Slashdot Mirror

Oh really? If others didn't call it Assist you might have a point. Pretty much EVERYONE else calls it Driver Assist; only Tesla is brash (and stupid) enough to call it "Autopilot".

You sure about that?
http://www.gmc.com/denali-luxu...

Professional Grade???

Huh, I went with GM. Wonder where my link went to.

Anyways, the GM site listed gross at 7.3k, gross for the ford is 8.5k.

For a vehicle that shouldn't be expected to carry cargo, yes you'd want it to be lighter.

Also keep in mind that net or gross wasn't mentioned, and in reporter-speak '4 tons' could be anything from 3-5.

You missed your chance. Ford and Chevrolet already made and subsequently discontinued small all-electric pickups. But, all is not lost. There are a growing number of full-sized hybrid gas/electric pickups on the market. These meet your specifications almost perfectly.

No idea whether it'll actually come true, but I believe that both GMC and Ford are set to release hybrid trucks next year.

GMC Sierra Hybrid
It's to be a 'light' hybrid, with a full size V8 to maintain towing capacity.

Ford F-150 hybrid
Hydraulic?
Note: Closer to vaporware, it's an older article, may have been canceled. Though with current gas prices, might be starting up again.

As others have noted, electric motors are actually quite good at providing low RPM torque, and it's not like you don't have plenty of mass and area with a truck to put a big battery and electric motor in capable of doing things like pull a stump out of the ground. If nothing else, all the proposals I've seen are for 'mild' hybrids, with full size engines.

As Congress has sought to target the increasingly large vehicles that Americans seek to buy, the auto makers response is to market larger and larger GVW vehicles to the consumer segment of the population. While many people will end up buying the more economical vehicles, there is a certain segment of the population that cannot deal with the tradeoffs* in performance and will switch to the next larger size. Currently, our local GMC dealer is beginning to carry pickup trucks based on the 4500 Series. They are selling like hot cakes. Larger vehicles are also possible, depending on how the MPG standards are written.

*One interesting tradeoff has nothing to do with fuel economy, but rather with the IRS's treatment of vehicle expenses allowed for 'cars' (and other light vehicles) vs those allowed for heavy trucks. People who use vehicles for business purposes, even if these do not involve the hauling of goods or equipment, realize such a tax savings by purchasing a vehicle that qualifies as a large truck, that fuel costs just vanish in the economic equation. Until the IRS removes the penalties for using smaller vehicles, I anticipate that this trend will only continue.

You are correct, however you may be surprised at the efficiency of these systems. (for their size weight and horse power)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_Fuel_Managemen t/ From the wiki
http://www.gmc.com/modelSelector.jsp/ select trucks - Active Fuel Management
These look like a step in the right direction. These (according to specs) can get up to 22MPG and 367max hp. Doesn't list torque but states towing cap of 10,500 pounds. (bet that mpg isn't at that hp rating or towing anything:)

There will always be a difference between professional and amateur grade.

That's why I only drive professional grade. http://www.gmc.com/

I dunno - they came out with a truck hybrid recently, so I would say they're still looking at viable alternatives that will actually become MAINSTREAM. That's the problem - the EV1 would never be mainstream until there is a breakthrough in battery technology.

...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.

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 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.