Not good news for the Chevy Volt!

[gunman41mag]

No argument from me. That was one of the deciding factors.

I looked for economy. The PRIUS is the one everyone mentions, so I did the math on the PRIUS and even that didn't make much sense. It would take about 7 years for that car to 'pay off' and that didn't factor in replacement of the Toyota batteries, etc. The 2 worst things about the PRIUS are that its like driving a gumball machine with its funky interior and the actual driving experience sucks. Oh, and they are horrible in the snow.

The Jetta, with the TDI diesel, got me a $1500 "alternative fuel" tax credit on my taxes and it a riot to drive. How many 40+MPG cars can spin their tires from a stop, scoot around like sports cars, and be filled with lots of luxury features that are not even available on many nicer cars.

You can also get some HIGH-PERFORMANCE up-grade for your TDI

 

[femurphy77]

A few years ago, I calculated the cost savings of a diesel jetta over the gas version. The diesel cost $4500 more and assuming diesel was the same price as gas. Even at the 15 mpg rated increase, it would take 180,000 miles to recoup that $4500 added cost and break even.

I did the same thing for the Honda civic hybrid. It gets 9 mpg more than the gas version at over $7000 more. It was close to 400,000 miles for the break even point.

People aren't going to pay thousands more just so they can feel good about the environment.

No they do it so they can feel like they are making an effort, as they pull into their 5000+sq ft house, after all the wife and two kids were feeling cramped in that little 2500 ft2 home they used to be in.

No kidding, a buddy of mine told me that

 

[femurphy77]

And your diesel engine will outlast the VOLT & PRIUS

This and the fuel economy is why my last vehicle purchase was a 4wd 1 ton diesel pickup to replace my 2wd 1 ton gas pickup. Even with the added drag of the 4wd components and bigger tires my diesel gets 17mpg vs 9mpg for the gas truck. My diesel is pushing 270k miles and doesn't even burn any oil between changes.

I'm paying off the 4wd in a few months and am already looking at TDI jettas!

 

[bman1962]

I drive 3/4 and 1 ton diesel trucks. No volt for me thank you!

 

[Yamaha]

So many critics of ethanol, but Brazil has been doing it with cane sugar for a decade and a half.

Michigan used to produce the most table sugar from sugar beets.

If only they had a pair they could have actually started an industry up there.

It appears Michigan only likes to break things, though.

ethanol enriched fuel is nothing new, they just keep upping its content in fuels and make vehicles run like crap.....

however, it is renewable and made from many things, but at what cost?




also, the smug factor is high on hybrids and electrics, but what is their carbon footprint......just to build their batteries does more damage to the enviroment than a hummer h2 being built, driven 20k a year for 50 years, while getting 9mpg....

 

[Endofdays]

I had the privilege to drive a VOLT a week off the line. It is not a practical car for the everyday commuter. the interior is very nice and well designed. If you like touch screen electronics and I-pad controls, then you will really like the way Gm is going to start building their lines. I can tell you that it is quite, fast enough to get you out and about and has a gas range extender when the power goes out. I can also tell you it is built for people in the 250 lb weight class or lower and no taller than 5'5". The engine is very cramped. Good luck getting anyone in the back seat. Batteries are in the trunk.

 

[Armed Eastsider]

When gas is $10 a gallon ill still be driving a big lifted diesel truck.

I dont really care about gas mileage, Im gonna drive what I like driving. You wouldnt catch me dead in a Toyota Prius, Nissan Cube, Smart Car, Nissan Leaf Honda, Fit or any of those other ridiculous looking pieces of ****.

 

[rhino]

I have it! I have The Solution to the emission of nitrogen oxides with the high-efficiency diesel engines: all we have to do is eliminate the nitrogen from the air, so when the engine sucks air into itself, the raw materials for the NOx won't be there. Our air is only about 78% N2, so someone else work on the technology to remove it all from our atmosphere. And while you're at it, remove any nitrogen in all of the crude oil that exists too.

Problem solved.

 

[ATOMonkey]

I propose we convert all nitrogen to helium.

1) Lower emissions

2) My ears won't pop anymore

3) Everyone sounds hilarious, and laughter is the best medicine, so that should fix our health care crisis too.

2 birds, one rock.

 

[Leadeye]

I propose we convert all nitrogen to helium.

1) Lower emissions

2) My ears won't pop anymore

3) Everyone sounds hilarious, and laughter is the best medicine, so that should fix our health care crisis too.

2 birds, one rock.

We all see the joke in this and the previous post , but it wouldn't surprise me to find a federal study grant out there going to someone working on these ideas.

 

[ATOMonkey]

Hey, grad students gotta eat too.

 

[LEaSH]

I read somewhere that we can buy a kit to convert the Kawasaki KLR to diesel like the USMC has.

Good for close to 100mpg.

 

[ATOMonkey]

I read somewhere that we can buy a kit to convert the Kawasaki KLR to diesel like the USMC has.

Good for close to 100mpg.

does this kit involve the installation of a new engine?

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Ok, sorry for going all engineer-speak on you guys...I just have a real passion for this stuff and wish the real physics could be told by the media and government, not just the hype.

Don't be sorry, it was interesting.

Euro Diesels fail BIG TIME when subjected to our EPA requirements. The Euro engines run very lean for good fuel economy, but they're very NOx heavy, which is the primary component of smog. Not a problem for europe where very few people drive, and when they do they don't drive very far. All that smog just blows away.

Now, the obvious solution is to apply low NOx regulations ONLY to areas like LA and DFW, but that would make too much sense. Instead we apply the same rules to ALL localities whether they make sense or not.

The Euro Diesels fail our EPA requirements due to how they are figured. Ours go by how much is released per gallon, I think theirs goes by how much is released per mile traveled.

There is a INGO member here who did some testing for Ford through a company he worked for(sorry can't find the thread). IIRC they got a diesel F-150 up to about 50 mpg average and it still performed quite well. But it would never pass the EPA regs for NOx but still passed the others. But if the regs where changed to go by how much was emitted per mile traveled it would of passed easily.

The obvious thing to do is rather than go by a straight gallon, is to go by emissions per mile.

The we need differing EPA requirements. I'd rather deal with the slight increase in NOx and see the improved MPG. That would do more for us than the silly EPA regs. It's not like we'd turn into Beijing overnight.

See above.

 

[ATOMonkey]

Don't be sorry, it was interesting.



The Euro Diesels fail our EPA requirements due to how they are figured. Ours go by how much is released per gallon, I think theirs goes by how much is released per mile traveled.

There is a INGO member here who did some testing for Ford through a company he worked for(sorry can't find the thread). IIRC they got a diesel F-150 up to about 50 mpg average and it still performed quite well. But it would never pass the EPA regs for NOx but still passed the others. But if the regs where changed to go by how much was emitted per mile traveled it would of passed easily.

The obvious thing to do is rather than go by a straight gallon, is to go by emissions per mile.




See above.

Our diesel requirements for any vehicle exceeding 8500 GVWR is g/bhp-hr

Diesel requirements (and gas) for vehicles under 8500 GVWR are grams/mile and are vehicle specific.

Euro legislators are more worried about acid rain eating up marble statues, so they err on the side of a lean burn. Since they drive so little smog isn't an issue, it works for them.

 

[Wwwildthing]

Let's hear from the Experts...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSFehyN8X7w]YouTube - Top Gear testing Tesla Roadster[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AUurBnLbJw]YouTube - Honda Clarity (Runs on Hydrogen and exhausts H2o)[/ame]

 

[Cherryspringer]

I'm not going to get on a high horse regarding this but I would like to point out that doing the right thing for the environment rarely adds up economically. And yes we are currently 45 % coal for electricity but Indiana is the nations leader in wind energy production which is something. Coal is still going to offer the most energy per dollar but is not the best for our planet. Even the US became 100% green it would make a small difference with china and India having no environmental conscience at all. Our planet is screwed. Sorry.

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

I'm not going to get on a high horse regarding this but I would like to point out that doing the right thing for the environment rarely adds up economically. And yes we are currently 45 % coal for electricity but Indiana is the nations leader in wind energy production which is something. Coal is still going to offer the most energy per dollar but is not the best for our planet. Even the US became 100% green it would make a small difference with china and India having no environmental conscience at all. Our planet is screwed. Sorry.

You are correct that coal is one of the cheapest. But nuclear is cheaper. And neither is particularly good at "load following". Nat Gas burners tend to be the best for that. With Nuke providing the bulk of the base load - and clean Nat Gas for the peakers we could do a LOT. Then use Nat Gas for the heavy trucks and you clean up a lot more pollution. With that - then if Joe Sixpack drives a Jetta TDI, it doesn't matter too much. The heavy stuff is running clean.

Problem is, we're too stupid to put Nuke to use , and can't see clearly enough to get the heavy trucks on clean, cheap, and importantly AMERICAN, nat gas.

China and India will change when they start choking on their own smog. And if you saw the Beijing Olympics, you realize that that will happen sooner rather than later.

 

[ATOMonkey]

You are correct that coal is one of the cheapest. But nuclear is cheaper. And neither is particularly good at "load following". Nat Gas burners tend to be the best for that. With Nuke providing the bulk of the base load - and clean Nat Gas for the peakers we could do a LOT. Then use Nat Gas for the heavy trucks and you clean up a lot more pollution. With that - then if Joe Sixpack drives a Jetta TDI, it doesn't matter too much. The heavy stuff is running clean.

Problem is, we're too stupid to put Nuke to use , and can't see clearly enough to get the heavy trucks on clean, cheap, and importantly AMERICAN, nat gas.

China and India will change when they start choking on their own smog. And if you saw the Beijing Olympics, you realize that that will happen sooner rather than later.

Fuel storage and range is always a problem with alternate fuel on vehicles.

What is the energy density of LP gas vs diesel? Would trucks still have the same range?

 

[LEaSH]

does this kit involve the installation of a new engine?

No. But not knowing the expense, it might be just as well.

The Marines' KLRs are original 650 engines converted over.