# Chevrolet Volt



## PoliticalChic (Apr 22, 2011)

The April 2011 edition of *Consumer Reports *has some interesting comments about the Chevrolet Volt. The following is from the article.

 GMs plug-in hybrid goes gas-free for short trips, but is pricey.

1.	The Volt will not be available nationwide until the end of the year.

2.	It is a 4-seat, battery powered hatchback that runs on electricity alone for short trips. The battery takes up the rear center. Its electric range is claimed to be between 25 and 50 miles, and after the lithium-ion battery is depleted, a gasoline engine kicks in and acts as a backup generator, powering the electric drive and extending the range to a total of about 300 miles.

3.	Ours cost $43,700 including options; with a dealer markup, the total was $48,700.

a.	There is a $7,500 electric vehicle tax credit.

4.	A weak electric heater is problematic.  It is quiet, has brisk acceleration, with a taut, supple ride. Due to the tepid warm air, the passengers were uncomfortable. When the temperature dips below 26, the engine will turn on even during the electric portion of the trip.

5.	The mph is not meaningful without knowing a trips length, because calculating fuel economy depends on the ratio of electric to gasoline use. 

a.	Weve been getting between 23 and 28 mpg, due to the winters freeze. The cars electric range is very susceptible to cold weather since the heater runs on electricity.

b.	Weve also found that an extended highway cruise shortens the electric range. 

6.	So, the fuel economy depends on your driving pattern. The more often and further you travel, the closer your overall energy use drops toward 30 mpg.

7.	Based on energy use, the Volt has been averaging close to 2 miles per kilowatt-hour, which, according to the EPA, is the equivalent of 65 mpg. But thats for the first 25 miles or so, on battery alone.

8.	GM says recharge times are about 4 hours with a 240-volt supply, and 10 to 12 hours with 120 volts. Our Volt has been taking almost 13 kWh in about 5 hours every time we charge. Volt buyers should purchase a 220-volt (Level 2) charger. 

a.	At the national average rate of 11 cents per kWh, the Volt costs about 5.7 cents per mile in electric mode and 10 cents a mile after that- if gas is $3 per gallon. 

b.	A Toyota Prius costs 6.8 cents  per mile, and a gas powered Honda Fit costs about 10 cents per mile (but the price is less than half of that of the Volt).

9.	In the Northeast, electricity cost is a lot higher. For example:
 Sep. 22, 2010: ($0.27 per kWh)
Aug. 23, 2010: ($0.24 per kWh)
Jul. 23, 2010: ($0.29 per kWh)
Jun. 23, 2010: ($0.28 per kWh)
May 24, 2010: ($0.41 per kWh)
Apr. 23, 2010: ($0.87 per kWh) W303 » New York City Electricity  Con Edison Kwh Charge History

10.So, the Volt works as an electric car with a gas backup.but it is not much of a money saver in many places. For now, the Volt is an expensive way to be green.

11.  The Nissan Leaf cost us $35,270 and is eligible for the $7,500 tax credit. The Leaf is great for short trips, but we found that the range rapidly reduced from 36 miles to barely 19 one frigid morning. Nissan claims 100 mile range.we averaged 65 in the winter.

	a. With a 220-volt charger it took 7 to 9 hours, and took 22 kilowatts per charge. On 110, it can take 20 hours to charge. We recommend the extra charging port ($700) that allows a charge in 27 minutes from DC charger. It is hoped that these chargers will be installed in many public places. 

	b. We averaged 3 miles per kWh, which is 3.7 cents a mile @ 11 cents. The EPA rates the Leaf at 99 mph equivalent ( 93 mph equivalent for the Volt). He heater is fine, and it seats five.


----------



## Sallow (Apr 22, 2011)

Man..if you guys ruled the roost back in the old days..there would be no airplanes, running water, toilets, or just about anything.

Come to think of it..the Dark ages..was the height of conservatism!


----------



## uscitizen (Apr 22, 2011)

I just cannot understand the anti electric vehicle mania bunch.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Apr 22, 2011)

uscitizen said:


> I just cannot understand the anti electric vehicle mania bunch.



I think you two have a comprehension prob....

there is no opinion in the OP...that is straight from the article...

...the only thing I added was the NYC kWh costs to give an accurate idea of costs.


Kind of early to be drinking.


----------



## Sunni Man (Apr 22, 2011)

I assume these cars do not have air conditioning.

 For people in the South and Southwest in the summer. This is a major problem.


----------



## Sunni Man (Apr 22, 2011)

I don't know how many years these batteries are supposed to last.

 I assume it's anywhere from 3 to 5 years.

 When it does come time to change them though.

 I would guess the bill would be anywhere between $5-$10,000 replacement cost


----------



## Zander (Apr 22, 2011)

I don't see these cars becoming popular any time soon.


----------



## Sallow (Apr 22, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> > I just cannot understand the anti electric vehicle mania bunch.
> ...



So essentially..you have no original thoughts?

Just as I suspected!


----------



## PoliticalChic (Apr 22, 2011)

Sallow said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > uscitizen said:
> ...



I provided the OP as a help, on an informational basis...

...clearly you have take it personally my note that you lacked comprehension.....

And that's exactly the way I meant it.


----------



## Trajan (Apr 22, 2011)

Sallow said:


> Man..if you guys ruled the roost back in the old days..there would be no airplanes, running water, toilets, or just about anything.
> 
> Come to think of it..the Dark ages..was the height of conservatism!



wrong, we had all those th8ings minus gov. interference and, its dem old robber barons that made it happen


----------



## PoliticalChic (Apr 22, 2011)

Sunni Man said:


> I don't know how many years these batteries are supposed to last.
> 
> I assume it's anywhere from 3 to 5 years.
> 
> ...



This, from one of my previous posts:

An EVs price reflects its expensive battery pack. EVs can do a reasonable range, but they cant do it at a reasonable cost given todays batteries, says Ron Cogan, editor and publisher of Green Car journal. The Volts batteries cost $8,000 or more and the Leafs about $18,000.

c. No one knows how long those batteries will last: there is no track record by which to gauge them.


----------



## uscitizen (Apr 22, 2011)

So if I post something negative from the Huffington post then you are ok with that PC?
And it would not show that I was supporting the huffpos position?


----------



## Trajan (Apr 22, 2011)

Sunni Man said:


> I don't know how many years these batteries are supposed to last.
> 
> I assume it's anywhere from 3 to 5 years.
> 
> ...



we've been thru this many times, I posted the cots per elect. vehicle, for the battery replacement, the battery life expectancy ( they say 9 so far its been 6-8) , the resale cost, cost efficiency to make a go of it (over 5$ a gallon for a sustained period) and the subsidies from the taxpayer to GM and nissan per vehicle..in effect we are paying their operating costs and profit to build the friggin things...its a loser.


----------



## uscitizen (Apr 22, 2011)

We will pay more as petro based transportation costs rise.
There will be a turnover point on alternatively powered vehicles.
But since we are not quite there yet we should abandon that route?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Apr 22, 2011)

uscitizen said:


> So if I post something negative from the Huffington post then you are ok with that PC?
> And it would not show that I was supporting the huffpos position?



Are you suggesting that Consumer Reports is biased in their reporting?

What, in your fevered imagination is the bias and/or negativity in the article?

If so, I'd like you to back up that claim.


All I can say is the whistle on that train of thought is barely audible.


----------



## uscitizen (Apr 22, 2011)

We are early in the game, sure electric vehicles are not yet acceptable  but will improve and look better as petro costs rise.
A good thing that Edison and Westinghouse did not feel like many do now about electric cars and give up on electric generation in the USA.

Edisons first electric generation /distrubution system would not go as far as a Volt does.
Just a few miles because it was DC.


----------



## Trajan (Apr 22, 2011)

uscitizen said:


> We will pay more as petro based transportation costs rise.
> There will be a turnover point on alternatively powered vehicles.
> But since we are not quite there yet we should abandon that route?



 abandon them as in how? we are SUBSIDIZING the cost and sales of these vehicles. How much does that count for? 

The break even point is actually close to $4 a gallon...think on that for a moment.....

we ARE pursuing battery tech. that will in the 10-15 year time span ( hopefully0  change the cost effectiveness.....and in the meantime?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Apr 22, 2011)

uscitizen said:


> We will pay more as petro based transportation costs rise.
> There will be a turnover point on alternatively powered vehicles.
> But since we are not quite there yet we should abandon that route?



If the Obama administration had not presided over the devaluation of the dollar, we would not be seeing $112 oil.


----------



## Trajan (Apr 22, 2011)

uscitizen said:


> We are early in the game, sure electric vehicles are not yet acceptable  but will improve and look better as petro costs rise.
> A good thing that Edison and Westinghouse did not feel like many do now about electric cars and give up on electric generation in the USA.
> 
> Edisons first electric generation /distrubution system would not go as far as a Volt does.
> Just a few miles because it was DC.



you  got it, Westinghouse and Edison........


----------



## uscitizen (Apr 22, 2011)

Trajan said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> > We will pay more as petro based transportation costs rise.
> ...



We subsidize our entire highway system.  Should we quit doing that?
We subsidized the transcontinental railway.
We subsidized nuclear power, Rural electrification, etc.

We have spent trillions subsidizing petro and still are.


----------



## Trajan (Apr 22, 2011)

uscitizen said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > uscitizen said:
> ...


----------



## Granny (Apr 22, 2011)

Since Consumer Reports does not have any kind of corporate ads, sponsorships, etc., they are pretty much free to call the shots as they see them after testing a product of any kind - without bias.  The "pros" and "cons" are decided by each individual as to how good, bad or economical a particular product would be for his or her personal uses.

I would not want to have one of the green cars for a variety of reasons:  they're just 'ucking ugly, way too small to be safe for anybody, I couldn't afford the car to begin with or to replace the battery, and I don't need my utility bills any higher than they are already.

What are they actually saving in terms of conserving energy?  Are we saying we're going to have to use these damned hazmat light bulbs in our homes to save energy so we can spend any savings we may have to charge a damned car?  

Does anyone know what kind of kw use savings we would realize from the hazmat bulbs vs. kw use of electricity to charge a car battery?


----------



## uscitizen (Apr 22, 2011)

Trajan said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> > Trajan said:
> ...


----------



## Trajan (Apr 22, 2011)

uscitizen said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > uscitizen said:
> ...


----------



## uscitizen (Apr 22, 2011)

Trajan said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> > Trajan said:
> ...


----------



## uscitizen (Apr 22, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> > We will pay more as petro based transportation costs rise.
> ...



Ohh obama did this in 2007 too?


----------



## boedicca (Apr 22, 2011)

Sallow said:


> Man..if you guys ruled the roost back in the old days..there would be no airplanes, running water, toilets, or just about anything.
> 
> Come to think of it..the Dark ages..was the height of conservatism!




Were the inventions airplanes, running water, and toilets financed by taxpayer bail outs?


----------



## uscitizen (Apr 22, 2011)

Running water sure has been finianced by tax dollars.

all that aside, perhaps the volt is a bad vehicle, but the electric car will improve and survive.
You better hope so unless you like paying $10 for gas.


----------



## Trajan (Apr 22, 2011)

uscitizen said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > uscitizen said:
> ...


----------



## Trajan (Apr 22, 2011)

uscitizen said:


> Running water sure has been finianced by tax dollars.
> 
> all that aside, perhaps the volt is a bad vehicle, but the electric car will improve and survive.
> You better hope so unless you like paying $10 for gas.



you have that exactly backwards amigo.


----------



## boedicca (Apr 22, 2011)

uscitizen said:


> Running water sure has been finianced by tax dollars.
> 
> all that aside, perhaps the volt is a bad vehicle, but the electric car will improve and survive.
> You better hope so unless you like paying $10 for gas.





Really?  Indoor plumbing was INVENTED by THE GOVERNMENT?

Link, s'il te plait.


----------



## GWV5903 (Apr 22, 2011)

uscitizen said:


> I just cannot understand the anti electric vehicle mania bunch.



So the motive of the Volt is lower our dependency on fossil fuels? 

Just a reminder, 70% of our electricity is generated from fossil fuel....


----------



## Toronado3800 (Apr 22, 2011)

Interesting about the heater in the volt.

I wanna drive one. 

The idea of a weed eater engine charging a battery for an electrical motor has to be the way to go.

Wonder how the 2015 Volt will perform.  Probably a good thing to subsidize if you support the troops.


----------



## boedicca (Apr 22, 2011)

Toronado3800 said:


> Interesting about the heater in the volt.
> 
> I wanna drive one.
> 
> ...




40 miles on one charge.

Not worth it.


----------



## Synthaholic (Apr 22, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> > We will pay more as petro based transportation costs rise.
> ...


Oh, is that the reason?  

I guess Bush also devalued the dollar a few years ago when gas hit $4.00, right?


----------



## Synthaholic (Apr 22, 2011)

Trajan said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> > Trajan said:
> ...


----------



## Synthaholic (Apr 22, 2011)

boedicca said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> > Running water sure has been finianced by tax dollars.
> ...



I've figured out that you are just plain dishonest.  Who claimed indoor plumbing was invented by the government?


----------



## Synthaholic (Apr 22, 2011)

GWV5903 said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> > I just cannot understand the anti electric vehicle mania bunch.
> ...




Not fossil fuels - imported oil.  Maybe honesty isn't your strong suit, either.



> Just a reminder, 70% of our electricity is generated from fossil fuel....



Natural gas, not imported oil.


----------



## MikeK (Apr 22, 2011)

Zander said:


> I don't see these cars becoming popular any time soon.


Someone mentioned these cars have no air conditioning.  If that's true I wouldn't own one if they cost $1,000 and got 50mpg.


----------



## Zander (Apr 23, 2011)

MikeK said:


> Zander said:
> 
> 
> > I don't see these cars becoming popular any time soon.
> ...



 

They have a lot of negatives....


----------



## PoliticalChic (Apr 23, 2011)

MikeK said:


> Zander said:
> 
> 
> > I don't see these cars becoming popular any time soon.
> ...



No, I believe that th question was asked.

I can't imaging trying to sell any car withour air conditioning...and I found the following, which suggests they have it:

"...When not running air conditioning or heating, 138 mile range is expected in leisurely driving with slow acceleration and slow stopping. Drive on the highway while running the AC during summer heat, and only expect 70 miles.[in the Nissan Leaf]..."
Nissan LEAF and Chevrolet Volt Test Drive Comparisons


----------



## Mad Scientist (Apr 23, 2011)

Sallow said:


> Man..if you guys ruled the roost back in the old days..there would be no airplanes, running water, toilets, or just about anything.
> 
> Come to think of it..the Dark ages..was the height of conservatism!


The Airplane was perfected by the Wright Brothers in the days *before* Social Security, The Welfare State, The National Education Association, The IRS, The Defense Department, Student Loans, Medicare, The EPA, OSHA, Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, Center for Nutrition Policy, CIA, FBI, Peace Corps, Office of Personnel Management, National Council on Disability and Health and Human Services.

We are *NOW* entering the Dark Ages.


----------



## Trajan (Apr 23, 2011)

Synthaholic said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > uscitizen said:
> ...


----------



## Toronado3800 (Apr 23, 2011)

Mad Scientist said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> > Man..if you guys ruled the roost back in the old days..there would be no airplanes, running water, toilets, or just about anything.
> ...



The airplane was INVENTED by the Wright brothers.

Think the P51 was when the airplane was perfected after the new deal?


----------



## Zander (Apr 23, 2011)

I am a big fan of electric cars. I drive one every week- it's called a golf cart.


----------



## boedicca (Apr 23, 2011)

Zander said:


> MikeK said:
> 
> 
> > Zander said:
> ...



Indeed.  At a huge premium for a vehicle which, at the end of the day, gets 37 MPG.

_The Chevy Volts 93 miles per gallon rating is only for when its running on battery power at the beginning of a trip. According to the EPA, it runs about 35 miles on its initial charge, using no gasoline. The EPA assigned the number based on converting battery power to the equivalent energy in a given amount of gasoline.

Once the battery is depleted and the small, four-cylinder gasoline engine kicks in, the Chevrolet Volt gets a second, distinct EPA rating of 37 mpg. Thats good, but its in line with other cars with small, four-cylinder engines._

Chevy Volt Gets Two EPA Gas Mileage Estimates, Neither of Them 230 MPG | BNET


----------



## Mad Scientist (Apr 23, 2011)

Toronado3800 said:


> Mad Scientist said:
> 
> 
> > Sallow said:
> ...


Wow. Not even close. Men were flying gliders for *decades* before the Wright brothers flew on Kill Devil Hill.

For the record: The Wright brothers *didn't invent the airplane*, they built and flew the first *heavier than air, self propelled aircraft.* (with *no* government assistance needed!)

Also, the P-51 was built (in record time) to specs issued by the *British Purchasing Commission.* Plus, since the -A model was such a dog performance wise, the British yanked the Allison motor out and put in their own Rolls Royce power plant. Then, and only then, did it become the dominant fighter that it was.

No New Deal help needed!


----------



## Slapshot28 (Apr 23, 2011)

Hi--

I have no political leanings per se (sorry); however, I do own a Volt.  I purchased it in early January, and now have driven it about 5,000 miles.

Regardless of all its political shortcomings, the Volt is a wonderful car in every way: absolutely the best I've ever owned (including some pretty amazing cars).  It is incredibly fuel efficient, using NO gas at all during daily commuting.  Yet I can take long road trips, no worries, using the on-board gasoline generator and 9-gallon gas tank.  This extends the range to about 350 miles.  Then I just fill up and drive on, just as with any normal car.

At all times the Volt's wheels are driven by the electric traction motor.  This means instant torque at all speeds, no transmission or gears, and glassy-smooth and eerily-quiet driving.  Of course the Volt has air conditioning!  In fact, it has amazing creature comforts, including state-of-the-art navigation, incredible climate-control (including auto-sensing seat-heaters) 5 years of OnStar, multiphone Bluetooth, a 30 GB hard drive for music and audiobooks, etc, etc, etc.

My prior car was a BMW 540i Sport, and I've owned other high-end sports cars as well.  Don't laugh, but I like my volt better.  Really.  It's quicker off the line (remember, instant torque), it handles beautifully (the suspension uses Corvette technology), and it has a low mean prowling look.  To me, this is one of the finest compact luxury sport sedans available today, at any price.  So while $41K sounds like a lot, the Volt is worth EVERY penny.

Look, I know that none of us are happy with our government.  Frankly, I gave up many years ago and starting focusing exclusively on technology, where I can actually make a difference.  Shame on me, but it is what it is.

All I ask is that you consider NOT taking out your frustrations on the Volt.  While I hate subsidies and bail-outs just as much as anyone, the fact is that the Volt truly is a GREAT new American car.

That's all I ask.  

Chris


----------



## Zander (Apr 23, 2011)

More bad news for Volt owners. First you over-pay by about 30k (a Nissan Versa is just as fuel efficient, goes farther and faster, has a longer warranty, and costs 10K) now it looks like you may be paying another tax (if you live in Washington). The hits just keep comin'...... 

Wash. considers annual flat fee for electric cars - Yahoo! News


----------



## peach174 (Apr 23, 2011)

Sunni Man said:


> I assume these cars do not have air conditioning.
> 
> For people in the South and Southwest in the summer. This is a major problem.



The batteries don't work they fizzle out really quick. They can't take the heat. So you are constantly replacing the batteries, way too expensive for those who live in south and southwest.
I don't know about if they have air conditioning or not but we are not getting one. We can't afford it.


----------



## peach174 (Apr 23, 2011)

Slapshot28 said:


> Hi--
> 
> I have no political leanings per se (sorry); however, I do own a Volt.  I purchased it in early January, and now have driven it about 5,000 miles.
> 
> ...




Do you live where it gets up to 115 or even 120 degrees in the summer?
If you do, does it work well in that heat?


----------



## Slapshot28 (Apr 23, 2011)

peach174 said:


> The batteries don't work they fizzle out really quick. They can't take the heat. So you are constantly replacing the batteries, way too expensive for those who live in south and southwest.



Actually, the Volt battery has an 8-year 100,000 mile factory warranty, and advanced internal temperature control.

There's a great video that describes it: YouTube - The 2011 Chevy Volt battery


----------



## Slapshot28 (Apr 23, 2011)

peach174 said:


> Do you live where it gets up to 115 or even 120 degrees in the summer?  If you do, does it work well in that heat?



No, I live in Philadelphia.  It was quite cold this winter, so my Volt saw all of that, and performed perfectly.  There are a number of Volt owners in Arizona and Florida.  They all report great things, including brilliant air conditioning!  

Here's another video on testing the Volt in extreme climates (sorry, this forum refuses urls from me).

You Tube  -  2011 Chevy Volt: Hot Weather Testing in Yuma, Arizona 

You Tube  -  Volt: Cold Weather Testing


----------



## peach174 (Apr 23, 2011)

I also hear that the Nissan Leaf does well in desert heat.


----------



## Zander (Apr 23, 2011)

Yes, the Leaf is very popular. They sold 67 of them in February. That's 67 units worldwide.


----------



## Zander (Apr 23, 2011)

Slapshot28 said:


> peach174 said:
> 
> 
> > The batteries don't work they fizzle out really quick. They can't take the heat. So you are constantly replacing the batteries, way too expensive for those who live in south and southwest.
> ...



A Nissan Versa costs $10K - that is less than the cost of new batteries for the "Volt".  I could drive 4 of them for 100,000 miles each, throw them away, and still be ahead of the game over a VOLT.  

You have your reasons for buying the VOLT- good for you. I am happy that you like it (for the price you paid- you'd better like it!).  But please, stop pretending that it makes financial sense. Because we all know that it  doesn't.


----------



## Slapshot28 (Apr 23, 2011)

Slapshot28 said:


> peach174 said:
> 
> 
> > Do you live where it gets up to 115 or even 120 degrees in the summer?  If you do, does it work well in that heat?
> ...



Here's one more where they test the Volt under heat lamps at over 200 F.  (yikes)

You Tube  -  Chevrolet Volt Solar Heat Test


----------



## Slapshot28 (Apr 23, 2011)

Zander said:


> You have your reasons for buying the VOLT- good for you. I am happy that you like it (for the price you paid- you'd better like it!).  But please, stop pretending that it makes financial sense. Because we all know that it  doesn't.



I agree with you 100%, to each our own.

Regarding "pretending that it makes financial sense" if I used logic along the lines you suggest, I would drive a 15-year-old Yugo (or something even more economical if I could find it).

Again, to each our own.


----------



## slukasiewski (Apr 23, 2011)

uscitizen said:


> I just cannot understand the anti electric vehicle mania bunch.



Can you tow a 5,000 camper with it? How about a 3,800 bass boat? How much does the electric upgrade you have to do to your house to charge the SOB up? 

I'll take a gas-swilling Tundra anyday.


----------



## slukasiewski (Apr 23, 2011)

Also - firefighters/EMTs HATE these electric vehicles. When they arrive on scene of an accident and have to pry someone out of these POS', they're shitscared. 

Sawing through elecrical wires - not cool.


----------



## slukasiewski (Apr 23, 2011)

Do Liberals earn enough to purchase a 45K automobile? Most are on the government teat already, barely getting by on the minimum wage.


----------



## slukasiewski (Apr 23, 2011)

Meanwhile.... in Obama's Suburban.......


----------



## kiwiman127 (Apr 23, 2011)

Another OP that shows, when the right said they wanted their country back, they weren't kidding,,,,*back*wards.


----------



## Zander (Apr 23, 2011)

Slapshot28 said:


> Zander said:
> 
> 
> > You have your reasons for buying the VOLT- good for you. I am happy that you like it (for the price you paid- you'd better like it!).  But please, stop pretending that it makes financial sense. Because we all know that it  doesn't.
> ...


I drive a CLS-550 AMG Diamond White Edition Mercedes Benz- the car cost a lot of money and is also expensive to maintain and insure. The tires alone are $1,800 to replace and only last about 30,000 miles. I don't pretend it was a good financial choice. I had other reasons for buying it- none were financial.

The VOLT, by contrast, is marketed as a money saving vehicle.  

 It is a glorified golf cart that costs a small fortune to own when compared to truly economical cars like the Versa, Yaris, et. al.


----------



## Slapshot28 (Apr 23, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> Can you tow a 5,000 camper with it? How about a 3,800 bass boat? How much does the electric upgrade you have to do to your house to charge the SOB up?



The Volt currently is not designed for towing.  Maybe someday.

It costs about $1.50 in electricity for a full Volt charge = roughly 35 to 40 miles.  So that's about 1/3 the cost today of driving a fuel-efficient car the same distance on gasoline.


----------



## Zander (Apr 23, 2011)

Slapshot28 said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > Can you tow a 5,000 camper with it? How about a 3,800 bass boat? How much does the electric upgrade you have to do to your house to charge the SOB up?
> ...


What a shill....


----------



## MikeK (Apr 23, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> Do Liberals earn enough to purchase a 45K automobile? Most are on the government teat already, barely getting by on the minimum wage.



I have a 1995 Sedan DeVille which is in perfect mechanical condition and cosmetically is in 98% showroom condition.  Not a scratch on its gleaming hunter green body or a blemish on its ivory leather interior.  It has less than 75k miles and is the most comfortable car I've ever owned or driven.  It is warm as toast in winter and the air conditioner couldn't be better.  

It rides like a sailboat, gets me around in pure comfort, is a nice-looking car and I have absolutely no need or wish to own a newer one.  If I wanted to I could but I don't drive much, I'm content with what I have and would much rather spend the money on my grandkids.


----------



## Old Rocks (Apr 23, 2011)

boedicca said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> > Man..if you guys ruled the roost back in the old days..there would be no airplanes, running water, toilets, or just about anything.
> ...



Yes, to all of them. The military, tax dollars, were the primary developer of airplanes. Water to most of our homes comes through a municipal water system. Guess who built that and how it was financed. And laws concerning sanitation made indoor plumbing a neccessity. Otherwise, you Conservatives would still be shitting in your back yard.


----------



## Old Rocks (Apr 23, 2011)

Synthaholic said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > uscitizen said:
> ...



Most of these dingleberries do not realize that the Minoans had indoor plumbing 3600 years ago, and that included flush toilets.


----------



## Old Rocks (Apr 23, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> Do Liberals earn enough to purchase a 45K automobile? Most are on the government teat already, barely getting by on the minimum wage.



LOL.  If it were not for liberals in the blue states, the red state trailer park Conservatives would starve. After all we support them.

United States Federal Tax Dollars -


----------



## uscitizen (Apr 23, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > Sallow said:
> ...



Wow! prrhaps I should quit using them for fish bait then?


