A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto makers » Honda
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Volkswagon unveils car that gets 282 miles to the gallon.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old May 22nd 07, 02:59 AM posted to alt.autos.toyota,alt.autos.toyota.trucks,rec.autos.makers.honda,alt.autos.honda,sci.energy
Broderick Crawford
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11
Default Volkswagon unveils car that gets 282 miles to the gallon.

Useful Info wrote:
> Read all about it, he http://Muvy.org
>

Don't worry, the US will ban it. They do not want to sell less oil.

Ads
  #12  
Old May 22nd 07, 06:20 AM posted to alt.autos.toyota,alt.autos.toyota.trucks,rec.autos.makers.honda,alt.autos.honda,sci.energy
Michael Pardee
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 147
Default Volkswagon unveils car that gets 282 miles to the gallon.

"Broderick Crawford" > wrote in message
...
> Useful Info wrote:
>> Read all about it, he http://Muvy.org
>>

> Don't worry, the US will ban it. They do not want to sell less oil.
>
>


What on earth makes you think that? Zero consumption vehicles, like
bicycles, are popular and encouraged in the US. I have owned several myself
over nearly half a century and have never encountered a "not enough oil"
goon squad.

The consumption would not be an issue, but crash-worthiness and emissions
are showstoppers. ZEV and P-ZEV vehicles are in great demand by regulators,
especially in California, but AFAIK diesels are still not available in
passenger cars there because of the emissions. The safety info in the
referenced article is not encouraging either; side impact standards
(mandatory in the US) appear to be lacking: "as safe as a GT sports car
registered for racing". That's damning with faint praise; if they could say
it met US safety standards they certainly would have said so. Fuel economy
really doesn't matter to grieving families.

Mike



  #13  
Old May 22nd 07, 11:41 AM posted to alt.autos.toyota,alt.autos.toyota.trucks,rec.autos.makers.honda,alt.autos.honda,sci.energy
Broderick Crawford
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11
Default Volkswagon unveils car that gets 282 miles to the gallon.

Michael Pardee wrote:
> "Broderick Crawford" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Useful Info wrote:
>>> Read all about it, he http://Muvy.org
>>>

>> Don't worry, the US will ban it. They do not want to sell less oil.
>>
>>

>
> What on earth makes you think that? Zero consumption vehicles, like
> bicycles, are popular and encouraged in the US. I have owned several myself
> over nearly half a century and have never encountered a "not enough oil"
> goon squad.
>
> The consumption would not be an issue, but crash-worthiness and emissions
> are showstoppers. ZEV and P-ZEV vehicles are in great demand by regulators,
> especially in California, but AFAIK diesels are still not available in
> passenger cars there because of the emissions. The safety info in the
> referenced article is not encouraging either; side impact standards
> (mandatory in the US) appear to be lacking: "as safe as a GT sports car
> registered for racing". That's damning with faint praise; if they could say
> it met US safety standards they certainly would have said so. Fuel economy
> really doesn't matter to grieving families.
>
> Mike
>
>
>

**** safety, Drive right and you won't need it. Safety is just a
protection scheme invented by the American car companies to keep out the
competition. They WILL NOT make fuel efficient vehicles. Hybrids should
get over 100mpg by rights. Americans don't make a single car that gets
50mpg. Europe makes several, every car company makes 2 or 3 that get 50
to 80mpg. Diesel hybrids get 120 to 150mpg. The US will avoid these.
Give me a choice, my motorcycle don't have air bags, seat belts or crash
test and works just fine. I want a car WITHOUT seat belts and air bags.
I want to choose my safety devices, I don't want you to. We don't need
forced communist compliance at all.
  #14  
Old May 22nd 07, 02:14 PM posted to alt.autos.toyota,alt.autos.toyota.trucks,rec.autos.makers.honda,alt.autos.honda,sci.energy
jim beam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,796
Default Volkswagon unveils car that gets 282 miles to the gallon.

Michael Pardee wrote:
> "Broderick Crawford" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Useful Info wrote:
>>> Read all about it, he http://Muvy.org
>>>

>> Don't worry, the US will ban it. They do not want to sell less oil.
>>
>>

>
> What on earth makes you think that? Zero consumption vehicles, like
> bicycles, are popular and encouraged in the US. I have owned several myself
> over nearly half a century and have never encountered a "not enough oil"
> goon squad.
>
> The consumption would not be an issue, but crash-worthiness and emissions
> are showstoppers. ZEV and P-ZEV vehicles are in great demand by regulators,
> especially in California, but AFAIK diesels are still not available in
> passenger cars there because of the emissions. The safety info in the
> referenced article is not encouraging either; side impact standards
> (mandatory in the US) appear to be lacking: "as safe as a GT sports car
> registered for racing". That's damning with faint praise; if they could say
> it met US safety standards they certainly would have said so. Fuel economy
> really doesn't matter to grieving families.
>
> Mike
>


a lot of the recent "safety" stuff is superfluous. it definitely ruins
gas mileage. is there a "conspiracy theory" connection?

my 2000 civic weighed over 1,000 lbs more than my 89. it takes a /lot/
of extra gas to lug that extra 1,000lbs up a hill, or accelerate from a
standstill. the 2000 should have been more economical based on more
advanced injection technology, but they're the same because of the extra
weight. it was /significantly/ slower. and based on junkyard crashed
vehicles i've seen, the 89, without the extra 1,000lbs, holds up just
fine in real world collisions, just as well as the 2000. given that
both vehicles have the same brakes and stock tires, the 89 will brake
more effectively as it's lighter, potentially avoiding more accidents in
the first place.

bottom line, there's a lot of myth and b.s. out there. joe's comments
in the "nothing goes to waste" thread, are a great example. somewhere
down the line, he'd read something improperly researched, and accepted
it at face value - as we all have a tendency to do. to get to the truth
however, you have to dig.

need another example? firestone vs. frod on the exploder rollover
fiasco. frod won that one, miraculously. there was no science or
analysis behind that. bottom line, a vehicle should not roll because of
a flat - tread separation or rocket propelled grenade should make no
difference - it should /not/ roll. tire manufacturer or tire failure
mode is /utterly/ irrelevant. yet a fundamentally unsafe vehicle, one
that was /known/ to be fundamentally unsafe before it even hit
production, was sold. in quanity. and when it rolled, it was also
known that the roof would collapse killing the occupants. yet because
there were no suv rollover safety standards, frod elected to not spend
the extra $10 on the materials that would have provided even that extra
safety. you talk about grieving families - a /lot/ of people have died
in that vehicle. safety? my ass.
  #15  
Old May 22nd 07, 02:32 PM posted to alt.autos.toyota,alt.autos.toyota.trucks,rec.autos.makers.honda,alt.autos.honda,sci.energy
jp2express
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9
Default Volkswagon unveils car that gets 282 miles to the gallon.

Are automatic transmissions still more expensive to maintain (i.e. fluid
changes, belt/band adjustments, filter replacements, etc.)?

I know of many older vehicles where the manual transmissions have not been
serviced during the lifetime of the vehicle. Has this been changed for
modern day manual transmissions?

I'm not trying to rag on anyone; I just want to know what the manufacturers
are doing these days. It seems like a lot of companies are building things
that can be sold for very little, but the consumable parts are becoming more
expensive than the original item (like printers and 4-blade razors).

"Tegger" wrote:
>
> These days, with computer controls, there is no technical reason a
> manual-style transmission cannot be used with an automatic (or
> semi-auto) clutch and shifter. And so they do exist: SAAB had the
> Sensonic in 1995. Ferrari's F1 team had the Selespeed unit around 1990.



  #16  
Old May 22nd 07, 03:00 PM posted to alt.autos.toyota,alt.autos.toyota.trucks,rec.autos.makers.honda,alt.autos.honda,sci.energy
Eeyore
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,670
Default Volkswagon unveils car that gets 282 miles to the gallon.



Broderick Crawford wrote:

> **** safety,


Don't do that.

> Drive right and you won't need it.


Rubbish, you can be killed by someone driving into you.


> Safety is just a protection scheme invented by the American car companies to
> keep out the competition. They WILL NOT make fuel efficient vehicles.


The problem is that the US idea of safety is 'make it big and heavy'. The proof
that this isn't necessary (or even particularly safe either btw) can be seen in
every car made outside the USA.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euro_NCAP
http://www.euroncap.com/home.aspx

Graham

  #17  
Old May 22nd 07, 03:02 PM posted to alt.autos.toyota,alt.autos.toyota.trucks,rec.autos.makers.honda,alt.autos.honda,sci.energy
Eeyore
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,670
Default Volkswagon unveils car that gets 282 miles to the gallon.



jim beam wrote:

> a lot of the recent "safety" stuff is superfluous.


You mean in the USA.

> it definitely ruins gas mileage.


Useless added weight does that.

> is there a "conspiracy theory" connection?


In the USA when *isn't* there a conspiracy theory to match ?

Graham

  #18  
Old May 22nd 07, 03:04 PM posted to alt.autos.toyota,alt.autos.toyota.trucks,rec.autos.makers.honda,alt.autos.honda,sci.energy
Eeyore
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,670
Default Volkswagon unveils car that gets 282 miles to the gallon.



jim beam wrote:

> need another example? firestone vs. frod on the exploder rollover
> fiasco. frod won that one, miraculously.


I thought it was Ford's idea to run the tyres with an absurdly low presure? How
can Firestone be liable for a design defect by the car maker ?

Graham

  #19  
Old May 22nd 07, 03:05 PM posted to alt.autos.toyota,alt.autos.toyota.trucks,rec.autos.makers.honda,alt.autos.honda,sci.energy
Eeyore
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,670
Default Volkswagon unveils car that gets 282 miles to the gallon.



jp2express wrote:

> Are automatic transmissions still more expensive to maintain (i.e. fluid
> changes, belt/band adjustments, filter replacements, etc.)?


The very fact they need any maintenance at all will do that.


> I know of many older vehicles where the manual transmissions have not been
> serviced during the lifetime of the vehicle. Has this been changed for
> modern day manual transmissions?


I've *never* seen a maintenance requirement for a manual transmission.

Graham

  #20  
Old May 22nd 07, 03:37 PM posted to rec.autos.makers.honda
john doe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5
Default Volkswagon unveils car that gets 282 miles to the gallon.


"Eeyore" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> jp2express wrote:
>
>> Are automatic transmissions still more expensive to maintain (i.e. fluid
>> changes, belt/band adjustments, filter replacements, etc.)?

>
> The very fact they need any maintenance at all will do that.
>
>
>> I know of many older vehicles where the manual transmissions have not
>> been
>> serviced during the lifetime of the vehicle. Has this been changed for
>> modern day manual transmissions?

>
> I've *never* seen a maintenance requirement for a manual transmission.
>
> Graham


Well, to make a true comparison you should include the clutch.

>



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2006 Vue. 12 miles per gallon? [email protected] Saturn 8 February 8th 07 05:26 AM
Rated miles per gallon is total BS! TOM KAN PA Chrysler 40 April 23rd 05 04:39 PM
miles/gallon guage? William R. Watt Technology 31 January 25th 05 08:03 PM
Gas miles per gallon Michael VW water cooled 19 October 13th 04 03:56 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.