Comments on: I Have Seen the Future of the Automobile — and It Sucks http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/i-have-seen-the-future-of-the-automobile-%e2%80%94-and-it-sucks/ Fri, 27 Nov 2009 21:45:49 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: G Alston http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/i-have-seen-the-future-of-the-automobile-%e2%80%94-and-it-sucks/comment-page-3/#comment-271662 G Alston Mon, 01 Jun 2009 16:36:30 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=57200#comment-271662 #110 -- <i>I am getting that de ja vu all over again feeling when I see stories like this. It makes me nostalgic for the 70s with all the new types of carburetors (remember those things?) that would make your go 100 miles on a drop of gas.</i> Of course I remember. But that's not what I reported. The company said "up to double" as a target which suggests to me that the gains will likely top out at 25% and vary like crazy per model/use/etc. I mentioned this because this is a company that makes injectors. Car companies make injectors, not necessarily 3rd party specialists. Yes they devote resources to the problem but fuel injectors are but a fraction of what they do. This struck me as realistic because in the early 90's I was involved in a project with Ford creating measurement equipment to be used for silicon micromachined injector nozzles. They hoped to be able to get more precise injector control. Meanwhile the big cheese at the mentioned outfit is a former Ford guy. It would appear as if perhaps this is like the rev 2.0 thinking process depending on internal Ford politics. And as I said this might be something to look into. #110 — I am getting that de ja vu all over again feeling when I see stories like this. It makes me nostalgic for the 70s with all the new types of carburetors (remember those things?) that would make your go 100 miles on a drop of gas.

Of course I remember. But that’s not what I reported.

The company said “up to double” as a target which suggests to me that the gains will likely top out at 25% and vary like crazy per model/use/etc.

I mentioned this because this is a company that makes injectors. Car companies make injectors, not necessarily 3rd party specialists. Yes they devote resources to the problem but fuel injectors are but a fraction of what they do.

This struck me as realistic because in the early 90’s I was involved in a project with Ford creating measurement equipment to be used for silicon micromachined injector nozzles. They hoped to be able to get more precise injector control. Meanwhile the big cheese at the mentioned outfit is a former Ford guy. It would appear as if perhaps this is like the rev 2.0 thinking process depending on internal Ford politics.

And as I said this might be something to look into.

]]> By: Paul -Indiana http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/i-have-seen-the-future-of-the-automobile-%e2%80%94-and-it-sucks/comment-page-3/#comment-271509 Paul -Indiana Mon, 01 Jun 2009 12:15:42 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=57200#comment-271509 Obambi's motorized coffins will fail at the dealership. This will only go on for a year or so until the government is convinced that they don't have buy-in to their plan. Then we will be haranged to be 'patriotic' and 'save the environment' by buying their stupid cars. Too bad! Obambi’s motorized coffins will fail at the dealership. This will only go on for a year or so until the government is convinced that they don’t have buy-in to their plan. Then we will be haranged to be ‘patriotic’ and ’save the environment’ by buying their stupid cars. Too bad!

]]> By: jerryofva http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/i-have-seen-the-future-of-the-automobile-%e2%80%94-and-it-sucks/comment-page-3/#comment-271200 jerryofva Sun, 31 May 2009 23:36:48 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=57200#comment-271200 Someone75: If you read my earliest post you would know that I drive a 2005 Jetta TDI as my primary vehicle. At 3000lbs it gets better fuel economy in my daily commute then you get in your POS FiT does on the highway; and diesels produce 25% less CO2 then gasoline engines of similar displacement. The Jetta is equipped with heated leather seats, electronic stability program and many other features not available on your little econobox. Although the TDI is no rocketship it handles like a sports sedan and is a blast to drive. My autobahn engineered Jetta will also keep me alive in most crashes not involving a Hummer. The problem with fuels cells is finding a way to produce hydrogen without a net energy loss. I have posted in other threads my opinion that T. Boone Pickens has it backwards. Wind power can never be reliable enough to satisfy base load requirements but it can be used to produce the electricity needed to distill water into Hyrdorgen and Oxygen. Since the energy input is available for zero price it doesn't really matter that hydrogen production is a net energy loser. Yes, we can design and build powerful and fun vehicles powered by hydrogen fuels cells but it will take many years to develop them and build the supporting infrastructure. If we start today we accomplish this task in 10 or 15 years but the Obama administration has eliminated funding for hydrogen fuel cells. They have a different agenda. You shouldn't argue cars and engineering with a technically sophisticated auto enthusiast. If you had the knowledge to make an intelligent contribution to this discussion while burnishing your environmental credentials you wouldn't be driving a Honda Fit. Instead you would have a 15 year old Mercedes 300 SD powered by waste vegetable oil. It's too bad that not you probably won't see this post and I have wasted one my best efforts on the ether. Someone75: If you read my earliest post you would know that I drive a 2005 Jetta TDI as my primary vehicle. At 3000lbs it gets better fuel economy in my daily commute then you get in your POS FiT does on the highway; and diesels produce 25% less CO2 then gasoline engines of similar displacement. The Jetta is equipped with heated leather seats, electronic stability program and many other features not available on your little econobox. Although the TDI is no rocketship it handles like a sports sedan and is a blast to drive. My autobahn engineered Jetta will also keep me alive in most crashes not involving a Hummer.

The problem with fuels cells is finding a way to produce hydrogen without a net energy loss. I have posted in other threads my opinion that T. Boone Pickens has it backwards. Wind power can never be reliable enough to satisfy base load requirements but it can be used to produce the electricity needed to distill water into Hyrdorgen and Oxygen. Since the energy input is available for zero price it doesn’t really matter that hydrogen production is a net energy loser. Yes, we can design and build powerful and fun vehicles powered by hydrogen fuels cells but it will take many years to develop them and build the supporting infrastructure. If we start today we accomplish this task in 10 or 15 years but the Obama administration has eliminated funding for hydrogen fuel cells. They have a different agenda.

You shouldn’t argue cars and engineering with a technically sophisticated auto enthusiast. If you had the knowledge to make an intelligent contribution to this discussion while burnishing your environmental credentials you wouldn’t be driving a Honda Fit. Instead you would have a 15 year old Mercedes 300 SD powered by waste vegetable oil.

It’s too bad that not you probably won’t see this post and I have wasted one my best efforts on the ether.

]]> By: Anonymous http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/i-have-seen-the-future-of-the-automobile-%e2%80%94-and-it-sucks/comment-page-3/#comment-271197 Anonymous Sun, 31 May 2009 23:35:11 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=57200#comment-271197 Someone75: If you read my earliest post you would know that I drive a 2005 Jetta TDI as my primary vehicle. At 3000lbs it gets better fuel economy in my daily commute then you get in your POS FiT does on the highway; and diesels produce 25% less CO2 then gasoline engines of similar displacement. The Jetta is equipped with heated leather seats, electronic stability program and many other features not available on your little econobox. Although the TDI is no rocketship it handles like a sports sedan and is a blast to drive. My autobahn engineered Jetta will also keep me alive in most crashes not involving a Hummer. The problem with fuels cells is finding a way to produce hydrogen without a net energy loss. I have posted in other threads my opinion that T. Boone Pickens has it backwards. Wind power can never be reliable enough to satisfy base load requirements but it can be used to produce the electricity needed to distill water into Hyrdorgen and Oxygen. Since the energy input is available for zero price it doesn't really matter that hydrogen production is a net energy loser. Yes, we can design and build powerful and fun vehicles powered by hydrogen fuels cells but it will take many years to develop them and build the supporting infrastructure. If we start today we accomplish this task in 10 or 15 years but the Obama administration has eliminated funding for hydrogen fuel cells. They have a different agenda. You shouldn't argue cars and engineering with a technically sophisticated auto enthusiast. If you had the knowledge to make an intelligent contribution to this discussion while burnishing your environmental credentials you wouldn't be driving a Honda Fit. Instead you would have a 15 year old Mercedes 300 SD powered by waste vegetable oil. It's too bad that not you probably won't see this post and I have wasted one my best efforts on the ether. Someone75:

