Hybrid or Diesel

**Viva** · 03-23-2004, 11:18 AM

Originally posted by mr_gyptian
yeah, that whole assembly line thing. First car. building of planes for WWII. Employing in excess of 100,000 people. completely worthless.

foRd invented the automobile? That's news to me!

Assembly line, WWII, you're reaching there fella...

I'm not so interested in foRd's distant past; it's where that company is headed, it's their current business decisions (after announcing to ax the Excursion bus to much fanfare, they changed their stand and quietly disclosed the the Excursion would be produce for at least a couple more years because projected sales justified continued production), it's their seeming comittment to mediocrity as a cost-cutting measure that tweak me. Good business? Sure, I suppose.

**Viva** · 03-23-2004, 11:20 AM

Originally posted by Beaver
I though you were going to explain to all us morons what tourque was all about.

What?! You didn't like the song lyrics? Twist, baby! It's all in the TWIST.

__________________________________________________ __
Q: What is torque?

A: Torque is a physical vector quantity characteristic for an object in rotational motion around a certain given axis. By definition torque () is the cross product between the vector of position (r) of the point where a force is applied ( from an origin considered to be on the axis of rotation) and the applied force (F) ( = r x F). According to the definition of the cross (or vector) product, the magnitude of the torque is equal to the magnitude of r times the magnitude of F multiplied by sine of the angle () between r and F ( = r F sin ). In this expression for magnitude of the torque, the product (r sin ) is equal to the magnitude of the distance (d) between the axis of rotation and the "line of action" of the force (F) (r sin = d). This distance (d) is called "arm of the force." Now, the torque can be expressed as = Fd (torque is equal to force multiplied by the arm of the force.) Intuitively, torque can be interpreted as "force with a twist" since it results in rotation of the object on which the force is applied.

http://www.slcc.edu/schools/hum_sci/...que/torque.gif

**grrrr** · 03-23-2004, 11:21 AM

Originally posted by lemon boy
The thing I just don't get about a hybrid is they really don't get that great a mileage. In the early 90s Honda made the CRX HF model which was a gasser that got 59+ mpg on the highway. That's a reasonably high bar and one I haven't seen the hybrids clear yet really (prius is what like 36?).

The Honda Insight at 61/68 rated. Only a 2 seater, but has the highest mpg rating of any car on the market.

**The AD** · 03-23-2004, 11:29 AM

Originally posted by grrrr
The Honda Insight at 61/68 rated. Only a 2 seater, but has the highest mpg rating of any car on the market.

But goofy looking, IMO, unless you want a car that looks like something the Jetsons would drive. Same thing with the Prius, that thing is homely as all get-out. The Civic hybrid is a step in the right direction since it looks like every other Civic out there: not exactly a style leader, but at least not ugly.

**mr_gyptian** · 03-23-2004, 11:36 AM

Originally posted by Viva
foRd invented the automobile? That's news to me!

Assembly line, WWII, you're reaching there fella...

I'm not so interested in foRd's distant past; it's where that company is headed, it's their current business decisions (after announcing to ax the Excursion bus to much fanfare, they changed their stand and quietly disclosed the the Excursion would be produce for at least a couple more years because projected sales justified continued production), it's their seeming comittment to mediocrity as a cost-cutting measure that tweak me. Good business? Sure, I suppose.

I just took an Excursion to Silverton. we packed 6 guys and all our shit in it. It averaged 18 mpg. from Silverthorne to Silverton and back. name a vehicle(or three) that could do this more efficiently.

oh yeah, and Ford is the only company whose SUV's adhere to car emission standards. spent about 1.5bb on the River Rouge plant to make it one of the most green assmeblage plants in the world. I guess that's a bad road to take a company down.

**lemon boy** · 03-23-2004, 11:41 AM

61/68 isn't bad (BTW- It does PISS ME OFF that in a decade we havne't added even 10mpg to the most efficient gassers) but the diesel still wins IMHO. 61/68 for a two seater vs 59 in a regular sized passat/jetta.

Don't get me wrong, I think that hybrids are promising tech but think they have a hell of a long way to go and currently represent an inferior product to a conventional diesel. Plus they're a LONG way from offering one that will push the 8,000lbs of vehicle I usually drive around.

Note to the hybrid engineer fucktards: USE FUCKING DIESEL FUEL YOU FUCKING FUCKS! That one change would put them into the 100+ range I bet. (This is basically what powers locomotives in the US BTW...)

and Yes, ford while not perfect is taking an active role in improving its green image.

Diesel fuel will save the world, you watch.

**Beaver** · 03-23-2004, 11:47 AM

I've been thinking of adding a propane system to my diesel. It would increase the power/economy and lower the emmisions. Like lemonboy, I have wondered why the hybrids don't use diesel. It probably has something to do with California not allowing the sale of diesel passenger cars (is that still the case?)

**mr_gyptian** · 03-23-2004, 11:50 AM

This is what I don't get. The Diesel tech and more importantly the techs are already out there.

These hybrids will be astronomical to fix.

**dipstik** · 03-23-2004, 11:51 AM

If your just into hybrid/electric cars to save money on gas, then it's pretty worthless. I heard somewhere (not sure how accurate it was) that it would take 10 years for a hybrid car to become efficient and for you to save the money for it to become worth it.

Personally, I don't see why everyone bitches about SUV's. If you work hard all your life and can finally afford to buy a car for $20,000, why would you spend it on something fruity like this?:

http://www.hondacars.com/images/bann...o_04_large.jpg

these cars produce less polluction, but not that much less. A regular gas guzzling honda civic puts out 7,000 pounds of carbon dioxide for every 12,500 miles it drives. The hybrid honda civic puts out 5,000. Say you only drive 12,500 miles a year, and say both cars have an expected life of 10 years. After these 10 years, the regular car will have put out 70,000 pounds of carbon dioxcide, and the hyrbid will have put out 50,000. Sure it's a lot less, but like I said before, not that much less.

I think Hybrid cars are really a waste and are somewhat of a marketing ploy. Did you know that a 14 hour plane flight (say NYC to London roundtrip) produces more smog in that 14 hour time frame than a car will produce in it's entire life? And thats assuming the car's life will total more than 200K, which is unlikely. Do you know how many thousands of planes fly that much per a day?

So if you look at it like that, Hybrid cars are basically a waste. If you want to save the world, you should walk or bike to work instead of tooting around in some hybrid car with a big smile on your face because you think your saving the world. You'll just look like a dweeb because you didn't do your homewok.

**grrrr** · 03-23-2004, 11:51 AM

Yes, and more places are looking at banning diesels. The emissions are proving to be far worse (health, not environment) than once thought. Seattle is facing a major air quality problem from diesel ships right now.

**powderhound** · 03-23-2004, 11:53 AM

Originally posted by mr_gyptian
The Diesel tech and more importantly the techs are already out there.

i don't get what you're saying either

**Viva** · 03-23-2004, 11:55 AM

Originally posted by mr_gyptian
I just took an Excursion to Silverton. we packed 6 guys and all our shit in it. It averaged 18 mpg. from Silverthorne to Silverton and back. name a vehicle(or three) that could do this more efficiently.

High altitude mountain driving carrying, maybe, 1500 lbs or more? Other than the part about shit, I don't believe this claim.

From IEMA International News

International News: SUVS get Low Gas Mileage - say Ford
May 18, 2000 - 12:00 AM

Ford Motor Co. admitted yesterday that SUVs are bad for the environment because they guzzle more gas, contribute more to global warming, and spew more smog-causing pollution than cars. In the company's first "corporate citizenship report," released yesterday at its annual shareholders' meeting, Ford said it will step up efforts to make its vehicles more eco-friendly. Still, the company's not ready to put its money where its mouth is. Ford will continue to produce SUVs, its most profitable products, including the hulking Ford Excursion, which weighs as much as two Jeep Grand Cherokees and gets just 10 miles to the gallon in the city. In other auto news, the National Academy of Sciences said yesterday that the U.S. EPA's computer model for predicting emissions from cars and trucks seriously underestimates pollution and may overestimate the benefits of some pollution-control strategies.

**powderhound** · 03-23-2004, 11:56 AM

anyone know what the tax write off for a hybrid is?

**Idris** · 03-23-2004, 11:56 AM

Off the shelf...diesel, no contest...my dacade old Citroen gets 60+mpg, if it had a more modern engine it would get 70+mpg...hybrids would work very well if the ones produced wern't such complete jokes to prove that the technology dosen't work....electric is the way to go, but no one produces (at least for europe or NA ) a decent one GM did crack almost all the problems with the GMEV1 10 years ago but were forced to recall and destroy all of them last year !

http://ev1-club.power.net/

**AntiSoCalSkier** · 03-23-2004, 11:58 AM

I've seen a number of complaints about hybrids not having enough power, but what about the Lexus RX 400h? They took a regular RX330, which isn't exactly under-powered, and stuck on an electric motor to increase milage and power (from 230 hp to 270 hp). Yeah it's a hybrid, but it looks like a normal car, and actually has MORE power (instead of less). I'm thinking that in the next ten years, hybrid engines will be offered on a lot of new vehicles. Some of them will be designed to save gas, while others will be designed to give you more power. In other words, the hybrid idea isn't just for tree-huggers, it's for everyone.

**lemon boy** · 03-23-2004, 12:00 PM

Viva- I bet he was in a diesel X 18 isn't that far out at all for an oilburner. The funny thing is that X's are specifically targeted by the eco-nuts for taggiing and burning yet they are frequently equipped with an engine that gets better mileage than many cars.

Beaver- Ohhhhhh PROPANE!

Lucky dog. I'd like to but in order to do it the way I want will be boocoo expensive ( fully armored frame mounted tank with side fill nozzle)

**Big E** · 03-23-2004, 12:02 PM

Originally posted by Viva
High altitude mountain driving carrying, maybe, 1500 lbs or more? Other than the part about shit, I don't believe this claim.

Glad I'm not the only one. Excursion couldn't get 18mpg going downhill with a tailwind.

**grrrr** · 03-23-2004, 12:09 PM

Originally posted by dipstik
these cars produce less polluction, but not that much less. A regular gas guzzling honda civic puts out 7,000 pounds of carbon dioxide for every 12,500 miles it drives. The hybrid honda civic puts out 5,000.

And the Honda Insight puts out 3,100 and the Excursion puts out 12,500.

Does it make even more sense to bike? Yes. Does choosing not to fly make a huge difference? Yes.

So, is your answer going to be, f*ck it, let someone else make changes, I'm going to do whatever I want?

I make enough to drive any SUV I want. Does that excuse me from making sensible choices?

**Beaver** · 03-23-2004, 12:10 PM

I'm a BOOB, are you? (Brotherhood Of Oil Burners)

**Idris** · 03-23-2004, 12:14 PM

If you drive diesel you can always run on cooking oil (vegetable) for a while in the UK it was all the rage because it was much cheaper than diesel, but then prices got hiked and folks got busted for avioding road tax!

**This End Up** · 03-23-2004, 12:17 PM

Cute little diesels, with less than 3 liters displacement, are a good idea whose time has come. Unfortunately the supply is low and the demand, from the greens/yuppies, is high giving us the rediculously high prices for a little econo car, like the TDi.

Hybrids are also a good idea, but I'd wait ten years for them to work the bugs out.

It is best just to get a gas guzzling SUV and not worry about it. Just change your motto to: "Making the world a warmer place to live, one degree at a time"

**Free Range Lobster** · 03-23-2004, 12:18 PM

some dude got 1400 miles out of a tank in a TDI VW.
screw hybrids.

**mr_gyptian** · 03-23-2004, 12:21 PM

Originally posted by Viva
High altitude mountain driving carrying, maybe, 1500 lbs or more? Other than the part about shit, I don't believe this claim.

From IEMA International News

International News: SUVS get Low Gas Mileage - say Ford
May 18, 2000 - 12:00 AM

Ford Motor Co. admitted yesterday that SUVs are bad for the environment because they guzzle more gas, contribute more to global warming, and spew more smog-causing pollution than cars. In the company's first "corporate citizenship report," released yesterday at its annual shareholders' meeting, Ford said it will step up efforts to make its vehicles more eco-friendly. Still, the company's not ready to put its money where its mouth is. Ford will continue to produce SUVs, its most profitable products, including the hulking Ford Excursion, which weighs as much as two Jeep Grand Cherokees and gets just 10 miles to the gallon in the city. In other auto news, the National Academy of Sciences said yesterday that the U.S. EPA's computer model for predicting emissions from cars and trucks seriously underestimates pollution and may overestimate the benefits of some pollution-control strategies.

Ummh...vehicles are less efficient at altitude b/c the oxygen density.

We pulled an 8000lb boat to Powell and averaged 14.5.

Oh and that sounds like the EPA's problem and not Ford's.

**Greydon Clark** · 03-23-2004, 12:21 PM

Originally posted by Beaver
I've been thinking of adding a propane system to my diesel. It would increase the power/economy and lower the emmisions. Like lemonboy, I have wondered why the hybrids don't use diesel. It probably has something to do with California not allowing the sale of diesel passenger cars (is that still the case?)

No. Lots of diesel Mercs and VWs out here.

**365wp** · 03-23-2004, 12:28 PM

Originally posted by mr_gyptian
name a vehicle(or three) that could do this more efficiently.

I had nine people in our old '85 Vanagon once...it wasn't getting 30mpg, but I'm sure it was over 18. Those things can hold a LOT.

We hauled five guys, five bikes and camping gear from Denver to Moab and back in an Excursion. Cruising at 95, we were getting about 13mpg. Great rig, felt more capable off pavement (just the sand around Bartlett's Wash) than I thought it would be.

Diesels kick ass. We had a diesel Volvo wagon with an extra tank...drove from MA to FL and stopped for gas ONCE.

BTW, VW is bringing over their DSG (dual something gearbox) in future TDI Golf and Jetta models. This is a transmission that has a clutch but no pedal, like the M3 SMG (got a chance to drive one the other night...holy crap!). You use paddles on the wheel to shift up/down (or use auto mode) and the computer does the gas/clutch for you. Will make for an even faster diesel...I'd think about one of these for the city for sure.