I need pic 16c84 or any with EEProm so that i could start my work. I
am new to this pic world. But the problem is that the chip is not
available in Pakistan.
Is there any one on the list who can send me the chip. Send me the
email about the cost.
Try to find a local distributor. You may get a couple of samples
free. I had written Microchip directly and they have sent me couple of
sample chips. If not use http://www.digikey.com or others.
For order in 10s or 100s quantity get a quote from sphere .....sphereKILLspam@spam@hardline.demon.co.uk
> I need pic 16c84 or any with EEProm so that i could start my work. I
> am new to this pic world. But the problem is that the chip is not
> available in Pakistan.
>
> Is there any one on the list who can send me the chip. Send me the
> email about the cost.
>
> I will be really thank full for the coopration.
>
> Sajjad Akhter
>
> sajjad.akhterKILLspamusa.net
>
I wrote for the samples to the maxim but since the long time i didnt
received any thing from them ... and now i cant wait for again :(
one thing if u can do is get samples from them and send me :))
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: Need to purchase a pic
Author: pic microcontroller discussion list <.....PICLISTKILLspam.....MITVMA.MIT.EDU> at smtpgwy
Date: 11/1/97 9:23 PM
Try to find a local distributor. You may get a couple of samples
free. I had written Microchip directly and they have sent me couple of
sample chips. If not use http://www.digikey.com or others.
For order in 10s or 100s quantity get a quote from sphere EraseMEspherespam_OUTTakeThisOuThardline.demon.co.uk
> I need pic 16c84 or any with EEProm so that i could start my work. I
> am new to this pic world. But the problem is that the chip is not
> available in Pakistan.
>
> Is there any one on the list who can send me the chip. Send me the
> email about the cost.
>
> I will be really thank full for the coopration.
>
> Sajjad Akhter
>
> sajjad.akhterspam_OUTusa.net
>
part 0 1957 bytes <META content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1 http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content='"MSHTML 4.71.1712.3"' name=GENERATOR>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2><STRONG>Hi PICListers,</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2><STRONG></FONT></STRONG> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2><STRONG>As I am in learning to program PICs, I
want to purchase small quantity of PIC 16C84-04/P </FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2><STRONG>and 16F84-04/P (each 5
pcs).</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2><STRONG></FONT><FONT size=2>Anybody can advice
me where is the place/company that I can get the above
parts</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2><STRONG>with cheaper price.Is there any Electronic's parts
shop or distributor in Hongkong that</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2><STRONG>I may purchase from them.</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2><STRONG> </FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2><STRONG>Looking forward to hearing the news from
PICListers,</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2><STRONG></FONT></STRONG> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2><STRONG>Thank you for anybody
help.</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2><STRONG></FONT></STRONG> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2><STRONG>Paul H.</STRONG></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
one lad writes in relkom.radio news:
lives on the first floor of building. On the street floor inheres a bar,
which regularly visit certain visitors. After several mugs of beer they
think great singers and wail as jackals. Lad much asks to prompt, as on the
distance 8-10 metres possible to spoil an equipment (microphones and other)
or at least create a hindrance for their work.
forgive for the bad translation.
VADIM @spam@vadKILLspamanet.lv
Vadim Jakunin wrote:
> [paraphrased: what can be done electronically to disturb a karaoke
> site eight to ten metres away?]
Not a lot. I won't give any advice to help, since I might then be an
accomplice to an illegal activity.
However, to protect yourself against this sort of attack tends to be
simple; a good balanced microphone, cable, and amplifier. If they use
two conductor jack connectors, chances are it ain't balanced. If they
use three pin cannon connectors, it is most likely balanced.
> one lad writes in relkom.radio news:
> lives on the first floor of building. On the street floor inheres a
> bar,
> which regularly visit certain visitors. After several mugs of beer
> they think great singers and wail as jackals. Lad much asks to
> prompt, as on the distance 8-10 metres possible to spoil an
> equipment (microphones and other) or at least create a hindrance for
> their work. forgive for the bad translation. VADIM RemoveMEvadTakeThisOuTanet.lv
What you need is a good Electromagnetic Pulse, say of 10 or 20
megajoules. That would fry his Karaoke machine and pretty much
everything else electronic in the general neighborhood. : ) : )
An Axe works pretty good too. : )
-- Lawrence Lile
"Nyquist was an optimist."
=> Median Filter Source Code
=> AutoCad blocks for electrical drafting
Nothing is as good as an old oil furnace ignitor unit mounted in a small
box (insulated) with a power cord, plugged into an outlet on the same
circuit as the amps (long wires preferred), with its own spark gap in the
box (adjust for long sparks) imho. Hehehe. I think it's even legal. Let
them find the circuit.
> Nothing is as good as an old oil furnace ignitor unit mounted in a
> small box (insulated) with a power cord, plugged into an outlet on
> the same circuit as the amps (long wires preferred), with its own
> spark gap in the box (adjust for long sparks) imho. Hehehe. I think
> it's even legal. Let them find the circuit.
>
> Peter
I use one of those in my Rube-Goldberg-Frankenstein Brownout and
Noise generator. My boss makes me hook PICs up to it to see if
regular noise will make them puke. It's also got:
SCR lamp dimmers
DC motors
Universal motors
Chattering relays
Won't stop a PIC with a brownout circuit at all!
-- Lawrence Lile
"Nyquist was an optimist."
=> Median Filter Source Code
=> AutoCad blocks for electrical drafting
There was a time that I was laid up after a car accident.
I discovered that my upstairs neighbor liked to practice his gitaur music,
which he certainly needed to do.
I also discovered that when I talked on the local repeater using my 2 meter
rig and 160W amplifier, he would, for some reason, stop practicing rather
abruptly, with a loud thumping noise.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.5.5
Comment: Trust them, they're from the government! (NOT!)
> What you need is a good Electromagnetic Pulse, say of 10 or 20
> megajoules. That would fry his Karaoke machine and pretty much
> everything else electronic in the general neighborhood. : ) : )
I think that's less than practical. I prefer to consider the
possibilities of creative use of a welding transformer judiciously
applied to the respective fuse box. IOW, boost the mains voltage to
180 or so for a few minutes. Subtle.
--
Cheers,
Paul B.
> Nothing is as good as an old oil furnace ignitor unit mounted in a
> small box (insulated) with a power cord, plugged into an outlet on the
> same circuit as the amps (long wires preferred), with its own spark
> gap in the box (adjust for long sparks) imho.
Memory tells me you're really "hot" on that furnace igniter!
--
Cheers,
Paul B.
Paul B. Webster VK2BZC wrote:
>
> Lawrence Lile wrote:
>
> > What you need is a good Electromagnetic Pulse, say of 10 or 20
> > megajoules. That would fry his Karaoke machine and pretty much
> > everything else electronic in the general neighborhood. : ) : )
>
> I think that's less than practical. I prefer to consider the
> possibilities of creative use of a welding transformer judiciously
> applied to the respective fuse box. IOW, boost the mains voltage to
> 180 or so for a few minutes. Subtle.
> --
> Cheers,
> Paul B.
IMHO: We need a good saying, something equivalent to the old saying,
"Only a fool would bring a knife to a gun fight."
Something like:
"Only a *moron* would seriously piss off any engineer!"
At 16:26 12/21/98 -0800, Mark Willis wrote:
> IMHO: We need a good saying, something equivalent to the old saying,
>
> "Only a fool would bring a knife to a gun fight."
>
> Something like:
>
> "Only a *moron* would seriously piss off any engineer!"
i don't know... to me, the better analogy is "only a fool would bring
anything less to seriously piss off an engineer than another engineer" :-)
Gerhard Fiedler wrote:
>
> At 16:26 12/21/98 -0800, Mark Willis wrote:
> > IMHO: We need a good saying, something equivalent to the old saying,
> >
> > "Only a fool would bring a knife to a gun fight."
> >
> > Something like:
> >
> > "Only a *moron* would seriously piss off any engineer!"
>
> i don't know... to me, the better analogy is "only a fool would bring
> anything less to seriously piss off an engineer than another engineer" :-)
>
> ge
Good point <G> We never rub each other the wrong way here, do we?
<G> So long as we end up on each others' right side...
"Smart people stay on the good side of all engineers they know!" ? ?
<G>
Hey, have a good holiday, all. I need to go get a tree today, should
be FUN as the van's down, it'll be a good walk for me.
> Memory tells me you're really "hot" on that furnace igniter!
Why would that be ? When I was in need of HV for sick experiments I used
2 cascaded HOT transformers w. separate secondary and a few cascades. I
think I reached 90kV a few times ? ;)
>Nothing is as good as an old oil furnace ignitor unit mounted in a
>small
>box (insulated) with a power cord, plugged into an outlet on the same
>circuit as the amps (long wires preferred), with its own spark gap in
>the
>box (adjust for long sparks) imho. Hehehe. I think it's even legal.
>Let
>them find the circuit.
>
>Peter
>
___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
> I beleive spark gap telegraphy was banned internationally around 1938.
> If you aren't using it to communicate though...
If it was not then, then the current FCC RFI rules buried it, but oil
furnaces use it all the time...
BTW, am I the only one to notice that the *first* demonstrations of radio
wireless communication used a spark gap transmitter AND receiver, worked
somewhere in VHF (probably around our FM bands of today, or higher,
judging from the dipole sizes), and used NO semiconductors, let alone
valves ? (H. Hertz). That much for advanced technology.
Peter L. Peres wrote:
> BTW, am I the only one to notice that the *first* demonstrations of radio
> wireless communication used a spark gap transmitter AND receiver, worked
> somewhere in VHF (probably around our FM bands of today, or higher,
> judging from the dipole sizes), and used NO semiconductors, let alone
> valves ? (H. Hertz). That much for advanced technology.
> Peter
And Tesla invented radio control and flourescent lights and free
broadcast power for a society he thought was altruistic etc.
Strange that Edison appears to be so popular in the USA still.
--
Steam engines may be out of fashion, but when you consider that an
internal combustion engine would require recovery of waste heat by
transfer just before top dead centre then fashion becomes rather
redundant, USE STRATIFIED HEAT EXCHANGERS ! and external combustion.
You heard it first from: Graham Daniel, managing director of Electronic
Product Enhancements.
Phone NZ 04 387 4347, Fax NZ 04 3874348, Cellular NZ 021 954 196.
> When I was in need of HV for sick experiments I used 2 cascaded HOT
> transformers w. separate secondary and a few cascades. I think I
> reached 90kV a few times ? ;)
How did you measure it? I've noticed the amateur HV sites on the web.
You could have a lot of fun with a recycled X-ray machine!
--
Cheers,
Paul B.
On Sun, 27 Dec 1998, Paul B. Webster VK2BZC wrote:
> Hello Peter.
>
> > When I was in need of HV for sick experiments I used 2 cascaded HOT
> > transformers w. separate secondary and a few cascades. I think I
> > reached 90kV a few times ? ;)
>
> How did you measure it? I've noticed the amateur HV sites on the web.
> You could have a lot of fun with a recycled X-ray machine!
TV service HV probe, slightly modified (2 probes in series, one shunt R).
This goes to 60 kV give or take. The monster pegged the meter connected to
this (300V) quite solidly, and I deduce from this that it went there. You
know that gut feeling you get with analog meters about how far the needle
would go if it wouldn't be stopped mechanically ? The reading was WAY over
60kV in any case.
Such a probe can be had for very little money, used, from a TV shop going
out of business.
Re: X rays: I have digged some more and found out that certain early makes
of DY86 (EHT rectifier valve for TV service) were responsible for most of
the X rays sprayed onto onlookers by early TV sets. They radiate most when
polarized BACKWARDS or driven with RF (microwave oven ?) w/o heating.
Apparently the electrons emitted by spontaneous emission in the CATHODE
hit the Thorium coated Anode hard enough to do this given enough
voltage ;).
OTOH the only reasonably accurate way to measure EHT without loading it is
a differential electrometer (chopped capacitive divider type). Lacking
this, a scope 'bare' tube w. psu will do a fine electrometer (remember the
B/E field deflection experiment in school ? - the electrodes need not be
INSIDE the tube as long as the Aquadag is far enough off ;).
Electrometer tubes can be gotten hold of, too, but a heptode will oblige
if only for low voltages. The 5th (?) grid is very well insulated and can
work wonders in cathode repeater configuration... but noval sockets will
arc violently at ~1.5kV or so.
Last let's not forget the BF245 electrometer ;) The venerable FET can be
used together with a 9V battery and a LED like in this URL:
<there should be an URL here but i lost it. plse use a web search engine
with the words 'inexpensive' 'homemade' 'electrometer' 'LED'>
Just in case you did not know, simple differential electrometers need to
be chopped to be useful, but the sky is the limit for what voltage you can
measure (literally). A simple chopper is an Al camping dish with 2 90
degrees sectors removed (or mug-bottom circles cut out - but that's
harder), stuck on the axis of a servo turning fairly slowly. It obscures a
coin that acts as sense electrode. Behind the coin there is the conductive
wall of a grounded box which is also shielding everything, and holds the
servo. The coin is installed on a piece of styrofoam about 1/2 as thick as
the distance between the box bottom and the rotating dish. This is a
fairly portable unit that can measure <g> very high voltages, including
that of clouds before a storm f.ex.. Of course the calibration depends on
the distance to the target, as well as on the potential difference.
As a sugar cube to replace the lost URL, here is my description of what it
did, and a magnetometer URL you can build on a weekend:
The FET electrometer: Take a 9V battery clip, a BF245(C) FET, and a red
LED (5mm) and a 1Meg resistor. Wire +Battery to Drain, LED Anode to
Source, LED Cathode to -Battery and leave the gate sticking up in the air.
Solder a short (2-4 in) piece of rigid straight wire to the resistor, and
the other side of it to the Gate, and use a clamp or similar device to
temporarily contact the tin body of the battery with the -Battery (this is
a handle - the battery, that is;). Stick a battery into the thing and you
are ready to go.
All the usual cat fur, Bakelite experiments etc will work. There is one
caveat: This is a unipolar instrument. Because of the FET junction that
conducts the other way around, the thing has different sensitivity for
positive and negative charges. It needs to be nulled from time to time
(touch the probe with another finger). Alternately, charge probe
negatively (light goes out), and measure opposite charges.
This may look like a toy, and is advertised as such, BUT if you use it in
the differential way with a calibration box it can measure any potential
fairly accurately. The 5Vgs0 of the BF254 is ridiculously small vs. most
HV sources and the null position can be determined very accurately.
I suppose that a VFET can be substituted with success (ex: BSS175 ?) but a
resistor is required for the LED and the gate protection diodes may come
in the way.
There is MUCH more. At least these guys are not Quacks, there is a lot to
learn from what they did, and their recipes yield useable instruments.
Don't miss the experiment with the reverse biased diode leakage on Pico's
page, it speaks volumes about everyday problems.
Has anyone had any problems with PICs they've
purchased from DIGIKEY? I ordered some p16f84-10p/ND.
They work fine at 4Mhz but when I try to run them at
10Mhz they just don't. I have some older chips that I
ordered earlier in the year and they are cranking
right along at 10 Mhz, on the same circuit, same
program. I even reprogrammed them to make sure that
I'm working with the same bits. I've checked the
config and they are set up for HS oscillators.
Thanks in advance,
m
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Free email you can access from anywhere! http://mail.yahoo.com/
Where are y'all buying hobbiest quanties of the MAX7219. I don't mind
buying 10, but at Digikey, they're still nearly $10 each (not to mention
that they don't have any DIP versions in stock). Purchasing them direct
from Maxim seems to be a much better deal ($7.xx, 1-25), but they show a 7
week wait for the DIP version.
Ah sheesh ... I missed the : on my previous post, so I'm reposting (I also
found a more appropriate tag, and am using it, too). Sorry to all that
receive this as a duplicate!
Mitch Miller wrote:
>
>Where are y'all buying hobbiest quanties of the MAX7219. I don't mind
>buying 10, but at Digikey, they're still nearly $10 each (not to mention
>that they don't have any DIP versions in stock). Purchasing them direct
>from Maxim seems to be a much better deal ($7.xx, 1-25), but they show a 7
>week wait for the DIP version.
Hobbyists probably don't use Maxim parts - they're just too durn
expensive - I always wonder who can afford to buy their stuff.
D-K seems to be the major hobbyist supplier of Maxim parts, but there
must be other guys - maybe Allied, Arrow, Future.
From what I can see on the ARROW web site http://www.arrow.com this particular IC
is reserve for large manufacturers. Arrow a fairly but there is quite a
variety of prices.
I chose Arrow as they are well represented around the world. I purchaced the
MAX1676 DC-DC converter Eval Kit from them and found it cheaper than buying
direct from Maxim. I also found that I can buy small quantities for research
and have good prices for quantities
> Mitch,
>
> You should be able to purchase Maxim Parts directly from Maxim.
>
> They have a small order department.
>
> Beats going to a deadbeat distributor who doesn't stock.
>
> Norman
>
> {Original Message removed}
Mitch Miller wrote:
>
>Where are y'all buying hobbiest quanties of the MAX7219. I don't mind
>buying 10, but at Digikey, they're still nearly $10 each (not to mention
>that they don't have any DIP versions in stock). Purchasing them direct
>from Maxim seems to be a much better deal ($7.xx, 1-25), but they show a 7
>week wait for the DIP version.
Hobbyists probably don't use Maxim parts - they're just too durn
expensive - I always wonder who can afford to buy their stuff.
D-K seems to be the major hobbyist supplier of Maxim parts, but there
must be other guys - maybe Allied, Arrow, Future.
Mitch Miller wrote:
>
>Where are y'all buying hobbiest quanties of the MAX7219. I don't mind
>buying 10, but at Digikey, they're still nearly $10 each (not to mention
>that they don't have any DIP versions in stock). Purchasing them direct
>from Maxim seems to be a much better deal ($7.xx, 1-25), but they show a 7
>week wait for the DIP version.
Hobbyists probably don't use Maxim parts - they're just too durn
expensive - I always wonder who can afford to buy their stuff.
D-K seems to be the major hobbyist supplier of Maxim parts, but there
must be other guys - maybe Allied, Arrow, Future.
I have been looking at the different PIC "BASIC" compilers and even
subscribed to some of the available lists.
The question is which is the best and most functional "BASIC" compiler
available for a user wanting to stay with the BASIC language, MPLAB and a PIC
Start Plus programmer?
I noticed that the MEL basic is already supported in the MPLAB software. Is
this indicative of the quality of their BASIC language or just because it is
more prevalent?
Any comments, suggestions or whatever welcome.
Thanks,
Ed
Dr. Edwin (Ed) A. Edmondson, P.hD.
1410 West 11th Street
Apt. 6
Alamosa, Colorado 81101-3375
Phone: 001-719-587-0130
Fax: 001-719-587-0626
E-mail: EraseMEee0035jrEraseMEaol.com
> The question is which is the best and most functional "BASIC" compiler
> available for a user wanting to stay with the BASIC language, MPLAB and a
> PIC
> Start Plus programmer?
>
Good afternoon, Ed
I am quite pleased with PIC Basic Pro and my WARP-13A programmer.
Ed - I went the same route as you looking for Basic compilers but couldnt
find one to "scrounge" to see if I got on with it.
I ended up learning by example (and there are a lot of them around on
PicList) to program in Assembler. It is suprisingly easy to pick up and
within a couple of weeks, I'd managed to design a tacho, speedometer,
interface with a LCD and get some pretty complex calculations worked out for
a thermistor based thermometer. Its a rapid learning curve (I'm a VB
programmer at heart) and some things may seem a little weird but very soon
everything starts to click into place and you're up and running.
Get a good book on Pic Assembler, give it a go - I would never look back now
and buy a copy of BASIC to program the PICs with.
I'm writing 3-4000 line programs purely in MPLAB with only a few months
behind me and its all self taught or learnt off code examples on Piclist.
Very well put Domonic, I second that. It's a somewhat steep but short
learning curve.
