gas2.org— Apparently they don't think they can make a profit...tell that to all the other car manufacturers that are bringer more efficient, clean diesels to the US.
Sep 9, 2008View in Crawl 4
It's also a death trap.Many of the neat funsy cars available outside the US never come here because while they're fun to drive, bringing them up to US safety standards would price them outside their class.
Why should we be BURNING anything for fuel? Honestly, the reality that we're all driving around burning gallons of combustible liquid every day is just silliness. Imagine if, for one day, each person who drove a car chose instead to just set a pan in front of his home with a couple gallons of gasoline in it and light it on fire. Can you picture row after row of smoke trails rising from peoples' homes? That's essentially what we're all doing... every day! It makes no sense, especially when solar, wind, nuclear, tidal and other technologies are emissions-free and the distribution network (power lines) is already in place. The internal combustion engine is a centuries-old technology that should have been retired decades ago.
Sure some advances in creature comforts and safety. But the cars today use much lighter metals and vast amounts of light weight plastics. 'have you seen the paper thin body metal? I would bet that the Fiesta is lighter than the 1985 ?Rabbit. My entire point was that the technology is readily available to improve fuel economy AND the other features, but without incentive it's not happening hitting the showrooms. A big reason is that the U.S. has historically had cheap gas, so the consumer has not cared about economy. Hence we get the Ford Excursion...Europe gets the Fiesta.
Most diesels use a combination of DPF (Diesel Particulate Filters) with a SCR (Selective Catalytic Converter.) However these systems are expensive, and add complexity to the system. As Infra6x said fuel is injected into the exhaust stream at the DPF to increase the temperature and burn off any particulates so the filter does not clog. The SCR generally uses a urea dosing system to help remove the NOx but this requires another tank to be added to the vehicle and it must be filled periodically. Up until 2007 SCR technology was not possible because low sulfur diesel fuel was not widely available, this type of fuel is necessary because regular fuel would clog the catalyst.Since these systems are quite expensive they are mostly implemented on Semis, but since any engine before 2007 is grandfathered into service, and the fact that diesel engines last for millions of miles with overhaul, it might be some time before they are a majority on the road.
afruff23Sep 10, 2008
Just because I think he's spouting BS, does not mean I support McCain.
Closed AccountSep 10, 2008
It's also a death trap.Many of the neat funsy cars available outside the US never come here because while they're fun to drive, bringing them up to US safety standards would price them outside their class.
nosecohnSep 10, 2008
Why should we be BURNING anything for fuel? Honestly, the reality that we're all driving around burning gallons of combustible liquid every day is just silliness. Imagine if, for one day, each person who drove a car chose instead to just set a pan in front of his home with a couple gallons of gasoline in it and light it on fire. Can you picture row after row of smoke trails rising from peoples' homes? That's essentially what we're all doing... every day! It makes no sense, especially when solar, wind, nuclear, tidal and other technologies are emissions-free and the distribution network (power lines) is already in place. The internal combustion engine is a centuries-old technology that should have been retired decades ago.
justblogginSep 10, 2008
Sure some advances in creature comforts and safety. But the cars today use much lighter metals and vast amounts of light weight plastics. 'have you seen the paper thin body metal? I would bet that the Fiesta is lighter than the 1985 ?Rabbit. My entire point was that the technology is readily available to improve fuel economy AND the other features, but without incentive it's not happening hitting the showrooms. A big reason is that the U.S. has historically had cheap gas, so the consumer has not cared about economy. Hence we get the Ford Excursion...Europe gets the Fiesta.
macinit1138Sep 11, 2008
It's ok, I'm sure they'll read it, it just won't sink in.
Closed AccountSep 11, 2008
but true.
bubblzSep 13, 2008
Most diesels use a combination of DPF (Diesel Particulate Filters) with a SCR (Selective Catalytic Converter.) However these systems are expensive, and add complexity to the system. As Infra6x said fuel is injected into the exhaust stream at the DPF to increase the temperature and burn off any particulates so the filter does not clog. The SCR generally uses a urea dosing system to help remove the NOx but this requires another tank to be added to the vehicle and it must be filled periodically. Up until 2007 SCR technology was not possible because low sulfur diesel fuel was not widely available, this type of fuel is necessary because regular fuel would clog the catalyst.Since these systems are quite expensive they are mostly implemented on Semis, but since any engine before 2007 is grandfathered into service, and the fact that diesel engines last for millions of miles with overhaul, it might be some time before they are a majority on the road.
christopheraaApr 3, 2009
The Fiesta looks a lot better than the Prius. I'd drive it over the prius any day wear Chef Hat <a class="user" href="http://www.culinaryclassics.com/chef-hat.htm">http://www.culinaryclassics.com/chef-hat.htm</a>