Newest urban electric vehicle
Quote: P90The intention was to expense light pickup trucks for business use.
But thanks to Hummer's excess weight and general SUV size bloat, a large number of vehicles now fall under the tax exemption that are bought strictly for personal use or just conspicuous consumption. You just need any business to write it off. But you don't get a tax break for buying a normal car for exact same purposes.
And it's not like the law hasn't been revised - it has been revised... only to keep conditions the same, but increase maximum exemption size.
Uh, yes you can write off the expenses on your car if you use it for business ues. I can and have, many years off and on, lately on. Split mileage rate last year, but as high as $.55 per mile before June 1st. Or you can deduct actual expenses, which for most people is more time consuming than it is worth.
If you use a vehicle for personal use the *business* can write it off if it is paying you as an employee with the car as part of your compensation, again very complicated.
The Hummer gets a fairly undeserved bad rap, its (H2) mileage is not much different than a pickup truck or even Corvette. A study was done that said when you consider all the energy to mine the lead for batteries, the H2 uses less energy over its lifetime than a Prius.
Quote: AZDuffmanUh, yes you can write off the expenses on your car if you use it for business.
AFAIK, you are only able to write off the depreciation, over time, and only up to about $15k, while new SUV can get same-year full price deduction up to a higher amount, that used to reach $100,000.
They aren't sending agents to check, are they?Quote: AZDuffmanIf you use a vehicle for personal use...
Quote: AZDuffmanThe Hummer gets a fairly undeserved bad rap, its (H2) mileage is not much different than a pickup truck or even Corvette.
It's not much different from a pickup truck, no. But H2 is not commonly used as a cargo vehicle.
Corvette is rated at 19 mpg combined, which is about twice the estimated mpg of H2.
Quote: AZDuffmanA study was done that said when you consider all the energy to mine the lead for batteries, the H2 uses less energy over its lifetime than a Prius.
I'd like to see that study. Because energy reflects itself in the price - something can't cost less than the energy it requires. Lead batteries are fairly inexpensive, the pack for Prius costs $2,500 (original) with some cheaper options.
While a Hummer uses a lot of gas over its lifetime. The figure for H3 is over $36,000 worth of gas in 10 years. H2 is much thirstier, estimated at between 9 mpg and 11 mpg combined versus 14 mpg for H3. That's an easy $50,000 worth of gas.
So I would really like to see that study, or I am left with no choice other than to call BS on it. Over 15,000 gallons of gas, that's 60 cubic meters, is used up by one H2 (following the estimates). That fuel contains over 2,000,000 MJ of energy, or 550,000 kWh. Burned in a powerplant, a comparable amount of fuel would produce at least 200,000 kWh, worth $24,000.
After taking out the fuel consumed by a Prius, that is 1/5 that of Hummer's use, even downgrading to 1/4, still leaves $18-$20k worth of extra energy. Battery makers must be very stupid, selling their product at ten times less than their energy cost for making it alone.
Quote: P90AFAIK, you are only able to write off the depreciation, over time, and only up to about $15k, while new SUV can get same-year full price deduction up to a higher amount, that used to reach $100,000.
You can do either depriciation and running costs or just take a mileage charge OR cost a lease payment and other expenses. This is why leasing is popular among even businessowners who put lots of miles on their cars. When I had a fleet the company "owned" the vehicles but "leased" them from a provider so as to maximize deductions. Most people who make less than $100K just use the mileage because to do the work for all of the expenses and then figure % of business use is not worth the efffort, more so with how generous the mileage rate can be.
Quote:They aren't sending agents to check, are they?
It's called an "audit." They can call you in and make you prove whatever they want.
Quote:I'd like to see that study. Because energy reflects itself in the price - something can't cost less than the energy it requires. Lead batteries are fairly inexpensive. While a Hummer uses a lot of gas over its lifetime.
The figure for H3 is over $36,000 worth of gas in 10 years. H2 is much thirstier, estimated at between 9 mpg and 11 mpg combined versus 14 mpg for H3.
Here is the best I can find, article is a few years old and the link is broke.
Seems it takes a lot of energy to produce lead, something shown on the show "Modern Marvels: Lead." Then ship that lead from Canada to Japan, then back in the Prius. Also, nobody disputes it takes 100,000+ miles to get your gas savings back in the Prius. But the article is about energy used over lifetime of vehicle, which takes the form of more than gasoline.
Quote: AZDuffmanIt's called an "audit." They can call you in and make you prove whatever they want.
But most likely won't. Or you'll be able to get away with it. People have successfully done that with Cayennes and X5's, which certainly aren't there for hauling bricks and manure.
Quote: AZDuffmanSeems it takes a lot of energy to produce lead, something shown on the show "Modern Marvels: Lead." Then ship that lead from Canada to Japan, then back in the Prius. Also, nobody disputes it takes 100,000+ miles to get your gas savings back in the Prius. But the article is about energy used over lifetime of vehicle, which takes the form of more than gasoline.
I still have to call bullshit on the article. See the calculation above. However much energy lead may take to produce - it can't incur more in energy costs than what the finished product sells for. And the finished product sells for the cost of less than 1,000 gallons of gasoline, versus 11,000 extra gallons that a Hummer burns over the same mileage.
The source is hardly NPOV. And then it indicates that the "study" makes certain assumptions to help it reach the conclusion it was intended to reach. Why quote marks around "study" - any comparison of this kind is driven by sensationalism, not research.
Quote: P90But most likely won't. Or you'll be able to get away with it. People have successfully done that with Cayennes and X5's, which certainly aren't there for hauling bricks and manure.
Business use does not have to be hauling bricks and mortor. Outside salespeople use vehicles for business often carrying nothing heavier than a laptop. I have used vehicles for business for 10+ of my 42 years in life and never hauled heavy stuff. If you need the X5 to make a good sales impression then you use one. It is still business use.
Quote:I still have to call bullshit on the article. See the calculation above. However much energy lead may take to produce - it can't incur more in energy costs than what the finished product sells for. And the finished product sells for the cost of less than 1,000 gallons of gasoline, versus 11,000 extra gallons that a Hummer burns over the same mileage.
You can call it whatever you want, the "cost" is in the production cost, not the MSRP. The difference is easily the excessive energy consumed in mining the lead as the engine/body/etc of both vehicles is not all that different in energy needed to produce them. Remember, we do not know how much of a loss the early Prius sold for, but when the similar Honda Impact came out a factory rep at a car show told me that Honda was losing $10K per unit, making it was all about publicity. No reason to assume Prius was not similar.
All along I have said, even here, a Prius is for math-challenged people.
Quote: AZDuffmanIf you need the X5 to make a good sales impression then you use one. It is still business use.
And if you need an S-class to make a good sales impression, it's somehow different? Yet they are treated differently, article 179 exemptions only apply to SUV and allow for greater deductions.
Quote: AZDuffmanYou can call it whatever you want, the "cost" is in the production cost, not the MSRP. The difference is easily the excessive energy consumed in mining the lead
Yes, and and as indicated by the above calculation, the excess energy consumed in mining the lead is much less than 1/10 - probably less than 1/100 - the amount of excess energy consumed by H2.
A product can not cost less than the energy required to produce it.
For a better estimate, lead costs $2,165 per metric ton. The battery pack of Toyota Prius consists of 28 modules weighing 1040 grams each. It's not actually a lead-acid battery, so the whole lead point is moot... but if it was, lead-acid batteries are 60% lead. That is 17.5kg of lead, worth $38. Energy used in lead mining can come in the form of electricity for fixed machinery and liquid fuel for mining vehicles.
$38 is 380 kWh of electricity at $0.10/kWh, or 10 gallons of diesel fuel at $3.8/gallon, or 12 gallons of gasoline at $3.2/gallon.
A Hummer H2 consumes approximately an additional 10,000-12,000 gallons over its lifetime.
Quote: P90And if you need an S-class to make a good sales impression, it's somehow different? Yet they are treated differently, article 179 exemptions only apply to SUV and allow for greater deductions.
The article you are talking about is just accelerating the deduction, allowing a method besides straight-line to take more deduction in earlier years. (see "double-declining balance method" for an example.) You still cannot deduct more than (PURCHASE PRICE - RESIDUAL VALUE) over the lifetime of the vehicle. If you do deduct more than the value you sell it for you will have a tax liability for a GAIN at the time of sale. At no time may you write off more than the total cost of the vehicle and running costs.
