There's a banner ad on this site for Mitsubishi's new i-MiEV electric car.
It looks like a four door Smart.
The price is an eye-watering £23,990, and that includes the buyer's £5,000 government plug-in electric car grant.
Mitsubishi cannot expect to sell any.
Marketing this car in the UK must be to fulfil green criteria of some sort to enable the company to carry on importing its conventional models.
www.mitsubishi-cars.co.uk/imiev/
Last edited by: Iffy on Sat 5 Feb 11 at 18:46
|
I saw one* on the M1 roundabout near Ratcliffe power station the other week... I understand they have a demo fleet in central London, but how did they get one to Nottinghamshire with a range of 80 miles on a charge?
*Definitely an i-MiEV, fully wrapped in signwriting proclaiming its electric-ness.
Last edited by: Dave_TD {P} on Sat 5 Feb 11 at 20:51
|
|
Perhaps the clue is in the location....? ;-)
|
Looks like they will continue to become jokes in near future.
To a consumer, they offer no benefit over petrol/diesel cars [except feeling smug about green credential ]
When too many people will use electric cars, cost of electricity will go up and that will negate their low running cost claim.
|
|
I wonder how much it would cost to use a small diesel generator running on veg oil to charge one up? Could even fit one in the boot just in case you ran out of juice....
|
im thinking of getting all the old potatoes that cant sell at the market and turning them into fuel
anybody want to back me?
what cant fuel we can drink so its win win
|
>>what cant fuel we can drink so its win win
Careful Bb. The town I live in has a large population of Poles left over from WW2. Every decade or so a couple die and a few more go blind from getting the chemistry wrong.
|
>> Careful Bb. The town I live in has a large population of Poles left over
>> from WW2.
He'll be long gone now, but my mate and i used to keep a lovely Austin Westminster finely fettled for a smashing Polish chap many years ago.
Every year he'd take the car to Poland to visit relatives and fill all the door insides up with goodness knows what proof Polish Vodka to bring back, he'd tell them 'windows kaput' at the border when they wanted to talk to him.
Lovely stuff too, he'd get us as merry as larry on it.
|
>> Marketing this car in the UK must be to fulfil green criteria of some sort
>> to enable the company to carry on importing its conventional models.
Don't they have that ruling that every manufacturer has to get down to some sort of low average CO2 emissions across their range of cars? Including that in their range would allow them more of the higher emission cars... Not that I'm being cynical or anything...
|
...Don't they have that ruling that every manufacturer has to get down to some sort of low average CO2 emissions across their range of cars?...
Think that's right, but I couldn't bring it to mind when I made the OP.
Of course, the authorities can only insist the green car is genuinely available as part of the range, they cannot insist on numbers sold.
Mitsubishi charge top price for this car because they are not bothered if they sell any or not.
|
|
No doubt some overpaid celeb will buy one...
|
What about this,
www.autoexpress.co.uk/carreviews/firstdrives/262954/volkswagen_xl1.html
Apparently due to be on sale in two years time. Where do you put your luggage? But the concept makes more sense, having a small diesel engine to work in conjunction with the electric motor.
|
But in reality it becomes the VW Up:
"Volkswagen is putting the final touches to a super-economical version of the Up city car, which will be good for at least 95mpg.
Expected to be called the Up blue-e-motion, the model will be powered by a production version of the powertrain from the XL1 concept, company sources say."
www.autocar.co.uk/News/NewsArticle/AllCars/255262/
|
That VW thing does look nice and clearly will be quite economical. Of course it will be very expensive to buy. Same sort of idea as the first Honda hybrid, but technically improved. Apparently it's quite noisy, which I find reassuring. No hundredweights of sound deadening, batteries instead.
It is a sort of paradox that these extreme eco cars are so expensive to buy. But if they were cheap everyone would want one and they'd be impossible to get. So we have the poor driving around in fuel-guzzling jalopies and the rich swanning about on a tiny sip of LPG or whatever. Such a rational species we are.
Of course it was asking for trouble to mass-produce the automobile in the first place. It was much better when it was a toy for rich mechanically minded anti-horse gents. Those gringos have a lot to answer for.
|
Electric cars cannot really be the answer, the charing points can be sorted but they take too long to charge.
There is the issue of the UK already heading for a electricity generation crisis and prices are going up and up all the time.
I still think the way forward is more efficient internal combustion engines, at least for the next ten years.
|
Skoda already do a Fabia Greenline Estate with combined figure of 83mpg, at £14300, which is mid price for Fabia Estates (and Seat and VW do similar models)... Until Electric cars or Hybrids can match that sort of price and/or economy they are on a hiding to nothing...
I know I'm quoting the Gov figures, but from what I've seen on Briskoda it is attainable, driven in the same way as a Hybrid to get its Gov Figs!
Last edited by: hobby on Sun 6 Feb 11 at 16:05
|
The i-MiEV has a range of 93 miles.
It is next to useless.
How many Colts would Mitsubishi sell if the car had a two-gallon tank?
Last edited by: Iffy on Sun 6 Feb 11 at 16:11
|
"How many Colts would Mitsubishi sell if the car had a two-gallon tank?"
Quite a lot if petrol was £25 per gallon
|
|
But if petrol was £25 a gallon, electricity would also be a lot more expensive.
|
|
they will never catch on once all the leads get entangled on the south bound orbitary
|
I suppose they could have someone standing by to untangle the leads BB.
After all. electric trains can now reach Glasgow from London without the plug coming out.
Ted
|
...electric trains can now reach Glasgow from London without the plug coming out...
And Teddy's train set goes round and round without becoming tangled.
|
It would but people would not be making long journeys in cars if the price of fuelling them was prohibitively expensive, which it may well become in the not too distant future.
Undoubtedly the long term future for personal transport will be public transport or rented vehicle for long journeys and small electrically powered vehicles for local use.
|
I agree and I think this is why trains will have a very important future role. However the government don't seem to have this worked out. They are spending billions on HS2 when actually the money needs to be spent on upgrading cross country links. We have far too many clapped out Pacers which need replacing long before any fancy 200mph train.
From Manchester for example it takes exactly two hours to get to London, we have 3 trains an hour which have 9 carraiges each. Does that really need improving? Then to Blackpool most the trains are clapped out dirty noisy class 142s which are so crowded the conditions are wore than cattle transport.
|
>> I agree and I think this is why trains will have a very important future
>> role. However the government don't seem to have this worked out. They are spending billions
>> on HS2 when actually the money needs to be spent on upgrading cross country links.
>> We have far too many clapped out Pacers which need replacing long before any fancy
>> 200mph train.
Spot on Rattle, and their latest wheeze to combat overcrowding is...
to increase fares...
Sometimes I despair!
|
Not so sure they'll be a joke in the long term.
The price of fuel has changed our ownership, where possible any long runs are and will be undertaken in the little Diesel hatch, and we don't travel unless we really have to.
It's the relatively short commutes of 7 or 8 miles like my own that are the problem, not really suited to modern Diesels with their DPF's, and they are the only vehicles being quoted by the anti electric/hybrid folk.
Whatever peoples views and preferences car wise are i hope everyone has their eyes wide open when buying any car, and a quality crystal ball available to try to see what extra taxes future govts will nobble them with.
When everyone has been good citizens and bought shoe boxes, they'll bring in road pricing to raise the shortfall in fuel tax take, and you just know that any subsidies or parking/congestion relief is only short term till enough people jump on the band wagon, then that too will alter.
|
I think they do have a place as a second car.
For example my wife drives 4 miles to work and 4 back, plus the weekly shopping trip and out to see local friends and family. An electric car would be perfectly suited for this if the 60 odd mile range was reliable.
The cost of them at the moment is prohibative though. They need to be £8k - £15k and a battery replacement scheme needs to be in place or in x years, a perfectly servicable car will be scrapped because of the cost of new batteries.
|
>> a perfectly servicable car will be scrapped because of the cost of new batteries.
>
Why would someone who paid £24k for a car scrap it some years later, rather than pay say £3-4K for a new battery. If they scrap it and buy a new car they're going to take at least that, if not more depreciation on the new car.
|
"Mitsubishi cannot expect to sell any."
