Chevy Volt, only $41,000

[vaughn]

Chevy announced the anticipated launch date for the first few Chevy Volts, and
the price tag today.
http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_15615613?nclick_check=1

$41,000 is a little rich for my blood, but I suppose folks pay that much for top
end SUVs.

Vaughn

 

[Josepi]

I would hope Chev would make a vehicle where the body will outlast the
batteries, for the first time.

No thanx, at any price. I've done my Chev product sentence too many times.


Chevy announced the anticipated launch date for the first few Chevy Volts,
and
the price tag today.
http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_15615613?nclick_check=1

$41,000 is a little rich for my blood, but I suppose folks pay that much for
top
end SUVs.

Vaughn

 

[kimmo]

don't forget the 7,500 federal credit

 

[cjt]

I've had my share of GM cr*p, too.

 

[vaughn]

I've had my share of GM cr*p, too.

I suppose, but some of my best vehicles were GM (before the Japanese listened
carefully to Dr. Deming and then blew Detroit away). Those old small-block V8s
were bulletproof, though terribly inefficient by today's standards.

Vaughn

 

[Josepi]

I bought many N.American crap cars and trucks throughout my life. The best
was my Ford van, bought at two years old, lasted until four years old, and
was sold to a scrap dealer for $100. Tow away included. It was completely
rusted out.

Brand new 1974 Chev Blazer, needed everything, 11 MPG, good vehicle if you
didn't have to drive it, carb problems, many factory safety recalls, spent
big buck on rust proofing, rusted out & sold at 7 years old $500, Old full
size Olds woody wagon, rusted out, carb problems, everything leaked. The
list goes on and on until...

I bought my first 1994 Camry in 1996 and another in 2003. Cripes I have only
changed the oil in the two of them about 6 times. Not one problem with
either. I have spent more money on my 2001 Chev S10 since 2003 (I should
have known better) than my two Camrys combined since 1996.

GM, Gord and Chrysler (somewhat) make junk! Their attitude is to squeeze as
much money out of a sale as possible. Toyota and Honda try to put as much
into the car as they can for the buck. They have some pride, The
N.AMericancras manufacturers have a bad attitude and will never make a
decent car.

They deserve to die a hard death because they will never learn their
lessons. **** GM and Ford.

Chev Volts! ROFLMFAO... Only 50 years behind all the patents they bought up.


I suppose, but some of my best vehicles were GM (before the Japanese
listened
carefully to Dr. Deming and then blew Detroit away). Those old small-block
V8s
were bulletproof, though terribly inefficient by today's standards.

Vaughn

 

[News]

Chevy announced the anticipated launch date for the first few Chevy Volts,
and the price tag today.
http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_15615613?nclick_check=1

$41,000 is a little rich for my blood, but I suppose folks pay that much
for top end SUVs.

It also uses far less fuel than any SUV or any comparable car.

 

[Josepi]

I understand it couldn't make the top ten list for hybrids due to high gas
consumption.


It also uses far less fuel than any SUV or any comparable car.

 

[vaughn]

Hey, I remember a story about an air-powered vehicle,
but It doesn't seem to have shown up in the Auto-X prize finals.
Anybody have any ideas about how it's doing nowadays?

In the embodiment of the "Aircar" the idea of an air-powered vehicle has all of
the earmarks of a persistent investment scam. For about a decade now, their
vehicles have been due on the road "next year".

The fact is that air is not a great vehicle for energy storage.

First, there are the laws of gas thermodynamics to complicate things. When you
compress a gas, it gets hot. That heat represents waste energy. Further; when
you expand a gas, it gets cold, which keeps it from properly expanding, which
means that you do not retrieve all of your stored energy. You can add
complexity to your compressors and air engines to reduce the thermodynamic
losses, but that adds weight, bulk, and cost.

Second; storing energy as a compressed gas takes heavy, bulky, and expensive
tanks. Even then, today's batteries probably give you better storage density.

Third; making an efficient air motor is not as simple as you may think. It
takes several stages of expansion to efficiently extract the energy from high
pressure compressed gas. Again, multiple stage engines add bulk, weight, and
cost.

One potential advantage of an air-powered vehicle might be quick recharging
compared to a battery vehicle.

Vaughn

 

[News]

Hey, I remember a story about an air-powered vehicle,
but It doesn't seem to have shown up in the Auto-X prize
finals.
Anybody have any ideas about how it's doing nowadays?
<<<<<

It is still on the go.

 

[News]

In the embodiment of the "Aircar" the idea of an air-powered vehicle has
all of the earmarks of a persistent investment scam.

Tata, one of the world's largest vehicle makers (they make Jaguar and Range
Rover) seriously took it up. Do you think they are stupid?

 

[vaughn]

Tata, one of the world's largest vehicle makers (they make Jaguar and Range
Rover) seriously took it up. Do you think they are stupid?

That's been 2 years ago. Look out your front door. See any Aircars? Thought
not.

I notice that you never have anything to add about the science and engineering
issues of the Aircar.

Vaughn

 

[vaughn]

It is still on the go.

The usual nonsense from the usual source.

Vaughn

 

[News]

That's been 2 years ago. Look out your front door. See any Aircars?

That is not the point. The point is that it technically works when you said
it would not. Whether there is market for it is another matters entirely.

The Chevy Volt's setup. A genny set proving power to a driving electric
motors, has been viable for near 30 years, once engine management system
became viable because is microprocessors. Why are we only just see one on
the market now. You are the sort that 25 years ago would have said it is
not as GM are not making them.

 

[News]

The usual nonsense from the usual source.

Have you notified Tata of this nonsense?

 

[News]

TOP POSTER!!!

Hey, I remember a story about an air-powered vehicle,
but It doesn't seem to have shown up in the Auto-X prize
finals.
Anybody have any ideas about how it's doing nowadays?

 

[vaughn]

That is not the point.

Wrong again. That IS the point.

The point is that it technically works

Wrong again. I have explained many times why it won't work. You refuse to
be bothered with reality.

Whether there is market for it is another matters entirely.

If it worked, there would likely be a market for it. But is doesn't, so
the question is academic

Vaughn

 

[News]

Wrong again. I have explained many times why it won't work.

Have you told that auto giant Tata about this? Hurry!

If it worked, there would likely be a market for it.

The hybrid has been feasible for 25 years. We never saw one until recently.

 

[Bob F]

Have you notified Tata of this nonsense?

A simple search of the Tata sites shows everything they have to say about their
miraculous air powered car.
..
..
..
..
..
Not a word.

Pretty impressive.

 

[Josepi]

Not **ECONOMICALLY** feasible for 25 years. The powers that be, had to sell
greenwashing first to get people to pay lots of extra money for a fad
technology vehicle. Battery technology was never that good and still isn't,
but better. The car manufacturers are not going to spend billions of
development yen when nobody wants it, like the hydrogen scam.

People have created a market for the hybrid and it is much more feasible.

Your statements are based on lack of market knowledge and attempts at
confusing a simple argument.


The hybrid has been feasible for 25 years. We never saw one until recently.