|
Re: Hybrids?
"reboot" <reboot@nothere.com> wrote
> >So I'm listening to this guy on the radio who calls in and is bragging on > >his Honda Civic Hybrid. Gets 40mpg or better and he claims it has "lots of > >power". So I'm not an engineer and I have not researched the technology but > >here is my question. > > > >Why are automakers making hybrid autos out of small cars? Why are they > >trying to add mpgs to autos that already get better than average mpg? > > > >Wouldn't it be more productive to try and double the mpg on the GMC Yukon? > >If I can take an SUV or a PU truck from 12 mpg to 24 mpg wouldn't that be a > >home run for conservation? .... > > > DCX, GM and BMW (in cooperation with each other) are developing hybrid > RWD applications, GM with the GMT900 series, Chrysler Group with the > Durango and BMW with ? > > I suspect that sales of the big vehicles will be disappointing .... I suspect you are right. "Hybrid" involves using a gasoline engine to make electricity that drives the car. It does save gas whenever, but only whenever, your car is idling at a stop or going very slowly. The mfgrs use it in small cars that are commonly used in such heavy traffic situations. But the multiple energy conversion (chemical -> mechanical -> electric -> chemical (battery) -> electric -> mechanical) uses more gas in highway driving so it'll prolly prove unpopular in "highway" applications. My 1957 Renault Dauphine got 42-45 MPG and my 1967 Fairlane got 18-21 MPG with a small V8 and auto trans. but, thanks to "smog" laws that went into effect in 1970, my buddy's 1972 Dodge with similar motor and tranny only gor 12-15MPG. Wonder what the Renault could have done with a modern computer managed FI engine??? |
Re: Hybrids?
"reboot" <reboot@nothere.com> wrote
> >So I'm listening to this guy on the radio who calls in and is bragging on > >his Honda Civic Hybrid. Gets 40mpg or better and he claims it has "lots of > >power". So I'm not an engineer and I have not researched the technology but > >here is my question. > > > >Why are automakers making hybrid autos out of small cars? Why are they > >trying to add mpgs to autos that already get better than average mpg? > > > >Wouldn't it be more productive to try and double the mpg on the GMC Yukon? > >If I can take an SUV or a PU truck from 12 mpg to 24 mpg wouldn't that be a > >home run for conservation? .... > > > DCX, GM and BMW (in cooperation with each other) are developing hybrid > RWD applications, GM with the GMT900 series, Chrysler Group with the > Durango and BMW with ? > > I suspect that sales of the big vehicles will be disappointing .... I suspect you are right. "Hybrid" involves using a gasoline engine to make electricity that drives the car. It does save gas whenever, but only whenever, your car is idling at a stop or going very slowly. The mfgrs use it in small cars that are commonly used in such heavy traffic situations. But the multiple energy conversion (chemical -> mechanical -> electric -> chemical (battery) -> electric -> mechanical) uses more gas in highway driving so it'll prolly prove unpopular in "highway" applications. My 1957 Renault Dauphine got 42-45 MPG and my 1967 Fairlane got 18-21 MPG with a small V8 and auto trans. but, thanks to "smog" laws that went into effect in 1970, my buddy's 1972 Dodge with similar motor and tranny only gor 12-15MPG. Wonder what the Renault could have done with a modern computer managed FI engine??? |
Re: Hybrids?
