Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Check out the post Tesla EV /plugin hybrid supercar!

Expand Messages
  • hawkerforest
    Check out the post Tesla EV /plugin hybrid supercar! http://www.cleantechblog.com/2007/09/wright-way-to-electric-car.html
    Message 1 of 23 , Sep 26, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Check out the post Tesla EV /plugin hybrid supercar!

      http://www.cleantechblog.com/2007/09/wright-way-to-electric-car.html
    • Peter Blackford
      old news, but a GREAT car - had two of them at Pebble Beach last month, very clean design, much of the cost is in the full carbon fiber body structure
      Message 2 of 23 , Sep 26, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        old news, but a GREAT car - had two of them at Pebble Beach last month, very clean design, much of the cost is in the full carbon fiber body structure

        -----Original Message-----
        >From: hawkerforest <hawkerforest@...>
        >Sent: Sep 26, 2007 1:36 PM
        >To: toyota-prius@yahoogroups.com
        >Subject: [toyota-prius] Check out the post Tesla EV /plugin hybrid supercar!
        >
        >Check out the post Tesla EV /plugin hybrid supercar!
        >
        >http://www.cleantechblog.com/2007/09/wright-way-to-electric-car.html
        >
      • Terry .
        Just another toy for the elite class to buy, but not much good for the rest of us average class people. I am guessing that it probably does not go very far
        Message 3 of 23 , Sep 27, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          Just another toy for the elite class to buy, but not much good for the
          rest of us average class people. I am guessing that it probably does
          not go very far before needing a recharge, hummmm??

          T e r r y
        • David Kelly
          ... Spoken like a true leftist. Low volume at high price is how new technology is funded. ... Is it too much to ask that you do a little research for
          Message 4 of 23 , Sep 27, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 08:16:18AM -0800, Terry . wrote:
            > Just another toy for the elite class to buy, but not much good for the
            > rest of us average class people.

            Spoken like a true leftist.

            Low volume at high price is how new technology is funded.

            > I am guessing that it probably does not go very far before needing a
            > recharge, hummmm??

            Is it too much to ask that you do a little research for *yourself*?
            http://www.teslamotors.com/learn_more/faqs.php says 245 miles is
            expected in the EPA combined city/highway cycle.

            --
            David Kelly N4HHE, dkelly@...
            ========================================================================
            Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad.
          • Noctaire
            ... Psssttt -- read the website at teslamotors.com or any of the numerous articles on the car. The battery bank on this thing has something like 50,000 LIon
            Message 5 of 23 , Sep 27, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              > Just another toy for the elite class to buy, but not much good for the
              > rest of us average class people. I am guessing that it probably does
              > not go very far before needing a recharge, hummmm??

              Psssttt -- read the website at teslamotors.com or any of the numerous
              articles on the car. The battery bank on this thing has something like
              50,000 LIon batteries in it and it's expected to go 245 miles between
              charges, depending on driving conditions of course.

              The cost is high but it's to be expected -- it's new technology. New tech
              hits the market in the high-end sector where early adopters and/or wealthy
              consumers get the technology first. This in turn provides capital to the
              enterprise for further improvements in the manufacturing process as well as
              a sort of "refund" on prior R&D. Then the costs go down and so do the
              prices until finally you have general availability.

              Probably the best example in modern history of this concept is the
              television. There was a time when very few could afford a television and
              they were tiny screens in enormous boxes. Now here we are today with one in
              every room of the house. In 1988, I paid over $550 for a 58 MEGabyte hard
              drive. Today they're selling drives in the 500 GIGabyte range for less than
              half that and that's WITH inflation.

              Tesla Motors has already announced a new concept car that will go for the
              $50,000 consumer market. It's called the WhiteStar and the first model is
              expected to roll off the line in autumn 2009. According to Tesla Motors,
              their new plant in Albuquerque will turn out 10,000 cars a year when it
              comes online.

              All in all, it's a fairly exciting series of developments and if it pans out
              (as it appears to be doing so) we will see a HUGE potential for change.
              Between this and things like the Chevy Volt, increased production of hybrid
              vehicles (and increased demand for them), as well as expected required
              increases in fuel efficiency.... Well, it's very easy to be optimistic
              about the future of the automobile and a reduction in dependence on fossil
              fuels. Don't forget too -- there's a MASSIVE trickledown effect of the
              technical advances these industries are driving. For example, the new
              developments in the battery industry, courtesy of the gazillion bucks the
              automotive industry is investing, will result in higher efficiency portable
              electronics and likely advances in medical sciences. The subtle links
              between all these industries, each reliant on electricity in some capacity,
              is fascinating.

              Of course, the next step is to increase the use of RE in churning out all
              that electricity to meet demand but that's moving in the right direction as
              well, albeit a bit on the slow side. :)

              James
            • Betty
              ... ********* I remember how delighted I was with my first hand-held calculator -- something like $200. You can get them now for $1.00. However, it seems that
              Message 6 of 23 , Sep 27, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                > Low volume at high price is how new technology is funded.
                *********

                I remember how delighted I was with my first hand-held calculator --
                something like $200. You can get them now for $1.00.

                However, it seems that our Prii do not adhere to that policy. Our 2003 was
                much cheaper in Dec 2002 than any of the American made cars (not cheaper
                than Carolla), but the price of the Prius has not gone down.

                Betty in Texas
              • Paul Lawler
                ... That would be a great example if we were talking electronics... but we are talking automobiles. My first new car cost less than $3,000. Please tell me
                Message 7 of 23 , Sep 27, 2007
                • 0 Attachment
                  On Sep 27, 2007, at 9:02, Noctaire wrote:

                  > Probably the best example in modern history of this concept is the
                  > television. There was a time when very few could afford a
                  > television and
                  > they were tiny screens in enormous boxes. Now here we are today
                  > with one in
                  > every room of the house. In 1988, I paid over $550 for a 58
                  > MEGabyte hard
                  > drive. Today they're selling drives in the 500 GIGabyte range for
                  > less than
                  > half that and that's WITH inflation.

                  That would be a great example if we were talking electronics... but
                  we are talking automobiles.

                  My first "new" car cost less than $3,000. Please tell me where I can
                  get a new car today for less than $3,000.
                • Noctaire
                  ... Ummmm...no, we ARE talking electronics. Even if we were just talking automobiles the same concepts would apply. ... Well, let s see, cars haven t been
                  Message 8 of 23 , Sep 27, 2007
                  • 0 Attachment
                    > That would be a great example if we were talking electronics... but
                    > we are talking automobiles.

                    Ummmm...no, we ARE talking electronics. Even if we were just talking
                    automobiles the same concepts would apply.

                    > My first "new" car cost less than $3,000. Please tell me where I can
                    > get a new car today for less than $3,000.

                    Well, let's see, cars haven't been priced new at $3,000 for what...40 or 50
                    years now? Let's give it the benefit of the doubt and say it was 1970 when
                    you paid that $3,000 for a new car, and we'll assume it actually was new
                    (not quite sure what you mean by "new", with quotes around the word).
                    $3,000 in 1970, accounting for inflation, would be the rough equivalent of
                    $16,000 today. So, what you're actually saying is tell you where you can
                    get a new car today for less than $16,000 and that's pretty easy to do. Of
                    course, we'd also have to compare that 30-50 year old car's feature set with
                    the features today, stripping out virtually all safety, technology, and
                    industry advancement to get remotely close to the same product for a valid
                    comparison.

                    If modern cars were still using the same technology as cars built 30-50
                    years ago (and I'm talking about far more than the Otto cycle engine, mind
                    you) then perhaps your argument would make sense. Of course, this isn't the
                    case. Hmmmm.... We'd probably have to return worker's wages and factory
                    conditions to the same general state as well -- doubt the UAW members would
                    be willing to work for a few dollars a day, no health benefits.... Didn't
                    the UAW just negotiate a total package of around $80/hour for auto workers?

                    That said, you CAN buy a new car today for less than $5,000. It won't have
                    any bells and whistles to it, but it's out there. Likewise, you have
                    Renault-Nissan and Tata Motors both who have said they will manufacture cars
                    for the $3,000 or less crowd as well. Those figures actually ARE at today's
                    currency values.

                    <Shrug> FWIW....

                    James
                  • K. B. Eric Riddle
                    ... That would be a great example if we were talking electronics... but we are talking automobiles. My first new car cost less than $3,000. Please tell me
                    Message 9 of 23 , Sep 27, 2007
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Paul Lawler <plawler@...> wrote: On Sep 27, 2007, at 9:02, Noctaire wrote:

                      > Probably the best example in modern history of this concept is the
                      > television. There was a time when very few could afford a
                      > television and
                      > they were tiny screens in enormous boxes. Now here we are today
                      > with one in
                      > every room of the house. In 1988, I paid over $550 for a 58
                      > MEGabyte hard
                      > drive. Today they're selling drives in the 500 GIGabyte range for
                      > less than
                      > half that and that's WITH inflation.

                      That would be a great example if we were talking electronics... but
                      we are talking automobiles.

                      My first "new" car cost less than $3,000. Please tell me where I can
                      get a new car today for less than $3,000.




                      My first new car cost $2,297, and was made in Germany by Ford. It was a pre-Nixon
                      tarriff 1973 L-M Capri and I bought it in Gulfport, Ms. Tarriffs raised the price to
                      $2,933 for the same car I had just a week later.


                      K. B. Eric Riddle
                      1983 GL1100i
                      2005 Prius
                      2007 HHR-2004 Ion
                      Bellevue, Sarpy County, Nebraska


                      ---------------------------------
                      Catch up on fall's hot new shows on Yahoo! TV. Watch previews, get listings, and more!

                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • David Kelly
                      ... Not just automobiles, but automobiles *with a lot of electronics*. -- David Kelly N4HHE, dkelly@HiWAAY.net
                      Message 10 of 23 , Sep 27, 2007
                      • 0 Attachment
                        On Sep 27, 2007, at 6:04 PM, Paul Lawler wrote:

                        > That would be a great example if we were talking electronics... but
                        > we are talking automobiles.

                        Not just automobiles, but automobiles *with a lot of electronics*.

