It is currently Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:34 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 415 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Tue Jun 11, 2013 10:35 am 
Offline
Mad Monkey
Mad Monkey
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 10:28 pm
Posts: 5509
TheRulesLawyer wrote:
LL Cool Jabe wrote:
They should get a credit for not adding to the pollution.


They do. There was a huge tax credit for buying them in the first place.


Well, only up until the manufacturer hit an arbitrarily imposed limit of cars. Once they hit that number, that rebate goes away.

_________________
Image
Flavor 'poons! BURSTING with flavor!


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Tue Jun 11, 2013 10:37 am 
Offline
Mad Monkey
Mad Monkey
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 5:39 pm
Posts: 4740
Drunk247 wrote:
TheRulesLawyer wrote:
Just taxing specific types of car that way isn't the right way to do it.


When has government ever chosen the right way to do anything. They choose the path that will most benefit government, not the people the government is supposed to serve.


Heh. Well they never met a tax they didn't like. They're all about adding taxes instead of simply redoing the system. Its why we have the horrible horrible tax code we have now for the IRS instead of throwing it all out and starting anew. I guess the uncertainty about anything being revenue neutral paralyzes them and instead they bandaid everything.

_________________
Image


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Tue Jun 11, 2013 10:39 am 
Offline
Mad Monkey
Mad Monkey
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 5:39 pm
Posts: 4740
Carpetbagger wrote:
TheRulesLawyer wrote:
LL Cool Jabe wrote:
They should get a credit for not adding to the pollution.


They do. There was a huge tax credit for buying them in the first place.


Well, only up until the manufacturer hit an arbitrarily imposed limit of cars. Once they hit that number, that rebate goes away.


Right. They whole point was to encourage their growth. Looks like it worked. We shouldn't be granting them favorable status forever.

_________________
Image


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Tue Jun 11, 2013 11:02 am 
Offline
Mad Monkey
Mad Monkey
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 10:28 pm
Posts: 5509
TheRulesLawyer wrote:
Carpetbagger wrote:
TheRulesLawyer wrote:
LL Cool Jabe wrote:
They should get a credit for not adding to the pollution.


They do. There was a huge tax credit for buying them in the first place.


Well, only up until the manufacturer hit an arbitrarily imposed limit of cars. Once they hit that number, that rebate goes away.


Right. They whole point was to encourage their growth. Looks like it worked. We shouldn't be granting them favorable status forever.


You're right. But they're still far from the standard. JD power estimates that we won't hit 10% of cars on the road being hybrids (including bio fuel hyrbids and the like) until 2015. The credit phaseout limit i believe was 60,000 cars period.

_________________
Image
Flavor 'poons! BURSTING with flavor!


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Tue Jun 11, 2013 11:18 am 
Offline
Mad Monkey
Mad Monkey
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:19 am
Posts: 6532
IMHO bio fuel vehicles shouldn't be getting any incentives. It is one thing to build a car to run off of waste fry oil. It is entirely another to turn food to fuel. Sorry, I don't see that ending well. Ever. Then again the commodities market is such a mess already I suppose it couldn't hurt to keep throwing incentives at it until that bubble bursts.


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Tue Jun 11, 2013 11:34 am 
Offline
Mad Monkey
Mad Monkey
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 10:28 pm
Posts: 5509
Drunk247 wrote:
IMHO bio fuel vehicles shouldn't be getting any incentives. It is one thing to build a car to run off of waste fry oil. It is entirely another to turn food to fuel. Sorry, I don't see that ending well. Ever. Then again the commodities market is such a mess already I suppose it couldn't hurt to keep throwing incentives at it until that bubble bursts.


Come on man. Think of the starving cars.

_________________
Image
Flavor 'poons! BURSTING with flavor!


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Thu Jun 20, 2013 6:56 am 
Offline
Silverback
Silverback
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 10:39 pm
Posts: 19751
GM ranks #1 in Quality...yes it's true!

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2 ... ality.aspx

_________________
Image


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Fri Jun 21, 2013 10:47 pm 
Offline
Silverback
Silverback
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 10:39 pm
Posts: 19751
cool but a pain in the ass too

http://autos.yahoo.com/blogs/motoramic/ ... 43291.html

also

"high-precision nut runners"

_________________
Image


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 7:33 am 
Offline
Silverback
Silverback
 Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:49 pm
Posts: 18950
Location: The Danger Zone
Not sure why that posted twice, and with no warning from the forum post.


Last edited by Zanshin on Sat Jun 22, 2013 9:03 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 7:33 am 
Offline
Silverback
Silverback
 Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:49 pm
Posts: 18950
Location: The Danger Zone
Skull1 wrote:
GM ranks #1 in Quality...yes it's true!

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2 ... ality.aspx


I'm convinced you don't read the articles you post; only the headlines ;P

Quote:
According to the report, Porsche ranks the highest in the study, with GMC and Lexus filling out the top three brands.


So GM ranks SECOND. They are the top-ranked corporation (which is still great) not the #1 quality car manufacturer, according to that JD Power study. Misleading click bait headline is misleading.

Also,how is Porsche not considered a corporation???


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 8:28 am 
Offline
Mad Monkey
Mad Monkey
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 5:39 pm
Posts: 4740
A good point is worth making twice.

_________________
Image


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Sat Jun 22, 2013 7:33 pm 
Offline
Mad Monkey
Mad Monkey
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2006 1:43 pm
Posts: 8827
Zanshin wrote:
Skull1 wrote:
GM ranks #1 in Quality...yes it's true!

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2 ... ality.aspx


I'm convinced you don't read the articles you post; only the headlines ;P

Quote:
According to the report, Porsche ranks the highest in the study, with GMC and Lexus filling out the top three brands.


So GM ranks SECOND. They are the top-ranked corporation (which is still great) not the #1 quality car manufacturer, according to that JD Power study. Misleading click bait headline is misleading.

Also,how is Porsche not considered a corporation???


It's not his fault if the headline is misleading, no one actually reads the article anymore! I don't.


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 4:01 pm 
Offline
Silverback
Silverback
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 10:39 pm
Posts: 19751
glow in the dark Tron lamborghini aventador

http://autos.yahoo.com/blogs/motoramic/ ... 16166.html

Image

_________________
Image


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 4:05 pm 
Offline
Silverback
Silverback
 Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:49 pm
Posts: 18950
Location: The Danger Zone
And now after reading about its' owner I hate all of humanity.


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Sat Jul 13, 2013 9:48 am 
Offline
Mad Monkey
Mad Monkey
 Profile

Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:57 am
Posts: 1295
A little shout-out to my aerialist friends dubbed "circus performers" -specifically the one at 3:22- I was her rigger for many shows and literally had her life in my hands. Interesting bond between rigger and aerialist and we keep in touch.



Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Wed Jul 31, 2013 3:07 pm 
Offline
Alpha Monkey
Alpha Monkey
User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 3:16 pm
Posts: 7588
Location: Chicago / Aurora
Maybe this is Shin's next car? 80-100mi range electric, $42K, aaaaand it's a bimmer.

Image

http://adage.com/article/news/bmw-s-ele ... 1375843057


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Wed Jul 31, 2013 3:52 pm 
Offline
Mad Monkey
Mad Monkey
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 5:39 pm
Posts: 4740
MrDooo wrote:
Maybe this is Shin's next car? 80-100mi range electric, $42K, aaaaand it's a bimmer.


Yah, BMW. Plan on at least 5-6k of stuff that should be in the base price before you get out the doo. Also that 80-100 miles is more like 40-60 miles in Chicago winter. At least a luxury version is the right way to go. I can possibly see buying a BMW in that price range. A Ford Focus? Get real.

Edit-from another article
"U.S. sales start in April 2014, at a starting price of $42,350. That’s not counting destination charge, or a $7,500 federal tax credit. BMW of North America will also offer an onboard “range extender” to recharge the battery, a two-cylinder gasoline engine. That version starts at $45,200. The estimated range on battery power is 80 to 100 miles, BMW said, The range extender roughly doubles that, the company said."

That range extender option makes it very very interesting.

_________________
Image


Last edited by TheRulesLawyer on Wed Jul 31, 2013 4:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Wed Jul 31, 2013 3:56 pm 
Offline
Silverback
Silverback
 Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:49 pm
Posts: 18950
Location: The Danger Zone
TheRulesLawyer wrote:
MrDooo wrote:
Maybe this is Shin's next car? 80-100mi range electric, $42K, aaaaand it's a bimmer.