If you read my earliest post you would know that I drive a 2005 Jetta TDI as my primary vehicle. At 3000lbs it gets better fuel economy in my daily commute then you get in your POS FiT does on the highway; and diesels produce 25% less CO2 then gasoline engines of similar displacement. The Jetta is equipped with heated leather seats, electronic stability program and many other features not available on your little econobox. Although the TDI is no rocketship it handles like a sports sedan and is a blast to drive. My autobahn engineered Jetta will also keep me alive in most crashes not involving a Hummer.

The problem with fuels cells is finding a way to produce hydrogen without a net energy loss. I have posted in other threads my opinion that T. Boone Pickens has it backwards. Wind power can never be reliable enough to satisfy base load requirements but it can be used to produce the electricity needed to distill water into Hyrdorgen and Oxygen. Since the energy input is available for zero price it doesn’t really matter that hydrogen production is a net energy loser. Yes, we can design and build powerful and fun vehicles powered by hydrogen fuels cells but it will take many years to develop them and build the supporting infrastructure. If we start today we accomplish this task in 10 or 15 years but the Obama administration has eliminated funding for hydrogen fuel cells. They have a different agenda.

You shouldn’t argue cars and engineering with a technically sophisticated auto enthusiast. If you had the knowledge to make an intelligent contribution to this discussion while burnishing your environmental credentials you wouldn’t be driving a Honda Fit. Instead you would have a 15 year old Mercedes 300 SD powered by waste vegetable oil.

It’s too bad that not you probably won’t see this post and I have wasted one my best efforts on the ether.

]]> By: Someone75 http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/i-have-seen-the-future-of-the-automobile-%e2%80%94-and-it-sucks/comment-page-3/#comment-271113 Someone75 Sun, 31 May 2009 20:14:03 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=57200#comment-271113 jerryofva: You are one uncreative guy. Hybrid technology is not the best we can do. It's a stepping stone. There will be new technologies available in the future! Ever heard of fuel cells? Horsepower = fun, but that's not even what I argued against. Efficiency is totally independent of both horsepower and driving pleasure. Right now, I'm driving a Honda Fit. It's got some pickup, it's efficient, and it's fun (fun to drive, fun to save on gas). I'm guessing you hate small cars simply because they're small. By your comments, I have no choice but to believe that you derive your driving pleasure from wasting fuel and polluting. That's what you're defending anyway. If that's what being an American means, count me out. *My* America is one of innovation. If we decide we want performance AND efficiency, then we can do it. What a nation of whiners we've become! jerryofva:

You are one uncreative guy. Hybrid technology is not the best we can do. It’s a stepping stone. There will be new technologies available in the future! Ever heard of fuel cells?

Horsepower = fun, but that’s not even what I argued against. Efficiency is totally independent of both horsepower and driving pleasure. Right now, I’m driving a Honda Fit. It’s got some pickup, it’s efficient, and it’s fun (fun to drive, fun to save on gas). I’m guessing you hate small cars simply because they’re small.

By your comments, I have no choice but to believe that you derive your driving pleasure from wasting fuel and polluting. That’s what you’re defending anyway. If that’s what being an American means, count me out. *My* America is one of innovation. If we decide we want performance AND efficiency, then we can do it. What a nation of whiners we’ve become!

]]> By: Eric Florack http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/i-have-seen-the-future-of-the-automobile-%e2%80%94-and-it-sucks/comment-page-3/#comment-270974 Eric Florack Sun, 31 May 2009 16:22:34 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=57200#comment-270974 <blockquote>Like I said there may be a period of time where the answer would be making cars small, but if you compare the cars today to those that came out after the 70’s oil crisis they are bigger, more powerful and better fuel efficient.</blockquote> That's true. However you will notice that the difference here is that there has been no "silver bullet". We keep looking for "80mpg carburetors". We keep looking for specialty fuel injectors. In other words we keep looking for the single answer that's going to solve the whole problem. The thing is, if you look at the way the fuel consumption curve has progressed in individual vehicles over the years, and you'll see that it's been a slow process. I'll give you a personal example. When I was growing up, my dad owned a 66 Chevy. A Belair. (Remember, the sub model progression for the fll-sized products then being made at Lordstown, OH, was Biscayne, Belair, Impala, Caprice.) A full size body, even by the standards of 1966, a 250 CID inline ^ cyl, generating 155 horsepower. A three on the tree. AM Radio. Heater. End of story. He got around 21MPG on the highway with this rig. We could tow about 1000lbs worth of popup with it. Today, I drive a Buick Rainier, which is essentially a Chevy Trailblazer with a lot of stuff added to it. It's got a 4.3 L I-6, generating 300 hp, and around 290ft lbs of Tourque. Automatic, all wheel drive. Air, Cruise, Tilt, power everything. Sat Nav Satalite radio. CD changer, AM-FM. Onboard computer systems, leather. Will tow 6000lbs with ease. I get 21-22 to the gallon on the highway. Much more capable, same MPG. But that progress was over a span of 40 years. If this is decidedly not the product of a magic pill, but a slow and gradually developing process. That evolves over time. It evolves not because the government forcing change down our throats, but because (at the time anyway ) we had a mobile companies that were inspired to develop better vehicles. When left to their own devices, these kind of developments occur. When government steps in, all of the creative effort is focused on satisfying government, not the consumer.

Like I said there may be a period of time where the answer would be making cars small, but if you compare the cars today to those that came out after the 70’s oil crisis they are bigger, more powerful and better fuel efficient.

That’s true. However you will notice that the difference here is that there has been no “silver bullet”. We keep looking for “80mpg carburetors”. We keep looking for specialty fuel injectors. In other words we keep looking for the single answer that’s going to solve the whole problem.

The thing is, if you look at the way the fuel consumption curve has progressed in individual vehicles over the years, and you’ll see that it’s been a slow process. I’ll give you a personal example.

When I was growing up, my dad owned a 66 Chevy. A Belair. (Remember, the sub model progression for the fll-sized products then being made at Lordstown, OH, was Biscayne, Belair, Impala, Caprice.)

A full size body, even by the standards of 1966, a 250 CID inline ^ cyl, generating 155 horsepower. A three on the tree. AM Radio. Heater. End of story. He got around 21MPG on the highway with this rig. We could tow about 1000lbs worth of popup with it.

Today, I drive a Buick Rainier, which is essentially a Chevy Trailblazer with a lot of stuff added to it. It’s got a 4.3 L I-6, generating 300 hp, and around 290ft lbs of Tourque. Automatic, all wheel drive. Air, Cruise, Tilt, power everything. Sat Nav Satalite radio. CD changer, AM-FM. Onboard computer systems, leather. Will tow 6000lbs with ease. I get 21-22 to the gallon on the highway.

Much more capable, same MPG. But that progress was over a span of 40 years. If this is decidedly not the product of a magic pill, but a slow and gradually developing process. That evolves over time. It evolves not because the government forcing change down our throats, but because (at the time anyway ) we had a mobile companies that were inspired to develop better vehicles.

When left to their own devices, these kind of developments occur. When government steps in, all of the creative effort is focused on satisfying government, not the consumer.

]]> By: Jim Baker http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/i-have-seen-the-future-of-the-automobile-%e2%80%94-and-it-sucks/comment-page-3/#comment-270661 Jim Baker Sun, 31 May 2009 05:21:46 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=57200#comment-270661 Wow, the Gang Green has won without even one verifiable fact to support any of their claims. Obama and his handlers are all Communists. Congratulations to all you government 'educated' morons who elected him. I am sorry for the redundancy folks, but I have no more time left for debating with these idiots. And, I don't think anyone else does either. Wow, the Gang Green has won without even one verifiable fact to support any of their claims.
Obama and his handlers are all Communists. Congratulations to all you government ‘educated’ morons who elected him.
I am sorry for the redundancy folks, but I have no more time left for debating with these idiots. And, I don’t think anyone else does either.

