Slashdot Mirror
Volkswagen Concept Car Averages 262 MPG
coolnumbr12 writes "The Volkswagen XL1 averages an amazing 262 mpg, and although it may never hit streets in the United States, the technology behind the car could impact future Volkswagen vehicles. The keys to the incredible mileage in the Volkswagen XL1 were reducing the weight of the vehicle and eliminating wind resistance. The XL1 only weighs 1,753 pounds — that's more than a thousand pounds lighter than the Toyota Prius, which weighs in at 2,921 pounds. The wheels on the Volkswagen XL1 are as thin as road bike's and wrapped in custom Michelin rubber. The XL1 chassis is a single piece of molded carbon-fiber, and has a drag coefficient of only 0.189 – similar to a bumblebee."
I really can't be arsed to convert numbers that obviously were metric to begin with, back from bass-ackwards to metric, in my head or otherwise. As nerds you ought to have figured out which system* is better and have made a complete transition long ago.
* One is an actual, well-integrated system, and that's but one reason it is superior to the other, which isn't.
We have very safe cars but they're also very heavy as a result. Granted gains can be made with expensive and exotic materials, but how about CHEAP and LIGHT cars that could be had for just a few grand, and get 80-100MPG? before you think no-one would want to drive something without airbags and side impact beams and crush zones, what about motorbikes? I really think it would be a big hit with consumers who don't wish to be exposed to the elements or have to balance a motorcycle, but would opt for BASIC transportation with a 500cc motor, 3 or 4 wheels, and enclosed cab. Current safety standards for 4 wheeled vehicles make basic and light car not an option.
"The Most Fun Possible on 4 wheels" is at SunBuggy in Las Vegas
Why are the USA still not using them?
Rear wheel drive is not a problem. Read wheel drive with all the weight over the front wheels is a problem, especially in low traction situations. Ideal is really all wheel drive with weight distributed close to evenly.
Why are talking about a two year old concept car as if it's a new thing?
Because the Germans at VW and the American regulators are all a bunch of ***** *****.
Actually, you're at great personal risk in one of these on roads populated with mobile-phone-yakking motorists in pickup trucks and SUVs (not that even a smart couldn't flatten you.) Use of a mobile phone while driving should be treated with the same severity as drunk driving.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Given the drag coefficient, I assume this car exhibits Laminar flow. This can get disrupted by external factors (say getting passed by a buss) and result in localized turbulent flow. This would drastically increase the drag on one part of the car, causing a sudden unexpected side load, likely causing a turn (into the passing bus). An airplane bouncing around is not much of an issue, but when your car moves over 6 feet sideways on the freeway unexpectedly, it can be rather bad.
Generally maximally aerodynamic cars are not safe. They may not have gotten to that point, or may have cleverly worked around the issues, but given the lack of side mirrors, I think mileage was the priority over safety here. Its a neat technical feet, but as mentioned in the article, its dangerous in multiple respects.
You'd have five service trips before the first gallon is burned.
German cars are enjoyable to drive, but they are high maintenance vehicles and seem designed that way.
Ask VW owners about engine oil mysteriously disappearing - this is no joke.
Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
But for 260+ MPG I don't give a crap. I've driven rear drive cars with all the weight up front. You just have to know how to handle the car. Know that in slippery conditions you MUST reduce speed and try not to stop if you don't have to do so.
A mile is 8 furlongs and a gallon is 8 pints. So this car can do 262 furlongs per pint. That's quite an achievement considering it's mass is 125 stones.
Sensationalist bullshit. From the article:
Volkswagen claims a consumption rating equivalent to 261 mpg; but that's using the full charge of the battery.
310 miles in all, starting out on a charge, on its 2.6-gallon (yes, that's right) fuel tank.
Not sure what "starting out on a charge" means, but if it means starting with zero battery power, the mileage is 119.23 -- and that is only according to the manufacturer. The test drive in the article was too short and limited to be meaningful.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
Basically. The vehicle's so lightly built that a fricking DODGE OMNI will tear through you like you were toilet paper.
Over in Germany, if someone spatters themselves on (or by the side of) the road, it's the driver's fault for not knowing their car.
Here in the US, it's the manufacturer's fault for not making the car crash-survivable.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
I think if VW were to go production on this concept vehicle; Toyota, and Hyundai would start feeling like they're deficating peach seeds.
Basically. The vehicle's so lightly built that a fricking DODGE OMNI will tear through you like you were toilet paper.
Over in Germany, if someone spatters themselves on (or by the side of) the road, it's the driver's fault for not knowing their car.
Here in the US, it's the manufacturer's fault for not making the car crash-survivable.
Never mind the willingness of people in Pickup Trucks to drive 70, 80 or 90 MPH in them. Remember when a Pickup was a farm or construction vehicle and could scarcely get over 55?
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Kudos to VW for this achievement. However, I'll keep on driving my 1982 diesel Westfalia. For me, the driving experience is better :)
For one, I never have to worry about speeding ;)
Damn it! I spit coffee all over my keyboard because of your post.
I really think it would be a big hit with consumers who don't wish to be exposed to the elements or have to balance a motorcycle, but would opt for BASIC transportation with a 500cc motor, 3 or 4 wheels, and enclosed cab.
You mean something like the Persu or the Carver One?
Why are these not on the market? Shut up and take my money!
There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with rear wheel drive. (unless you don't know how to drive to begin with)
Why is it that most of the people that I encounter seem to have been shat from the Sphincter of Mediocrity?
That's 125 stone. Not plural.
Fixed that for you.
Why is it that most of the people that I encounter seem to have been shat from the Sphincter of Mediocrity?
Yup - agreed on that. Or Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, and Nissan could start designing and building their own hyper-milers. Nissan is already ahead of the game with the Leaf. But the latter suffers from a miles between charge deficit. The battery technology needs to get better over time.
The Prius is built to MUCH higher crash safety standards than the Pinto or the Nova.
It is also expected to perform better, be much quieter, and last far longer than that old junk. The Pinto and Nova were econoboxes built as cheaply as possible.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/1977/09/pinto-madness
The Prius is also carrying a hefty battery pack.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
Here in the US, it's the manufacturer's fault for not making the car crash-survivable.
But what about all those idiots making claims that "Loud pipes saves lives"? You know, those same guys that don't wear helmets?
They chose to ride an inherently dangerous machine. So dangerous, in fact, that they will make claims that the only thing saving them from an untimely end are exhaust pipes so loud they will blow out the eardrum of an adjacent motorist. Helmets? Nah! It's our freedom to ride without them! Safety? Nah! That's your fucking problem if my bike gives you permanent hearing damage.
Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool.
I think in a decade or so, all the cars will get an electric motor as the zeroth gear.If the IC engine has work only above 5mph or 7mph they can tune it completely differently and improve fuel economy by 50% easily. Much of the fuel economy of the Prius comes from the engine that does not have to work below 10 mph. It would not be too expensive to store enough juice to pull the car up to 5 or 10mph a few times.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Perhaps it the batteries...
Why is it that most of the people that I encounter seem to have been shat from the Sphincter of Mediocrity?
But the Stone is a fundamental unit of Weight, not Mass. Divide the result by 0.04848 furlongs/s^2 to get a meaningful result.
And the worms ate into his brain.
If a bumblebee has such a low drag coefficient I'd be completely astounded - I'd guess closer to 0.5.
1.6l engine, 48hp, 1753 lbs sounds a lot like my 72 beetle that has a 1600cc engine 54hp and weighed 1800 lbs. Of course, it only gets 27mpg around town and about 32 on the highway, Besides, it's fun to drive by the school yards and watch the kids all punch each other in the arm and yell "Slug bug!"
don't want cheap cars that result in injured drivers. They make their money when you wreak your car, not your body. In America insurance is mandatory, and the insurance companies pay out for medical claims (no socialized medicine here). A wreaked car is a one time expense where they give you 1/2 or less the value of the car and jack your rates way up (I've had friends turn down their own insurance claims because the rate increase was higher than the cost of a new car). Medical expenses though can be ongoing. I knew a gal that got rear ended by an SUV doing 40 mph (she was at a dead stop at a train crossing). She's had back surgery on and off for decades.
Want cheap, light vehicles America? Ban SUVs, get socialized medicine, or forget it.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
I live in California, which is a Helmet state, but incredibly it allows for Lane Splitting, which really was about noodling between stationary vehicles, not racing between moving traffic.
When I worked in the Bay area there wasn't a day that went by where traffic reports didn't tell of at least one motorcycle down somewhere in the area.
I enjoyed riding on back roads in Michigan, but hated riding in California so sold my motorbike.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
My 2000 Honda insight has a curb weight of 1,880 lbs, While I can't touch 262mpg I still get about 69 mpg, and that's in a car with most modern safety features, over a decade old, and at a not unreasonable price....
Adapt it for motorcycle wheels and you'll get better mileage.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
This car is the third iteration of a concept car that has been around since 2009, this iteration since 2011. Is there some other significance that I am missing that puts it in the news today?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_1-litre_car
The concept car is real wheel drive with rear engine, similar to the origianl VW although it isn't aircooled.
They are actually going to produce and sell a small number of them (250 I believe), though I fear the price might be a bit prohibitive for the mass market...
not yet available and not cheap:
Frequently Asked Questions
When can I get a Persu V3?
Production vehicles are targeted for a 2014 model release.
How much will the Persu V3 cost?
MSRP is targeted at $25,000.
"The Most Fun Possible on 4 wheels" is at SunBuggy in Las Vegas
Ya, I love the strength per weight that carbon fiber brings, but the stuff is (as of yet) unrecyclable and non-repurposable. Shatter a bit of carbon fiber and all you have is is a bunch of broken carbon fiber. The repair process is shaky and there's no reclamation process for the baked final product...
My idea of a an irony-laden "green" auto:
Carbon Fiber Frame/body
Plug-In Battery Electric
Owned and Operated in Appalachia
Metals are recyclable. Plastics can be recyclable. When we keep our eyes on the cradle-to-grave aspect, we make better judgements for the futures of our children, grandchildren, etc.
My Toyota FJ40 Land Cruiser weighs in at over 4,000 lbs. 3,427 lbs stock curb weight + another 600 (+/- 50lbs) of off-road accessories.
41 years old and getting 16 city and 22+ on the highway. Best ever was 25mpg.
Why is it that most of the people that I encounter seem to have been shat from the Sphincter of Mediocrity?
Basically. The vehicle's so lightly built that a fricking DODGE OMNI will tear through you like you were toilet paper.
Over in Germany, if someone spatters themselves on (or by the side of) the road, it's the driver's fault for not knowing their car.
Here in the US, it's the manufacturer's fault for not making the car crash-survivable.
Actually, in most of Europe, vehicle safety is concerned with protecting who you hit, particularly pedestrians versus you the driver or the occupants of the vehicle. That doesn't mean that automakers don't exceed those standards, but that is a priority. VW even admited that their test fleet of these vehicles had to get a special waiver because it didn't have a passenger side air bag.
That said, VW also said not to expect this vehicle in the US as it would not meet US safety standards and would have to be totally re-engineered to do so which would probably kill the high mileage it gets.
VW makes THE dullest looking vehicles on the market today. Even as a prototype this XL1 wouldn't even look cool or modern in an 80's James Bond flick staring Timothy Dalton.. I actually puked a little bit looking at this thing. Its like they started off with a boring Jetta front and then just gave up as they reached the back.
Das "Boring" Auto.
I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
The problem with RWD is that 99% of drivers have never driven one and have no clue how to properly handle one. But then, 99% of drivers simply don't know how to drive at all, so it doesn't really matter.
The thin little tires are what bothers me most. There's a damn good reason we don't use "bicycle wheels" on cars... traction and cornering stability. (and the reviewer breifly mentioned how quickly the tires give up.)
Here in the US, it's the manufacturer's fault for not making the car crash-survivable.
But what about all those idiots making claims that "Loud pipes saves lives"? You know, those same guys that don't wear helmets?
They chose to ride an inherently dangerous machine. So dangerous, in fact, that they will make claims that the only thing saving them from an untimely end are exhaust pipes so loud they will blow out the eardrum of an adjacent motorist. Helmets? Nah! It's our freedom to ride without them! Safety? Nah! That's your fucking problem if my bike gives you permanent hearing damage.
No matter how loud or how often somebody makes a claim doesn't make it true. Take loud pipes on a motor cycle, since the most come car/motor cycle accident is where a car pulls out into traffic because they didn't see the motorcycle, loud pipes don't make a difference because the car pulling out is in front of them. But if motorcyclist want to argue that loud pipes make them easier to be noticed, well, so would blaze orange helmets and vests like deer hunters wear.
Light weight cars go crumble on the autobahn. Bad news. I would rather get lower mpg and be safe. Better yet, I minimize travel.
What's a mile ? A gallon ? A pound ? Do they use those units in Germany ? This summary only makes sense in Myanmar, Liberia and the US. Was it that hard to convert into proper unit, at least as a complement, as most of us will have to do now ? If you can't bother to adapt to your readership, your readership won't bother adapt to you.
Most of the rest of the world is pretty good at adapting US speak to their usage such as miles and gallons to metric. The problem is when it has to go the other way around. Don't fault our /. overlords because they had to dumb down the summary so those in the US could understand it.
The Prius is built to MUCH higher crash safety standards than the Pinto or the Nova.
It is also expected to perform better, be much quieter, and last far longer than that old junk. The Pinto and Nova were econoboxes built as cheaply as possible.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/1977/09/pinto-madness
The Prius is also carrying a hefty battery pack.
The Pinto today's dollars also cost 1/3 the price of a Prius. Any of them (Prius, Pinto, Nova) hitting an SUV at freeway speeds won't make much different for the occupants. The Pinto, btw, was Ford's response to the VW Beetle. The Nova, on the other hand was actually a family sedan. Might you mean the Vega?
Interesting how they say their measurements start with a full battery charge but don't say they end with a full battery charge. It's almost as though the so-called MPG number is totally made up out of thin air.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
It's spelled "batteries". The 85 airbags adds a lot to it as well.
Actually, There has been some shift back to a taller, narrower tire lately. The idea being they are keeping the same ground contact patch area, only in a different orientation, which produces better traction in wet conditions, additionally, for reasons that are math, they improve fuel efficiency.
http://www.bridgestone.com/corporate/news/2013030502.html
I've decided to Diversify my Holdings. I've divided my cash between my left and right pockets, instead of all in one.
(unless you don't know how to drive to begin with)
That describes 90% of all U.S. (and I suspect the world's) drivers.
"Be particularly skeptical when presented with evidence confirming what you already believe." -
So subtract the 31 miles on battery, leaving 279 miles on gas, and it can get 107.3 MPG on gas alone. The 262 MPG figure probably comes from a shorter test drive where the first 31 miles were on battery, the remainder on gas, then attributing the total distance to gas. Which if I did my math right is a 52.5 mile run.
Thing is, if you're going to cheat this way, why not just make it a 32 mile run and claim your car gets over 3400 MPG.
It's also worth pointing out that outside of research, these ultra-high mileage vehicles are rather pointless. MPG is the inverse of fuel consumption, so higher MPG means smaller savings. e.g. Consider a trip of 300 miles in a variety of different cars:
15 MPG SUV = 20 gallons consumed
25 MPG sedan = 12 gallons consumed
50 MPG hybrid = 6 gallons consumed
100 MPG research car = 3 gallons consumed
300 MPG super-car = 1 gallon consumed
So if you consider a switch from an SUV to a super-car on a 300 mile trip, where exactly do the 19 gallons of fuel saved come from?
8 gallons saved comes from the 10 MPG jump from 15 to 25 MPG.
6 gallons saved comes from the 25 MPG jump from 25 to 50 MPG.
3 gallons saved comes from the 50 MPG jump from 50 MPG to 100 MPG.
2 gallons saved comes from the 200 MPG jump from 100 MPG to 300 MPG.
The biggest fuel savings comes from the low end of the MPG range. The smallest savings from the high end. Or in other words, in a SUV to super-car switch:
42.1% of the fuel savings comes from the 15-25 MPG jump
31.6% of the fuel savings comes from the 25-50 MPG jump
15.8% of the fuel savings comes from the 50-100 MPG jump
10.5% of the fuel savings comes from the 100-300 MPG jump
Diminishing returns says the cost-effectiveness of improving mileage rapidly drops off above about 50 MPG. If we want to reduce overall fuel consumption, we should be concentrating on ad campaigns to get people out of gas guzzlers into smaller cars. Not concentrating on designing ultra-high mileage vehicles.
Remember when a Pickup was a farm or construction vehicle and could scarcely get over 55?
No
"Be particularly skeptical when presented with evidence confirming what you already believe." -
Rear wheel drive is not a problem. Read wheel drive with all the weight over the front wheels is a problem, especially in low traction situations. Ideal is really all wheel drive with weight distributed close to evenly.
A friend of mine had a Mustang too. ;-)
StarTrekPhase2 - The Five Year Mission Continues!
The wheels on the Volkswagen XL1 are as thin as road bike's and wrapped in custom Michelin rubber.
So having a 1700lb car riding on road bike tires just seems like this car is ripe for a disaster. How much friction/traction can be gained from having such a tiny tire? If these tires are super-sticky tires then they'll have almost no lifespan. I wonder at what speed you could nolonger take an emergency avoidance maneuver? As they say, "Sir Isaac Newton is in the driver's seat."
There's a reason why high performance race cars have wide tires and bicycles or those college competition solar powered vehicles have ultra narrow tires.
Do you want low resistance or low traction, pick one.
A mile is 8 furlongs and a gallon is 8 pints. So this car can do 262 furlongs per pint. That's quite an achievement considering it's mass is 125 stones.
But don't exclude the performance figures! It will do 266,112 furlongs per fortnight. Not too shabby for what it is.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
My racing slicks hydroplane at 120MPH (a fair bit more speed than I'd be comfortable with on a bicycle), so you can't be talking about wet traction.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
I think you misunderstand the engineering behind these tires. Much of the improved performance in wet conditions and lower rolling resistance can be chalked up to their higher air pressure. Contact area is approximately vehicle (corner) weight divided by air pressure, so these tires will have smaller contact area than conventional tires. The larger diameter allows the tire to deform less to achieve that contact patch, further reducing rolling resistance. And a narrower tire has less air resistance.
Traction control has pretty much eliminated the risk of oversteer that used to be associated with rear wheel drive. I'm all for teaching folks how to drive, but you no longer have to apply the pedals differently depending on drive wheels.
Rear wheel drive is not a problem. Read wheel drive with all the weight over the front wheels is a problem, especially in low traction situations. Ideal is really all wheel drive with weight distributed close to evenly.
And this is why high end sports and performance cars use the mid-rear configuration.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
(unless you don't know how to drive to begin with)
That describes 90% of all U.S. (and I suspect the world's) drivers.
If you're excluding German and English drivers.
I dont blame the drivers, it's the cars that coddle them.
No need to learn manual, just buy an auto. Cant park, we'll now we have self parking cars. Cant keep a constant speed, try cruise control. Cant keep a safe gap, adaptive cruise control. Cant be bothered using your mirrors, now we have rear and side proximity sensors.
We've been moving towards fully automated cars for years, it's only recently have people even noticed.
BTW, I drive a six speed manual without traction control. I drive a lot better than most because I dont expect my car to pull me out of dangerous situations I get myself into.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
...higher crash safety standards than the Pinto or the Nova.
