SM_ATL's Carrera S Journal
Registered User
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 2,806
From: Dallas
Rep Power: 176
Serge:
Couldn't agree more! Isn't that amazing? Yep, Porsche has done a good job of meeting emissions and mileage requirements. I'm convinced after the car is fully broken in we'll be getting mid-thirties on the highway; quite a feat for a car that does 0-60 in 4+ seconds, and makes corners at 1.5g.
ChuckJ
PS I hope that was a loan and that it will be paid back (not betting on that one)
Couldn't agree more! Isn't that amazing? Yep, Porsche has done a good job of meeting emissions and mileage requirements. I'm convinced after the car is fully broken in we'll be getting mid-thirties on the highway; quite a feat for a car that does 0-60 in 4+ seconds, and makes corners at 1.5g.
ChuckJ
PS I hope that was a loan and that it will be paid back (not betting on that one)
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 558
From: Columbia Ca. JSA
Rep Power: 48
Top gear did another one with a Prius driving flat out on their track followed by an BMW 5 series. They burned the same fuel.
The newer cars are improving all the time and vehicles will evolve to the best solution if the just let the consumers cast their vote with their wallets.
I got an 2012 A8 for my wife and it gets 20 going back and forth to the store and average about 26 on a trip. I checked it in a no wind condition at 80 and it was getting 34.
This electric $hit is kind of silly as electricity is not 0 emisions and not cost effective.
The newer cars are improving all the time and vehicles will evolve to the best solution if the just let the consumers cast their vote with their wallets.
I got an 2012 A8 for my wife and it gets 20 going back and forth to the store and average about 26 on a trip. I checked it in a no wind condition at 80 and it was getting 34.
This electric $hit is kind of silly as electricity is not 0 emisions and not cost effective.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 558
From: Columbia Ca. JSA
Rep Power: 48
Eco-run
I never posted the attached pic showing the result of an 'eco-run' with the 991. I could only focus for half an hour and had to go back to my bad habits after that (sport mode, PDK in manual, etc.).
34 mpg, traveling at 68mph is not bad at all IMO.
I thought about this while reading an article about the Fisker Karma in 'Road & Track'. I may going a bit off topic in a 991 forum, but what I read got me totally mad and irate.
Here are a few quotes: "The EPA uses a complicated mpg-equivalent formula for fuel use at electrical powerplants, and that gives the car an official rating of 54 mpg for the first 33 miles of range. After that, it drops to 20 mpg combined city/highway". "Fisker got a federal loan of $529 million to develop and build their cars (only $169 million used so far on the Karma)". "Fisker has sold just under 1000 of these cars so far". "So who is the Karma built for? Well, someone who has more than $100K to spend and wants a handsome high-performance 4-seat sports car that draws a crowd of curious car buffs wherever it goes, an unexpected sight that’s a little outside the norm, visually and technically."
My personal interpretation of this is that the government has committed half a billion $ of taxpayer's money to build a luxury car that will have no positive impact on the environment (you will have a very good mpg if you drive very few miles, meaning that you would not have emitted much CO2 anyhow. If you drive over long distance, many cars have a much better mileage than the Fisker). If $169m have been used to make the Karma and that they only sold 1,000 of them for about $100k per car, it means that taxpayers are subsidizing each Karma up to $69k (assuming Fisker pays back its debt...)
This whole eco-chic scam and hijacking of Federal taxes make me sick. I will not have an ounce of shame when I burn 8 mpg on the track, since I have a better mileage than a Karma after 33 miles on my way back
I never posted the attached pic showing the result of an 'eco-run' with the 991. I could only focus for half an hour and had to go back to my bad habits after that (sport mode, PDK in manual, etc.).
34 mpg, traveling at 68mph is not bad at all IMO.
I thought about this while reading an article about the Fisker Karma in 'Road & Track'. I may going a bit off topic in a 991 forum, but what I read got me totally mad and irate.
Here are a few quotes: "The EPA uses a complicated mpg-equivalent formula for fuel use at electrical powerplants, and that gives the car an official rating of 54 mpg for the first 33 miles of range. After that, it drops to 20 mpg combined city/highway". "Fisker got a federal loan of $529 million to develop and build their cars (only $169 million used so far on the Karma)". "Fisker has sold just under 1000 of these cars so far". "So who is the Karma built for? Well, someone who has more than $100K to spend and wants a handsome high-performance 4-seat sports car that draws a crowd of curious car buffs wherever it goes, an unexpected sight that’s a little outside the norm, visually and technically."
My personal interpretation of this is that the government has committed half a billion $ of taxpayer's money to build a luxury car that will have no positive impact on the environment (you will have a very good mpg if you drive very few miles, meaning that you would not have emitted much CO2 anyhow. If you drive over long distance, many cars have a much better mileage than the Fisker). If $169m have been used to make the Karma and that they only sold 1,000 of them for about $100k per car, it means that taxpayers are subsidizing each Karma up to $69k (assuming Fisker pays back its debt...)
This whole eco-chic scam and hijacking of Federal taxes make me sick. I will not have an ounce of shame when I burn 8 mpg on the track, since I have a better mileage than a Karma after 33 miles on my way back
You may note that the battery manufacturer also had a similar investment by us and they already went **** up. I wish they would let me make my own investments as they tend to pay off.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,154
Rep Power: 198
Current best solutions for quick and easy development: Diesel and natural gas . After 2017, add hydrogen as a genuine option. In the meantime, I have not found anything wrong with my 996TT. There won't be a space in my garage for a Prius or anything that looks or sounds like a hair dryer or a vacuum cleaner.
Registered User
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 2,806
From: Dallas
Rep Power: 176
"No place for that in my garage"
I was just thinking about that. My first 356 back in '67 ('63 normal) was not as quick to 60 as a 2012 Prius and I thought it was okay. Now we think the 3.4 that makes it in 4 seconds needs more torque!
ChuckJ
I was just thinking about that. My first 356 back in '67 ('63 normal) was not as quick to 60 as a 2012 Prius and I thought it was okay. Now we think the 3.4 that makes it in 4 seconds needs more torque!
ChuckJ
Sure the Prius is not a vacuum cleaner because of performance numbers but because it is stupid value for money and marginal environmental impact, not to mention the suppository looks
I'd rather go in a heartbeat for a TDI engine if I had concerns about mpg's.
Still I'd take your 356 above any of this!!!!
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,154
Rep Power: 198
Your 356 is nowhere near as boring as a Prius
Sure the Prius is not a vacuum cleaner because of performance numbers but because it is stupid value for money and marginal environmental impact, not to mention the suppository looks
I'd rather go in a heartbeat for a TDI engine if I had concerns about mpg's.
Still I'd take your 356 above any of this!!!!
Sure the Prius is not a vacuum cleaner because of performance numbers but because it is stupid value for money and marginal environmental impact, not to mention the suppository looks
I'd rather go in a heartbeat for a TDI engine if I had concerns about mpg's.
Still I'd take your 356 above any of this!!!!
Have had a Jetta and 2 Passat TDI myself in when I was Europe. Liked the cars a lot: lots of torque and record mileage...
Registered User
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 2,806
From: Dallas
Rep Power: 176
Your 356 is nowhere near as boring as a Prius
Sure the Prius is not a vacuum cleaner because of performance numbers but because it is stupid value for money and marginal environmental impact, not to mention the suppository looks
I'd rather go in a heartbeat for a TDI engine if I had concerns about mpg's.
Still I'd take your 356 above any of this!!!!
Sure the Prius is not a vacuum cleaner because of performance numbers but because it is stupid value for money and marginal environmental impact, not to mention the suppository looks
I'd rather go in a heartbeat for a TDI engine if I had concerns about mpg's.
Still I'd take your 356 above any of this!!!!
ChuckJ
http://www.flickr.com/photos/60293300@N06/7785458892/
Replacement car
Left the car at Freed Performance to install 6 point harnesses + some maintenance today and rented a replacement 'car' from the Enterprise location around the corner. Turned out they were almost sold out, so here's my ride for the day:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/60293300@N06/7788102358/
Reminds me of another thread about replacement cars
Left the car at Freed Performance to install 6 point harnesses + some maintenance today and rented a replacement 'car' from the Enterprise location around the corner. Turned out they were almost sold out, so here's my ride for the day:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/60293300@N06/7788102358/
Reminds me of another thread about replacement cars