You can slice and dice this all you like, it is not the same as the Feds giving you a $7,500 check to buy the vehicle with as you get on the EV. After you buy the EV you still get the depriciation and running costs. The $7,500 is a gift from me and every other taxpayer to buy a car that cannot be sold competitively on its merits.
Quote: AZDuffmanThe article you are talking about is just accelerating the deduction, allowing a method besides straight-line to take more deduction in earlier years.
Complete value deduction, early money that is worth more to you. And the limits for that deduction are greater than those for an ordinary car (IIRC about 15k value cap).
Quote: AZDuffmanYou can slice and dice this all you like, it is not the same as the Feds giving you a $7,500 check to buy the vehicle with as you get on the EV.
They don't. It's a tax deduction, if your tax is less, you don't get extra.
Quote: AZDuffmanThe $7,500 is a gift from me and every other taxpayer to buy a car that cannot be sold competitively on its merits.
Seeing how they sold out the most expensive model well in advance, sounds like it very much can be sold on its own.
But if we're talking about competition and merits... What was the cost of General Motors bailout? Guess we have to say the same about every GM car now as well, couldn't sell on their own merits, required the taxpayer to subsidize them.
At least tax deductions for Tesla buyers proceed to help people who are actually doing something, rather than just sit on their butt collecting pay because they can't be fired.
Now, my intention is not to deflect, so where were we? Right, talking about a "gift". It's not. Taxes are like blinds - once you post them, they are gone, just part of the pot now. Except that pot is distributed without your input. Some is raked, some embezzled, some pays off lobbyist interests, some is dumped into the sand overseas, some might even end up doing something useful. But that that last one is like comps in a casino.
Quote: P90They don't. It's a tax deduction, if your tax is less, you don't get extra.
No, it is a tax "credit." Meaning if your tax bill is $7500 you drop your tax bill to zero. (sorry if I implied it was refundable before, I have done some research.) You get that $7500 off your taxes if you use if for business or not. If you buy the Hummer you get to write it off only againsgt your income and only if you use it for business. So if you buy the Hummer for $30K you get to write that off against $30K of income. So if someone was in a 30% tax bracket (for simplicity) they would reduce their tax burden by only $9,000. By the EV for $30K in the same tax bracket you reduce by $7,500 + $9,000 for a total of $16,500.
And yes, I know all of this is over many years and depritiation schedules, but after 5 years that is the net result. A bonus of $7,500 in tax savings for the EV.
Quote:Seeing how they sold out the most expensive model well in advance, sounds like it very much can be sold on its own.
Hardly projectible saying a microproduction car being sold out means they are "selling on their own." How many units is the Leaf selling vs how many gasoline subcompacts get sold is a more realistic measure. By that measure EVs are not remotely competitive.
Quote:But if we're talking about competition and merits... What was the cost of General Motors bailout? Guess we have to say the same about every GM car now as well, couldn't sell on their own merits, required the taxpayer to subsidize them. At least tax deductions for Tesla buyers proceed to help people who are actually doing something, rather than just sit on their butt collecting pay because they can't be fired.
Obama screwed every bondholder at GM and Chrysler to help his union buddies. I don't like that either. Anyone knows that GM cars have been glued to the showroom floor for years.
Quote: AZDuffmanSo if you buy the Hummer for $30K you get to write that off against $30K of income. So if someone was in a 30% tax bracket (for simplicity) they would reduce their tax burden by only $9,000.
Well, the Hummer usually sells for over $53k. Escalade, more. I've read that the average tax reduction is about $17,500 for SUV filed via section 179.
Quote: AZDuffmanBy the EV for $30K in the same tax bracket you reduce by $7,500 + $9,000 for a total of $16,500. And yes, I know all of this is over many years and depritiation schedules, but after 5 years that is the net result.
Will it depreciate to zero in 5 years? That doesn't seem to be the case. So AIUI you can only write off some of the price, and that will come year by year, as you know money coming early has more value.
Also, isn't there a limit of approximately the first $15k of vehicle price, depreciation on which can be deducted as business expenses, with the rest considered a luxury for expenses purposes?
