,"

"Once you start putting on the brakes, this circulation pattern could slow down faster and faster and eventually stop altogether."

The paradox, the scientists say, is that the same greenhouse effect that might make the Earth warmer, overall, could have the opposite effect on much of Europe by slowing or shutting down the warm ocean circulation patterns on which it depends.

"Most, but not all, coupled general circulation model projections of the 21st century climate show a reduction in the strength of the Atlantic overturning circulation with increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases," the researchers write in their report in "Nature." "If the warming is strong enough and sustained long enough, a complete collapse cannot be excluded."

Very interesting related thread (http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread58289/pg3)


The counterpoint to this argument just isn't valid...its not our polices that have created disfavor

Ironically, terrorism may end up galvanizing not separating the world.

[MicahO]

p.s. George, Bill, anyone--with regard to global warming, have you considered the role of the North Atlantic Current? Below is a quote I found in a quick search that summarizes the potential situation:


Probably the biggest thing that no one is talking about - that global warming is happening, and will likely lead to a MASSIVE temperature drop across the developed portions of Northern Hemisphere. Of course, it is also Mom Nature's way of applying the brakes to our propensity to create a warming planet. When Mom Nature puts on the brakes, it's going to hurt.

This is actually something that's getting a bit of play inside the Pentagon. This report was the most interesting bit I've found to date on the topic. It shows that whatever the current executive branch seems to say (and maybe even think) about the topic, there are minds in the military looking ahead to the day.....

"An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario and Its Implications for United States National Security" (http://www.ems.org/climate/pentagon_climatechange.pdf)

Very comforting. (please note the dripping sarcasm)

[Bill R.]

hardly divided its more like 98 to 2 with only a very small number of handpicked scientists favoring Bush's position on it and even that is now going away as seen here (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37232-2004Aug26.html)
As far as the hybrids go , better get used to them since they appear to be here to stay. Toyota has announced that they will offer a hybrid version of every model they make in the next five years and others will follow suit.
I aggree that a 270 hp suv hybrid is not needed but thats the only way your going to wean the big block suburban driving soccer moms and real men over to something more efficient. Its going to have to be a gradual process and we started down this path back after the first fuel crisis. You're starting to see higher voltage systems on cars already which is going to make the switch to hybrid cheaper and cheaper, The electric power steering systems and hermetic air conditioners are also following the same lines.
Even more gains for the hybrids are seen in the large commercial vehicles as seen here
(http://www.gm.com/company/gmability/edu_k-12/5-8/fc_energy/hybrid_seattle.html)Didn't we have this discussion about a year and a half ago when you said the hybrids would never catch on;)












lol Bill...you putting words in my mouth? You won't find a single statement of mine to that end. I have studied both sides as eminent scientists are divided on global warming. With a background in thermodynamics and a scientific bend, I think there is an argument in favor of global warming but contribution so far due to the polution we have contributed is likely infinitesimally small and therefore not a factor....but perhaps a small contribution. Hurricane occurrence can easily be explained away as statistical noise...probably somewhere in between this position and the doomsday forecast. Oh and BTW...hybrid cars are tokenistic to the problem....what we should do is make smaller displacement IC engine cars with better emission controls...we don't need 270hp Hybrid SUV P.O.S from any mfr. As to voting in the next election....since school kids are fair game...unbelieveable....and today in Austraulia...their embassy was bombed...further Al Qaeda linkage....I know who I want at the controls. The counterpoint to this argument just isn't valid...its not our polices that have created disfavor....take inventory of what is happening to other countries....Europe is next.
Ironically, terrorism may end up galvanizing not separating the world.
Would love to chat further but have to run :-)
George

[George M]

98 to 2?...huh?
First economics: "The Cambridge University Press has just published the findings of a group of 26 economists,headed by a Yale University resource expert, who studied what would happen to human activities rangingfrom agriculture to recreation to water use if the earth warmed substantially in the next century. Contrary to media spin, the economic consequences would be on the whole positive, not negative. Agriculture and forests would particularly benefit because of the fertilizing effect of rising atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2), a greenhouse gas but also plants' basic food source. GDP would increase substantially in a warmer world, as would personal income and standards of living.


Then physics: Scientific dissent does exist, and on at least two levels. First, whether human actions are causing a significant warming. Second, whether there is any warming trend at all.

We have to look at historic climate records. Since the end of the last ice age, about 11,000 years ago, glaciers covering Canada and the northern United States have retreated, leaving behind the Great Lakes. But the climate has not been steady since then. Even before written records and thermometers, information in ocean and lake sediments, in Greenland and Antarctic ice cores, and from the width of tree rings indicates large temperature changes.

Since the Second World War, growing populations and increasing industrial activity have put billions of tons of CO2 in the atmosphere, mainly from the burning of fossil fuels. CO2 is a greenhouse gas, yet the climate cooled significantly between 1940 and 1975. The Earth had another sudden warming between 1975 and 1980, but from then on, the story becomes complicated. Surface thermometers show a continued small warming trend up to the present, while satellites, as well as balloon-borne radiosondes, do not. A good hypothesis is that local warming in urban areas has contaminated surface data, affecting many weather stations but not the globe as a whole.

Recently, direct temperature measurements (with thermometers) on an ice core from Greenland have confirmed this picture. Writing in the renowned journal Science, researchers state explicitly that the "temperature cools between 1940 and 1995." This clearly contradicts the results of climate models, which all predict that the warming at high latitudes should greatly exceed the global average.

What about the human influence on climate change? Urban heat has assuredly affected local temperatures. But has a nearly 50% increase in the overall greenhouse-gas level since about 1850 caused a global warming? It's certainly plausible and expected from theory, but so far, natural climate variability appears to dominate over any human effect."

Surprised nobody has mentioned the most precipitous climatic event in our world's history...long before man existed....when the dinosaur ruled the earth. Their extinction is surmised to be due to a defining temperature swing resulting from a large asteroid colliding with the earth....lol.
George
And Greg...the right man will win...hehe...good discussion guys.

[632 Regal]

98 to 2?...huh?
First economics: "The Cambridge University Press has just published the findings of a group of 26 economists,headed by a Yale University resource expert, who studied what would happen to human activities rangingfrom agriculture to recreation to water use if the earth warmed substantially in the next century. Contrary to media spin, the economic consequences would be on the whole positive, not negative. Agriculture and forests would particularly benefit because of the fertilizing effect of rising atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2), a greenhouse gas but also plants' basic food source. GDP would increase substantially in a warmer world, as would personal income and standards of living.


Then physics: Scientific dissent does exist, and on at least two levels. First, whether human actions are causing a significant warming. Second, whether there is any warming trend at all.

We have to look at historic climate records. Since the end of the last ice age, about 11,000 years ago, glaciers covering Canada and the northern United States have retreated, leaving behind the Great Lakes. But the climate has not been steady since then. Even before written records and thermometers, information in ocean and lake sediments, in Greenland and Antarctic ice cores, and from the width of tree rings indicates large temperature changes.

Since the Second World War, growing populations and increasing industrial activity have put billions of tons of CO2 in the atmosphere, mainly from the burning of fossil fuels. CO2 is a greenhouse gas, yet the climate cooled significantly between 1940 and 1975. The Earth had another sudden warming between 1975 and 1980, but from then on, the story becomes complicated. Surface thermometers show a continued small warming trend up to the present, while satellites, as well as balloon-borne radiosondes, do not. A good hypothesis is that local warming in urban areas has contaminated surface data, affecting many weather stations but not the globe as a whole.

Recently, direct temperature measurements (with thermometers) on an ice core from Greenland have confirmed this picture. Writing in the renowned journal Science, researchers state explicitly that the "temperature cools between 1940 and 1995." This clearly contradicts the results of climate models, which all predict that the warming at high latitudes should greatly exceed the global average.

What about the human influence on climate change? Urban heat has assuredly affected local temperatures. But has a nearly 50% increase in the overall greenhouse-gas level since about 1850 caused a global warming? It's certainly plausible and expected from theory, but so far, natural climate variability appears to dominate over any human effect."

Surprised nobody has mentioned the most precipitous climatic event in our world's history...long before man existed....when the dinosaur ruled the earth. Their extinction is surmised to be due to a defining temperature swing resulting from a large asteroid colliding with the earth....lol.
George
And Greg...the right man will win...hehe...good discussion guys.

[Bill R.]

First here
(http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/science/08/27/bc.environment.climate.reut/)and
Here (http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1153513,00.html)
and here is the pentagon report on global warming (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37232-2004Aug26.html)












98 to 2?...huh?
First economics: "The Cambridge University Press has just published the findings of a group of 26 economists,headed by a Yale University resource expert, who studied what would happen to human activities rangingfrom agriculture to recreation to water use if the earth warmed substantially in the next century. Contrary to media spin, the economic consequences would be on the whole positive, not negative. Agriculture and forests would particularly benefit because of the fertilizing effect of rising atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2), a greenhouse gas but also plants' basic food source. GDP would increase substantially in a warmer world, as would personal income and standards of living.


Then physics: Scientific dissent does exist, and on at least two levels. First, whether human actions are causing a significant warming. Second, whether there is any warming trend at all.

We have to look at historic climate records. Since the end of the last ice age, about 11,000 years ago, glaciers covering Canada and the northern United States have retreated, leaving behind the Great Lakes. But the climate has not been steady since then. Even before written records and thermometers, information in ocean and lake sediments, in Greenland and Antarctic ice cores, and from the width of tree rings indicates large temperature changes.

Since the Second World War, growing populations and increasing industrial activity have put billions of tons of CO2 in the atmosphere, mainly from the burning of fossil fuels. CO2 is a greenhouse gas, yet the climate cooled significantly between 1940 and 1975. The Earth had another sudden warming between 1975 and 1980, but from then on, the story becomes complicated. Surface thermometers show a continued small warming trend up to the present, while satellites, as well as balloon-borne radiosondes, do not. A good hypothesis is that local warming in urban areas has contaminated surface data, affecting many weather stations but not the globe as a whole.

Recently, direct temperature measurements (with thermometers) on an ice core from Greenland have confirmed this picture. Writing in the renowned journal Science, researchers state explicitly that the "temperature cools between 1940 and 1995." This clearly contradicts the results of climate models, which all predict that the warming at high latitudes should greatly exceed the global average.

What about the human influence on climate change? Urban heat has assuredly affected local temperatures. But has a nearly 50% increase in the overall greenhouse-gas level since about 1850 caused a global warming? It's certainly plausible and expected from theory, but so far, natural climate variability appears to dominate over any human effect."

Surprised nobody has mentioned the most precipitous climatic event in our world's history...long before man existed....when the dinosaur ruled the earth. Their extinction is surmised to be due to a defining temperature swing resulting from a large asteroid colliding with the earth....lol.
George
And Greg...the right man will win...hehe...good discussion guys.

[Bill R.]

Probably the biggest thing that no one is talking about - that global warming is happening, and will likely lead to a MASSIVE temperature drop across the developed portions of Northern Hemisphere. Of course, it is also Mom Nature's way of applying the brakes to our propensity to create a warming planet. When Mom Nature puts on the brakes, it's going to hurt.

This is actually something that's getting a bit of play inside the Pentagon. This report was the most interesting bit I've found to date on the topic. It shows that whatever the current executive branch seems to say (and maybe even think) about the topic, there are minds in the military looking ahead to the day.....

"An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario and Its Implications for United States National Security" (http://www.ems.org/climate/pentagon_climatechange.pdf)

Very comforting. (please note the dripping sarcasm)

[Bill R.]

here (http://www.envirospace.com/print.asp?article_id=91)

He is widely known as science for hire... do a little research on him and you'll see that his positions follow whoever is paying his funding, currently on enviromental issues its big oil... Previously when he wrote articles disclaiming the epa's warnings on secondhand smoke it was the tobacco industry, he's also associated with the reverand sun moon
Here (http://www.ecosyn.us/adti/Singer-Seitz.html)

Also that article was 5 years ago, the pentagon reports paint a different picture of the economic issues now.









98 to 2?...huh?
First economics: "The Cambridge University Press has just published the findings of a group of 26 economists,headed by a Yale University resource expert, who studied what would happen to human activities rangingfrom agriculture to recreation to water use if the earth warmed substantially in the next century. Contrary to media spin, the economic consequences would be on the whole positive, not negative. Agriculture and forests would particularly benefit because of the fertilizing effect of rising atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2), a greenhouse gas but also plants' basic food source. GDP would increase substantially in a warmer world, as would personal income and standards of living.


Then physics: Scientific dissent does exist, and on at least two levels. First, whether human actions are causing a significant warming. Second, whether there is any warming trend at all.

We have to look at historic climate records. Since the end of the last ice age, about 11,000 years ago, glaciers covering Canada and the northern United States have retreated, leaving behind the Great Lakes. But the climate has not been steady since then. Even before written records and thermometers, information in ocean and lake sediments, in Greenland and Antarctic ice cores, and from the width of tree rings indicates large temperature changes.

Since the Second World War, growing populations and increasing industrial activity have put billions of tons of CO2 in the atmosphere, mainly from the burning of fossil fuels. CO2 is a greenhouse gas, yet the climate cooled significantly between 1940 and 1975. The Earth had another sudden warming between 1975 and 1980, but from then on, the story becomes complicated. Surface thermometers show a continued small warming trend up to the present, while satellites, as well as balloon-borne radiosondes, do not. A good hypothesis is that local warming in urban areas has contaminated surface data, affecting many weather stations but not the globe as a whole.

Recently, direct temperature measurements (with thermometers) on an ice core from Greenland have confirmed this picture. Writing in the renowned journal Science, researchers state explicitly that the "temperature cools between 1940 and 1995." This clearly contradicts the results of climate models, which all predict that the warming at high latitudes should greatly exceed the global average.

What about the human influence on climate change? Urban heat has assuredly affected local temperatures. But has a nearly 50% increase in the overall greenhouse-gas level since about 1850 caused a global warming? It's certainly plausible and expected from theory, but so far, natural climate variability appears to dominate over any human effect."

Surprised nobody has mentioned the most precipitous climatic event in our world's history...long before man existed....when the dinosaur ruled the earth. Their extinction is surmised to be due to a defining temperature swing resulting from a large asteroid colliding with the earth....lol.
George
And Greg...the right man will win...hehe...good discussion guys.

[George M]

like anything...depends who you listen to and mostly...what you want to believe.
As to Hybrids catching on...wonder how many we have on the board now? Any out there? Wonder what the percentage is from this group of car enthusiasts?...is it 1%...likely less than that...probably a lot more motorcycles than hybrid cars on the board....has to be 10:1. Bill when are you going to order that Prius? I haven't ordered mine. Looks like they are taking the country by storm...lol.
Kidding aside...they're coming slowly...kind of like global warming...1 to 3 deg. C. by 2100 which we will likely figure out a way to avert as we deplete the world's reserve of fossil fuel and convert to a more benign by-product environmentally friendly energy source.
Lastly...here is a data point for you...this summer was the coldest summer I can ever remember in Michigan...the absolute coldest.
George

[rickm]

If they truely want to push energy efficient vehicles they have to put them at a cost point that is affordable. How many "working class" folks can dump 30k plus for a vehicle to save gas when the savings aren't exactly immediate? I'd consider one of them, even one of the Chrysler Smarts, if they were more affordable and available.

[George M]

Yup...you're right Rick...a key counterpoint to purchasing a hybrid vehicle...spend more money to save less...as I mentioned above...the economics don't wash...at least for now. Believe I heard Bush and it stands to reason that Kerry if voted in would legislate some tax incentive to those that purchase a hybrid vehicle to offset the initial purchase price. Because most Americans think with their pocket books, hybrid vehicles are more about fewer emissions than saving gas....which is in part but not completely due to getting better fuel economy. People have already demonstrated an inability to be environmentally conscious by purchasing all the thirsty cars we drive because they like the unnecessary size and power. The insanity however is the power and fuel economy of the 99.9% of IC powered cars out there which make up the vast majority of polution....why hybrid cars though a start are really tokenistic to the problem. The more fuel cars burn as a general rule, the more they polute. So a double liability...we use more fossil fuel....again, only so much on the planet...none being imported from outer space :-)...and emit more hydrocarbons. What it really comes down to is freedom. Americans don't want to be told or be limited as to what to drive no matter what it does to the planet.
George

[rickm]

They could also jack the price up and use it to implement alternative fuels. Historically we'll probably dream up something, make it work, then sell it to the Japanese who will clean it up and use it (high speed trains come to mind.)