                        --
                        David Kelly N4HHE, dkelly@...
                        ========================================================================
                        Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad.
                      • Michael Pardee
                        ... car.html ... Most of the observations are right on the money... except for concentrating on the vehicles that consume the most fuel. The problem is one of
                        Message 11 of 23 , Sep 28, 2007
                        • 0 Attachment
                          --- In toyota-prius@yahoogroups.com, "hawkerforest"
                          <hawkerforest@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > Check out the post Tesla EV /plugin hybrid supercar!
                          >
                          > http://www.cleantechblog.com/2007/09/wright-way-to-electric-
                          car.html
                          >

                          Most of the observations are right on the money... except for
                          concentrating on the vehicles that consume the most fuel. The
                          problem is one of technology, not of choice. There certainly are
                          high power motors and controllers and there are batteries up to the
                          challenge of providing the power to hybridize heavier vehicles; the
                          Tesla itself demonstrates that as do the Honda Dualnote and Toyota
                          Volta. The problem is one of economics, which the Tesla again
                          demonstrates.

                          Advancing technology has the characteristic of making increased
                          capability more available to ordinary people. Unfortunately, it does
                          take time.

                          Mike
                        • katiebethligler
                          I think your math is off. Here s why: 1979 Toyota Corolla: $3698 2008 Toyota Corolla: $14,405 In simple terms, the difference reflects a 5% per year price
                          Message 12 of 23 , Sep 28, 2007
                          • 0 Attachment
                            I think your math is off. Here's why:

                            1979 Toyota Corolla: $3698
                            2008 Toyota Corolla: $14,405

                            In simple terms, the difference reflects a 5% per year price increase. Inflation has been
                            closer to 3% over the past 30 years. So, when comparing apples to apples (as best you
                            can...) I think Eric is right. The "$3000 car" does not exist in today's dollars.

                            -Steve


                            --- In toyota-prius@yahoogroups.com, "Noctaire" <noctaire@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > > That would be a great example if we were talking electronics... but
                            > > we are talking automobiles.
                            >
                            > Ummmm...no, we ARE talking electronics. Even if we were just talking
                            > automobiles the same concepts would apply.
                            >
                            > > My first "new" car cost less than $3,000. Please tell me where I can
                            > > get a new car today for less than $3,000.
                            >
                            > Well, let's see, cars haven't been priced new at $3,000 for what...40 or 50
                            > years now? Let's give it the benefit of the doubt and say it was 1970 when
                            > you paid that $3,000 for a new car, and we'll assume it actually was new
                            > (not quite sure what you mean by "new", with quotes around the word).
                            > $3,000 in 1970, accounting for inflation, would be the rough equivalent of
                            > $16,000 today. So, what you're actually saying is tell you where you can
                            > get a new car today for less than $16,000 and that's pretty easy to do. Of
                            > course, we'd also have to compare that 30-50 year old car's feature set with
                            > the features today, stripping out virtually all safety, technology, and
                            > industry advancement to get remotely close to the same product for a valid
                            > comparison.
                            >
                            > If modern cars were still using the same technology as cars built 30-50
                            > years ago (and I'm talking about far more than the Otto cycle engine, mind
                            > you) then perhaps your argument would make sense. Of course, this isn't the
                            > case. Hmmmm.... We'd probably have to return worker's wages and factory
                            > conditions to the same general state as well -- doubt the UAW members would
                            > be willing to work for a few dollars a day, no health benefits.... Didn't
                            > the UAW just negotiate a total package of around $80/hour for auto workers?
                            >
                            > That said, you CAN buy a new car today for less than $5,000. It won't have
                            > any bells and whistles to it, but it's out there. Likewise, you have
                            > Renault-Nissan and Tata Motors both who have said they will manufacture cars
                            > for the $3,000 or less crowd as well. Those figures actually ARE at today's
                            > currency values.
                            >
                            > <Shrug> FWIW....
                            >
                            > James
                            >
                          • Joe's Morgue
                            Actually, you CAN buy Chery automobile for about $8,000...Adjusting for inflation, thats cheaper! Re: Check out the post Tesla EV /plugin hybrid supercar!
                            Message 13 of 23 , Sep 28, 2007
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Actually, you CAN buy Chery automobile for about $8,000...Adjusting for inflation, thats cheaper!

                              Re: Check out the post Tesla EV /plugin hybrid supercar! Posted by: "Noctaire" noctaire@... noctaire Thu Sep 27, 2007 5:27 pm (PST) > That would be a great example if we were talking electronics. .. but
                              > we are talking automobiles.

                              Ummmm...no, we ARE talking electronics. Even if we were just talking
                              automobiles the same concepts would apply.

                              > My first "new" car cost less than $3,000. Please tell me where I can
                              > get a new car today for less than $3,000.

                              Well, let's see, cars haven't been priced new at $3,000 for what...40 or 50
                              years now? Let's give it the benefit of the doubt and say it was 1970 when
                              you paid that $3,000 for a new car, and we'll assume it actually was new
                              (not quite sure what you mean by "new", with quotes around the word).
                              $3,000 in 1970, accounting for inflation, would be the rough equivalent of
                              $16,000 today. So, what you're actually saying is tell you where you can
                              get a new car today for less than $16,000 and that's pretty easy to do. Of
                              course, we'd also have to compare that 30-50 year old car's feature set with
                              the features today, stripping out virtually all safety, technology, and
                              industry advancement to get remotely close to the same product for a valid
                              comparison.

                              If modern cars were still using the same technology as cars built 30-50
                              years ago (and I'm talking about far more than the Otto cycle engine, mind
                              you) then perhaps your argument would make sense. Of course, this isn't the
                              case. Hmmmm.... We'd probably have to return worker's wages and factory
                              conditions to the same general state as well -- doubt the UAW members would
                              be willing to work for a few dollars a day, no health benefits.... Didn't
                              the UAW just negotiate a total package of around $80/hour for auto workers?

