On Feb 26, 10:12*pm, "Existential Angst" wrote:
"whoyakidding's ghost" wrote in message

...









On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 00:24:35 -0500, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"whoyakidding's ghost" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 17:11:31 -0500, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

Your lucidity ebbs and flows.... *I think you need a few months of rest,
relaxation, and detox.

You got some nerve talking about lucidity in the same thread you
claimed that Gunner could build an EV. **** me, a week or so ago he
couldn't identify a starter solenoid without help.

Gummer also has to sit down to pee.... *that might have sumpn to do with
it.

Your argument that electric cars could be so simple that even Gunner
could build one is a huge fail. You don't even need to consider the
technical side. The fact is that the majority of RCM posters pay
someone else to change their oil. It's crazy to think the same people
can build any entire car, much less an EV. *Big projects take real
dedication. Usenet posting tends to be a way to avoid that kind of
commitment. I think it's fair to say that a lot of RCM posters would
be at their productive dedication limit with an IKEA project. Now if
you're talking unproductive dedication then sure, RCM posters could go
a thousand rounds TALKING about their preferred weapon to destroy
unfinished IKEA projects, why they prefer freedom meat balls over
communist meat balls, ad infinitum.

So what's the
difference between you, and someone predicting the end of the world on
a certain date?

Ummm, lessee, ummm..... the diff is that I'm not predicting the end of he
world on a certain date??
Could that be it?????

No, there's no practical difference. You're both promoting things that
aren't impossible, but are so unlikely that it makes no sense to bring
them up. This being Usenet though, if the thread goes on long enough
we'll read that vehicle nuke reactors can be protected with lead
airbags.

But the reality here is that if someone can afford a new Sonata, MX-5,
Silverado, Impala, Wrangler, or Sante Fe, then they can afford a Volt.
http://www.kbb.com/car-news/all-the-...ost-of-ownersh...
Yeah I know that most people don't believe their lyin calculators, but
then most people believe in angels. They're proud that nobody can
hornswaggle them outa that notion, or into an EVil.

Well, I don't know whatcher beef is with RCMers, but there are plenty of
RCMers/AMCers/AHRers who could build a "servicable" (ie, not luxurious)
electric car. *One even built one already.

And I never laid claim to that idea being *practical* -- I simply mentioned
it metaphorically, if you will, to make the point that the BigfuknAuto (and
gummint) is making much ado about sumpn fundamentally simple. *If you want
10 fukn air bags and teleporting navigation, then yeah, that might be tough
for an RCMer, but if you want a vehicle that can go from point A to point B
real cheap, then plenty here could do it.

And Big Auto apparently CANNOT do it -- or won't -- economically, despite
the fact that there is 1/100 the mechanical complexity in an electric than
in an ICE.
Altho the Prius c is starting to get there.

As far as Wrangler peeple being able to afford a volt, why not stick
Mercedes in there, as well?
Wrangler people can afford a Volt, but they're not going to buy them.
Honder Fit/Toyoter Yaris peeple want Volts, but will NEVER realize any ROI
on such an inflated purchase.
You need to keep yer apples with yer apples, and yer oranges with yer
oranges.

The Volt is $11K more expensive (over 5 years) than a Nissan Versa. *Go
figger....
And, CR would disagree with those figures anyway. *The cheapest car to own,
according to CR, is the Honder Fit, at 44c/mile. *Other vehicles easily hit
60, 70, 80c/mile. *If you figger the avg schmoe drives 100K in 5 years, the
costs, and the differentials, become much greater and wider.
--
EA

EVs are FAR more complex than an ICE car.
Hybrids even more so, you have two complete power systems inone car.