I thought Oregon had a tax break for fuel efficient vehicles, maybe AZ.

If you look around you'll see a lot of "feel good" action. All State of NC vehicles have a "AFV" (alternative fuel vehicle) on the side. Funny, I don't consider 87 octane to be an alternative fuel. :P

What truely kills me are the folks who drive tanks long distances. One of our staffers has a 4x4 dualie and drives 70 miles one way. She could probably make a car payment on what she spends on gas alone. One article I read about a woman in Atlanta who drives a H2....414/mo on gas for normal driving. Ack.

Once we sell our home and move I'll probably ditch the e34 and get something miserly depending on how close to the city center I am.

[George M]

Lots of Hummers in the motor city. It will change over time. In 1972 when the oil embargo hit...you couldn't give a V8 car away. I likely just sold my last one last summer...won't own another....but then straight line performance isn't that important to me anymore....if it was I would buy a 1200 cc motorcycle :-) The whole issue of government intervention is....nobody wants it much including me. Without it however...there would be no CAFE or polution control standards...or very little regulation. The catch 22 is...without government regulation...people won't necessarily do what is right for the overall good of the planet....a paradox.
George

[Bill R.]

ordering a prius since you can order one for msrp, the more i look around at used cars for my wife the more i keep thinking about just going ahead and taking the leap , getting a prius. msrp on a prius with option 7 is 23,065 if we order one. Considering all the options that come on the prius thats not that bad a price compared to some of the other stuff i have seen for that price. That includes hid, keyless entry ,keyless start, vcs , front and side airbag curtain option and just about everything else with the exception of the navigation stuff which i don't want anyway. This year toyota has increased production 50% on the prius from 10,000 a month to 15,000 a month to try to keep up with demand, by the end of the year they are aiming for 300,000 total sales. There are currently 43,000 registered hybrids in the US, thats up 25% from 2002..... As far as reliability and repair costs I don't think its going to be worse than any new car. They warranty the battery system for 8 years or 100k miles and the mechanical systems have the standard toyota warranty of 3 years , 36k miles. My neighbor has had one of the first generation prius for 4 years now with only a few minor problems. The battery life is expected to exceed 15 years and toyota has not had to warranty a single battery in the 4 years that the prius has been out. Even at 15,000 a month the biggest problem the dealer has had is trying to keep one in stock for people to test drive..







Yup...you're right Rick...a key counterpoint to purchasing a hybrid vehicle...spend more money to save less...as I mentioned above...the economics don't wash...at least for now. Believe I heard Bush and it stands to reason that Kerry if voted in would legislate some tax incentive to those that purchase a hybrid vehicle to offset the initial purchase price. Because most Americans think with their pocket books, hybrid vehicles are more about fewer emissions than saving gas....which is in part but not completely due to getting better fuel economy. People have already demonstrated an inability to be environmentally conscious by purchasing all the thirsty cars we drive because they like the unnecessary size and power. The insanity however is the power and fuel economy of the 99.9% of IC powered cars out there which make up the vast majority of polution....why hybrid cars though a start are really tokenistic to the problem. The more fuel cars burn as a general rule, the more they polute. So a double liability...we use more fossil fuel....again, only so much on the planet...none being imported from outer space :-)...and emit more hydrocarbons. What it really comes down to is freedom. Americans don't want to be told or be limited as to what to drive no matter what it does to the planet.
George

[MicahO]

ordering a prius since you can order one for msrp, the more i look around at used cars for my wife the more i keep thinking about just going ahead and taking the leap , getting a prius. msrp on a prius with option 7 is 23,065 if we order one. Considering all the options that come on the prius thats not that bad a price compared to some of the other stuff i have seen for that price. That includes hid, keyless entry ,keyless start, vcs , front and side airbag curtain option and just about everything else with the exception of the navigation stuff which i don't want anyway. This year toyota has increased production 50% on the prius from 10,000 a month to 15,000 a month to try to keep up with demand, by the end of the year they are aiming for 300,000 total sales. There are currently 43,000 registered hybrids in the US, thats up 25% from 2002..... As far as reliability and repair costs I don't think its going to be worse than any new car. They warranty the battery system for 8 years or 100k miles and the mechanical systems have the standard toyota warranty of 3 years , 36k miles. My neighbor has had one of the first generation prius for 4 years now with only a few minor problems. The battery life is expected to exceed 15 years and toyota has not had to warranty a single battery in the 4 years that the prius has been out. Even at 15,000 a month the biggest problem the dealer has had is trying to keep one in stock for people to test drive..

Keyless start will be nice for you guys - get it warmed up on those cold winter mornings......

Well, perhaps just get the AC blowing before you plop into the seats...

Of course, the good mileage sort of goes away at that point.


;)

[Bill R.]

sensor in your pocket when you get close to the car it will automatically unlock and recognize you so that you push a button to start instead of using the key... It also has a thermos bottle type cooling system to keep the engine warmed up for something like 48 hours to reduce fuel wasted when warming up... and since the A/C is a hermetic compressor, electrically run not belt driven you can turn the a/c on and run it for up to 2 hours without the engine running before you'll run the battery down..So in arizona if you came up with a remote for the A/C to start cooling the car off 5 minutes before you get in that might be a big seller....When my neighbor takes off in the morning hers doesn't start the gas engine until she's completely out of the neighborhood, minimum speed is 18mph before the gas engine starts up, so she pulls away pretty much silently, then when she gets to the first main street it starts up as soon as she merges with traffic








Keyless start will be nice for you guys - get it warmed up on those cold winter mornings......

Well, perhaps just get the AC blowing before you plop into the seats...

Of course, the good mileage sort of goes away at that point.


;)

[winfred]

is that a key in your pocket or are you just happy to see me?

[George M]

Toyota makes very good cars...would be a good choice Bill if you do get one. I do like the styling in particular of the Prius. Have you looked into any fed or state tax relief if you do get one? Remote A/C start up would be a great feature in AZ....having spent some time there...man the summers are hot...sure love the winters there though. In Detroit...many people have remote starters...mostly for the winter to heat their cars up..hehe.

[MicahO]

sensor in your pocket when you get close to the car it will automatically unlock and recognize you so that you push a button to start instead of using the key... It also has a thermos bottle type cooling system to keep the engine warmed up for something like 48 hours to reduce fuel wasted when warming up... and since the A/C is a hermetic compressor, electrically run not belt driven you can turn the a/c on and run it for up to 2 hours without the engine running before you'll run the battery down..So in arizona if you came up with a remote for the A/C to start cooling the car off 5 minutes before you get in that might be a big seller....When my neighbor takes off in the morning hers doesn't start the gas engine until she's completely out of the neighborhood, minimum speed is 18mph before the gas engine starts up, so she pulls away pretty much silently, then when she gets to the first main street it starts up as soon as she merges with traffic

Nicely thought out on many fronts - it's really no wonder other companies are licensing Toyota's technology. Hopefully the licensing and (relatively) widespread use will make it widely affordable and available.

[Bill R.]

toyota but ford has always said they were developing their own with ideas like compressed air energy storage etc but in the end they ended up licensing toyotas system for the escape









Nicely thought out on many fronts - it's really no wonder other companies are licensing Toyota's technology. Hopefully the licensing and (relatively) widespread use will make it widely affordable and available.

[callen]

Ford and GM have pounded the theory that the bigger vehicle you have the safer you are. They did this in part due to their inability to create competent sedans to compete with Japanese and European auto makers. If you can't beat them change demand. You can't watch a program on free TV without seeing 5 or six commericals about Fords newest F150 that stands 5 feet taller than it did in 1972. Add to this the typical American males inability to do anything for himself making him feel week so he buys the biggest vehicle he can find. The saddest part to all this is the reason we are in Iraq is oil.......the same oil used by Americans that want the freedom to drive what they want........soo sad.

Callen

[rickm]

I thought huge vehicles were popular to protect them from their piss-poor driving skills.

[George M]

sorry Callen have to disagree on both fronts...I work in the crash business in the auto industry...bigger vehicles are safer and most consumers intuitively know that. As to cultivating demand for bigger cars...nope....don't have to. Amercian automakers are adept at making big cheap cars...more so than the Japanese. People like the size and can afford the gas because its cheap...why they buy them. The Japanese make wonderful cars...some would argue perhaps some of the best cars in the world...but American car companies make bigger cars for less money than the Japanese so Americans buy them. And lastly...do agree we are in Iraq for the oil...more than that of course...whether you agree with the other reasons.
George

[warton]

When my neighbor takes off in the morning hers doesn't start the gas engine until she's completely out of the neighborhood, minimum speed is 18mph before the gas engine starts up, so she pulls away pretty much silently, then when she gets to the first main street it starts up as soon as she merges with traffic

As a cyclist, this scares me... I rely on noise quite a bit to keep tabs on motorists. ;-)

Peter

[Bill R.]

you're backing out of your driveway.....






As a cyclist, this scares me... I rely on noise quite a bit to keep tabs on motorists. ;-)

Peter

[Paul in NZ]

or big vs imoveable object.The hybrids will become more popular and cheaper as gas goes up,and it will go up,even in the USA.The big car mentality will change with it.

[George M]

Paul...sorry to disagree with you as well....with all the permutations of big you are better off from a crash standpoint....Big versus Big....Big versus small, you don't want to be the small car....Small into an abuttment...better to be big into an abuttment because of reduced crash pulse/crush volume...both linear and surface area and decel. rates.
Its kind of like little league football versus the pros or boxing...you don't see too many flyweights contending against heavyweights. Or an 18 wheeler versus any car...big wins almost everytime. Small versus small is survivable depending on crash severity...or small into an abuttment provided the speed isn't too high....above 50 mph is iffy.
Agree that gas will go up and hybrid cars will become more popular as a result. The downside of hybrid cars is they are very complex...kind of like EDC shocks...poor cost/benefit ratio...lol...but quite novel :-)...and because comprised of mostly new tooling, very expensive for their performance....not only two versus one powerplants but the proprietary interfacing computers that allow both powerplants to work together are not only very complex and therefore expensive but impossible to trouble shoot without dealership diagnostics.
Demand for all fuel efficient cars will catch on long term as fuel prices rise. My DOHC Saturn SC2 5 speed which I drive daily and might add really enjoy...a fun car to drive with all options and has very close to the same quarter mile time as my M-30 E-32...gets over 30 mpg on 87 octane gas.
Both are 1 hp per cubic inch but the Saturn achieves this with more valves
:-). My big six E-32 by comparison which I drove yesterday and love...gets only a little over half of that...not good enough for commuting in my opinion. A hybrid car may not be the most elegant solution or it maybe...time will tell.
George

[scott mc '95 540 6spsd]

This world has been experiencing fluctuations of temperature since it's creation. What caused the various ice ages? It wasn't R12 or sulfer dioxide...One large volcanic eruption emits more problematic elements than several times all the man-made pollutants combined. I think you have been watching too many left leaning movies.

[Bill R.]

was srs I'm sure you're already aware that Big suv's have a much higher deathrate per miles traveled than do any passenger cars...but a lower injury rate. In this case the extra mass doesn't help as much due to the higher center of gravity, poorer stability etc etc, the typical suburbanite housewife is in this big safe suv thats inherently less stable,doesn't stop as quick, and requires more driver skill in and emergency situation ... So statisticly they are far less likely to get injured in this suv but far more likely to get killed
but the average buying public still feels safer in this big unstable suv? go figure. The prius has best in class crash test ratings due to the constuction methods and the class that its rated as is considered midsize. Which includes a lot of cars. Some prius crashtest and design info (http://www.newstreet.it/home/article_Id_627.html)
My neighbor feels safer driving his 63 impala convertible with non collapsing steering wheel and lap belts only, thinks those new fangled airbags are unsafe, who am i to argue, i figure its darwins theory, evolution in action...
big suv's same thing, my only concern is that one of those idiots might take me out while their attempting to kill themselves..
As far as increasing complexity in the hybrids, thats a non issue since the average person can't do a large percentage of the diagnostics on any new cars already hybrid or not... and with an increasing number of electrically driven devices on a car already then a hybrid is a natural.. such as electrical brakes, throttle by wire, electrical power steering these things are incorporated into hybrids but they were already around before this.
The prius has a 3 year 36 bumper to bumper warranty and then it has 5 year 60k warranty on the drivetrain, then it has an 8 year 100k warranty on the hybrid system which includes the battery , hybrid controller components, computers , drive motor etc... I don't think you can expect more of any car. Since the average consumer doesn't keep a car more than 8 years i don't see how cost of ownership would be any higher for them.
Resale values so far for hybrids seem to be extremely high so thats also a benefit.
As this technology gets used more and more costs will come down...remember the carburator? and how much whining was done about complexity of a fuel injected car when they first came out, now most people wouldn't have it any other way, but the carburator is simpler to work on.. I heard similar arguments about increased complexity, costs etc about fuel injection when it came out, airbags when they came out, dual circuit brakes when they came out, those newfangled overhead cam engines are much more complex than my fine pushrod v8 motor... those complicated turbochargers will never replace my big block pushrod v8, those complicated engine control computers with knock sensors will never replace my simple distributor with points..... Anti lock brakes? more complex new fangled stuff, traction control? My point is that all cars are going to get increasingly complex but thats not always a bad thing
Safety in light weight vehicles, it already happening and with enough encouragement we can get a lot of these big old shitboxes off the road and make all cars safer for everybody..... 1700 lb F1 cars with carbon fiber tubs head on into a concrete barrier at 200mph and the drivers walk away, better crush zone design and restraint systems... I personally would like to see car weights under 2000 lbs with lightweight composites, small displacement ice's and hybrid designs this may happen
The big three as usual have had their heads in the sand ignoring things around them until change is forced on them, kinda like the typical american
then they get to play catchup.... they ignored the hybrid and the japanese have stolen the show... using the hydrogen fuel cell excuse that bush gave them. They still have this dodge magnum hemi v8 mentality, this michael jackson neverland fantasy, meanwhile the japanese are asking themselves how much mileage can we get ? Sorry for the rant.









Paul...sorry to disagree with you as well....with all the permutations of big you are better off from a crash standpoint....Big versus Big....Big versus small, you don't want to be the small car....Small into an abuttment...better to be big into an abuttment because of reduced crash pulse/crush volume...both linear and surface area and decel. rates.
Its kind of like little league football versus the pros or boxing...you don't see too many flyweights contending against heavyweights. Or an 18 wheeler versus any car...big wins almost everytime. Small versus small is survivable depending on crash severity...or small into an abuttment provided the speed isn't too high....above 50 mph is iffy.
Agree that gas will go up and hybrid cars will become more popular as a result. The downside of hybrid cars is they are very complex...kind of like EDC shocks...poor cost/benefit ratio...lol...but quite novel :-)...and because comprised of mostly new tooling, very expensive for their performance....not only two versus one powerplants but the proprietary interfacing computers that allow both powerplants to work together are not only very complex and therefore expensive but impossible to trouble shoot without dealership diagnostics.
Demand for all fuel efficient cars will catch on long term as fuel prices rise. My DOHC Saturn SC2 5 speed which I drive daily and might add really enjoy...a fun car to drive with all options and has very close to the same quarter mile time as my M-30 E-32...gets over 30 mpg on 87 octane gas.
Both are 1 hp per cubic inch but the Saturn achieves this with more valves
:-). My big six E-32 by comparison which I drove yesterday and love...gets only a little over half of that...not good enough for commuting in my opinion. A hybrid car may not be the most elegant solution or it maybe...time will tell.
George

[George M]

Ok to rant Bill...what this board is for :-) and thanks for your perspective. You hit on a big issue in the crash business and that's getting the big cars off the road...but ain't gonna happen because Americans love big vehicles for a number of reasons and can afford the gas....so Automakers sell them. You simply don't want to be in a small car if you collide with a big car. I hate to think what my SC2 would do if hitting head on with a typical V8 SUV...would likely go underneath it because it is very low. Can't compare a F1 car hitting a wall to a passenger car...apples and oranges...many more crash scenerio's in passenger cars...specifically what are called "out of position" tests that NHSTA insists upon...where occupants aren't where they supposed to be in a crash. Guess what? Many lives lost in car crashs are due to people not wearing their saftey belts. As to vehicle complexity...I hear ya...will take time...but a hybrid vehicle isn't a little more complex...it isn't a single system....it is another order of magnitude in complexity. A good backyard mechanic can do alot on modern cars....I always have been able to....not much I can't do on most of them. Any hybrid is a different world altogether. Bill will leave you with a thought. You believe the Japanese are kicking our butts in the cars they put out and in some areas they are. But technologically...the Asians have nothing on us....I know because I work with Asian engineers every day. There aren't any secrets in the worldwide auto industry....including the rotory engine we developed and that Mazda uses today that I wouldn't buy either. Even the Koren's who couldn't even make a decent bicycle a few years ago are starting to come on...China is the next Japan technically....they are pumping out two engineers to our one per capita. The hybrid thing is a calculated risk. I actually endorse the American's strategy for a change of not being first to market with this technology....lets copy the Japanese for a change. When the hybrids start to account for 2% of the market...it maybe time to get in the game....plenty of time for catch up...the Japanese have taught us that...game is just getting started.
George

[winfred]

i miss my old 83 rx7 that thing was a blast, paid $300 for it put almost 40k miles on it and sold it for $300, did nothing but tune it up and put brake pads and shoes on it and gased up the ac with a fresh slug of r12, the last time i ran it i remember watching the tach pass 8k while roasting the tires at 190k on the clock


including the rotory engine we developed and that Mazda uses today that I wouldn't buy either

[George M]

my dad in the 70's used to bring home experimental rotory powered Chevrolet's from the tech center...remember the Monza? I almost bought an 80's RX-7 years ago...in fact had a down payment on one....and the dealer played games with me so I pulled up...a very popular sports car. The last model produced would be a car worth owning....saw one the other day on the road.

[scott540]

Good friend in high school had Monza. Put that thing in th snow banks many times in western michigan lake effect snow. Wife had a chevy Vega wagon in College in Fargo/moorhead. No matter how cold it got that thing started. Always had to use it to jump my '79 Ford Fiesta. I loved that little car.

[George M]

I had a Vega at the end of my college days...drove a Triumph TR4 through most of Engineering school. In spite of all the overheating/head gasket issues with the silicone etched (same technology as Porsche) linerless aluminum Vega block (iron head of all things)....mine also ran great...replete with German Opel 4 speed manual transmission. Of course the Vega was infamous for that engine which was superceded by the Iron Duke...lol. Had a couple of trips up to Western in that thing.:-) Chevrolet almost went into production with putting a rotory in a Monza...pulled the plug 11th hour because of emission control and fuel economy issues and concern about apex seal life. Chevy did put a destroked small block V8 in the Monza however which was essentially a Vega with different sheetmetal.
George

[winfred]

chevy had a 3 or 4 rotor in one of the concept vettes that they pulled and replaced with a v8, it was one of the ray or shark cars. in racing mazda had a deadly 4 rotor that was based on two normally asperated 13b stacked together that made 600+ hp and slaughtered the 800+ hp v8s it ran against, they couldn't hold it back no matter what kind of restrictions was imposed on it so it was outlawed

[Bill R.]

examples of evolution in action... as long as its not my tax dollars supported them on life support.... I don't necessarily thing that americans love big vehicles, I think alot of it is salemanship and what they are told. The typical dodge hemi commercial is a good example, I think if the automakers made a concerted effort to encourage people to buy more reasonably sized and powered cars that the efforts would prove positive , Attitudes wouldn't change immediately but if its suddenly cool to drive something like a scion and large suv's are scorned in advertising then there would be an effect.. but as you and I both know the highest profit margins that the automakers have are on the big landbarges and they aren't about to give up that margin
As far as the rotary motor goes, we didn't do much development on it... Felix Wankel did (A good hitler youth) and then later when he worked with NSU most of the later development was done. GM gave up on the idea due to the tip and rotor seal problems as you also know.. GM licensed it from Felix Wankel also, Mazda was the only company that stuck it out and finally came up with a system that worked for the seals...I owned a 78 for about 5 years and one of my good friends had one of the first rotary trucks that mazda produced... I don't feel that the japanese are innovators but they tend to refine things and make them work well. My brother also works with japanese engineers every day and he shares your feelings that technologically they have nothing on us, however he agrees that they are much more likely to bring an idea to market and make it work regardless of whether we came up with the idea first. Since toyota has recently pushed ford aside and become the 2nd largest automaker in the world I would have to say that they are doing something right... I'm not questioning that the US automakers have the ability to do these things , its just that they don't seem to want to be the innovators like we were in the past, i see a number of good american cars just not a lot of great american cars... We should be leading by example not playing catch up because some one elses cars leading the way. As far as toyotas example with the prius I would think these awards speak for themselves (http://www.theautochannel.com/F/news/2004/09/02/217353.html)
And its been around since 97 , 7 going on 8 years now so I suspect that they have most of the bugs worked out of it...
I would also think that anybody who buys a factory service manual for the prius would be able to do a large chunk of the typical work needed on one.
And at a recent meeting of 200 sae engineers 40% saw the hybrids as having between 5 to 25% of market share while another 40% saw them as having less than 5% by 2010...
I see probably an average of 5 a day here, not many but the numbers are increasing quickly... If you go here to prius on line (http://www.priusonline.com/index.php)
you can see how quickly any that show up are snatched up






Ok to rant Bill...what this board is for :-) and thanks for your perspective. You hit on a big issue in the crash business and that's getting the big cars off the road...but ain't gonna happen because Americans love big vehicles for a number of reasons and can afford the gas....so Automakers sell them. You simply don't want to be in a small car if you collide with a big car. I hate to think what my SC2 would do if hitting head on with a typical V8 SUV...would likely go underneath it because it is very low. Can't compare a F1 car hitting a wall to a passenger car...apples and oranges...many more crash scenerio's in passenger cars...specifically what are called "out of position" tests that NHSTA insists upon...where occupants aren't where they supposed to be in a crash. Guess what? Many lives lost in car crashs are due to people not wearing their saftey belts. As to vehicle complexity...I hear ya...will take time...but a hybrid vehicle isn't a little more complex...it isn't a single system....it is another order of magnitude in complexity. A good backyard mechanic can do alot on modern cars....I always have been able to....not much I can't do on most of them. Any hybrid is a different world altogether. Bill will leave you with a thought. You believe the Japanese are kicking our butts in the cars they put out and in some areas they are. But technologically...the Asians have nothing on us....I know because I work with Asian engineers every day. There aren't any secrets in the worldwide auto industry....including the rotory engine we developed and that Mazda uses today that I wouldn't buy either. Even the Koren's who couldn't even make a decent bicycle a few years ago are starting to come on...China is the next Japan technically....they are pumping out two engineers to our one per capita. The hybrid thing is a calculated risk. I actually endorse the American's strategy for a change of not being first to market with this technology....lets copy the Japanese for a change. When the hybrids start to account for 2% of the market...it maybe time to get in the game....plenty of time for catch up...the Japanese have taught us that...game is just getting started.
George

[George M]

we will respectfully disagree on what the average consumer likes in cars or trucks. As much as I disdain that Dodge Hemi Wagon...a hoot to drive BTW...power, size and utility are an intoxicating combination...I would never buy one of course....someone brought one to work for testing recently....a great stab and steer car that goes like hell. Irrevelant to our discussion is the ad on TV for that thing...one of the funniest I have seen...when the foreign exotic car hot shot pulls up to the Hemi Wagon owner and asks him what he's got in that thing...lol...the guy answers...a guitar an amplifier....etc....that is seriously funny and further drives home the utility point over and above the performance....very clever marketing. Americans are in love with big Bill....not small. Big everything...from houses to wrist watches. The average Amercian given two trucks for the same price will invariably buy the bigger truck...same applies to cars. Automakers simply sell consumers what they want. Anybody that knows much about cars knows that the Japanese make great cars...but Americans make some decent small ones as well.....both my girlfriend and I drive Saturns and they are very good cars and simple to work on...all plastic panels that won't rust...good in the rustbelt where I live.
Also take note that the Japanese want a bite out of our big car and truck market as well. They still don't make good big cheap cars however like the Americans...won't rule them out longer term however. As to people who don't wear safety belts dying in crashs...who gets blamed?...the automakers for not making safer cars...same with drunk driving....and it is in your tax dollar and insurance premium...we do pay for it.
And it also is a matter of philosophy...Europeans test only belted instrumented dummies and Americans test both ways conceding that many don't wear their seat belts which is coined due care testing in the industry....hard to save people in a crash who don't wear their belts and inflator outputs have to be lower to prevent killing people with an air-bag that aren't where they should be...resulting in not saving large people in high speed crashs...a design conundrum and a waste for penalizing people doing the right thing.
George

[callen]

Raising the current F150 by a foot or more doesn't make the occupants safer........it sure the heck going to cream anyone in a traditional sedan. Was next to one at stoplight yesterday....geeze. So the answer is for us all to buy these grossly large vehicles....then we'll all be safe????

[George M]

Callen...raising the F150 does make the F150 occupants safer provided you don't roll over... :-)....and of course as with most things...its not win win either....so yeah...would hate to be in a traditional sedan and tangle with one.
Ford did it to sell more trucks Callen...set themselves apart...a new std. for all the short pricked guys out there that need an extension...lol. There is no immaculate solution to safety Callen. Like all of the world's problems, if there was, it would be resolved.
Cheers,
George

[Scott H]

just saw this on cnn.com:

Big rig pick-up? (http://money.cnn.com/2004/09/13/pf/autos/monster_truck/index.htm?cnn=yes)

and like you guys said.....some marketing play here:

web site for CXT (http://www.navistar.com/site_layout/severe/cxt.asp)

"POSSIBLY TOO MUCH TRUCK. LIKE THAT’S A PROBLEM."

I don't know what to make of all of this......sometimes all I can do is laugh.....it is much easier than trying to form an opinion and take a side if you know what I mean

Enjoy

[ryan roopnarine]

just saw this on cnn.com:

Big rig pick-up? (http://money.cnn.com/2004/09/13/pf/autos/monster_truck/index.htm?cnn=yes)

and like you guys said.....some marketing play here:

web site for CXT (http://www.navistar.com/site_layout/severe/cxt.asp)

"POSSIBLY TOO MUCH TRUCK. LIKE THAT’S A PROBLEM."

I don't know what to make of all of this......sometimes all I can do is laugh.....it is much easier than trying to form an opinion and take a side if you know what I mean

Enjoy

they already have this....its called the ford f350 powerstroke....
navistar was already SOOOOO successful parlaying T444e into sales numbers in 'dem fords (groan).