I drove a Pinto. It burst into flames (engine, not tank) long before I could test crash safety. That's still better than my 89 Grand Prix's steering wheel catching fire. I drive a Toyota now, fewer flame related incidents to lower the resale value.
I don't know that it was ever acknowleged but as a proud Pinto owner I know the nasty visibility constraints of the rear "posts" were a problem and I've always suspected Pinto owners put themselves into position for a rear collision and explosion.
Cant keep a constant speed, try cruise control
Or maybe on long drives when there is not much traffic around me, I like to give my legs a break, and have a slight bit more variety in positions they could be in. It doesn't have anything to do with a need to drive at a constant speed (I'm not even sure if that level of constant speed is really needed at all for 99+% of the people).
No need to learn manual, just buy an auto.
Or maybe because there are times driving manual really sucks. I know how to drive manual, and it can be fun in some cars out in rural areas. It starts to suck a lot in traffic and in urban areas though. I wouldn't trade my auto transmission for a manual unless I moved, regardless of knowing how to drive stick or not.
BTW, I drive a six speed manual without traction control. I drive a lot better than most because I dont expect my car to pull me out of dangerous situations I get myself into.
Being a good driver doesn't mean having a blanket self-ban on using such options. Being a good driver is about knowing when such things could be used, and then using them to make things easier or better when there is no sacrifice to safety. People abuse screwdrivers all the time, not knowing the difference of sizes of Phillips drivers or using flat head drivers to tear things apart. That doesn't bean choosing to using only nails to assemble everything makes you a good tool user by removing the possibility of misusing a screw driver.
Over the years, I have driven pretty much all types - rear wheel (VW's mostly), front wheel, all wheel (Subaru - Oh yeah!), and 4-wheel. (Yes, there is a difference).
The FJ40 is very much like the Volkwagons, excepting that they are way top heavy. It's a HEAVY 4WD for its size (over 4,000 lbs), and a relatively light rear end. It has a habit of breaking loose on wet roads in the turns (much like my '69 VW Camper. Have to be pretty careful. My 2004 Subaru Forester simply could not give a damn about the road conditions - it was just completely predictable (after I disabled the anti-lock break system). My old '69 VW Square Back was very predictable and drifted like a freaking dream. Believe it or not, it out handled many of the heavier American muscle cars. Not all that fast (top speed of about 100mph), but on mountain roads it was freaking awesome.
It's all old school for me now.
The golden rules:
Know your limits
Know your vehicles performance limits
Know your vehicles foot print on the pavement.
Why is it that most of the people that I encounter seem to have been shat from the Sphincter of Mediocrity?
My not even quite bald tires hydroplane going around a corner entering a highway at 35 mph. They also hydroplane straight on at the highway at 60+.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Why wait? Plans for the XR3 (a strikingly similar vehicle) have been around for years and you can build it yourself. It basically uses a Kubota D902 diesel up front and an electric motor drives the rear wheel. The design even lets you forgo one or the other and go all diesel or all electric. But combined you get the 200+ MPG version.
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
So you've got cars like the Subaru Forester/Outback which are labeled as All-Wheel Drive, and then you've got cars like Land Rover/Range Rover which seem to be Four Wheel Drive. What's the actual difference? I'm guessing it has something to do with the differential?
Plan My Week for iPhone
I very much doubt this would meet the US safety requirements.
Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
This is a feature, not a bug. See: Porsche, Ferrari, BMW, Mercedes, etc.
Yes, if you drive in snow you probably want ALL wheel drive.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
Yeah, rear wheel drive done properly is not the homocidal axe murderer type car that some people fear, and others (including myself know and love).
Take a big beemer or merc for a drive and understand how rear wheel drive can and should behave. Yes if you're talking massive massive power (AMG or M5, etc) then it will demand respect, but power levels that would see a front wheel drive basically become un-drivable are no problem. I actually have to be quite a dick to get my 5 series to step out. Why? good chassis balance, well sorted suspension and massive rubber on it.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
The golden rules:
Know your limits
Know your vehicles performance limits
Know your vehicles foot print on the pavement.
I couldn't agree with this more.
If you want to test your cars limits, go to the track (or at least to a place where you'll bother absolutely no-one else). Honestly, track day is the most fun you'll have with your clothes on.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
"Ideal" depends on what you are trying to achieve. To go fast, yes mid/rear or mid/awd is the way to go.
But unfortunately, the vast majority of the population are muppets when it comes to driving and some degree of inbuilt understeeer (so that when they panic brake or mash the throttle mid-corner the car is closer to neutral or slight understeer rather than snap oversteer if the car was properly balanced) is preferable. Which is why FF cars are popular.
Mid engined cars require either electronic aids or a driver who has some level of competency to stay facing the right way around in an emergency situation.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
So you've got cars like the Subaru Forester/Outback which are labeled as All-Wheel Drive, and then you've got cars like Land Rover/Range Rover which seem to be Four Wheel Drive. What's the actual difference? I'm guessing it has something to do with the differential?
To me the difference is:
AWD and "4x4 on demand" are computer controlled. 4 Wheel Drive is either selectable or always on.
IIRC the AWD in the Subaru Impreza's distribute the power 70-30 between the front and rear wheels but the computer alters this according to the detected conditions. If you get into an old school Land Cruiser or Pajero, you'll see two sticks, one for selecting 2WD and 4WD and the other for selecting gears.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Hydroplane speed will depend very much on how much standing water you have vs. tread level. Also, air pressure. Improperly inflated tyres will hydroplane more.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
As I understand it, generally the "4 wheel drive" types have either part time 4 wheel drive with lockable/freewheel front hubs (no center differential - on bitumen you need to disengage 4 wheel drive), or a center differential which can be locked. They also usually have a dual range gearbox. AWD typically have a non-lockable center differential and single range gearbox. Though trick stuff like the EVO and higher grade STi have electronically controlled center differentials these days which has blurred the line somewhat.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
"Ideal" depends on what you are trying to achieve. To go fast, yes mid/rear or mid/awd is the way to go.
To be fair, I did specify performance and sports cars, so balance is key there.
If you're talking about a cheap runabout, Front Forward is the way to go as it gets better gains out of smaller engines, reduces the weight of the engine/drive train and are a hell of lot cheaper to build. People who buy a Toyota Yaris dont care about performance as much as just getting from A to B cheaply.
Ultimately, the cheapness of FF cars is what drives people towards them.
