Post #275,265
12/9/06 9:33:36 AM
12/9/06 9:34:24 AM
|
Carbon Footprints.
Most (I'm seeing figures of around 80%) of the environmental impact of any vehicle is actually in the manufacturing stage. My car is much simpler (both electrically, mechanically and chemically) than a Prius. (It's also much, much better dynamically and will last much longer but that's not for here)
My car isn't actually listed on [link|http://cnwmr.com/nss-folder/automotiveenergy/Cost%20per%20mile%20by%20segment%20by%20model%20and%20sorts.xls|this spreadsheet], but if I point out that the dust-to-dust per-mile cost of a Porsche Carrera 4 is less than that of a Prius, and much less than that of the Honda hybrids (Civic and Accord) and that 6 series, which is pretty darned big, has a smaller cost per mile, too, then I think that it's not unreasonable to assume that the E39 5 series is less, too.
I'm aware that this study has upset a lot of people in the environmental lobby and that there's a lot of back-and-forth about it; there're "credible scientists" on both sides of the debate claiming that it's bollocks and gospel by turns.
I'm also finding a lot of anecdotal evidence that the manufacture and recycling of NiMH batteries is not something that does the environment a great deal of good, mainly due to the massive energy costs involved. Unfortunately for my argument, I'm yet to find something that's concrete.
<rant>One of the reasons that the hybrid is getting a lot of airtime is that it's one of those things that the car manufacturers have all had to commit to for political reasons. At the highest levels of government, there is a tacit agreement that anthropogenic climate change is (a) real and (b) reversible and so, in order to secure gubmint funding around the world, the car companies have to be seen to be "doing something".
Of course, they're not doing the right something, which would be to produce workable hydrogen (no, BMW, a 7-series that loses half its fuel in 9 days through evaporation is not the right thing) or biodiesel cars.
Even better, of course, would be for the ecofuckwits to not get into their Prius at all but to get a job that allows zero-emission commuting - like Mike V, for example. And I'm willing to bet that the fuckers fly around hither and thither on holiday, too, rather than taking a train to the Lake District or Cornwall. But they've got a PRIUS and buy organic carrots, so they're GREEN. Fuckers.</rant>
Edit: It wasn't a 911.
Peter
[link|http://www.no2id.net/|Don't Let The Terrorists Win]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Home]
Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
[link|http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?pwhysall|A better terminal emulator]
[link|http://darwinia.co.uk/|[image|http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h262/pwhysall/Misc/saveus.png|0|Darwinia||]]
Edited by pwhysall
Dec. 9, 2006, 09:34:24 AM EST
|
Post #275,269
12/9/06 10:52:33 AM
|
Thanks. The CNW report has problems... 41 kB img.
That's an interesting spreadsheet, but some of it makes little sense at first glance. E.g. an Explorer has a lower lifetime cost per mile than a Jetta Wagon?!? The [link|http://cnwmr.com/nss-folder/automotiveenergy/|Dust to Dust] site is put out by a marketing firm - CNW Research - so I would want to know a lot more about the methodology. For instance, what are the assumptions about the vehicle lifetime and miles driven per year? E.g. I assume an xB would be driven a lot more than a Maybach or Aston Martin. The skeptic in me notes that Daimler-Chrysler is citing the work in an [link|http://www.jeep.co.uk/jeep/pdf/greenjeep.pdf|ad] in the UK: \ufffdCNW research shows that the greenest car you can buy right now is the Jeep Wrangler\ufffd Yeah, right. Toyota says it's [link|http://www.motoring.co.za/index.php?fArticleId=3532239&fSectionId=751&fSetId=381|bogus] and cites research at Argonne National Lab and MIT. MIT and the Argonne laboratory concluded that the majority (80-85 percent) of the total lifetime energy use of a vehicle comes from the driving stage, says Toyota, while the CNW study shows these percentages to be reversed.