Make sure you have printed copies of the relevant datasheet of your
chosen PIC and keep it at hand _at all times_. When I started, I read
it once almost from cover to cover, only skipping some parts I knew
I wasn't going to use for a long, long time. I'm 18 months further down
the road, programming in C but I'm still in need for that document on
a more then daily basis.
Regards,
Claudio
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
I ended up learning by example (and there are a lot of them around on
PicList) to program in Assembler. It is suprisingly easy to pick up and
within a couple of weeks, I'd managed to design a tacho, speedometer,
interface with a LCD and get some pretty complex calculations worked out for
a thermistor based thermometer. Its a rapid learning curve (I'm a VB
programmer at heart) and some things may seem a little weird but very soon
everything starts to click into place and you're up and running.
Get a good book on Pic Assembler, give it a go - I would never look back now
and buy a copy of BASIC to program the PICs with.
I'm writing 3-4000 line programs purely in MPLAB with only a few months
behind me and its all self taught or learnt off code examples on Piclist.
Regards
Dominic
-- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads
What are the criterias I need to pay attention to when purchase a
switching power supplies adaptor ? The qty purchase could be 5000 pcs.
Any experience
to share ?
James
-- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads
1. Certification for the intended markets (safety, EMI, power factor,
efficiency, standby power, etc)
2. Input voltage/frequency range for the intended market
3. Main power plug(s) that fits the intended markets
4. Form factor, is it a wall wart, brick, etc.
5. Does it have a LED indication
6. Output voltage/current specification
7. Efficiency /Heat dissipation
8. Aesthetic
9 Cable length and DC power plug dimensions (should match the jack on
your product)
10. DC power plug shape (straight, right angle etc)
11. Regulation (input voltage variations, load variations, etc)
12. Minimum load current (should be 0ma)
13. Ripple and noise
14. Classification that will help you certify the actual product
(Limited Power Supply, Class II, etc)
15. Price (including shipping, taxes, etc) and availability
16. Warranty
17. Packaging (does it comes already packaged in a box, is it 'bulk'
etc).
18. Reputation of the manufacturer.
19. If your product is mobile, you want to consider size, weight,
folding power plug, etc.
Most reputable manufactures will be able to provide you with a detailed
spec of the power supply, much beyond the one line of description you
find in catalogs such as Jameco.
Everything Tal said, plus if the guy you buy them from wants to meet at the
pub and then takes you to a van parked outside to 'fill your order', then
you might not want to buy them ;-)
> What are the criterias I need to pay attention to when purchase a
> switching power supplies adaptor ? The qty purchase could be 5000 pcs.
> Any experience
> to share ?
>
> James
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
> [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads
>
--------------------------------------------------
Marc Nicholas Geekythings Inc. C/416.543.4896
UNIX, Database, Security and Networking Consulting
-- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads
Has anyone ever purchase anything from http://www.futurlec.com before ? I asked because I ever ordered some PIC and AVR development boards from them (about a year ago). Apparently, they update their website frequently but, they never response to my order and emails. Subsequently, I called it a quit.
A year later (which is now), I thought I give it try again and placed order for 7 copies of Silicon magazines. Again, no one seems to process my order and when I send them emails, they never respond. Fortunately, I did not order any PIC or AVR development boards I had in mind. If not, I will be extrememly disappointed.
If someone can let me know about their past experience with them, that will be great. Looks like their shop or distribution center is located in Thailand though.
Thanks in advance for the info.
cheers,
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
____________________________________________
Hello. I have ordered from Futurlec on two occasions and I
would consider my experience to be 'good', but not
'exceptional'. Both orders were small; and included PIC
development boards and a few ICs and discretes.
These orders took a few weeks to arrive, but I did receive them
without incident. I recall that I received no tracking or
direct contact information so if there had been a problem, I
don't know what I would have done. But they arrived in good
condition within a reasonable amount of time.
The dev board quality is very good. I used them for an
introductory PIC course. But they are not suitable for general
purpose development, where flexibility may be important. They
support only the 4Mhz 16F877 and are programmed through the
parallel port. But the price is good and they do perform as
advertised.
Andrew
________________________________________________
Get your own "800" number
Voicemail, fax, email, and a lot more http://www.ureach.com/reg/tag
> Hi guys,
>
> Has anyone ever purchase anything from http://www.futurlec.com before
? I asked because I ever ordered some
> PIC and AVR development boards from them (about a year ago).
Apparently, they update their website
> frequently but, they never response to my order and emails.
Subsequently, I called it a quit.
>
> A year later (which is now), I thought I give it try again and
placed order for 7 copies of Silicon
> magazines. Again, no one seems to process my order and when I
send them emails, they never respond.
> Fortunately, I did not order any PIC or AVR development boards
I had in mind. If not, I will be
> extrememly disappointed.
>
> If someone can let me know about their past experience with
them, that will be great. Looks like
> their shop or distribution center is located in Thailand
though.
>
> Thanks in advance for the info.
>
> cheers,
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection
around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> ______________________________________________
Hi,
Due to my current success with the 18F4550 and USB..... :-)
Can anyone suggest where I can purchase (cheaply?) a valid USB VID/PID
for a device I am making, I don't need and can't afford my own VID and
are hoping to buy just a PID from someone that has their own VID.
Maybe FTDI. They allocate PIDs when you use their chip in your products
and might be open to selling a block of PIDs to you..worth a shot anyway.
Madhu
>
> Hi,
> Due to my current success with the 18F4550 and USB..... :-)
>
> Can anyone suggest where I can purchase (cheaply?) a valid USB VID/PID
> for a device I am making, I don't need and can't afford my own VID and
> are hoping to buy just a PID from someone that has their own VID.
>
> regards
>
> Lee McLaren
> Howard,
>
>...
> Well, assuming you use Paypal...Paypal has a policy that the seller is only
> 'protected' if they ship to the (confirmed?) address on the transaction
> details page. Maybe you could add another address to your paypal account?
My address on my PayPal account is shown as "Unconfirmed", despite the fact that I've been using it for
several years. My address on eBay (the same address) has been Confirmed for almost as long as I've had it! I
have no idea how you get PayPal to confirm an address - their web site seems to give no clue, and as usual the
FAQ list is about as useful as a chocolate teapot...
As I can't get my actual address confirmed, it seems unlikely that I could get conformation on an address that
isn't mine!
On 1/14/06, Howard Winter <.....HDRWRemoveMEh2org.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> My address on my PayPal account is shown as "Unconfirmed", despite the
> fact that I've been using it for
> several years. My address on eBay (the same address) has been Confirmed
> for almost as long as I've had it! I
> have no idea how you get PayPal to confirm an address - their web site
> seems to give no clue, and as usual the
> FAQ list is about as useful as a chocolate teapot...
>
> As I can't get my actual address confirmed, it seems unlikely that I could
> get conformation on an address that
> isn't mine!
>
> But if anyone knows how, please let me know.
Log into your Paypal account. Click on the search box and search for
'confirmed address'.
Under Profile, Street Address there is also an "Add Address" button.
> On 1/14/06, Howard Winter <RemoveMEHDRWspamBeGoneh2org.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >...
> > As I can't get my actual address confirmed, it seems unlikely that I could
> > get conformation on an address that
> > isn't mine!
> >
> > But if anyone knows how, please let me know.
>
> Log into your Paypal account. Click on the search box and search for
> 'confirmed address'.
That wasn't as easy as it sounds - there isn't a Search box on the main screen, you have to go into Help...
> Under Profile, Street Address there is also an "Add Address" button.
Yes, but I have already added the addresses of my friends in the USA, but none of them are confirmed - there
seems to be no way to get them confirmed, either. In the Help area they say: "A confirmed address is an
address that has been reviewed by PayPal and found to be safe based on information related to the address. For
example, a credit card billing address is confirmed because PayPal can check that the address is the same as
the address on file at the credit card company."
Most UK credit card issuers won't confirm cardholders' addresses, so I suspect that's where it all stops for
me! The weird thing is that they say you can make your eBay address the same as a confirmed PayPal address,
but not the other way round.
> Most UK credit card issuers won't confirm cardholders'
> addresses, so I suspect that's where it all stops for
> me! The weird thing is that they say you can make your eBay
> address the same as a confirmed PayPal address,
> but not the other way round.
IIRC my address became confirmed after the $1 (or E1) was withdrawn from
my CC and I filled in the code number that was on the withdrawal. But
that might have been the procedure a few years ago.
Wouter van Ooijen
-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu
You have to give a credit card information for a mastercard or visa card, then Paypal withdraws a small amount of money together with a 4digit number on your creditbill. When you will fill in this 4digit number in your Paypal account the address is verified.
> > Most UK credit card issuers won't confirm cardholders'
> > addresses, so I suspect that's where it all stops for
> > me! The weird thing is that they say you can make your eBay
> > address the same as a confirmed PayPal address,
> > but not the other way round.
>
> IIRC my address became confirmed after the $1 (or E1) was withdrawn from
> my CC and I filled in the code number that was on the withdrawal. But
> that might have been the procedure a few years ago.
>
> Wouter van Ooijen
>
> -- -------------------------------------------
> Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
> consultancy, development, PICmicro products
> docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu
>
>
IIRC your confirmed address has to match your credit card billing
address. This prevents someone who has your credit card number from
shipping to another address that you are unaware of.
> <>On 1/14/06, Howard Winter <HDRWEraseMEh2org.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>>...
>>>As I can't get my actual address confirmed, it seems unlikely that I could
>>>get conformation on an address that
>>>isn't mine!
>>>
>>>But if anyone knows how, please let me know.
>>>
>>>
>>Log into your Paypal account. Click on the search box and search for
>>'confirmed address'.
>>
>>
>
>That wasn't as easy as it sounds - there isn't a Search box on the main screen, you have to go into Help...
>
>
> My address on my PayPal account is shown as "Unconfirmed",
> despite the fact that I've been using it for several years.
> My address on eBay (the same address) has been Confirmed for
> almost as long as I've had it! I have no idea how you get
> PayPal to confirm an address - their web site seems to give
> no clue, and as usual the FAQ list is about as useful as a
> chocolate teapot...
>
> As I can't get my actual address confirmed, it seems unlikely
> that I could get conformation on an address that isn't mine!
>
> But if anyone knows how, please let me know.
>
> Cheers,
>
>
> Howard Winter
> St.Albans, England
PayPal will not confirm addresses outside the USA. If they do, they have to
pay for "lost" shipments. Part of the seller protection policy.
>
> PayPal will not confirm addresses outside the USA. If they do, they have to
> pay for "lost" shipments. Part of the seller protection policy.
>
PayPal has confirmed my address which is outside USA and they give me guarantee if I pay with PayPal.
> > PayPal will not confirm addresses outside the USA. If they
> do, they have to
> > pay for "lost" shipments. Part of the seller protection policy.
> >
> PayPal has confirmed my address which is outside USA and they
> give me guarantee if I pay with PayPal.
>
> Enrico Schuerrer
> Vienna, Austria, Europe
>
Buy something from me so I can see if it shows up as a confirmed address
with /seller/ protection. <grin>
> > > PayPal will not confirm addresses outside the
> USA. If they
> > do, they have to
> > > pay for "lost" shipments. Part of the seller
> protection policy.
> > >
> > PayPal has confirmed my address which is outside
> USA and they
> > give me guarantee if I pay with PayPal.
> >
> > Enrico Schuerrer
> > Vienna, Austria, Europe
> >
>
>
> Buy something from me so I can see if it shows up as
> a confirmed address
> with /seller/ protection. <grin>
>
> ---
> James Newton: PICList webmaster/Admin
> jamesnewtonspamBeGonepiclist.com 1-619-652-0593 phone
> http://www.piclist.com/member/JMN-EFP-786
> PIC/PICList FAQ: http://www.piclist.com
>
>
James Newton, Host wrote:
>
> PayPal will not confirm addresses outside the USA. If they do, they have to
> pay for "lost" shipments. Part of the seller protection policy.
>
> ---
??
My take-
They will only confirm an address consistant with your banking and
credit card address. You can be confirmed in another country if that is
where you financials point to.
But that makes you an "international" or (insert specific country) user.
D
> > My address on my PayPal account is shown as "Unconfirmed",
> > despite the fact that I've been using it for several years.
> > My address on eBay (the same address) has been Confirmed for
> > almost as long as I've had it! I have no idea how you get
> > PayPal to confirm an address - their web site seems to give
> > no clue, and as usual the FAQ list is about as useful as a
> > chocolate teapot...
> >
> > As I can't get my actual address confirmed, it seems unlikely
> > that I could get conformation on an address that isn't mine!
> >
> > But if anyone knows how, please let me know.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> >
> > Howard Winter
> > St.Albans, England
>
> PayPal will not confirm addresses outside the USA. If they do, they have
I'm purchasing a piece of equipment (over $3k) from someone in another corner
of the U.S. and wondering if anyone has suggestions as how to protect myself,
as I don't know the seller.
Are there any types of escrow services for this thing? Or should I just send
a deposit and do the rest COD, or ...?
PicDude wrote:
> I'm purchasing a piece of equipment (over $3k) from someone in another
> corner
> of the U.S. and wondering if anyone has suggestions as how to protect
> myself,
> as I don't know the seller.
>
> Are there any types of escrow services for this thing? Or should I just
> send
> a deposit and do the rest COD, or ...?
Neil, what kind of payment options does the seller offer? If they accept
credit cards, you can do a chargeback within 6 months of purchasing the
item. PayPal also offers some kind of protection.
This is just a guy that advertised the item on a discussion forum. Not a
business. So no credit cards. Also, I spoke with Paypal earlier, and they
don't cover items unless it is from an Ebay purchase.
Cheers,
-Neil.
On Wednesday 16 August 2006 22:12, Vitaliy wrote:
> Neil, what kind of payment options does the seller offer? If they accept
> credit cards, you can do a chargeback within 6 months of purchasing the
> item. PayPal also offers some kind of protection.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Vitaliy
There are escrows, but do some background checking if you go that route.
You can put it on ebay and do a private auction thus being the only one
to have access to buy it (or "buy it now" right after he lists it) but
the ebay fees are generally large.
You can try to get some relatively indelible proof that the device works.
--
Martin K
> I'm purchasing a piece of equipment (over $3k) from someone in another corner
> of the U.S. and wondering if anyone has suggestions as how to protect myself,
> as I don't know the seller.
>
> Are there any types of escrow services for this thing? Or should I just send
> a deposit and do the rest COD, or ...?
>
> Cheers,
> -Neil.
>
>
Yeah, ebay will ream us for this. I have photos, details and a lot of
assurance, but you can never know for sure with machinery. I found
escrow.com ($101 for my transaction), but have not reports on them. Know of
any *tried and tested* escrow services?
Cheers,
-Neil.
On Wednesday 16 August 2006 22:50, Martin K wrote: {Quote hidden}
> There are escrows, but do some background checking if you go that route.
> You can put it on ebay and do a private auction thus being the only one
> to have access to buy it (or "buy it now" right after he lists it) but
> the ebay fees are generally large.
> You can try to get some relatively indelible proof that the device works.
> --
> Martin K
>
> PicDude wrote:
> > I'm purchasing a piece of equipment (over $3k) from someone in another
> > corner of the U.S. and wondering if anyone has suggestions as how to
> > protect myself, as I don't know the seller.
> >
> > Are there any types of escrow services for this thing? Or should I just
> > send a deposit and do the rest COD, or ...?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > -Neil.
My fiance and I are looking at buying a car. We both drive sub-optimal autos
(2003 Jetta GLI for me, 2005 Chevy Malibu for her) and we want to can them
both. I bus it to work everyday day, and she drives 5 miles across town. We
rarely take trips longer than 10 miles.
She owes more on her car than it's worth, but mine is paid off. We want both
a fiscal and environmental sustainability upgrade here- meaning we want to
pay less for gas and car payment and insurance, AND we don't want to be
contributing to the worsening environmental situation. We also don't want to
be stuck with a car that's going to require huge repair bills annually.
We're leaning towards a new or slightly used Prius or a new Yaris. I hate the
idea of a new car because new cars are part of the problem- building a car
takes a lot of energy. OTOH, if we keep the car for ten years, it makes
sense to get a new one.
At any rate, someone on this list has a resource that they can point me to
that will help me gauge the relative impact of these choices. I'm totally lost.
Greenercars.org seems good to me, but they completely ignore the used
car option....
Not true, you can order the ACEEE's Green Book that has car ratings for
years 1998 and 1999. The online subscription gives you access to cars from
2000 through 2006.
The latest-and-greatest ratings are available for free on the site...
Consumers Reports has an online car buyer's kit that my wife and I used.
We decided on a Honda Fit. It should be here in a couple days.
Harold
> Not true, you can order the ACEEE's Green Book that has car ratings for
> years 1998 and 1999. The online subscription gives you access to cars
> from
> 2000 through 2006.
>
> The latest-and-greatest ratings are available for free on the site...
>
>
> {Original Message removed}
Mike,
We've just bought a secondhand Echo (same as the Yaris). Very happy with it
although I was a bit sorry to see my 12year old Justy depart. The new one
appears to be even more economical, is more comfortable and generates less
smoke! In the longer term, the VVT-i engines have a timing chain, rather
than a belt, so that's an expense I don't have to worry about down the line.
(The Justy had a belt but at >220000km it hadn't been changed either!)
I thought about a Prius but it was bigger than we need as a second car and I
was a bit worried about the battery condition of the older models in my
price range. Would have created some interest here at work however! I'm not
sure on Toyota's policy on battery replacement and it appears that most of
the benifits of the hybrid depend on the sort of driving you do. I'm not
sure we would fit the optimum model.
The ratings for the older cars may be available, but there's no "derating"
presented for new vs. used.
That's my biggest bugaboo- new or used? Does it matter if I keep it for
10 years?
James is fond of saying that buying an older car that gets okay gas
mileage is better than buying a new hybrid. But what about a used
hybrid? And how used does it have to be? Is a "used" car with 2000
miles a good option, or should I just buy new at that point?
It gives me a headache.
Mike H.
On Nov 27, 2007 12:14 PM, Lucas Korytkowski <.....lucasSTOPspam@spam@rosstech.ca> wrote:
> Not true, you can order the ACEEE's Green Book that has car ratings for
> years 1998 and 1999. The online subscription gives you access to cars from
> 2000 through 2006.
>
> The latest-and-greatest ratings are available for free on the site...
On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 12:02 -0600, Mike Hord wrote:
> James, I already know what you'll say.
>
> My fiance and I are looking at buying a car. We both drive sub-optimal autos
> (2003 Jetta GLI for me, 2005 Chevy Malibu for her) and we want to can them
> both. I bus it to work everyday day, and she drives 5 miles across town. We
> rarely take trips longer than 10 miles.
>
> She owes more on her car than it's worth, but mine is paid off. We want both
> a fiscal and environmental sustainability upgrade here- meaning we want to
> pay less for gas and car payment and insurance, AND we don't want to be
> contributing to the worsening environmental situation. We also don't want to
> be stuck with a car that's going to require huge repair bills annually.
>
> We're leaning towards a new or slightly used Prius or a new Yaris. I hate the
Given the choice I'd 100% go for the Yaris.
Yes, the Prius will have marginally better mileage in the city (but not
by much in real world driving), but people often forget that first the
amount of energy and resources used to build the Prius is quite high
(compared to a "regular" car like the Yaris). Second, those batteries
will someday either have to be replaced or the car thrown away, in
either case you've got some pretty ugly materials going in the trash.
I know this is all personal opinion, but I'll throw it out here anyway.
My wife's car is a 2004 Pontiac Vibe. It's really a Toyota Matrix in terms
of all of the mechanicals, including most of the interior, except the radio.
On a fairly recent trip which required several hours of driving, it got 36
mpg (mostly highway). We went with the Vibe over the Matrix because I get a
GM supplier discount, but no Toyota discount. We wanted something big
enough to fit our three kids in the back, but most economy vehicles have
terribly small back seats. The Vibe/Matrix have a fairly roomy back seat.
The back seats fold flat, so you can carry somewhat bulky items. All Vibes
from that year came with a factory roof rack, which has come in handy a
couple of times.
Jeff
--
A clever person solves a problem.
A wise person avoids it. -- Einstein
On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 14:33 -0500, Jeff Findley wrote:
> I know this is all personal opinion, but I'll throw it out here anyway.
>
> My wife's car is a 2004 Pontiac Vibe. It's really a Toyota Matrix in terms
> of all of the mechanicals, including most of the interior, except the radio.
> On a fairly recent trip which required several hours of driving, it got 36
> mpg (mostly highway). We went with the Vibe over the Matrix because I get a
> GM supplier discount, but no Toyota discount. We wanted something big
> enough to fit our three kids in the back, but most economy vehicles have
> terribly small back seats. The Vibe/Matrix have a fairly roomy back seat.
> The back seats fold flat, so you can carry somewhat bulky items. All Vibes
> from that year came with a factory roof rack, which has come in handy a
> couple of times.
I'll second the vote for the Vibe/Matrix. I went for the Matrix because
the options I wanted were more expensive on the Vibe (moonroof, ABS,
extended warranty).
The gas mileage has been phenomenal. In the summer I actually sometimes
reach the upper 5s (L/100kms), normally I manage ~6.2L/100km in the
summer and around 7L/100km in the winter.
For me the clutch/gear box feel on the Matrix/Vibe was the deciding
factor. Every other car I tried either had way too light a clutch (i.e.
the Mazda3), not enough power (i.e. the Dodge Caliber, the Matrix only
has 126hp, but it pulls like a vehicle with much more) or looseness in
the shifter (the Hyundai Elantra).
The utility is amazing. As you mention the rear seats fold down, in
addition the passenger seat also fold flat. I covered my front porch
with wood this summer (ugly concrete) and was able to carry the whole
load of lumber in the Matrix with room to spare (8' 2x4s not a problem
with the hatch closed).
For cases where I really need to carry something big (i.e. a front door
or full 4x8 sheet of whatever) my brother has a trailer.
It's funny, in Europe trailers are everywhere, you see Audi A2's with
trailer hitches and Subaru Justy's hauling trailers, yet here in North
America (except Quebec) there is this perception that to use a trailer
you need a truck or SUV...
The Matrix was on our list, but we're kind of shying away from it
because of price (a nicely equipped one isn't much cheaper than
a Prius and a stripped one isn't much more than a very well
equipped Yaris). We don't need the extra room (yet).
I agree with the Prius battery disposal complaint, but I've heard
quite regularly of those going in excess of 300,000 km (or more)
with no trouble, which means that the amortization of that waste
becomes quite a bit less over time. Also, they get recycled, so
that's something.
This is our primary car, so the size thing isn't much of an issue.
We'd rather be a bit too big than a bit too small, but not if it
means a disaster in gas mileage (or price). Plus, 99% of our
driving is in-town, very stop-and-go (we live 10 blocks south
of downtown Minneapolis), so the regenerative braking in a
hybrid would likely pay HUGE dividends.
My guess is that its due to everyone wanting to do 70 MPH while towing, you just can't do that in a Justy without lumping in a load equaliser and anti-sway.
Anyone see that Tog Gear episode where they went on a caravaning holiday?
>>> mailinglist3EraseME@spam@farcite.net 27 Nov 07 15:18:23 >>>
On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 14:33 -0500, Jeff Findley wrote:
<snip>
For cases where I really need to carry something big (i.e. a front door
or full 4x8 sheet of whatever) my brother has a trailer.
It's funny, in Europe trailers are everywhere, you see Audi A2's with
trailer hitches and Subaru Justy's hauling trailers, yet here in North
America (except Quebec) there is this perception that to use a trailer
you need a truck or SUV...
On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 15:47 -0500, Eoin Ross wrote:
> My guess is that its due to everyone wanting to do 70 MPH while towing, you just can't do that in a Justy without lumping in a load equaliser and anti-sway.
I don't know what the tow rating is for a Justy, but I guarantee that
any car can do 70MPH as long as you stay within the tow rating.
My car has a tow rating of 1500lbs and has zero trouble getting to and
staying at 70MPH while towing. Going up hills I may have to drop a gear,
but that's about it.
I see so many people on the highway towing a small trailer with a Chevy
Suburban, and I'm sure most think they NEED such a monster vehicle for
their tiny trailer.
I do not know American cars but Japanese are definitely worth to buy. Here
in Ireland probably the most popular is the Nissan Micra - some people
swears that is better than Yaris. However, they say Toyota is the most
reliable, Nissan is just after that (but the price is much better for the
Nissan).
BTW I have an Opel Omega with BMW diesel engine - the engine is very
reliable, the rest are better not to talk about :-) But as experimented on
this car I could say the bigger the engine the longer it lasts. Also a
manual gearbox is cheaper to run and probably lasts longer than the
automatic one (at least mine is not on the top :-) )
> James, I already know what you'll say.
>
> My fiance and I are looking at buying a car. We both drive sub-optimal
> autos
> (2003 Jetta GLI for me, 2005 Chevy Malibu for her) and we want to can them
> both. I bus it to work everyday day, and she drives 5 miles across town.
> We
> rarely take trips longer than 10 miles.
>
> She owes more on her car than it's worth, but mine is paid off. We want
> both
> a fiscal and environmental sustainability upgrade here- meaning we want to
> pay less for gas and car payment and insurance, AND we don't want to be
> contributing to the worsening environmental situation. We also don't want
> to
> be stuck with a car that's going to require huge repair bills annually.
>
> We're leaning towards a new or slightly used Prius or a new Yaris. I hate
> the
> idea of a new car because new cars are part of the problem- building a car
> takes a lot of energy. OTOH, if we keep the car for ten years, it makes
> sense to get a new one.
>
> At any rate, someone on this list has a resource that they can point me to
> that will help me gauge the relative impact of these choices. I'm totally
> lost.
>
> Greenercars.org seems good to me, but they completely ignore the used
> car option....
>
> Mike H.
Here in USA, Mitsubishi is the one every one try to avoid, Nissan seems got serious quality issue recently. Ford Explorer was good, and I was about to buy one.
On one trip in Canada in the winter, I saw one Explorer smoking and burning, and then I heard about the cruise switch firing story, so I turned to Chevy Tahoe, which is a great design.
Sorry Ford, I will wait another 10 years until your guys figured out why everything causes fires.
Hi Mike,
Between that Prius Crap and the Yaris, I would prefer the Yaris. I can
almost get the same economy on fuel from my VW Passat TDI as you can out
of that rubbish that is the Prius, and I do not have batteries to
dispose off.
In my opinion the Prius is not an environmentally friendly car at all is
just a marketing gimmick, and looking at it from an energy waste to
produce it I am sure it will be more than the Yaris.
Best regards
Luis
>It's funny, in Europe trailers are everywhere, you
>see Audi A2's with trailer hitches
They are also useful for minimising damage in minor bumps, in NZ the last
company I worked for every company car came with a towbar (hitch) for this
reason.
What scares me is when people buy a car to tow horsetrailers and horses...
The average UK trailer weighs in at about 800kg (empty) the average car can
tow about 950kg, that is not a lot of horse - and yet you see people towing
with 2 horses in the trailer.
We looked for a 4x4 (before we bought a truck to move our horses), and
amazingly most dealer garages dont know about the towing weights of their
vehicles. "yes sir, it will tow a horse trailer".
A Vauxhall Frontera 4x4 can tow LESS than my old Toyota Avensis family car!
We decided upon a Range Rover - which weighing in at 2,000kg itself - has a
towing limit of 3,300kg (and 8,000kg in an emergency at 18mph!!)
1 trailer @ 800kg + horse1 @ 750kg + horse2 @ 700kg = 2250kg - well within
the limits.
Anyway - we now bought a 7.5ton truck - and we are closer on the weight
limit than with the trailer - its amazing how much stuff you DO carry when
you CAN carry it. ;)
-Jim
On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 15:47:05 -0500, Eoin Ross wrote {Quote hidden}
> My guess is that its due to everyone wanting to do 70 MPH while
> towing, you just can't do that in a Justy without lumping in a load
> equaliser and anti-sway.
>
> Anyone see that Tog Gear episode where they went on a caravaning holiday?
>
> >>> spamBeGonemailinglist3spam_OUTRemoveMEfarcite.net 27 Nov 07 15:18:23 >>>
> On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 14:33 -0500, Jeff Findley wrote:
> <snip>
> For cases where I really need to carry something big (i.e. a front door
> or full 4x8 sheet of whatever) my brother has a trailer.
>
> It's funny, in Europe trailers are everywhere, you see Audi A2's with
> trailer hitches and Subaru Justy's hauling trailers, yet here in
> North America (except Quebec) there is this perception that to use a
> trailer you need a truck or SUV...
>
> TTYL
>
Don't you mean they are also useful for transfering the energy of a
minor bump into the frame (past the bumper's crumple/crush zone) where
the damage will be invisible as well as putting the passengers at
slightly greater risk?
:-D
-Adam
On 11/28/07, Alan B. Pearce <.....A.B.PearceRemoveMErl.ac.uk> wrote:
> >It's funny, in Europe trailers are everywhere, you
> >see Audi A2's with trailer hitches
>
> They are also useful for minimising damage in minor bumps, in NZ the last
> company I worked for every company car came with a towbar (hitch) for this
> reason.
>
> -
> Don't you mean they are also useful for transfering the
> energy of a
> minor bump into the frame
Frame ...
??
Bzzzt.
Does not compute.
Term missing from glossary.
Please re-enter.
> (past the bumper's crumple/crush zone) where
> the damage will be invisible
and not affect the handling enough to matter in many cases
thereby allowing max market resale value at minimum expense
when it is flicked on after a year or two.
I owned a Honda City which my son, through no fault of his
own, had shortened while waiting in a queue of traffic.
Handled amazingly well - every bit as good or better at
ear-oling through corners as it ever had been and far bettr
than most would credit to such a utilitarian beast. Only
cm's shorter than it had been. Only the drivers door would
open. Others overlapped to varying extents. Back was broken
inside rear so the rear boot floor sloped alarmingly.
He wrote off 3 of my cars and only one was solidly
attributable to him (according to the Police) but even that
was in doubt. Note - when the con rods slap on the bore you
should have stopped already ;-).
I run a Land Rover Discovery for towing, but I still keep to 55-60 MPH even though I could push it to 80 towing a Samurai 4x4. Its easier on fuel, don't have to worry about lane changes so much, and I have less distance to stop.
I see same thing in NZ with vehicles too small for what they pull. 30 foot twin axle caravans/campers behind a Ford Falcon/Ford Taurus size car. Crazy.
>>> jimf@spam@webstudios.co.uk 28 Nov 07 05:04:49 >>>
What scares me is when people buy a car to tow horsetrailers and horses...
The average UK trailer weighs in at about 800kg (empty) the average car can
tow about 950kg, that is not a lot of horse - and yet you see people towing
with 2 horses in the trailer.
We looked for a 4x4 (before we bought a truck to move our horses), and
amazingly most dealer garages dont know about the towing weights of their
vehicles. "yes sir, it will tow a horse trailer".
A Vauxhall Frontera 4x4 can tow LESS than my old Toyota Avensis family car!
We decided upon a Range Rover - which weighing in at 2,000kg itself - has a
towing limit of 3,300kg (and 8,000kg in an emergency at 18mph!!)
1 trailer @ 800kg + horse1 @ 750kg + horse2 @ 700kg = 2250kg - well within
the limits.
Anyway - we now bought a 7.5ton truck - and we are closer on the weight
limit than with the trailer - its amazing how much stuff you DO carry when
you CAN carry it. ;)
-Jim
On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 15:47:05 -0500, Eoin Ross wrote {Quote hidden}
> My guess is that its due to everyone wanting to do 70 MPH while
> towing, you just can't do that in a Justy without lumping in a load
> equaliser and anti-sway.
>
> Anyone see that Tog Gear episode where they went on a caravaning holiday?
>
> >>> EraseMEmailinglist3RemoveMESTOPspamfarcite.net 27 Nov 07 15:18:23 >>>
> On Tue, 2007-11-27 at 14:33 -0500, Jeff Findley wrote:
> <snip>
> For cases where I really need to carry something big (i.e. a front door
> or full 4x8 sheet of whatever) my brother has a trailer.
>
> It's funny, in Europe trailers are everywhere, you see Audi A2's with
> trailer hitches and Subaru Justy's hauling trailers, yet here in
> North America (except Quebec) there is this perception that to use a
> trailer you need a truck or SUV...
>
> TTYL
>
hmmm...so, factoring in a car payment on a "newer" car, even if used, plus insurance....is it better to drive something that is paid off and gets lower mileage? I think so....thats why I still drive my 3/4ton 4x4 each day. I go thru around $250/mo in fuel. For about $5K, I can convert to dual fuel..natural gas, get the same mileage but pay around 75 cents per gallon (last I checked). Its the 5K to come up with, and how long till it really gets paid for. I've got 200K on the truck, and plan on keeping it for another 100K at least.
---------------------------------
Get easy, one-click access to your favorites. Make Yahoo! your homepage.
Where do you live? If you're in California I believe the state mandated
battery/electronics warranty on hybrids is 150,000 miles or 10 years,
though don't quote me. I just bought a new Honda Civic Hybrid. I'm sure
it wasn't the smartest idea to buy a new car, but that was my decision.
IIRC the HCH is a few thousand cheaper than the Prius but it also
doesn't have as many features in the electric drive system. In many
situations it gets the same mileage as a Prius, other situations it gets
much worse (stop and go in cold weather).
Used hybrids tend to get a premium over non-hybrids. This is bad for
you, good for the seller. There are many new diesels coming out next
year it will be interesting to see what comes of that.
-
MK
> James, I already know what you'll say.
>
> My fiance and I are looking at buying a car. We both drive sub-optimal autos
> (2003 Jetta GLI for me, 2005 Chevy Malibu for her) and we want to can them
> both. I bus it to work everyday day, and she drives 5 miles across town. We
> rarely take trips longer than 10 miles.
>
> She owes more on her car than it's worth, but mine is paid off. We want both
> a fiscal and environmental sustainability upgrade here- meaning we want to
> pay less for gas and car payment and insurance, AND we don't want to be
> contributing to the worsening environmental situation. We also don't want to
> be stuck with a car that's going to require huge repair bills annually.
>
> We're leaning towards a new or slightly used Prius or a new Yaris. I hate the
> idea of a new car because new cars are part of the problem- building a car
> takes a lot of energy. OTOH, if we keep the car for ten years, it makes
> sense to get a new one.
>
> At any rate, someone on this list has a resource that they can point me to
> that will help me gauge the relative impact of these choices. I'm totally lost.
>
> Greenercars.org seems good to me, but they completely ignore the used
> car option....
>
> Mike H.
>
I call shenanigans on your Passat TDI getting the same mileage as a
Prius. Maybe on the highway. Not a chance in the city. Battery disposal
is a non-issue in the Prius. They get recycled.
-
Martin K
> Hi Mike,
> Between that Prius Crap and the Yaris, I would prefer the Yaris. I can
> almost get the same economy on fuel from my VW Passat TDI as you can out
> of that rubbish that is the Prius, and I do not have batteries to
> dispose off.
> In my opinion the Prius is not an environmentally friendly car at all is
> just a marketing gimmick, and looking at it from an energy waste to
> produce it I am sure it will be more than the Yaris.
> Best regards
> Luis
>
>
>
On Nov 28, 2007 1:31 PM, Martin <RemoveMEmartinKILLspamTakeThisOuTnnytech.net> wrote:
> I call shenanigans on your Passat TDI getting the same mileage as a
> Prius. Maybe on the highway. Not a chance in the city. Battery disposal
> is a non-issue in the Prius. They get recycled.
My '87 ford escort wagon with every power gizmo they offered, and
throttle-body injection got a consistent 32mpg with air on, and a mix
of in-town and highway driving.
When going downhill, my add-on (zemco) engine computer showed fuel
consumption of 0 gal/hr if the grade was steep enough.
In the late 70's there were conventional engine cars with as much as 50mpg.
Why is it that now anything over 30 seems to be a big deal?
On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 13:31 -0500, Martin wrote:
> I call shenanigans on your Passat TDI getting the same mileage as a
> Prius. Maybe on the highway. Not a chance in the city.
I don't know about the Passat TDI, but small diesel engines can easily
beat the Prius in most driving situations except perhaps truly stop and
go traffic jam environments (where walking is faster; the question of
course then is why are you even bothering to drive?). The only problem?
These diesel cars don't exist in North America. Everywhere else in the
world, but not here.
> Battery disposal
> is a non-issue in the Prius. They get recycled.
Hehe, sorry, but if you want to consider the actual impact of a vehicle
on our planet a recycled battery most definitely is worse then no
battery (recycling can take alot of energy). And lets not forget the
huge energy and resources needed to manufacture the batteries to start
with. Then the energy and resources to build the electric motors,
relevant hardware to connect it to the rest of the car, and the
electronics.
Hybrids look superb if you only consider emissions. But when you start
calculating the extra energy and resources used to add the hybrid
feature to the car things don't look quite a rosy anymore. Remember, a
hybrid car IS a regular car, with stuff added, that stuff added doesn't
come free from an environmental point of view.
It's so common in the "greening" world of today for people to only
consider a small subset of a product's impact on the environment.
Another thing that REALLY bugs me is CFLs. YES, they do require less
energy to run, but if you add up the energy needed to manufacture them
and dispose of them properly, are they REALLY that much better then a
glass bulb and filament?
Herbert Graf wrote:
> Hehe, sorry, but if you want to consider the actual impact of a vehicle
> on our planet a recycled battery most definitely is worse then no
> battery (recycling can take alot of energy). And lets not forget the
> huge energy and resources needed to manufacture the batteries to start
> with. Then the energy and resources to build the electric motors,
> relevant hardware to connect it to the rest of the car, and the
> electronics.
>
>
I haven't added it up, have you? It's a moot point then. How can you say
that because it has more parts, it's energy efficiency is therefore
negated? It's a terrible claim to make without backing it up. Same with
your mention of CFLs.
"Ironically, coal fired power plants emit mercury, and using CFLs
reduces the amount of electricity used and therefore the amount of
mercury emitted. The Maryland Sierra Club calculated an estimate
<http://maryland.sierraclub.org/newsletter/archives/2007/07/a_012.asp>
of the amount of mercury emitted per kilowatt hour of electricity
production in Wisconsin and came up with .023mg/kWh. They then looked at
the average amount of mercury in a CFL and came up with 5.1mg. They
figured out that a 100 watt incandescent bulb over 10000 hours (replaced
10 times because it lasts 1000 hours) will cost $105.50 in electricity
and bulbs, and result in coal-fired plants emitting about 23 mg of
mercury and about 2,000 pounds of CO2, a greenhouse gas. Both
Incandescent and CFL bulbs also often contain lead solder, a powerful
toxin. A 100 watt equivalent CFL (23 watt) will cost about $25.50 in
bulbs and electricity, last 10,000 hours, emit about 5.2mg of mercury
(plus the 5.1mg stored in the bulb for a total of 10.3 mg) and emit 460
lbs of CO2. CFLs are cheaper. When coal-fired plants produce
electricity, CFLs are responsible for less mercury and much less carbon
dioxide emissions than incandescents. According to Earth911
<http://earth911.org/blog/2007/06/01/balancing-environmental-impact-household-lighting/>,
CFLs take five times the energy of incandescent bulbs to produce. CFLs
last ten times as long, so they use half the energy of incandescents in
production."
I really don't understand how people can claim that because new energy
saving technology has side effects, it must be worse than what it's
benefits are. Everything in our modern (or NOT so modern) society has
detrimental environmental effects. Maybe the solution is just not to
drive and to not turn any lights on in your house. I, for one, choose to
drive a car that pollutes LESS (mileage is generally related to this but
not always). I'd take public transit if I could. I'll either be driving
an electric Vectrix or a gas motorcycle next summer when I can.
David VanHorn wrote:
> On Nov 28, 2007 1:31 PM, Martin <spamBeGonemartin@spam@nnytech.net> wrote:
>
>> I call shenanigans on your Passat TDI getting the same mileage as a
>> Prius. Maybe on the highway. Not a chance in the city. Battery disposal
>> is a non-issue in the Prius. They get recycled.
>>
>
> My '87 ford escort wagon with every power gizmo they offered, and
> throttle-body injection got a consistent 32mpg with air on, and a mix
> of in-town and highway driving.
> When going downhill, my add-on (zemco) engine computer showed fuel
> consumption of 0 gal/hr if the grade was steep enough.
> In the late 70's there were conventional engine cars with as much as 50mpg.
>
> Why is it that now anything over 30 seems to be a big deal?
>
My HCH gets over 100MPG going downhill, what's your point?
My 1999 cavalier routinely got 35 MPG on the highway at 65+ MPH. My HCH
gets ~45 in the city and highway. Your 87 escort does not get 45 MPG in
the city. Over 30 is not a big deal, never really has been. Over 40 for
a normal sized car is a big deal.
-
Martin K
> My HCH gets over 100MPG going downhill, what's your point?
> My 1999 cavalier routinely got 35 MPG on the highway at 65+ MPH. My HCH
> gets ~45 in the city and highway. Your 87 escort does not get 45 MPG in
> the city. Over 30 is not a big deal, never really has been. Over 40 for
> a normal sized car is a big deal.
Well, if you listen to the ads here, anything over 30 is a big deal.
The prius is claimed to get 32 mpg.
All that complication, and in the end, the same at the gas pump as my
little four-banger wagon.
On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 14:46 -0500, Martin wrote:
> I haven't added it up, have you?
Nope.
> It's a moot point then.
Why is it a moot point? Just because I haven't done the math doesn't
mean it isn't important to at least CONSIDER factors a particular car
has on this planet beyond emissions.
> How can you say
> that because it has more parts, it's energy efficiency is therefore
> negated?
I never said that it was negated, only that it isn't as good as
emissions alone say it is.
> It's a terrible claim to make without backing it up. Same with
> your mention of CFLs.
>
> From:
> local-warming.blogspot.com/2007/08/mercury-compact-fluorescent-cfl-bulbs.html
>
> "Ironically, coal fired power plants emit mercury, and using CFLs
> reduces the amount of electricity used and therefore the amount of
> mercury emitted.
Again, another example of a limited view of benefits. Note I'm not
denying there are benefits, only that I become VERY sceptical when an
organization concentrates on only one tiny factor of a much larger
problem.
In this case they are only considering ONE "bad" thing, mercury. Second
they are only considering the energy needed during the use of the bulb
(and another nitpick is they are assuming the energy comes from coal,
depending where you are very little of your energy may come from coal).
There is zero mention of how much energy and "bad stuff" was needed to
make the CFL, nor the energy/bad stuff needed to properly dispose of the
bulb.
> I really don't understand how people can claim that because new energy
> saving technology has side effects, it must be worse than what it's
> benefits are.
I NEVER said that. I only raised the fact that pretty much every time
somebody claims something is "better" they always base the "better" on a
VERY small section of the impact that item has on our planet.
> Everything in our modern (or NOT so modern) society has
> detrimental environmental effects.
True. My problem with our society is the moment something seems to have
a small advantage it's blasted to the top of the "you should use this"
pile without a proper examination of the ACTUAL effects that item has on
the planet.
The Prius is a perfect example of this. The ONLY thing people latch on
to with the Prius (and other hybrid vehicles) is it's mileage (which
isn't even that good). They completely ignore other factors that COULD
make the Prius a WORSE choice for the planet. I'm NOT saying it IS
worse, I don't have the data, I just want to point out that just because
everybody SAYS it's better, basing their opinion only on emissions,
doesn't make it so.
Perhaps the most telling thing of this thread is how violently people
seem to respond when someone asks them to reconsider whether something
is actually as good for the planet as they think it is.
> Perhaps the most telling thing of this thread is how violently people
> seem to respond when someone asks them to reconsider whether something
> is actually as good for the planet as they think it is.
We want an easy solution and there isn't one.
Part of the reason I'm even considering a Prius is the fact that the more
people buy them, the better the technology gets, and the closer to a
real solution it becomes. But let's face it, TANSTAAFL. As long as we
insist on driving, all this talk about batteries versus emissions versus
cost to manufacture is really deck chairs on the Titanic.
Herbert Graf wrote:
>
> Perhaps the most telling thing of this thread is how violently people
> seem to respond when someone asks them to reconsider whether something
> is actually as good for the planet as they think it is.
>
> TTYL
>
I apologize, I was mainly set off by Luis's repeated comment of "that
prius crap" or some such. The Prius was the first popular hybrid car.
While I agree that it's benefits and consequences should be weighed, I
believe it is a step in the right direction: cars that pollute less and
use less fuel. It also makes people take an interest in cleaner
technology, which I think is considerable.
-
Martin K
>-----Original Message-----
>From: RemoveMEpiclist-bouncesspam_OUTmit.edu [piclist-bouncesspammit.edu] On
Behalf Of >Mike Hord
>Sent: 28 November 2007 20:39
>To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public.
>Subject: Re: [OT] Car purchase
>
>> Perhaps the most telling thing of this thread is how violently people
>> seem to respond when someone asks them to reconsider whether
something
>> is actually as good for the planet as they think it is.
>
>We want an easy solution and there isn't one.
>
>Part of the reason I'm even considering a Prius is the fact that the
more
>people buy them, the better the technology gets, and the closer to a
>real solution it becomes
Hybrids by their very nature will never be a real solution, they are a
temporary stop gap whilst technology works out how to remove the
infernal combustion engine for good.
Regards
Mike
=======================================================================
This e-mail is intended for the person it is addressed to only. The
information contained in it may be confidential and/or protected by
law. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you must
not make any use of this information, or copy or show it to any
person. Please contact us immediately to tell us that you have
received this e-mail, and return the original to us. Any use,
forwarding, printing or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.
No part of this message can be considered a request for goods or
services.
=======================================================================
"David VanHorn" <spam_OUTmicrobrixspam_OUTspam_OUTgmail.com> wrote in message
news:25b178740711281111p7bce8c7dha341d01965dc521bspam_OUTmail.gmail.com...>
> On Nov 28, 2007 1:31 PM, Martin <RemoveMEmartinKILLspam@spam@nnytech.net> wrote:
>> I call shenanigans on your Passat TDI getting the same mileage as a
>> Prius. Maybe on the highway. Not a chance in the city. Battery disposal
>> is a non-issue in the Prius. They get recycled.
>
> My '87 ford escort wagon with every power gizmo they offered, and
> throttle-body injection got a consistent 32mpg with air on, and a mix
> of in-town and highway driving.
> When going downhill, my add-on (zemco) engine computer showed fuel
> consumption of 0 gal/hr if the grade was steep enough.
> In the late 70's there were conventional engine cars with as much as
> 50mpg.
My dad's 1980 VW Rabbit Diesel got about 50 mpg on the highway and a bit
less in the city.
> Why is it that now anything over 30 seems to be a big deal?
Because the mileage standards on cars have not increased in a long time and
before gas was over $3 a gallon in the US, most US consumers cared little
about mileage. Now that gas is higher, some people are starting to care
more about mileage. Still, big gas guzzling vehicles are a status symbol in
the US. Driving a Hummer H2 shows you have the money to not care about gas
mileage.
Jeff
--
A clever person solves a problem.
A wise person avoids it. -- Einstein
"Herbert Graf" <mailinglist3spamBeGone.....farcite.net> wrote in message
news:1196278244.4147.16.camel@PD804...
> On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 13:31 -0500, Martin wrote:
>> I call shenanigans on your Passat TDI getting the same mileage as a
>> Prius. Maybe on the highway. Not a chance in the city.
>
> I don't know about the Passat TDI, but small diesel engines can easily
> beat the Prius in most driving situations except perhaps truly stop and
> go traffic jam environments (where walking is faster; the question of
> course then is why are you even bothering to drive?). The only problem?
> These diesel cars don't exist in North America. Everywhere else in the
> world, but not here.
They used to, but there were very few models to chose from. My dad's 1980
VW Rabbit Diesel got 45 to 50 mpg depending on the city/highway mix. Most
of the diesel cars back then were imports.
The problem in the US was that, for a while, GM built a diesel engine that
would pretty much self destruct before 100k miles. If I recall correctly,
it was a gas engine design converted to diesel, so it simply wasn't strong
enough to last and the mileage was still pretty terrible since they were put
into big GM cars. That put a diesel == bad into many consumer's minds.
Jeff
--
A clever person solves a problem.
A wise person avoids it. -- Einstein
>> Battery disposal
>> is a non-issue in the Prius. They get recycled.
> Hehe, sorry, but if you want to consider the actual impact
> of a vehicle
> on our planet a recycled battery most definitely is worse
> then no
> battery (recycling can take alot of energy). And lets not
> forget the
> huge energy and resources needed to manufacture the
> batteries to start
> with. Then the energy and resources to build the electric
> motors,
> relevant hardware to connect it to the rest of the car,
> and the
> electronics.
Arguably the cost of a recycled battery is a charge on the
use that the material is put to, not on the use that it WAS
put to previously. ie you assume that the disposed of item
has whatever value is placed on it when it enters the
recycling scheme - positive if the recycler pays you,
negative if they charge you and zero if they take it for
free. Then the recycling operation calculates its own costs.
As most originally high cost items, including batteries,
will actually be paid for by a commercial recycler, and that
would certainly include large batteries, then it seems
reasonable to assume a zero value or greater for such items.
And ecological and other costs are then borne by the
recycler who presumably finds it cheaper to source their
lead or cadmium or whatever from a pile of someone else's
junk than from a mine. So, arguably, and it is arguable, a
recycled battery is BETTER than no battery if the recycler
will pay you for it, as it represents a lower cost resource
than digging the material out of a hillside and processing
it.
I'm aware of the potential deficiencies in such an argument
but it seems an accurate enough one to take at a simplistic
level;.
A major problem with "market forces" arguments, which this
is one of, is that "the market" aka the invisible hand is a
thief or a naive taker (depending on one's altruistic
attitude). ie "the market" will acquire resource at the cost
that it can, not at the cost that it "should" if all factors
were considered "properly". "Should" has no meaning to 'the
hand' - it deals only with "can". Friends of the hand deride
'should' as attempts at nannying and at corruption of true
economic drive, and this may often enough be true, but
"should" also arises from the use of intelligent vision to
identify local and distant peaks in the cost benefit
continuum. The hand is a dumb brute that can only crawl the
local gradient in the same way that natural selection does,
and may find itself stalled on a local peak without
"realising" (as it has no brain" that true optimum, even by
its own blind rules, lies somewhere else if only something
were able to move it there. The 'valley" which the hand is
unable to crawl down into and cross to reach the higher
pastures elsewhere may be (and arguably usually is) caused
by it misvaluing resources that it has questionable rights
to.
This assessment is not an attempt to inject social
perspective per se but rather an attempt to understand
reality. If eg an action impacts air quality or the disposal
of 'divalent chromium, or lowers water table below the level
where permanent pollution of an island's water lens will
result (as per the misattributed example in "An inconvenient
truth"), or ... and forces controlling "the market" have
not caught up with such issues, or do not detect the impact,
or the impact is not appreciated, then air or water or life
quality may be degraded until such issues are addressed. In
due course you end up with China or industrial Russia or, I
imagine, Pittsburgh, and people may then start to act. But
the true past costs are then being paid for by unrelated
future actions.
China is a good example, as I have just recently seen. What
was for certain a once beautiful landscape is broken and
battered beyond belief where-ever I looked. Throughout a 500
km train ride, and at every other point where I was able to
observe, visual evidence that the environment had been
horribly abused abounded. If they ever decide to "fix" this
the costs of the past will be visited on the products of the
future.
I didn't notice any identifiable Prius batteries lying
around.
On Wed, 2007-11-28 at 15:46 -0500, Martin wrote:
> Herbert Graf wrote:
> >
> > Perhaps the most telling thing of this thread is how violently people
> > seem to respond when someone asks them to reconsider whether something
> > is actually as good for the planet as they think it is.
> >
> > TTYL
> >
>
> I apologize, I was mainly set off by Luis's repeated comment of "that
No need, I see nothing wrong in being passionate about something, as
long as that passion is open to considering it might only be 98%
correct. :)
> prius crap" or some such. The Prius was the first popular hybrid car.
> While I agree that it's benefits and consequences should be weighed, I
> believe it is a step in the right direction: cars that pollute less and
> use less fuel.
The prius is most certainly not crap IMHO. It is a very good quality car
that holds it's value extremely well.
> It also makes people take an interest in cleaner
> technology, which I think is considerable.
No matter what the real story (benefit wise) is with the Prius, you are
absolutely correct that it's popularity is most certainly a good
influence on the public in general with regards to at causing people to
at least consider how they are impacting the planet.
I suppose my biggest problem isn't with the Prius, it's with the people
that are of the opinion that if you drive anything other then the Prius
you are destroying the planet, while they are the lone saviours of the
planet. There are people out there.
My car may not get the mileage of a Fit, Yaris, Versa or Prius, but it's
pretty damn close, and certainly light years better then the huge SUVs
and Trucks you see driving on our roads every day.
> My dad's 1980 VW Rabbit Diesel got about 50 mpg on the highway and a bit
> less in the city.
I had a friend who had one of those, ran it on fuel that they pulled
for testing on 747s.
They couldn't put the fuel back in the system, and used to just dump it.
:) 50 mpg and $0/gal.
> > Why is it that now anything over 30 seems to be a big deal?
>
> Because the mileage standards on cars have not increased in a long time and
> before gas was over $3 a gallon in the US, most US consumers cared little
> about mileage. Now that gas is higher, some people are starting to care
> more about mileage. Still, big gas guzzling vehicles are a status symbol in
> the US. Driving a Hummer H2 shows you have the money to not care about gas
> mileage.
I remember something gas powered from toyota(?) in the late 70's that
got 40+, and I seem to remember 50-ish highway.
For my money, disposable ceramic turbines with electric generators are
the way to go, the infernal contraption engine is a kludge.
We can't escape physics. Weight + Speed = Fuel.
People want to go faster, carry more (A/C, 20" Woofers, power windows, less road noise, comfy ride, etc)
Until its OK to drive a bicycle wheeled, carbon fibre frame and thin fish shaped shell, at 30 MPH with no accesssories, we won't see huge ( >60) MPG happening.
I looked into getting a bike but it'd only save about $800 a year @ $4 a gallon - without insurance and repairs factored in. On top of that I have enough issues with people trying put their wheels where mine are now.
>>> KILLspammicrobrix.....gmail.com 28 Nov 07 14:11:56 >>>
On Nov 28, 2007 1:31 PM, Martin <spam_OUTmartinKILLspamnnytech.net> wrote:
> I call shenanigans on your Passat TDI getting the same mileage as a
> Prius. Maybe on the highway. Not a chance in the city. Battery disposal
> is a non-issue in the Prius. They get recycled.
My '87 ford escort wagon with every power gizmo they offered, and
throttle-body injection got a consistent 32mpg with air on, and a mix
of in-town and highway driving.
When going downhill, my add-on (zemco) engine computer showed fuel
consumption of 0 gal/hr if the grade was steep enough.
In the late 70's there were conventional engine cars with as much as 50mpg.
Why is it that now anything over 30 seems to be a big deal?
> >Part of the reason I'm even considering a Prius is the fact that the
> more
> >people buy them, the better the technology gets, and the closer to a
> >real solution it becomes
>
> Hybrids by their very nature will never be a real solution, they are a
> temporary stop gap whilst technology works out how to remove the
> infernal combustion engine for good.
My point exactly- I quit driving. This whole thing came about because
of a desire to collapse our two cars into one, until such time as no cars
is a viable solution.
The "infernal" (I like that) combustion engine addiction is a tough one to
break. The people who anger me the most are the ones who don't worry
about this, and who say "oh, we'll come up with a solution before peak oil.
Don't worry about it."
It strikes me a bit like saying "By the time smoking gives me cancer,
there will be a pill to cure it." It's human nature: awful things ALWAYS
happen to somebody else. It's not until YOUR nation grinds to a halt
without oil (ask Cuba) or YOUR lungs seize up with COPD that the true
impact of our decisions actually occurs to us. Then it's too late.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: RemoveMEpiclist-bouncesRemoveMEEraseMEmit.edu On Behalf Of David VanHorn
> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 4:14 PM
>
<snip>
>
> I remember something gas powered from toyota(?) in the late 70's that
> got 40+, and I seem to remember 50-ish highway.
The 1982 Honda Civic got 41 mpg city and 55 mpg highway, the problem was
that by then the worst of the gas crisis in the US was over and gas prices
fell drastically up to 1986. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_Civic
The falling price of gasoline, especially when adjusted for inflation, was
the major market force preventing the introduction of more fuel efficient
cars in the US. When looked at using inflation adjusted dollars we still pay
less for gas in the US than we did in 1980. http://www.randomuseless.info/gasprice/gasprice.html
Add on the exemption from fuel economy standards for trucks/SUV's and tax
exemptions for SUV's used for business and it's easy to see how the USA
ended up where we are. Someone I know wanted to buy an efficient Volvo wagon
for her work as a lawyer a few years ago. The tax incentives loophole made
the BMW SUV less expensive so that's what she bought. Although she is
groaning over gas prices now the financial calculations still show her
coming out ahead with the business use heavy SUV tax loophole.
Paul Hutch
>
> For my money, disposable ceramic turbines with electric generators are
> the way to go, the infernal contraption engine is a kludge.
>
> The 1982 Honda Civic got 41 mpg city and 55 mpg highway, the problem was
> that by then the worst of the gas crisis in the US was over and gas prices
> fell drastically up to 1986
>
My 1992 Geo Metro gets 48mpg on the freeway cruising at 75mph with
occasional runs up to 80MPH. I can't seem to keep the speeds down so I
don't know how much better I could do (I drive pretty agressively). Up
Conejo Grade it'll do 68MPH. City mileage is ~ 41mpg.
315,000 miles on the original, unopened 3 cyl 1.0L engine and 5 speed
transmission. Bought it for $2K in 1998 with 108Kmiles on the
odometer. They've been making these since I think 1985 and with better
gas mileage back then (with carbs even).
It's a car that is alway made fun of but in reality they're zippy, have
lots of room inside (my road bike fits inside - with the wheel off.
2x4x8's fit with the hatch closed) and fun to drive.
Don't know what I'll do when the engine is finally worn out.
Dave
(who's annoyed by all the Prius drivers doing less than the speed limit
on the freeways to save gas)
> I remember something gas powered from toyota(?) in the late 70's that
> got 40+, and I seem to remember 50-ish highway.
Emissions equipment and fuel content has changed relatively
significantly since the 70s, hasn't it? The LA basin isn't
brown any more, and you have things like California's complete
ban on diesel passenger cars...
Also, given the way efficiency standards work, it seems that
the horsepower of american cars creeps up at a given MPG level,
rather than MPG creeping up while horsepower remains constant.
>> The Prius was the first popular hybrid car.
>> While I agree that it's benefits and consequences should be
>> weighed, I
>> believe it is a step in the right direction: cars that pollute
>> less and
>> use less fuel.
Sigh. Especially since so many other hybrid models seem to tack an
electric motor along side a V6 "performance" frame for what appears
to be a quite modest efficiency gain. "Hybrid SUVs" BOASTING milage
of 28mpg. Sigh.
I seem to average 50mpg in my prius, about twice what I got in my
last car (97 Saturn wagon), and pretty significantly over anything
I've ever gotten in my cars (76 (?) celica, 84 accord, 97 Saturn,
2007 prius, or the family mini-vans.)
I have a lot of neighbors in the business of towing horses
from here to there - Tried to collect hard data, as I suspect
the towed/ridden ratio is well North of 100:1
A scarred & suspicious lot, seemingly, whenever the
subject comes up. Not enough tax breaks for horsemanship,
I guess...
> For my money, disposable ceramic turbines with electric
> generators are
> the way to go, the infernal contraption engine is a
> kludge.
The Stirling engine will save us all :-).
But it may be a while before they get it sorted.
AFAIR Philips estimated that full development to sort out
all the bugs would cost about ?10 billion? dollars. And
have a payback period of about 4 months after that ;-)
This is exactly my point.
A few years back we had on the UK a TV program where this stupid woman, apart from making families eat on candle light to save the planet, because you know that is really practical, came out with the Zero emissions hydrogen powered car. The Car was great, according to her, almost zero impact in the planet, the only emission was water, just perfect... Apart from the fact hydrogen to run the car had to be produced somehow, hand this thing was packed with exotic materials that energy wise were probably not cheap to produce, and most likely can not easily be recycled.
This people really annoy me because they give a false idea to the public, that instead of looking at their daily life and seeing where they can make a difference to the planet decide to try to by this sort of vehicle because like that they are doing their bit. To me this environmentalist rubbish will not save the planet, what will make an impact is money. I am investigating ways of being self sufficient with my energy needs, but is not because of the environment, I am doing it because it will save me money, will be an interesting project, and I am worried about the fact I can not live without energy and I can see that I will have to pay a premium for it in the future.
I want to insulate my house better and find alternative ways of heating it, but that is just because I now have a bigger house and I have a big heating bill, nothing to do with saving the planet.
People will be sensitive to saving money and will probably make some changes to their lifestyle in order to do so, but they have to be practical. As an example for me to get to work it use to take me 1.5 hours on my car, and cost me £13 a day on fuel. The car would bring me from the front of my house to the front of my office. I tried it by train, it took 3 hours, two train changes one bus trip and 10 minutes walk for the same thing. This trip cost £34. This is not practical.
I have done the best thing which was to move closer to work, but some people do not have that choice. Again I have done this not because of the environment but because of the wasted time in the car, fuel costs, car maintenance costs and my family life.
Best regards
Luis
>I looked into getting a bike but it'd only save about $800 a
>year @ $4 a gallon - without insurance and repairs factored
>in. On top of that I have enough issues with people trying
>put their wheels where mine are now.
I was going to say, that the saving is without considering the increased
risk of coming off in a spectacular way that finishes using that mode of
transport (and potentially having "one last ride in a box"), but I think
that is what your saying in the last sentence.
One of my colleagues got real messed up when he ended up T-Boning a car at
around 30-40MPH when it pulled out in front of him on a narrow English
country lane. He was real lucky a police helicopter was available to take
him to hospital - there was no time to wait for the air ambulance. Now some
2 years later he is still going to hospital appointments about the metalwork
in his arm and leg.
> The Prius is a perfect example of this. The ONLY thing people
> latch on to with the Prius (and other hybrid vehicles) is
> it's mileage (which isn't even that good). They completely
> ignore other factors that COULD make the Prius a WORSE choice
> for the planet. I'm NOT saying it IS worse, I don't have the
> data, I just want to point out that just because everybody
> SAYS it's better, basing their opinion only on emissions,
> doesn't make it so.
That's an interesting point. Dollar wise, buying a Prius makes little
sense. Its high price and dubious resale value (ya mean it's need a new
battery?) would never be offset by the fuel you'd save.
However, I've heard that the maintenance costs are far lower, mainly due to
less moving parts overall. Anyone got any hard numbers on that? That could
make the Prius a better choice.
All electric would be great, since the only parts that wear out in a motor
are the bearings. (The cynic in me suddenly sees great advances in brushed
motors.)
Given that only money will ever get people to leave the car at home (well,
plus a cheap alternative), the fact people buy the Prius at all shows
there's a long way to go. Ok, there's the novelty & smug (South Park)
factor too, I guess.
In this entire thread I don't think anyone has said 'why not get a bike?',
be it motor, bicycle, or electric.
On Thu, 2007-11-29 at 23:30 +1100, Tony Smith wrote:
> In this entire thread I don't think anyone has said 'why not get a bike?',
> be it motor, bicycle, or electric.
There was a mention that motorcycles don't necessarily get stellar
mileage either. They are good, certainly better then most cars, but not
super good (bike mileages I see are around 4.5-6L/100km, on the
highway).
That said, a bike is only an option for a VERY small subset of
commuters. For me a bike is mostly useless (from a commuting
standpoint).
First I live in a country where it gets bloody cold bloody quickly, so
for about 2/3s of the year it's just too dangerous to ride a bike
(unless I got snow tires with studs for the bike I suppose... :) ).
Second, I very often have to carry stuff with me to work and back, so
that would limit me to only a subset of the 1/3 year where the weather
would be cooperative.
My brother drives a bike, but for him it's mostly the "fun" factor, and
the lessening of depreciation of his car. Mileage wise he does do better
then his car (Mazda3 Sport), but not much better then my car.
> On Thu, 2007-11-29 at 23:30 +1100, Tony Smith wrote:
>
>> In this entire thread I don't think anyone has said 'why not get a bike?',
>> be it motor, bicycle, or electric.
>>
>
> There was a mention that motorcycles don't necessarily get stellar
> mileage either. They are good, certainly better then most cars, but not
> super good (bike mileages I see are around 4.5-6L/100km, on the
> highway).
>
> That said, a bike is only an option for a VERY small subset of
> commuters. For me a bike is mostly useless (from a commuting
> standpoint).
>
> First I live in a country where it gets bloody cold bloody quickly, so
> for about 2/3s of the year it's just too dangerous to ride a bike
> (unless I got snow tires with studs for the bike I suppose... :) ).
>
> Second, I very often have to carry stuff with me to work and back, so
> that would limit me to only a subset of the 1/3 year where the weather
> would be cooperative.
>
> My brother drives a bike, but for him it's mostly the "fun" factor, and
> the lessening of depreciation of his car. Mileage wise he does do better
> then his car (Mazda3 Sport), but not much better then my car.
>
> TTYL
>
I intend to get a used motorcycle next summer. Here in New England, the
weather seems to be much like Old England. I've seen several people this
week driving motorcycles though. The weather is MUCH colder when you're
moving at any speed! It will be interesting to see if I can get used to
commuting on two wheels. I live in Boston. The traffic is interesting to
say the least.
-
Martin K
On Thu, 2007-11-29 at 11:32 -0500, Martin Klingensmith wrote:
> I intend to get a used motorcycle next summer. Here in New England, the
> weather seems to be much like Old England. I've seen several people this
> week driving motorcycles though. The weather is MUCH colder when you're
> moving at any speed! It will be interesting to see if I can get used to
> commuting on two wheels. I live in Boston. The traffic is interesting to
> say the least.
Considering our weather my brother got gear that has heaters in the
jacket and the gloves. When plugged in he can ride at speed in the low
40s upper 30s and still be nice and toasty! :)
>Today, the most economic way to produce hydrogen is to extract
>it from petrolium products. So, it would be good to ask, what
>happens to the carbon from this industrial process?
On Thu, 2007-11-29 at 11:32 -0500, Jeff Findley wrote:
> Hydrogen won't be an economically and environmentally friendly fuel for a
> long time (i.e. until fossil fuels become so hideously expensive that US
> power plants stop burning them).
Or until you can come up with a way to extra hydrogen that is cheaper
then getting it from fossil fuels.
There has been some promising news with regards to using microorganisms
to do that work.
The obvious other option is some form of cold fusion being developed
since then the amount of hydrogen needed to produce the electricity to
extract more hydrogen would be very small... :)
> > In this entire thread I don't think anyone has said 'why not get a
> > bike?', be it motor, bicycle, or electric.
>
> Winter in pittsburgh.. Look at a topo map.
Ok, you're excused. Now the OP said they only did short trips...
Well, let's face it, people don't drive cars because they want to be evil.
They drive cars because they are the most practical alternative.
Rain, hail, snow, bugs, hot, cold, packages, groceries, dogs, kids, lumber...
A place to leave your stuff, kinda hard to leave your packages on the
bus while you run in somewhere for a few minutes.
Not that all this couldn't be solved, but whatever we do has to work
in the world we're living in.
Otherwise, we'd all be riding Segways.
> > In this entire thread I don't think anyone has said 'why not get a
> > bike?', be it motor, bicycle, or electric.
>
> There was a mention that motorcycles don't necessarily get
> stellar mileage either. They are good, certainly better then
> most cars, but not super good (bike mileages I see are around
> 4.5-6L/100km, on the highway).
>
> That said, a bike is only an option for a VERY small subset
> of commuters. For me a bike is mostly useless (from a
> commuting standpoint).
I disagree with the 'very small subset' comment, and so would many Chinese,
as would many Europeans.
Yeah, some people have special needs, or can rustle up enough of them to
justify their car. With fuel at $20 a gallon, I wonder if their needs will
still be so special.
There was a study done in Sydney a while back that showed for trips under
10km, the bicycle 'won' (personally, I'd say motorcycles should have).
Sydney is fairly flat, but very spread out (50 sqr km?). I'd say a fair
chunk of the 4,500,000 million people here are within 10km of work.
Electric bikes are become more common, and removes the 'arriving all sweaty
& puffed' negative. I like the add-on kits, where the motor attaches to the
bottom bracket, and uses the lowest chainring (not quite sure of the
details). Has a removeable battery pack to you can charge it at your desk.
Apparently my workplace does have showers etc, down on the mysterious
'Basement 3' level. Mysterious because the lift only has B1. Hmmm. My
commute is about 15km, and I can do that in well under an hour, depending on
how many grid-locked buses I need to dodge. Reminds me of the scene from
'Office Space'...
And when I was a boy, I rode my bike to school every day in the snow, uphill
both ways. Ok, no snow, but it was below freezing. And it WAS uphill both
ways. And downhill, of course.
On Fri, 2007-11-30 at 06:24 +1100, Tony Smith wrote:
> > That said, a bike is only an option for a VERY small subset
> > of commuters. For me a bike is mostly useless (from a
> > commuting standpoint).
>
>
> I disagree with the 'very small subset' comment, and so would many Chinese,
> as would many Europeans.
Ahh, I should have limited my comment to North America. Yes, in many
other parts of the world a bike is more attractive because people just
don't commute very far.
In North America however, probably because cars and gas are cheap, it's
VERY common for commutes to be 1hour each way. My commute is actually on
average quite short, I only travel about 30 minutes one way to work
(55kms).
> Yeah, some people have special needs, or can rustle up enough of them to
> justify their car. With fuel at $20 a gallon, I wonder if their needs will
> still be so special.
>
> There was a study done in Sydney a while back that showed for trips under
> 10km, the bicycle 'won' (personally, I'd say motorcycles should have).
> Sydney is fairly flat, but very spread out (50 sqr km?). I'd say a fair
> chunk of the 4,500,000 million people here are within 10km of work.
In North America that's quite rare. Of all the people I've worked with,
the closest anyone has been to work was about 16kms. Yes, in the
downtown cores there will be more people who live that close to work,
and for them public transit is a wonderful option. For the rest of us...
Heck, most of my relatives in Austria still go home for lunch every day,
they live that close to where they work...
"Herbert Graf" <mailinglist3spamBeGonespamBeGonefarcite.net> wrote in message
news:1196365515.4080.21.camel@PD804...
> In North America however, probably because cars and gas are cheap, it's
> VERY common for commutes to be 1hour each way. My commute is actually on
> average quite short, I only travel about 30 minutes one way to work
> (55kms).
Mine is similar. Here in the Cincinnati Ohio area, the "good places" to
live are in a handful of places around the city suburbs, so a great many
people have similar commutes. The actual Cincinnati Public schools aren't
very highly rated (according to test scores), so most white collar workers
live elsewhere.
In the US in general the quality of schools varies widely. Here in Ohio, a
lot of their funding comes from local property taxes, so they seem to vary
*a lot* in this state. So that's one reason why many people in the US have
long commutes.
Jeff
--
A clever person solves a problem.
A wise person avoids it. -- Einstein
> I call shenanigans on your Passat TDI getting the same mileage as a
> Prius. Maybe on the highway. Not a chance in the city. Battery
> disposal
> is a non-issue in the Prius. They get recycled.
Call shenanigans all you like: My wife's Jetta TDI gets a consistent
34 MPG in city and pushes 40 MPG on highway trips, no problem at all.
She has the automatic transmission, too.
It'll probably survive to well over 200,000 miles (No need to waste
energy making another car), no batteries to deal with, and it'll run
just as happily on biodiesel as it will on fossil diesel.
American's views of diesels are very primitive and don't take modern
diesel innovations into account much at all.
From a pure handling and build-quality standpoint, it's also not beer-
can thin, it's bigger, more comfortable, and FAR better built than the
Prius. It handles like an Audi A4, and considering its ancestry, that
makes a lot of sense.
> > > In this entire thread I don't think anyone has said 'why not get a
> > > bike?', be it motor, bicycle, or electric.
> >
> > Winter in pittsburgh.. Look at a topo map.
>
>
> Ok, you're excused. Now the OP said they only did short trips...
That I did. The car is less for me, and less for us, than it is for my
fiancee. She drives about five-six miles to work, through town.
We live in Minneapolis; she works in Saint Paul. She does run
errands and such for work, so she "needs" a car (as much as
anyone truly needs one). Her 20-30 minute commute jumps to
70 minutes on the bus, which is somewhat unpalatable if it can
be avoided. All in all, the standard excuses about not biking apply,
especially the one about living in Minneapolis.
I wore snowpants on the bus this morning, and home again in
the evening. Otherwise the cold would be crippling- I can't imagine
it on any kind of unprotected vehicle.
I would say, however, that we're ideal candidates for a small
electric car. If it had an 8-hour recharge time and a 90-100 mile
range it would completely cover 99% of our trips, and we could
rent a car for the other 1%.
>> I call shenanigans on your Passat TDI getting the same mileage as a
>> Prius.
>
> Call shenanigans all you like: My wife's Jetta TDI gets a consistent
> 34 MPG in city and pushes 40 MPG on highway trips, no problem at all.
That's quite a bit less than I get on my Prius (48 to 52mpg, averaged
over about 400 miles worth of driving that combines the 20mile commute
to work (easy), home from work (usually congested), and very local
driving (1-5 miles to and from schools and shopping.)
Interestingly, it looks like I get about the SAME 50mpg for both
the local at highway driving. The instances of 60mpg seem to happen
for stop-and-crawl congestion on the highway, and 35mph zones with
a mile or so between stoplights (my local trips are slower and have
more frequent stops.)
On Nov 30, 2007 3:24 AM, Tony Smith <spam_OUTajsmithSTOPspamrivernet.com.au> wrote:
> I disagree with the 'very small subset' comment, and so would many Chinese,
> as would many Europeans.
The thing is that even in China, more and more people are buying
cars. Bicycles/Motorcycles are still popular but cars seems to be
the big thing in China now. When the living standards get
higher and higher, more and more Chinese will have a car,
taxing the already congested road and causing more and more
pollution.
Singapore is another example that people still want to buy cars
despite having a very good public transport system. People need
to pay about 2 to 3 times the price here comparted to USA to
buy a car (an average Nissan/Honda/Toyota/etc costs about
US$35,000-40,000 here due to high tax and COE). Still people want
to buy cars. Here even learning to drive cost US$2000-3000
depending on your lucks.
Hi actually get routinely 43.5MPG on mix driving no problem with my
Passat TDI.
On the motorway if I keep to 70 MPH and use my 6th gear, which sometimes
I forget I have, the average will push towards the 50MPG.
Is the brilliant thing about the new diesel technologies, I think the
Audi does even better.
>There was a study done in Sydney a while back that showed for trips
>under 10km, the bicycle 'won' (personally, I'd say motorcycles
>should have). Sydney is fairly flat, but very spread out (50 sqr km?).
>I'd say a fair chunk of the 4,500,000 million people here are within
>10km of work.
My memories of Sydney, from around 1988, is that there is nowhere that one
could go very far without having to stop at traffic lights. Just no motorway
sections that one could get on to get out of the city. This would probably
help the bike fraternity.
That's capitalism at work. The wealthy actually want to spend the money
they earn.
That and automobiles are just a very comfortable, individualistic way to
travel. There is something nice about having your own car that you can
drive every day.
Jeff
--
A clever person solves a problem.
A wise person avoids it. -- Einstein
> >There was a study done in Sydney a while back that showed for trips
> >under 10km, the bicycle 'won' (personally, I'd say
> motorcycles should
> >have). Sydney is fairly flat, but very spread out (50 sqr km?).
> >I'd say a fair chunk of the 4,500,000 million people here are within
> >10km of work.
>
> My memories of Sydney, from around 1988, is that there is
> nowhere that one could go very far without having to stop at
> traffic lights. Just no motorway sections that one could get
> on to get out of the city. This would probably help the bike
> fraternity.
Sydney isn't very pedestrian friendly, let alone offer concessions for
cyclists. God help you if you're a woman with a pram or a skater. Timely
article:
<www.smh.com.au/news/national/walkers-need-to-reclaim-the-streets/2007/11/30
/1196394622483.html>, probably recycled from 6 months ago & ad infinitum.
Yeah, reclaim the streets. You'd need to get out of your car first. Lol.
There are dedicated bike paths, but they're few & far between. Typically
councils will denote a bike path by painting a bicycle picture on the side
of the road. Sometimes you can see them if that parking spot is empty.
Typical of what Sydney does is to redesign payphones. Most are now two
phones side by side, nice and wide so you can slap a big advertisement on
the back. Now put them where pedestrians walk, and swing them around so
that people sitting in their cars can see the ads, and block most of the
walkway while doing it. Retards ahoy, and praise the almighty dollar.
As a disclaimer, I don't own a car, and don't even have a drivers licence.
Got bikes though. I grew up in Australia's petrolhead mecca Bathurst, home
of Mount Panorama, where being car-less is a mortal sin, and evidence of
someone being 'not quite right'. I did the usual teenage thing of 'buying a
piece of junk and fixing it up' (Holden Torana, not XU1 of course), before I
decided it was a money sink and I had better things to do. I've no idea
what ever happened to that car, and don't really care.
Bathurst (a country town of ~35,000 people) expressed its love of
pedestrians by removing all of the pedestrian (zebra) crossings in its
shopping area, all while promoting tourism. Presumably the tourists drive
around & around in circles unhindered by pesky shoppers for a while, then
leave.
A couple of anecdotes - One year the council decided to paint the name in
big letters across the hilltop. Being methodical, the workers did 'Mount'
first, working backwards. First the 'T', then 'N', then 'U', and got
halfway thru 'O' before knocking off for a smoko. A friend regrets he
didn't have a camera handy. No complaints, apparently. A few years before
that the Count & Countess of Bathurst (how quaint!) paid a visit, and the
local newspaper made an unfortunate typo. The 'o' went missing from Madams
title... They recalled most copies, but not mine.
A trip to the supermarket today was an 8km round trip, and took about 25
minutes. You're limited to what will fit in a backpack, but that's a
journey most would do by car. (If I take the motor bike I can carry more).
Needless to say, I don't buy the 'I need a car' argument. 'I want a car' is
a sentiment I can accept better.
On 11/30/07, Tony Smith <EraseMEajsmithSTOPspamRemoveMErivernet.com.au> wrote:
> ... A few years before
> that the Count & Countess of Bathurst (how quaint!) paid a visit, and the
> local newspaper made an unfortunate typo. The 'o' went missing from Madams
> title... They recalled most copies, but not mine.
:-D
It's hard to believe that go through all the stages of writing,
editing, and printing before it was caught - makes me wonder if it was
not entirely accidental...
> Personally, my ideal car would be the reverse: an electric car with say
> a 200 mile range, but in the boot is a gas generator so that if you do
> run out of battery the gas generator starts up and you can keep going.
> You're mileage while on the generator will surely not be stellar, but
> it's rare that you'll use it much (and if you do use it much a petrol
> car would be a better choice).
>
Of course, the gas generator would have to be about the size of a normal
car engine to produce enough power to keep the thing rolling at freeway
speeds (though it would not need the peak power capacity required for
acceleration since that could be handled by batteries). I once read of a
"pusher" project an electric car enthusiast did. He figured the gas to
mechanical to electricity to mechanical was too many conversions to be
efficient, so he made a trailer that was just gas to mechanical. When gas
power was needed, the trailer would push the electric car. The control
system was pretty interesting also.
>> Personally, my ideal car would be the reverse: an electric car with say
>> a 200 mile range, but in the boot is a gas generator so that if you do
>> run out of battery the gas generator starts up and you can keep going.
>> You're mileage while on the generator will surely not be stellar, but
>> it's rare that you'll use it much (and if you do use it much a petrol
>> car would be a better choice).
>>
>>
>
> Of course, the gas generator would have to be about the size of a normal
> car engine to produce enough power to keep the thing rolling at freeway
> speeds (though it would not need the peak power capacity required for
> acceleration since that could be handled by batteries). I once read of a
> "pusher" project an electric car enthusiast did. He figured the gas to
> mechanical to electricity to mechanical was too many conversions to be
> efficient, so he made a trailer that was just gas to mechanical. When gas
> power was needed, the trailer would push the electric car. The control
> system was pretty interesting also.
>
> Harold
>
>
Actually at "highway speeds" you only use about 10KW or so assuming your
vehicle is somewhat slippery. IE ditch the SUV. My missus has a 250cc
motor bike that will put out about 4x that without trying too hard. A
single cylinder turbo diesel would probably do the job and be very fuel
efficient to boot.
> The Stirling engine will save us all :-).
>
> But it may be a while before they get it sorted.
>
> AFAIR Philips estimated that full development to sort out
> all the bugs would cost about ?10 billion? dollars. And
> have a payback period of about 4 months after that ;-)
>
> James will now say, ...
>
>>
> Actually at "highway speeds" you only use about 10KW or so assuming your
> vehicle is somewhat slippery. IE ditch the SUV. My missus has a 250cc
> motor bike that will put out about 4x that without trying too hard. A
> single cylinder turbo diesel would probably do the job and be very fuel
> efficient to boot.
10kW is pretty good! We just got a Honda Fit. I'll do some mileage tests
on it next month when we drive half way across the US and back. 10kW is
only 13.4HP. Can we really make a car go 65MPH with 13.4HP?
This transportation discussion reminds me of something my wife just heard
from her sister. As mentioned in a previous post, we just bought a Honda
Fit. We did have a car (actually two) before that, but did, and still do,
ride the bus to work for our 30 mile commute. My wife's sister's husband
(I can never figure out what various relations are called) had apparently
thought we did not have a car, since we ride the bus to work. When he
found out we DID have a car, he asked, "Then why do they ride the bus?" It
did not make sense to him for us to ride the bus when we had a car. It
DOES actually work out very well and is inexpensive ($30 per month for
each of us for a monthly pass). It does take about 15 minutes longer than
driving, but we don't have to hassle with traffic, parking, etc. We just
have this rather large limo (that holds 50) show up and give us a ride
home. During the ride, we have time to catch up on reading, visiting with
friends, etc.
Yes, you do know what I'll say, but I wanted to chime in on a couple of
related points:
First, I'm really impressed with the way everyone has responded to this
thread. It's one of the better discussions we have had. The use of
references to back up statements of fact is just totally cool.
One thing that sort of surprises me is that no one presented total cost of
ownership and operation figures. In almost every case, sustainability =
frugality. If it costs less, it does less damage. There are exceptions, but
that is a very good rule of thumb.
Just to let you know, I just purchased a "new" car a bit ago after the head
gasket blew on my 91 Honda Civic. The engine is probably reparable in the
old car and I've put it "up on blocks" while I save my pennies for the
repair. I paid $4k for it with 139k miles and it now has 230k on it so that
is around 4 cents a mile. It got about 32mpg gas with gas at between $2 and
$3 per gallon during it's life, it cost me about 8 cents a mile to operate
gas wise... Add another few cents a mile for repairs and so on and the total
cost of ownership and operation is around 14 cents a mile. It's now worth
about $0 but with a rebuilt engine (cost $1k) it should be worth around
$1.5k or $2k. I won't bother to take that off the cost; $14 cents a mile is
darn good.
In the mean time my wife and I did a LOT of looking around and researching
cars and eventually settled on a 2001 Toyota Camery. It only gets about
27mpg, and it is sort of a boat. But with 90k miles on the odometer, I
expect to be driving it for a long time. If it lives as well as the Civic,
it will die around 2017 at about 240k miles and having paid about $10k for
it and gotten 150k miles, it will have cost me 7 cents a mile to own. Given
the higher gas prices (I'm assuming it will average $5/gal over the next
several years) and lower mileage, with a few repairs, it will probably cost
20 cents a mile to operate. That totals out to 27 cents a mile, or about
double the cost of the Civic.
So why would I double my cost and therefore impact the planet twice as much
as I could have?
"What price the crown of a king on his throne, when you're chained in the
dark all alone?" (Extra points for naming the song.)
And I still haven't managed to pull off being able to work from home or at
least very near home. If I do, the wife can drive it and we can sell her Van
(don't buy the '98 Odyssey! Any other year is fine.) and I will get a little
solar recharging electric NEV http://www.sunvee.com/ or at least something small http://techref.massmind.org/techref/other/cars.htm and stay away from the
freeways.
If I could have found a diesel with as good a reliability rating (the VW's
are NOT reliable) in our state, and a good crash test rating, I would have
gone with that and tried to do a veggie conversion. There are 24 small
restaurants in walking distance of my house. But I probably wouldn't have
actually done it, and I was concerned about other people beating me out for
the oil in the future. If I can find something interesting, I still might
trade in the Camery. I spend about $2500 on gas each year so that adds up to
a solid $12500 in just 5 years. I could invest $20k in a truck and break
even pretty quick if I felt better about scavenging oil. 11 mpg * $0 per gal
= donut cost of operation.
A Prius would have cost around 15 cents a mile to operate and something like
14 cents a mile to own. At 29 cents a mile it is actually worse, but that is
based on VERY rough numbers which are hard to smooth due to the newness of
the technology.
Has anyone else actually run the numbers? Did you come up with something
different?
> As a disclaimer, I don't own a car, and don't even have a drivers licence.
> Got bikes though. I grew up in Australia's petrolhead mecca Bathurst, home
> of Mount Panorama, where being car-less is a mortal sin, and evidence of
> someone being 'not quite right'. I did the usual teenage thing of 'buying a
> piece of junk and fixing it up' (Holden Torana, not XU1 of course), before I
> decided it was a money sink and I had better things to do. I've no idea
> what ever happened to that car, and don't really care.
>
It is lucky that you can ride a bike. I wish I could ride a bike to work
(it is really not far away) but it is not safe here to ride a bike at all
as the road is not friendly to cyclists here in Singapore.
I do have a driving license. My wife and I spent about US$4k+ on
the driving license tests. The reason for me is that I may need to
drive for oversea trip (Example: life is not easy in US without a car).
I do not have a car here as I really do not think it is a good idea
to have a car here in Singapore because of the high price and
excellent public transportation. But maybe that is because that I
do not have kids and maid. Many Singaporeans feel they need
to buy a car once they have kids and maid. Taxi is relatively
cheaper but so often you can not get them when you need them.
On Dec 1, 2007 9:20 AM, James Newton <spamjamesnewton.....spammassmind.org> wrote:
> Has anyone else actually run the numbers? Did you come up with something
> different?
>
Here in Singapore you do not need to run the numbers. You lose when
you drive a car. Calling taxi everyday to work is normally cheaper
than buying a car.
Still people want to drive. Cost may not be the real issue here
as car is kind of lifestyle.
I was doing some back of the envelope on a plug in hybrid car a few days
ago. Assuming you need about 15KW to cover you average daily drive
(about 1 hour on the highway so say about 100km range, at lower speeds
150 or so would be a likley figure). The best batteries at the moment
are lithium nano phosphate cells exemplified by the A123 companies M1
cells (as used by dewalt 36v power tools). Currently i can get those off
ebay for around $10 per cell, or $8 if i'm picky. That is by purchasing
pre-built DeWalt packs and splitting them for the cells. Each cell has a
voltage of 3.2 volts and will supply 2.2AH of current. Roughly speaking
7 watts per battery. Ergo you need about 2200 cells (this is on par with
the Tesla roadster which has a similar specced range so I feel I'm in
the ballpark). Assuming you can get the cells for $8 per cell thats
$17600 worth of batteries. On average an Australian will drive 25000KM
per year. Assuming the average car gets 8 liters per 100km traveled
(which is a fairly efficient car) they will use about 2000 liters of
fuel. At $1.50 per liter that is $3000 per year. Electricity cost here
is 14 cents per KWh peak and about 6c off peak. Therefore a 15KW charge
will cost you $2.1 (Plus a bit of margin). If we assume conservatively
you have used this to drive at 100KM/H for 1 HR it costs you $0.021 per
KM. Over a year that is $525 at peak rates. Charging off peak you get
$0.9 for a charge and $225 per year.
This is on batteries alone but they are the most expensive single
component and the most likely to need replacement.
Payback period charging at off peak rates is.
$3000 - $225 = $2775 per year that electric is cheaper.
$17600 / $2775 = 6.3 years.
Assuming you spend an additional $8000 on other gear for the car
(chargers, speed controllers, motors, new wiring, 12KW generator etc)
you still pay for the electric mods in 9 years on fuel savings alone. If
you factor in scheduled services, maintenance etc you shorten this
period by a decent amount.
> Hey Mike,
>
> Yes, you do know what I'll say, but I wanted to chime in on a couple of
> related points:
>
> First, I'm really impressed with the way everyone has responded to this
> thread. It's one of the better discussions we have had. The use of
> references to back up statements of fact is just totally cool.
>
> One thing that sort of surprises me is that no one presented total cost of
> ownership and operation figures. In almost every case, sustainability =
> frugality. If it costs less, it does less damage. There are exceptions, but
> that is a very good rule of thumb.
>
> Just to let you know, I just purchased a "new" car a bit ago after the head
> gasket blew on my 91 Honda Civic. The engine is probably reparable in the
> old car and I've put it "up on blocks" while I save my pennies for the
> repair. I paid $4k for it with 139k miles and it now has 230k on it so that
> is around 4 cents a mile. It got about 32mpg gas with gas at between $2 and
> $3 per gallon during it's life, it cost me about 8 cents a mile to operate
> gas wise... Add another few cents a mile for repairs and so on and the total
> cost of ownership and operation is around 14 cents a mile. It's now worth
> about $0 but with a rebuilt engine (cost $1k) it should be worth around
> $1.5k or $2k. I won't bother to take that off the cost; $14 cents a mile is
> darn good.
>
> In the mean time my wife and I did a LOT of looking around and researching
> cars and eventually settled on a 2001 Toyota Camery. It only gets about
> 27mpg, and it is sort of a boat. But with 90k miles on the odometer, I
> expect to be driving it for a long time. If it lives as well as the Civic,
> it will die around 2017 at about 240k miles and having paid about $10k for
> it and gotten 150k miles, it will have cost me 7 cents a mile to own. Given
> the higher gas prices (I'm assuming it will average $5/gal over the next
> several years) and lower mileage, with a few repairs, it will probably cost
> 20 cents a mile to operate. That totals out to 27 cents a mile, or about
> double the cost of the Civic.
>
> So why would I double my cost and therefore impact the planet twice as much
> as I could have?
>
> Because it has a much better crash rating than the Civic. And more than
> 60,000 people die on the US roads every year.
> http://techref.massmind.org/techref/other/911.htm
>
> "What price the crown of a king on his throne, when you're chained in the
> dark all alone?" (Extra points for naming the song.)
>
> And I still haven't managed to pull off being able to work from home or at
> least very near home. If I do, the wife can drive it and we can sell her Van
> (don't buy the '98 Odyssey! Any other year is fine.) and I will get a little
> solar recharging electric NEV
> http://www.sunvee.com/ or at least something small
> http://techref.massmind.org/techref/other/cars.htm and stay away from the
> freeways.
>
> If I could have found a diesel with as good a reliability rating (the VW's
> are NOT reliable) in our state, and a good crash test rating, I would have
> gone with that and tried to do a veggie conversion. There are 24 small
> restaurants in walking distance of my house. But I probably wouldn't have
> actually done it, and I was concerned about other people beating me out for
> the oil in the future. If I can find something interesting, I still might
> trade in the Camery. I spend about $2500 on gas each year so that adds up to
> a solid $12500 in just 5 years. I could invest $20k in a truck and break
> even pretty quick if I felt better about scavenging oil. 11 mpg * $0 per gal
> = donut cost of operation.
>
> A Prius would have cost around 15 cents a mile to operate and something like
> 14 cents a mile to own. At 29 cents a mile it is actually worse, but that is
> based on VERY rough numbers which are hard to smooth due to the newness of
> the technology.
>
> Has anyone else actually run the numbers? Did you come up with something
> different?
>
> --
> James.
>
>
>
>
>
>
That's in the same ballpark as what I figure for my car, though a
contour gets worse gas mileage (22-23mpg) than what you've chosen. If
a repair costs less than 10cents a mile, then I'll repair it - for
instance the transmiaaion needed to be rebuilt several years ago, cost
$2,000, and I expected I'd get at least 20k miles before another major
repair. Replaced the shocks/struts awhile ago, and the tires now need
to be replaced. Fortunately the Duratec engine is very long lasting,
so I figure I still have a ways to go.
So including original cost of the car (used), all the repairs and
maintenance I hover right around $0.10 per mile, and then gas varies
on top of that, right now about $0.13 per mile.
The largest cost, however, is insurance. But that is largely a fixed
cost - in other words if I drive more then I pay less per mile. Right
now I'm driving about 1,200 miles/month, and paying about $90 per
month (IIRC) so each mile is about $0.08 per mile.
Bringing my total car cost to about $0.30 per mile, or $4,000 per year.
A bicycle is _much_ cheaper, but on the other hand I value my time at
a significantly high value relative to these costs, and so saving 1-2
hours a day on transportation is worth the $4k per year. Further, I
don't have the option of public transportation - about the best I
could do is car-pool, but it would again be a large waste of time, and
I'm willing to pay the cost for that time.
The best solution, of course, is to choose a job closer to me, even if
it pays a little less. One with showers, or within walking distance.
Who is it on this list that walks to the house next door for work? I
thnk I could handle that...
> Hey Mike,
>
> Yes, you do know what I'll say, but I wanted to chime in on a couple of
> related points:
>
> First, I'm really impressed with the way everyone has responded to this
> thread. It's one of the better discussions we have had. The use of
> references to back up statements of fact is just totally cool.
>
> One thing that sort of surprises me is that no one presented total cost of
> ownership and operation figures. In almost every case, sustainability =
> frugality. If it costs less, it does less damage. There are exceptions, but
> that is a very good rule of thumb.
>
> Just to let you know, I just purchased a "new" car a bit ago after the head
> gasket blew on my 91 Honda Civic. The engine is probably reparable in the
> old car and I've put it "up on blocks" while I save my pennies for the
> repair. I paid $4k for it with 139k miles and it now has 230k on it so that
> is around 4 cents a mile. It got about 32mpg gas with gas at between $2 and
> $3 per gallon during it's life, it cost me about 8 cents a mile to operate
> gas wise... Add another few cents a mile for repairs and so on and the total
> cost of ownership and operation is around 14 cents a mile. It's now worth
> about $0 but with a rebuilt engine (cost $1k) it should be worth around
> $1.5k or $2k. I won't bother to take that off the cost; $14 cents a mile is
> darn good.
>
> In the mean time my wife and I did a LOT of looking around and researching
> cars and eventually settled on a 2001 Toyota Camery. It only gets about
> 27mpg, and it is sort of a boat. But with 90k miles on the odometer, I
> expect to be driving it for a long time. If it lives as well as the Civic,
> it will die around 2017 at about 240k miles and having paid about $10k for
> it and gotten 150k miles, it will have cost me 7 cents a mile to own. Given
> the higher gas prices (I'm assuming it will average $5/gal over the next
> several years) and lower mileage, with a few repairs, it will probably cost
> 20 cents a mile to operate. That totals out to 27 cents a mile, or about
> double the cost of the Civic.
>
> So why would I double my cost and therefore impact the planet twice as much
> as I could have?
>
> Because it has a much better crash rating than the Civic. And more than
> 60,000 people die on the US roads every year.
> http://techref.massmind.org/techref/other/911.htm
>
> "What price the crown of a king on his throne, when you're chained in the
> dark all alone?" (Extra points for naming the song.)
>
> And I still haven't managed to pull off being able to work from home or at
> least very near home. If I do, the wife can drive it and we can sell her Van
> (don't buy the '98 Odyssey! Any other year is fine.) and I will get a little
> solar recharging electric NEV
> http://www.sunvee.com/ or at least something small
> http://techref.massmind.org/techref/other/cars.htm and stay away from the
> freeways.
>
> If I could have found a diesel with as good a reliability rating (the VW's
> are NOT reliable) in our state, and a good crash test rating, I would have
> gone with that and tried to do a veggie conversion. There are 24 small
> restaurants in walking distance of my house. But I probably wouldn't have
> actually done it, and I was concerned about other people beating me out for
> the oil in the future. If I can find something interesting, I still might
> trade in the Camery. I spend about $2500 on gas each year so that adds up to
> a solid $12500 in just 5 years. I could invest $20k in a truck and break
> even pretty quick if I felt better about scavenging oil. 11 mpg * $0 per gal
> = donut cost of operation.
>
> A Prius would have cost around 15 cents a mile to operate and something like
> 14 cents a mile to own. At 29 cents a mile it is actually worse, but that is
> based on VERY rough numbers which are hard to smooth due to the newness of
> the technology.
>
> Has anyone else actually run the numbers? Did you come up with something
> different?
>
> --
> James.
>
>
>
>
>
>
My youngest daughter (who is 9) has been walking home from school.
It's less than a mile, along but not crossing a relatively busy
street. ... People call the police: "there's this little girl
walking alone on this busy street..." They've shown up once or
twice, and neighbors who know things are ok have intervened now
and then. We DO think it's relatively safe; the last suspected
pedophile who tried the "have you seen my lost dog" ploy on some
local young teens turned out to in fact be looking for his lost
dog. But other people's perceptions are ... interesting.
We hope she'll look less ... noteworthy, now that she's riding
a bike instead of walking. (alas, this DOES involve crossing
the busy street if she wants to obey bike traffic rules.)
> Just to let you know, I just purchased a "new" car a bit
> ago after the head
> gasket blew on my 91 Honda Civic.
My "main" car is an 89 Subaru Leone 'station Wagon'. 1800cc
(I think) opposed 4 boxer and PUSHRODS!
" could afford "better" but see very little point in buying
anything newer/flasher/dearer as long as this one serves me
as well as it does now..
MPG was good but got worse in recent times but a 2 screw
twiddle tuneup yesterday plus finding the fuel filter hidden
away at the back rear has hopefully partially fixed that.
The filter was so blocked that it was causing intermittent
starving that needed extra throttle on motorways. time to do
some mpg tests (l/100km if you wish) again.
The engine sounds horrific to me but my friendly visiting
mechanic says the engine sounds good so it may last a few
more years. Or die tomorrow. It has hydraulic self adjusting
pushrods (which never need adjusting and aid fuel economy)
and these initially have high clearances when it starts up
so it souns like it is running all its bigends when you
start it. As it cost me under $US1000 2 years ago I'm happy
with its value for money. It has no sex appeal whatsoever.
But, it has manually selectable 4WD and hi/low ratio. Also 4
headlights and 2 foglights which was probably meant to give
it sex appeal in 1989 but hasn't lasted the distance.
