Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by HallGator, Oct 17, 2013.
Here's something that'll conflict certain ideologues 'round here:
Tesla hates unions
Exactly, torque is not an issue with electric vehicles.
Serious question -- is Tesla more, or less, than 1/194,000th of the total volume of cars from which that 194,000 fire stat comes from? See why I ask?
I'd say the sample size is too small to deduce much about fire hazard. Seems more like a means of quibbling. One could quibble back that any slight fire risk (that may or may not actually exist) would be negated by superior safety statistics of the car. See? Quibble-y.
I guess I feel quibble-y myself this morning.
It turns out that there are an estimated 254 million cars on the road. Divide demo's 194,000 by 254 mil and you get 0.07% chance of your ICE car catching fire.
I'm having a hard time getting hard numbers on the number of Model S on the road, but there were ~4,700 sold in the 1st quarter of 2013. I'll low ball the number at 10,000. 1/10,000 = 0.01% chance of your Model S catching fire.
I wouldn't consider it conclusive regardless. But if Tesla is, for instance, more line 1/500,000th of cars, being 1/194,000 fires at least arches an eyebrow of curiousity. "1" pretty much blows sample size regardless. But by contrast, if Tesla was 1 of every 100,000 cars on the road, to only have fire by half the proportion is worth a tentative attaboy.
Well, there you are -- not quite "attaboy", but certainly not an eye row raise either.
GM must have some leftover government virus.
I'm well aware that numbers in a vacuum mean little to nothing which is the point of my post. I can single out any instance of catastrophic damage leading to a car fire and ask when they're going to resolve the fire issue. See where that is a problem? We have a sample size of one and yet people are quick to engage in demagoguery of electric vehicles.
Bottom line is whether you are sitting over stored energy in the form of lithium ion batteries or a gas tank, there's a risk of fire.
I have driven a bifuel car in Italy (subaru) for 5 years already......nothing new here, in fact, GM behind the curve as usual...
Why do you single out GM. If they are behind the curve aren't a lot of the other manufacturers too? How about refueling stations not being plentiful, don't you think that would have an impact on the situation?
There's quite a few Tesla Model S in my area. Everything I've heard is this is one of the best luxury sports sedans on the planet. And less than 5 seconds to 60mph.
Not sure what kind of golf carts Bill has been driving, but he must scare the hell out of people on his ball hunts.
Florida Power will have an all electric fleet,,except where it isnt viable.
BioDiesel and diesel can use the same motor.
And a golf cart is considered a great way to get around
more select communities.
The Apopka police converted to LNG-gasoline hybids
some time ago.
All are good news that cuts demand for oil.
My sister and her husband (both staunch conservatives) live in a golf cart friendly town and drive them all over the place.
Home refueling stations for NG.
I like that GM is pushing in this direction. Home stations and new production will drive the market and infrastructure will follow.
I single out Gm because they are VASTLY behind rest of automotive world in offering diesel engines and bifuel cars that can run NG----for the LARGEST car company in US that is pathetic...but what you get when the GOVT instead of market picks winners----the consumers of the world already rejected GM---now you see why.
In rest of world diesel engines make up >60% of new car sales---more efficient, clean, much better MPG, longer life, massive torque----yet GM still slow on selling these engines....
Can you name the companies that are offering NG vehicles? Especially in cars.
Just wondering how you counter this:
No problem for Bill, he can't hit it far enough any more to get up to that speed! :grin: