Slashdot Mirror

I think a proper comparison would be a Porsche to a Ford. There are some beautiful Fords. There are Fords that are a work of art. It's not denegrating to Ford, it's just that Porsche's have that certain look and appeal. It's not for everyone, but those who are "into" Porsche's are *really* into them. I think it's safe to say that with Porsche and Mac, there is very little middle ground. Sure, to some Porsche owners it's "just a car", but on the other hand, they still are concious of the fact that it's a Porsche, even when driving it to the store.

Not all SUVs are big/bad and evil. Sometimes you just have to look for them. You might be surprised.

The toyata prius has a very special system that deals with this, as this page shows. Especially with hybrid SUV's coming out soon, building your own hybrid seems like it would be way too much work.

Also keep in mind, that right now making a hybrid car (for a major automanufacturer) costs several thousand dollars more than making an equivalent conventional car mostly because they don't have enough mass production on the hybrid parts, and they are making thousands and thousands of cars. Buying the parts individually, the price would be outragous.

Ford's web site - http://fordvehicles.com/escapehybrid/home/index.as p?bhcp=1 says $26,970 for front wheel drive, $28,595 for four-wheel drive. Where did you get your numbers from?

He clearly pulled the numbers for the traditional Escape. The one thing this does show (besides the grandparent poster's lack of research skill) is that hybrids are really, really expensive still. So much so that you're never going to break even on gas costs, even when you project a much higher $/G then we're currently paying. In fact, using Ford's own calculator, I'd only save about $1000/yr at $3.00/G (much higher than I'm actually paying) and 85 miles/day (much higher than most I'd bet) compared to their traditional Escape. That means, not even accounting for the net present value of the dollars, I'd have to own the vehicle for at least 7 years (probably much longer) to break even, and by that point I'd probably be looking at having to replace fairly expensive batteries.

There may be other reasons for choosing a hybrid (that same calculator suggested I'd save 331 gallons of gasoline), but until the cost of these comes down to where it actually makes sense to the pocketbook, these will be nothing but toys to brag about by the green crowd.

>Base MSRP is $19,855, for manual transmission.
>Since no one in the US drives manual (except me
>it seems), I suspect $21,000 to start for most
>people.

Ford's web site - http://fordvehicles.com/escapehybrid/home/index.as p?bhcp=1 says $26,970 for front wheel drive, $28,595 for four-wheel drive. Where did you get your numbers from?

It would be nice to see the government provide more tax credits to encourage use of these vehicles (less pollution, encourage new technology development, less gas use leading to less reliance on middle east oil, etc), but the existing credits are set to expire soon. Meanwhile Bush wants to drill in Alaska for a minimal oil supply, but that's another story...

None of the articles, or the Escape website itself, report the actual mileage of the hybrid SUV. Their Fuel Cost Savings Calculator touts mileage that will "exceed 35MPG", which turns out to be 36MPG. Any comparison to a user's current mileage over 35MPG reports that relative costs compare "quite favorably", even when the Escape has to beat 72MPG or more (double the Escape's mileage, for the arithmetic impaired). Trying current several mileages around 30MPG reports a consistent $2778:y for 100,000mi @$1.00:gallon in the Escape, which is 36MPG. Their mileage figures are "preliminary estimates of EPA certification", so the actual number is "YMMV".

That mileage number is the only important number. Hybrids use electric regeneration from the same gasoline tank as the internal combustion engine, so they are not in any way "alternative fuel" vehicles, any more than is the gas guzzling SUV in the next lane. But that guzzler probably gets about 15MPG, so these hybrids are certainly laudable. At $27K, driving 252,000 miles saves enough gas money to pay for the car. Which is about 20 times around the Aelutian Islands / Tierra Del Feugo circuit. Finally a use for that "Intelligent 4WD" SUV.

• americans love their cars
• we have alot more land

Another practical consideration is that Germany is approximately the size of Montana and all of Japan's islands add up to about as space as California. So a national system of high-speed public transporation such as a maglev train would require a much larger area of coverage than either of those two countries, and require a larger number of people using it on a regular basis to sustain it.

personally i love public transportation (unless i've got people jammed into my armpits (I'm tall) in a bus or subway, which of course happens occasionally) and i'm all for more of it, but there are cultural and practical issues we must take into consideration.

If you were only paying $2/gallon for gasoline, you'd think 30 mpg was quite reasonable, too.

That's 0.43 Euro/liter, if I'm doing my math correctly. And it was less than half that price when my car was built. No shock with these prices that America's most popular vehicle is rated at 16/21.

(1994 Ford Escort - EPA 30/38... but in real life, 31 around Seattle, 33 on the freeway with the cruise set at 80 mph.)

With a little experimenting, I found that 7 DVDs stack to a height of exactly 1 cm. The diameter of a dVD is 12 cm (radius = .06).

Volume of a DVD = pi * r^2 * h = 3.141 * (.06)^2 * 1/7 * .01 = .0000161 cubic meters

The volume of a large SUV:

"With rear seats folded 5-pass: 86.2, 7-pass: 79.9"

79 cubic feet is 2.26251604 cubic meters

2.26251604 cubic meters / .0000161 cubic meters/dvd = 140061.6601 DVDs

4.37 gigs / DVD * 140061.6601 DVDs = 612069.4546 gigs in one carload

Throughput speed = Data / (setup time + transmit time)

Assume a one-way transmission, one mile down the road. Assume the DVDs are packed in such a way so that loading the time spent loading the van is negigible (they're boxed well). Therefore, setup time ~= 0. Assume the van drives at an average speed of 60 mph.

1 mile / 60 mph = 60 seconds

612069.4546 gigs / 60 seconds = 10201.15758 gigs / second.

10201 >> 6.5 gigs per second. Sneakernet wins.

Except that Microsoft didn't make up the name "windows" it pre-dates Microsoft Windows.

And taurus pre-dates the Ford Taurus. The fact is, Microsoft uses "Windows" as a trademark as it relates to computer operating systems because at the time no one else called their operating system "Windows".

Making a soundalike name is like what cheap Taiwanese knock-off companies do... There's a relevent Simpsons quote here somewhere, but I'm too lazy to dig it up. Suffice to say, you can venture into a local dollar store and probably see a few products with blatent-attempt-to-trick-the-customer names.

If you want to compete with an established brand, you come up with your own name for a product, then you make that name mean something. Coke vs Pepsi, AMD vs Intel, Ford vs Chevorlet, Energizer vs Duracell, etc. have you noticed a trend yet?

Cars are still designed by people... some just use computers. It's not the fault of computers that modern designers suck so bad. Take a look at the Ford GT. They used computers extensively in its design, and its one of the sexiest cars out there.

No accounting for taste (I end up saying that a lot, usually defensively ;)), but I mind the oddball look of the Honda Insight less than I do that of (last year's) Prius; the current Prius is a little better. Of course, the Insight isn't a practical car for mountain driving with gear and a few passengers, but hey -- I didn't buy one ;)

I am looking forward to the (hyped / announced, then pushed back) Hybrid Escape from Ford; I happen to like the shape / size of the Escape, at least from the outside. (I have not been inside one, though I have been inside the identical-cousin Mazda Tribute.) I had been planning to wait on a car purchase until the Escape Hybrid had been out for a year, then look for a deal on a used lease-return model. However, the old car started dying too fast, so I bought my Subaru wagon.

Also interesting is the (also upcoming) Ford Freestyle; I hope they make a hybrid version of this as well. It actually looks even more like the thing I've been waiting for, which is to say a domestic (and therefore, hopefully, cheap to repair) answer to the Subaru Outback wagon. I bet they'll offer it in automatic-transmission only, though. (Bastards!)

timothy

Are you kidding? Try to buy a Ford Taurus without these things, substituting AM-FM radio for the MP3 player.

Let's see you "download" a new paint job for it, "download" interior upholstery, etc. I still maintain M$ never had a monopoly in the most accurate sense of the word, since I have never been forced to by PC with an OS I didn't want. I have always been able to download other browsers, media players, etc. PCs are far more flexible than cars.

Yes, but why don't we have plans to switch away from fossil fuels? Why don't we have plans to make a more self-reliant society? Why don't we have plans to benefit all of mankind?

Well, there is one thing I would get.

A solid 24 karat gold Zelda 1 NES cartridge. If one doesn't exist I'll have it made.

Also, I would get the ultimate racing game. Or the other ultimate racing game.

Or the extremely rare Virtua Racing 2 machine. I know I played it at least once at Epcot Center.

OOh, Ooh, one of those ms. pac-man galaga machines. Those are hot!

*DRM 20 years into the futire*

Record companies have now removed the "stop", "FF", and "Rewind" buttons from your cassette player so you can only consume your entertainment the way that they intended for you to.

How is a Tivo any different? Because of the business model. the Fox show 24 does unbelievable product placement. Not only does everyone drive a Ford, but Apple, Dell and Gateway computers can be seen everywhere. And when I skip through the commercials, those particular brands are still getting my attention.

Through frankly, I don't see most federal agents driving a F-150

B. Invent an SUV that gets 100 miles to the gallon (preferably a gallon of H20).

Working on it.

Let's put things into perspective...

Would you rather have a 10 panel LCD system or a brand new 2005 Ford GT40?

I've got a bucket of change I'm saving for the GT40. I'm going to buy a used one when they're one year old. Not sure how, but I am.

Oh, and Ford is coming out with a hybrid SUV (Explorer?) in 2004.

According to Ford's web site, the Escape Hybrid will be available the end of next summer (2004). If I'm not mistaken, it is already available to "fleet" customers.

From Ford's on Escape Hybrid FAQ site:

What kind of performance will I get from the Escape Hybrid?
The Escape Hybrid performs with V6-like acceleration yet consumes much less fuel.

Can I tow a trailer with an Escape Hybrid?
Yes, the Escape Hybrid is expected to be rated for towing up to 1,000 pounds.

While it certainly may not be as powerful as a non-hybrid Escape (I'm guessing), it doesn't sound woefully underpowered as all that.

Ford is coming out with an
Escape hybrid SUV in a year, as an '05 model. Toyota has one coming out soon too.

Here is a link to information about the Ford Escape. I actually considered it, but it was not available when I needed to get the new vehicle. There is also a little concern about cargo space since it is a smaller SUV, but when it comes out, I will definitely be giving it a look. It is supposed to have V6 power and 4WD with somewhere around 40 mpg. Not bad at all.

Another interesting tidbit mentioned on the site is that in the US there are tax deductions for owning a hybrid vehicle.

Separate cargo and crew are exactly what we need for space missions in the next few decades.

The cargo can fly on a Delta-2 rocket. The crew can take a Ford Expedition from Cape Canaveral to the NASA pavillion at Walt Disney World.

There, they can conduct all their orbital duties in complete safety, while being more accessible to the admiring public than ever before!

(Oops, maybe Disney isn't that safe after all...)

Do you always post random thoughts showing your ignorance?
No, but apparently YOU do!
A simple google would show that Pontiac makes the Thunderbird. Why post something like that without checking first?
I don't know what google you're using, but a simple google search turns up this Loser troll!

"they did come up with the what would jesus drive aimed at SUVS..."

Well, let's see here. He's a carpenter (meaning he has lots of tools, equipment, and supplies) who does a lot of traveling to exotic areas. Sounds like he'd use something like a Ford Excursion.

Granted, the Ford Excursion is an extreme case, but I'm serious. I wish I were joking. Ford has stopped publishing the Excursion's estimated mpg because the EPA doesn't rate vehicles that large. That itself should tell you something.

This Ford dealer claims the 2000 model gets up to 10 mpg with a gas engine, and up to 18 mpg with a diesel engine. This review puts actual mileage at 10/14 (city/highway), but I've heard real world reports around 5/9.

There's nothing constraining car companies from introducing hybrid SUV's or even electric ones.

Actually Ford is about to do this. The Ford Escape is a hybrid SUV. They are estimating between 35-40 miles per gallon, not bad for a vehicle that size, though the 4WD version will get a bit less. Its due out in '04, and from what they say on their site, it'll probably price in the low to mid $30k range. With any luck I'll be in the market for a new vehicle about thar time, and this could be a really good option.

BTW, not all of us are Dwarves.

Amen, most of the econo-boxes are designed for midgets. I remember seeing commercials claim that you could get "4 full sized adults" in one of those little boxes. My response is, umm, no, at least not what my friends and I consider full size. I'm 6'3", 265 lbs (just a bit overweight), and I'm about the average size of the people I hang out with. Right now the only way to get 4 of us in a vehicle is to take my sedan sized vehicle. And even then we have to be creative in the seating arragements to make sure that everyone has enough leg room. I'd love to be more helpful to the environment, but I really hate it when my legs fall asleep from being cramped too long.

...All browsers are named after cars.

Microsoft/Ford Explorer

Apple/GMC Safari

Netscape/Lincoln Navigator

Omni Group/DodgeOmni[web]

iCab... not even going to bother. I'm hoping you'll see the connection.

My point?

The Mozilla group is making a Big Mistake with the upcoming changes.

Point one: not naming their browser after a car. People want to see their browsers named after cars. If Microsoft does it, it HAS to have been researched on the market.

Two: People want to see monolithic browsers using up resources like there's no tomorrow. With every major browser out there named after either an SUV, a minivan or a sporty pickup-type-car, gas guzzling is a must-have feature in a browser.

Therefore, I proclaim Mozilla's 1.5 efforts flawed, and doomed, like BSD.

Volvos are more classy than Thunderbirds

Maybe, in the past, but new Thunderbird looks very nice, and is very classy. I'd take that over most Volvos.

Has anyone checked out the Ford Model U?
Article
Pictures

With the release of Safari, Apple has continued the time honored tradition of naming web browsers after SUVs.

(okay, so the Safari is a van, but its close enough.)

I dunno. I don't think the price of a brand new Chevy Camaro Z-28, or a Ford Mustang Cobra (1977 prices) is trivial. I know I certainly wouldn't pay $24,000 - $38,000 on a new computer today, even if I had that kind of cash lying around to spend.

No *kidding*. The *point* of HTML is that the author should *not* care or try to force a font size on the end user -- the end user should be free to choose whatever's most convenient for them.

Unfortunately, the market got flooded with "web designers" who came straight from print magazines or got all their ideas from print magazines.

Hi-Ho, a trolling we go, eh?

Look, I'll make this very simple. Plain text webpages are ugly. XHTML compatable pages are ugly. HTML 1.1 compatable pages are ugly. Leaving the border around your image link is ugly. Not using tables is ugly.

Why do you think people hire webdesigners? Because they know how to create an eye catching site. Why do you think magazines look like they look? Because, through trial and error, they have found what works.

People want webpages to seem alive. People want an interactive web. This is something that's a foreign concept to most linux users: You are all used to seeing pages like CGIwrap's webpage that is an assault to the eyes at the expense of being compatable with all browsers including lynx and mosaic. Or, you might get as advanced as the apache webpage which is not as much an assault on the senses, but is still boring.

I don't care what this loser says, he needs to get out of the ninteys and give people what they want. It's all about target marketing. Linux geeks are content to see pages like the cgi-wrap page. HOWEVER, normal people are impressed by things that move, things that make noise, things that interact. You're suggesting we should give people a bycicle because it'll get them from a to b and it's easy to use. But there will always be a market for flashy sport compacts, and if you ignore these people in favor of backwards compatability, you're going to alienate a good section of the population.

Take a look, for example, at the 2 Advanced Studios webpage. Tell me you've seen a cooler webpage, and I'll tell you you're lying. Or, take a look at some of the work they've done.

Making a good looking, interactive page, with javascript menus, flash animations, etc, means "I have taken an interest in my work, and I care what it looks like". Some of you may have seen his XHTML bullshit at the top of this page and thought, "Oh, wow, this guy is great. This page is so readable, and so well organized." But, what most of the rest of us that live in reality said was "Jesus, that's aweful. It looks like he made it with an old copy of Frontpage 98 that was included with his windows 98 install". It looks aweful.

For example, this guy is claiming that flash intros suck. Some of them do, but done right, it definately adds to the "wow" factor of the website. And the "wow" factor makes you money, or gets you accolades, not the "this will work in every browser ever, including my cell phone and my command line" factor.

Get with the times. There are graphic designs artists and webpage designers for a reason. The reason is because they know how to make a page look better than you do.

This guy's just a douche that's to stupid to smell the change and know he's obsolete. People like him are the reason it's ok to have a website that looks like shit, and I say I've had enough.

~Will

That's why you get a Ford F-250 king cab diesel or any other big diesel thing and convert it to run on french fry grease. That is exactly my plan in the next year or so -- get a used Ford (why Ford? they are common in my neck of the woods (I hate to wait for parts) and my brother-in-law is a Ford mechanic) and do the mods for used grease (my wife works at a culinary school!). ANY diesel vehicle (even BIG OLD CHEVY SUBURBANS if you want to feel tank-like) will do. Mercedes are nice and safe. Escalade schmescalade - get a diesel EXCURSION!!

Considering that used grease is usually free, the $1000 install of the kit should pay for iself in short order -- at a minimum I go 40 miles a day, 5 days a week, 52 weeks a year. At $1.50 a gallon of something (and 15 mpg, though that is optimistic for a big thing) it will pay for the kit in ONE YEAR.

It also explains why im moving to europe in a month from detroit!

The MSRP on a 2003 Ford F-150 is around $20,000 USD.

The MSRP on a 2003 Honda Insight is about the same, $20,000 USD.

It's clear that the hybrid car at roughly the same price will start saving you money almost immediately.

How do you know this is something worth doing?

Or is it just a matter or "because we can build something bigger, we should"? Isn't this what led to the Escalade and the Excursion?

Take a look here, Ford just announced that the latest line of the Ford Focus will be a wireless car! Yes, that's right you'll be able to take the car anywhere you want without having to worry about those annoying connector cables.

Where's the /. story on this one?

And finally, your "BIG BAD EVIL SUV", the mother of 'em all, the Ford Excursion, weighs 3575 pounds. ~1.78 tons. Not even 2 tons, and nowhere close to your "3 tons of death" you're trying to imply.

Christ. Yeah, the SSSCA sucks, but you're way off the mark with your comments. Do your homework first.

(Emphasis added.)

Not to doubt your sincerity, but my Ranger weighs more than 2 tons. I think this is the homework you meant, where it appears that the curb weights go up to 11,000lbs., with the likely peak of the soccer mom distribution falling somewhere around 6-8,000lbs.

I understand the arguement that people give for regulation on real-world, tangible products: Cars flip over and kill people when engineered improperly. But there is no safety issue with software. The only issues are security and quality. When bad security results, companies change software. if software is hard to use, cumbersome, un-intuitive, well, companies change software. I don't see why we're punishing microsoft.

I don't buy "bundling" as an arguement. Companies offer , in software and in other products, extra features that make life easier, cheaper, faster, etc. They also offer things that will contribute to repeat sales, like coupons. All microsoft is doing is giving a browser that points to MSN to everyone, for free. No one is suing linux distro's for bundling other software with it. hell, mandrake came out with so many little features they stuck them on 4 cds!

Personally I'm against anti-trust. I'm always against the government bothering people who have found a way to make money without resorting to force.

Brits/Europeans drive cars like the Smart and Polo, which are quick, economical and aethetically pleasing. Neither of which will sell in America. Yanks drive LandYachts like Excursion and Suburban, which are slow, inefficient eyesores. With far too much chrome. Sound familiar?

Here's the deal I see. First, we don't have the infrastructure, which is covered by other posts here. Second, all of the extra power-sapping stuff we have in cars these days.

Power windows. Air conditioning. Heat. Power seats. Power steering. High power audio systems. Need I go on? People love their cars, people like to drive and commute. Do you really think everyone wants to give up their gas engine, which runs things like your A/C compressor and power steering hydraulics, in favor of an electric-only car that doesn't have any power to spare for air conditioning? I don't think so.

Your electric car doesn't create enough heat to heat a car they way we currently do it, and certainly not enough to run enectric heaters, which just plain suck down an encredible amount of power. Is there enough electricity to spare for power windows? Headlights, if you're driving at night a lot? No, and no again. These cars don't appeal to the general population because of these nice touches, options, and luxuries that we like to have in our cars. However, a fuel cell that puts off a good amount of power could run all kinds of electric compressors, pumps, and whatnot like a modern vehicle. Or a hybird engine that kicks in when the extra power is needed for whatever reason.

It's the V-10 engines that are killing us, not the I-4's and smaller. The Insight uses an I-3 engine, and only has a curb weight of 1878 pounds. Here in America, we're on an SUV craze, with bigger vehicles that weigh more and demand bigger engines to move a 6000 pound vehicle. Give me a 2400 pound Focus with an I-4; less power required to move the thing, uses less gas than a V-10. Think about how much less gas wold be used if there were only cars. 30 MPG is better than 12, even if it isn't a hybird's 60.

Give us a car that's exactly the same as today's cars in every way except in what's under the hood. Give us our climate control and a million power accessories. Build the infrastructure that we need to run a hydrogen based fuel cell vehicle, or more hybird vehicles. Give us the option of having a hybird engine for no extra cost over a gas engine, or better yet, a discount on the total price for choosing hybird over gas only. People will then start to see these cars as real alternatives, not some toy car lacking major features. But electric-only just isn't any kind of serious alternative to gas engines.

Or maybe not, just because a car isn't a big-ass SUV, which is today's vehicle of choice. Get more people to drive a car first.

--

Oh, please. You can't tell me the reason SUV's are popular is because they're useful utility vehicles. I commute 15 miles to work every day, and I always see at least 20 massive SUV's with exactly one person in them, a middle aged guy in a suit, usually talking on a cel phone. I assure you, that man's SUV will never see a spot of road that isn't paved or outside the metropolitan area. And it certainly won't be hauling drywall or bathtubs any time soon, as Ford would like you to believe.

And it always cracks me up to see a Ford Excursion parked on the side of the road downtown, taking up two parking spots. I'm just glad they don't fit in the parking garages.

I bet, Japan will be the place you see more fuel cell / bybrid first, then Europe, then North America. Not to be soon.

And America will be a very distant third. Nobody in the US wants to drive fuel-efficient cars, they want to drive hideously oversized SUV's. Until those things can run on electricy, roar a loud, obnoxious engine, and take up more space than two normal vehicles, nobody will give up their SUV's.

To go to a good colledge (really good one) will cost you around $30,000 a year.

If only! I see that the cost now to attend Harvard is $35000 + travel expenses. MIT weighs in at about the same. Stanford is $1k cheaper (Bargain!), and you pay a meager $30,000+ for a year at CalTech.

No wonder going off to college feels like an Expedition - they cos t about the same! Makes me thankful for the "paltry" $10K/yr I paid a decade ago (compare at $20,000 for Stanford).

Of course, $20,000 to $35,000 in 10 years is only 6% per year, or twice the rate of inflation. If the stock market keeps growing at 15% like it has for the last decade, the $125,000/year our kids will feel like $5500 today. That's only a little bit more than my freshman tuition was. Go, bull, go! ;-)

See here for an example.