• Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral

Electric cars...

Would you buy an electric car?

  • No thank you

  • Sign me up!

  • If I must

  • I don't drive, thus I really don't care anyway

  • I am interested, but until there is more reliable technology for long highway trips


Results are only viewable after voting.
We have lots of lithium here in Ontario. need to open up new mines. I'll have to ask my sister. a geologist or her husband a mining engineer. China tried buying mining properties.
Most of the solar panel production which was once held by the USA is now mostly made in China ;)
 
I agree, but you have to consider that aviation fuel also has a different vapor pressure level that standard road gasoline.
We now run 100 octane low lead fuel in all of them, but the tetraethyl lead in the fuel is a necessary component of the valve train for stem lubrication in air cooled engines.
The other downside to the LS in an aircraft is the liquid cooling system as well.

Recip aircraft engines are generally slower turning than their land based counterparts.
The reason behind that is to prevent the propellor tips from stalling as the blade goes supersonic.
As the RPM increases, the stall, exactly the same as a wing stall will travel towards the center of the prop.
The counter effect of that is reduced thrust, which an prop plane needs in order to fly.

Anyone that has ever been to a prominent airshow has experienced that as some aircraft pass by with a raspy note to their sound.

The LS engines are very sound in the low end torque department, but would likely benefit from a gear drive that adds more weight to the powerplant which in turn reduces the useful load of the airframe.

Water-cooled aircraft engines are not unheard of, and speaking of distinctive sounds the P-51 Mustang was using the "Meredith effect" to generate additional thrust from the heat pulled from its radiator. This was discovered in 1936 (that waste heat might have a use for added propulsion) and I think if people could figure out how to use that, back then, no telling what will be invented now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meredith_effect
 
Water-cooled aircraft engines are not unheard of, and speaking of distinctive sounds the P-51 Mustang was using the "Meredith effect" to generate additional thrust from the heat pulled from its radiator. This was discovered in 1936 (that waste heat might have a use for added propulsion) and I think if people could figure out how to use that, back then, no telling what will be invented now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meredith_effect
Somewhere in our huge pile of "stuff", we have a new old stock regen turbo off a WWII B-29 that converted exhaust pressure back into rotating force to extend the range of them.
 
Last edited:
Is that flying cars? If they start selling those at 1pm, we'll have the first crash and fatality at 1:15pm and those things will be banned by the authorities before 4pm I think. Flying cars sounds like accidents waiting to happen.
Yes, flying cars. Racing cars. 0 to 60 mph in 2.3 seconds. They're hoping the idea will take off and they'll start having international races like formula 1 series.
 
Yes, flying cars. Racing cars. 0 to 60 mph in 2.3 seconds. They're hoping the idea will take off and they'll start having international races like formula 1 series.
The world was fascinated by air races when planes were invented, but they had to quit--too many fatalities.
 
Just watched a U-tube video. on bull dozers noticed that a very large dozer in using a diesel electric expect this in commercial vehicles like trucks in the future.
 
The world was fascinated by air races when planes were invented, but they had to quit--too many fatalities.
These things should be a lot more maneuverable than traditional aircraft though, I'm curious to see them for real now. I agree they'll still be dangerous, but so is Formula 1 and Touring Car racing. Air races have the advantage of not needing a physical track laid out on the ground so they can race almost anywhere. I wouldn't recommend racing in a city though.
 
I read now that Ford Motor Co.'s electric vehicle business has lost $3 billion before taxes during the past two years and they say they will lose a similar amount this year.

3 billion US dollars! So they lost 3 billion dollars selling electric cars and the plan is to lose another 3 billion this year. Wow. I remember not long ago if you lost 3 billion, you got fired or you were bankrupt. Or both. You had to lock the door and go home. They stopped doing what they were doing. Now they lose another 3 billion instead. And twice as fast as the first 3 they lost. That's a 6 billion dollar loss in three years. Amazing. Sounds like the profit isn't great on these electric things.
 
Last edited:
A billion ain't what it used to be.

While producing small numbers production is very expensive, it's when they start selling in the hundreds of thousands that the venture becomes financially viable. Simple fact of economics, without our massive populations no one would be able to afford any modern technology.
 
A billion ain't what it used to be.

While producing small numbers production is very expensive, it's when they start selling in the hundreds of thousands that the venture becomes financially viable. Simple fact of economics, without our massive populations no one would be able to afford any modern technology.

But 3 billion dollars in two years though. And they assume they will lose another 3 billion this year. It just sounds crazy. I wonder how much they will lose next year. They have to make up for that loss later, that's alot of cars to sell before they make a dollar.
 
Yep. That's the way it works, and now you can see the risks they take and why they play so hard on government policies. If the new ammonia engines take off and become popular then those billions will never be recovered.
 
I read now that Ford Motor Co.'s electric vehicle business has lost $3 billion before taxes during the past two years and they say they will lose a similar amount this year.

3 billion US dollars! So they lost 3 billion dollars selling electric cars and the plan is to lose another 3 billion this year. Wow. I remember not long ago if you lost 3 billion, you got fired or you were bankrupt. Or both. You had to lock the door and go home. They stopped doing what they were doing. Now they lose another 3 billion instead. And twice as fast as the first 3 they lost. That's a 6 billion dollar loss in three years. Amazing. Sounds like the profit isn't great on these electric things.
If you read the press release, it notes that Ford considers their electric division as a "start-up." Every business, even a lemonade stand, requires a bit of capital up front before the dollars come in, and hopefully exceed the investment. They expect to be profitable in three years. It takes a shopping mall seven, on average.
 
If you read the press release, it notes that Ford considers their electric division as a "start-up." Every business, even a lemonade stand, requires a bit of capital up front before the dollars come in, and hopefully exceed the investment. They expect to be profitable in three years. It takes a shopping mall seven, on average.

I don't think it should be considered a start-up. It's Ford, they have sold cars since 1903. Maybe I'm just too old fashion, but I think that if a company builds cars and lose 6 billion dollars in three short years, they should stop doing what they are doing and do something that makes a profit.
 
Last edited:
But 3 billion dollars in two years though. And they assume they will lose another 3 billion this year. It just sounds crazy. I wonder how much they will lose next year. They have to make up for that loss later, that's alot of cars to sell before they make a dollar.
Just study business. There are many things wrong with electric Fords, but the business plan is quite conventional.
 
Just study business. There are many things wrong with electric Fords, but the business plan is quite conventional.

I still vote for doing something that makes a profit. They will have to make up for a 6 billion dollar loss and I'll bet that loss will go well beyond 10 billion before 2024 is over. That's a lot of cars they have to sell just to break even. I know companies need to get going and it costs money but this is Ford, this is not a new company and that loss is getting dangerously big. This isn't good business, it's this new green-thing everyone is hoping will be profitable. Now they are soon so deep in the hole that they can't quit, they'll just have to keep losing money and desperatly hope it will work out later.
 
Last edited:
I still vote for doing something that makes a profit. They will have to make up for a 6 billion dollar loss and I'll bet that loss will go well beyond 10 billion before 2024 is over. That's a lot of cars they have to sell just to break even. I know companies need to get going and it costs money but this is Ford, this is not a new company and that loss is getting dangerously big. There is a limit to how much loss a company can handle and if something changes, a new technology or something, they are screwed. This isn't good business, it's this new green-thing everyone is hoping will be profitable. Now they are so deep in the hole that they can't quit, they'll just have to keep losing money and desperatly hoping it will work out later.
Compared to what other examples you have studied? Let's see a broad selection of successes and failures.
The high capital costs are one of the main reasons that car start-ups usually fail, but Ford can cover that. The cycle of business is that first, you lose money, then you make money and have a "cash cow." That's why the oil business is so tenacious. However, even the best cash cows get old and feeble, so those fat years have to finance new ventures for long-term survival. Those profits have to go somewhere anyway, so why not try for another winner? GM has hundreds of experimental vehicles, from motorized skates on up to the Firebird series, in hopes of catching the next trend early.
 

New Threads

Top Bottom