
Love the Japenese Quality like the Nissan GTR.
Jetz, you sound just like the auto companies want people to sound like...JETZcorp wrote:Regarding electric cars, I'm still skeptical that they can work well enough. I mean, when Top Gear tested the Tesla Roadster, they found that it really doesn't work well enough to replace gasoline. It's got a fairly decent range of 120mi, but then takes a whopping 12 hours to charge again. You can kiss that road-trip to Disneyland goodbye. I think the future is in alternative fuels, like hydrogen. You can simply fill your car up, just like normal. With an electric car, I'd always be wondering whether I was filling my car up with power from the Mega Green Enviroplex dam, or the Smogg Industries Oil-Sucking Power Works.
If you want to power your electric car for free, I'm afraid you're out of luck. A personal windmill will take 600 hours to charge a Tesla, and that's if it happens to be windy at the moment. Solar power might work if you cover your back yard with photovoltaic panels, but when Tesla were making their Roadster they thought about putting a panel on the roof until they realized that it would handle somewhere on the order of 1% of the car's power demands, and scrapped the idea. The Lemons might work if you want to buy a swimming pool and fill it, and of course you'll have to feed it with new lemons every other day or so using a big diesel truck.With pure electricity, you can get it free from the sun, wind, or water (or even lemons and potatoes )
Not that I'm a biofuel fan but they aren't a net loss: "Cynics claim that it takes more energy to grow corn and distill it into alcohol than you can get out of the alcohol. However, according to the DOE, the growing, fermenting and distillation chain actually results in a surplus of energy that ranges from 34 to 66 percent. Moreover, the carbon dioxide (CO2) that an engine produces started out as atmospheric CO2 that the cornstalk captured during growth, making ethanol greenhouse gas neutral. Recent DOE studies note that using ethanol in blends lowers carbon monoxide (CO) and CO2 emissions substantially. In 2005, burning such blends had the same effect on greenhouse gas emissions as removing 1 million cars from American roads."JETZcorp wrote:They're developing a type of fuel that can be created by algae, which should theoretically be a more environmentally-friendly way of making biofuel than making it agriculturally. As it turns out, the current process of making ethanol-based fuels from plants adds up to 1.1 gallons of gas burned per gallon of biofuel prouduced - which sucks. I don't think there's any reason to abandon the idea of fuel if it can be made in an eco-friendly way. At the same time, if battery power can show that it can practically meet the demands of a formerly fuel-based world, then there's no reason to let it go, either. Both sides have a challenge, but I think the challenge faced by biofuel is less. We'll just have to see what they do.
That is because diesels achieve much better fuel mileage then petrol engines, therefore making your argument slightly invaliddearnhardtfan7 wrote:My uncle drives a Dodge Ram 3500 with the Cummins turbo diesel, and with 5 of us in the cab, pulling a 17 ft dual axle enclosed trailer, with 3 bikes, tons of gear, and a 6x4x4 dog crate with a bassett hound, and rat terrier, on the interstate we get 26-30 mpg. The "american vehicles are gas guzzlers" argument is very untrue. Myself I drive a 2003 Nissan Frontier XE and unloaded I get about 20 mpg on the highway. Go figure.
High-Five man, high-five! Oh how I'd love to get my hands on a 'Cuda, Challenger, Charger or Roadrunner - with the Hemi of course! I told my mom just a few minutes ago that I wanted a Superbird and she laughed. Not because it's expensive or rare, but because it's "too fast." Who would've thought my mom would be so much like the NASCAR administrator people - that was their reaction, too.Just my 2 cent Mopar or No Car.
I probably didn't think that quite through.JETZcorp wrote:I don't think it's invalid at all. Diesels are amazing things, and I think that they're going to take over the economy-car market if two-strokes don't start hitting the scene pretty soon.
Yeah but most diesel cars are up to $10,000 more expensive than petrol. So you either need to drive a shit load or keep the car for the best part of half a centuryfirthy689 wrote:But then that extra cost for fuel is overcome by their far superior fuel economy.