Not that FF cars are all bad (cheap and cheery), you get some crackers of FF's like the Honda Integra and Ford Focus ST's.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
In 1966, VW built a car with a curb weight of 1672 pounds. They did it with inexpensive steel, not expensive carbon fiber. Perhaps they should review herr Doktor Porsche's designs, so they can remember how it's done!
a) "racing slicks" (r-comp, race rubber, etc. or in other words "NOT STREET LEGAL") are not designed for use on wet pavement. b) if they are "hydroplaning" on drive payment, they're broken. (dried out, too many heat cycles, or it's just too cold to use them -- they don't work worth a damn until heated up)
What I'm talking about is a tire's cornering capability. That is mostly a function of width. (along with many other factors) Just watch highspeed video of cars turning hard at speed. (I've seen some where the tire should've come off the rim.)
BTW, I drive a six speed manual without traction control. I drive a lot better than most because I dont expect my car to pull me out of dangerous situations I get myself into.
I am a completely mediocre driver with traction control, anti-lock brakes and as much safety tech as I can slap on a car. When I hit an unexpected patch of black ice, my computer chips will react far faster than any veteran race car driver that ever lived. Don't let pride blind you to to the advantages of technology.
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
Amory Lovins was barking about hypercars years ago. This is not a new idea. Back when he was pissing and moaning, gas was cheap. Now oil's $100 bbl. So, now it "makes sense". Duh. As if making sense has to be about money.
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
You didn't actually look at the site did you?
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
A lot of the concepts in this concept car are no good. The mass budget is just too tight, they've thrown out too much structural strength, safety equipment, comfort equipment, etc.
BUT, turbodiesel hybrid is the way to go. Turbodiesel is inherently more efficient than gasoline, but it's got a much flatter torque profile than gasoline, meaning you can't get much by putting the pedal to the metal. But that's where the electric motor comes in. Diesel and electric techs are a match made in heaven, as anyone who's ever designed a rail locomotive is well aware.
I'm sorry to hear that your horn does not work. It's good to know that you had for wits to do that trick with the engine though. How long did it take to rev? A second or two? You should really get that horn fixed though, so next time that happens the other driver will notice you STRAIGHT AWAY.
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
This is not about liberals or conservatives (and I am as conservative as they get). And I have owned and own many high-performance muscle cars and sports cars.
The Prius is a FAR superior and more practical car to a Pinto or Nova and it carries batteries. A Pinto is a notoriously crappy car, little better than a big lawn tractor. A Nova is a very crude and simplistic muscle car with nearly no consideration for safety or comfort that could not be sold on the US market today for any number of reasons, most of them good.
I don't have a Prius, but have ridden in them and driven them. They are dandy cars for what they purport to do (and for the record, for the first 100 feet it will eat your small-block Nova for breakfast, MUCH better off the line) and perfectly practical and very economical. No one in their right mind would choose to drive a Pinto instead. The only thing I have found wrong with the Prius is that some of them tend to wander around on the highway due to the "low=drag" wheel alignment, which can easily be corrected.
Yeah, this is the same stuff they've been doing with early electric cars here in Norway. Classify them as motorcycles, because then you don't have to fulfill any safety requirements (almost). That does not mean this isn't as unsafe as a '62 Chevy Corvair.
for i in `facebook friends "=bday" 2>/dev/null | cut -d " " -f 3-`; do facebook wallpost $i "Happy birthday!"; done
massive rubber on it.
I've always suspected BMW drivers use their cars as penis extenders, but this takes "safety" to a whole new level...
for i in `facebook friends "=bday" 2>/dev/null | cut -d " " -f 3-`; do facebook wallpost $i "Happy birthday!"; done
I think he was talking about racing slicks for a bicycle. Which of course do not hydroplane below 120MPH, since they're 1 inch wide.
for i in `facebook friends "=bday" 2>/dev/null | cut -d " " -f 3-`; do facebook wallpost $i "Happy birthday!"; done
I think if VW were to go production on this concept vehicle; Toyota, and Hyundai would start feeling like they're deficating peach seeds.
it's going to production at end of the year in some quantity. that's why it's "2014 euro spec" model..
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
4WD systems include a (generally) manual shift transfer case that puts power to the front axle. In my case I also have manual locking front hubs (really old school here) The transfer case has three settings: 2WD (rear), 4WD high for driving in dirt and snow and ice, and 4WD low for when you need extra torque for steep hills or pulling. Because the power split is 50/50 front rear, handling can be a bit strange for the uninitiated.
In the AWD systems, you have a center differential along with the normal front & rear diffs. Some of them are electronically controlled to split the power asymmetrically and some are fixed. The asymmetric ones are more common. They provide excellent handling in pretty much all driving conditions and most drivers would not be able to tell if it was AWD at all.
The problem with the Subaru (and perhaps others) is that the tires need to be close to the same diameter on all four tires. Prolonged driving on an undersized spare can cause serious damage to the center differential. It is recommended to replace all tires at the same time. If you can not afford to, then 'shaving' the new tire down to match the older tires is recommended. I always rotated my tires through the spare so if I ever had a flat, the spare was always close enough to the driving tire diameter so that I had no worries. That being said, I only had one flat in the eight years that I owned the Forester. I have rolled the bead during rally races though.
It is also pretty much instant death to the center differential to tow the car on a car dolly or with a conventional tow truck. The safest way to tow a Subaru (and perhaps other AWD vehicles) is on a flat bed. It is sometimes permissible to tow the Subaru with ALL 4 wheels on the ground (I.E. behind a motor home), you should consult the owners manual for your specific vehicle - there are differences between auto and manual transmissions..
Why is it that most of the people that I encounter seem to have been shat from the Sphincter of Mediocrity?
Absolutely. I did a fair amount of rally driving with my Forester. Doing the ALCAN 5000 next year in my FJ40. I believe that it's the first FJ40 entered since the rally started many years ago. Of course, there is a VW 'Thing' entered next year as well. Too cool.
Why is it that most of the people that I encounter seem to have been shat from the Sphincter of Mediocrity?
I think you've entirely missed the point. The problem is not about using the loud pipes to save your life. Of course that can happen.
The point is about when you're just pulling up to a stop light. The guy next to you is in a normal sized car (ie. something that isn't 12 feet tall) and the pipes go off right in their ear as you pull away when it turns green. There is absolutely no need for that. If I take down your license plate and press charges or sue so that my audiologist gets paid, is that okay with you?
I'm not sure how many nines you'd need to describe how often loud pipes are simply a societal nuisance, but I'm guessing it's at least four. One time in ten-thousand, those loud pipes will save someone's life, such as yours. The rest of the time... well, you know the rest.
Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool.
Being a good driver is two things. [...]
My grandmother used to say that "Good Driving is Good Manners".
Treating other road users with courtesy and respect is more important than any level of technical skill. Not only will it make you consider their actions and act appropriately, it will keep you calm and avoid the sort of aggressive and impatient driving that causes the majority of accidents.
And, yes, it is good manners to behave well to people even if they do not behave well to you...
I'd add:
* Don't use your phone while driving
* Keep your distance from the car in front
* Expect everyone else on the road to be an idiot
The XL1 has a frame made from carbon fibre. You know, the stuff that lets F1 racing drivers survive crashes at 300 km/h with nothing more than bruises. The XL1 also meets European safety standards.
They are especially fun when the cyclist comes home late at 2:00 and drives by your house waking the neighborhood.
Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
I will see your pedantry, and raise you more pedantry: the stone is defined as 14 avoirdupois pounds; one avoirdupois pound is defined as 0.45359237 kg; therefore the stone is a unit of mass.
Yes, I was disappointed too. Still, we'll always have tons (which depending on the usage can be weight, mass, volume, energy, or power).
How is that "not cheap"? If it gets the claimed MPG over its lifetime it's an absolute bargain.
It is a VW, they are well built quality cars. $25k would be good for a VW even if it wasn't this efficient.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
I instantly thought of this head-on test: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=joMK1WZjP7g
But I'm being a little unfair in comparing an 80s vintage to a 1959. I still love those fins and tear-drop tail lights on the '59 Chevys. Naturally, they ruined them in '60.
Is there some technological reason for covering the back wheel? I noticed a lot of early electric or hybrid prototypes did this too. If there's a technological advantage then that's ok-ish, but if its just for stylistic reasons I just can't see the appeal.
"People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
Lane splitting (or filtering as it's known here) is good. It means you're not stationary at the end of a traffic queue just waiting to be rear ended.
I think most places that ban it, the bans are put in place by jealous car drivers who happen to be in the legislature. They see bikes passing stationary traffic and think that bikes should have to wait with the cars and not have an advantage because it's unfair to car drivers. However, this is cutting your nose off to spite your face - where bikes can filter, it reduces traffic jams because the bikes effectively are no longer taking part in the traffic jam that the cars are in. As an example, imagine a traffic signal with 100 cars and 10 bikes. The traffic signal goes green only long enough for 10 vehicles to get through. Imagine you're in the last vehicle of this queue. If bikes are allowed to filter, you have to wait 10 light cycles to get through, because you are in a 100 car queue and the bikes form a parallel queue of bikes. If bikes are not allowed to filter you get an 11 light cycle delay because now you have 10 more vehicles added to the queue in front of you.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
Once again, dead wrong. Driving a manual rocks, it's just that you just dont know how to drive one.
That is your [somewhat arrogant] opinion.
I have a six-speed manual with a moderately stiff clutch in my car (2003 Mini Cooper S), and enjoy it very nearly all of the time. When I was caught in a traffic jam due to an accident in a tunnel (no possibility of off ramps) that lasted 4 HOURS and traffic moved mere feet at a time for several miles (with irate drivers honking and attempting to rear-end you of you didn't creep every inch), I LOATHED it. My left leg was aching from the literal thousands of clutch actuations.
Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
A mile is 8 furlongs and a gallon is 8 pints. So this car can do 262 furlongs per pint.
Is that an English pint or an Imperial pint? There's a significant difference between them (around 20%).
Remember that "English" units are the version used by Americans, whereas the English use Imperial units. Got that? Great! ;-)
That's quite an achievement considering it's mass is 125 stones.
Ironically, you can't blame the Americans for stones, as they don't have a clue what that is. Ironic, given their fetish for "traditional" non-metric units.
"Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
A F1 car is a single-seater speed machine with a cockpit engineered to be crash survivable. Not just with layers of carbon fiber honeycomb. But with exceptionally strong bonding agents between the layers, holding them rigid.
Somehow I doubt this little street car is engineered to the same specs.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
This is a nice Proof of Concept. I wonder if eventually we will develop a graphene based car shell which won't be cost prohibitive and could be used for manufactoring automotive parts such as the exterior, for example.
The problem with the way our automotive industry is regulated is that it mandates so many specifics that many new developments are basically a bad investment for manufacturers. And it's not just limited to automotive.
Boeing had to submit requests for all kinds of exemptions for its 787, having to explain why requirements that assume a metallic fuselage were not relevant to the composites used in their new jet.
Similarly, I see all sorts of vehicles which are allegedly non-road that upon a quick smell test reveal themselves to be every bit as much of a car as any other. They don't call them cars, of course, that would make them illegal. Sooner or later, we must as a society step back and decide if all these well-meaning regulations are what we really want.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
Many of the implementations are strictly forbidden by U.S. law (mostly due to it being outdated). It's a long time problem in the U.S. automobile industry. Just changing to newer better headlights took an immense campaign because the law stated they had to be x,y,z.
Please take your unsafe vehicle off the road until it has been equipped with the mandatory audible warning device.
Its time to break our addiction to the car and get serious about transportation:
http://www.skytran.net/
Cars and trucks are incredibly wasteful when you consider all the weight which has to be moved from point A to point B along with your fat ass. Increasing MPG does very little to solve the real problem of too many cars/people and not enough geography.
How many lanes can really fit into an area? I've driven on 5 lane highways which did little or nothing to increase traffic flow and forget about rush hour...its still a parking lot.
Imagine a 'network' of Skytran pods being able to haul people within 1/2 mile of any destination. The business advantages are immense when you consider a manufacturing company which builds their own hub and has pods deliver their materials. FedEx and UPS would no longer be the only game in town.
Look at the advances which the public road system does for humanity and then increase that exponentially with a SkyTran system...:)
Who said it didn't work? Or are you now trying to mandate that I use a less efficient method to stay safe?
Oil companies will have the U.S. Gov't torpedo the ships.
Over in Europe, Smart Cars get twice the mileage as here. Cars in Japan are almost twice as fuel efficient.
They'll have to put a device on the thing that makes it get under 50MPG, or they won't let it in the country.
The problem with RWD is that 99% of drivers have never driven one
Really? Are you saying that BMW and Mercedes between them have less than a one percent market share?
The "unsafe at any speed" wasn't that unsafe. The book was a condemnation of Detroit, not a condemnation of that car. If Nader's bias had been against foreign cars, he could easily have written it about the VW Bug, or any of a number of other cars. It was an easy target, but not a stand-out amongst unsafeness, and in fact, the crash rates for the cars and associated fatality rates, were in line with or often better than average.
Learn to love Alaska
Not everyone is going to respond to an engine being revved, while a horn is well established in every driving culture as a universal warning sound.
However I see you were riding a motorcycle so it is possible your horn is under-powered. That is a fault of the manufacturers of course, and regulators for allowing vehicles with such quiet kiddie whistles on the road in the first place.