Toyota also pointed out that two Toyota models mentioned in the report, the US market-only Scion xA and xB, were built on the same assembly line using the same engine and transmission and weighed the same within 20kg, yet the CNW research shows a 53 percent difference in the lifetime energy use of these vehicles. As you mention, there's arguments back and forth, but it looks to me like the CNW report has major problems. Argonne has a software package called [link|http://www.transportation.anl.gov/software/GREET/index.html|GREET] that can be used to compare various total costs for various propulsion technologies. In their posted [link|http://www.transportation.anl.gov/software/GREET/sample_results.html|examples], they show that the Total Energy Use (BTU/mi) is substantially less for gas or diesel hybrids than for conventional autos. PTW is "Pump to Wheels", WTP is "Well to Pump": [image|http://www.transportation.anl.gov/software/GREET/images/greet_sample_total_energy.gif|0|GREET Example|360|599](I don't know the details of the assumptions in this simulation and can't play with GREET right now...) Cheers, Scott. (Who remembers, "Microsoft marketing reports that WindowsXP is cheaper than Linux!" ;-)
|
Post #275,271
12/9/06 10:57:04 AM
|
Prius lifetime
Toyota warrants the battery for the "lifetime of the car". This is 8 years or 100K miles. Most consumer cars are, if properly maintained, capable of well over 200K miles.
Exotica like AM and Ferrari I wouldn't care to comment on.
Peter
[link|http://www.no2id.net/|Don't Let The Terrorists Win]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Home]
Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
[link|http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?pwhysall|A better terminal emulator]
[link|http://darwinia.co.uk/|[image|http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h262/pwhysall/Misc/saveus.png|0|Darwinia||]]
|
Post #275,281
12/9/06 12:36:52 PM
|
Most non-US Cars
US Cars seem to be worth about 100k miles. Perhaps its more like 150k now. They're still mostly crap and I'll certainly never waste a buck on another one.
Better engineered cars from sweden and germany do a lot better.
I'm driving my 1989 Volvo at around 190k miles and see no reason I won't keep driving it another couple-5 years. Maybe longer given that I'm only using it to drive to Vacouver once a month and local shopping.
[link|http://www.blackbagops.net|Black Bag Operations Log]
[link|http://www.objectiveclips.com|Artificial Intelligence]
[link|http://www.badpage.info/seaside/html|Scrutinizer]
|
Post #275,283
12/9/06 1:36:22 PM
|
US cars outside the US...
...are a bit of a rarity. Over here, for example, the Chrysler 300C has been on sale for about a year. Allegedly based on the Mercedes E-Class platform, it's incredibly ugly with a crappy interior. People aren't buying them in droves. Here's the money shot from Jeremy Clarkson's review of the touring version: For \ufffd27,275 this looks like the bargain of the century and a brief test drive will do little to dispel that notion. The diesel engine is so unclattery that I had to get out to check the badge. And despite the size it\ufffds terribly easy to drive. The only thing that might put you off is the limited rear visibility, but apart from this you\ufffdd be hard pressed to find anything wrong. Don\ufffdt worry, though. I have. Lots.
You need to think of this car as one of those home-brand council house stereos that you find in department stores. It\ufffds cheap, but it\ufffds cheap for a reason, which becomes abundantly clear when you turn it on. It\ufffds rubbish. So it goes with the 300C. Chrysler, which is owned by Mercedes these days, is at pains to point out that this car is not \ufffd as I\ufffdve previously claimed \ufffd based on the old Mercedes E-class. They say they considered this idea but dismissed it.
Pity. Basing it on a well-proven car would have been a better idea than basing it on a cr\ufffdme br\ufffdl\ufffde. God, it\ufffds a wallowy old hector. You have absolutely no sense that you\ufffdre connected to the road in any way. Imagine, somehow, fitting an engine to your duvet and you start to get the picture. Of course this might not bother you but the ride comfort will. Despite the wallow-matic suspension and the tall tyres, it crashes and jolts where a normal, proper European car glides and hangs on.
Then there\ufffds the sat nav screen, which is so bright it\ufffds like driving into a second world war searchlight, and the difficulty you\ufffdll have while parking and the sheer ghastliness of the half-timbered steering wheel.
Yes, it\ufffds cheap, but so\ufffds the RAF these days. And that doesn\ufffdt work either. In the 2L family saloon class, the Mondeo got its arse handed to it last year by the BMW 3 series. I can't see an American-spec (bigger engine, squishy suspension, automatic) car doing too well against the quality of vehicles that Ford and BMW put into that sector. You might not like BMWs much, but you cannot deny that dynamically, they are among the best in the world. I don't know why more American manufacturers don't make a concerted effort to sell us stuff. Mustangs have a small but incredibly dedicated following. Vipers and other muscly stuff too. RHD Corvettes at the right price sell like hot cakes. Maybe the competition is just too stiff over here. I can't think of an American car that would match the driving dynamics and performance of the little French hatchbacks like the Clio and 206 (French people! Make small cars! You're good at that! Stay away from the big 'stuff, though. It never goes well. Leave that to the Germans.). We buy lots and lots of these because they're small, cheap, a hoot to drive and economical. Well, economical if you don't get the Renault Clio with a 3L V6 in it. Complete nutterwagon.
Peter
[link|http://www.no2id.net/|Don't Let The Terrorists Win]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Home]
Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
[link|http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?pwhysall|A better terminal emulator]
[image|http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h262/pwhysall/Misc/saveus.png|0|Darwinia||]
|
Post #275,319
12/10/06 12:30:01 AM
|
US market is very competitive
and that's one reason a number of Chinese carmakers are looking to take a crack at Europe first.
IMNSHO, French cars are crap - that's based on driving a Peugeot 308 (or something similar) in Spain over 1000 miles or so. It floated all over the road - very soft. I saw very few French cars in Germany. Peugeot and Renault both ran screaming from the US. Maybe the French have improved in the last five years or sell different cars in the UK.
BMWs are nice cars - and almost always get great reviews from the US enthusiast magazines - but the maintenance costs are way high (at least compared to typical Japanese car). If I ever go for a cheap, used luxary car, I'll shop Lexus (SC400, LX470) or Infiniti (Q45, FX35/45, G35 coupe).
For a fun, reliable car, we have options such as the Scion tC and Acura Integra/RSX, which are very reliable.
If Lexus could ever get their styling together (and, based on the latest LS460, it looks like they haven't yet), BMW and MB would be in serious trouble in the US.
--Tony
Who is still very happy with his reliable, paid off long ago, 14 year old, fun to drive RWD Nissan 240SX convertible.
|
Post #275,344
12/10/06 10:29:58 AM
|
Much agreement.
Lexus cars look horrible to my eyes, unless they're knockoffs of a big Mercedes barge (like the previous LS, and even that looks bloated). The latest "Look Ma, my car can park itself!" LS is just weird - it looks wayyyy too long from the side.
I think Acura has the most consistently good-looking cars these days. The RSX was a sweet design, and the TL is very well done. You have to look pretty closely to realize that it's based on an Accord (a give-away is the front and rear glass). The Honda brand, on the other hand, usually disappoints because it's become so bland (see the Accord).
BMW can make very nice handling cars, but I more-often like the styling of M-B cars. Both are expensive to maintain, as you note.
I think the Germans' profits over the years have suffered due to competition with Lexus, Acura, and Infiniti. But the competition is good for all of us, and they're branching out into new brands (like the Mini).
I think the French would have a tough time re-entering the US car market. They are known (if they're known at all) for making quirky cars and consumers here have become accustomed to the importance of reliability. Building a service network will also be a challenge.
Initially, the Chinese will have to compete on price. They're used to fighting battles for decades, but one has to wonder how long they can tolerate huge losses these days. I don't expect the Chinese market to continue its 10% per year growth rate indefinitely (AFAIK, it's never happened before). When the Chinese recession comes, I would expect it to be a duesey. I wouldn't bet against it being 15 years or more before China sells more than 50k cars a year in the US. The existing big players aren't stupid either, though they act that way sometimes. If very low cost cars become important in the US, they'll ship cars from places like Brazil, Thailand, etc., to the US to compete and not simply hand the market to the Chinese manufacturers.
The 240SX was a nice looking car, too. I think Nissan would do better if they'd bring over more light-weight, small cars like that again. They should have had things like the Versa here long ago, IMO. It apparently competes very well against the Honda Fit (which admittedly is an older design).
Cheers,
Scott.
(Who realizes he's gone on too long again...)
|
Post #275,391
12/10/06 9:45:11 PM
|
I'm not an Acura fan
or Honda fan, although the RSX is very nice looking - and going out of production. Acura is trying to move upscale, which I think is a mistake, especially because they do not have any V-8s. The S2000 is OK, most Hondas are boring, and the Element and Ridgeline are very ugly.
Many of the Chinese auto companies have ties to regional governments, so if the government has the money, they have a lot of staying power (apparently the provincial governments are quite powerful in China). One company just spent about $1 billion improving their plant with imported equipment. And they realize that just functional doesn't cut it in Europe or the US (one big problem is workers' "iron rice bowl" mentality - in the past in China, nobody ever got fired).
The biggest Chinese car companies have volumes of about 200,000 cars/year, but some have bigger volumes in joint ventures with non-Chinese auto makers. My guess is that the companies with joint venture experience will do better outside of China.
I suspect the US will go into recession or little growth soon (based on housing blowing up), and it'll probably affect China, too.
Anyway, cars are a very personal thing. For example, I don't like to work on cars or spend a lot of money on maintenance. If I did do my own work, I'd be much more likely to consider BMW or Audi.
BTW, the 240SX in Japanese form is called the Silvia, and was used quite a bit as a stock car racer with souped up engines. I've seen a 240SX on the road with a "Silvia" badge, but I'm not sure it's real. After all, I've seen a Mercedes with a "AMG CLK 500" badge, which isn't real (the AMG model is CLK55).
--Tony
|
Post #275,405
12/11/06 12:03:02 AM
|
On Acura and Honda. (new thread)
Created as new thread #275404 titled [link|/forums/render/content/show?contentid=275404|On Acura and Honda.]
|
Post #275,286
12/9/06 3:16:12 PM
|
238k on the ford van, still runs, expensive to buy gas for
most lincolns are good to about 250k also withput major repair (speaking 1987 and older, no experience with the newer ones) once the crap little car is paid for a kid will inherit it and I will be driving an old lincoln again.
thanx,
bill
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 51 years. meep
reach me at [link|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net]
|
Post #275,288
12/9/06 3:28:31 PM
|
I dunno about that anymore.
My 1988 pontiac 6000 had 227K when I traded it (it had ugly paint but was functionally fine - needed a pickup because I started doing cabling work)
Our 1995 Dodge Grand Caravan had 195K when we sold it (its transmission was leaky - but otherwise it was functionally fine as well. My boss was selling his 1997 - my wife looked at it and loved it, he made us a great deal, so we upgraded.)
Our 1997 Dodge Grand Caravan had 178K when we traded (its transmission was slipping - we stupidly bought an '05 town and country to replace it...shoulda just fixed this one)
My 1999 Chevy pickup has 156K on it right now. I bought it with 80k on it and have done brakes, a belt, an alternator and a battery.
Comparatively - our 1999 Nissan Sentra had 136k on it when it's motor gave up, and it's interior was shot. My 1984 Toyota Tercel was the biggest POS I've ever owned. I sunk more money into that thing in the ~year i owned it than any other car I've ever had.
I remember, though, in the early eighties when people would talk about choosing this car or that car because 'it has the best chance of making it to 100k miles of the cars I like.' I think they've all come a long way.
--
Steve
[link|http://www.ubuntulinux.org|Ubuntu]
|
Post #275,292
12/9/06 4:28:58 PM
|
No need to edit.
PeeWee writes: ...the dust-to-dust per-mile cost of a Porsche Carrera 4 is less than that of a Prius... [...] Edit: It wasn't a 911. Was too. The Carrera is a 911. HTH!
[link|mailto:MyUserId@MyISP.CountryCode|Christian R. Conrad]
(I live in Finland, and my e-mail in-box is at the Saunalahti company.)
Ah, the Germans: Masters of Convoluted Simplification. — [link|http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=1603|Jehovah]
|
Post #275,293
12/9/06 4:31:28 PM
|
Re: No need to edit.
Ta for that.
I'm not a Porscheophile. They all look much of a muchness to me.
I'm sure they're very good cars, but I can't get excited about them.
Peter
[link|http://www.no2id.net/|Don't Let The Terrorists Win]
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org|There is no K5 Cabal]
[link|http://guildenstern.dyndns.org|Home]
Use P2P for legitimate purposes!
[link|http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?pwhysall|A better terminal emulator]
[link|http://darwinia.co.uk/|[image|http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h262/pwhysall/Misc/saveus.png|0|Darwinia||]]
|