Yah, BMW. Plan on at least 5-6k of stuff that should be in the base price before you get out the doo. Also that 80-100 miles is more like 40-60 miles in Chicago winter. At least a luxury version is the right way to go. I can possibly see buying a BMW in that price range. A Ford Focus? Get real.


I'd buy it if the range was longer. I need to get at LEAST 80 on a charge so I can get to work and back in one day (and that's without driving anywhere else, just literally to and from work). The price/luxury thing seems right, just it needs to go farther.

I'm sure Tesla's Sedan or Economy model (probalby 2015 and 16) will be the first electric I wind up buying. The stock battery does 200mi/charge right now, and I'm sure the 220 or higher will be the stock one by then, and the price will be like 35k-20k.


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Wed Jul 31, 2013 4:09 pm 
Offline
Mad Monkey
Mad Monkey
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 5:39 pm
Posts: 4740
Zanshin wrote:
I'd buy it if the range was longer. I need to get at LEAST 80 on a charge so I can get to work and back in one day (and that's without driving anywhere else, just literally to and from work)


Check the edit- there is going to be a range extended model with a gas generator for an extra $3850. doubles range.

_________________
Image


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Wed Jul 31, 2013 4:25 pm 
Offline
Silverback
Silverback
 Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:49 pm
Posts: 18950
Location: The Danger Zone
TheRulesLawyer wrote:
Zanshin wrote:
I'd buy it if the range was longer. I need to get at LEAST 80 on a charge so I can get to work and back in one day (and that's without driving anywhere else, just literally to and from work)


Check the edit- there is going to be a range extended model with a gas generator for an extra $3850. doubles range.


Truth. But in the end you're spending over 50k (taxes, title, gas engine, whatever else you needed that wasn't base) for a short range car.

I don't have 50k to throw. If I was spending 50k I'd just go get an M3.


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 10:57 am 
Offline
Mad Monkey
Mad Monkey
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 5:39 pm
Posts: 4740
I think I found the solution to your commuting problems Zanshin.

_________________
Image


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 11:34 am 
Offline
Silverback
Silverback
 Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:49 pm
Posts: 18950
Location: The Danger Zone
There's a runway close enough to my house, but not one in the city to land at :(

It would be hilarious to never pay to use that runway (it's a semi-private runway for people who live at Aero Estates). Just drive up where the cars park, drive across the grass, and drop the wings and take off.


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 1:06 pm 
Offline
Mad Monkey
Mad Monkey
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2006 1:43 pm
Posts: 8827
Zanshin wrote:
There's a runway close enough to my house, but not one in the city to land at :(

It would be hilarious to never pay to use that runway (it's a semi-private runway for people who live at Aero Estates). Just drive up where the cars park, drive across the grass, and drop the wings and take off.


I've driven through that neighborhood, it fascinates me.


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 2:23 pm 
Offline
Silverback
Silverback
 Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:49 pm
Posts: 18950
Location: The Danger Zone
LL Cool Jabe wrote:
I've driven through that neighborhood, it fascinates me.


I'd love to live there (especially if I owned a plane). I LOVE how it looks from above. How a bunch of houses have airplane hangars right off the back. Like BRB HONEY GONNA RUN OVER TO THE NEXT STATE FOR A FEW MINUTES FOR SOME MILK.

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Aero+Est ... 19&iwloc=A


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Thu Aug 01, 2013 2:55 pm 
Offline
Mad Monkey
Mad Monkey
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2006 1:43 pm
Posts: 8827
Zanshin wrote:
LL Cool Jabe wrote:
I've driven through that neighborhood, it fascinates me.


I'd love to live there (especially if I owned a plane). I LOVE how it looks from above. How a bunch of houses have airplane hangars right off the back. Like BRB HONEY GONNA RUN OVER TO THE NEXT STATE FOR A FEW MINUTES FOR SOME MILK.

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Aero+Est ... 19&iwloc=A


Never thought to look at it on Google maps, wow.


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 10:59 am 
Offline
Mad Monkey
Mad Monkey
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2006 1:43 pm
Posts: 8827
Tesla Model S is the safest car ever:

http://www.teslamotors.com/about/press/ ... ver-tested

I guess you do get what you pay for, in this case.


