On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 20:45:43 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 16:04:03 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 13:24:06 -0500, wrote:


The price of a Volt puts it totally out of the running. Car and Driver
ran the numbers and said the Cruze was a better deal.

Better deal? Does that mean everybody should buy the one car that Car
and Driver says is a "better deal?"
+20,000 Volts were sold last year. According to Forbes, the Volt "is
outselling about half of all cars marketed in the U.S."
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jimgorze...efine-failure/
So your "totally out of the running" is a personal opinion.

I agree the
government bribe may shade that a little but the real cost is just
being foisted off on the people who don't buy a Volt. If everyone
bought one, the rebate simply moves from your car payment to your tax
bill.

The all-electric Nissan Leaf gets more preference with government
incentives than the Volt.
And you probably meant to say "federal and state government bribes."
Many states are kicking in.
http://www.pluginamerica.org/incentives
I noticed a guy in the Volt forum said he got a $6k tax credit from
Colorado to add to the $7.5k from the fed.

So the poor are subsidizing the rich. That sounds right, at least the
way it works here. They also subsidize the people who can afford
$50,000 solar PV arrays.
I am surprised the big business republicans are not really pushing
this. but maybe they are.

No, it's the big business Democrats who are really pushing this. Wake
up.

On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 12:53:33 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


dsi1 wrote:

The guys that complain about the deficiencies of the electric car must
think that the gas-powered internal combustion engine vehicles sprang up
fully developed in the early 20th century. The reality is that it took
about 50 years to get it right. Those guys deserve to drive horse carts.


You deserve to be harnessed with the other idiots to pull one.

What makes you think that the losers would pull even their own weight?
They aren't now.

Gunner wrote:

On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 16:54:18 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


The US started a war with Japan. You cut off their oil resources.


Sure we did. After they bombed Pearl Harbor.

We did cut off their steel imports...after they brutalized China and
performed the Rape of Nanking.

They wanted the US out of the Pacific..they wanted total control of
the Pacific. We disagreed.

The rest is history.

Despite what the Leftwingers want to believe.


Leftwingers beleive all the Fairytales. Or is that Fairytails?

Gunner wrote:

On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 16:58:58 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


harry wrote:

America is the home of junk food. (I assume this is what you mean?)


Junk food? Blood pudding sounds like junk food to me. Something any
civilized people consider waste. Then there are the biblical warnings
not to use the blood as food. Most of the crap meals I've seen from the
British aren't fit to feed to a hog, are are perfect for you ignorant
limeys.

They have a national holiday food known as Spotted Dick ...too.


Isn't that one of the symptoms of advanced VD?

The Daring Dufas wrote:

On 2/26/2013 4:00 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

The Daring Dufas wrote:

Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Tiny little liberals?

Naaa, they're a bunch of apolitical nonfunctional females much like
bees. ^_^


You just keep droning on! ;-)


What can I say, I have a BUZZ from all the pain meds I must take. I was
doing a bit of climbing yesterday to install and certify a CAT6 cable in
a Kmart yesterday.


Why bother? They are closing a lot of stores.


At least I wasn't having any chest pains.


You finally found a comfortable bra for your man boobs? ;-)

Gunner wrote:

On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 17:02:41 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


Gunner wrote:

On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 12:26:21 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


Stormin Mormon wrote:

Can't eat it, wear it, or shoot it. Gold is the perfect example of indirect
survival.


I wonder what it would do to a gun barrel if you cast bullets out of
gold?

Gold is quite abrasive and it would wear the barrel in x number of
rounds. On the other hand..it would work as well as lead and at
higher velocities

The thing to remember is...when wacking the bad guy...he is armed
also. So by taking him out..you gain his arms and ammo as well.

Which is why the Liberator pistol was developed and shipped.

http://www.americanrifleman.org/arti...erator-pistol/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ic5oOKfzCsc

Etc etc So you would shoot the bad guy and take his much better guns
and ammo.


The duty of any soldier is to kill as many of the enemy as he can,
without getting killed.

To make the other poor ******* die for HIS country.


Quickly and without suffering, if possible. Unless he has a blue
pencil. Then you waterboard him for months on end, until he pushes the
pencil through his brain.

On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 01:00:28 -0800 (PST), harry
wrote:

On Feb 25, 6:59*pm, wrote:
On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 09:58:14 -0800 (PST), harry









wrote:
On Feb 25, 4:56 pm, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:
The Daring Dufas wrote:

Electric vehicles are wonderful for the capabilities they have. The
electric car can never take the place of a gasoline powered vehicle
until it has the range and convenience of what we have now. Perhaps
a small nuclear reactor would give an electrically driven vehicle the
ability to travel long distances without having to stop every 50 miles
to recharge the battery. My concept of vehicle range is one that travels
far enough and long enough so that I must stop to empty my bladder
before the vehicle runs out of power. ^_^

There were five mounting locations for 30 gallon tanks on my old
stepvan service truck. Fully loaded, it got over 20 MPG or 600+ miles
per tank. Dual tanks easily let you drive over a thousand miles. All
five would take you over 3000 miles, if you could afford to fill all of
them. ;-)

In Europe we let the train take the strain. Or the bus.
Or fly.

But you've been trained from birth to be sheep. *They don't call you
"subjects" for nothing.

Better than being slaves to US banksters.

Only an idiot would willingly be a slave to the government. You're
such an idiot, obviously.

wrote:

On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 12:53:33 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


dsi1 wrote:

The guys that complain about the deficiencies of the electric car must
think that the gas-powered internal combustion engine vehicles sprang up
fully developed in the early 20th century. The reality is that it took
about 50 years to get it right. Those guys deserve to drive horse carts.


You deserve to be harnessed with the other idiots to pull one.

What makes you think that the losers would pull even their own weight?
They aren't now.


Use a flamethrower on ther sorry asses.

On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 19:07:59 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 2/25/2013 6:09 PM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
"The Daring Dufas" wrote in
message ...
The population density is also similar to Europe but get outside the
densely populated cities of the Northeast and your subway pass won't
get you very far. ^_^
TDD

Outside the larger towns Southern Germany had little more public
transportation than the US.


I'll bet you could get lost in The Black Forest. ^_^

With all that ham, beer, and chocolate cake, who cares?

On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 01:17:20 -0800 (PST), harry
wrote:

On Feb 25, 7:24*pm, Transition Zone wrote:
On Feb 25, 12:58*pm, harry wrote:







On Feb 25, 4:56*pm, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:

The Daring Dufas wrote:

Electric vehicles are wonderful for the capabilities they have. The
electric car can never take the place of a gasoline powered vehicle
until it has the range and convenience of what we have now. Perhaps
a small nuclear reactor would give an electrically driven vehicle the
ability to travel long distances without having to stop every 50 miles
to recharge the battery. My concept of vehicle range is one that travels
far enough and long enough so that I must stop to empty my bladder
before the vehicle runs out of power. ^_^

* *There were five mounting locations for 30 gallon tanks on my old
stepvan service truck. *Fully loaded, it got over 20 MPG or 600+ miles
per tank. Dual tanks easily let you drive over a thousand miles. *All
five would take you over 3000 miles, if you could afford to fill all of
them. ;-)

* In Europe we let the train take the strain. *Or the bus.

*Or fly.

North of Washington, we do that in the states, too.

Ah. The area first colonised, hence the most civilised:-)

No, idiot, the area with the densest people, like Europe.

I expect they still have wagon trains in the midwest.

We know you would expect such, moron.

Or they remember them at least.

Unlike Europeons, they're capable of remembering something, anyway.

On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 12:30:00 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


Frank wrote:

I know a Lib that sucks up all the subsidies he can get and brags about
it. Solar electric panels, geothermal heating, two Prius's and a cash
for clunkers deal are what I know about. He gets ****ed when I point
out he lives off the government teat.

But, the best part is that he is affluent and brags about that too


Affleunt? I think he's closer to effleunt.

He did say he was a lib.

On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 12:27:52 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


Stormin Mormon wrote:

Who pays for the subsidies? What gives you the moral authority to force
other citizens to pay for Volt drivers cars? Using the force of the IRS to
take my money to pay for someone else's car?

Why would you want a plug in a parking lot? Plug goes on the car, socket
supplies the power. Martin sounds like a dreamer with little grounding in or
connection to reality. He's in for a shock.

Lets take a couple hundred bucks from Martin to help buy my next work van,
shall we?


One school system just annnounced a fee for students who want to play
sports. IADT they paid their own way.

Sounds like a good idea to me. If they don't like that, they can
raise the money by working or baking cookies.

wrote:

On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 12:30:00 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


Frank wrote:

I know a Lib that sucks up all the subsidies he can get and brags about
it. Solar electric panels, geothermal heating, two Prius's and a cash
for clunkers deal are what I know about. He gets ****ed when I point
out he lives off the government teat.

But, the best part is that he is affluent and brags about that too


Affleunt? I think he's closer to effleunt.

He did say he was a lib.


That's nothing to brag about.

wrote:

On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 12:27:52 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


Stormin Mormon wrote:

Who pays for the subsidies? What gives you the moral authority to force
other citizens to pay for Volt drivers cars? Using the force of the IRS to
take my money to pay for someone else's car?

Why would you want a plug in a parking lot? Plug goes on the car, socket
supplies the power. Martin sounds like a dreamer with little grounding in or
connection to reality. He's in for a shock.

Lets take a couple hundred bucks from Martin to help buy my next work van,
shall we?


One school system just annnounced a fee for students who want to play
sports. IADT they paid their own way.

Sounds like a good idea to me. If they don't like that, they can
raise the money by working or baking cookies.


Or actually study instead of hoping for a sports scholarship.

On 2/26/2013 6:07 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 10:05:47 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 01:33:47 -0800 (PST), harry
wrote:

They buy short ladders because a long one won't fit in the trunk of a
Volt.

So which car will they fit in?

I can put a 6 foot step ladder in my Honda Prelude and close the
hatch.

These fit with the windows and doors closed

http://gfretwell.com/ftp/Packing%20honda.jpg

I could put a 10' board inside my Voyagers (when I had them, a couple
of decades ago).


I was able to carry a 6' step ladder inside my Renault 16 when I had the
funky machine 35 years ago. It had a great cargo capacity for a
small car. ^_^

TDD

On 2/26/2013 6:20 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

The Daring Dufas wrote:

On 2/26/2013 4:00 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

The Daring Dufas wrote:

Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Tiny little liberals?

Naaa, they're a bunch of apolitical nonfunctional females much like
bees. ^_^


You just keep droning on! ;-)


What can I say, I have a BUZZ from all the pain meds I must take. I was
doing a bit of climbing yesterday to install and certify a CAT6 cable in
a Kmart yesterday.


Why bother? They are closing a lot of stores.


At least I wasn't having any chest pains.


You finally found a comfortable bra for your man boobs? ;-)


My man boobs went away when I lost a hundred pounds and I don't mean
U.K. currency. Sears merged with Kmart and me and JH do a lot of work
in both stores. We also wind up doing a lot of work in Sam's Club and
Walmart stores. We still need a young sober guy about 50 years old to
help us with the climbing around we're always having to do. O_o

TDD

On 2013-02-26, dsi1 wrote:
I don't know of anybody in America that thought these cars were very
good. Perhaps it's different in the UK. No matter, the idea changed
everything.

It was a brilliant car from a purely technical standpoint but suffered
mightily from poor excecution, spotty build quality, and nonexistent
rustproofing. (In other words, a pretty typical BMC/British Leyland
product. :-) The Austin America was heavily advertised in the U.S. as
having a fully-automatic 4-speed transmission available, which was unheard
of in a small import at the time. Even full-size Chevys were still using a
2-speed automatic back then. Unfortunately those transmissions, sharing
the engine oil, frequently would not even make it through the warranty
period without grenading, particulary given the typical American driver's
penchant for skipping oil changes..

The transverse engine idea was actually introduced with the original Mini
in 1959. The Austin America shared the same basic drivetrain but with a
larger displacement engine, which is another reason so few are left --
many were tossed aside after the power unit was plucked to install in
a Mini.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roger Blake (Change "invalid" to "com" for email. Google Groups killfiled.)

"Climate policy has almost nothing to do anymore with environmental
protection... the next world climate summit in Cancun is actually
an economy summit during which the distribution of the world's
resources will be negotiated." -- Ottmar Edenhofer, IPCC
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 03:41:30 -0500, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 24 Feb 2013 18:48:17 -0800 (PST), bob haller
wrote:


His point was the autos rely on oil for a fuel source
and are responsible for using a whole lot of it.
Very little electricity is generated from oil, at least here
in the USA. It's only a few percent. Coal is the largest
source, followed by nat gas. And there is a lot more of
that available, enough for hundreds of years.

That's true, as far as it goes, but the infrastructure isn't there to
allow a significant number of cars to switch. ...and there are no
plans to put it there because the same people who are insisting on
electric vehicles are standing in the way of more generation.

During the day the power grid is used a lot, but after work, evenings
nights and weekends the power grid as lots of extra capacity

People could charge their vehicles at nght, at off peak rates.

...and come home from work in the morning. Nice idea, dolt.

I got it, I got it.... this krw asshole is Plimpton, THE legendary
venerealated asshole of multiple ngs.....
Howzit goin, Plimpie?? Why'd you give up yer moniker?

And, and once again, you are fulla****, and haller is right.
The night-time grid could easily accommodate the initial transition to
electric.... mebbe not the WHOLE transition, suddenly, but certainly the
transition at its current rate, and rate-to-come for a while.

WTF would you think otherwise??


Agreed. I've read they will have filling stations for electric cars
too and I think they already have some as a prototype but I don't
recall where.

On Feb 26, 6:19*pm, George Plimpton wrote:
On 2/26/2013 9:58 AM, harry wrote:









On Feb 26, 5:23 pm, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:
harry wrote:

On Feb 26, 12:15 am, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:
Attila Iskander wrote:

But that comment again demonstrates how provincial harry's mindset is.
Obviously what works around him has to work just as well ALL OVER the world
It's a holdover from the times when Euros imagined they controlled and were
superior to the rest of the world

* * Their egos have always outreached their grasp.

True more of the USA than Europe.

* * The US has never started a world war, but you have two under your
belts. *Does: "The sun will never set on the British Empire!" ring any
bells in your tiny belfry? *How about your slave trade, where you limeys
brought slaves to your southern plantations, then left us to deal with
the problems when we kicked your syphilis infected carcasses out in that
little spat where a handful of farm boys kicked the **** out of "The
best army in the world"?

You don't know your history.

We do. *Brit historical revisionism is funny.

We were having a problem with the French.
When we sorted them out we came back and burned down the white house
and chase you across America.

The War of 1812, a minor conflict of the Napoleonic wars, was not a
victory for either side.

The US started a war with Japan. You cut off their oil resources.

The US did not start a war with Japan. *There's that silly Brit
revisionism again.



The US armed forces have never won a war since WW2.

Wrong. *The US prevailed militarily in Iraq twice, and in several minor
conflicts. *The Brits would have lost in the Falklands if not for the US.

Various forms of gooks beat them all round the world regardless of all
the technology.

The sun did set on the Brit empire, in no small part due to US.



And we have started many "world" wars, all against tyrants.

No Brit war ever was started to fight tyranny.

I can see you're another uneducated Yank.
You have not won in Iraq (or Afghanistan.) They have defeated you. US
troops are being pulled out while the war continues. And they will
win.

The USA did not exist while we fought European tyrants.
From Philip II of Spain to Louis XIV of France to Napoleon.
We fought Wilhelm IIs Germany.
We declared war on Hitler.
The USA only joined these wars when forced to.
You killed two million indians, by war, disease and ethnic cleansing.
You invade Mexico, Hawaii and the Philipines
You invaded Canada, burning and looting until thrown out by the Brits
and Canadians.
Truly the Great Satan.
What a load of ****.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manifest_destiny

On Feb 26, 6:21*pm, Sinclair Weeks v wrote:
On 2/26/2013 10:03 AM, Gunner wrote:









On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 12:23:46 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:

harry wrote:

On Feb 26, 12:15 am, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:
Attila Iskander wrote:

But that comment again demonstrates how provincial harry's mindset is.
Obviously what works around him has to work just as well ALL OVER the world
It's a holdover from the times when Euros imagined they controlled and were
superior to the rest of the world

* * Their egos have always outreached their grasp.

True more of the USA than Europe.

* *The US has never started a world war, but you have two under your
belts. *Does: "The sun will never set on the British Empire!" ring any
bells in your tiny belfry? *How about your slave trade, where you limeys
brought slaves to your southern plantations, then left us to deal with
the problems when we kicked your syphilis infected carcasses out in that
little spat where a handful of farm boys kicked the **** out of "The
best army in the world"?



I should point out that syphilis came from America.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syphilis#History

On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 19:17:12 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


Gunner wrote:

On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 16:58:58 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


harry wrote:

America is the home of junk food. (I assume this is what you mean?)


Junk food? Blood pudding sounds like junk food to me. Something any
civilized people consider waste. Then there are the biblical warnings
not to use the blood as food. Most of the crap meals I've seen from the
British aren't fit to feed to a hog, are are perfect for you ignorant
limeys.

They have a national holiday food known as Spotted Dick ...too.


Isn't that one of the symptoms of advanced VD?

One assumes so.


The methodology of the left has always been:

1. Lie
2. Repeat the lie as many times as possible
3. Have as many people repeat the lie as often as possible
4. Eventually, the uninformed believe the lie
5. The lie will then be made into some form oflaw
6. Then everyone must conform to the lie

On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 19:25:35 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 19:07:59 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 2/25/2013 6:09 PM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
"The Daring Dufas" wrote in
message ...
The population density is also similar to Europe but get outside the
densely populated cities of the Northeast and your subway pass won't
get you very far. ^_^
TDD

Outside the larger towns Southern Germany had little more public
transportation than the US.


I'll bet you could get lost in The Black Forest. ^_^

With all that ham, beer, and chocolate cake, who cares?


Can I get lost in a Strudel mine? Yummm!!


The methodology of the left has always been:

1. Lie
2. Repeat the lie as many times as possible
3. Have as many people repeat the lie as often as possible
4. Eventually, the uninformed believe the lie
5. The lie will then be made into some form oflaw
6. Then everyone must conform to the lie

On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 19:27:24 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 01:17:20 -0800 (PST), harry
wrote:

On Feb 25, 7:24*pm, Transition Zone wrote:
On Feb 25, 12:58*pm, harry wrote:







On Feb 25, 4:56*pm, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:

The Daring Dufas wrote:

Electric vehicles are wonderful for the capabilities they have. The
electric car can never take the place of a gasoline powered vehicle
until it has the range and convenience of what we have now. Perhaps
a small nuclear reactor would give an electrically driven vehicle the
ability to travel long distances without having to stop every 50 miles
to recharge the battery. My concept of vehicle range is one that travels
far enough and long enough so that I must stop to empty my bladder
before the vehicle runs out of power. ^_^

* *There were five mounting locations for 30 gallon tanks on my old
stepvan service truck. *Fully loaded, it got over 20 MPG or 600+ miles
per tank. Dual tanks easily let you drive over a thousand miles. *All
five would take you over 3000 miles, if you could afford to fill all of
them. ;-)

* In Europe we let the train take the strain. *Or the bus.

*Or fly.

North of Washington, we do that in the states, too.

Ah. The area first colonised, hence the most civilised:-)

No, idiot, the area with the densest people, like Europe.

Oh..that would be Northern Michigan, rather than the East Coast.

I expect they still have wagon trains in the midwest.

We know you would expect such, moron.

Or they remember them at least.

Unlike Europeons, they're capable of remembering something, anyway.

The methodology of the left has always been:

1. Lie
2. Repeat the lie as many times as possible
3. Have as many people repeat the lie as often as possible
4. Eventually, the uninformed believe the lie
5. The lie will then be made into some form oflaw
6. Then everyone must conform to the lie

On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 19:32:11 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 12:30:00 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


Frank wrote:

I know a Lib that sucks up all the subsidies he can get and brags about
it. Solar electric panels, geothermal heating, two Prius's and a cash
for clunkers deal are what I know about. He gets ****ed when I point
out he lives off the government teat.

But, the best part is that he is affluent and brags about that too


Affleunt? I think he's closer to effleunt.

He did say he was a lib.

Lib, effluent..same substance.


The methodology of the left has always been:

1. Lie
2. Repeat the lie as many times as possible
3. Have as many people repeat the lie as often as possible
4. Eventually, the uninformed believe the lie
5. The lie will then be made into some form oflaw
6. Then everyone must conform to the lie

On Feb 26, 7:32*pm, Frank wrote:
On 2/26/2013 12:48 PM, harry wrote:









On Feb 26, 5:02 pm, jon_banquer wrote:
How many billions of dollars will US taxpayers end up losing on the
government bailout of GM?

http://www.mbtmag.com/news/2013/02/g...ll-remaining-s....

"The U.S. government has started selling its remaining General Motors
stock as it moves to end four years of partial ownership of the
Detroit automaker.

The Treasury Department said in its January report to Congress that it
sold $156.4 million worth of GM common stock last month.

The report, dated Feb. 11, says the government has recovered about $29
billion of its $49.5 billion bailout of GM. That means it's just over
$20 billion in the hole on the bailout.

Details on the average share price will be revealed later, Treasury
says in the report.

GM's stock ranged from $27.61 to $30.68 in January. At the midpoint of
that range, $29.15, the government would have sold about 5.4 million
shares.

The government owned 300.1 million GM shares, or 19 percent of the
company, at the start of the year. Treasury has said it will sell the
rest by early in 2014, depending on market conditions. Treasury would
not reveal specific details of the sales plan or provide further
information on timing.

Breaking even would require selling the remaining 300 million shares
for an average of about $70 each more than double the current
trading price."

I'm glad you pointed that out. There are folks here think the US gov.
made a big profit.

Just the folks that believe US government lies

Well similar projects here in the UK ended the same way.
There was a single exception.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolls-R...and_separation

On Feb 26, 9:40*pm, Roger Blake wrote:
On 2013-02-26, dsi1 wrote:

Alec Issigonis pretty much changed the car and car manufacturing. I used
to have a 65 Austin America back in the early 70s. I told my wife that

Ah, yes, the Austin America -- British Leyland's attempt at grabbing a
piece of VW's 1960s action in the U.S. As I recall the Austin America
actually debuted as a 1968 model, though a variation of it was sold as
the "MG Sport Sedan" in the U.S. several years beforehand. (The Sport
Sedan was a 4-door with 1100cc engine, the America a 2-door with 1300cc.)

Did it manage to get to 20k miles before needing a complete overhaul? :-)
The 4-speed automatic transmissions were particularly problematical. The
transmissions in these cars lived in the crankcase and worked with the
engine oil. Clever packaging, but not a recipe for longevity.

The few Austin Americas that didn't have their drivetrains self-destruct
just out of warranty crumbled to heaps of rust within a relatively few
years. There's a reason that so few of those cars were sold and almost
none survived! (Even at this late date original VW Beetles are not an
uncommon sight. On the other hand, It has been decades since I've seen
an Austin America.)

The Austin America was a very advanced car for its time, but could not
compete at all with the relative anvil-like reliability of the antiquated
VW Beetle.

one of these days, all cars would be built with a transverse
engine/transmission/drivetrain in a single package driving the front
wheels. As usual, I was right.

You were wrong. :-) Although a popular configuration, far from "all cars"
make use of it.

If you want to remember a particularly **** car intended for America,
how about this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austin_Metropolitan

On Feb 26, 9:54*pm, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:
harry wrote:

On Feb 26, 5:23 pm, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:
harry wrote:

On Feb 26, 12:15 am, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:
Attila Iskander wrote:

But that comment again demonstrates how provincial harry's mindset is.
Obviously what works around him has to work just as well ALL OVER the world
It's a holdover from the times when Euros imagined they controlled and were
superior to the rest of the world

* *Their egos have always outreached their grasp.

True more of the USA than Europe.

* *The US has never started a world war, but you have two under your
belts. *Does: "The sun will never set on the British Empire!" ring any
bells in your tiny belfry? *How about your slave trade, where you limeys
brought slaves to your southern plantations, then left us to deal with
the problems when we kicked your syphilis infected carcasses out in that
little spat where a handful of farm boys kicked the **** out of "The
best army in the world"?

You don't know your history.
We were having a problem with the French.
When we sorted them out we came back and burned down the white house
and chase you across America.

* *The White House? *You don't know the difference between the
Rvolutinary War & the War of 1812. *Only cowards, likethe British burn
buildings when they occupy a city.

The US started a war with Japan. You cut off their oil resources.

* *Sure we did. *After they bombed Pearl Harbor.

The US armed forces have never won a war since WW2.

* *Yawn... *What has England won?

Various forms of gooks beat them all round the world regardless of all
the technology.

Oh, sorry, you won in Greneda.

* *After England lost them as a colony in 1974, and it really stuck in
your craw.

* *The US also had:

*Organization of American States
*Antigua and Barbuda
*Barbados
*Dominica
*Jamaica
*Saint Lucia
*Saint Vincent and the Grenadines

*as allies against:

*People's Revolutionary Government of Grenada
*Cuba
*Soviet Union (advisory)

And we have started many "world" wars, all against tyrants.
The US starts wars mainly in order to steal the resources of
countries. On a few other occasions because you have crazy presidents.

* *You have a long history of being greedy, bloodthirsty fools who start
wars for no reason, and you lost many of them. *Then you needed our help
in both World Wars.

The USA invaded Canada burning and looting. Why do you suppose
Canadians don't like you?
In the 1930's there was a US plan to invade Canada again.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Plan_Red

Germany and Japan both declared war on you.
You had to come running to get our help (and the Russians)

On Feb 26, 9:58*pm, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:
harry wrote:

America is the home of junk food. (I assume this is what you mean?)

* *Junk food? *Blood pudding sounds like junk food to me. *Something any
civilized people consider waste. *Then there are the biblical warnings
not to use the blood as food. *Most of the crap meals I've seen from the
British aren't fit to feed to a hog, are are perfect for you ignorant
limeys.

Tsch. It is incorporated into American beefburgers/hot dogs you bloody
half wit..

On Feb 26, 9:55*pm, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:
Gunner wrote:

On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 12:23:46 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:

harry wrote:

On Feb 26, 12:15 am, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:
Attila Iskander wrote:

But that comment again demonstrates how provincial harry's mindset is.
Obviously what works around him has to work just as well ALL OVER the world
It's a holdover from the times when Euros imagined they controlled and were
superior to the rest of the world

* *Their egos have always outreached their grasp.

True more of the USA than Europe.

* The US has never started a world war, but you have two under your
belts. *Does: "The sun will never set on the British Empire!" ring any
bells in your tiny belfry? *How about your slave trade, where you limeys
brought slaves to your southern plantations, then left us to deal with
the problems when we kicked your syphilis infected carcasses out in that
little spat where a handful of farm boys kicked the **** out of "The
best army in the world"?

^5!! * Very very well stated!! *Bravo!!

* *He won't get it. *He only knows the crap they printed in the British
tabloids they wrapped his fish & Chips in.

Hah. Another American ****ferbrains.
Did you ever go to school?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_imperialism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_1812

On Feb 26, 10:02*pm, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:
Gunner wrote:

On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 12:26:21 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:

Stormin Mormon wrote:

Can't eat it, wear it, or shoot it. Gold is the perfect example of indirect
survival.

* I wonder what it would do to a gun barrel if you cast bullets out of
gold?

Gold is quite abrasive and it would wear the barrel in x number of
rounds. *On the other hand..it would work as well as lead and at
higher velocities

The thing to remember is...when wacking the bad guy...he is armed
also. So by taking him out..you gain his arms and ammo as well.

Which is why the Liberator pistol was developed and shipped.

http://www.americanrifleman.org/arti...erator-pistol/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ic5oOKfzCsc

Etc etc *So you would shoot the bad guy and take his much better guns
and ammo.

* *The duty of any soldier is to kill as many of the enemy as he can,
without getting killed.

The exact reason that 11-9 event happened.
Only they didn't care about getting killed.

On Feb 26, 10:05*pm, George Plimpton wrote:
On 2/26/2013 1:58 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:



harry wrote:

America is the home of junk food. (I assume this is what you mean?)

* * Junk food? *Blood pudding sounds like junk food to me.

Followed by a dessert of spotted dick.

Yummy. Better then fried 'coon.

On Feb 26, 10:06*pm, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:
Frank wrote:

Bragging about his wealth trying to hit on a gal that posted in ng.
Found his place on Google maps and it looks like big bucks

* *If he really lives there, and isn't the butler or gardener.

Point of my post is that you give the government money to hand out and
smart people will know how to get it. *People go where the money is and
then the Libs bitch about big business getting it. *Follow the money,
how stupid can they get?

* *Too stupid to live, but no one has told them yet.

Hybrid/electric cars should succeed on their merits not subsidies.

* *If, at all. *The technology just isn't there yet and likely never
will be unless they can make batteries that are tiny, indestructible and
weightless while allowing you to drive across the US without being
charged.

Ah. You mean a horse?

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.

On Feb 26, 10:29*pm, dsi1 wrote:
On 2/26/2013 11:40 AM, Roger Blake wrote:









On 2013-02-26, dsi1 wrote:
Alec Issigonis pretty much changed the car and car manufacturing. I used
to have a 65 Austin America back in the early 70s. I told my wife that

Ah, yes, the Austin America -- British Leyland's attempt at grabbing a
piece of VW's 1960s action in the U.S. As I recall the Austin America
actually debuted as a 1968 model, though a variation of it was sold as
the "MG Sport Sedan" in the U.S. several years beforehand. (The Sport
Sedan was a 4-door with 1100cc engine, the America a 2-door with 1300cc..)

Did it manage to get to 20k miles before needing a complete overhaul? :-)
The 4-speed automatic transmissions were particularly problematical. The
transmissions in these cars lived in the crankcase and worked with the
engine oil. Clever packaging, but not a recipe for longevity.

The few Austin Americas that didn't have their drivetrains self-destruct
just out of warranty crumbled to heaps of rust within a relatively few
years. There's a reason that so few of those cars were sold and almost
none survived! (Even at this late date original VW Beetles are not an
uncommon sight. On the other hand, It has been decades since I've seen
an Austin America.)

I don't know of anybody in America that thought these cars were very
good. Perhaps it's different in the UK. No matter, the idea changed
everything.



The Austin America was a very advanced car for its time, but could not
compete at all with the relative anvil-like reliability of the antiquated
VW Beetle.

one of these days, all cars would be built with a transverse
engine/transmission/drivetrain in a single package driving the front
wheels. As usual, I was right.

You were wrong. :-) Although a popular configuration, far from "all cars"
make use of it.

Your options for RWD cars are pretty good these days. Most of them are
cars in the "sporty" and/or high-priced market luxury segments. If you
just want a good old family car that an average Joe can afford, your
choices are pretty limited. This is pretty much the way it's been since
the 80s.

The only reason front wheel drive cars exist is that they are cheaper
to manufacture.

They will never handle as well as front /mid engine, rear wheel drive.

On Feb 27, 12:00*am, Gunner wrote:
On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 16:54:18 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"

wrote:

The US started a war with Japan. You cut off their oil resources.

* Sure we did. *After they bombed Pearl Harbor.

We did cut off their steel imports...after they brutalized China and
performed the Rape of Nanking.

They wanted the US out of the Pacific..they wanted total control of
the Pacific. *We disagreed.

The rest is history.

Despite what the Leftwingers want to believe.

Gunner

Since when has the USA worried about what happened in China? The US
was just looking for trouble.
I wonder what would happen if the Iranians cut off US oil in the
straights of Hormus?

On 2/26/2013 10:56 PM, harry wrote:
On Feb 26, 6:19 pm, George Plimpton wrote:
On 2/26/2013 9:58 AM, harry wrote:









On Feb 26, 5:23 pm, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:
harry wrote:

On Feb 26, 12:15 am, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:
Attila Iskander wrote:

But that comment again demonstrates how provincial harry's mindset is.
Obviously what works around him has to work just as well ALL OVER the world
It's a holdover from the times when Euros imagined they controlled and were
superior to the rest of the world

Their egos have always outreached their grasp.

True more of the USA than Europe.

The US has never started a world war, but you have two under your
belts. Does: "The sun will never set on the British Empire!" ring any
bells in your tiny belfry? How about your slave trade, where you limeys
brought slaves to your southern plantations, then left us to deal with
the problems when we kicked your syphilis infected carcasses out in that
little spat where a handful of farm boys kicked the **** out of "The
best army in the world"?

You don't know your history.

We do. Brit historical revisionism is funny.

We were having a problem with the French.
When we sorted them out we came back and burned down the white house
and chase you across America.

The War of 1812, a minor conflict of the Napoleonic wars, was not a
victory for either side.

The US started a war with Japan. You cut off their oil resources.

The US did not start a war with Japan. There's that silly Brit
revisionism again.



The US armed forces have never won a war since WW2.

Wrong. The US prevailed militarily in Iraq twice, and in several minor
conflicts. The Brits would have lost in the Falklands if not for the US.

Various forms of gooks beat them all round the world regardless of all
the technology.

The sun did set on the Brit empire, in no small part due to US.



And we have started many "world" wars, all against tyrants.

No Brit war ever was started to fight tyranny.

I can see you're another uneducated Yank.

You're wrong again.


You have not won in Iraq (or Afghanistan.)

We won in Iraq. Twice. Not in rational dispute. Afghanistan looks
bad, but it's not a military defeat; it's a political defeat. The US
has never been militarily defeated. We've gotten into some stupid wars
and lost politically, but never militarily. Not so the Brits.


They have defeated you.

No.



The USA did not exist while we fought European tyrants.

You've never fought European tyrants to fight tyranny.

You lost your empire - pure and simple. You didn't want to lose it, but
you did.

On 2/26/2013 11:01 PM, harry wrote:
On Feb 26, 6:21 pm, Sinclair Weeks v wrote:
On 2/26/2013 10:03 AM, Gunner wrote:









On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 12:23:46 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:

harry wrote:

On Feb 26, 12:15 am, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:
Attila Iskander wrote:

But that comment again demonstrates how provincial harry's mindset is.
Obviously what works around him has to work just as well ALL OVER the world
It's a holdover from the times when Euros imagined they controlled and were
superior to the rest of the world

Their egos have always outreached their grasp.

True more of the USA than Europe.

The US has never started a world war, but you have two under your
belts. Does: "The sun will never set on the British Empire!" ring any
bells in your tiny belfry? How about your slave trade, where you limeys
brought slaves to your southern plantations, then left us to deal with
the problems when we kicked your syphilis infected carcasses out in that
little spat where a handful of farm boys kicked the **** out of "The
best army in the world"?



I should point out that syphilis came from America.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syphilis#History

You're a liar, of course. From your own citation:

The exact origin of syphilis is unknown. Of two primary
hypotheses, one proposes that syphilis was carried to Europe by
the returning crewmen from Christopher Columbus's voyage to the
Americas, the other proposes syphilis existed in Europe
previously, but went unrecognized.

On 2/26/2013 11:30 PM, harry wrote:
On Feb 26, 10:05 pm, George Plimpton wrote:
On 2/26/2013 1:58 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:



harry wrote:

America is the home of junk food. (I assume this is what you mean?)

Junk food? Blood pudding sounds like junk food to me.

Followed by a dessert of spotted dick.

Yummy. Better then fried 'coon.

Women, children and queers say 'yummy'. Men do not.

On Feb 27, 12:01*am, Gunner wrote:
On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 16:58:58 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"

wrote:

harry wrote:

America is the home of junk food. (I assume this is what you mean?)

* Junk food? *Blood pudding sounds like junk food to me. *Something any
civilized people consider waste. *Then there are the biblical warnings
not to use the blood as food. *Most of the crap meals I've seen from the
British aren't fit to feed to a hog, are are perfect for you ignorant
limeys.

They have a national holiday food known as Spotted Dick ...too.

Americans claiming our food is weird. That's rich.
This the nation that invented junk food.
The nation of fat gits.
The nation addicted to salt and sugar.
The nation with the most polluted, chemical filled food in the world.
The nation that stuffs it cows full of hormones.
http://www.thedailymeal.com/andrew-z...izarre%2Bfoods

Yuck!!!!!!!

On Feb 27, 12:09*am, wrote:
On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 20:45:43 -0500, wrote:
On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 16:04:03 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 13:24:06 -0500, wrote:

The price of a Volt puts it totally out of the running. Car and Driver
ran the numbers and said the Cruze was a better deal.

Better deal? *Does that mean everybody should buy the one car that Car
and Driver says is a "better deal?"
+20,000 Volts were sold last year. *According to Forbes, the Volt "is
outselling about half of all cars marketed in the U.S."
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jimgorze...ust-chevrolet-....
So your "totally out of the running" is a personal opinion.

I agree the
government bribe may shade that a little but the real cost is just
being foisted off on the people who don't buy a Volt. If everyone
bought one, the rebate simply moves from your car payment to your tax
bill.

The all-electric Nissan Leaf gets more preference with government
incentives than the Volt.
And you probably meant to say "federal and state government bribes."
Many states are kicking in.
http://www.pluginamerica.org/incentives
I noticed a guy in the Volt forum said he got a $6k tax credit from
Colorado to add to the $7.5k from the fed.

So the poor are subsidizing the rich. That sounds right, at least the
way it works here. They also subsidize the people who can afford
$50,000 solar PV arrays.
I am surprised the big business republicans are not really pushing
this. *but maybe they are.

No, it's the big business Democrats who are really pushing this. *Wake
up.

Robin Hood stole from the rich and gave to the poor.
In America the rich have always stolen from the poor.
They import poor people for this purpose.