Hybrid Cars No Better than 'Intelligent' Cars 883
eldavojohn writes "There's no doubt been a lot of analysis done recently on energy consumption, especially on the road. Now, a study released today reveals that cars with traffic flow sensors built into them can perform just as efficiently as hybrids. The concept of an 'intelligent' car that communicates with the highway or other cars is an old idea, but the idea of them using sensors to anticipate braking could vastly reduce fossil fuel consumption. From the article, 'Under the US and European cycles, hybrid-matching fuel economy was reached with a look-ahead predictability of less than 60 seconds. If the predictability was boosted to 180 seconds, the newly-intelligent car was 33 percent more fuel-efficient than when it was unconverted.' Now, the real question will be whether or not you can convince consumers that the three minutes of coasting up to a red light or halted traffic is worth the 33 percent less gas and replacing your brake pads/cylinders less often."
can't you just do this now? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:can't you just do this now? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:can't you just do this now? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:can't you just do this now? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
In any case, I'd be surprised to see any modern car above the absolute lowest class without some kind of device that would keep track of fuel consumption. Our '85 Ford/Merkur Scorpio [wikipedia.org] had it, and my dad's more recent Nissan Primera has an even more advanced version accessible through its central console thingie [irishcar.com].
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And that spedometer, what waste. Just drive so the trees don't go buy too fast. The tacometer? when the engine whines, shift! Isn't this slashdot where we deserve access to all information? Including our current mpg rate?
In any case, most cars don't. I've yet to buy a car that does have it standard and while they aren't BMWs they aren't bottom line. I don't believe the Honda Accord has it standard, at least 2-3 years ago it didnt.
And guess what, for every M3 and A4 that is bought 100 average joe's do
Re:can't you just do this now? (Score:5, Funny)
Mild
Medium
HOT!!!
Extra salsa on mine, please...
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I just had a mental picture of the auto dashboard of 2050, complete with indicator lights reading "LOOK OUT!", "NOT SO FAST", "POTHOLE!", "SHARP TURN AHEAD", "DON'T FOLLOW SO CLOSE"... in other words, they've digitized my Mom and stuck her in the dash.
Re:can't you just do this now? (Score:5, Informative)
I drive a Chrysler Sebring, and as one of the OPs talked about on his relative's car, it has a digital display of "at that second" MPG as well as an averaged MPG (and a bunch of other things). And between that and watching my gasoline receipts, I know for a fact that my car gets its best mileage at approximately 2000 RPM. It sucks gas like a big dog above 3000 RPM...but it also starts getting bad as it goes below 1500 RPM, and gets worse the further down it goes.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
That was GP's point -- you don't get that in modern cars unless you buy some outrageous upgrade. I'm not vouching for the truth of that statement, I'm just pointing out that GP is saying that most modern cars don't have a MPG meter.
Just because older cars don't have the MPG meter doesn't mean it has spread to almost all modern cars. Imagine this scenario: car m
Re:can't you just do this now? (Score:4, Interesting)
Take my '01 Audi A4 Quattro v6. On average, I get approximately 18 mpg. On the highway, on a straight trip, using cruise control and driving at a relatively sedate 70mph, I get a spectacular 24.3 mpg. Honestly, it's a kick right in the mean bean machine.
It's even worse when you don't turn average on, and you have to go up a steep hill at a low speed. No one wants to see "5.6mpg" flash up on your screen, even if it is only for a few seconds.
Okay, with all that said, I do drive a lot more efficiently than I did when I first got the car, and was averaging about 14mpg on my way to work (which, as I somewhat alluded to earlier, I get 18). But seriously, 18 is as good as it gets? Seriously, in this case, "fuck" is the only word that applies. Or maybe "god fucking dammit", but it's still going with the same general theme.
Re:can't you just do this now? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:can't you just do this now? (Score:5, Interesting)
From what this article [motherjones.com] says, they do. Of course, the driver who is the main focus of the article may have suicidal tendencies in how he drafts 18 wheelers and how he deals with stop signs in the name of saving gas. Still, it's an intriguing read.
