Who cares about looks! Is there a diesel option??

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

Again you have no idea what you are talking about. The US has plenty of both. Maybe check your facts before talking. Sure they can do with a lot more, since % of total productions is low. And wind energy and solar is defined as a farm not a powerplant.

A powerplant is plant (i.e stationary machinery) which produces power. Duh.

Actually it is already more than 150W/m2 .
That's a peak figuere. Good luck getting it.

Diesels do produce more average power than a petrol of the same kw rating. It's simple, fatter torque curve means more power is available.

If you think hydrogen is an energy source, then you're either a complete idiot or someone who can't even spell thermodynamics. Either way, you're not qualified to discuss energy choices at all.

A polo is not a Jetta.
A Toureg is not a landcruiser.
The 70 series engine is severely derated.
 
Last edited:
Not sure what Bush and US bashing has to dowith anything.

It has everything to do with the value of opinion. I may not have presented all the facts, but you guys are no better swallowing everything your government feeds you... Isn't that slime oozin' out from your TV set yummy!

Funny that the "smart" and "evolved" Canadians use the same amount of oil and energy per capita than the US. See link at bottom.

I don't disagree. But we use a lot of that fuel to simply keep warm and we drive thriftier cars as a group than you guys. Just come up north and check it out. You won't see so many large pickups like you see so many in the US.

There is no unwarrented negative attitude towards diesels on
my side. Just pointed out a number of points to consider.

I'm truly sorry if I offended you personaly, come on now, :crybaby: take a handkerchief, go watch Borat instead ;)

But the problem is there is a definite bias AGAINST diesels in the US and as a satellite to the US, we are suffering from that and it contributes to our poverty. Thank You, Toyota America, nice to have taken over Toyota Canada in 1989 and to have taken our great diesels away. And I'm sick and tired of being treated like a Caveman by the so-called experts who have determined what we want and what we need from afar.

ANother funny thign is that Canadians and Europeans are streaming into the US to live and work here, not sure why they would move to such a backwards country.

Yeah, because we're often more qualified that you guys, so much so that big companies actually scout for talent here. And frankly, where would you be without Albert Einstein, Robert Oppenheimer, Edward Teller, Werner Von Braun, Robert Noyce and Arnold Scharzewnegger, to mention a few...

Like I said before, Americans should get out more and realize, they are not the end-all and be-all of the world!

And if you think I'm "Anti American", you should listen to my American in-laws!!!

And by the way, I LOVE America, great country, love the place, love the people and even love the arguments... Spend as much time as I can there...

Anyway I think the thread is way off topic now. :grinpimp:

Indeed, how time flies when we're having fun, eh? ;)
 
83bj60, I really don't want to get into the whole warming debate too much here (for one I anecdotally see it, but separate thread); curious as to what you mean by New Orleans and this? I'm sure there's some things I don't know about the whole rundown, but my current understanding is the effect of some dykes, not really as much the hurricane proper?

Yes, and how come those dykes couldn't hold? maybe the rising sea level had something to do with it, hmm? Do I really have to spell out what causes it?

If one cannot understand the cause of the problem, one is condemned to suffer the consequences. But if you prefer to think that the flooding of New Orleans was simply an Act of God and that Global Warming is an illusion, be my guest. Just see what the insurers think. That should be refreshing.
 
A powerplant is plant (i.e stationary machinery) which produces power. Duh.


That's a peak figuere. Good luck getting it.

Diesels do produce more average power than a petrol of the same kw rating. It's simple, fatter torque curve means more power is available.

If you think hydrogen is an energy source, then you're either a complete idiot or someone who can't even spell thermodynamics. Either way, you're not qualified to discuss energy choices at all.

A polo is not a Jetta.
A Toureg is not a landcruiser.
The 70 series engine is severely derated.

Go check your own terminology.
Easily achieve it in sunlight.
Diesels do not have a fatter torque curve for similar technology, just higher peak.
You clearly need to check your facts before speaking first. Hydrogen is as much a source as diesel, electricty or petrol, all need to be refined/produced from another form of energy (crude, coal, etc) with additional processing.

Hybrids have more than showed their worth in light applications. Electric vehicles have a plcae and will become more relevant down the line. Electric motors are closer to 90% efficient, thus 10m2 of modern solar panels will easily generate in an hour the equivalent of kinetic energy of 1 gal in a gas car vs an electric motor vehicle. This excludes storage losses, but also excludes regeneration during braking. Your blindess to anything other than diesel is clouding your judgement, and it is clear you should not be discussing alternative technologies.

The speculated TD is supposed to produce 280HP and 500 lb/ft (similar power to what I have listed at 300HP and 500 lb/ft). It will have to be available in the Tundra and other platforms to be viable (think servicing and support infrastructure). Toyota might decide to use the LC as the testbed due to low volumes, before taking it more mainstream.

So it is highly probabe that it will be introduced. which will be great to have another option. Would love to see the technology it includes. ANd then hopefully people can realize it is just another engine and not the second coming of Christ. Good choice for some, not a good choice for others.
 
Here's the solution to global warming!!

Based on this Guatemala should soon become as cool as the north pole!!
 
Toyota might decide to use the LC as the testbed due to low volumes, before taking it more mainstream.

Actually the Tundra is probably the low volume as far as worldwide sales are concerned. The Tundra is a "Made in the USA for the USA" Toyota while the LandCruiser is a worldwide vehicle, many of them will be diesel.
 
It has everything to do with the value of opinion. I may not have presented all the facts, but you guys are no better swallowing everything your government feeds you... Isn't that slime oozin' out from your TV set yummy!
I doubt it, half the country hates the government. Probably more for various reasons.


I don't disagree. But we use a lot of that fuel to simply keep warm and we drive thriftier cars as a group than you guys. Just come up north and check it out. You won't see so many large pickups like you see so many in the US.
DOwn here it is used to keep cool ;)

I'm truly sorry if I offended you personaly, come on now, :crybaby: take a handkerchief, go watch Borat instead ;)
No offence was ever taken. You might enjoy hand parties while watching Borat. Naked hairy men does nothing for me. ;p

But the problem is there is a definite bias AGAINST diesels in the US and as a satellite to the US, we are suffering from that and it contributes to our poverty. Thank You, Toyota America, nice to have taken over Toyota Canada in 1989 and to have taken our great diesels away. And I'm sick and tired of being treated like a Caveman by the so-called experts who have determined what we want and what we need from afar.
Diesel didn't pan out in the past and left soem bad feelings towards it. I grew up with diesels (old slow pickups that tended to be very reliable for the service they had to endure). The new generation diesels have not been on the market very long though (common rail variable vane turbos), and we had some failures with a number of them at high altitude due to turbos overspooling (BMWs mostly). But things improve and get better.

I honestly think it is just a fact that most people have not experienced modern diesels and like with any new technology there will have to be an adoption cycle. And it will go through the normal ups and downs like any other technology. My understandign is 2008 will see a number of new diesel models in the NA, pending there commercial success there will be more. NA loves their diesels in the big pickup trucks, so I don't see why it won't be adopted. But I also don't see it solving the world energy crisis, world hunger, make all women beautiful and easy, get Borat laid with Pam, etc, etc. It is just an engine technology with pros and cons. I just see people going gaga over the pros, but nobody looking at the cons.

Yeah, because we're often more qualified that you guys, so much so that big companies actually scout for talent here. And frankly, where would you be without Albert Einstein, Robert Oppenheimer, Edward Teller, Werner Von Braun, Robert Noyce and Arnold Scharzewnegger, to mention a few...
You wish, BTW I'm a transplant as well.

Like I said before, Americans should get out more and realize, they are not the end-all and be-all of the world!

And if you think I'm "Anti American", you should listen to my American in-laws!!!
Sort of proofs my point above doesn't it. People critizing the US, doesn't know it well enoguh. Or just like to make fun of the Texans like the rest of us ;)

And by the way, I LOVE America, great country, love the place, love the people and even love the arguments... Spend as much time as I can there...



Indeed, how time flies when we're having fun, eh? ;)

Yeah yeah, I will get Ann Coulter to kick your ass canuck :D

Time to get back to topic anyway.

Do you think they will introduce the TD immediately or wait a year or 2 like most models to bring in new options? Gives them time to sort out the bugs in the engine somewhere else anyway :grinpimp: I see no reason why they won't bring the engine in apart from the support infrastructure and associated costs (which is why leverage with other models will be required). Tooling up and training techs will cost big bucks.
 
How many new LC 100s are sold WW annually?

I have no idea but I do know that the Tundra is NOT sold outside of the USA or Canada. So we have a worldwide LandCruiser market and a local North American Tundra market. I probably see 4-5 or more 100 series for each Tundra that has been brought down from the USA here in Guatemala. I'd imagine in places like Australia or the mid-east that the 100 series is probably a pretty good seller and the Tundra is unavailable.

You can be SURE that Toyota's V8 TD will be in a 'Cruiser before a Tundra, but it won't be in a North American market 'Cruiser because folks in North America have a perverse anti-diesel bias.
 
Go check your own terminology.
Easily achieve it in sunlight.
Diesels do not have a fatter torque curve for similar technology, just higher peak.
You clearly need to check your facts before speaking first. Hydrogen is as much a source as diesel, electricty or petrol, all need to be refined/produced from another form of energy (crude, coal, etc) with additional processing.

Sorry, I thought I was discussing diesels and energy sources with someone who had a clue.
But I was wrong about that.

Want to buy shares in my hydrogen mine?:rolleyes:

Check out a diesel torque curve one day.
 
I have no idea but I do know that the Tundra is NOT sold outside of the USA or Canada. So we have a worldwide LandCruiser market and a local North American Tundra market. I probably see 4-5 or more 100 series for each Tundra that has been brought down from the USA here in Guatemala. I'd imagine in places like Australia or the mid-east that the 100 series is probably a pretty good seller and the Tundra is unavailable.

You can be SURE that Toyota's V8 TD will be in a 'Cruiser before a Tundra, but it won't be in a North American market 'Cruiser because folks in North America have a perverse anti-diesel bias.

Well they need to build up the infrastructure to service these vehicles in NA, so I wouldn't expect to see it pop up immediately. Toyota seems a bit smarter than VW with the Touareg and Pheatom (sp?), where they introduced vehicles in markets than had no dealer infrastructure to service such spohisticated machinenary. That why it is crucial to get leveraged technology to recpoup the investment quicker. Somewhere there is always a bean counter lookign at numbers to see what is viable or not.

Actually found this. Total WW LC sales are almost 300K.
http://toyota.alsayeronline.com/English/toyota_models/landcruiser/history/html/sales/index.html

Toyota targeted 200K sales of the new Tundra in the first year in NA. Thus leverage will help a lot to get new tech in. LC/LX sales has been abismal since 2000 in NA, partly because of the Sequoia but mostly due to local market needs.

WW the LC will get the TD, but to get it in NA will require some manuevering and leverage. Teh Tundra will be the perfect platform to share it, whcih will allow ahigh enough volume to make the investment feasible. The gas V8 used that leverage now and in the past, so why not the TD??
 
Sorry, I thought I was discussing diesels and energy sources with someone who had a clue.
But I was wrong about that.

Want to buy shares in my hydrogen mine?:rolleyes:

Check out a diesel torque curve one day.


Pretty pathetic comeback. Unfortunately when someone know they are wrong they resort to insults.

More data and less opinion would have been good.

Maybe you should check out a gas engine's tq curve someday. The current 4.7 V8 in the LC100 here in the US produces 87% or more of its tq between 1200 and 4800 RPM. It pretty much produces 80% or more of it's TQ from 1000 RPM to max RPM (5500). No need for turbos, a turbo gasser typically have even better stats.
 
Well they need to build up the infrastructure to service these vehicles in NA, so I wouldn't expect to see it pop up immediately.

Well they brought in the 3B in Canada without such a fuss, I don't see why they couldn't do it again!

Actually found this. Total WW LC sales are almost 300K.
http://toyota.alsayeronline.com/English/toyota_models/landcruiser/history/html/sales/index.html

Toyota targeted 200K sales of the new Tundra in the first year in NA. Thus leverage will help a lot to get new tech in. LC/LX sales has been abismal since 2000 in NA, partly because of the Sequoia but mostly due to local market needs.

I guess I was right!! I suspect that the price of gasoline has a bearing on the number of SUV's being sold as many folks don't NEED one. I on the other hand need one in the work I do and the one that will eventually replace my BJ60 will certainly have a diesel. Toyota North America can provide it if they want to but if not then I'll get it here in Central America!

WW the LC will get the TD, but to get it in NA will require some manuevering and leverage. Teh Tundra will be the perfect platform to share it, whcih will allow ahigh enough volume to make the investment feasible. The gas V8 used that leverage now and in the past, so why not the TD??

I really can't see Toyota bringing the diesel in. They are too heavily in bed with the hybrids that frankly make their current offerings even less of interest to me than they already are!! Where I work a gasser is too expensive to run, a hybrid would be a maintenance nightmare!! Here in Central America the KISS principle is pretty important and the diesels fit the bill quite nicely.
 
Last edited:
Pretty pathetic comeback. Unfortunately when someone know they are wrong they resort to insults.

More data and less opinion would have been good.

Maybe you should check out a gas engine's tq curve someday. The current 4.7 V8 in the LC100 here in the US produces 87% or more of its tq between 1200 and 4800 RPM. It pretty much produces 80% or more of it's TQ from 1000 RPM to max RPM (5500). No need for turbos, a turbo gasser typically have even better stats.

You want data to prove that hydrogen isn't an energy source?
That's like asking for data to prove that perpetual motion machines don't work.
First law of thermodynamics sunshine.

The torque at 2000rpm in the 4.7 V8 petrol is less than than the torque at 2000rpm in the diesel.
Hence fatter torque curve.
I didn't think the concept was that hard to grasp. Duh.

Turbo petrol engines have fuel economy even more appalling than NA petrol engines. When not boosting you've got a low compression engine with an intake and exhaust restriction.
When boosting at less than WOT you're throttling compressed air. When boosting at WOT you're burning a hideous amount of fuel.

Got any more irrelevant arguments to throw around?
 
DOwn here it is used to keep cool ;)

Good point!

No offence was ever taken. You might enjoy hand parties while watching Borat. Naked hairy men does nothing for me. ;p

LOL... You got to admit he's outrageous!

Diesel didn't pan out in the past and left soem bad feelings towards it. I grew up with diesels (old slow pickups that tended to be very reliable for the service they had to endure). The new generation diesels have not been on the market very long though (common rail variable vane turbos), and we had some failures with a number of them at high altitude due to turbos overspooling (BMWs mostly). But things improve and get better.

Good point; but as you probably already know since you are a Toyota fan, a LOT of this has to do with the dismal standards and reliability of the North American auto industry. As a matter of fact, I read recently that the most reliable NA vehicles are those produced... Right here in Canada ;). Besides, we all know about the problem domestic manufacturers face trying to produce something as good as the competition, I guess they could but are strapped with financial obligations to the old unions and the old workforce with steel clad contracts. I know, a client of mine had one and retired with full benefits at MY age (50!), can you believe it!

As for Toyota reliability, it is definitely there in their diesel engines. Look into what Toyota has offered in the past, and look at the results: the 24 year old 3B can easily reach 500,000 km, is thrifty and works very well in winter. Plus, even when old, although it does puff a luittle when changing gears and the like (newer diesels have a much 'fatter' power band, like Dougal said, the 1HD-T is quite useable on the highway between 1,600 and 2,800 RPM and probbaly even more [haven't tried] while the older generation needed many gears to keep tyhe engine within that usable power band...), and even after 23 years it doesn't pump tons of smoke like the old american diesels did.

I honestly think it is just a fact that most people have not experienced modern diesels and like with any new technology there will have to be an adoption cycle. And it will go through the normal ups and downs like any other technology. My understandign is 2008 will see a number of new diesel models in the NA, pending there commercial success there will be more. NA loves their diesels in the big pickup trucks, so I don't see why it won't be adopted. But I also don't see it solving the world energy crisis, world hunger, make all women beautiful and easy, get Borat laid with Pam, etc, etc. It is just an engine technology with pros and cons. I just see people going gaga over the pros, but nobody looking at the cons.

I have had both types of engines in my vehicles. OK maybe I can't give an unbiased opuinion, because I am comparing how poor the gas engines were in the late 70s - early 80s as compared to the indestructible 3B (which is after all not that much more recent), and also as I had to repair quite a few chevys and fords that crapped out after just 100,000 km... Comparatively, the 3B has been such an OX that I NEVER had to open the valve cover, I NEVER had to replace injectors and I only had to replace glow plus twice in the more than 400,000 km I drove them. And in the end, although it is noiser now and could probably greatly benefit from new injectors and a good valve adjustment, and possibly new rings, that thing still runs using no more than 1 litre of oil per 4,000km and and uses no more fuel than the day I first drove it more than 15 years ago.

In comparison, both my 2F engines in my old FJ40s had engine problems. One seized and could not be repaired, the other burnt valves and required an overhaul. Even as Toyotas, they didn't last as long as the diesels that replaced them in the next LCs I got and consumed much more fuel that the diesels ever did. I remember a 3 hour expedition used to be a major budgetary drain with the FJ40, while I can do the same trip in the HDJ81 15 years later for not much more. On top of that the engine is actually much quieter than the 2F ever was, has much more grunt to move along, to keep up and even to lead the traffic. And I say that comparing it to the 2F powered FJ60 my buddy Pierre had at a time.

If you were nearby, I'd be happy to let you test drive the HDJ81. No one is left indifferent trying the "Beast". Compare it with an FJ80 of the same year and you too, will be demanding diesels...

You wish, BTW I'm a transplant as well.

Sort of proofs my point above doesn't it. People critizing the US, doesn't know it well enoguh. Or just like to make fun of the Texans like the rest of us ;)

Yeah yeah, I will get Ann Coulter to kick your ass canuck :D

Time to get back to topic anyway.

Do you think they will introduce the TD immediately or wait a year or 2 like most models to bring in new options? Gives them time to sort out the bugs in the engine somewhere else anyway :grinpimp: I see no reason why they won't bring the engine in apart from the support infrastructure and associated costs (which is why leverage with other models will be required). Tooling up and training techs will cost big bucks.

Yes, I can see the problem with that, to which you have to add the public image of Diesls in general. However, it's mostly a matter of pure and simple ingnorance. Pepole simply don't know, in the US, how great recent diesels are. Not later than last night, when I was ready to leave for Canada, a lady accosts me in the parking lot in Sanford, surprised I was driving on the right side of the car... She liked what she saw, and didn't even realize it was a diesel until I told her! OTOH, you put that beside a big Powertroke Ford (I can see why they have a loyal following, not only do they impress by size, but also by noise ;), and it's pretty much like any other SUV... Except that it sips fuel like a mid-size car or a minivan...

So... Yes it will get sorted out eventually and we will end up with true high tech and robust diesels in NA. But it will probably not become a truly afordable and common option before 2010, at the least. Unfortunatley, we're behind everyone else in that matter and it's quite possible that we will never, as an industry, recover lost ground. I can see the time fairly soon, when truly world vehicle standards will come to pass, that America will leave Auto manufacturing to foreigners, like they did for cameras and electronics.
 
Diesels do not have a fatter torque curve for similar technology, just higher peak.

Sorry, but you are wrong. Torque especially on new diesels are very broad. I know from using one that's 15 years old already... Actually not much different from driving any large V8 powered vehicle.

the problem is you are comparing OLD american diesels with what is already widely avaliable in Dougal's country, OZ.

You clearly need to check your facts before speaking first. Hydrogen is as much a source as diesel, electricty or petrol, all need to be refined/produced from another form of energy (crude, coal, etc) with additional processing.

Dougal can correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm sure he meant that Hydrogen has to be CREATED from another source of energy such as electricity, which at least in the US, mostly comes from burning OIL and COAL. ...

Hybrids have more than showed their worth in light applications.

In a city application, yes.

Electric vehicles have a plcae and will become more relevant down the line. Electric motors are closer to 90% efficient, thus 10m2 of modern solar panels will easily generate in an hour the equivalent of kinetic energy of 1 gal in a gas car vs an electric motor vehicle. This excludes storage losses, but also excludes regeneration during braking.

I agree, but it is only 'efficient' if the electricity doesn't have to be produced from oil in the first place. Otherwise you are replacing your own power plant in the car with the one from the Utility (which is more likely to be diesel in the fist place ;). OTOH in Québec where I live, we produce electricty from the Sun (hydro) so do not have much of an impact as far as global warming and pollution goes. Too bad our locally invented 'moteur-roue' didn't pan out. I guess with 7 million people we're just too small to think big. Ah well, I guess it's one of the prices you pay to stay by yourself. Don't get me started, these village-mentality politics have kept us in the dark for decades...
 
You want data to prove that hydrogen isn't an energy source?
That's like asking for data to prove that perpetual motion machines don't work.
First law of thermodynamics sunshine.

The torque at 2000rpm in the 4.7 V8 petrol is less than than the torque at 2000rpm in the diesel.
Hence fatter torque curve.
I didn't think the concept was that hard to grasp. Duh.

Turbo petrol engines have fuel economy even more appalling than NA petrol engines. When not boosting you've got a low compression engine with an intake and exhaust restriction.
When boosting at less than WOT you're throttling compressed air. When boosting at WOT you're burning a hideous amount of fuel.

Got any more irrelevant arguments to throw around?

No all the other claims you make.
Point of a TQ curve is to refer to the range of RPMs the engine can supply useful torque compared to its peak, not a hard concept at all. Yet one you botched again. So DUH yourself.
Again read what I write in terms of turbo gas engine, it was refering to torque curve, and you will also notice the new turbo gassers provide better fuel econmy in daily use than NA. Duh.
As usual just your blind opinions, no real data. Go read some and educate yourself on other countries and technologies.
This discussion adds no value to the thread or me anymore. So have fun.
 
I really can't see Toyota bringing the diesel in. They are too heavily in bed with the hybrids that frankly make their current offerings even less of interest to me than they already are!! Where I work a gasser is too expensive to run, a hybrid would be a maintenance nightmare!! Here in Central America the KISS principle is pretty important and the diesels fit the bill quite nicely.

I hope they do if the 4.5 TD is all they speculate. I also think they might specifically for the Tundra as there is a fairly large market for diesel pickups for HD towing. So they might just leverage that for different applications. Current hybrid technology makes no sense for big heavy vehicles, HD workloads like towing and for rugged terrian.

My whole point in the first place was that modern diesels are no longer the KISS that you have and love. They are more powerful, economical, offers much beter operating range, comply with new emissions regulations, but they are a hell of a lot more complex with a ton more technology compared to old diesels.
 
Sorry, but you are wrong. Torque especially on new diesels are very broad. I know from using one that's 15 years old already... Actually not much different from driving any large V8 powered vehicle.
What are to the top and bottom end of the TQ curve for 80% of peak on the 4.5TD we are talking about? Or the TD you are referring too?




Dougal can correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm sure he meant that Hydrogen has to be CREATED from another source of energy such as electricity, which at least in the US, mostly comes from burning OIL and COAL. ...
Hydrogen just as electricity needs to be generated in some way shape or form as well. Oil based products need to be refined. Bio fuels, need to be grown and then refined. SO all of them take processing in one way or shape, but when used in a vehicle or other application they are the source of energy.


I agree, but it is only 'efficient' if the electricity doesn't have to be produced from oil in the first place. Otherwise you are replacing your own power plant in the car with the one from the Utility (which is more likely to be diesel in the fist place ;). OTOH in Québec where I live, we produce electricty from the Sun (hydro) so do not have much of an impact as far as global warming and pollution goes. Too bad our locally invented 'moteur-roue' didn't pan out. I guess with 7 million people we're just too small to think big. Ah well, I guess it's one of the prices you pay to stay by yourself. Don't get me started, these village-mentality politics have kept us in the dark for decades...
An ICE is pretty inefficient at generating kinetic energy form the base fuel. Powerplants are quite a bit more efficient, even with ditribution taken into account. The real thing is, as you rightly say, in finding alternatives to generate the electricity (which is much easier to do than most other forms of energy). Hoem soalr doesn't look very attractive today, but if energy prices keep going the way they are it will get far more attractive in the near future. A number of folks have installed home solar, that feeds to the grid durign the day, that ends up in them having a zero bill to the local utilities at the end of the year. It will be even better to get your daily commute miles the same way as well, thus reducing the overall fuel consumption in the area (which will help stabilize fuel prices for the times when you want to get out of town). Naysayers simply have no vision of the future in this regard, as plugin hybrids will the next phase before battery technology develops to the point where it can be battery driven only (and affordable). Anyhow I digress.

Again we are off in the weeds though :grinpimp:
 
Last edited:
No all the other claims you make.
Huh?

Point of a TQ curve is to refer to the range of RPMs the engine can supply useful torque compared to its peak, not a hard concept at all. Yet one you botched again. So DUH yourself.
The concept of a fat torque curve isn't a difficult one to understand. Yet you've missed it again.
Hint. Fat is not Flat.

Again read what I write in terms of turbo gas engine, it was refering to torque curve, and you will also notice the new turbo gassers provide better fuel econmy in daily use than NA. Duh.

Again I call BS. Show me a turbo petrol car that gets better economy than it's NA version?
The only turbo economy car in mainstream is the SMART. There is no NA version to compare it to.

As usual just your blind opinions, no real data. Go read some and educate yourself on other countries and technologies.
This discussion adds no value to the thread or me anymore. So have fun.

Such a loss. I have formal education in this subject. It's easy to spot those that don't.

Hydrogen just as electricity needs to be generated in some way shape or form as well. Oil based products need to be refined. Bio fuels, need to be grown and then refined. SO all of them take processing in one way or shape, but when used in a vehicle or other application they are the source of energy.

You've finally got it.
I told you many posts back that hydrogen is only as useful as a battery. You're finally comparing it to electricity (or was that a mistake)?

Now you just need to realise that neither electricity nor hydrogen is an energy source. Will you ever get that far?

From generation to use, an electric car will not be much more efficient than a petrol car, probably only on par with a diesel.
Thermal electricity generation can't easily break the 50% efficiency mark, transmission losses and battery efficiency reduce it further. Maybe 30-40% of the generated power will make the road.

Which surprisingly enough is right on par with a diesel cars efficiency.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom