GM should build one of these!!

Serendipity

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/S8ckrHZDFi8&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/S8ckrHZDFi8&hl=en_US&fs=1&&quot; type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

Hybrids are so yesterday's technology...

Electric cars are where it's at!

phuz

The Tesla roadster is all electric and does 0-60 in 3.7 seconds.

Serendipity

On a recent road trip, my Mom's C6 travelled 153 miles in just under 5 gallons. That's 30+ MPG from a V8 engine!!

I followed the Vette and got just shy of 26MPG in a Japanese economy car

vc69

phuz wrote: »

The Tesla roadster is all electric and does 0-60 in 3.7 seconds.

Coolest car out there right now imho.

comfortablycurt

lmao!! That was awesome!!


It's not a very accurate representation of electric cars though.

There are some extremely fast electric cars out there.

Serendipity

comfortablycurt wrote: »

lmao!! That was awesome!!


It's not a very accurate representation of electric cars though.

There are some extremely fast electric cars out there.

They should build one anyways. My experience with driving the Vette is if you are driving at a constant speed, fuel economy is amazing. Probably due to the low drag/light weight/etc.

So why not make an electric version? Would be awesome!!

dudeinaroom

appadv wrote: »

They should build one anyways. My experience with driving the Vette is if you are driving at a constant speed, fuel economy is amazing. Probably due to the low drag/light weight/etc.

So why not make an electric version? Would be awesome!!

I don't think I would call the Corvette light at over 3200 lbs. My 77 nova weighed less. I think it has more to do with the torque and low gear ratios in the upper gears. I have a friend that has one (works for GM just out side of Detroit) and at 60 mph it gets a little over 40 mpg.

comfortablycurt

dudeinaroom wrote: »

I don't think I would call the Corvette light at over 3200 lbs. My 77 nova weighed less. I think it has more to do with the torque and low gear ratios in the upper gears. I have a friend that has one (works for GM just out side of Detroit) and at 60 mph it gets a little over 40 mpg.

Newer cars are heavier than older cars generally. For a new American sports car...3200 lbs is very light. Take the new Dodge Challenger for instance...it's a pig! IIRC, it weighs in at about 4300 lbs...the new Mustangs and Camaro's aren't exactly lightweight either.


I'd love to see GM start get more involved in electric technology. The new Volt that's coming out is looking pretty promising. There are a lot of misconceptions about electric technology in cars...one of the most common is that an electric car is always going to be slow. Not true at all...electric cars have the potential to be just as fast, if not faster than gas burning engines. They have a lot of advantage, such as the lack of parasitic drive train loss. With an electric motor, the full power is available instantly at all times. Gas engines don't respond as quickly to throttle adjustments etc.

thuffman03

Don't get me started on electric plug in cars. Total wast of time and money!

comfortablycurt

thuffman03 wrote: »

Don't get me started on electric plug in cars. Total wast of time and money!

Whaaaa?

Elaborate.

Toxis

I watched a documentary movie called "who killed the electric car?" and it was very educational and makes me wish we had plug in cars. So I'd love to hear other facts.

Ps - I rented it from blockbuster online.

thuffman03

First electric cars are not greener than gas cars. They do not get any better milage per unit of energy than gas.

Second the cost of producing a car that can travel 300 miles per charge vs typical range of a full tank of gas is a whole lot more than a gas car. The energy required to produce the batteries and then dispose of them after they no longer hold a charge is huge.

Third the charging time is like 8 hours. So you can drive 40 to 60 miles and then you have to charge the batteries.

I am all into trying to find other means and using other technologies but electric cars are not the way to go. The battery technology is not there and we do not have enough nucular power plants to get us off of coal. 70% of power is still produced by coal which if you are into this whole green house gas thing it is then killing the planet.

F1nut

thuffman03 wrote: »

First electric cars are not greener than gas cars. They do not get any better milage per unit of energy than gas.

Second the cost of producing a car that can travel 300 miles per charge vs typical range of a full tank of gas is a whole lot more than a gas car. The energy required to produce the batteries and then dispose of them after they no longer hold a charge is huge.

Third the charging time is like 8 hours. So you can drive 40 to 60 miles and then you have to charge the batteries.

I am all into trying to find other means and using other technologies but electric cars are not the way to go. The battery technology is not there and we do not have enough nucular power plants to get us off of coal. 70% of power is still produced by coal which if you are into this whole green house gas thing it is then killing the planet.

Excellent post and right on the money. I highlighted your one comment because that fact is indeed HUGE!

obieone

Toxis wrote: »

I watched a documentary movie called "who killed the electric car?" and it was very educational and makes me wish we had plug in cars. So I'd love to hear other facts.

Ps - I rented it from blockbuster online.

I watched part of that flick myself. The title they SHOULD HAVE used, is, "What killed the electric car?". It wasn't a 'who', it was a 'what'.

Plain and simple: JOBS!!! The same thing that caused Obama to kill funding to GM's Hydrogen powered car.
I crunced the numbers, using the info. at the co. websites, and determined that approx. 1+ million people work at places like Autozone and Pepboys, and ALL those convenience store/ gas stations

Knucklehead

comfortablycurt wrote: »

Newer cars are heavier than older cars generally. For a new American sports car...3200 lbs is very light. Take the new Dodge Challenger for instance...it's a pig! IIRC, it weighs in at about 4300 lbs...the new Mustangs and Camaro's aren't exactly lightweight either.

Throw a fiberglass body on a Mustang or Camaro and see if that helps.

bigaudiofanatic

Not really electric cars still have to get the power from somewhere and that comes from plants who have too produce it. The future is hydrogen powered cars. Besides I want gm dead anyway.

bigaudiofanatic

appadv wrote: »

On a recent road trip, my Mom's C6 travelled 153 miles in just under 5 gallons. That's 30+ MPG from a V8 engine!!

I followed the Vette and got just shy of 26MPG in a Japanese economy car

I am going to throw the BS flag out on that one.

Serendipity

bigaudiofanatic wrote: »

I am going to throw the BS flag out on that one.

Don't believe it? It's definitely possible.

So why would you call BS?

See the attached picture.

TECHNOKID

thuffman03 wrote: »

First electric cars are not greener than gas cars. They do not get any better milage per unit of energy than gas.

Second the cost of producing a car that can travel 300 miles per charge vs typical range of a full tank of gas is a whole lot more than a gas car. The energy required to produce the batteries and then dispose of them after they no longer hold a charge is huge.

Third the charging time is like 8 hours. So you can drive 40 to 60 miles and then you have to charge the batteries.

I am all into trying to find other means and using other technologies but electric cars are not the way to go. The battery technology is not there and we do not have enough nuclear power plants to get us off of coal. 70% of power is still produced by coal which if you are into this whole green house gas thing it is then killing the planet.

Let me guess, you are working for one of the big companies or may be a mechanic?

Electric car is the way to go... it should have been done 30 years ago but power and money has priority over common sense.

[Plain and simple: JOBS!!! The same thing that caused Obama to kill funding to GM's Hydrogen powered car.
I crunched the numbers, using the info. at the co. websites, and determined that approx. 1+ million people work at places like Autozone and Pepboys, and ALL those convenience store/ gas stations /QUOTE]Everyone thought the same when computers were introduced. Everyone thought it would kill all the jobs, in fact it introduced new jobs and the same will apply with electric cars. The goal isn't to kill the average Joe's job/income but ratter move away from the dependency created by the multi billionaire exploiters.

dudeinaroom

thuffman03 wrote: »

.....They do not get any better milage per unit of energy than gas.

WHAT!!!!!!!!!!! Gas engines get less than .1% of the of the fuel energy to the ground. Where as electric get around 80% +/- to the ground. Yes I know our electric production and distribution system is around 30% efficient, your still looking at around 24% of that energy from production getting to the ground. Now back to gas besides the terrible inefficiency of the internal combustion engine there is also the wasteful possess of refining the fuel, not to mention the energy used refine the fuel.so if you want to break it down by mileage per unit of energy take into account the terrible efficiency of the gasoline engine, the energy use in the refining process and you are way under that .1% if you want to really look at the gas hog, factor in the energy used to harvest the oil, and to ship it.

thuffman03 wrote: »

The battery technology is not there

I totally agree with you here.

later,
dude

p.s PBS has had some great shows on electric vehicles and green technology, and their NOVA series is pretty cool. check out pbs.org and do some searching.

dudeinaroom

bigaudiofanatic wrote: »

Not really electric cars still have to get the power from somewhere and that comes from plants who have too produce it. The future is hydrogen powered cars. Besides I want gm dead anyway.

