PRC as a amplifier in GPS question.

Simon S Aysdie · May 16, 2008

On May 16, 5:54 am, "David L. Jones" <altz...@gmail.com> wrote:

I just saw the movie Who Killed the Electric Car?:http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0489037/

Fantastic!
Everyone should watch this one.
The IMDB user comment is spot on - " This film WILL frustrate you greatly"
In fact, it's enough to make you want to cry.

Can't believe I had never heard of the movie before the other day.

The electric car killed the electric car.

David Gravereaux · May 16, 2008

Jim Thompson wrote:

... and leaving the cars on-the-road has
some legal and cost aspects you haven't considered.

For GM? Enlighten us.

Michael A. Terrell · May 16, 2008

Reality. There isn't enough generating capacity to convert to electric
cars.

--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html

Use any search engine other than Google till they stop polluting USENET
with porn and junk commercial SPAM

If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm

Richard Henry · May 16, 2008

On May 16, 5:54 am, "David L. Jones" <altz...@gmail.com> wrote:

I just saw the movie Who Killed the Electric Car?:http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0489037/

Fantastic!
Everyone should watch this one.
The IMDB user comment is spot on - " This film WILL frustrate you greatly"
In fact, it's enough to make you want to cry.

Can't believe I had never heard of the movie before the other day.

Dave.

The EV-1 is GM's Edsel. Except that it worked and they couldn't make
enough to satisfy demand.

Beancounters killed it. And they took away a marketing advantage GM
could still be milking.

Joerg · May 16, 2008

Paul E. Schoen wrote:

"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ieidnSvlPKQURrDVnZ2dnUVZ_qjinZ2d@earthlink.com...
Reality. There isn't enough generating capacity to convert to electric
cars.

It may not exist at the moment, but the switch to electric (as well as
other more efficient vehicles) must be accompanied by an overall reduction
in our total per-capita energy consumption. Even if new electric power
plants would be built, using the same fossil fuels that now power
automobiles, they would be much more efficient and cleaner than millions of
individual cars and trucks being driven in stop-and-go traffic. But the
ultimate resolution to this problem will involve people changing their
lifestyles, using more public transportation, living closer to jobs (or
telecommuting), and generally becoming a more cooperative society living
and working closely with other people, rather than isolationism, needless
competition, and broken families.

Amen! Well said.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

Jim Thompson · May 16, 2008

On Fri, 16 May 2008 14:26:56 -0700, Joerg
<notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

Paul E. Schoen wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ieidnSvlPKQURrDVnZ2dnUVZ_qjinZ2d@earthlink.com...
Reality. There isn't enough generating capacity to convert to electric
cars.

It may not exist at the moment, but the switch to electric (as well as
other more efficient vehicles) must be accompanied by an overall reduction
in our total per-capita energy consumption. Even if new electric power
plants would be built, using the same fossil fuels that now power
automobiles, they would be much more efficient and cleaner than millions of
individual cars and trucks being driven in stop-and-go traffic. But the
ultimate resolution to this problem will involve people changing their
lifestyles, using more public transportation, living closer to jobs (or
telecommuting), and generally becoming a more cooperative society living
and working closely with other people, rather than isolationism, needless
competition, and broken families.

Amen! Well said.

Clint Sharp · May 16, 2008

In message <7bir24l7pmsrp15j5sn7dav4ktp8fim2h4@4ax.com>, Jeff Liebermann
<jeffl@cruzio.com> writes

On Fri, 16 May 2008 09:45:34 -0700, Joerg
notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

The concept of electric cars is a whole lot older than 30 years:
http://www.thoroughbred-cars.com/electric.htm

I have a repair manual for an electric delivery vehicle made prior to
WWI. It was used for delivering milk to homes (no refridgeration) in
the pre-dawn hours. Since noise was then considered a serious
problem, electric delivery vehicles were the only option.
Our milk and much of the doorstep delivered milk in the UK is still

delivered on electric vehicles with no refrigeration. I suspect the
design of the vehicle hasn't changed much at all in the last 50 years,
some of the 'floats' I see have registration letters that indicate they
are over 40 years old.
--
Clint Sharp

Jim Thompson · May 16, 2008

On Fri, 16 May 2008 12:01:49 -0700, David Gravereaux
<davygrvy@pobox.com> wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
... and leaving the cars on-the-road has
some legal and cost aspects you haven't considered.

For GM? Enlighten us.

(1) Any product you have in the public's hands exposes you to
liability suits.

(2) In the automotive industry you have to provide parts for 7 years
after introduction.

My guess is that the battery technology wasn't ready for prime time
and they had some accidental "events" they didn't publish.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: "skypeanalog" | |
| Voice

Joerg · May 16, 2008

Jim Thompson wrote:

On Fri, 16 May 2008 14:26:56 -0700, Joerg
notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

Paul E. Schoen wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ieidnSvlPKQURrDVnZ2dnUVZ_qjinZ2d@earthlink.com...
Reality. There isn't enough generating capacity to convert to electric
cars.
It may not exist at the moment, but the switch to electric (as well as
other more efficient vehicles) must be accompanied by an overall reduction
in our total per-capita energy consumption. Even if new electric power
plants would be built, using the same fossil fuels that now power
automobiles, they would be much more efficient and cleaner than millions of
individual cars and trucks being driven in stop-and-go traffic. But the
ultimate resolution to this problem will involve people changing their
lifestyles, using more public transportation, living closer to jobs (or
telecommuting), and generally becoming a more cooperative society living
and working closely with other people, rather than isolationism, needless
competition, and broken families.

Amen! Well said.

Heavens, Yes! Let's squash competition... and no more bellyaching...
Windows Vista for everyone ;-)

Oh, there'll be competition, has to be. But there shouldn't be a
needless one, such as umpteen shuttle services going to the airport but
none to the local industry parks around here. We can't keep on
pretending that it's ok to keep tooling around in big trucks just to go
to the grocery store. Guess what, people around here have come to their
senses about that. The number of flights leaving our local airstrip is
down to about half, when walking the dogs we see lots of trucks for
sale, lots of brand new Priuses showing up in driveways. Fact is, Toyota
has recognized the signs of the time and GM has not. They'll better get
cracking on it, and soon.

As for Vista: I was even contemplating removing the sign at the end of
the driveway because it reads "Casa de la Vista" (we have a great view
and a previous owner put it up).

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

Joerg · May 16, 2008

Jim Thompson wrote:

On Fri, 16 May 2008 12:01:49 -0700, David Gravereaux
davygrvy@pobox.com> wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
... and leaving the cars on-the-road has
some legal and cost aspects you haven't considered.
For GM? Enlighten us.

(1) Any product you have in the public's hands exposes you to
liability suits.

Good old capitalist's rule: He who takes no risks will not win.

I have taken quite some risks in my career and I am sure you did. I
expect the same from our corporate leadership, else there won't be progress.

(2) In the automotive industry you have to provide parts for 7 years
after introduction.

A good company ups that to 15 or 20 years, at least. Else the reputation
is toast and in automotive a loos of reputation is nearly a permanent thing.

My guess is that the battery technology wasn't ready for prime time
and they had some accidental "events" they didn't publish.

Maybe they should send their engineers to a Japanese university then?

Sorry for being so sarcastic but sometimes the excuses the big three
come up with are almost sickening. And they should stop calling 32mpg
for a mid-size passenger car an achievement when my wife's 1995 Toyota
regularly nets >35mpg.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

Joerg · May 16, 2008

Paul E. Schoen wrote:

"Joerg" <notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote in message
news:4OnXj.1326$qH4.1110@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...
Jim Thompson wrote:
On Fri, 16 May 2008 14:26:56 -0700, Joerg
notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

