On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 13:50:46 GMT, jeff
wrote:


The "close to 50%" was from a casual conversation some 15 years ago with
an engineer in the precision engineering lab at Livermore when I was out
there on a CRADA. It was in large measure based on the 80000 mile throw
away Detroit junk of the late 70s. I haven't been able to lay my hands
on them, but ANL did a lot life cycle modeling of work in that era as
well. Most of the current analysis I see is based around "green" vehicles.

Here's one that gets it down to 10% by claiming a 14 year life cycle for
a 1990 Taurus: http://www.ilea.org/lcas/macleanlave1998.html

Here is one that puts it at 30% http://www.co-design.co.uk/green.htm

Here is one that runs about 20%:
http://www.autosteel.org/pdfs/avc_20...t_analyses.pdf

Where is your less than 5% from, because it flies in the face of
everything I've seen in the past 25 years?.

--
My 1995 Mazda/Ford pickup has 366,000 miles on the odometer.

That should tend to squew the amortization. Same engine as the Taurus
btw.

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner