10 Techno-Cool Cars

mrv writes "The IEEE Spectrum picks their '10 Techno-Cool Cars'. The article picks vehicles from the 2003 or upcoming model years, that feature significant jumps in performance, convenience, or comfort, are technologically bold, and otherwise cool (for engineers, not just the 'motorhead' type)."

Comments

This car should have been on the list...

[$$$$$exyGal]

The best car of all time.

Poor Uncie Herb ;-)

--sex

Re:This car should have been on the list...

[t0qer]

These
are just as nice IMHO.

Quoting DS9's Benjermin Cisco, it's 2003, where are my flying cars?

Re:This car should have been on the list...

[packeteer]

Why do we need flying cars. It is so much less efficient to have to fight off gravity as you are trying to travel. Know why people dont fly helicopters other than they are difficult to fly without training? Its because they cost a lot. Unless we can perfect cold fusion these flying transportation plans are not going to work.

Re:This car should have been on the list...

[Anonymous Coward]

"Why do we need flying cars."

NEED? There are lots of things you don't NEED.
Want? No that is something completely different.

You may just want to take your pansy ass out of the slashdot upgrade cycle.

I like

[Anonymous Coward]

that humpable car with a rear-bumper orifice from Saturday Night Live.

Gives the word joyride a new meaning.

Re:WORST POST

[Anonymous Coward]

Your panties smell like limburger cheese.

Where is the Honda S2000

[Squeezer]

It puts out more horsepower per liter then any other naturally aspirated engine in production (120 HP/L, 240HP total) and revs to 9000 RPM. Does the quarter mile in 13.8 seconds stock, and handles better then most cars on the road.

Why is it not mentioned in the article?

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[flewp]

For that matter, where is the Enzo? As close as you can get to F1 by THE best F1 team around (Ferrari). F1 is by far the most technologically advanced racing series, so a car such as the Enzo should be on this list.

All in all, I think they were going with newer technology that isn't seen on most cars, and excluded exotics. However, right below the headline it says: Spectrum picks the 10 most technically sophisticated cars for 2003. So I say again, where are the cars that are truly the top of engineering and technology?

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[panurge]

Because there is nothing technically interesting in high output high rev gasoline engines. That's just development, putting well established racing technology on the road unlike the cars in the article which have genuinely new technology, at least for cars.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[binaryDigit]

Well as cool as the S2000 and Enzo are, they either are just very refined (S2000) or are priced in such a way that most people will never benefit from their hi tech (Enzo).

There really isn't anything all that groundbreaking tech wise with the S2000. Honda just paid a lot of attention to detail and applied what their extensive engine know-how to create a very highly tuned motor mated to a firm and responsive chassis. Hardly hitech, but definitely way cool from a gear head point of view.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[matt4077]

because its (a) two years old and (b) just another gas-sucking penis-replacement.
The really cool cars are those that come up with new ideas, like drive-by-wire (joystick) or HUDs. You know, stuff that will never be useful but look really cool at your high school reunion

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[flewp]

Actually, cars WILL benefit from technology on the high tech cars. Sequential gearboxes are starting to make their way onto more accessible (in terms of price) cars. Basically it's a trickle down effect in a way. Also, what allows the S2000 to be refined? Technology and engineering.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[Radio Shack Robot]

Kirby Boteler rocks!

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmmm - my little 600 cc 105 HP sportsbike produces WAAAYY more than 120 hp per liter and certainly the GSX1000 and R1 making over 150hp from a litre engine is more as well.

Not that I don't like the S2000, it just doesn't seem that impressive from a pure engine performance standpoint.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[binaryDigit]

Actually, cars WILL benefit from technology on the high tech cars.

Right, but if you notice the cars they chose are all geared toward the general consumer, vs 200 unit annual run more expensive than the average house (excepting Bay Area) type vehicles.

Also, what allows the S2000 to be refined? Technology and engineering.

Right, but nothing ground breaking. That's what makes the S2000 so damn cool. It doesn't rely on massive amounts of high tech "drivers aids" to get at its performance. It's just tried and true automobile engineering taken to a very high level.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[zapfie]

because its (a) two years old and (b) just another gas-sucking penis-replacement.

Dude.. I dunno.. I don't think that car is fitting in my girlfriend.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[Anonymous Coward]

The Honda S2000 does not have the highest horsepower per liter ratio for a naturally aspirated engine. That honor belongs to the Mazda RX-8, which produces 255 horsepower from 1.3 liters of displacement. That's 196 hp/l, significantly greater than the 120hp/l figure of the Honda S2000.

The Honda S2000's engine has over 50 moving parts. The Mazda RX-8's Renesis motor has only five (2 rotors, 1 shaft, 1 flywheel, 1 counterbalance). Feel free to read up on the wonderful Wankel Rotary engine at http://www.howstuffworks.com/rotary-engine.htm

P.S. Honda's Suck.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[Bagheera]

Why not? Because it doesn't put out more power per litre than any other normally aspirated production mill, and compared to Honda's bike engines it's not especially impressive. In fact, bike motors have been getting better than 120HP/L for years.

Horsepower is all about getting fuel and air through the motor. You can go big bore (8L Viper), pressure charged (Subaru WRX, Mercedes SLK), or spin it like crazy (Honda S2000, nearly any Bike motor), to get the same effect.

I was surprised to see them calling GM's V8/4 truck motor innovative. Have they forgotten the old Cadillac V8/6/4 motor? On second thought, they probably have. That motor was a disaster...

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[Anonymous Coward]

Does it also make your penis bigger?
What is it with HP? I prefer a car that has great fuel efficiency over HP.
All the people in my office used to make fun of my Metro/Swift and bragged about their big bad SUVs and Trucks. Funny how the jokes stopped after I told them that I pay 6~6.50 USD on gas per week.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[UniverseIsADoughnut]

>> It puts out more horsepower per liter then any other naturally aspirated engine in production (120 HP/L, 240HP total) and revs to 9000 RPM. Does the quarter mile in 13.8 seconds stock, and handles better then most cars on the road.

Most this cars power is worthless. It's in to high of a speed to be good for much. Yes if your going to go for highspeeds it will be nice. But for good performance you need power down low. Most car engines don't do much past around 6Krpm for a reason, it's no good up there. Honda has been hi-reving engines for ever. Due to there motorcycle heritage. The fact is though hi-revs are only good to a point. More than anything the s2000 engine is a marketing tool. They make it sound good to those who don't know crap. Even on their normal cars, IE civics, accords they do this. They wind them out higher then there counter parts to get high HP numbers. Then it sounds like they have the same power as the competition but are much more efficent and clean. When there not. When it comes to real power their rather low compaired to others. It isn't that other car companies can't make high rev-ing engines. It's they don't want to do that. They can if they want, look at any makers racing engines. But it comes down to a car on the street is not a race car on the track.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[Neon Spiral Injector]

The RX-8's Renesis engine was revving to 10,000 and making 270 HP out of a 1.3 L engine. But the production version was scaled back to 8,000 RPM and 250 HP. But still 1.3 L. That beats the 2000's engine.

Of course four strokes only use half of their displacement per revolution where the rotary uses it's entire displacement every time around. So to be fair you either multiply the displacement of the rotary by 2 or divide the boinger (piston engine) by 2.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[Anonymous Coward]

1) There's nothing particularly advanced about it.

2) It makes all its power above 7500 RPM, where nobody really drives in practical terms. VTEC is a marketing scam, and nothing more. Peak power and torque mean nothing if the area under the curve is accordingly tiny.

3) 13.8 seconds is not fast for a car with a small footprint like that. My Audi S4 is a 3700 lb. four door behemouth and I can 1/4 it in 13.2 without having to worry about boffing the launch, thanks to AWD.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[Anonymous Coward]

Get a bigger GF then.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah the RX-8's absence from this list is enough to convince me the list is useless. There isn't much out there more "high-tech" than the new Renesis, and hell the car is in the new X-Men movie for chrissakes!

What more can a geek ask for?

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[Forgotten]

Unfortunately you won't see many more Metro/Swift/Justy type little fuel-efficient cars in North America anytime soon. Since Reagan repealed the fleet efficiency requirements on product lines at the end of his terms, the trend has been bigger and worse, with the subcompacts steadily falling off the bottom, as people buy the SUVs and minivans they think will protect them from this harsh modern world they think they live in. You know, the one they're afraid to walk through at the fast-food or bank machine drivethru. The cars are still made and sold in other slightly saner parts of the world, of course, but here in the free markets of the US and Canada you don't need that choice, because, you're, um, so free. Surely we can't all be that obsese yet.

On the subject of FUD-based car marketing, I saw an ad for some sort of Canyonero the other day where the automaker had licenced Gary Numan's eighties song "Cars". You know the one:

Here in my car
I feel safest of all
I can lock all my doors...

Never mind that the visual makes it clear that the marketroid merely saw the title of the song and heard the catchy tune, missing the fact that it's a prescient satire of the fearful survivalists in their little civilian tanks. It's sad on so many levels, and yet it's the closest they could have come to an honest ad. Without the cognitive dissonance of knowing it of course.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[gnovos]

because its (a) two years old and (b) just another gas-sucking penis-replacement.

Dude.. I dunno.. I don't think that car is fitting in my girlfriend.

yeah, true... but in reality, for most slashdotters, it works fine as a replacement... it can be "waxed" all day long...

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[Moofie]

Meh. Looks like a doorstop, and the engine does NOTHING until you spool it up to 7000rpm.

I mean, it's a capable sports car, but it's nothing special.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[Anonymous Coward]

If you're looking for the S2000, remember this is for cool cars, not souless punchouts of plastic on wheels.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[Anonymous Coward]

I just got done with her. Try it again.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[On Lawn]

Isn't it like a pipeline, so you get the power from a charge of displacement 3 times a revolution? Come to think of it I'm not sure how a wankle measures displacement, but I figured it is the max volume of the rotor on the intake side like every other IC engine.

-------------------
Onroad: Mining urban legend for fuel efficiency.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[nelsonal]

I think the increasing size of cars has more to do with the exceedingly low price of gas, adjusted for inflation of course, than fleet fuel efficiency standards. Detroit has been selling their smaller fuel efficient cars at a loss in order to lower their overall average, so they can sell bigger cars at more of a profit. If it makes you feel better, everyone who drives one of those monsters, is subsidizing those who choose to drive Metro/Fiesta and other American companies' smaller cars.
I think the Canyonero is Rush's parody of SUV sizes, he is trying to mock the people who think we should have strict standards on fuel efficiency.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[glenkim]

If you really want to get into it, the 600cc engine of a Yamaha YZF-R6 gets in over 200hp/L. It uses ram air intake, if you want to disqualify it from natural aspiration. Otherwise, yes, that's efficiency.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[Anonymous Coward]

Excellent.

YOU DO NOT FAIL IT.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[Anonymous Coward]

Rush? AFAIK the Canyonero is a Simpsons invention (as shilled by Krusty on TV).

Car size is absolutely correlated to gas prices, but that's the whole point. Lower gas prices post-"energy crisis" were good for everyone except energy companies. That's exactly why Reagan froze the fleet efficiency requirement. We should have standards on fuel efficiency because fuel inefficiency costs everyone down the road. Subsidise my ass - the real cost of any car isn't buying it, or even buying gas for it. The cost is *burning* the gas.

You *can't* choose to drive (new) small cars any more because they're just not available in North America. The smallest cars they're shilling are the size of what used to be a mid-sized sedan. The entire spectrum has shifted, and of *course* it's a bone to oil companies. But just because gas is cheaper doesn't mean you should find a way to keep spending the same amount on it by burning more!

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[DavittJPotter]

It just makes me laugh when people talk about 'penis envy' or 'penis replacement' when someone has a sports car/high horsepower car. Get over yourselves and your own shortcomings.

Building or owning a high-performance/high-horsepower car is for most people, a fun and rewarding hobby. You own something a small percentage of the population 'gets' or understands. Dropping the hammer on a 500hp Camaro or Mustang is an adrenaline-pumping experience. So is being the passenger, for that matter!

Let me put in geek speak: Do you really need a GeForce4 4600Ti for your video games? Really? And an overclocked Pentium 4 2.4 GHz? 1GB of RAM? No, you really don't. You may step in here and tell me about 'frame rate' and 'playability', etc., etc., but I'll put it this way. If you want more and more framerates, that's your power/speed addiction. Yeah, a freakin' VW Bug will get you there, but a Corvette will get you there in style and with some fun along the way.

Most of us don't drive our high-performance/high-horsepower cars daily - they're too expensive, and we don't want the speeding tickets and wear & tear.

Talking about a car as a penile replacement is stupid. Yeah, I've seen the Corvette/BMW/Mercedes owners that think they're God's gift, but most people just like a cool car that they find fun/sexy/exciting/good looking.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[Kysh]

The Honda CBR600F4 and Yamaha R6 both produce
120hp at the crank, for 200hp per liter. They are
both normally aspirated, water cooled engines, which
rev to 14500 and 15000 rpm respectively. They both
do the 1/4 mile in around 10.80.

Yes, I know this article was about cars, but your
'more horsepower per liter then [sic] any other
naturally [sic] aspirated engine in production'
needed refutation.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[binaryDigit]

There are so many better (from a gearhead perspective) cars than an S2000... I don't even know where to start. bleck.

Thank you for stating an opinion and totally neglecting providing any examples to substantiate it. Oh and then posting as AC just to top it off, your post was quite valuable.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[Anonymous Coward]

rx8 is a rotary engine, different class. like comparing a weasel and a chipmunk.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[Anonymous Coward]

Because that car is dog crap. None of the auto enthusiast magazines have fallen in love with that car. It only makes 160 ft-lbs of torque at an ungodly high rpm. If the car is anywhere under 6000 rpm the performance is pitiful. Anywhere over 6000 rpm the noise is gonna get laughable, and the power isn't much better.

Compare that with a Camaro Z28 with it's old-tech pushrod V8 that gets 350+ HP and torque. Coupled with an M6 tranny, it can even get 30 mpg highway. It's torque is flat, and handles better than most people think. It destroyed anything in it's price range in performance (road course or drag race) by a longshot and could typically beat up on high dollar sports cars (Porsche Boxster, Acura NSX) (escpecially after a few mods).

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[Black Rabbit]

Car size is very much related to gas prices. That's why GM, being the money grubbing scum-fucks that they are, tried to get away with putting those horrendous Diesels in their full sized cars in the early 80's, engines that were basically 350 gas motors with cheap Diesel heads on them. Didn't work worth a damn, and Diesel in North America still suffers from the bad image that these engines produced.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, I saw your girlfriend and I think it does

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[Waffle Iron]

Rotary engines have traditionally produced large amounts of power for their displacement, but the displacement figures are "cheating", because they really are sharing about 3 cylinders worth of thermodynamic cycling per rotor. There are still 6 distinct gas cycle regions in a 2 rotor engine, so to do an apples-to-apples comparison, you should multiply the displacement by 3.

For rotary engines, the tradeoff has traditionally been low efficiency because geometry dictates that the combustion chamber has a large surface area. This saps heat out of the expanding gas. It's the exact opposite of a "hemi" head engine. Maybe the RX8 has somehow solved this problem; I can't seem to find MPG figures after a cursory Googling.

2-cycle chainsaw motors also generate large amounts of power for their size/weight and have few moving parts because of their thermodynamic cycle. However, they are not considered "high tech".

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[Anonymous Coward]

I respectfully disagree. The reason so many people spend more on fiberglass, carbon fiber and overweight wheels than on performance enhancing mods is pure cock. The reason the Mustang still sells is pure cock (excepting those people who spend $20k+ on aftermarket parts to make up for its dead suspension). The reason most sports cars are so heavy has nothing to do with performance (and safety doesn't add that much weight).

I've gotten into racing and performance modding recently and yes, it's about the skill and the rush. I've just gotten heel'n'toe down to where I do it almost without thinking in daily driving and I'll be working on using left foot braking when I have the opportunity to do so safely. The thing is that even though I'm relatively inexperienced in racing (I just joined the SCCA), I can probably outdrive the majority of the people who own sports cars because I actually care to know how to drive well, not just how fast I can open the throttle or how to do a burn out. I think if you ask half the people who own a M3 to figure out a correct driving line for a simple 4 turn section, they'd probably either glaze over or else just try to hit a standard apex on every turn. It's fine that most people don't care and they go for status and horsepower, but in the end, yes, it does come down to their car being a bigger cock for them. After all, your cock (hopefully) gives you an adrenline rush and sense of power, too, your overweight 500+ hp car with a shitty suspension just adds to it.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[LighthouseJ]

I know too many guys that drive Corvettes that have their heads stuck up their asses and think they "have it made", just like the jerk japanese imports with the body kits and screwdriver-sized holes in the muffler so it "sounds rough" or the guys with the beehive-sounding motor.

The above outlined guys are the kind that care what other people think about them, that their cars are an extension of themselves. If they buy body kits, they feels superior. Like-minded people will agree with them.

I see the 1988 Honda Accords with wings and laugh and say to myself "that car doesn't have the horsepower to effectively use that wing".

I also have a problem with modifications to a car in general because to me it says they think "hey, the car shouldn't have been made that way, it's too boring, let's riceify it" and that's a slap in the face to the designers. Granted, I'm speaking about body modifications mostly, if you race professionally, then of course you need to upgrade to something to win and make money. But that's not the point, the point is, if you don't have to, then don't do it.

This is mostly fueled by a rant I always make because I live in a very cheapy ricey environment, where there are ugly-ass wings, clear tailights and rims in every Dodge Neon, Honda Integra (even though owners won't admit it) and whatever cheap car that can have crap put on there. I'm sick of seeing it because someone has to tell them it looks like shit. To the people that fall into this category, your money is better spent elsewhere than on your car.

If anyone thinks of defending themselves because they feel offended, just don't say anything because nothing you can say can adequately support because I've read lots of material and there's nothing to rationalize such stupid modifications.

All I'll say about myself is that I drive a european car, not a VW bug and it's not a Corvette, somewhere in the middle. But it's completely stock and runs the same now as it did as it rolled off the factory floor in Ingolstadt Germany (hint).

As for S2000's, high rpm's aren't that big of a deal, the horsepower may be impressive but the torque is more important to me. How often are you going to use all 240 horses, not unless you run from the cops. A quick look listed the new 2003 S2000's with 153 lb-ft of torque which is pretty sad compared to the hype the S2000 gets.

Alright, I'm done, I'll submit this bad boy and then check the numerous amount of replies later.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[SewersOfRivendell]

Get over yourself, dude. The people who *really* just "like a cool car that they find fun/sexy/exciting/good looking" drive vehicles like the Miata, Nissan 350Z, the Subaru WRX, 'rice burner' base Hondas, and other cars that aren't in the shop 75% of the time -- OR -- they drive cars like the Austin-Healey 3000 or other classic exotics.

Camaros and Mustangs and Corvettes do one thing really well: they go fast. Everything else is mediocre. They also have traditionally had poor steering and build quality. (Don't know about the new Mustang, but certainly true for them up to 2002.)

The one thing that everyone should be able to agree on: People who buy Porches most certainly are lacking in penis length.

Perhaps not applicable to the Cayenne.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[glenkim]

This really depends on how you define natural aspiration. Ram air is a form of forced induction, isn't it?

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[nexthec]

The Corvet xo6 2001 skidpads at 1.01G according to Car and driver...Not sure how that works tho

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[Anonymous Coward]

The latest corvettes are well balanced machines and handle quite well. They still have cheap looking interiors, but if anything that should be considered a good thing. A good sports car will have put the interior dead last in priorities, excluding the shifter, wheel, driver's chair and tach. The other two you mention are meathead cars. The new Mustang won't be out until 2004 (a 2005 model) and it turns out its's going to still have a dead rear suspension, which is a shame IMO. I guess they don't want to put the aftermarket mod makers out of business.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[Anonymous Coward]

That's cheating. Displacement is displacement. Volume is volume. 1.3 != 2.6. Not even for large values of said number :-)

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[Anonymous Coward]

Well aren't we just full of ourselves today. You recently got into the sport and now your a freakin expert. Wow. Short learning curve, huh?

Or does the little club plaque on the wall somehow make your feel superior, kinda a pensis enlargement diploma.

Tard

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[Goth Biker Babe]

" It puts out more horsepower per liter then any other naturally aspirated engine in production (120 HP/L, 240HP total) and revs to 9000 RPM "

I think you missed the word "car" out of this sentence. There are many bike engines which perform better than this, the Suzuki GSXR1000 or Hyabusa 1300 are two examples. The Yamaha YZF R1 has a 998 cc engine producing 152HP at 10,500 RPM.

Why pay to haul all that weight around? Get yourself something cheap and fun to commute on and hire a car when you need to.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[Anonymous Coward]

A rotary (Wankel) engine, fires 1/3 of its capacity 3 times per revolution. So you get 1 full displacement per rev.