Personally, I was just wondering why it had to be an either-or? Why can't the ultra-economy conscious have the intelligent sensors built into a hybrid car? One would imagine that this would be far better than either.
Re:can't you just do this now? (Score:5, Insightful)
Half true, or perhaps one third. Hybrids also get better gas mileage because when stopped in stop-and-go city driving they use no fuel. That's a huge gain. Also, energy capture during regenerative braking is imperfect both because it is easy to exceed the maximum charging rate of the batteries, and also because the charge/discharge cycle is not all that efficient (about 70% both ways, if memory serves.)
In any case, things that exist are better than things that do not. Hybrids actually exist. I can't tell from the article if the intelligent technology being talked about is anything other than a simulation. But I am sure I can't go down to my local car dealer and buy a car so equipped, whereas I can certainly buy a hybrid.
Finally, the only reason the story sets up a false and misleading opposition between hybrids and intelligent driving choices (whether human or automated) is that lies of this kind get more eyeballs on the page and sell more advertising, and who wouldn't want to get their knowledge about the future of technology from such a pristine and unsullied source?
Prius owner chiming in, braking not the big winner (Score:3, Informative)
I own a 2007 Prius. IMHO, you're correct about the regenerative braking not being the big money maker in the vehicle. It's the hybrid train switching off the engine when you're on the freeway on slight declines.
It's got a screen that shows your energy consumption, including the net gains from the regenerative braking, and I watch it fairly closely as I drive. If you're on a slight decline, the car gets around 75mpg with the gas engine providing minimal torque. The scale maxes at 100 when the engine sh
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I have a hybrid and you are entirely correct in your assessment. Stop and go driving is hard on gas in both a conventional car and a hybrid. Mine shows the KW regenerated. Best economy is when I have little to no regeneration. Slowing gently instead of rush
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.channel4.com/4car/feature/feature.jsp?i d=740 [channel4.com]
And, VW's been doing this for ages - I've found evidence of their "single-shaft" diesel-electric hybrid prototype dating back to 1987. I don't know about the function of the Golf ECO.Power, which is VW's latest version, but they claimed an AVERAGE of 3.8 L/100km with that one. (That's 62 US MPG.) Not too shabby.
Re:can't you just do this now? (Score:5, Interesting)
I wonder if we will see a pattern of people who have MPG displays getting into fewer accidents because they drive less aggressively? I want an insurance discount.
Re:can't you just do this now? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:can't you just do this now? (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, no. The key is to watch the MPG display about as often as you watch the speedometer. Eventually, within a few weeks, you will learn what behaviors drive your MPG up or down, and then you will not have to watch the MPG display very often. At least, that is my own personal experience.
--Rob
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I have a '00 TransAm WS/6 with a 6 speed. Stock it was 325hp.
I cruised the length of I-10 (Jacksonville, FL to Los Angeles, CA) a few times now.
On one trip, I normally held 80mph, and got 26mpg average across the whole trip.
On another trip, I normally held 70mph to 75mph, and got 25mpg.
On shorter trips, taking my time to accelerate up past 85, and then holding that in 6th gear works very well for better gas mileage. I can kill my
Stick-shift Economy Lamp (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Now we recently got a prius that gets about 45 (indicated), but cost twice as much (in non-inflation adjusted dollars).
Doesn't seem like great progress to me.
Re:can't you just do this now? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, teaching people better habits is a nice thing to do, but getting them to actually drop their old bad habits is an entirely different story. Our oil problems would be greatly solved if everyone stopped driving their cars and started riding bicycles for any trip less than, say, 5 miles long, but that isn't likely to happen. We must solve these problems through technology because making other people change their lifestyle is just not practical. Most people will resist, and even those who don't are likely to go back to their old ways because people are inherently lazy and will take the path of least resistance whenever possible.
Re:can't you just do this now? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:can't you just do this now? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:can't you just do this now? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:can't you just do this now? (Score:5, Insightful)
I think that would solve a whole lot more than just the oil problems..