Wow it is really nice of you to want Michigan to die. GM employees 252000 people around the world. GM's Technical Center has more than 10000 employees in Warren MI. Not to mention the workers in the plants here in Michigan, and all of the people that work at all of the dealerships in MI. Yes we Still have Chrysler(a joke) and Ford. I think that if anyone needs to fail it should be Chrysler, they scraped their alternative fuel/energy program last I head on the local news. I believe hydrogen is a real good concept too. I really think we need to work harder on developing solar, wind and hydro electricity generation. And also find a way to harness and store static electricity including lightning.

bigaudiofanatic

^^ All I have to say is IF they made good working and quality cars people would buy them. But what do they do ignore the problems and build more cars with the same problems. All I am saying is they had year after year to fix their mistakes and their little dilemma is not my problem. People want everything they can get for they money they pay today so they buy imports that will last and not have to worry about problems. That is why I could care less if they go under. Yes it will suck for the family's and people but it is not their fault it is the owners fault. I mean come on they took their private jets to fly to Washington to beg for money when it would of been ten time cheaper to fly on a normal airline. That is why I could car less if they go under.

I agree with you 100% on pursuing other energy alternatives.

F1nut

bigaudiofanatic wrote: »

^^ All I have to say is IF they made good working and quality cars people would buy them. But what do they do ignore the problems and build more cars with the same problems. All I am saying is they had year after year to fix their mistakes and their little dilemma is not my problem. People want everything they can get for they money they pay today so they buy imports that will last and not have to worry about problems. That is why I could care less if they go under. Yes it will suck for the family's and people but it is not their fault it is the owners fault. I mean come on they took their private jets to fly to Washington to beg for money when it would of been ten time cheaper to fly on a normal airline. That is why I could car less if they go under.

I am going to throw the BS flag out on that one.

KASR

Damn, I gotta get me that 6 mile extension cord option!

dudeinaroom

um... GM's quality has been on par with just about everyone else, all makers have their problem vehicles, and GM's have lasted me longer than any thing else I have ever owned. As far as the jet thing, It wasn't just GM, All 3 of the of the big ones reps flew in on private jet if I recall correctly. I think the biggest way for GM to save money would be to not renew the contracts with the unions and hire in new. Do they really need people who get a break every hour who get paid 25 bucks an hour to screw on a bolt. Then come in on Saturday get paid time and a half and work on personal stuff. Also not to mention the supervisors who get a fake degree online so they can get ahead. There was a time for unions, but the feds now have work guide lines in place to look out for the little guy and to avoid unfair work practices. I do know a decent amount of people who work for GM and have told me about a lot of the bs and snuffing off that goes on.

dudeinaroom

KASR wrote: »

Damn, I gotta get me that 6 mile extension cord option!

it only works on 6 mile in Detroit:D

maximillian

I know that this vid is tongue-in-cheek. However, check out this review of the Tesla by Top Gear. You will gain some respect for these cars. As soon as you accelerate the torque is there so in drag races it can be most gas powered cars. It's not a perfect car and it's still expensive.<br><br>

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/7x73Z6ndtjE&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/7x73Z6ndtjE&hl=en_US&fs=1&&quot; type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

concealer404

bigaudiofanatic wrote: »

I am going to throw the BS flag out on that one.

No, he's right. The 6th gear in the vette is a TRUE overdrive gear, and the car is just loafing at highway speeds. Plus the fact that it's likely lighter than the Maxima, has a way lower drag coefficient, and is putting way less load on the motor than the Maxi at those cruising speeds, it makes perfect sense.

30+mpg for a C6 highway is the norm.

obieone

Why don't they just build nuclear powered cars? They're already using the priciples of 'diesel-electric'(hybrid vehicles) from the bubblehead world anyway.

Just take it to the next level:eek::p

dudeinaroom

obieone wrote: »

Why don't they just build nuclear powered cars? They're already using the priciples of 'diesel-electric'(hybrid vehicles) from the bubblehead world anyway.

Just take it to the next level:eek::p

Breaking News: Today there was a nuclear explosion on I-75

audiobliss

dudeinaroom wrote: »

Breaking News: Today there was a nuclear explosion on I-75

And later we bring you news on the recent 10-car nuclear pile-up that leveled Southern California, Arizona, and parts of Nevada!