We reached the point of diminishing returns as regards vehicle emissions technology, probably 20 years ago. Maybe even 30. There was a huge reduction in smog-forming compounds as a result of widespread adoption of catalytic converters (mid 1970s) and then fuel injection (mid-1980s). Since then, further reductions have been incremental and lately, infinitesimal.
Most people do not understand this.
For instance, when it is announced that New Technology X will “cut tailpipe emissions by 10 percent,” which sounds very impressive, the truth is usually less spectacular. They invariably neglect to mention that new cars are already 97 percent “clean” at the tailpipe – and have been, for years. That is, only about 3 percent of the exhaust output of a late-model car is other than water vapor and C02 – neither of which have any bearing on smog formation or air pollution.
Hence, New Technology X will actually (if the claim is taken at face value) reduce that remaining 3 percent of “bad stuff” by 10 percent. And 10 percent of 3 percent is a great deal less than the implied 10 percent of 100 percent. In fact, it is a fractional reduction. Almost unmeasurable – and more to the point, negligible as regards the vehicle’s “impact” on air quality. Put another way, the difference in emissions output between say a 2000 model year car and a 2012 model year car is on the order of 1 percent or less.
And these literally fractional improvements often come at great cost relative to what’s gained – exactly the opposite of the first-generation emissions controls, which made huge strides without adding massively to the cost of the car. A simple catalytic converter, for example, massively alters the quality of the exhaust output, curbing the harmful emissions by double digits – for about $200-$400 or so. A simple throttle body fuel-injection system achieves a similar reduction relative to a carburetor – and (again) without adding a massive expense to the car. Adding an overdrive gear to the transmission dramatically cuts fuel consumption – which also lowers total exhaust emissions simply as a result of burning less fuel.
All of these things have been in widespread use since the mid-1980s. This is the period when the major gains, in terms of reducing vehicle emissions, were achieved. Put another way, the basic problem has been solved for more than 20 years. Cars have been “clean” for decades.
So why do we – why do they – continue to tilt at windmills? Why continue to invest huge sums – and impose huge costs – for ever-diminishing returns? Mostly, it’s because of the lingering perception that cars are still “dirty” – which they aren’t. This, in turn, provides the rationale for increasingly unreasonable federal regulations – regulations that demand fractional reductions of the remaining fraction of vehicle exhaust that’s not clean. That previously mentioned 3 percent. 
Whatever the cost. To be paid by you.
A better (because more cost-effective) solution would be to mass-market relatively simple, much-lighter-than-current-average vehicles equipped with updated versions of something like Honda’s old CVCC engine of the mid-1970s fed by a throttle body injector (TBI) teamed up with a modern six speed overdrive transmission or CVT. Such a vehicle, weighing about 1,800 lbs., let’s say, would not need more than about 100 hp (probably less) to be powerful enough for most A to B driving, would be capable of 60-plus MPG, and – critically – would burn probably 40 percent less fuel than the typical current 270 hp V-6 (and 3,400-plus pound) sedan or crossover – which mostly never sees the high side of 80 MPH anyhow and thus is as pointless as giving a eunuch Viagra.
If such vehicles became mass-market vehicles, the result would be a massive reduction in emissions output (and fuel wastage) without the need to pursue ever-more-elaborate, ever-more-expensive technological solutions in the quest for diminishing returns, tailpipe emissions-wise. Such a machine would not need gas direct injection, or variable cam/valve timing, or multiple sequential turbochargers – just a sampling of the technology the car industry is currently deploying in order to “save fuel” and “lower exhaust emissions” in cars that are morbidly obese and thus require bigger, more consumptive engines that burn more fuel – and produce more total emissions.
The best part is that this approach does not require mandates on new cars – or restrictions on old cars. In fact, getting rid of the mandates currently in force would make it possible to build sensible cars again. The watermelons (because green on the outside but red on the inside) say they want to see low-polluting, high-mileage cars. Well, why not build them? We have – have had – the technology for decades. It would be so easy. A car like the 2012 VW Jetta diesel gets 42 MPG. It also weighs more than 4,200 lbs. Imagine the mileage this car could deliver if it weighed 3,000 lbs. – and instead of a 2.0 liter engine, had a 1.5 liter engine.Let’s say 60 MPG – a fuel consumption reduction of about 40 percent. Just by dintof burning 40 percent less fuel, our hypothetical Jetta would also produce a great deal less in the way of total emissions, since the total volume of fuel used (and emissions produced as a result of burning that fuel) would be 40 percent less. No additional technology – or expense – required.
This is where the big gains are to be made – by lightening and deregulating cars, not by straining to eke out a less than 1 percent “improvement” in the exhaust stream of morbidly obese, over-regulated, over-teched cars.
The first step is getting people to understand they’ve been conned. The next step will take care of itself.
Throw it in the Woods?
- Department of Annoying Technology
- How Technology Killed Toyota
- The Truth About “Giving You a Break” . . .
- St. Trayvon – and The Truth
- The Truth About Pearl Harbor
You are absolutely correct. A small car will run great with a small engine. However, we’re all super-sized. I know there’s a lot of us who would find it impossible to fit in a 1970s-era Honda (I include myself in that group, BTW). My work truck, a 2011 F-150, has almost all plastic body panels, 2 overdrive gears, and free-wheels any time you let up on the gas, manages about 20MPG, but I’m sure that’s about all it will do without shutting down the engine on the fly.
I spend a lot of time over at the TDI club forums (http://forums.tdiclub.com/), and a lot of the old-timers fondly talk about their diesel Rabbits that got 60-70MPG. That’s nearly 1000 miles on a 13 gallon tank! Not to mention they run just fine on B100 (100% biodiesel), unlike my A3 that can only run on B10 or less.
Bringing the old Rabbits back would be cool as long as they improve the wiring harness and other electrical problems. I’m also not sure that it should come with AC.
Brad, you’d be absolutely certain about the a/c if you lived in Texas.
You should see what we’re dealing with on HD diesel engines. I work for a Cat dealer in the truck engine shop. We went from mechanical fuel systems that got 6 or 7 mpg to extremely complex “green” engines that get 4 or 5 mpg. They break down constantly and are mandated to shut down if any of the emissions systems are in trouble. They are them coming in on tow trucks daily. All this to remove some particulate matter, sulfur, and trace amounts of NO2. Not to mention the cost, trucks cost more than twice what they did when the engines were using mechanical fuel pumps with no aftertreatment of the exhaust.
