Link, please
Is all the "fuel saving" tech really worth it in the long run?
- Thread starter 762mm
- Start date
Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.
Sure it did. From all the "investors" that bought into it. Now, how did the investors do? And where are the products?
carymccarr
Full Access Members
Americans tax payers were the investors. And the govt backed fund paid back the money plus interest.
Investors get returns not products.
Last edited:
carymccarr
Full Access Members
I linked about 5 articles above so I’ll just use a picture.
But sometimes pics don’t work so I’ll add another link to the pile
https://cotap.org/per-capita-carbon-co2-emissions-by-country/
And if you want to really melt minds and the media’s talking points read up on CUMULATIVE emissions. Ie: total greenhouse pollutants dumped into the air over the last 100 years by country.
http://pdf.wri.orgnavigating_numbers_chapter6.pdf
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited:
Problem with this type of test is we are testing each car the way it is and was.
The newer cars with energy absorbing bumpers and bumper shocks, shoulder straps, better seat belts and airbags give occupants more safety.
IF we still made big metal cars like in the 60s and 70s...we would not have stopped with safety.
They went from NO seatbelts ( still have a couple) to lap belts to shoulder belts.
They would have evolved. We would have big metal heavy cars with better seat belts, padding around the interior windshield and rood areas, airbags.
I fully believe a 71 Impala or 1976 Ford LTD with current airbag and seat belts would give occupants even more safety over the car in the vid.
We will really never know though.
They could disable the airbags in the car but that is only one small part of it.
Much harder to retrofit the systems into and old car.
SO we only have the facts form the tests.
This doesn't mean big metal, long, heavy cars would be less safe if they still made them today.
Only being in SW Ohio I really knew nothing of this.
I know there was a fight over a river and a river caught fire but that's it.
Air has always been just fine. After a few miles away from a city in Ohio you have all flat corn and soybean fields for 100+ miles until you come into the next city and Ohio only has like 4-5 "large" cities.
I see that commercial and I'm thinking...Get outta the water man!!
I'm just a fruitcake, human oddity, mostly bad human being (at least bad citizen)....but oh well. I just can't get along with what some people feel.
carymccarr
Full Access Members
Absolutely not a snowballs chance in hell lol.
EVEN if you got rid of all of the passenger maiming items INSIDE the vehicle (rigid steering wheels, hard touch dashes, window crank handles, seats that fold like a patio chair etc) the
Intrusion into the passenger compartment, as we saw in this video, crushes everything in its path. The concept of crumple zones, energy deflection/absorption and a protective cage around the passenger compartment were still years away from reality.
An airbag would do as much as an ice cube in an ocean of boiling lava.
Last edited:
As I said, those cars would have continued to evolve but I guess you could argue that they did and we have what we have as the end of the evolution or the current Evolution. When most people speak of old cars being safer and comparing the safety to new cars they are referring to the thickness and the amount of metal the car is made of and the size of the car.
There's also a world of difference between a 59 Impala and a 1949 Lincoln cosmopolitan. The Lincoln is an absolute tank and doesn't crumple up like a much cheaper Impala does. But, the car had no seat belts and metal everywhere inside so when you get blasted into the windshield Channel and the dash that pretty much kills you.
I'm just saying the results will be a lot closer if you retrofit at the old car with airbags and if you turned off the airbags on the new car.
What I wish is they still made big cars like the 1975 Buick Electra 225 with the 455 in it. Those were nice cars to wreck. They always seem to use the flimsy cheap cars like that Impala in their old vs new test. I would love to see a select handful of old cars tested.
I wish they still made cars like the 75 Buick Electra or the large Lincoln's with the 429 and them. These things were Landyachtz. Those cars would have evolved with better seat belts, better safe receipts, energy-absorbing steering columns which they did have in the fifties and sixties, airbags, energy-absorbing bumpers and shocks, and then they could have easily designed crumple zones into all that metal with the inner and outer Fender's all being metal. Even the wheel wells for metal on those cars for now everything is a plastic Splash
So just take a new car and stretch it 4-6 feet and make it out of really thick heavy gauge metal I doesn't Flex when you push on it.
It would still have all the safety features and be just as safe but it would feel more like the old cars.
That's one thing I would like to see.
Also, long and low. That's how cars used to look at least for a while. Not the case with the 49 Lincoln Cosmopolitan but definitely case on the waiter Continentals. I don't like the way cars got short and you can't even see the front of the hood as they rounded them off. I like the days for your head fenders with ridges and turn signal indicators on the fenders and a nice big hood ornament.
Another edit.. It's not the design that makes the car safer it's just the fact that they've added all the safety features in cars just happened to change and their design. There was a time before all the airbags and safety just came out that they were making cheap little cars out of flimsy metal that they were very very dangerous. The Ford Fairmont comes to mind right off the top my head. No airbags, then little flimsy body panels, not much of a frame. These things were cut in half when they got hit in wrecks
There's also a world of difference between a 59 Impala and a 1949 Lincoln cosmopolitan. The Lincoln is an absolute tank and doesn't crumple up like a much cheaper Impala does. But, the car had no seat belts and metal everywhere inside so when you get blasted into the windshield Channel and the dash that pretty much kills you.
I'm just saying the results will be a lot closer if you retrofit at the old car with airbags and if you turned off the airbags on the new car.
What I wish is they still made big cars like the 1975 Buick Electra 225 with the 455 in it. Those were nice cars to wreck. They always seem to use the flimsy cheap cars like that Impala in their old vs new test. I would love to see a select handful of old cars tested.
I wish they still made cars like the 75 Buick Electra or the large Lincoln's with the 429 and them. These things were Landyachtz. Those cars would have evolved with better seat belts, better safe receipts, energy-absorbing steering columns which they did have in the fifties and sixties, airbags, energy-absorbing bumpers and shocks, and then they could have easily designed crumple zones into all that metal with the inner and outer Fender's all being metal. Even the wheel wells for metal on those cars for now everything is a plastic Splash
So just take a new car and stretch it 4-6 feet and make it out of really thick heavy gauge metal I doesn't Flex when you push on it.
It would still have all the safety features and be just as safe but it would feel more like the old cars.
That's one thing I would like to see.
Also, long and low. That's how cars used to look at least for a while. Not the case with the 49 Lincoln Cosmopolitan but definitely case on the waiter Continentals. I don't like the way cars got short and you can't even see the front of the hood as they rounded them off. I like the days for your head fenders with ridges and turn signal indicators on the fenders and a nice big hood ornament.
Another edit.. It's not the design that makes the car safer it's just the fact that they've added all the safety features in cars just happened to change and their design. There was a time before all the airbags and safety just came out that they were making cheap little cars out of flimsy metal that they were very very dangerous. The Ford Fairmont comes to mind right off the top my head. No airbags, then little flimsy body panels, not much of a frame. These things were cut in half when they got hit in wrecks
carymccarr
Full Access Members
Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
Ooooohhhhhg gaaaaaa.
Short version... They could still make, and I wish they would, cars big long and low like Land yachts out of thick metal but incorporate all of the new safety features over the past 50 years and they would be just as safe if not safer as a new cars today.
It's not the style or basic visual design that gives the cars their increased safety.
carymccarr
Full Access Members
They certainly could. But they won’t. Large heavy sedans are stapled to dealer lots these days.
Were you ever a CB radio-er?
I tend to think not. I think it would annoy you more than my -what you call -walls of words.
I have no time schedule, agenda or constraints. I go on several forums from time to time to kill time and see what people are talking about.
It's not about being factual, concise, or getting the job done. It's about sitting around killing time shooting the shit.
Talking about likes, dislikes, dreams and aspirations, and wishes for the future. Usually starting out with Automobiles and maybe even the ones the Forum is named after but almost always veering off onto tangent upon tangent and talking what about whatever floats our boats.
Boats! Back to big boat cars of yesteryear.
I have now come full circle. Good evening to all and I will see myself out.
I tend to think not. I think it would annoy you more than my -what you call -walls of words.
I have no time schedule, agenda or constraints. I go on several forums from time to time to kill time and see what people are talking about.
It's not about being factual, concise, or getting the job done. It's about sitting around killing time shooting the shit.
Talking about likes, dislikes, dreams and aspirations, and wishes for the future. Usually starting out with Automobiles and maybe even the ones the Forum is named after but almost always veering off onto tangent upon tangent and talking what about whatever floats our boats.
Boats! Back to big boat cars of yesteryear.
I have now come full circle. Good evening to all and I will see myself out.
They haven't since around 1985.
What they refer to as sedans today, or even the 98-2011 town car ARE NOT even in the same league as what I am referring to.
OP
OP
762mm
Full Access Members
The "97% of climate scientists agree" and "the science is settled!" scam has been debunked long ago. Try again.
The Climate Change industry is a 400-billion dollar a year INDUSTRY with some of the World's most powerful banks and corporations heavily invested in it financially. These heavy hitters are expecting a return on their investment and will peddle whatever b.s. needs peddling in order to do so. They have the main stream media pundits in their pockets, as well as most governments (who in turn finance the academia via research grants).
They also know that fear of impeding doom is a great motivator and it sure as hell seems to be working in your case!
Here's a good argument as to why it's a scam... because the OWNERS of this planet made it up, so they can drain your retirement fund (and your kids' as well) :
Last edited:
OP
OP
762mm
Full Access Members
P.S. How's Obama, the high priest of Climate Change, doing at his new 15 million beach-front home?
Does he know something YOU don't?
Does he know something YOU don't?
Last edited:
I said volcanic eruptions disrupt weather patterns(aka climate change, storms). I did not say one volcano, releases more CO2 than all man made CO2.
jeff kushner
Full Access Members
Yeah Toby....my girlfriend had "The last of the boats" with her '78 Bonneville ...not her car of course......but man was that thing smoooooth. Especially for a guy riding a ported & piped H1 Kaw triple at the time.
jeff
jeff
carymccarr
Full Access Members
P.S. How's Obama, the high priest of Climate Change, doing at his new 15 million beach-front home?
Does he know something YOU don't?
Yeah. He knows that he’ll be dead in 30 years and that home won’t be underwater for 100.
carymccarr
Full Access Members
It does in the short term. Showing that what is released into the atmosphere by man (which we do at a much higher level) also impacts it.
What was your point?
Similar threads