A normal 4 stroke engine fires on every 4th revolution, but the engines are typically seperated into two sets of pistons, with the first set two strokes out of phase of the second set, such that you have two firings per 4 revs, or half the displacement per 2 revs. (So really only one full displacement per 4 revs).

A 4-stroke has the benefit of easier or higher compression (A rotary engine has less time, and less leverage to compress air).

Obviously a rotary suits forced induction slightly better than a 4-stroke. Actually rotary engines benefit from two positive feedbacks loops when mated to a turbo. As a rotary revs faster, it becomes easier to increase its speed. Couple this to a turbo, which increases boast as the exhaust gets faster.

So in theory a rotary is 4 times more powerful per Litre. Of course, its more like 2.5-3 times in practice.

However this is just power per litre. This is not a comparison of fuel consumption. I'm not sure exactly what the fuel consumption is, a rotary has less non power "strokes" then a 4-stroke, and has the advantage of using its own momentum to increase speed (rather than reducing in a 4-stroke, since a piston must be constantle slowed, and reversed).

A rotary is compact, increases revs faster, and is more tolerent of high revs.

A 4-stroke is well understood, requires less frequent maintainence, and scales up easily.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[maddskillz]

I have to disagree, that owning a hi-performance car, for most people, is a fun and rewarding hobby. There are definetly people who do want to drive, but I would have to say this is in the minority. This is speacking as a car nut, and seeing the way people drive there cars.
How many balding executives have you seen in Corvettes (or whatever) trying to impress the ladies?
That being said, they are nowhere near the penis replacement as SUV's! I hate thos bloated, gas guzzling pos's. Bad Handling, bad for the environment, and unsafe to the other cars on the road (why add all that extra kinetic energy?)

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[secolactico]

How many balding executives have you seen in Corvettes (or whatever) trying to impress the ladies?

As a balding man (not quite there yet, but you should see my father and grandfather... ouch) I take offense in your implication that we need a Corvette to impress the ladies.

All women know that a shiny head is a sign of high testosterone, and of course high sexual performance!

So if we ever wanted to impress the ladies, we will just take off our hats/head rugs.

;-) Smiley here for the humour impired moderator.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[Anonymous Coward]

What can I say, your right! Hondas SUCK!!!
Anyone that would spend 20k on a 10k car to make it ALMOST as fast as 25k car... well, I understand the hobby, but still...

Even as a hobby, most of these punks are just pouring money into a car marketing company's pocket... Jeazus. I can't believe ANYONE would pay $600 for a cat-back exauhast and muffler, when you can have a custom made one done at the local muffler shop for under $300 (including that nice shiny muffler with the 10" tip)

The next time you see a Hon-duh Dude with his pimped out (or riced out, depending on your definition/age) vehicle, please tell him what a moron he is...

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not an expert, nor did I claim to be. If I had any pretension about it, I wouldn't have mentioned that I've gotten into recently, now would I? However, I care to learn and practice how to drive well whereas most people that own high power cock mobiles do not. That was my point. Thanks for the attempts at petty insults, though.

Re:Where is the Honda S2000

[Anonymous Coward]

Unfortunately, you'd figure srong.

Rotary engines are figured to have a constant displacement: at any given instant, the volume of space enclosed between the rotor and the chamber is the same as any OTHER given instant.

So, you'd have to multiply by at LEAST 2 to get a parity with a reciprocating engine's "displacement"

(properly engineered multi-cylinder reciprocating engines ALSO have a constant displacement, across all of the cylinders, BUT that's not how they're advertized, is it?)

Electrorheological fluid

[hak hak]

Of course, why didn't someone think of that before?

Re:Electrorheological fluid

[Anonymous Coward]

What's so new about this? Corvettes have had Delphi's Magnaride for a year or two.

Re:Electrorheological fluid

[Anonymous Coward]

Those who aren't trying to act cool by claiming "physics is hard" might wonder why the blurb is actually describing a magnetorheological fluid. Is Cadillac confused about their own technology or is it just the writer?

Vrroomm

[Anonymous Coward]

With separate bubbles for the kids!

Hmmm. . .

[bplipschitz]

"Refuel it at home with an optional $1000 (natural) gas station".

I wonder if that comes with an optional (taco) bell, instead of a horn.

Excellent

[mao che minh]

Cool, I can't wait to abandon my clingy android son in the middle of the woods, his eyes tearing and hangs clinging feebily to the bumper, while driving away in my stylish Honda FCX. I can't wait for the future.

America Under-represented

[Scott Hussey]

Doesn't speak well for American engineering. Mostly European and Japanese makes it looks like. Maybe when GM gets their fuel-cell cars in production, America will look a little more updated. Or maybe the Ford Model U.

Re:America Under-represented

[SoCalChris]

Volvo Safety Concept Car - Volvo is owned by Ford
Saab 9-3 - Saab is owned by General Motors
Honda Civic GX - I'm pretty sure that Honda has a design studio in California
Honda FCX - See above
Cadillac XLR - Owned by General Motors
Audi A8
Mercedes-Benz SL500
Fiat Stilo
Chevrolet Trailblazer - Owned by General Motors
Toyota Prius

So, in review four of the 10 cars are American, and two of them were probably designed in America. That's not bad considering that most of the "high end" cars that you would expect to see on a list like this such as Mercedes, Audi, Lexus etc... aren't American.

Re:America Under-represented

[aneiken]

Except that half the cars on the list are owned in one way or another by an american auto company. GM Owns saab and fiat. Also since when is a Cadillac not a damn american car.

Re:America Under-represented

[PaybackCS]

To Update your list: Volvo Safety Concept Car - Volvo is owned by Ford
Saab 9-3 - Saab is owned by General Motors
Honda Civic GX - I'm pretty sure that Honda has a design studio in California (Honda has some ties with GM)
Honda FCX - See above
Cadillac XLR - Owned by General Motors
Audi A8
Mercedes-Benz SL500
Fiat Stilo (Owned by GM)
Chevrolet Trailblazer - Owned by General Motors
Toyota Prius (Toyota has some very strong ties to GM, the Matrix and Pontiac Vibe are the same car, several others were platformed shared, older MR2s were the same as the Pontiac LeMans).

Re:America Under-represented

[Moofie]

Oh good. The ugliest cars on the page (two Hondas and a Chevy) were all designed here. And the Volvo and Saab have managed to retain their own identity, because their American parents noticed that they (unlike Detroit) were actually making cars people want to buy.

Woo woo. *waves flag*

At least the new Cadillac roadster looks like nothing else on the road. I'll need to see one in person to say whether I in fact like it.

Re:America Under-represented

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the parent was referring to the engineering behind the cars.

Volvo is owned by Ford but built and designed in europe. So are Saab and Fiat.

Re:America Under-represented

[FigWig]

You're mistaken, no one wants to buy a saab. Great car, nice turbo engine, but horrible resale.

Re:America Under-represented

[Anonymous Coward]

If it can't be used to blow stuff up, america is not interested. Funny thing is that most people are proud of this fact. Wait how proud you are when I pass you with my new 760i! ;-)

Re:America Under-represented

[Moofie]

Uh, somebody bought it, from SAAB, in the first place, right?

SAAB doesn't care about resale values.

Re:America Under-represented

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

SAAB does care about resale values because depreciation is the #1 factor in determining lease rates on new vehicles.

Re:America Under-represented

[Izmunuti]

"Maybe when GM gets their fuel-cell cars in production, America will look a little more updated."

The Scateboard? That little project is just to impress Congress in an effort to hold off proposals to increase the CAFE standard. They have no intention of EVER shipping it. They're lobbying against a measly 1.5 mpg increase by 2007!

"2/19/2003 DETROIT (Reuters) - U.S. automakers, led by General Motors Corp., have fired back at a federal proposal to raise fuel economy standards for trucks by 1.5 miles a gallon, claiming regulators overestimated the companies' ability to meet higher targets and that the costs of tougher rules outweigh the benefits. ... Toyota Motor Corp. and Honda Motor Co. Ltd. told NHTSA they were in favor of the increase...Ford called the levels "technically challenging," and warned NHTSA's cost estimates were low, but said it was committed to meeting the standards."

Re:America Under-represented

[10Ghz]

GM Owns saab and fiat.

Incorrect. GM is a minority owner in Fiat Auto, but does not own it whole.

Re:America Under-represented

[Anonymous Coward]

What role does America play in making the Volvo and SAAB vehicles? They were all developed in Sweden under no influence from Ford/GM. Ford was even against the whole project from the very start (or at least when they bought half the sharehold of Volvo).

Re:America Under-represented

[frozenray]

> [...] no one wants to buy a saab. Great car, nice turbo engine, but horrible resale.

...and thus I got an excellent deal when I bought my Saab second-hand. Much better value IMO than an equivalent model from BMW or Audi, and that turbo engine really kicks butt.

Interesting mix

[JUSTONEMORELATTE]

I'm surprised by the mix -- I would have expected either the geekmobile set (a car like the Prius -- sends both the message "I'm saving the planet" and "Beat me up for my lunch money") or the beasty sports car set.
They seem to have a bit of each, along with two or three that someone might actually buy

Gas/Electric Hybrid cars are cool

[very]

High Miles/Gallon Gas ratio, that's what we need in a car. Unfortunately these cars don't have enough "muscles" as compared to the "more traditional" gas-only cars.
So far the hybrid cars come only with automatic transmissions.
Gas-Electric hybrid car with manual transmission, it would have higher MPG ratio, wouldn't it?

Re:Gas/Electric Hybrid cars are cool

[Ryu2]

The Honda Insight has a optional manual transmission, and it indeed does get higher gas mileage than the automatic.

Re:Gas/Electric Hybrid cars are cool

[meshko]

why would it?
I beleive modern automatic transmissions in regular cars are at least as efficient as an average driver with manual transmission. With the hybrid, I think, it is really better to let the computer do the shifting since its doing switching between enginges as well.

Re:Gas/Electric Hybrid cars are cool

[garignak]

Actually, the Insight was first introduced with only a manual transmission. The automatic was introduced last year. My brother just bought a 2002 Insight (w/automatic) and it kinda cool. With the automatic he gets around 50mpg. From what I've seen the manual transmission gets around 70mpg. Even the automatic gets better gas mileage than my motorcycle (around 45mpg).

Re:Gas/Electric Hybrid cars are cool

[Amoeba Protozoa]

I've always been told that a *properly* driven manual will drive more effeciently than an automatic because the automatic's torque converter taps some of the power.

-AP

Re:Gas/Electric Hybrid cars are cool

[Anonymous Coward]

I design friction packs and one-way clutches for car transmissions for a living and I can tell you that automatic transmissions are not as efficient as a manual. The internal mechanism/design is completely different. In some cases, a manual can be 15%+ more efficient.

As far as slushboxes go, what is needed is improved CVT design (see Audi's new box in the A6 and Nissan's x-mission in the Murano) or a transmission that has the internals of a manual which is shifted electrohydraulically via computer (I think Renault has something like that in production but I'm not 100% sure).

However, I'd rather see an all out assault on hybrid drivetrains using diesel engines with an eventual switch to fuel cells. And it would be nice to be able to buy that home refueling pump so you can fill your hydrogen-fueled, fuel cell-powered car with hydrogen you make yourself with a solar panel and electrolyzer (because you know the only way the infrastucture for hydrogen refueling will appear is with Big Oil's big bucks).

Re:Gas/Electric Hybrid cars are cool

[Kentamanos]

If CVT stands for continously variable transmission, then the Prius (a Toyota hybrid) does have that.

Re:Gas/Electric Hybrid cars are cool

[AmigaAvenger]

even a poorly drivenf manual will still get better mileage than the similar auto. auto's lose way too much in heat, just as mentioned. (in the torque converter) although vehicles with overdrive on highway take care of most o this. (converter is locked out by overdrive)

Re:Gas/Electric Hybrid cars are cool

[Anonymous Coward]

When I say improved, I mean torque capacity (not everyone wants a small car with low horsepower). Most CVT's can't handle more than 150 lb-ft. The Audi will do at least 220 and the Nissan even more.

Re:Gas/Electric Hybrid cars are cool

[arivanov]

They are not.

Especially for urban.

See the figures on recent models from Honda, Audi, VW or even Toyota or Nissan. The auto is usually 5% worse. After all it weights additional 50-60 kg over the manual transmission which you have to carry. So there is no way it can be more economical then manual that is driven correctly.

Re:Gas/Electric Hybrid cars are cool

[mrv]

Actually, the Prius is the only gas/electric hybrid available in the US that is only available with an "automatic" transmission. (Prius has a CVT.)

The Honda Insight and the Honda Civic HEV both come in manual and CVT versions. The manual versions, when driven appropriately, do get far better gas mileage than their CVT counterparts.

Re:Gas/Electric Hybrid cars are cool

[Sabina]

And as we know you need a lot of "muscle", look at me driving back from work every day, sometimes I can even achieve the superspeed of 15 miles/h.
(CA 101 to SF)

Re:Gas/Electric Hybrid cars are cool

[Moofie]

I can't figure out how the Civic Hybrid with the CVT doesn't get good gas mileage.

Guess the thing just turns all that extra efficiency into waste heat. How lame.

Re:Gas/Electric Hybrid cars are cool

[very]

Lucky you!

I drive 30 miles one way.
Need every advantages I can get from a car.
Fast, fuel efficient, and comfortable.

I am considering to get a hybrid, but I'll wait till they nailed it down!

Re:Gas/Electric Hybrid cars are cool

[john1701a]

>I am considering to get a hybrid, but I'll wait till they nailed it down!

How long do you need to wait?

Prius has been on the road since 1997 and over 120,000 have sold worldwide. So it's well proven in every driving condition imaginable. There's even one documented case of Prius used as a cab having exceeded 200,000 miles using the original battery-pack already. And to top all that, the 3rd generation design is on the way. (Rumor is that it will be available this fall.)

My Prius is completing its 3rd winter in Minnesota. (Extreme cold really hurts MPG in all vehicles.) (I get around 40 MPG in the frigid months and 50 MPG in the warm.) My overall real-world performance after driving 47,000 miles is 44.8 MPG.

Re:Gas/Electric Hybrid cars are cool

[Izmunuti]

I guess in the first generation, they went for ultimate fuel efficiency. There's no reason one couldn't build hybrids with muscles that get better gas mileage than a similar performing regular car.

Train locomotives are diesel/electric hybrids, it doesn't get much more muscley than that.

Re:Gas/Electric Hybrid cars are cool

[very]

Thanks for the info.

I'm still contemplating if I'd get a Honda or a Toyota hybrid.

Re:Gas/Electric Hybrid cars are cool

[Anonymous Coward]

I drive a Honda Civic Hybrid with a manual transmission. There is also a CVT option. Horespower-wise, it's nearly the same as my wife's regular Civic LX, but the curb-wieght of the hybrid is lower.

The hybrid cost only a little more, and I regularly get in the mid-50's for gas mileage (on certain terrain, I get over 60 mpg without any change in my driving style). The auto-stop feature turns off the engine at stop lights and autostarts the engine as I slip it into gear (so no fuel is wasted idling the car).

All-in-all, it seems silly to not go hybrid if you even remotely care about the environment, gas prices, etc. If nothing else, the purchase is a vote for efficient fuel-conservative technology and a notice to those not developing same that they better catch up and put alternative power plant cars on the market soon.

Re:Gas/Electric Hybrid cars are cool

[Anonymous Coward]

The Honda Civic Hybrid comes with an optional manual transmission (though you won't find many on lots). According to this article, it appears to get fairly good pick-up.

Re:Gas/Electric Hybrid cars are cool

[j-beda]

In fact, the Prius has some sort of fancy "planetary gear" system which in some sense isn't even a transmission, though it is effectively a CVT - so getting a "manual" version wouldn't really be possible.

See here for details.

Re:Gas/Electric Hybrid cars are cool

[john1701a]

> Most CVT's can't handle more than 150 lb-ft.

Prius can though. It can deliver 258 lb-ft. having a large (33kW) motor connected directly to the power system.

Motorhead

[Anonymous Coward]

I think he means "gearhead".
A "motorhead" is a speed freak, meth head, etc.

I wonder.....

[Lord_Slepnir]

"Honda Civic GX...Relying solely on Natural gas"

How long until GWB decides to go to war against japan?

What what!?

[Col. Panic]

No BMW 7-series?

Check out the force-feedback controller.

Re:What what!?

[kendric]

I personally think that the BMW 7-series shout be on the list. It has some of the best and new technology on the market right now.

First it has the I-Drive system which is single button on the center console that controls almost all the systems on the machine. It is really cool, but a lot of people don't like it. I personally love the little thing and wish I had one of them in my car. (Heck, I wish I even had one) A large number of people have been annoyed with it because unlike most of us on /. they are techincally unenlightened :) and don't like having to use any computers of any kind. I found the system intuitive and easy to learn.

However, the BMW has a number of other features that are way better than anyone else on the road. They have the first, and currently only, six speed automatic. They have electronic fly by wire throttle control, Direct fuel injection, traction and yaw control, auto leveling headlamps (for hard acceleration and braking), electronic braking and throttle, and so many other little feautres that no one else has.

They also have spent millions of dollars on developing some of the best parts for this machine. The fans in the car have been heavily engineered to be absolutely quiet and perfecty balanced. They did this by taking a fan and increasing its size by over 50 and looked for imperfections. I know if I wanted a sweet fan for my computer's CPU, it would be straight from BMW.

The car also have the most advanced suspension on the market right now. When body roll is detected, the car levels itself so even under heavy connering the car won't tilt. The suspension firmness can be changed by a push of a button within the car, making it firm or soft at the drivers will.

There are numerous other things that makes the BMW the most technologically advanced, and cool, cars on the road. I only wish I could afford one...

Re:What what!?

[t_aug]

But you forgot to mention, NONE OF THAT SHIT WORKS. http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/01/17/212621 1&mode=nested

Re:What what!?

[Anonymous Coward]

auto leveling headlamps (for hard acceleration and braking)

These are necessary here in germany if your car has XEON lighting, so this is really nothing extraordinary. In fact my car (which is a much smaller BMW) also has the xeon light, and of course the auto leveling headlamps.

Much more interesting regarding lights are some developments done currently which involves automatic left or right panning of the head lamps for curves which are ahead of you. This is done using the GPS and tracking of the cars position. I think the first car to buy with this will be a Mercedes-Benz.

Favorite feature!

[JUSTONEMORELATTE]

A third feature is the radar-enhanced automatic cruise control, ...

Sweet! So I can set it for 95, but when the fuzzbuster detects a speed trap, it'll revert to the speed limit!

...which maintains a constant speed until the car gets too close to a vehicle in front of it, at which point it slows down enough to maintain a constant distance.

Awwwwwww.......

Re:Favorite feature!

[SoCalChris]

Actually, Mercedes has something similar. It sends out a radar ahead of you, and if it detects another car that you're coming up on, it will ease up on the gas, apply some brakes, or sound an alarm if you're about to hit them. The first generation of these cruise control systems were known to drive cheap radar detecters nuts. The new ones don't bother the detecters any more though.

Re:Favorite feature!

[hawkbug]

Yeah, but if everybody has cars like this, that will totally throw off my $300 just-purchased-state-of-the-art radar detector, now won't it? I'll be pissed if I have to quit speeding every 5 minutes on the interstate just because I think a radar trap is set up, only to find out it's some jerk with a car like this!

Re:Favorite feature!

[On Lawn]

I wonder how long before this and GPS guidance systems combine to make for a road trip where my wife and I can both relax in the back of the winebego for the trip. Or even better, I can truely put it in cruise control and follow through on the age old parental threat, "don't make me come back there".

----------------
Extreme fuel efficiency. 200mpg carburator and Smokey Yunick's miracle engine evaluated.

Re:Favorite feature!

[catch23]

but really this is nice! Imagine all those times you are switching from break to gas when you're stuck in heavy traffic? now you can just let it all go and let the car do the annoying work!

Re:Favorite feature!

[ibjhb]

I think Mercedes developed it. There's cool flash demos on the the Mercedes site: http://www.mbusa.com

Re:Favorite feature!

[JUSTONEMORELATTE]

Or even better, I can truely put it in cruise control and follow through on the age old parental threat, "don't make me come back there".
My dad used to use the old "Don't make me separate you!"
It was pretty effective though, since I'm an only child.

Re:Favorite feature!

[On Lawn]

Too bad the mod points have moved on, thats the best I've heard in weeks.

No WinCE

[Dynedain]

Glad to see that the BMW-Windows hybrid is NOT on the list....showing these guys are impressed by well thought out, practical solutions, not gimmicks and gadgets

Re:No WinCE

[homer_ca]

But they did include the Saab 9-3 with Bluetooth and the Audi A8 with a Multi Media Interface that looks just as complex as BMW's Idrive. No word on which embedded OS Audi is using.

Still, those stories about the 745i are funny, like these from Autoweek:

"Many owners' cars have been suffering from an overwhelming number of electrical problems, from faulty tire pressure monitor readings to clocks that would run slow, to headrests that popped up on their own. One reader actually got a "limited danger of complete transmission failure" warning from his car--for no reason."

Re:No WinCE

[hitzroth]

Whoo!
Windows SuX0rs. Linux r001z j00!
I want my +5 Insightful, too!

The new 7 series is well thought out and practical. The secondary controll interface takes a little getting used to... but so what? So does your new Clarion head unit.

The 7 is ugly, though. But, hey, it's still prettier than that Volvo thing.

Re:No WinCE

[Dynedain]

I love using Windows....when it is apropriate (for instance the software packages that I use at work)

However, a full-fledged operating system modified to control a car in a haphazard hackjob is the wrong answer, regardless of what OS is used IMHO. A knob paired with complicated menus and flaky voice-activation is not the right interface for a car, regardless of whats underneath.

So, wait a minute

[Coffee Warlord]

Did I miss something? Is there some unwritten rule I missed out on where engineers love crappy, foreign, enviornmentally sound compact cars?

I mean, really. A HONDA CIVIC?!?!?

There's a couple genuinely spiffy cars in that list, but the majority of them...no. Hell, if we wanna generalize engineers, most of us are too damn fat to fit in a Civic anyway. :)

Re:So, wait a minute

[cheese_wallet]

"Hell, if we wanna generalize engineers, most of us are too damn fat to fit in a Civic"

I think we should have a slashdot poll with choices being various percentages of how over weight we are.

Where I work, there aren't many fat engineers. maybe 5%. I get the feeling that the % of fat slashdotters is higher than that.

Re:So, wait a minute

[BigBlockMopar]

Did I miss something? Is there some unwritten rule I missed out on where engineers love crappy, foreign, enviornmentally sound compact cars?

Not the engineers I know. Most of us remember that p = m v^2 when we're car shopping.

I mean, really. A HONDA CIVIC?!?!?

I find it offensive. Half the cylinders are missing, and those that are there, are pointing the wrong way and driving the wrong set of wheels.

I wouldn't use a Honda as more than a winter beater. And not even that, if I had an automatic transmission. (I really don't want automatic creep biasing the same set of wheels where I steer and brake when I'm on an icy surface.)

There's a couple genuinely spiffy cars in that list, but the majority of them...no. Hell, if we wanna generalize engineers, most of us are too damn fat to fit in a Civic anyway. :)

Speak for yourself. I've got a 34" waist... but the problem is that I'm 6'4". I fit better, ironically, into a Fiero than I do into a "full-size" Japanese car like an Accord.

Re:So, wait a minute

[Anonymous Coward]

Best ice driving car I've ever owned:
1986 Ford Escort LX with automatic

Worst car:
1986 Ford Mustang LX 5.0 with manual (and clutch that was like an on/off switch)

Re:So, wait a minute

[BigBlockMopar]

Best ice driving car I've ever owned: 1986 Ford Escort LX with automatic Worst car: 1986 Ford Mustang LX 5.0 with manual (and clutch that was like an on/off switch)

Heh... The problems with that Mustang are the V8 and the clutch! Too much power, and not enough control!

I've driven my '76 Ram in the snow exactly twice. Once I wanted to see what a 440CID (7.2L V8) would do in snow, and the second time, I had to tow a car out of a snowbank.

In either case, the Ram has an automatic transmission. I'd sit there, stopped, and the rear wheel on the torque side would just spin. According to the speedometer, I was doing 15 MPH. If I stomped on the gas, I wouldn't go anywhere. The only way I could get the truck moving in snow was to release the brakes, let it come up to its natural idling speed, then gently give it some fuel. Too hard, and I went sideways... :)

Seriously, though, part of the reason that modern FWD cars *seem* to do well in snow is their complete lack of power. (That, and the weight of the drivetrain on the driven wheels.)

Choose a RWD car with a small engine and a stickshift, and you'll have more control in snow and ice than a FWD car. You *might* get stuck a little more often, but I guarantee that you'll have more control when you need it. The big problem with FWD is that too many things are happening on the front wheels which can upset your already tenuous traction.

That's why cop cars and real performance cars (not Civics with clear taillights, I mean *real* cars) are almost always RWD.

Chevettes are an ideal winter car, except they're such great little cars that I don't like to see 'em get rusted!

My favorite winter beater was a 1983 Dodge Ram D-150 with a Slant-6 and a 4-speed. The body was absolutely toasted, though - my friends nicknamed it "Patches" for all the welded patches to repair the rustholes. Primer red paint... :) Got 25 MPG (in a full-size pickup!) and just ate snow. Used to drive around with a crushed Prelude in the back for winter ballast. When Toronto got hit by a massive snowstorm a couple of years ago, I had a great time. 5 foot tall snowbank? No biggie - just hit the gas! Pissed off some home-boy in a Suzuki Sidekick whose "truck" (as he called it) got stuck getting out of a gas station, and I plowed right through.

Good tires never hurt, either. I love my Firestone Radial ATX LT235-75R15 - the recalled tires - excellent tread pattern, great tread life, and besides if you can't drive through a tread separation (which is less dangerous than a blowout), you probably shouldn't be allowed to drive - only 20 years ago, blowouts were commonplace.

Re:So, wait a minute

[Anonymous Coward]

Since when are environmentally sound, compact, non-American cars crappy?

I'm not talking about tiny cars, but Americans call the BMW 3-series a compact...

Chevrolet Trailblazer: Four or eight cylinders

[Doobian Coedifier]

Ummm.....GM has done this before... in 1981 Cadillacs. The system got mixed reviews. Some people said it worked great, some said it was nothing but trouble (getting stuck in V8 mode was one problem, IIRC). They scrapped it after MY 1984, presumably in favor of 4 cylinders.

No RX8?

[Anonymous Coward]

Man that just ticks me off that they are not putting the RX8 in there. I mean the Rotary engine is coming back and it is suppose to be pretty nice with the RX8. These engines are amazing....why not point that car out?

Re:No RX8?

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree. The Mazda RX-8 and it's Renesis motor is pretty damn impressive. 5 moving parts, and 255 horsepower from only 1.3 liters of displacement (a typical car these days will have 2.0 liters of displacement and produce only about 120 horsepower).

The engineers at Mazda have done incredible work on the Rotary engine since the RX-7 left the US. They're producing the same amount of power as their last turbo model did, but now without the turbo. The absence of the turbo means less heat is produced, and that means a reliable Rotary engine.

Re:No RX8?

[Neon Spiral Injector]

Yep, I was going to make the same post. The rotary isn't that revolutionary anymore as a concept, but now Mazda has one that runs clean and makes almost 200 HP per L naturally aspirated (I'm sure with a little tuning it will reach that mark.)

Of course I'll stick with my car for a bit, at least until I get it done. (See sig.)

Re:No RX8?

[D_Nebuchadnezzar]

Not only the rotary, but the suspension engineering, that makes it handle BETTER than a Spirit-R and Type-RZ RX-7.

The body dynamics that stiffen everything up, even without the center pillar in the doors.

Howabout the multistage intake system that uses the variable effect of the vacuum the rotary produces to increase the horsepower?

Then, back to the heart and soul, the rotary. Cleaner, fuel efficient, and powerful, all thanks to the new multi-side-port design.

Having driven a tester in Laguna Seca last month, I can say this car is better in many ways than the 350Z, and the G35... Two other cars I think should be on that list (well the G35 at least!) ... Interms of engineering and technical prowless, Mazda is where it's at.

Re:No RX8?

[OneFix]

Because it's been done before...I mean there's nothing ultra kewl about old technologies...all of the cars on the list are unique because they are firsts in some way or use alternative fuel sources...

The only one that seems to stray from that definition is the Audi A8 and the Trailblazer...the A8 is just lotsa goodies...and the displacement-on-demand technology in the Trailblazer has been used by Mercedes for a while...

Re:No RX8?

[Anonymous Coward]

There's nothing "new" or "revolutionary" about the diesel powered Fiat. The only new thing on the whole car is an improved catalytic converter. Whoop-de-f@cking-doo.

Re:No RX8?

[bozoman42]

There's also nothing new about being able to do on-demand 4/8 cylinders in the SUV. That's been done before. In American cars, no less.

Re:No RX8?

[turgid]

Yes, I agree, the rotary isn't revolutionary any more (no pun intended ;-> ) but it's way ahead of the Victorian reciprocating piston engines in every car in their list. Mazda, virtually on its own, over the last 30-40 years has done so much good work improving the rotary. It is truly an awesome machine. The best car I ever had was my humble old 1983 RX7 :-) Apart from its smoothness and power to weight ratio, it's light and compact too. There are so many applications that can benefit from it. Have a look at the Skycar for starters. I think a hybrid Wankel/electric sports car would be cool too.

Hybrids?

[kevinvh]

Almost half the cars on the list were cars running on alternate fuel sources/hybrids.. that's nice and all, but not what I would consider "Techno-cool".

Oye, more tech != good?

[binaryDigit]

I have an '89 750il, which for it's time was way high tech. Antilock, electric everything, fly by wire throttle. And of course, one of the most hated things about this vehicle is all the electronic doodads. When it works it's great. When it doesn't, rottsaruck. BMW is having some problems now with it's latest 7 series and their on board computers going wacko. There was a funny post about it, can't remember if it was here or not, some guy even video taped his car doing strange stuff (cell phone not working, stereo acting strange, car doesn't want to accelerate, etc).

I can see the mechanics repair books now:

Replace head gaskets 2hrs
Replace starter 2.5hrs
Debug car suddenly speaking in German 40 man hours

Funny thing about the last problem is that it is one that actually occurs!

Re:Oye, more tech != good?

[On Lawn]

Debug car suddenly speaking in German 40 man hours

I'm sure that if they can't reset it they'll just replace it. People are all to used to paying mechanics $500 each time they visit them. Besides at 10 hours of mechanic time you've already hit the price of the component.

------------------
Extreme fuel efficiency! 200mpg carburator and Smokey Yunicks miracle engine evaluated.

Re:Oye, more tech != good?

[atta1]

Except there's a real problem with that. I recently read an article where a Honda GoldWing went to 3 different dealerships, had multiple sensors replaced, had the main computer replaced twice, and was about to be sent to Honda's headquarters because the mechanics assumed some sophisticated electronic part had gone out and started swapping parts rather than actually diagnosing the problem. The author went in, put in a freshly charged battery, and went to work with a multimeter. He couldn't find anything else wrong, so he started it up. It turns out the entire problem was a faulty battery!

Re:Oye, more tech != good?

[Anonymous Coward]

This is the link, I think

Re:Oye, more tech != good?

[binaryDigit]

Actually it's just a simple matter of changing it through the on board computer. I was just using this example for effect :)

Re:Oye, more tech != good?

[On Lawn]

Yes, my friend, I agree. The "swap it" mentality is not a good thing.

I recently used a soldering iron to fix the windshield wipers. With the part from the junkyard (which wasn't needed after all) it was $20. The previous owner had a mechanic friend that said he'd fix it real cheap, like $330 cheap.

You can't even argue that it took lest time to fix then swapping it. Fixing it was 1/2 an hour, but to get the steering wheel off and everything would have been 1.5 hours.

--------------
OnRoad: It gets you there and back again.

Re:Oye, more tech != good?

[On Lawn]

Yeah, the irony is not lost on me. But it seems to me that anything more then the smallest configuration issue would be solved with a "reset" back to factory settings or a replacement before you could convince a mechanic to start hunting and clicking for the problem.

Its not that they are crooked, although for those that are this would be very easy to pawn off. Its that as a systems admin, I know that is what I would rather do then scour /etc files, or even worse point and hunt through a maze of menus.

----------------
Extreme fuel efficiency. 200mpg carburator and Smokey Yunick's miracle engine evaluated.

Toyota Fine-S

[Anonymous Coward]

Check it out

For some reason it's gotten almost no press, even though it's both amazing looking (like a car version of the Tron cycle) and uses impressive technology.

Re:Toyota Fine-S

[mstrjon32]

Yes, it is a fine copy of the Hummer H2.

Re:Toyota Fine-S

[Anonymous Coward]

Were you being facetious or couldn't you figure out which one is the Fine-S and which is the FJ Cruiser?

Re:Toyota Fine-S

[paulcammish]

For some reason it's gotten almost no press ... looks like a car version of the Tron cycle

Its probably because of the way it can only turn right angles, and leaves a two dimentional wall behind it wherever it goes.

*shrug*

They are still missing key feature.

[ewhenn]

What I am looking for is someone to come up with a seat that wont get jammed by all the little tabs that fall off my beer cans down under the seat.

Dashpc Prototype vehicle...

[bergeron76]

I'm suprised that the dashpc prototype linux vehicle didn't make the cut.

Oh well, maybe next year...

I wonder if...

[Lord_Slepnir]

"Honda Civic GX...Relying solely on Natural gas"

If I'm running low on fuel, if i can pull over and load up on taco bell to keep it running

Better city than highway milage?

[phorm]

This one got me as odd... with the way the "Prius" electric+gas motors work, you actually tend to get much better milage in the city (50-75mpg) than on the highway (45mpg).

This is probably due the power required for highway speeds, but maybe also due to the charging effect start/stop traffic would have.

Guess this one would be a good vehicle for those who drive to work in bad city traffic - 75mpg would be quite nice under current gas prices.

Re:Better city than highway milage?

[Pxtl]

I assume its because the electric motor is taxed much more at high speeds. While a conventional engine is just wasting energy when stopping or idling, the electric is doing fine. So, speed becomes the dominant concern in the Hybrid - low speed = better mileage.

Re:Better city than highway milage?

[Fzz]

At higher speeds you spend a lot of energy pushing air out of the way - wind resistance is roughly proportional to the square of the speed. In the city, you don't spend much energy moving air, but in normal city driving, you're constantly accelerating, then turning all that kinetic energy into heat by braking. If you just drove at a constance 30 mph, you'd get pretty good mileage mileage in almost any car, but practically no-one ever does this for obvious reasons. A hybrid will turn most of that energy lost by braking into electricity through regenerative braking, so each time you speed up and slow down you don't use much additional fuel.

- Fzz

Re:Better city than highway milage?

[UniverseIsADoughnut]

>> This one got me as odd... with the way the "Prius" electric+gas motors work, you actually tend to get much better milage in the city (50-75mpg) than on the highway (45mpg). mechanical). With each transfer you lose energy to heat and such. But for city driving Series in the future will be great. But for now there are none out there.

hope this helps

Re:Better city than highway milage?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's because it runs purely electic during low-speed, low demand driving (like crawling in traffic).

Re:Better city than highway milage?

[john1701a]

> I assume its because the electric motor is taxed much more at high speeds

That comment isn't even remotely correct, but it is a very good guess based on conventional knowledge.

In reality, when cruising on a highway in a Prius, the engine is doing all the work. It BOTH propels the car AND generates electricity to recharge the battery-pack.

Then when you get off the highway, you have the opportunity to drive using ONLY electricity since the battery-pack was topped-off while cruising.

"Stealth" (being able to drive up to 42 MPH with the engine running, known for its silent operation) is what gives Prius such great MPG in the city.

Hey!

[tarquin_fim_bim]

I'm a motorcyclist you insensitive clod.

But does it work in Europe?

[airrage]

Frankly, all this concept from an industry severely lacking it in, seems, well contrived. Yet, I am drawn to a couple of the designs, and the fuel mileage on some is outstanding.

The problem is the pump (or the adapter) if you will. What we need to do is insure that any pump can supply and type of fuel seamlessly.

Reminds me of the Universal Adapter ad from IBM. Where the engineer is spouting all the things that can be integrated, and yet when asked 'Does it work in Europe?', he replies, 'You need an adapter for that'.

We typically accept this type of stuff in new technology -- serial was good for a long time -- but USB was good too. It allowed for one cord for many devices. It was hub in nature. We need to get the same thinking into the universal fuel pump so that these cars have a chance.

The car alone is risky, the infrastructure is even more so, I mean how much dark fiber is buried around the US?

Re:But does it work in Europe?

[Zathrus]

The pump isn't the problem... that's pretty trivial.

But where the heck are you going to store all the fuel? The average gas station already has three huge tanks - regular unleaded, plus, and premium. Some have a fourth for diesel. You want to add two or more? One for natural gas, one for hydrogen, and maybe one for bio-diesel? The cost to add them to even a small number of gas stations is immense... and that's what keeps killing any attempts to switch to an alternate fuel... well, that and the problems with a lot of the alternate fuel sources (especially fuel cells).

Re:But does it work in Europe?

[rwise2112]

I work for a natural gas company in Canada, and we sell adapters that attach to the gas meter on the home (for natural gas furnace, water heater, etc), so you can fill up in your own driveway. They are called a Vehicle Refueling Appliance or a NGV Home Compressor

However, they are not very popular. But who knows what the future will hold.

For everyone who plays AO..

[Anonymous Coward]

Heh, just noticed that the article was written by Philip Ross....

Omni-Tek is your friend!

The name

[Radio Shack Robot]

There is some irony in the IEEE's name: "The Institute for Electrical and Electronic Engineers" also includes computer engineers, but the computer engineers have coded themselves out of the name. Thanks to legacy issues in source code like C and VHDL (e.g. #include ieee_std_80211a.h), the computer engineers would have a heck of a time going back and changing the code if the IEEE changed its name to include computer engineers. It would become confusing to have one name for the society but the legacy header files another name.

Real life BSOD

[r00zky]

The SL500's by-wire braking system, the first in a mass-produced car, equips the driver with a more sensitive, computer-assisted response to crises. The usual hydraulically controlled brakes are no longer prime; the brake pedal you push is like a mouse click to a computer.
Let's pray they're not running Winblow$

Re:Real life BSOD

[Anonymous Coward]

>> Let's pray they're not running Winblow$

Lets pray they're not running X-Winblow$, because there is absolutely no consistency to the behaviour of a mouse click.

Your joke is lame and old.

Re:Real life BSOD

[Anonymous Coward]

No, they're running some tight assembler code on some processors you propably have never heard of, nigga!

(When will those lame jokes go away...)

Best Feature

[(54)T-Dub]

"a card in the driver's wallet opens the car and lets him start it up by simply pushing a button."

Re:Best Feature

[jo_ham]

The Renault Laguna has this feature - and it doesn't cost $75,000!

I can pick up a top specced model tomorrow for £22,000 (about $30,000).

Because when I think Cool...

[mmmjstone]

... I think Volvo.

(Sure, I drove a Saab for years, but I thought it had to be said)

Re:Because when I think Cool...

[mehfu]

BTW the Saab pictured is the old version. The newer looks better, is better.

Re:Because when I think Cool...

[Anonymous Coward]

Is this from some advertisement?

Not too long ago, Volvos used to be ugly and horrible to drive, but well-built.

The new models are nicer, but still...e.g. the S40 looks nice on the outside, but on the inside, well, IMO the dash says "cheap".

As for Saab - more classy, better interior, but I can't say I like the way they look on the outside...

I wouldn't choose a Swedish car. Probably German or Japanese.

Re:Because when I think Cool...

[mmmjstone]

I was attempting to make a joke.... As in, "volvos are cool.... suuuuureee...." but I don't think it's gone across well.

Eh. I suppose my humor only makes sense to me.

Ahem

[Anonymous Coward]

On a serious note, what they sort of mention about the Civic's home refueling station is that it takes over 12 hours to completely refuel.

Mot�rhead

[Sans_A_Cause]

Gearhead, motorhead...whatever. Significantly different from Motörhead.

Give 'em hell, Lemmy!!!

Re:Mot�rhead

[Anonymous Coward]

EAT THE RICH!

Brake by wire? Sounds horrid.

[sulli]

The usual hydraulically controlled brakes are no longer prime; the brake pedal you push is like a mouse click to a computer.

So when the computer crashes, so do you? No thanks.

Look a little closer

[john.r.strohm]

The current-generation Corvette beats just about everything else. The car has full-time fly-by-wire, computer-controlled engine and suspension, and absolutely superb performance and handling qualities.

And it all works, RELIABLY.

Re:Look a little closer

[Anonymous Coward]

The car has full-time fly-by-wire...

Corvettes can FLY now? No wonder they beat everything else.

Re:Look a little closer

[Anonymous Coward]

In Europe, almost no one would buy a cheap car like the corvette. You should look at the latest Mercedes SL (which was mentioned in the article). It will beat your corvette in power and gadgets. And, of course, it's 100% german engineering & build quality.

Re:Look a little closer

[DavittJPotter]

Yeah! :) What he said.

And it looks good, too.

Re:Look a little closer

[Anonymous Coward]

why is there so much hatred for the corvette? Bring up that you like Corvettes or think they're cool, someone knocks you down with a condescending comment like "no one would buy a cheap car like a corvette." Well, to begin with, 50k isnt cheap, but I'm going to assume you mean "cheap quality." The current generation of Corvettes is the best ever, but the old ones still work too. Something like 90% of all corvettes ever made are still registered. Perhaps the corvette doesnt have the luxury of the SL500. It also costs half as much, but I'll give you that. But the power issue? Please. According to the SL500 website, it's putting out about 300hp. standard vette? 345. z06? 405. Do we need to start talking about torque? I know, lets talk about fuel consumption and the 405hp, 26mpg highway.
How about the various articles throughout automotive literature pitting the z06 against sports cars (gee, the sl500, or Grand Tourer, wasnt included in any) Where it ranked up there with the Ferrari's selling for a multiple of the Vette price.
I highly suggest you a) actually test drive both (i doubt you've done more than read about them) and b) read "Corvette From the Inside" By Mclellan. He was the cheif engineer at Corvette for a good long time and the book shows just how advanced the corvette is.
Oh and about the 10 coolest cars....The magnetic suspension is a current option on the 2003 corvette.
PS The active handling in Corvette has been touted as superior to even Porsche's...the 100% german build crap you were talking about.
pps. Go stand somewhere in baghdad for a month or two.

Re:Look a little closer

[NewWazoo]

I think you two are a little confused. :)

The current-gen Corvette uses a transverse leaf spring suspension, with dampers - hardly innovative, much less computer controlled.

Its looks are also shamelessly ripped off of the third generation Mazda RX-7, with the exception of that huge billboard-size arse.

Add to that that it's powered by a 1920s-tech pushrod V8 that makes rediculously low specific power (low hp/litre) and revs to a stratospheric (yeah right) 6500 RPM.

It's also stupid-heavy for a "sports car", with the Z06 weighing in at a very portly 3200 lbs (my FC RX-7 weighs 2800 lbs, and I consider it heavy). That's also as light as the car could realistically be made, already having such things as a titanium exhaust system (of a rather inefficient design, I might add).

Sure, it handles and scoots well, but what do you expect, given that it's been basically the same chassis, suspension, and engine since 1982, and costs $55k new? I mean, it only took Chevy 9 years to catch up to Mazda's RX-7. ;)

Brandon

Rotating Headlights

[riedquat]

The rotating headlights on the Volvo safety concept car are hardly a new feature - they were present on the far more attractive Citroen DS, amongst many other features before its time.

Re:Rotating Headlights

[Anonymous Coward]

And the Tucker Torpedo.

Re:Rotating Headlights

[Ojamin]

That, and the Tucker

Re:Rotating Headlights

[Ojamin]

aaaaw damn, spent all the time looking for the site, and then forgot to change the url, cause I can never remember those tages. :-)

Re:Rotating Headlights

[adolf]

The rotating headlights on the Citroen DS are hardly a new feature - the concept was present on the far more attractive Tucker 48, amongst many other features before their time.

Re:Chevrolet Trailblazer: Four or eight cylinders

[kzinti]

getting stuck in V8 mode was one problem, IIRC

I heard just the opposite: that it would go into 4-cylinder mode under full throttle. I wonder if GM will get it right this time.

--Jim

BMW 7 Series and Tokyo Breakfast

[t0qer]

Every time I think of the BMW-7 Series I always think about what the dad in
Tokyo
Breakfast said to his weeping daughter.

(please follow link and watch video)

Father: You failed every class except animation!

Daughter: So What?

Father: So what? If nigga no go to school, nigga no get a job, if nigga no get
a job, nigga no make no money, if nigga make no money, nigga can no afford BMW
seVUHN series nigga!

I know it sounds horrible, just watch the video if you've never seen it,
funny ass shit.

Re:BMW 7 Series and Tokyo Breakfast

[benzapp]

Ahh yes, how BMW's are the greatest aspiration of our nihilistic African American residents of the urban ghettos.

Rather sad if you ask me.

Re:BMW 7 Series and Tokyo Breakfast

[Moofie]

Uh, if you'd watched the movie, you'd note that all the characters were, in fact, Japanese. The cultural disconnect of Japanese people calling each other "nigga" created something that was funny. Sometimes, we call those things that are funny "jokes".

But hey, don't let that get in the way of your knee-jerk reaction.

Re:BMW 7 Series and Tokyo Breakfast

[t0qer]

But hey, don't let that get in the way of your knee-jerk reaction

No shit, I gave 2 disclaimers to watch the movie and still got downmodded, sorry if u mods can't watch windows media format on your linux PC's.

Jeesh

Re:BMW 7 Series and Tokyo Breakfast

[Moofie]

Well, dude, if it's any consolation, I still laugh out loud every time I watch that movie. It's one of the great pieces of net.humor.

So, funk the mods. It just don' matter.

thoughts

[oyenstikker]

1.) Smokey Diesels.
Diesels do not have a history of being smokey. 1 diesel engine, the 70s GM diesel V-8. It was an America only engine. EU doesn't have a problem with diesels.

2.) 8/4 Cylinders.
Lets hope it fares better than GMs infamaous 8-6-4 of the 80s.

Re:thoughts

[Chicane-UK]

The smokey diesels thing is not entirely true.. have you ever followed a diesel car, and watched it when they stick their foot down? Or have you ever followed a diesel car at speed on a motorway / highway?

In both of those situations, even brand new diesels can bellow out quite a bit of smoke.. and I am not talking about cheap models here... Even decent Audi and BMW models all it.

Not that I am complaining.. I think diesel is a great technology, and I think the continued advancement and development of it is excellent - but as it is, it still needs a little work.

Re:thoughts

[CoJoNEs]

I have a VW Golf diesel and it doesn't smoke except the puff when it starts on a cold morning. Smokey diesels are much a thing of the past, on top of that I get around 50mpg and gas prices are rising far faster then diesel costs. Even if petro costs get too high I can still get biodiesel which only costs a bit more right now, but has the benefit of running cleaner.
I think American automakers should spend more time perfecting diesel and biodiesel and less time making huge SUVs.

Re:thoughts

[jo_ham]

High pressure common rail diesel engines hardly smoke at all.

You're likely to get some smoke from a big diesel that isn't using fine injection control (things like Land Rover Discoverys and the like) but on any 2002/2003 diesel it's been pretty much eliminated.

Re:thoughts

[joediga]

A lot of the smokey diesels out there only smoke because of the type of diesel fuel burned. The chemical composition of type 2, if I remember correctly, is cleaner. (I think it's sulfur they filter out.) My old boss drives a GMC diesel. He says the visible difference between the fuel types is remarkable.

Re:thoughts

[chunkwhite86]

1.) Smokey Diesels. Diesels do not have a history of being smokey. 1 diesel engine, the 70s GM diesel V-8. It was an America only engine. EU doesn't have a problem with diesels.

Agreed. Whoever said that needs to check out the VW/Audi TDI engines. Very high tech with their direct-injection and turbos, very economical with 50 miles per gallon, quite powerful with 150 ft/lbs of torque from a 1.9l engine, and QUIET and CLEAN. No clatter and black smoke here.

Re:thoughts

[hollowmadman]

i must admit i thought the same thing when i read about the cylinders on demand for the chev. for those who don't know, the 8-6-4 was mainly a cadillac motor of the early 1980's. the idea was the similar to that in the article, being that you would only use the cylinders that you needed at any given time.

this turned out to be a gimmick more than anything, cause it didn't actually save gas. all that happened was the spark was cut off to the cylinders that were not being used, but atomized fuel was still being dumped into the cylinders. this generally isn't good for lubrication, nor efficiency. a combustion engine is already relatively inefficient, and when you have a rotating assembly that is just dead weight, it just makes things worse.

i'm wondering just how they're going to do it. with fuel injection today, fuel and spark can be cut to a given cylinder, so you'd actually be saving fuel. interesting to see but still seeming to be a gimmick to me. if it makes significant gains in fuel economy, it might be worth it.

Re:thoughts

[hovik]

The main problem with new Diesel engines is not the visible smoke, but particle emmisions. PSA (Peugeot and Citroen) developed the first particle filter for diesel engines which removes almost all particle emissions. If I'm not mistaken the engine Fiat uses is produced/designed by PSA.

VW/Audi TDI engines have terrible particle emissions, but since you can't see it, most people don't care. Newer direct injection gasoline engines have got the same problem.

for more info : http://www.ecocouncil.dk/arkiv/1999/990614_diesel_ eng.html

Honda Dualnote

[IvyMike]

Unfortunately these cars don't have enough "muscles" as compared to the "more traditional" gas-only cars.

Check out the concept Honda Dualnote. Hybrid, 400 HP, and 40mpg gas mileage. Sweet! Unfortunately, it doesn't sound like it will ever make it to production.

Re:Honda Dualnote

[nelsonal]

The current speculation is that the next generation of the NSX will be a hybrid. It won't be the 2003, still to heavy, perhaps by '06 or so.

Re:Another key area is user control

[Anonymous Coward]

Some members of my research group have been working with major Japanese automakers (whose identity I am not at liberty to discuss at the moment) to apply concepts learned in video game design to driving cars.

...especially for a generation of drivers raised on video games, and will cause fewer accidents on the road, due to the intuitive nature of the control mechanisms and the ingrained neurological psycho-response actuations... blah blah blah

Riiight. Can't believe this guy still gets modded up.

These cars

[SlashdotTroll]

...all these cars have PUSSY written all over them.

These cars couldn't even push themselves out of a wet paper bag!

Greenhouse Gases

[LongJohnStewartMill]

The FCX is the first car for the U.S. market that is powered purely by fuel cells. It meets zero-emissions standards by exhaling water vapor--no noxious fumes and no greenhouse gases.

As far as I know, water vapor is a greenhouse gas. Others are Carbon Dioxide, Methane, and Nitrous Oxide. This was told to me by an Earth and Atmospheric Science professor in university, so the source is reputable.

Re:Greenhouse Gases

[LongJohnStewartMill]

Huh? Modded Troll? Wha? How is that a troll? I was just saying that water vapor is a greenhouse gas, which is a common misconception.

Re:Greenhouse Gases

[Anonymous Coward]

Water Vapor is a greenhouse gas

Re:Greenhouse Gases

[LeadfootCA]

The key difference here is that when water vapor builds up in the atmosphere, it rains. Carbon Dioxide, on the other hand, just sits there. There are processes at work that reduce CO2 (increased vegetation, for one), but they work over extreamly long time cycles, and can't keep up with our CO2 output.

Re:Greenhouse Gases

[john1701a]

> It meets zero-emissions standards by exhaling water vapor--no noxious fumes and no greenhouse gases.

That statement is very misleading.

While true that the emissions from the tailpipe are clean, the process to create the fuel isn't. Extracting hydrogen from water or another fuel is a DIRTY process; it's inefficient too. Based on current fuel-cell technology, you're better much off with a SULEV hybrid from instead.

Re:Greenhouse Gases

[drinkypoo]

How is converting water to hydrogen a dirty process? It depends on where you get your energy. If you convert salt water you do create chlorine gas, which you wouldn't want to breathe, nor would you want to release it into the atmosphere in large quantities, but you can always use it for something...

Re:Greenhouse Gases

[john1701a]

> How is converting water to hydrogen a dirty process? It depends on where you get your energy.

You answered your own question.

Energy is needed to do the conversion. The most realistic/common/abundant/inexpensive source of that energy *currently* is electricity created from coal burning sources. That's far from clean.

We don't have mass quantities of renewable sources of electricity that are completely clean *yet*. In fact, many of us don't even have small quantities available *yet*.

And to add to the problem, the MPG equivalent of hydrogen is quite a bit lower than gasoline *currently*.

So when you take the entire "well to wheel" factors into account, a SULEV hybrid is *currently* cleaner than a fuel-cell vehicle.

Re:Greenhouse Gases

[drinkypoo]

I was thinking about this the other day, and I thought up a nifty way to use solar power to generate hydrogen, if you have a ready source of water. You use water and (probably low-grade) mirrors focused on a boiler to generate steam (this is predicated on sunlight of course) and then use that power to generate electricity to split water up.

This has the advantage that it will take relatively little maintenance (Especially if alternators are used for power generation, as they so often are.) If you are doing this with seawater then you have to decide what to do about chlorine gas, that is a real issue. Otherwise it's not a real problem, so any place that has a ready supply of both sun and water (you could do a closed system but that is significantly more difficult) is a likely candidate for this kind of treatment.

Hydrogen is hard to beat as a power storage medium because it's so clean-burning and energy-dense compared to batteries, for example, and without the weight issues and failure mode issues of flywheels. It can be dangerous to store but there are certainly ways to minimize the risk involved.

Notably Missing - INSIGHT!

[BeerVarmint]

The honda insight is missing from the list; but that's because honda killed the model. A two-seater is really hard to sell when you have a four-seater (civic hybrid) available. Really a shame, i've got one and it's an excellent car. They never have many of them, AFAIK they never made a profit on them. Good strong engineering (and frame too, mine's been in a wreck. damn dumbass...)

Re:Notably Missing - INSIGHT!

[mph]

A two-seater is really hard to sell when you have a four-seater (civic hybrid) available.

Well, that's true for a slow two-seater. Fast two-seaters tend to do pretty well in their target markets!

Re:Notably Missing - INSIGHT!

[BeerVarmint]

Slow my ass....I've hit 126 with it...

I know what you mean though. No one knows that it has a higher torque-to-weight ratio than a durango...Except my buddy with a durango...

Someday..

[boulat]

We gonna have a car that will have a computer start it's engine. One huge EMP exploision over a major city will be enough to take out every car in town and same applies to computers, peacemakers, telephony, all the circuitry and chips.

Perhaps people should invest money in shielding for vital electronics and circuits.

Re:Someday..

[homer_ca]

Almost every car made since the 70s has had electronic ignition. Early ones were analog and used mostly discrete components, but they still wouldn't survive an EMP. About the only thing that would still work is points and magneto ignitions.

Re:Someday..

[j-beda]

You want to spend money to protect your CAR from a nuclear attack? Where do you live that you fear such an event, the Pakistan/India border region?

With the enlightened political leadership we enjoy in the "western world", there seems like there should be little fear that we would be involved in some sort of conflict of this nature. Unless people were crazy enough to try to undermine the UN and other international organizations, agressivley go against world opinion, and threaten their own citizens and others around the world with unreasonable exercise of military and police powers. Come on, it is the 21st century! Those things are never going to happen.

Re:Someday..

[boulat]

You seem to be unaware of EMP generators (portable devices that could generate huge electro magnetic pulses) that could easily be built and obtained by terrorists, not to mention from off-the shelf kits and parts.

Re:Where is Enzo

[babyrat]

Ummm 6 feet under??

Re:Slashdot still sucks.

[Anonymous Coward]

How many moths did you catch then?

You'd have a spare tank...

[siskbc]

...so one of them is always fueling of fueled. Pop the empty off the car, swap tanks at the station, put the full one on the car.

That said, since each tank is only good for 180 miles, this ain't for road trips. Also not good for forgetful people.

Re:You'd have a spare tank...

[arivanov]

Alternatively - drive in Eastern Europe.

All public transport in Eastern Europe as well as all taxis have been running on natural gas using a similar system (the french version which converts any carbeurator based design) for 15+ years now. There is a gas station every 10 km on major roads and every petrol station sells gas. Even Shell surrendered to the laws of economics and started selling natural gas.

While on the topic you will never see this honda in some other EU countries like Great Britain. The government income here depends so heavily on indirect taxation through fuel duty that such vehicles are outlawed. You can drive using the abomination calledl LPG. You cannot drive on natural gas.

Re:Chevrolet Trailblazer: Four or eight cylinders

[Bagheera]

A close friend of mine owned one of these abominations - it used to drop into V4 mode and refuse to come out until the motor had shut down and cooled off. As I commented earlier, I find it strange to see them praising the revival of a 20 year old technology.

At least they didn't include BMW's iDrive...

Re:Chevrolet Trailblazer: Four or eight cylinders

[Smidge204]

Knowing someone who owned one, getting stuck in FOUR cylinder mode was the bigger problem.

maybe they've done a better job this time around, but I'm still wairy of it. And you're right, this is hardly a new idea.
=smidge=

Re:Brake by wire? Sounds horrid.

[Mr. X]

Did you read the entire article? There is a manual backup braking system on this car.

Manual Honda Hybrids: better on hwy, worse in city

[raygundan]

Honda's hybrid Civic and Insight both have options for manual transmissions. The Civic does better with manual on highways, as does the Insight. The CVTs are much better than traditional automatics, especially in town. Note the tiny difference between highway and city on the Insight CVTs, and the fact that city mileage is better on the CVT civic than the manual civic. And, oddly, the Hybrid Civic CVT gets better mileage in the city than it does on the highway, much like the Toyota Prius. It is also important to note that yearly emissions are lower with the CVTs.

Insight:
61 city/68 hwy (manual) 3.50 tons/yr emissions
57/56 (CVT auto) 3.10 tons/yr emissions

Civic Hybrid:
46/51 (manual) 4.10 tons/yr emissions
48/47 (CVT auto) 4.00 tons/yr emissions

Also, the non-hybrid Civic HX can be ordered with a CVT (good for comparison, and isolation of CVT performance):
36/44 (manual) 4.90 tons/yr
35/40 (CVT auto) 5.20 tons/yr

Numbers are quoted from this site. I really wish they'd label the trim lines-- it's hard to pick one civic from another without them.

CVTs are Continuously Variable Transmissions. The gear ratio is smoothly variable in realtime-- no fixed "gears" like traditional manual and automatic transmissions. This allows the car to select the most efficient gear ratio all the time. It also makes my HX CVT accelerate much more like the manual. No "slip".

Hope that helps!!

Re:Chevrolet Trailblazer: Four or eight cylinders

[miller701]

I think the story has it wrong. The feature kicks in when cruising on the highway, not at idle (my guess would be the RPMs are too low at idle). Once you're up to speed, it doesn't take that much power to keep going.

The old Caddy system had much less electronics. They needed today's sophisticated engine management systems to really make it work.

Re:Brake by wire? Sounds horrid.

[kaisyain]

When was the last time you had the ECU in your car "crash"?

The Volvo is nice but...

[mhaisley]

The Volvo is that they put on the top of the list is really nice, but you really have to wonder about it, it seems like they went about it the wrong way, lacing glass and metal, insted of making stronger glass, what they really need I guess is transparant aluminum.

Tech is OK, but I prefer these cars

[sublimespot]

These cars are ok.. but I prefer to do my shopping over at http://molestedcars.com

Corbin Motors Roadster!!!

[dameron]

If I ever get to go through one of those awesome mid life crisis thingees I'm getting one of these:

Merlin Roadsters

or one of these:

Merlin Coupe

I'm just a few more years, a little more disposable income, and a massive emotional breakdown away from buying one of these sweet little machines... (wow, I can finally say that about a product that -isn't- produced by Apple!)

-dameron

Re:Corbin Motors Roadster!!!

[benzapp]

Those cars look really cool but I think they are overpriced. I mean, especially since the MINI Cooper is in the same price range and it seats two and can handle highway travel.

Perhaps most people drive alone most of the time. But for me, I would like to have at least one extra seat for a chick or something. Don't need four, but I definitely need two.

Re:Corbin Motors Roadster!!!

[CaseyB]

If you're looking for a sweet little impractical car, consider a Caterham. Better looking than the above, only slightly more expensive, and instead of apologizing for their performamce, they're *rockets*.

Plus, you can save some money and buy it in kit form if you're feeling like a real geek.

Re:Corbin Motors Roadster!!!

[Moofie]

Ugly website.

Prettier car.

Check it out.

Re:Corbin Motors Roadster!!!

[Vengeance_au]

I don't know what hurts more, my ears or my eyes!

Re:Corbin Motors Roadster!!!

[Moofie]

oooh, I'm glad I have my speakers turned off. Smart me.

Re:Corbin Motors Roadster!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh my god... that must have been the ugliest cars I've ever seen.

saab 9-3

[shaunbaker]

i have a new saab 9-3, awsome car with a lot of cool gagets but the bluetooth option is for the '04 model year

Re:saab 9-3

[Anonymous Coward]

I have only one question: where is the ignition switch? If it is still on the floor the there is hope. If not I fear that the car is headed away from its odd ball roots.

Re:saab 9-3

[Anonymous Coward]

It is still on the floor, where God meant all ignition switches to be.

Re:saab 9-3

[AssFace]

I loved my '00SE.

the current ones have fiber optics to connect all the electronic - for future upgrades and high data bandwidth.

I'm moving soon, so I can't have my saab - but I enjoyed it while I had it.

ergonomics are all very personal things - I personally *hate* the BMW ergonomics, but like the general look of their new cars.
Saabs are quirky, but the ergonomics are perfect for me.
that is the usual complaint of Saabs - but they are great cars - and safe as hell. you could drive one full speed into a brick wall and be just fine. although I'm not sure why you'd want to :)

Re:saab 9-3

[AssFace]

still on the floor.

but the picture they show is wrong - the sedan shape will stay for a bit and the hatchback isn't coming back for some time yet unfortunately.

the key being on the center console just makes sense to me - it saves from knee laceration in an accident, and it is also a leftover in efficiency back when they were rally raced years ago (faster to get in and turn on there).

bmw and volvo are what people usually associate with the safest cars, but Saabs are the safest in real world accidents. They are incredible and put engineering first.
I find it amusing when people dislike them

Where are the performance hybrids?

[Klaruz]

It seems like if you want to get good fuel economy you have to buy a car that takes 3 minutes to get to 60 mph, and handles like a shopping cart. I don't want an SUV (ford has a new hybrid suv) nor do I want an econobox. I want a car that has similar performance and styling to something like an celica/rsx type S/tiberon v6/accord v6/new edge cougar v6 (which I currently drive). Oh, and remembering the market, it must be below $25k. Ideally around $20k. (My Cougar was $18k loaded) Heck, I'd even settle for a 4 door sport sedan.

Yes, I'd even be willing to give up my beloved 5 speed gear box for this. 40mpg city in a fastish car would be nice. C'mon car makers, what's the deal?

Re:Where are the performance hybrids?

[Elwood P Dowd]

And remember, since electric motors have full torque at 0 rpm, you can light the tires on fire standing still. The 0-60 on a Prius was programed based on its eventual marketting, not its abilities. A $5 mod on a hybrid sports car could really fuck with all those "damn streetracers".

Re:Where are the performance hybrids?

[Klaruz]

Yah, and new suspension, new tires that aren't 3 inches wide, stiffer chassis, bigger brakes (that could be interesting with the regenerative braking), and so on. Oh, and there goes your warenty. Not exactly something I'd like to do to a car I just dropped $20k on, and intend to drive for at least 5 years. I'll do all my tinkering on cars that I paid less than $4k for, thankyou.

The point is, the tech is there to build a car with insane torque like you mentioned, but nobody has done it. I do remember mention of some sort of honda sporty hybrid concept car, but I can't remember any details.

Re:Where are the performance hybrids?

[MtViewGuy]

They're coming.

Both Honda and Toyota are working on scaling up their hybrid drivetrain technologies for more powerful applications down the road. Already, rumors abound of the replacement of the Acura RL luxury sedan possibly including a model that has a variant of the Honda Integrated Motor Assist (IMA) hybrid drive system with 200 bhp gasoline and 100 bhp electric motor! Imagine getting something like 35-40% better fuel mileage than what the current Acura RL can do.

Re:Where are the performance hybrids?

[mph]

handles like a shopping cart

The usual comparison is "go-kart." If your car handled like a shopping cart, it would have a front wheel at 30 degrees toe-out and a broken steering linkage.

Re:Where are the performance hybrids?

[Moofie]

The thing that gets me is that the hybrids seem to be aggressively ugly.

Look at the Prius. Look at the Insight. Both are HORRIBLY UGLY CARS. Even the Civic Hybrid looks like, well, a civic, which has never won any beauty contests (although the guy on the next street over who's painted his neon green and put a huge wing on the back and an intercooler in the front might disagree...but he's FREAKIN' WRONG).

Come on! Hybrid technology is cool stuff! Why not make a cool, aggressively styled, Jetsons looking future-mobile?

But no. You get a car that looks like a box a car should come in. Lame.

Re:Where are the performance hybrids?

[Klaruz]

Thanks, that's what I was looking for. I just wrote the first thing that came in my mind when I thought about sliding around. A loaded shoping cart doesn't really turn much, you just kinda slide around the back wheels.

Anyway, you get the idea...

Re:Where are the performance hybrids?

[On Lawn]

You probably have just as much if not more torque at a standstill with an internal combustion engine. There is a lot of energy in the flywheel (a lot), as well as a clutch/torque converter that can translate the torque of higher rpm's to that initial start.

----------------
Extreme fuel efficiency. 200mpg Carburator and Smokey Yunick's miracle engine evaluated.

Re:Where are the performance hybrids?

[plastik55]

It's actually a well-known technique in rock crawling. When you're on some precarious obstacles you don't want to gun the engine for fear of flipping or falling, but when you go too slow you stall the engine. In this situation you don't want to use the clutch to start up again. Releasing the clutch while on a steep hill is a bad idea for many reasons, especially when the engine is stalled (ie, no power brakes). The proper technique actually is to turn the ignition while the car is in gear! The starter motor driven by an ordinary truck battery has enough torque to pull you over the hump, and once over the hump, the engine starts right up too.

Since the motors and batteries in hyrids are far beefier than regular starter motors, I'm surprised that I heaven't heard of anyone dropping a hybrid setup into a jeep.

Re:Where are the performance hybrids?

[On Lawn]

I've used that technique myself, both in off road situations like you mentioned. I've gone 30ft or so uphill on nothing more then a starter. Its for that reason that my father told me a long time ago to always get the biggest battery you can. I think you have a point, they are a natural for crawlers.

I know Ford and Dodge are looking into hybrid setups for their SUV's. They cleverly use the ground as the medium to tramsit power from the engine in the back wheels to the electrical motors/generators. But that kind of kills the coolness you bring up of getting truely distributed 4wd power from having motors on all four wheels.

In highschool I had the idea of a turbine hybrid Mickey Thomson like race truck where the turbine powered the generator, directly feeding power to the engines and the rest went to batteries. If electrical motors could produce more high-rev HP, I think it would be a pretty cool idea.

Do you know any good technical sites for crawlers? Its one of the things I always wanted to include on OnRoad.

---------------------
Extreme fuel efficiency. 200mpg carburator and Smokey Yunick's miracle engines evaluated.

Re:Where are the performance hybrids?

[Guy Harris]

I do remember mention of some sort of honda sporty hybrid concept car, but I can't remember any details.

Are you thinking of the Honda DUALNOTE (NorthAmericanized into the Acura DN-X)? (Although the horsepower and fuel economy values are "calculated", which presumably means "we hadn't gotten enough working as of the 2001 Tokyo Motor Show to be able to try it to see what we could get".)

Re:Where are the performance hybrids?

[john1701a]

> Why not make a cool, aggressively styled, Jetsons looking future-mobile? But no. You get a car that looks like a box a car should come in.

Your comments don't make any sense.

The front-end of Prius has very high emphasis on a bubble-shaped contour. That's exactly what the future-mobile's in the Jetsons look like. That's also the extreme opposite of a box. In fact, it's the style that some people have trouble accepting, they feel it's too aggressively different from the norm.

Re:Where are the performance hybrids?

[Klaruz]

I want to know how the fuck this got modded a troll. If you look at the replies, you'll see that other people, and even honda agrees with me. The mods are on complete crack these days.

Mod parent "Karma Whore"

[mph]

Yeah, we heard you last time.

Fuel efficiency

[Anonymous Coward]

Why is it that only the Asian car-makers are the only ones making any effort to reduce their cars' fuel-intake? Why are only Asian car-makers selling hybrids? Where is the competition in the other parts of the world, particularly the US? There's at least the Fiat from Europe in that list, but none of the US brand cars seem to make any headway in this area, and don't even seem to make any effort.

Re:Fuel efficiency

[mph]

Where is the competition in the other parts of the world, particularly the US?

Americans, and American car manufacturers, don't care about fuel economy nearly as much as everyone else in the world. Even now that I'm paying about $1.90 a gallon, fuel is cheap here compared to other countries. The popularity of SUVs speaks volumes about American priorities.

Fuel economy is, of course, important to Europeans, but the European manufacturers have generally pursued efficient diesel engines rather than gasoline-electric hybrids. The VW TDI's are examples of this technology, but are somewhat hampered by the quality of US diesel, which is considerably inferior to European diesel.

Re:Fuel efficiency

[shd99004]

BMW is planning on introducing hydrogen fuelled cars in the near future, too, I think.

Re:Fuel efficiency

[Anonymous Coward]

My next car is a 2003 VW Golf Mk4, 130hp diesel.

Fuel Efficiency? some 50mpg (4,5l/100km if you drive carefully).

I guess I'll end up around 6,5l/100km (35mpg), but mostly due to my driving and the 4motion four-wheel-drive.

Remember, gas is quite expensive in the EU: currently 1.17/l (4.45/gal, $4.75/gal).

Diesel is cheaper (90ct/l) due to tax breaks.

Bugatti Veyron...

[Chicane-UK]

I guess the petrolhead in me was hoping to see the Bugatti Veyron in there. Yeah, sure it wouldn't exactly make it in there for safety, but for engineering perfection it pretty much has it in the bag. The engine is a Volkswagen developed 16 cylinder, 8 litre, 64 valve quad turbo lump outputting 1001BHP..

Acceleration on this machine must only be comparable to a ride in a jet plane.. 0-62MPH is estimated at just over 3 seconds, and do from 0-186MPH in little under 14 seconds. And the top speed is around 250MPH.

If you fancy Slashdotting someone, try this link for more information and pictures :

http://www.gizmo.com.au/public/News/news.asp?artic leid=1290

Re:Bugatti Veyron...

[DanCo]

"...64 valve quad turbo lump outputting 1001BHP.."

1001B == 9D

Heck, my old Aries had more horsepower than that, and it only had a 2.2L 4-banger... :P

Re:Brake by wire? Sounds horrid.

[sulli]

Mine failed a couple of years ago in my 1991 VW Jetta, causing the car to fail to start but not before the starter burned out. So, yes, I have, and with consequences. Tie that to the brakes? No way.

Re:Rotating Headlights Even older

[ashitaka]

Tucker 1948

Re:The Volvo is nice but...

[Anonymous Coward]

Not to mention it runs Windows 98

GDI will probably put diesel out of passenger cars

[Anonymous Coward]

Gasoline Direct Injection gives gas cars the MPG of diesel cars on the highway, and will likely put diesel out to pasture for passenger cars.

I hope it *doesn't fare better

[kfg]

Because it's a lousy idea. There are far better ways to handle variable power output and energy usage.

This one is just designed to feed off the public's misconception that "4 cylinders weak, but thrifty. 8 cylinders strong, but gas hog. Uggg."

It's a marketing ploy and not only technologically uninteresting, it's repugnant.

KFG

Re:I hope it *doesn't fare better

[On Lawn]

Actually no.

Cutting out half your cylinders increases the air/fuel charge in the remaining cylinders for the same power output. You get better BFCM(?) (combustion efficiency) with greater charge.

-------------------
Extremely efficient engines of the past. The 200mpg carburator and Smokey Yunick's miracle engine evaluated.

Re:I hope it *doesn't fare better

[kfg]

Which is why all cars should be flat twos.

Either that or you've missed something.

Nevermind that your scenario has nothing to do with the car in question which doesn't hold power constant, but reduces power, and thus fuel requirments, by cutting out the cylinders.

And there are better, and technologically more interesting, ways to do that, as stated.

KFG

Re:I hope it *doesn't fare better

[On Lawn]

Which is why all cars should be flat twos.

Two cylinder flatheads or two cylinder boxers? I'm not sure what I said to convince you of those.

Nevermind that your scenario has nothing to do with the car in question which doesn't hold power constant, but reduces power, and thus fuel requirments, by cutting out the cylinders.

I have news for you then. Power output is constant. To overcome air resistance and rolling friction (those are just the major two) you need a certain amount of power. As a driver behind the wheel going a fixed speed, you modulate the power of the engine with the throttle to match the power required to overcome the forces slowing you down at that speed.

Thats what governs the power output. Whether you are in second gear or fifth, using 8 cylinders or 4, part throttle or full you will never be able to change that to maintain a certain speed you are using a fixed amount of power.

In this case, since we are talking about an engine that modulates between four and eight cylinders you can even add engine friction as requiring a fixed amount of power. Its ludicrous to think that you are actually stopping motion in four cylinders when you cut from eight to four cylinders.

So if cutting to four cylinders doesn't cut the power output *at all*, where do you think the efficiency is coming from? It comes from the thermodynamic efficiency of the combustion itself. The greater the charge in the cylinder the greater the thermodynamic efficiency.

--------------------
Extreme fuel efficiency. 200mpg carburators and Smokey Yunick's miracle engine evaluated.

Re:I hope it *doesn't fare better

[ZxCv]

And there are better, and technologically more interesting, ways to do that, as stated.

Not to troll, but-- like what?

Re:The Volvo is nice but...

[benzapp]

transparant aluminum.

You mean like in Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home?

It Is On the List Already

[Homebrewed]

It's just been renamed. Now it's called the Fiat Stilo.

What's the difference between a Fiat and a Yugo? Not a bloody thing!

FIAT is an acronym-- Fix It Again Tony. Why anyone put a POS Fiat on a list of cool cars is beyond me.

Re:It Is On the List Already

[Usquebaugh]

Fiat owns Ferrari.

Not all Fiats are a POS.

Re:It Is On the List Already

[Alien Being]

Fiat isn't on the cutting edge of Serbo-Croation technology.

I recently made a road trip to Fla and was amazed to see a guy cruising down I95 in a mint condition Yugo. I probably made his day by taking a picture of his fine ride.

Cadillac XLR's suspension

[Andorion]

The XLR shares the Corvette platform, it's cool magnetic suspension is in this year's Vette (standard on the Z06, optional on the coupe and vert.)

~Berj

Re:Cadillac XLR's suspension

[Anonymous Coward]

The Z06 doesn't have the magnetic suspension, only the 50th anniv. editions do.

Re:Cadillac XLR's suspension

[Andorion]

Absolutely right. My bad =)

~Berj

Ford Escape HEV

[UniverseIsADoughnut]

I was bummed not to see the Ford Escape HEV that comes out in the fall. It's the first mass production hybrid and is a very practical one at that. It gets 40mpg to in a SUV. It at least is a vehicle that will be on sale, where some of these are just concepts. Apparently uber-practical and avalible wasn't the tech they like. There is only one other real hybrid out there right now and that's the prius, it's nice but not what many people want/need. The insight and civic are mild hybirds and should not be to closely compaired to the prius. Also all of those vehicles are special built. For the Escape, hybrid is just an option, this is why it's mass production. The prius is not an echo option, it's completely differant underneath.

Re:Ford Escape HEV

[mrv]

Actually, the Prius is a production vehicle. Been in Japan since the '98 model year (1997).

The Toyota Echo came out in '99 or '00 or so, and except for some similar looks (like the new '03 Corolla), that's about all it shares with the Prius.

Oh, and the Ford Escape HEV gets several of its hybrid components from the same vendor as Toyota gets their hybrid Prius components. Go figure.

Re:Ford Escape HEV

[UniverseIsADoughnut]

Yes the prius is a production vehicle but it is not very mass production. They don't make many of them. And like i said all the prius shares with the echo is looks.

Far as the hybird parts. Yes the same people designed the escape drivetrain as the prius. But they are fairly differant, the escape's is much more advanced.

In general most parts in cars today come from suppliers that supply parts for many makes. Most car compainies only do the body, core engine, tranny and suspension. Most all the sub-systems are made by suppliers.

Re:Ford Escape HEV

[jyang]

Okay, What do you mean Insight and Civic Hybrid are "mild" hybrid? Civic Hybrid gets roughly same milage as prius. Considering Prius is designed as hybrid from ground up, Civic Hybrid did a impressive job to fit electric motor in a Civic body.

Read the ford.com FAQ, 40mpg is city driving. The hiway mpg is only 29 (at 55 mph). I am sure if you drive it at 70 mph it can hardly go above 25. That's on a 4x2. 4x4 gets even lower

Prius and Civic Hybrid are not specially built. Go to car dealers today and you can test drive them or take it home. Escape "will be available at selected dealers", meaning what? California?

And Civic Hybrid is as much an "option" to Honda Civic line as Escape Hybrid to Ford Escape line.

If you can live with a passenger car, why drive a SUV, even it's a hybrid. SUV still tends to tip over, remember that.

Re:Ford Escape HEV

[john1701a]

> The insight and civic are mild hybirds and should not be to closely compaired to the prius.

Insight & Civic are "ASSIST" hybrids. Prius is a "FULL" hybrid. There is a very significant difference in the way the 2 types work.

In a "FULL" hybrid, you have the ability to both create & consume electricity on-the-fly (without needing to use the battery-pack at all). That's because you have 2 motors. An "ASSIST" hybrid has just 1 motor. "FULL" hybrids offer more efficiency opportunities since they can also be driven using only electricity, without the engine running at all.

The point, of course, for either design is to improve emissions & efficiency. Both deliver those results.

Re:Ford Escape HEV

[UniverseIsADoughnut]

You differance is incorrect. What makes it a mild hybrid verse full hybrid is the percentage of power from the electrical drive. You can have full hybirds with one motor. I don't know why you corrected my line about compairing the insight and civic vs. the prius, you said the same thing I did.

Re:Ford Escape HEV

[UniverseIsADoughnut]

>>Prius and Civic Hybrid are not specially built. Go to car dealers today and you can test drive them or take it home. Escape "will be available at selected dealers", meaning what? California?

No shit you can buy one. You clearly don't get it. The are specialy built in as they are not just the normal model with a differanct power train. They are built on there own assembly lines then the rest of the models. Any car that is in very low production or needs it's own assembly line compaired to be an option in a platform is a specialty built car. The insight is a complete ground up hybird. The Civic hybrid uses a beefed up version of the insight drive train. Still it needs a fair bit of modifciation to the civic chassis to make it work.

The Escape will not be like this. They just bolt the hybrid bits into the chassis on the same assembly line.

Mild hybrid means it doesn't have a high electric power to IC engine power ratio, the Electric motor in the insight is very small.

No kidding it doesn't get 40mpg all the time. Nether do other hybrids of cars get their peak milage numbers all the time. But when people gove a number for them they give their peaks.

Yeah you could drive a car, i'm not saying there is anything wrong with that. but for a large chunk of people cars are impracticle. Far as SUV's rolling over that 99 percent idiot driver. Cars get flattened by other vehicles easier then SUV's you want to get everyone to not drive a car now? Saying SUV's are bad because the roll easier is just stupid. Just because they have a better chance of rolling over doesn't mean it's going to spontanously roll over. News flash, cars roll over to. Actully seen more of them flipped then SUV's in my life, but i don't go saying they're more likely to flip. SUV's only flip when drivers are stupid, or there is some horrible accident in which case it probably wouldn't matter. Reality is not GTA, just because your vehicle flips doesn't mean you die cause it blows up.

Re:Ford Escape HEV

[john1701a]

> You can have full hybirds with one motor.

How? It's not "full" if you lack an ability.

Being able to create & use electricity immediately, rather than always needing a storage medium, is a huge benefit. The battery-pack will last a much longer time if you don't always need it.

And if you insist on not calling that design "full", you should suggest an alternate term. You definitely can't call it a "two motor" system, since an "assist" system could have a motor mounted to each wheel. In fact, there already is a hybrid that does that. It's called "Estima", the 4WD hybrid currently available in Japan.

Re:Ford Escape HEV

[UniverseIsADoughnut]

You can do both with the same motor. This is what we do on one of the hybrids i work on. The motor assist on launch, but much of the time it is just making power. By doing this it's putting load on the engine to reduce emmisions. Also it is used for regenerative braking. You don't need two motors to generate electricity and propel the vehicle, it's all a matter of control strategy.

Re:Ford Escape HEV

[john1701a]

> You don't need two motors to generate electricity and propel the vehicle

Yes, you can alternate function. But without that ability to do both *SIMULTANEOUSLY*, you lack flexibility (hence, not "full").

An "assist" hybrid system must carefully manage power to be able to perform a long steep climb, since it drains the battery-pack on the way up.

A "full" hybrid system usally doesn't drain the battery-pack at all when climbing. In fact, it does exactly the opposite. It can increase engine RPM enough to charge the battery-pack when climbing. So there's always reserve power available. This is especially helpful if the climb is extremely long or there's a flat highway at the top. An "assist" system could struggle if a recharge opportunity isn't readily available to replenish the drained battery-pack.

Re:Ford Escape HEV

[UniverseIsADoughnut]

I see you even own a prius, to bad you simple don't know much about how they work. It's good that you have interest in them. I've been into them since the long before first production ones were built and have been working on them for 4 years. I try to help people better understand them. But I feel there is no way you will let go of many of your ideas. I don't know where you picked up some of your stuff, or your termanology (sp) but it's not very accurate.

But I'm happy you enjoy your prius they are nice, and fun to drive. I wish I had some place to point you to for better info, but it comes down to most sites out there no nothing past what the automakers put out with pres releases. And many out there are completely wrong. I would sugest www.futuretruck.org to you. I have been part of one of the teams since it's start. And before that was futurecar, I belive there is links to that info. I hope you might be able to get a better understanding from this.

Re:Ford Escape HEV

[john1701a]

> I don't know where you picked up some of your stuff, or your termanology (sp) but it's not very accurate.

I am one of the leaders of the most well informed hybrid groups on the web, the "Toyota-Prius" group on Yahoo. There are nearly 5,300 international members and over 50,000 messages there now. They heavily research and provide feedback on everything I do.

Anything you claim to be incorrect can easily be countered based on the arsenal of facts I have readily available. Bring it on! My purpose is to provide the most accurate information possible. In the rare event that a fact is disproven or simply changes due to progress having actually occured, I can provide an update. That's why every webpage clearly displays a "Last Updated" date, to show that I do exactly that.

Bah!

[Dolemite_the_Wiz]

No car will ever match the standars the Ford Pinto set for the automotive industry!

I'm proud to say 'Doo-Doo Brown' is an awesome color for a Pinto!

Dolemite

Diesels that smoke

[ishmaelflood]

I think you'll find it difficult to eliminate the cold start smoke directly, as it is due to cold fuel hitting cold cylinder walls, and so not burning properly. Inevitably when the engine is cold this will happen, unless you have a pre-warmed block (which is feasible, but wastes energy). Since it is only once per journey I don't think a great deal of effort is justified in getting rid of it.

The other black smoke you see when (typically trucks or tractors) hit the throttle hard is a calibration issue. There's no reason why the mixture has to be set that rich, except that it makes more power. The maximum demand stop on the fuel rack (sorry I don't know the proper name for it) can be wound in, which will reduce or eliminate the black smoke, but it will reduce the maximum power of the engine.

All of this smoke is solvable downstream by fitting particulate traps, but at present these are either messy or expensive.

You live in the wrong country...

[jo_ham]

Come to the UK, where you can have all that in a diesel for little money.

Take the Renault Laguna's diesel engine for exmaple.

2.2 Turbo, 4 cylinders, high pressure common rail, 150 horsepower, 6 speed manual box. Top speed of 120 mph

It handles extremely well, comes with all the good stuff (traction control, ABS, all round discs, keyless entry, start button etc) for £23,000.

If you want to cut out some of the options, you can get it down to £16 to £17,000, which is about $25,000

The best part: 52 miles per gallon, extra urban. (about 32mpg urban) see here

Remember also, our sales tax (VAT) is 17.5%, so the price above is higher than it would be if the car was sold in the US.

Re:You live in the wrong country...

[ZachReligious]

I do live in the wrong country. I currently drive a 2000 VW TDI, and while it is a nice car, with a nice engine, the best of VW's offerings are not available in the states. For those that are interested, you can check out TDI Clubfor more information about these cars.

BTW... When the law requires that all diesel fuel sold in the U.S. is Ultra Low Sulpher (I think 2005 or 2006), we will start to see the really good engines. Like the new common rail engine in the new VW SUV. I believe it is an eight cylinder. HP around 325, Tourqe over 500 ft/lbs and 28 mpg in regular driving. Simply Amazing.

No mention of Honda Civic Hybrid?

[MtViewGuy]

I'm surprised the article does not mention the Honda Civic Hybrid.

Unlike the Toyota Prius, the Civic Hybrid is much more like a real car, since the Civic Hybrid is based on the standard Honda Civic four-door sedan. Also, Honda designed the car so its interior amenities and general driving feel is almost the same as the gasoline-only Civic sedan, so it doesn't have the quirky feel of the Prius with its somewhat strange instrument panel.

Re:No mention of Honda Civic Hybrid?

[delcielo]

I agree. I bought a 2003 Civic Hybrid in November, and I LOVE it. It not only does everything they promised (my best tank was 55mpg); but it looks, feels, and drives like a normal car. I can totally ignore the fact that it's a hybrid if I want. The only difference operationally is that I only have to fill the tank every 3 weeks (work close to home).

I bought the Civic rather than the Prius for the very reason that it looks just like the normal Civic.

Re:No mention of Honda Civic Hybrid?

[j-beda]

I would tend to disagree that the Prius is particularly "quirky". As a frequent renter of many different types of cars, the Prius is not much different than any of them. The Prius certainly seems just like any other "real" car, whatever that mean. I have not driven a HCH so I can't make any direct comparisons, but the Prius drives quite normally, and unlike the Honda models had the nifty ability to run on just the electric motor under certain conditions.

Re:No mention of Honda Civic Hybrid?

[MtViewGuy]

I think what makes the Toyota Prius particularly quirky is the instrument panel of the car--it is essentially a small electronic display on the top center of the front dash supplemented by a CRT-like display. This is definitely quite different than what you see on just about every other automobile.

Re:Chevrolet Trailblazer: Four or eight cylinders

[ThumbSuck]

I think Honda has done this too. If I recall correcly, all 8 cylinders started working when rpms went past 6.5k (huh). Can't remember which make was it, but it was some sports car in the last 2-3 years.

Re:Brake by wire? Sounds horrid.

[Black_Logic]

Commercial air-liners work this way now. Pulling on the yoke tells a computer to tell the wing to move.

Re:Brake by wire? Sounds horrid.

[Jmstuckman]

Did you read the rest of that paragraph? There's a backup, traditional braking system in place.

Re:GDI will probably put diesel out of passenger c

[ishmaelflood]

That's a good point, but the headline figure, mpg, won't quite match up. The reason is that diesel is significantly denser (5% off the top of my head) than gasoline, so the mpg of a diesel car will always look better than that of a similarly efficient GDI car.

I've driven one of the Orbital GDI supercharged two strokes, they are incredibly torquey - pulling smoothly in top gear from idle, and the fuel economy and emissions were excellent.

Unfortunately they had decided to use a 3 cylinder engine, which are very fdiifcult to mount successfully, so the car was fairly unrefined.

Orbital leased a hundred or so of these vehicles to government agencies and motoring organisations a few years back, but had durability problems, so I think they've all been withdrawn.

This is not an indictment of the GDI technology, which is excellent, just that Orbital haven't had much experience at developing reliable cars.

Re:Manual Honda Hybrids: better on hwy, worse in c

[very]

Thanks for the info!

And, oddly, the Hybrid Civic CVT gets better mileage in the city than it does on the highway, much like the Toyota Prius.
Well, Gas/Electric Hybrid cars; in general have better mileage when running at lower speed, because it generally used more of the electricity than the gas.
On highways, cars are running at higher speeds. I beleve the engine needs more power than the electricity can provide. That's why the mileage on the highway is lower.

Also, the non-hybrid Civic HX can be ordered with a CVT (good for comparison, and isolation of CVT performance):
36/44 (manual) 4.90 tons/yr
35/40 (CVT auto) 5.20 tons/yr

For a comparison, here's the spec for Toyota ECHO
Mileage Estimates (mpg city/highway)
Manual 34/41
Automatic 31/38

That's great for a Gas only car.

Techno cars?

[daddymac]

Where are the wings? Where are the lasers? Techno-cool cars my ass.

Troll?!?!

[joediga]

Unfair moderation!! I guess someone out there doesn't like their water being called a greenhouse gas...

i could use a car that makes . . .

[kraksmoka]

some users report more than 3 L/100 km (75 mpg) in particularly snarled traffic.

here in miami, that thing might get 100 miles to the gallon during rush hour. . . .

Re:i could use a car that makes . . .

[Anonymous Coward]

In Bangkok, you will never have to fill it again, ever.

Unfortunately...

[Anonymous Coward]

...the disadvantages of moving to Eastern Europe kind of outweigh the fuel economy.

Old technology

[ishmaelflood]

Because they were looking for new approaches, not refined versions of old technology. Hats off to Mazda for persevering and making it work, but Wankel engines made from present day materials are never going to be as efficient or as low in emissions as the equivalent technology used in a conventional piston engine.

The reason is that a Wankel has a large surface area in the combustion chamber, in proportion to its volume, so a lto of heat is drageed out through the walls, instead of being ud\sed to push the rotor round. The realatively cool chmaber walls also cause emissions problems because the fuel does not burn as efficiently when cold, so HC emissions in particular increase. Unburnt fuel=lost energy as well of course.

Things that make you go hmmmm...

[Dolemite_the_Wiz]

Did you ever wonder about the cars, noted in this article, that will have voice activated technology and how the technology will react when you crank up the tunes?

What will happen when you loudly play the following songs:

Metallica - Seek and Destroy
"Searching...Seek and Destroy!!!"

Rush - Red Barchetta
"Drive like the wind, straining the limits of machine and man."

The Clash - "Brand New Cadillac"
"Driiiiiiiive!!! Driiiiiiiive!!! My baby drove up in a brand new Cadillac."

Prince - "Little Red Corvette"
"Baby you're much 2 fast. Little red corvette.
U need a love, U need a love that's That's gonna last. (Little red corvette) U got 2 slow down (U got 2 slow down) Little red corvette."

Hmmmmmm...

Dolemite

Personally...

[chunkwhite86]

I don't want a car that's cool from a geek perspective. I want a car that's cool from a motorhead perspective.

Asking for a car that is cool from a geek perspective is like asking for a computer that's cool from a motor-head perspective.

I personally dislike all the electronic gadgets and doo-dads. I drive a Porsche 911, special ordered to have NO sunroof, NO power locks, NO heated seats, NO power windows, and yes folks... NO stereo. I absolutely love it. It is the best car in the world. Powerful, reliable, clean... And no wacky electronic gadgets standing between me, and the most ultimate driving experience available to a human.

Save the gadgets for your cubicle.

Re:Personally...

[Anonymous Coward]

I drive a Porsche 911, special ordered

Hey, where'd you get the cash for that?

-IRS

Re:Personally...

[Colonel Panic]

I don't want a car that's cool from a geek perspective. I want a car that's cool from a motorhead perspective.

I tend to agree. I don't like power/electric everything either... it's hard to find a decent car anymore that doesn't have power windows. I also much prefer a manual transmission to an automatic one. But, I do want a radio/CD/MP3 player.

The Mini Cooper S is pretty cool, btw.

Re:Personally...

[chunkwhite86]

Yes... Manual transmission is the only way to drive.

And the new Cooper S isa sexy beast! Especially at that price... mmmmm.

Re:Personally...

[maddskillz]

Not to mention power nothing is a good choice with German electronics

Re:Personally...

[On Lawn]

If you like the Cooper, you might also like the CLio.
Unfortunately, like many cool pocket rockets its not available in the US.

Personaly, I like cars like my computers. Hacked personally by me. I've recently had a car-hacking rennasaince of a sort.

After hacking with the enigmatic bits and code, it feels good to take a hacksaw to cold steal (thats not just allegorical flowery either, I'm serious that it feels good). After feeling the afterglow of installing Gentoo and finally get it working, I look forward to feeling the rush of punching the accelorator down on my car.

Right now I'm putting a 1.6L turbo engine from a Mercury Capri into a Festiva. My progress is updated in my personal journal at OnRoad. You can read up on how to do it at fordfestiva.com.

Re:Personally...

[chunkwhite86]

That was a factor in my decision ;-)

The German's aren't quite as good at the electronics as they think they are.

But not nearly as bad as the British.

The Germans make some damn good lighting products (Hella) though...

Re:Personally...

[Anonymous Coward]

People... we're out of the stone age and don't live in caves anymore. Perhaps you should sell your computer and cancel your internet account, too.

Re:Personally...

[cgleba]

One word: SRT-4

Simple car, 215 turbo horses for under $20k. It absolutely squashes everything in its class. The only thing that is in its class is the high model WRX (not the lower $24k one) which is $10k more.

You can not get more bang for your buck then this machine. I'm buying one when I get enough cash together.

Re:Personally...

[SpaceCadetTrav]

Too bad it's ugly and domestic.

Re:Personally...

[mr.nobody]

I drive a Porsche 911, special ordered to have NO sunroof, NO power locks, NO heated seats, NO power windows, and yes folks... NO stereo.

Good luck trying to resell that one!

Re:Personally...

[TheAntiCrust]

Why? Just... WHY? Do you get some rush out of cranking the windows? Music enhances my driving expierence. Of course, im driving a 99 tuarus, but even if I had a much faster car, I think Id still like to be open all my windows and locks without leaning all over the car. Music would only enhance the expierence. And Id also like a navigation system to let me know where to drive the beast. All these things can be ignored and not used while driving... its not like they demand something special of you while you are enjoying the ultimate driving expierence.

Oh well, personal preference and all that rubbish, at least you know what you like.

Re:Personally...

[Anonymous Coward]

except the WRX doesn't look completely retarded, like that riced-up neon...

Re:Personally...

[jahalme]

In some ways, I do wholeheartedly agree with you but I think you're exaggerating a bit. I don't mind having electric windows, sunroof, central locking or a sound system - they are very handy and, in my opinion, improve the driving experience. I couldn't imagine driving my car without music playing unless I'm on a racetrack.

However, I don't want to have power steering, anti-lock brakes, automatic transmission, traction control or any other gadgets that effect the actual driving itself. I want to be in full control of the car, feel the road on the steering wheel and know exactly how my car is going to behave. Sure, I have to pay a lot more attention while driving to keep the car in control but that's just the way I like it.

Mind you, my car is a Honda CRX which, being an FF, isn't quite comparable to a 911 but it's still an incredibly exciting car drive with it's light and agile chassis and a reasonably powerful engine.

Re:Personally...

[SuperCal]

I know its cool not to want electro gadgets between you and the road but anti-lock breaks are different. Even many race drivers want them when the rules allow. I don't care how good of a driver you are, anti-lock breaks will stop a car faster and safer then you can. I think its as much a safty issue as performance.

Re:Personally...

[oingoboingo]

If you like the Cooper, you might also like the CLio [renault.com].

The French pocket rockets certainly are a lot of fun. The Peugeot 205 GTi and 206 GTi are in the same class as the Clio Sport, but I don't think you get Peugeots in the US either.

Re:Personally...

[On Lawn]

Like the Renaults, we did for a while. The Peugot 505's were imported in the early 80's I think. Those 205's are pretty sweet.

Re:Personally...

[oingoboingo]

I think Peugeot may have pulled out of the US because of quality issues (not sure about that though). The 205s are great fun...like driving a go-cart. I have a 206...just one of the regular 1.6 litre 82kW versions (not the 2.0 litre 100kW GTi), but it handles brilliantly and is a lot of fun to drive.

Re:Personally...

[On Lawn]

Yeah, I can't wait to get my `88 Festiva (Mazda 121, Kia Pride) rolling. Its getting a 100kw 1.6L turbo, the same that is found in the Mazda 323 GTX's. Since it weighs only 1800lbs I expect some fun results. Some of the people that have already done this swap complain of traction problems though.

Re:Personally...

[oingoboingo]

Mazda 121...is that the 'jellybean' shaped 121, or is it an earlier version? 100kW in a car that small should be good fun. No wonder people are getting traction problems :-). btw, you are in the US aren't you? I don't think we got Mazda 323 GTXs here in Australia, but I'm not really a Mazda expert.

Re:Personally...

[On Lawn]

Its the boxy, earlier car. An '88 in this case. I am in the US but I have a passion for foreign cars. From Deux Cheveux's to Unimogs to Lancias.

I think you did get the GTX's. I can be more sure that you got the Ford Lasers which are about the same thing. I know this because I've talked to a few owners of these cars down under.

www.fordlaser.com

Re:Personally...

[thomn8r]

Non-sunroof coupes are actually highly sought after, and, believe it or not, command a premium.

Re:Chevrolet Trailblazer: Four or eight cylinders

[Doobian Coedifier]

I know next-to-nothing about imports, but... has Honda EVER used a V8 in a production car???

Re:Chevrolet Trailblazer: Four or eight cylinders

[arivanov]

Also it is plain bloody stupid because you still have to move the dead weight of the camshaft and 4 cylinders when you go into 4-only mode.

Locating a Refueling Station for your NGV

[gregger]

I really want to buy the Civic GX. You get to use the HOV lane with 1 person (in California), and you get all the power of a "real" vehicle. Something the Honda Hybrid is missing. The Hybrid supposedly has a $2,000 federal tax deduction associated with it, but I talked to a dealer yesterday and he said the program was over. He might be lying.

The refueling station isn't available yet. The GX is however. In the short term, you can find CNG refuelling stations on Web sites all over.

This site lists sites in California and a couple other states.

These stations are open 24 hours a day and allow you to use a credit card or a fuel card (from PG&E) to do a "quick refuel." A quick refuel takes place in about the same time as a regular car does at a gas station. Phill, the Home Refueller from FuelMaker is supposed to be out in late 2003. This would allow you to refuel overnight and get a few more miles out of each "tank."

The price of CNG is a little less expensive on a mileage basis compared to gas (at least in California). It really depends on the price of unleaded.

One contributor said keeping a spare fuel tank around might be an option, but I think those tanks at gas stations are LPG (propane), not CNG (methane). Maybe not, but the GX's tank is certainly bigger than what you find at the gas station.

So, yeah, it's sort of a "commuter-only" car. I wouldn't be able to take this up to the mountains. Though if you look at the CA map, you'll find a number of stations that could allow you to get pretty far around California anyway.

The problem I think about is that I'm not going to be "saving" much in terms of fuel costs. The Hybrid might save you some more money per year, or at least trips to the gas station. The CNG car does pollute even less than a hybrid does. Another plus is that a CNG vehicle operates more like a "real" car than a hybrid.

Speaking of batteries, is the process for making the batteries more pollution causing? What about disposal?

TTFN

Re:Locating a Refueling Station for your NGV

[nelsonal]

I think the hybrids come with a tax credit, meaning that you get to reduce your tax bill by $2000, not just take it off your income only worth about 1/3 of the stated value, assuming a 33% marginal rate.

Re:Locating a Refueling Station for your NGV

[Shadow Wrought]

If you replace your truck with it I will be left with no recourse but to fly down there and kick you in the arse.

If it replaces the Magster, well, I'd probably still have to do it owing to the fact that you are a) my friend and b) its a Honda for shitsakes;-)

Allow me to humbly encourage you towards one of these or one of these.

Insight is sexy, not ugly

[LiamQ]

Look at the Prius. Look at the Insight. Both are HORRIBLY UGLY CARS.

I find my Insight to be very attractive. On multiple occasions, I've had someone shout "Sweet car!" as I drove by. When stopped at a traffic light, people will honk to get me to wind down the window so they can ask about my car.

The Insight certainly looks different from other cars. I consider that a good thing.

Re:Insight is sexy, not ugly

[Moofie]

Oh, I concur that different is good.

But I can't say I agree. I keep looking at them, and they keep looking at a caricature of a car. Something drawn by a six year old.

I'm glad you like your car, and I'd be the last person to tell you your car sucks...

But I don't like 'em. At all.

Joystick control...

[Gordonjcp]

... is nothing new. I genuinely feel sorry for people in the US. It seems you don't have Citroens over there. Consider that the Citroen XMs and Xantias are the only "consumer" car with active hydraulic suspension as standard. Lovely soft ride, into a corner, suspension stiffens up. Great stuff. They have produced some of the most distinctive and technologically advanced cars in the world. Volvo's swivelling headlights? Citroen SM, in the late 1960s/early 1970s. Dynamic roll control? Prototyped on the DS and ID in 1967 or so, but didn't see production use until the Xantia Activa in 1995.

Get a Citroen. You'll like it.

Re:Joystick control...

[secolactico]

Volvo's swivelling headlights?

Didn't Tucker came up with those?

Re:Joystick control...

[Gordonjcp]

They did, in fact. I remember reading that now, some time in the 50's they did it IIRC. Just goes to show, there's nothing new under the sun.

BTW, Citroen had ABS on cars in 1948, which was the first application outside of the aircraft industry.

Honda's are lame and so are these cars

[Anonymous Coward]

All these cars are hippie BS

gimmie a 2003 50th aniversar Corvette Z06

now *THATS* a car 405 hp AT THE WHEELS STOCK

eat that honda boys.

Re:Honda's are lame and so are these cars

[Waffle Iron]

All these cars are hippie BS

gimmie a 2003 50th aniversar Corvette Z06

now *THATS* a car 405 hp AT THE WHEELS STOCK

The 405 HP Corvette also gets 28 MPG highway. As far as penis extensions go, it's pretty environmentally friendly. Even a hippie could approve.

Do these cars strike anybody else as...

[NineNine]

... really, well, pussy cars? I mean, yeah, they'ev got techno gee-whiz gizmos, but what ever happened to good ol' displacement? I consider myself a bit of a car geek, and I just can't get into these computerized, plastic-ized, quiet little eco-friendly golf-cart type cars. They're just so damn boring, and emasculating. What ever happened to being able to work on cars with a socket set, some screwdrivers, and the occasional hammer? Am I the only one left?

Re:Do these cars strike anybody else as...

[Vigilante42]

No you're not the only one left, but it's getting damn hard to survive out there. I own three pieces of pure Detroit steel (i.e. late sixties/early seventies), but just getting hold of UNC/UNF bolts and nuts is starting to become a real problem.

Of course I don't mind some modern cars...my Audi does have a 4.2l (256cui) V8 after all...

Re:Do these cars strike anybody else as...

[DavittJPotter]

Nope, I'm with ya. They may as well weld the freakin' hood shut for as much work as you can do.

Oh yeah, the guys bolt their wheels and tires on, do their cold-air intakes, etc., but it's the rare person anymore that rebuilds a motor, drops in a new high-performance clutch, etc.

Car rebuilding/restoring as a hobby is kinda endangered - we need to keep it alive if we can!

Me, I work on a 1956 Chevy 150 2-door post w/ 327 bored .090 over, 2.02 heads, Lunati bumpstick, Holley 650 double pumper (too much carb, gonna try a 650 Dominator) Muncie M22, and a 4.11 rear end. Dad's got a 1957 Chevy Bel-Air hardtop, 283, Turbo 400, front discs. New 383 is planned for this winter.

I'm also always on the lookout for a '55 2 door and a '67/'68/'69 Camaro as well...

See, cars have their own "geek-speak" as well, everyone! heh.

Re:Do these cars strike anybody else as...

[Lemmeoutada Collecti]

Please don't forget to bring 2 wire hangers and a roll of duct tape... works for every Ford ever made LOL

Re:Do these cars strike anybody else as...

[pyite]

Well, I recently bought a 1999.5 Audi A4 1.8tqm (Turbo, Quattro, Manual). While it seems like most of the ricer enthusiasts do stupid things like you say to their cars, the Audi crowd seems to attract more intelligent buyers who really work on their cars. Aside from Audi's firmware being reverse engineered and redone for a 40 hp gain (not marketing lies, a real 40 - 50 hp gain on the turbo engines), a lot of the Audi people are very hands on. Swapping out turbos for bigger ones, changing clutches (like you said), etc. It's even more impressive these days because when you upgrade your turbo for instance, your firmware pretty much HAS to be different, otherwise things don't work. REAL tuning is alive and well in some communities.

Re:Do these cars strike anybody else as...

[Anonymous Coward]

Getting 40 hp more out of a 1.8ltr turbo car is nothing special. There is not much "reverse engineering" to do... You just increase boost pressure which is stored in a table in an eeprom.

Re:Do these cars strike anybody else as...

[Anonymous Coward]

The Mercedes certainly doesn't...

I happen to like the fact that cars get more performance out of smaller engines. I like performance, but I don't think that it needs to be associated with a lot of noise...

Re:Do these cars strike anybody else as...

[NineNine]

"Weld the hood shut"... exactly. I had a '97 Vette for a while. While it was *very* fast, and could corner like nothing else I've ever been in, not being able to do *anything* to the engine without a computer really turned me off. It was a great car, but I other than drive it, there was very little that I could do to it. I unplugged the gas guzzer tax avoider thingy (something that forced low RPM shifting in 1 & 2 that was used to get around the "gas guzzler" tax, but other than that, there wasn't much I could do. I sold it, and I'm on the lookout for a '68 GTO hardtop 400 right now.

Re:Because we all know...

[Anonymous Coward]

V0LV0'S AR3 F0RDS!!!!...at least the new ones

wtf? Informative? MODER8ORS ON CRACK!

[Anonymous Coward]

Would I be modded informative if I hint to everyone that the parent is a TROLL?

Or, as usual, I get modded as flamebait.

Re:Rotating Headlights Even older

[riedquat]

Yes, it's just the Citroen was the first one I'd heard of with tilting headlights, probably as I live in Europe. Thanks for the link.

Re:Brake by wire? Sounds horrid.

[SpaceCadetTrav]

Also, I guess feedback from the road goes right out the window with all this drive-by-wire crap....

Not very innovative

[Goonie]

Where's the innovation? It may be an impressive example of what existing car technologies are capable of, but what's new about it?

In any case, if you want acceleration thrills, may I suggest a decent Japanese motorcycle, which will accelerate just as quickly (up to 100 mph or so) and will feel a lot scarier doing so...and keep the other million dollars or so in your pocket :)

Re:Not very innovative

[chunkwhite86]

Where's the innovation? It may be an impressive example of what existing car technologies are capable of, but what's new about it?

Perhaps the fact that no one has achieved such a mechanical marvel before? Or the extreme amount of engineering talent and resources that it requires to develop something of that magnitude? Think outside "the box" a little buddy...

Re:Not very innovative

[Anonymous Coward]

What are you talking about? Take two V8s and call it a W16, put it on the road and call it engineering talent? How about I put one in the front of my car and one in the back and race it. I'm an engineering talent now.

I'm just trying to say that there aren't really any engineering marvels about this. It's a big, badass car that I'd do just about anything for - but I wouldn't think of it as being anything special engineering wise.

Re:Not very innovative

[jred]

If you can put a v8 in the front & a v8 in the back, both working perfectly syncronized at all speeds, then yes, you're an engineering talent.

Re:Not very innovative

[chunkwhite86]

If you can put a v8 in the front & a v8 in the back, both working perfectly syncronized at all speeds, then yes, you're an engineering talent.

Actually there's a guy who has put two 16v VW engines into his Golf. One in front and one in back with all the proper linkages so that they are synchronised. I don't remember the link, but that took some serious engineering talent!!

Re:Not very innovative

[chunkwhite86]

That's just it - it isn't "just two V8's".

It's two W8's mated together at the crank, plus quad turbos. The W8 is available in the current VW passat. The beauty of the W8 engine is that it is so compact - it's smaller than most standard V6's. The cylinder banks in the W8 are only 15 degrees apart, and they share common heads. It's a very unique design that no one else is working with.

Mod this up!

[Marton]

You forgot about the best Park Distance Control system ever devised. The iDrive screen actually shows what the ultrasonic sensors "see".

Headrests automatically align themselves to the estimated (by weight) height of the person occupying the back seat.

In rain, miniscule amount of brake pressure is applied automatically from time to time to keep the brake discs dry.

Also, while the car has every extra you can wish for, the dashboard has fewer buttons and knobs than a 15-year-old Civic.

Man, I do love that car.

But maybe the nerds at IEEE just hate seeing a car with a Start button.

Re:Chevrolet Trailblazer: Four or eight cylinders

[nelsonal]

I don't know for sure about the Pilot or the minivans, or any Japan only models, but I think that is a pretty save assumption, since their sports cars do not.

Drive/Brake by wire

[Anonymous Coward]

Drive and Brake by wire are two of the stupidest things they could do to cars...

Where is the feedback that you would normally get from the steering column and brakes?

That feedback is important.

1981 El Dorado

[AnonymousCowheard]

The 1981 El Dorado:

weighs as much as a tank,
eats gas like a tank,
built like a tank,
maneuverable like a tank...

The El Dorado is a tank and I stand behind its excellent Demolition Derby record as always being within the top 10% of finishing cars.

I won 5th place in the Demolition Derby: 5th place of 33 entrants; three El Dorados, four Lincolns, and one Lincoln Continental.

Reaching 5th place didn't pay for the Cadillac Lincoln we were using; bought the Lincoln for $100.00. Yes, my team payed $100.00 USD for a Lincoln whos' 4th cylinder wasn't firing. No prize was one...I will soarly miss...

On a side note, we cut off the muffler just behind the transmission and that Ford 400 sounded as American as Buttered Toast; sweeeeeet! It just eats the gas...

Re:1981 El Dorado

[trailerparkcassanova]

Cadillac Lincoln? You got ripped off.

Re:Volvo WinCE

[Anonymous Coward]

Hopefully, volvo is no longer including WinCE
in its models. My wife needs a new car
and wanted a volvo station wagon, but we
will be getting a honda instead, almost
entirely due to the WinCE issue.
That may sound extreme, but I figure MS owes
me a year of wasted time accumulated since
1994.

Re:Brake by wire? Sounds horrid.

[Anonymous Coward]

And how long does it take you to know that the braking system failed and to revert to the backup?

1/20ths of a second can possibly be the difference of a sprained thumb and death. Unless that system uses a standard brake pedal, I wouldn't even give it a second look.

I'll stick to my old no-abs, only power brakes mustang. At least I know that my brakes have and will keep on working in those events. :)

Why no abs...heh don't need it. Most people got along fine for years without it. But my rant about abs is for another day.

Re:Where is Enzo

[Usquebaugh]

And spinning like a top.

Ferrari put's very little of of it's F1 tech in road cars, the only thing I can think of is the maintenance schedule :-)

Ferrari is a very exclusive brand. They're not the most technically advanced, they're not the fastest nor the most expensive. However they do have prestige.

But Ferrari has something else, genuine F1 history. As Chris Rea growled in his song 'red is the colour I choose'.

I hoped Schumacher, the cheating kraut, would not end the draught. Irvine had a chance but it was gone. Enzo would have liked that, I think, compared to the team orders. It's important Ferrari wins, not the driver. Schumacher may have brought Ferrari success but at what cost to it's prestige.

Personally, I liked Lotus with Chapman or currently Williams. As for drivers, Clark and Prost, smooth very, very smooth. Not for me the drama of a Villneuve or Alesi. Not the blinding one lap speed of Senna. Not the morals of Schumacher. Not the lost talent of a Herbert. Clark and Prost had something else, effortless speed. You never thought they were trying until you saw the times. Sheckter said once "...jeez Prost spun.(long pause).never mind he'll probably do it again in three or four years"

But, the driver I have most respect for is Lauda in '76. Not for receivng the last rites. Not for racing so soon after the 'ring. But for pulling into the pits and climbing out when the rain turned to a torrent at Fuji. Leaving behind an almost certain World Championship. That one act took more courage than starting to race again. Stopping when all around might label you a coward and a fool. And who was Lauda driving for?

Check out the Carver.

[1nhuman]

I'm not sure if it's a car but it certainly has a cool 'Tron' feel about it. http://www.carver.nl/home.htm Another Dutch inovating voiture brand: http://www.spykercars.nl/

Never get in a plane then.

[rebelcool]

Every commercial jet built within the past 40 years has been fly by wire.

Only poorly programmed general purpose computers crash. The brake-by-wire system not only uses redundant wires and chips, all software within is proven correct through mathematical analysis. And the system is task specific - it only brakes.

Further, your mechanical brakes are far more likely to fail catastrophically. What do you do when a hydraulic brake line gets cut? All fluid will seep out from the entire system, rendering all your brakes useless.

With brake by wire, not only is it easy and feasible to run 'back up' wires to each wheel, a cut will only affect that specific wheel rather than all of them.

Re:Never get in a plane then.

[Mr. X]

Every commercial jet built within the past 40 years has been fly by wire.

Incorrect. The first fly-by-wire commerical jet was the Airbus A320 in 1988. I believe the first Boeing to feature fly-by-wire was the 777, introduced in 1994.

Re:Never get in a plane then.

[Swaffs]

Read the article. Brake-by-wire just means that the application of braking is controlled by a computer There is no physical connection between your foot and the brakes, hitting the brake just actuates a sensor. However, braking power is still supplied by a traditional hydraulic setup. So no, you can't run a back-up wire to the wheel, and you can still have a cut brake line that drains all your fluid.

Re:Never get in a plane then.

[Usquebaugh]

The braking system in most cars is built that at worse if a single tube gets cut only two wheels will lose brakes.

Brakes rarely fail on roads cars. The only problem I've felt on the road is that of fade. When I come screaming down a mountain road, at the bottom of the moutain my brakes fading and smell as well.

The best case of brake problems I heard of was back in the 60s. The London police had these new jags and they were all set up for pursuit work. Pretty soon a number of these cars had been in wrecks and the police drivers were blaming brake loss, not fade, complete loss. The investigators checked everything found nothing wrong with the brakes so cited driver error. Anyway some copper was out on a chase came to junction, went for the brakes and his foot hit the floor. The jag sailed throught the junction and front ended a stone wall. The copper just sat there with his foot on the brakes until the investigators showed up. Turns out the brake fluid tank was situated in the V of cam shafts. Race the engine and the temperature boils off the fluid.

Single-Precision brakes are not good

[Anonymous Coward]

Hydraulic brakes are more understandable as being the analog brake system. If you need more hault-power, you just push the pedal harder, yet you will notice resistance.

A single-pull single-throw brake system on a car doesn't let the end-user/operator do this and that is not helpful. Designers recognise the trait of losing control of a car when the braking-system is locked, yet that is a simply predicament caused by the lack of skill in the operator. Rather than try to prevent operators from locking the braking-system, why not just make a simlarly analog braking-system instead of this stupid one-click braking-system? Because it is all about controll...

They think their decisions are better than mine, our ours as a whole. Well I'll tell everyone: I DON'T WANT YOUR PRIMITIVE FOUR-WHEELERS! I'll build spacecraft before I choose one of those gay-mobiles.

cod bosd

[dirvish]

To address the worry about software bugs and electrical snafus, first voiced when by-wire controls appeared in aircraft many years ago, Mercedes also includes a hydraulic backup system for the front wheels, forgoing any savings in weight or cumbersome connections that the system might have provided.

...looks like the cause of death was a bsod.

A lotta money for a stupid compressor...

[aquarian]

A thousand bucks is a lot of money for a stupid little compressor. These could be really cheap, but of course Honda has to go for full markup with accessories for their cute little yuppie greenie car.

It works wherever there's a gas line...

[aquarian]

The compressor will work anywhere there's a gas line. That's most towns in the US, and probably Europe too.

The biggest hurdle to adopting this technology is the fight over who's not getting paid -- governments that aren't set up to collect road taxes from such things.

Bruin Online?

[mess31173]

Am I the only one that gets this:

Authentication Required
INSTRUCTIONS: Enter your Bruin OnLine username and password and click OK to initialize access to the UCLA restricted site.

Mirrors?

xeno, anybody?

[Capt'n Hector]

The Xeno III is the coolest car, (not of 2003 however.) And my brother made it! It's not too technology driven, although it does play MP3s, but it certainly is leaps and bounds ahead of any other design out there. Look for elements from it in 2-5 years from the major detroit companies.

Quote that conjured up a funny picture

[terkozer]

"The technological rivalry was quickened in recent years as microchips and other electronic wizardry got about as cheap to toss around as confetti."

Did anybody else crack up about this one? I was reminded of the Simpsons episode where Monty Burns decided to rain down coins on the city to gain popularity? I think Lenny get's a coin buried in his forehead!

I've got to get a life!

How could they leave this one out?

[skookum]

How could a list of ultra cool cars be complete without mentioning the ZMW?

(ouch, why are you hitting me?)

Re:Brake by wire? Sounds horrid.

[santos_douglas]

A sound concern - however they have built in multiple redundant backups to the system to guard against just such a problem.

High Technology Goes Wrong IN VWs

[santos_douglas]

Believed to largely be caused by an overapplication of technology to engine management VW is currently involved in its biggest recall ever. Autonews article I love technology as much as the next geek but a the automakers are going a little overboard in some cases and aren't able to deal with the increased service costs of these vehicles.

Heh, heh, he said Motorhead

[hondo77]

Motorhead rocks. If Lemmy says a car is cool, it's cool for engineers, too, dumbass. :-)

Did anyone else notice

[Tom in Boston]

> some users report more than 3 L/100 km
> (75 mpg) in particularly snarled traffic.

Did anyone else notice that the IEEE seems to be mishandling its ratio here? In saying that some users have better efficiency, they could say "more than X mpg," but shouldn't they say that "some users report LESS than 3 L/100 km," when a smaller ratio is better?

Yamaha YZF-R6 200hp per litre

[Anonymous Coward]

The S2000 isn't even close to the top of the list.

Cadillac 4-6-8 System of the 1970s-80s.

[BigBlockMopar]

The old Caddy system had much less electronics. They needed today's sophisticated engine management systems to really make it work.

I think so, yeah. The old Caddy 4-6-8 System worked by turning on and off different sets of camshafts with solenoid-operated clutches. Of course, this was hard on the clutches... and it took a moment or two for the valvetrain to come up to speed, so the compression ratio had to be low to avoid interference with the pistons.

Reliability was poor, too.

I'm sure the modern system will use solenoid-operated valves like some race car and concept car engines use. This will allow complete computer control of the valve timing, as well as neat things like shutting down un-needed cylinders.

If the system cycles which cylinders are in use and out of use, it will also keep the engine wearing evenly - which I didn't find on either one of the two 4-6-8 setups that I've rebuilt. (The cylinders which were always running were worn 0.030" greater than the others by constant heat and ring loads.)

*However*, I think that some people are probably expecting that such a system will make a big increase in gas mileage. It WON'T. You still have the load of driving around 2 or 4 extra pistons - which are still contributing friction and inertial loads - even when you're in 4 or 6 cylinder mode. Until GM figures out a way of actually disconnecting those connecting rods on the fly, this modern 4-6-8 system is only a marginal improvement in gas mileage at best.

I think it's only practical in a car which will have completely computer-controlled solenoid-operated valves anyway, since in that case, it's just a software feature requiring no expensive or weird hardware.

Re:Chevrolet Trailblazer: Four or eight cylinders

[Anonymous Coward]

I had one of those abominations. It was called an V-8-6-4, or at least that's what the metal logo on the side of the car said. It was truly horrible. I think the V8, like most American made ones at the time, had about 120 HP. I know that doesn't sound like much now, but the same model year Corvette only had 160 HP. The biggest problem with the car was lack of power despite the claimed rated power. I think it was rated at about 13 seconds to 60 MPH. In real life, it took about 20! I didn't time it, but running off of four cylinders I think it was somewhere around 30 seconds to 60. I had a four cylinder Regal from the same year that only had (if I remember correctly) 70 HP, and it was faster to 60 than the 8-6-4.

The next problem was spark plug fouling. Because two or four (depending on the load) of the cylinders don't always fire, they don't stay hot enough to burn the oil off of the plugs. After the plug gets covered with oil, it doesn't fire so it can't ever get hot enough to fire again without removing it and cleaning it by hand. Fortunately under the hood, it wasn't cluttered at all and changing plugs was a 10 minute operation. The new Trailblazer also has this problem, but changing the plugs is about an hour long operation in the new ones since you have to remove other parts to get to the plugs. As far as I know, all most all of the complaints about the engine only running on four cylinders was due to plug fouling.

The other problem, and this made the plug fouling worse, is that oil was sucked past the rings by the low pressure in the cylinders that aren't firing. Until I disabled the 8-6-4, I had to put a quart of oil in the car about every 250 miles! Lotus has a new system that changes the exhaust valve timing to keep the pressure in the unused cylinders high, so you don't end-up sucking oil from the crankcase into the cylinder. The new Chevy engine has no means of dealing with the problem.

After disabling the 8-6-4 crap, I got just over 24 MPG on the interstate. I don't know why GM thought it had to get better mileage than that. I replace it with a new Honda Accord. The Honda got no better gas mileage than the Cadillac, and I literally spent more than I paid for the in repairs the five years I had it. If the Caddy just hadn't been so slow, it wouldn't have been a bad car.z

How about the ten LOWEST tech cars?

[Black Rabbit]

What I'd like to see is a list of the ten lowest tech cars...easy to fix, cheap to run and repair, something i could get seriously dirty and take a hose to the inside. Why does just about every car these days come pre-yuppie-fied? I'd prefer to ditch things like ABS, any sort of airbag, auto-door locks, auto-trans, auto-dome lights...you get the idea. This is all shit that has done nothing more than add to the price of a new car, and a good deal of it is totally unnecessary. Just give me four wheels, a reliable engine with adequate power, a body that won't rust out in less than a decade, canvas seats, and a decent manual transmission. Do any cars like these exist at all, or am I condemned to fork out extra for power windows and heated seats on even the lowest end econobox?

The two things I mention that are safety related, namely ABS and airbags, can be replaced by a far more effective five point harness and good driver trtaining. Ever see a race car with either ABS or airbags?

Re:How about the ten LOWEST tech cars?

[Kenshiro]

Here in east germany, there appears to still be
quite a market for the Trabant, the car which east
germany produced during its communist era. This is
a (imo) really ugly car, but beautiful in its
simplicity. Fiberglass body to achieve your rust-
free goal. Simple two-stroke engine which anyone
can fix at home.

I admit, I personally pine for the days of simple
60's musclecars. Even in the 80s, you could at
least usually find the error codes yourself. Now
you're left little choice but to pay $80 to have
someone read a little code of the computer. That's
wrong!

Re:How about the ten LOWEST tech cars?

[jjc2222]

Ever see a race car with either ABS or airbags?

Although I'm not up on the current rules of Formula 1, there have definitely been F1 cars with ABS and traction control. In fact, these technologies are points of contention for racing purists, since, simply put, they allows drivers to stand on the brakes while entering corners and stand on the gas exiting corners with no worry for skidding, sliding, etc. It works so well it takes some of the skill out of driving.

Re:How about the ten LOWEST tech cars?

[Trejus]

Ever see a race car with either ABS or airbags?

I haven't looked at F1 in a while, but I know that two years ago all F1 cars had abs and traction control. While many racing purists complained about the addition of the technology, since it does somewhat detract from driver skill, I'm sure F1 added it to increase the saftey of the event. I've seen races (Monaco mostly) where only 8 cars or so finish. F1 cars also come with a semi automatic transmission that actually shifts faster than even the best driver with a manual transmision.

Race cars also don't have airbags because everything around them is designed to absorb the impact of the accident. A lof of US tracks even have softwalls which sit infront of the normal concrete wall to take some of the impact of the cars. On many road courses, tirewalls line the most dangerous parts of the track.

Then you have the cars themselves. The cockpits of open-wheel racers are fitted to the primary driver. They act much like the packaging that comes in your computer box. In NASCAR, they now have special head restrainers that are attach the helmet to the seat. Additionally, in many serieses, these cars are designed to disintegrate on impact, which reduces the total momentum and kinetic energy of the driver in addition to cushioning the impact. Everything the driver wears is flameretardent and also specifically designed to protect the driver in the event of an accident.

Therefore, you are right, you will never see an airbag in a racecar. But that's because all the protection that an airbag offers is already built into the car. Pasenger cars are designed to a different spec, where accidents are rare and creature comfort matters.

Unfortunatly, if you want a car without these, you're pretty much stuck buying a Dodge Viper with the performance package, a Porche GT2, or a Ferrari. Regular people won't buy regular cars without these features, so regular car manufacturers don't make them. It's probably the same reason you don't see Linux on OEM laptops.

Re:How about the ten LOWEST tech cars?

[Rob Parkhill]

Try a Jeep Wrangler SE. It doesn't even come with a roof or a back seat. Air-bags are standard, of course, as that's pretty much the law now. The Wrnalger is the Meccanno set of the automotive world, feel free to mod it to your hearts content.

The KIA Rio S is about as basic as cars come. You won't find many fancy gadgets on this car.

The Nissan Sentra SE is bare-bones as well.

Most car makers have a bottom-end car with no fancy add-ons. They won't have them in stock, and they will try to sell you a more expensive one, but they do exist.

brake by wire on the SL500

[AssFace]

the car mags all say that it SUCKS - in theory it is good, but it leaves one feeling detached and the response ends up being jerky and hard to control.

perhaps over time they will get that worked out

Yay egocentrism!

[Daetrin]

What? Geeks don't drive cars? First i've heard of it. I suppose motorheads don't use computers either?

Personally i don't like power locks, power windows, powerer everything else. However I do like having a cd player, and I'd also like having a hybrid or a fuel cell car.

And by the way, if you wanted to have nothing between you and the driving experience, shouldn't you also remove the suspension and the windshield? And maybe you should get a hand crank model so you don't have the starter and alternator interfering with the experience. I'm not sure what Model-Ts go for these days, but you might want to look into one.

Just because i _like_ a particular stage in the evolution of cars doesn't mean that i'll try to fool myself into thinking that it's somehow the most natural stage.

110 outlet

[Anonymous Coward]

i recently saw a commercial for an suv (i think) that has a 110 outlet in it. i think thats pretty cool for charging a laptop or something without the need on an inverter.

Re:110 outlet

[Black Rabbit]

>> ...charging a laptop or something without the need on an inverter.

And just what the hell do you think is at the other end of that 110VAC wire?

Re:110 outlet

[Anonymous Coward]

i meant without the need of having one laying around in your car. obviously it's needs an inverter. my bad,

the windows 2000 of cars

[Anonymous Coward]

talk about bloatware...

i don't really think those cars have any real intriguing concepts just a bunch of junk i won't use anyhow. oh well.

If fuel cell cars ever become popular...

[jrstewart]

...Will Los Angeles have a humidity problem?

While not on the level of CO2, water vapor is a greenhouse gas. I also wonder if it might affect local climates.

I don't know how much water vapor fuel cell cars emit, or the environmental impact of refining hydrogen for them to use, but nothing comes for free.

(yes, yes, fuel cells are a vast improvement over burning gasoline.)

Agree on the MINI Cooper S...

[SuperKendall]

I have a Cooper S and it is a blast. Plus I would say the percentage of people who own MINI's and are interested in customization (performance or looks) is probably a lot higher than other cars, which is cool...

I was half expecting to see it on the list, though as they noted the list was for real technical leaps, and not just refinement of existing car tech (which the MINI has in spades).

Re:Agree on the MINI Cooper S...

[chiph]

Agreed: Cooper S should have been on the list - more than 100hp per liter, one of the highest slalom speeds in recent history, and three computer networks.

Chip H.

Re:Chevrolet Trailblazer: Four or eight cylinders

[Swaffs]

Mercedes is also already offering this. Apparently it works pretty well.

I hate Saabs, but...

[phillymjs]

...using Bluetooth is a good idea.

If nothing else, car stereo makers need to start offering this as a feature in their products... so when you make or take a call from your Bluetooth-enabled mobile phone, the stereo automatically mutes itself for the duration of the call (unless you manually override the volume) and then restores it to its previous level when you terminate the call. I'm fairly certain there are already gadgets that do something like this, but not wirelessly and with nothing but what's built into the phone and stereo.

~Philly

Re:I hate Saabs, but...

[frozenray]

> so when you make or take a call from your Bluetooth-enabled mobile phone, the stereo automatically mutes itself for the duration of the call

Third-party "Hands-Free" GSM car kits such as the one I have in my 9-3 are seamlessly integrated into the car stereo system and offer this feature already. In most European countries it is illegal to use a mobile phone without one of these kits, and the fines if you get caught using your mobile while driving can be substantial. Still, Bluetooth support would be a welcome addition because it reduces the amount of wiring needed and could serve to eliminate the need for proprietary (and expensive) audio equipment.

Just like every other stereotype...

[ZxCv]

Just because the stereotype isn't true for all doesn't mean that it isn't true for some or even most. After all, stereotypes don't just pop out of thin air--something true almost always inspires them.

(Case in point: Jews and their obsession for money.)

Re:Chevrolet Trailblazer: Four or eight cylinders

[Anonymous Coward]

There's no need to even have a V8 in the TrailBlazer in the first place. It comes standard with a 4.2L I6 which makes 275 HP and about 280 ft.-lbs of torque--60HP more than the Ford Explorer's 4.6L V8, and it's smoother, has better power delivery and gets better gas mileage! If GM hadn't decided the TrailBlazer needed an extended model it wouldn't need any other engine.

That straight six is an engineering masterpiece, easily the best truck engine I've ever driven, and smooth enough to pull duty in a luxury car. Putting a V8 in that truck is like putting socks on a rooster.

You missed half-American Daimler-Chrysler

[alienmole]

If you're only concerned about ownership, then you missed DaimlerChrysler, which is half American, and makes Mercedes-Benz (along with Jeep, Dodge and Chrysler - quite a strange combination!)

Re:Chevrolet Trailblazer: Four or eight cylinders

[BigBir3d]

don't forget the Corvette ZR-1 with "valet mode"

what a turd that was.

They got the Prius backwards

[sacrilicious]

[The Prius uses] an electric motor to top off the output of a small (1.5-L) engine. When more power is needed, the gearbox draws on nickel metal-hydride batteries to drive an electric motor.

I have a friend who purchased a Prius, and according to her it is a gas-assisted electric vehicle, NOT an electric-assisted gas vehicle... in other words, the gas is not always on. The article seems to suggest the opposite, but having driven in her car I'd have to agree with her.

Cars suck

[ArmorFiend]

How about a few cool bikes? Infinate miles per gallon! Non polluting! Reliable! Its so small you can put it in a closet!

Re:Brake by wire? Sounds horrid.

[Sabalon]

Commercial air-liners work this way now. Pulling on the yoke tells a computer to tell the wing to move.

That's nothing new - I had that in the first vesion of Flight Simulator back in the early 80s. In fact, Microsoft had an advanced setup with the computer controlled pretty much the whole plane.

It doesn't have 1001 SAE BHP

[Anonymous Coward]

For those comparing to historical numbers, it has 987BHP. It has 1001 metric HP. The Japanese and much of Europe use it, but it isn't as large as a real SAE HP, so 1001 of them isn't really 1001BHP.

This is part of the reason cars seem to lose HP when coming to the US. Jag S-Type R makes 400HP in Europe but not the US. How does that happen on a Ford? Well, it didn't. They just measure their HP differently.

Also, the acceleration is MUCH faster than a jet plane. Only a few fighters could possibly match it. Tops speed, well, yes, that's a different story.

Personally, I find nothing amazing about the engine. Quad turbos, 16 cylinders and 8 liters to get to 987BHP? F1 cars did this over 10 years ago with less than 2 liters, 8 cylinders and only 1 turbo.

Also, if Bob Lutz has his way, the Cadillac (GM) Sixteen will make an SAE 1000HP with no turbos at all. It will have a 14 liter engine though. It is also far more luxurious and far cheaper, at about US$250K a pop.

http://www.web-cars.com/math/horsepower.html
ht tp://autoshow.msn.com/autoshow2003/article.aspx? xml=Cadillac

More distracting

[gnarled]

I-Drive is tauted by BMW as less distracting than having many buttons to adjust all the things in your car, such as volume, temperature, deforst, etc. However when you think about it, it takes you more time, and is therefore more distracting, to navigate through many menus just to turn on the radio.

In my car I am distracted only slightly when turning on the radio because I already know where the knob is, therefore all i do is glance down for a fraction of a second and get my bearings, put my eyes back on the road, reach for the knob with one hand while keeping the other on the wheel, and hit the knob. That is much simpler and intuitive.

It is not tech fear that causes people to hate the I-Drive, it is the poor, distracting UI. The underlying system behind I-Drive is probably fine (although it is Windows..) but people will not like it unless the UI is better designed.

I stay with my motorbike

[Anonymous Coward]

As a previous poster said, there techno-gizmo-feature-laden cars are a nightmare to me and only give the driver the feeling that he is immortal, what he is, of course, not.

As an european, where fuel is quite expensive, I'd like to see the fuel-consumption reduced for my everyday-use, but not by cutting down the BHP to a boring level; also cars are getting heavier each generation, what I strongly dislike.

For real power- or fun-driving I have my Suzuki Hayabusa motorbike, which has 175 BHP on ~240kg weight and it does the 0-100 clearly under 2.9 sec and the 0-200 in somewhat of 8 sec.
Before the Bugatti it used to be the fastest mass-produced vehicle ever (311 km/h)

Fiat Stilo

[10Ghz]

Available in Europe for 15 360, it incorporates both a new diesel engine, produced in conjunction with parent company General Motors Corp., and a particulate filter.

GM is not Fiat Autos parent-company, Fiat is. GM owns part of Fiat Auto (about 20% if I remember correctly).

Cool cars or dorky engineers?

[Merovign]

#1: This article forever embeds in my mind the image of geeky engineers who conduct a 6-month series of experiments in 9 countries to see if the coriolis force really does control the direction of water flow in toilets, and when they get back they don't even realize they just traveled around the world and looked at nothing but the inside of hotel toilets. These cars are dorky.

#2: Brake-by-wire: Never in My Car. I am not going to have some engineer with a lawyer looking over my shoulder and "correcting" my braking technique. Say I come around a mountain corner and see a truck backing onto the road. I have to heel-and-toe threshhold brake while turning around the vehicle and keeping an eye on oncoming traffic and the computer decides I meant "stop as fast as possible" and I get hit by the truck. NO.

#3: Yes, the RX-8 rocks. The suspension design is magic, but dorks hate the car for some reason. I think it has too few useless gadgets that get in the way of the driving experience. There's somebody at Mazda who loves Ferraris, I guess.

#4: Hybrid performance cars: Go ahead and light up those tires. That'll guarantee I'll outrun you as you waste energy melting rubber. Traction, weight. Maybe someday, guys. More power to ya.

Just about every gadget they mentioned is either something I could do without (what idiot gets into their car without looking in the back seat?), or a positive danger (anything that overrides the driver). I want a car designed by a driver, not an engineer.

And as cool as turbodiesels are, diesel is noxious.

Mods, go stick it somewhere

[Anonymous Coward]

WTF?! How the hell is this a troll?! It's completely on topic. Moderators are fucks.

Fiat Stilo's Diesel Engine...

[Anonymous Coward]

What's so great about Fiat joining the group of manufacturers that use particle filters to remove soot from exhaus gases? Peugeot has been doing it for years (HDI FAP engine).

Besides, General Motors is not exactly a parent company of Fiat. The parent of Fiat is - still - Fiat (despite their current problems)...

Oh, and the 1.9JTD most probably has a 1.9l-engine, not 1.2l. (I think the Common Rail Diesel engine was a joint development of Fiat and Daimler-Benz (don't know if anyone else was involved, though)).

Volkswagen claims to reach Euro-4 emission standards (including limits for soot emission) without filters.

Go Sweden

[martingunnarsson]

Wohoo, two swedish cars in the list, go go!

TZero Elecric faster than a 'Vette

[Civil_Disobedient]

A company called AC Propulsion built an all-electric car that can outrun a 'vette, and just about any other production car out there. 0-60 in 4.1 seconds. The 30mph-50mph range is done in 1.4 seconds. The acceleration curve is linear, which also helps since there are no 'blips' during gear changes. This is one seriously cool car. Of course, if you're going 100 mph continuously, you'll probably only get 50 miles out of it. But it is an absolutely beautiful design.

Re:Manual Honda Hybrids: better on hwy, worse in c

[Anonymous Coward]

Having actually driven the Civic Hybrid, I can say that it is a nice car, for what it is designed to be. It does have good pickup for a small 4cyl, which I was a little leary of before I drove it. Don't misunderstand, it doesn't have the pickup of a sports car, or even a nicely equiped "family car"(my 98 Accord Ex V-6 specificly), but it is not designed to.

I would also like to point out that the actual MPG is less than they estimate (as most cars are, we just don't realize it) My mother uses her Civic Hybrid as her daily driver, which inclues an average of (2) 250 mile each direction trips per week (~75mph) resulting in ~40mpg. Not the numbers Honda quote, but good for real world use.

I do notice that the mpg is better in the city. It goes up highly when you can coast, which is more often in the city than the hwy. An interisting feature for the city driving is an auto shut off. When you come to a stop (at a light, or in traffic), the engine will actually shut itself off, then start again when you release the brake. It is wierd getting used to.

Re:WORST POST

[Anonymous Coward]

Troll posts are moderated +1 Informative, normal posts are moderated down -1 Troll or -1 Flamebait, and blood coming out of my faucets. What's happening?

Re:Sigh

[Anonymous Coward]

American blinkers strike again.

There are better cars out there. I'd dare say if you take the same car and call it the same name as an old family car, it wouldn't be anywhere near as desirable.

FP

[Anonymous Coward]

Four Hundredth Post.

�Where are the links?

[Anonymous Coward]

Volvo Safety Concept Car - Volvo is owned by Ford - Ford is owned by Nestle

Saab 9-3 - Saab is owned by General Motors - GM is owned by Bill Gates

Honda Civic GX - I'm pretty sure that Honda has a design studio in California - I'm pretty sure that Honda has a design studio in Alaska

Honda FCX - See above - See below

Cadillac XLR - Owned by General Motors - Owned by Homer Simposon

Audi A8 - Owned by Bush Brother.
Mercedes-Benz SL500 - Owned by Cobwboyneal

Fiat Stilo - Owned by Cobwboyneal

Chevrolet Trailblazer - Owned by General Motors - and by Elvis

Toyota Prius - Secretely owned by Microsoft.

+5 Informative

Overclock this!

[metamatic]

I don't have an overclocked bleeding-edge penis-substitute computer either.

"...but most people just like a cool car that they find fun/sexy/exciting..."

Sexy? I think you just proved the point you were trying to mock.

Re:WTF

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you going on about?

The insight and civic use the same system, so I'll just refer to Honda.

The Honda has an electric motor and a petrol engine. The electric moto just happens to be mounted inside the petrol engine, rather than having two completely seperate engines, they have been combined.

You can run on electric, petrol, or both. The electronics however control this. An insight starts off using the electric to get the car moving, then the petrol engines joins in. As the car speeds up, the electric cuts off again, and starts generating power. (Exactly the same way a Prius works)

All of the listed cars have relatively small battery capacity, and I can't think of a single reason you'd want to drive only on the electric motor for the short time the battery allows. You are much better keeping the power in reserve for when you really need it (hills, acceleration).

Tax Incentive?

[SharkJumper]

Aren't there also tax incentives in the US for purchasing an electric or hybrid car? If so, is it going to make a noticeable difference on your tax return, this year? I'm trying to sell myself and my wife on the hybrid civic.

Re:Tax Incentive?

[Anonymous Coward]

2000 dollars tax incentive on both the Honda Civic Hybrid and the Toyota Prius. Enjoy!

Re:Tax Incentive?

[j-beda]

Take a look at the yahoo.groups mailing lists with "prius" and "hybrid" in their names - the "toyota-prius" group has extensive information about incentives and tax breaks in various states, countries, and provinces in their online resources web pages.

K.I.S.S. principle

[muchandr]

I think Mazda should be on the list for their Wankel rotaries. Just two moving parts in the whole engine! I hope this Merc lunacy with by-wire controls is going to be a fad that goes away. The computer industry is actually way ahead of car industry in understanding that every complex system needs a manual failover. Why isn't there a single car with an additional manual control for electric windows? As the cars get old, gizmos are the first to go, so you have to be able to still use the functions manually. I know somebody, who had the battery die on him in an armored 7-series beemer. He couldn't open the door or even knock out a window. Good thing he had his cellphone, so the towing company came and got him out of the can.

SL500 brake & suspension problems

[Anonymous Coward]

Yea I was talking with my Benz mechanic when I had my '97 SL in for service and he said that the dealerships are seeing a lot of trouble with the fancy new high tech brakes and suspension. ...as the rule goes never by the first year model.

Bag that

[IWantMoreSpamPlease]

Most of my cars were from 1976, a Lancia Scorpion, an Alfa GTV (Alfetta), a TVR 2500M.

They all had several things in common:

No pollution control
Big honkin' Webers
Freakin' loud exhausts
Fast as hell performance.

Best of all? Gizmos were nary to be found. I like it that way, if I want cantankerous, I'll boot up Windows (are you listening BMW???)

Re:WTF

[UniverseIsADoughnut]

You have it very wrong. The Insight Uses it electric motor at higher speeds and for starting and stopping it's engine. It works rather differant from the prius. It's a mild hybrid do to the small size of it electrical power compaired to it's IC engine power.

Yes you want to have electical power for hills and such. But you also want it for when your doing something that would be wastefull or produce emissions, such as very slow speeds. The insight does not have enough electrical power to drive in EV, and thus never does. The prius on the other hand can drive in EV, in fact revearse is EV only.

BTW,

[On Lawn]

I'm looking for a few good car enthusiasts to help me out with http://onroad.onlawn.net if your interested.

Diesel cat was first sold by Peugeot not Fiat

[egghat]

It's in mass production and more than half of Peugeot-Citroens diesel models are equipped with their diesel cat.

Peugeot sells them for more nearly two years now and they were definitely they first to bring this technology to the masses. (I'm not sure, if this technology really counts as a cool innovation after being on the market for two years ...).

Peugeot has some background info availyble here

Bye egghat.

Toyota Prius has brake by wire too...

[HTMLSpinnr]

I was a bit disapointed that they claimed that MBZ had this first. The Toyota Prius (also mentioned) has brake by wire to a degree. When the brakes are first applied, the computer applies regenerative power via the electric motor to the front wheels and light hydraulic pressure to the rear brakes. When more pedal pressure is applied, some pressure is applied to the front brakes as well. Only if you sink the pedal quite a distance do you override the computer and hit the master cylinder yourself (for that much needed manual backup).

Gas is cheap. (among other things)

[oneiros27]

Well, it actually comes down to three things, as I see it --

• Gas is cheap. In the US, it's almost subsidized. Most european countries pay the same amount per L as we pay per gal.
  
• Suburbs. Most Americans don't live anywhere near where they work. There isn't the abundance of public transportation, and when there is, it's considered to be un-cool, or it's not on equal footing with driving. [face it, cars are a status symbol... no other reason for me and other dumbasses to drive in every day when we know there's a chance at spending 3hrs to go 20 miles into DC].
  
• Bad Drivers. Bad drivers => more accidents => more accidents => more government regulations => 'safer' cars => heavier cars => worse gas milage. So now, we've got someone who wants to be fual efficient, and make a nice, light car (which they can), which can protect a driver from a 45mph offset crash.... but they can't regulate the bumper height to keep that Suburban from accidentally backing over you.
  
  Bad drivers also brings us the need to 'intimidate' other drivers (bigger == more fierce), and drive faster (faster == scary... nevermind that drag being a factor of velocity cubed), etc.
  

In all, America just isn't a ready market for these types of cars...it's going to require not just the technology, but also re-education of the population.

Oh...and GM was the winner of a solar car competition in the past... and both Ford and GM have had electric and hybrid vehicles for a while [over a decade?], but the electrics don't have good range for a typical daily commute [or the top end to keep you from eating the grill of an Excursion on your way into work], and the hybrids are only good for fleet use, as there aren't a whole lot of natural gas refilling stations near my house.

Last Post!

[alpg]

Fehlermeldung von StarOffice:

Das Dokument wurde fuer den Drucker Generic PostScript Printer formatiert.
Der Drucker ist nicht vorhanden. Soll der Standarddrucker Generic
PostScript Printer verwendet werden?

Ob Programme schizophren werden koennen?
-- Oliver Bedford

- this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...