Have you always wanted to compensate for the small size of your penis while at the same time doing right by the environment? Here’s your chance!
The FT-HS is a hybrid sports car–the name stands for Future Toyota Hybrid Sports. Its powertrain marries a 3.5-liter V-6 with a new-generation hybrid system to provide a combined output of some 400 hp driving the rear wheels.
Not only does it kick ass versus other cars in its class, but it’s a hybird. Why is this important?
What is interesting is not the direct impact of this car on the environment, though we can expect it to be better than the “traditional” V8 gasoline-powered sports cars it will compete against (a lesser evil). No, the interesting thing is the “halo” effect it could have, making hybrids cool and desirable to a new public. Even if they never end up buying that particular model, they’ll notice the technology and associate it with something they want instead of something they don’t.
Making hybrids cool… That’s an idea worth pursuing. The Honda Civic Hybrid is pretty low key, as is the Toyota Prius. Dori Monson calls Dave Ross’ car a “prissy” Prius. That’s Dori for you, but he has a point. Hybrids have an image problem. If people think of a hybrid car as more like this and this, and less like this and this, we’ll make progress.
The FT-HS isn’t yet in production, but if they move forward this year, they can have them ready for sale at Toyota dealerships just in time for a “Dori Monson Midlife Crisis” purchase.
If you really want high end, check out the Tesla.
High-end hybrids are an idea worth pursuing. Despite my cynicism about and loathing of growth in this area, I actually see a lot of merit in New Urbanism. But changing our cars is going to be easier than changing our neighborhoods, so let’s change our cars and then worry about the neighborhoods. As Teddy Roosevelt, one of our earliest environmentalists, said: “Do what you can with what you have where you are.”
@ 1
The Tesla would be cool, but it costs nearly 100k. But for the rich enviro, it looks good.
I got approved to buy a Porsche but at the last moment they told me they’d have to measure my dick before turning over the car.
Seems you have to have a penis under 4″ long to buy a Porsce. Oh, well. I’m sure MTR qualified.
Enviromancy
Corn based ethanol, hybrid cars, electro cars ,,,, all of these are fuzzy targets for environmentalism. Hybrid cars, for example, do burn less gasoline but they have other costs associated with recycling their batteries, The net sum mayu not be impressive. The extreme example is the elctro car that uses electricity generated by burning hydrocarbons in a plant someplace.
Thermodynamics trumps all.
There’s nothing prissy about this hybrid. http://www.michaeltaylor.ca/US/atsf5638.shtml
What Boeing’s gonna need after the oil runs out is a good electric airplane.
To quote the Magliozzi brothere….”It’s got tooo much powah!”
Who the fuck needs to go zero to sixty in four seconds? The industry needs to get out of promoting its wares as icons of personal importance and just get us from point “A” to point “B” in safety and comfort without justifying another assinine war.
@4 ” … electricity generated with coal in a central power plant is still much cleaner than pure gasoline propulsion, due to the much greater efficiencies of a central plant …”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_car#Technology
@8 Roger
Wikipedia doesn’t help. Thermodynamics dictates that there is a loss of energy every time there is a conversion between forms. If you burn coal to make heat, then use the heat to spin a turbines, then use the turbine to make electricity, then transmit the electricity, store it in battery, then convert the electricity into motion …. the steps dictate you will be less efficient then of, e.g. you burned the coal in a stem engine in the car.
The usual argument for electricity has most t do with storage. renewable electrciity, eg hydro here in Seattle, generates 24/7. If we can store the energy generated at times of low use, in effect we do get something for free. This is not true when fuel is burned as in a coal plant.
Another issue is burning the hydrocarbob out in the distance rather than in a city.
In the end, however, conservation is going to mean a lot les spleasant decisions .. nuclear power, toll praods, high density housing, lower living standrads.
Malthus wins.
I find it interesting that the leading edge of auto innovation is coming from Toyota. The US makers are mired in old technology and hostile unions. So when GM disappears, and all their union pensions become a liability to the US taxpayer, you can thank your buddies like Roger who think that unions are the greatest thing to benefit mankind since the wheel was invented.
Unions will destroy the economy of this country, if left to their devices. Fortunately, they are becoming an ever smaller influence in business and are now focusing on destroying government as we know it. That’s where the money is, and that’s where they will focus.
Does anyone know about the batteries in hybrid cars? I’ve heard these batteries (that are essentially part of the locmotion of the vehicle) have to be replaced after a few years, and they’re very exepensive. What’s the story on them?
re 10: So, what you are saying is that GM’s unionized engineering department and management is is to blame? I don’t think so.
Related to this topic, there was a good documentary last year, “Who Killed the Electric Car?” GM had a perfectly good electric car (a lot like the Tesla) that they developed in response to CA guidelines for low-emission cars. But they only leased them to customers, and when CA modified its rules due to politics by both the car makers and the oil companies, GM literally destroyed them all.
The best mid-term solution for cars will be a hybrid that you can recharge in your garage at night so that the first 50-100 miles the next day will be gasoline-free. The solution pushed by the current administration, hydrogen-powered cars, is a stupid approach (at least for a long, long time); it’s the approach favored by oil companies so they retain complete control of fuel distribution.
And battery technology has made phenomenal progress since the time of the GM electric car…
Janet wants to blame the unions (again) for the U.S. car industry’s decline. Sorry, but that dog won’t hunt.
Sure, the unions have tried to protect their workers from bearing the cost of their manager’s incompetence. But the facts are that the U.S. auto industry has wasted most of its time trying to blame others for its problems, and only trying to do “just a little better” than the other U.S. automakers, while the Japanese, European, and even Korean automakers have taken over the world markets, and now are within arm’s reach of taking over the U.S. market as well.
* While the U.S. automakers were spending all their efforts in the 1960’s and early 1970’s to fight against government safety mandates (seat belts, and eventually air bags), European (Volvo) and Japanese automakers simply added those items to their standard packages.
* While U.S. automakers stubbernly fought against the conversion to unleaded gasoline (early 1970’s) and other pollution controls, the Japanese automakers had already upgraded their cars.
* When U.S. automakers stubbernly resisted any focus on more fuel-efficient cars (Henry Ford II said “Small cars equal small profits”), Japanese automakers Honda, Toyota, and Nissan (known here then as Datson) were upgrading their already-fuel efficient cars in quality and comfort, and were pefectly positioned to take over the U.S. market when oil prices doubled, and then tripled, in the latter half of the 1970’s.
*When U.S. automakers found themselves unable to compete in the 1980’s, they asked for government protection from imports, which resulted in the Japanses automaker’s “voluntary quotas” of 1984~1986. Of course if the Japanese can only sell a limited number of cars in the U.S., they are going to get the maximum value from those cars, so they abandoned the economy car market and instead sold their luxury models (eventually establishing new brands – Lexus, Infinity, etc.). Now U.S. consumers were finding that Japanese automakers were not only making great economy cars, but that their luxury cars were better quality than the U.S. automakers also. The end result: even more U.S. consumers switched to Japanese automakers. To further protect themselves from future political pressure, Japanese carmakers are now building most of their U.S. destined cars in – the U.S.
Unions had no impact on those decisions (except perhaps the last, when they joined the management in asking the U.S. government for protection from Japanese imports). Detroit management did it to themselves, although it is convenient for them to blame the unions and the government for all their problems, despite the fact that European automakers manage to build pretty good cars with even stronger unions, and the Japanese manage to do it with even stronger environmental laws than we have here in the U.S.
Nice guest column in the Seattle Times today by Froma Harrop, who dissects the Republican claim that the minimum wage shouldn’t be raised because most of its recepients are retirees earning “pin money” or teenagers “who want to play video games”.
Harrup points out the statistics which proves this to be a lie.
But more importantly, Harrup points out accurately that CEO’s aren’t quizzed by their boards about whether they really “need” their huge salaries, stock options, bonuses, or other compensation.
“There is a conservative worldview that people who don’t make serious money aren’t serious people. Economic incentives are for entrepreneurs. For the low-of-wage, you put a bowl of nuggets on the ground and pat their heads.”
http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....oma12.html
@ everywhere, re: batteries
Battery technology has made leaps and bounds. Not only that, but batteries, if mass produced for automobiles, will only get cheaper and cheaper for the consumer. Disposing of batteries is actually easy. Just give them to Interstate Battery and they’ll break them down to their elemental parts and recycle most everything.
@ 10
Unions to blame? Only if you discount, I don’t know, EVERYTHING ELSE the US automakers have done that’s stupid.
1.) Late to hybrids. Toyota’s Synergy Drive system is used in Ford’s hybrid, that little SUV. Why? Toyota has the patent, and Ford was too busy making SUVs to read the tea leaves.
2.) Universal health care. 1500 bucks of the sale price of any US made car pays for healthcare. In Europe/Canada, the gov’t pays for health care (or helps pay). This sets us up at a disadvantage.
3.) Bad cars nobody wants. GM, Ford, and the rest have been making cars that are either bad, or that people don’t want. European imports and Japanese imports (which are often MADE in the USA or Canada) sell better in more affluent markets. They also totally own the small car market.
Tooth Fairies and Batteries
It is ironic that liberals are drinking the same koolaid as Repubicans when ti come to the environment. Republicans claim, based on the deity called “Invisible Hand” that the market solves all problems. Now Will wants to believe that the Deity called “Technology” has solved the energy crisis by making better, recycleable batteries.
I suspect that many technologies will change as the price of petroleum goes up. But nothing will be free.
@ 19
Did I say the energy crisis was solved? No. But battery technology has made leaps and bounds.
Stop fucking making shit up.
Ironically, hybrid cars have been around for decades. You can look under the hood of any car and find one. Check out the “battery”, the “alternator”, and the “engine”. The battery provides the power to start the engine. The alternator switches off the battery power as soon as the engine begins running on its own. As the engine produces electricity as a by-product of the excess (unused) energy, the alternator converts it back into stored electricity in its battery.
The hybrid cars simply took advantage of improved battery technology, smaller, lighter engines, and computerized switching mechanisms between the battery and the engine to change the priorities. Now the gas-powered engine is only used when it is needed, otherwise the battery powers the vehicle.
The big advantage to hybrids over pure electric cars is range (you aren’t likely to run out of electrical power on the highway requiring a long re-charge time), and the absence of the need for a new energy delivery infrastructure (i.e., parking garages all equiped with coin-operated electrical sockets at each slot for re-charging your car while you are at work).
Personally, I think hybrid cars are the best thing since sliced bread. I can see why the oil companies would be opposed, however. But I’ve never understood Detroit’s reluctance to embrace this type of technology. Must they always be drug, kicking and screaming, into forced acceptance of any new technology?
It might require a bit of transition on our part. I was almost hit by one a while back while I was walking on a campus street to a UW football game. It seems I’m used to “listening” for the approach of a car, but a hybrid running on electricity at low speeds hardly makes any noise at all. Also, I’ve always wondered how well they handle the increased load of an air conditioner?
re 19: “I suspect that many technologies will change as the price of petroleum goes up. But nothing will be free.”
What about solar? Are they gonna put a box over your car if you don’t pay them? Or are they just not gonna make them so you and I remain in economic thrall to the monied classes.
I suspect the latter.
It might require a bit of transition on our part. I was almost hit by one a while back while I was walking on a campus street to a UW football game. It seems I’m used to “listening” for the approach of a car, but a hybrid running on electricity at low speeds hardly makes any noise at all. Also, I’ve always wondered how well they handle the increased load of an air conditioner?
Two quick points (and I won’t be able to respond – sorry):
First, there’s not much of a transition to quiet parking lots. I just roll down my window and say “Excuse me” to people in my way. :-)
Second, the Prius handles the AC surprisingly well. My mpg takes only a small hit in the summer months due to AC. For example, on a trip from Wenatchee to Spokane, we still got 54 mpg during all highway driving, even though it was 95+ degrees and the AC was on the whole time.
Winters are much tougher on hybrids than summer. For all the same reasons as normal gas-powered cars, hybrids don’t do as well in the winter with respect to fuel economy (worse tires, worse driving conditions, heater fan running much more often, lights on more during shorter daylight hours, etc.). And for a few other reasons, hybrids are more affected by cold than normal cars (the engine doesn’t shut off as often – which is where much of the savings comes from – because of the increased power demands on the engine and the need to maintain engine temps, battery performance degrades in colder weather, etc.).
Just as a point of reference: my current tank is at about 46 mpg. Over the summer, I was regularly getting 55-58, with one tank right at 60 mpg (put another way, I went over 600 miles on a tank and had some to spare).
If anyone is considering a hybrid, keep in mind that your winter performance will be poor (by the altered standards of a hybrid), and your summer performance will be spectacular.
No fucking way I will ever drive an Oscar Meyer Weiner-mobile.
We\’ll wave as we leave you behind… try to stay out of our way… and no, no SUV in this family, but no planned obsolescence union thug cars either.
And, with the way PSE is raising electric costs… good luck to ya.
We\’ll wave as we leave you behind.
That car reminds me of you liberals… all flash and mouth with nothing inside.
@ 24 SLLLI-N stupidly said:
“no planned obsolescence union thug cars”
“the way PSE is raising electric costs… good luck to ya”
Does this right wing moron have any idea what a hybrid vehicle is, or who makes them?
Thanks for the laugh!
What kind of car does Dori have anyway?
this post was written by an enviro with no penis who rides bicycles to work
Monson is a fool pritnear all the time his mouth is open. I would be ashamed if I were the KIRO programming director and this was the best I could do.
So, while Detroit execs were busy making lots of stupid decisions (I do not contest your statement), the unions held the big three hostage to higher and higher wages. They would strike, or threaten to strike, one maker and the other two would fall into line.
No one is forced to work at the place they are currently working at. If auto workers were displeased by what they were seeing, the answer was to work elsewhere, not blackmail the company into higher wages and benefits.
US car makers have admitted that they build too many cars that they know no one wants, and then they force the dealerships to take them. They have such high fixed costs that they need a certain level of volume to generate cash. The unions have no incentive to eliminate unneeded jobs. The whole US industry is disfunctional, and the US taxpayer will wind up bailing them all out.
I’m glad you see this as a positive reason for having unions.
How is it the RNC was able to convince people like Janet S. that a good paying job with benefits and retirement security is a bad thing?
Study your history, baby cheeks, Unions made the secure, working middle class that is the envy of the world. Or, at least it used to be until conservatives mucked it all up.
Imagine – blackmailing a company into paying above-market wages eventually leads to that company declaring bankruptcy. Now the Dems want to pass legislation that eliminates the secret ballot to unionize in the workplace. What are the worried about? That workers value their jobs, and don’t want to risk them for demands they know they will never fully benefit from?
Boeing workers will never recover the lost wages from the strikes their union bosses persuaded them to make. The union bosses have every motivation for this – they never miss a paycheck, and make multiples more than the average union employee. The union dues keep flowing, even when the the worker’s check stops for a strike.
#9: Furball was too stupid to take Thermodynamics in college. I bet he didn’t do well in science in high skrull either. He opted for law. He has no recourse except to use Wikipedia! He’s also too stupid to know where to look for real science. Instead he’ll send you to wikipedia because it has his slant to life!
HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR!
I’ve used this site before but Moonbat!s don’t look at neocon sites. They take everything and try to politicize it. That’s prima facie evidence yous a Moonbat!
This URL puts it into libtardease! http://howthingswork.virginia.edu/
Nuff Said!
GBS: Please email Puddybud!
We are in the vacuum tube days when it comes to alternative fuels and alternatives to the internal combustion engine. We could have had a seamless transition if we’d started 25 to 35 years ago, but we didn’t. It’s good to see us getting started now, though.
@7:
Hey, what a coincidence. I view my car the same way, too.
But guess what? Not everyone does. And you’re going to have to deal with that. Unless, of course, you’re driving a Solipsist.
Unless it is a turbodiesel hybrid i AIN’T buyin it…
PETROgas sucks and PETROgasoline from funded capitolist pig-backed wars sucks MORE…
get off the hybrid battery=powered drug… And get on the french fry high!
you want a date magnet?
try THIS on biodiesl vs your hybrid…
http://www.motoring.co.za/inde.....Id=3436888
or even better this…(french) “De là à attendre une version TDI de la R8 de série…”http://www.autodeclics.com/blog/comments.php?id=90
url freaking out….
http://www.autodeclics.com/blog/comments.php?id=90
@33 Isn’t that Cute! Little CINO (Christian In Name Only) Neocon PuddlyBuddly trying to give lectures on SCIENCE!
Har Har Har Har Har Har Har!
Right you are PuddlyBuddly! Right you are!