On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 11:48:21 +0100, "Doctor Evil"
wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 02:39:01 +0100, "Doctor Evil"
wrote:

What balls. Ken L, runs London.

He thinks he does.

He is the mayor of London.....you know like Dick Whittington. He doesn't
run Liverpool, it is London...just in case you got the two mixed up.

Wrong surname. I think you meant Turpin.



If he ran the government he would ban, or
tax to the hilt, polluting cars.

I imagine that he would.

I wish he would.

Fortunately, I don't suppose that Comrade Ken
ever will run the government.

He is doing a brilliant job on London.

Certainly the public transport does take people for a ride.



A part of his job is to keep London's air
clean, and he attacks that in a way that
is becoming more effective.

You're easily taken in, aren't you......

No. He want the likes of you and your 4x4 diesel crap out of London; I am
with him.

That's sweet. I hope the two of you will be very happy.



He doesn't care too much about people
in Wokingham who use London as a doormat.

Neither do I.

Then keep your polluting machine out of London.


Did I say that I ever took it there? Nope....




--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 10:10:48 +0100, Pete C
wrote:

On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 00:25:26 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

Negative control again. The correct way os to encourage people to
use alternative routes by building appropriate capacity through ways
and bypasses.

and...

The costs aren't fixed. We have among the highest tax rates on fuel
in the world.

Sounds a little like /self interested/ whining to me...!

Just an observation that taxation is not an effective form of
behaviour control.


Isn't global warming like meddling with the planet and it's climate on
a fairly big scale?

Could be...




--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 15:19:19 +0100, Grunff wrote:

Doctor Evil wrote:

Wrong! All major scientists in the world agree that man has influenced the
climate. Kyoto is because they agree this point to start with.


Lol - "all major scientists" eh?

Dimm's a major artist, so I'm not sure how that all fits together.



--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

On 15 Jul 2005, Andy Hall wrote

On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 10:10:48 +0100, Pete C
wrote:

On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 00:25:26 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

Negative control again. The correct way os to encourage people
to use alternative routes by building appropriate capacity
through ways and bypasses.

and...

The costs aren't fixed. We have among the highest tax rates on
fuel in the world.

Sounds a little like /self interested/ whining to me...!

Just an observation that taxation is not an effective form of
behaviour control.

Oh, it undoubtedly controls behaviour -- not necessarily in the way it
was intended to, but it controls it all the same, and very effectively.

I used to be self-employed, but am now employed by my own limited
company -- of which I'm the sole director. This was a direct
consequence of taxation -- to minimise it -- and taxation has thus
"controlled" my behaviour.

--
Cheers,
Harvey

On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 19:53:41 +0100, "Doctor Evil"
wrote:


"T i m" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 11:03:03 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
T i m wrote:
4) Use you batteries (for a few hundred cycles and they need
changing
= pollution).

And cost some 2000 quid.

My (very low tech) 8 x 6V Crompton semi-traction monoblocks were £800
20 years ago! ;-(

Lexus in the new RX400 use Nickel-metalhydride batteries with a 5 year
warranty and 2000 quid replacement cost.

Would that be against failure or loss of capacity? They could be at 5%
starting capacity and still not 'faulty'?

Failure and loss of capacity. In the US the guarantee is 10 years, for the
batteries, transmission, electric motor and inverter; 8 years for the Prius.

Did I read right the batteries are only good for 4-5 miles? (I was
wondering how they could be so cheap 'these days' compared with those
for my E only V)?

And did you mention something about polythene, batteries and no
polution?

T i m

On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 22:59:48 GMT, Harvey Van Sickle
wrote:

On 15 Jul 2005, Andy Hall wrote

On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 10:10:48 +0100, Pete C
wrote:

On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 00:25:26 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

Negative control again. The correct way os to encourage people
to use alternative routes by building appropriate capacity
through ways and bypasses.

and...

The costs aren't fixed. We have among the highest tax rates on
fuel in the world.

Sounds a little like /self interested/ whining to me...!

Just an observation that taxation is not an effective form of
behaviour control.

Oh, it undoubtedly controls behaviour -- not necessarily in the way it
was intended to, but it controls it all the same, and very effectively.

I used to be self-employed, but am now employed by my own limited
company -- of which I'm the sole director. This was a direct
consequence of taxation -- to minimise it -- and taxation has thus
"controlled" my behaviour.


Fair point. I was thinking about the specific area here....



--

..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

"Dave Plowman (News)" foolishly wrote in message
...
In article ws.net,
Doctor Evil wrote:
Yes I've looked. Was it the bit about it having a CVT gearbox you
wanted to draw to my attention?

It doesn't have a CVT. Ignorance on behalf of even car journos.

Strange for one who claims to have one.

Not strange at all. The Prius does NOT have a CVT. Read my posts. Nah
don't, you will not grasp it.

snip babble

"Dave Plowman (News)" foolishly wrote in message
...
In article ws.net,
Doctor Evil wrote:
It is not poor at all, about 45mpg, for a Camry sized car. The
emissions
are about 90% less than other new cars, something goons like you omit.

The emissions are 90% lower than other
new cars while doing its 45mpg on a
motorway?

Overall 90%, on Mway, not far off. A highly tuned engiens on an Atkinson
cylce with motor assist.

snip babble

"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 19:53:41 +0100, "Doctor Evil"
wrote:


"T i m" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 11:03:03 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
T i m wrote:
4) Use you batteries (for a few hundred cycles and they need
changing
= pollution).

And cost some 2000 quid.

My (very low tech) 8 x 6V Crompton semi-traction monoblocks were
£800
20 years ago! ;-(

Lexus in the new RX400 use Nickel-metalhydride batteries with a 5
year
warranty and 2000 quid replacement cost.

Would that be against failure or loss of capacity? They could be at 5%
starting capacity and still not 'faulty'?

Failure and loss of capacity. In the US the guarantee is 10 years, for
the
batteries, transmission, electric motor and inverter; 8 years for the
Prius.

Did I read right the batteries are only good for 4-5 miles?

Yep. A Californian company puts Lith Ion batteries in which is good for 60
mile and 135mpg.

(I was wondering how they could be so cheap 'these days' compared with
those
for my E only V)?

Metal hydride for the Prius. The better batteries, and still in R&D are
Lith ion and Lith poly, which come from cell phone technology.

And did you mention something about polythene, batteries and no
polution?

