Who is holding back my electric car? The electric car that I should be able to buy at reasonable cost is no challenge to produce with todays technology.

The car has two banks of light weight battery on either side of the centered motor under the front hood.

The roof mounted high output solar panels charge the battery opposite the battery under drain.

There could be a small propane bottle fueled motor for emergency side of the road battery refresh, but efficiency advances would soon make that requirement obsolete.

I want to plug my car in at night and get clear of the noise, the poison stink, the volatility of gas, the cost of gas, the need to find a gas seller, muffler and exhaust problems, fuel mix problems, anti-freeze problems, radiator problems, water pump problems, air filter problems, oil filter problems, gasket leaks and faulty seals. Failing rubber hoses and clamps.

Have you ever seen the excellent performance of the electric bus?
The ideal electric car looks like this:
http://TonyGuitar.blogspot.com

Crude oil is for making plastics and paints, not for burning. We are no longer cave dwellers.

Where is my modern trouble free electric car? Seniors who run about on their electric carts with that smug look have an unfair monopoly! TG

I thought the sniper on the grassy knoll made his getaway in an electric car.

No wonder he got away with it. Electric car in his day? Eat your heart out 007. TG

personally I support ethanol

and what's with all the * ?

I personally don't care for all-electric vehicles. It's not so bad for small ugly cars, but I just don't see how you can get the power out of it for more muscle cars and heavier vehicles.
Ethanol is ok except for finding the fuel. Probably just end up using regular gas anyway cause it's more convenient.
I don't care for hybrid cars either cause then it just seems like you have two engines and twice the failure chance that one function or the other will go out.

Surely there is something better on the horizon.

I am still waiting for the flying cars we were all supposed to have overr 30 years ago.

Hey guess what dude, I probably have about as good of insight into this industry with what I do at work as almost anyone on these forums, but I'm not even going to consider reading your post until you can make it something decent.

I am not goign to read crap that uses * for spaces. When you decide to be a little mature with whatever you were trying to say, then by all means say it. And say it in Meeting Spot not Other Hardware.

Was it mature to promptly appoint yoursef investigator, policeman and judge and jury?

The asterisks are an oddity of HTML code translation relating to the new Opera brower used to make the post.

Would it not have been more mature to learn whether the asterisks are an immiture attempt to gain attention or the results of a technical error?

If you go back and read carefully, with your temper impulses under control, you will discover where I was about to erase the text and then decided to leave it for the benifit of local tech gurus.

This seems to be an add occurance and It seems not to happen on following comments, so there must be a unique key in the one place that it did occur.

By the way, someone did send me several pics of a sleek modern converable that is equally at home hydroplaning on the lake. Thanks for the excellent and amazing Email, Duke, TG

Was it mature to promptly appoint yoursef investigator, policeman and judge and jury?That was done for us when we got out moderatorship. We are here to make sure posts do not offend anyone or break any rules but at the same time we are asked to keep "fluff" threads to a minimum. People come to TS for quality threads, not quantity. :p

& it's odd that the one you're talking happens to use Opera as his main borwser yet he never once got your "technical problem" with it. ;)

SNGX is moderator? I didn't know that. You guys have a list of people who "work" for TS somewhere?

Hi Vig.

Take a look at this full list of moderators etc.

http://www.techspot.com/vb/showgroups.php?

Hope this helps.

Regards Howard :)

It*s a mystery that real TS special forces will have to solve.

I have no idea how the asterisk thing happened, yet, I bet if I studied it carefully, something would come to mind.

In the first place, scrutinize more closely and notice that the asterisk is a trailing character and not a space substitute at all....

oh honourable guru. Your humble, but not humourless servant, TG

Thanks for that link Howard. Always wondered whom ALL the mod gods were. Knew who some were from years ago when I was a member, never knew all of them.

more and more ethanol stations are opening up. HEB and Kroger grocery chains are going to offer ethnol in Texas soon. I have a flex-fuel truck and can't wait.
Ethanol - a true American fuel made from corn samplin's and other goodies..... heh heh

Heck a country liberated for booze (and other stuff) running on booze! I love it!

I see you removed the asterisks, interesting problem, but apparently not doing it anymore, so, ok.

Howard, thanks, I see you are the only one on the whole list who is online right now, lol.

Tedster, get a new license plate called "BZZ MBL". I think you know what it stands for, lol

1. of course the technology is here to make electric cars. but as far as I have read, they are still not a practical gasoline powered replacement.

2. you will never see flying cars for simple saftey reasons. most people don't know how to drive on the ground, you want those fools up in the air to crash into your house??? :D

3. ethanol engines are not the future, the technology is as old as gasoline engines. and E85 costs more than gas!

I find it odd that nobody has mentioned hydrogen? hydrogen power is the future.

The reason that we are "addicted to oil" (as dubya puts it) is simply due to politics and economics. there is way too much money invested in the oil industry.

the technology exists to make a car run on tap water, but you will never see it in mass production. if we could run our cars on tap water then the entire oil infrustructure would collapse. everybody involved in the oil infrustructure industry would not make any money from water-fueled cars.

what you will see in the not so far future, is hydrogen powered cars... but with a hydrogen fueling station infrustructure behind it. this way we get virtually pollution-free cars and a revenue producing infrustructure.

But with hydrogen power you need power in the first place to seperate the hydrogen and the oxygen from the water so that they can combust and recombine in the engine to produce the energy that drives the car forward.

So for this process to help save the environment you also need an environmentally-friendly electricity supply. Which im not sure we quite yet have here across the waters. (Too many gas, oil and coal powered stations).

I agree with KingCody on the flying car point, its a bit hard to put up bollards in the sky!

Corn likker in Newfoundland and PEI is referred to as screech. Seems odd because it*s a smooth clear slightly syrupy beverage one can only nip at and too much will put you in a coma.

So we all like ethanol for several reasons, but, sadly, I recently read where it is only one third as efficient as petrol and thus will always be an additive rather than a fuel.

Young fellar above is correct about hydrogen. We need a tech break-through because the ratio of electricity to hydrogen needs help.

That*s why I say we need to get those featherweight batteries, super efficient soalr cells and power thrust motors working together and selling off the car lots. Once started, the electric car will go from the grocery getter to the silent muscle car in no time.

Governments are afraid of this getting out of the bag though. As mentioned above, the employment dislocation will be rough for some time.

We have to let buggy-whips go sooner or later. Let*s do it now! TG

but, sadly, I recently read where it is only one third as efficient as petrol and thus will always be an additive rather than a fuel.

That's complete rubbish. Don't believe it. They are already running vehicles on it in Brazil. A Top Gear stunt on british TV also demonstrated that ethanol is just as good as petrol as a fuel. It is alchohol after all. Or, we could all use bio-diesel. A little stickier than real deisel, but it does the job well enough.

There is a Hydrogen highway being built in europe (hydrogen supplying gas stations at set intervals along the roads across europe). Bush has even made repeated references to it.

The initial burst of power needed to create the hydrogen from water can be collected through renewable means. It acts only as a catalyst to free up the potential energy that is held in water, which is to be converted to heat energy, in the process creating water and electricity - and there's a lot of energy in water. All it needs really is hydro-electrolysis.

The first commercial hydrogen filleing station opend in Iceland, april 24th, 2003, in the nations capital.

First off, there aren't any featherweight batteries that are even remotely close to having the power/capacity to power a car.

The amount of solar panels needed currently would be far bigger than the car itself. Just look at the World Solar Challenge races where universities compete. That is some of the most advanced solar technology in the world and those cars run into problems during rainstorms. And the cars are super light and only hold 1 person uncomfortably.

Hydrogen may be the future, but its still a long time away, because as mentioned above you have to get the hydrogen from somewhere, and unless the energy to split water comes from solar/wind/wave power you are doing just as much damage to the environment (coal).

Biodiesel and ethanol are the more near term future, problem is E85 won't work in non flex fuel vechiles, well it will work just not for very long. Another problem is the availability of crops to produce the amount of fuel needed to replace oil, its not feasable now to get completely off oil from ethanol and biodiesel.

Spike is right about saying the ethanol is 1/3 as efficient as gasoline being rubbish. That statement is wrong on several levels. Efficiency depends on the engine not the fuel. Ethanol inherently has less BTU/gal than gasoline, but saying its 1/3 is absolutely wrong. It has about 80-85% of the energy as gasoline (off the top of my head), which will require you to use15-20% more of it to get the same performance as gasoline.

Biodiesel is a better option than ethanol for several reasons I can get into later if anyone cares.

SUre SNGX. I'd love to know the ins and outs of Biodiesel as it happens. I might even start running my car on it if I can.

It's also worth noting, further to SNGX's comments, that current petrol engines are incredibly inefficient anyway. I'm not sure if that's a cost cutting thing or a technology thing (I suspect the former).

Ya let's hear it. I've never even heard of Biodiesel. Guess I'll have to look it up some time.

Where is the car that runs off ones own body heat? lol

We can agree to disagree about this 1/3rd value. I only quote from a supposed expert and I admit experts have often been proven slightly off target.

Interesting debate though and the solar cell bottleneck has something to do with silicone purification or concentration. Once that is ironed out, panels will be 10x more efficient and a fraction of current prices.

100 years ago this same transition happened with glass production.

Just recently computer memory was in short supply and now it is as cheap as dirt.

There are several other things that have become amazingly cheap as of late and you can find dozens of different items like perfectly good electric watches, calculators, am fm radios ad infinitum at the local One Dollar Store.

When hydrogen is combined in the cumbustion chamber with petrol it allows all the hydrocarbons to burn, raising gas efficiency from the physics limit of 37% to an actual 97 -98% level. The exhaust changes from a dumping of carbons and monoxide to a very clean limit of lost carbons and droplets of water.

Hydrogen will most likely come into common use as an injected supplement to gas engines , extending milages threefold or so.

This stuff comes from University of British Columbia sources and must be taken as anecdotal until I can get concrete links. It*s been months since I read up on this stuff. TG

The two gas reailers selling the Gas / ethanol mix in Western Canada provinces are the Mohawk and the Huskey chains.

Same price as regular gas but with a little lower octane. There is no noticable performance difference. Maybe on a dynometer.

Sold as an ethol - gas mix in Brazil too, is it? TG

I just found out "who killed the electric car" was a movie. lol

So that's where this came from. Where is my electric motorcycle? Surely...

I just found out "who killed the electric car" was a movie. lol

So that's where this came from. Where is my electric motorcycle? Surely...

Did any of you see something on TV recently about some inventor that has made himself an electric motorcycle?? Seems like it was some kind of hybrid engine, I cant remember exactly.

I don't have TV, couldn't say. Just seems to me because a basic motorcycle or even scooter which is worthy of the hiway, can be small and light and only carry one person, that it shouldn't be to hard to get enough power to drive it electrically.


[off topic]
It's funny, I just saw a guy who attached some kind of simple motor, maybe a weed wacker or something, onto an "arm" on the back of a regular bicycle. So he can ride the bike as normal, but if he starts the motor, he just reaches back and lowers the motor (because it's on an arm with a handle), and the motor simply touches the rear tire, turning it for him. No chain or belt drive or whatever, just touches the spinning part of the motor down onto the tire itself, and makes it turn. It was kinda cool, and funny.
[end off topic]

You are right, it seems like the power to weight ratio would be lower on some type of scooter or small motorcycle. Looks like it would be easier to make some type...if nothing else some type of hybrid. The cops at the Atlanta airport ride the little 2 wheel jobs with the centrifugal wheels....I cant for the life of me remember the name of them. But I heard they will go around 35 MPH. And run for several hours. But even with their batter technology, they are still way out of the price range for the average person to utilize as a practical means of transportation.

Ethanol is a joke. The pollution made to produce it is as great if not greater than burning the same volume of gasoline in your car.

Last thing,
About:http://tonyguitar.blogspot.com/2006/06/laser-toner-savings.html#links
In my HP LaserJet IIP's(1989) manual, they tell you to do this in the troubleshooting section on the manual.


The amount of solar panels needed currently would be far bigger than the car itself. Just look at the World Solar Challenge races where universities compete.
Not with batteries.

I personally don't care for all-electric vehicles. It's not so bad for small ugly cars, but I just don't see how you can get the power out of it for more muscle cars and heavier vehicles.

Well, a lot of prototype of electric cars were actually more powerful and efficient than gas cars.

One was developed in Quebec in the '90s but the project stopped because of money problems.
http://www.crest.org/discussion/ev/200001/msg00612.html <- The guy describes the report here.
Other info :
http://storageforum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=24932#24932

They seem to come up with other cars with different technology tho. http://ww.tm4.com/

I'll try to get some videos of it.

Very good read. The motor wheel sounds like the bomb.

I SO wish I could adapt a basic motor wheel to the rear of my bicycle! It obviously would need very very little horsepower and a low top-end speed. I would think a fairly small battery and relatively little addition to the rear wheel would be suficient. Then then the motion of the turning wheel could, in turn, generate power to recharge the battery again, thus self-sustaining itself and requiring very little "recharge" time at home. Theoretically, if you were continually riding, it would continually charge and never run out of juice!

Dude, I so wish I was an engineer. lol

Actually, it seems like they re-started working on it, but instead modified the motor-wheel into a single motor for all 4 wheels instead of one per wheel. The only thing is that the car demo that is using this is pretty SMART-like. (Small)

The actual report I saw isn't available online, but other reports using some small parts of it are. If you want to watch two 12 minutes 160x120 clips in French I can give you the links (To see the 10 years old car for a few seconds) I think I might as well record them and just give the interesting parts)

In fact, Hydro-Quebec / TM4 didn't invent the motor wheel but modified it to make it efficient at low power (Because the original motor-wheel apparently was only efficient using high-power)

Then then the motion of the turning wheel could, in turn, generate power to recharge the battery again,
Any electrical motor can do this. The only problem is that it can only be used for breaking. (You will need to go very fast to be able to still go forward while plugging the motor backwards)

In the video you see the wheel switching from forward to reverse about 5 times in 2-3 seconds.

Would you really need the SAME motor for this? What if you just added a secondary system? A small alternator-type device to use the motion of the wheel. So the motor wouldn't have to turn backwards, it just does its thing independant of this other system used for recharging.

Or is that no good?

Would you really need the SAME motor for this? What if you just added a secondary system? A small alternator-type device to use the motion of the wheel. So the motor wouldn't have to turn backwards, it just does its thing independant of this other system used for recharging.

Well, an alternator IS actually a motor running backwards. When you turn a motor the other way than the one it's running with no load, instead of using power, it's making some. In fact, alternators work because I forgot that you could just use a pair of diodes(Allows current to go one side, but not the other) to prevent the motor to run backwards. (But the load you put on it will make it harder to run. The more power you use, the harder it will be to turn.)

Not with batteries.

Yes with batteries. Thats how they can even go at all when it gets cloudy. If you search the forums for Solar Challenge you will see some discussion we had here when UMR (where I went to school and now work) was competing last summer.
Here is the link: http://www.techspot.com/vb/topic6437.html


Tonyguitar - We can agree to disagree all you want. But you are wrong about that 1/3, either your misunderstood your expert, or he's not an expert.
The LHV for Ethanol is 75,700Btu/gal the HHV for Ethanol is 84,000Btu/gal.
The LHV for Gasoline is 115,000Btu/gal the HHV for Gasoline is 125,000Btu/gal.
Source: http://www.evworld.com/library/energy_numbers.pdf
The numbers are going to vary a little bit from those depending on the source and the standard used to calculate the values, but its not going to change much.
So by my calculations that makes ethanol have 65.8-67.2% as much energy as gasoline. (maybe you got that 1/3 by doing something like 100- my number, which would come out to 33%, but I'm not sure what logic you'd use to do that).

As for why biodiesel is superior compared to ethanol is that it runs in diesel engines which inherently are more efficient than gasoline engines, the biodiesel can come from all sorts of sources from plant oils to animal oils to re-cracked plastics (cracking refering to breaking the hydrocarbon chains into shorter chains). It is also arguably easier, and definately safer to produce at your own house than ethanol, and the byproducts are safe.

For more information check out this link: http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel.html some of the claims they make may not be vaiid in all conditions, studies are still being done at universities across the world and sometimes the results conflict. I don't have any sources on this right now and probably won't bother to look, but I've seen this stated in reports before.

Vigalante - You likely wouldn't see any improvement using a 2 motor system as opposed to single. It takes energy to create it, so if you run 1 motor in reverse to charge and the other running off battery power to drive the vechile foward, in reality all you are doing is taking power from the battery and taking it from electrical to mechanical and back to electrical, and the motors aren't 100% efficient in the changes. So you'd still have a net loss of energy. So it makes more sense to just turn the motor into a generator when breaking like they currently do in hybrid vechiles.

So it makes more sense to just turn the motor into a generator when breaking like they currently do in hybrid vechiles.


Who said anything about breaking? lol

I don't have much knowledge of electro-mechanical systems, but it doesn't make sense to me yet. I understand, going from electro to mech back to electro. But it seems like the process of charging the battery wouldn't "use" much energy. A little, but not much.
You remember flashlights where you pump the handle to charge it up? Or shortwave radios with a turn handle? Or kids toy guns where you pump the handle and it lights up and makes noise?
Seems to me, that same kinetic energy can be used from a spinning wheel, without hurting it's normal use. In other words, it isn't like, one motor pushing the wheel, and another equal motor running backwards with equal force. I'm not talking about two central shafts running in opposite directions on the same wheel.

Maybe my logic is screwey, probably is. But seems to me, you've got the primary drive motor connected to the shaft of the wheel, the axle, say. And the battery supplies the power. Now lets say, somewhere else against the wheel, like just inside the rims for example, where the breaks are on a bicycle, there is a small gear which turns when the wheel turns. The faster the wheel spins, the faster this little wheel spins. The small wheel is not putting enough pressure against the main wheel to make a significant hurt of performance. But anyhoo, the small wheel is connected to some kind of system which generates current which flows back to the battery.

Make sense? Of course not, I don't know what I'm talking about. But I think you know what I mean. Is that possible? Or is the power generated by such a small thing not enough to charge such a battery? Would the energy used to move the wheel, HAVE to be equal to the energy needed to recharge? So it would take just as much torque for the "charging" unit to charge, as it does torque to move it?

I guess what it boils down to is, is there any self-sustaining system by which it can use its generated power both to do work, AND regenerate itself wholly? Where, once the process is started, it can run indefinitely?
Kinda like those little silver ball things you see on desks, when you start the outter ball swinging, which transfers energy between the balls to the other side, then that other side ball swings out and comes back, hitting the others and reversing direction. It just keeps going without running out of energy.

Ok I'll shutup now.

In short no.

I understand what you are saying, but its not possible to do that and gain energy, or even self sustaining.

Also those silver balls you are talking about do stop - the energy transfer is pretty efficient there, perhaps it would even go forever if you could cut out air resistance and the resistance of the strings they are on pivoting the bars they are connected to.

Forget about diodes, I told anything.

Well, you understand somewhat, it's just that the most power you pull out of the motor, the harder it's going to be to turn. Say you take a wind generator : If you put no load(infinite resistance), it could run too fast and break. If you put a small load(high resistance), it's going to be harder to turn, because current is returning just a bit in the motor (Putting a bit of force the other way than the one it's turning). If you put a big load(low resistance), it's even harder to turn because a lot of current returns in the motor. If you short both leads of the motor(no resistance), it will just stop turning because the current that is sent out it is going in again. The magnetic fields are cancelling each others. The more current you pull out, the slower it will turn (lower resistance).

So, batteries are a "negative" load, but have a current limit they can deliver and that's why you can pull the motor the other way than the batteries are trying to do. When you do this, the current won't come out of the batteries but goes in instead.

If a car alternator would be connected directly to a couple of full batteries without a regulator, I think the engine would have an hard time. (Why powering defrost is slowing down an engine : Pulls more current, alternator harder to turn, engine goes slower) But the alternator works because it has a regulator and then it's output is limited. Small cranking radios and the like use much less power than the motor can deliver and that's why they're so easy to work with.

Noticed how much strength you need to turn a crank generator? There's a resistance in there. It would slow down your bike to recharge the batteries. That's why chargers are there. They limit the current. Going down an hill with your bike or breaking could be used to recharge batteries.(They would slow you down)

The faster you charge something with a generator, the more mechanical energy you need.

I figured that would be the case.

Then we can leave it up to the future. Think big! A self-sustaining energy source. wow.

Harvard? Berkeley? NASA?

Looks like this is right up our topic alley. Got an invite so am inviting you as well. Did the publisher or Tom Standage learn of our need for the Electric car?

Economist.com invites you to attend an editorial event on
Tuesday, June 27th at 9 a.m. PST/12:00 p.m. EST,
featuring
Economist Technology Quarterly Editor, Tom Standage, as he discusses
critical developments in the field of automobile hybridisation.

By attending this webcast, you can learn how hybrid "hackers" are
accessing the control software of hybrid petrol-electric cars such as
the Toyota Prius, effectively converting these hybrid cars to plug-in
cars capable of traveling longer distances in all-electric mode
post-conversion, improving the car's fuel economy, and reducing
greenhouse gas production in the process.

To learn more about how these hacked hybrids are influencing
everything from lithium-ion battery technology, to big car
manufacturers and America's power utilities, click here:

http://news.economist.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eqPi0KfPTK0Mo0DDZL0EZ
===============

Never had much knowledge about the elecric car, but in this discussion I have learned more than I bargained for and it*s very inspiring. We are really closer to silent clean wheeles than first imagined. TechSpot is da SPOT. TG

I thought I'd post a collection of links on the evolution of water/hydrogen/browns engines. One in particular is posted by a conspiracy theorist (noted by the statement "free energy") but the video itself looks fine......

http://www.keelynet.com/energy/garrett.htm - earliest known patent for water fuelled motor vehicle)

...onwards to more modern "back yard science"...

http://members.tripod.com/~anon99/water_engine/index2.html

http://www.spiritofmaat.com/archive/watercar/h20car2.htm ( - Was slow on my computer to load. Maybe just my ISP?)

http://media.putfile.com/Water-Fuel

http://www.veoh.com/videoDetails.html?v=e63521sqC4TXQ6 ( - Still watching this video. The movie is interesting but the distribution sucks.)

what the ratio for power transfer
in locamotive trains
diesel to AC high freq veri drives or standard PWM Dc sync drives
who needs speed
I would be happy to see gas cut by 80%
if you can get hyd from space I would use that , oops cost to much again to get and deliver
I wonder how much untapped power there is in the solar winds
maybe we can build a device to capture
of course thats outside the mag field of earth
so for now I'll stick to pedal power and shoe leather
maybe we should go back to the horse we may have to in a n'other 100 yrs or so

and knitting and knitting and knitting

CBC Radio One 8:30 am Friday July 14th/06 on **The Current**

Who Killed the Electric Car ?– Film Director
No gas, no oil, no tune-ups, no problems. It's the story of the EV-1, General Motor's ill-fated electric car.The EV-1 cruised the California roads in 1990, when 800 of the cars were leased to customers eager to drive a zero-emission automobile.
But despite rave reviews from the few who drove it, GM shut down the production line in 2003 and recalled every single one of them. Most of the fleet was shredded, crushing consumers' hopes that the electric car was here to stay.

========= TG
You could only lease the car, never buy it.. Every last car was re-claimed by GM.. Drivers loved it, yet GM claimed only 800 were in use and demand was too low to warrant production. I think they saw it would eclipse all other auto products and snuffed it out before it could be discovered by the public
========= TG.

One of its fans was filmmaker Chris Paine, who was once a proud driver of an EV-1. And now, the story of why General Motors decided to short-circuit the production of the electric car is what powers his documentary, appropriately titled, Who Killed the Electric Car? We reached Chris Paine by telephone in Los Angeles, California.

GM Response
While there may be plenty of blame to go around in Chris Paine's documentary, in the end, it was General Motors's decision to discontinue production of the EV-1 electric car.
To find out why, we contacted Dave Barthmuss. He's the manager for public policy, environment and energy for General Motors North America, and he was also in California.

http://www.cbc.ca/thecurrent/2006/200607/20060714.html

============ TG

EDIT: Here's the direct link to the stream (rtsp://media.cbc.ca/cbc.ca/thecurrent/media/200607/20060714thecurrent_sec1.rm) if anybody want's to listen... - Spike

Who killed the electric car?

You could only lease the car, never buy it.. Every last car was re-claimed by GM.. Drivers loved it, yet GM claimed only 800 were in use and demand was too low to warrant production.

I think they saw it would eclipse all other auto products and snuffed it out before it could be discovered by the public.

Excellent coverage , well beyond my humble ability can be enjoyed at;
The Huffington Post (www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/who-killed-the-electric-c_b_24348.html)

== TG

Just google **The HuffingtonPost** and scroll down some.

The HTML href= does not function as I am still a greenhorn so far.

= TG

Edit: Just use the [url] vB tag. as in the example below (ignoring the asterixes). Please also note that the edit button allows you to edit your posts instead of posting countless replies on the same subject. - Spike.

[*url=www.NotARealAddress.com]click here[/url*]

Why did GM kill the EV-1 Electric car?

Is it because engines with valves , bearings and seals that fail will no longer be required?

Is it because there will be no need for;

[1] Transmissions [electric drives are in the wheels]

[2] Power trains. [“]

[3] Cooling systems & radiators

[4] mufflers

[5] Catalytic converters

[6] Ignition and timing systems

[7] fuel pumps and water pumps

[8] Air filtering and oil pumps & filters

[9] Solid state fuel mixing

[10] and others you have in mind… no doubt.

Big Auto is selling us expensive hybrids for obvious reasons.
The Electric car is here and I want an EV-1 now!

=TG

:eek: omg... there is more spam in this thread than there is in a grocery store! :eek:

i do agree tony, whatever makes them less money in the end.. will not prevail :(

No, they'll just make crumy, plastic parts that fail after 20,001 miles, just after your 20,000 mile warranty. So you'll continue to buy thousands in parts every year.

That's the way to do it. Just make an awesome car, with crumy parts. Create the virus and infect people so they will come back and buy your cure.

Create the virus and infect people so they will come back and buy your cure.that's the "corporate american" way :haha:

I thought that was just the corporate pharmaceutical way. :p (or am I thinking of the FDA?)

you're right spike, it is... but it works the same way ;)

[OFF-TOPIC] the FDA doesn't create the viruses, they just make it illegal to patent (and in some cases even sell) a potential cure for one. it would seem that they only allow you to call it a drug if it causes more health problems than it treats :haha: [/OFF-TOPIC]

Finally found the photo of the Elegant GM EV-1 electric car on my site now:
http://TonyGuitar.blogspot.com

and a link to the movie and more shots. = TG

Tony, if you are so fired up about this alternative vechile being canned.

What are your opinions on nuclear energy then? If US regulations had not prevented the constructoin of nuke power plants then 2 things would happened. 1 is that there would be an asston less pollution because they were running nuke instead of coal for power. and 2, because of the less demand for oil, there might be somewhat less of a ****storm over in the middle east over oil.

Sounds like the EV-1 was the only electric car in production - or that there aren't any now.

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