They'll sell two at least. Jonathan Ross and Robert Llewellyn will buy one.
|
An electric car is actually perfect for the kind of driving I do but there is one major problem apart from the cost, I have no off street parking. How am I supposed to charge it up?
I will be sticking to a little petrol for a long time yet I think.
|
I find myself in agreement with toycollector's comment on 1st Feb:
"Yet another "pie in the sky" eco car. When will governments, car makers and motoring journos realise that most of us can't afford to buy these stupid green cars. In my town most people are struggling to put fuel in the tanks of their ten year old, £300 puntos!
These people live in a different World to the rest of us."
Well said, that man.
|
"In my town most people are struggling to put fuel in the tanks of their ten year old, £300 puntos!"
In 15- 20 years they won't be able to own a petrol/diesel car at all. Ownership or rental of a small electric car will be the norm, albeit not as widespread as car ownership is at present.
|
...In 15- 20 years they won't be able to own a petrol/diesel car at all...
Rubbish.
CG,
You've made several posts in this thread predicting the death of the fossil fuelled motor car, but to suggest such an enormous change will happen in such a short space of time is ludicrous.
Car ownership as we know it may cease, but it will take a lot longer than that for it to do so.
|
|
And they are coming up with new ways to develop fuels all the time too. It will have an impact but in ten years time there will be loads of cars around still but I suspect things like the school run will no longer be done via cars.
|
>> In 15- 20 years they won't be able to own a petrol/diesel car at all.
>> Ownership or rental of a small electric car will be the norm, albeit not as
>> widespread as car ownership is at present.
>>
Someone had better start putting in some affordable, decent, integrated, public transport infrastructure then. Outside the already well provided city centres (M25, M60).
|
|
Maybe CGN doesn't know about the untapped oil reserves under Sakhalin island which exceed those of Saudi Arabia.
|
|
I heard some "expert" say on TV recently that there is about 40 years worth of oil left, which strangely is exactly the same thing that i remember was being said in the early 70's, which was errr about 40 years ago ! A work colleague tells me that they were saying the same back in thye 50's !
|
>> Maybe CGN doesn't know about the untapped oil reserves under Sakhalin island which exceed those
>> of Saudi Arabia.
What are the current estimates of extraction cost per barrel as opposed to Saudi Arabia?
Long before we actually run out of oil, it will be far too expensive for most of us to fill our cars up with its products.
It is the price of oil, rather than the absence of it, that will push us to alternatives (either fuel alternatives or transport alternatives).
Still, I'm not for guessing when that will be, if the best minds currently focused on it can't tell.
|
>> It is the price of oil, rather than the absence of it, that will push
>> us to alternatives (either fuel alternatives or transport alternatives).
>>
The oil companies make billions in profit, there is a lot of room for them to make sure they don't price themselves out of existence, likewise the government does not want unrest, (riots), so they will transfer the taxation elsewhere. Or maybe even stop spending so much on wars. I can always dream.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Sun 6 Feb 11 at 20:20
|
>> The oil companies make billions in profit, there is a lot of room for them
>> to make sure they don't price themselves out of existence
Not really. For example, Exxon Mobil's profit margin over the last 12 months has been just shy of 8%. Not a fantastic return given the risks, and certainly a problem if the cost of extraction goes up.
It is a fallacy that oil companies make fat profits, they are only big numbers because they are big comapnies, the margins are small given the risks, and do not leave much wiggle room.
|
>> Maybe CGN doesn't know about the untapped oil reserves under Sakhalin island which exceed those
>> of Saudi Arabia.
It will take 5 new Saudi Arabias to meet the projected demand for oil of the emerging economies of China, India, South American and Africa as well as the increasing populaiton growth of USA and Europe. There is no way that the present affordability of transport in the west will continue in the coming decades. Widespread ownership of personal transportation will be seen as a historical aberration of the twentieth and early twenty first centuries. Ownership of a small electrictvehicle for local transportt will become an aspiration.
|
The government seem to be think it is far more important to get brummies to London 30 minutes quicker than actually spend money on public transport which will be used by all people in the UK, not just Birmingham and possible Manchester and Leeds.
