JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks


Advertising


Australian Speakers Agency



GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper



Archives

Australian cars fail outdoor emission tests too. To reduce pollution we must only drive in laboratories…

Australian cars just as bad — one hybrid car puts out 400% more CO2 than “advertised”

The AAA tested 30 cars under Australian real on-road conditions and found that like VW and so many others, the cars pass pollution tests in the lab, but fail in the real world:

– Sydney Morning Herald

The report by the Australian Automobile Association, members of which include the NRMA and RACV and RACQ, says real-world testing reveals some new cars are using up to 59 per cent more fuel than advertised. Almost six in 10 exceeded the regulated limit for one or more pollutant in cold-start tests.

The report found that, on average, real-world fuel consumption was 23 per cent higher than laboratory results, including one diesel vehicle that used 59 per cent more fuel than lab tests indicated.

One fully charged plug-in hybrid electric car consumed 166 per cent more fuel than official figures suggest – or 337 per cent more when tested from a low charge. It also emitted four times more carbon dioxide than advertised.

Of 12 diesel vehicles tested, 11 exceeded the laboratory limit for nitrogen oxides emissions….

Environmentalists accused the AAA of “seeking to delay the introduction of new standards” and urged the government to ignore the “misinformation”.

 

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.4/10 (73 votes cast)
Australian cars fail outdoor emission tests too. To reduce pollution we must only drive in laboratories..., 9.4 out of 10 based on 73 ratings

203 comments to Australian cars fail outdoor emission tests too. To reduce pollution we must only drive in laboratories…

  • #
    ivan

    First question, who sets these limits?

    Second question, do those setting the limits live in the real world or la-la land?

    I am assuming the answer to the first question is the green environmental clique and the answer to the second is la-la land.

    We need some people with intestinal fortitude to tell the green environmentalists what to do with themselves and force them to live in the real world where people have to earn a living and would like to keep some of their earned income for later life and not have it taken away by green taxes that do nothing other than make a few very rich people even richer.

    531

    • #
      James Murphy

      Who actually believes the advertising though? Fuel economy ratings seem to be consistently lower than “real world” conditions, so why would anyone expect emissions ratings to match reality? Too cynical, I know…

      As an aside, the main driver (ahem!) for hybrid vehicle purchase, seems to be a desire to spend less on fuel – which I am assuming is a real saving, or the Prius would not continue to dominate taxi ranks, unless there is something else at play, and my sample group is small, and isolated.

      I’ve only met 2 people who seem to genuinely believe that electric cars will save the planet and cannot be questioned on this “fact” at all – ironically, or depressingly, they are husband and wife scientists of some renown in their own areas of expertise.

      220

      • #
        ghl

        Do Priii really dominate taxi ranks? I would have thought them too slow to refuel.

        81

      • #
        Manfred

        …they are husband and wife scientists of some renown in their own areas of expertise.

        James…which merely shows the well established observation that critical polymaths are rare. On the other hand, ideological autism seems to so often isolate the afflicted on their island of critical expertise surrounded by an otherwise grey ocean of intellectual torpor. The Con is a good example.

        120

      • #
        philthegeek

        As a daily driver for mainly around town with occasional country run the Prius is actually a pretty good car.

        That said, buying a new one is probably a bit expensive for the capability unless you are the kind of person who is planning to keep the vehicle for more than 5 years.

        However, with the “real world” fuel consumption i get of 4.6 – 5l / 100km balanced off against the depreciated 2nd hand price…..they are a good value used car. A lot of the urban legend stuff about the batteries and how long they are usefully serviceable turns out to be untrue. Even with a 10 year old battery working at lower capacity than a new one, they work well as a hybrid. If i ever have to replace the battery in mine i’ll look into doing a lithium pack and, maybe a plug in conversion….but not to fussed about plug in.

        On the “label” fuel use i think Toyota quote the 2017 model as having a consumption of 3.9l / 100km? And on my experience of the type that may actually be pretty much in the ballpark for real world. And its got a better suspension so is more of a better balanced “drivers” car. Bigger and lithium battery so while still a hybrid is more biased to electric more often. 2-3 years when they are on the second hand market will be interesting to have a look at.

        60

        • #
          OriginalSteve

          I often wonder tongue in cheek whether Priuses should come with a combo deal…like with the tradies rechargible tool pack whereby one set of batteries will do a grinder and saw etc etc

          That way you could turn your prius into one large battery, much the same as inserting your phone SIM into the dash of a porsche turns it into a $100K phone….

          60

      • #
        Chris

        Prius is present in the taxi ranks because our urge to drive the Australian car industry into the ground has taken with it the excellent factory LPG version of Ford Falcon, which had no problem with lugging around five people and suitcases at a cost per kilometre below that of Prius. Ford Falcon LPi was previously the mainstay of the taxi industry. We will not seek the likes of it again, bacause no one in the word will take time and spend money to optimise a vehicle as an Austrealian taxi.

        20

        • #
          Mark

          No, the reason why taxi ranks are filled with prii and blue oval camrys is five years ago, when excise started factoring onto the cost of LPG, there was a price hike from 36cpl to 82cpl. Use of LPG as a cheap fuel crashed. Trades got rid of their V6 and V8 utes and traded up to diesel four by fours. Taxi companies moved to hybrids in massive numbers. You cannot get greener fuel than LPG yet it has been bagged incessantly.

          20

    • #
      rollo

      Only a few years ago we were celebrating the fact that modern cars with their ECU, catalytic converters and fuel injection were less polluting, more efficient and vastly more reliable than their predecessors with carburetters and kettering ignition systems. Green fanatics don’t acknowledge these innovative improvements and demand even harsher emission controls. What comes out of the tailpipe of a modern petrol engined car is mostly water vapour, plantfood and a few trace gases. Be happy greentards.

      220

      • #
        Hanrahan

        But wait, there’s more.
        Nissan and, I think, Mazda will have compression ignition petrol engines in show rooms in a couple of years and constantly variable electronic valves are working down the food chain. Another 20% fuel economy I suspect.

        20

    • #
      Graham Richards

      Watch it, here comes another of carbon tax by stealth. Anyone noticed that since Trump indicated the dumping of the Paris Accord the tempo of the green left has lifted about 60 points.
      The Globalists/ NWO mob are in panic mode & destruction of what’s left of the western world’s economy is under intensified attack, before the populations of the free world awake from their comatose state. Any excuse however minuscule will be blown out of all proportion & Abbott’s
      London speech has galvanised the Turdball into more action….carbon taxes on vehicles with EU standards for emissions. His bosses at the UN & EU d mand acrion!!!

      11

      • #
        Ted O'Brien.

        No, I hadn’t noticed. that. But the election of the Abbott government in 2013 brought a doubling of the AGW propaganda effort world wide. That increased propaganda has paid off for them.

        We need to make Tony Abbott’s recent speech pivotal.

        10

    • #
      Santa Baby

      We have a New Mazda 3 and an old Polo. Both are diesels. I can get the Polo down to 4,0 liters 100 km and the Mazda down to 4.5 liters 100 km. This on roads with a 80 km/h speed limit. Not possible on roads with higher speed limits. The Mazda weights about 200 kg more. But it’s so boring for me and other drivers behind me. The only satisfaction is driving around 1100 km with a gas tank on 45 liters. But it’s not realistic. They have to be driven in utopia or in Wonderland?

      10

    • #
      Santa Baby

      The results are based on inverted climate models?

      10

  • #
    Lionell Griffith

    If your device has to pass a test dictated by the government before you can sell it and you know the test procedure in detail, you design and build the device to pass the test. That is simply the way it works.

    The fact that the test results failed to reflect real world use conditions is simply a result of the government designing the test. Governments typically confuse themselves with a god. The belief is so strong, they assume reality will conform to their dictates without bothering to verify.

    When reality doesn’t conform, out comes the boots, guns, government thugs, and the full force of the government to rains hell down on the designer and builder. After all, brute coercive force is assumed by government to be the universally efficient cause that will fulfill any governmental whim. That the test was flawed never occurs to them.

    The fix is not still more government intrusion and force. All you need to do is get the government out of the business of setting standards and testing. Let the seller specify what he is delivering and at what price. Let the customer decide if he wants to make the deal. Then if what was promised was not delivered, then the seller should take the heat he deserves. The test is simple. Did the seller deliver what he promised? Yes or no. Under this regime, the seller will be careful what he promises and the buyer will be careful what he buys. The false belief that the government is keeping you safe will not be a factor.

    “But…but…but what if there is an environmental impact and the buyer and seller don’t care?” I say so what? Question: what makes you think that a government that produced a test that failed to measure emissions correctly can determine if there is a environmental impact correctly? They can’t. The government will always presume that because the government said so, it is true without really being concerned that it is in fact true. Nor will it be concerned that it is eventually found to be false. In fact the government prefers to fail because that gives them an excuse to to more of the same on a larger and more intrusive scale.

    If you don’t believe me, find for me one government program that delivered as initially promised, on time, and on budget. You will be hunting a very long time. The critter simply does not exist.

    441

    • #
      James

      A retired engineer from Rover told me that there used to be a fuel economy standard for driving at a flat 50 mile per hour. As a result the manufacturers set the carbs (SU and stormburg) so the needles were profiled to they ran lean at 50mph. So yes they have been doing this for a long time.set them up to pass the test.

      120

      • #
        Another Ian

        Way back when I remember a comment that a good SU man with a jewelers lathe could give you any performance envelope you desired

        30

        • #
          Dave Ward

          SU provided a whole range of needle profiles. If anyone’s interested the following link (1.64MB PDF) is a scanned version of the official SU carburetor tuning manual, with a full list of needles and their dimensions.

          mgaguru.com/mgtech/books/pdf/Tuning_SU_Carburetors.pdf

          The process isn’t really much different to the modern day method of “chipping” an ECU, except us older drivers used a MK1 eyeball and our noses to set the fuel/air ratio, or for better results the “Colortune” diagnostic sparkplug featured at the end of that manual. I still have mine on the garage shelf…

          30

          • #
            Another Ian

            Dave

            Did you ever see one of these?

            http://www.oldengine.org/members/diesel/SUCarburettors/AUD388.htm

            A really clean and neat design. Was on a Volvo. Had a bimetal temperature compensator on the main jet too

            20

            • #
              Dave Ward

              Yes, AI – One of the company vans I drove had that design fitted. But before the HIF6 “integral” layout, some of the earlier types with the float bowl on the side had a “Waxstat” capsule on the jet to compensate for temperature. They were a right bu**er to set up, as working in a hot engine bay meant the mixture kept weakening, and you had to run the engine at a fairly high speed for a minute to get fresh fuel through and cool the capsule down. As for setting up twin carb installations….

              20

              • #
                Chad

                Needle jet carbs are still common on small petrol engines..both 4stroke lawn mowers etc and 2stroke chain saws scooters etc.
                Most are preset at the factory and rarely touched…
                ..But, Carb tuning for Moto X bikes and 2 stroke racing karts is a very complex skill with a huge range of needle profilesand jet sizes to work with, depending on temperature, humidity, fuel mix etc.
                Mikuni, or Dellorto ( float bowl) and Tillotson ( diaphram pump), are the carbs currently used.

                10

    • #
      Will Janoschka

      “If you don’t believe me, find for me one government program that delivered as initially promised, on time, and on budget. You will be hunting a very long time. The critter simply does not exist.”

      I did dat once, 1968 US$60,000; only to be severely criticized by all, even by the customer!

      30

      • #
        Lionell Griffith

        I hear you. Been there, done that, and even brought the project in slightly under quoted cost. Interestingly it was for the same amount. However, it was an add on project to correct faulty work that cost over five times that amount. The program, as such, was way over budget and schedule. It was part of the space effort so the $60K for my part was petty cash that warranted hardly a footnote.

        The program was eventually an operational success and was used for several decades.

        20

        • #
          Will Janoschka

          “However, it was an add on project to correct faulty work that cost over five times that amount.”

          Mine was the opposite, letter contract, a successful attempt of meaningful observation over a 10kHz data link. Ad-dons grew that to US$700,000 before both me and my customer rep bailed out; before the auditors descended!
          Are we having fun yet? :-)

          10

          • #
            Lionell Griffith

            It does show that good work can be done inside a pathological system. Sadly, the effect is in the noise part of the signal to noise ratio.

            Ultimately, even the best of us can’t do any better than the system in which we are embedded permits. The system will soon negate any of the good that we do and revert back to business as usual. It is as if we had accomplished nothing.

            You would expect that if someone shows that it is possible to design, quote, and deliver a difficult project on time, on spec, and on budget, someone would try to replicate it as a better practice. In my 50+ years of such efforts, the practice seems to leave the system when I leave the system.

            This leaves me with the cynical belief that the purpose of such systems is to control a stream of causeless wealth without producing useful results beyond pretty words and pictures.

            10

            • #
              Will Janoschka

              “It does show that good work can be done inside a pathological system. Sadly, the effect is in the noise part of the signal to noise ratio.”

              Many mil-spec manufactures (i.e. electrical connectors) sell the very same part for 1/10th the price without the governmental paperwork. Any Mil-spec by reference brings in all other mil-spec\standards. The AR coating on microscope lenses is still limited by the type of spar varnish used on masts of sailing ships. Oh woha are we!

              00

              • #
                Lionell Griffith

                “Any Mil-spec by reference brings in all other mil-spec\standards.”

                I once attempted to acquire the governmental specification tree documents that were “by reference” in order to discover what had to be done for a project. Each document led to multiple other documents that led to still more multiple documents with seemingly infinite regression. I never got to the last referred document.

                I can’t say referring to one includes all but the referral of one made it impossible for me to know what the project specification was. Hence, I could not complete the project on spec. I created a specification I could deliver and management accepted it. I proceeded to deliver to that specification and got paid for my efforts.

                Thankfully I retired from that scene in 2001.

                10

  • #

    I don’t think anyone has ever believed the laboratory test figures. The simple fact that people drive differently, load their vehicles differently, drive in different conditions, fuel quality varies, servicing varies etc, means that real world tests will always be worse than and laboratory tests. No changes to testing methods will alter this. The laboratory tests are the closest to standardisation that you can get.

    190

    • #
      Dennis

      I agree, but your commented reminded me of some Tesla EV articles I read in NRMA Open Road Magazine over the past year, one was a road test travelling from Sydney to Goulburn NSW and touring using the Goulburn Tourist Information Tesla recharge station.

      Later a Tesla owner wrote a letter to the Editor about his experience after reading the NRMA road test he decided to take a similar weekend away trip and explained that he added an excursion down to the coast from Goulburn and then to Canberra via a different highway, recharging in Goulburn and then expecting to recharge in Canberra.

      He did not consider the extra power his Tesla S would need to climb the rather steep mountain road from coast to Canberra and almost didn’t make it. Electricity usage Sydney to Goulburn was significantly lower.

      140

      • #
        Dennis

        I assume that readers here are aware that the Australian Commonwealth Government has gifted a fleet vehicle leasing company $100 million to encourage marketing and sales of Tesla EV to company car users.

        Another example of socialism, government attempting to pick market winners and losers. Our government has also flagged that they are considering phasing out firstly diesel engine vehicles in the not too distant future. An enormous expense for Australians and then add the enormous expense of rolling out recharging stations around this vast land.

        And, where would the extra electricity come from?

        330

        • #
          James Murphy

          Ahh, the 7 words which induce apoplexy and incoherent ranting in every ardent supporter of electric vehicles…

          Where will the extra electricity come from?

          330

          • #
            OriginalSteve

            From SA….they have excess and can export it via the puppy dogs and rainbows power grid they have stood up just for this lost cause….

            100

          • #
            Maverick

            They are not electric cars, they are “Coal Fired Powered Cars”

            80

        • #
          Hanrahan

          Diesel passenger vehicles will go the way of the dodo and only the nostalgic will miss them. Their pollution problems are well known and insurmountable.
          But Nissan, and I think Mazda, have compression ignition petrol engines coming soon and with constantly variable electronic valves will give us a viable replacement.

          33

          • #
            rollo

            ..and don’t forget that the large number of diesels in Europe and England was due to green incentives because of the lower CO2 emissions. Greentard idiots shooting themselves in the foot again.

            60

            • #
              Carbon500

              Rollo: there’s more on why the EU threw its weight behind diesels. Daniel Hannan, a Member of the European Parliament, wrote a book called ‘Why Vote Leave’ (ISBN (HB):9781784977108, Head of Zeus Ltd), which came out before the referendum which resulted in ‘Brexit’.
              On page 59, chapter 4, he discusses ‘Euro-coporatism’.
              He says (and I quote) “Why had the EU, almost uniquely in the world, adopted standards that promoted diesel emgines? He goes on “The automotive diesel market was almost dead in the late 1980s, when Volkswagen revived the technology with its turbocharged direct injection (TDI) engines. European car manufacturers saw a market opportunity and set about lobbying for Brussels rules that would give them an advantage over their rivals. It wasn’t an easy case to make. Diesel emits four times more NO2 than petrol, and twenty-two times more particulates.” Then he tells us “Most consumers still thought of diesel, with reason, as the dirtier alternative. How were car producers like BMW, Volkswagen and Daimler to ask for a protected market share? Well, they were savvy enough not to put the argument in terms of their commercial self-interest. Instead, they focused on the need to reduce CO2 emissions, and so slow climate change. Alrhough diesel is the filthier fuel in most other respects, it does produce 15 per cent less CO2 than petrol. And so a massive operation was begun to sell the new standard as part of the Kyoto process. Health risks were overlooked and the conversation was skilfully turned to global warming. It worked. During the mid-1990s, the car companies negotiated a deal with the European Commission which prioritised a cut in CO2 emissions over the more immediate health problems caused by exhaust fumes – an arrangement announced in 1998 by Neil Kinnock, then the Transport Commissioner. According to Simon Birkett of Clean Air London: ‘It was practically an order to switch to diesel. The European car fleet was transformed from being almost entirely petrol to predominantly diesel. Britain, along with Germany, France and Italy, offered subsidies and sweeteners to persuade car makers and the public to buy diesel.”

              80

              • #
                LevelGaze

                And now, of course, diesel engine personal vehicles are now being phased / forced out in UK and a lot of mainland Europe, at considerable loss to their owners.

                50

              • #
                Ted O'Brien.

                Print this one out and hang it on the wall. The old rule applies: Follow the dollar!

                Then look into the Montreal Protocol and the Hole in the Ozone Layer.

                I still think my next car will be a diesel.

                00

  • #
    Dennis

    Climate numbers don’t add up

    MAURICE NEWMAN
    The Bureau of Meteorology’s defenders won’t like it, but we need some answers.

    The Australian

    182

  • #
    Dennis

    Rudd (government) upped power bills $7.5 billion

    DENNIS SHANAHAN
    Consumers face an extra $7.5bn in power bills thanks ­to the Rudd government.

    The Australian

    211

  • #
    Dennis

    Back the wind and we’ll be ruined

    IAN PLIMER
    Humans don’t change the climate much — just the laws.

    The Australian

    262

  • #
    robert rosicka

    You would be amazed at the products today that are tested in labs to obtain efficiency data.
    Fridges , washing machines , microwaves , dishwashers etc etc .
    The wattage consumption of the humble microwave can be double what is claimed for quite a few if not all brands .

    100

    • #
      john

      Great point! The hybrid cars have on big problem, when the vehicle needs the extra power, it has to intermittantly start a cold Internal combustion engine. Since the engine is cold as is the catalytic converter etc., the emissions will be significantlt higher until the engine reaches proper operating temperature. Which is almost never…I hope Volkswagen jumps all over this just because.

      120

      • #
        Dave Ward

        It has to intermittantly start a cold Internal combustion engine

        Which, from an engineering point of view, is the worst possible way to treat an IC engine. I would NEVER thrash a cold engine (synthetic oils or not). My brother-in-law once took me out in his hybrid Lexus, and headed out to the local bypass. Our initial drive was on silent battery power, but on reaching the slip road he floored it and I was horrified when the engine suddenly fired up and went to near full revs…

        20

        • #
          Hanrahan

          Which is not the way it works. A hybrid never travels far on battery power alone so never gets cold. You can, however get a few Ks with no engine holding the throttle steady at about 60 Ks.

          The rest is true, you never get good economy with a cold start driving to the shops but the results are good with a warm start. That’s true of all cars though. I would recommend one one for anyone doing a half hour plus commute.

          00

    • #
      clivehoskin@yahoo.com.au

      A few times whilst waiting for my car to be serviced,I have picked up a magazine featuring 4 wheel drives.On reading some of the performance articles,particularly power figures and fuel consumption,I always have a chuckle to myself,because most of the time the stories contradict themselves.Fuel consumption can very from the sublime to the ridiculous,like 10 liters per 100KM and actual millage of 15 liters per 100KL.

      10

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        My mate who goes 4WD-ing rates his trips in litres/hour once youre off the tar…makes the greenies heads explode it does….but who cares….

        When you have 4 tonne of dead weight being hauled up a 45 degree slope by a big V8, the last thing you worry about is CO2….rollover…yes, being stuck out in the bush…yes…..CO2…..no…..

        80

      • #
        Sceptical Sam

        15 litres/100km you say. Wow, that’s impressive. Sounds like an under-powered, unreliable Nissan.

        When I drive my Cruiser at 140kph towing my camper-trailer across to the east coast every summer I can actually see the needle moving on the fuel gauge. It always moves down of course (except when I fill the tanks, when it moves up – but I don’t see that ’cause I’m holding the nozzle).

        I reckon when the air-con is on full bore and we’re crossing the Hay Plain (a dead pull either way) I get about 20litres/100km. The servo owners always phone ahead to Balranald to tell them I’m on my way and to make sure they’ve got plenty of fuel in the bowser. Sometimes the local servo owners put up celebratory bunting to welcome me, along with a brass band and hot pies. Sometimes they don’t.

        40

    • #
      James

      Did you hear about the new energy efficient vacuum cleaners? They use half the power, and don’t suck!

      170

  • #
    Graeme No.3

    “Environmentalists …. urged the government to ignore the “misinformation”. I like that. Perhaps we can apply the same rule to environmentalists?

    161

    • #
      Dennis

      “socialism masquerading as environmentalism”

      131

    • #
      William

      Environmentalists …. urged the government to ignore the “misinformation”. This is precisely the response you get over at the Fairfax Collective when you present them with inconvenient facts that counter their AGW/MMCC beliefs. They refuse to read anything you link to – some go to skepticalscience.com to try and rebut the facts (that site, even for a non-scientist like me is so easy to shred). But generally, they will get shouty about facts that they decide are misinformation.

      50

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        DOes anyone actually take the Faux-Facts Collective seriously?

        I dont think anyone does…similar to the Australian Bolshevik Collective….

        20

        • #
          William

          No, it is hard to take them seriously – although I always look at the links they provide to support their arguments – always the same ones and generally ones that have been debunked years ago.

          40

  • #
    Another Ian

    Keep an eye on Small Dead Animals posts on the Canadian standards organization for interesting reading on standards.

    And on media standards


    Kevin | October 22, 2017 2:55 PM | Reply

    It has been pretty obvious for a very long time, they don’t ever get anything correct. From the 100% chance Hillary wins in a landslide, to Brexit has no chance, to unreliable power is cheaper than reliable coal/nuclear/nat gas/hydro/… Anyone who still believes anything they have to say, richly deserves what is coming their way. Reality is ignored at your own peril.”

    http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/2017/10/stop-believing-.html#comment-1131801

    140

  • #
    Robdel

    If the greenies attempt to limit car usage because of environmental concerns that will only accelerate the revolt of the plebs.

    151

    • #
      Dennis

      I wonder if they realise that the average Aussie drives an older vehicle and on average pay around $5,000 for a second hand car? So I read not long ago.

      Government and company fleet vehicles are the source of 2-4 year old vehicles for the average second hand buyer.

      So this government hands over $100 million for promotion of Tesla EV to fleet buyers. The second hand market will be, given that Tesla S sedans are the price of about four equivalent Toyota petrol engine cars?

      And what about the battery pack after, say, 3 years of possibly intermittent operation and charging? Who will be willing to risk incurring replacement cost?

      130

      • #
        KinkyKeith

        A lot of hidden CO2 involved in “electric” vehicles.

        Even the extra purchase price has to be saved up. How many extra months of to and from work required to make up the difference? Think of the extra fuel, wear and tear on the car.

        These electric cars are not carbon neutral and overall are very environmentally unfriendly.

        KK

        141

      • #
        Chad

        Tesla batteries have an 8 year warranty.

        68

        • #
          Graeme#4

          If you are going to submit your battery pack to lots of fast charging, I doubt that you will obtain 8 years life out of it. Since they use previous-generation laptop batteries, their expected lifetime should be similar to that of earlier laptop batteries and surely power tools that use lithium cells, and in my experience this never gets close to 8 years. It’s interesting to read the comments from Tesla owners about the battery life of their cars.

          132

          • #
            Chad

            Graham…you need to check your sources more carefully.
            Tesla battery cells, are nothing like lap top cells.
            Chemistry, capacity, performance, even size and shape ore totally different..
            Battery packs like Tesla’s are not the ultimate solution for transportation ..(too big, heavy, expensive, and not enough capacity)…. But they do perform well within their limits.and deserve credit for pushing transport development a little bit further away from the oil well and traditional thinking.

            26

            • #
              robert rosicka

              So Chad , what’s wrong with oil ? They’re still pumping it .

              31

              • #
                Chad

                Nothing wrong with oil…
                Its grear for salad dressings and cooking !
                ..its also a very dense and useful energy source, but it needs a dumb inefficient mechanical engine , and gearbox, to use it.
                Electric drive is much smoother, quieter, cleaner, and more suited to vehicle propulsion.

                13

            • #
              Graeme#4

              The name’s Graeme Chad, not Graham. If my battery info source is wrong, then perhaps you had better inform Wikipedia. (What, Wikipedia is wrong, who would have known?…) The Wikipedia statement is “The cells are of the 18650 form factor commonly found in laptop batteries”. And I didn’t say that they are still used in newer laptops either, only that they WERE used. Look at my words again – I clearly say “previous generation”. And we both know 18650 cells are still used in Models X and S, so what’s wrong with what I said? The batteries are also used in vaporisers and torches.

              10

            • #
              Graeme#4

              And I notice Chad, that you didn’t challenge me on my main statement about battery life. But then we would need to discuss charge/discharge profiles and their impact on battery lifetime, then try to determine how most Tesla drivers charge and discharge, which opens a rather large can of worms.

              20

              • #
                Chad

                Here you go Graeme..
                Knock yourself out with data..
                But i suspect you will conclude the battery will outlast the owners love afair with the car..
                https://electrek.co/2016/11/01/tesla-battery-degradation/
                And whilst the cells may be the 18650 form factor, they are custom produced to teslas spec with many characteristics, features, and performance results very different to other cells of similar appearance.
                Sorry about the spelling..using a mobile.

                00

      • #
        Graeme#4

        Had a quick look at used Tesla car prices. Surprisingly, the prices are holding up well, comparable to used ICE vehicles. However, currently the only used Teslas on sale are the higher-priced models, so perhaps having to also buy a new battery pack doesn’t deter potential buyers.

        50

        • #
          OriginalSteve

          Or they turn them over just days before the warranty expires…which a lot of prestige car owners do….

          20

  • #
    tom0mason

    I wonder if a horse and cart passes the emissions test?

    120

  • #
    Bodge it an scarpa

    Most of us who drive old school carbureted cars have noted that our vehicles perform better and use less fuel on journeys on a cool evening than in warmer conditions. The denser cool air gives a type of supercharging/ intercooling effect similar to more modern turbo charged/ intercooled vehicles. Motor vehicle manufacturers quoted performance and fuel consumption figures are sometimes based on laboratory tests under controlled atmospheric conditions with power sapping ancillaries such as water pumps, alternators, power steering pumps,even complete exhaust systems etc disconnected. My old Series 2 LandRover owners manual quotes Max 77 brake horsepower on bench (lab), and 67bhp when installed in the vehicle. I could have it the wrong way round but the former test figure was produced under SAE standards whilst the latter real world figure was produced under European DIN standards.
    I suspect the former method is still used by the manufacturers that are the subject of the above article.

    71

    • #
      Bodge it an scarpa

      I no longer have the LandRover owners manual, but from memory it quoted ‘specific fuel consumption’ figures for bench test, and after engine is fitted to vehicle. This seemingly more honest practice of quoting both sets of figures was due to the fact that LandRover also marketed their engines for stationary industrial uses where power sapping ancillaries could vary from those fitted to the actual LandRover vehicles.
      Perhaps modern vehicle manufacturers should be compelled to quote real world consumption, power and emissions figures, or at least state that the published figures were produced under lab conditions.

      61

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        My old analogue phone had a cord on the handset so you could sit more than the 1m away the manual recommended.
        They also recommended not touching the antenna while transmitting. I could crank up to 5W and was a brilliant and reliable phone…

        They decomissioned 1G and handed the spectrum to 4G so people can put photos of kittens and blurry drunken photos of themselves online….and they call that “progress” apparently….I shake my head….

        60

      • #
        Another Ian

        See if you can find a copy of the Haynes workshop manual for the RR Merlin for more on charge density etc. The reason RR used carburettor fueling before the supercharger was to get the cooling effect of fuel evaporation on charge density.

        The old SAE horespower ratings were a bit like BOM record temperatures – a fleeting glance with everything off. I think SAE may have changed that these days.

        50

        • #
          Another Ian

          And (btw) injection carburettors did away with the inverted flight problems of early Merlins.

          50

          • #
            Bodge it an scarpa

            Wasn’t it a diaphram,with a small hole that was added at the top of the float chamber that solved the Merlin’s dive and inversion issues ? The modification was apparently designed by a female engineer at RR whose name I can’t recall.

            30

            • #
              Graeme No.3

              Known as Miss Shilling’s Orifice in those politically incorrect times.

              70

            • #
              Another Ian

              That was a sort of fix for the early float type carbs. Gets mentioned in that Merlin book.

              Design aim for the first Merlin was 750 hp. Last series were just over 2000. You don’t usually think of RR as “hotrodders in suits and bowler hats”

              40

              • #
                Bodge it an scarpa

                I’ve read that although the RR Merlin was instrumental in winning the Battle of Britain, it was actually the “more reliable” Packard built Merlins that played a bigger role in winning the war and establishing the so called Merlin myth among enthusiasts.

                21

              • #
                rk

                The reason the Merlin went from 750 h.p. to 2000 h.p. was the adaption by Stanley Hooker of a two staged super charger with and inter cooler which added 70 knots and 10,000′ of altitude to the Spitfire. This was on the Mark 9 Spitfires and those that followed. He was also responsible in fixing the huge problems with the RB-211 engine that sent Rolls Royce broke in 1971. The subsequent RB211 – 514 engine become one of the most preferred engines on the later big jets because of it’s better fuel economy.
                ” Not Much of an Engineer” is a great book on Stanley Hooker.

                70

              • #
                Another Ian

                RK 100 and up octane fuel had a lot to do with the performance gains too. The last ones could use 145.

                According to that Merlin book the ones produced by Packard were following developments by RR to maintain interchangability. They did use US accessories like magnetos to avoid the problems of supply from UK.

                More in that book – recommended if high level spanners are your thing. “Rolls Royce Merlin 1933-50 (all engine models). Owners Workshop Manual” Haynes.

                Also interesting how they were developed to stand 8 or so hours at full throttle. I knew a Lancaster flight engineer who had the ultimate respect for RR. He’d been through one of the engine management courses and reckoned RR really knew its product. “Taught you how you could go within about 99% of wringing the neck of a Merlin without actually succeeding”.

                40

              • #
                Wayne Job

                RK That big bypass engine of RR had carbon fibre first stage fan blades that were doing very well until in test they flew into a tropical downpour of Noachian proportions and the blades disintegrated. Yankee Westinghouse helped them out with a titanium blade fix.

                10

            • #
              Wayne Job

              The Packard merlin was indeed different, RR would not use gaskets and assembly was hand scraping cylinders and heads to match. The Yanks in their wisdom used gaskets and could pump them out of their factory like sausages.

              10

        • #
      • #
        Another Ian

        There was a BSS for engine performance which required fuel consumption in “lbs/bhp/hour” which Southern Cross used on their older diesels

        IIRC they were something like “within 0.45 pints/bhp/hour” – but that was in a long ago catalogue so might not be right. In real life our YC uses about 2 gallons in a 10 hour pumping shift which calculates as around 3.5 bhp which is within belief.

        40

  • #
    PeterS

    Pretty much every device or service on the market would fail a “real life” test. Marketing is way up there in the scale of telling fibs. Talk to anyone who used to work in a computer software or hardware company, and is now open and honest. Not sure we can do anything about it except to make buyers more aware by funding and supporting an agency that does all the tests necessary to reveal the truth. That would cost a lot so not sure if it’s worth it. It would be if one believes in honesty and the truth, but then again not many do if they had to pay for it.

    60

    • #
      Dennis

      It’s alright to publish deceptive information as long as it is referred to as marketing hyperbole and puffery, a legal letter advised me many years ago from a competitor client defending “hyperbole and puffery”.

      10

      • #
        PeterS

        That sort of agrees with my experience. The thing is it means companies knowingly treat their clients and customers as fools. Just as well there is no law against that practice otherwise we would have millions of people more behind bars.

        00

  • #
  • #

    The first and most effective way to reduce vehicle emissions is to have a serious mass transit system such as exists in some cities already – but not in Australia. And it’s too late now.

    Sustainable Development likes to inflict light rail on cities which cry out for a proper metro system where the rails and roads do not share the same space. So the light rail obstructs the cars, which obstruct the light rail, and everything costs too much because the User Pays system, so beloved of the Green Left since they discovered the “market”, also means that these expensive toy trams cost too much to ride on. Instead of taking pressure off roads, public transport becomes a public tax and private trough which gobbles up precious road space.

    And you still can’t get where you’re going. But maybe that’s what they want. Globalists want very strange things.

    120

    • #
      Another Ian

      M

      Keep an eye on

      http://www.coyoteblog.com/

      for financial and other data on the “raging success” that is light rail in Phoenix Az – or scroll back for previous posts

      50

    • #
      Graeme#4

      In Europe light rail works well when they run it underground close to the city centre, only coming above ground a few kms out in the suburbs.

      40

      • #
        David Benn

        When the first phase of the Edinburgh to Edinburgh airport tram line was built, it was reputedly calculated that it would have been cheaper to pave the route with gold…..

        (I think the calculation was done using gold leaf, but even so…..)

        10

    • #
      David H

      While autonomous vehicles aren’t quite there yet, even quite far away just now, I can’t see them not being the future. And I think that will make HUGE changes to the way we live. Looking N years into the future, my 3-car garage may have been converted into another purpose (huge train set?) because I won’t own a car. When I need to go anywhere, I’ll just summon a vehicle to pick me up, drive me to the shopping centre where I get left at the entrance and the car buggers off, to another job or perhaps a waiting area where others have ordered – as part of their checkout – a car to be ready for them at the exit to take them home. Gone will be the vast car parks we now have to drive around, desperately looking for a free space. What about about the wonderful Sydney light rail? It may remain useful for those who want to get on where it starts and get off where it goes to. But others may prefer to be picked up from their home and dropped at the very door of their destination, then their ride goes off by itself to another job or a marshalling area. Road congestion could be a think of the past, as the motorways become 100% efficient with convoys of autonomous vehicles taking up minimum space at optimum speed. It can all happen through market forces, fixing problems that the heavy hand of government has cocked up for years.

      00

  • #
    Carbon500

    I’ve always said that the car manufacturers should hire some proper scientists (as opposed to say, climate computer modellers or IPCC stooges) and challenge the CO2 nonsense.
    If memory serves me well, I recall that the atmosphere contains about 3,000,000,000 tonnes of CO2.
    So what difference will electric cars going to make?

    81

    • #
      Bodge it an scarpa

      Yes, we need a coalition of auto manufacturers, and/ or from other heavy engineering industries, that will have real political clout so as to mount a serious challenge in the World Court to the Green Climate Change, Save The Planet, Renewable Energy dogma.

      50

  • #
    Carbon500

    Typo alert! I meant ‘So what difference will electric cars make?’
    It’s getting late……

    30

  • #
    David Maddison

    The test is no more than a standardised procedure to give a set of numbers that should only be treated as relative figures. Because of wildly different driving habits and usage conditions it is basically impossible to design a real-world test.

    In any case, why is CO2 measured at all when it isn’t a pollutant? The other exhaust gases measured are only a problem in certain cities with a propensity to develop photochemical smog. In other areas pollution controls should automatically be turned off to improve fuel efficiency and power, the specific area the car is in determined by GPS.

    93

    • #
      Another Ian

      DM

      Another case of YMMV

      20

    • #
      Bruce J

      DM. You’re about right. The whole idea of the fuel consumption figures was to give potential customers numbers from a standardised source so they could compare various cars. Nobody ever suggested (years ago, when they were introduced) that owners would actually achieve the quoted figures. After all the biggest factor influencing fuel consumption is the driving style. To quote from personal experience, In two consecutive weekends, driving the same car, same fuel,etc, I achieved 72 miles per gallon (that’s how long ago it was) and 9 miles per gallon. Both were in competitions – the first in the Mobil economy run and the second in a Six Hour race at the old Caversham circuit in W.A. (Yep, ancient history). Extreme cases, but they show how much driving style can impact on fuel consumption.

      So any lab. test can only give figures under controlled conditions for comparison purposes. The so-called “real world testing” conducted by the AAA is not under truly controlled conditions as there are still many variables, besides driving style, such as ambient temperature, road conditions, traffic and congestion, fuel age, engine temperature, tyre pressures, etc. etc that impact fuel consumption.

      My final comment – just another “Greeny” beat up to look like they are doing something.

      51

      • #

        what the tests show is actually that they do not

        give potential customers numbers from a standardised source so they could compare various cars.

        the test data is hopeless at this. And these greenies found that by far the worst examples of misleading results was the electric vehicles. Disloyal greenies.

        22

  • #
    TdeF

    Relevant but off topic, the Australian has two great articles on the Global Warming scam behind all this. One by Prof Ian Plimer and the other by Maurice Newmann. Both express utter frustration with the Climate Change scam and seriously question the many people involved including the BOM, but the list is endless.

    In all this you have the stolen and fake ‘Conservative’ government in Canberra. The Liberal controlled upper house in Victoria passed Andrews’ bill banning gas exploration and now we have a growing shortage and prices rocketing. Andrews forced Hazelwood to close by tripling coal prices and Turnbull said that was a private matter. Now the Victorian euthanisia law is being passed and once again Turnbull says there is nothing he can do while he knows Liberal MPs will vote for it. No question where his progressive beliefs lie.

    At what point did the Australian Liberal party agree to banning gas exploration, shutting coal power stations and now supporting euthanasia, against the wishes of the bulk of Australians. That’s without mentioning the poll.

    What does it matter if hybrids output CO2? Journalists do too. So does everyone complaining about CO2. Their fairy land must come to an end.

    Every living thing outputs CO2 but the biggest source of CO2 is the ocean, 50x as big as all the land and air combined and this is controlled only by temperature. The progressive fantasy world where you can have energy without CO2 is ridiculous, unless you are talking about nuclear and they have banned that too. Clearly Turnbull is leading a Green Labor party.

    Given Australia does not make cars or aircraft and only pretends to make submarines when we are importing them, what choice do we have in any of these things? Our CO2 is emitted in China to warm and aircondition their homes, CO2 we are not allowed to release in our own country. What point then electric cars in a place with not enough electricity and the world’s highest prices? Giant batteries to make wind viable, at any cost?

    Will the Liberal party of Australia please get rid of the man who supports stopping gas exploration, closing coal power stations, shutting manufacturing and enthanasia and pleasing his little ‘progressive’ group of self important like minded friends? His attitude though, as shown last week, is that what Malcolm and his wife want, they get. This is a dictatorship, not a democracy.

    172

    • #
      TdeF

      On topic, of course hybrids make sense. Great idea. The 70 tonne tanks in WWII were driven by electric motors. It is a great way to save energy and saving energy doubles power reserves.

      However you only a precise amount of CO2 per litre of petrol or diesel. That is stoichiometric chemistry, not opinion.

      Then how much petrol you use is related solely to how much energy you use. Drivers and the terrain and speed determine that. How do you simulate that in a laboratory? How do you average flat Melbourne with hilly Sydney and country cruising with stop start driving? As energy needs to overcome air resistance vary with the square of the speed, a 20% increase in average speed means a 40% increase in petrol consumption.

      However CO2 is an evil pollutant. Better send it all to China. We do not want it ruining the grapes in South Australia.

      91

      • #
        TdeF

        However you output a precise amount of CO2 and H2O per litre of petrol.

        62

      • #
        LevelGaze

        TdeF

        “70 tonne tanks in WWII were driven by electric motors”

        I suspect you’re being sarcastic!

        20

        • #
          TdeF

          Really, electric drives were common. A lot less to go wrong in the drive train, a lot less mechanically. Diesel generators driving huge electric motors. Also as the war ended, the Germans had a great lead in Lithium batteries and their 65 very fast new electric submarines would have been unstoppable. The Russians grabbed them. A German friend’s father was held by the Russians after the war in Irkutsk, so they could study Lithium batteries, the same ones which power your phone and now start your car. Super compact.

          An amazing number of advances from mass production of antibioties to jet aircraft, radar, microwaves, cataract replacement, hip surgery, plastic surgery, refrigerators, television.. came out of the war. Plus the realization that electric motors could both use and generate power. Would be US President Joseph Kennedy was killed flying a drone filled with plastic explosive and with two TV cameras for guidance. It exploded prematurely over Kent before he could jump out. Ultimately his younger brother was president. So drones, remote control, TV and battries.

          The war developments have saved countless lives since and the mass production taught by Henry Ford to the Nazis created the consumer society after the war, the greatest threat to Marxism. Poor old uncle Karl had never thought of making the poor into the world’s biggest consumers with cash and holidays. Still people push the Socialist barrow, without any idea that they are so 1860.

          What is hard to understand is that the socialist like the Turnbulls still believe in a failed socialist ideology, despite their massive wealth. Russians would love to have our quality of life.

          20

          • #
            Chad

            ..and, until H Ford started making petrol cars available cheaply, (1900), 90% of all the Taxis in New York were battery powered electric drive cars.

            11

          • #
            Bodge it an scarpa

            A British series I watched years ago on PAY TV about restoring WW2 tanks, mentioned that as the German Tiger Tanks became heavier as the war progressed, they began to suffer transmission and final drive breakage due to the use of straight cut (spur) gears. No mention of Diesel Electric drive though. Being a bit of a gear head, I recall them contrasting them with the US heavy tanks that employed Herringbone gears in their final drives that were much stronger with significantly greater tooth contact area.

            00

            • #
              Another Ian

              Um!

              Then just why were herringbone gears tried in aircraft engine propeller reduction drives and abandoned for straight cut gears?

              “Despite the quietness of herringbone gears, a great many designers until very recently have preferred to accept the roughness of straight cut gears as the price of greater strength” Herschel Smith “A history of aircraft piston engines”

              And IIRC the final drives of dozers are straight cut. Interesting story is that Allis Chalmers financial problems weren’t helped by the axing of an export order of HD 41 dozers to Russia on the grounds of technology transfer as their finals lasted better than the then current tanks of both sides.

              00

          • #
            Chad

            Also as the war ended, the Germans had a great lead in Lithium batteries and their 65 very fast new electric submarines would have been unstoppable. The Russians grabbed them. A German friend’s father was held by the Russians after the war in Irkutsk, so they could study Lithium batteries, the same ones which power your phone and now start your car. .

            Wow ! I hope you can verify that, !
            Because there are a few folks at Stamford who claim they were the first to figure out how to store electricity using Lithium ions in a battery…in the 1970s !
            Mr Goodenough, is also recognised as the man who developed the first operational Lithium cell (1980s) as later commercially developed by Sony in the 1990s

            00

    • #
      David Maddison

      Well said, as usual, TdeF.

      53

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      And how many times have I said Australia is a one-party system thats globalist to its core?

      The only real option we have is to vote out anyone who advocates anything to do with the CAGW scm ( regardless of which party it is ), and keep them out of office until they give up.

      I’m happy to have a country slightly destablized for 5 years if it means we bar the globalists and thier puppet pollies from wrecking it. It would be a small price to pay to drain the swamp….

      91

  • #
    TdeF

    While we debate the virtues and chemistry of hybrids, across the news, even Labor ex Prime Minister Paul Keating has attacked Daniel Andrews euthanasia law. All the churches, notices everywhere and not getting any press. Of course Tony Abbott.

    However Turnbull says there is absolutely nothing he can do and he does not even offer an opinion. He certainly would not interfere with Victorian politics where Liberal members are voting for this bill?

    How much longer do we have to suffer an ultra rich Labor Green couple who have purchased the Australian Liberal party for $1.75Million? There is not even a pretence of democracy.

    It is a plutocracy “government by the wealthy”
    and/or
    an autocracy “a state or society governed by one person with absolute power.”

    120

  • #
    PeterS

    When will we “Westerners” going to wake up? So some are worried about CO2 emissions from cars not being reported truthfully. So What?! Let’s get back to reality and look at the big picture, and in context. China alone increases their CO2 emissions EACH AND EVERY YEAR (and perhaps even every WEEK) far more than what we could ever reduce it by fiddling with our cars or replacing them with electric ones. China would have to join the “game” to make a real difference – and guess what – they won’t! Neither would India and many other non-Western nations. I now firmly believe the West has caught some terminal mental illness probably transmitted from the left. When the West finally collapses, and it will just like any past great and powerful nation or group of nations, mankind will look back in amazement as to how foolish the West was.

    110

    • #
      TdeF

      The reality is that the CO2 problem is one invented by self labelled ‘progressive’ politicians who want to drag Australia back in to a stone age. The bulk of Australisans agree with you.

      For example yesterday Mrs Turnbull, former Lord Mayor of Sydney announced that Sydney should be laid out differently, reorganized on the progressive ideas of aborigines 250 years ago. Cloud cuckoo land. Who would have dreamed that aborigines were experts in building cities so long ago? They have their own flag. What have the British done for us?

      141

      • #
        PeterS

        If indeed most agree with us then at the next election if Turnbull is still the PM backed up by all his brain dead cohorts then we better make sure they are booted out with such a great force the rest of the party get the message loud and clear. There is no point using the argument that Shorten will be worse. What’s the difference between being killed by a 38 handgun or a 44 magnum? Dead is dead.

        60

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        Let them eat cake, huh?

        Tony Blair and his QC wife went through an mayan “rebirth” ceremony….

        Right, then….

        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-465798/Is-Cherie-Blair-misunderstood-bonkers.html

        The Establishment are a bit unhinged….absolute power and all that….

        40

      • #
        robert rosicka

        What have the British done for us ?
        Well there’s our law , roads , education , sanitation, oh hang on that’s from the life of Brian , !

        20

        • #
          OriginalSteve

          Ironically, in London, the only reason the british parliament approved to build a sewer for London was becasue the smell of the effluent in the Thames was so bad parliament couldnt sit.

          So literally, it took a massive stink to get parliament to act.

          There is a lesson in that….

          00

  • #

    CO2 is not pollution and has no significant effect on climate. Plants must sort through more than 2400 molecules to find one that can be used to make food. The planet is impoverished for CO2.

    111

  • #
    Michael Reed

    Well what do you know ! Have recently been in Sri Lanka where a lot of vehicles are hybrids
    either Prius or Honda.Takes just 5 years to have to chuck the battery out .Then buy a new one
    at just $4900.What a steal you get to run a car that will pay back its Co2 debt after 8 to 10 years
    and have the added bonus of spending about $10000 on batteries..Minor problem those batteries
    have to be somehow “recycled ” but let’s not go into the hideous mentality of green fake science and its unintended consequences.I hate the BS of junk pollution science where Co2 gets conflated with pollutants like sulphuric dioxide ,nitrous oxides,lead and particulate matter.The shear ignorance of the young(and old)and gullible to greenie “pollution “is astounding.

    Mike R

    130

  • #
    Whalehunt Fun

    but fail in the real world:

    Rubbish. The advertising asserts results in a test. The test is very carefully soecified and is well known to be in a lab. Running the car under different conditions does not invalidate the claim. This “real world testing” gimmick is leftwing stupidity. Next these ledtards will be testing fuel economy of cars while driving them up steep hills. The stuoid are aleays with us but should be sedated, not permitted to publish arrant stupidity. Free speech is for the sane.

    71

    • #

      you quote from a newspaper reporter and use that to attack the testers, accusing them, among other things, of being leftards. If you would address the actual study and read their methods and findings you might comment differently. Or maybe you wouldn’t as I can tell you are probably not one to be moved by data or inclined to go into detail.

      Here is something for you to refute; a main point of their conclusions is that the lab tests don’t allow meaningful comparisons among vehicles. A test result is not a predictor of what happens on the road. Two cars with similar lab results can have wildly different consumption on the road.

      26

      • #
        robert rosicka

        You of all people shouldn’t be quoting data GA , the data from your side is far from credible .

        40

      • #
        robert rosicka

        GA said “If you would address the actual study and read their methods and findings you might comment differently. Or maybe you wouldn’t as I can tell you are probably not one to be moved by data or inclined to go into detail.”

        Pot , kettle , black !

        00

        • #

          So you agree with me that it would be good if he actually read the document before presupposing what is in it?

          Why not take the high ground instead of using AndyG’s handbook of blind abuse?

          00

    • #

      I should have written “reported lab result”. The reporting is important since, although methods are meant to be standardised there is no good way of knowing whether the tests were carried out to standard. This is aside from the issue of whether the tests themselves are suitable for the vehicles being tested.

      26

      • #
        robert rosicka

        Tests should be real world on any product and not be done in a laboratory, nobody lives in a lab in a real world .

        31

        • #
          AndyG55

          They can test my V8 any time they want to pay for it…..

          So long as I can have the wheel scrubbing while they do it. ! :-)

          The world needs MORE CO2 !!!

          And I’m doing my best to provide it. :-)

          42

        • #

          I part agree. Basic performance metrics must be done under controlled conditions. According to many posters here though Robert, real world tests such as Jo reports on, are a green plot of some sort. The AAA testers are leftards for not believing the lab data when actually they did tests and came to their conclusions using data not preconceptions.

          00

  • #
    Dave in the States

    Quite often governments set impossible to meet standards. The purpose of the standard in many of these cases is not cleaner air but to manipulate the market place. Sometimes they simply set a new standard because it is scheduled. It doesn’t matter to them that it won’t make any difference to the air or not, or that the existing performance is already 100% of what is realistically attainable. It has to be a new standard now, even if the costs of implementation are beyond practical.

    Many are so clueless of the physical laws involved that they think they can simply legislate the physical performance of the autos in question. An example are the ridiculous CAFE standards in the US. Cheating is the inevitable result. I suspect that selective enforcement has been going on for some time.

    71

  • #
    Dave in the States

    The main stream media seem to think that the VW scandal would kill diesel cars. That is not what is happening, at least in the US. Indeed, one of my nieces went and bought a VW diesel afterward. She loves it.

    62

    • #
      Dennis

      My new Izuzu 4WD diesel conforms to Euro 5 Standard and is equipped with a particulate collector that burns them off periodically, automatically, or the driver can perform a burn if the gauge indicates that a burn off could occur while driving in dangerous conditions, e.g. long grass.

      40

      • #
        robert rosicka

        My Nissan is old enough to dodge most of the anti pollution engine killing garbage that manufacturers have to abide by nowadays.

        30

  • #
    TdeF

    Frankly, as we no longer manufacture cars, thanks specifically to the Unions who drove Toyota out of the county, we have no say. Set all the standards you like, but it comes to a choice. Buy what they offer or build your own. Or stamp your feet in frustration that you cannot buy a car with no CO2 output. Perhaps we can buy our electricity overseas and bring in giant batteries, already charged?

    The next big target will be cows which do not fart. Failing that, we can send our dairy and cattle industry overseas too. Soon we will be the only CO2 free country in the world. Shame about all the animals, people and plants.

    120

    • #
      Another Ian

      TdeF

      When the ADR standards were introduced Alfa abandoned the Oz market, deciding that meeting the special rules was not worth it.

      Expect the same for any other specifically Oz government requirements for this small market.

      40

    • #
      KinkyKeith

      TdeF

      How did you fit all of that in just 8 lines.

      Sums up “The Full Catastrophe”, as Zorba might have said.

      KK

      30

    • #
      Will Janoschka

      http://wmbriggs.com/page/2/
      Do Not Read This Article On Why You Don’t Have Free Will

      Our intellect and will are thus free to engage in higher pursuits, like in telling our bodies it’s cocktail hour. We then let our bodies take us where we need to go and do what we need to do so that our blood-alcohol levels do not drop to a dangerous low (as Rumpole would say)……all attempts to run from free will boil down to this (what we can call) self-contradictory Frithian statement: we must agree that we cannot make choices so that we can make better choices.

      All the best! -will-

      20

  • #
    Graham Richards

    Any “advice” from a left leaning government regarding emissions is promptly disbelieved and totally ignored. The lies & bullshit have turned everyone off especially when they use “modelling” as the basis for their propaganda. Nobody believes a word of anything coming from government and have generally switched off. You bunch of liars are now talking to yourselves…..no wonder you are are dozy & barely awake to what’s really happening!

    20

  • #
    TdeF

    Who needs Snowy II? perhaps an interconnector across the Tasman to New Zealand and we can charge Teslas with hydro power? I would like royalties on this idea, when Turnbull and Weatherill think of it.

    70

    • #
      Another Ian

      Careful what you suggest – current NZ government might be receptive to that.

      Though maybe you could make a dollar selling a scheme to move it by supertanker?

      40

      • #
        Another Ian

        Using giant super-capacitors maybe

        40

      • #
        Dennis

        The new NZ PM is opposed to capitalism, she told an Australian journalist, according to The Australian.

        40

        • #
          TdeF

          Greed works in every political view. Money for power, electrical power. Whoever controls the electricity and the telephones and now the internet controls society. That is the aim of both sides of politics now. Sorry, there is only one side now.

          70

        • #
          Yonniestone

          On Catallaxy Files Yesterday, NZ the next Venezuela, I’m not even sure she’s playing the part for the usual vested parties but after reading it the word ‘unhinged’ came to mind.

          20

        • #

          Look, there’s more important stuff than real data, there are
          political goals, see, herewith a statement made by UN official
          Christiana Figueres at a news conference in Brussels. Figueres
          admitted that the Global Warming conspiracy set by the U.N.’s
          Framework Convention on Climate Change, of which she’s the
          executive secretary, has a goal, not of environmental activism
          to save the world from ecological calamity, but to get rid of
          capitalism.

          “This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are
          setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined
          period of time, to change the economic development model that
          has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial
          Revolution.”

          She even restated that goal: “This is probably the most difficult
          task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally
          transform the economic development model for the first time in
          human history.”

          60

          • #
            Yonniestone

            “which is to intentionally transform the economic development model for the first time in human history.”

            Not the first attempt in history re the long list of failed countries that adopted various Marxist based economic theories, but spoken like a true bloody minded revolutionary, its our ideals or nothing even if it fails!

            51

  • #
    pat

    WSJ (behind paywall) broke this story.

    22 Oct: Reuters: Tesla moves closer to deal to build cars in China
    by Joseph White, Norihiko Shirouzu
    China levies a 25 percent duty on sales of imported vehicles and has not allowed foreign automakers to establish wholly owned factories in the country, the world’s largest automaker. Those are problems for Tesla, which wants to expand its presence in China’s growing electric vehicle market without compromising its independence or intellectual property…

    Tesla would still have to pay a 25 percent duty on cars built in a free trade zone, but it could lower its production costs…
    The Wall Street Journal reported that Tesla and the Shanghai government have already reached a deal in that city’s free trade zone…
    Chinese internet company Tencent Holdings Ltd has a five percent stake in Tesla and is seen as a potential ally for Tesla’s efforts to enter the Chinese market.

    It was unclear if the Chinese government will conclude a deal with Tesla to coincide with U.S. President Donald Trump’s visit next month…

    Tesla Chief Executive Elon Musk has said the company eventually will need vehicle and battery manufacturing centers in Europe and Asia.

    Tesla is wrestling with production problems at its sole factory, in Fremont, California. It is trying to accelerate output of its new Model 3 sedan, but conceded earlier this month that production bottlenecks had held third-quarter production to just 260 vehicles, well short of the 1,500 previously planned.
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-sofi-talks/sofi-held-sale-talks-but-bidders-balked-at-8-billion-price-newspaper-idUSKBN1CR0W7

    22 Oct: NYT: Tesla Plant in China May Be a First
    By KEITH BRADSHER and NATALIE KITROEFF
    China already has the world’s largest market for electric cars. Their dominance is a byproduct of the government’s extensive subsidies…LMC Automotive, a global consulting firm, estimates that 295,000 battery-electric cars will be sold this year in China, compared with 287,000 in the rest of the world combined…
    LMC predicts that China’s total will nearly triple in the next two years, while the rest of the world’s will merely double…

    The W.T.O. has allowed developing countries to retain much higher trade barriers than industrialized countries, on the theory that they have infant industries that may not have grown big enough to withstand global competition. Today, however, China has the world’s largest auto industry…

    China charges a tariff of 25 percent on imported cars, compared with 2.5 percent in the United States and 9.8 percent in the European Union. China also has a 17 percent value-added tax — a kind of sales tax — that is charged not only on the price of the car but also on the tariff, so that the taxes are effectively compounded…
    Robert Lighthizer, the United States trade representative, has expressed concern about China’s trade practices.
    President Trump is set to visit Beijing from Nov. 8 to 10, but China has shown little sign of willingness to negotiate on sectors that it regards as strategic imperatives, and electric cars are one such industry…
    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/22/business/tesla-plant-in-china-may-be-a-first.html

    10

  • #
    pat

    GreenTechMedia goes with higher sales for this year than LMC in NYT piece:

    20 Oct: GreenTechMedia: Electric Cars in China Are On Track for a Record Year
    by Katie Fehrenbacher
    The China Association of Automobile Manufacturers said this week that companies likely will sell 700,000 electric cars in China in 2017. That’s an estimate based on the latest monthly sales figures for September, which hit 77,000, and brought the year’s total EVs sold in China to 398,000 so far. The last three months of the year historically have the best sales of electric cars in the country…

    The large size of the Chinese electric car market — it makes up the majority of the world’s — has attracted both domestic and international automakers alike. Chinese electric car company BYD, which is backed by Warren Buffett, was the best-selling electric carmaker last year and sells seven models in the country…
    Another big Chinese electric car player is Beijing Electric Vehicle, the electric car division of state-owned BAIC Motor…

    This summer, it was reported that Tesla was in talks to set up an electric car factory in Shanghai. Such a move would enable Tesla to avoid steep import tariffs and lower the price of its cars in the country (a Model S can cost between $100,000 and $200,000 in China)…

    Automakers sold close to 700,000 electric cars across all countries last year, according to figures from Bloomberg New Energy Finance. Yes, that’s the same number that might be sold in China alone this year…

    ***In comparison, there were 88.1 million cars and light commercial vehicles of all types sold worldwide last year, according to Macquarie Bank (LINK). Electric cars made up less than 1 percent of the total number of all cars sold last year…
    https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/electric-cars-in-china-are-on-track-for-a-record-year#gs.EZtE4ws

    00

  • #
    pat

    22 Oct: NYT: Lisa Friedman: E.P.A. Cancels Talk on Climate Change by Agency Scientists
    The Environmental Protection Agency has canceled the speaking appearance of three agency scientists who were scheduled to discuss climate change at a conference on Monday in Rhode Island, according to the agency and several people involved.

    John Konkus, an E.P.A. spokesman and a former Trump campaign operative in Florida, confirmed that agency scientists would not speak at the State of the Narragansett Bay and Watershed program in Providence. He provided no further explanation.
    Scientists involved in the program said that much of the discussion at the event centers on climate change. Many said they were surprised by the E.P.A.’s last-minute cancellation, particularly since the agency helps to fund the Narragansett Bay Estuary Program, which is hosting the conference. The scientists who have been barred from speaking contributed substantial material to a 400-page report to be issued on Monday.

    The move highlights widespread concern that the E.P.A. will silence government scientists from speaking publicly or conducting work on climate change…
    “It’s definitely a blatant example of the scientific censorship we all suspected was going to start being enforced at E.P.A.,” said John King, a professor of oceanography at the University of Rhode Island who chairs the science advisory committee of the Narragansett Bay Estuary Program. “They don’t believe in climate change, so I think what they’re trying to do is stifle discussions of the impacts of climate change.”…

    Rhode Island’s entire congressional delegation, all Democrats, will attend a morning news conference. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, an outspoken critic of Mr. Pruitt, will be among the speakers.
    Scientists there will unveil the report on the state of the bay, which E.P.A. scientists helped research and write. Among the findings will be that climate change is affecting air and water temperatures, precipitation, sea level and fish in and around the estuary…

    Autumn Oczkowski, a research ecologist at the E.P.A.’s National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory Atlantic Ecology Division in Rhode Island, was scheduled to give the keynote address. Colleagues familiar with her speech said she intended to address climate change and other factors affecting the health of the estuary.
    Rose Martin, a postdoctoral fellow at the same E.P.A. laboratory and Emily Shumchenia, an E.P.A. consultant, were scheduled to speak on an afternoon panel entitled “The Present and Future Biological Implications of Climate Change.”…

    Under Mr. Pruitt’s leadership the E.P.A. also has removed most mentions of the words “climate change” from its website. He has declined to link carbon dioxide emissions to global warming, and in an interview with Time magazine last week said he intended to assemble a team of independent experts to challenge established climate science because, Mr. Pruitt asserted, it has not yet been subject to “a robust, meaningful debate.”
    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/22/climate/epa-scientists.html

    20

  • #
    pat

    can only recommend listening to the entire interview. covers the endangerment finding, clean power plan, red team, blue team, etc:

    VIDEO: 21mins43secs: 20 Oct: Time: Justin Worland: EPA Head Scott Pruitt Says Oil and Coal Companies He Met With Aren’t ‘Polluters’
    The head of the Environmental Protection Agency defended his meetings with energy companies, chemical manufacturers, automakers and other industry groups, arguing that they were “stakeholders” not “polluters.”
    In an exclusive interview with TIME on Oct. 18, former Oklahoma attorney general Scott Pruitt argued that the recent criticism of his schedule, which showed he met with environmental groups less than 1% of the time, was inaccurate.
    “I don’t spend any time with polluters. I prosecute polluters,” says Pruitt. “What I’m spending time with are stakeholders who care about outcomes. I think it’s a wrong premise. It’s Washington D.C.-think to look at folks across the country — from states to citizens to farmers and ranchers, industry in general — and say they are evil or wrong and we’re not going to partner with them.”…

    He also questioned the common conception of what it means to be an environmentalist, arguing that the term also applies to farmers and ranchers who live off the land. “Those farmers and ranchers in Iowa or North Dakota, are they less of a conservationist or environmentalist because they’re not part of some association?” Pruitt asked. “I mean they are our first environmentalists. Their greatest asset is their land.”…
    http://time.com/4990060/scott-pruitt-interview-epa-schedule-meetings/

    10

  • #
    pat

    HuffPo naturally took on the job of fact-checking Pruitt’s Time interview, see below.

    the HuffPo’s writer, Alexander C. Kaufman’s LinkedIn: I’m a reporter on the politics team. I write about the environment, climate politics and business issues. I’m a regular guest on CBC and BBC radio, and occasionally appear once MSNBC, Fox and other TV networks. I previously led the business team, where I set the story agenda…

    Kaufman churns out the usual clichéd CAGW headlines:

    17 Oct: Americans Are Willing To Pay A Carbon Tax, But Trump Won’t Even Consider It

    12 Oct: Trump Axes Climate Plan as the World Burns
    As the effects of global warming become undeniably visible (HURRICANES, WILDFIRES, ETC), the EPA has proposed eliminating the country’s only major climate change policy.

    28 Sept: Puerto Rico’s Colonial Legacy Doomed It To Dirty Electricity — And Now Darkness
    The storm-ravaged island gets just 2 percent of its power from renewable sources, and that may not change anytime soon

    21 Oct: HuffPo: 7 Misleading Things EPA Chief Scott Pruitt Said In His Interview With Time
    In a rare mainstream media interview, the nation’s top environmental regulator blows some smoke.
    by Alexander C. Kaufman
    5. The endangerment finding is based on the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

    During the interview, Pruitt said the finding “represents, and this is the first time in history this has ever occurred, this agency took work product of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and adopted it, transferred it to this agency and used that as the basis, underpinnings, of the endangerment finding.”
    That claim appears to be a dog whistle to nationalists, suggesting the legal mandate for the federal government to address climate change is rooted in fulfilling some demand from an international body.
    The technical support document on the endangerment finding references more than 100 published scientific studies and cites peer-reviewed syntheses of climate research by the White House’s U.S. Global Change Research Program, the National Research Council of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences and the IPCC, according to the Environmental Defense Fund…

    6. A red-team, blue-team debate on climate change will foster a “robust, meaningful discussion.”

    The science behind human-caused global warming is largely settled, despite what so-called skeptics like Pruitt argue. Only 3 percent of peer-reviewed scientists have found that climate change is either not a risk or not exacerbated by humans. And a research review published last November found flaws in the methodologies, assumptions or analyses used in those studies that, when corrected, put their findings in line with the 97 percent of scientists who say climate change is a major, manmade threat.
    Yet Pruitt said in June he plans to assemble a red team and a blue team to debate the merits of climate science.

    Yet the premise here is based on the idea that the peer-reviewed process that every major scientific paper on climate change has already gone through is somehow flawed. And giving equal weight to skeptics of the existing consensus skews Americans’ perception of the scientific findings, according to U.S. National Academy of Sciences atmospheric scientist Benjamin Santer, MIT atmospheric science professor Kerry Emanuel and Harvard history of science professor Naomi Oreskes.

    “Such calls for special teams of investigators are not about honest scientific debate,” the trio wrote in The Washington Post in June. “They are dangerous attempts to elevate the status of minority opinions, and to undercut the legitimacy, objectivity and transparency of existing climate science.”…
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/scott-pruitt-time-magazine-interview-misleading_us_59ea6caae4b0a484d0634d5a

    00

  • #
    pat

    21 Oct: Time: Justin Worland: Scott Pruitt Casts Doubt on EPA Document Showing the Dangers of Climate Change
    Environmental Protection Agency chief Scott Pruitt questioned the legitimacy of a key scientific document on the dangers of climate change — but he does not plan to formally consider reversing it anytime soon.
    The finding — a 2009 EPA document that said man-made climate change harms human health — has had a major impact on EPA policy, driving Obama-era regulations on power plants. Because of a Supreme Court ruling, the document means the EPA must address climate change by regulating carbon-dioxide emissions. In an interview with TIME this week, Pruitt cast doubt on the validity of the EPA finding.
    “Did this agency engage in a robust, meaningful discussion with respect to the endangerment that CO2 poses to this country?” Pruitt asked about the 2009 document, known as an “endangerment document.” “I think by any definition of that process they didn’t.”

    But Pruitt did not go so far as to say that he would seek to overturn the document’s conclusions in an upcoming reevaluation of how the agency regulates carbon dioxide emissions, as some hardline conservatives had hoped. That means the EPA will remain legally required to reduce carbon emissions.

    Still, regardless of those requirements, Pruitt has no intention of implementing strong climate regulations. Instead, he suggested to TIME that he plans to limit the scope of the EPA’s climate rules through legal arguments that sidestep the need to question mainstream climate science. (He declined to rule out formally questioning climate science in the future.)
    Pruitt’s primary target is the Obama administration’s Clean Power Plan…
    Leaving the endangerment finding untouched means that legally Pruitt needs to replace the Clean Power Plan — or at least begin a process to do so…READ ON
    http://time.com/4990265/scott-pruitt-clean-power-plan-epa/

    00

  • #

    Indeed engineered to pass the tests.

    I noted nearly two years ago that when Dieselgate popped up that:

    UK’s Which? (consumer) magazine has an article titled Car emissions: is nobody clean?.

    In light of the recent emissions scandal, we extracted and analysed detailed emissions data for over 300 cars that we’ve tested since 2012, in order to find out what cars are really emitting into our atmosphere.

    Despite all of the vehicles officially complying with recent EU emission regulations (either Euro 5 or the tougher Euro 6 depending on the age of car) our realistic testing found there is a chasm like gap between what is claimed and what is pumped into our air:

    • Staggeringly, nearly all (95%) the diesel cars emitted more oxides of nitrogen (NOx) during our tests than official limits allow. …;
    • One in 10 (10%) petrol cars also emitted more NOx than limits allow;
    • Two-thirds (65%) of petrol cars emit more Carbon Monoxide than the 2006 limit (Euro 4)…;
    • Despite being a hybrid, the Peugeot 508 RXH also creates more NOx than EU limits. Several petrol hybrids (the worst being the Lexus LS) also create more CO than limits would allow;
    • 38 of the cars we tested were even unable to meet the ‘Euro 1’ emissions standards from 1993.

    So vehicles that pass current emissions test cycles, may fail previous test cycles. Regulators seem to be oblivious to “regression testing”.

    Sitting around a table with bureaucrats, delegates from manufacturers have agreed to increasingly irrelevant restrictions and rules; some of which benefit the car makers.

    It seems that the regulators, just like our BoM, are no longer fit for purpose.

    52

  • #
    Geoffrey Williams

    There is room in this country for all sorts of cars and phones and whatever, powered by any source people choose. But,let them choose thro’ the free and open market without inteference from governments controlled by upper house/senate minority leftists. No preferential subsidies or taxes, let the people make their own choices. Then we will have much saner economic outcomes.
    Regards GeoffW

    60

  • #
    Another Ian

    An example of picking your test for advantage.

    I reckon our IC engined pollution averaged over our 20000 acres will be a lot lower per acre than the best suburban equivalent

    50

  • #
    Anders Valland

    The cars ‘failed’ in the real world? In what sense is the word ‘failed’ relevant here? The cars passed a laboratory test. They have different emissions when driven on the road. That is not failure, that is difference. The only failure here is to not grasp the difference between laboratory conditions and real world conditions.

    60

    • #
      robert rosicka

      The reason I’m against lab in favour of real world tests is we don’t live in a lab and while different to cars solar panels work as rated in a lab , to the equivalent of being on a very high mountain at a certain latitude at a certain time of the year .
      If car testing is even half that restrictive it’s still a joke .

      31

      • #
        Chad

        The “lab” test is only a controlled way to produce compareable results between similar vehicles.
        Lab conditions are needed to minimise all the random variables…( weather, wind, temp, etc)

        21

        • #
          Will Janoschka

          “The “lab” test is only a controlled way to produce compareable results between similar vehicles.
          Lab conditions are needed to minimise all the random variables…( weather, wind, temp, etc)”

          Very true! But just who is looking for “lab comparable results”? Certainly not the producer, customer, nor government. Consider “are you but some peon, Chad?” :-(

          21

          • #
            Chad

            OK ..i suggest its “car buyers” who use the data to compare consumption under similar conditions.
            So who would you want to do the “real world” tests ?
            The manufacturers ?
            Government ?
            Customers ?
            Or someone trained to do tests in a repeatable , consistent , unbiased way ?
            Whoever does it, it has to be under controlled conditions….or its pointless

            10

            • #
              Will Janoschka

              “Whoever does it, it has to be under controlled conditions….or its pointless”

              If some government demands it; ‘it’ must be pointless! :-)

              21

        • #
          Lionell Griffith

          Since all the test items were designed to pass the test, the results will never apply to the real world. So what if the boxes are all the same color of red, what does that have to do with the contents of the box? Nothing at all.

          ALL such testing is simply some manager/bureaucrat being able to check an action item as DONE. It has nothing to do with any real world result. It is let’s pretend we did something, take the money, and run.

          10

        • #
          toorightmate

          Chad,
          You are correct, but red thumb is not capable of discerning what is correct.

          01

      • #
        Anders Valland

        So, how do you set up a ‘real world test’ for a car? What is the purpose of the test?

        00

  • #
    Chad

    Does anybody seriously even look at the emmissions data from those tests when deciding which car to buy ?

    20

    • #
      Will Janoschka

      “Does anybody seriously even look at the emmissions data from those tests when deciding which car to buy ?”

      NO!

      20

  • #
    toorightmate

    No doubt this news will have all of the SUV and Hilux owners aghast.
    The will all have Teslas or Suzukis by the end of this week.

    10

  • #
    Gerry, England

    I think what people miss, and apologies if it is in the 160 odd comments made earlier, is that the standard is there as a comparison between cars and not to show real world use. If manufacturers do tune their engines to meet the standard which in the UK has a few scenarios and not just one set speed, then you would assume they all did still giving you a comparison. ECUs would make it possible to vary at all test speeds that a carburetor couldn’t. One set thing about engines is that they are most efficient when delivering their maximum torque. Cruise at that point and it makes a big difference.

    10

    • #
      Will Janoschka

      “One set thing about engines is that they are most efficient when delivering their maximum torque. Cruise at that point and it makes a big difference.”

      This is correct for engines powered by oxidizing fuel! Stationary constant RPM is most efficient,(power plants). Slow ships and diesel-electric locomotives emulate that! Well designed hybrid auto\motor freight with power storage (battery) for compensating acceleration\deceleration may eventually become viable, maybe. But never “can become” with current governmental gross incompetent regulation!
      All the best!-will-

      20

  • #
    BruceC

    One set thing about engines is that they are most efficient when delivering their maximum torque

    In that case, I would have to cruise at +200km/h in my 2003 LS1 powered, auto Monaro CV8-R! Max torque is 465Nm @ 4400rpm. At the legal 110km/h freeway speeds in NSW, my Munro is cruising at ~1900-2000rpm.

    00

    • #
      BruceC

      I must add that those figures quoted above are for a standard LS1 as quoted by GM-H. My Munro has Pacemaker 4-into-1 headers, with 2.5inch collectors feeding into a full 2.5inch ‘free-flow’ system (including ‘cats’). It also has a larger throttle body and larger air intake with ‘pod-type’ air filter.

      Not sure if it’s had a computer ‘re-map’ as well???

      00

  • #
    Chad

    Will, why get so worked up over something of little consequence.
    You already agreed that nobody takes any notice of these test results, so calm down !
    It only another set of Government rules, and like any other rule set you , and the car makers, simply adapt, and play the game within the rules, …..
    ……..but to the best of your advantage.

    00

  • #

    Sometimes when reading a motoring article about new car models the kw size is given along with “Tailpipe” emissions. Maybe 141g/km CO2. I often ponder just how many new car buyers really take an interest in such a fact? I would imagine the type of car, power, extras, color and many other factors would override any tailpipe consideration except for the most zealous conservationist.

    00