Can someone please explain how this technology existed 31 years ago & where’d it go?

[freebeard]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

I won't click on links unless there's some explanation of what it is.

There is this:

48:14: “quote” - Carl Sagan 2/9/90.

I intend to watch it because it's Carl Sagan when I have the time.

I don't know about adolescent males today, but in my day cars were divided into rods and customs.

Carl Sagan’s 4 step call to action:

1. Why not cars that get 70mpg, instead of 25.
....
2. Alternative energy like solar & wind.

3. Reforestation on a grand scale.

4. Helping to bring the billion poorest people on the planet to self sufficiency, which is the key step in curbing world population growth.

These are worth doing even if Climate Change has been deprecated.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Had the American customers engaged in a more austere buying pattern in the immediate aftermath of WWII like most Europeans did, I'm sure there would be more opportunities for automakers to sell smaller and more fuel-efficient models there and for extension in Canada and Mexico.

[Autobahnschleicher]

Well, I'm Gen Z and the record fuel economy I got with my first car was 3,5L/100 km or nearly 70 mpg with a small 3-cylinder car.
Granted, it had less than 70 PS, it litteraly had 20Nm more torque in the lugnuts than in the engine and no luxury whatsoever besides a ****ty radio.

[redpoint5]

Ah, I missed the reference to a timestamp and thought it was just a quote of Sagan, not something from the video. I'll watch a Sagan video.

The 4 points above are all well underway; Carl simply left too soon. I expect item #2 will be replaced by nuclear though.


...and womens consumer behavior is at least as vain as mens. I dated a girl who traded in her 2008 Chevy Aveo for a 2009 because she liked the color better and "could afford it" on her nanny paycheck.

[oil pan 4]

That's an easy answer. The it's the government.
Oh and you're not going to get anywhere near 100mpg in a gasoline burner in anything that resembles a car with modern features and traveling at interstate speeds.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by Autobahnschleicher

Well, I'm Gen Z and the record fuel economy I got with my first car was 3,5L/100 km or nearly 70 mpg with a small 3-cylinder car.

What car was that?

Granted, it had less than 70 PS, it litteraly had 20Nm more torque in the lugnuts than in the engine

Sometimes when I look at the power and torque ratings of newer 1.0L engines in my country, and got remembering the days they felt more underpowered than now, it does surprise me how the average Joe is fooled into believing power to be always more important than torque.

[freebeard]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

...in anything that resembles a car with modern features...

There's your problem.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by freebeard

There's your problem.

Convincing the average redneck, or even a self-proclaimed "cosmopolitan" New Yorker, into replacing a more traditional 4-wheeler car or truck with a tricycle is not easy. Some may keep an eye on them as a funny or "exotic" deal, but in the end they may take a more "entitled" approach while claiming a trike seems more suitable to Bangkok or some beach resort.

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by freebeard

There's your problem.

Now convince people to buy that instead of an suv.

[Galvatron1]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

..,you're not going to get anywhere near 100mpg in a gasoline burner in anything that resembles a car with modern features and traveling at interstate speeds.

Well, at least this resembles a car (although some may disagree), but it does have more cargo capacity than almost all, if not all, vehicles of this size & efficiency.

Not sure what the max fuel efficiency is at interstate speed.

If you were to travel at the most fuel efficient legal speed of interstate travel, what would you guess the mpg to be?

Anyone here have a Prius Eco, that can verify their personal best interstate MPG in real world conditions? Thanks!