Paul E. Schoen wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ieidnSvlPKQURrDVnZ2dnUVZ_qjinZ2d@earthlink.com...
Reality. There isn't enough generating capacity to convert to
electric
cars.
It may not exist at the moment, but the switch to electric (as well as
other more efficient vehicles) must be accompanied by an overall
reduction in our total per-capita energy consumption. Even if new
electric power plants would be built, using the same fossil fuels that
now power automobiles, they would be much more efficient and cleaner
than millions of individual cars and trucks being driven in
stop-and-go traffic. But the ultimate resolution to this problem will
involve people changing their lifestyles, using more public
transportation, living closer to jobs (or telecommuting), and
generally becoming a more cooperative society living and working
closely with other people, rather than isolationism, needless
competition, and broken families.

Amen! Well said.
Heavens, Yes! Let's squash competition... and no more bellyaching...
Windows Vista for everyone ;-)

Oh, there'll be competition, has to be. But there shouldn't be a needless
one, such as umpteen shuttle services going to the airport but none to
the local industry parks around here. We can't keep on pretending that
it's ok to keep tooling around in big trucks just to go to the grocery
store. Guess what, people around here have come to their senses about
that. The number of flights leaving our local airstrip is down to about
half, when walking the dogs we see lots of trucks for sale, lots of brand
new Priuses showing up in driveways. Fact is, Toyota has recognized the
signs of the time and GM has not. They'll better get cracking on it, and
soon.

As for Vista: I was even contemplating removing the sign at the end of
the driveway because it reads "Casa de la Vista" (we have a great view
and a previous owner put it up).

The competition I was referring to is the sort that makes drivers do stupid
maneuvers to get one or two cars ahead in traffic, or resorting to
cutthroat tactics to get advancement in the business world. There is good
competition, and as long as it is fair, it results in better products and
better people. It's OK for people to engage in sports and games to
outmuscle and outsmart each other, but when they buy extra horsepower and
bigger vehicles and use them in a deadly real-life game on the roads, it
becomes a problem. That is where cooperation is really needed.

I sure don't want Vista. XP is the first OS (since maybe MSDOS6.22) that
seems to be stable and reliable. But at least there is Linux that I would
consider if XP were no longer available. I use the automatic update
feature, ...

Only over my dead body.

... and I dread the day that I get a particularly lengthy update, and
a reboot screen that reads:

"Welcome to Windows Vista! Microsoft has generously updated your old XP
system to our latest wonderful product at absolutely no charge to you!
Since you were a little short of disk space, we have removed those old
files so you will have more room for the colorful multimedia presentations
we have loaded there for your entertainment!"

Or you want to finish that one design that the client needs on Monday
and you realize that your CAD now only produces "An unknown error has
occurred and the application is being debugged", followed by 10 minutes
of trundling and a blue screen.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

Jim Thompson · May 16, 2008

On Fri, 16 May 2008 18:39:39 -0400, "Paul E. Schoen"
<pstech@smart.net> wrote:

"Joerg" <notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote in message
news:4OnXj.1326$qH4.1110@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...
Jim Thompson wrote:
[snip]

Heavens, Yes! Let's squash competition... and no more bellyaching...
Windows Vista for everyone ;-)

[snip]

The competition I was referring to is the sort that makes drivers do stupid
maneuvers to get one or two cars ahead in traffic, or resorting to
cutthroat tactics to get advancement in the business world.

Try as I may, when I'm scurrying to my office, I can't avoid being
cut-off by my dog ;-)

There is good
competition, and as long as it is fair, it results in better products and
better people. It's OK for people to engage in sports and games to
outmuscle and outsmart each other, but when they buy extra horsepower and
bigger vehicles and use them in a deadly real-life game on the roads, it
becomes a problem. That is where cooperation is really needed.

I agree. However I prefer excess power for my own safety. On many
occasions I've simply out-run highway predators. I even had one
occasion where some banditos ran out into the roadway to stop me... I
simply took aim and sped up... I could see the whites of their eyes as
they fled ;-)

[snip]

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: "skypeanalog" | |
| Voice

Joerg · May 16, 2008

Jim Thompson wrote:

On Fri, 16 May 2008 18:39:39 -0400, "Paul E. Schoen"
pstech@smart.net> wrote:

"Joerg" <notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote in message
news:4OnXj.1326$qH4.1110@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...
Jim Thompson wrote:
[snip]
Heavens, Yes! Let's squash competition... and no more bellyaching...
Windows Vista for everyone ;-)

[snip]
The competition I was referring to is the sort that makes drivers do stupid
maneuvers to get one or two cars ahead in traffic, or resorting to
cutthroat tactics to get advancement in the business world.

Try as I may, when I'm scurrying to my office, I can't avoid being
cut-off by my dog ;-)

Strange. Our shepherd does the same thing with me. Every morning.

There is good
competition, and as long as it is fair, it results in better products and
better people. It's OK for people to engage in sports and games to
outmuscle and outsmart each other, but when they buy extra horsepower and
bigger vehicles and use them in a deadly real-life game on the roads, it
becomes a problem. That is where cooperation is really needed.

I agree. However I prefer excess power for my own safety. On many
occasions I've simply out-run highway predators. I even had one
occasion where some banditos ran out into the roadway to stop me... I
simply took aim and sped up... I could see the whites of their eyes as
they fled ;-)

Man, what neighborhood do you live in? Even in rough-and-tumble South
Sacramento where most of the shootings are that doesn't happen a lot.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

Franc Zabkar · May 16, 2008

On Fri, 16 May 2008 10:59:46 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
put finger to keyboard and composed:

On Fri, 16 May 2008 09:45:34 -0700, Joerg
notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

The concept of electric cars is a whole lot older than 30 years:
http://www.thoroughbred-cars.com/electric.htm

I have a repair manual for an electric delivery vehicle made prior to
WWI. It was used for delivering milk to homes (no refridgeration) in
the pre-dawn hours. Since noise was then considered a serious
problem, electric delivery vehicles were the only option.

Note that there are several Li-Ion conversions for Prius hybrids
effectively making them electric cars.
http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/34422/113/
The new battery and plug-in charger extends the battery only range of
the Prius from about 7 miles to about 20 miles.

However, gas, electric, and such will soon be out of fashion. What we
need is a nuclear powered automobile.:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Nucleon

Australia has plenty of gas. Maybe this car would be a viable option:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysler_Turbine_Car

"The fourth-generation Chrysler turbine engine ran at up to 60,000 rpm
could use diesel fuel, unleaded gasoline, kerosene, JP-4 jet fuel, and
even vegetable oil. The engine would run virtually on anything and the
president of Mexico tested this theory by running one of the first
cars - successfully - on tequila. No adjustments were needed to switch
from one to another. The engine had a fifth as many moving parts as a
piston unit (60 rather than 300). The turbine was spinning on simple
sleeve bearings for vibration-free running. Its simplicity offered the
potential for long life, and because no combustion contaminants enter
engine oil, no oil changes were considered necessary. The 1963
Turbine's engine generated 130 brake horsepower (97 kW) and an instant
425 pound-feet (576 Nˇm) of torque at stall speed, making it good for
0-60 mph in 12 seconds ..."

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.

Joerg · May 16, 2008

Franc Zabkar wrote:

On Fri, 16 May 2008 10:59:46 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com
put finger to keyboard and composed:

On Fri, 16 May 2008 09:45:34 -0700, Joerg
notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

The concept of electric cars is a whole lot older than 30 years:
http://www.thoroughbred-cars.com/electric.htm
I have a repair manual for an electric delivery vehicle made prior to
WWI. It was used for delivering milk to homes (no refridgeration) in
the pre-dawn hours. Since noise was then considered a serious
problem, electric delivery vehicles were the only option.

Note that there are several Li-Ion conversions for Prius hybrids
effectively making them electric cars.
http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/34422/113/
The new battery and plug-in charger extends the battery only range of
the Prius from about 7 miles to about 20 miles.

However, gas, electric, and such will soon be out of fashion. What we
need is a nuclear powered automobile.:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Nucleon

Australia has plenty of gas. Maybe this car would be a viable option:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysler_Turbine_Car

"The fourth-generation Chrysler turbine engine ran at up to 60,000 rpm
could use diesel fuel, unleaded gasoline, kerosene, JP-4 jet fuel, and
even vegetable oil. The engine would run virtually on anything and the
president of Mexico tested this theory by running one of the first
cars - successfully - on tequila. No adjustments were needed to switch
from one to another. The engine had a fifth as many moving parts as a
piston unit (60 rather than 300). The turbine was spinning on simple
sleeve bearings for vibration-free running. Its simplicity offered the
potential for long life, and because no combustion contaminants enter
engine oil, no oil changes were considered necessary. The 1963
Turbine's engine generated 130 brake horsepower (97 kW) and an instant
425 pound-feet (576 Nˇm) of torque at stall speed, making it good for
0-60 mph in 12 seconds ..."

Rover had built a similar car but AFAIR only one. The manager once let
another guy whom he'd picked up somewhere take it for a spin and he was
thoroughly impressed. But as usual the gas mileage was quite terrible.
Probably there is a lot of load change lag as well. Somehow a great
concept if one could get the NOX under control but nowadays all that is
water under the bridge anyhow.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

Jim Thompson · May 16, 2008

On Fri, 16 May 2008 16:29:37 -0700, Joerg
<notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
[snip]
...I prefer excess power for my own safety. On many
occasions I've simply out-run highway predators. I even had one
occasion where some banditos ran out into the roadway to stop me... I
simply took aim and sped up... I could see the whites of their eyes as
they fled ;-)

Man, what neighborhood do you live in? Even in rough-and-tumble South
Sacramento where most of the shootings are that doesn't happen a lot.

This was just east of El Paso, I10 eastbound, 3-4 Mexicanos popped out
from behind an overpass abutment, waving their arms wildly hoping I
would stop. Seeing no wreck, fearing a hijack attempt and seeing
clear road ahead of me, I just took aim at one of them, keeping aim as
he tried to dodge me. He barely made the edge safely.

What made this particularly amusing was I was taking Jennifer's
furniture and stuff to her first year at Baylor (26 years ago). She
was following right behind my 280ZX in a new Nissan Sentra... with
instructions... in case of unusual circumstances, do _exactly_ as I
do... so she followed my gyrations precisely... I think the Mexicanos
were suitably frightened by the double-teaming ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: "skypeanalog" | |
| Voice

Joerg · May 17, 2008

Damon Hill wrote:

Franc Zabkar <fzabkar@iinternode.on.net> wrote in
news:g4qr24tf0gr7h41bk4nggj7mb2fun46def@4ax.com:

engine oil, no oil changes were considered necessary. The 1963
Turbine's engine generated 130 brake horsepower (97 kW) and an instant
425 pound-feet (576 Nˇm) of torque at stall speed, making it good for
0-60 mph in 12 seconds ..."

The exhaust was also known to melt asphalt pavement...though I suppose
that's better than a gamma tan from tail-gating a nuclear reactor.

--Damon, still hoping for a Mr. Fusion

There is a Ford Fusion:
http://www.fordvehicles.com/cars/fusion/?v=html

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

Jeff Liebermann · May 17, 2008

On Fri, 16 May 2008 11:26:49 -0700, Joerg
<notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

Note that there are several Li-Ion conversions for Prius hybrids
effectively making them electric cars.
http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/34422/113/
The new battery and plug-in charger extends the battery only range of
the Prius from about 7 miles to about 20 miles.

But those extra miles can cost you. This month's IEEE spectrum has a
story of a guy who spent another $32k (!) on top of the Prius price tag
to get his Li-Ion conversion. That's a bit steep.

Quite a few people think it's worthwhile. One of the conversion
sites:
<http://www.calcars.org/howtoget.html>
lists the costs of converting a Prius to various plug-in power options
at:
- $6,000-10,000 for lead acid batteries
- $8,000 for NiMH
- $10,000 and up for Li-Ion

One of the do it thyself sites:
<http://www.eaa-phev.org>
suggests about $6,000 plus 2 weeks labor.

$32,000 seems a bit extreme.

However, gas, electric, and such will soon be out of fashion. What we
need is a nuclear powered automobile.:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Nucleon

Well, maybe a nuclear powered home water heater (and sterilizer).

Right now Priuses are being bought in California as if it was the best
thing since sliced bread. The big three are in for another round of
hardship. Don't know if they can afford another round ...

I wouldn't be so quick to blame the manufacturers. Every time the
economy, ecology, or government tries to push Americans into smaller
cars, the domestic manufacturers find that only the big behemoth
vehicles sell. The dealers discount the "unsellable" big cars in
order to get rid of them. The buyers look at the price tags and
notice they can buy a big car for sometime less than an economy car.
Also, the buyers have a perception that they get more "value" per
dollar in a bigger car. The net result is that the big cars continue
to sell, while the poorly thrown-together economy cars, tend to sit on
the lots.

Let's play with the numbers. A gas hog SUV will get about 14mpg. An
economy mini-SUV will do about 28mpg. If I drive 15,000 miles per
year, at $4/gallon for regular, the gas costs are:
$4,300 /year for the 14mpg gas hog SUV
$2,100 /year for the 28mpg econo SUV
That's $2,200/year difference. If the economy SUV costs MORE than the
gas hog (due to dealer discounts and difference in demand), a customer
might be willing to pay the extra $2,100/year just to drive the bigger
SUV. I've been looking for a new vehicle and found that I can buy a
2003 gas hog SUV for about $5,000 and an economy mini-SUV for about
$12,000. If I plan to keep it for about 3 years, I'll break even. A
bit more than 3 years if I throw in time value of money.

So, at this time, economy cars are in demand, yet I'm sure if I quiz
the local used car dealers, the discounted gas hogs are still selling
equally as well.

--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558 jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
# http://802.11junk.com jeffl@cruzio.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

Joerg · May 17, 2008

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Fri, 16 May 2008 11:26:49 -0700, Joerg
notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

Note that there are several Li-Ion conversions for Prius hybrids
effectively making them electric cars.
http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/34422/113/
The new battery and plug-in charger extends the battery only range of
the Prius from about 7 miles to about 20 miles.

But those extra miles can cost you. This month's IEEE spectrum has a
story of a guy who spent another $32k (!) on top of the Prius price tag
to get his Li-Ion conversion. That's a bit steep.

Quite a few people think it's worthwhile. One of the conversion
sites:
http://www.calcars.org/howtoget.html
lists the costs of converting a Prius to various plug-in power options
at:
- $6,000-10,000 for lead acid batteries
- $8,000 for NiMH
- $10,000 and up for Li-Ion

I wonder whether they all did a sober calculation including the rather
finite number of charge cycles. I've seen lots of enviro-fans get
carried away.

One of the do it thyself sites:
http://www.eaa-phev.org
suggests about $6,000 plus 2 weeks labor.

$32,000 seems a bit extreme.

Well, here's the story I mentioned. He had to plunk down $32k but that
was with labor and not DYI:

http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/may08/6174

However, gas, electric, and such will soon be out of fashion. What we
need is a nuclear powered automobile.:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Nucleon

Well, maybe a nuclear powered home water heater (and sterilizer).

That would be nice. We (have to) use propane for water heating. Used to
be $35/mo. Now it's about $80/mo. I'd call that hyper-inflationary.

Right now Priuses are being bought in California as if it was the best
thing since sliced bread. The big three are in for another round of
hardship. Don't know if they can afford another round ...

I wouldn't be so quick to blame the manufacturers. Every time the
economy, ecology, or government tries to push Americans into smaller
cars, the domestic manufacturers find that only the big behemoth
vehicles sell. The dealers discount the "unsellable" big cars in
order to get rid of them. The buyers look at the price tags and
notice they can buy a big car for sometime less than an economy car.
Also, the buyers have a perception that they get more "value" per
dollar in a bigger car. The net result is that the big cars continue
to sell, while the poorly thrown-together economy cars, tend to sit on
the lots.

Let's play with the numbers. A gas hog SUV will get about 14mpg. An
economy mini-SUV will do about 28mpg. If I drive 15,000 miles per
year, at $4/gallon for regular, the gas costs are:
$4,300 /year for the 14mpg gas hog SUV
$2,100 /year for the 28mpg econo SUV
That's $2,200/year difference. If the economy SUV costs MORE than the
gas hog (due to dealer discounts and difference in demand), a customer
might be willing to pay the extra $2,100/year just to drive the bigger
SUV. I've been looking for a new vehicle and found that I can buy a
2003 gas hog SUV for about $5,000 and an economy mini-SUV for about
$12,000. If I plan to keep it for about 3 years, I'll break even. A
bit more than 3 years if I throw in time value of money.

Ok, my calcs are way different. I tend to keep cars for much longer than
a decade. Heck, my trusty Mitsubishi econo SUV is 11 years old now and
looks like new. I could imagine driving it another 10 years easily. Same
for my wife's 1995 Toyota, looks like new, runs like new.

If I had my druthers I'd import one of those 16-horse Citroen 2CV I use
to drive back at the university. This one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Citroen2cvtff.jpg

It always netted me around 50mpg on regular, didn't mind the transition
to unleaded and the engine was designed 70 (!) years ago. All they
really did later was up the horsepower once in a while.

So, at this time, economy cars are in demand, yet I'm sure if I quiz
the local used car dealers, the discounted gas hogs are still selling
equally as well.

Not out here. There is a reason why Toyota does so well and we can see
that reason in driveways every day when we take our dogs for a long
walk. Remember when the guys at Buick and other places scoffed and
laughed once they saw an ad for the VW Beetle? Pretty soon after they
were heard syaing things like "Oh s..t!". Anyhow, at the end of the day
the bottomline at the individual automaker speaks the truth. And that
truth is painfully clear.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

Joerg · May 17, 2008

Eeyore wrote:

Joerg wrote:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 17 May 2008 15:19:06 +0100, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
No-one has killed electric cars. They simply died of lack of interest,
practicality and high cost.
Graham
In 1999, GM planned to produce only 465 EV1 cars. There was a 1000+
unofficial waiting list in case someone changed their mind or GM
decided to increase production. When GM refused to extend the leases,
many EV-1 owners send GM lease payment checks anyway (which GM did not
deposit). When GM discontinued the EV-1 in 2003, the unofficial
waiting list was over 2000+ names. Lack of interest was never a
problem.

The first major problem was liability issues due to a fire started
while charging in the Gen 1 models. Some interesting reading from
Phil Karn:
http://www.ka9q.net/ev/
http://www.ka9q.net/ev/ev1fire.html
Leaky electrolyte from a failed capacitor in the charging port.

GM setup the EV-1 to fail. They were very surprised when it became
quite popular and very much in demand, despite the high price, lousy
GM support, and leasing requirements.
http://www.cleanup-gm.com/

I wonder when car manufacturers (including European ones) will finally
wake up. Sometimes I wonder whether they'll wake up at all. A brief look
at Japan might help ...

Pure electric-only EVs aren't the answer. It'll be HEVs that most likely win
the day.

Hydrogen? Where's that going to be coming from?

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

PRC as a amplifier in GPS question.

Simon S Aysdie

Guest

David Gravereaux

Guest

Michael A. Terrell

Guest

Richard Henry

Guest

Joerg

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Clint Sharp

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Joerg

Guest

Joerg

Guest

Joerg

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Joerg

Guest

Franc Zabkar

Guest

Joerg

Guest

Jim Thompson

Guest

Joerg

Guest

Jeff Liebermann

Guest

Joerg

Guest

Joerg

Guest

Log in

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor