Detroit Is Full Of Shit!!!

T-Case

I remember reading in a science magazine a couple years ago how by the end of the decade we would have cars that could get up to 500 MPG, FUCKING 500 MPG!

or how about these: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztFDqcu8oJ4

come on Washington, lets get the ball rolling on these innovations

Skitch Patterson

lowbudgetlush wrote:

I live in Detroit & agree that we can't keep bailing these companies out, but it would be a DISASTER if we did let them fail. I read in the paper last week that if GM declares chapter 11 bankruptcy that pensions and retirees benefits would be null & void. That just doesnt seem right.

There have been, without question, terrible business practices from the big 3.

Having said that, it really pains me to see the malice directed toward them. As if they wanted this to happen. These are companies, that even outside of the union, have done tremendous things to help this nation, this region, and the people that work for them. From being early adopters of Same-Sex benefits, to good wages, and even donating a LOT of money to local charities and developments.

For people to be rooting for these 3 companies to fail, to punish the couple hundred at the top, at the expense of Hundreds of thousands of honest, dedicated workers, and the supporting businesses, is absolutely insane to me.

Gonzo1977

Look the Suburu car from 1969 was just an example of how 60 mpg or more is not this unattainable goal that the Big 3 is making it out to be.

Obviously the Suburu had it's flaws. The car was only able to obtain a maximinum speed of 80 mph and it had some huge safety issues that took it off the road.

The fact is...The car was able to get 60 mpg. You mean to tell me that we haven't figured out how to improve the safety of cars since 1969? That it is impossible to create a car that is both safe and fuel efficient?

That is bullshit and we all know it.

The fact of the matter is The Big 3 has made some huge errors in judgement over the last 20 years in regards to their failed business model. The decision to flood the market with useless gas guzzling SUV's, Hummers, and Big Trucks was a huge and arrogant mistake.

The Big 3 lost touch with their customers and ignored their needs. And that is why they are in this mess.

And now they come to Washington with their hands out begging for some help, yet they continue to claim that the technology and money isn't there to produce Customer Friendly Fuel Efficient Cars.

Which is not only a flat out lie, but a blatant lazy and apathetic approach to business and it's completly unacceptable.

I'm all for giving these companies some assistance in getting them back on track, but we really need to take the Big 3 to task and force them to get their act toghether.

We have to make it very clear that in order to recieve this money, they are going to have to get off their asses and give the American People what they want and need.

No more Irresponsibility
No more Lazyness
No more of this bullshit underacheiving goal of 30-40 mpg by 2010.

It's time to pull the straps up and get down to work.

El_Kabong

Strangest Tribe wrote:

Yeah, you can thank the Highway Safety Act for the trend of larger less fuel efficient vehicles of the 70's.

Who was largely responsible for the HSA you might ask?

Well....

That would be Mr Ralph Nader of course.

Thanks for playing:D

where did you get such garbage?

http://www.answers.com/topic/national-traffic-and-motor-vehicle-safety-act

Regulators issued twenty standards for passenger cars by the initial deadline, including rules requiring installation of seat belts for all occupants, impact-absorbing steering columns, padded dashboards, safety glass, and dual braking systems.


so which of these features made the vehicles less fuel efficient than they were?

the 2009 volkswagon jetta is supposed to get 60mpg, i haven't seen it but i bet it's a pretty safe care.

i don't really think impact-absorbing steering columns and padded dashboards makes a car slower or less efficient, it's the technology


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal-Combustion_Engine#Engine_Efficiency

Engine Efficiency
The efficiency of various types of internal combustion engines vary. Most gasoline fueled internal combustion engines, even when aided with turbochargers and stock efficiency aids, have a mechanical efficiency of about 20% [2][3]. The efficiency may be as high as 37% at the optimum operating point in engines where this is a high priority such as that of the Prius. Most internal combustion engines waste about 36% of the energy in gasoline as heat lost to the cooling system and another 38% through the exhaust. The rest, about 6%, is lost to friction.

thanks for playing, maybe next time you will get it right

MrBrian

The Jetta just won 'Green car of the Year'

They rate it at 41+ MPG but has gotten closer to 50MPG when driven at more normal speeds.

http://www.greencar.com/features/2009-vw-jetta-clean-diesel-wins

MrBrian

I guess i'll just post it here.

The new Honda Insight is coming out soon, it has a very weird dash/speedo/computer system.

Depending on your driving, the colors change to tell you how much fuel you are burning.
---
The Ecological Drive Assist System was developed by Honda to enable its clients to improve their fuel economy in actual driving conditions. The scoring function offers accumulated, long-term feedback via graphic ‘leaves’, which ‘grow’ over time as drivers learn and then implement a sleeker driving style that raises fuel economy. The visual character of the scoring function presentation makes it easy and enjoyable for drivers to enhance the efficiency of their driving skills in time.

http://jalopnik.com/5045333/new-honda-insight-hybrid-revealed-expected-18500-price-tag-to-make-it-worlds-cheapest

http://jalopnik.com/photogallery/insightdashpreview/1004747662