Lityh Poly, which "promise" 300 mile range on one charge. Toshiba have
developed another type which can recharge in a minute or so. So, fast
recharges for cars.

In message ws.net,
Doctor Evil writes

Metal hydride for the Prius. The better batteries, and still in R&D are
Lith ion and Lith poly, which come from cell phone technology.

And did you mention something about polythene, batteries and no
polution?

Lityh Poly, which "promise" 300 mile range on one charge. Toshiba have
developed another type which can recharge in a minute or so. So, fast
recharges for cars.

Recharge in a minute or so?

How many Amps is that

or did you throw away the envelope again ?

--
geoff

Doctor Evil wrote:
"Capitol" wrote in message
...


Doctor Evil wrote:


Second hand Jap cars are sold in the UK? Only the up market ones I

would

assume.

Hmm, your spheres of ignorance are much wider than I gave you credit for!!


Yep. I am ignorant

Hmm, I think you might get general agreement there!!

LOL

Capitol

On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 00:43:53 +0100, "Doctor Evil"
wrote:


Did I read right the batteries are only good for 4-5 miles?

Yep. A Californian company puts Lith Ion batteries in which is good for 60
mile and 135mpg.

I'm not sure where the link between the batteries and mpg comes from
unless you are adjusting the driving pattern (range) accordingly.

In a straight EV the 'cost' per mile (afa batteries and energy are
concerned) is a function of their efficiency (what percentage of the
engery in you can get back out). Bigger batteries give longer range
but needent affect the efficiency (~mpg?) The batteries are the only
energy source.

In the case of your (?) Hybrid the energy comes from two stores,
battery and fuel. On a journey say of 5 miles I believe you *could*
use 'battery only mode' so we are using the same rules as a straight
EV and it's all down to battery efficiency (well there are loads of
other considerations but we don't need to consider them for this
example). As before the bigger the battery (capacity) the longer the
range.

On 'hybrid mode' the batteries would have their initial charge (so you
have yer straight 5 miles range) plus whatever range the fuel tank
gives you .. so, after 5 miles you have effectivly an IC vehicle? The
mpg is now whatever the straight mpg is for the vehicle? If you were
(say) running the vehicle flat out (lets say no spare capacity for no
charging) the engine would continue running at the end of the journey
to recharge the 'free' 5 miles you got at the beginning? (so therefore
not 'free' (in energy terms)). The charge / discharge process is not
100% efficient and ignoring the minimised local pollution for a sec
(the 5 miles 'clean' driving still wouldn't get you out of London)
would probably be (overall) less efficient than running it as an IC
vehicle in the first place?

Take the batteries out you just have an IC vehicle.

Is the above correct?

(I was wondering how they could be so cheap 'these days' compared with
those
for my E only V)?


Metal hydride for the Prius. The better batteries, and still in R&D are
Lith ion and Lith poly, which come from cell phone technology.

'Better batteries' are always in developent and *sometimes* we
actually get them! ;-)

And did you mention something about polythene, batteries and no
polution?

Lityh Poly, which "promise" 300 mile range on one charge. Toshiba have
developed another type which can recharge in a minute or so. So, fast
recharges for cars.

As spotted elsewhere I can't see how a battery with a '300 mile range'
can also be "charged in 1 min" (.. ask nurse to read that again and
see if says CHANGED ..?) (Dave made me say that) ;-)

Maybe this is based around the mains rechargable Prius where a spare
battery pack could be (potentially groan) CHARGED away from the
vehicle then swapped for the discharged one on return to base (this
has been done before with many EV's)?

The battery in my EV is 400Ah at 48V and therefore would need 24,000
(+) Amps to charge them in one min? That would mean a 4,800+ Amp fuse
in my mains plug?

All the best ..

T i m

In article ws.net,
Doctor Evil wrote:
It doesn't have a CVT. Ignorance on behalf of even car journos.

Strange for one who claims to have one.

Not strange at all. The Prius does NOT have a CVT. Read my posts. Nah
don't, you will not grasp it.

Watch my lips. The revised one does. As does the Lexus.

Of course, since all the details you've been quoting like warranties on
batteries and real world fuel consumption figures come from dubious
sources or are just plain lies, I'll leave others to judge.

--
*Virtual reality is its own reward*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ws.net,
Doctor Evil wrote:
The emissions are 90% lower than other
new cars while doing its 45mpg on a
motorway?

Overall 90%, on Mway, not far off. A highly tuned engiens on an Atkinson
cylce with motor assist.

Then you won't be too pleased with the Lexus RX400. Now it does shine fuel
consumption wise - although in a sector where that's not difficult. It
uses a near conventional petrol V-6.

--
*There's no place like www.home.com *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
raden wrote:
Lityh Poly, which "promise" 300 mile range on one charge. Toshiba have
developed another type which can recharge in a minute or so. So, fast
recharges for cars.

Recharge in a minute or so?

How many Amps is that

or did you throw away the envelope again ?

It's a bit like his high flow 'combi's'

Energy in is ignored. It's a one box solution he's so fond of. He'll
believe in perpetual motion soon.

--
*The statement below is true.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"John Rumm" wrote in message
...

I was referring to you "works of the devil" claim. I was not sure if you
meant that child seats were said work, or the lack of child seats in the
"good old days" was?


The current child seats are. Like very many other products they keep
being changed to include more gee gaws. We have a friend who designs
them. It's marketing.

True. So long as they still perform the basic requirement of preventing
their contents becoming a projectile in the event of a crash, they seem
like a worthwhile idea (even if you can't buy one without cup holders!)

(needed to buy a new one recently - I got a ten quid discount form the man
in Halfords (offered - not asked for) on the grounds that the one I wanted
was in "last years colours" and hence was end of line. Just how shallow
are some people?)

I rest my case :-)


No, but women's lack of spatial awareness was mentioned.

One of the sillier male misapprehensions.

One however that is a well documented scientific fact. ;-)


No it isn't.

Promise you it is. I don't have all the books I need to hand to give you a
decent list of references, but I can find you a few:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/humanbo...al_tests.shtml
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4202199.stm
http://www.sfu.ca/~dkimura/articles/sex.htm

Ah well, if it was on BBC it MUST be true, I can't compete with that noble
body.

For a very readable and entertaining book on the subject (that includes
links to many peer reviewed research papers) I would recommend this one:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/...ternodeltdcomp

Anything on a subject like that which is 'entertaining' to some might not be
to everyone.

What's more, in my experience women are far better at loading a
dishwasher economically. That's an example of spatial awareness.

Also comes down to experience - perhaps women tend to load dishwashers
more often than their menfolk?

That might be true in your household but here Spouse pulls his weight :-)

And I follow him round re-doing things. Many women do, they have to for the
sake of efficiency.

It is not that women lack spacial ability completely - more that they
don't (generally) have a dedicated area of the brain for the task.


What utter nonsense.

Easy to demonstrate with an EEG. It is one of the reasons that women tend
to recover from stokes better than men. Their brains tend to have heavier
cross linking and less compartmentalisation. So when a section of brain
tissue is damaged there is far less chance of it wiping out a single
capability (like speech).

Er -what have stokes (sic) to do with spatial (not spacial) awareness?

I think you're confused.



I was also suggesting that it helps if you know what happens when you go
beyond the limit of your vehicles handling.


Which you shouldn't.


i.e. Does it over or under steer, and do you know how to deal with what
it does without loosing control.


A good driver would never get into that position.

That does not hold true from experience I would say. There can be any
number of reasons why you may need to swerve sharply to avoid an obstacle
in the road. Even at low speeds a patch of oil on a road or black ice can
result in you car loosing grip at one end or the other. As can a tyre
unexpectedly deflating.

But a good driver would be aware of the possibility of all those things and
be prepared.

Why do you think advanced drivers are expected to pass a course on skid
pan driving? As are many professional drivers like bus/coach drivers?

That's only part of the course - to make people into good drivers. I think
that the ordinary driving test should be far more rigorous - to the
standards of the ASM. Those standards should be enforced. They never will be
though and people do all sorts of things which they know are illegal because
they know they can - as well as disagreeing with the law. They think they
know better.

Just because someone is trained to react to adversities and is made to take
more advanced driving courses neither makes them responsible nor good
drivers if they can't be bothered applying what they've learned. Very many
bus and coach drivers use phones while driving and drive faster than the
limit.

But are you suggesting that all men drivers never lose control?

Nope. They are probably more likely to, since they tend to drive faster
and cover greater mileages.

So the majority of drivers aren't good drivers. That's what I've been
saying.

I've seen lots of men drivers skidding on ice, I never have skidded on
ice.

Nor have I. And I've driven on ice quite a lot. I was once mocked by a
driving instructor - the husband of a friend, who smirked when I was about
to set off outside his house, up a hill, on ice in our Moggie van(renowned
for lack of traction). He actually said, "Oh, this will be fun! Come and
watch this woman slide and skid all over." Of course I didn't, he could
never look me in the face again.

And I was glad that BSM - his employer - hadn't taught me to drive if that
attitude was allowed.

Your point being what exactly? I think you are reading too much into my
comments on driving and coping with the unexpected. They were made without
any intended connection to my other comments on male/female cognitive
skills differences.

I didn't bring up the female bit.

I was suggesting that all drivers (i.e. both sexes) should at least
understand the basics of controlling car dynamics when something goes
wrong.

So do I.

Mary

"John Rumm" wrote in message
...
Mary Fisher wrote:

Where do you put the letterbox?

You have a mailbox on a pole - its a fuel economy drive ;-)

I'mnot talking computers, I'm talking porches.

Mary

In article ,
T i m wrote:
Did I read right the batteries are only good for 4-5 miles?

Yep. A Californian company puts Lith Ion batteries in which is good for 60
mile and 135mpg.

I'm not sure where the link between the batteries and mpg comes from
unless you are adjusting the driving pattern (range) accordingly.

First rule with Dimm is that he doesn't understand the concept of energy
in against energy out.

In a straight EV the 'cost' per mile (afa batteries and energy are
concerned) is a function of their efficiency (what percentage of the
engery in you can get back out). Bigger batteries give longer range
but needent affect the efficiency (~mpg?) The batteries are the only
energy source.

They will, of course be heavier.

In the case of your (?) Hybrid the energy comes from two stores,
battery and fuel. On a journey say of 5 miles I believe you *could*
use 'battery only mode' so we are using the same rules as a straight
EV and it's all down to battery efficiency (well there are loads of
other considerations but we don't need to consider them for this
example). As before the bigger the battery (capacity) the longer the
range.

That's how you get the very good MPG - ie petrol - instantaneous readout
on the Prius, because when it's running on its batteries it's not using
any petrol at that point in time. So for perhaps 5 miles it's using near
zero petrol. However, Drivel conveniently forgets that the battery has to
be charged first. So to work out the *true* MPG for that journey, you'd
need to know how much petrol that takes.

On 'hybrid mode' the batteries would have their initial charge (so you
have yer straight 5 miles range) plus whatever range the fuel tank
gives you .. so, after 5 miles you have effectivly an IC vehicle?

Yes. And that's when the instantaneous MPG goes haywire.

Hence the result of the Autocar touring route which is some 30 miles but
including stop start town work. And I'd guess they'd have made sure the
batteries were in the same state of charge at the beginning and end of
that test for it to make any sense. Otherwise it would be like adding or
removing petrol from the tank before making the measurement. Now using a
petrol motor to supply the entire energy (as the Prius does eventually) to
the vehicle can only result in better economy if the drive train offers
other savings. Ie, basically, friction.

Which is where the Lexus scores so heavily over its 4X4 'competitors'
which with 'permanent' AWD have a great deal of friction. But then things
like Range Rovers are designed to go off road which the Lexus can't and
isn't designed to.

Of course where these Hybrids win easily is in heavy stop start traffic.
Because for most of the time - or indeed all of it if the distance isn't
too great - the petrol engine will be stationary. An idling petrol engine
is doing zero MPG. Not rocket science. Also, an electric motor has a
fairly constant efficiency curve speed wise - certainly compared to a
petrol one which is very poor at low speeds.

The mpg is now whatever the straight mpg is for the vehicle? If you
were (say) running the vehicle flat out (lets say no spare capacity for
no charging) the engine would continue running at the end of the journey
to recharge the 'free' 5 miles you got at the beginning? (so therefore
not 'free' (in energy terms)). The charge / discharge process is not
100% efficient and ignoring the minimised local pollution for a sec (the
5 miles 'clean' driving still wouldn't get you out of London) would
probably be (overall) less efficient than running it as an IC vehicle in
the first place?

For a truer comparison you'd have to arrange for the IC engined vehicle to
stop it's engine when not moving and re-start automatically. Which has
been done. Also, because fuel is still so cheap, few conventional car
makers pay *that* much attention to weight and friction. Spend *the
production cost* of a Prius on *the production cost* of a similar sized
car with similar performance and concentrate on weight saving and
friction, and you'd get a vehicle which would give much better overall
economy. As it is, many small diesels will match the Prius in fuel
consumption crossing London, then leave it for dead when they hit the
motorway.

Take the batteries out you just have an IC vehicle.

Is the above correct?

(I was wondering how they could be so cheap 'these days' compared with
those
for my E only V)?


Metal hydride for the Prius. The better batteries, and still in R&D are
Lith ion and Lith poly, which come from cell phone technology.

'Better batteries' are always in developent and *sometimes* we
actually get them! ;-)

Yes. They'll be wonderful when we get renewable electricity. Which will
probably be never. And burning a fossil fuel in a power station to charge
*any* battery is far less efficient than using that fuel directly to power
the vehicle.

And did you mention something about polythene, batteries and no
polution?

Lityh Poly, which "promise" 300 mile range on one charge. Toshiba have
developed another type which can recharge in a minute or so. So, fast
recharges for cars.

As spotted elsewhere I can't see how a battery with a '300 mile range'
can also be "charged in 1 min" (.. ask nurse to read that again and
see if says CHANGED ..?) (Dave made me say that) ;-)

Maybe this is based around the mains rechargable Prius where a spare
battery pack could be (potentially groan) CHARGED away from the
vehicle then swapped for the discharged one on return to base (this
has been done before with many EV's)?

The battery in my EV is 400Ah at 48V and therefore would need 24,000
(+) Amps to charge them in one min? That would mean a 4,800+ Amp fuse
in my mains plug?

As I said, he has no concept of energy. It comes from planet Drivel for
free to him. I shudder to think of the cost of installing such a supply to
every home, or even to filling stations. And can you imagine the size of
the plug and cable? ;-)

--
*The problem with the gene pool is that there is no lifeguard *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" ptrattled garbage in message
...
In article ,
T i m wrote:
Did I read right the batteries are only good for 4-5 miles?

Yep. A Californian company puts Lith Ion batteries in which is good
for 60
mile and 135mpg.

I'm not sure where the link between the batteries and mpg comes from
unless you are adjusting the driving pattern (range) accordingly.

First rule

This idiot can't read results, and thinks he knows all the answers, despite
being continually made of fool of, he keeps coming back. The sign of nut.
Prius has 90% less emissions than other new cars, and gets around 60mpg on
average. When running on the engine it also turns a genny which also power
the electric motor too, which assists in propelling the car along with the
engine. The engine is specifically adapted for the application.

snip utter lunatic garbage

"raden" wrote in message
...
In message ws.net,
Doctor Evil writes

Metal hydride for the Prius. The better batteries, and still in R&D are
Lith ion and Lith poly, which come from cell phone technology.

And did you mention something about polythene, batteries and no
polution?

Lityh Poly, which "promise" 300 mile range on one charge. Toshiba have
developed another type which can recharge in a minute or so. So, fast
recharges for cars.

Recharge in a minute or so?

How many Amps is that

Maxie, again you think you know it all. Are you taking Mr Cranium pills?
You should know better than lunatic Richard.

Just for you Maxie:
http://www.toshiba.com/taec/press/dmfc_05_270.shtml

Maxie, enjoy.

"Capitol" wrote in message
...


Doctor Evil wrote:
"Capitol" wrote in message
...


Doctor Evil wrote:


Second hand Jap cars are sold in the UK? Only the up market ones I

would

assume.

Hmm, your spheres of ignorance are much wider than I gave you credit
for!!

Yep. I am ignorant

Hmm, I think you might get general agreement there!!

I know nothing a second hand cars. You right little Arfur Daley, you.

In article ws.net,
Doctor Evil wrote:
This idiot can't read results, and thinks he knows all the answers,
despite being continually made of fool of, he keeps coming back. The
sign of nut. Prius has 90% less emissions than other new cars

It will have zero 'emissions' when running on batteries.

However, I know you don't, but lets look at facts. And official government
ones that you love to quote when it comes to MPG and suits you.

The Prius CO2gm/km is 104. If that is 90% less than any other new car,
that makes them at best about 1000 CO2gm/km. Now the Bentley Continental
with a 6 litre W12 engine is 410 CO2gm/km...

Go to a Smart, another town car and rather better suited for this because
of its size, and that figure is 113 CO2gm/km. And it's also half the
price.

Now you seem to object to Autocar giving a figure for a hard driven car
during their test. But it's still valid as a comparison.

The dreadful 23 MPG overall of the Prius translates into 32 for the Smart.

The gentle urban road route very representative of normal driving where
the Prius was distinctly so-so at 44 MPG? The Smart managed 58.


, and gets around 60mpg on average.

Not by any respected source.

When running on the engine it also turns a genny which also power the
electric motor too, which assists in propelling the car along with the
engine. The engine is specifically adapted for the application.

Now let me see. The engine is directly coupled to the wheels under some
circumstances, and at the same time is running a generator which is also
supplying power to the wheels via an electric motor.

You really haven't a clue, do you? Remind us of what degree you once
claimed to have? Wasn't it some form of engineering? How much did the
certificate cost you?

--
*Everyone has a photographic memory. Some don't have film *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 10:55:10 +0100, "Mary Fisher"
wrote:


I was once mocked by a
driving instructor - the husband of a friend, who smirked when I was about
to set off outside his house, up a hill, on ice in our Moggie van(renowned
for lack of traction).

They were? My first Moggy van had crossplies and in the mud / snow /
ice outperfomed my mates RS2000 tractionwise ;-) (narrower tyres =
more traction in mud / snow etc ..( more chance of 'digging in'))?

I'm with the 'if you know your vehicles limits you might be better off
in an emergency' school of though (sids pans and the like).

I had my Sierra Estate for 22 years and drove most of the 97k on it's
clock before we retired it. A wet empty roundabout could be 'fun' if
you played with the throttle a bit;-)

Whilst coming hope from a family party along a damp dark high street a
car came in front of me from a side road (turning right), paniced and
stopped with his bonnet on the apex leaving me no where to go ( I'm
not sure even ABS would have stopped us in time). I checked nothing
was coming in the opposite direction, cadence braked and threaded this
long estate round his nose and beside the cars parked on the other
side to come to a halt just past the other car.

"Oh well done" said the missus (she had had a bottle of red wine to
herself that evening g) and the daughter just stared ahead (having a
better view of the whole thing from the rear seat).

My point was that I 'knew' my vehicle and because I had pushed it to
and sometimes past (you often have to go 'past' to know where that
point is) it's limits on several ocations my instincts also knew where
that point was (that and a bit of luck of course).

In spite of advanced training etc there will be times when you simply
don't have a chance (this could have been one of them for many folk)
and although I know I'm not as good a driver as I was (bad habits /
slower reactions / worse eyesight etc) I believe I am (still)
generally more considerate than many?

I try not to prejudge folk (I wouldn't have do that with you and the
slope etc) .. like the young lady that drove a diesel tranny van round
the "Ring" 9 seconds slower than Clarkeson could in a Jag ;-)

All the best ..

T i m

On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 10:57:37 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:


Bigger batteries give longer range
but needent affect the efficiency (~mpg?) The batteries are the only
energy source.

They will, of course be heavier.

Indeed, deminishing returns n that .. I tried to keep it simple for
our 'hard of understanding' reader .. ;-)

When I got my EV (it looks like a Austin Mini Moke) it came with 4
'ex' car batteries just to get it out the blokes drive and onto my
trailer.

As an experiment I bought 4 x 12 'lorry' batteries and although it was
quite 'nippy' only had a range of 5 miles or so (and who could treat
that as serious eh) ;-)

Putting the best part of 1/2 tonne 8 x 6V of semi-traction monoblocks
in it put the rage up to 20 odd miles (low voltage so high current /
hi conductor losses and poor battery efficient), high drag coeficcient
shape (basically a shed) and poor rolling resistance (wideish 'Mini'
Weller white spoke wheels / tryes, Reliant Regal rear axle etc etc).

A higher voltage / less current, higher revving transmision (involving
a single speed reduction GEARBOX g) would also have helped reduce
losses therefore increase range.

Many of the guys in the BVS had vehicles doing nearly 70 mph AND 5-7-
miles range (a Scimitar GTE comes to mind).

Nothing compared with the 2000+ (is it) mpg obtained from the fuel
econimy record boys!

All the best ..

T i m

"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 00:43:53 +0100, "Doctor Evil"
wrote:


Did I read right the batteries are only good for 4-5 miles?

Yep. A Californian company puts Lith Ion batteries in which is good for
60
mile and 135mpg.

I'm not sure where the link between the batteries and mpg comes from
unless you are adjusting the driving pattern (range) accordingly.

The Toyota transmisison/managemnet system is brilliant. The engine can be
powering the car and also a genny and the genny powers an electric motor
that also powers the car and erechages teh batteeuies simutanously. See the
link on how the epicylical arragement works. Power is split depending on
demand, from 0 to 100%, from one to the other. The transmission is way
above what anyone else has come up with. There is little to it, but very
well thought out.

People just don't understand it, yet the Prius is simpler than a normal
engine/auto trans setup.

Lith Poly, which "promise" 300 mile range on one charge. Toshiba have
developed another type which can recharge in a minute or so. So, fast
recharges for cars.

As spotted elsewhere I can't see how a
battery with a '300 mile range'
can also be "charged in 1 min" (.. ask nurse
to read that again and see if says
CHANGED ..?) (Dave made me say that) ;-)

First please do not quote a clear idiot. Regarding the 1 min re-charge see:
http://www.toshiba.com/taec/press/dmfc_05_270.shtml

Then ask nurse to pull the covers over. Don't guess or make things up, or
quote ridiculous tests based on dragsters, like the looney. Yahoo groups
have few groups onnthe Prius, and all the info you wnats is via thsoe
peopel, who know what the Prius is all about, and NONE get 21mpg, all
average around 50mpg and above.

Do a Google on the Prius, there is lots out there, explaining its operation.

On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 11:42:09 +0100, "Doctor Evil"
wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" ptrattled garbage in message
...
In article ,
T i m wrote:
Did I read right the batteries are only good for 4-5 miles?

Yep. A Californian company puts Lith Ion batteries in which is good
for 60
mile and 135mpg.

I'm not sure where the link between the batteries and mpg comes from
unless you are adjusting the driving pattern (range) accordingly.

First rule

This idiot can't read results, and thinks he knows all the answers, despite
being continually made of fool of,

(in your mind)

he keeps coming back. The sign of nut.

Or the sign of soneone (fruitlessly) trying to get through to a nut?

Prius has 90% less emissions than other new cars,

And where did I say it didn't?

and gets around 60mpg on
average.

Good, as I mentioned before, a figure easily obtained by many small
cars today. You chose to take that as "The Prius is a small car".

When running on the engine it also turns a genny which also power
the electric motor too, which assists in propelling the car along with the
engine.

Oh, I wondered how that worked ... not pixey dust then?

The engine is specifically adapted for the application.

Indeed.

snip utter lunatic garbage
Or things you don't understand / can't counter morelike?

Bless ;-)

The thing that you seem to miss is whilst you thrash about wildly with
yer claims and insults (the reaction of any animal pushed into a
corner) is that I am actually 'on your side' re anything that actually
reduces pollution and provides a solution to as many of the real
problems as possible.

In (your) ideal world London would be 'congested' with Prius's, none
of which would be paying the conjestion charge and all parking free?
And Londoners gain from that by you 'polluting' (when you charge yer
battery) 5 miles away?

Aas an alternative you could go wherever by cycle or even a Honda 90
doing 120 mpg and taking less space on the road whilst doing so and
when parking?

If you don't think you could manage all that cycling (but as a honed
athlete you should be up to it) you could get an 'assisted' cycle.

I mean. how often do you need to carry family or friends?

All the best ..

T i m

In article ,
T i m wrote:
Nothing compared with the 2000+ (is it) mpg obtained from the fuel
econimy record boys!

Heh heh. Bring back the Mobile economy run, I say. Used to be fascinating
to see vast barges of cars doing phenomenal MPG. But despite all the
complaints about fuel costs, few drive for best economy.

A pal from Wales stayed for a few days, and drove here in a Series 1 Land
Rover which he was going to attend an LR rally at Gaydon (50th
anniversary) on the next Sunday, and return home afterwards. So early on
Sunday we set out in convoy - and at the time I had a BMW 525 auto. Two
models ago - an E34. We both filled up at the local petrol station and set
off, me following him. I zeroed the OBC as I do each time I fill up.

I doubt we even quite touched 50 on the motorway - inside lane all the way.

Door to door including some 10 miles crossing London before hitting the
motorway, the BMW did 44 mpg.

--
*Even a blind pig stumbles across an acorn now and again *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 13:11:30 +0100, "Doctor Evil"
wrote:

The Toyota transmisison/managemnet system is brilliant. The engine can be
powering the car and also a genny and the genny powers an electric motor
that also powers the car and erechages teh batteeuies simutanously. See the
link on how the epicylical arragement works. Power is split depending on
demand, from 0 to 100%, from one to the other. The transmission is way
above what anyone else has come up with. There is little to it, but very
well thought out.

Quite possibly, and I applaud good / clever engineering design, but
what has that got to do with anything? It could you Borg nanobot
technology for all I care or Flux Capacitors for that matter, it's the
pollutants / mile that count in the end?

People just don't understand it, yet the Prius is simpler than a normal
engine/auto trans setup.

Indeed, and my EV is simpler still, so what?

Lith Poly, which "promise" 300 mile range on one charge. Toshiba have
developed another type which can recharge in a minute or so. So, fast
recharges for cars.

As spotted elsewhere I can't see how a
battery with a '300 mile range'
can also be "charged in 1 min" (.. ask nurse
to read that again and see if says
CHANGED ..?) (Dave made me say that) ;-)

First please do not quote a clear idiot. Regarding the 1 min re-charge see:
http://www.toshiba.com/taec/press/dmfc_05_270.shtml

Great, I wonder how far your Prius wil get on a battery of 600mAh
cells ;-) Ok, let's say they actually produced a battery of this
ability the laws of physics still apply (wether you want to accept it
or not) and they are.

1) You need a certian amount of energy to accellerate (even if that's
done slowly) a mass to a speed.

2) You need a certian amount of energy to maintain that speed (wind
resistance / frictional losses)

So, if you need to accellerate your Prius (whatever it weights) up to
a speed (in whatever the time) that will take Y energy. So, the
batteries needed to do that would need Y x range = Z

To charge a battery in 1 min would talke thousands of amps (don't
bother taking yer socks off) and trust me, yer domestic power supply
won't do that.

Then ask nurse to pull the covers over. Don't guess or make things up, or
quote ridiculous tests based on dragsters, like the looney.

;-)

Yahoo groups
have few groups onnthe Prius, and all the info you wnats is via thsoe
peopel, who know what the Prius is all about, and NONE get 21mpg, all
average around 50mpg and above.

Great, enjoy your 50 mpg .. I'll do the same or better in any number
of much cheaper and more practical offerings?

Do a Google on the Prius, there is lots out there, explaining its operation.

You might find this artical interesting though ..

http://www.zyra.org.uk/battery.htm

All the best ..

T i m

In article ,
T i m wrote:
Prius has 90% less emissions than other new cars,

And where did I say it didn't?

You should have done, because you're dealing with Drivel who never gives
accurate figures for anything.

The closer figure would be it produces approx 90% of the emissions of
other comparable new cars. Except when running purely on batteries, where
that figure will be to all intends and purposes 0. But unfortunately for
Drivel the government isn't so stupid to just quote 'best case' results.

It's interesting that the Lexus RX400 which uses a far more sophisticated
version of the hybrid drivetrain and is heralded as a breakthrough
produces 192 C02gm/km which is about the same as a new average family car.
Some breakthrough - apart from in its class. But it's not going to save
the planet.

--
*If work is so terrific, how come they have to pay you to do it?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 13:27:35 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:


I doubt we even quite touched 50 on the motorway - inside lane all the way.

Door to door including some 10 miles crossing London before hitting the
motorway, the BMW did 44 mpg.

Well exactly ..

Now if someone comes up with a practical hybrid / fuel cell or even a
tradional car that does 200 mpg (equiv cost / mile) then I can see
folk clambering for them, but only 55 mpg .. hardly worth the effort
when there is such choice already?

They say something about 'a fool and his money' don't they?

All the best ..

T i m

"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 11:42:09 +0100, "Doctor Evil"
wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" ptrattled garbage in message
...
In article ,
T i m wrote:
Did I read right the batteries are only good for 4-5 miles?

Yep. A Californian company puts Lith Ion batteries in which is good
for 60
mile and 135mpg.

I'm not sure where the link between the batteries and mpg comes from
unless you are adjusting the driving pattern (range) accordingly.

First rule

This idiot can't read results, and thinks he knows all the answers,
despite
being continually made a fool of,

(in your mind)

...and everyone else's.

he keeps coming back. The sign of nut.

That strue.

Or the sign of soneone (fruitlessly) trying to get through to a nut?

...or someone havinhg fun with the nut.

Prius has 90% less emissions than other new cars,

And where did I say it didn't?

and gets around 60mpg on
average.

Good, as I mentioned before, a
figure easily obtained by many small
cars today. You chose to take that as
"The Prius is a small car".

The Prius has the interior space of a Camry. It is no crawing, noisey,
smelly, slow, micro-hatch diesel, that can't pull the sheets off the bed.

When running on the engine it also turns a genny which also power
the electric motor too, which assists in propelling the car along with
the
engine.

Oh, I wondered how that worked ...
not pixey dust then?

Nope.

The engine is specifically adapted for the application.

Indeed.

snip utter lunatic garbage
Or things you don't understand / can't counter morelike?

What don't I understand out the Prius? I don't take the ramblings of a
loony seriously.

Bless ;-)

The thing that you seem to miss is whilst you thrash about wildly

Wildy?

with yer claims and insults (the reaction of
any animal pushed into a corner) is that I
am actually 'on your side' re anything that actually
reduces pollution and provides a solution to
as many of the real problems as possible.

That is encouraging.

In (your) ideal world London would be
'congested' with Prius's, none of which
would be paying the conjestion charge
and all parking free?

No. Few cars and all pollution free vehicles. The hybrid is a stop gap,
before new technology comes along, which looks sooner rather than later.

And Londoners gain from that by
you 'polluting' (when you charge yer
battery) 5 miles away?

The emission will then be via the power station, who can control emissions
far better than individual cars.

Aas an alternative you could
go wherever by cycle or even a Honda 90
doing 120 mpg and taking less space
on the road whilst doing so and
when parking?

Sounds good. And have the bikes running of compressed air so no pollution
at all.

If you don't think you could manage
all that cycling (but as a honed
athlete you should be up to it)

I am.

you could get an 'assisted' cycle.

Good idea.

I mean. how often do you need to carry family or friends?

Good observation. The percentage of time that only onen person is in a car
is way into the 90s.

"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 10:55:10 +0100, "Mary Fisher"
wrote:


I was once mocked by a
driving instructor - the husband of a friend, who smirked when I was about
to set off outside his house, up a hill, on ice in our Moggie van(renowned
for lack of traction).

They were? My first Moggy van had crossplies and in the mud / snow /
ice outperfomed my mates RS2000 tractionwise ;-) (narrower tyres =
more traction in mud / snow etc ..( more chance of 'digging in'))?

I bow to your greater knowledge, I've no idea what an RS2000 is!


I had my Sierra Estate for 22 years and drove most of the 97k on it's
clock before we retired it. A wet empty roundabout could be 'fun' if
you played with the throttle a bit;-)

We have different ideas about what is fun :-)

Whilst coming hope from a family party along a damp dark high street a
car came in front of me from a side road (turning right), paniced and
stopped with his bonnet on the apex leaving me no where to go ( I'm
not sure even ABS would have stopped us in time). I checked nothing
was coming in the opposite direction, cadence braked and threaded this
long estate round his nose and beside the cars parked on the other
side to come to a halt just past the other car.

That sounds eminently sensible.

"Oh well done" said the missus (she had had a bottle of red wine to
herself that evening g) and the daughter just stared ahead (having a
better view of the whole thing from the rear seat).

:-)

My point was that I 'knew' my vehicle and because I had pushed it to
and sometimes past (you often have to go 'past' to know where that
point is) it's limits on several ocations my instincts also knew where
that point was (that and a bit of luck of course).

It's not just the vehicle's limit you have to know. It's your own. I believe
that many drivers don't - they assume that they're at least among the best
drivers on the roads.

In spite of advanced training etc there will be times when you simply
don't have a chance (this could have been one of them for many folk)
and although I know I'm not as good a driver as I was (bad habits /
slower reactions / worse eyesight etc) I believe I am (still)
generally more considerate than many?

I hope so. But why bad habits? If you know you have them you could do
something about them.

I try not to prejudge folk (I wouldn't have do that with you and the
slope etc) .. like the young lady that drove a diesel tranny van round
the "Ring" 9 seconds slower than Clarkeson could in a Jag ;-)

Don't know anything about that - but speed simply isn't everything.

Mary

All the best ..

T i m

"Dave Plowman (News)" has rabbling thoughts in
message ...
In article ws.net,
Doctor Evil wrote:

This idiot can't read results, and thinks he knows all the answers,
despite being continually made of fool of, he keeps coming back. The
sign of nut. Prius has 90% less emissions than other new cars

It will have zero 'emissions' when running on batteries.

You don't say? Gasp.

snip disjointed stuff

Now you seem to object to Autocar
giving a figure for a hard driven car
during their test. But it's still valid as
a comparison.

....more madness. He thinks we should take dragster starts as
representative. Duh! Not only that a few here have told that is not the
way, but he keep this up. Duh! How are the electric cabers?

, and gets around 60mpg on average.

Not by any respected source.

You have been told. It does!!!!!!! Ask the nurse at your clinic. Mine
gets over 55mpg. AutoExpress got over 65mpg - a respected source.

When running on the engine it also turns a genny which also power the
electric motor too, which assists in propelling the car along with the
engine. The engine is specifically adapted for the application.

Now let me see. The engine is directly coupled to the wheels under some
circumstances, and at the same time is running a generator which is also
supplying power to the wheels via an electric motor.

Got it in one.

You really haven't a clue, do you?

Do you mean the Prius does not do that? Tell how it works then. Give us a
clue, better still explain how it works. Now take note. Don't make things
up as you usually do.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote under medication in
message ...
In article ws.net,
Doctor Evil wrote:
It doesn't have a CVT. Ignorance on behalf of even car journos.

Strange for one who claims to have one.

Not strange at all. The Prius does NOT have a CVT. Read my posts.
Nah
don't, you will not grasp it.

Watch my lips. The revised one does. As does the Lexus.

Mr Cranium, the Prius, the one out of the box at the local deals does NOT
have a CVT. It was clear you did not have a clue how the Prius works, now
he is telling us how it works. Time for the medication again.....

snip tripe

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ws.net,
Doctor Evil wrote:
The emissions are 90% lower than other
new cars while doing its 45mpg on a
motorway?

Overall 90%, on Mway, not far off. A
highly tuned engine on an Atkinson
cylce with motor assist.

Then you won't be too pleased with
the Lexus RX400.

I don't have one, and don't intend to. A Chelsea tractor.

Now it does shine fuel
consumption wise

The technology must work then.

- although in a
sector where that's not difficult. It
uses a near conventional petrol V-6.

"near". You got that right. You can feel pleased with yourself now.

On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 14:18:39 +0100, "Mary Fisher"
wrote:

They were? My first Moggy van had crossplies and in the mud / snow /
ice outperfomed my mates RS2000 tractionwise ;-) (narrower tyres =
more traction in mud / snow etc ..( more chance of 'digging in'))?

I bow to your greater knowledge, I've no idea what an RS2000 is!

MKII Ford Escort with a 2L Pinto engine in it (or summat like that)
His big wide tryes didn't work in snow like my narrow ones as he found
when entering someones front drive by mistake! ;-(


I had my Sierra Estate for 22 years and drove most of the 97k on it's
clock before we retired it. A wet empty roundabout could be 'fun' if
you played with the throttle a bit;-)

We have different ideas about what is fun :-)

Of that there is no doubt Mary ;-)

In spite of advanced training etc there will be times when you simply
don't have a chance (this could have been one of them for many folk)
and although I know I'm not as good a driver as I was (bad habits /
slower reactions / worse eyesight etc) I believe I am (still)
generally more considerate than many?

I hope so. But why bad habits? If you know you have them you could do
something about them.

Well I suppose it comes down to focus. Simplistically, when you new
you look ahead because that's where you are going. As you get more
experienced you look around (as such) to take in other information
that may affect you (schools, crossings, vehicles overtaking,
hedgelines, road surface etc etc). When you get more experienced you
know where you can (as in 'get away with') pay less attention. Eg, I
think I'm still safe but might' go through I local camera because I
know what speed is 'safe' (lived here 48 years).

I try not to prejudge folk (I wouldn't have do that with you and the
slope etc) .. like the young lady that drove a diesel tranny van round
the "Ring" 9 seconds slower than Clarkeson could in a Jag ;-)

Don't know anything about that - but speed simply isn't everything.

Indeed, except it's quite important in motor racing ;-)

The 'skill' in this case was taking an inappropriate vehicle around a
track at high speed and not loosing it. A skill that was simply
demonstrated when a real racing driver took the "Star in a reasonably
price car" around the Top Gear track and got the best time ever, in
spite of some of the opposition being very much 'into' cars.

All the best ..

T i m

In article ws.net,
Doctor Evil wrote:
I mean. how often do you need to carry family or friends?

Good observation. The percentage of time that only onen person is in a
car is way into the 90s.

Then for your town car, you get a Smart. Half the price and half the size.
Can carry two people too. And it uses less fuel. Better residuals too.

A win win win win situation. I'm surprised you never thought of it.

--
*Pentium wise, pen and paper foolish *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ws.net,
Doctor Evil wrote:
When running on the engine it also turns a genny which also power
the electric motor too, which assists in propelling the car along
with the engine. The engine is specifically adapted for the
application.

Now let me see. The engine is directly coupled to the wheels under
some circumstances, and at the same time is running a generator which
is also supplying power to the wheels via an electric motor.

Got it in one.

You really haven't a clue, do you?

Do you mean the Prius does not do that? Tell how it works then. Give
us a clue, better still explain how it works. Now take note. Don't make
things up as you usually do.

There's no point. You just wouldn't understand. It requires some very
basic engineering knowledge. Ask a clever 10 year old to explain it to you
in simple terms.

--
*I'm really easy to get along with once people learn to worship me

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ws.net,
Doctor Evil wrote:
Mr Cranium, the Prius, the one out of the box at the local deals does NOT
have a CVT.

Then find a dealer who has new stock, fool.

--
*If all is not lost, where the hell is it?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 13:11:30 +0100, "Doctor Evil"
wrote:

The Toyota transmisison/managemnet system is brilliant. The engine can
be
powering the car and also a genny and the genny powers an electric motor
that also powers the car and erechages teh batteeuies simutanously. See
the
link on how the epicylical arragement works. Power is split depending on
demand, from 0 to 100%, from one to the other. The transmission is way
above what anyone else has come up with. There is little to it, but very
well thought out.

Quite possibly, and I applaud good / clever engineering design, but
what has that got to do with anything?

Well you are talking tech and how it works and along with Mr Cranium were
musing about batteries etc, and saying the Pruis couldn't actually work and
do what it did. Now you think it is all irrelevant.

It could you Borg nanobot
technology for all I care or Flux Capacitors
for that matter, it's the
pollutants / mile that count in the end?

It is the mpg and emissions that count, for the size of the vehicle with the
performance of cars in that class.

People just don't understand it, yet
the Prius is simpler than a normal
engine/auto trans setup.

Indeed, and my EV is simpler still, so what?

What do you mean so what?

Lith Poly, which "promise" 300 mile range on one charge. Toshiba have
developed another type which can recharge in a minute or so. So, fast
recharges for cars.

As spotted elsewhere I can't see how a
battery with a '300 mile range'
can also be "charged in 1 min" (.. ask nurse
to read that again and see if says
CHANGED ..?) (Dave made me say that) ;-)

First please do not quote a clear idiot. Regarding the 1 min re-charge
see:
http://www.toshiba.com/taec/press/dmfc_05_270.shtml

Great, I wonder how far your Prius wil get on a battery of 600mAh
cells ;-)

I don't know, but that is not the point. The point is that there is new
battery technology that is highly suited for vehicles.

Ok, let's say they actually produced a battery of this
ability the laws of physics still apply (wether you
want to accept it or not) and they are.

1) You need a certian amount of energy to accellerate (even if that's
done slowly) a mass to a speed.

2) You need a certian amount of energy to maintain that speed (wind
resistance / frictional losses)

So, if you think the Toshiba battery does not work, then have you contacted
Toshiba to tell them to stop wasting their time?

So, if you need to accellerate your Prius (whatever it weights) up to
a speed (in whatever the time) that will take Y energy. So, the
batteries needed to do that would need Y x range = Z

To charge a battery in 1 min would talke thousands of amps (don't
bother taking yer socks off) and trust me, yer domestic power supply
won't do that.

The domestic supply would trickle charge. Charging centres would zap an
auto battery in a few minutes. Using existing battery technology, batteries
can only absorb so much brake regen and much energy is wasted. The Toshiba
batteries promise to claw back most, if not all, of the brake regen energy.
So, this battery scores on clawing back energy, fast re-charges and promised
large energy storage

So, if you think the Toshiba battery does not work, then have you contacted
Toshiba to tell them to stop wasting their time on this?

Then ask nurse to pull the covers over. Don't guess or make things up,
or
quote ridiculous tests based on dragsters, like the looney.

;-)

Yahoo groups
have few groups on the Prius, and all the info you want is via those
peopel, who know what the Prius is all about, and NONE get 21mpg, all
average around 50mpg and above.

Great, enjoy your 50 mpg

Thank you, 55 actually and I drive mixed town and fast road. Many get over
60mpg average.

.. I'll do the same or better in any number
of much cheaper and more practical offerings?

Not in the size of the Prius you will not - remember I told you not to make
things up like the loony. And you do not have the ultra low emissions of
the Prius either, and super smooth transmission. The Prius is worth getting
for the absence of the gearbox alone. Superb drive. When on only batteries,
the drive is uncanny.

Cheaper offerings. Do the calcs. Every day in central London saving £8 a
day on congestion and parking, then the amazing mpg. Must be say £20 a day
saved @ 5 per week @ 48 weeks a year, which is £4,800 alone, then that will
be over £5K per ann. Then the cheaper servicing as the electric components
are service free. Doesn't take long to claw back the costs does it. See
why there is a waiting list?

Do a Google on the Prius, there is lots out there, explaining its
operation.

You might find this artical interesting though ..

http://www.zyra.org.uk/battery.htm

Not bad, but out of date with nothing on Lith Poly, from what I initially
saw, and the new Toshiba, of which you only got to know from me. The point
is that battery technology over the past few years has really come along,
and shows strong signs of changing the propulsion units in cars to electric
drive of some sort. More work on lighter bodies, more efficient motors
(some scope left in this) and batteries (promises a hell of alot) and the
stdard production all electric EV car is not that far off.