Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Clive" wrote in message
...
In message , Steve Firth
writes
Clive wrote:
In message , Steve Firth
writes
Someone pedalled an aircraft across the Channel in 1977,
I remember Gossamer Albatross crossing the channel under pedal
power, I didn't realise it was so long ago. Didn't they win a
prize that had been outstanding for about 50 years?

Yes, they did and as mentioned the same designer/team created another
"gossamer" which flew powered by solar cells from Paris to London. An
incredible feat but not one that leads to viable electric powered
aircraft.
Please don't put me in a class of D. Drivel & Co.

You never could be as I am pure class.

Yes, 100% pure lower class.

On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 13:42:12 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Phil Bradshaw wrote:
Doctor Drivel wrote:

The epicyclical cluster shares power

The gearbox then.

Dribble obviously doesn't understand that cluster in this case means 'gear
cluster'. How he wriggles and squirms. If he were more intelligent he
might be a troll.

I suppose that his argument is that the Primus doesn't have a gearbox
of the type that a conventional IC car does - i.e. a box with gears
where the ratio from one side to the other (engine to axle) is changed
by means of of a manual control or automatic mechanism.

Looking at it from the perspective of a user who never opens the
bonnet, the control on a Pius is basically the same as an automatic
conventional car - forwards, backwards and stop, although it doesn't
seem to have an "L" setting.

However, it does have a box of tricks containing gears which serves to
match the speed and torque characteristics of the power sources with
the requirement of the car on the road and between the power sources.
In that sense, it can be called a gearbox.

ISTM, that the terminologies used by the manufacturer like "CVT" and
all the rest of it are just there as marketing-speak to position the
car differently to others to the impressionable, while creating
technobabble for those who are into that.


--

..andy

On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 13:47:57 -0000, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


"Clive" wrote in message
...
In message ews.net,
Doctor Drivel writes
The Prius is averaging 66mpg UK Official US gov figures. No contest.
Wrong again. It was revealed a few nights ago on ABC evening news that
the mpg figure were obtained in a shed on a rolling road at 54mph with no
rolling resistance and no wind resistance and all drains on the engine
neglected. Because so many people complained about unrealistic
government figures, they changed to real life tests and the Prius is now
officially 37.3 US mpg.

Nope. I gave you the figures.

How do you explain this?

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/...-ratings_x.htm




--

..andy

Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Steve Firth" wrote in message
...
Clive wrote:
In message , Steve Firth
writes
Someone pedalled an aircraft across the Channel in 1977,
I remember Gossamer Albatross crossing the channel under pedal power,
I didn't realise it was so long ago. Didn't they win a prize that
had been outstanding for about 50 years?

Yes, they did and as mentioned the same designer/team created another
"gossamer" which flew powered by solar cells from Paris to London. An
incredible feat but not one that leads to viable electric powered
aircraft.

They said that about Porches hybrids. Now we have them.

Which Porsche hybrid is on the market?

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
...

I suppose that his argument is that the
Primus doesn't have a gearbox
of the type that a conventional IC
car does - i.e. a box with gears
where the ratio from one side to
the other (engine to axle) is changed
by means of of a manual control
or automatic mechanism.

Matt, yep. You are one of the brighter one on this thread so far as you
have actually figured out what a gear box does to some degree.

However, it does have a box of
tricks containing gears which serves to
match the speed and torque characteristics
of the power sources with the requirement
of the car on the road and between the power sources.
In that sense, it can be called a gearbox.

Nope. Not an in-line gearbox as per normal awful crock cars, as the loonies
here think it is. It is a 'power splitter', and does what it says. It
works in parallel combining the power of two motors presenting them as one
to the wheels.

ISTM, that the terminologies used by
the manufacturer like "CVT" and
all the rest of it are just there as
marketing-speak to position the
car differently to others to the
impressionable, while creating
technobabble for those who are
into that.

yep. If you say it doesn't have a gearbox people will think they are being
cheated out of something, when infact eliminated that thing is a great thing
to do.

Matt, you did very well, so 7/10.

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 13:47:57 -0000, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


"Clive" wrote in message
...
In message ews.net,
Doctor Drivel writes
The Prius is averaging 66mpg UK Official US gov figures. No contest.
Wrong again. It was revealed a few nights ago on ABC evening news that
the mpg figure were obtained in a shed on a rolling road at 54mph with
no
rolling resistance and no wind resistance and all drains on the engine
neglected. Because so many people complained about unrealistic
government figures, they changed to real life tests and the Prius is now
officially 37.3 US mpg.

Nope. I gave you the figures.

How do you explain this?

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/...-ratings_x.htm

Bush is attempting ridicule so his string lifters can sell more oil.

"Steve Firth" wrote in message
...
Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Steve Firth" wrote in message
...
Doctor Drivel wrote:

I have no time for arrogant pretentious snotty uni people.

Good to see you admitting that you don't have a degree.

I have one, from a poper uni, not a snot.

You attended a Catholic university?

I didn't know they existed.

"Steve Firth" fresh from kicking **** wrote in
message ...
Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Clive" wrote in message
...
In message , Steve Firth
writes
Clive wrote:
In message , Steve Firth
writes
Someone pedalled an aircraft across the Channel in 1977,
I remember Gossamer Albatross crossing the channel under pedal power,
I didn't realise it was so long ago. Didn't they win a prize that
had been outstanding for about 50 years?

Yes, they did and as mentioned the same designer/team created another
"gossamer" which flew powered by solar cells from Paris to London. An
incredible feat but not one that leads to viable electric powered
aircraft.
Please don't put me in a class of D. Drivel & Co.

You never could be as I am pure class.

Yes, 100% pure lower class.

the wit flows forth.

"Steve Firth" wrote in message
...
Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Steve Firth" wrote in message
...
Clive wrote:
In message , Steve Firth
writes
Someone pedalled an aircraft across the Channel in 1977,
I remember Gossamer Albatross crossing the channel under pedal power, I
didn't realise it was so long ago. Didn't they win a prize that had
been outstanding for about 50 years?

Yes, they did and as mentioned the same designer/team created another
"gossamer" which flew powered by solar cells from Paris to London. An
incredible feat but not one that leads to viable electric powered
aircraft.

They said that about Porches hybrids. Now we have them.

Which Porsche hybrid is on the market?

You are slow. very slow.

In message ews.net,
Doctor Drivel writes

"Clive" wrote in message
...
In message
enews.net, Doctor
Drivel writes
The Prius is averaging 66mpg UK Official US gov figures. No contest.
Wrong again. It was revealed a few nights ago on ABC evening news
that the mpg figure were obtained in a shed on a rolling road at
54mph with no rolling resistance and no wind resistance and all
drains on the engine neglected. Because so many people complained
about unrealistic government figures, they changed to real life tests
Prius is now officially 37.3 US mpg.

Nope. I gave you the figures.
You mean the WRONG figures, boy are you dumb.
--
Clive

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
...
How do you explain this?

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/...-ratings_x.htm

Matt, driving conditions in the US are very different to here. They have
more long faster straight roads. The Prius is counter intuitive. It return
more in stop start traffic than on a motorway. British urban driving will
produce far high mpg. BTW, US gallons are smaller than UK.

"Clive" wrote in message
news
In message ews.net,
Doctor Drivel writes

"Clive" wrote in message
...
In message ews.net,
Doctor Drivel writes
The Prius is averaging 66mpg UK Official US gov figures. No contest.
Wrong again. It was revealed a few nights ago on ABC evening news that
the mpg figure were obtained in a shed on a rolling road at 54mph with
no rolling resistance and no wind resistance and all drains on the
engine neglected. Because so many people complained about unrealistic
government figures, they changed to real life tests Prius is now
officially 37.3 US mpg.

Nope. I gave you the figures.

You mean the WRONG figures,

The right figures. Boy are you dumb. and who has a name like Clive.

In article ,
Andy Hall wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 13:42:12 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Phil Bradshaw wrote:
Doctor Drivel wrote:

The epicyclical cluster shares power

The gearbox then.

Dribble obviously doesn't understand that cluster in this case means
'gear cluster'. How he wriggles and squirms. If he were more
intelligent he might be a troll.

I suppose that his argument is that the Primus doesn't have a gearbox
of the type that a conventional IC car does - i.e. a box with gears
where the ratio from one side to the other (engine to axle) is changed
by means of of a manual control or automatic mechanism.

But it does have a mechanism which alters the gearing betwixt petrol
engine and road wheels. And this is an automatically varying ratio - it
has to be given their is no clutch. Otherwise the engine would be driven
by the road wheels even when not in use.

Looking at it from the perspective of a user who never opens the
bonnet, the control on a Pius is basically the same as an automatic
conventional car - forwards, backwards and stop, although it doesn't
seem to have an "L" setting.

Indeed. However, on a DIY group it's not unreasonable to go beyond this
and explain how such things are achieved.

However, it does have a box of tricks containing gears which serves to
match the speed and torque characteristics of the power sources with
the requirement of the car on the road and between the power sources.
In that sense, it can be called a gearbox.

Anything which contains gears and some form of mechanical input and output
is a gearbox. It really is that simple. Anyone who says different is a
fool or charlatan. Gearboxes may also have names which further define
their function, but a gearbox they remain. Dribble seems to have latched
on to 'in line' - does a right angle gearbox therefore cease to exist?

ISTM, that the terminologies used by the manufacturer like "CVT" and
all the rest of it are just there as marketing-speak to position the
car differently to others to the impressionable, while creating
technobabble for those who are into that.

Ad speak. Something dribble certainly believes in.

--
*No word in the English language rhymes with month, orange, silver,purple

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

In article ,
Andy Hall wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 13:47:57 -0000, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


"Clive" wrote in message
...
In message ews.net,
Doctor Drivel writes
The Prius is averaging 66mpg UK Official US gov figures. No contest.
Wrong again. It was revealed a few nights ago on ABC evening news
that the mpg figure were obtained in a shed on a rolling road at
54mph with no rolling resistance and no wind resistance and all
drains on the engine neglected. Because so many people complained
about unrealistic government figures, they changed to real life
tests and the Prius is now officially 37.3 US mpg.

Nope. I gave you the figures.

How do you explain this?

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/...-ratings_x.hem

Anyone who drives a real car in the real world knows that even in the UK
the 'official' figures are only any use as a comparison between similar
vehicles. They are not what most achieve. So it doesn't take too much
imagination to produce a vehicle which is favoured by the testing methods
used - but the results not born out in practice. The Prius is a perfect
example. Autocar got an average mpg - over 1000 miles - which was pathetic
for a car of this size/weight/performance. Which goes to show fiddling one
set of 'official' figures through design ain't going to give real world
economy.

--
*The modem is the message *

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

"Dave Plowman (News)" through a haze of senile
flatulence wrote in message ...

I suppose that his argument is that
the Primus doesn't have a gearbox
of the type that a conventional IC
car does - i.e. a box with gears
where the ratio from one side to
the other (engine to axle) is changed
by means of of a manual control or
automatic mechanism.

But it does have a mechanism which
alters the gearing betwixt petrol
engine and road wheels.

Nope. The mechanism, a 'power splitter', is to vary/split the power between
two power sources (motors) and present the two to the wheels as one electric
motor (an electric motor doesn't need a gearbox) . Senile people will
difficulty understanding this.

Looking at it from the perspective of a user who never opens the
bonnet, the control on a Pius is basically the same as an automatic
conventional car - forwards, backwards and stop, although it doesn't
seem to have an "L" setting.

Indeed. However, on a DIY group it's
not unreasonable to go beyond this
and explain how such things are achieved.

Not by you, as you haven't a clue how it works, still prattling about CVT
gearboxes and other such tripe.

However, it does have a box of
tricks containing gears which serves to
match the speed and torque characteristics
of the power sources with
the requirement of the car on the road
and between the power sources.
In that sense, it can be called a gearbox.

Anything which contains gears and some
form of mechanical input and output
is a gearbox.

And the power splitter doesn't do this as it works in parallel, not series
(input, output). Some engine have a few messed cogs inside so this must be
gearbox as well - boy you are dumb. Senile people will difficulty
understanding this.

** snip senility **

ISTM, that the terminologies used by the manufacturer like "CVT" and
all the rest of it are just there as marketing-speak to position the
car differently to others to the impressionable, while creating
technobabble for those who are into that.

Ad speak.

Oh be jabbers!!! he got something right.

"Dave Plowman (News)" through a haze of senile
flatulence wrote in message ...
In article ,
Andy Hall wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 13:47:57 -0000, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


"Clive" wrote in message
...
In message ews.net,
Doctor Drivel writes
The Prius is averaging 66mpg UK Official US gov figures. No contest.
Wrong again. It was revealed a few nights ago on ABC evening news
that the mpg figure were obtained in a shed on a rolling road at
54mph with no rolling resistance and no wind resistance and all
drains on the engine neglected. Because so many people complained
about unrealistic government figures, they changed to real life
tests and the Prius is now officially 37.3 US mpg.

Nope. I gave you the figures.

How do you explain this?

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/...-ratings_x.hem

Anyone who drives a real car in the real
world

Anyone who drives a Prius in UK urban conditions will get at or near to 60
mpg. A very real figure in real world. Mine does that, and most other do
the same. Boy you are senile.

On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 15:47:03 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Andy Hall wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 13:42:12 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Phil Bradshaw wrote:
Doctor Drivel wrote:

The epicyclical cluster shares power

The gearbox then.

Dribble obviously doesn't understand that cluster in this case means
'gear cluster'. How he wriggles and squirms. If he were more
intelligent he might be a troll.

I suppose that his argument is that the Primus doesn't have a gearbox
of the type that a conventional IC car does - i.e. a box with gears
where the ratio from one side to the other (engine to axle) is changed
by means of of a manual control or automatic mechanism.

But it does have a mechanism which alters the gearing betwixt petrol
engine and road wheels. And this is an automatically varying ratio - it
has to be given their is no clutch. Otherwise the engine would be driven
by the road wheels even when not in use.

Sure. Call it what you like, but essentially it has one speed and
torque on one side and a different one on the other.

Most people, in the context of a car, would call that a gearbox.



Looking at it from the perspective of a user who never opens the
bonnet, the control on a Pius is basically the same as an automatic
conventional car - forwards, backwards and stop, although it doesn't
seem to have an "L" setting.

Indeed. However, on a DIY group it's not unreasonable to go beyond this
and explain how such things are achieved.

However, it does have a box of tricks containing gears which serves to
match the speed and torque characteristics of the power sources with
the requirement of the car on the road and between the power sources.
In that sense, it can be called a gearbox.

Anything which contains gears and some form of mechanical input and output
is a gearbox. It really is that simple. Anyone who says different is a
fool or charlatan. Gearboxes may also have names which further define
their function, but a gearbox they remain. Dribble seems to have latched
on to 'in line' - does a right angle gearbox therefore cease to exist?

This was my point. I've never studied the mechanical intricacies of
a gearbox for a transverse engine, front wheel drive car vs. an inline
one. I'm sure that the layout is different, but the principle is the
same.

If he means that the gearbox in a Prion is not the same as that for
other types of car, then that's probably true because it has to handle
the electric motor etc. as well as the petrol engine. However, at a
higher level, it is still a gearbox.




ISTM, that the terminologies used by the manufacturer like "CVT" and
all the rest of it are just there as marketing-speak to position the
car differently to others to the impressionable, while creating
technobabble for those who are into that.

Ad speak. Something dribble certainly believes in.

OK, so it's fancier than that of a conventional car. So what? As a
user, what I care about is cost of ownership, performance, usability
and perhaps comfort.

I wouldn't buy one of these because I am unconvinced about it in all
of these respects.



--

..andy

On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 14:47:51 -0000, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 13:47:57 -0000, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


"Clive" wrote in message
...
In message ews.net,
Doctor Drivel writes
The Prius is averaging 66mpg UK Official US gov figures. No contest.
Wrong again. It was revealed a few nights ago on ABC evening news that
the mpg figure were obtained in a shed on a rolling road at 54mph with
no
rolling resistance and no wind resistance and all drains on the engine
neglected. Because so many people complained about unrealistic
government figures, they changed to real life tests and the Prius is now
officially 37.3 US mpg.

Nope. I gave you the figures.

How do you explain this?

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/...-ratings_x.htm

Bush is attempting ridicule so his string lifters can sell more oil.


Oh I see. Obvious really.



--

..andy

"Dave Plowman (News)" through a haze of senile
flatulence wrote in message ...

seems to have latched
on to 'in line' - does a right angle
gearbox therefore cease to exist?

The above proves how thick this one is. In-line is a 'logical' term, not
'physical'. This is obvious to anyone with half an engineering mind. Power
through...Engine - gearbox - wheels. Simple. The whole three can
physically go up and down and be in U formations if you want, but the
'logic' of the power driveline is 'in-line'...in 'series'. Get it? Of
course he can't.

The power splitter operates in 'parallel. Senile people will have
difficulty in understanding this simple concept.

On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 15:01:53 -0000, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
.. .
How do you explain this?

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/...-ratings_x.htm

Matt, driving conditions in the US are very different to here. They have
more long faster straight roads.

Not around cities they don't. Virtually every intersection has a
stop light. Most cars have AC.



The Prius is counter intuitive. It return
more in stop start traffic than on a motorway. British urban driving will
produce far high mpg.

It will be interesting to see.


BTW, US gallons are smaller than UK.

Yes I do know that. Their miles are the same though.


To be fair, all of the cars mentioned in the article had worse real
world figures than the standard test ones.

As was pointed out, the tests were designed decades ago when car and
engine technology was quite different as well as patterns of use.

Manufacturers have been less than honest in optimising their products
for the tests rather than pratical use.

It will be interesting to see what the figures are like when the tests
are revised.

I suspect that there will be new firmware for engine management
systems to optimise for these tests.


--

..andy

On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 16:22:30 -0000, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


Anyone who drives a Prius in UK urban conditions will get at or near to 60
mpg. A very real figure in real world. Mine does that, and most other do
the same. Boy you are senile.


What colour is it?



--

..andy

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
...
On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 15:47:03 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Andy Hall wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 13:42:12 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Phil Bradshaw wrote:
Doctor Drivel wrote:

The epicyclical cluster shares power

The gearbox then.

Dribble obviously doesn't understand that cluster in this case means
'gear cluster'. How he wriggles and squirms. If he were more
intelligent he might be a troll.

I suppose that his argument is that the Primus doesn't have a gearbox
of the type that a conventional IC car does - i.e. a box with gears
where the ratio from one side to the other (engine to axle) is changed
by means of of a manual control or automatic mechanism.

But it does have a mechanism which alters the gearing betwixt petrol
engine and road wheels. And this is an automatically varying ratio - it
has to be given their is no clutch. Otherwise the engine would be driven
by the road wheels even when not in use.

Sure. Call it what you like, but essentially it has one speed and
torque on one side and a different one on the other.

Most people, in the context of a car, would call that a gearbox.

Only those who don't understand it.

If he means that the gearbox in a
Prion is not the same as that for
other types of car, then that's
probably true

Ah some encouragement here. Has he grasped the concept? We shall see...

because it has to handle
the electric motor etc. as well as
the petrol engine.

It is merges/splits power between two power source which are in parallel.
The cluster is a control mechanism to merge the two and present to the
wheels an electric motor. Notice that: after the two motors are merged by
the power splitter, there is no in-line gearbox between it and the wheels.
Why? because the power splitter combined the two motors to give to the
wheels the characteristics of one electric motor (electric motors don't
require gearboxes)

OK, so it's fancier than that of a conventional car. So what? As a
user, what I care about is cost of ownership, performance, usability
and perhaps comfort.

I wouldn't buy one of these because I am unconvinced about it in all
of these respects.

You have never seen one.

Cost of ownership: very low
Performance: average and competes with similar sized cars
Usability: size of Avensis
Comfort: Very and joy to drive, being silent to very quiet.

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
...
On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 14:47:51 -0000, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


"Andy Hall" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 13:47:57 -0000, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


"Clive" wrote in message
...
In message ews.net,
Doctor Drivel writes
The Prius is averaging 66mpg UK Official US gov figures. No contest.
Wrong again. It was revealed a few nights ago on ABC evening news
that
the mpg figure were obtained in a shed on a rolling road at 54mph with
no
rolling resistance and no wind resistance and all drains on the engine
neglected. Because so many people complained about unrealistic
government figures, they changed to real life tests and the Prius is
now
officially 37.3 US mpg.

Nope. I gave you the figures.

How do you explain this?

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/...-ratings_x.htm

Bush is attempting ridicule so his string lifters can sell more oil.

Oh I see. Obvious really.

Matt, Yep.

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
...
On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 15:01:53 -0000, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
. ..
How do you explain this?

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/...-ratings_x.htm

Matt, driving conditions in the US are very different to here. They have
more long faster straight roads.

Not around cities they don't. Virtually every intersection has a
stop light. Most cars have AC.

The Prius is counter intuitive. It return
more in stop start traffic than on a motorway. British urban driving will
produce far high mpg.

It will be interesting to see.

It does.

BTW, US gallons are smaller than UK.

Yes I do know that. Their miles are the same though.

Matt, yep.

To be fair, all of the cars mentioned in the article had worse real
world figures than the standard test ones.

As was pointed out, the tests were designed decades ago when car and
engine technology was quite different as well as patterns of use.

Manufacturers have been less than honest in optimising their products
for the tests rather than pratical use.

Well they all drop down together at the same rate, and the Prius still beat
them hands down.

Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Steve Firth" wrote in message
...
Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Steve Firth" wrote in message
...
Doctor Drivel wrote:

I have no time for arrogant pretentious snotty uni people.

Good to see you admitting that you don't have a degree.

I have one, from a poper uni, not a snot.

You attended a Catholic university?

I didn't know they existed.

So much you don't know. So little you do know. BA in your case means
bugger all.

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 16:22:30 -0000, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


Anyone who drives a Prius in UK urban conditions will get at or near to 60
mpg. A very real figure in real world. Mine does that, and most other do
the same. Boy you are senile.

What colour is it?

Does tye colour give more mpg?

Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Steve Firth" wrote in message
...
Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Steve Firth" wrote in message
...
Clive wrote:
In message , Steve Firth
writes
Someone pedalled an aircraft across the Channel in 1977,
I remember Gossamer Albatross crossing the channel under pedal
power, I didn't realise it was so long ago. Didn't they win a
prize that had been outstanding for about 50 years?

Yes, they did and as mentioned the same designer/team created
another "gossamer" which flew powered by solar cells from Paris to
London. An incredible feat but not one that leads to viable electric
powered aircraft.

They said that about Porches hybrids. Now we have them.

Which Porsche hybrid is on the market?

You are slow. very slow.

So is the Prius. Now remind me, just how many hybrid cars do Porsche sell?

"Steve Firth" wrote in message
...
Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Steve Firth" wrote in message
...
Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Steve Firth" wrote in message
...
Clive wrote:
In message , Steve Firth
writes
Someone pedalled an aircraft across the Channel in 1977,
I remember Gossamer Albatross crossing the channel under pedal power,
I didn't realise it was so long ago. Didn't they win a prize that
had been outstanding for about 50 years?

Yes, they did and as mentioned the same designer/team created another
"gossamer" which flew powered by solar cells from Paris to London. An
incredible feat but not one that leads to viable electric powered
aircraft.

They said that about Porches hybrids. Now we have them.

Which Porsche hybrid is on the market?

You are slow. very slow.

So is

You are also very silly too.

John Wright wrote:
I suspect the car type CVT most people are familiar with
would contain pulleys and belts

Most old people are more familiar with bicycle epicyclic gearboxes
which bear a surprising resemblance to the drive train of a Prius,
complete with chain.

Regards
Capitol,

In message ews.net,
Doctor Drivel writes
BTW, US gallons are smaller than UK.
My word, this mans bright, next he'll be telling us that a US pint is
smaller than a UK one.
--
Clive

Steve Firth wrote:

Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Steve Firth" wrote in message
...
Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Steve Firth" wrote in message
...
Clive wrote:
In message , Steve Firth
writes
Someone pedalled an aircraft across the Channel in 1977,
I remember Gossamer Albatross crossing the channel under pedal
power, I didn't realise it was so long ago. Didn't they win a
prize that had been outstanding for about 50 years?

Yes, they did and as mentioned the same designer/team created
another "gossamer" which flew powered by solar cells from Paris to
London. An incredible feat but not one that leads to viable electric
powered aircraft.

They said that about Porches hybrids. Now we have them.

Which Porsche hybrid is on the market?

You are slow. very slow.

So is the Prius. Now remind me, just how many hybrid cars do Porsche sell?

About as many Prius without a gearbox at a guess.

As an aside, I wonder if anyone at Toyota realises what /prius/ means. Maybe
they do, as in /prius visum/.

Doctor Drivel wrote:
"Alistair J Murray" wrote in message
...

[...]

Cross-country journeys of more than 300miles mostly.

A Prius will do that no problem and return superb mpg.

But in *far* less comfort.

[...]

95% of people in the UK fall in line with the Prius.

Yet 99.9% don't buy one...

Because most have never heard of it....yet.

Even those who've heard of it very, very rarely buy one.

[...]

My current car can transport me and my passengers across continents
without strain at average speeds greater than the Pius's maximum
in complete comfort...

So can the Prius and use les fuel and pollute less. Prius max speed
100mph. You are thick.

On a recent journey through Germany I averaged ~140mph.

Averaging over 100mph is not difficult.

My current car can overtake very quickly, and therefore safely, on
SC trunk roads...

So can a Prius.

A Prius does 50-70mph in 7.9s, my car takes 2.5s; much safer.

My current car can corner at 1G, reducing wasteful braking...

Prius braking is regen and charges athe battery.

Just as well since it has to slow so much for corners.



A

In article ,
Andy Hall wrote:
Anything which contains gears and some form of mechanical input and
output is a gearbox. It really is that simple. Anyone who says
different is a fool or charlatan. Gearboxes may also have names which
further define their function, but a gearbox they remain. Dribble seems
to have latched on to 'in line' - does a right angle gearbox therefore
cease to exist?

This was my point. I've never studied the mechanical intricacies of
a gearbox for a transverse engine, front wheel drive car vs. an inline
one. I'm sure that the layout is different, but the principle is the
same.

I've asked dribble for an explanation of what he considers an 'in line'
gearbox since he considers it crucial that the Prius hasn't got one but of
course got nowhere. My guess would be one where the input and output
shafts are in line. Like on a conventional rear wheel drive car. But not,
of course, on many front wheel drive designs. And anyway has nothing to do
with being a gearbox.

If he means that the gearbox in a Prion is not the same as that for
other types of car, then that's probably true because it has to handle
the electric motor etc. as well as the petrol engine. However, at a
higher level, it is still a gearbox.

It's very similar to part of the gear train in a 'conventional' auto -
except that the ring gear isn't just allowed to rotate freely or locked
stationary.

ISTM, that the terminologies used by the manufacturer like "CVT" and
all the rest of it are just there as marketing-speak to position the
car differently to others to the impressionable, while creating
technobabble for those who are into that.

Ad speak. Something dribble certainly believes in.

OK, so it's fancier than that of a conventional car.

But with a poor IC engine. Toyota soon realised this as they use a
conventional design more successfully on another model.

So what? As a user, what I care about is cost of ownership,
performance, usability and perhaps comfort.

Indeed.

I wouldn't buy one of these because I am unconvinced about it in all
of these respects.

Unlike dribble, I have driven one, and although it has merits on short
town journeys the overall driving experience is poor - as is the overall
running costs.

--
*If God dropped acid, would he see people?

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

In article ,
Andy Hall wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 16:22:30 -0000, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


Anyone who drives a Prius in UK urban conditions will get at or near to
60 mpg. A very real figure in real world. Mine does that, and most
other do the same. Boy you are senile.


What colour is it?

Autocar who measure carefully the mpg of their cars on test - not relying
on the OBC or makers figures - got 42 mpg on their urban test route. About
the same as a BMW 330D which out performs the Prius in every way. Go to a
car which matches the performance of the Prius and it uses less fuel. Oh -
and costs much less.

--
*I yell because I care

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

In article ,
Steve Firth wrote:
Good to see you admitting that you don't have a degree.

I have one, from a poper uni, not a snot.

You attended a Catholic university?

I didn't know they existed.

Dribble finds it easy to claim many things on here. But refuses to give
any proof. Draw your own conclusions - near everyone else on here has.
He's simply a liar.

--
*When it rains, why don't sheep shrink? *

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

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Steve Firth wrote:
Good to see you admitting that you don't have a degree.

I have one, from a poper uni, not a snot.

You attended a Catholic university?

I didn't know they existed.

Dribble finds it easy to claim many things on here. But refuses to give
any proof. Draw your own conclusions - near everyone else on here has.
He's simply a liar.

Oh. I thought he was a Hamilton.

On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 10:07:52 +0000, John Wright wrote:

On Sat, 14 Jan 2006 23:14:46 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jan 2006 17:15:46 +0000, Clive wrote:

In message ews.net,
Doctor Drivel writes
But diesels are noisy and filthy emitting soot - so a no. no.
Ever thought you could be wrong. Soot is visible, but unburned and
therefore not causing harmful CO2 and not invisible like the harmful
PM10s produced by all engines.

It is however a n irritant and very nasty carcinogen. I WISH they would put
cats on diesels.

You probably need both a cat and a particulate filter.

Yep. But I thought that a red hot cat oxidised the carbons anyway.

On Sat, 14 Jan 2006 23:47:55 +0000, Steve Firth wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

I am not here to win the arguments. I am here to tell you what I know,
because I thought you might be interested, and to listen to what others
say, because I am interested. Except Drivel of coures - after an agonising
30 seconds when I balanced the amusement of watching his dribbles, against
the waste of time responding to them, I kill filed him.

I'll end up kill filing you if you keep insisting that your experience
with building models scales to automotive use.


It does.
In certain respects.

watts per pound doesn;t vary from a big battery to a small one. Overall
motors scale was well - 100bhp per liter is good in a car, and good on a
1cc glo engine. And so on.

Kill filed and be damned, if you can't answer the points with more than
blanket assertions.

The Tzero USED model aircaft batteries in the prototype IIRC.

It ran, it did its 140mph, its shattering acceleration and its 200 mile
range.

Shame they didn't talk to YOU first, or they would never have
bothered...;0-)

Of course things change when you scale up. Surface area to volume as you
said - but there is no reason not to mount small cells in stacked plates
with airgaps in between, and the step up from a couple of kilowatts to 50
or 60KW is not that huge a step.

Particularly when the car will never be using anything LIKE the peak rates
and therefore heating, as we do. Remember heating goes up as the SQUARE of
the current (assuming losses are approxinmately resistive, which they are)

Cars don't need to achieve 60mph vertical flight capability. 60 along the
ground perhaps...

Herss some fun reading...not yet scaled up ceratinly..
http://alt-e.blogspot.com/2005/04/al...y-toshiba.html

Lithium cells have a theoretical energy desnity of 350Wh per kg...and
already up to half that or more has been achieved.

Thst nothing to dop with the size, since the amount of enbergy available in
electrocehnmical reactis froka kilo of lithium salts is a constant.

the smaller cells are safe to under 3 minute discharge, although lifetime
is compromised. It is inconceivable that a vehicle would discharge - except
in competition - a full battery in less than an hour. Thats 20 times less
current - 400 times less heating - than in a far more demanding RC plane
environment.


At around 5 minute disharges, a power train power to weight of 800W/lb, or
about 2000 bhp per tonne is achievable ..falling top abouit half that in a
complete vehicle. Again the scaling shows that this is an achievable
factor when going upscale in both battery and motor technology. With the
battery being about 80%of the powertrain weight, going to one hour
discharge allows but 40W/lb...say 100bhp per ton. On a similar sized
battery (but smaller motor) system. Very crude mental arithemetic.

The batteries and the motors exist to do what needs to be done to get a 200
mile range car that will top 100mph. With a power to weight as good as or
better than a normal car.

What sdoesn;t exist is commercial product at a competive price, or a sub 5
munute recharge time in larger sized batteries,

Or a cheap way to generate electricity without using fossil fuels.

All of these do exist in potential though. Nuclear power stations, 1 minute
recharge batteries and lower cost batteries are all happing now.

On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 13:30:08 +0000, Steve Firth wrote:

Doctor Drivel wrote:

I have no time for arrogant pretentious
snotty uni people.

Good to see you admitting that you don't have a degree.

Oh he's getting at me, because I think he's a ******, and I did.

On Sat, 14 Jan 2006 23:45:05 +0000, Steve Firth wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jan 2006 20:20:03 +0000, Steve Firth wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On Sun, 8 Jan 2006 18:33:41 +0000, Simon Hobson wrote:

On Fri, 6 Jan 2006 10:45:26 +0000, Doctor Drivel wrote
(in message ews.net):

Electric planes have flow. Diesel electric planes with inboard genny and
light electric motors on the wings have flow.
Which is irrelevant, they have an IC engine, but use an electric transmission
instead of direct drive - it's nothing like having stored electric energy !

I'd say you COULD get a lightplane up on batteries, with about a
hundred miles or so range - maybe a bit more.
Mmmm. Not going to get very far from Heathrow, then...
100 miles.
Nothing like it. Start by taking a minimum of 30mins reserve off the flying
time - that's just for flight in good visual conditions.
Mm. I'll give you that one.

Someone HAS actually strapped teh biggest RCaircraft electricmotor - I
think about 10KW - to a small glider and stuffed an amazingly expesbnive
LIPO pack in it and actually flown it - I can't remember if it took off
though. Migt have been catapult or tow launched..
Someone pedalled an aircraft across the Channel in 1977, and in 1981 an
aircraft from the same designer covered 163 miles on solar power. So one
would rather expect the sky to be full of pedal powered and solar
powered aircraft, if one applied your bizarre logic.

Pleas desist from putting words in my mouth. I merely noted a technical
feasibility. I never said that electric planes would ever be more than
extremely short haul ones, and probably never economically viable.
It was merely a note in passing, that electric planes - full size ones -
have been tried, and worked. It was purely experimental, and will probably
never catch on. OK?

Good, the scales are falling from your eyes, now admit that you were
wrong about Lithium batteries and your redemption will be complete.

Well whether I am wrond fepend on waht you claimn I actually said.
In essence I said

1/. Lithium batteries are technically adequate to match an IC engine in
performance, weight, cycle time and range in BEV applications.
2/. They COULD be used to power aircraft, but that is a more quirky and
experimental use, and te figures don't stack up for commercial usage.
3/. I have never claimed that a suitable large sacle production traction
battery exists at an affordable price at this moment in time
4/. I do claim that such WILL exist in the not too distant future. The
problems are more of development than design at this point.
5/. I have consistently asserted that this makes no real sense in economic,
or environmental terms UNLESS a large scale use of non fossil fuel power
generation, and cheaper prices than fiossil fuels rise to, is implemented.
6/. I have also asserted that whilst stengthening of electrical
distribution would be needed - this is not a huge technical issue, and te
costs involved are no worse than building a substation for e.g. a new town
here and there.
6/. I have laose attempted top establish that teh technical issues to do
wuth supplying fast charge points are not iunsurmountable and
7/. the majority of short haul traffic has enough power coming into their
homes to recharge overnight, on cheap rates, and with very little
infrastrucure adiition being requried. Only those travelling more than 200
miles would NEED fast charging anyway.
8/. The area where BEV shows the best efficiency, is in short haul urban
situations. This is also where on-street pollutiuon is at its worst.
9/. I have consistently claimed that the cells used in RC aircraft are
operated at far harder demand levels than a BEV, and that they do indeed
show up as being reliable enough, light enough and powerful enough under
that abuse to strongly suggest that at far more modest drains per unit
capacity, at the very worst, BEV relaibility and efficiency would BE NO
WORSE than the already adequate figures we achieve.
10/. I have posted URLS to a site where people are assembling the data on
what we can lay or hands on. In case you felt that one 'liar' was not
enough and you wanted more ;-) those guys are NOT associated with any
company, they have no reason to lie. They simply fly the pants off, and run
tests on, lithium cells.

As a professional ex engineer, with a better qualification in electrical
science than probably anyone else here, and I can post you a scan of my
degree in it if you like, I have tried to be balanced, accurate, restrict
my extraploations to known data using sensible techniques of extrapolation.

I ahve not claimed that BEVS will enlarge your peni,t save the whales,
restore natural harmony and balance to your sex life, or take a rocket to
the moon.

Merely that a perfectly adequate BEV car using adapations of existing
technology will (unlike the Prius)(be avialable, and *worth having*, in
probably 2-4 years. AND if oil prices keep going up, and we are forced to
take the nuclear route, is not only the BEST alternative, but possibly the
ONLY alternative achievable in the timescales, to replace the IC engine in
MOST (but not all) of existing vehicle applications.

The reason I have belaboured the point is not to win an argument of and by
itself, it is to wake people up to the fact that when oil and petrol hit
silly prices, they don't go charging down the 'hydrogen economy' route -
which is likely a dead end in more ways than one, and do realise that just
because a sinclair C5 is about as much use as Drivels dick up your arse,
doesn't mean that BEV's are fundamentally flawed as a concept,.

They are not. but they are a few years away in practical terms.