Don White wrote:
Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:

On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 13:42:05 -0500, "Bert Robbins"
wrote:


"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...

On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 15:11:10 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


Ford's development of a hybrid SUV is an attempt to control
behavior? Please
explain this conclusion. They'll still be selling the "regular"
kind, for
people who actually need a truck-style power train, but sales of
those will
be reduced to levels they were at 30 years ago, when they were mostly
purchased by people who needed the 4WD and the gear ratio.

Don't get mired in that paragraph. Explain your conclusion.


I was reading in the Times this morning about hybrids and the really
curious part is that they aren't that much more "efficient" than a
regular car - maybe a mpg or two at most.

Emissions are about the same.


However the cost of operation of a hybrid is greater than the cost of
a fuel only vehicle. The thing people forget is that the batteries
only last so long and then then have to be replaced and the old
batteries need to be disposed of properly.

People make comments about my needing to buy a more fuel efficient
vehicle, I currently drive an 2001 F150 SuperCrew with a 5.4L V8 gas
sucking engine. I pay for insurance, fuel and maintenance. I have no
monthly payment which costs me about $350 per month. There is no way
the total cost of ownership of a new vehicle is going to cost less.



I have an 2000 F-250 Super Duty diesel with the 7.3 liter engine and
it's more efficient over time, cost me less in fuel, than the previous
F-350 gas pickup.


These little diesel cars are getting popular around here.
(regular self service gas = $1.07 per liter)
I see England has 4 door versions. All we need is a little SUV with a
1.5 liter diesel engine.

oopps...for got the link
http://www.thesmart.ca/index.cfm?ID=4720

On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 20:42:08 +0000, Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:


It ain't gonna happen with gas/electric. It will happen when they develop
small diesel/electric.

Gas isn't the way to go.

I'm not sure. Different crudes refine differently. I'm not sure if it is
due to demand, but I've read that there is more gallons of gas in a barrel
of oil, than diesel. We really should be talking in miles per barrel, not
gallons, and I don't know what the breakdown is.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
. ..

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 15:11:10 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


Ford's development of a hybrid SUV is an attempt to control behavior?
Please
explain this conclusion. They'll still be selling the "regular" kind,
for
people who actually need a truck-style power train, but sales of those
will
be reduced to levels they were at 30 years ago, when they were mostly
purchased by people who needed the 4WD and the gear ratio.

Don't get mired in that paragraph. Explain your conclusion.

I was reading in the Times this morning about hybrids and the really
curious part is that they aren't that much more "efficient" than a
regular car - maybe a mpg or two at most.

Emissions are about the same.

So far....but they will address the need. It's obvious that they see it,
or they wouldn't be spending money trying to build something better. It
has to be obvious to anyone but a total idiot that the vast majority of
SUVs are NOT being purchased by people who tow things or clamber over
bolders and drive through streams for fun. Luggage space and driving in
snow are two reasons which hold no water, so we can safely eliminate
those.

Some of us don't fit into regular cars. My legs and torso are long most
of tyical sedans I can't fit into. Therefore, I buy vehicles where I can
comfortably sit in the drivers seat and operate the vehicle without
contorting my body.

I'm not talking about changes to the size of the driver's seat, or the SUV
in general. According to an interview with a Ford representative on the
radio news a month ago, neither are they. Their goal is to maintain some
of what they know to be the main selling points for many buyers: Size.

What they ARE trying to do is two things: Build a hybrid SUV (what's under
the hood, in other words), and make major changes to the drive train.
Besides aerodynamics, those are obviously the two major detractors from
better gas mileage. The majority of non-sports-oriented buyers have no
need for 4WD or towing capability.

You keep making judgments about the appropriateness of vehicles for people,
why? Last time I checked I had the freedom to purchase any vehicle I want.
If I want a big gas sucking pig of a vehicle what business is it of yours?
It is my money?

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Bert Robbins" wrote in message
. ..

