On Wednesday, January 29, 2003, at 04:23 PM, Harmon Seaver wrote:

On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 03:36:20PM -0800, Mike Rosing wrote:

...

On Wed, 29 Jan 2003, Harmon Seaver wrote:

...

Although canola oil is a much better source for fuel. And diesels a much better IC engine for hybrids. Even in non-hybrids, VW builds some pretty nice diesel cars, including the Lupo, on the market for a couple years now, which gets 80mpg. And the prototype that VW's CEO drives around in that gets 280mpg.

From http://www.used-volkswagen-cars.co.uk/volkswagenlupo.htm:

"As befits a small car, the cheapest models come with a 1.0-litre engine that is decent enough, though finds it hard going on the motorway."

Hard going on the motorway? It cruises at 80mph. And as much as I love riding bicycles, even in Winter, the Lupo certainly has a lot more practical uses than a bike. Even neater is their new one tho -- http://www.vwvortex.com/news/index_1L.html

It too will do 75mph -- fast enough for the likes of me. At 239mpg. What's that saying about muscle cars? Something about the size of their motors is an inverse ratio to the size of their dicks?

It's an old and silly line. I value my life quite highly. I put about 8000 miles per year on my main car (and about 4000 miles per year on an older SUV I used to haul large items, etc.). My car gets about 20 mpg. This costs me about $700 per year in gasoline. Some of the leftie/environmentalists on another list I am on attempted to argue, strenuously, that I owed it "to the planet" and "to yourself" to start driving a Prius, a hybrid that the enthusiasts say averages around 40 mpg. Whatever the exact number, if it is 40 mpg it would "save" me about $300-400 per year in gas, depending on the grade of gas it takes. (Of course, my 1991 Mercedes-Benz is bought and paid for, and costs less than a Prius by about $6000-$9000, based on blue book comparisons of early 90s MBs to late 90s-early 00s Priusi. Saving $350 a year will take 15-25 years to amortize, modulo others costs.) Then there's safety, and personal injury insurance rates. If my 3500-pound S-Class hits a Prius, the laws of physics dictate what happens. And if I hit a golf cart, er, a Honda Lupo, I'd better yell "Fore!" (Here's a quote about the size: "Developed in the wind tunnel and built entirely from composite carbon-fiber reinforced material, it has a width of only 1.25 m (49.2 inches) and is just over a meter high (39 inches).") Since my life and my safety is vastly more valuable to me than saving $350-$600 a year in gas, I'll be keeping my 3500-pound S-Class. (Actually, the little golf car runabouts are slightly popular (maybe one car in 2000 is one of these golf carts) near the downtown beach area around here. But not on the California freeways, and most definitely not the on the highway which consumes most of my driving: the mountainous Highway 17 between Santa Cruz and San Jose, with 18-wheelers only a foot away. I wouldn't want to be sitting inside a golf cart "just over a meter high" when the wheels of an 18-wheeler are taller!) And then there's the issue of carrying passengers, cargo, plus the availability of repairs in small towns, etc. A lot of "theoretically good" solutions fail for market reasons, what someone correctly said is Metcalfe's Law, or the fax effect. Until fueling stations carry exotic fuels, or until all cars and trucks are reduced to golf cart sizes, the disadvantages outweigh the slight savings in fuel costs. I'm quite surprised to see, on this list and on other lists, the ignorance of basic economics. Markets clear. Gas costs what it costs. To argue that there is a "moral cost" to consider, as some on those other lists have been arguing, is silly. Prisoner's Dilemma and all the usual arguments apply. It's why I'll be safer when I run into Harmon on the freeways. His heirs will appreciate his savings in gasoline for the time he owned his Lupo. --Tim May