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 11:51 am 
Offline
Alpha Monkey
Alpha Monkey
User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 3:16 pm
Posts: 7588
Location: Chicago / Aurora
I like these:

Quote:
The Model S was also substantially better in rollover risk, with the other top vehicles being approximately 50 percent worse. During testing at an independent facility, the Model S refused to turn over via the normal methods and special means were needed to induce the car to roll.


Quote:
Of note, during validation of Model S roof crush protection at an independent commercial facility, the testing machine failed at just above 4 g's. While the exact number is uncertain due to Model S breaking the testing machine, what this means is that at least four additional fully loaded Model S vehicles could be placed on top of an owner's car without the roof caving in.


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 12:12 pm 
Offline
Mad Monkey
Mad Monkey
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2006 1:43 pm
Posts: 8827
MrDooo wrote:
I like these:

Quote:
The Model S was also substantially better in rollover risk, with the other top vehicles being approximately 50 percent worse. During testing at an independent facility, the Model S refused to turn over via the normal methods and special means were needed to induce the car to roll.


Quote:
Of note, during validation of Model S roof crush protection at an independent commercial facility, the testing machine failed at just above 4 g's. While the exact number is uncertain due to Model S breaking the testing machine, what this means is that at least four additional fully loaded Model S vehicles could be placed on top of an owner's car without the roof caving in.


They need a new scale now. :)


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 1:01 pm 
Offline
Mad Monkey
Mad Monkey
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 10:28 pm
Posts: 5509
Quote:
The above results do not tell the full story. It is possible to game the regulatory testing score to some degree by strengthening a car at the exact locations used by the regulatory testing machines. After verifying through internal testing that the Model S would achieve a NHTSA 5-star rating, Tesla then analyzed the Model S to determine the weakest points in the car and retested at those locations until the car achieved 5 stars no matter how the test equipment was configured.


Kinda like how we teach kids to standardized testing? Hopefully that works out a little better for cars than it does for kids.

_________________
Image
Flavor 'poons! BURSTING with flavor!


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 1:05 pm 
Offline
Silverback
Silverback
 Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:49 pm
Posts: 18950
Location: The Danger Zone
The top rollover resistance one is probably because the battery is under the car. All the weight is hung below the wheel mounts.


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 7:01 am 
Offline
Mad Monkey
Mad Monkey
 Profile

Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 10:28 pm
Posts: 5509
Zanshin wrote:
The top rollover resistance one is probably because the battery is under the car. All the weight is hung below the wheel mounts.



Oh I don't doubt it's a super safe car. I just find it kind of hilarious that Tesla posted a press article on their own site that out and out said they gamed the system.

_________________
Image
Flavor 'poons! BURSTING with flavor!


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 7:54 am 
Offline
Alpha Monkey
Alpha Monkey
User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 3:16 pm
Posts: 7588
Location: Chicago / Aurora
Carpetbagger wrote:
Zanshin wrote:
The top rollover resistance one is probably because the battery is under the car. All the weight is hung below the wheel mounts.



Oh I don't doubt it's a super safe car. I just find it kind of hilarious that Tesla posted a press article on their own site that out and out said they gamed the system.


It's a glowing review on their own site, but they wrote how they did the opposite. I think it was more of a statement about what other car manufacturers do to get high ratings.

Quote:
It is possible to game the regulatory testing score to some degree by strengthening a car at the exact locations used by the regulatory testing machines. After verifying through internal testing that the Model S would achieve a NHTSA 5-star rating, Tesla then analyzed the Model S to determine the weakest points in the car and retested at those locations until the car achieved 5 stars no matter how the test equipment was configured.


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 9:54 am 
Offline
Silverback
Silverback
 Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:49 pm
Posts: 18950
Location: The Danger Zone
Yeah, sounds like they anti-gamed the system.


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:17 pm 
Offline
Mad Monkey
Mad Monkey
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2006 1:43 pm
Posts: 8827
Zanshin wrote:
Yeah, sounds like they anti-gamed the system.

:thumbup:


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Tue Aug 26, 2014 12:35 pm 
Offline
Silverback
Silverback
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 10:39 pm
Posts: 19751
Had no idea lol

http://jalopnik.com/is-that-really-a-sn ... 1626686519

_________________
Image


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Wed Oct 01, 2014 9:16 pm 
Offline
Silverback
Silverback
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 10:39 pm
Posts: 19751
Lamborghini hybrid 897 hp

http://blog.caranddriver.com/its-its-be ... -supercar/

_________________
Image


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 1:27 pm 
Offline
Silverback
Silverback
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 10:39 pm
Posts: 19751
The limited edition Ferrari f60 America is bad ass

http://www.carbodydesign.com/2014/10/fe ... 60america/

_________________
Image


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Mon Oct 13, 2014 3:57 pm 
Offline
Silverback
Silverback
 Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:49 pm
Posts: 18950
Location: The Danger Zone
Skull1 wrote:
The limited edition Ferrari f60 America is bad ass

http://www.carbodydesign.com/2014/10/fe ... 60america/


FUCK. I want one, I can't have one, because I'm not a hobillionaire and they're only making 10 :(


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Mon Nov 03, 2014 4:55 pm 
Offline
Alpha Monkey
Alpha Monkey
User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 3:16 pm
Posts: 7588
Location: Chicago / Aurora
Chevy Volt is getting redesigned for 2016. They've sold about 70K of the current design.

http://www.autonews.com/article/2014110 ... -with-volt

Zanshin wrote:
MrDooo wrote:
In this scenario I don't care about:
a) price of gas
b) chevy's target
c) ultimate fate of the volt

My goals:
a) see the car do better than what you're predicting
b) win cash/prize paid for by you

:D


I'm predicting it will fall short of their projected 45,000 units. So if you want to bet, my number is 44,999 sold or less.

Dollar amount = $10.00

However, this is a lose-lose situation for you, because now Chevy has once again changed their target:

"Out of the 2012 production, General Motors expected to produce 10,000 Amperas for sale in Europe, 6,000 destined for Opel and 4,000 for Vauxhall in the UK. In addition, 2,000 Volts will be made available for the region.[111] By early 2012 GM abandoned its sales target to deliver 45,000 Volt in the U.S and instead announced that production in 2012 will depend on demand.[112][113] By March 2012 the Volt plant has a global production capacity of 60,000 vehicles per year.[113]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_ ... _and_sales

Like, GM has already "abandoned its sales target to deliver 45,000 Volts." So you're now betting against Chevy who don't even have faith it'll hit their 45k mark.


So does this mean you owe me 10 bucks? :D

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_ ... _and_sales


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Mon Nov 03, 2014 5:34 pm 
Offline
Silverback
Silverback
 Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:49 pm
Posts: 18950
Location: The Danger Zone
Uh, Dooo? Thanks for reminding me of this bet. The bet was based on 2012 sales projections, which by every indication they didn't come anywhere near hitting.
They haven't even sold 45k units in ANY calendar year they've reported sales.

So you can mail me the $10 if you really want to, but since I forgot about this bet and didn't come knocking for the money (and to be 100% fair we never shook on it), I'm totally willing to let this slide.

:8)


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Mon Nov 03, 2014 7:06 pm 
Offline
Silverback
Silverback
 Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:49 pm
Posts: 18950
Location: The Danger Zone
Zanshin wrote:
Uh, Dooo? Thanks for reminding me of this bet. The bet was based on 2012 sales projections, which by every indication they didn't come anywhere near hitting.
They haven't even sold 45k units in ANY calendar year they've reported sales.

So you can mail me the $10 if you really want to, but since I forgot about this bet and didn't come knocking for the money (and to be 100% fair we never shook on it), I'm totally willing to let this slide.

:8)


To frame this bet properly, here are the original terms as stated by you, Mr. Dooo:

viewtopic.php?p=81395#p81395

MrDooo wrote:
I see gas prices going over $5 very soon, and we'll see "back down" as the $4 we have right now.

Care to wager on your guess of 27,468 sold by 12/31/12? I'll concede anything under 30k sold.


I then agreed to a slightly stricter term of the bet, which I stand by, because I was merely trying to point out that CHEVY couldn't hit their own numbers, by saying I'll go right up to Chevy's stated # they'd ship by end of 2012, which was 45k units. If they shipped just ONE unit less (44,999), I win. Any over that number and you (really Chevy) wins.

According to the Wikipedia article you linked, they produced (not sold, or even shipped, just built) exactly 30,827 in 2012, which isn't even the model year (2013), which was a slightly lower number of units AT 28,367.

If they're bragging that they sold 70k total units of Volts so far, and they shipped 30k in 2012, that means numbers have come down (if they produced 30k in 2012, and another 18k between 2010-2011, the car is getting less popular. Just splitting the difference means they only shipped/sold roughly 16k/year between 2012 and today.

I would also be remiss (i.e. NOT STEVE) if I didn't also point out how close I came to actually predicting the number of units they'd ship in 2012, coming in under the actual number by 3.2%. If this was Let's Make a Deal, I would have just won A NEW CARRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :D


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Mon Nov 03, 2014 8:12 pm 
Offline
Alpha Monkey
Alpha Monkey
User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 3:16 pm
Posts: 7588
Location: Chicago / Aurora
Eh, whatev. 1st 2 rounds are on me next Foundry Night then!

In any case the car lives on for another few at least! Shocked?


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Mon Nov 03, 2014 9:46 pm 
Offline
Silverback
Silverback
 Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:49 pm
Posts: 18950
Location: The Danger Zone
MrDooo wrote:
Eh, whatev. 1st 2 rounds are on me next Foundry Night then!

In any case the car lives on for another few at least! Shocked?


Yay awesome! I'd love that! Wooooo :)

I'm not shocked that Chevy (really any automaker) is continuing to bet on/push electronic alternatives. I AM shocked that Chevy is "doubling down" on the Volt. It is really plain and unexciting, and I feel like the "promise" of longer range only while in Econ mode isn't really pushing any envelopes.

Tesla is going to have the X model out before this, and potentially the $35k sedan around the same time as Volt 2 (did the article say 2016? 2017? I don't remember). When that happens, Tesla will be eating all lunches.


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Thu Nov 20, 2014 2:29 pm 
Offline
Alpha Monkey
Alpha Monkey
User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 3:16 pm
Posts: 7588
Location: Chicago / Aurora
Toyota Mirai coming next year in Cali for $57,500. It ain't fast, but I'd go for this over the Tesla electric sedan:

Image

Ideally our Prius lasts until we have hydrogen fill stations in the midwest. I'd love to power my house with my car.


http://www.forbes.com/sites/joannmuller ... red-mirai/


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Thu Nov 20, 2014 9:39 pm 
Offline
Silverback
Silverback
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 10:39 pm
Posts: 19751
One word....fugly

It's like they took 4 different designers and isolated them, had them design a piece of a car, then took the pieces and slapped them together...

_________________
Image


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Mon Nov 24, 2014 1:33 am 
Offline
Silverback
Silverback
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 10:39 pm
Posts: 19751
A Lamborghini powered Audi s8 for the price of a used minivan

http://carbuying.jalopnik.com/you-can-b ... 830769/all

_________________
Image


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Mon Dec 08, 2014 8:16 pm 
Offline
Silverback
Silverback
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 10:39 pm
Posts: 19751
This an interesting series of articles (links to all the stories near the bottom of this article) about what it's like for an ordinary guy to own a Ferrari for a year

http://jalopnik.com/owning-a-ferrari-fo ... 1668355120

_________________
Image


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Mon Jan 12, 2015 2:59 pm 
Offline
Silverback
Silverback
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 10:39 pm
Posts: 19751
The all new ford gt

http://jalopnik.com/ford-gt-this-is-it-1678893649

600hp 3.5 ltr economist v6

Image

_________________
Image


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Mon Jan 12, 2015 4:23 pm 
Offline
Silverback
Silverback
 Profile

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 9:49 pm
Posts: 18950
Location: The Danger Zone
Oh my god. It definitely got a more modern update. I like it, but not as much as the classic GT.


Top
 


 Post subject: Re: CAR STUFF
PostPosted: Mon Jan 12, 2015 7:21 pm 
Offline
Silverback
Silverback
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 10:39 pm
Posts: 19751
Yeah the classic is better....and an econo v6? It may be powerful but it can't sound as cool as a v 8/10/12

_________________
Image


Top
 


Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 415 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

Home

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Board index » Mad Monkey Public Forums » Jibberish
All times are UTC - 6 hours   
Overrun by Effin Monkeys