Quote: AZDuffmanHardly projectible saying a microproduction car being sold out means they are "selling on their own." How many units is the Leaf selling vs how many gasoline subcompacts get sold is a more realistic measure. By that measure EVs are not remotely competitive.
I said previously that I would strongly consider Tesla Model S if looking for a quality sedan car (which I actually do have some need for). It's fast, it's reported to have superb handling, and at the same time it's large, well outfitted, comfortable to drive, the console seems to be the best yet, it looks great, the brand is cool, the price is right, backed by a long warranty and low maintenance, it's made on the right side of the pond, it will sell easily because it's a Tesla, what else is there.
Though my location isn't optimal for it, but if I lived in California, where they have charging stations and will have more, yeah, that's most likely the one. Being electric is neither the deal-maker nor a deal-breaker here. It's a great car that among other things scores some points for its powerplant.
But I would definitely not buy a Nissan Leaf. Not for $30k post-credit they are asking for this mutilated Sentra. And not for $16k the Sentra costs. Maybe for $16k minus $7.5k credit... but no, I still don't think I would. Maybe if gas prices went up. The value just isn't there, it's slow, cramped, utilitarian, all plastic inside, bland outside, and just plain bad. Even if I were a treehugger, I'd just ride a bicycle instead. That said, a certain segment will probably still buy them.
Quote: P90Well, the Hummer usually sells for over $53k. Escalade, more. I've read that the average tax reduction is about $17,500 for SUV filed via section 179.
Will it depreciate to zero in 5 years? That doesn't seem to be the case. So AIUI you can only write off some of the price, and that will come year by year, as you know money coming early has more value.
Also, isn't there a limit of approximately the first $15k of vehicle price, depreciation on which can be deducted as business expenses, with the rest considered a luxury for expenses purposes?
The number I gave is for simplicity and to show that you get a max of 34% or so of the SUV back in tax savings but you get that same amount plus the $7500 *credit* on the EV. No, it will not fall to zero. The IRS does have a depriciation schedule based on estimated lifespans of different items, from computers to cars. I do not remember nor do I care about looking up more detail. Stated simply you depriciate (cost basis) - (residual value) over the number of years of useful life. For the EV you get that PLUS the credit. I never had to deal with a "luxury" limit when I was doing taxes. anything could have changed. Doesn't matter, the extra credit for the EV is my beef.
Quote:I would definitely not buy a Nissan Leaf. Not for $30k post-credit they are asking for this mutilated Sentra. And not for $16k the Sentra costs. Maybe for $16k minus $7.5k credit... but no, I still don't think I would. Maybe if gas prices went up. The value just isn't there, it's slow, cramped, utilitarian, all plastic inside, bland outside, and just plain bad. Even if I were a treehugger, I'd just ride a bicycle instead. That said, a certain segment will probably still buy them.
A certain segment will buy anything. People bought the Aztek.
The analyst I saw was generally upbeat about eventually developing cures for range anxiety, infrastructure for recharging, and patrons adapting to slower speeds. He felt that there was no solution to the high capital investment being asked of customers for batteries which have almost no resale value. Generally, the batteries are at least $10K and usually higher. In contrast, there are no major components of a well maintained gasoline vehicle that depreciate to near zero in five years.
He felt that the only solution was to decouple the price of the battery from that of the car, and to have government support in procuring the battery.
Quote: pacomartin
He felt that the only solution was to decouple the price of the battery from that of the car, and to have government support in procuring the battery.
My, what a suprise!
Lately the Volt has closed their factory while they sell the backlog and Consumer Reports couldn't even get the electric they were testing into the garage. The square peg keeps getting pounded into the round hole.
Quote: AZDuffmanMy, what a suprise!
Lately the Volt has closed their factory while they sell the backlog and Consumer Reports couldn't even get the electric they were testing into the garage. The square peg keeps getting pounded into the round hole.
Edmunds compared the Volt (priced at US$31,712) with the same-size gasoline-powered Chevrolet Cruze (priced at US$19,656) ($12K difference) and found that the payback period for the plug-in hybrid is 15 years for gasoline prices at US$3 per gallon, 12 years at US$4 per gallon, and drops to 9 years with gasoline prices at US$5 per gallon. I imagine that even, 9 years is way beyond the life expectancy of the battery.
So, bottom line the consumer must be an idealist.
Quote: pacomartinEdmunds compared the Volt (priced at US$31,712) with the same-size gasoline-powered Chevrolet Cruze (priced at US$19,656) ($12K difference) and found that the payback period for the plug-in hybrid is 15 years for gasoline prices at US$3 per gallon, 12 years at US$4 per gallon, and drops to 9 years with gasoline prices at US$5 per gallon. I imagine that even, 9 years is way beyond the life expectancy of the battery.
So, bottom line the consumer must be an idealist.
People are math-challenged in the USA.
Yhe sad part is the Volt could make a little sense from an engineering standpoint. Charge a more-efficient electric motor via a liquid-fueled engine by running the engine only at its most efficient levels. The thing is just a miniature diesel-electric locomotive when you get down to it. Yet is still cannot pay for itself.
One thing I saw with it is that the Volt uses the gasoline engine directly, contrary to what GM promised and what seems to be common sense (see above.) I would wonder if it wouldn't be better to have say a small turbine engine charge the battery, or something else more efficient than a piston engine. The value of the piston engine is it gives power NOW while the turbines need to spool up. Not good at the traffic light.
Quote: pacomartinEdmunds compared the Volt (priced at US$31,712) with the same-size gasoline-powered Chevrolet Cruze (priced at US$19,656) ($12K difference)
The sticker price on a new Cruze is $17,500. My daughter just
bought one.
Great car. I recently drove one as a rental and was shocked at how much it felt like an expensive car. Amazing how far we've come in technology where a $17K car now has pretty much the same features and power as a $40K car twenty years ago.Quote: EvenBobThe sticker price on a new Cruze is $17,500. My daughter just
bought one.
3 or 4 hundred thousand miles out of them if take care of
them. Don't abuse the transmission and change the oil when
you're supposed to.
Heh. I abuse the hell out of my car. I don't change the oil but every 6-8K miles or so and don't do any regular maintenance. On the other hand, I'm pretty light on the transmission and the brakes. My last service the mechanic said, "I see you've had new brakes put in." They were still the factory brakes. 83K miles and the engine is starting to sound a little rough. 2007 Ford Focus SE.Quote: EvenBobChevy makes some great mid sized cars, and you can get
3 or 4 hundred thousand miles out of them if take care of
them. Don't abuse the transmission and change the oil when
you're supposed to.
Quote: FaceAnd don't live north of the Mason-Dixon
That used to be true, but not as much now. I see
15-20 year old cars every day with no rust on them.
30 years ago a 15 year old car would be an antique,
now they're everyday vehicles. I have a 93 Jeep I
drive in the winter with no rust and its 19 years old.
20 actually, I got it in Sept of 92.
Quote: AZDuffmanBut why try? Electrics have just a narrow power advantage. Liquid fuel is an advantage everywhere else. You have to be crazy to think electric makes sense for anybody but the person with garage parking in a not snowy area who never drives more than ten miles from home. And their envrioental impact is similar to gasoline cars anyways.
I pulled the list of cars rated 35 mpg or greater for 2012 model. I didn't get MSRP The Volkswagon Passat is probably the cheapest at $20K.
How Volkswagen Brilliantly Cut $7,000 From The Price Of The 2012 Passat
mpg
35 Volkswagen Volkswagen Passat
36 Mercedes-Benz Mercedes-Benz Smart fortwo (CABRIOLET)
36 Mercedes-Benz Mercedes-Benz Smart fortwo (COUPE)
37 Honda Honda CR-Z
42 Honda Honda INSIGHT
44 Honda Honda CIVIC HYBRID
37 Hyundai HYUNDAI MOTOR COMPANY SONATA HYBRID
37 Kia KIA MOTORS CORPORATION OPTIMA HYBRID
39 Ford Motor Company Ford Division FUSION HYBRID FWD
39 Ford Motor Company Lincoln Truck MKZ HYBRID FWD
37 Toyota SCION iQ
40 Toyota TOYOTA CAMRY HYBRID XLE
41 Toyota TOYOTA CAMRY HYBRID LE
42 Toyota LEXUS CT 200h
42 Toyota TOYOTA PRIUS v
50 Toyota TOYOTA PRIUS c
50 Toyota TOYOTA PRIUS
Any opinions on these models?
The Honda Civic Hybrid seems to do the high mpg, by having a small motor
1.5-Liter, SOHC i-VTEC® 4-Cylinder Engine with Integrated Motor Assist IMA®
110 horsepower
Quote: pacomartin
The Honda Civic Hybrid seems to do the high mpg, by having a small motor
They made the Scion look big inside by removing
half the car too. I get it, the Scion is a pickup truck
without the bed.
Settlement a windfall for electric-car drivers
San Diego seems serious about setting up 200 fast charge stations around the county. The Nissan Leaf is not a hybrid, but runs only on electricity. The infrastructure to support this car is developing slowly in California.
Las Vegas currently has about 10 locations where cars can recharge.
I guess some car drivers will try anything by accident.
Who knows what people will try to do with a folding electric car with individual drive trains on each wheel. Especially since the original ones will be rentals. Someone will try to do something with sidewalks or stairs to get around traffic.
These new Chevy Sparks are getting 40 mpg for about $15K. They don't go over 95 mph so they may not be the best car if you are driving outside of urban areas.
That seems pretty economical, and for about the price of the batteries in the CHevy Volt.
Quote: pacomartinThey don't go over 95 mph so they may not be the best car if you are driving outside of urban areas.
Back in 1969-70, I drove a 1966 VW "sedan", i.e., the bug. Its top speed was about 72 mph, even though the speedometer was marked much higher than that. I drove it on the highway all the time. On the interstate highways, it was pedal flat to the floor and leave it there until you reach your exit. I've never had any need to drive faster than 95 mph, and that VW had pretty good low-speed acceleration. How does a "Spark" perform at lower speeds?
Quote: pacomartinThese new Chevy Sparks are getting 40 mpg for about $15K. They don't go over 95 mph so they may not be the best car if you are driving outside of urban areas.
95 mph is a rather insane speed for most highways and freeways.
In Mexico the speed limit is 110 kmh, or about 69 mph. Many people drive faster, of course, myself included in certain highways. Yet I never go higher than 130 kmh, or about 81.25 mph. 95 mph is 152 kmh. That's actively dangerous, even in straight, flat roads with good visibility and a dry roadbed.
Quote: NareedI never go higher than 130 kmh, or about 81.25 mph. 95 mph is 152 kmh. That's actively dangerous, even in straight, flat roads with good visibility and a dry roadbed.
It is fast, but with a proper vehicle, it's a joy. Most car suspensions seem to be optimized for 70, but if you get into a luxury sport sedan, you can cruise the open highway at 95, and still be in complete control.
Quote: DocBack in 1969-70, I drove a 1966 VW "sedan", i.e., the bug. Its top speed was about 72 mph, even though the speedometer was marked much higher than that. I drove it on the highway all the time. On the interstate highways, it was pedal flat to the floor and leave it there until you reach your exit. I've never had any need to drive faster than 95 mph, and that VW had pretty good low-speed acceleration. How does a "Spark" perform at lower speeds?
I believe that the Bug had a 50 hp engine. These new Chevy Spark's have an 85 hp engine which is puny by today's standards. I imagine that you would not have the kind of acceleration for an on-ramp that you are used to having today.
The Spark is four-passenger five-door hatchback. The $12,995 starting price includes such standard features as 15-inch alloy wheels, air-conditioning, power windows, rear wiper, outside temp display and auxiliary input jack. It seems like it is trying to be this generation's bug.
GM is planning to make Spark their first all-electric vehicle option. Available in limited quantities and in select U.S. states, including California, the Spark EV will be powered by a lithium-ion battery pack. No word on what the range or charge times will be. The Spark EV will launch in 2013 in select markets.
I posted this comment in this thread to see what people think about springing for an electric version of this car. The current range is about 370 miles with gasoline, so we can assume that electric is going to be about 100 miles. If the car is $13K base price as a gasoline car, then my guess is it will be $20K for the electric model.
Quote: NareedIn Mexico the speed limit is 110 kmh, or about 69 mph. Many people drive faster, of course, myself included in certain highways. Yet I never go higher than 130 kmh, or about 81.25 mph. 95 mph is 152 kmh. That's actively dangerous, even in straight, flat roads with good visibility and a dry roadbed.
The sports cars usually have a lock so that they can't go above 250 km/hr. My friend used to try to get her BMW above 160 km/hr every single day and not get a speeding tickets, even though her commute on the highway was about 10 kilometers. She was a little insane.
The little sports car that I had could go 200 km/hr. I think I had it to 190 km/hr on a desert road, but it felt a little shaky so I backed off. I have never driven faster then that.
Quote: pacomartinThe sports cars usually have a lock so that they can't go above 250 km/hr. My friend used to try to get her BMW above 160 km/hr every single day and not get a speeding tickets, even though her commute on the highway was about 10 kilometers. She was a little insane.
I rest my case.
The fastest I've ever driven was about 160 kmh, in an old 8 cylinder Chevy Malibu in 1983. I was young, stupid, reckelss and very lucky.
Quote: pacomartinI believe that the Bug had a 50 hp engine. These new Chevy Spark's have an 85 hp engine which is puny by today's standards. I imagine that you would not have the kind of acceleration for an on-ramp that you are used to having today.
Well, today I'm driving a V8 Ford SUV with power I don't have any need for -- I bought it because I thought I was going to be towing a travel trailer, and that didn't happen.
If you are someone who doesn't have any need/desire to drive over 75 or 80 (that's me), the real issue is not the max mph but how quickly will the vehicle gets you to the speed you want. The old VW did pretty well at that with a combination of gearing and low-end torque. It just died out at a modest top speed.
Quote: DocThe real issue is not the max mph but how quickly will the vehicle gets you to the speed you want. The old VW did pretty well at that with a combination of gearing and low-end torque. It just died out at a modest top speed.
Wikipedia says the post WWII bug did 0-60 mph in 27.5 seconds, but I don't know how fast they were by their peak in the 1970's. They were made in Mexico as late as 2003.
Here is a table I found for modern mini-cars. The specs for the Spark are slightly different than the ones in the news today. They have been toying around with releasing this car for several years.
| Car | Model | Doors | 0-60: | Top Speed | BHP |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chevrolet Spark: | 1.2i LT | 5d | 11.7 | 102mph | 79bhp |
| Nissan Micra: | 1.2 Visia | 5d | 13.3 | 106mph | 78bhp |
| Vauxhall Agila | 1.2 VVT s | 5d | 11.6 | 109mph | 92bhp |
| Citroen C1: | 1.0i VTR | 3d | 13.3 | 98mph | 68bhp |
| Ford Ka | 1.2 Titanium | 3d | 12.3 | 99mph | 68bhp |
| Peugeot 107 | 1 Sport | 3d | 13.7 | 100mph | 68bhp |
| Toyota Aygo | 1 VVT-i Sport | 3d | 13.7 | 98mph | 67bhp |
| Volkswagen Fox | 1.4 | 3d | 12.6 | 104mph | 73bhp |
Quote: DocIf you are someone who doesn't have any need/desire to drive over 75 or 80 (that's me), the real issue is not the max mph but how quickly will the vehicle gets you to the speed you want.
I've a rather new Toyota with some kind of 4 cylinder engine (just about every non-luxury sedan these days is 4-cylinder). On flat roads she does well enough, but climbing steep grades really takes it out of her. Unfortunately I face a really steep, very long slope every day going home. I can get up to 40-45 kmh if I floor it. With my old Nissan, I had to nearly over-rev the engine just to reach 35 kmh. I'd love an 8 cylinder right now, more so since my employer now pays my gas.
Quote: NareedUnfortunately I face a really steep, very long slope every day going home. I can get up to 40-45 kmh if I floor it.
While I was driving my '66 VW, I carpooled a daily route on US70 through Organ Pass in New Mexico, between White Sands and Las Cruces. All of the commuters were slowed quite a bit. When I was driving, I had to shift to 3rd gear to make the climb without seriously lugging the engine. Even the carpool member with a Ford Mustang had to shift down. In such a situation, top speed is important, but not the flat road top speeds of 100+ mph like in pacomartin's table. At least they are not important to me.
Quote: NareedUnfortunately I face a really steep, very long slope every day going home. I can get up to 40-45 kmh if I floor it. With my old Nissan, I had to nearly over-rev the engine just to reach 35 kmh. I'd love an 8 cylinder right now, more so since my employer now pays my gas.
Wow, that must be some grade. Where is it?
Mostly in America since WWII the cities won't permit streets to be built to those kind of grades. There are too many costly problems. These photos are from Los Angeles on streets that are very old.
Quote: pacomartinWow, that must be some grade. Where is it?
Paseo de la Herradura, in La Herradura, Naucalpan, Estado de México.
Quote: DocWhile I was driving my '66 VW, I carpooled a daily route on US70 through Organ Pass in New Mexico, between White Sands and Las Cruces. All of the commuters were slowed quite a bit. When I was driving, I had to shift to 3rd gear to make the climb without seriously lugging the engine. Even the carpool member with a Ford Mustang had to shift down. In such a situation, top speed is important, but not the flat road top speeds of 100+ mph like in pacomartin's table. At least they are not important to me.
The run from Toluca to the top of the mountains surrounding Mexico City rivals the San Augustin Pass in New Mexico.
Looking at a map I see
840 feet (256 m) of elevation change in 3 miles (4.8 km) in New Mexico on San Augustin Pass.
1040 feet (317 m) of elevation change in 5 miles (8.0 km) on the road from Toluca.
The fact that the VW bug could even keep up with traffic on that kind of grade is pretty impressive.
Quote: pacomartinThe fact that the VW bug could even keep up with traffic on that kind of grade is pretty impressive.
3rd gear, pedal to the floor.
Quote: pacomartinI believe that the Bug had a 50 hp engine. These new Chevy Spark's have an 85 hp engine which is puny by today's standards. I imagine that you would not have the kind of acceleration for an on-ramp that you are used to having today.
A 1966 bug would likely have a 1200cc 36hp motor although it may have had the recently introduced 1300cc with 40hp.
Quote: Doc3rd gear, pedal to the floor.
With an automatic, I need to floor the throttle so it will engage a lower gear. Since some genius decided to place two speed bumps at the foot of the slope, I need to floor it since then.
BTW, the other day I counted the speed bumps and dips on the route from the office. There are 36 such in an 11 km trip, or an average of one every 305 meters or so (say one every 1,000 feet). That's ridiculous and extreme even for Mex City. Most of them are in a stretch more or less 7 km long.
Quote: kenarmanA 1966 bug would likely have a 1200cc 36hp motor although it may have had the recently introduced 1300cc with 40hp.
Mine had the 1300cc engine and the 1300 chrome ID on the engine cover. I think it also was the last year of the 6 volt electric system.
on everything, but 45mpg in the city and it got me
where I was going. No gas gauge, I used a yardstick.
In 1933, Adolf Hitler got involved, demanding the production of a basic vehicle
capable of transporting two adults and three children at 100 km/h (62 mph).
The "People's Car" would be available to citizens of the Third Reich
through a savings scheme at 990 Reichsmark (US$396 in 1930s dollars)-
about the price of a small motorcycle (an average income being around 32RM a week).
("Fünf Mark die Woche musst du sparen, willst du im eigenen Wagen fahren" – "
Five marks a week you must put aside, if you want in your own car to ride")
Quote: WongBoi feel it only appropriate to again invoke godwin's law and say, VW was a car that the Nazis really loved.
In 1933, Adolf Hitler got involved, demanding the production of a basic vehicle
capable of transporting two adults and three children at 100 km/h (62 mph).
The "People's Car" would be available to citizens of the Third Reich
through a savings scheme at 990 Reichsmark (US$396 in 1930s dollars)-
about the price of a small motorcycle (an average income being around 32RM a week).
("Fünf Mark die Woche musst du sparen, willst du im eigenen Wagen fahren" – "
Five marks a week you must put aside, if you want in your own car to ride")
Ford was selling the Model B in 1933 for $495. Engines were at least 75 horsepower with a speedometer that went to 80 mph.
Does he know something that I don't? That sounds outrageous.