Part of my brain says (and I haven't done any figures on
this) that by driving a "junker", as long as the mpgs are
about as good as a newer car, I'm vastly reducing the
effective planetary resource load. I know people who discard
their cars at 3 years or less. That is far from writing them
off as there is a long food chain before the car is actually
discarded.
My other car is also 1989 and has alas been off the road for
about a year now. End of year's resolution (ha!) is to get
it back on road by Christmas. Little hope alas. In its long
gone day it (this identical model) was the world's fasted
production car bar none to 30 mph from a standing start.
(Faster than any Lotus, Ferrai, Lamboghini, Porsche, BMW,
... ). Few find this credible. AND its an automatic :-). AND
it's Japanese. What is it? (Clue - the reason that it beat
also these turbo-erised monsters off the line is that it's
Supercharged (ie NOT a turbo).
> "What price the crown of a king on his throne, when you're
> chained in the
> dark all alone?" (Extra points for naming the song.)
Extra points. What poem / story is it based on? By who? (A
nasty little tale of the sort that made me wish that I'd
never read it. Offers very little that's edifying and
produces occasional horrid mental flashbacks years later).
Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> It is lucky that you can ride a bike. I wish I could ride a bike to work
> (it is really not far away) but it is not safe here to ride a bike at all
> as the road is not friendly to cyclists here in Singapore.
I've started using bike for going to customers' some 4 years ago, after
a lot of time without riding a bicycle at all.
I use it when distance is not longer than some 7-10Km. I don't care
arriving there in shorts or sweaty - after all I'm just a computer guy :-))
It's not this simple to go by bicycle in Turin, Italy too... but worth to.
Just a thought, because I am a soccer fan.
Most of my soccer friends come from South America, a few from Europe. Soccer is so popular in England and Europe.
On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 11:50:29AM -0800, Harold Hallikainen wrote:
>
> > Personally, my ideal car would be the reverse: an electric car with say
> > a 200 mile range, but in the boot is a gas generator so that if you do
> > run out of battery the gas generator starts up and you can keep going.
> > You're mileage while on the generator will surely not be stellar, but
> > it's rare that you'll use it much (and if you do use it much a petrol
> > car would be a better choice).
> >
>
> Of course, the gas generator would have to be about the size of a normal
> car engine to produce enough power to keep the thing rolling at freeway
> speeds (though it would not need the peak power capacity required for
> acceleration since that could be handled by batteries).
Actually from what I was reading, the engine can be smaller and more
efficient because it didn't have to handle peak power loads.
> I once read of a
> "pusher" project an electric car enthusiast did.
The basic idea was to extend the range and refueling capability of an
around town electric with a gas pusher.
> He figured the gas to
> mechanical to electricity to mechanical was too many conversions to be
> efficient, so he made a trailer that was just gas to mechanical. When gas
> power was needed, the trailer would push the electric car. The control
> system was pretty interesting also.
Which raised my point in my other response. A series hybrid has too many
inefficiencies. They only extra issue in a true hybrid is that you have to
carry around both engines plus batteries all the time. With the pusher
concept you detach the gas pusher once you reach your long distance
destination and use the electric engine for its typical short distance
trips.
It still seems to me that incorporating a really light, moderate power, gas
engine as a hybrid would work better in the long run. The big problem with
true electrics is running out of power along the road. The smallest gas
engine that can safely limp the car home for a recharge would be the best
bet.
> I always thought a cool idea would be to have adhoc trains of personal
> vehicles that travel together during rush hour. Then you get the
> advantages
> of the personal vehicle along with some of the benefits of public
> transportation. It could be sold with the three pronged attack of faster
> to
> work/home, keep your personal space, and time to work or relax because
> while you are attached to the adhoc train, you don't need to drive.
>
This brings up a couple ideas I've had, both probably not original.
On the ad hoc train, once a car is on a freeway, a control system could
lock on to the car in front of it, adjusting speed and steering. The
driver would be free for other tasks until the desired offramp neared.
On commuter trains, a fair percentage of the total travel time is spent
stopped at intermediate stations letting passengers on and off the train.
Another approach would be for every station to have a car with passengers
loading it. As a train approached, the last car would disconnect and pull
in to the station while the rest of the train continued. The car that was
in the station picking up passengers would catch up with the train passing
by and hook up. Passengers wanting more distant stops would move from the
last car to another car. Passengers wanting the next stop would move into
the last car, which gets dropped off at the next stop.
On 12/2/07, Byron Jeff <spamBeGonebyronjeffRemoveMEEraseMEclayton.edu> wrote:
> I always thought a cool idea would be to have adhoc trains of personal
> vehicles that travel together during rush hour. Then you get the advantages
> of the personal vehicle along with some of the benefits of public
> transportation. It could be sold with the three pronged attack of faster to
> work/home, keep your personal space, and time to work or relax because
> while you are attached to the adhoc train, you don't need to drive.
>
This is a nice idea but hard to achieve. A simple method will be
to have more car pool lanes. I think it can be rather effective,
especially in those congested loads. Car sharing schemers
should also be given some incentives.
The "easier" way is to let the oil price raise further (say let it
go up to US$300 to US$500 per barrel) so that alternative
energy becomes really attractive. But this is not so easy
after all...
Xiaofan (who uses public transportation if not in USA)
Ahh, yes, fortunately we do get (very abbreviated) late night plays of the
V8 championship here in the UK. For the normal 3 race weekend, they cram it
into approximately an hour, for the 6 hours of Bathurst they do expand it
out to about 1 1/2 hours.
>Personally, my ideal car would be the reverse: an electric car
>with say a 200 mile range, but in the boot is a gas generator
>so that if you do run out of battery the gas generator starts
>up and you can keep going.
I was thinking it should be on a trailer, so for normal motoring you are not
hauling the weight around, but hook it up for extended travel only.
On Mon, Dec 03, 2007 at 10:02:05AM -0000, Alan B. Pearce wrote:
> >Personally, my ideal car would be the reverse: an electric car
> >with say a 200 mile range, but in the boot is a gas generator
> >so that if you do run out of battery the gas generator starts
> >up and you can keep going.
>
> I was thinking it should be on a trailer, so for normal motoring you are not
> hauling the weight around, but hook it up for extended travel only.
Alan,
I want to take another crack at explaning the problem. We can all agree
that when a car of any type runs out of energy, that it stops moving.
Now consider the three types of vechicles:
gas/diesel: Refill stations are everywhere. Refilling takes minutes.
Someone can bring you fuel to a remote spot if you run out.
Hybrid: Fundamentally the same as gas/diesel. I won't differentiate
different types until later.
Electric only: Problem. You can't refill quickly, fuel cannot be easily
brought to you in a remote place.
So it's not just about extended travel. If you are in a electric car and it
runs out of energy, though you can probably get recharge somehow presuming
that it's a plugin, you're not going to get going again quickly.
Until hydrogen fuel cells become a commodity (and they have their issues
too) one will have issues running a strictly electric car.
So the trailer idea has issues, because for it to be useful in the precise
situation the OP outlined above (run out of battery), you have to carry it
with you. And the plant has to be powerful enough to power the car (again
because you have run out of battery)
So fundamentally because of the nature of the problem you are stuck with a
hybrid. The only question is what hybrid configuration most closely mimics
an electric only vehicle.
I believe that work on a backup generator type powerplant is the right
direction. You don't plan to use it, but you have it just in case. But it
has to be onboard and available all the time.
Then you can couple with the extended range trailer.
So now what's the best way to utilize the onboard backup. Several choices
are available:
Series: It's a genset only that can charge the batteries and power the
electric motor. There's been quite a bit of debate on the efficiency of
this setup. It does greatly simplify the drivetrain though because it's
electric only.
Parallel: The gas/diesel engine powers the car directly. Batteries can be
charged by regeneration of both forward motion and braking.
Split: Split the power between the two above. So have a genset that charges
the batteries directly while applying power directly to the drivetrain.
Now it's a backup. So while the performance doesn't have to be perfect, it
needs to be good enough to limp the car to somewhere where it can be
charged.
I wonder in our all electric car world we'll have emergency battery service.
So when you run out of juice a vechicle with fresh batteries shows up and
you plug right in?
Maybe that's a better model. Something along the lines of propane refills.
Instead of waiting to refill your existing tank, you simply turn in your
tank and pick up a fresh filled tank. That would solve most of the problems
of the electric car running out of juice. Simply swap out battery packs.
Or rent a trailer to get you home and bring it back the next day for a fee.
>Alan,
>
>I want to take another crack at explaning the problem. We can all agree
>that when a car of any type runs out of energy, that it stops moving.
OK
>Electric only: Problem. You can't refill quickly, fuel cannot be easily
>brought to you in a remote place.
>
>So it's not just about extended travel. If you are in a electric car and it
>runs out of energy, though you can probably get recharge somehow presuming
>that it's a plugin, you're not going to get going again quickly.
To me this is a management problem. Most journeys that one would do without
a backup source of fuel would be commuting. So if one doesn't recharge the
car overnight, then you deserve to run out of fuel.
OK, so the round trip of the commute is a little more than half the total
available travel distance on a charge. I personally would be looking at
having the roof (and possibly the bonnet and boot (trunk) covered in solar
cells, to get some top up while it is parked.
Maybe the extra cautious among us would haul the equivalent of one of these
portable generators, just like having a pump for putting air in the tyres,
or a set of jump start leads. To me that becomes a matter of personal
preference. Yes, I would probably do that for the first couple of years
after obtaining an electric only car, until I got the hang of it, or found
some way to fast charge it.
And on that note, I guess some form of fast charging will be needed for the
roadside service organisations - so they can do the equivalent of carrying a
can of gas. Until that capability exists I see difficulties for the wider
population being really convinced about taking up any form of electric only
product. But then once fast charging is available, it changes the dynamic of
operating one anyway.
> I wonder in our all electric car world we'll have
> emergency battery service.
> So when you run out of juice a vechicle with fresh
> batteries shows up and
> you plug right in?
Inductive power transfer. Electromagnetic jumper leads.
Rescue vehicle (or potentially any vehicle) snuggles up to
your and transfers some energy. Maybe just enough to get you
to the nearest filling point.
The way Li Ion variants are going the rate of transfer say
10 years from now is going to be limited only by the charge
circuit capabilities. If you want to crash charge your
battery in one minute then it will be doable. Get it wrong
and "vents with medium sized crater in road".
Nah ... restaurants, theatres, shopping malls and truck stops will put in
coin/bill operated fast-charge-vending so quickly that it'll make your head
spin. They have the real estate that the gasoline filling stations lack.
Municipal parking, recharge for XX dollars per half hour or park for Y
dollars ... charge finished and still there ... 50$ overtime parking
fine:-))
>
> > I wonder in our all electric car world we'll have
> > emergency battery service.
> > So when you run out of juice a vechicle with fresh
> > batteries shows up and
> > you plug right in?
>
>
> Inductive power transfer. Electromagnetic jumper leads.
>
> Rescue vehicle (or potentially any vehicle) snuggles up to
> your and transfers some energy. Maybe just enough to get you
> to the nearest filling point.
>
> The way Li Ion variants are going the rate of transfer say
> 10 years from now is going to be limited only by the charge
> circuit capabilities. If you want to crash charge your
> battery in one minute then it will be doable. Get it wrong
> and "vents with medium sized crater in road".
>
>
>
>
> Russell
>
On Mon, Dec 03, 2007 at 01:13:24PM -0000, Alan B. Pearce wrote:
> >Alan,
> >
> >I want to take another crack at explaning the problem. We can all agree
> >that when a car of any type runs out of energy, that it stops moving.
>
> OK
>
> >Electric only: Problem. You can't refill quickly, fuel cannot be easily
> >brought to you in a remote place.
> >
> >So it's not just about extended travel. If you are in a electric car and it
> >runs out of energy, though you can probably get recharge somehow presuming
> >that it's a plugin, you're not going to get going again quickly.
>
> To me this is a management problem. Most journeys that one would do without
> a backup source of fuel would be commuting. So if one doesn't recharge the
> car overnight, then you deserve to run out of fuel.
I agree to a point. It is analogous to forgetting to fill up with gas. You
allude to the difference below, which is that if you do run out, there's no
infrastructure to support getting going again right now.
> OK, so the round trip of the commute is a little more than half the total
> available travel distance on a charge. I personally would be looking at
> having the roof (and possibly the bonnet and boot (trunk) covered in solar
> cells, to get some top up while it is parked.
Solar only has a minimal recharge capacity. More logical would be recharge
meters that you feed coins and plug-in. Again a infrastructure issue.
> Maybe the extra cautious among us would haul the equivalent of one of these
> portable generators, just like having a pump for putting air in the tyres,
> or a set of jump start leads. To me that becomes a matter of personal
> preference.
So why not simply integrate this into the existing electric car
infrastructure? Most cars carry a spare tire just in case.
I'll answer my own question. Any additional weight will affect the range of
the electric car. That's the tradeoff. And I fear that any portable
generator that actually is useful enough to recharge the vehicle is going
to be both large and heavy, thereby cutting down usable space and range on
the vehicle.
> Yes, I would probably do that for the first couple of years
> after obtaining an electric only car, until I got the hang of it, or found
> some way to fast charge it.
Fast charging seems to be the key component.
> And on that note, I guess some form of fast charging will be needed for the
> roadside service organisations - so they can do the equivalent of carrying a
> can of gas. Until that capability exists I see difficulties for the wider
> population being really convinced about taking up any form of electric only
> product. But then once fast charging is available, it changes the dynamic of
> operating one anyway.
On Mon, 2007-12-03 at 13:13 +0000, Alan B. Pearce wrote:
> To me this is a management problem. Most journeys that one would do without
> a backup source of fuel would be commuting. So if one doesn't recharge the
> car overnight, then you deserve to run out of fuel.
Right, so, you're a commuter, driving an electric car. Your commute is
half the range, so LOTS of room to spare, right?
Consider this: horrible traffic jam in the middle of the winter (snow
storm). Takes you 3 times as long to get home as normal (been there,
done that).
Ahh, you're in an electric car, which is really efficient at stop and go
since you don't have an engine running, right? Wrong, it's 0 degrees F
outside (-18C) and you need to have the heater running. Half way home
you run out of power.
Electric only cars ARE great for when everything goes right. They are a
big problem when things go wrong, and as a result will not catch on in
many parts of NA until a "5 minute refill" is possible.
I really enjoyed your analysis. I think where it falls apart for me is
in two places, and they're in the "fuzzy" stuff around the raw numbers
analysis.
1) The VW's may have some minor "reliability" problems, but they also
have an enormous warranty. If a problem doesn't make the car
un-driveable, there's something to be said for just dropping it off,
getting a free loaner, and having it fixed in a day or so. My wife's VW
has experienced four minor issues, and all have either been under
warranty or turned into a recall. They're serious about fixing the
problems.
2) Driving enjoyment factor -- how to put a number on it? I know we're
all engineering/techies here and want to quantify everything, but
there's something to be said for driving a vehicle that handles like
it's on rails, can drag me uphill on I-70 westbound out of Denver (above
6000' MSL) without losing any significant power (turbo-charged) and
generally is big enough for a big guy to be comfortable in.
Prius's are great, but uncomfortable (for me anyway), and the Toyota
Camry over-steers like an ocean liner and generally rides like it's on
marshmallows.
So -- how much one ENJOYs the operating the vehicle also factors in here
somehow. Not sure how best to quantify it. It also factors into how
well someone will take care of the vehicle, etc. If you like the car,
sometimes the numbers don't matter. (GRIN)
On Mon, 2007-12-03 at 14:52 -0700, Nate Duehr wrote:
> 1) The VW's may have some minor "reliability" problems, but they also
> have an enormous warranty. If a problem doesn't make the car
> un-driveable, there's something to be said for just dropping it off,
> getting a free loaner, and having it fixed in a day or so. My wife's VW
> has experienced four minor issues, and all have either been under
> warranty or turned into a recall. They're serious about fixing the
> problems.
Generally VW problems pop up mostly after the warranty is done,
historically around the 5 year point and beyond. The TDI models usually
do much better then the petrol models.
Past models had very serious electrical issues. More important then just
the fact that there were electrical problems was the fact that
replacement parts are quite a bit more expensive then the equivalent
Toyota or GM part.
I was considering a Golf as my next vehicle. I called several
dealerships asking if they had one to test drive with a standard gear
box. None did. One suggested I buy the car and test drive it when
delivered!???! Another suggested I test drive a 2002 model they had on
the lot... Suffice it to say if that's how the sales people are I can't
imagine how the rest of the company would treat me.
> 2) Driving enjoyment factor -- how to put a number on it? I know we're
> all engineering/techies here and want to quantify everything, but
> there's something to be said for driving a vehicle that handles like
> it's on rails, can drag me uphill on I-70 westbound out of Denver (above
> 6000' MSL) without losing any significant power (turbo-charged) and
> generally is big enough for a big guy to be comfortable in.
I used to agree with you. As a result I bought a 2001 Subaru Legacy.
Amazingly fun car to drive (almost as fun as the Impreza). Then the
repair bills started coming in (some due to actual failures, others due
to mechanics making mistakes).
In the end I got rid of it, at a great loss and bought a Toyota Matrix
with extended warranty. It certainly isn't as much fun to drive in the
snow as the Subaru was (although I can still have a good amount of fun),
but at least I don't have to budget $1000/month for repairs...
Still, no comparison to my brother's experience with his 2002 Subaru
Impreza, can anyone say blown engine at < 100000 miles?
At least so that you can warn her who not to go for if she needs help?
And she has had some sort of training to avoid the common dangers?
And she calls you when she reaches the house and you have an alarm set to
remind you if you have not received that call?
She has a cell phone?
I don't know where you live in the USA, and I will not pretend to know what
is better for your daughter than you do, but this is not a chance I would
take in Escondido, CA with my daughter, even at the age of 13. If it is
something that must be done, or that you decide to do, I believe the most
important thing is to do everything you can to reduce the risks.
Just a regular car with a large spring steel "bumper" that loops out in
front of the car and is connected to hinges (vertical axis) at the left and
right. The average angle of the hinges controls the steering of the car. The
difference between the angles controls the speed (acceleration or
deceleration) so that when the spring loop is squeezed on the left and
right, the car accelerates and when it is compressed at the front, it
decelerates. Coupling the main spring to the controls with weaker or
stronger spring segments allows for more or less control by the driver over
the system.
Small roller blade type wheels on the sides of the loop keep it from wearing
as it follows a "curb" and could serve as electrical contact points for an
electrified road. Existing roadways would need additional "curbs" in between
lanes. This is much less costly than any other system I have seen, and could
be done over time in different areas. There would still be a cost, and on
street parking would be a problem.
Speed is proportional to the inverse of the distance between the curbs.
Maximum speed is maintained when the car is held to the narrowest path. The
car coasts when there is no contact left or right.
Given the relative risks I would think you should be *far* more worried
about her getting hit by a car crossing the road. Here at least there
are signs up saying 1 in 3 traffic accidents involve pedestrians. And if
you do drive her to /from school she is far more likely to be involved
in a car accident rather than any form of problem with another person.
At least as far as I'm aware. In addition if you are that worried about
pedo's your best off looking closer to home, most cases involve friends
and family.
It might just be an Australian thing but I think the level of paranoia
with regards "stranger danger" is ridiculous. You teach the children
that everybody is out to get them then wonder why nobody stops to help
grandma on the side of the road, or why people are afraid to go out in
public. But quite happy to drive somewhere.
> And you have checked the local listings for Pedophiles alone the way?
>
> http://www.klaaskids.org/pg-legmeg2.htm
>
> At least so that you can warn her who not to go for if she needs help?
>
> And she has had some sort of training to avoid the common dangers?
>
> And she calls you when she reaches the house and you have an alarm set to
> remind you if you have not received that call?
>
> She has a cell phone?
>
> I don't know where you live in the USA, and I will not pretend to know what
> is better for your daughter than you do, but this is not a chance I would
> take in Escondido, CA with my daughter, even at the age of 13. If it is
> something that must be done, or that you decide to do, I believe the most
> important thing is to do everything you can to reduce the risks.
>
> --
> James.
>
> Small roller blade type wheels on the sides of the loop
> keep it from wearing
> as it follows a "curb" and could serve as electrical
> contact points for an
> electrified road.
Inductive power transfer !!!!
Better, cheaper, and faster :-)
(Perhaps).
The problem with VW warranty, and I agree they are great for that, is that
it runs out. Sustainability depends on driving every last bit of function
out of a car before it gets replaced.
At 46 and after seeing more than my share of wrecks, I'm pretty much over
the desire to enjoy driving... and when it pops up, I go to K1 speed and
drive kick ass little electric go karts that accelerate fast enough to knock
my head back.
On the bus ride home from work today, I was reading the November 5 issue
of Electronic Design. There's an interesting article on the driving range
of the Tesla electric car.
The article says in a city drive cycle of 252 miles, it took 30kWh per 100
miles to recharge the batteries. For city driving, I'd guess they averaged
about 35 miles per hour, so they took about 2.86 hours to consume 30kWh,
or were using about 10.5kW or 14HP.
For highway driving, they drove 236 miles with a recharge requirement of
32kWh per 100 miles. I'd guess they were doing 65MPH on the highway, so it
took 1.54 hours to go 100 miles and use that 32kWh. That's about 20.8kW or
28HP.
Is this a really low loss car, or can a typical car get highway speeds
with 28HP? If so, why do we have hundreds of HP in many cars?
I'd REALLY like to see a spreadsheet showing at several speeds what the
"power" (energy/time) of the fuel is, the power out of the engine, the
power hitting the wheels, power lost due to drag, power loss due to tire
rolling friction, and all other losses. Where is all this power going?
On 01/12/2007, Apptech <TakeThisOuTapptechparadise.net.nz> wrote:
>
>
> My other car is also 1989 and has alas been off the road for
> about a year now. End of year's resolution (ha!) is to get
> it back on road by Christmas. Little hope alas. In its long
> gone day it (this identical model) was the world's fasted
> production car bar none to 30 mph from a standing start.
> (Faster than any Lotus, Ferrai, Lamboghini, Porsche, BMW,
> ... ). Few find this credible. AND its an automatic :-). AND
> it's Japanese. What is it? (Clue - the reason that it beat
> also these turbo-erised monsters off the line is that it's
> Supercharged (ie NOT a turbo).
Well, mine makes this list, would yours? http://www.autofacts.ca/classics/fast.htm
Mine probably weighs twice yours and has something in common with the model
T.
(I'll play this game too :)
On Mon, Dec 03, 2007 at 04:02:24PM -0800, James Newton wrote: {Quote hidden}
> And you have checked the local listings for Pedophiles alone the way?
>
> http://www.klaaskids.org/pg-legmeg2.htm
>
> At least so that you can warn her who not to go for if she needs help?
>
> And she has had some sort of training to avoid the common dangers?
>
> And she calls you when she reaches the house and you have an alarm set to
> remind you if you have not received that call?
>
> She has a cell phone?
>
> I don't know where you live in the USA, and I will not pretend to know what
> is better for your daughter than you do, but this is not a chance I would
> take in Escondido, CA with my daughter, even at the age of 13. If it is
> something that must be done, or that you decide to do, I believe the most
> important thing is to do everything you can to reduce the risks.
Sheesh, I was walking home from school by myself starting at... 8-9 years
of age or so? By 13 I was allowed to go to downtown Toronto by myself,
first for a pottery class and Active Surplus and later at 14 for jobs; I
didn't have a cellphone then. By 16 I spent three months alone in
Toronto working full-time while the rest of my family went to BC for the
summer. (had a cellphone that time)
Sure it depends on the kid, and gender, but still...
On 12/4/07, Peter Todd <spamBeGonepeteKILLspamTakeThisOuTpetertodd.ca> wrote:
> > I don't know where you live in the USA, and I will not pretend to know what
> > is better for your daughter than you do, but this is not a chance I would
> > take in Escondido, CA with my daughter, even at the age of 13. If it is
> > something that must be done, or that you decide to do, I believe the most
> > important thing is to do everything you can to reduce the risks.
>
> Sheesh, I was walking home from school by myself starting at... 8-9 years
> of age or so? By 13 I was allowed to go to downtown Toronto by myself,
> first for a pottery class and Active Surplus and later at 14 for jobs; I
> didn't have a cellphone then. By 16 I spent three months alone in
> Toronto working full-time while the rest of my family went to BC for the
> summer. (had a cellphone that time)
>
> Sure it depends on the kid, and gender, but still...
>
I am not so sure about Toronto. But I've been to a few places in
USA and I will not dare to go alone in those places. Actually when
we were in Cleveland last year, the local tour guide also warned
us not to go to certain places (at least not to go off the car).
Even here in Singapore (quite safe), the police always warn
us "low crime rate does not mean no crime".
That being said, certain places in California seems to be
quite safe. Irvine may be one example.
Harold Hallikainen wrote:
> On the bus ride home from work today, I was reading the November 5 issue
> of Electronic Design. There's an interesting article on the driving range
> of the Tesla electric car.
>
> The article says in a city drive cycle of 252 miles, it took 30kWh per 100
> miles to recharge the batteries. For city driving, I'd guess they averaged
> about 35 miles per hour, so they took about 2.86 hours to consume 30kWh,
> or were using about 10.5kW or 14HP.
>
> For highway driving, they drove 236 miles with a recharge requirement of
> 32kWh per 100 miles. I'd guess they were doing 65MPH on the highway, so it
> took 1.54 hours to go 100 miles and use that 32kWh. That's about 20.8kW or
> 28HP.
>
> Is this a really low loss car, or can a typical car get highway speeds
> with 28HP? If so, why do we have hundreds of HP in many cars?
>
>
I'd say the tesla is moderately slippery (ie better than a SUV) but
being a convertible they are liable to have lots of aerodynamic losses,
combined with its "sporty" nature its liable to have lots of down force
which wont help matters either. The only use you have for all that
horsepower is acceleration and towing heavy things (like your SUV) up
hills. For 99% of the time your foot is nowhere near the floor. All
those cubic inches are doing is wasting fuel pushing pistons up and down.
Keep in mind too electric and petrol horsepower are different. Petrol
engines are rated at their absolute maximum horsepower. Electric motors
are rated at their sustained output, and its not uncommon to drive an
electric motor to 5 times its rated power for short periods. IE a 15kw
motor is probably going to be fine putting out 80KW or so for a few seconds.
Put 4 of those in your car and you will have plenty of "go fast" ;->
If you want to be efficient then http://www.seriouswheels.com/cars/top-vw-1-liter-car.htm is the way to go
its 3x more efficient than my other half's motorcycle. (thats 282 miles
per gallon for the imperials out there ;-.)
> I'd REALLY like to see a spreadsheet showing at several speeds what the
> "power" (energy/time) of the fuel is, the power out of the engine, the
> power hitting the wheels, power lost due to drag, power loss due to tire
> rolling friction, and all other losses. Where is all this power going?
>
> Harold
>
>
>
> Is this a really low loss car, or can a typical car get highway speeds
> with 28HP? If so, why do we have hundreds of HP in many cars?
To go from 0-65mph in less than 90 seconds.
Cars are designed and built for the 1% sections of driving. My Jetta
GLI has about a 5.5s 0-60. Do I ever get to exercise that? No,
because most stoplights are on 30-35mph roads. Because I'm
rarely the first one in the line. Because accelerating like that in a
highly urbanized area is dangerous (more to others than myself)
and irresponsible. It can take corners like a beast, but that doesn't
come into play either, for the same reasons.
It's nice to know I can do that, but it would be nicer to not pay $0.20
per mile in gas. It would be nicer still to know that polar bears will
exist when my grandchildren have children.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: EraseMEpiclist-bounces.....KILLspammit.edu [spampiclist-bouncesmit.edu] On
Behalf
> Of Mike Hord
> Sent: 04 December 2007 14:26
> To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public.
> Subject: Re: Re: [OT] Car purchase
>
> > Is this a really low loss car, or can a typical car get highway
speeds {Quote hidden}
> > with 28HP? If so, why do we have hundreds of HP in many cars?
>
> To go from 0-65mph in less than 90 seconds.
>
> Cars are designed and built for the 1% sections of driving. My Jetta
> GLI has about a 5.5s 0-60. Do I ever get to exercise that? No,
> because most stoplights are on 30-35mph roads. Because I'm
> rarely the first one in the line. Because accelerating like that in a
> highly urbanized area is dangerous (more to others than myself)
> and irresponsible. It can take corners like a beast, but that doesn't
> come into play either, for the same reasons.
>
> It's nice to know I can do that, but it would be nicer to not pay
$0.20
> per mile in gas. It would be nicer still to know that polar bears
will
> exist when my grandchildren have children.
Out of interest why did you buy it if you feel the performance is
unusable and the mileage is poor?
Mike
=======================================================================
This e-mail is intended for the person it is addressed to only. The
information contained in it may be confidential and/or protected by
law. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you must
not make any use of this information, or copy or show it to any
person. Please contact us immediately to tell us that you have
received this e-mail, and return the original to us. Any use,
forwarding, printing or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.
No part of this message can be considered a request for goods or
services.
=======================================================================
A few months ago the guy who shares my office bought a new car for his
wife. I don't recall what it was, but it cost about $28K. This got me
thinking back, and after totaling up a list, I concluded that $30K was
about the total purchase price of all the cars I have bought in the past
(nearly) 40 years.
About one-third of that total was for one used minivan. While I ran it
for over 100K, I later figured it was the worst miles/$ return of any
vehicle I'd had. Everything else I've bought has been for $3K or less.
While I have paid more for maintenance and repairs, I've seldom had a
car payment (or insurance other than liability). Of course I've never
gotten any resale value either, when I'm done with a car it usually goes
straight to the junkyard.
I figure it's transportation; I don't live in it more than a few minutes
a day. (OTOH I've never had long commutes.) However, I've also usually
had quite comfortable, reliable cars. (Hint, the last three cars I've
bought have been from friends mothers; granny cars, low mileage, not
abused, well maintained.)
Saving the planet by running old cars into the ground.
> > Cars are designed and built for the 1% sections of driving. My Jetta
> > GLI has about a 5.5s 0-60. Do I ever get to exercise that? No,
> > because most stoplights are on 30-35mph roads. Because I'm
> > rarely the first one in the line. Because accelerating like that in a
> > highly urbanized area is dangerous (more to others than myself)
> > and irresponsible. It can take corners like a beast, but that doesn't
> > come into play either, for the same reasons.
> Out of interest why did you buy it if you feel the performance is
> unusable and the mileage is poor?
Oh, I bought it for the performance, no mistaking that. The mileage is
not THAT poor- at it's absolute worst it's better than most SUVs or
pickup trucks. And it's fun on the few occasions I can squeeze some
of the performance out of it. My experience with it has left me with
a few conclusions:
1. A car with higher performance is a COMPLETE waste of money,
as you'll run into societal constraints before performance limits.
2. It's not worth it.
3. Unless you have a lot of money to waste, don't buy a car for
performance, as you'll probably end up frustrated most of the time
and want to sell it at a loss pretty quickly.
It's been fun, but my conscience is just too loud to ignore, now.
It's often the most interesting story. Child abductions per capita
may not have increased much, but the media (and the parents using the
media, as well as every other means, to find their child) have pushed
the terror to the stratosphere.
> Given the relative risks I would think you should be *far* more worried
> about her getting hit by a car crossing the road. Here at least there
> are signs up saying 1 in 3 traffic accidents involve pedestrians. And if
> you do drive her to /from school she is far more likely to be involved
> in a car accident rather than any form of problem with another person.
> At least as far as I'm aware. In addition if you are that worried about
> pedo's your best off looking closer to home, most cases involve friends
> and family.
>
> It might just be an Australian thing but I think the level of paranoia
> with regards "stranger danger" is ridiculous. You teach the children
> that everybody is out to get them then wonder why nobody stops to help
> grandma on the side of the road, or why people are afraid to go out in
> public. But quite happy to drive somewhere.
>
>
>
>
> James Newton wrote:
> > And you have checked the local listings for Pedophiles alone the way?
> >
> > http://www.klaaskids.org/pg-legmeg2.htm
> >
> > At least so that you can warn her who not to go for if she needs help?
> >
> > And she has had some sort of training to avoid the common dangers?
> >
> > And she calls you when she reaches the house and you have an alarm set to
> > remind you if you have not received that call?
> >
> > She has a cell phone?
> >
> > I don't know where you live in the USA, and I will not pretend to know what
> > is better for your daughter than you do, but this is not a chance I would
> > take in Escondido, CA with my daughter, even at the age of 13. If it is
> > something that must be done, or that you decide to do, I believe the most
> > important thing is to do everything you can to reduce the risks.
> >
> > --
> > James.
> >
Look at ebay item 110208479997. Looks nice....not a bad price...just wondering if anyone has one and can comment? I *need* to replace my old HP luggable analyzer.
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
I have no use for this, but maybe one of you has... First taker gets it
all. RhinoSoft make an ftp client and server and some other Internet
software for Windows -- check out their web site http://www.RhinoSoft.com/
Gerhard
----------------------------------------------
25% Off Your Next RhinoSoft.com Purchase
----------------------------------------------
To thank you for using our software, we're pleased to offer you a 25% off
eCoupon that is valid for all of our software. All you need to do to take
advantage of this offer is visit the URL below with your eCoupon code.
Simply enter the provided eCoupon number in the space provided and proceed
as normal! Hurry! Your eCoupon expires in 45 days on Friday, February 22,
2008. This eCoupon can only be used a single time.
Feel free to send it to a friend or associate if you have no current need
for additional RhinoSoft.com software.
----------------------- YOUR eCoupon ------------------------
eCoupon: 660fa6a44783ca13
Redeem at: https://RhinoSoft.com/coupon
Valid Through: Friday, February 22, 2008
-------------------------------------------------------------
alan smith wrote:
> Look at ebay item 110208479997. Looks nice....not a bad price...just wondering if anyone has one and can comment? I *need* to replace my old HP luggable analyzer.
>
>
looks usable, just wonder if capture speed would be an issue too often?
as a hobby tool it looks great.
I went with the Logicport, less scope more analyzer (also more money)
<http://www.pctestinstruments.com/index.htm>
but it has paid for itself a few times over since I got it.
Still looking for some people that would be interested in
sharing in the purchase of 1 reel (1000pcs) of FTDI FT232RL chips (single UART to USB, 28SSOP package).
Price is US$2.65/piece + shipping to your location.
Please email me if you are interested.
> Still looking for some people that would be interested in
> sharing in the purchase of 1 reel (1000pcs) of FTDI FT232RL chips (single UART to USB, 28SSOP package).
> Price is US$2.65/piece + shipping to your location.
> Please email me if you are interested.
>
> regards
> Volker
>
>
>
>
Microchip has purchased HI-TECH, makers of the C compilers for PIC and other
chips. In the future, HI-TECH will narrow their focus to only PIC parts.
This acquisition greatly expands Microchips C language support for PIC
parts. No word on any changes in the cost or availability of the HI-TECH C
compilers for the PICs, but some "deals" are expected.
Now in Acacia Ridge (just a 30 min drive down the road) is a certain
other 'C'for Pics development tool manufacturer. I seem to recall
chatter about them being the writers of C18, this might also explain
why this other compiler (optimisation not withstanding) is bundled
with C30 - maybe my conspiracy theory is working overtime :)
On Mon, 9 Mar 2009 14:31:43 -0500, "solarwind" <KILLspamx.solarwind.xspam_OUTgmail.com>
said:
> Very good news. I hope their compiler set becomes unified and optimized.
Could it be that MPLAB becomes Eclipse based in the future?
Because they are hiring people in Australia, so it seems like there is
more work there, not less like I would expect, especially given that
they are no longer developing for MSP430 etc.
:: Could it be that MPLAB becomes Eclipse based in the future?
The thing that interested me was that the job advertisment included a
requirement for Java - and there is a Java developer in Australia who
has I understand, shown his compiler and Eclipse IDE to Microchip -
Muvium is the compilers name.
That's actually bad news for C18 and C30 users.
Hi-tech did got some advantage on PIC16 and PIC18 C compilor due to some of their engineer and advantages on these part of business. But their dsPIC30/33+PIC24 C compilor is a loser to GNU GCC. Now, they are part of Microchip, which might lead C30 to dead for marketing reason (which is why the PICkit2 still cannot debug PIC32, and until last fall, the PICkit2 couldn't debug dsPIC30Fs).
Same will apply to C18 which has been improved recently (though still not as perfect as old PICC18 (8.35Plx and older.)).
Hi-tech is good on marketing on the past years, and their focus has shift from good product to Good market control, so don't be surprise if you got more MBA staff (One example is they abandoned their in-house developed HI-TIDE which is really productive, and went to Eclipse based New Hi-TIDE, which is so slow and many useful function/features are missed, the new HI-TIDE is now full of useless but beautiful icons).
Eclipse really sucks on the New Hi-tech HI-TIDE, a machine with 2G of RAM still runs very slow. None of machine with 512M RAM can really run this staff.
:: Could it be that MPLAB becomes Eclipse based in the future?
The thing that interested me was that the job advertisment included a
requirement for Java - and there is a Java developer in Australia who
has I understand, shown his compiler and Eclipse IDE to Microchip -
Muvium is the compilers name.
> Eclipse really sucks on the New Hi-tech HI-TIDE, a machine with 2G
> of RAM still runs very slow. None of machine with 512M RAM can
> really run this staff.
I'm very much a beginner, though what I appreciate is Hi-Tide will run
natively on OS-X. MPLAB requires starting a virtual machine session.
> I'm very much a beginner, though what I appreciate is Hi-Tide will run
> natively on OS-X. MPLAB requires starting a virtual machine session.
>
Java runs on virtual machine as well... (Java VM) Therefre I would not say
that a Java app is running natively on X or Z platform. As far as I know
there is no CPU that is able to run Java bytecode natively anyway. The
VmWare and the VirtualBox runs the OS and the application on the bare
machine with only a small overhead on it. For example on my Ubuntu/VBox
config I do not even feel that the XP/MPLab is running on a virtual machine,
and the CPU is mostly in idle on the host machine.
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 8:04 PM, Xiaofan Chen <TakeThisOuTxiaofancspam_OUTgmail.com> wrote:
> Hopefully not. Even though MPLAB has its problems, moving to
> Eclipse may not solve the problems. IMHO, it is slow and
> bloated.
>
> Xiaofan
I agree. MPLAB is pretty snappy and nice. However, it severely lacks
tabbed editor support. I hate having multiple windows. Which idiot
designed that?
On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 5:20 AM, Funny NYPD <RemoveMEfunnynypdspamSTOPspamyahoo.com> wrote:
> That's actually bad news for C18 and C30 users.
> Hi-tech did got some advantage on PIC16 and PIC18 C compilor due to
> some of their engineer and advantages on these part of business. But their
> dsPIC30/33+PIC24 C compilor is a loser to GNU GCC. Now, they are part of
> Microchip, which might lead C30 to dead for marketing reason (which is why
> the PICkit2 still cannot debug PIC32, and until last fall, the PICkit2
> couldn't debug dsPIC30Fs).
I would think C30 and C32 will survive. HiTech's compilers for PIC24/dsPIC/PIC32
can not beat GCC based C30 and C32.
Not so sure about C18, most likely they will combine the power of PICC 18 and
C18. PICC for PIC12/16 is the best. So Microchip will have the best compilers
across the board.
Maybe it is bad news for 3rd party developers. But it is a trend that many
MCU vendors (exclude 8051 and ARM MCU vendors who rely on Keil/IAR/etc)
to be self-sufficient in the compiler offerings.
Eclipse based HI-TIDE is even worse.
I think the MPLAB is still usable on most of the machines even though it is getting bigger and bigger with the recent V8.xx.
usa.net
