4 of the 10 were Trucks, which means most of them play a role in someone's WORK.
[/QUOTE]
Electric cars are a pipe dream
- Thread starter Syzygys
- Start date
4 of the 10 were Trucks, which means most of them play a role in someone's WORK.
[/QUOTE]
I have seen American reality TV shows. Families running trucks when they could run something more suitable. Problem is you have a warped view of what is a gas guzzler and what isn't a gas guzzler (exactly my point).
F-series (truck)
Silverado (truck)
Dodge Ram (truck)
Malibu (a large car with no more capacity for passengers than a VW Passat. Just got bigger engine options, and a heavier weight.)
Ford Escape (large car, small engine for the size= poor economy)
Ford Fusion (really like the look of this but again is it economical, still a large car)
GMC Sierra (truck)
Ford Focus (2litre as standard, uk focus starts with a 1, 1.2 litre engine, but faster models are available, better performance than US models no doubt due to a reduced frame weight)
Impala (doesn't need such a big engine. Would it beat a 3litre Golf?)
Jeep (standard 3.8 litre engine. Is that economical?)
4 trucks yes. But all of the cars have bigger engine options than is needed, and heavier weights. All are no doubt poor on economy compared to something comparable over here, because your vehicles tend to be heavier. And I mean without the engine in the frame.
All in all these vehicles could be smaller and supply a comparable service if they were engineered to tighter tolerances.
It's funny I have recently seen some talk online about the Ford Diesel Fiesta and Diesel Ranger Global Pick-Up Truck.It seems many in America want these type of vehicles due to their improved mileage range.The Fiesta Diesel gets 63 mpg and the Global Ranger also has much improved mileage.The Diesel Ranger is sized between the American F-150 and the American Ranger but Ford will not import it to the States due to competition with it's successful F-150.Ford actually states they wont import it due to it being to close in size to the F-150 but all agree that's hogwash.We in America get only the gas guzzlers.
Until or unless the US Government steps in and gets serious about fuel economy and alternative transportation we will keep limping along blindly and with no real solutions falling further and further behind.
Until or unless the US Government steps in and gets serious about fuel economy and alternative transportation we will keep limping along blindly and with no real solutions falling further and further behind.
I'm saying a lot are yes. (Or with other businesses that require the hauling capabilites inherent in a truck). You don't seem to understand the implications for the workforce in a country that has grown by 60 million people over the last two decades? That means not only building houses for these people but all the supporting infrastructure, roads, schools, offices, shopping etc. So yes, the US has a significantly larger general construction effort going on and that means a lot of people in the TRADES to support this dramatic growth. The fact is people generally don't buy trucks unless they need the capabilities they provide. You are just an anti-American BIGOT and think that Americans are ignorant.
Again, just your opinion not based on any facts. Gas isn't exactly cheap over here considering we drive more than twice as many miles per year than you do, so it factors in to our decisions just like it does over in the UK.
According to the figures I can find, the average miles per vehicle in the UK is 10,000 miles per year, but that includes all vehicles and so for passenger cars it's going to be quite a bit less. In the US, we drive our cars an average of 24,000 miles, so this much greater utilization affects our choice of car. You seem to think there is no difference between us, and so our choices should be the same, but that is demonstrably false. I've tried to give you an idea of a few of the differences that account for our choices but you've taken the low road and your obvious BIGOTRY is why you simply concluded that Americans are ignorant.
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/downloads/theme_compendia/UK_in_Figs_2002.pdf
You wouldn't and in the same situation, we wouldn't either. Again, contrary to your opinion Americans aren't ignorant.
Sure in the UK it might be cheaper because your country is STAGNANT.
In the US that is not the case and there is simply no way that any major building supply company could operate a delivery service to keep up with the friggin demand. You simply don't have a clue as to what it takes to build out the equivalent in housing, offices, utilities and buildings for the entire population of the UK in just twenty years.
Again you have no idea what you are talking about. One of the requirements is to pull a heavy load that includes a trailer and 4WD is a necessity, so NO a mini and a trailer won't do that.
The best vehicle for my needs was the one I bought, for you to presume that you know better than I do what vehicle I need is the height of arrogance mixed with a ton of stupidity.
And you clearly have no idea what the average American needs.
I think Ford has a better idea than you do of who buys their trucks and what they are looking for in them, hence this ad for the number 1 selling vehicle in the US:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhEkVakVWFE
Notice who they are selling to and what they are stressing about its capabilities. If you spend millions in advertising, you know who is buying your product and what they are looking for.
UD said:
LOL, well that explains a lot.
I've been hearing a lot about this big wedding going on over there, should I likewise assume that all Brits are into such frivolous excess?
Your anti-American bigotry simply blinds you to the idea that our needs might possibly dictate our choices and our choices likewise dictate what is offered. Not every car and truck model can be sold/supported by a car maker, so since the majority of buyers need larger more powerful trucks, few smaller models are available here. They don't sell enough to make building them for our market profitable.
Arthur
Last edited:
The Ford Fiesta issue:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Fiesta
I suspect a similar issue exists with the diesel version of the truck.
Ford isn't stupid, they know small diesels don't sell well here and the reason is unlike the EU we pay quite a bit more for a gallon of Diesel then we do for a gallon of gas. So when you look at the higher cost to build a diesel plus the higher cost at the pump (about 30 cent a gallon more then gas where I live), you can see why sales might not justify bringing in another model that is within 10% of the size of the F-150. Note, similarly, Ford doesn't sell the F-150 in the countries where they are bringing out the T6 Global Ranger either, and it's the best selling vehicle in the US.
It's an expensive proposition to introduce a new model into a market (remember we drive on the right, so you can't just import a model, you have to make it for the US market), and so to outsiders in the industry it might appear that the decisions don't make sense.
I know the higher MPG you get with Diesel makes up for the higher cost per gallon, but at about 10% higher cost, it really cuts down on the savings and when you factor in the higher initial price of the Diesel engine and the fact that not many in town stations carry diesel, it really cuts down on the demand in the US for diesel powered vehicles unless you are towing heavy loads which always favors the diesel.
http://www.worktruckonline.com/Channel/Fuel-Management/Article/Story/2008/05/Gas-vs-Diesel.aspx
Arthur
Last edited:
Again, the US is a huge place and prices for houses vary tremendously, even within the same state. You really need to decide WHERE you want to put this house to determine price.
Right now, buying existing is generally a much better deal than building by the way.
http://www.newhomes.com/search.jsp
Simply put in locations, number of bedrooms and take a look.
Three different areas:
http://www.newhomeguide.com/New-Homes/North-Carolina/Raleigh/
http://www.newhomeguide.com/New-Homes/Florida/Sarasota/
http://www.realtor.com/realestatean...4_Troupsburg_NY_14885_M48749-34896?source=web
Yes, I looked into it, but the actual article referenced by the link you posted didn't mention the ability to deal with Fast Recharge at all.
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ja110522x
I'm not being slow. You say that Fast Recharge is what will make EVs work but now you say that very few will need to recharge during the day. If that's the case then there is not likely to be many places to get a fast recharge as demand drives availability of the commodity. The last place you would expect it then would be in the middle of nowhere (between cities) as the demand there would not justify the expense.
You are if you think that a $56,000 battery means diddly squat or that driving on a lighted track in a MICRO sized car at 28 mph means anything compared to REAL LIFE passenger car requirements.
What I find interesting is that places like the UK where annual car miles and daily trip miles tend to be short are within the limitations of an an EV, but unfortunately justifying the high cost of a battery is based on savings of using electricity vs gas which means to pay for the high initial cost of the battery one needs to put a lot of miles on the cars each year. So I wonder if they will really work out there?
Arthur
Last edited:
I am sorry Adoucette, I really can't buy the fact you think US models are fitter for purpose. But I suppose we will have to agree to differ because you do not wish to be swayed.
The 650 mile range EV is obviously a prototype/mock-up made for the means of breaking the record, but there is no reason why this tech cannot be refined and cheapened for production in years to come. Demand will drive down costs on new bat. tech. And ranges will improve at higher speeds.
The "bigotry" (as you call it) I have expressed is obviously well founded as I think you could PROBABLY cope with a smaller engined vehicle. And definitely the average American could and I will explain to you why in a sec. To say driving more miles requires a larger engine is just rubbish.
Thanks for the backup X, there are obviously some Americans who are looking for a more sensible option.
How can a country where 82%, yes 82% live in urbanized areas (worldwide urban rate 50%). Areas where building suppliers can deliver goods. I think in Uk it is more like 50% but I am going from memory. Seems to me you are trying to project your needs, or local people to you and their needs onto the rest of your population. The truth is 82% of Americans live in urban or suburban areas which are catered to sufficiently by building contractors (I would bet).
So the ONLY conclusion I can possibly come to is that Americans simply like big cars, and ARE ignorant of what they actually need. And ARE confusing what they want very badly with what they need. You are an individual and know what you need. Does the rest of America? (I was only saying a normal car could carry 5 bodies comfortably. Only you know your true haulage needs, and the availability of economical haulage services in YOUR area). But what the hell does an 82% urbanized population's average citizens need with a truck or large engined vehicle. I know people in our cities do not need them. Am I missing something? Or are you just attempting to delude the participants in this thread with your way off assertions that Americans need big vehicles to haul things that do not exist, or to travel further distances using more fuel per mile.
Can you please explain, in laymans terms as I am feeling a little bit slow, what the hell an 82% URBANIZED population need with that top ten American cars you showed me???
As to the longer and longer range of EVs issue; Maybe batswap would then be a better option if the demand for recharge was much lower. This is a very fluid debate and I am uncovering new data all the time. But yes, if battery ranges are increased to 600mile norm then nighttime charging would be sufficient for 99% of cars. Also this does however seem to open up the debate for electrical lorries? If longer ranges are a real possibility then would a 600mile range (for beginners) be enough for a long-haul lorry? I suppose this opens up a whole new can of worms and I am only inaccurately conjecturalising on this lorry idea.
I do feel you have some explaining to do on the true demographics of your nation. I don't see any way you can justify an urbanized population driving such big vehicles. I wait with anticipation
The 650 mile range EV is obviously a prototype/mock-up made for the means of breaking the record, but there is no reason why this tech cannot be refined and cheapened for production in years to come. Demand will drive down costs on new bat. tech. And ranges will improve at higher speeds.
The "bigotry" (as you call it) I have expressed is obviously well founded as I think you could PROBABLY cope with a smaller engined vehicle. And definitely the average American could and I will explain to you why in a sec. To say driving more miles requires a larger engine is just rubbish.
Thanks for the backup X, there are obviously some Americans who are looking for a more sensible option.
How can a country where 82%, yes 82% live in urbanized areas (worldwide urban rate 50%). Areas where building suppliers can deliver goods. I think in Uk it is more like 50% but I am going from memory. Seems to me you are trying to project your needs, or local people to you and their needs onto the rest of your population. The truth is 82% of Americans live in urban or suburban areas which are catered to sufficiently by building contractors (I would bet).
So the ONLY conclusion I can possibly come to is that Americans simply like big cars, and ARE ignorant of what they actually need. And ARE confusing what they want very badly with what they need. You are an individual and know what you need. Does the rest of America? (I was only saying a normal car could carry 5 bodies comfortably. Only you know your true haulage needs, and the availability of economical haulage services in YOUR area). But what the hell does an 82% urbanized population's average citizens need with a truck or large engined vehicle. I know people in our cities do not need them. Am I missing something? Or are you just attempting to delude the participants in this thread with your way off assertions that Americans need big vehicles to haul things that do not exist, or to travel further distances using more fuel per mile.
Can you please explain, in laymans terms as I am feeling a little bit slow, what the hell an 82% URBANIZED population need with that top ten American cars you showed me???
As to the longer and longer range of EVs issue; Maybe batswap would then be a better option if the demand for recharge was much lower. This is a very fluid debate and I am uncovering new data all the time. But yes, if battery ranges are increased to 600mile norm then nighttime charging would be sufficient for 99% of cars. Also this does however seem to open up the debate for electrical lorries? If longer ranges are a real possibility then would a 600mile range (for beginners) be enough for a long-haul lorry? I suppose this opens up a whole new can of worms and I am only inaccurately conjecturalising on this lorry idea.
I do feel you have some explaining to do on the true demographics of your nation. I don't see any way you can justify an urbanized population driving such big vehicles. I wait with anticipation
And with a rate of 842 vehicles per thousand people! And most of those vehicles (gas guzzlers (X backs me up)) are in the urbanized areas. Why do they need those gas guzzlers in the CITY???
We don't in the CITY, but our cities are not nearly as dense as you might think and you absolutely need a car to get around in the suburbs.
Take Atlanta for instance (from Wiki).
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Atlan...3.790561,-84.111328&spn=0.821739,2.197266&z=9
Year City Suburbs
1990 394,017 2,959,950
2000 416,474 4,112,198
2010 420,003 5,729,304
So, the city residents represent less than 10% of the Metro area, or what you are calling Urban, and some of them can probably get by without a car and use public transport, but you need a car to get around the suburban areas of Atanta, there is no other choice.
Now as far as construction in the last twenty years this ONE CITY in the US has grown by almost the number of people as the entire UK has over the same period (and the areas just outside the Metro area have also grown) which means the infrastructure to support these additional two million people was also added over these last twenty years.
That's a LOT of Carpenters, Plumbers, Electricians, HVAC, Roofers, Framers, Masons etc etc who invariably need a friggin TRUCK. Not to mention all the support for these nearly 5 million suburbanites.
You simply don't get it because your population is sagnant and apparently you can't imagine what it took to build out the infrastructure to support a population equal to the entire UK over the last twenty years in the US.
Arthur
That's why the suburbs are doomed. They and the failing infrastructure that supports them were the biggest waste of money and resources perhaps in history.
The UK is FAR more built up than the US. Indeed, 20% of your population live in the London Metro area, and more importantly your growth is stagnant.
On the other hand we have this:
Not at all the same.
In the next 20 years we expect to grow by the ~size of the UK once again.
Arthur
Have you worked in the building trade? Do you think all these contractors need massive engined trucks? My point is it is more efficient to use delivery services for building materials in the suburbs. You are talking complete rubbish. Tonnes of contractors with oversized vehicles for purpose. Building flatpack houses. Inefficiently built on the back of cheap diesel. Wake the fuck up. You can not defend this position. Any one reading this thread can see what you are talking out of.
Suburbs are part of the urbanized figures for good reason. This means they are within the scope of services, and within delivery catchment areas. London is a massive city. London supplies and delivers to all areas within its suburbs, in fact London is more or less one big suburb. Are you saying UK service industries are more developed than in the US?
Our population is stagnant? LOL; Think we have done pretty damn well for the size of our country. We are punching above our weight in many of the worlds industries. Film, Music, Finances, Industry, Sciences. The fact we don't over procreate, filling the world with more over-consumers is a good thing, and representative of the important issues the world faces. Issues you clearly have little or no regard for.
Wildly inefficient because it can afford to be, the US could do with learning some clear and real lessons from countries like the UK, where it takes a lot of figuring out, and intensive problem solving to just keep ticking over.
Downsize those trucks, not fuckin' needed.
Let's see if I have this right. The Greater London area covers about 607 sq miles. The DFW metroplex covers over 9,000 sq miles.
While I agree that many people have larger vehicles than they need, I don't think you really understand the situation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas–Fort_Worth_metroplex
While I agree that many people have larger vehicles than they need, I don't think you really understand the situation.
Thanks for backing me up. Smaller engined vehicles would serve the needs of many US citizens fine. How does Canada's top ten cars compare?
http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2011/03/top-20-best-selling-cars-in-canada.html
Do they have builder's merchants in DFW metroplex? Builder's merchants who deliver goods to their local areas? Am I missing something? Do you not have infrastructure geared up for building?
Is the DFW metroplex a city or just a collection of settlements/counties all latched together? Individual areas of this "metropolitan statistical area" no doubt have their own infrastructure and means of supplying the building trade with materials within their borders. Driving oversize cars simply means people driving across this area would spend more on fuel than is needed. Wasteful, very wasteful.
What does that have to do with it?
While I agree that many people have larger vehicles than they need, I agree with Arthur - more or less. While the majority of supplies for a project are delivered by construction companies to the work sites (lumber, bricks, etc...) there are still many independant contractors that do require their own vehicle. Texas is largely rural with patches of city. (Look at Arthur's map.) DFW is an excellent example. It's thirty miles from Ft Worth to Dallas, and you never leave city... It can easily take 2 hours to get from one end of the metroplex to the other -and that's using the freeways. On the other hand, I can drive two hours in the other direction and be miles from nowhere. (What's that they say? Americans think 100 years is a long time. Europeans think 100 miles is a long distance.)
I've been to London several times and a person can get around fairly well without a vehicle. Not so here. We are too spread out. Dallas/Fort Worth exploded in population at a time when land (and gas) was cheap. We spread out as opposed to up.
I've been to London several times and a person can get around fairly well without a vehicle. Not so here. We are too spread out. Dallas/Fort Worth exploded in population at a time when land (and gas) was cheap. We spread out as opposed to up.
I live in Houston and I second this-I have to have a car to have a job-even when I lived in the middle of town this was so.
(If Dallas is Texas's armpit, Houston is the crotch...hot, wet, smelly, full of bugs...)
My car is currently my number one biggest expense, biggest nightmare, I hate it, it sucks to work on...if I could get where I needed to go on some sort of transport system that would be great!
I would happily leave the Japanese Princess parked in the driveway most of the time.
I live on the very edge of one side of town-and I have driven two hours before to get to a temporary posting. Average commute time is 45 minutes.
This is why I want a motorbike-50-60 mpg in a vehicle I can pay cash for? I'm so there...
Figuring out how to ride it and getting the bejeezus scared out of me by the Loons on the Freeway a bonus...
If I magically get a much better job, I want to get an old car and pay someone to convert it to an electric car. 280Z's have lots of hood...
I commute 65-ish miles a day currently, five times a week. I doubt I can find too much closer, so I'm going to look for something where I work 12 hour shifts or some such, so that I only work 3-4 days a week.
One day a week less I have to run the car that far.
But my trailer park is in the boonies...they basically cue the "dueling banjos" theme about four miles from my residence.
Last edited: