I don’t know why Ford isn’t hyping their plans for this car. It would certainly get great press !
http://www.nextenergynews.com/news1/next-energy-news-escort-hybrid.html
Yes, you would think they don’t want to sell vehicles. A plug-in Escort, or a plug-in ANYBRAND, are excellent ideas. Why the automobile manufacturers are dragging their feet on plug-ins is beyond me, especially considering that gasoline is over $4 per gallon and climbing. Oh, I almost forgot. Plug-in capability can more than double gas mileage. Those that are holding back from buying the SUV and pickup truck gashogs would come to the dealers showrooms in droves.
They’re trying to find ways they can add stuff that will fall apart or make the vehicle obsolete in other ways, so they can make money on repairs and continually convince people they need to buy a new car every few years.
If the car won’t break or it’s not a hassle to own, people will never replace it!
Toyota plans to add solar panels to its next generation Prius hybrid early next year to power the vehicle’s air conditioning according to a Japanese newspaper report.
As part of a complete design makeover, the Prius will be fitted with rooftop solar panels on its high-end models, the Nikkei economic daily said.
The newspaper noted that If it happens, Toyota would be the first major carmaker to use a solar power generation system on a mass-produced vehicle.
The Nikkei said the solar panels on the roof would supply part of the power needed for the vehicle’s air conditioning.
The carmaker plans to produce some 450,000 Priuses at home in 2009, up 60 percent from 2007, the Nikkei said
[QUOTE=arb;3803]Toyota plans to add solar panels to its next generation Prius hybrid early next year to power the vehicle’s air conditioning according to a Japanese newspaper report.
As part of a complete design makeover, the Prius will be fitted with rooftop solar panels on its high-end models, the Nikkei economic daily said.
The newspaper noted that If it happens, Toyota would be the first major carmaker to use a solar power generation system on a mass-produced vehicle.
The Nikkei said the solar panels on the roof would supply part of the power needed for the vehicle’s air conditioning.
The carmaker plans to produce some 450,000 Priuses at home in 2009, up 60 percent from 2007, the Nikkei said[/QUOTE]
Holly cow that’s a whole lot of highbreeds. They just love making all those extra parts to rub together. Keep those revenue streams in service and repairs a flowing. They need to quit drinking the coo-lade in the cooler and dump the ICE.
Yeah
Since they licensed their hybrid technology to Ford, I wounder if they do like Ford does and routes freon (OK, R-134) back to their battery pack to keep them from a melt-down ?
[QUOTE=mpipes;3708]They’re trying to find ways they can add stuff that will fall apart or make the vehicle obsolete in other ways, so they can make money on repairs and continually convince people they need to buy a new car every few years.
If the car won’t break or it’s not a hassle to own, people will never replace it!
:)[/QUOTE]
You hit the nail on the head, it’s all about money they could easily make cars that get great mileage. I drive a 96 Intrepid with 198.000 kms I have gone
from 25 mpg to 40 with a fuel cell and sensor controllers.
Fuel Cell ? You did an EV conversion with the battery being a hydrogen fuel cell ? Or, the sealed gas tank fuel cell for gasoline ? What sensors ?
You also forgot that EVs pay no road taxes. If you were the governent would you want to give up 44.5 cents of road tax on every gallon of gas. The goverment doesnt want EVs.
One of the associations of state treasuries’ reported yesterday that most states are in shock that we are burring much less gas / diesel (49 states charge 10% - 29% higher tax on diesel) so their coffers are running a little dry…
What to do ?
You might think, hey, if we are driving less due to $4.00 / g gas, then the roads need less repairs. Right ? Completely WRONG !!
If the roads were designed for cars, they would only need to be 4" thick and not cost $1,000,000 or more per mile. But, we share the roads with heavy trucks. They require the 12" or more of road surface and feet of road beds.
Even still, most states allow a max of 60,000 - 80,000 pounds for trucks, and many many truck drivers see the 1/10 of the time they get caught over weight as being less expensive than the extra money they make hauling over weight loads. In Michigan we have 120,000 max weight and often truckers are caught with 180,000 or more. These weights cause the damage and wear and tear to the roads, not our little EV or gasser cars. We really should not be paying the bulk of the road taxes anyway.
[QUOTE=arb;4578]In Michigan we have 120,000 max weight and often truckers are caught with 180,000 or more. These weights cause the damage and wear and tear to the roads, not our little EV or gasser cars. We really should not be paying the bulk of the road taxes anyway.[/QUOTE]
I have a simple fix for this little problem. Lower the max allowed by 2 percent. Allow a 3 percent overage with no penalty. If the truck is between 3 and 7 percent overweight, fine the driver and the company 10 dollars per pound over, and hit their license with 2 points. If the truck is between 7 and 11 percent overweight, make it 20 dollars per pound over the 7 percent, and hit the license with 4 more points. If the truck is more than 11 percent overweight, confiscate the truck and cargo with no recourse for recovery, and add 20 points to the driver’s license. The financial incentive to pull an overweight load would disappear overnight, because nobody will want to risk a fine of hundreds of thousands of dollars, and then lose a truck and have to reimburse the value of the shipped merchandise to their customers.
This would likely also relieve the interstates of semis that slow down to unsafe speeds when they hit hills, which would make the roads safer too. Never understood why they’d be buying trucks that underpowered, but if they are pulling 20 tons more than they are supposed to, it now makes sense. Dirtbags… What really ticks me off is when they move over into the fast lane because the slow lane is too rough, when they are the ones that messed the lane up to begin with.
There is a real problem with this… it would likely need to be a federal law that states adopt because any truck registered out of state could duck the law citing that they are engaged in interstate commerce and this law does not apply in their own state. There was a legal precedent in this a number of years back… its why a car with Florida plates can have fully tinted windows and drive by Michigan cops thumbing their nose at them…
Actually, I don’t see that. I can see where you are going, but don’t think it would hold water. This would actually not be aimed at controlling interstate commerce, but would be a safety issue. The state’s not saying the shipper can’t ship anything, nor is the state trying to charge sales tax on an item shipped across its borders. All the shipper has to do to get his load across the state is either break the load down into two smaller trucks or get an overweight permit to carry the oversized load. If the shipper doesn’t like these options, then they can go around the state. States do have the right to control how heavy trucks are on its roads, otherwise trucks would not have to stop at weigh stations and state police would not be able to pull trucks over for spot checks.
I am still learning it