Throckmorton
Lifer
There is no battery problem.
The Prius averages 55mpg not because of the hybrid system, but because it has a really small gasoline motor.
No, they aren't viable everywhere, however Solar/Wind are perfectly predictable in the right places. Solar in the desert southwest and Wind in the Texas panhandle for example are two great places to make cheap energy.
I also think nuclear is good too, but it's not completely renewable. Better than coal/gas though 🙂
Right, the batteries work
however
They are expensive, offer poor range because they have 1/10th the energy density compared to gasoline and have what most people consider to be an inordinate amount of time to charge.
Most people consider these to be problems
Purely opinion. I don't need a hybrid drive system in a daily driver, nor do I need NAV or plush accommodations for a BASIC fuel efficient car. I appreciate the discussion, but you are spouting opinion and not FACT.
It's not purely opinion. Those cars got lousy ratings when they were new and compare even worse now. As was stated, with their tiny little engines they couldn't keep freeway speeds with the slightest incline. With the crash, safety, and emissions standards you're never going to see anything as cheap or as fuel efficient (at least with a traditional drivetrain).
Beyond that, its hard for car companies to make money off those cars. Those tin cans are competing with far nicer used cars so they have to be ridiculously cheap to make people consider them. Ridiculously cheap cars have ridiculously small margins. Ridiculously small margins means that car companies would prefer to focus on things that can actually make them profitable.
Like building SUV's that cause them to nearly go bankrupt and forcing a government bailout?
I didn't know it was the SUV's that ruined GM and Chrysler. Are you sure it wasn't the way the companies were run?
I didn't know it was the SUV's that ruined GM and Chrysler. Are you sure it wasn't the way the companies were run?
Yeah me either, SUV's were their highest profit vehicles. Pretty sure it was shitty management + shitty unions + shitty banks not wanting to loan money.
Pretty much this. After maybe $30,000 (in the US), you're not allowed to bitch about gas mileage. If gas money was that tight for simple commuting, you wouldn't be buying a $30,000 car.A 4 pages thread discussing about a pointless vehicle that cost $41,000? MPG is so overrated.
"my car does 90 mpg" oh wow!
It added to the mess. When they were pumping out SUV's for the "masses" without an eye to the future, they were "blindsided" by the economic downturn. Plus, if you were a bank and saw these companies and the way they were run, would you risk loaning them money too?
Well, the Volt is not really for saving fuel. It's for looking trendy and green, and that's priceless.
They risked loaning Ford money and at the time they loaned Ford money they were in a shittier situation that GM. The banks weren't loaning ANYONE money when GM and Chrysler went to ask. GM had already set out a plan to restructure that didnt involve the government. The banks fucked them.
Unfortunately Americans are not all about looking cool. Top google result for best selling cars in america says the top selling vehicles are:
1. Ford F150
2. Chevy Silverado
3. Toyota Camry
4. Honda Civic
5. Honda Accord
6. Toyota Corolla
And the list goes on like that. Americans don't want expensive ass trendy cars. They want a car that goes from A to B without breaking down and without costing a fortune (40k???). Everything else after that doesn't matter.
It added to the mess. When they were pumping out SUV's for the "masses" without an eye to the future, they were "blindsided" by the economic downturn. Plus, if you were a bank and saw these companies and the way they were run, would you risk loaning them money too?
I agree, but the only thing separating GM and Chrysler from Ford was money management.They screwed themselves by over extending, over producing and overpaying. You can't fail in business and blame someone else, period.
It's not political spin at all. I used to work for Chrysler so I was in the middle of the mess. It was typical tunnel vision with an eye on the bottom line of the moment.That's political spin. They built what customers wanted which is their job. Then those customers panicked when gas prices went up, even though they were already driving vehicles they couldn't really afford.
My old Ford Aspire got 50 actual on the highway, no idea what it was rated. I just can't see paying the premium price for a car that is crippled to short trips or weighed down for long ones with useless extra electric stuff.
The Geo Metro XFI can get 80+ mpg when modified. I believe stock it's around 53 mpg. There is a whole enthusiast forum to people who modify the hell out of the care to get 80+ mpg and keep in road safe. The problem is that Americans want to drive in style.