]]> By: Bilgeman http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/i-have-seen-the-future-of-the-automobile-%e2%80%94-and-it-sucks/comment-page-3/#comment-270579 Bilgeman Sun, 31 May 2009 02:25:38 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=57200#comment-270579 Okay...good comments here. Yes, the future of the American automobile is the junkyard, where you will find the parts and body panels to keep your ante-Obama vehicle in running order. My boss has a past-time manufacturing "matching numbers" and "date-code correct" late 1960's GTO's...he's got a warehouse chock full of GTO parts doodads and Lemans frames. But here's the deal...here's the solution. Ban all private ownership of automobiles within metropolitan areas. City-dwellers take the buses and the trolleys and the subways...that will be part and parcel of urban American existence. Private ownership of automobiles will be the prerogative of suburbanites and rural dwellers. There ya go...we just saved the planet by turning urbanite eco-freaks into pedestrians. ...you're all quite welcome. Okay…good comments here.

Yes, the future of the American automobile is the junkyard, where you will find the parts and body panels to keep your ante-Obama vehicle in running order.

My boss has a past-time manufacturing “matching numbers” and “date-code correct” late 1960’s GTO’s…he’s got a warehouse chock full of GTO parts doodads and Lemans frames.

But here’s the deal…here’s the solution.

Ban all private ownership of automobiles within metropolitan areas.
City-dwellers take the buses and the trolleys and the subways…that will be part and parcel of urban American existence.

Private ownership of automobiles will be the prerogative of suburbanites and rural dwellers.

There ya go…we just saved the planet by turning urbanite eco-freaks into pedestrians.

…you’re all quite welcome.

]]> By: Adrian Wainer http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/i-have-seen-the-future-of-the-automobile-%e2%80%94-and-it-sucks/comment-page-3/#comment-270331 Adrian Wainer Sat, 30 May 2009 18:16:56 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=57200#comment-270331 America has to break its dependence on imported fuel. America was once a World leader in railway technology, trains are patriotic and they're damm sexy too! http://www.rocousa.com/BigBoy/bigboy1.jpg http://www.northeast.railfan.net/images/tr_up8080.jpg Best and Warm Regards Adrian Wainer America has to break its dependence on imported fuel. America was once a World leader in railway technology, trains are patriotic and they’re damm sexy too!

http://www.rocousa.com/BigBoy/bigboy1.jpg

http://www.northeast.railfan.net/images/tr_up8080.jpg

Best and Warm Regards
Adrian Wainer

]]> By: Bill Johnson http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/i-have-seen-the-future-of-the-automobile-%e2%80%94-and-it-sucks/comment-page-3/#comment-270233 Bill Johnson Sat, 30 May 2009 15:28:29 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=57200#comment-270233 Um, diesel is all very well and good, but what will you do with the fractional part of the crude oil that is gasoline? Can't turnit into diesel in any quantities without usig more energy than you get back. Long story short, as long as we are pumping crude, there will be a percentage of that crude that refines into gasoline, and a percentage that refines into diesel (and others for fuel oil, bunker oil, kerosene, mineral spirits, etc.).if all our carws were diesel, we'd be hurting for overall supply. It's a mix that's necessary. Diesel for some, gas for some, electric for a few, mandated wind-power-only for non-DOD government vehicles - especially Obama's (and AlGore should be legally restricted to walking - without output of CO2). Um, diesel is all very well and good, but what will you do with the fractional part of the crude oil that is gasoline? Can’t turnit into diesel in any quantities without usig more energy than you get back.

Long story short, as long as we are pumping crude, there will be a percentage of that crude that refines into gasoline, and a percentage that refines into diesel (and others for fuel oil, bunker oil, kerosene, mineral spirits, etc.).if all our carws were diesel, we’d be hurting for overall supply.

It’s a mix that’s necessary. Diesel for some, gas for some, electric for a few, mandated wind-power-only for non-DOD government vehicles – especially Obama’s (and AlGore should be legally restricted to walking – without output of CO2).

]]>