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 15:11:10 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


Ford's development of a hybrid SUV is an attempt to control behavior?
Please
explain this conclusion. They'll still be selling the "regular" kind,
for
people who actually need a truck-style power train, but sales of those
will
be reduced to levels they were at 30 years ago, when they were mostly
purchased by people who needed the 4WD and the gear ratio.

Don't get mired in that paragraph. Explain your conclusion.

I was reading in the Times this morning about hybrids and the really
curious part is that they aren't that much more "efficient" than a
regular car - maybe a mpg or two at most.

Emissions are about the same.

So far....but they will address the need. It's obvious that they see
it, or they wouldn't be spending money trying to build something
better. It has to be obvious to anyone but a total idiot that the vast
majority of SUVs are NOT being purchased by people who tow things or
clamber over bolders and drive through streams for fun. Luggage space
and driving in snow are two reasons which hold no water, so we can
safely eliminate those.

Some of us don't fit into regular cars. My legs and torso are long most
of tyical sedans I can't fit into. Therefore, I buy vehicles where I can
comfortably sit in the drivers seat and operate the vehicle without
contorting my body.

I'm not talking about changes to the size of the driver's seat, or the
SUV in general. According to an interview with a Ford representative on
the radio news a month ago, neither are they. Their goal is to maintain
some of what they know to be the main selling points for many buyers:
Size.

What they ARE trying to do is two things: Build a hybrid SUV (what's
under the hood, in other words), and make major changes to the drive
train. Besides aerodynamics, those are obviously the two major detractors
from better gas mileage. The majority of non-sports-oriented buyers have
no need for 4WD or towing capability.

You keep making judgments about the appropriateness of vehicles for
people, why? Last time I checked I had the freedom to purchase any vehicle
I want. If I want a big gas sucking pig of a vehicle what business is it
of yours? It is my money?

You keep responding this way. Why? Nobody except you has suggested that when
Ford produces a leaner SUV, you will be unable to buy the original variety.
If you disagree, please provide quotes or other evidence of where I've said
this. I suspect you have problems when I say most people don't need the
truck capabilities, but in fact, it is true.

On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 22:10:02 +0000, Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:

About twice as much gas in a barrel of crude as diesel.

Yeah, but is that due to the demand, or the physical properties of a
barrel of oil? I know that home heating oil is quite close to diesel, but
is it included in the number?


Which makes sense.

Just shooting off an opinion, diesel/electric has got to be a better
method than gas - just makes sense to me.

I wouldn't argue with that, but the point would be to maximize the use of
each barrel, be it gas or diesel. By the by, there are several
diesel/electric hybrids starting to appear. It seems one of the main
pros, is emissions, especially with the low sulfur being mandated in
October.


Of course, I can't prove that, but still... :)

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 17:39:29 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
. ..
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 15:11:10 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


Ford's development of a hybrid SUV is an attempt to control behavior?
Please
explain this conclusion. They'll still be selling the "regular" kind,
for
people who actually need a truck-style power train, but sales of those
will
be reduced to levels they were at 30 years ago, when they were mostly
purchased by people who needed the 4WD and the gear ratio.

Don't get mired in that paragraph. Explain your conclusion.

I was reading in the Times this morning about hybrids and the really
curious part is that they aren't that much more "efficient" than a
regular car - maybe a mpg or two at most.

Emissions are about the same.

So far....but they will address the need. It's obvious that they see it,
or
they wouldn't be spending money trying to build something better. It has
to
be obvious to anyone but a total idiot that the vast majority of SUVs are
NOT being purchased by people who tow things or clamber over bolders and
drive through streams for fun. Luggage space and driving in snow are two
reasons which hold no water, so we can safely eliminate those.

It ain't gonna happen with gas/electric. It will happen when they
develop small diesel/electric.

Gas isn't the way to go.

Maybe, but it will happen.

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 17:33:58 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 22:10:02 +0000, Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:

About twice as much gas in a barrel of crude as diesel.

Yeah, but is that due to the demand, or the physical properties of a
barrel of oil? I know that home heating oil is quite close to diesel, but
is it included in the number?

#2 and diesel are identical. The difference is in the lubricant
additives in diesel. #2/diesel are considered a "distillate" in
commodity trading and hold pretty close to each other in wholesale
pricing. The difference is in additives and how much kerosene is
added to the diesel. #2 is pretty much as it comes out of the stack.

It's about two to one, gas/diesel in a barrel of oil.

An interesting side note - there is more product in a barrel of oil
than there is parent stock. A normal "barrel" is 42 gallons, but it
produces 44.5 gallons of product.

Something doesn't make sense. Diesel is very popular in most of Europe
because gas prices are so high.
But if there is double the amount of gasoline yield in a barrel of crude
than diesel, why is diesel cheaper in Europe and often less than premium gas
here in the US?

Oh ..... before I forget. Remember our discussion on diesel nozzles vs gas
nozzles? I stopped at a truck fueling place in Iowa for fuel. They almost
laughed at me, but let me fill up with a warning to be careful. The pump
was capable of delivering fuel at 63 (sixty-three) gallons per min.! I
squeezed that sucker very, very carefully.

RCE

RCE wrote:

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...

On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 17:33:58 -0500, thunder
wrote:


On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 22:10:02 +0000, Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:


About twice as much gas in a barrel of crude as diesel.

Yeah, but is that due to the demand, or the physical properties of a
barrel of oil? I know that home heating oil is quite close to diesel, but
is it included in the number?

#2 and diesel are identical. The difference is in the lubricant
additives in diesel. #2/diesel are considered a "distillate" in
commodity trading and hold pretty close to each other in wholesale
pricing. The difference is in additives and how much kerosene is
added to the diesel. #2 is pretty much as it comes out of the stack.

It's about two to one, gas/diesel in a barrel of oil.

An interesting side note - there is more product in a barrel of oil
than there is parent stock. A normal "barrel" is 42 gallons, but it
produces 44.5 gallons of product.


Something doesn't make sense. Diesel is very popular in most of Europe
because gas prices are so high.
But if there is double the amount of gasoline yield in a barrel of crude
than diesel, why is diesel cheaper in Europe and often less than premium gas
here in the US?

RCE

I didn't know that, but I remember when diesel was cheaper than
*regular* unleaded. After the hurricanes, it was higher than premium
and it's now between mid-grade and premium here.

Dan

On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 20:43:47 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

I have an 2000 F-250 Super Duty diesel with the 7.3 liter engine and
it's more efficient over time, cost me less in fuel, than the previous
F-350 gas pickup.

There are more BTUs in a gallon of diesel than a gallon of gasoline,
plus the combustion process for diesel is more efficient, primaily
because of the higher compression ratio. Taken as a whole diesel is
about twice as efficient at producing energy for a given volume of
fuel.

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 20:43:47 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

I have an 2000 F-250 Super Duty diesel with the 7.3 liter engine and
it's more efficient over time, cost me less in fuel, than the previous
F-350 gas pickup.

There are more BTUs in a gallon of diesel than a gallon of gasoline,
plus the combustion process for diesel is more efficient, primaily
because of the higher compression ratio. Taken as a whole diesel is
about twice as efficient at producing energy for a given volume of
fuel.


It is now, but 2007 emissions requirements is going to totally re-vamp
diesels. I don't know if the new emission requirements affect small
pickups, (or boats), but for the trucking industry this is a big deal as
power and mileage are expected to suffer.

They are adding expensive scrubbers to the exhaust that have to be cleaned
and/or replaced regularly and the engines are being detuned to produce fewer
particle emissions. I read recently that the emission changes to the
requirements for diesels is as far-reaching and hard-hitting as the '72
emission changes for gas engines were.

Trucking companies are replacing aging trucks with the 2006 models as
quickly as they can.

RCE