Slashdot Mirror
Wrong Fuel Chokes Presidential Limo
An anonymous reader writes "Fueling your car with the wrong type of fuel happens even to POTUS. This happens when you put gasoline instead of diesel in the tank. ...." And Yes, the presidential limo really is a diesel. What about clean, renewable solar?
The presidential limo is much heavier than a standard limo due to the extra protection it offers. There isn't enough room on the thing to get enough solar power to move it anywhere, let alone a detail like wanting to move it at night. Adding enough batteries to provide reasonable drive time would mean making it even bigger.
There are some problems that solar can't solve. You'd think an editor here would know that.
-- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
The first link says it wasn't the wrong fuel. The second link says they speculate it's diesel. WTF people, can't you read?
No, the story says the Secret Service says the correct fuel was used... but an Israeli official is adamant that it was the incorrect fuel... and as the second link helps establish for you that it's known the limos are diesel...
"The correct gas was used." - diesel is not gas!
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
Given that that's possibly the shortest Slashdot story ever, it manages to make only two assertions, both of which are confirmed as false (by the linked articles themselves, no less).
And I heard about this story about 6 hours ago on my way in to work and, honestly, didn't care then.
No longer "News for Nerds"
Now "Inaccurate insights for imbeciles".
Math is why the presidents limo isn't run by solar power. The idea that you power something like that by solar is absurd. Solar power cars tend to way as little as possible. While I don't specifics any more than any other lay person the presidents limo is built on a heavy duty truck chassis, is armored and it weighs quite a bit. These are mutually exclusive things that probably won't be resolvable for a few centuries at best.
I thought this was Slashdot - news for nerds and all that.
A simple back of the envelope calculation will tell you why the presidential limo (or any practical car) is not solar powered.
It *could* be battery powered, charged by a solar power station, but I'd rather not put yet another $100K - $200K of taxpayer money into the presidential limo (which already costs $300K) to add enough batteries to give that heavy car a reasonable range. Plus the presidential limo is not a good use-case for current electric power technology. It's not like the President uses it only to commute from the Whitehouse to the Capital building every day -- it's role includes the possibility of long-distance travel and every stop is a potential security risk.
Neither the submitter nor the editor read the story. And "OMG Diesel means black smoke clouds."
Idiots. Makes me sad to be an American.
Actually, a lot of things make me sad to be an American.
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
I doubt you're really an American if you use the word "petrol."
The reason automatics rule in the US is because no one has time to use a manual. We are all busy texting, talking on the phone, eating, watching movies and sleeping. Sometimes, a few of those things at the same time... We only have two hands a knee to drive with!
Okay, you get funny points, but in case anyone takes you seriously, automatic transmissions pretty much became the norm in the U.S. in the 1950s and from your list only eating and sleeping were available in the car.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
What about clean, renewable solar?
For those who don't remember, $535 million was given to the Obama endorsed solar panel manufacturer - Solyndra, which went bankrupt.
"Lame" - Galaxar
Have you actually driven a car with a modern Diesel engine?
I had a Diesel rental about 20 years ago, and was impressed how little difference there was to a gasoline engine. But yes, you are right, back then Diesels did lack some of the "oomph" that I had come to expect from a high-powered gasoline engine.
In the last couple of years though, Diesel engines have gotten so good, there really is no reason whatsoever to buy a gasoline engine -- unless of course, you drive an incredibly small number of miles, in which case fuel efficiency doesn't matter and the slightly higher cost for the Diesel engine does.
Other than that, modern Diesels drive just like gasoline cars, are a lot more fuel efficient, and are extremely clean. I have read (slightly tongue in cheek) research saying that tail pipe emissions tend to be cleaner than the intake air :-) It's pretty much just CO2 and water.
You do realize that until recently automatic transmissions ate up significant amount of power\MPG right? How is that significantly better exactly? Anyone who has driven a stick for any length of time isn't flailing around - I'm guessing you're one of the fools who can't do so. It's got nothing to do with image and quite a bit more to do with control. The best "DSG" type automatics are actually stick shifts run by a computer - complete with one or more clutches. Stick shift transmissions are often capable of withstanding far more torque than automatics and they are most certainly a simpler piece of hardware. Not burning out the clutch in a heavy vehicle with a stick is simply a matter of knowing WTF you're doing and having proper gear range available. You should maybe take a gander in a few 18 wheeler cabs or dump trucks to figure out just how wrong you are, perhaps you think pickups are pulling more weight? The automatic is starting to make inroads there too but manuals are most certainly capable of moving those vehicles without issue...
Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
I'm European. I spent 11 years driving Diesels. Now I'm back in a petrol / gasoline vehicle and intending to convert it to run on LPG autogas. My reasons? Modern diesel engines.
the 3 diesel cars I ran all had one thing in common - the same 90-horsepower 1753cc Ford 8-valve diesel turbo engine. It was ludicrously simple, noisy, rough-running, but produced LOTS of torque at fairly low revs and in a fairly narrow band when the turbocharger was online and in full boost had a fairly impressive ability to sprint.. it required lots of gear changes but could keep up with fast-accelerating traffic. Oil changes were at 10,000 mile intervals and only required 5w30 semi-synthetic, which is cheap. Engine life was 200,000 miles.
When my last one died of extreme old age I started looking around and found that all the replacement vehicles available at my price point and feature requirements had dual-mass flywheels, high-pressure / commonrail fuel injection, variable geometry turbochargers - and seriously reduced life expectancy. The 1990s cars I owned were designed for simplicity, reliability and economy (45 miles per UK gallon average efficiency, 55+mpg on longer runs). Their replaements were designed as drop-in replacements for petrol drivers with comparable performance, and the compromises and complexity required to give that extra urgency had a bad effect on the long term reliability and costs. My 2-litre 2001-model Volvo V40 is screamingly insane in performance comparisons, and probably far more reliable. Unlike the new diesels it will probably also last 180,000 miles. And with the LPG conversion will be cheaper to run than a diesel.
I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
I think maybe you ought to tell the railroad industry of your theories and see what they have to say about the futility of electric for towing....
Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org