It will be interesting to see what happens to car journeys in my area once the Metrolink tram system opens in a few months time. The problem is some people just won't use public transport no matter how clean/fast and modern it is.
I can talk though, I do need the car for my work but I admit I have recently made many car journeys I could have done by public transport. The problem is when drivers have to pay a fixed cost for insurance, loan and tax you want to use it as it is madness leaving it idle.
I feel a great way to reduce car journeys would be a pay as you go insurance system.
|
>> The government seem to be think it is far more important to get brummies to
>> London 30 minutes quicker than actually spend money on public transport which will be used
>> by all people in the UK, not just Birmingham and possible Manchester and Leeds.
>>
Unfortunately they do seem to be following the same pattern as the French, spend billions on headline grabbing fancy express routes to make a quick journey a bit quicker, whilst 'backwater' routes are allowed to wither and die.
|
|
We'll get to know the truth about the oil soon enough. Dallas is coming back.
|
>> We'll get to know the truth about the oil soon enough. Dallas is coming back.
>>
>>
And that is about as close to the truth that Joe Public will get.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Sun 6 Feb 11 at 21:21
|
...Dallas is coming back...
I remember it as a well-acted and generally well put together programme, until the story lines got ridiculous.
|
S'wellin, you're a drunk and bad mother.
Hope JR's in it, my hero.
|
|
They should cast BBD in it as the mancunian ex-patriot toyboy of the now ageing Sue-Ellen. He's got the outfit and everything.
|
"now ageing Sue-Ellen"
Yup. I'd do her.
|
...Yup. I'd do her...
If you did, JR would run you out of Kracow.
|
>> ...Yup. I'd do her...
>>
She must still have a pulse then ?
Ted
|
I feel a great way to reduce car journeys would be a pay as you go insurance system.
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>you wouldnt say this if you needed your car to seriously make your living on todays congested routes
|
You would have a choice, so could pay a flat rate insurance like we currently do or choose pay as you based on milleage. Not practical really though and similar trials have been done in the past.
|
After the next oil crisis (at about $200+ dollars/barrel) the penny will finally drop and we'll go back to using coal-powered power stations as it will then be economcailly viable to start extracting the 300-400yrs worth of coal beneath the UK.
Only then will the electric car start to have a real cost advantage.
Forget hydrogen fuel cells unless they start to produce 'town gas' from coal again as the cost of electrolysing water to make the necessary amounts will be mad.
Within 10 years we'll see diesel-electric hybrids take over from petrol/diesel turbos as the main powerplant of our cars.
|
>> I have no off street parking. How
>> am I supposed to charge it up?
>>
>>>>
With a long extension lead.
|
>> In 15- 20 years they won't be able to own a petrol/diesel car at all
In spite of what media want to make us believe, fossil fuel will be available at least for next 50 years (if not 100).
|
>> "In spite of what media want to make us believe, fossil fuel will be available
>> at least for next 50 years (if not 100)."
I don't doubt it. I equally don't doubt that in 10 /15 years most people in this country will not be able to afford to buy anything like the amount of petrol/diesel they can afford today.
|
If you're right CGN, then let's hope it's an orderly, gradual transition. By your scenario, the value in the existing fleet of ICE cars will be destroyed very quickly, thus leaving most folk too far out of pocket to upgrade to suitable alternate vehicles.
You would also see most commuters out of work, desperately trying to find appropriate employment with walking distance, as even public transport (if any still exists by then) will be too pricey.
In a civilised world, how likely do you think our government would allow this state of affairs to happen? I think it's quite unlikely.
I've been following Peak Oil and listening to the arguments of doom since 2004, waiting for the inevitable collapse that has been foretold daily since then, and guess what, it's pretty much business as usual, no reason to see why that should change either.
Even if oil prices double overnight, the cost of a litre of petrol would still be about £1.70 or so. Yes, it would hurt, but the end of personal transport for the masses? No.
|
The conspiracy theorists will say that the governments are phasing in the change to alternative fuel supplies slowly so not as to upset OPEC because if they saw a change coming over a few short years or a couple of decades then they would ramp up the price of fuel to extract every last penny from the rest of the world.
Now, where did I put that tin foil hat?
|
Our government has no control over the price of oil
We are already seeing the decline in value of fuel thirsty vehicles with an increased demand for more economical cars. This trend will continue and accelerate as fuel becomes relatively more expensive. Far fewer households will run multiple vehicles and the idea of long distance commuting will no longer seem viable.
There will be no collapse, just an increasing tendency to buy smaller and more economical vehicles, mainly electric. For most people such vehicles will fulfil 95% of their transport needs.
I don't see this as particularly drastic, merely a reversal in the trend over the past 40 years of ever increasing car ownership and miles travelled. If you go back to 1960 very few families has a car. Within 20 years this had completely changed to most families owning a car. Car ownership and usage has continued to grow since then. A change over the next 20 years in which car ownership becomes more expensive and a small electric car is all most can afford to run is not really too radical a prediction
|
whilst i agree in principle the problem still arises that the poorest members of society that do the dirty jobs in this country still need to get to work and buses and trains do not fill the criteria so there will always be a market for gas guzzling heaps like vectras rovers and old mondeos because these people cant get enough credit together to buy an electric car
so the poorer get poorer
|
CGN. who said the government controlled the price of oil? However, they do control the price of _fuel_, that is petrol and diesel, through taxation. Should things get bad enough, they'll find a way to lower the burden on motorists.
In any case, how exactly would you imagine a reversal of car ownership to early 60s levels?
The kind of local, jobs for life that your average working man once had simply do not exist any more. We have very specialised jobs, that necessitate long commutes. You can't simply move nearer to your work place, because that changes too often. Plus, both partners work these days, so making it nearly impossible for both earners to be physically near to work. The price of houses and living in general requires both partners to work, so two commutes is the norm and will remain so.
The world has changed and there is no going back to the old ways. A simple electric car for better off families just isn't good enough.
Personal transportation for the masses will survive, because it has to. Sure, for some an electric car might work, as will working from home etc. There will be many solutions, but don't expect car ownership to decline significantly yet, IMHO.
|
'In any case, how exactly would you imagine a reversal of car ownership to early 60s levels?''
I don't. I was simply making the point that an enormous change in things like level of car ownership can occur in 20 years. To believe that the government somehow must maintain the current level of car ownership and that the current levels of mobility in the population must be maintained is somewhat wishful thinking
I predicted that the level of car ownership will fall due to increasing costs and that a small electric car would be the best most families could afford. In actual fact that state of affairs would allow life to go on pretty much as they are at the moment. Most people don't commute vast distances to work by car and an electric vehicle would do the job.
|
|
I should add that my local petrol station has put fuel down 1p now to 127.9p a litre it will be interesting to see if it fuel will go down a bit more before it peaks again.
|
>> I don't. I was simply making the point that an enormous change in things like
>> level of car ownership can occur in 20 years. To believe that the government somehow
>> must maintain the current level of car ownership and that the current levels of mobility
>> in the population must be maintained is somewhat wishful thinking
>>
If car ownership is reduced the government is going to have a huge drop in tax income from the motorist and will have to think of something else to tax heavily.
|
"government is going to have a huge drop in tax income from the motorist and will have to think of something else to tax heavily."
Don't worry, I'm sure they will think of something.
|
>> ' Most people don't commute vast distances to work by car and
>> an electric vehicle would do the job.
>>
That remains to be seen! :)
|
Consider it another way, OB. (Nice to see you here again, by the way.) The huge increase in personal prosperity over the last 40 years is the aberration, not the norm.
We have had a boom based on cheap consumer goods manufactured by citizens of emerging economies in Asia and elsewhere. Those countries' own prosperity is increasing because of this, so prices and wages there are rising. IT companies are already looking for alternatives to India because it's getting too expensive for them.
There are two consequences of this, neither of them pleasant. Our cars, along with other manufactured goods, will get more expensive, and the jobs that fund their purchase will get scarcer. Costs of motoring are a drop in a bucket next to housing costs - sustained till recently by plentiful jobs and cheap personal transport; I think that's where the real correction is still to come.
|
The cost of housing is inflated by the high cost of land and the fact that houses are still built in the same way they were two hundred years ago.
British housebuilding works as a cottage industry with suimilar quality standards....
|
So true - I saw a gang of half-a-dozen Germans on Kevin McCloud's programme build a house in under a week with parts pre-fabbed in their factory.
He couldn't knock the build quality and the design was pretty decent.
video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2784715121086172729#
|
>> So true - I saw a gang of half-a-dozen Germans on Kevin McCloud's programme build
>> a house in under a week with parts pre-fabbed in their factory.
>>
>> He couldn't knock the build quality and the design was pretty decent.
>>
I agree, my bungalow is basically a timber kit assembled in a factory, called timber framed here, or brick skinned in some countries. It is well insulated, all the right angles are just that, it is warm, comfortable, and will outlast me X2 at least.
|
>> Huf Haus? Lovely things.
>>
Ooohh, yess please!!
|
Hi WdB, it's good to have some time on my hands! :)
Mrs OB often comes up with very similar arguments to yours, and I admit, I have a hard time addressing them. I think the possibilities are twofold: either we become poorer as other nations enrich themselves, using us as we perhaps have used them over the last 2 centuries, but with a diminishing worldwide resource base for us all to fight over. Or, we could increase the level of wealth and prosperity for all, bringing everyone up to a higher standard. I currently subscribe to the second view, although I see plenty of evidence for the first.
This is partly, why I look down on electric cars I suppose, the compromises and limitations suggest the first scenario is taking place. They don't seem like progress, just a means of hanging on to some element of our currently affluent, safe and healthy lifestyles (in comparison to elsewhere), in a slippery slope down towards the future envisioned by CGN, and worse. As to the housing market, yes something needs to change, the current situation seems untenable, but then I've been thinking that for over 10 years!
For cars, I don't much care for the means of propulsion, but whatever cars we build, they should be bigger, better and faster than before. And perhaps more efficient as a bonus, not as a total encompassing goal.
|
The housing situation will resolve istself as the baby boomers - who mainly own houses - die or become senile.
And of course there is NO way the NHS will cope with the numbers of senile OAPs....
I find the debate on NHS cus shypocritical as all politicians know the above. And if we are to look after the rising tide of decrepit OAPs those in work will have to pay lots more taxes. Which will not happen.. I can see involuntary euthanasia..
Last edited by: madf on Tue 8 Feb 11 at 15:42
|
I think the possibilities are twofold: either we become
>> poorer as other nations enrich themselves, using us as we perhaps have used them over
>> the last 2 centuries, but with a diminishing worldwide resource base for us all to
>> fight over. Or, we could increase the level of wealth and prosperity for all, bringing
>> everyone up to a higher standard. I currently subscribe to the second view, although I
>> see plenty of evidence for the first.
The only reason we have been able to sustain the lifestyle we have is because we are not living within our means. You can thank the rest of the developing world for that, because they do. I don't think there is enough to go round on this planet of ours to increase everyones wealth and prosperity, certainly not with current populations.
>>
>> This is partly, why I look down on electric cars I suppose, the compromises and
>> limitations suggest the first scenario is taking place. They don't seem like progress.
>> For cars, I don't much care for the means of propulsion, but whatever cars we
>> build, they should be bigger, better and faster than before. And perhaps more efficient as
>> a bonus, not as a total encompassing goal.
Why would you want cars that are bigger and faster? Do you mean top speed, or acceleration? We have speed limits everywhere already. But if you think that electric cars are not progress, maybe the fact that you can get maximum torque from an electric motor instantaneously might change your mind. And much faster than conventional engined cars, as it happens. Roads are already over crowded - bigger justs means more congestion and more weight to drag around, which erodes speed and efficiency. Look at the civilian Hummer - big and useless.
|
People may well want larger and faster cars (apart from longevity and comfort) because of safety. There are many lunatics on the roads, a bigger car offers more protection in a crash. Faster acceleration is also very important as it helps you to get out of a dangerous situation.
www.edmunds.com/car-safety/are-smaller-cars-as-safe-as-large-cars.html?articleid=106748
www.ehow.co.uk/facts_5727570_small-car-safety.html
Last edited by: Roverfan on Tue 8 Feb 11 at 18:35
|
In nearly 40 years of driving I've yet to have to accelerate to get out of a dangerous situation... more likely slowing down fast has been better... Perhaps those who promote this myth could point out those situations when accelerating fast is a better option than being aware of what is going on and either not getting yourself in such a situation, or slowing down...
This morning whilst overtaking someone they deliberately speeded up, I too went faster and managed to get past but looking back I have to admit that slowing down and slotting back in would have been the better option... Even though it meant 'losing face' - which is the more likely reason to try to go faster rather than the sensible one of slowing down...
Incidentally, RF, what happens when we are all driving around in Hummers?
Last edited by: hobby on Tue 8 Feb 11 at 19:33
|
>> In nearly 40 years of driving I've yet to have to accelerate to get out of a dangerous situation... more likely slowing down fast has been better... Perhaps those who promote this myth could point out those situations when accelerating
In more than 50 years of driving I've accelerated out of trouble on a number of occasions. It isn't a myth. It's just that some people would rather decelerate than accelerate. Braking is their default response. They often cause accidents.
Of course people who want to go faster and faster cause accidents too. But somehow I would much, much rather be counted as one of them.
|
So you think that we need faster and bigger cars, then, AC?
When we all have them and any advantage we had over the others is neutralised what would you suggest we do then? Buy Tanks?
Those two reasons he gave for bigger and faster cars are the ones which are used every time someone wants to justify having, or wanting, a big, fast car, and is one of the most common reasons for 'needing' a 4x4... Fact is for most of us we don't!
I still say that its a myth peddled by those who want to justify their new purchase, and nothing you say will convince me otherwise! ;-)
Last edited by: hobby on Tue 8 Feb 11 at 19:49
|
What's bigger got to do with it?
Some of us, but only some of us, want fast cars. 4X4s however capable aren't really fast in most cases (no need to quote manufacturer's figures for the Cayenne Turbo, I've seen them).
I repeat, it isn't a myth. But it's of only academic interest to the waddling, happy-as-pigs-in-excrement majority.
I feel an access of rudeness coming on. Bless you hobby. You keep my ticker ticking.
|
>>I feel an access of rudeness coming on.
That'll be just for a change, will it?
|
>> That'll be just for a change, will it?
Are you implying that I am always rude, Clk Sec? Perhaps I seem so to the weaker sisters. So be it.
|
|
Just on the internet, perhaps.
|
Rude? Nah, touch of frustration perhaps that this myth ('excuse' is what it actually is, though) is always brought out when people want bigger and faster cars...
Trouble is, its a self defeating argument... if everyone had faster (or bigger, substitute which ever word suits!) then they would want something faster/bigger to replace it to keep themselves safe, and so on, and so on...
Fact is most roads in this country just don't suit either... so all rather pointless
(Though I can see the use for a fast car on a suitable road/track, AC... Great idea in the right location... Just that in a rush hour traffic jam or on a crowded motorway its a liability!)
Last edited by: hobby on Wed 9 Feb 11 at 09:16
|
>> I've yet to have to accelerate to get out of a dangerous situation...
Same here.
>> Perhaps those who promote this myth could point out those situations when
>> accelerating fast is a better option than being aware of what is going on and
>> either not getting yourself in such a situation
The basic thing is indeed to know how to drive properly.
|
As for cars being bigger or faster:
Albert Einstein: "There is a race between mankind and the universe. Mankind is trying to build bigger, better, faster, and more foolproof machines. The universe is trying to build bigger, better, and faster fools. So far the universe is winning."
That's kind of what I meant, it doesn't have to be literal. ;)
|
If we all had spikes on the steering wheels instead of air bags, I am sure we would all drive a bit more carefully and with a lighter foot.
This game of everyone wanting bigger cars is just plain stupid.
unless it is a true work horse car of course.
I.E 4x4's actually used for off road abilities, not these half off road useless things.
|
>> This game of everyone wanting bigger cars is just plain stupid.