It’s the poison of the demand for ‘continuous improvement’. At some point the technology is as good as it is going to be, ever. Then you need to accept that further improvements do not outweigh the costs, or you need different technology.
Bureaucracies do not care about costs, because they do not require profits, nor do they create anything new.
“the poison of the demand for continuous improvement”
I love that, once I graduated from college and began working as an engineer I worked for an incredibly smart old timer and one of the 2 most memorable lines/saying he passed on was the “engineering triangle” (good, fast and cheap-can only be two) and the difference between a scientist and an engineer
scientists search for truth but an engineer searches for “good-enough.”
i remember the pzev hondas from almost 10 year ago, they were such low emission vehicles, if you drove them in places like LA the exhaust coming out was cleaner than the air going into the air box.
when will emissions be good enough so we can move onto more important/interesting things?
“…as pointless as giving a eunuch Viagra”
I am so stealing that line…it has to be the “Response of the Century” especially when discussing politics with anyone supporting the ideologically lobotomized positions of either of the 2 major parties
My pleasure!
It made me laugh. I’m putting that ditty into my list of memorable quotes. Also – I really liked the picture of the fat car at the top of this article. Thanks Eric, not only for a well written article, but also for the good laughs.
My pleasure, Larry – welcome to our little corner of the ‘net!
“The first step is getting people to understand they’ve been conned. The next step will take care of itself.”
Indeed they have and indeed it will, Eric. Indeed it will.
tgssam
Unfortunately, I’ve come to the conclusion that most of the sheeple LIKE to be conned. Recognition of rality, however simple and beneficial that reality, causes them to shift fundamental assumptions upon which they’ve based their entire belief system. Better to hide one’s head in the sand and cling to comfortable myths.
Sorry, make that “recognition of reality.” Fat fingers today!
Sad isn’t it,when it’s so very easy to admit to error and just move on.
Hide your head in the sand and someone will surely kick your upturned ass. –Tinsley Grey Sammons (1936 –)
WEIGHT AND AERODYNAMICS
The focus ought now to be on weight reduction. Materials that work well in modern aircraft ought to work as well or better in automobiles.
Aerodynamically cars are doing rather well. That’s why some have begun to look so much alike. Less weight and clean aerodynamics make it possible to get by with smaller fuel tanks providing an additional weight reduction.
SPACE AND COMFORT
Observant individuals already know what is necessary to make a person fairly comfortable for three hours. By that time someone in the car will want to stop to pee.
Are we there yet? . . . Are we there yet? . . . Are we there yet? . . .
tgsam
WEIGHT REDUCTION, VIBRATION AND COST
The Wankel offers much more than Snob Appeal. Eric, without alienating any of your $ponsor$, I’d be interesting in what you have to say about the Wankel versus Reciprocating. Haven’t most of the disadvantages inherent in the old carburetted Wankels been eliminated?
The Wankel versus Reciprocating issue probably merits an editorial by that name. Seems t’me that an engine having an internal mass that simply rotates is preferable to one that has major internal parts that literally stop and reverse direction a few thousand times a minute.
Well, admittedly the Wankel does have Exotic Appeal.
tgsam
The Wankel, IIRC, uses more oil and is not as fuel efficient as some other engines.
I do not know if these issues were corrected or improved.
I do like the hum of an RX-7 engine when it is revved up.
The best thing about the RX-7 engine is you can rev it to infinity with the proper fuel delivery system.
Even Nigel could only turn his amp up to 11.
No worries about $ponsors$ – we don’t have any of those – and if we did, it would not prevent me from erupting. I’m not interested in shilling for anyone – and luckily, I can (sort of) afford to do whatever/say whatever.
The Wankel engine is appealing. Like a two-stroke, it’s compact and simple and produces a lot of power for its size. The only reason they haven’t been more widely used is…. drum roll…. emissssssions. Sealing issues over time, in particular. Supposedly, ceramic-tipped rotors fixed this, but other than the RX-8, I don’t think anyone is using them or has plans to…
Doesn’t Ford Motor Co. own a chunk of Toyo Kogyo (Eastern Industries)?
Perhaps licensing for the Wankel is too costly.
I don’t see a viable adiabatic engine during my lifetime either.
tgsam
My understanding is that the biggest problem with rotary engines is surface area to volume ratio, which negatively affects emissions as well as fuel economy. A cylinder is hard to beat, as its surface area to volume ratio is near that of a sphere, the ideal, so there’s less wasted heat to carry away.
The sealing problem is also non-trivial and closely related. Making a sharp 90 degree turn with a seal is much harder to engineer than those nice rings in cylinder engines.
BINGO! JdL. And that surface area is prone to warp badly if the engine overheats.
The Wankel has its weaknesses but I will always be fascinated by it. In my opinion, nobody else ever made a quantum leap in gasoline engine design to match that made by Felix Wankel.
I forgot to mention the other small problem with Wankels: Fuel consumption. They are thirsty! In the CAFE climate, that alone would make using this engine difficult.
My personal opinion as a long time investigator into the Wankel, after driving an RX-3 way back when too, is that it’s a matter of application.
A single-rotor Walkel wedded to an electrical generator for a hybrid car would be very effective. The engine could be tuned to a specific RPM rather than a range, matching emissions control, and all the benefits of knowing exactly how fast the engine will spin at all times.
But also, such a really small Wankel could easily be fitted to a truly light-weight car to make an efficient commuter car. The problem is that truly light-weight cars won’t pass the legally mandated crash tests &etc., which is the point of this article in the first place.
CAFE is not going away. I’m in speaker development at a major OE, and have been asked for weeks about “saving” 25 grams per 6×9 speaker (for double the cost and no improvement in sound).
The weight police are all over everybody. It’s like Jenny Craig is our CEO.
Needless to say, cars are going to get so expensive I should probably look for a different line of work. Perhaps trains or tractors?
It would be nice if the rulers knew a damn thing about science or engineering (and political science is not science). Do they not understand that everything is a compromise?
They do understand this – and they don’t care. Extremely expensive cars will only be available to the rich (or politically connected, or do I repeat myself).
This is the goal – not fuel economy.
It would be nice if management at ANY of the OEMs would grow a pair and tell these government regulatory dipshits go fuck themselves.
You don’t like it – don’t buy our cars. Seems easy to me.
Great article.
I have stated it many times over the years CAFE is about eliminating vehicle choice and the furthering of CAFE and other regulation is to make the car back into a rich man’s toy.
Once they get a stranglehold on new cars to the point where rebuilding old cars for daily use becomes a popular business expect the clamps to come down hard on existing cars or at the very least the repair there of.
Those with power are not satisfied with their wealth, they are not satisfied with the power they have. It is not enough for them to have power and wealth, everyone else must have nothing. Sick people run this world and the majority has no clue and even actively supports it.
I think we’ve probably already past the point that evading the CAFE fines with technology costs more than just paying them as a tax on a new car purchase.
First non luxury/exotic* automaker to figure that out will undercut the competition.
*BMW and others already do this.
Brent:
Are you referring to the “gas guzzler tax?”
I would pay it. At least our cars would be fun.
I would also pay all of our lawmakers the same salary to just stop doing anything. The last thing we need is another law.
The gas guzzler tax is a tax on particular models that fall below certain mpg thresholds. CAFE is an average of all vehicles sold by a manufacturer. There are fines for not achieving CAFE. That’s all that happens if they don’t meet CAFE numbers. As I understand it, there is also a lot of smoke in mirrors in the calculation of that average. Much as the states had in showing the 55mph NMSL was being obeyed so they could get federal highway money.
The question is, what costs more, complying or the penalties? Do the big automakers even ask that question?
Thanks, Blake –
And I feel your pain. I know others “on the inside” and they tell a similar tale… you have my sympathy. I could never work “inside” – and I’ve only seen glimpses of it…
I’ve gotten in trouble for voicing my opinion about politics “on the inside” quite a few times. I let is slip out every time I read something about awards for C02 emissions reductions, diversity awards, CAFE requirements, celebrating kowtowing to our masters in DC, and all the other “team building” BS.
My boss has repeatedly told me not to bring up politics, since it’s not work related.
It is work related when you need to fly to a supplier and be exposed to your choice of radiation, or a man (who’s not your doctor) feeling up your private parts.
It is work related when you need to increase the cost of your parts by 100% with zero benefit to your customers.
It is work related when most aspects of your job is dictated by some imbecile in DC.
And I work in speakers. I thought I’d escaped when I made it out of safety electronics.
Don’t know how much longer I’ll be there. I’m a contract engineer, and the vast majority of people, including upper brass, believe good times are here to stay.
I say “People can afford our cars now – and seem to be buying a lot of them lately – but wait until interest rates go up” and people look at me like I’m from Mars.
Politics is definitely “work related”. Furthermore, nothing is more important to Americans today than knowing the WHOLE truth. In the entire history of our country it has simply never been more important.
tgsam
While I don’t get in any trouble for voicing my opinions at work, I just get written off as stupid. A lot of people I talk to tell me all the new ideas/laws sound good and will help with safety and less lawsuits… Okay, I say.
Pigs lose!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4vC4aoHJf4&feature=related
Dood, you should see how many cops are on my first five mile stretch of Rt66 when I leave work. Today I counted like eight. Half of which had cars pulled over. Worthless fucks!
If the “car czar” position ever becomes an elected office, you have my vote.
The problem, of course, is that guys like me aren’t interested in telling anyone else what to do at gunpoint!
That’s just because you’re a radical, wild-eyed, Utopian libertarian who thinks that people can live together in peace without having the overwhelming violence of the state hanging over your every move.
At least my motorcycle gets just a bit more of a “pass” on things like emissions, so far.
Great column, eric.
I look forward to the coming fall of Leviathan — it will inevitably fall once its tax intake plummets or sees greatly reduced purchasing power — and the great surge of ingenuity and creativity that will ensue once the bureaucrats have gone home due to not being paid, or being paid a mere pittance due to rabid inflation.
When I was a kid my grandfather used to tell me stories about the first time he ever saw a car. He said it came driving past his house and he could smell it for half an hour. Now you can just about stick your nose in a tail pipe and not notice it. I thought that it was simply the fact that we are used to it. But I don’t think so. I spent a month in an area where there we was nothing mechanical at all. I got back and still didn’t notice the smell of my car. Sure you notice the smell of some cars, but not most of them.
This is a far stretch, but I once heard that the interior of the car gives off more HC than the exhaust.
When Kathy and I returned a month after Katrina to see if anything in our home in St. Bernard Parish was worth saving, New Orleans was like a Ghost City. In almost no passenger car traffic we traveled I-10 across the city and it was downright surreal. We were reminded of the Twilight Zone episode where Earl Holliman was dead and alone and did not yet realize it.
But the air was incredibly clear
Unbelievably so.
Perhaps more clear than it had been since the first settlers arrived and built fires.
But there was the stench of ruin emanating from the toxic muck that has even covered the floors inside the homes with a foot of stuff so foul that it was foolish not to breathe thru a filter.
Even the insects were gone.
Abandoned Six Flags over New World Order Orleans
A declaration of independence, an emancipation of slaves, a liberation of women, & a revolution of sexualty are all ongoing battles that must be fought by each generation or else lost forever.
That must have been surreal.
It’s funny how cities all have thier own smells. I think I could be blindfolded and taken back to any of the cities I have lived in and I would know them by smell. It must have felt very odd coming back to a city that was so changed.
Yes Brad, It was. However, we now have a much better life in less densely populated Ascension Parish*. Other than the ruin of certain irreplaceable keepsakes, we have no regrets.
Historically, I don’t believe Ascension Parish has a history of being riddled with corruption as does St. Bernard Parish. As an habitual dissident I do not feel the apprehension here in Ascension Parish that I felt while living in St. Bernard Parish.
tgsam
*Louisiana calls their Counties “Parishes”. So far no one has objected on separation of church and state grounds. Not even me, and I dislike organized religion intensely.
tgsam
In Jakarta Indonesia (Google: Jakarta Globe)the Islamic Defenders Front caused the Lady GaGa concert to be cancelled on the grounds that it is a “dangerous” influence on Indonesias youth.
What riddles me with despair is that the doings of Lady Gaga, et al, constitute “news” at all.
Once again, I feel the passage of time… it was not all that long ago, it seems, that material relating to fuuuuhhhhhhhtball and the antics of celebrities was handled elsewhere. The news was about, well, news. It was a manlier time.
Not that I am a big fan of Walter Cronkite, but try to imagine him (or his colleagues) “reporting” about Lady Gaga…
When I was a kid in the ’70s, most middle and upper middle class adults were not jocksniffers or celebrity-addled.
It’s funny, isn’t it, that a nation of fuhhhhhhhttttttttttttball worshippers can’t bear the idea of risk off the field.
Jakarta Globe “Letters”
bastlaw
10:43pm May 16, 2012
The Islamic Defender Front is a greater danger to Indonesian Youth than the Lady Gaga Concert could ever be.
How long is it going to take the People of the world to embrace and defend the Natural Rights of the Individual Human Being?
Muslim Fanatics are an even greater danger to Mankind than Christian Fanatics.
Hopefully America’s Unanimous Declaration will someday serve as a model for limiting government power the world over. America included!
Tinsley Grey Sammons
Gonzales, Louisiana
Many people don’t know that Hitler was a great admirer of the Grand Mufti of Palestine (and of Islam, generally – which he considered completely compatible with national socialism).
Bread and circuses, and a standing army.
“Muslim Fanatics are an even greater danger to Mankind than Christian Fanatics” I dunno about that as we have huge nunbers of Christian Fanatics HERE now. The Muslim fanatics did not seem to exist until the Soviets went away and we started killing the relatives of Muslims in the 1990s in huge numbers. You kill my kids, parents, siblings, and destroy my home, property, and business and I might get a little pissy myself. I would get labeled as a Agnostic Fanatic maybe?
What a wierd board. Maybe it’s a glitch! Going from small cars and carburetors, to Lady Caca, then flooded New Orleans stench, then Hitler? Lol.
LOL Hitler was awesome, and liked small cars. Some people credit him with the birth of the Volkswagen Beetle for his support of Porsche and VW.
Hitler actually favored big cars – for himself. For the masses, he favored a Volks Wagen….
Eric, I wouldn’t recognize a lady GaGa song if I heard one.
I rarely listen to music anymore now that my hearing is as dull as the points on a wrench-worn hex nut or bolt.
When I told my doctor that I can hardly hear myself fart anymore he just prescribed something to make me fart louder.
I only inadvertently learned what a Lady Gaga is – fairly recently. I could not tell you what it sings. And hope never to be able to!
Cool New Technology Y: High Quality Stanford Classes Online
http://see.stanford.edu/see/courses.aspx
http://www.udacity.com/
http://www.openculture.com/freeonlinecourses
Speaking of new technology, for all of our safety and health, the black box mandate passed in the senate. The house is our last line of defense… haha…
The house is our last line of defense… haha…
We need to start considering ourselves screwed.
The Terrorists want you out of your cars.
Everything they do is for that alone.
They also want their tax livestock safe and productive like any farmer takes care of his animals…The Safety Nazis have priority.
Most people just don’t understand their own slavery…If you did then everything Your Owners do makes perfect sense. They are not stupid and benevolent…they want you to think they are though.
Well said, DD.
Is “tax livestock” an original?
I’ve been reading and hearing it more and more lately. It’s an accurate term that should get wide use.
I believe it’s a Stephan Molyneaux original. He frequently compares “citizens” to cattle, and nation-states to ranches.
Accurate analogy.
Welcome to neo-feudalism, serf.
Re: Calling people “cattle”.
Makes sense to me. I see them mindlessly grazing along the aisles in Walmart whenever I go there. However, their big rounded eyes do give real cattle much better peripheral vision.
Humans can compensate for their inferior peripheral vision by frequently turning their heads and by the application of superior intelligence . . . but for some reason humans seem reluctant to intelligently use what nature has given them.
tgsam
I saw a few herd of cattle on the highway this morning grazing on their cell phones while driving.
Tax livestock. Good term.
Either Stephan Molyneaux or Karen Kwiatkowski used “Tax Livestock” referring to human animals owned by Statist Terrorists on their Tax Farms which they call “Countries”
I think it was Molyneaux – and it’s a brilliant conception. Exactly (and bleakly) descriptive of our status. Only now we’re headed to the feed lots. We used to be free range, at least.
They are trying to put a shorter leash on their “free-range” tax livestock…They don’t like when their property escapes the farm like Eduardo Saverin just did. The Terrorists and their MSM psycho-whores now refer to Saverin as a “Traitor”. As Malcolm X understood – Lincoln didn’t free the black slaves, he enslaved us all. The Global Counterfeiters (they are NOT Bankers!) own you.
Karen Kwiatkowski is a 21-year retired military officer whose entire life and her current livlihood depends on that “Tax Livestock”.
That livestock has paid for and continues to pay for her Ph.D., her kid’s education, her farm, her food, her TRICARE health insurance, her tax-free shopping, her VA loans, her 10% discounts and even free entry at public facilities that the livestock has to pay for and the list goes on.
I always laugh when her name comes up. It’s irrational for someone to genuinely campaign against something that their very existance is dependent upon.
I’ve exchanged many emails with Karen and her defense has always been: I’m trying to bankrupt the gov’t as quickly as possible.
I think responses like that from people is probably why I drink.
Gotta quit drinking. The man likes it when you do that! It’s been over a month for me.
I think about Kwiatkowski and some of the others published by LewRockwell.com every time is send him one of my best. Rockwell does publish some very good material but he also publishes some really vapid crap.
And I don’t write crap.
I had an uncle and a first cousin who were each KIA at nineteen. One in WWI and the other in Korea. Each was a Georgia born PFC. Karen probably receives as much in a month as the two of them earned during their entire young lives. They lost all they would ever have for a pittance.
“When you take a man’s life you’ve taken all he’s got and all he’s ever gonna have.” –Clint Eastwood
Tinsley Grey Sammons
I don’t know Karen, but her writing is good. That said, you make a very valid point. Of course, it’s also true that people become aware at different points in their lives. Karen may not have realized the nature of the thing – and the source of her income – until she was already heavily committed and invested. She may (probably did) enter the military at a young age, for good reasons – in the sense that she honestly meant to do right. Perhaps by the time she became aware, or began to see the truth of the matter, she’d already put in 15 or 20 years. Now she’s middle aged, and this is her “career.” What to do? Start over? Chuck everything? To do so would be admirable, certainly. I like to think it’s what I would do (in my case, the crucible will be SS; I plan not to accept one red – stolen – cent. I hope I can live up to that.)
Not an excuse, but an explanation – and my reason for being a bit more gentle toward her and most definitely having empathy for her.
I don’t think lewrockwell takes submissions but from just a few people that have been on the site for ages. I’ve made email comments and he asked me to write something on it and he used an article I wrote here. Ones I just wrote cause I felt like it and sent… crickets. And sometimes those were better ones IMO.
If I was the engineer in charge of a new car I would make two versions. One would be the regular, road legal version with all of the government safety crap. The other would have all of that stripped out, but otherwise be perfectly capable of every function the road legal version had. I would then invite every single auto journalist in the world to come and see for themselves exactly what is wrong with cars today, and what could be done if we just said no.
That would be magnificent, wouldn’t it?
Even better, allow both versions into showrooms and give buyers the free choice to decide for themselves what they need.
That would just piss off your political owners…they will be murdered if they try something like that.
97% harmless water vapor and CO2 huh? Mr. Peters, we at the EPA are going to recommend you for “re-education”. Water vapor and CO2 are two of the most serious pollutants known to our agency, second only to cow farts as a threat to society.
You didn’t expect us to just fold up our tents and go home after we cleaned up the air back in the 70′s did you? Think man! we have families and mortgages.
Now, let us tell you all about Global Warming…
I know, I know…!
Both have in fact been re-categorized as “emissions” – implying they’re in the same league as NOx and carbon monoxide.
ROFLMAO! That’s beautiful Scott.
(tongue firmly in cheek…)
Please tell us about global warming, er, “climate change” and how we’ve all been Very Very Naughty Boys and Girls who deserve to explode for drowning all those polar bears.
Also please delude us about CO2, and be sure to ignore the sun while you’re at it. Hell, ignore all logic and science at all; I’ve grown to LIKE being lied to and deceived, it’s FUN!
(remove tongue from cheek)
I’m convinced many people truly do enjoy being fooled; “ah, you got me again! THIS time I won’t believe you….unless you put on a great show!”
Similar to suspension of disbelief going into a movie, they continue to support Obama. I was shocked this morning on my way to work as I drove though my neighborhood–$600K minimum house prices–and saw a fucking Obama 2012 lawn poster.
What sane, logical, intelligent person–or even one possessing one of those three qualities–would still support this assclown teleprompted Trotsky Jr?
How deep in dreamland do you have to be?
I think Alex Jones has it right when he says to feel sorry for the truly deluded, because they’re literally in a trance. I don’t know how much credence to give the theories of mind control, because I’m a firm believer in free will theories of mind. But I must say–propaganda has never been so effective, judging from the somnambulistic drones Amerikans have become.
I think it’s guilt that’s responsible for the Obama ads on suburban lawns. The soccer moms want to be seen as caring, nurturing humans so they stop considering their own enlightened self interests and publicly support a policy aimed squarely at totally destroying their lives. I believe they secretly hope Obama will either fail to be re-elected because someone else has some sense, or that if he’s elected nothing substantial will change (which when you think about it isn’t all that irrational).
Then there’s the theory that they just want to be punished for being successful when some many others aren’t. There’s plenty of room for self-flagellation in the modern Western psyche. The Catholic church has diminished somewhat, but it hasn’t entirely disappeared.
The soccer moms want to be seen as caring, nurturing humans so they stop considering their own enlightened self interests and publicly support a policy aimed squarely at totally destroying their lives.
“Soccer moms” = the ultimate argument for forced sterilization.
There’s no need to force sterilization of a good soccer mom, they do it themselves. This is where Cougars come from.
Wikipedia has an excellent piece about the still receding glaciers. It is a good read and apparently well researched.
Dear TGS:
I found this paragraph in the wiki article “Retreat_of_glaciers_since_1850.” Is this the article you meant? My browser is running a
script that substitutes a number/punctuation for its corresponding two-letter digraph short-name, but it’s still legible right?
The word BRacket => [acket; DOllar => $llar; EQuals => =uals; QUestion => ?estion; TWo => 2o; and ZEro => 0ro. Does this make
sense?
Impacts of glacier retreat
The conti#ed retre@ of glaciers will ha| a number of "ffer;t qu&ntitative im(cts. In areas 3at are heavily dep;dent on water r_off from
glaciers that melt during the warmer summer >nths, a ,ntinuation of the {rrent retreat will eventually dep<te the glacial ice and
substan*ally reduce or eli-nate runoff. A reducti1 in runoff will affect the ~ility to irrigate crops and will reduce summer stream flows
necessary to keep dams and re7rvoirs reple9shed. This 6tuation is particularly acute 4r irrigation in South Ameri^, where numerous
arti5cial lakes are filled almost exclusively by glacial melt. Central Asian countries have also been historically de%ndent on the
seasonal glacier melt water for irrigation and drinking sup+ies. In Norway, the Alps, and the Pacific Northwest of North America,
glacier runoff is im.rtant for hydropower.
Some of this :treat has resulted in efforts to /ow down the loss of glaciers in the Alps. To retard melting of the glaciers used by certain
Austrian ski resorts, portions of the Stubai and Pitztal Glaciers were partially covered with plastic. In Switzerland plastic sheeting is
also used to reduce the melt of glacial ice used as ski slopes. While covering glaciers with plastic sheeting may prove advantageous
to ski resorts on a small scale, this practice is not expected to be economically practical on a much larger scale.
Many species of freshwater and saltwater plants and animals are dependent on glacier-fed waters to ensure the cold water habitat to
which they have ad'ted. Some species of freshwater fish need cold water to survive and to reproduce, and this is especially true with
salmon and cutthroat trout. Reduced glacial runoff can lead to insufficient stream flow to allow these species to thrive. Alterations to
the ocean currents, due to increased freshwater inputs from glacier melt, and the potential alterations to thermohaline circulation of
the World Ocean, may impact existing fisheries upon which humans depend as well.
The potential for major sea level rise depends mostly on a significant melting of the polar ice caps of `eenland and Antarctica, as this
is where the vast majority of glacial ice is located. If all the ice on the polar ice caps were to melt away, the oceans of the world would
rise an estimated 230 ft. Although previously it was thought that the polar ice caps were not contributing heavily to sea level rise,
recent studies have confirmed that both Antarctica and Greenland are contributing 0.020 in. a year each to glo\l sea level rise. The !ct
that the IPCC estimates did not include rapid ice sheet decay into th8r sea level predictions makes it difficult to ascertain a plausible
estimate for sea level rise but recent studies find that the minimum sea level rise will be around 2.6 ft. by 2100.
Thank you, ТФЯ МЦПКОВ
re: {[{Freeing Speech & Thwarting Naggers Project}])
Scott we at the *EPA no longer refer to it as the safe sounding euphemism “water vapor.” Update your lexicon; it is di-hydrogen oxide and it is a deadly pollutant. Approximately 1.2 million people die annually from breathing di-hydrogen oxide in its condensed form. Many of these respiratory overdoses of di-hydrogen oxide occur right in the victim’s home or in their own back yard! Until we can effectively regulate, control and tax atmospheric di-hydrogen oxide emissions and clean up the ubiquitous pools of its lethal condensate, we can expect a continuing trend of human inhalation fatalities.
*EPA – Empty-headed Pernicious Assclowns
One of my workout buddies works at the EPA. I won’t mention what he says about it, but it’s pretty much what ya’ll would expect.
I really liked the comment left on youTube anyway:
“Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand.”
This little clip reveals my opinion of the EPA pretty well:
di-hydrogen oxide! I love it
Oh well. I’ve never figure the secret of embedding video in a blog. Here’s the clip:
back in the sixties, there were a number of smaller cars, though sufficiently commodious, that weighed in at well under the one ton mark, had engines in the one to one point six or so liter displacement, easily held highway speeds in the eighties, and delivered upward of forty five miles to the gallon of cheap regular. AND were fun to drive. Then there were the BIG ones.. weights slightly on the high side of twenty five hundred pounds, engine displacement in the three liter plus range, cruising speeds near a hundred, and fuel consumption in the high thirties at “sane” speeds, low thirties and high twenties at insane speeds. E type Jag, Austin Healy BN7, Rover three thousand five, Porsche 911, BMW Bavaria, Mercedes 280 SEL….. now, curb weights are near double, displacements as well, and mileage in the low twenties to low teens… and, for the most part, nowhere near as fast. A Honda Accord from the early nineties has two and a half liters displacement, is gutless, and delivers perhaps 25 miles to the gallon if driven gently. Its got worse since then, undoubtedly.
I know – I owned one of those cars!
I had (until about 2003) a ’64 Corvair Monza coupe. All stock. 110 hp engine, four-speed transmission. The interior was very roomy (rear engine allowed flat floor and three-across bench seating). It easily held 70-75 MPH. Gas mileage was not great – low 20s – but that’s pretty good when you reflect it’s about the same as a current Accord and my Corvair did not have overdrive gearing or the benefit of fuel injection. If it had, I am sure it would have been mileage competitive with a new Accord, if not superior to it.
The Corvair weighed about 2,500 lbs. A 2012 Accord (with four cylinder engine) weighs about 3,500 lbs.
The Corvair also cost a lot less when new – and much less to maintain.
Re: Corvair
Slimy lawyer (Is that one word or two?) Ralph Nader cut short the future of what could have evolved into a truly great car.
How many gallons of ethylene glycol find their way into the environment each year? What is the cost of the resources that are applied to the manufacture and recycling of liquid coolant? How big is the environmental footprint of the anti-freeze industry, including distribution and sale?
On Nader: Many people aren’t aware that the shitbag shyster didn’t even have a driver’s license, much less ever actually drive a Corvair.
The early (1960-’63) models were prone to rear suspension jacking/oversteer, especially if the owner did not maintain the correct tire pressure and/or made the novice driver error of lifting off the gas abruptly in a fast curve. The ’64s had a transverse leaf spring and handled much more predictably. The ’65-’69s had a Corvette-like independent suspension and handled excellently for their time. This car could have been developed into something really great.
Nader’s real legacy is not so much killing the Corvair as it is convincing GM that it was better policy to stifle innovation and play it “safe.”
Not just GM. It spread to other automakers and even outside autos as the consumer safety nonsense*. Hell, it’s spread throughout the whole culture because it plays to the social nature of the human animal where different people are harassed, attacked, etc. Nader killed innovation by punishing being different.
This is what I hate most about the safety culture. It’s not bad enough that someone fail in the market, put up with the jeers of being different and so on that come with innovation but Nader and crew pushed it further, that innovators must be punished for daring to be different in the first place. No one is allowed to challenge the collective without suffering.
*Lawyers and political people such Nader, et al. practice nonsense. If there is a desire to achieve safety through 3rd party standards then it best comes out of the private engineering groups. SAE, ANSI, ISO, UL and so on.
I guess the scary part of it is there’s no clear way out. Blaming the car manufacturers isn’t going to work because they’ll just point at the EPA and NTSB, who’ll point at Congress, who’ll point at the electorate and it starts all over again. But you can’t get rid of the two most “honored” Agencies of the federal government, that just won’t happen. Who would disband the protectors of Clean Air and Safe Transportation? You couldn’t do it, it’s a political non-starter.
Things might change when the US loses its place as the largest market for cars. I’ve heard GM sold more cars in China than in the US last year, I’d think that put China at least in a position to tell GM what to do even if the US government doesn’t care for it.
Of course then we’d all have to move to China where they’ve only recently agreed to stop harvesting body parts from political prisoners. There’s just no winning for losing these days.
There’s a huge disconnect out there. Millions of people who see EPA/NHTSA (etc.) as their saviors; the agencies protecting “clean air” and “safety” – not realizing it’s also these agencies that have made cars far more expensive (and less efficient) than they might otherwise be. The real tragedy is it’s illegal to let the market sort it out. To give, for instance, people the option of selecting a more fuel efficient (but perhaps less “safe”) vehicle – or for it to be legal for a guy (as opposed to a massive corporate cartel) to build and sell a minimalist car – and see whether it sells.
Yeah, the Owasso Motor Company tried to dodge all that jazz in the 1980s by selling a tippy motorcycle car that looked like a jet fighter. I liked it, but it never “took off.”
But we can’t let people make choices like that Eric. If we let them chose lower cost over their own safety they’d all run out like lemmings and throw themselves of cliffs en mass. People just can’t be trusted to handle their own affairs.
Excuse me while I dust off my hang glider. My guess is its use it or lose it time at the OK Coral.
choose dammit! Not chose.
Dom, is there any way you can let us correct spelling on these things after we post them? I just look for the red underscores and hit Post if I don’t see any.
“off cliffs” not “of cliffs”
Jeez. How many typos can you fit in one paragraph? Watch while I demonstrate…
It is – use it or lose it time…
Once the “safety” premise has been accepted – and this society is leg-humping it – then look out. Everything’s on the table. Already, they are going after people who choose to drink raw milk – their raw milk, on their (alleged) property. Not “safe,” doncha know. Once Obamacare is approved, anything we do that the government decides might be “unsafe” will become illegal, or at least, heavily regulated/fined and so on.
Wait and see…
Scott, the State, every State, will always be the enemy of every Individual who has a passion for Liberty and Justice. Albert Jay Nock nailed it with OUR ENEMY THE STATE* back in 1935, the year before I was born.
Tinsley Grey Sammons
*Free on the ‘net.
America’s adult population would be wise to acquire sufficient competence to:
(a) File sui juris without paying an unlawful filing fee to the legal extortionists.
(b) Implement jury nullification.
(c) Take part in Issuing Presentments ordering that indictments be drawn. Presentment power is guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment. There is no more powerful lawful, and also legal, weapon in the People’s Bill of Rights arsenal.
So-called Runaway Grand Juries have the potential power to kick office holders asses by issuing Presentments. A so-called Runaway Grand Jury is a grand jury that has liberated itself from unlawful control and influence by a member of the Brotherhood of Juris Doctors.
A so-called Runaway Grand Jury is a grand jury that has liberated itself from unlawful control and influence by a member of the Brotherhood of Juris Doctors.
Specifically members of that brotherhood serving in the role of prosecutor, this particular strain of vermin having hi-jacked and co-opted the grand jury as one of their own tools.
Catalytic Converters are shit. I hate riding a bike behind any of these new cars. Oh damn that smell! It’s some kind of horrible chemical smell which gives the worst headache. I”m all for lighter and reasonably powered vehicles, but I think that most of the emissions stuff is just to make money for politicians and state governments. I think it all craps out in a couple years and no one ever fixes it unless forced to. I’m not paying $400 for a crapalytic converter on my truck. I found an aftermarket one for $100, and an electric exhaust cutout for cheap. I’ll make that stupid converter last a LONG time.
If it smells, something’s wrong!
That rotten egg/sulfur smell indicates a problem. A properly functioning cat results in an exhaust stream that’s far easier on the nose (and lungs and eyes).
That said, Honda was able to sell the CVCC engine in the ’70s Civic without cats – so it is possible to run a “clean” engine without a cat.
Motorcycles mostly did not have cats until fairly recently (circa 2004) and ran very cleanly, too.
“If it smells, something’s wrong!”
Yep. When I rode motorcycles, way back when there were few if any cats, the oily smell caused by worn out valve stem seals along with the smell of unburned fuel was occasionally so bad that I would exit and take an alternate route to my destination, even when it was the long way around.
You really get a snoot full on a motorcycle. Often I could pick up a smoker and/or a raw gas fume emitter from a mile behind. Had I wanted to I could have unerringly bloodhounded my way to the source vehicle. In fact, I often wondered if the two wheeler ticket writing lawmen ever did just that.
I’m fairly sure that I was the world’s champion Clunker Curser.
I added the recommended quantity of a well-known fuel injector cleaner fluid to a full tank of gas and the exhaust began to smell like rotten eggs combined with some other strong evil nauseating odor!
One benefit: It seemed to keep the usual tailgaters away for a while until it cleared up with a fresh tank of gas!
It was possible in the 1970s to do it. Up until about about 1982. Even with some work for a few years after maybe. HC (now VOC) limits have dropped considerably since. It simply isn’t possible now, let alone holding that level for a 100K miles.
As evidence that you are correct, my 1992 civic VX, which I bought new 20 years ago, still gives me 45mpg regularly. That is better than any currently available non hybrid new car in the US, even the “smart” car. But you are wrong about what comes out of your car’s tailpipe. Most of it is N2(nitrogen).
“Many people don’t know that Hitler was a great admirer of the Grand Mufti of Palestine (and of Islam, generally – which he considered completely compatible with national socialism).” Supposedly either the Taliban or Al Queda was started by a man in contact with Hitler-Hassan Al- Bana. The extremists there are essentially a metastasized offshoot of the national socialist movement.
Dom – Good for you man.
I’m starting slow. I’ve dedicated three days a week (M,W,F) as “health days” for me. I don’t drink and I ride my bike. A slow, gradual change of lifestyle. If I tried to quit cold turkey it’d never work.
The hardest thing on my health days is going to bed. I’ve been passing out for so many years, I forgot how to fall asleep.
)
To be completely honest, the only reason I quit is so I can have a clear mind and be ready for when times get tough!
…”And three percent of 10 percent is a great deal less than the implied 10 percent of 100 percent.”
I think you mean “10 percent of three percent…”
the reduction would be 10 percent of the remaining 3 percent…
small point, but more accurate.
A few years ago, in my part of the country, the State of Texas had a person with a van to monitor tail pipe emissions of a Gulf Coast city. It used a laser system pointed at the exhaust.
No one was fined or impounded and was only to see what kind of population of cars were in use.
It turned out that the operate could not tell the difference between an early 90′s vehicle or a new one. If the vehicle is maintained, the emissions are minimal.
As you say this is done on purpose due to taxation revenue. Gas is taxed per gallon, so if we get better gas mileage there would less revenue for the revenuers. That is why the gubment does not allow better gas mileage cars. Also lightening cars would involve taking out the airbags, which would cause that industry to fail; something the gubment does not want, because that industry provides jobs and tax revenue. The fact that industry produces a worthless product does not matter. It’s all about jobs, jobs, jobs, and taxes, taxes, taxes
We’ve all heard that Obamacare will pay nuns for birth control. What a lot of people don’t know is that Eunuchs will be able to get Viagra. It’s in there.
Eric writes that:
“a vehicle, …(@) 1,800 lbs., …would not need more than about 100 hp (probably less) to be powerful enough for most … driving”
I lived in Germany most of the 90s and drove a 1.6l Golf II much fo the time there. That engine produced 72hp (DIN), and had a stated (registration papers) top speed of 155kmh (about 95mph).
That was plenty, even when driving on the Autobahn.
Sure, it would have been nice, over there, to be able to go 175-200kmh (about 110-125mph), and to get to 100kmh/62mph in less than about 11-12s, but necessary?
No, and in fact, then, many cars had less than that 72hp.
Even today, just check out on some local websites what the average car in Germany comes equipped with today:
VW doesn’t offer any Golf with 200hp (not counting specials, or the R or GTI).
If such a car was fine on the Autobahns, and elswhere too, why would 100hp be the bottom for us here in the US, esp. given that even those willing to go 85+mph virtually never can or do?
The hypothetical Jetta (barring the weight, but certainly with engine size) ALREADY exists for sale all over Europe.
They just are not on sale here in the bloated/inflated US.
Its customers’ lack of demand or acceptance, that keeps companies like VW from bringing these cars here.
Consumers in the US are as much at fault here, as government mandates!
The pre-1961 VW Beetle had a 36 hp engine and performed quite well. In fact, the 36 hp was a much better engine than the 40 hp engine that replaced it.
The WWII Kubelwagen’s* engine produced a mere 25 hp. Waffen SS veteran Alois Neu told me that they loaded their Kubelwagens until the torsion bars could stand no more and the vehicle was still able to negotiate the bad roads in Russia. However, Neu did say that they were always glad to capture an American Jeep because it was a better machine. After being transferred to the Western Front, Neu was badly wounded during the Battle of the Bulge and that ended his war.
BTW, Unlike SAE horsepower, the German Industrial (DIN) rating is honest Pferdestaerke.
tgsam
*The service school in Jacksonville, Florida actually had one. The gears in the transmission were not synchronized so it was called a “crashbox”.
I once owned a Thing (1973), which of course is the civilianized version of the Kubel. Like the Beetle, with which it shared running gear, it was powerful enough to be driven on modern American roads. The key being, to make use of what you had. Most American drivers do not. I encounter the same phenomenon today. When I go out in the ’98 Nissan pick-up, which has a small four-cylinder engine, I am still usually “quicker” (and “faster”) than almost every other car, because I use what I’ve got and the rest of them, don’t. I often pass vehicles with twice (or even three times) the hp, dawdling along at 57 MPH in a 55…. in the curves, I dart by sports cars with 19 inch wheels/tires, auto-adjusting magneto-hydraulic sport suspensions, etc. driven by not-so-sporty drivers, in my 14-year-old pick-up with 140,000 miles and 15-inch wheels with el cheapo tires on them.
The whole hp/power/capability thing is to a great extent about talking points, not functional reality. A willing driver in a basic little car can get more done – more quickly – than the typical American oblivio, sail fawn glued to his ear, “driving” his 300 hp sport sedan…
“oblivio”
A perfect description with a single word. I visualized the dumfuk in an instant.
Those who think must constantly beware of those who do not.
SITUATION AWARENESS
The race does not always go to the driver with the most powerful machine. Most of my driving is done in my 2002 Corolla on Hwy 61 in the Gonzales area. There is plenty of distance between traffic lights so, I focus on a light in plenty of time to adjust my speed in an effort to avoid making a complete brake wearing, fuel squandering, time wasting stop. I am truly amazed at the number of drivers who simply do not.
I easily outpace the other drivers who apparently make no time calculation regarding a long visible traffic light. I’ve been doing it for so long now that it seems instinctive.
*****
In air-to-air combat combat the kill will go to the better trained and smarter pilot. During the Korean War the F-86 Sabre pilots enjoyed a better than ten-to-one kill advantage over the more powerfully armed, higher flying and faster Mig-15 mostly because they were smarter and better pilots.
Ace Joe McConnel made long range kills at extreme high altitude by instinctively taking advantage of the improved ballistics in the rarefied atmosphere. Now that’s cool.
Google: Situation Awareness
Situation Awareness is just as applicable to ground vehicles as it is to aircraft.
“I focus on a light in plenty of time to adjust my speed in an effort to avoid making”
I TRY to do this, but while this may work in CA, not in NJ! There are so many old-style highways (the ones with teh famous jug-handles), with lights at all those intersections.
There is no coordination of those lights at all, even at the same time on a different day, there is no pattern.
Not only does one leave at a green light, only to get to the next one when it turns red (speed limit plus 10-25%),
only to have someone moron move into the well-calculated gap ahead, and ruin that.
Or you will have one nice driver in the left lane passing a car in the next lane at about 0.5mph faster.
And agreed, the 911 driver going 55mph in oblivio mode is the biggest waste of all. Only consolation around here is that his 30-aspect ratio tires (and the 19″/20″ wheels too) get to meet our potholes a lot
“Or you will have one nice driver in the left lane passing a car in the next lane at about 0.5mph faster.”
Formation Flyers. They should be subjected to a skillfully and enthusiastically applied knout.
tgsam
I fantasize about a 007 under-headlight-mounted disintegration beam:
it would lighten the earth by about 3750#: 3400 for the car and 350 for the lone driver
I fantasize about a side-mounted retractable missile pod, to launch K-, X-, and Ka-band seeking missiles.
Light me up with radar will you? Well son I’ll light you up right back!
‘Twould test the commitment of the revenuers for sure.