"reboot" <reboot@nothere.com> wrote
> >So I'm listening to this guy on the radio who calls in and is bragging on > >his Honda Civic Hybrid. Gets 40mpg or better and he claims it has "lots of > >power". So I'm not an engineer and I have not researched the technology but > >here is my question. > > > >Why are automakers making hybrid autos out of small cars? Why are they > >trying to add mpgs to autos that already get better than average mpg? > > > >Wouldn't it be more productive to try and double the mpg on the GMC Yukon? > >If I can take an SUV or a PU truck from 12 mpg to 24 mpg wouldn't that be a > >home run for conservation? .... > > > DCX, GM and BMW (in cooperation with each other) are developing hybrid > RWD applications, GM with the GMT900 series, Chrysler Group with the > Durango and BMW with ? > > I suspect that sales of the big vehicles will be disappointing .... I suspect you are right. "Hybrid" involves using a gasoline engine to make electricity that drives the car. It does save gas whenever, but only whenever, your car is idling at a stop or going very slowly. The mfgrs use it in small cars that are commonly used in such heavy traffic situations. But the multiple energy conversion (chemical -> mechanical -> electric -> chemical (battery) -> electric -> mechanical) uses more gas in highway driving so it'll prolly prove unpopular in "highway" applications. My 1957 Renault Dauphine got 42-45 MPG and my 1967 Fairlane got 18-21 MPG with a small V8 and auto trans. but, thanks to "smog" laws that went into effect in 1970, my buddy's 1972 Dodge with similar motor and tranny only gor 12-15MPG. Wonder what the Renault could have done with a modern computer managed FI engine??? |
Re: Hybrids?
Vito wrote:
> > "reboot" <reboot@nothere.com> wrote > > >So I'm listening to this guy on the radio who calls in and is bragging on > > >his Honda Civic Hybrid. Gets 40mpg or better and he claims it has "lots of > > >power". So I'm not an engineer and I have not researched the technology but > > >here is my question. > > > > > >Why are automakers making hybrid autos out of small cars? Why are they > > >trying to add mpgs to autos that already get better than average mpg? > > > > > >Wouldn't it be more productive to try and double the mpg on the GMC Yukon? > > >If I can take an SUV or a PU truck from 12 mpg to 24 mpg wouldn't that be a > > >home run for conservation? .... > > > > > > DCX, GM and BMW (in cooperation with each other) are developing hybrid > > RWD applications, GM with the GMT900 series, Chrysler Group with the > > Durango and BMW with ? > > > > I suspect that sales of the big vehicles will be disappointing .... > > I suspect you are right. > > "Hybrid" involves using a gasoline engine to make electricity that drives the > car. It does save gas whenever, but only whenever, your car is idling at a stop > or going very slowly. The mfgrs use it in small cars that are commonly used in > such heavy traffic situations. But the multiple energy conversion (chemical -> > mechanical -> electric -> chemical (battery) -> electric -> mechanical) uses > more gas in highway driving so it'll prolly prove unpopular in "highway" > applications. > > My 1957 Renault Dauphine got 42-45 MPG and my 1967 Fairlane got 18-21 MPG with a > small V8 and auto trans. but, thanks to "smog" laws that went into effect in > 1970, my buddy's 1972 Dodge with similar motor and tranny only gor 12-15MPG. > Wonder what the Renault could have done with a modern computer managed FI > engine??? Yup, what a snow job. The original 70's Honda Civic got 50 mpg if you drove it easy, same for the Austin Mini and they both went like scalded cats when tuned nice. I got clocked at 132 mph in one Mini I owned and it wasn't tached out. I was as the Canadian Road Race of Champions on a Mosport track in the 70's and a Mini and Civic were nose and nose at the finish. They had lapped 3rd place which was a Porsche Turbo Carrera with a Vett or Camaro bringing up a dismal 4th. I got a nice 25% increase in fuel mileage up to 23 mpg in my CJ7 when I killed the 'emissions' computer and it still has really low emissions numbers. The new engines are pigs in comparison. Mike |
Re: Hybrids?
Vito wrote:
> > "reboot" <reboot@nothere.com> wrote > > >So I'm listening to this guy on the radio who calls in and is bragging on > > >his Honda Civic Hybrid. Gets 40mpg or better and he claims it has "lots of > > >power". So I'm not an engineer and I have not researched the technology but > > >here is my question. > > > > > >Why are automakers making hybrid autos out of small cars? Why are they > > >trying to add mpgs to autos that already get better than average mpg? > > > > > >Wouldn't it be more productive to try and double the mpg on the GMC Yukon? > > >If I can take an SUV or a PU truck from 12 mpg to 24 mpg wouldn't that be a > > >home run for conservation? .... > > > > > > DCX, GM and BMW (in cooperation with each other) are developing hybrid > > RWD applications, GM with the GMT900 series, Chrysler Group with the > > Durango and BMW with ? > > > > I suspect that sales of the big vehicles will be disappointing .... > > I suspect you are right. > > "Hybrid" involves using a gasoline engine to make electricity that drives the > car. It does save gas whenever, but only whenever, your car is idling at a stop > or going very slowly. The mfgrs use it in small cars that are commonly used in > such heavy traffic situations. But the multiple energy conversion (chemical -> > mechanical -> electric -> chemical (battery) -> electric -> mechanical) uses > more gas in highway driving so it'll prolly prove unpopular in "highway" > applications. > > My 1957 Renault Dauphine got 42-45 MPG and my 1967 Fairlane got 18-21 MPG with a > small V8 and auto trans. but, thanks to "smog" laws that went into effect in > 1970, my buddy's 1972 Dodge with similar motor and tranny only gor 12-15MPG. > Wonder what the Renault could have done with a modern computer managed FI > engine??? Yup, what a snow job. The original 70's Honda Civic got 50 mpg if you drove it easy, same for the Austin Mini and they both went like scalded cats when tuned nice. I got clocked at 132 mph in one Mini I owned and it wasn't tached out. I was as the Canadian Road Race of Champions on a Mosport track in the 70's and a Mini and Civic were nose and nose at the finish. They had lapped 3rd place which was a Porsche Turbo Carrera with a Vett or Camaro bringing up a dismal 4th. I got a nice 25% increase in fuel mileage up to 23 mpg in my CJ7 when I killed the 'emissions' computer and it still has really low emissions numbers. The new engines are pigs in comparison. Mike |
Re: Hybrids?
Vito wrote:
> > "reboot" <reboot@nothere.com> wrote > > >So I'm listening to this guy on the radio who calls in and is bragging on > > >his Honda Civic Hybrid. Gets 40mpg or better and he claims it has "lots of > > >power". So I'm not an engineer and I have not researched the technology but > > >here is my question. > > > > > >Why are automakers making hybrid autos out of small cars? Why are they > > >trying to add mpgs to autos that already get better than average mpg? > > > > > >Wouldn't it be more productive to try and double the mpg on the GMC Yukon? > > >If I can take an SUV or a PU truck from 12 mpg to 24 mpg wouldn't that be a > > >home run for conservation? .... > > > > > > DCX, GM and BMW (in cooperation with each other) are developing hybrid > > RWD applications, GM with the GMT900 series, Chrysler Group with the > > Durango and BMW with ? > > > > I suspect that sales of the big vehicles will be disappointing .... > > I suspect you are right. > > "Hybrid" involves using a gasoline engine to make electricity that drives the > car. It does save gas whenever, but only whenever, your car is idling at a stop > or going very slowly. The mfgrs use it in small cars that are commonly used in > such heavy traffic situations. But the multiple energy conversion (chemical -> > mechanical -> electric -> chemical (battery) -> electric -> mechanical) uses > more gas in highway driving so it'll prolly prove unpopular in "highway" > applications. > > My 1957 Renault Dauphine got 42-45 MPG and my 1967 Fairlane got 18-21 MPG with a > small V8 and auto trans. but, thanks to "smog" laws that went into effect in > 1970, my buddy's 1972 Dodge with similar motor and tranny only gor 12-15MPG. > Wonder what the Renault could have done with a modern computer managed FI > engine??? Yup, what a snow job. The original 70's Honda Civic got 50 mpg if you drove it easy, same for the Austin Mini and they both went like scalded cats when tuned nice. I got clocked at 132 mph in one Mini I owned and it wasn't tached out. I was as the Canadian Road Race of Champions on a Mosport track in the 70's and a Mini and Civic were nose and nose at the finish. They had lapped 3rd place which was a Porsche Turbo Carrera with a Vett or Camaro bringing up a dismal 4th. I got a nice 25% increase in fuel mileage up to 23 mpg in my CJ7 when I killed the 'emissions' computer and it still has really low emissions numbers. The new engines are pigs in comparison. Mike |
Jeep more enviromentally friendly was Re: Hybrids?
check out this site
http://www.auto123.com/en/info/news/...tid=59574&pg=1 Mike Romain wrote: > Vito wrote: > >>"reboot" <reboot@nothere.com> wrote >> >>>>So I'm listening to this guy on the radio who calls in and is bragging on >>>>his Honda Civic Hybrid. Gets 40mpg or better and he claims it has "lots of >>>>power". So I'm not an engineer and I have not researched the technology but >>>>here is my question. >>>> >>>>Why are automakers making hybrid autos out of small cars? Why are they >>>>trying to add mpgs to autos that already get better than average mpg? >>>> >>>>Wouldn't it be more productive to try and double the mpg on the GMC Yukon? >>>>If I can take an SUV or a PU truck from 12 mpg to 24 mpg wouldn't that be a >>>>home run for conservation? .... >>> >>> >>>DCX, GM and BMW (in cooperation with each other) are developing hybrid >>>RWD applications, GM with the GMT900 series, Chrysler Group with the >>>Durango and BMW with ? >>> >>>I suspect that sales of the big vehicles will be disappointing .... >> >>I suspect you are right. >> >>"Hybrid" involves using a gasoline engine to make electricity that drives the >>car. It does save gas whenever, but only whenever, your car is idling at a stop >>or going very slowly. The mfgrs use it in small cars that are commonly used in >>such heavy traffic situations. But the multiple energy conversion (chemical -> >>mechanical -> electric -> chemical (battery) -> electric -> mechanical) uses >>more gas in highway driving so it'll prolly prove unpopular in "highway" >>applications. >> >>My 1957 Renault Dauphine got 42-45 MPG and my 1967 Fairlane got 18-21 MPG with a >>small V8 and auto trans. but, thanks to "smog" laws that went into effect in >>1970, my buddy's 1972 Dodge with similar motor and tranny only gor 12-15MPG. >>Wonder what the Renault could have done with a modern computer managed FI >>engine??? > > > Yup, what a snow job. The original 70's Honda Civic got 50 mpg if you > drove it easy, same for the Austin Mini and they both went like scalded > cats when tuned nice. I got clocked at 132 mph in one Mini I owned and > it wasn't tached out. > > I was as the Canadian Road Race of Champions on a Mosport track in the > 70's and a Mini and Civic were nose and nose at the finish. They had > lapped 3rd place which was a Porsche Turbo Carrera with a Vett or Camaro > bringing up a dismal 4th. > > I got a nice 25% increase in fuel mileage up to 23 mpg in my CJ7 when I > killed the 'emissions' computer and it still has really low emissions > numbers. > > The new engines are pigs in comparison. > > Mike |
Jeep more enviromentally friendly was Re: Hybrids?
check out this site
http://www.auto123.com/en/info/news/...tid=59574&pg=1 Mike Romain wrote: > Vito wrote: > >>"reboot" <reboot@nothere.com> wrote >> >>>>So I'm listening to this guy on the radio who calls in and is bragging on >>>>his Honda Civic Hybrid. Gets 40mpg or better and he claims it has "lots of >>>>power". So I'm not an engineer and I have not researched the technology but >>>>here is my question. >>>> >>>>Why are automakers making hybrid autos out of small cars? Why are they >>>>trying to add mpgs to autos that already get better than average mpg? >>>> >>>>Wouldn't it be more productive to try and double the mpg on the GMC Yukon? >>>>If I can take an SUV or a PU truck from 12 mpg to 24 mpg wouldn't that be a >>>>home run for conservation? .... >>> >>> >>>DCX, GM and BMW (in cooperation with each other) are developing hybrid >>>RWD applications, GM with the GMT900 series, Chrysler Group with the >>>Durango and BMW with ? >>> >>>I suspect that sales of the big vehicles will be disappointing .... >> >>I suspect you are right. >> >>"Hybrid" involves using a gasoline engine to make electricity that drives the >>car. It does save gas whenever, but only whenever, your car is idling at a stop >>or going very slowly. The mfgrs use it in small cars that are commonly used in >>such heavy traffic situations. But the multiple energy conversion (chemical -> >>mechanical -> electric -> chemical (battery) -> electric -> mechanical) uses >>more gas in highway driving so it'll prolly prove unpopular in "highway" >>applications. >> >>My 1957 Renault Dauphine got 42-45 MPG and my 1967 Fairlane got 18-21 MPG with a >>small V8 and auto trans. but, thanks to "smog" laws that went into effect in >>1970, my buddy's 1972 Dodge with similar motor and tranny only gor 12-15MPG. >>Wonder what the Renault could have done with a modern computer managed FI >>engine??? > > > Yup, what a snow job. The original 70's Honda Civic got 50 mpg if you > drove it easy, same for the Austin Mini and they both went like scalded > cats when tuned nice. I got clocked at 132 mph in one Mini I owned and > it wasn't tached out. > > I was as the Canadian Road Race of Champions on a Mosport track in the > 70's and a Mini and Civic were nose and nose at the finish. They had > lapped 3rd place which was a Porsche Turbo Carrera with a Vett or Camaro > bringing up a dismal 4th. > > I got a nice 25% increase in fuel mileage up to 23 mpg in my CJ7 when I > killed the 'emissions' computer and it still has really low emissions > numbers. > > The new engines are pigs in comparison. > > Mike |
Jeep more enviromentally friendly was Re: Hybrids?
check out this site
http://www.auto123.com/en/info/news/...tid=59574&pg=1 Mike Romain wrote: > Vito wrote: > >>"reboot" <reboot@nothere.com> wrote >> >>>>So I'm listening to this guy on the radio who calls in and is bragging on >>>>his Honda Civic Hybrid. Gets 40mpg or better and he claims it has "lots of >>>>power". So I'm not an engineer and I have not researched the technology but >>>>here is my question. >>>> >>>>Why are automakers making hybrid autos out of small cars? Why are they >>>>trying to add mpgs to autos that already get better than average mpg? >>>> >>>>Wouldn't it be more productive to try and double the mpg on the GMC Yukon? >>>>If I can take an SUV or a PU truck from 12 mpg to 24 mpg wouldn't that be a >>>>home run for conservation? .... >>> >>> >>>DCX, GM and BMW (in cooperation with each other) are developing hybrid >>>RWD applications, GM with the GMT900 series, Chrysler Group with the >>>Durango and BMW with ? >>> >>>I suspect that sales of the big vehicles will be disappointing .... >> >>I suspect you are right. >> >>"Hybrid" involves using a gasoline engine to make electricity that drives the >>car. It does save gas whenever, but only whenever, your car is idling at a stop >>or going very slowly. The mfgrs use it in small cars that are commonly used in >>such heavy traffic situations. But the multiple energy conversion (chemical -> >>mechanical -> electric -> chemical (battery) -> electric -> mechanical) uses >>more gas in highway driving so it'll prolly prove unpopular in "highway" >>applications. >> >>My 1957 Renault Dauphine got 42-45 MPG and my 1967 Fairlane got 18-21 MPG with a >>small V8 and auto trans. but, thanks to "smog" laws that went into effect in >>1970, my buddy's 1972 Dodge with similar motor and tranny only gor 12-15MPG. >>Wonder what the Renault could have done with a modern computer managed FI >>engine??? > > > Yup, what a snow job. The original 70's Honda Civic got 50 mpg if you > drove it easy, same for the Austin Mini and they both went like scalded > cats when tuned nice. I got clocked at 132 mph in one Mini I owned and > it wasn't tached out. > > I was as the Canadian Road Race of Champions on a Mosport track in the > 70's and a Mini and Civic were nose and nose at the finish. They had > lapped 3rd place which was a Porsche Turbo Carrera with a Vett or Camaro > bringing up a dismal 4th. > > I got a nice 25% increase in fuel mileage up to 23 mpg in my CJ7 when I > killed the 'emissions' computer and it still has really low emissions > numbers. > > The new engines are pigs in comparison. > > Mike |
Re: Jeep more enviromentally friendly was Re: Hybrids?
So I am driving an economy car now?
Earle "FrankW" <fworm@norpak.ca> wrote in message news:H6mdndV86fUmjtDZnZ2dnUVZ_vidnZ2d@magma.ca... > check out this site > > http://www.auto123.com/en/info/news/...tid=59574&pg=1 > > Mike Romain wrote: > > > Vito wrote: > > > >>"reboot" <reboot@nothere.com> wrote > >> > >>>>So I'm listening to this guy on the radio who calls in and is bragging on > >>>>his Honda Civic Hybrid. Gets 40mpg or better and he claims it has "lots of > >>>>power". So I'm not an engineer and I have not researched the technology but > >>>>here is my question. > >>>> > >>>>Why are automakers making hybrid autos out of small cars? Why are they > >>>>trying to add mpgs to autos that already get better than average mpg? > >>>> > >>>>Wouldn't it be more productive to try and double the mpg on the GMC Yukon? > >>>>If I can take an SUV or a PU truck from 12 mpg to 24 mpg wouldn't that be a > >>>>home run for conservation? .... > >>> > >>> > >>>DCX, GM and BMW (in cooperation with each other) are developing hybrid > >>>RWD applications, GM with the GMT900 series, Chrysler Group with the > >>>Durango and BMW with ? > >>> > >>>I suspect that sales of the big vehicles will be disappointing .... > >> > >>I suspect you are right. > >> > >>"Hybrid" involves using a gasoline engine to make electricity that drives the > >>car. It does save gas whenever, but only whenever, your car is idling at a stop > >>or going very slowly. The mfgrs use it in small cars that are commonly used in > >>such heavy traffic situations. But the multiple energy conversion (chemical -> > >>mechanical -> electric -> chemical (battery) -> electric -> mechanical) uses > >>more gas in highway driving so it'll prolly prove unpopular in "highway" > >>applications. > >> > >>My 1957 Renault Dauphine got 42-45 MPG and my 1967 Fairlane got 18-21 MPG with a > >>small V8 and auto trans. but, thanks to "smog" laws that went into effect in > >>1970, my buddy's 1972 Dodge with similar motor and tranny only gor 12-15MPG. > >>Wonder what the Renault could have done with a modern computer managed FI > >>engine??? > > > > > > Yup, what a snow job. The original 70's Honda Civic got 50 mpg if you > > drove it easy, same for the Austin Mini and they both went like scalded > > cats when tuned nice. I got clocked at 132 mph in one Mini I owned and > > it wasn't tached out. > > > > I was as the Canadian Road Race of Champions on a Mosport track in the > > 70's and a Mini and Civic were nose and nose at the finish. They had > > lapped 3rd place which was a Porsche Turbo Carrera with a Vett or Camaro > > bringing up a dismal 4th. > > > > I got a nice 25% increase in fuel mileage up to 23 mpg in my CJ7 when I > > killed the 'emissions' computer and it still has really low emissions > > numbers. > > > > The new engines are pigs in comparison. > > > > Mike > |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:44 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands