Hydro-Powered Stang
6/14/04, 06:58 AM
#241
Shelby GT500 Member
Join Date: January 30, 2004
Location: Riverside, CA
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Darth Stang@June 14, 2004, 2:16 AM
Safety is what you have seat belts for. The rest of life is clearly labeled "ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK".
The US has been operating hundreds of nulcear reactors (US Navy) since the 50's and guess what, it was the Russians who nearly baked the european continent! Though I haven't read a lot of this thread (surprisingly it's one of the biggest) it seems to spiral down the stairwell of a an Al Gore speech. darn people, this is a MUSTANG Forum, and guess what, MUSTANGs are going to use A LOT of dino-juice.
Environmentalists, you're probably a neat bunch of guys, but why in the h e l l do you want a MUSTANG when you espouse all of these environmental views. It goes against many of the things environmentalists hold dear. It's metal, it's technology, it produces (gasp!) Carbon Dioxide (and Monoxide for those interested in silencing chatty wives) , it uses EVIL OIL, and it has leather for god's sake! (That's ginuwine cowskin for you undereducated types!). Even the V6 is going to be a mother at 210HP. I mean, does anyone here actually buy the story that a V6 will be "more environmentally friendly"? It'll rip the doors off of some sports cars from the 90's! It will still run over recently "liberated" lab bunnies at 90 MPH and not skip a beat!!!
And while I'm ranting, pick a d a m n side people!!! Stop sitting on the fence, you eaither want to drive an H-bomb or you don't, but stop saying maybe! Do you maybe want a MUSTANG or do you want a freakin Prius? I doubt anyone here will pay to convert their 300HP of goodness into 200HP of green machine. Besides, how cool will you look when some ******** in a honda civic SMOKES YOU?
wow, I'm emotionally drained.
-Darth
:jedi:
Safety is what you have seat belts for. The rest of life is clearly labeled "ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK".
The US has been operating hundreds of nulcear reactors (US Navy) since the 50's and guess what, it was the Russians who nearly baked the european continent! Though I haven't read a lot of this thread (surprisingly it's one of the biggest) it seems to spiral down the stairwell of a an Al Gore speech. darn people, this is a MUSTANG Forum, and guess what, MUSTANGs are going to use A LOT of dino-juice.
Environmentalists, you're probably a neat bunch of guys, but why in the h e l l do you want a MUSTANG when you espouse all of these environmental views. It goes against many of the things environmentalists hold dear. It's metal, it's technology, it produces (gasp!) Carbon Dioxide (and Monoxide for those interested in silencing chatty wives) , it uses EVIL OIL, and it has leather for god's sake! (That's ginuwine cowskin for you undereducated types!). Even the V6 is going to be a mother at 210HP. I mean, does anyone here actually buy the story that a V6 will be "more environmentally friendly"? It'll rip the doors off of some sports cars from the 90's! It will still run over recently "liberated" lab bunnies at 90 MPH and not skip a beat!!!
And while I'm ranting, pick a d a m n side people!!! Stop sitting on the fence, you eaither want to drive an H-bomb or you don't, but stop saying maybe! Do you maybe want a MUSTANG or do you want a freakin Prius? I doubt anyone here will pay to convert their 300HP of goodness into 200HP of green machine. Besides, how cool will you look when some ******** in a honda civic SMOKES YOU?
wow, I'm emotionally drained.
-Darth
:jedi:
6/14/04, 03:02 PM
#242
Originally posted by Darth Stang@June 14, 2004, 2:16 AM
Safety is what you have seat belts for. The rest of life is clearly labeled "ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK".
The US has been operating hundreds of nulcear reactors (US Navy) since the 50's and guess what, it was the Russians who nearly baked the european continent! Though I haven't read a lot of this thread (surprisingly it's one of the biggest) it seems to spiral down the stairwell of a an Al Gore speech. darn people, this is a MUSTANG Forum, and guess what, MUSTANGs are going to use A LOT of dino-juice.
Environmentalists, you're probably a neat bunch of guys, but why in the h e l l do you want a MUSTANG when you espouse all of these environmental views. It goes against many of the things environmentalists hold dear. It's metal, it's technology, it produces (gasp!) Carbon Dioxide (and Monoxide for those interested in silencing chatty wives) , it uses EVIL OIL, and it has leather for god's sake! (That's ginuwine cowskin for you undereducated types!). Even the V6 is going to be a mother at 210HP. I mean, does anyone here actually buy the story that a V6 will be "more environmentally friendly"? It'll rip the doors off of some sports cars from the 90's! It will still run over recently "liberated" lab bunnies at 90 MPH and not skip a beat!!!
And while I'm ranting, pick a d a m n side people!!! Stop sitting on the fence, you eaither want to drive an H-bomb or you don't, but stop saying maybe! Do you maybe want a MUSTANG or do you want a freakin Prius? I doubt anyone here will pay to convert their 300HP of goodness into 200HP of green machine. Besides, how cool will you look when some ******** in a honda civic SMOKES YOU?
wow, I'm emotionally drained.
-Darth
:jedi:
Safety is what you have seat belts for. The rest of life is clearly labeled "ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK".
The US has been operating hundreds of nulcear reactors (US Navy) since the 50's and guess what, it was the Russians who nearly baked the european continent! Though I haven't read a lot of this thread (surprisingly it's one of the biggest) it seems to spiral down the stairwell of a an Al Gore speech. darn people, this is a MUSTANG Forum, and guess what, MUSTANGs are going to use A LOT of dino-juice.
Environmentalists, you're probably a neat bunch of guys, but why in the h e l l do you want a MUSTANG when you espouse all of these environmental views. It goes against many of the things environmentalists hold dear. It's metal, it's technology, it produces (gasp!) Carbon Dioxide (and Monoxide for those interested in silencing chatty wives) , it uses EVIL OIL, and it has leather for god's sake! (That's ginuwine cowskin for you undereducated types!). Even the V6 is going to be a mother at 210HP. I mean, does anyone here actually buy the story that a V6 will be "more environmentally friendly"? It'll rip the doors off of some sports cars from the 90's! It will still run over recently "liberated" lab bunnies at 90 MPH and not skip a beat!!!
And while I'm ranting, pick a d a m n side people!!! Stop sitting on the fence, you eaither want to drive an H-bomb or you don't, but stop saying maybe! Do you maybe want a MUSTANG or do you want a freakin Prius? I doubt anyone here will pay to convert their 300HP of goodness into 200HP of green machine. Besides, how cool will you look when some ******** in a honda civic SMOKES YOU?
wow, I'm emotionally drained.
-Darth
:jedi:
You sure are right that you didn't read through the thread. Every single issue you mentioned has been countered many times in the pages before this.
As for why we like mustangs, ever heard of a thing called Styling? I like them because they look good. Other's like them for the power, sound, and speed. All of which can be attained without fossil fuels.
The V6 is the most envromentally friendly mustang available. If you want a mustang and not a gas hogging v8, you get the v6, why? because even though it's not as efficient as a civic or prius, IT'S STILL MORE EFFICIENT THAN THE V8!
If you're going to rant, make sure it's something that doesn't make you look so stupid by actually READING the WHOLE thread.
wow, I'm not emotionally drained. Why? Because I didn't go on an angry rant about something I know nothing about.
6/14/04, 08:15 PM
#243
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: April 18, 2004
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Decipher@June 14, 2004, 1:06 AM
Nuclear is currently not very attractive due to nuclear waste. No matter how little it produces, it lasts for such a very long time that the pollution is handed from generation to generation. Not to mention any radiation. No matter how secure it may be, there's always a chance it could leak, with devastating results. Fission as we know it now isn't all that great, and cold fusion is a long ways off. Yes, all the problems with fission can be remedied or prevented, but as far as a worst possible scenerio goes, hydrogen's is far, far safer.
Nuclear is currently not very attractive due to nuclear waste. No matter how little it produces, it lasts for such a very long time that the pollution is handed from generation to generation. Not to mention any radiation. No matter how secure it may be, there's always a chance it could leak, with devastating results. Fission as we know it now isn't all that great, and cold fusion is a long ways off. Yes, all the problems with fission can be remedied or prevented, but as far as a worst possible scenerio goes, hydrogen's is far, far safer.
And as far as safety is concerned, if we just treated things the way the military does...there are tons of nuclear reactors running subs and aircraft carriers all over the world, without incident.
Thanks for your comments.
6/14/04, 08:31 PM
#244
Post *****
Join Date: May 13, 2004
Location: Berkeley/Redwood City, CA
Posts: 18,613
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
2 Posts
Originally posted by Badandy+June 13, 2004, 10:05 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Badandy @ June 13, 2004, 10:05 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Decipher@June 13, 2004, 5:21 PM
Yeah, hypocrites suck. If there were a way to convert my 82 Nissan over to one of these alternatives without spending more than the car is worth, I would, but alas.
Yeah, hypocrites suck. If there were a way to convert my 82 Nissan over to one of these alternatives without spending more than the car is worth, I would, but alas.
Do you have any figures on the performance of the hydro-powered RX-8? [/b][/quote]
hey bro, check the first couple pages i think someone already posted a bit about it. somewhere around 180hp on hydro and like 240hp (i think) on gas. but i think the low power rating is cuz the bloody thing isnt all hydro, its still half gas. if the whole thing was hydro i think the power output would be substantially higher.
oh yeah and steve19970, i think the main reason no ones really all to keen on nuclear power is, at least this is what i think, it wont sit well with some people. the mere idea of driving a nuclear bomb will scare the S*** out of people. i personally dont think they're that bad of an idea and i dont regard them as bombs, but there are those who are uneducated enough about this technology to think this. im not calling nobody stupid its just that not everyone takes the time to find these things out. and one last thing, how much would it cost to buy radioactive materiel to power your car on a daily basis. i mean isnt that stuff hecka expensive?
6/14/04, 11:16 PM
#245
Yeah, actually that's probably more of a reason than the one's I mentioned before. Cost. It costs a small fortune to run a small nuclear reactor, there is no way we're going to see nuclear powered cars anytime soon. The technology just isn't there to make it an economically viable choice.
6/14/04, 11:23 PM
#246
Team Mustang Source
Join Date: April 22, 2004
Posts: 468
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote from anonymous source:
" The V6 is the most envromentally friendly mustang available. If you want a mustang and not a gas hogging v8, you get the v6, why? because even though it's not as efficient as a civic or prius, IT'S STILL MORE EFFICIENT THAN THE V8!"
Forgive my sarcasm...but that's like an environmentalist saying " I like tactical nukes because they're smaller and less powerful than the ballistic ones."
Sounds dumb don't it? Yeah, because either way, you're still getting a sports car that eats gas and pollutes vs. a clean car that fits your philosophy, you know, like the one in the avatar... The only thing environmentally friendly about a MUSTANG is the climate control system.
:flame2:
- Darth
" The V6 is the most envromentally friendly mustang available. If you want a mustang and not a gas hogging v8, you get the v6, why? because even though it's not as efficient as a civic or prius, IT'S STILL MORE EFFICIENT THAN THE V8!"
Forgive my sarcasm...but that's like an environmentalist saying " I like tactical nukes because they're smaller and less powerful than the ballistic ones."
Sounds dumb don't it? Yeah, because either way, you're still getting a sports car that eats gas and pollutes vs. a clean car that fits your philosophy, you know, like the one in the avatar... The only thing environmentally friendly about a MUSTANG is the climate control system.
:flame2:
- Darth
6/14/04, 11:33 PM
#247
Well, if you had read the thread, as I told you to, you would know that as soon as it's possible, I will convert mine to Hydrogen ICE. I won't be getting one until 2008 at the earliest, so I have a feeling I'll be able to switch to Hydrogen within 2 years from purchase.
No, it does not sound dumb, it's simply stating that if you're absolutely in love with a cars styling and but want to protect the environment, the V6 is the obvious choice. What you're saying is that it's like getting lite beer instead of regular because you're on a diet. Sure, the lite beer is still fattening, but NOT AS FATTENING as the regular. Therefore you're STILL doing yourself a favour and not just going for the fattening one.
I want a "beer". I'm "on a diet". I'm going to buy the "lite beer" instead of the "regular."
Makes perfect sense.
No, it does not sound dumb, it's simply stating that if you're absolutely in love with a cars styling and but want to protect the environment, the V6 is the obvious choice. What you're saying is that it's like getting lite beer instead of regular because you're on a diet. Sure, the lite beer is still fattening, but NOT AS FATTENING as the regular. Therefore you're STILL doing yourself a favour and not just going for the fattening one.
I want a "beer". I'm "on a diet". I'm going to buy the "lite beer" instead of the "regular."
Makes perfect sense.
6/15/04, 03:12 AM
#248
Member
Join Date: June 15, 2004
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Believe it or not, I just read through this whole thread, and am now sold on this hydrogen thing.
It really bothers me how the oil companies and Bush are handling things. Kinda makes you feel like there is no hope for the future, humanity destroyed by human greed.
It really bothers me how the oil companies and Bush are handling things. Kinda makes you feel like there is no hope for the future, humanity destroyed by human greed.
6/15/04, 05:37 AM
#249
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: March 28, 2004
Posts: 609
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sure... when I argue about 10mpg SUVs/trucks nobody needs because they use it for driving to work and to the supermarket every day while insisting it's their freedom to choose whatever car they like I argue about the fact that those people didn't ever spend a second on thinking about
a) the effects on the environment they live in and
B) the future of this planet, the future their very own children have to live in and bear with
but no... people are always complaining about f*ing gas prices and voting for you-know-who every four years.
a) the effects on the environment they live in and
B) the future of this planet, the future their very own children have to live in and bear with
but no... people are always complaining about f*ing gas prices and voting for you-know-who every four years.
6/15/04, 06:01 AM
#250
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: April 18, 2004
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by future9er24+June 14, 2004, 8:34 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (future9er24 @ June 14, 2004, 8:34 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
lol.
Do you have any figures on the performance of the hydro-powered RX-8?
Originally posted by Badandy@June 13, 2004, 10:05 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-Decipher
<!--QuoteBegin-Decipher
@June 13, 2004, 5:21 PM
Yeah, hypocrites suck. If there were a way to convert my 82 Nissan over to one of these alternatives without spending more than the car is worth, I would, but alas.
Yeah, hypocrites suck. If there were a way to convert my 82 Nissan over to one of these alternatives without spending more than the car is worth, I would, but alas.
lol.
Do you have any figures on the performance of the hydro-powered RX-8?
oh yeah and steve19970, i think the main reason no ones really all to keen on nuclear power is, at least this is what i think, it wont sit well with some people. the mere idea of driving a nuclear bomb will scare the S*** out of people. i personally dont think they're that bad of an idea and i dont regard them as bombs, but there are those who are uneducated enough about this technology to think this. im not calling nobody stupid its just that not everyone takes the time to find these things out. and one last thing, how much would it cost to buy radioactive materiel to power your car on a daily basis. i mean isnt that stuff hecka expensive? [/b][/quote]
LOL yeah...actually the car idea was kind of a joke...the probability of collision with another vehicle causing a meltdown or explosion is way too high. And to answer what someone else said, just for good measure, the output from the exhaust would be steam, since that's how nuclear reactors create electricity...through pushing turbines.
I don't see it happening in cars...now in the DeLorean...of course that's a different story.
6/15/04, 04:59 PM
#253
Originally posted by steve19970@June 15, 2004, 5:04 AM
I don't see it happening in cars...now in the DeLorean...of course that's a different story.
I don't see it happening in cars...now in the DeLorean...of course that's a different story.
I love being able to bring this chop out again. I'm so proud of it.
6/16/04, 09:07 AM
#255
Bullitt Member
Join Date: April 3, 2004
Posts: 351
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yaa. thats sort of cool how the votes are pretty even. I would buy a Hydro Powered Stang. For one thing. Ford won't make one until they can get enough power to live up to Mustang Standards. Plus Gas prices are nuts. and there gonna get worse. When winter comes, they might go down a little. but not to what they were. Hydro Powered Cars are a soon must. In Winnipeg( 5 hours from where I live), They have ordered hydro powered buses to be built for the city. They are also building transit roads for them to travel on. But they can travel all over the city. Once we see things like Mass Transit on Hydro. I can see Hydro Power coming to the buyer soon after.
6/16/04, 09:47 AM
#257
GT Member
Join Date: June 7, 2004
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At this point, everyone is getting a little too crazy over something that, as of right now, doesn't exist. I respect the opinions of both sides, but IMO this topic is not worth arguing over. "Why?" you might ask...
Because THERE IS NO HYDRO POWERED MUSTANG. That's not to say that this thread isn't great. It's a really good way to speculate about the future of everyone's favorite car. All I'm saying is I think some people need to step back and take a deep breath. The proposed Hydro (with today's hydro power abilities) would cause Ford to not live up to its high standards of performance regarding the Mustang. However, in the future, when hydro powered performance can rival or exceed today's standards, a hydro powered Stang would definately be the way to go.
I may sound environmentally friendly, but I personally am a performance freak. I put an order in at my dealer last night for my '05 GT
. So think of me what you will.
Of course that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.
Because THERE IS NO HYDRO POWERED MUSTANG. That's not to say that this thread isn't great. It's a really good way to speculate about the future of everyone's favorite car. All I'm saying is I think some people need to step back and take a deep breath. The proposed Hydro (with today's hydro power abilities) would cause Ford to not live up to its high standards of performance regarding the Mustang. However, in the future, when hydro powered performance can rival or exceed today's standards, a hydro powered Stang would definately be the way to go.
I may sound environmentally friendly, but I personally am a performance freak. I put an order in at my dealer last night for my '05 GT
. So think of me what you will. Of course that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.
6/16/04, 10:05 AM
#258
Cobra Member
Join Date: April 7, 2004
Posts: 1,204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Wombert@June 15, 2004, 5:40 AM
sure... when I argue about 10mpg SUVs/trucks nobody needs because they use it for driving to work and to the supermarket every day while insisting it's their freedom to choose whatever car they like I argue about the fact that those people didn't ever spend a second on thinking about
a) the effects on the environment they live in and
B) the future of this planet, the future their very own children have to live in and bear with
but no... people are always complaining about f*ing gas prices and voting for you-know-who every four years.
sure... when I argue about 10mpg SUVs/trucks nobody needs because they use it for driving to work and to the supermarket every day while insisting it's their freedom to choose whatever car they like I argue about the fact that those people didn't ever spend a second on thinking about
a) the effects on the environment they live in and
B) the future of this planet, the future their very own children have to live in and bear with
but no... people are always complaining about f*ing gas prices and voting for you-know-who every four years.
6/16/04, 10:06 AM
#259
Cobra Member
Join Date: April 7, 2004
Posts: 1,204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Gattguy47@June 16, 2004, 9:20 AM
oh yaa I forgot. We won't see Hydro Power for a while I think. Not to the buyer. Why? I'll tell you. Bush is Oil hungry and Oil Companys Control the Worlds Economny
oh yaa I forgot. We won't see Hydro Power for a while I think. Not to the buyer. Why? I'll tell you. Bush is Oil hungry and Oil Companys Control the Worlds Economny
6/16/04, 02:04 PM
#260
GT Member
Join Date: January 31, 2004
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I really wish you would have made the options
Yes
No
Maybe but toward the yes side
Maybe but toward the no side
Just so we can see where the votes would have actually end up..because maybe is defenatly splitting the votes...
Yes
No
Maybe but toward the yes side
Maybe but toward the no side
Just so we can see where the votes would have actually end up..because maybe is defenatly splitting the votes...