----------



## Old Rocks (Apr 23, 2011)

*There is no way that this can be done economically at present. However, all it would take is a breakthrough in battery technology for this to be practical. The nation that is host to the company that makes that breakthrough will benefit greatly from it. *

Electric Mini: 0-60 in 4 Seconds: It Has Motors In Its Wheels : TreeHugger

A British engineering firm has put together a high-performance hybrid version of BMW's Mini Cooper. The PML Mini QED has a top speed of 150 mph, a 0-60 mph time of 4.5 seconds. The car uses a small gasoline engine with four 160 horsepower electric motors &#8212; one on each wheel. The car has been designed to run for four hours of combined urban/extra urban driving, powered only by a battery and bank of ultra capacitors. The QED supports an all-electric range of 200-250 miles and has a total range of about 932 miles (1,500 km). For longer journeys at higher speeds, a small conventional internal combustion engine (ICE) is used to re-charge the battery. In this hybrid mode, fuel economies of up to 80mpg can be achieved.


----------



## Toronado3800 (Apr 23, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> > I just cannot understand the anti electric vehicle mania bunch.
> ...



Ew, has that Tundra company fixed their frame tech issue or do you plan on trading it in before the rust becomes an issue for towing?

I mean if you lease it fine, who cares I suppose. My 65 year old mother should honestly lease cars she flips them so quick. She asks me all these questions about reliability then turns in whatever, a 40k mile vehicle!

Sometimes for work I have to drive one of the medium trucks. Sucks I agree dealing with too big a vehicle for your daily needs just so you can haul a trailer forty weekends a year. Bad fuel economy the other 280 days. Like the empty SUV folks who could drive a MR2 six of seven days a week I suppose.


----------



## Toronado3800 (Apr 23, 2011)

Zander said:


> Slapshot28 said:
> 
> 
> > Zander said:
> ...



Ouch on the Mercedes.  But hey, I have a 68 Mustang not because it is efficient but because it is fun. Have a rep for admitting you bought your car because u like it.


----------



## Douger (Apr 23, 2011)

I have a GEMCAR. My hydro-turbine is charging it as I type.
I also have an old Land Cruiser diesel that runs on the shit the restaurants used to send to the land fill.
I heat it up, filter it and pump it in.
Global Electric Motorcars


----------



## Zander (Apr 23, 2011)

Toronado3800 said:


> Zander said:
> 
> 
> > Slapshot28 said:
> ...



Thanks Tornado- yes it's a ridiculously expensive car. But I can afford it and what the hell, it makes me feel important when I pull up to the valet.  

Actually, my wife drives it most of the time. I drive a Nissan Titan pick up truck for business. I have always lived well below my means and because of that, I am now financially independent (meaning that I work because I want to, not because I have too!). When I was in the accumulation phase of life, I drove and purchased used cars that got good mileage and were inexpensive to own.   I delayed gratification for a very long time to be able to drive around in that overpriced car.


----------



## Toronado3800 (Apr 23, 2011)

Zander said:


> Toronado3800 said:
> 
> 
> > Zander said:
> ...



You should lecture folks on personal economics.

I suppose the country has to "Keep up with the Jones' " or Chinese or whoever but individuals who take on such ridiculous monthly payments in relationship to their income are idiots.

Think my next car might be something made in the 2000's but that isn't coming for a couple years.


----------



## DonC (Apr 23, 2011)

Zander said:


> Thanks Tornado- yes it's a ridiculously expensive car. But I can afford it and what the hell, it makes me feel important when I pull up to the valet.


So you can choose to drive a "stupid" car but everyone else should listen to your pronouncements as to what vehicle is appropriate for them? Seems like you're suffering from something of a God complex. As a FYI, I get a smug sense of satisfaction whenever I see someone driving a slow, dirty, noisy, vibration ridden internal combustion car and think of how technologically advanced my Volt is.  

No offense, but I'm having some trouble believing the Mercedes story. If you did drive one you'd know that a Mercedes gets you zip from valets. At the moment the only people driving a Mercedes are 55+ or Asian or posers. Basically everyone who hasn't gotten the memo about how passe the Mercedes brand is. Yeah, the guy who cuts my hair drives one, but that's about the brand's status level, which is why it won't remotely get you a front row parking place at a nice restaurant. 

I bought a Volt. I love it. And since it's far and away the cheapest car I've ever bought, it has already saved me at least $20K, and that's before I drive it for a month on what it would cost me to buy a can of nuts. (Expensive nuts but you get the point). I particularly like the fact that I'm getting a tax rebate which makes the car even less expensive. In fact I'm getting two rebates. Thank you very much. And if you think I feel badly about this you need to think again. I paid cash for my house so I've never gotten a tax break on my mortgage, and I'm sick and tired for paying more in taxes so other people can get tax breaks on their houses and charities and medical insurance and children, and I'm delighted for once to be able to keep some of my hard dollars rather than sending them to Uncle Sam. And if you don't like that, too bad so sad.

As for your not wanting a Volt, that's great. They are in such short supply that your not ordering one will just make someone else a happy camper. They thank you.


----------



## Zander (Apr 23, 2011)

DonC said:


> Zander said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks Tornado- yes it's a ridiculously expensive car. But I can afford it and what the hell, it makes me feel important when I pull up to the valet.
> ...



I could care less what you drive and even less what you think.  If you want to drive a Volt - go for it.  But please don't go around telling anyone that driving it is "saving" you money.  

PS- A trailer is not a house.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Apr 24, 2011)

kiwiman127 said:


> Another OP that shows, when the right said they wanted their country back, they weren't kidding,,,,*back*wards.



Let me deflate your post, and comment on your reading comprehension at the same time...

The OP was not opinion, it was informational.

I merely posted my notes on the article from Consumer's Reports, and the only thing I added was the price of kWh of electicity in NYC.

So...
1. is it your contention that CR is right wing?

2. can you show the OP to be a hit piece?

3. would you care to review and revise your post?



Have a great Easter.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Apr 24, 2011)

Slapshot28 said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > Can you tow a 5,000 camper with it? How about a 3,800 bass boat? How much does the electric upgrade you have to do to your house to charge the SOB up?
> ...



The suggesting was made that you are involved in some business fashion with the Volt....or any electric vehicles...

is this the case, or merely an owner of one?

It would be informative to know.


----------



## westwall (Apr 24, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > Sallow said:
> ...






I suggest you reread the history of commercial aviation because, as usual, you are flat ass wrong.  Post WWI most aviation companies folded.  Those that survived did so absent Government monies for the most part.  They survived by developing airline travel and sport aviation.  On their own. The only help the airlines got was by carrying the mail.  The government tried to run the mail but after a series of fatal accidents the mail service was transferred to the airlines.

Read the history of any aviation company post WWI and it is one of scrabbling for money to survive.  Those companies that came up with the best ideas and technologies survived, most didn't.


"In the year 1911 demonstrations of airplane mail service were made in India, England and the United States. The first air mail service in the United States, however, was conducted at the aviation meeting at Nassau Boulevard, Long Island, N. Y., during the week of September 23 to 30, 1911. Earle L. Ovington, with his "Queen" monoplane, was duly appointed an air mail carrier and covered a set route between the temporary post office established at the flying field and the post office at Mineola, N. Y., dropping the pouches at the latter point for the postmaster to pick up. This service, performed without expense to the Department, was flown at regular intervals during the period, a total of 32,415 post cards, 3,993 letters and 1,062 circulars being carried. It was quite satisfactory on the whole, and very promising. 

A few other similar experiments were made during the remainder of the year 1911, and the Post Office Department recognizing the possibility of developing the airplane into a practicable means of aerial transportation, made recommendation to Congress early in 1912 for an appropriation of $50,000 with which to start an experimental service, but Congress refused to grant the appropriation. Notwithstanding, the keen interest of the Post Office Department in aerial transportation was kept up and during the fiscal year 1912 a total of 31 orders, covering 16 different states, were issued permitting mail to be carried on short exhibition and experimental flights between certain points. Such service was merely temporary, of course, but performed in each instance by a sworn carrier, and without expense to the Department. These experimental flights were continued, however, request being made on Congress for an air mail appropriation from year to year."





History of the Air Mail Service


----------



## westwall (Apr 24, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > boedicca said:
> ...






More like 5000 years ago, but who's counting.  I've actually been to Knossos and it is very impressive, the water channels are amazing.


----------



## Old Rocks (Apr 24, 2011)

Really. You mean that the airlines developed the engines, ect. on their own? That there was little transfer of technology from military to civilian aviation? So what was a Boeing 707 before it was the 707?


----------



## westwall (Apr 24, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > Do Liberals earn enough to purchase a 45K automobile? Most are on the government teat already, barely getting by on the minimum wage.
> ...






I guess you still don't know how to read a map do you!  There's a lot of blue states getting WAY more money from the government then the red states.  And more to the point, those states that get the most money back are those with lots of land under plow but very little relative population so it sorta makes sense that that happens, no?

But hey I live in the state that gets the least amount of money back from the feds, guess that means we're better then those leeches up in Oregon eh?


----------



## westwall (Apr 24, 2011)

DonC said:


> Zander said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks Tornado- yes it's a ridiculously expensive car. But I can afford it and what the hell, it makes me feel important when I pull up to the valet.
> ...







I guess you missed the AMG part huh?  That would be like equating a Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren with an "E" Class.  Let me educate you a bit, in Germany (where nearly every taxi cab you see is a Merc) if you drive up to a casino in an AMG or an SLR, you will get noticed in a New York minute and you will be very well taken care of.  It is the duty of those in the service industry to notice the small details, it gets them taken care of as well.

You on the other hand revel in buying a car that is useless outside of a urban setting and furhtermore you revel in the fact that all the rest of us are helping you pay for your car...typical.


----------



## Slapshot28 (Apr 24, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> The suggesting was made that you are involved in some business fashion with the Volt....or any electric vehicles...
> 
> is this the case, or merely an owner of one?
> 
> It would be informative to know.



No, I have no association whatsoever with GM, or with any EV initiative.  I'm just a happy Volt owner.  My public profile is here: www[dot]linkedin.com/profile/view?id=6802886 (sorry, I can't post real urls on this forum).

All Volt owners are well-aware of the Consumer Reports article, which most of us consider badly slanted.  There is some mis-information in that article (specifically the 30 MPG number is pure-gas mode is well-below any real experience), and actually I think some of what you quoted might not be 100% correct (the range of 22-27 I believe refers to all-electric range in miles, and not mpg; and, it's also at the very lowest end of real experience).

One significant incongruity that I couldn't understand in your original post regarded electricity rates.  While surely NY is among the most expensive in the country, the information I can found suggests a rate of about 17 or 18 cents/kwh.  The average across the country is about 10 cents/kwh (www[dot]eia.doe.gov/energyexplained/index.cfm?page=electricity_factors_affecting_prices)

It sounds like you like the Nissan Leaf, and I applaud you for that.  Pure EV is a great solution, if it matches your driving patterns and vehicle needs (which it does for many people).  Furthermore, as battery range increases, pure EV cars will garner much broader appeal.  Certainly going forward we will see more and more EV and EREV offerings from many auto companies, no question.  Here is the one that I REALLY want: YouTube: Jaguar C-X75 Electric-Turbine.  

Thank you very much for following up to my posts here.

Chris


----------



## PoliticalChic (Apr 24, 2011)

Slapshot28 said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > The suggesting was made that you are involved in some business fashion with the Volt....or any electric vehicles...
> ...



Go ahead...rub it in re: our electric rates in NYC!

I keep trying to correct the record, but folks think I have written an opinion piece in the OP...I have not.

I always post about subjects that interest me, and when I read the latest CR article, I thought it would interest others, as well.

Again, outside of the NYC electric rates, the entire OP is taken from the CR article. You can probably find it on line at some minimal cost, to verify same.

I am far from shy about posting my opinions, but I have no personal opinion about the Volt or the Leaf.

I do have an opinion about government selection of winners and losers, vs. the free market, but that will be for another thread.

Thank you for answering my question.


BTW, I loved 'Slapshot:' we're big hockey fans here.
My team was eliminated yesterday. And I hate your team.


----------



## Slapshot28 (Apr 24, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> Go ahead...rub it in re: or electric rates in NYC!



Oh, sorry.  I was not trying to rub anything in



PoliticalChic said:


> My team was eliminated yesterday. And I hate your team.



Oh come on, how can you hate the Broad Street Bullies?  (We are on the brink of elimination today...)

Your avatar must THE BEST on the Internet!!!  

And I'm with you on government intervention.


----------



## Big Fitz (Apr 24, 2011)

Maybe there's time to rename this car the Chevy Edsal.

This car is DOA.  

Can't wait for the bitching to start the first time the holier than thou greenies discover how little they save when it's -10 outside, they're freezing cold and their car only runs 40 miles on the gas engine.


----------



## Trajan (Apr 24, 2011)

Zander said:


> Toronado3800 said:
> 
> 
> > Zander said:
> ...




very well said,I bought a Mustang GT in 05, when the new body style came out, my wife called it my MCC....my midlife crisis car, yea, I'll cop to that.


In late 06 when the advertised the Shelby GT 500  Cobra, I bought one, that was really my dream car,it was the car I could never afford back in the day when they came out originally and even used, no dice ( 67-68). 

And yes it has concomitant costs over and above say the GT or another car of its similar model, the brakes require rotors when they are serviced, the tires and alignment for correct cast and camber as the balance because of the sport package and drive tuning wears out the tires in 15K... it is as one would expect way expensive, hello, its a high performance automobile.  

As Toronado3800 and you allude, its not a car that one buys lightly but one buys when they reach a point in their life where they can reap the reward for being successful, sometimes frugal,as you manage well and have done well enough to buy that kind of toy. 


the volt? well hey if someone wants to sooth their conscience and convince themselves they are buying a vehicle that will help the environment, have it, but don't expect any hurrah's from me, because its a no go.

It doesn't do what its advertised to do and no one, via rebate or otherwise financially rewarded me for buying my car, I paid the full reg. and tax fees,I don't get to ride around in the car pool lane etc. I admit it has absolutely no impact other than on my driving joy and ego...I just wish that those folks who buy the volt would admit same.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Apr 24, 2011)

A real cost-benefit analysis might take into consideration many more variables then listed in the OP.  Consider a few:

1.  The cost to the taxpayer for a foreign/military/defense/energy policy predicated on our addiciton to oil which may have created the climate for radical muslims to hate our country and seek to do us harm;
2.  The environmental/health costs associated with air pollution, a bi-product of the internal combustion engine and the burning of coal;
3.  The environmental/health costs associated with water pollution; a bi-product of coal mine production washing into steams and rivers; 
4.  The bi-products of oil from vehicles washing into storm drains and eventually into the oceans;
5.  The average miles driven by commuters in the U.S.;
6.  The ability of science and industry to R&D new, better and more efficient products;
7.  The competition amongy vehicle manufacturers worldwide to develop alternative type vehicles.


----------



## kiwiman127 (Apr 24, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> kiwiman127 said:
> 
> 
> > Another OP that shows, when the right said they wanted their country back, they weren't kidding,,,,*back*wards.
> ...



Here's another review of the Volt.

Another overview of the 2011 Chevrolet Volt: Voltec Technology Wins Edmunds' 2011 Green Car Breakthrough Award.

2011 Chevrolet Volt Archives - Long-Term Road Tests 

I could have worded my response post better.  To be more accurate,,,,"Another OP that  ignites the oil-addicted righties to show that, when the right said they wanted their country back, they weren't kidding,,,,*back*wards"

And you have a nice Easter too.


----------



## Zander (Apr 24, 2011)

The Volt....






a very expensive golf cart.


----------



## Trajan (Apr 24, 2011)

Zander said:


> The Volt....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Wry Catcher (Apr 24, 2011)

Zander said:


> The Volt....
> 
> 
> 
> ...



To be expected, a stupid post followed by an echo.


----------



## Big Fitz (Apr 24, 2011)

Wry Catcher said:


> A real cost-benefit analysis might take into consideration many more variables then listed in the OP.  Consider a few:
> 
> 1.  The cost to the taxpayer for a foreign/military/defense/energy policy predicated on our addiciton to oil which may have created the climate for radical muslims to hate our country and seek to do us harm;
> 2.  The environmental/health costs associated with air pollution, a bi-product of the internal combustion engine and the burning of coal;
> ...


You have one critical flaw in your list.

First prove direct harm from auto pollution and personal health from general exposure that cannot be attributed to other sources.  Once that is done, your premise may have much more credibility.  No proof of direct causation, no proof of costs being linked to cars.

Also, when's the last time a car was run on coal?  1892?

Do you know what the difference is between medicine and poison many times?

Dosage.

You need proof of direct causation by even minute to trace amounts of pollution to health.  Case in point, how's the Deepwater spill harming people still outside of unemployment by an anti-capitalist administration?


----------



## Trajan (Apr 24, 2011)

Wry Catcher said:


> Zander said:
> 
> 
> > The Volt....
> ...



yes you're right;  posting stupidity is your domain , I'll ask for a copyright next time.......I apologize.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Apr 24, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > A real cost-benefit analysis might take into consideration many more variables then listed in the OP.  Consider a few:
> ...





Maybe introducing coal was a step too far.  I withdraw that example.  Though there is no such thing as clean coal.

How many commuters drive a greater distance to and from work than can be accomplished by an all electric car?  For over 30 years my commute was less than 30 miles.  BTW, electric cars have HVAC systems, CD/Radios and even seat belts and air bags (ooops, I forget, making people wear seat belts deprives them of liberty and air bags are one more example of government interference).

I suppose you don't recall SMOG alerts/acid rain before another interference by government -removing lead and adding afterburngers to the exhaust system of vehicles.

See:   Killer London Smog of 1952 

 Let me suggest a test:  Go to your garage and get a garden house and your car keys.  Step two, place one end of the garden hose in the tailpipe and the other through a small opening in the front drivers side window.  Last step:  start the car and breath deeply the exhaust from the TP now entering the cab of the vehicle.  
No one will ever confuse carbon monoxide with medicine (at least more than one time).


----------



## Synthaholic (Apr 24, 2011)

Trajan said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > You forget about the cost of the military presence in the ME, whose sole reason for being there is to protect our flow of oil.
> ...


If you didn't 'forget' about it, you must have left it out on purpose.


----------



## Synthaholic (Apr 24, 2011)

Zander said:


> More bad news for Volt owners. First you over-pay by about 30k (a Nissan Versa is just as fuel efficient, goes farther and faster, has a longer warranty, and costs 10K) now it looks like you may be paying another tax (if you live in Washington). The hits just keep comin'......
> 
> Wash. considers annual flat fee for electric cars - Yahoo! News


What's your argument against that tax?


----------



## Synthaholic (Apr 24, 2011)

slukasiewski said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> > I just cannot understand the anti electric vehicle mania bunch.
> ...


Well, yes, America is filled with morons like you who probably use just one skillet to do all your cooking, also.  Do you also use your weed whacker to mow your lawn?

Smart people realize that there are different tools for different jobs.  Ask one - they'll tell you!


----------



## Synthaholic (Apr 24, 2011)

Zander said:


> Slapshot28 said:
> 
> 
> > Zander said:
> ...



I don't believe you, mainly because you don't have a good track record on this forum for telling the truth.


----------



## Zander (Apr 24, 2011)

Synthaholic said:


> Zander said:
> 
> 
> > Slapshot28 said:
> ...


What don't you believe? That I own the MBZ? I'll be happy to post a photo of it with me sitting in it.  What would you like to wager?


----------



## Zander (Apr 24, 2011)

Synthaholic said:


> Zander said:
> 
> 
> > More bad news for Volt owners. First you over-pay by about 30k (a Nissan Versa is just as fuel efficient, goes farther and faster, has a longer warranty, and costs 10K) now it looks like you may be paying another tax (if you live in Washington). The hits just keep comin'......
> ...



Why would I be against it?


----------



## Synthaholic (Apr 24, 2011)

Zander said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > Zander said:
> ...


Sure.  Then I'll run down to the dealership and have my photo taken in a Porsche!


----------



## Synthaholic (Apr 24, 2011)

Zander said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > Zander said:
> ...


Well, you referred to it as a 'hit'.

Roads are paid for by gas taxes, as a user fee.  There's nothing wrong with electric cars also paying a user fee to maintain those roads.


----------



## Zander (Apr 24, 2011)

Synthaholic said:


> Zander said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...


Make a wager.  You called me a liar kid, now man the fuck up or apologize.


----------



## Zander (Apr 24, 2011)

Synthaholic said:


> Zander said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...



It is a hit. If the people who are purchasing these $41,000  golf carts want to delude themselves into believing that they are "saving" money by purchasing one, I think a government imposed user fee is yet another pin in their balloon of self delusion.


----------



## Trajan (Apr 24, 2011)

Synthaholic said:


> Zander said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...



uhm, if I recall they were given tax breaks/allowances if they bought an elec. car, use of motor pool lanes etc...now, they have a budget issue and are looking for cash, they think these folks got an out and are going to stick it to them.

 I am not down with any of the breaks they gave them but nor am I into the gov. pulling a bait and switch on them either.


----------



## Big Fitz (Apr 24, 2011)

Trajan said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > Zander said:
> ...


No no...you don't have to worry about copyright.  It falls under 'fair use' as long as you cite stupidity credit to Rye.


----------



## Big Fitz (Apr 24, 2011)

Wry Catcher said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...





> How many commuters drive a greater distance to and from work than can be  accomplished by an all electric car?



In the midwest, great plains and parts of the mountains, a lot.  A significant minority.  I know personally of about 5 people who commute, one way around 60 miles.  I know one person who commutes 120.  This is in MN.  The less dense the population the greater the commute distance.  Secondly, is there any proof of improved: quality, convenience, economy or speed in their commute by using an electric car?  I am still highly dubious.  

It makes sense for buses, for example, to go hybrid (not whole hog electric) because the vast majority of them do not do highway miles unless they are express routes, and outside of major metropolitan area, those needs are few and far between.



> Though there is no such thing as clean coal.



Baaaaaloney.  Emissions from 'clean coal facilities', like new version garbage incinerators have fabulous scrubbing systems that are almost to the point of putting cleaner air back in the atmosphere than when it went in.  I think that's a little overkill because the expense for such levels of environmental cleaning are past the return on investment, but am a firm believer in clean coal uses.  Mining is far cleaner in the US than pretty much every other nation in the world... not too clean, but getting stupidly prohibitive.



> I suppose you don't recall SMOG alerts/acid rain before another  interference by government -removing lead and adding afterburngers to  the exhaust system of vehicles.



Two positive changes, implemented in the 1970's and have been expanded to near ludicrous levels of cleanliness versus return on investment. And you're trying to base the "need", and no it's not a need it's a want, for cleaner emissions still based on a freak incident in the 1950's before even rudimentary clean air regulation went into effect?  You do realize that even in 1950, the air in london was many many multiples better than it was 100 years earlier when the gritty smog was so powerful it was called a 'miasma' and blamed for many health issues, justifiably?  

But those statistics for death were not recorded well, because the scientific interest was very low at the time, and the concept of germs and pollution based illness was still a foreign concept.  Tuberculosis was still being 'treated' by taking a holiday in the country for 3 months if they could get it.  

I'm sorry, but these are not justifications for tighter air quality standards when what has been done since the 1970's has no reason to be tightened.  There is no further benefit to be gained.



> Let me suggest a test:  Go to your garage and get a garden house and  your car keys.  Step two, place one end of the garden hose in the  tailpipe and the other through a small opening in the front drivers side  window.  Last step:  start the car and breath deeply the exhaust from  the TP now entering the cab of the vehicle.
> No one will ever confuse carbon monoxide with medicine (at least more  than one time).



Yeah... that's equivalent to anything we're discussing.    How about you huff a can of krylon paint and compare it to air pollution.  I can see how that'd be equivalent.  come on, don't even try to pass that crap out.


----------



## Big Fitz (Apr 24, 2011)

Synthaholic said:


> slukasiewski said:
> 
> 
> > uscitizen said:
> ...


Comparing a car to a skillet or weed-whacker is like comparing a spatula to an outhouse.  How about we compare at least fruit to fruit here.  not fruit to cleaning solvents.


----------



## Big Fitz (Apr 24, 2011)

Synthaholic said:


> Zander said:
> 
> 
> > Slapshot28 said:
> ...


Mr. Pot I presume?  More like a chamberpot but who's checking?


----------



## Slapshot28 (Apr 24, 2011)

Zander said:


> If the people who are purchasing these $41,000  golf carts want to delude themselves into believing that they are "saving" money by purchasing one...



Hi Zander--  I am a bit confused here.  I know that some magazine headlines read on whether or not Volt ownership can "pay for itself" (especially versus a Prius, not comparable in my view) but I'm not aware of GM advocating this argument.  There is no way that I am trying to justify my Volt purchase this way, and I don't think any other Volt owners believe in the "pay-back" notion either.

Sure, minimizing gasoline use is good (for lots of reasons), but $41K worth in real dollars and cents?  Come on!

I'm just curious what convinced you that GM and/or any real Volt owners are trying to make this "pay-back" case.  I've just never seen it, other than on Prius-chats where the "pay-back" argument seems to get ridiculous airtime...

BTW, I know that Volt mileage numbers are all over the map, starting with the famous 230 MPG, and going every which way.  But that's not the same thing as a silly notion that the car somehow will pay for itself.

Thank you!

Chris


----------



## Synthaholic (Apr 24, 2011)

Zander said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > Zander said:
> ...


No I didn't.  I said I didn't believe you.


----------



## Zander (Apr 24, 2011)

Slapshot28 said:


> Zander said:
> 
> 
> > If the people who are purchasing these $41,000  golf carts want to delude themselves into believing that they are "saving" money by purchasing one...
> ...



Don here seems to think he's hit the jackpot.....http://www.usmessageboard.com/science-and-technology/164416-chevrolet-volt-6.html#post3563858


DonC said:


> Zander said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks Tornado- yes it's a ridiculously expensive car. But I can afford it and what the hell, it makes me feel important when I pull up to the valet.
> ...


----------



## Zander (Apr 24, 2011)

Synthaholic said:


> Zander said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...



Sorry Mr Clinton, but that circular logic crap ain't gonna fly with me. When you say you don't believe me you are calling me a liar.  I can prove beyond reasonable doubt that I own the car. Now you can either apologize, or man up. So what's it gonna be punk?


----------



## Slapshot28 (Apr 24, 2011)

Zander said:


> Don here seems to think he's hit the jackpot.....



Yea, a lot of us Volt owners are pretty psyched about using less gasoline.  Before, with my 5-Series, I might have spent $50/week on fill-ups, or about $2500 per year.  Even if I cut that cost in half, it's going to take a hell of a long time to justify whatever efficiency-based premium I might ascribe to the Volt.

So, I'm not focused on pay-back.  For me, the $41K is justified by owning a car that I really like, period.

Thank you again!

Chris


----------



## Synthaholic (Apr 24, 2011)

Zander said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > Zander said:
> ...



I think your premise is wrong.  The rich people who are early adopters of new technology are buying it because that's what they do.  That includes the Michael Moores, Bill Mahers, and assorted Hollywood types who also were the first to buy the Prius.

Then there are the people like Slapstick, who could have bought another BMW, or an Acura TL, or an Audi A6, or any number of similarly priced sports cars.  For them, there is significant savings by not having to buy gas (or as much of it).

I seriously doubt that there is anyone who normally would buy a $25k car paying an extra $16k to save gas money.


----------



## Zander (Apr 24, 2011)

Synthaholic said:


> Zander said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...



You should talk to Don...see his post above. 


So, you gonna man up? or crawl back to mommy?


----------



## Old Rocks (Apr 24, 2011)

westwall said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > slukasiewski said:
> ...



Well, once again Walleyes demonstrates that he cannot read. New Jersey gets the least back from the money they put in. Nevada is second. Oregon gets 98 cents back for every dollar we send in. 

Neveda has lots of land under the plow? Growing what? Cactus and sage?


----------



## Big Fitz (Apr 24, 2011)

Synthaholic said:


> Zander said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...


And this is different from calling some a liar how?

You may fall for your own semantic bullshit, but most normal humans can see through it.


----------



## GWV5903 (Apr 24, 2011)

Synthaholic said:


> GWV5903 said:
> 
> 
> > uscitizen said:
> ...



BTW Coal gasification plants generate most of our electricity.....

Rock vs Synthaholic 

Rock wins.....

That's about as honest as it gets....


----------



## westwall (Apr 24, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Really. You mean that the airlines developed the engines, ect. on their own? That there was little transfer of technology from military to civilian aviation? So what was a Boeing 707 before it was the 707?






No, moron, the aviation companies developed the aircraft that allowed the airlines to succeed.  The transfer was from civilian to the military.  The DC-2 and the DC-3 that followed it became the vaunted C-47 of WWII fame.  Read some history!


----------



## Synthaholic (Apr 24, 2011)

Zander said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > Zander said:
> ...


I said I don't believe you because you regularly lie on this forum.  Deal with it.


----------



## Synthaholic (Apr 24, 2011)

Zander said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > Zander said:
> ...



Don said he bought the Volt because he likes it.  He also said that he has saved around $20k, with rebates, tax credits, and gas savings.

So what should I talk to him about?


----------



## Synthaholic (Apr 24, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > Zander said:
> ...


I've called him a liar frequently, in many threads.  So I'm not backpedaling from that.

There is a difference between saying I don't believe him when he makes a statement about himself, and calling him a liar when he posts untruthful things about Obama, that are easily proven to be lies.


----------



## Synthaholic (Apr 24, 2011)

GWV5903 said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > GWV5903 said:
> ...


Depends on where you live.


----------



## Slapshot28 (Apr 25, 2011)

Synthaholic said:


> Zander said:
> 
> 
> > You should talk to Don...see his post above.
> ...



Actually, the $20K was simply how much less Don PAID for his Volt than he normally would pay for a car.  No operating savings or tax rebates were included in Don's initial $20K savings.

Here are his words:



DonC said:


> And since it's far and away the cheapest car I've ever bought, it has already saved me at least $20K...



Chris


----------



## Toronado3800 (Apr 25, 2011)

westwall said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Really. You mean that the airlines developed the engines, ect. on their own? That there was little transfer of technology from military to civilian aviation? So what was a Boeing 707 before it was the 707?
> ...



Westwall, I love that avatar of yours. I designed a t shirt once off a similar picture.

Was the design scammed from the Concord or something?

These "x" prize winners are getting into soace on their own. Granted its fifty years after government contractors did it...


----------



## Big Fitz (Apr 25, 2011)

Synthaholic said:


> Zander said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...


Links to proof?


----------



## Big Fitz (Apr 25, 2011)

Synthaholic said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...


So now, saying you don't believe him is not calling him a liar?  Tell me President Clinton, What's the definition of "is"?

Did you crack your skull on the bottom of the pool diving in the shallow end again?


----------



## Big Fitz (Apr 25, 2011)

Synthaholic said:


> GWV5903 said:
> 
> 
> > uscitizen said:
> ...


Horsecrap and you... wait... no you probably don't know it, considering your consistent track record for idiocy.





Source the Dept of Energy via Wikipedia.

Something else to realize that the cost of Natural Gas generation is up to 3 times more expensive than coal or Nuclear.  It is used generally for 'peaking plants' and run only during times of high demand (extreme cold or heat) in most places.  They are no where NEAR as reliable or effective as coal, nuclear and nothing comes close to hydro.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_generation

More information to wake your dumb ass up can be found here.


----------



## westwall (Apr 25, 2011)

Toronado3800 said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...






The SR-71 was developed on Lockheeds dime and predates Concorde by almost a decade.  Project ARCHANGEL was the name of the project and the design was the 12th one tried.  Convair also attempted to develop a similar aircraft.  This was the beginning of the Military Industrial Complex that Ike warned us would occur if we were not careful.  Obviously he was proven correct.  After the late 1950's the aviation industry and the Pentagon became ever more intertwined.  Before that aviation was independent to the point of starvation till WWII saved them.


----------



## Synthaholic (Apr 25, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > Zander said:
> ...


No.  It's not worth my time to prove anything to morons.  But I will be happy to point you to his future lies, which will be along shortly, I'm sure.


----------



## Big Fitz (Apr 25, 2011)

Synthaholic said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...








yep.  Just able to pop off like a punkass bitch.  

Let me show you the door.

<<<< THERE'S THE DOOR!


----------



## Synthaholic (Apr 25, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > Big Fitz said:
> ...



Hey - asshole - you're pissing me off because now I have to talk to you like the simpleton that you are.

Example #1:  You say _"The upper tax rates under Carter were 90%"_.  I call you a liar, because I can prove that they weren't.

Example #2:  You say _"When I was 11 years old, I killed a grizzly bear with my bare hands"_.  I say I don't believe you.  I can't call you a liar, because I cannot prove that you didn't.

Do you understand now, moron?


----------



## Synthaholic (Apr 25, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > GWV5903 said:
> ...

















Thank you for proving me *correct *when I said:



Synthaholic said:


> Depends on where you live.




You are one stupid fuck.


----------



## Big Fitz (Apr 25, 2011)

Synthaholic said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...


Huh.  A distinction without a difference.

You getting it yet, moron?


----------



## Big Fitz (Apr 25, 2011)

Synthaholic said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...


Well I like orange juice on my tambourine platypus too.

Once again.  You make no sense and have no relevance.


----------



## Synthaholic (Apr 25, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > Big Fitz said:
> ...




Like I said:  you're a simpleton.


----------



## Big Fitz (Apr 25, 2011)

Synthaholic said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...


Link to my stupidity?  It feels like I've been illustrating yours since you joined.


----------



## Synthaholic (Apr 25, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > Big Fitz said:
> ...



http://www.usmessageboard.com/3570493-post140.html


----------



## Big Fitz (Apr 25, 2011)

Synthaholic said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...


ROFLMAO... yep.  just the type of brainless retort I thought I'd get.

I do believe your retarder is enabled.






Anything further you'd like to gibber incoherently about?


----------



## GWV5903 (Apr 25, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > GWV5903 said:
> ...



, but I am not sure that will wake it up....


----------



## Big Fitz (Apr 25, 2011)

GWV5903 said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...


you could put this moron on a caffeine and PCP drip and he'd not wake up.

Hope you're enjoying the beat down.  It's been enjoyable way to waste some time.


----------



## Big Fitz (Apr 25, 2011)

Damn. I just remembered a line from the Monty Python Dead Parrot sketch.

"That parrot wouldn't go 'VOOM' even if you put 50,000 volts through it!  He's bleeding DEMISED!"


----------



## Trajan (Apr 30, 2011)

hey!! who's ready for some GOOOOOOOD news!!!!

Volts sales have SURGED!!!

to a whole *608* units in March..hot damn we are on our way.......for a total of...hold your breath now..get ready.............1210 units!!!!!!!




Volt sales surge in March
Jake Weyer

April 4, 2011  General Motors sold more Chevrolet Volts in March than in January and February combined, according to the manufacturer's latest sales report.

Volt sales hit 608 units in March, adding to 281 sold in February and 321 that found buyers in January, for a sales total of 1,210 cars. Its a tiny number compared to sales of some other GM models, such as the Cruze, which hit 18,018 units in March. But its significant given the Volts low numbers during the past couple of months.

Volt sales surge in March


----------



## westwall (Apr 30, 2011)

Trajan said:


> hey!! who's ready for some GOOOOOOOD news!!!!
> 
> Volts sales have SURGED!!!
> 
> ...






Wow!  That's great!  That means (if my math is correct) the volt sales are 3% of what the Cruzes are!  Wow, that sucker is going to be a money maker!


----------



## xotoxi (Apr 30, 2011)

PoliticalChic said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> > I just cannot understand the anti electric vehicle mania bunch.
> ...



Yeah, uscitizen.  It's 100% bonafide cut and paste.

There is no opinion given whatsoever.


----------



## Sallow (Apr 30, 2011)

xotoxi said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > uscitizen said:
> ...



Basically.

It's corn fed 100% USDA blogosphere conservatism.


----------



## westwall (Apr 30, 2011)

Sallow said:


> xotoxi said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...







No, it's simple economics.  Poor people are taxed to give subsidies to wealthy car companies that sell electric vehicles that only the wealthy can afford.  Sounds real FAIR to me.  Isn't that what libs are all about, fairness?  What's fair about ripping off poor people so that rich people can have expensive toys?


----------



## Big Fitz (Apr 30, 2011)

westwall said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > hey!! who's ready for some GOOOOOOOD news!!!!
> ...


I reiterate... the Chevy Edsal.  If they wanted it to be a more accurate, hip name, they'd have called it the 'Singularity'.  It sucks so hard not even light escapes.


----------



## Trajan (Apr 30, 2011)

westwall said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> > xotoxi said:
> ...



its ok, its the old help me sooth my guilt 'out'....

for those 608 Volts,  Laurie David can fly to the golden globes in a private jet and Gore can heat his pool this summer...


----------



## boedicca (Apr 30, 2011)

westwall said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> > xotoxi said:
> ...




That certainly SPLAINS TESLA MOTORS.


----------



## westwall (Apr 30, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Trajan said:
> ...






Damn!  I have to wait to rep you again!


----------



## Sallow (Apr 30, 2011)

westwall said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> > xotoxi said:
> ...


----------



## Zander (Apr 30, 2011)

The people buying the Volt are buying it for reasons that are not related to economics. They "feel" good by buying it.  They are using less fuel.  Good for them.  I like feeling good too.  I feel especially good when I am flying around in my Cessna 182RG and burning 12-15 gallons of fuel per hour.  Sometimes I go places and sometimes I might stay in the pattern doing takeoffs and landings.  I even fly in circles sometimes!  I simply love and enjoy the freedom of flying.  The lower demand for fuel is good for folks like me. 

So let me say to the Volt owners - Thank You for subsidizing my passion for aviation!


----------



## Trajan (Apr 30, 2011)

Zander said:


> The people buying the Volt are buying it for reasons that are not related to economics. They "feel" good by buying it.  They are using less fuel.  Good for them.  I like feeling good too.  I feel especially good when I am flying around in my Cessna 182RG and burning 12-15 gallons of fuel per hour.  Sometimes I go places and sometimes I might stay in the pattern doing takeoffs and landings.  I even fly in circles sometimes!  I simply love and enjoy the freedom of flying.  The lower demand for fuel is good for folks like me.
> 
> So let me say to the Volt owners - Thank You for subsidizing my passion for aviation!



fukin' alex....


----------



## Big Fitz (Apr 30, 2011)

westwall said:
			
		

> Damn!  I have to wait to rep you again!



LOL... thank you thank you... don't applaud.. just throw money to my awesomeness.  LOL


----------



## Trajan (Apr 30, 2011)

Zander said:


> The people buying the Volt are buying it for reasons that are not related to economics. They "feel" good by buying it.  They are using less fuel.  Good for them.  I like feeling good too.  I feel especially good when I am flying around in my Cessna 182RG and burning 12-15 gallons of fuel per hour.  Sometimes I go places and sometimes I might stay in the pattern doing takeoffs and landings.  I even fly in circles sometimes!  I simply love and enjoy the freedom of flying.  The lower demand for fuel is good for folks like me.
> 
> So let me say to the Volt owners - Thank You for subsidizing my passion for aviation!



welllll, I get in my Shelby, and just roar around the cul de sac for hours, smoking a cigar after a huge steak,  in my especially ordered calfskin leather...........sometimes I leave tr running in the driveway over night.....and thank you as well...


----------



## Synthaholic (May 1, 2011)

Sallow said:


> xotoxi said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


With subsidies!


----------



## Synthaholic (May 1, 2011)

westwall said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> > xotoxi said:
> ...



I thought the wingnut argument was that poor people didn't pay taxes?


----------



## Synthaholic (May 1, 2011)

Sallow said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Sallow said:
> ...


I know!  Wingnuts giving a shit about poor people!


----------



## Synthaholic (May 1, 2011)

Trajan said:


> Zander said:
> 
> 
> > The people buying the Volt are buying it for reasons that are not related to economics. They "feel" good by buying it.  They are using less fuel.  Good for them.  I like feeling good too.  I feel especially good when I am flying around in my Cessna 182RG and burning 12-15 gallons of fuel per hour.  Sometimes I go places and sometimes I might stay in the pattern doing takeoffs and landings.  I even fly in circles sometimes!  I simply love and enjoy the freedom of flying.  The lower demand for fuel is good for folks like me.
> ...


I'm buying Xenatec Maybach 57 S Coupes for everyone in my family!


----------



## Zander (May 1, 2011)

Synthaholic said:


> Trajan said:
> 
> 
> > Zander said:
> ...



Yeah, sure you are....


----------



## Synthaholic (May 1, 2011)

Zander said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > Trajan said:
> ...


Just keeping up my end of the fantasy.


----------



## Zander (May 1, 2011)

Synthaholic said:


> Zander said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...



What don't you believe now? Do you doubt I am a pilot ? Or that I own a plane?   Either way, you'd be wrong.  Of course you're so small minded and pathetic that the idea of owning luxury automobiles, planes, and beautiful homes are fantasies for you. For me, they are my everyday life.  

Do keep fantasizing though,  dreams do come true if you know how capitalism works.


----------



## westwall (May 1, 2011)

Zander said:


> Synthaholic said:
> 
> 
> > Zander said:
> ...






And, more importantly, are willing to work hard for the things you want.


----------



## Big Fitz (May 1, 2011)

westwall said:


> Zander said:
> 
> 
> > Synthaholic said:
> ...


Oh that's crazy talk.  All rich people just got lucky on the lottery of life.


----------



## Synthaholic (May 1, 2011)

There are plenty of rich people, like Donald Trump, who were born on third base and think they hit a triple.


----------



## Big Fitz (May 2, 2011)

Synthaholic said:


> There are plenty of rich people, like Donald Trump, who were born on third base and think they hit a triple.


And there are many more who started with nothing to become captains of industry.  As a matter of fact, MOST of the guilded Age wealthy started out poor.  Rockafeller, Vanderbilt, Carnegie, Jay Gould, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Tony Robbins, Walt Disney, Collis Huntington.

Trump could just as easily have squandered his inheritance from his father, (BTW he didn't get one till 1999 when his father died of Alzheimers) and fallen into "Upper Class Twit of the Year" status.  But he didn't.  Looking at his bio, the man may have started with a lot of resources, but he went on to make his own fortune that dwarfed his fathers.  In a lot of ways, he followed the path of J.J. Astor, the richest man of the Guilded age (before his death on the Titanic).

So you just keep on being jealous of the rich and hating them.  Only proves your utter cluelessness.


----------



## Avorysuds (May 2, 2011)

uscitizen said:


> We will pay more as petro based transportation costs rise.
> There will be a turnover point on alternatively powered vehicles.
> But since we are not quite there yet we should abandon that route?



Question, where does the electricity come from to charge that car? Oh that's right, you simply displaced that oil from the pump to somewhere else to be converted to electricity. So in reality, just going off reality this car is 0% &#8220;green.&#8221;


----------



## theHawk (May 2, 2011)

Sallow said:


> Man..if you guys ruled the roost back in the old days..there would be no airplanes, running water, toilets, or just about anything.
> 
> Come to think of it..the Dark ages..was the height of conservatism!



Yea, thank God the rabid liberals were in charge of everything back in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.


----------



## Big Fitz (May 2, 2011)

theHawk said:


> Sallow said:
> 
> 
> > Man..if you guys ruled the roost back in the old days..there would be no airplanes, running water, toilets, or just about anything.
> ...


Riiiight.  Rich industrialists would have stifled all growth and invention... Completely moronic theory.

Let's see.

John Rockefeller: Standard Oil.  Took the new commodity and made it into the lifeblood of the world.

Andrew Carnegie:  US Steel.  Made the metal that made America into the industrial Giant it was.

Thomas Edison:  Hmmmmmmm... wonder what made him famous and rich?

Elias Singer: Created the sewing machine.  Revolutionized the clothing industry.

George Stephenson:  Invented a moving kettle.  Created the biggest industry of the 19th century... the Railroad.

George Westinghouse: Airbrakes and then partnered with Nicola Tesla to create 80% of all the types of electrical generation equipment that exists and the basis for our entire electric grid today.

Although Philo Farnsworth invented TV, it was stolen by RCA because it was a damn good idea and profited millions and now billions ever since.

Igor Sikorsky: Invented the helicopter and created Sikorsky Aviation, for many years the ONLY producer of that type of aircraft.

I could keep going but I figure these are enough examples to prove you're so fulla shit you squeak going into the turn.


----------