You also have my sympathy - a lot of drivers simply aren't conditioned to look for anything smaller than a car when pulling out or changing lanes.
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
Your bad driving doesn't fix it. One time I was stuck in a turn lane in a smaller car, and I couldn't see far enough over the hill in front to see whether it was safe to turn. So I waited. The guy behind me honked. I stepped out of my car, walked back and informed him that I will go the first opportunity I feel safe going, and I'd appreciate him not honking. He looked like he thought I was going to shoot him. I got back in my car, and went when I felt comfortable.
That you reward honkers with aggressive driving when you'd rather drive in a different manner doesn't indicate any failing with clutches, just the driver.
Learn to love Alaska
Googled cheap cars.. The lowest end car is apparently the $12780 Nissan Versa. (I sure thought I've seen new cars even cheaper in dealer ads in the newspaper, but that was only me skimming, and I'm not 100% positive they were new.)
Over $12K "left over" from that thing, that looks much more like a motorcycle, compared to a 'regular car'.. that $12+K will buy a lot of gas.
(Yes, some people will pay extra for lots of things, like luxury cars.. and I am going to look into solar panels even though I think it won't make financial sense for me, though I also intend to get an electric car which may weigh it more in that direction.. But this sub-thread was about cheap/safe/legal transportation.)
The current definition I'd use is "Is the center diff manually controlled?" If yes, 4WD, of no, AWD. Though, the '80s Subaru GL I owned once had selectable diff, but was considered AWD at the time, but the label on it was 4WD. It didn't have a low, and so some consider it a 4WD only if it has a variable speed transfer case. Though I own an AWD SUV that doesn't need its 1 (6 speed automatic), so 1 is essentially a low, though about as low as 2nd in "low" on the "real" 4WDs I've driven. But manual lows has always been lower to allow for pulling boats out of the water with minimal clutch feathering.
Learn to love Alaska
I moved to a country with legal lane splitting and I've only heard once of a lane splitting biker down. In about 4 years. Plenty have died on the rural windy roads, but almost nobody lane splitting. So I'm confused as to why so many hate it and call it unsafe.
Learn to love Alaska
Your clutch hand is also the horn hand, and the horn is easier to hit than the clutch. Are you sure you don't ride a Huffy?
Learn to love Alaska
The Pinto today's dollars also cost 1/3 the price of a Prius.
And would be illegal. Illegal safety equipment, illegal crash worthiness. Illegal. Build the Prius to Pinto standards, and you'll get something like the car that this topic is about.
Learn to love Alaska
*snort* you're hilarious, but for someone that doesn't have enormous hands, yes, the clutch is far easier than reaching across the left-hand turn signal (having to readjust my hand at the same time, which, if someone is swerving into my lane I wouldn't want to have to rely on). Did around 7000 miles up the coast a few years ago, and while you might be able to do that on a Huffy, I'm pretty sure if that had been the case I'd be in better shape.
> The problem with RWD is that 99% of drivers have never
> driven one and have no clue how to properly handle one.
A generation ago, it was the other way around. Front wheel drive was something that only "furriners" produced, until the 1966 Oldsmobile Toronado http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oldsmobile_Toronado
> Conceived as Oldsmobile's full-size personal luxury car and competing directly with
> the Ford Thunderbird, the Toronado is historically significant as the first front-wheel
> drive automobile produced in the United States since the demise of the Cord in 1937.
But the Oldsmobile Toronado, and its corporate sibling the Cadillac Eldorado, were high-priced niche cars. It wasn't until the mid to late 1970's that Detroit began producing FWD cars in large numbers, prodded by competition from "furriners"...
Honda Civic (1973)
Volkswagen Rabbit (later renamed Golf) (1974)
Plymouth Horizon and Dodge Omni (1978)
Chevrolet Citation (1980)
People learned to switch from RWD to FWD, and they can go the other way if necessary.
BTW, the VW Golf was initially sold as the Rabbit in the US and Canada, due to trademark issues and similarity to Gulf Oil Corp's trademark http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_Oil After Gulf and SOCAL merged to form Chevron in 1985, that issue disappeared, and VW was able to switch to the same Golf name that it used in the rest of the world.
I'm not repeating myself
I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
On my bike, the horn is under the turn signal. If you can signal a left turn, you can honk without moving anything on your left hand but your thumb. I guess hogs are designed to be deliberately unsafe, as all the ones I've ridden (almost exclusively Japanese) have the same layout.
Learn to love Alaska
That you reward honkers with aggressive driving when you'd rather drive in a different manner doesn't indicate any failing with clutches, just the driver.
Reading comprehension - practice it. I didn't say I participated in the creeping every inch, I said I was getting honked at for NOT participating in it. Even with decent amounts of forward movement I still had to use the clutch thousands of times, and it was a pain.
You sound like one of those 'no one is a better driver than me' folks. Your example seems to indicate that you're a bad driver - if you couldn't see over the hill, there was NO safe time to execute your left turn no matter how long you waited. You should've proceeded straight and turned around at the first safe spot to approach your turn from the other direction.
Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
The Pinto today's dollars also cost 1/3 the price of a Prius.
And would be illegal. Illegal safety equipment, illegal crash worthiness. Illegal. Build the Prius to Pinto standards, and you'll get something like the car that this topic is about.
Pintos are legal to drive today. There is nothing illegal about them. You are correct that you could not build a new one today because of US safety standards, but actually, they are not far off, adding airbags would be pretty close. Having an actual frame means the manufacturer can use shock absorbing bumpers instead of crumple zones. And you would need to add reinforcements in the doors. None of that is insurmountable. Does that mean it would fair as well as a Prius in a crash? Probably not, but then, a Prius doesn't fair as well as a Ford Escape, either.
The Prius is built to MUCH higher crash safety standards than the Pinto or the Nova.
It is also expected to perform better, be much quieter, and last far longer than that old junk. The Pinto and Nova were econoboxes built as cheaply as possible.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/1977/09/pinto-madness
The Prius is also carrying a hefty battery pack.
Crash safety standards are relative. At highway speeds, it won't matter much which vehicle you are in if it is a large SUV or semi hitting you. Below 20mph, the Nova will sustain less damage than the Prius and have a good chance of still being able to be driven because of the steel under frame of the Nova versus the unibody construction of the Prius. As most accidents occur below 20 mph, the likelihood is that both occupants will fair about the same and the vehicle will be less likely to be totaled if it is a Nova versus a Prius. (But maybe the insurance companies don't know what they are talking about).
You are correct, though, that it isn't a fair comparison with the Nova being an economy family car and the Prius being a luxury compact. As for noise, yes, that electric motor is a lot quieter than the gas motor and the Prius does have better sound insulation for highway noise overall, but most road noise is related to tire and road conditions. As for longevity, a Prius will need new battery packs around 7 years. That is a major expense and the car is useless without them. So one could argue that it doesn't really last longer. And definitely it fails on performance, unless performance means only mpg. However, in terms of acceleration, from 0 to 60, a Nova will out perform a Prius hands down and if you try and make a Prius outperform the Nova, you sacrifice the mpg, the only performance area the Prius wins.
But instead of comparing the Prius to 40 year old cars, compare it to the VW or BMW diesels that get similar mileage (upper 40s) have real performance and don't have costly battery packs that need to be replaced every 7 years.
Pintos are legal to drive today.
But illegal to sell as new.
There is nothing illegal about them.
Except the bumpers, the airbags, the crash rating, and everything else about it.
Probably not, but then, a Prius doesn't fair as well as a Ford Escape, either.
A Ford F-150 doesn't fair as well as a Honda Civic. And I'm not sure about your assertion, I've not seen the comparison before, and I'm tempted to believe you made it up and are hoping nobody checks.
I drove a '67 Bug for years. No seat belts. It was legal to drive, and legal to sell as used, but would have not been legal to sell as new. It is only because of specific grandfather clauses that the Pinto isn't illegal to drive, as it is illegal to make.
Learn to love Alaska
with irate drivers honking and attempting to rear-end you of you didn't creep every inch
Logic dictates that you did creep every inch for at least some small portion, as you indicate that honking stops in that case. If not, how would you know? And "attempted rear-end" is 100% ignorable. They try to never actually hit you.
Your example seems to indicate that you're a bad driver - if you couldn't see over the hill, there was NO safe time to execute your left turn no matter how long you waited.
And you are an idiot. I was at a light and waited for a protected arrow. Your problem is that you are an idiot and presume everyone else is as well. We aren't all as dumb as you. If someone deliberately rams me from behind because they are mad at traffic, I'll press assault charges against them, so bring it on. He'll not be driving for a while. I've been in the same situation, and I managed to spend a long time with the clutch out, either in first or neutral.
Learn to love Alaska
Sure, it wasn't that bad by the standards of that time. But I meant by todays standards.
for i in `facebook friends "=bday" 2>/dev/null | cut -d " " -f 3-`; do facebook wallpost $i "Happy birthday!"; done
Logic dictates that you did creep every inch for at least some small portion, as you indicate that honking stops in that case. If not, how would you know?
Again, reading comprehension - practice it. I said ...irate drivers honking and attempting to rear-end you if you didn't creep every inch.... I used the pronoun 'you', which indicates a situation not specific the the writer. I did not say I gave in to the honking, only that there were those doing the honking and those that crept (I presume those with automatics) were spared additional honking until there was another gap. There were only about a hundred other cars immediately around me that I could use as examples. Car X doesn't creep, gets honked at until it moves. Repeat for all the other cars around me in the traffic jam.
One time I was stuck in a turn lane in a smaller car, and I couldn't see far enough over the hill in front to see whether it was safe to turn. So I waited. The guy behind me honked. I stepped out of my car, walked back and informed him that I will go the first opportunity I feel safe going, and I'd appreciate him not honking.
No mention of being at a light, no mention of the possibility of a 'protected arrow', so your vitriol at my interpretation of your poorly-described situation is unwarranted.
Your problem is that you are an idiot and presume everyone else is as well. ...and the ad hominem attacks that indicate a weak mind begin. I don't associate intelligence with driving ability as you seem to. My intelligence aside, I must be doing something right because I've been driving since I was 16 (that's 32 years now) without a single speeding ticket and without ever causing* an accident of any sort. I do assume that everyone is a bad driver - that is called defensive driving and it keeps me and those around me safe.
I managed to spend a long time with the clutch out, either in first or neutral.
Time spent with the clutch out was not the issue, if that was your understanding than you misread my statement. It was the sheer number of clutch engagements/disengagements (even without creeping at every chance) that wore me out.
If someone deliberately rams me from behind because they are mad at traffic, I'll press assault charges against them, so bring it on. He'll not be driving for a while.
I love your passive-agressive bravado. In the real world you'd find it impossible to prove malice or intent, so it would just be chalked up to another typical fender-bender.
All of your replies in this thread have been rather angry; perhaps you should interact with society more or get some help with anger management.
Don't bother replying, I will not read it.
*I have been involved in exactly 1 'accident' where someone plowed into the side of my car from a driveway. Not at fault. Funny aside: She was driving a rental car because she totaled her own car the day before.
Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
No mention of being at a light, no mention of the possibility of a 'protected arrow', so your vitriol at my interpretation of your poorly-described situation is unwarranted.
How does that matter? I had an unprotected left turn option. The person behind honked for me not going when I didn't feel it safe to do so. I did go when it was safe. The fact it was at a light, and I had a green ball has no bearing on the facts. You made an assumption that I was a bad driver, that was the only error made. It was yours. You were looking for something somewhere to complain about, so you found it. Good for you. I'm sure you feel better.
I love your passive-agressive bravado. In the real world you'd find it impossible to prove malice or intent, so it would just be chalked up to another typical fender-bender.
I wish I'd pressed charges the one time the lady in the large SUV told the trooper "Yeah, I saw him, but I figured he'd get out of my way" when she changed lanes into me. That proves intent. Of course, after telling the trooper that, the accident was 100% her fault, though that didn't stop the driver from insisting that I shouldn't have been in her way, and she has the right to change lanes when she comes across a slow car in front of her. Maybe I'm still mad over someone who claimed they saw me and deliberately hit me because the felt like it. A nice confession of assault in front of a cop is something I wish I'd pursued. I've wised up since then. Press hard, press early. Like the time my sister was rearended in a parking lot waiting for a parked car pulling out and lost her license for it. PROTIP: don't get hit by a lawyer who knows the responding officer.
I'd like a system more like Mexico. Every crash is a criminal action. Police take them seriously (even if only to extract bribes from the guilty party). If we had that in the US, then there would be fewer crashes and lots more nice people. Instead, we have people honking because you are driving in a safe and reasonable manner that they don't like, and trying to rear-end you repeatedly.
Learn to love Alaska
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=joMK1WZjP7g
'59 Bel Air works too, when I see the Corvair mentioned by name, I don't like it (the implications are beyond the reality). The actual crash statistics on that car weren't that bad. *All* the cars were unsafe. See the common and rarely singled-out Bel Air.
Learn to love Alaska