Your Thougts on this new Technology

[Rich Parsons]

http://autos.msn.com/advice/standardart.aspx?contentid=4021814&src=msn

What are your thoughts on this new Technology?

What does it mean to you?

Do you Care?

:asian:

 

[Seig]

Originally posted by Rich Parsons
http://autos.msn.com/advice/standardart.aspx?contentid=4021814&src=msn

What are your thoughts on this new Technology?

What does it mean to you?

Do you Care?

:asian:

It means I probably not like it or be able to afford it.

 

[Kirk]

Way cool! You could ahve a mini van during the week, and a
sports car for the weekends! LOL

Now if they could make them like "Johnny Cabs" in the movie
Total Recall. Would be cool to catch a nap on the way home
from work, huh?

 

[Rich Parsons]

Originally posted by Kirk
Way cool! You could ahve a mini van during the week, and a
sports car for the weekends! LOL

Now if they could make them like "Johnny Cabs" in the movie
Total Recall. Would be cool to catch a nap on the way home
from work, huh?

Kirk,

Actually there is a road that has metal deposits in the road. And there is a special cruise control system that will follow these deposits around curves at speed with no human input to the controls. So A 'Johnny Cab' or Local Net AI system is possible. Another company has been working on a radar type cruise control that would decel the vehicle from 1 - 4 mph to the person in front of you so you would not have to tap your brakes. Once traffic allowed for you to pull out you would resume to normal cuise speed.

We have plans to have vehicles running on a variable displacement of the engine. That is to say we can control the engine and turn off a cyclinder or 4 to save on gas consumption. When the throttle is increased then the cyclinders would re-engage and all the power of the engine would be available.

 

[Kirk]

Originally posted by Rich Parsons
Kirk,

Actually there is a road that has metal deposits in the road. And there is a special cruise control system that will follow these deposits around curves at speed with no human input to the controls. So A 'Johnny Cab' or Local Net AI system is possible. Another company has been working on a radar type cruise control that would decel the vehicle from 1 - 4 mph to the person in front of you so you would not have to tap your brakes. Once traffic allowed for you to pull out you would resume to normal cuise speed.

We have plans to have vehicles running on a variable displacement of the engine. That is to say we can control the engine and turn off a cyclinder or 4 to save on gas consumption. When the throttle is increased then the cyclinders would re-engage and all the power of the engine would be available.

NOW you're talking! Get it done before I'm at retirement age! LOL

I forgot to mention in my previous post, that a complete redesign
like this is necessary, to make TRUE improvements to the
automobile - IMO. Starting all over from scratch = GOOD thing!

 

[Rich Parsons]

Originally posted by Kirk
NOW you're talking! Get it done before I'm at retirement age! LOL

I forgot to mention in my previous post, that a complete redesign
like this is necessary, to make TRUE improvements to the
automobile - IMO. Starting all over from scratch = GOOD thing!

Kirk,

The no input Cruise, would take a lot of changes to the roads. Not feasible just yet and not cost effective.

The Fuel Cell and 'hybrids' will be around, since more and more requirements for emissions and volumes of vehicles to meet zero emissions at the tail pipe. We will ignore the fact the energy required to charge the electrical vehicles of today cause more emissions, from the sulfur containing coal. Yet it is not at the tail pipe.

Most of the things I have mentioned with the exception of the cruise systems will be in production in 5 years +/- 3 given technology, marketing, engineering resources.

A redesign from ground up is a good plan. Personally, I want an instant transportation device.

Note: There were never any Carburetors out there that got 75 MPH . The physics just would not allow it.


PS: I am doing my best to help you all out. As is most of the large car companies. It is in their best interest.

 

[Kirk]

Originally posted by Rich Parsons
I am doing my best to help you all out. As is most of the large car companies. It is in their best interest.

Personally, I don't feel that's the general consensus. I'm often
told by people how efficient cars don't exist, because of the
conspiracies, and strength the car manufacturers.

 

[Rich Parsons]

Originally posted by Kirk
Personally, I don't feel that's the general consensus. I'm often
told by people how efficient cars don't exist, because of the
conspiracies, and strength the car manufacturers.

Kirk,

Every sensor we put in the car cost us say $25 for the piece cost and maybe $10 for engineering cost. Say $35. No say we put in 100 such sensors to make the car better. Would any one by this vehicle if they could another car that looks the same for less money?

In 1972 Air Bags were available on the Chevrolet Caprice. Sticker for the Car was $1,800 to $2,200, with the Air Bag Option being a flat $2,000. Obviously, this would not fly. Who would buy a car for $4,000 when the same car can be bought for $2,000????

Yet, people want safe air and safe cars, and less deaths. For these are the things we have put "VALUES" on. So our legislatures pass laws to have cleaner air and safer cars.

There will always be some people who want to ride a Motorcycle without a helmet or drive 120 MPH on the highway and do it for $1.00 per Gallon gas and drive in the brand new car that would have cost them less than $10,000 to buy.


Yet, if car companies were truly thinking about marketing they would come up with the first cost effective hybrids and fuel cells. This is why companies are investing money into these technologies. Because the people have spoken and said they want clean air and safer cars. Oh yeah everyone wants it for free also, yet it cost money to add functionality and options.

Today Airbag are standard, and side seat airbags and or Side Roof Airbags are more common. Seat belts are required by law, and really do help the "Supplemental Restraining Units" AKA Air bags do their jobs correctly.

No one wants a vinyl seat bench in their car, they want the 20 way with full lumbar and two passenger memory with the exit button. This costs money, yet people want it for the price of their Dad's car. People want the AM/FM CD/Cassette Player with 8 Speaker system and optional instead of the old AM radio.

Yet, it was advantageous to the car companies in the long run to add these new technologies to our vehicles. People desire them.

So, yet there will always be some that say car companies want to make a million on each car , yet the government has no problem with Microsoft and their version system of making money. Oh yeah they took them to court for a monopoly not for the version system of selling you the same thing, over, only with the bugs fixed. Wait did I tell you that we fixed two but added three???

Cars are really expensive yes, and the car companies could make them and sell them cheaper, if they could remove content and still be able to legally sell them or to have the public actually decide to by the reduced content vehicle.

Oh Yeah add in that our Courts are now allowing the dealerships to be sued for leased vehicles, since people are always looking for those with the deepest pockets. The courts also punish the car companies in law suits when smaller vehicles, the most likely to have the reduced content anyway, for not have ABS or passenger side air bags as standard before the law made it so. Why the people who could not afford the expensive cars do not deserve to live?

So, it is the best interest of the car companies to build a better car for everyone, not only to sell but so as not to have to pay out in court in suits or fines.

Yet, with everyone of these new innovations we add in, a light comes on your car, and this causes you to do to get it fixed, which costs money for the sensor and for the labor. So, everyone hates this, since the Car is still running why did I need that sensor anyway? Your car just did not meet emissions, or it would run, yet over a long time more serious damage would occur, yet people do not like this, it cost money.

Yet everyone wants safe air to breath and safe cars to drive. So, a fuel cell technology would take away most of the air concerns. Yet will people be willing to pay for it? How bad do we want it?

Sorry for the rant and length.

 

[GaryM]

Dang, bet those suckers is hard to work on.

 

[Shinobi]

No one wants a vinyl seat bench in their car,

I do. Seriously.



Personally I don't want one of these cars, and wont buy one. I like old cars better. You know, the type I can pop the hood on and fix. Without having to unhook 20 different emission hoses, hook a computer to, and remove the fuel injection system.


But they can do whatever they want, as long as they allow me to have what I want. Which will be old Muscle cars with alot of power, and gas hog 4X4's all jacked up.

:asian:

 

[Rich Parsons]

Here is an article on Hydrogen research to be used potentially with fuel cells.