I agree. Same goes for the monstrosities that pass for houses in this country too. We have a housing shortage, there is no way an average family of 4 can justify a 3 bed house. Flats are much better for the environment, a 3 bed flat, but do away with the living room idea, the main bedroom can double up as common in eastern Europe.
People don't need these excessively large houses, it's become completely ridiculous, the example above would be seen as average, yet it's off the scale in terms of excess already.
;-)
|
If people did not have excessivley large houses and associated garages, where would they put all the rubbish they buy and never use?
They would stop consuming.....
|
Bigger is one thing, faster is another. In fact they contradict each other to some extent.
Modern cars have become obese with crumple zones and other safety-related kit. Their increasing size and weight wipes out a good proportion of the performance and economy gains brought by engine design and manufacturing progress.
Many of the nicest and quickest cars I have been in were 'death traps' according to some of you: Lotus Elan (real one, not the fat front-drive thing that made a brief appearance a few years back), real tweaked early Minis, best of all a Unipower GT, a very rare small plastic mid-engined road bullet once owned by a friend... could do over 120 and 40mpg with its Mini-Cooper unit. I don't suppose even the gorgeous Lancia B20 would pass modern safety tests.
120? That's nothing by modern standards, I can hear all you tutting mimsers saying. But of course to a driver flat-out maximum is of limited interest. Acceleration, roadholding, handling and behaviour under braking - in a word, driveability - are of greater practical importance. Sensible people want quick, driveable cars to cut through the mimsing carp that congests our roads, not huge wide supercars capable of 200mph but something of a nuisance in the home counties except to poseurs, football players and the like.
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Wed 9 Feb 11 at 15:52
|
Compared with 20 years ago, I agree AC, safety features have made them bloated... But with modern cars its all about styling vs packaging, there are many cars where it isn't the safety features that have made cars bigger, but bulbous styling... Look at the inside of a Roomster and then any similar sized car, the Roomster is a 5 star rated car but has plenty of space, a Focus estate, which is roughly similar in overall size isn't as big inside... you pays your money... etc.!
Re houses, I thought they were a lot smaller now than they used to be? Last time we moved we looked at several new builds and ended up with a mid 60s house as it was bigger!
Last edited by: hobby on Wed 9 Feb 11 at 16:14
|
>> Look at the
>> inside of a Roomster and then any similar sized car, the Roomster is a 5
>> star rated car but has plenty of space.
The Roomster is an interesting one, because if you look at the fuel consumption figures for a 1.9 diesel model, it does less mpg than an Octavia with the same engine. The bulbous styling as you mentioned had made cars like the Roomster very unaerodynamic - plenty of space, but unefficient at higher speeds especially. It's the same with all cars of this type - the engines are way more efficient than they used to be but the brick styling cancels out some of this improvement.
|
Yes Corax, as soon as I'd posted I realised it was a bad example, the Fabia Estate would have been better, we bought a 2001 Mk1 version in preference to a 2001 Focus estate as the Fabia made better use of internal space, the Mk2 is equally good.
Though to be fair to the Roomster, they could drop the roofline and not loose the practicality of the interior, that would sort out the mpg!
Last edited by: hobby on Wed 9 Feb 11 at 21:09
|
>> Re houses
Was yankin' diddy's chain, just for perspective that's all.
Me ole 7er in the driveway says I'm happy with big cars. That being said, big cars are better suited to intercity mile munching. If I lived in a city I'd have something dinky but nippy for that.
For occasional city jaunts the 7er is ok, has great turning circle but causes too much drama if you try to drive it like a wee nippy city car, plus it can't breathe in for tight gaps.
|
>> Re houses, I thought they were a lot smaller now than they used to be?
>> Last time we moved we looked at several new builds and ended up with a
>> mid 60s house as it was bigger!
That's my experience too. The houses are smaller, but the plots especially have shrunk enormously. Decent sized gardens are a thing of the past with new builds, unless of course you're looking at 4+ bed detached stuff, and even then they are often not generous. All in the name of maximising the number of plots on a given area.
|
Electric cars are still a joke - Dave_