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:can't you just do this now? (Score:5, Insightful)
Then we simply need to make the path of least resistance also the most efficient. Any system designer will tell you that you need to make the best choice the default one, because people will overwhelmingly choose the default.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Where I live there is a stretch of road that the stupid city planners decided should be th
Re:can't you just do this now? (Score:4, Insightful)
Roundabouts are far more efficient at traffic control than stop lights. Rather than stopping traffic entirely for one or two cars, traffic keeps moving. When you have a smaller road intersecting with a larger, a roundabout naturally causes the heavier traffic to move more easily through while not preventing people on the less travelled roads from moving at all. It also reduces traffic speeds by presenting approaching cars with a green wall and a sharp turn, forcing them to slow down at the intersection like they're supposed to. They also make it safer for pedestrians by giving them an island of safety in the busy intersection as well as forcing them to look in only one direction to make sure traffic is clear. Finally, you don't have cars crossing each other's paths of travel, so "left hook" accidents are eliminated.
My biggest suggestion, other than more control over zoning to eliminate massive subdivisions that create traffic problems, would be to replace traffic light intersections with roundabouts wherever possible.
Technology is not the answer (Score:5, Insightful)
Human beings consume resources up to the limit of what is available unless they have to pay for it. Well we consume huge amounts of energy because it's cheaper than it has been ever before in history. If energy was expensive people would be very careful about how they used it, including buying more energy efficient devices.
Re:Technology is not the answer (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Water, thermostats, showers, lights. They are all part of an upgraded lifestyle brought on by having plenty of each item. If/When these things become less available they will become more expensive and will be pushed up to people w
Re:can't you just do this now? (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm not a hypermiler (they are willing to go too slow, sacrificing speed for mpg, and putting themselves at risk) but I drive like this and use other techniques to increase mileage and it is more fuel efficient. I also try to anticipate stops, lights and drive accordingly. If I see a light that just turned red 200 meters out, I try to coast there, maybe brake early, so that either I let my existing kinetic energy run out or so that I still have some speed when it turns green.
The people behind me don't like this, which I don't understand, because they want to race to the red light, brake the last 20-50 feet, and then start up from 0mph again. They are only wasting their gas and wearing out their brakes fasters, while not getting their any earlier.
Re: (Score:3)
As another poster points out, the common sense move is to let energy prices float up, perhaps through a tax t
Re:can't you just do this now? (Score:4, Insightful)
Fuck that. I'd rather see those asshat cops/HP-men run over by rampaging drivers as long as they ignore real road-safety problems and instead focus on revenue-generation (read: speeding tickets instead of real moving violations). Yes, I just said I'd prefer dead cops over corrupt government. Am I a criminal or a patriot?
As AC pointed out in the sibling thread... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:can't you just do this now? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
NO, you can't just do this now. (Score:5, Insightful)
Believe me, I've tried.
I often find myself in a half-mile back up of cars at a stop sign. I'm in a rural area that's quickly being developed and adequate traffic control devices (IOW, stop lights) haven't been installed everywhere. It's obvious as all hell that a perfectly reasonable way to get to the intersection is to just idle along. A gap will open in front of me then I'll idle through it. Before I get to the car in front of me, it will have again opened a gap and then stopped while I just idle smoothly along.
Sounds reasonable, right? Well, apparently not. I've had drivers behind me go into apoplectic fits, screaming and flipping me off, because I allowed a half-dozen car lengths to open ahead of me. I've had drivers pass me on the shoulder where there is no shoulder (I literally mean a two lane road with big, scary ditches on the sides) because they couldn't stand to see a gap in front of me. I've had drivers pull out of line, swerve in front of me, then watch their mirror as I idled up from behind and slam on the brakes as I approached, attempting to cause an accident that would be my fault. I hate to ascribe motives to people I don't know, but that seems to me to be just an attempt to "get" me for not driving like everybody else.
Hell, I've actually been stopped in a long line at a red light and had this happen. I was taught that you should stop far enough behind the car in front to see their rear tires on the ground. If they stall out, this gives you enough room to go around. Well, given the right combination of hood and bumper heights, this can also leave enough room in front to fit a small car. On three separate occasions over the past couple of years, I've had the car behind me whip out and pull in front of me (never *quite* fitting into the space) because I left too much room in front of me while we were ALL stopped at a light.
Nope, you can't drive steady in the U.S. It's apparently not allowed. You must floor the gas, roar up twenty feet, and slam on the brakes to stop every time someone in line in front of you clears the stop sign.
People are idiots. No wonder researchers tend to look for technological solutions to human problems.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Wow, US drivers must be insane. Here in the UK, if anybody tried things like that that and the police spotted th
Re:NO, you can't just do this now. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The longer you take to move up, the more traffic backs up at the back, and the more people who obstructed who are trying to get on/off the road. But at least you save 5 cents on your petrol bill...
Come on, think about the engineering here; which is more efficient: turbulent or laminar flow?
The standard reference for this take on the topic is here: http://amasci.com/amateur/traffic/trafexp.html [amasci.com]
Re:NO, you can't just do this now. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Hybrid Intelligent Cars? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Hybrid Intelligent Cars? (Score:4, Interesting)
-Rick
Re:Hmmm. (Score:5, Informative)
In practice, the engine runs at a variety of speeds, but it seems to prefer running the engine at the most efficient speed and torque when it can.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Perhaps they are talking [out of their ass] about cars that don't use the motor to drive the wheels, but instead use it to drive a generator?
There is no absolutely accepted terminology to separate that type of hybrid from the kind of hybrid where the engine is coupled to the transmission and helps to drive the vehicle directly.
It does make good sense however, because a motor or a generator can be over 90% efficient. Even with those losses added together it's comparable to the loss of a traditional drivetr
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Where's my flying car? I was promised a flying car.
Until then, I pedal my way home.
why does this read like they are competing? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Intelligent Drivers (Score:5, Insightful)
The idiot behind you (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:The idiot behind you (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The idiot behind you (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
2. I'd still rather have a reckless driver crash behind me than in front of me.
3. Then let him pass, and back off enough to let him get way ahead of you.
Re:The idiot behind you (Score:5, Insightful)
I go 65-70 on So. Cal freeways. Period. I also manage to keep a healthy 3 second window most of the time. I rarely brake. There are days I could make it from home to work without hitting the brake once (well, if it wasn't for red lights, right turns and parking).
They have room to pass me, and I give them all the room they want. I guess what it all boils down to is I'm comfortable with the size of my penis.
Re:Intelligent Drivers (Score:5, Funny)
I think my idea is a lot more likely to happen than yours.
Re: (Score:3)
Sorry, but I don't like everyone on the road passing me. That creates a far more dangerous condition than simply exceeding the artificially-low, revenue-maximizing "posted" limits.
If you can't keep up with traffic, get off the road.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No, I'm suggesting we run train tracks near to every house and business in America. Everyone else can use a golf cart or similar to get themselves and their cargo to/from the PRT.
The system will be smart enough to schedule vehicles to detour them around other vehicles. Busy areas will have sidings, just like we've been doing for trains for decades.
Disavowing (Score:2, Funny)
Why not both? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why not both? (Score:5, Informative)
From the tone of the post, it seems like they're making an argument against hybrid cars by showing that they're no more efficient than regular cars with this new tech... but why not just stop comparing the two and combine them? Shouldn't the title read "Hybrid Car Efficiency Improves Even More with new Technology?"
Yup, they lose the debate through the old "Not mutually exclusive" argument. Not only that, but those "intelligent" driving techniques aren't always practicable, like in bumper to bumper traffic. That sort of thing is where Hybrids really shine - where speeds are averaging less than 20 mph and people spend time sitting. If I'm in a hybrid, my engine cuts off and I run off the battery for the start-n-stop traffic, and it charges back later. A regular car will typically get well under 10 mph in such situations; a hybrid will get around 60.
In other words, hybrids totally kick ass in the city - small, nimble, typically a short turning radius, and great mileage in city driving.
Weeell (Score:3, Interesting)
VAR (Vehicular Area Network)? (Score:2)
Re:VAR (Vehicular Area Network)? (Score:4, Insightful)
How do you stop someone from fixing their car to constantly broadcast "DANGER: MOOSE AHEAD" or "EMERGENCY VEHICLE APPROACHING" so they can use it to get through traffic faster?
I think the abuse potential of these technologies need to be carefully studied. If there's a way that any system can be used to create even the most minuscule advantage in traffic, or simply be used to cause mayhem, people will do it in spades.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Ummmm... make it illegal to transmit false traffic data? Just like it's illegal in many jurisdictions to use those devices that signal to traffic lights that your car is an emergency vehicle so that the lights give you priority (unless your car is actually an emergency vehicle).
Seems kinda obvious.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And they can deliver it when? (Score:2)
You can do it without sensors, too. (Score:5, Insightful)
However, most people don't. They'll accelerate when they know there's a red light or stopped traffic in front of them, even though it just means they need to brake harder (and probably come to a complete stop, which they might have avoided by slowing down sooner); people follow too closely on highways and have to use their brakes, which really shouldn't be used for anything except emergencies (and the flashing of which screws up traffic behind them, because people think there's a problem); people mash down on the gas when they're just going to have to stop again in another 100 feet
Perhaps when gas costs more, people will choose to drive more efficiently.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
While I agree with what is safer, you shouldn't take this attitude. You are NOT causing the person behind you to tailgate you. Only they can do that. That's why it's called tailgating and not frontbumpering.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Nest light? We're not talking about incubators here.
Seriously though folks, if gas hits $8.95 a gallon, you're going to see a lot more fuel-efficient vehicles on the road to begin with. DaimlerChrysler would have a hybrid SMART out in the US before you can say "holy fuck that's expensive" (both the gas and the car, I'd bet.)
Most of those cars will be astoundingly gut
drivers that hurry to the next red light (Score:2)
Their average velocity is no higher than any other driver, but they sure do bu
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Want economy? (Score:3, Interesting)
food for thought... (Score:3, Interesting)
In yankee, I'm getting 23.6MPG now instead of 18.2MPG (both in city) for a boost of 29.7% more MPG. I still do the speed limit, I'm just not as heavy on the gas. And when I hit the speed limit I use cruise control where possible. I also don't keep constant speed when there is a red up ahead. Usually I'm doing 20-30 kph under the limit by time I have to brake. If this could be helped via a computer I'm all for it.
Obviously my "study" isn't really comprehensive. But given that i do the same 14Km route every day there aren't a lot of variables in the mix.
Tom
Anticipating traffic and adjusting speed to match (Score:2)
The same car (94 Saturn) started getting about 10% better gas mileage with the same commuting pattern. This was pretty consistent in both the summer and winter months.
Just a data point
Hybrids means getting ready for our future (Score:4, Insightful)
Also don't forget there are more reasons for hybrids to exist. We're not going to run on oil forever, and the effect it has on preparing the market for a chance shouldn't be downplayed. Plus, we have R & D and manifacturing/safety practices in the development of those cars won't go to waste, when "the time comes".
If anything, the real question isn't "why drive a hybrid when you can drive an intelligent car", but "where the heck are the intelligent hybrids?"...
Why "Hybrid cars no better"? (Score:5, Insightful)
Second, the negative spin on hybrids is bizarre: that they—a widely available commercial technology—are "no better" than the tests suggest a proof-of-concept, not-yet-commercially-available technology might be if put into practical use is, well, a weird way of looking at things.
I mean, usually, that a presently available technology does just as well, with less specialized infrastructure, than a proof-of-concept isn't, even if they are directly competing, bad news for the existing technology, its bad news for the experimental alternative. "New, unproven technology offers no more than existing, popular technology" would be the usual way of looking at that.
Of course, they aren't competing technologies, there is no reason a hybrid couldn't benefit from being "intelligent" or vice-versa. Now, you might not get the full efficiency gains of each, since there is some overlap in their benefits vs. dumb non-hybrids, but you would expect more efficiency than either alone.
There is an easy way to increase gas mileage now: (Score:5, Interesting)
Seriously, is it that hard to tie the road sensors to timing chips? It doesn't even have to be done on all roads - but anything labeled an expressway, as well as a major roads with known traffic patterns should all have coordinated lights at all times. Expressway cuts through residential areas for 3 miles? Have a green wave run one way in the morning and the other way in the evening. Major road intersects with expressway? All lights on that major road are timed according to the same mechanism, except the one that controls the intersection with the expressway. It's not perfect, but it doesn't have to be. Any improvement over the current idiocy of stopping 10 cars to prevent one car from idling for more than 20 seconds will result in a dramatic improvement in gas mileage.
How do I know? My car computer shows average gas mileage, as well as current. I can improve my gas mileage from 27 mpg to 32 mpg if I manage to coast through major roads at 45 mph, instead of having to stop at every friggin red light. All it takes is to have a timing chip control each light, program it according to traffic patterns and expected (or even desired!) speed of cars, and you're done. Instant improvement in gas mileage, and instant reduction in oil imports.
It boggles my mind how Europe had those things down pat 20 years ago, but here they still don't get the concept of a green wave on major roads.
Re:There is an easy way to increase gas mileage no (Score:4, Interesting)
Need Smarter Hybrids (Score:5, Interesting)
I have a prius. I have a 20+ mile commute one way. Yesterday I averaged 70.3 MPG for the trip home. I did this using manual "look ahead" and very carefully planning braking and coasting just to see how high I could get it. You can easily blow 10MPG with one bonehead maneuver from lack of attention but this manual concentration on mileage is probably as distracting as talking on a cell phone.
I'd welcome the technology in my prius or in my SUV. Both can benefit.
Backwards Headline (Score:3, Insightful)
"'Intelligent Cars' As Good As Hybrid Cars"
Otherwise the headline is about hybrids, which this story is not about. And it implies that hybrids aren't so good, as if not-so-good "intelligent cars" are their benchmark.
Plus, the research is only a single prediction of a complex system yet to be built, let alone tested, so a correct headline would be in the future tense, anyway.
how about intelligent city design? (Score:5, Informative)
with that said, i always did wonder how much of my great mileage in Connecticut was due to the fact that I could watch and keep track of my mpg. ie. would I see a similar increase in mileage in a non-hybrid car just by being able to monitor my driving efficiency?
Wool Coat No Better than 'Intelligent' Coat (Score:5, Insightful)
Killing two birds with one stone (Score:4, Insightful)
Not to mention that road fatalities would drop to effectively zero.
I'm not saying...I'm just saying.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Millions of out-of-shape obese people forced, overnight, into bicycle commutes, often in the tens of miles?
I think "effectively zero" fatalities is rather unrealistic.
Re:Killing two birds with one stone (Score:4, Insightful)
Personally, I think several of our social problems stem from the automobile culture and it's effect on our city planning and lives.
Perhaps if people, oh, I don't know... didn't live 30 miles from where they worked? If our city planners allowed for the necessary commercial establishments (grocery & drug stores, etc.) to be integral parts of a neighborhood instead of having enormous residential zones separated by equally enormous commercial zones? What about all of the land we waste on roads and parking lots? The list goes on and on...
What really gets me is all the people who are outraged about the deaths of soldiers in Iraq, but don't bat an eye at the fact that the total number of lives lost (both Iraqi and occupation forces) over 5 years is less than a single year of fatalities on the roads in the U.S. I mean, in Iraq they're actually *trying* to kill each other, and they can't top the number of *accidental* deaths on our roads?! Why do we put up with this nonsense?
Hybrids, Shmybrids. Intelligence, Inshmelligence. (Score:3, Insightful)
Alternate solution: don't ever leave the house. Perfect mileage! Let the pizza delivery guy worry about mileage.
-G
Convincing people (Score:5, Funny)
All you have to do is make it so people who have this feature get an extra vote on Dancing With The Stars or American Idol. BOOYAH! Instant success.
Re:I don't think this is what people want... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:hybrid cards are no better than DUMB cars (Score:4, Insightful)
125cc Motor Scooter: $2500
Year of insurance for 125cc motor scooter: $98
Tank of premium gas for 125cc motor scooter: $3.84
Getting 80mpg: Priceless.