"Jon Elson" wrote in message
...
Existential Angst wrote:




So, I figger, since I drive about 20,000 mi/yr, let's compare the Fit and
the Volt in that mile range.
So in the driving I do, I get about 40 mpg on the Fit.... course, I
free-wheel all over the fukn place, have a helium foot, and shut off the
engine at the drop of a hat, etc.
And the Volt, at that mileage, will do 45 mpg. And, very importantly,
what
I do manually the Volt does *automatically*. Long live The Chip, eh?
Well, you can get a Honda Civic Hybrid for a little over $20K, and I
get up to 57 MPG without much work. I do have a light foot. I drove
3 kids plus myself (and the oldest of that crew outweighs me) about
250 miles to a basketball tournament at got 57 MPG on the highway
at 59 MPH without air conditioning. It was just at the upper range of
comfortable temps. This was flat southern Illinois country, the HCH
does great on that terrain. I just used the cruise control.

Last week I drove 1000 miles on an out of town trip taking about 600 Lbs
of stuff to a show, hotter than hell both ways, and lots of hills
that make it harder to get good mileage. I got about 47 MPG on that
run, mostly around 68 MPH. AC, hills and speed all conspire to
wreck the mileage.

You can almost buy two of the Civic Hybrids for the price of one
Volt, and get good mileage both in town and on long trips.

In that case, Kidding would indeed never ever EVER realize an ROI, unless it
was under the 10,000 mi/yr range.
And then it would be sumpn like 69 years.... lol

57 mpg is fantastic; 47 is excellent.
The prius c geekies talk about hitting 68 mpg.
The VW TDI engine supposedly returns mpg's in the mid-fifties, with a light
foot.
When sumpn like a prius c pushes 70 mpg, 100 mpge electrics -- with all the
associated prices/visissytudes thereof -- lose quite a bit of their dazzle.

And not knockin the Volt. The concept is excellent, the engineering grand,
the quality apparently very good.... just, the execution and logic was a
bit off.
But much too much for Kidding to grok, apparently.
--
EA



Jon

On 6/26/2013 7:10 PM, Existential Angst wrote:
"Jon Elson" wrote in message
...
Existential Angst wrote:




So, I figger, since I drive about 20,000 mi/yr, let's compare the Fit and
the Volt in that mile range.
So in the driving I do, I get about 40 mpg on the Fit.... course, I
free-wheel all over the fukn place, have a helium foot, and shut off the
engine at the drop of a hat, etc.
And the Volt, at that mileage, will do 45 mpg. And, very importantly,
what
I do manually the Volt does *automatically*. Long live The Chip, eh?
Well, you can get a Honda Civic Hybrid for a little over $20K, and I
get up to 57 MPG without much work. I do have a light foot. I drove
3 kids plus myself (and the oldest of that crew outweighs me) about
250 miles to a basketball tournament at got 57 MPG on the highway
at 59 MPH without air conditioning. It was just at the upper range of
comfortable temps. This was flat southern Illinois country, the HCH
does great on that terrain. I just used the cruise control.

Last week I drove 1000 miles on an out of town trip taking about 600 Lbs
of stuff to a show, hotter than hell both ways, and lots of hills
that make it harder to get good mileage. I got about 47 MPG on that
run, mostly around 68 MPH. AC, hills and speed all conspire to
wreck the mileage.

You can almost buy two of the Civic Hybrids for the price of one
Volt, and get good mileage both in town and on long trips.

In that case, Kidding would indeed never ever EVER realize an ROI, unless it
was under the 10,000 mi/yr range.
And then it would be sumpn like 69 years.... lol

57 mpg is fantastic; 47 is excellent.
The prius c geekies talk about hitting 68 mpg.
The VW TDI engine supposedly returns mpg's in the mid-fifties, with a light
foot.
When sumpn like a prius c pushes 70 mpg, 100 mpge electrics -- with all the
associated prices/visissytudes thereof -- lose quite a bit of their dazzle.

And not knockin the Volt. The concept is excellent, the engineering grand,
the quality apparently very good.... just, the execution and logic was a
bit off.
But much too much for Kidding to grok, apparently.


I'm sure he sends checks to the State and Fed for the unpaid road taxes.
And a check to the EPA for all the coal burned.

On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 21:17:28 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

On 6/26/2013 7:10 PM, Existential Angst wrote:
"Jon Elson" wrote in message
...
Existential Angst wrote:




So, I figger, since I drive about 20,000 mi/yr, let's compare the Fit and
the Volt in that mile range.
So in the driving I do, I get about 40 mpg on the Fit.... course, I
free-wheel all over the fukn place, have a helium foot, and shut off the
engine at the drop of a hat, etc.
And the Volt, at that mileage, will do 45 mpg. And, very importantly,
what
I do manually the Volt does *automatically*. Long live The Chip, eh?
Well, you can get a Honda Civic Hybrid for a little over $20K, and I
get up to 57 MPG without much work. I do have a light foot. I drove
3 kids plus myself (and the oldest of that crew outweighs me) about
250 miles to a basketball tournament at got 57 MPG on the highway
at 59 MPH without air conditioning. It was just at the upper range of
comfortable temps. This was flat southern Illinois country, the HCH
does great on that terrain. I just used the cruise control.

Last week I drove 1000 miles on an out of town trip taking about 600 Lbs
of stuff to a show, hotter than hell both ways, and lots of hills
that make it harder to get good mileage. I got about 47 MPG on that
run, mostly around 68 MPH. AC, hills and speed all conspire to
wreck the mileage.

You can almost buy two of the Civic Hybrids for the price of one
Volt, and get good mileage both in town and on long trips.

In that case, Kidding would indeed never ever EVER realize an ROI, unless it
was under the 10,000 mi/yr range.
And then it would be sumpn like 69 years.... lol

57 mpg is fantastic; 47 is excellent.
The prius c geekies talk about hitting 68 mpg.
The VW TDI engine supposedly returns mpg's in the mid-fifties, with a light
foot.
When sumpn like a prius c pushes 70 mpg, 100 mpge electrics -- with all the
associated prices/visissytudes thereof -- lose quite a bit of their dazzle.

And not knockin the Volt. The concept is excellent, the engineering grand,
the quality apparently very good.... just, the execution and logic was a
bit off.
But much too much for Kidding to grok, apparently.


I'm sure he sends checks to the State and Fed for the unpaid road taxes.
And a check to the EPA for all the coal burned.

Tom, what the hell are you talking about? Oh, you don't know?

If you drive a Volt 40 miles each way to work, that's about 20,000
miles per year. That's at 94 mpg.

What? You don't know where 94 mpg comes from? Really? Then what are
you doing wising off in this thread?

Ask and you'll get the explanation.

--
Ed Huntress

Existential Angst wrote:


57 mpg is fantastic; 47 is excellent.
The prius c geekies talk about hitting 68 mpg.
Apparently you can do it on some Honda hybrids, too, by overpressurizing
the tires, tweaking the rear tire alignment and running it on
pure petroleum gas, instead of gasohol. The numbers I gave
were on gasohol, as pure gasoline is pretty rare in these parts.

There was a guy selling one of the original Honda Insights
on eBay that had a photo of his dashboard showing a
lifetime average of 86 MPG over 140,000 miles. I wanted
one of those SO BAD!

Jon

"Jon Elson" wrote in message
...
Existential Angst wrote:


57 mpg is fantastic; 47 is excellent.
The prius c geekies talk about hitting 68 mpg.
Apparently you can do it on some Honda hybrids, too, by overpressurizing
the tires, tweaking the rear tire alignment and running it on
pure petroleum gas, instead of gasohol. The numbers I gave
were on gasohol, as pure gasoline is pretty rare in these parts.

There was a guy selling one of the original Honda Insights
on eBay that had a photo of his dashboard showing a
lifetime average of 86 MPG over 140,000 miles. I wanted
one of those SO BAD!

I hear dat.
Funny, those hybrid Insights were not a good seller, fwiu.
But I wonder if 86 mpg is a real number, tho...

I over-pressurize my tires, up to 45 psi, usually around 40.
I don't know what I'm gaining mpg-wise over 35 psi, tho.
The higher pressures don't seem to affect the *pattern* of wear, so I don't
appear to be sacrificing anything.
Altho you can feel it in the ride.
--
EA


Jon

On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 22:14:58 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 21:17:28 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

Existential Angst wrote:

And not knockin the Volt. The concept is excellent, the engineering grand,
the quality apparently very good.... just, the execution and logic was a
bit off.
But much too much for Kidding to grok, apparently.


I'm sure he sends checks to the State and Fed for the unpaid road taxes.
And a check to the EPA for all the coal burned.

Tom, what the hell are you talking about? Oh, you don't know?

If you drive a Volt 40 miles each way to work, that's about 20,000
miles per year. That's at 94 mpg.

What? You don't know where 94 mpg comes from? Really? Then what are
you doing wising off in this thread?

He's doing exactly the same thing he does when he talks about his
birtherism. Demonstrating beyond a shadow of a doubt that he's not
smart enough to STFU.

On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 08:14:46 -0700, whoyakidding's ghost
wrote:

On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 22:14:58 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 21:17:28 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

Existential Angst wrote:

And not knockin the Volt. The concept is excellent, the engineering grand,
the quality apparently very good.... just, the execution and logic was a
bit off.
But much too much for Kidding to grok, apparently.


I'm sure he sends checks to the State and Fed for the unpaid road taxes.
And a check to the EPA for all the coal burned.

Tom, what the hell are you talking about? Oh, you don't know?

If you drive a Volt 40 miles each way to work, that's about 20,000
miles per year. That's at 94 mpg.

What? You don't know where 94 mpg comes from? Really? Then what are
you doing wising off in this thread?

He's doing exactly the same thing he does when he talks about his
birtherism. Demonstrating beyond a shadow of a doubt that he's not
smart enough to STFU.

He's doing a Roger. No serious conversation goes unpunished with silly
right-wing wisecracks or reactionary tirades.

--
Ed Huntress

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 08:14:46 -0700, whoyakidding's ghost
wrote:

On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 22:14:58 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 21:17:28 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

Existential Angst wrote:

And not knockin the Volt. The concept is excellent, the engineering
grand,
the quality apparently very good.... just, the execution and logic
was a
bit off.
But much too much for Kidding to grok, apparently.


I'm sure he sends checks to the State and Fed for the unpaid road taxes.
And a check to the EPA for all the coal burned.

Tom, what the hell are you talking about? Oh, you don't know?

If you drive a Volt 40 miles each way to work, that's about 20,000
miles per year. That's at 94 mpg.

What? You don't know where 94 mpg comes from? Really? Then what are
you doing wising off in this thread?

He's doing exactly the same thing he does when he talks about his
birtherism. Demonstrating beyond a shadow of a doubt that he's not
smart enough to STFU.

He's doing a Roger. No serious conversation goes unpunished with silly
right-wing wisecracks or reactionary tirades.

Idnat just like Kidding? Except kidding substitutes narcissistic
self-obsession for right-wingism, constantly interrupting adult discussion.
And I think kidding does believe in perpetual motion..... now he's "dropped
down to 147 mpg"...... must be what his pyooter readout says, since he
can't quite do division, on a calculator.
--
EA



--
Ed Huntress

On 6/26/2013 10:14 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 21:17:28 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

On 6/26/2013 7:10 PM, Existential Angst wrote:
"Jon Elson" wrote in message
...
Existential Angst wrote:




So, I figger, since I drive about 20,000 mi/yr, let's compare the Fit and
the Volt in that mile range.
So in the driving I do, I get about 40 mpg on the Fit.... course, I
free-wheel all over the fukn place, have a helium foot, and shut off the
engine at the drop of a hat, etc.
And the Volt, at that mileage, will do 45 mpg. And, very importantly,
what
I do manually the Volt does *automatically*. Long live The Chip, eh?
Well, you can get a Honda Civic Hybrid for a little over $20K, and I
get up to 57 MPG without much work. I do have a light foot. I drove
3 kids plus myself (and the oldest of that crew outweighs me) about
250 miles to a basketball tournament at got 57 MPG on the highway
at 59 MPH without air conditioning. It was just at the upper range of
comfortable temps. This was flat southern Illinois country, the HCH
does great on that terrain. I just used the cruise control.

Last week I drove 1000 miles on an out of town trip taking about 600 Lbs
of stuff to a show, hotter than hell both ways, and lots of hills
that make it harder to get good mileage. I got about 47 MPG on that
run, mostly around 68 MPH. AC, hills and speed all conspire to
wreck the mileage.

You can almost buy two of the Civic Hybrids for the price of one
Volt, and get good mileage both in town and on long trips.

In that case, Kidding would indeed never ever EVER realize an ROI, unless it
was under the 10,000 mi/yr range.
And then it would be sumpn like 69 years.... lol

57 mpg is fantastic; 47 is excellent.
The prius c geekies talk about hitting 68 mpg.
The VW TDI engine supposedly returns mpg's in the mid-fifties, with a light
foot.
When sumpn like a prius c pushes 70 mpg, 100 mpge electrics -- with all the
associated prices/visissytudes thereof -- lose quite a bit of their dazzle.

And not knockin the Volt. The concept is excellent, the engineering grand,
the quality apparently very good.... just, the execution and logic was a
bit off.
But much too much for Kidding to grok, apparently.


I'm sure he sends checks to the State and Fed for the unpaid road taxes.
And a check to the EPA for all the coal burned.

Tom, what the hell are you talking about? Oh, you don't know?

If you drive a Volt 40 miles each way to work, that's about 20,000
miles per year. That's at 94 mpg.

What? You don't know where 94 mpg comes from? Really? Then what are
you doing wising off in this thread?

Ask and you'll get the explanation.



Any car that "plugs in" is basically burning coal at least some of the
time and avoiding road taxes and increasing pollution, unless you have
your own solar array or such. When electric cars become prevalent
enough, the gov will further tax ALL electricity to make up for lost
road tax. I'll explain it to you if you further if you like.

On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 16:11:00 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

On 6/26/2013 10:14 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 21:17:28 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

On 6/26/2013 7:10 PM, Existential Angst wrote:
"Jon Elson" wrote in message
...
Existential Angst wrote:




So, I figger, since I drive about 20,000 mi/yr, let's compare the Fit and
the Volt in that mile range.
So in the driving I do, I get about 40 mpg on the Fit.... course, I
free-wheel all over the fukn place, have a helium foot, and shut off the
engine at the drop of a hat, etc.
And the Volt, at that mileage, will do 45 mpg. And, very importantly,
what
I do manually the Volt does *automatically*. Long live The Chip, eh?
Well, you can get a Honda Civic Hybrid for a little over $20K, and I
get up to 57 MPG without much work. I do have a light foot. I drove
3 kids plus myself (and the oldest of that crew outweighs me) about
250 miles to a basketball tournament at got 57 MPG on the highway
at 59 MPH without air conditioning. It was just at the upper range of
comfortable temps. This was flat southern Illinois country, the HCH
does great on that terrain. I just used the cruise control.

Last week I drove 1000 miles on an out of town trip taking about 600 Lbs
of stuff to a show, hotter than hell both ways, and lots of hills
that make it harder to get good mileage. I got about 47 MPG on that
run, mostly around 68 MPH. AC, hills and speed all conspire to
wreck the mileage.

You can almost buy two of the Civic Hybrids for the price of one
Volt, and get good mileage both in town and on long trips.

In that case, Kidding would indeed never ever EVER realize an ROI, unless it
was under the 10,000 mi/yr range.
And then it would be sumpn like 69 years.... lol

57 mpg is fantastic; 47 is excellent.
The prius c geekies talk about hitting 68 mpg.
The VW TDI engine supposedly returns mpg's in the mid-fifties, with a light
foot.
When sumpn like a prius c pushes 70 mpg, 100 mpge electrics -- with all the
associated prices/visissytudes thereof -- lose quite a bit of their dazzle.

And not knockin the Volt. The concept is excellent, the engineering grand,
the quality apparently very good.... just, the execution and logic was a
bit off.
But much too much for Kidding to grok, apparently.


I'm sure he sends checks to the State and Fed for the unpaid road taxes.
And a check to the EPA for all the coal burned.

Tom, what the hell are you talking about? Oh, you don't know?

If you drive a Volt 40 miles each way to work, that's about 20,000
miles per year. That's at 94 mpg.

What? You don't know where 94 mpg comes from? Really? Then what are
you doing wising off in this thread?

Ask and you'll get the explanation.



Any car that "plugs in" is basically burning coal at least some of the
time and avoiding road taxes and increasing pollution, unless you have
your own solar array or such.

Unless you're in the habit of paying more taxes than you have to, all
your wisecracks amount to is some pretty snotty sarcasm, Tom.

When electric cars become prevalent
enough, the gov will further tax ALL electricity to make up for lost
road tax. I'll explain it to you if you further if you like.

Since transportation fuel charges only cover 48% of our paltry highway
maintenance costs now, with the rest coming from general funds (in the
form of repeated emergency appropriations), there isn't much to
explain. We'll either tap more from the general fund or we'll have to
get halftracks on our Toyotas.

--
Ed Huntress

On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 19:05:50 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 16:11:00 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

On 6/26/2013 10:14 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 21:17:28 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

I'm sure he sends checks to the State and Fed for the unpaid road taxes.
And a check to the EPA for all the coal burned.

Any car that "plugs in" is basically burning coal at least some of the
time and avoiding road taxes and increasing pollution, unless you have
your own solar array or such.

Unless you're in the habit of paying more taxes than you have to, all
your wisecracks amount to is some pretty snotty sarcasm, Tom.

When electric cars become prevalent
enough, the gov will further tax ALL electricity to make up for lost
road tax. I'll explain it to you if you further if you like.

Since transportation fuel charges only cover 48% of our paltry highway
maintenance costs now, with the rest coming from general funds (in the
form of repeated emergency appropriations), there isn't much to
explain. We'll either tap more from the general fund or we'll have to
get halftracks on our Toyotas.

Tom was complaining about my driving sucking the funding from his
highways. That is IMPOSSIBLE. Same with his coal claim. Local grid has
none and it's a net exporter. Tom should ask if there's anyone here
who could add a toggle switch to his tunnel vision. Then he could turn
it off once in a while and live a brighter life.

In case there might be any serious readers other than Ed, they can see
Volt fuel consumption stats by EV percentage etc.
http://www.voltstats.net/ They use a standardized MPGe to
differentiate MPG. It's a handy and interesting resource although one
needs to apply local fuel and electric rates to calculate individual
economics.

Note to EA: I'm on the list. Get busy. Do not sleep until you find my
stats. I suggest you get Gunner's cyber wieners on the case.

Existential Angst wrote:


I hear dat.
Funny, those hybrid Insights were not a good seller, fwiu.
But I wonder if 86 mpg is a real number, tho...
Well, I saw the picture on the eBay listing of his dashboard
trip display. I have no idea how to fake it, but I think it
would be real hard.

2 seat cars (the original Insight) have never been great sellers,
although the Mazda Miata and Toyota MR2 have a bit of a cult
following. The styling of the original Insight was a bit
funky, especially with the fender skirts. But, I know of
no other production car that gets that kind of mileage.
Not even close.

Oh, for comparison, the "king of the hypermilers" Wayne Gerdes
was in a competition of hypermiling. He borrowed a stock
Insight from somebody in town, and ran the measured
course under supervision. He got ** 168 ** miles per gallon!
It was also raining, which tends to hurt mileage, too.

Jon

On 6/27/2013 7:05 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 16:11:00 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

On 6/26/2013 10:14 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 21:17:28 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

On 6/26/2013 7:10 PM, Existential Angst wrote:
"Jon Elson" wrote in message
...
Existential Angst wrote:




So, I figger, since I drive about 20,000 mi/yr, let's compare the Fit and
the Volt in that mile range.
So in the driving I do, I get about 40 mpg on the Fit.... course, I
free-wheel all over the fukn place, have a helium foot, and shut off the
engine at the drop of a hat, etc.
And the Volt, at that mileage, will do 45 mpg. And, very importantly,
what
I do manually the Volt does *automatically*. Long live The Chip, eh?
Well, you can get a Honda Civic Hybrid for a little over $20K, and I
get up to 57 MPG without much work. I do have a light foot. I drove
3 kids plus myself (and the oldest of that crew outweighs me) about
250 miles to a basketball tournament at got 57 MPG on the highway
at 59 MPH without air conditioning. It was just at the upper range of
comfortable temps. This was flat southern Illinois country, the HCH
does great on that terrain. I just used the cruise control.

Last week I drove 1000 miles on an out of town trip taking about 600 Lbs
of stuff to a show, hotter than hell both ways, and lots of hills
that make it harder to get good mileage. I got about 47 MPG on that
run, mostly around 68 MPH. AC, hills and speed all conspire to
wreck the mileage.

You can almost buy two of the Civic Hybrids for the price of one
Volt, and get good mileage both in town and on long trips.

In that case, Kidding would indeed never ever EVER realize an ROI, unless it
was under the 10,000 mi/yr range.
And then it would be sumpn like 69 years.... lol

57 mpg is fantastic; 47 is excellent.
The prius c geekies talk about hitting 68 mpg.
The VW TDI engine supposedly returns mpg's in the mid-fifties, with a light
foot.
When sumpn like a prius c pushes 70 mpg, 100 mpge electrics -- with all the
associated prices/visissytudes thereof -- lose quite a bit of their dazzle.

And not knockin the Volt. The concept is excellent, the engineering grand,
the quality apparently very good.... just, the execution and logic was a
bit off.
But much too much for Kidding to grok, apparently.


I'm sure he sends checks to the State and Fed for the unpaid road taxes.
And a check to the EPA for all the coal burned.

Tom, what the hell are you talking about? Oh, you don't know?

If you drive a Volt 40 miles each way to work, that's about 20,000
miles per year. That's at 94 mpg.

What? You don't know where 94 mpg comes from? Really? Then what are
you doing wising off in this thread?

Ask and you'll get the explanation.



Any car that "plugs in" is basically burning coal at least some of the
time and avoiding road taxes and increasing pollution, unless you have
your own solar array or such.

Unless you're in the habit of paying more taxes than you have to, all
your wisecracks amount to is some pretty snotty sarcasm, Tom.

When electric cars become prevalent
enough, the gov will further tax ALL electricity to make up for lost
road tax. I'll explain it to you if you further if you like.

Since transportation fuel charges only cover 48% of our paltry highway
maintenance costs now, with the rest coming from general funds (in the
form of repeated emergency appropriations), there isn't much to
explain. We'll either tap more from the general fund or we'll have to
get halftracks on our Toyotas.



Electricity WILL be taxed for lost revenue due to electric cars, look it
up! Since I pay a fortune for electricity, the added taxes won't be
fair to me to pay for everybody's coal-burner. I know leftists haven't
the slightest idea about "Unintended Consequences" because they don't
think about what they do, they only think that it feels good at the
time. They don't care what they hurt or destroy.

Where does the General Fund come from Ed?

On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 23:59:27 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

On 6/27/2013 7:05 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 16:11:00 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

On 6/26/2013 10:14 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 21:17:28 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

On 6/26/2013 7:10 PM, Existential Angst wrote:
"Jon Elson" wrote in message
...
Existential Angst wrote:




So, I figger, since I drive about 20,000 mi/yr, let's compare the Fit and
the Volt in that mile range.
So in the driving I do, I get about 40 mpg on the Fit.... course, I
free-wheel all over the fukn place, have a helium foot, and shut off the
engine at the drop of a hat, etc.
And the Volt, at that mileage, will do 45 mpg. And, very importantly,
what
I do manually the Volt does *automatically*. Long live The Chip, eh?
Well, you can get a Honda Civic Hybrid for a little over $20K, and I
get up to 57 MPG without much work. I do have a light foot. I drove
3 kids plus myself (and the oldest of that crew outweighs me) about
250 miles to a basketball tournament at got 57 MPG on the highway
at 59 MPH without air conditioning. It was just at the upper range of
comfortable temps. This was flat southern Illinois country, the HCH
does great on that terrain. I just used the cruise control.

Last week I drove 1000 miles on an out of town trip taking about 600 Lbs
of stuff to a show, hotter than hell both ways, and lots of hills
that make it harder to get good mileage. I got about 47 MPG on that
run, mostly around 68 MPH. AC, hills and speed all conspire to
wreck the mileage.

You can almost buy two of the Civic Hybrids for the price of one
Volt, and get good mileage both in town and on long trips.

In that case, Kidding would indeed never ever EVER realize an ROI, unless it
was under the 10,000 mi/yr range.
And then it would be sumpn like 69 years.... lol

57 mpg is fantastic; 47 is excellent.
The prius c geekies talk about hitting 68 mpg.
The VW TDI engine supposedly returns mpg's in the mid-fifties, with a light
foot.
When sumpn like a prius c pushes 70 mpg, 100 mpge electrics -- with all the
associated prices/visissytudes thereof -- lose quite a bit of their dazzle.

And not knockin the Volt. The concept is excellent, the engineering grand,
the quality apparently very good.... just, the execution and logic was a
bit off.
But much too much for Kidding to grok, apparently.


I'm sure he sends checks to the State and Fed for the unpaid road taxes.
And a check to the EPA for all the coal burned.

Tom, what the hell are you talking about? Oh, you don't know?

If you drive a Volt 40 miles each way to work, that's about 20,000
miles per year. That's at 94 mpg.

What? You don't know where 94 mpg comes from? Really? Then what are
you doing wising off in this thread?

Ask and you'll get the explanation.



Any car that "plugs in" is basically burning coal at least some of the
time and avoiding road taxes and increasing pollution, unless you have
your own solar array or such.

Unless you're in the habit of paying more taxes than you have to, all
your wisecracks amount to is some pretty snotty sarcasm, Tom.

When electric cars become prevalent
enough, the gov will further tax ALL electricity to make up for lost
road tax. I'll explain it to you if you further if you like.

Since transportation fuel charges only cover 48% of our paltry highway
maintenance costs now, with the rest coming from general funds (in the
form of repeated emergency appropriations), there isn't much to
explain. We'll either tap more from the general fund or we'll have to
get halftracks on our Toyotas.



Electricity WILL be taxed for lost revenue due to electric cars, look it
up!

Where? On the palm-reader's website?

Since I pay a fortune for electricity, the added taxes won't be
fair to me to pay for everybody's coal-burner. I know leftists haven't
the slightest idea about "Unintended Consequences" because they don't
think about what they do, they only think that it feels good at the
time. They don't care what they hurt or destroy.

When you start sending checks to the IRS for the tax breaks you get
for depreciating capital equipment, we'll be interested in your
argument. Meantime, that's a tax break that YOU get, which benefits
YOUR profits from an investment that makes YOU money (or you wouldn't
make the investment). And because of your tax break, I wind up paying
more taxes to compensate for your special treatment.

As for road taxes and not paying them for electricity, that's
something that benefits all of us. He's using less petroleum-based
fuel, which reduces demand and reduces our prices. With coal at 37% of
US electricity generation, and with stack scrubbers etc. that reduce
pollution below what your car puts out, that's another benefit that's
accruing to all of us. And natural gas is producing 30%; nuclear and
renewables are producing almost all of the rest. Taken together,
electricity-powered cars are even putting out less CO2 than your
dinosaur-burner. Do the math.


Where does the General Fund come from Ed?

42% individual income taxes. 9% corporate taxes. Most of the rest is
payroll taxes.

--
Ed Huntress

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 23:59:27 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

Electricity WILL be taxed for lost revenue due to electric cars,
look it
up!

Where? On the palm-reader's website?
Ed Huntress

http://green.autoblog.com/2013/05/04...c-vehicle-tax/
"To determine mileage, cars registered in the area would be fitted
with a GPS device to track the number of miles traveled."

Then the government would know not only who you phoned or e-mailed,
but who you met in person. You can turn off your cell phone, but
disabling the car GPS would be criminal tax evasion even if they
didn't catch you selling drugs or pressure cookers.

On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 13:03:57 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 23:59:27 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

Electricity WILL be taxed for lost revenue due to electric cars,
look it
up!

Where? On the palm-reader's website?
Ed Huntress

http://green.autoblog.com/2013/05/04...c-vehicle-tax/

In committee for almost 5 months and counting. The reporter got the
story wrong: it applies to all passenger vehicles of all types.
Eliminates the motor fuels tax, so Tom's comments don't apply -- it's
a straight replacement, not an addition, and it doesn't tax
electicity. It taxes vehicles by the mile, of all types.

It will die in committee or the governor will kill it. However, NJ
will have some kind of expanded revenue generator before long, because
we have over 650 bridges that are "structurally deficient." Our
governor likes tolls -- they nail people from other states. g

Oregon's law does the *opposite* of what Tom is worried about. It
taxes only electric vehicles, not electricity.

"To determine mileage, cars registered in the area would be fitted
with a GPS device to track the number of miles traveled."

sigh That's San Francisco. What chance do you think that one will
have?

Again, it's the opposite of what Tom is claiming. It's taxing vehicle
miles -- if it ever were to pass.


Then the government would know not only who you phoned or e-mailed,
but who you met in person. You can turn off your cell phone, but
disabling the car GPS would be criminal tax evasion even if they
didn't catch you selling drugs or pressure cookers.

These things won't pass. This one is being "studied," it says.

So Tom's assertion that electricity will be taxed is not supported by
a single one of those claims, even the NJ one that the reporter
mis-reported.

'Try again?

--
Ed Huntress

On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 13:39:12 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 13:03:57 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 23:59:27 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

Electricity WILL be taxed for lost revenue due to electric cars,
look it
up!

Where? On the palm-reader's website?
Ed Huntress

http://green.autoblog.com/2013/05/04...c-vehicle-tax/

In committee for almost 5 months and counting. The reporter got the
story wrong: it applies to all passenger vehicles of all types.
Eliminates the motor fuels tax, so Tom's comments don't apply -- it's
a straight replacement, not an addition, and it doesn't tax
electicity. It taxes vehicles by the mile, of all types.

It will die in committee or the governor will kill it. However, NJ
will have some kind of expanded revenue generator before long, because
we have over 650 bridges that are "structurally deficient." Our
governor likes tolls -- they nail people from other states. g

Oregon's law does the *opposite* of what Tom is worried about. It
taxes only electric vehicles, not electricity.

"To determine mileage, cars registered in the area would be fitted
with a GPS device to track the number of miles traveled."

sigh That's San Francisco. What chance do you think that one will
have?

Again, it's the opposite of what Tom is claiming. It's taxing vehicle
miles -- if it ever were to pass.


Then the government would know not only who you phoned or e-mailed,
but who you met in person. You can turn off your cell phone, but
disabling the car GPS would be criminal tax evasion even if they
didn't catch you selling drugs or pressure cookers.

These things won't pass. This one is being "studied," it says.

So Tom's assertion that electricity will be taxed is not supported by
a single one of those claims, even the NJ one that the reporter
mis-reported.

'Try again?

"Market inertia manifests in so many ways, including an incredible
variety of excuses based on ignorance." - whoyakidding, 6/24/2013

The "electric cars will destroy highway funding" is one of those
excuses based on ignorance.

"Jon Elson" wrote in message
...
Existential Angst wrote:


I hear dat.
Funny, those hybrid Insights were not a good seller, fwiu.
But I wonder if 86 mpg is a real number, tho...
Well, I saw the picture on the eBay listing of his dashboard
trip display. I have no idea how to fake it, but I think it
would be real hard.

2 seat cars (the original Insight) have never been great sellers,
although the Mazda Miata and Toyota MR2 have a bit of a cult
following. The styling of the original Insight was a bit
funky, especially with the fender skirts. But, I know of
no other production car that gets that kind of mileage.
Not even close.

Oh, for comparison, the "king of the hypermilers" Wayne Gerdes
was in a competition of hypermiling. He borrowed a stock
Insight from somebody in town, and ran the measured
course under supervision. He got ** 168 ** miles per gallon!

How was he able to do that????
6th gear at 20 mph??


It was also raining, which tends to hurt mileage, too.

I've noticed that myself, but thought it might have been my imagination.
Water vapor in the air displaces O2, compromises combustion?
--
EA




Jon

On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 13:55:35 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"Jon Elson" wrote in message
m...
Existential Angst wrote:


I hear dat.
Funny, those hybrid Insights were not a good seller, fwiu.
But I wonder if 86 mpg is a real number, tho...
Well, I saw the picture on the eBay listing of his dashboard
trip display. I have no idea how to fake it, but I think it
would be real hard.

2 seat cars (the original Insight) have never been great sellers,
although the Mazda Miata and Toyota MR2 have a bit of a cult
following. The styling of the original Insight was a bit
funky, especially with the fender skirts. But, I know of
no other production car that gets that kind of mileage.
Not even close.

Oh, for comparison, the "king of the hypermilers" Wayne Gerdes
was in a competition of hypermiling. He borrowed a stock
Insight from somebody in town, and ran the measured
course under supervision. He got ** 168 ** miles per gallon!

How was he able to do that????
6th gear at 20 mph??

Look up "hypermiling." It's a sport you may want to participate in.



It was also raining, which tends to hurt mileage, too.

I've noticed that myself, but thought it might have been my imagination.
Water vapor in the air displaces O2, compromises combustion?

It's not the vapor. In fact, in the old days when they ran carburetted
Offys on methanol at Indy, the drivers would often wait until the last
possible minute before a rainstorm to make a qualifying run, because
they got more horsepower when the humidity was at max. It delayed
detonation and produced a bit more power as a result.

OTOH, humid air is less dense, so unless you're getting the cooling
effect from drawing methanol though a carburetor, you'll actually
*lose* horsepower.

But those are minor effects on a road car. The major ones *in* the
rain are 1) loss of tire adhesion, and slippage; 2) increased rolling
resistance from dragging up water with the tires and flinging it
around; and 3) increased laminar airflow attachment to the car body
due to raindrops. No kidding. The effect is measurable.

--
Ed Huntress

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 13:55:35 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"Jon Elson" wrote in message
om...
Existential Angst wrote:


I hear dat.
Funny, those hybrid Insights were not a good seller, fwiu.
But I wonder if 86 mpg is a real number, tho...
Well, I saw the picture on the eBay listing of his dashboard
trip display. I have no idea how to fake it, but I think it
would be real hard.

2 seat cars (the original Insight) have never been great sellers,
although the Mazda Miata and Toyota MR2 have a bit of a cult
following. The styling of the original Insight was a bit
funky, especially with the fender skirts. But, I know of
no other production car that gets that kind of mileage.
Not even close.

Oh, for comparison, the "king of the hypermilers" Wayne Gerdes
was in a competition of hypermiling. He borrowed a stock
Insight from somebody in town, and ran the measured
course under supervision. He got ** 168 ** miles per gallon!

How was he able to do that????
6th gear at 20 mph??

Look up "hypermiling."

Ed, you keep axing me to READ stuff.....

It's a sport you may want to participate in.

So that 168 is a REAL number? How did he do it? I'm under the impression
there weren't tremendous modifications, if he did this in a borrowed car.
Is this stuff Joe Blow can do?? Is this what prius c geekies are doing to
some extent, when they get near-70 mpgs?
I don't imagine it's nearly as effective on a hot date, as would be burning
rubber..... LOL




It was also raining, which tends to hurt mileage, too.

I've noticed that myself, but thought it might have been my imagination.
Water vapor in the air displaces O2, compromises combustion?

It's not the vapor. In fact, in the old days when they ran carburetted
Offys on methanol at Indy, the drivers would often wait until the last
possible minute before a rainstorm to make a qualifying run, because
they got more horsepower when the humidity was at max. It delayed
detonation and produced a bit more power as a result.

OTOH, humid air is less dense,

And in addition to raw density, the vapor lowers the partial pressure of the
O2...

so unless you're getting the cooling
effect from drawing methanol though a carburetor, you'll actually
*lose* horsepower.

But those are minor effects on a road car.

Yeah, I knew the O2 would be less dense, but it seemed odd that it would
have THAT much effect -- mebbe .001 sec effects at a strip, but nothing you
could "feel".

The major ones *in* the
rain are 1) loss of tire adhesion, and slippage; 2) increased rolling
resistance from dragging up water with the tires and flinging it
around; and 3) increased laminar airflow attachment to the car body
due to raindrops. No kidding. The effect is measurable.

That is all very inneresting, and explains sumpn I couldn't quite put my
finger on:
In retrospect, it indeed seemed like the vehicle at hand was working harder!
I would estimate the effect at about 10% -- in a heavy rain.
--
EA



--
Ed Huntress

On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 22:18:44 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 13:55:35 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"Jon Elson" wrote in message
news:HOmdnbDGFrZXmFDMnZ2dnUVZ_jKdnZ2d@giganews. com...
Existential Angst wrote:


I hear dat.
Funny, those hybrid Insights were not a good seller, fwiu.
But I wonder if 86 mpg is a real number, tho...
Well, I saw the picture on the eBay listing of his dashboard
trip display. I have no idea how to fake it, but I think it
would be real hard.

2 seat cars (the original Insight) have never been great sellers,
although the Mazda Miata and Toyota MR2 have a bit of a cult
following. The styling of the original Insight was a bit
funky, especially with the fender skirts. But, I know of
no other production car that gets that kind of mileage.
Not even close.

Oh, for comparison, the "king of the hypermilers" Wayne Gerdes
was in a competition of hypermiling. He borrowed a stock
Insight from somebody in town, and ran the measured
course under supervision. He got ** 168 ** miles per gallon!

How was he able to do that????
6th gear at 20 mph??

Look up "hypermiling."

Ed, you keep axing me to READ stuff.....

Yeah, it's a bitch, ain't it? If you want something that's a little
easier, you could try the Rightard Way of Knowledge: Get yourself a
double-ended USB cable and plug one end into your computer, open up a
Web page on your favorite subject, bend over, and shove the loose end
of the cable up your ass. In one step, you can get a 5-Volt anal
stimulation and the entire Encyclopedia Britannica dumped into your
colon at 30 MB/sec.

You can see how well that works every day here with the posts
cross-linked from the nutbag NGs.


It's a sport you may want to participate in.

So that 168 is a REAL number? How did he do it? I'm under the impression
there weren't tremendous modifications, if he did this in a borrowed car.
Is this stuff Joe Blow can do?? Is this what prius c geekies are doing to
some extent, when they get near-70 mpgs?
I don't imagine it's nearly as effective on a hot date, as would be burning
rubber..... LOL

It's something that started decades ago with the Mobil Economy runs,
where they got up over 2,000 mpg at one point. It's a bag of tricks,
some of which can get you tickets for multiple traffic violations.

Seriously, you should look it up. You'd find it interesting.





It was also raining, which tends to hurt mileage, too.

I've noticed that myself, but thought it might have been my imagination.
Water vapor in the air displaces O2, compromises combustion?

It's not the vapor. In fact, in the old days when they ran carburetted
Offys on methanol at Indy, the drivers would often wait until the last
possible minute before a rainstorm to make a qualifying run, because
they got more horsepower when the humidity was at max. It delayed
detonation and produced a bit more power as a result.

OTOH, humid air is less dense,

And in addition to raw density, the vapor lowers the partial pressure of the
O2...

Are you sure that's correct? I haven't had to think about that since
college, but I remember that partial pressures were pretty
non-intuitive.


so unless you're getting the cooling
effect from drawing methanol though a carburetor, you'll actually
*lose* horsepower.

But those are minor effects on a road car.

Yeah, I knew the O2 would be less dense, but it seemed odd that it would
have THAT much effect -- mebbe .001 sec effects at a strip, but nothing you
could "feel".

The major ones *in* the
rain are 1) loss of tire adhesion, and slippage; 2) increased rolling
resistance from dragging up water with the tires and flinging it
around; and 3) increased laminar airflow attachment to the car body
due to raindrops. No kidding. The effect is measurable.

That is all very inneresting, and explains sumpn I couldn't quite put my
finger on:
In retrospect, it indeed seemed like the vehicle at hand was working harder!
I would estimate the effect at about 10% -- in a heavy rain.

Supposedly, most of it is tire slippage.

--
Ed Huntress

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 22:18:44 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 13:55:35 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"Jon Elson" wrote in message
news:HOmdnbDGFrZXmFDMnZ2dnUVZ_jKdnZ2d@giganews .com...
Existential Angst wrote:


I hear dat.
Funny, those hybrid Insights were not a good seller, fwiu.
But I wonder if 86 mpg is a real number, tho...
Well, I saw the picture on the eBay listing of his dashboard
trip display. I have no idea how to fake it, but I think it
would be real hard.

2 seat cars (the original Insight) have never been great sellers,
although the Mazda Miata and Toyota MR2 have a bit of a cult
following. The styling of the original Insight was a bit
funky, especially with the fender skirts. But, I know of
no other production car that gets that kind of mileage.
Not even close.

Oh, for comparison, the "king of the hypermilers" Wayne Gerdes
was in a competition of hypermiling. He borrowed a stock
Insight from somebody in town, and ran the measured
course under supervision. He got ** 168 ** miles per gallon!

How was he able to do that????
6th gear at 20 mph??

Look up "hypermiling."

Ed, you keep axing me to READ stuff.....

Yeah, it's a bitch, ain't it? If you want something that's a little
easier, you could try the Rightard Way of Knowledge: Get yourself a
double-ended USB cable and plug one end into your computer, open up a
Web page on your favorite subject, bend over, and shove the loose end
of the cable up your ass. In one step, you can get a 5-Volt anal
stimulation and the entire Encyclopedia Britannica dumped into your
colon at 30 MB/sec.


I'm going to try that!!!
It might could explain Gummer????
Also kidding, altho I think he would encase the USB in something like a coke
bottle first.

You can see how well that works every day here with the posts
cross-linked from the nutbag NGs.

Indeed.
This USB-up-the-ass method seems to work, at least partially. It seems the
(m)assive amounts of info get a li'l discombobulated by the time it reaches
the brain.
I think the solution might be to simply shove the USB further up. You know
what happens to digital cable when it gets too long.... LOL



It's a sport you may want to participate in.

So that 168 is a REAL number? How did he do it? I'm under the impression
there weren't tremendous modifications, if he did this in a borrowed car.
Is this stuff Joe Blow can do?? Is this what prius c geekies are doing to
some extent, when they get near-70 mpgs?
I don't imagine it's nearly as effective on a hot date, as would be
burning
rubber..... LOL

It's something that started decades ago with the Mobil Economy runs,
where they got up over 2,000 mpg at one point. It's a bag of tricks,
some of which can get you tickets for multiple traffic violations.

Seriously, you should look it up. You'd find it interesting.

I was hoping you would just tell me, but OK, I'll read.... but only the
wiki article... lol






It was also raining, which tends to hurt mileage, too.

I've noticed that myself, but thought it might have been my imagination.
Water vapor in the air displaces O2, compromises combustion?

It's not the vapor. In fact, in the old days when they ran carburetted
Offys on methanol at Indy, the drivers would often wait until the last
possible minute before a rainstorm to make a qualifying run, because
they got more horsepower when the humidity was at max. It delayed
detonation and produced a bit more power as a result.

OTOH, humid air is less dense,

And in addition to raw density, the vapor lowers the partial pressure of
the
O2...

Are you sure that's correct? I haven't had to think about that since
college, but I remember that partial pressures were pretty
non-intuitive.

Assolutely correck.



so unless you're getting the cooling
effect from drawing methanol though a carburetor, you'll actually
*lose* horsepower.

But those are minor effects on a road car.

Yeah, I knew the O2 would be less dense, but it seemed odd that it would
have THAT much effect -- mebbe .001 sec effects at a strip, but nothing
you
could "feel".

The major ones *in* the
rain are 1) loss of tire adhesion, and slippage; 2) increased rolling
resistance from dragging up water with the tires and flinging it
around; and 3) increased laminar airflow attachment to the car body
due to raindrops. No kidding. The effect is measurable.

That is all very inneresting, and explains sumpn I couldn't quite put my
finger on:
In retrospect, it indeed seemed like the vehicle at hand was working
harder!
I would estimate the effect at about 10% -- in a heavy rain.

Supposedly, most of it is tire slippage.

But subtle slippage, right? Not outright spinning?

Perty neat.
--
EA



--
Ed Huntress

On Sat, 29 Jun 2013 00:03:33 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:


Yeah, it's a bitch, ain't it? If you want something that's a little
easier, you could try the Rightard Way of Knowledge: Get yourself a
double-ended USB cable and plug one end into your computer, open up a
Web page on your favorite subject, bend over, and shove the loose end
of the cable up your ass. In one step, you can get a 5-Volt anal
stimulation and the entire Encyclopedia Britannica dumped into your
colon at 30 MB/sec.


I'm going to try that!!!
It might could explain Gummer????
Also kidding, altho I think he would encase the USB in something like a coke
bottle first.

Im rather curious how Ed managed to determine throughput.

Now that may explain those deliveries to his home from Rat Shack and
Adam and Eve....doesnt it?

Gunner

--
""Almost all liberal behavioral tropes track the impotent rage of small
children. Thus, for example, there is also the popular tactic of
repeating some stupid, meaningless phrase a billion times" Arms for
hostages, arms for hostages, arms for hostages, it's just about sex, just
about sex, just about sex, dumb,dumb, money in politics,money in
politics, Enron, Enron, Enron. Nothing repeated with mind-numbing
frequency in all major news outlets will not be believed by some members
of the populace. It is the permanence of evil; you can't stop it." (Ann
Coulter)

"whoyakidding's ghost" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 13:39:12 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 13:03:57 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 23:59:27 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

Electricity WILL be taxed for lost revenue due to electric cars,
look it
up!

Where? On the palm-reader's website?
Ed Huntress

http://green.autoblog.com/2013/05/04...c-vehicle-tax/

In committee for almost 5 months and counting. The reporter got the
story wrong: it applies to all passenger vehicles of all types.
Eliminates the motor fuels tax, so Tom's comments don't apply -- it's
a straight replacement, not an addition, and it doesn't tax
electicity. It taxes vehicles by the mile, of all types.

It will die in committee or the governor will kill it. However, NJ
will have some kind of expanded revenue generator before long, because
we have over 650 bridges that are "structurally deficient." Our
governor likes tolls -- they nail people from other states. g

Oregon's law does the *opposite* of what Tom is worried about. It
taxes only electric vehicles, not electricity.

"To determine mileage, cars registered in the area would be fitted
with a GPS device to track the number of miles traveled."

sigh That's San Francisco. What chance do you think that one will
have?

Again, it's the opposite of what Tom is claiming. It's taxing vehicle
miles -- if it ever were to pass.


Then the government would know not only who you phoned or e-mailed,
but who you met in person. You can turn off your cell phone, but
disabling the car GPS would be criminal tax evasion even if they
didn't catch you selling drugs or pressure cookers.

These things won't pass. This one is being "studied," it says.

So Tom's assertion that electricity will be taxed is not supported by
a single one of those claims, even the NJ one that the reporter
mis-reported.

'Try again?

"Market inertia manifests in so many ways, including an incredible
variety of excuses based on ignorance." - whoyakidding, 6/24/2013

Oh jesus, now the assholeKidding chronicles/quotes hisself??? Jesus, it was
just a matter of time, anyway....
First, the Gummer Expose.... Now, The Best of KiddingHisSelf.....
How fukn blessed can we be, eh?


The "electric cars will destroy highway funding" is one of those
excuses based on ignorance.

'sall moot.
With gummints unlimited and for all intents and purposes unchallenged (
RePube bull**** rhetoric notwithstanding) ability to tax, have no fear,
taxes will come from somewhere, perty much dudn't matter from where. An
ass****ing is an ass****ing, whether it occurs behind the bushes in a public
park, or on satin sheets -- sumpn Kidding oughtta know about..... well, at
least the former......

Oh, Ed, I daresay NJ is THE most "toll-ed" in the nation. What a fukn
nightmare that place is. Or is it just the Garden State??
Altho Bloomberg is right on NJ's tail, at least bridge-wise.

GPS is a great li'l toy. I in fact live by it on m'iphone, esp. the traffic
part. That li'l blue dot gives me a mild chubby.
BUTT..... GPS is ultimately a mega-ass****ing of 7,126,100,000 assholes.
Esp. the fraction of those 7,126,100,010 assholes who drive.
Oh..... http://www.worldometers.info/
--
EA

On Sat, 29 Jun 2013 00:03:33 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 22:18:44 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 13:55:35 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"Jon Elson" wrote in message
news:HOmdnbDGFrZXmFDMnZ2dnUVZ_jKdnZ2d@giganew s.com...
Existential Angst wrote:


I hear dat.
Funny, those hybrid Insights were not a good seller, fwiu.
But I wonder if 86 mpg is a real number, tho...
Well, I saw the picture on the eBay listing of his dashboard
trip display. I have no idea how to fake it, but I think it
would be real hard.

2 seat cars (the original Insight) have never been great sellers,
although the Mazda Miata and Toyota MR2 have a bit of a cult
following. The styling of the original Insight was a bit
funky, especially with the fender skirts. But, I know of
no other production car that gets that kind of mileage.
Not even close.

Oh, for comparison, the "king of the hypermilers" Wayne Gerdes
was in a competition of hypermiling. He borrowed a stock
Insight from somebody in town, and ran the measured
course under supervision. He got ** 168 ** miles per gallon!

How was he able to do that????
6th gear at 20 mph??

Look up "hypermiling."

Ed, you keep axing me to READ stuff.....

Yeah, it's a bitch, ain't it? If you want something that's a little
easier, you could try the Rightard Way of Knowledge: Get yourself a
double-ended USB cable and plug one end into your computer, open up a
Web page on your favorite subject, bend over, and shove the loose end
of the cable up your ass. In one step, you can get a 5-Volt anal
stimulation and the entire Encyclopedia Britannica dumped into your
colon at 30 MB/sec.


I'm going to try that!!!
It might could explain Gummer????

Sure. And the other rightards who have caught onto this trick.

Also kidding, altho I think he would encase the USB in something like a coke
bottle first.

You can see how well that works every day here with the posts
cross-linked from the nutbag NGs.

Indeed.
This USB-up-the-ass method seems to work, at least partially. It seems the
(m)assive amounts of info get a li'l discombobulated by the time it reaches
the brain.

Well, that's the limitation. It never gets to the brain; it can't swim
upstream against the flood of Mountain Dew and Cheetos. So it just
comes out as random, broken bits of text, often inverted. For example,
Keller and Leroy.

I think the solution might be to simply shove the USB further up. You know
what happens to digital cable when it gets too long.... LOL

It's no use, the brains are atrophied and incapable of handling all
those facts.




It's a sport you may want to participate in.

So that 168 is a REAL number? How did he do it? I'm under the impression
there weren't tremendous modifications, if he did this in a borrowed car.
Is this stuff Joe Blow can do?? Is this what prius c geekies are doing to
some extent, when they get near-70 mpgs?
I don't imagine it's nearly as effective on a hot date, as would be
burning
rubber..... LOL

It's something that started decades ago with the Mobil Economy runs,
where they got up over 2,000 mpg at one point. It's a bag of tricks,
some of which can get you tickets for multiple traffic violations.

Seriously, you should look it up. You'd find it interesting.

I was hoping you would just tell me, but OK, I'll read.... but only the
wiki article... lol

That looks pretty good. There are clubs and online newsletters; it's
quite a big deal.

BTW, that 2,000 + mpg was not with a regular car, and it was the Shell
competition, not the Mobil Economy Run. The "vehicles" were
cigar-shaped bubbles riding on bicycle tires, with engines of 20 cc or
something like that. I see that the record now is over 3,800 km/liter
of fuel.







It was also raining, which tends to hurt mileage, too.

I've noticed that myself, but thought it might have been my imagination.
Water vapor in the air displaces O2, compromises combustion?

It's not the vapor. In fact, in the old days when they ran carburetted
Offys on methanol at Indy, the drivers would often wait until the last
possible minute before a rainstorm to make a qualifying run, because
they got more horsepower when the humidity was at max. It delayed
detonation and produced a bit more power as a result.

OTOH, humid air is less dense,

And in addition to raw density, the vapor lowers the partial pressure of
the
O2...

Are you sure that's correct? I haven't had to think about that since
college, but I remember that partial pressures were pretty
non-intuitive.

Assolutely correck.



so unless you're getting the cooling
effect from drawing methanol though a carburetor, you'll actually
*lose* horsepower.

But those are minor effects on a road car.

Yeah, I knew the O2 would be less dense, but it seemed odd that it would
have THAT much effect -- mebbe .001 sec effects at a strip, but nothing
you
could "feel".

The major ones *in* the
rain are 1) loss of tire adhesion, and slippage; 2) increased rolling
resistance from dragging up water with the tires and flinging it
around; and 3) increased laminar airflow attachment to the car body
due to raindrops. No kidding. The effect is measurable.

That is all very inneresting, and explains sumpn I couldn't quite put my
finger on:
In retrospect, it indeed seemed like the vehicle at hand was working
harder!
I would estimate the effect at about 10% -- in a heavy rain.

Supposedly, most of it is tire slippage.

But subtle slippage, right? Not outright spinning?

Perty neat.

It's not spinning but I don't know more about it. I suspect it's like
the difference bewteen slipping and sliding in high-speed cornering.
"Slipping" actually refers to a phenom that occurs when the tire still
has traction, but over a reduced area and with a lot of elastic
distortion that makes the tire run at an angle rather than straight
ahead. My guess is that this is the same thing, only in a straight
line.

--
Ed Huntress

On Sat, 29 Jun 2013 08:19:36 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"whoyakidding's ghost" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 13:39:12 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 13:03:57 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
m...
On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 23:59:27 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

Electricity WILL be taxed for lost revenue due to electric cars,
look it
up!

Where? On the palm-reader's website?
Ed Huntress

http://green.autoblog.com/2013/05/04...c-vehicle-tax/

In committee for almost 5 months and counting. The reporter got the
story wrong: it applies to all passenger vehicles of all types.
Eliminates the motor fuels tax, so Tom's comments don't apply -- it's
a straight replacement, not an addition, and it doesn't tax
electicity. It taxes vehicles by the mile, of all types.

It will die in committee or the governor will kill it. However, NJ
will have some kind of expanded revenue generator before long, because
we have over 650 bridges that are "structurally deficient." Our
governor likes tolls -- they nail people from other states. g

Oregon's law does the *opposite* of what Tom is worried about. It
taxes only electric vehicles, not electricity.

"To determine mileage, cars registered in the area would be fitted
with a GPS device to track the number of miles traveled."

sigh That's San Francisco. What chance do you think that one will
have?

Again, it's the opposite of what Tom is claiming. It's taxing vehicle
miles -- if it ever were to pass.


Then the government would know not only who you phoned or e-mailed,
but who you met in person. You can turn off your cell phone, but
disabling the car GPS would be criminal tax evasion even if they
didn't catch you selling drugs or pressure cookers.

These things won't pass. This one is being "studied," it says.

So Tom's assertion that electricity will be taxed is not supported by
a single one of those claims, even the NJ one that the reporter
mis-reported.

'Try again?

"Market inertia manifests in so many ways, including an incredible
variety of excuses based on ignorance." - whoyakidding, 6/24/2013

Oh jesus, now the assholeKidding chronicles/quotes hisself??? Jesus, it was
just a matter of time, anyway....
First, the Gummer Expose.... Now, The Best of KiddingHisSelf.....
How fukn blessed can we be, eh?


The "electric cars will destroy highway funding" is one of those
excuses based on ignorance.

'sall moot.
With gummints unlimited and for all intents and purposes unchallenged (
RePube bull**** rhetoric notwithstanding) ability to tax, have no fear,
taxes will come from somewhere, perty much dudn't matter from where. An
ass****ing is an ass****ing, whether it occurs behind the bushes in a public
park, or on satin sheets -- sumpn Kidding oughtta know about..... well, at
least the former......

Oh, Ed, I daresay NJ is THE most "toll-ed" in the nation. What a fukn
nightmare that place is. Or is it just the Garden State??
Altho Bloomberg is right on NJ's tail, at least bridge-wise.

Tolls are for out-of-staters. I can drive all the way to Atlantic City
without hitting a single toll. Likewise, to Washington, DC. The only
thing that snags me is going to Long Island or Westchester. So I
don't.

BTW, regular gas, full-serve, is $3.21 today around the corner from
where I live. That's what happens with our tolls.


GPS is a great li'l toy. I in fact live by it on m'iphone, esp. the traffic
part. That li'l blue dot gives me a mild chubby.
BUTT..... GPS is ultimately a mega-ass****ing of 7,126,100,000 assholes.
Esp. the fraction of those 7,126,100,010 assholes who drive.
Oh..... http://www.worldometers.info/

I used in once, in DC, when I was helping my son find his first
apartment. It almost killed me. "Turn rught NOW!" ....aack..

--
Ed Huntress

On Sat, 29 Jun 2013 08:19:36 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

When I mentioned that I'd just upgraded to a new smartphone ($500
outright, no contract), I expected EA to accuse me of being Thurston
Howell III. Now I see why he didn't...

m'iphone,

What's the ROI of a $600 iphone compared to this $100 substitute for
example? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTC_One_V LOL Holy ****ing
double standard batman! Wouldn't owning an iphone mean that you're
addicted to swinging from Apple's dick?

What are the chances that paying $600 outright wasn't a bad enough
deal, and that you preferred the savvy investor strategy of paying
even more by getting the phone "cheap" at the beginning of a 3 year
butt ****ing? You know, if you didn't bend over so much you wouldn't
get raped from behind so often, and could save all the time you spend
ranting about how much you "hate" that.

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 29 Jun 2013 00:03:33 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 22:18:44 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
m...
On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 13:55:35 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"Jon Elson" wrote in message
news:HOmdnbDGFrZXmFDMnZ2dnUVZ_jKdnZ2d@gigane ws.com...
Existential Angst wrote:


I hear dat.
Funny, those hybrid Insights were not a good seller, fwiu.
But I wonder if 86 mpg is a real number, tho...
Well, I saw the picture on the eBay listing of his dashboard
trip display. I have no idea how to fake it, but I think it
would be real hard.

2 seat cars (the original Insight) have never been great sellers,
although the Mazda Miata and Toyota MR2 have a bit of a cult
following. The styling of the original Insight was a bit
funky, especially with the fender skirts. But, I know of
no other production car that gets that kind of mileage.
Not even close.

Oh, for comparison, the "king of the hypermilers" Wayne Gerdes
was in a competition of hypermiling. He borrowed a stock
Insight from somebody in town, and ran the measured
course under supervision. He got ** 168 ** miles per gallon!

How was he able to do that????
6th gear at 20 mph??

Look up "hypermiling."

Ed, you keep axing me to READ stuff.....

Yeah, it's a bitch, ain't it? If you want something that's a little
easier, you could try the Rightard Way of Knowledge: Get yourself a
double-ended USB cable and plug one end into your computer, open up a
Web page on your favorite subject, bend over, and shove the loose end
of the cable up your ass. In one step, you can get a 5-Volt anal
stimulation and the entire Encyclopedia Britannica dumped into your
colon at 30 MB/sec.


I'm going to try that!!!
It might could explain Gummer????

Sure. And the other rightards who have caught onto this trick.

Also kidding, altho I think he would encase the USB in something like a
coke
bottle first.

You can see how well that works every day here with the posts
cross-linked from the nutbag NGs.

Indeed.
This USB-up-the-ass method seems to work, at least partially. It seems
the
(m)assive amounts of info get a li'l discombobulated by the time it
reaches
the brain.

Well, that's the limitation. It never gets to the brain; it can't swim
upstream against the flood of Mountain Dew and Cheetos. So it just
comes out as random, broken bits of text, often inverted. For example,
Keller and Leroy.

Mountain Dew is actually a very versatile brew.
It's used similarly by hillbilly appalachians and college students, as a
stimolant.
'ceptin, well, hillbully appalachians ain't in college....
But the HA's also use it as baby formula.... therein lies the versatility.

Oh, assholeKidding may keep a gallon in his Volt, so's he can intensify his
Driving Speriance, every time he hollers out the window at the gas station
he's currently passing -- which he will have to do for 75 more years, until
he recoups his investment.
Apparently, tho, Mountain Dew didn't help him while he was punching in the
Volt numbers on his HP calculator.


I think the solution might be to simply shove the USB further up. You
know
what happens to digital cable when it gets too long.... LOL

It's no use, the brains are atrophied and incapable of handling all
those facts.

BUTT.... it will still FEEL good!!!
Kidding to his Proctologist -- or simpleton plimpleton:
Oh, a little deeper.... a little more to the left.... ooooohhhh
that's it, NOW you've got it....






It's a sport you may want to participate in.

So that 168 is a REAL number? How did he do it? I'm under the
impression
there weren't tremendous modifications, if he did this in a borrowed
car.
Is this stuff Joe Blow can do?? Is this what prius c geekies are doing
to
some extent, when they get near-70 mpgs?
I don't imagine it's nearly as effective on a hot date, as would be
burning
rubber..... LOL

It's something that started decades ago with the Mobil Economy runs,
where they got up over 2,000 mpg at one point. It's a bag of tricks,
some of which can get you tickets for multiple traffic violations.

Seriously, you should look it up. You'd find it interesting.

I was hoping you would just tell me, but OK, I'll read.... but only the
wiki article... lol

That looks pretty good. There are clubs and online newsletters; it's
quite a big deal.

I skimmed thru a cupla things on hypermiling, didn't see anything that I
don't do already, or that I could really use.
On my bikes, I used to draft behind tractor trailors -- heh, on I95 in NJ,
of all places -- and holy ****, I could cut back the throttle down by over
1/2 it would seem!!!
The point was also made that at a given speed, driving with/in traffic is
more economical than driving the car isolated, by itself -- a lower-level
drafting.

They mentioned the thing I bleat about all the time: LOW rpm -- but which
you cain't really do, without mods.... Altho my buddy's Hyundai has this
feature where it drops down to 1,000 rpm whenever it can.... really cool.

Yeah, and rock-hard tires, coasting, anticipation, etc etc, but other than
that, I don't see what else Joe Blow can really do.
Oh, one wise-ass site's number one recommendation for hypermiling: Heh,
Don't Drive! gimme a fukn break, already....


BTW, that 2,000 + mpg was not with a regular car, and it was the Shell
competition, not the Mobil Economy Run. The "vehicles" were
cigar-shaped bubbles riding on bicycle tires, with engines of 20 cc or
something like that. I see that the record now is over 3,800 km/liter
of fuel.

20 cc?? holy ****....
Bicycle tire?? Ahm surprised.... why not just use the fukn RIM??? lol









It was also raining, which tends to hurt mileage, too.

I've noticed that myself, but thought it might have been my
imagination.
Water vapor in the air displaces O2, compromises combustion?

It's not the vapor. In fact, in the old days when they ran carburetted
Offys on methanol at Indy, the drivers would often wait until the last
possible minute before a rainstorm to make a qualifying run, because
they got more horsepower when the humidity was at max. It delayed
detonation and produced a bit more power as a result.

OTOH, humid air is less dense,

And in addition to raw density, the vapor lowers the partial pressure of
the
O2...

Are you sure that's correct? I haven't had to think about that since
college, but I remember that partial pressures were pretty
non-intuitive.

Assolutely correck.



so unless you're getting the cooling
effect from drawing methanol though a carburetor, you'll actually
*lose* horsepower.

But those are minor effects on a road car.

Yeah, I knew the O2 would be less dense, but it seemed odd that it would
have THAT much effect -- mebbe .001 sec effects at a strip, but nothing
you
could "feel".

The major ones *in* the
rain are 1) loss of tire adhesion, and slippage; 2) increased rolling
resistance from dragging up water with the tires and flinging it
around; and 3) increased laminar airflow attachment to the car body
due to raindrops. No kidding. The effect is measurable.

That is all very inneresting, and explains sumpn I couldn't quite put my
finger on:
In retrospect, it indeed seemed like the vehicle at hand was working
harder!
I would estimate the effect at about 10% -- in a heavy rain.

Supposedly, most of it is tire slippage.

But subtle slippage, right? Not outright spinning?

Perty neat.

It's not spinning but I don't know more about it. I suspect it's like
the difference bewteen slipping and sliding in high-speed cornering.
"Slipping" actually refers to a phenom that occurs when the tire still
has traction, but over a reduced area and with a lot of elastic
distortion that makes the tire run at an angle rather than straight
ahead. My guess is that this is the same thing, only in a straight
line.

Ad hoc'ing here a li'l bit, it seems in a heavy rain, the car really IS
pushing..... literally, the rain.
I'll bet the rain is actually a good part of that number.
I'm going to pay close attention next time.

Also, on a very wet roadway, the water would serve as a very low viscosity
mud..... but a mud, nevertheless, adding to the rolling friction.
--
EA


--
Ed Huntress

"whoyakidding's ghost" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 29 Jun 2013 08:19:36 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

When I mentioned that I'd just upgraded to a new smartphone ($500
outright, no contract), I expected EA to accuse me of being Thurston
Howell III. Now I see why he didn't...

I guess you assumed I have an iPhone 5.... heh, and yer correck.... for
once.....


m'iphone,

What's the ROI of a $600 iphone compared to this $100 substitute for
example? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTC_One_V LOL Holy ****ing
double standard batman! Wouldn't owning an iphone mean that you're
addicted to swinging from Apple's dick?

The first chance I get, ahma bite Apple's dick clean off.
**** Apple.


What are the chances that paying $600 outright wasn't a bad enough
deal, and that you preferred the savvy investor strategy of paying
even more by getting the phone "cheap" at the beginning of a 3 year
butt ****ing?

Well, if it is in fact a 3 year ass****ing, it's about 1/15th of your 75
year ass****ing, eh?


You know, if you didn't bend over so much you wouldn't
get raped from behind so often, and could save all the time you spend
ranting about how much you "hate" that.

Apparently you aren't married..... or mebbe it's that no one will fess up
to being your wife.... cain't blame'em....
But if you WERE married, you'd understand how I had very little say in the
matter.
I in fact woulda preferred a Samsung. But, no biggie....

Heh, she claimed she got a very good deal, on his'n'hers..... Idk, and
don't really wanna know, all's I want is to avoid another argerment....
You, otoh, proly arger with yourself in front of a fukn mirror. And then
claim victory..... Go figger, eh?
--
EA

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 29 Jun 2013 08:19:36 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"whoyakidding's ghost" wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 13:39:12 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 13:03:57 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
om...
On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 23:59:27 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

Electricity WILL be taxed for lost revenue due to electric cars,
look it
up!

Where? On the palm-reader's website?
Ed Huntress

http://green.autoblog.com/2013/05/04...c-vehicle-tax/

In committee for almost 5 months and counting. The reporter got the
story wrong: it applies to all passenger vehicles of all types.
Eliminates the motor fuels tax, so Tom's comments don't apply -- it's
a straight replacement, not an addition, and it doesn't tax
electicity. It taxes vehicles by the mile, of all types.

It will die in committee or the governor will kill it. However, NJ
will have some kind of expanded revenue generator before long, because
we have over 650 bridges that are "structurally deficient." Our
governor likes tolls -- they nail people from other states. g

Oregon's law does the *opposite* of what Tom is worried about. It
taxes only electric vehicles, not electricity.

"To determine mileage, cars registered in the area would be fitted
with a GPS device to track the number of miles traveled."

sigh That's San Francisco. What chance do you think that one will
have?

Again, it's the opposite of what Tom is claiming. It's taxing vehicle
miles -- if it ever were to pass.


Then the government would know not only who you phoned or e-mailed,
but who you met in person. You can turn off your cell phone, but
disabling the car GPS would be criminal tax evasion even if they
didn't catch you selling drugs or pressure cookers.

These things won't pass. This one is being "studied," it says.

So Tom's assertion that electricity will be taxed is not supported by
a single one of those claims, even the NJ one that the reporter
mis-reported.

'Try again?

"Market inertia manifests in so many ways, including an incredible
variety of excuses based on ignorance." - whoyakidding, 6/24/2013

Oh jesus, now the assholeKidding chronicles/quotes hisself??? Jesus, it
was
just a matter of time, anyway....
First, the Gummer Expose.... Now, The Best of KiddingHisSelf.....
How fukn blessed can we be, eh?


The "electric cars will destroy highway funding" is one of those
excuses based on ignorance.

'sall moot.
With gummints unlimited and for all intents and purposes unchallenged (
RePube bull**** rhetoric notwithstanding) ability to tax, have no fear,
taxes will come from somewhere, perty much dudn't matter from where. An
ass****ing is an ass****ing, whether it occurs behind the bushes in a
public
park, or on satin sheets -- sumpn Kidding oughtta know about..... well,
at
least the former......

Oh, Ed, I daresay NJ is THE most "toll-ed" in the nation. What a fukn
nightmare that place is. Or is it just the Garden State??
Altho Bloomberg is right on NJ's tail, at least bridge-wise.

Tolls are for out-of-staters. I can drive all the way to Atlantic City
without hitting a single toll. Likewise, to Washington, DC. The only
thing that snags me is going to Long Island or Westchester. So I
don't.

BTW, regular gas, full-serve, is $3.21 today around the corner from
where I live. That's what happens with our tolls.


GPS is a great li'l toy. I in fact live by it on m'iphone, esp. the
traffic
part. That li'l blue dot gives me a mild chubby.
BUTT..... GPS is ultimately a mega-ass****ing of 7,126,100,000 assholes.
Esp. the fraction of those 7,126,100,010 assholes who drive.
Oh..... http://www.worldometers.info/

I used in once, in DC, when I was helping my son find his first
apartment. It almost killed me. "Turn rught NOW!" ....aack..

A Google Map app is a li'l different. You can watch yerself via the blue
dot.
I can actually watch myself move in my house via that blue dot.... 'course,
itsa big-ish house, just a note for Kidding, that this proly wouldn't happen
in a trailor.

Anyway, if you have a general idea of where you are going, I find tracking
the dot to be easier, more informative than listening to that fukn Garmin
chatter.
AND the fact that Garmin RARELY chooses an intelligent or optimal route, AND
that it loves fukn TOLLS...... goodgawd......

But, if you are totally clueless in the middle of nowhere, Garmin et al
would be pretty helpful. In our neck of the woods, tho, I think the google
blue dot is better.

Of course, we're STILL being ass****ed, but this particular ass****ing don't
feel so bad..... at least not yet.
I'm still emotionally attached to my Hagstrom maps, tho.... I must have a
pile almost 2 feet high!!!
--
EA





--
Ed Huntress

On Sat, 29 Jun 2013 15:10:58 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"whoyakidding's ghost" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 29 Jun 2013 08:19:36 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

When I mentioned that I'd just upgraded to a new smartphone ($500
outright, no contract), I expected EA to accuse me of being Thurston
Howell III. Now I see why he didn't...

I guess you assumed I have an iPhone 5....

Nope. Because I correctly assumed that you signed up a while ago, and
are sill stuck on the contract. Lots of my friends are in the same
boat and I don't care, but then they're not hypocritically spouting
"ROI" like you.

heh, and yer correck.... for
once.....


m'iphone,

What's the ROI of a $600 iphone compared to this $100 substitute for
example? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTC_One_V LOL Holy ****ing
double standard batman! Wouldn't owning an iphone mean that you're
addicted to swinging from Apple's dick?

The first chance I get, ahma bite Apple's dick clean off.
**** Apple.

Whiner. You knelt down for the buy now pay more later hype. Open wide
and swallow.

What are the chances that paying $600 outright wasn't a bad enough
deal, and that you preferred the savvy investor strategy of paying
even more by getting the phone "cheap" at the beginning of a 3 year
butt ****ing?

Well, if it is in fact a 3 year ass****ing, it's about 1/15th of your 75
year ass****ing, eh?

No, because you're just merely making up nonsense, and in particular
ignoring the fact that I set out to power my home and car mostly
independently of power and oil companies. A goal that you can't even
fathom apparently.

You know, if you didn't bend over so much you wouldn't
get raped from behind so often, and could save all the time you spend
ranting about how much you "hate" that.

Apparently you aren't married.....

Told you the following last Feb. 28 when you tried the same weak
flame:

"Celebrated our 30th anniversary about a week ago. Lived in sin for
some years prior to wedding."

You have a bad habit of refusing to absorb simple facts even when
they're put directly under your nose.

or mebbe it's that no one will fess up
to being your wife.... cain't blame'em....
But if you WERE married, you'd understand how I had very little say in the
matter.
I in fact woulda preferred a Samsung. But, no biggie....

If your wife is an Apple fanboi or prone to nod her head at hipster
cell salesmen horse****, then get ready to stay bent over after the
current contract is up. She's hardly alone, the lure of those "cheap"
new phones really appeals to people. Somebody should build a web site
with short video clips of fools who spend for iphones and tattoos, and
then complain about the cost of living and how they're powerless to
keep ahead of big biz's "tricks."

Heh, she claimed she got a very good deal, on his'n'hers..... Idk, and
don't really wanna know, all's I want is to avoid another argerment....

Next time tell her there's no i(phone) in team. arf arf

You, otoh, proly arger with yourself in front of a fukn mirror. And then
claim victory..... Go figger, eh?

I don't see anything being won. You should start thinking about what
you're going to do for an encore. Sign up as an altar boy at every
church in a 100 mile radius?

On Sat, 29 Jun 2013 15:17:45 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:


A Google Map app is a li'l different. You can watch yerself via the blue
dot.

Every $50 portable GPS does the same thing. No satellite view
available like there is on a smartphone, but works out of cell range
and doesn't require a data contract.

I can actually watch myself move in my house via that blue dot.... 'course,
itsa big-ish house, just a note for Kidding, that this proly wouldn't happen
in a trailor.

Is it on a 100 acre mountaintop overlooking a large lake? Then you
might want to pick somebody else to one-up.

Anyway, if you have a general idea of where you are going, I find tracking
the dot to be easier, more informative than listening to that fukn Garmin
chatter.
AND the fact that Garmin RARELY chooses an intelligent or optimal route, AND
that it loves fukn TOLLS...... goodgawd......

Most cheap GPSs can be programmed to avoid tolls, Uturns, and dirt
roads. They also provide multiple route choices, and offer a default
by shortest or fastest. RTFM

But, if you are totally clueless in the middle of nowhere, Garmin et al
would be pretty helpful. In our neck of the woods, tho, I think the google
blue dot is better.

Of course, we're STILL being ass****ed, but this particular ass****ing don't
feel so bad..... at least not yet.

You have so much ass ****ing experience that you're grading the
severity? LOL

Have you thought of moving to some place where nobody's out to get
you? Might be as easy as some shrink sessions. Although I get the
feeling that you'd prefer aversion therapy.

"whoyakidding's ghost" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 29 Jun 2013 15:17:45 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:


A Google Map app is a li'l different. You can watch yerself via the blue
dot.

Every $50 portable GPS does the same thing. No satellite view
available like there is on a smartphone, but works out of cell range
and doesn't require a data contract.

I can actually watch myself move in my house via that blue dot....
'course,
itsa big-ish house, just a note for Kidding, that this proly wouldn't
happen
in a trailor.

Is it on a 100 acre mountaintop overlooking a large lake? Then you
might want to pick somebody else to one-up.

Is your trailer park on a mountaintop?? We have a couple of those around
here.... we're tryna shut them down.
Condo's, donchaknow....


Anyway, if you have a general idea of where you are going, I find tracking
the dot to be easier, more informative than listening to that fukn Garmin
chatter.
AND the fact that Garmin RARELY chooses an intelligent or optimal route,
AND
that it loves fukn TOLLS...... goodgawd......

Most cheap GPSs can be programmed to avoid tolls, Uturns, and dirt
roads. They also provide multiple route choices, and offer a default
by shortest or fastest. RTFM

Thank you very much for the (old) lesson on GPSs.....


But, if you are totally clueless in the middle of nowhere, Garmin et al
would be pretty helpful. In our neck of the woods, tho, I think the
google
blue dot is better.

Of course, we're STILL being ass****ed, but this particular ass****ing
don't
feel so bad..... at least not yet.

You have so much ass ****ing experience that you're grading the
severity? LOL

I can tell. You have been ass/mind****ed 'til you are numb.


Have you thought of moving to some place where nobody's out to get
you? Might be as easy as some shrink sessions. Although I get the
feeling that you'd prefer aversion therapy.


Like the typically oblivious, you think that you're just getting a
colonoscopy, and that anyone who bitches is a whiner.
So you run out, buy a Volt with a 75 year breakeven point, and brag to the
world to make yourself feel better.
Your Volt is your vaseline. And yer dumb enough that it actually works as a
salve.
Hard to say where they've ****ed you harder, in your ass or in your mind.
Wheeeeeeeee, Mommy, I passed another gas station.....
--
EA

"whoyakidding's ghost" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 29 Jun 2013 15:10:58 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"whoyakidding's ghost" wrote in message
. ..
On Sat, 29 Jun 2013 08:19:36 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

When I mentioned that I'd just upgraded to a new smartphone ($500
outright, no contract), I expected EA to accuse me of being Thurston
Howell III. Now I see why he didn't...

I guess you assumed I have an iPhone 5....

Nope. Because I correctly assumed that you signed up a while ago, and
are sill stuck on the contract.

Still the huckstering clarivoyant, I see.

Lots of my friends are in the same
boat

You are Kidding, right? About the friends?


and I don't care, but then they're not hypocritically spouting
"ROI" like you.

heh, and yer correck.... for
once.....


m'iphone,

What's the ROI of a $600 iphone compared to this $100 substitute for
example? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTC_One_V LOL Holy ****ing
double standard batman! Wouldn't owning an iphone mean that you're
addicted to swinging from Apple's dick?

The first chance I get, ahma bite Apple's dick clean off.
**** Apple.

Whiner. You knelt down for the buy now pay more later hype. Open wide
and swallow.

What are the chances that paying $600 outright wasn't a bad enough
deal, and that you preferred the savvy investor strategy of paying
even more by getting the phone "cheap" at the beginning of a 3 year
butt ****ing?

Well, if it is in fact a 3 year ass****ing, it's about 1/15th of your 75
year ass****ing, eh?

No, because you're just merely making up nonsense, and in particular
ignoring the fact that I set out to power my home and car mostly
independently of power and oil companies. A goal that you can't even
fathom apparently.

Dumb****, if you charged your car for free, you might drop the ROI down to
65 years.
Let us know how all those PV's turn out.... and what the ROI on DAT
bull**** is.

Which means, btw, you won't be charging yer car for free, cuz you'll be
paying for fuknever for the PVs....
Dude, you just keep paying, and paying, and paying in advance.
Renind me not to ax you for investment advice.


You know, if you didn't bend over so much you wouldn't
get raped from behind so often, and could save all the time you spend
ranting about how much you "hate" that.

Apparently you aren't married.....

Told you the following last Feb. 28 when you tried the same weak
flame:

"Celebrated our 30th anniversary about a week ago. Lived in sin for
some years prior to wedding."

Will you give my condolances to her?
And thank her for sparing other potential victims?


You have a bad habit of refusing to absorb simple facts even when
they're put directly under your nose.

or mebbe it's that no one will fess up
to being your wife.... cain't blame'em....
But if you WERE married, you'd understand how I had very little say in the
matter.
I in fact woulda preferred a Samsung. But, no biggie....

If your wife is an Apple fanboi or prone to nod her head at hipster
cell salesmen horse****, then get ready to stay bent over after the
current contract is up. She's hardly alone, the lure of those "cheap"
new phones really appeals to people. Somebody should build a web site
with short video clips of fools who spend for iphones and tattoos, and
then complain about the cost of living and how they're powerless to
keep ahead of big biz's "tricks."

Heh, she claimed she got a very good deal, on his'n'hers..... Idk, and
don't really wanna know, all's I want is to avoid another argerment....

Next time tell her there's no i(phone) in team. arf arf

You, otoh, proly arger with yourself in front of a fukn mirror. And then
claim victory..... Go figger, eh?

I don't see anything being won. You should start thinking about what
you're going to do for an encore. Sign up as an altar boy at every
church in a 100 mile radius?

Nahh, what I'll do is buy the Gen2 Volt after GM comes to its senses.
THEN we can compare ROIs.
Or, speaking of encores, mebbe by then someone will actually build an
AngstMobile

Heh, then YOUR encore will be the same squiggly-wiggly weaseling and lying
you've been pulling for 6 months now:
OH, that's not what you said, that's not what meant, this is not an
AngstMobile, you're this, you're that, yer fulla****.......
Yeah, yeah.... now go enjoy the view from yer trailer.... PVs did you
say?? They got'em cheap at HF, ought to be more than enough to charge the
RV battery and yer CB radio.
--
EA

"Jim Wilkins" wrote in message
...
"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 23:59:27 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

Electricity WILL be taxed for lost revenue due to electric cars, look it
up!

Where? On the palm-reader's website?
Ed Huntress

http://green.autoblog.com/2013/05/04...c-vehicle-tax/
"To determine mileage, cars registered in the area would be fitted with a
GPS device to track the number of miles traveled."

Then the government would know not only who you phoned or e-mailed, but
who you met in person. You can turn off your cell phone, but disabling the
car GPS would be criminal tax evasion even if they didn't catch you
selling drugs or pressure cookers.



The prospect of such taxation needs no cites, references. It is a simple
inevitability.
Suggesting that such a tax is NOT inevitable is like suggesting that
perpetual motion machines are possible, but just haven't been discovered
yet.
And if a car-based tax ditty is too complicated, guess what? Income tax
will simply go up.
Taxation idn't rocket science.... it's proctological science.
--
EA

On 6/28/2013 11:15 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

When you start sending checks to the IRS for the tax breaks you get
for depreciating capital equipment, we'll be interested in your
argument.

I don't capitalize nor depreciate equipment at my accountant's advice,
most is built from "shop expences".

I still remember, and laugh at your assertion that Christians won't be
murdered or even discriminated against in the ME nor are Iranians
seeking to build bombs. You're a great barometer for how things aren't
and won't be. I'd LOVE to play Poker with you!

On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 03:31:23 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

"Jim Wilkins" wrote in message
...
"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 23:59:27 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

Electricity WILL be taxed for lost revenue due to electric cars, look it
up!

Where? On the palm-reader's website?
Ed Huntress

http://green.autoblog.com/2013/05/04...c-vehicle-tax/
"To determine mileage, cars registered in the area would be fitted with a
GPS device to track the number of miles traveled."

Then the government would know not only who you phoned or e-mailed, but
who you met in person. You can turn off your cell phone, but disabling the
car GPS would be criminal tax evasion even if they didn't catch you
selling drugs or pressure cookers.



The prospect of such taxation needs no cites, references. It is a simple
inevitability.

Taxing electricity to pay for road repairs, as Tom suggested, is not
going to happen. If electric vehicles proliferate, I don't doubt
they'll tax the vehicles and/or miles travelled -- and they should.
That's what Jim's references are about.

But Tom's suggestion that governments will tax electricity to pay for
roads is just plain paranoia. Taxes on motor fuels are so low, and
have gone so long without a change, that something will indeed need to
be done to avoid continuing to tap into general funds. But taxing
electricity isn't it. Taxing miles for all vehicles, like some
south-Jersey legi-clown has suggested, is much more likely.

Suggesting that such a tax is NOT inevitable is like suggesting that
perpetual motion machines are possible, but just haven't been discovered
yet.
And if a car-based tax ditty is too complicated, guess what? Income tax
will simply go up.
Taxation idn't rocket science.... it's proctological science.

--
Ed Huntress

On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 03:58:38 -0400, Tom Gardner Mars@Tacks wrote:

On 6/28/2013 11:15 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

When you start sending checks to the IRS for the tax breaks you get
for depreciating capital equipment, we'll be interested in your
argument.

I don't capitalize nor depreciate equipment at my accountant's advice,
most is built from "shop expences".

So you've found an even better angle -- you expense everything, and
carry the value of your equipment on your books at zero.

Very nice, Tom. That's a better dodge than rapid depreciation. Hats
off to your accountant.


I still remember, and laugh at your assertion that Christians won't be
murdered or even discriminated against in the ME nor are Iranians
seeking to build bombs.

You've said that several times, but you've never come up with the
words I actually said. It sounds like myths that have gestated in your
head until they're upside-down and growing with the roots up in the
air.

As I recall, you said there would be a mass uprising (like the "Great
Cull"?) and that masses of Muslims would slaughter all of the
Christians. To which I objected. Correctly.

Now you say it was "any murders" and discrimination. This is beginning
to sound like the innocuous comment I made about rich kids that got
you so upset. I never said then what you thought I said, either.

As for the Iranians seeking to build bombs, if I ever said anything
like that, fie on me. I never thought that. I expected from the start
that's what they intended.

You're a great barometer for how things aren't
and won't be. I'd LOVE to play Poker with you!

Same here. Everything you're holding probably looks like a flush to
you. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 08:53:02 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Sun, 30 Jun 2013 03:31:23 -0400, "Existential Angst"
wrote:

Taxing electricity to pay for road repairs, as Tom suggested, is not
going to happen. If electric vehicles proliferate, I don't doubt
they'll tax the vehicles and/or miles travelled -- and they should.
That's what Jim's references are about.

But Tom's suggestion that governments will tax electricity to pay for
roads is just plain paranoia.

He's not really worried about. It's merely another of those stupid
excuses tossed out by the ignorati who are terrified of change. Same
with "PV takes more energy to produce than it will ever generate." You
can bet he believes as strongly in that one as he does in talking
snakes.

Taxation idn't rocket science.... it's proctological science.

What's your goal for the rest of your life, to set a record for
milking a single lame premise? I'll donate the cost of a second joke
if you agree to use it.

Tom Gardner wrote:

On 6/28/2013 11:15 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:

When you start sending checks to the IRS for the tax breaks you get
for depreciating capital equipment, we'll be interested in your
argument.

I don't capitalize nor depreciate equipment at my accountant's advice,
most is built from "shop expences".

I still remember, and laugh at your assertion that Christians won't be
murdered or even discriminated against in the ME nor are Iranians
seeking to build bombs. You're a great barometer for how things aren't
and won't be. I'd LOVE to play Poker with you!


Make sure it's sharp. And red hot, for the hotshot.