                              That said, you CAN buy a new car today for less than $5,000. It won't have
                              any bells and whistles to it, but it's out there. Likewise, you have
                              Renault-Nissan and Tata Motors both who have said they will manufacture cars
                              for the $3,000 or less crowd as well. Those figures actually ARE at today's
                              currency values.


                              ---------------------------------
                              Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows.
                              Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.

                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            • Paul Lawler
                              ... More to the point, the OP was comparing actual dollar costs of TV sets and hard drives, not inflation adjusted costs. Even if the inflation adjusted
                              Message 14 of 23 , Sep 28, 2007
                              • 0 Attachment
                                On Sep 28, 2007, at 7:05, katiebethligler wrote:

                                > I think your math is off. Here's why:
                                >
                                > 1979 Toyota Corolla: $3698
                                > 2008 Toyota Corolla: $14,405
                                >
                                > In simple terms, the difference reflects a 5% per year price
                                > increase. Inflation has been
                                > closer to 3% over the past 30 years. So, when comparing apples to
                                > apples (as best you
                                > can...) I think Eric is right. The "$3000 car" does not exist in
                                > today's dollars.

                                More to the point, the OP was comparing "actual dollar" costs of TV
                                sets and hard drives, not "inflation adjusted" costs.

                                Even if the inflation adjusted price of a 30 year old car is exactly
                                the same as a new one, the "actual dollar" cost s significantly higher.
                              • Noctaire
                                ... increase. Inflation has been closer to 3% over the past 30 years. So, when ... $3,698 in 1979 is equivalent to $10,536.18 in today s currency, adjusted
                                Message 15 of 23 , Sep 28, 2007
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  > I think your math is off. Here's why:
                                  >
                                  > 1979 Toyota Corolla: $3698
                                  > 2008 Toyota Corolla: $14,405
                                  >
                                  > In simple terms, the difference reflects a 5% per year price
                                  increase. > Inflation has been closer to 3% over the past 30 years.
                                  So, when
                                  > comparing apples to apples (as best you can...) I think Eric is right.
                                  > The "$3000 car" does not exist in today's dollars.

                                  $3,698 in 1979 is equivalent to $10,536.18 in today's currency,
                                  adjusted for inflation. There's just one problem with an assertion
                                  based on your comparison of a 1979 and 2008 Corolla -- the comparison
                                  is not "apples to apples". That was one of the points in the thread.

                                  You're assuming the cars are basically the same. This is, of course,
                                  not even remotely the case. The technological innovations of the last
                                  30 years have maintained the price of a new vehicle regardless of
                                  inflation's influence.

                                  Additionally, the initial assertion is that there is no $3,000 car.
                                  That's equally not the case. Adjusting for inflation, there most
                                  assuredly IS such a beast and it includes a number of technological
                                  advancements at that. Even without such adjustments, there are $3,000
                                  cars available on the market, right now with more planned in the
                                  future. I understand that some may find this realization stunning but
                                  that does not change the fact that they exist and may well become
                                  increasingly prevalent as Chinese and Indian manufacturers begin
                                  pushing their vehicles here in the US over the next several years.

                                  I don't make reality up -- it just sort of happens.

                                  James
                                • Noctaire
                                  ... No change here -- adjusted for inflation, the $3000 figure from the 70s is roughly $11,500 in today s USD currency (we ll just use 1975 as a reference to
                                  Message 16 of 23 , Sep 28, 2007
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Minor adjustment to my original statement to be clear:

                                    > Additionally, the initial assertion is that there is no
                                    > $3,000 car. That's equally not the case. Adjusting for
                                    > inflation, there most assuredly IS such a beast and it
                                    > includes a number of technological advancements at that.

                                    No change here -- adjusted for inflation, the $3000 figure from the
                                    70s is roughly $11,500 in today's USD currency (we'll just use 1975 as
                                    a reference to keep it simple). The least expensive car one can buy
                                    in the US, in 2007 and with no real effort, runs right about $10,000.
                                    That's the equivalent to right about $2,600 in 1975 USD.

                                    > Even without such adjustments, there are $3,000 cars available
                                    > on the market, right now with more planned in the future. I
                                    > understand that some may find this realization stunning but
                                    > that does not change the fact that they exist and may well become
                                    > increasingly prevalent as Chinese and Indian manufacturers begin
                                    > pushing their vehicles here in the US over the next several years.

                                    This is what I need to qualify -- due to a variety of factors, there
                                    aren't any cars on the US market priced at a current $3,000US figure.
                                    The list is long but includes both demand as well as industry
                                    regulations. This is poised to change in the near future with the
                                    introduction of new low-cost lines from European/Asian manufacturers
                                    like Tata Motors and Renault-Nissan, both of which have already
                                    announced a small passenger vehicle that is expected to retail for
                                    right about $3,000USD in India; it's only a matter of time before it
                                    is adapted to fit our regulations here in the States and therefore
                                    marketable here.

                                    FWIW....

                                    James
                                  • Cor van de Water
                                    Two remarks: The car industry has always been known for maintaining and even increasing prices of the same model cars year over year, instead of reducing them.
                                    Message 17 of 23 , Sep 29, 2007
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Two remarks:

                                      The car industry has always been known for maintaining and even
                                      increasing prices of the same model cars year over year, instead
                                      of reducing them.
                                      They do that by growing the car in size: every new model version
                                      is larger than the previous and by including more options.
                                      Since the car contains a lot of material and labor, it would not
                                      be simply possible to reduce the cost, especially with a model
                                      that grows in size and included options.

                                      Electronics on the other hand, tend to become cheaper every year.
                                      The reason in one word: miniaturization.
                                      Making the electronics smaller, integrating more into the chips
                                      and reducing the amount of material needed to make the same or
                                      better performance product - that is what electronics is good at.

                                      Now I do not see our cars being miniaturised.....
                                      On the contrary, many buyers are lured into larger and more powerful
                                      vehicles every year. But let's not go there.
                                      An additional issue is that both the cost of material and labor
                                      have risen significantly, neither of which affect mass-produced
                                      electronics much, but all the more the car industry.
                                      Cor.

                                      --- In toyota-prius@yahoogroups.com, Paul Lawler <plawler@...> wrote:
                                      >
                                      > On Sep 28, 2007, at 7:05, katiebethligler wrote:
                                      >
                                      > > I think your math is off. Here's why:
                                      > >
                                      > > 1979 Toyota Corolla: $3698
                                      > > 2008 Toyota Corolla: $14,405
                                      > >
                                      > > In simple terms, the difference reflects a 5% per year price
                                      > > increase. Inflation has been
                                      > > closer to 3% over the past 30 years. So, when comparing apples
                                      to
                                      > > apples (as best you
                                      > > can...) I think Eric is right. The "$3000 car" does not exist
                                      in
                                      > > today's dollars.
                                      >
                                      > More to the point, the OP was comparing "actual dollar" costs of
                                      TV
                                      > sets and hard drives, not "inflation adjusted" costs.
                                      >
                                      > Even if the inflation adjusted price of a 30 year old car is
                                      exactly
                                      > the same as a new one, the "actual dollar" cost s significantly
                                      higher.
                                      >
                                    • Cor van de Water
                                      Mike, It is vastly more impactful to improve MPG of the low-MPG cars than of high-MPG cars. For example: to bring one car from 9 MPG to 10 MPG saves 5 times as
                                      Message 18 of 23 , Sep 29, 2007
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        Mike,

                                        It is vastly more impactful to improve MPG of the low-MPG cars
                                        than of high-MPG cars.
                                        For example: to bring one car from 9 MPG to 10 MPG saves 5 times
                                        as much fuel as bringing a 45 MPG car to 50 MPG.
                                        You would think: both raise 10% in efficiency, should it not
                                        be equal?
                                        Well - let's turn the units around:
                                        9 MPG = 11.1 gal/100mi
                                        10 MPG = 10 gal/100mi
                                        45 MPG = 2.22 gal/100mi
                                        50 MPG = 2 gal/100mi
                                        So, you see that for to the same driving distance (100 miles for
                                        example) the impact of raising the fuel economy from 9 to 10 MPG
                                        saves 1.1 gallon of gas, while raising the fuel economy from
                                        45 to 50 MPG only saves 0.22 gallon.
                                        In addition, in the USA more than half the vehicles sold are
                                        Light Trucks: pickup trucks plus SUVs. They both suffer from a
                                        bad fuel economy because of weight, size and low requirements on
                                        the fuel economy in the first place.
                                        That is why the PT Cruiser got classified as Light Truck, so it
                                        would not spoil Chrysler's average *car* fuel economy numbers.

                                        Hope this clarifies,
                                        Cor.
                                        --- In toyota-prius@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Pardee"
                                        <flagmichael@...> wrote:
                                        >
                                        > --- In toyota-prius@yahoogroups.com, "hawkerforest"
                                        > <hawkerforest@> wrote:
                                        > >
                                        > > Check out the post Tesla EV /plugin hybrid supercar!
                                        > >
                                        > > http://www.cleantechblog.com/2007/09/wright-way-to-electric-
                                        > car.html
                                        > >
                                        >
                                        > Most of the observations are right on the money... except for
                                        > concentrating on the vehicles that consume the most fuel. The
                                        > problem is one of technology, not of choice. There certainly are
                                        > high power motors and controllers and there are batteries up to
                                        the
                                        > challenge of providing the power to hybridize heavier vehicles;
                                        the
                                        > Tesla itself demonstrates that as do the Honda Dualnote and Toyota
                                        > Volta. The problem is one of economics, which the Tesla again
                                        > demonstrates.
                                        >
                                        > Advancing technology has the characteristic of making increased
                                        > capability more available to ordinary people. Unfortunately, it
                                        does
                                        > take time.
                                        >
                                        > Mike
                                        >
                                      • Jon Wilson
                                        Cor, I don t think miniaturizing electronics is the reason for their becoming cheaper. Otherwise laptops would be less expensive than desktops (; ). Yeah, I
                                        Message 19 of 23 , Sep 29, 2007
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          Cor,
                                          I don't think miniaturizing electronics is the reason for their becoming
                                          cheaper. Otherwise laptops would be less expensive than desktops (;>). Yeah,
                                          I know, both have been getting less expensive, but I don't think it is
                                          because of miniaturization. Lower cost desktop computers are not necessarily
                                          miniaturized. There must be some other factors such as volume production,
                                          competition, etc.

                                          Jon
                                          ----- Original Message -----
                                          From: "Cor van de Water" <cor_van_de_water@...>
                                          To: <toyota-prius@yahoogroups.com>
                                          Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2007 2:29 AM
                                          Subject: [toyota-prius] Re: Check out the post Tesla EV /plugin hybrid
                                          supercar!


                                          > Two remarks:
                                          >
                                          > The car industry has always been known for maintaining and even
                                          > increasing prices of the same model cars year over year, instead
                                          > of reducing them.
                                          > They do that by growing the car in size: every new model version
                                          > is larger than the previous and by including more options.
                                          > Since the car contains a lot of material and labor, it would not
                                          > be simply possible to reduce the cost, especially with a model
                                          > that grows in size and included options.
                                          >
                                          > Electronics on the other hand, tend to become cheaper every year.
                                          > The reason in one word: miniaturization.
                                          > Making the electronics smaller, integrating more into the chips
                                          > and reducing the amount of material needed to make the same or
                                          > better performance product - that is what electronics is good at.
                                          >
                                          > Now I do not see our cars being miniaturised.....
                                          > On the contrary, many buyers are lured into larger and more powerful
                                          > vehicles every year. But let's not go there.
                                          > An additional issue is that both the cost of material and labor
                                          > have risen significantly, neither of which affect mass-produced
                                          > electronics much, but all the more the car industry.
                                          > Cor.
                                          >
                                          > --- In toyota-prius@yahoogroups.com, Paul Lawler <plawler@...> wrote:
                                          >>
                                          >> On Sep 28, 2007, at 7:05, katiebethligler wrote:
                                          >>
                                          >> > I think your math is off. Here's why:
                                          >> >
                                          >> > 1979 Toyota Corolla: $3698
                                          >> > 2008 Toyota Corolla: $14,405
                                          >> >
                                          >> > In simple terms, the difference reflects a 5% per year price
                                          >> > increase. Inflation has been
                                          >> > closer to 3% over the past 30 years. So, when comparing apples
                                          > to
                                          >> > apples (as best you
                                          >> > can...) I think Eric is right. The "$3000 car" does not exist
                                          > in
                                          >> > today's dollars.
                                          >>
                                          >> More to the point, the OP was comparing "actual dollar" costs of
                                          > TV
                                          >> sets and hard drives, not "inflation adjusted" costs.
                                          >>
                                          >> Even if the inflation adjusted price of a 30 year old car is
                                          > exactly
                                          >> the same as a new one, the "actual dollar" cost s significantly
                                          > higher.
                                          >>
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > To access group's website features such as Files, Photos, Links, Database
                                          > and Polls, go to
                                          > http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/toyota-prius
                                          > , Photos, Links, Database and Polls, go to
                                          > http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/toyota-prius
                                          >
                                          > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                        • Michael Pardee
                                          ... I agree with the reasoning, but differ on the viability in this phase of hybridization. I defer to you on the more intimate knowledge of the Toyota hybrid
                                          Message 20 of 23 , Sep 29, 2007
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            --- In toyota-prius@yahoogroups.com, "Cor van de Water"
                                            <cor_van_de_water@...> wrote:
                                            >
                                            > Mike,
                                            >
                                            > It is vastly more impactful to improve MPG of the low-MPG cars
                                            > than of high-MPG cars.
                                            > For example: to bring one car from 9 MPG to 10 MPG saves 5 times
                                            > as much fuel as bringing a 45 MPG car to 50 MPG.
                                            > You would think: both raise 10% in efficiency, should it not
                                            > be equal?
                                            > Well - let's turn the units around:
                                            > 9 MPG = 11.1 gal/100mi
                                            > 10 MPG = 10 gal/100mi
                                            > 45 MPG = 2.22 gal/100mi
                                            > 50 MPG = 2 gal/100mi
                                            > So, you see that for to the same driving distance (100 miles for
                                            > example) the impact of raising the fuel economy from 9 to 10 MPG
                                            > saves 1.1 gallon of gas, while raising the fuel economy from
                                            > 45 to 50 MPG only saves 0.22 gallon.
                                            > In addition, in the USA more than half the vehicles sold are
                                            > Light Trucks: pickup trucks plus SUVs. They both suffer from a
                                            > bad fuel economy because of weight, size and low requirements on
                                            > the fuel economy in the first place.
                                            > That is why the PT Cruiser got classified as Light Truck, so it
                                            > would not spoil Chrysler's average *car* fuel economy numbers.
                                            >
                                            > Hope this clarifies,
                                            > Cor.

                                            I agree with the reasoning, but differ on the viability in this
                                            phase of hybridization.

                                            I defer to you on the more intimate knowledge of the Toyota hybrid
                                            systems and I feel they are the best in general production. However,
                                            there are certainly reasons a canny automaker like Toyota has stuck
                                            with hybridizing lighter vehicles in spite of the greater return for
                                            choosing heavier ones. My guess is that the incremental cost of
                                            installing hybrid power trains in heavier vehicles made it
                                            unattractive in vehicles as heavy as the Camry until recently and
                                            for vehicles larger than the Camry at present. Similar reasons are
                                            probably why Toyota is still using the less-efficient series-
                                            parallel hybrid system rather than a potentially more efficient and
                                            powerful serial hybrid system.

                                            Some vehicles will probably never be hybridized: genuine working
                                            trucks would be a poor fit because the continuous power requirements
                                            can be too high, as when hauling a trailer or a heavy load.

                                            Don't get me wrong; I think we are seeing the most important change
                                            in automotive history. We are in the infancy of the technology - it
                                            needs time to grow.

                                            Mike
                                          • reza khadem
                                            I see the same result : 0.22x50mpg=11 miles and 1.1x10mpg=11 miles. Keeping the number of miles people drive constant, the saving is the same! _____ From:
                                            Message 21 of 23 , Sep 29, 2007
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              I see the same result :

                                              0.22x50mpg=11 miles and 1.1x10mpg=11 miles. Keeping the number of miles
                                              people drive constant, the saving is the same!



                                              _____

                                              From: toyota-prius@yahoogroups.com [mailto:toyota-prius@yahoogroups.com] On
                                              Behalf Of Michael Pardee
                                              Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2007 11:33 AM
                                              To: toyota-prius@yahoogroups.com
                                              Subject: [toyota-prius] Re: Check out the post Tesla EV /plugin hybrid
                                              supercar!



                                              --- In toyota-prius@ <mailto:toyota-prius%40yahoogroups.com>
                                              yahoogroups.com, "Cor van de Water"
                                              <cor_van_de_water@...> wrote:
                                              >
                                              > Mike,
                                              >
                                              > It is vastly more impactful to improve MPG of the low-MPG cars
                                              > than of high-MPG cars.
                                              > For example: to bring one car from 9 MPG to 10 MPG saves 5 times
                                              > as much fuel as bringing a 45 MPG car to 50 MPG.
                                              > You would think: both raise 10% in efficiency, should it not
                                              > be equal?
                                              > Well - let's turn the units around:
                                              > 9 MPG = 11.1 gal/100mi
                                              > 10 MPG = 10 gal/100mi
                                              > 45 MPG = 2.22 gal/100mi
                                              > 50 MPG = 2 gal/100mi
                                              > So, you see that for to the same driving distance (100 miles for
                                              > example) the impact of raising the fuel economy from 9 to 10 MPG
                                              > saves 1.1 gallon of gas, while raising the fuel economy from
                                              > 45 to 50 MPG only saves 0.22 gallon.
                                              > In addition, in the USA more than half the vehicles sold are
                                              > Light Trucks: pickup trucks plus SUVs. They both suffer from a
                                              > bad fuel economy because of weight, size and low requirements on
                                              > the fuel economy in the first place.
                                              > That is why the PT Cruiser got classified as Light Truck, so it
                                              > would not spoil Chrysler's average *car* fuel economy numbers.
                                              >
                                              > Hope this clarifies,
                                              > Cor.

                                              I agree with the reasoning, but differ on the viability in this
                                              phase of hybridization.

                                              I defer to you on the more intimate knowledge of the Toyota hybrid
                                              systems and I feel they are the best in general production. However,
                                              there are certainly reasons a canny automaker like Toyota has stuck
                                              with hybridizing lighter vehicles in spite of the greater return for
                                              choosing heavier ones. My guess is that the incremental cost of
                                              installing hybrid power trains in heavier vehicles made it
                                              unattractive in vehicles as heavy as the Camry until recently and
                                              for vehicles larger than the Camry at present. Similar reasons are
                                              probably why Toyota is still using the less-efficient series-
                                              parallel hybrid system rather than a potentially more efficient and
                                              powerful serial hybrid system.

                                              Some vehicles will probably never be hybridized: genuine working
                                              trucks would be a poor fit because the continuous power requirements
                                              can be too high, as when hauling a trailer or a heavy load.

                                              Don't get me wrong; I think we are seeing the most important change
                                              in automotive history. We are in the infancy of the technology - it
                                              needs time to grow.

                                              Mike





                                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                            • reza khadem
                                              I think you are right in this sense: Improving 9 mpg to 10 mpg saves 11 miles. But improving 45 mpg to 46 mpg saves about 8.5 miles, assuming that mpg is
                                              Message 22 of 23 , Sep 29, 2007
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                I think you are right in this sense:

                                                Improving 9 mpg to 10 mpg saves 11 miles. But improving 45 mpg to 46 mpg
                                                saves about 8.5 miles, assuming that mpg is linear.



                                                _____

                                                From: toyota-prius@yahoogroups.com [mailto:toyota-prius@yahoogroups.com] On
                                                Behalf Of Michael Pardee
                                                Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2007 11:33 AM
                                                To: toyota-prius@yahoogroups.com
                                                Subject: [toyota-prius] Re: Check out the post Tesla EV /plugin hybrid
                                                supercar!



                                                --- In toyota-prius@ <mailto:toyota-prius%40yahoogroups.com>
                                                yahoogroups.com, "Cor van de Water"
                                                <cor_van_de_water@...> wrote:
                                                >
                                                > Mike,
                                                >
                                                > It is vastly more impactful to improve MPG of the low-MPG cars
                                                > than of high-MPG cars.
                                                > For example: to bring one car from 9 MPG to 10 MPG saves 5 times
                                                > as much fuel as bringing a 45 MPG car to 50 MPG.
                                                > You would think: both raise 10% in efficiency, should it not
                                                > be equal?
                                                > Well - let's turn the units around:
                                                > 9 MPG = 11.1 gal/100mi
                                                > 10 MPG = 10 gal/100mi
                                                > 45 MPG = 2.22 gal/100mi
                                                > 50 MPG = 2 gal/100mi
                                                > So, you see that for to the same driving distance (100 miles for
                                                > example) the impact of raising the fuel economy from 9 to 10 MPG
                                                > saves 1.1 gallon of gas, while raising the fuel economy from
                                                > 45 to 50 MPG only saves 0.22 gallon.
                                                > In addition, in the USA more than half the vehicles sold are
                                                > Light Trucks: pickup trucks plus SUVs. They both suffer from a
                                                > bad fuel economy because of weight, size and low requirements on
                                                > the fuel economy in the first place.
                                                > That is why the PT Cruiser got classified as Light Truck, so it
                                                > would not spoil Chrysler's average *car* fuel economy numbers.
                                                >
                                                > Hope this clarifies,
                                                > Cor.

                                                I agree with the reasoning, but differ on the viability in this
                                                phase of hybridization.

                                                I defer to you on the more intimate knowledge of the Toyota hybrid
                                                systems and I feel they are the best in general production. However,
                                                there are certainly reasons a canny automaker like Toyota has stuck
                                                with hybridizing lighter vehicles in spite of the greater return for
                                                choosing heavier ones. My guess is that the incremental cost of
                                                installing hybrid power trains in heavier vehicles made it
                                                unattractive in vehicles as heavy as the Camry until recently and
                                                for vehicles larger than the Camry at present. Similar reasons are
                                                probably why Toyota is still using the less-efficient series-
                                                parallel hybrid system rather than a potentially more efficient and
                                                powerful serial hybrid system.

                                                Some vehicles will probably never be hybridized: genuine working
                                                trucks would be a poor fit because the continuous power requirements
                                                can be too high, as when hauling a trailer or a heavy load.

                                                Don't get me wrong; I think we are seeing the most important change
                                                in automotive history. We are in the infancy of the technology - it
                                                needs time to grow.

                                                Mike





                                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                              • K. B. Eric Riddle
                                                ... No change here -- adjusted for inflation, the $3000 figure from the 70s is roughly $11,500 in today s USD currency (we ll just use 1975 as a reference to
                                                Message 23 of 23 , Sep 30, 2007
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  Noctaire <noctaire@...> wrote: Minor adjustment to my original statement to be clear:

                                                  > Additionally, the initial assertion is that there is no
                                                  > $3,000 car. That's equally not the case. Adjusting for
                                                  > inflation, there most assuredly IS such a beast and it
                                                  > includes a number of technological advancements at that.

                                                  No change here -- adjusted for inflation, the $3000 figure from the
                                                  70s is roughly $11,500 in today's USD currency (we'll just use 1975 as
                                                  a reference to keep it simple). The least expensive car one can buy
                                                  in the US, in 2007 and with no real effort, runs right about $10,000.
                                                  That's the equivalent to right about $2,600 in 1975 USD.

                                                  > Even without such adjustments, there are $3,000 cars available
                                                  > on the market, right now with more planned in the future. I
                                                  > understand that some may find this realization stunning but
                                                  > that does not change the fact that they exist and may well become
                                                  > increasingly prevalent as Chinese and Indian manufacturers begin
                                                  > pushing their vehicles here in the US over the next several years.

                                                  This is what I need to qualify -- due to a variety of factors, there
                                                  aren't any cars on the US market priced at a current $3,000US figure.
                                                  The list is long but includes both demand as well as industry
                                                  regulations. This is poised to change in the near future with the
                                                  introduction of new low-cost lines from European/Asian manufacturers
                                                  like Tata Motors and Renault-Nissan, both of which have already
                                                  announced a small passenger vehicle that is expected to retail for
                                                  right about $3,000USD in India; it's only a matter of time before it
                                                  is adapted to fit our regulations here in the States and therefore
                                                  marketable here.

                                                  FWIW....

                                                  James




                                                  In 1976 I purchased a 1975 Mustang II for $3,000. In 1992 I purchased a Mercury Sable
                                                  for $11,000. In 2007 my wife purchased a 2007 HHR for $17,200. The effect of inflation
                                                  caused vehicle expenses to increase almost quadruplefold in the first 15 years, and not
                                                  so much lately. I remember when the Tarus first hit the streets in 1986 it was priced
                                                  a tick over $12000. Just looked at one, which is really a rebadged Ford 500, and it is
                                                  roughly double the initial issue price. My 2004 Saturn Ion stickered somewhere near
                                                  $13,000 and I gave the dealer a 2001 Ford ZX2 (110k miles and a blown tranny) and
                                                  $4000. Deal ended up showing gross sale price of $6400. The Ion is a much better
                                                  car than the ZX2, far and away better than the Sable that had gone through 7 transmissions
                                                  by the time it reached 70K miles, and is much more thrifty than the Ford 500 I had
                                                  to rent while in Houston a couple of years ago. Its all relative. The HHR is quite comfortable and somehow manages continuous 29.5 mpg consumption, in spite of
                                                  occasional lead foot driving. Pathetic against the Prius, but it didn't cost as much
                                                  and Teal Gold is the best retro color they offer.


                                                  K. B. Eric Riddle
                                                  1983 GL1100i
                                                  2005 Prius
                                                  2007 HHR-2004 Ion
                                                  Bellevue, Sarpy County, Nebraska


                                                  ---------------------------------
                                                  Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows.
                                                  Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.

                                                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.