fuzzy02CLS

iTrader: (2)

Who says you can't buy that award

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...12_031120_coy/

BoostedM3

lol

It makes me want to buy that car now.

CLUofI

so how was the award bought?

Water-S

great a car that competes with the civic hybird gets Motor Trend car of year give me a break. The Green Party paid off Motor Trend. the Acura TL, and Z4 3.0 is 10 times the car that of a Toyota and YOU DON'T HAVE TO PLUG IT IN

Shawn S

At first I thought that was a DUMB car to pick, but I read the entire article and the Toyota is a technological marvel for what it does.
It’s not the most beautiful thing on the road by any account, but what’s under the hood impresses me more then anything the competition offered.

Shawn S

Shawn S

SOMEBODY didn’t read the article.
You don’t “plug the car in”.

Shawn S

charliemike

No shit ... the only here is that guy.

proaudio22

still, that car is :ghey: I'd rather get 6mpg and look good

beerknurd

so it gets good MPG, big deal. styling is whack, performance is whack... i don't get it. It seems to only have one good feature.

spdy0001

its not the MPG that got this car "car of the year" its how it get the high MPG. This car is way beyond any other car on the market as far as hybrid technology. Im not a fan of this car nor do I agree with the title it has been given, but I respect the people who designed it

Jonesi

I saw a review of it on tv and I was pretty impressed. The electric motor never needs charged, it gets charged by the brakes and something else,can't remember. The gas motor kicks in when power is needed. It all sounded pretty good from what I hear.

gto2050

One day you will be driving one of those hybrids out of necessity. The interesting thing to watch is the torque that is possible from an electric motor. A big enough motor will probably be able to out-accelerate a Z06!

You have to admit though, ghey or not, the idea of what they are trying to do is pretty cool. Fossil fuels will be pretty scarce in 25-30 years so something must be tried for alternative fuels.

CLSter

I wouldn't mind having this as a commuter car. I sat in one at an auto show and it had more room and more features than the standard Civic or many other econo cars. I think they made a good decision. If you compare the old Prius, Insight and Civic Hybrid to the new Prius it's even more impressive.

Pure Adrenaline

iTrader: (2)

Looks like a steaming pile of crap.

I wouldn't buy a Toyota, for one, and the design is just butt ugly. I don't care if it's the most technologically advanced vehicle on the planet. If it doesn't suit my tastes, then I'm not buying one. Simple as that.

The Aztec was a very versatile car, and had one of the best thought-over interior ever. But most people never found out because it was so ugly, that they never even bothered to check it out thoroughly.

Nonetheless, the idea of a hybrid energy is cool. But I think it's too early in the stage. I, for one, can't imagine my cars running on electricity... yet. I want to hear the exhaust and the intake running wild when I floor the car. Not some weak ass "weeeeeee" whine from the electric motor. That's just gay.

But it is a fact that in the near future, we'll have to switch to electric vehicles. But until I absolutely have to, I won't.

Just my .02

synth19

I think it's sporty.

EricL

Hey, if that was 6 MPG of hydrogen, that we were producing here (IN THE GOOD ol' USA) -- why not?

When I bought my Bimmer back 20 years ago, it would only do 0 to 60 in around 10-seconds (before modding the shit out of it). That car -- with some tasty mods -- killed most of the vehicles of its day, and got pretty good gas mileage.

When I look at So Cal Air Quality maps that look like plague alerts, and think of young people getting their body parts blown off for oil and other geopolitical reasons, I sure would like to have some options in the "driving" department. Forget about the KIA numbers, check out number of kids with missing parts. (Does anyone really think we would have bothered with Iraq if it only exported saw dust, beets, and guano?)

That "gay" vehicle is the basis for some rather cool engineering that could:

1. Make for near zero dependence on religious zealots with black gold stuck up their ass.

2. Make for some really fast cars that sound great, get great gas mileage, have serious torque at 0 RPM, and great HP at high RPMs. (Gas engines compliment electric engines nicely.) A CLS with a similar setup and a couple of small electric motors in the rear could be doing low 12 second runs while getting 30+ MPG in the city!

Jens H.

BAHHHAHHHAHAHAH Motor Trend ,yeah ok I might go and buy a car based on what those boneheads have to say .

Jens

proaudio22

That ridiculous. The US has enough oil reserves to keep the country running at our current oil usage rate for thirty years. That doesn't count what Alaska or Texas produces. The problem here is our greedy ass government. We don't need any oil from Iraq or any middle east country. Robin Williams had a great plan for this. Refuse to pay them any more than $10 a barrel for their oil. We have plenty to get by with, and they will agree, who else are they gonna sell to?

Forget California too.

LegendC

Not even close, we supply ourselves with less than 40% of the oil we use. Remember it goes into more than making just fuel, it's used to make plastics, lubricating oil, etc.

I want to know what makes the Prius so much better than the Civic Hybrid? It does seem a lot more practical than the Insight, but the Civic looks and feels like a normal Civic until you go to turn it on. It also has regenerative braking and all the other goodies in the new Prius.

proaudio22

WTF are you talking about? I said oil reserves, meaning we don't use them. I didn't say a damn thing about what we use. The reserve number I gave would be if we had ZERO other oil. So if we do provide 40% of our oil then we could be self supporting for 48 years.

LegendC

What do you mean by reserves?

What we have found but are not extracting?
Where we are currently extracting, but not dried up?
Or the Stategic Oil Reserve that stockpiles up oil in case of a serious situation?

Any way you slice it our reserves are limited compared to what we consume. Also if you look at the attempt to get into areas like ANWR which was rejected you can pretty much assume that even all the oil we have "found" we cannot extract.

Gilgamesh

Exactly. The car mags are nice, especially for high quality pics and what not, but these things are NOT objective, and I would daresay the guys at M/T are the 'softest' The newest car/truck in their review wins the award every year. If a maker redeigns their half ton truck, they will win Truck of the Year that year...Chevy did, Dodge did, and this year Ford will, only becuase their truck is newer...

EricL

So, on the one hand you have a comment saying there is enough oil for 30 years (meaning a 20-year-old can expect a petro supply till they are 50 -- and that's it), and then use the Robin Williams for support. Enjoy the laughs... The government works in its own self interest, and if it doesn't see any, it isn't going to bother fighting wars, etc in an area that it has no need to bother with. If you basically are looking at a mini-prototype of a car that will kick-ass if scaled up, while getting 2-5x the fuel economy around town of non-hybrids, what does that say for being able to keep future generations tinkering and modding fast cars (and out of little metro buses).


(This is from, "Alexander's Gas & Oil Connection")

http://www.gasandoil.com/goc/news/ntn21630.htm


US more dependent than ever on imported oil

25-03-02 Anyone who drives a car would have noticed the rise in gasoline prices over the past month or so....

The US is more dependent than ever on imported oil. Imports represented about one-third of total US petroleum needs in 1973. That figured climbed to 60 % last year. A growing economy, which raises the demand for oil, in conjunction with declining domestic production explains the upward trend in the amount of imports.
OPEC oil production accounts for about 40 % of the world's total. At 8.1 mm bpd, the US in fact is the world's largest producer. It also, however, is the world's largest importer, consuming about 25 % of total global production. Imports from OPEC countries account for nearly 50 % of US oil imports (over 25 % of total domestic needs), so the US would be very exposed to an OPEC oil embargo, in the (unlikely) event that one occurred.

Russia is the world's third largest producer (behind Saudi Arabia). However, the US still imports very little oil from Russia despite improved relations between the two countries. In terms of the US's top five suppliers, Saudi Arabia (#2), Venezuela (#3), and Nigeria (#5) are OPEC members. Canada (#1) and Mexico (#4) would be hard pressed to make up for lost OPEC production. However, the US could tap the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which currently holds about 500 mm barrels, in the event of an emergency.


BTW, check out the link and notice the steadily declining oil reserves in Texas. You can get people to do same pretty fancy deep well drilling if the price of oil goes high enough (something to thing about). Approx. 20% of the energy in petrol is converted to mechanical energy -- and that is generally at cruise. Toss in city cycle, and things really look pathetic. So, keep on being ignorant. It's your opinion. I'm glad Toyota got the award.


http://www.rrc.state.tx.us/divisions.../ogisopwc.html

proaudio22

This is a pointless argument. Go do some research if you want to get the facts.

However, here is one fact for you. Chattanooga, TN (where I live) is #7 on the list of top foreign attack targets in the united states. Do you know why? B/c of the oil reserves stored here. There are at least TWENTY 400,000 gallon storage tanks here. KABOOM!

LegendC

Why don't you just read above your post?

EricL

Real cost of a gallon of gas... Something to think about:


http://washingtontimes.com/commentar...3718-6082r.htm

"The real cost of imported oil


By Milton R. Copulos



War critics have made much of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's recent upward revision of the price tag for maintaining 150,000 U.S. troops in Iraq to around $1 billion a week. That sounds like a lot, but if it results in a more stable region and a reduction in the continuing need to defend Persian Gulf oil, it could prove to be quite a bargain indeed.
As the 30th anniversary of the 1973 Arab oil embargo approaches, the United States finds itself even more vulnerable than it was three decades ago. In 1972, the year before the embargo, U.S. oil imports were 27.6 percent of consumption. Last month, they stood at 56.8 percent, more than twice the 1972 level.
As long as there is no shortage and prices are within reason, most Americans are indifferent to the level of imports. They may understand on an intellectual level that a high level of imports of crude oil and refined petroleum products is not a good thing. As long as they do not feel personally affected, however, they remain complacent. What they do not understand is that the flood of foreign crude imposes an economic penalty of enormous proportions that is not reflected in the price they pay at the gasoline pump. It is a penalty that costs jobs, drains investment capital and inflates the nation's defense burden. It is a cost we cannot pay forever.
For the past year, the National Defense Council Foundation has been engaged in a detailed analysis of the "hidden" cost of imported oil. The analysis looked at three elements: military expenditures specifically tied to defending Persian Gulf oil, the cost of lost employment and investment resulting from the diversion of financial resources and the cost of the periodic "oil shocks" the nation has experienced.
When these three elements are combined, they total $304.9 billion annually, nearly six times what we are spending in Iraq.
The breakdown of these elements is instructive.
The most obvious import-related cost are the expenditures associated with defending the flow of Persian Gulf oil. The logical place to begin is with the U.S. Central Command.
Its area of responsibility encompasses 6.5 million square miles that hold 25 countries with populations totaling 522 million people. Its mission, according to the Department of Defense, however, is focused "primarily on the Middle East." Indeed, it grew out of the Rapid Deployment Force created in 1979 in response to the Iranian Revolution and general tensions in the Middle East.
Still, Central Command is not exclusively tied to the Persian Gulf. It was responsible for conducting the operations against al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan as well as Operation Restore Hope in Somalia where the "Blackhawk Down" incident occurred. Allowing for this, roughly $42.8 billion of Central Command's budget goes to defending Persian Gulf oil. When special one-time costs and contingency funds are included, the total rises to $49.1 billion — an amount equal to adding $1.17 to the cost of a gallon of gasoline.
But that's just the tip of the iceberg.
The loss of economic activity resulting from the diversion of financial resources is even larger. Direct economic losses come to $36.7 billion annually, and indirect losses to $123.2 billion for a whopping total of $159.9 billion — each and every year. To put these figures in human terms, this loss of economic activity results in a loss of 828,400 jobs in the U.S. economy and a loss of $13.4 billion in tax revenues and royalty payments that state and federal treasuries do not receive.
But there is one other element that must be included: the cost of the periodic "oil shocks" to the U.S. economy. The NDCF analysis puts the combined cost of the 1973-74, 1978-80 and 1991 "oil shocks" at between $2.3 trillion and $2.5 trillion. Lest you think the figure is inflated, Oak Ridge National Laboratories places the figure at $4 trillion. Amortizing these costs over the past three decades still yields an annual penalty of from $74.8 billion to $82.5 billion.
When all of the elements are taken together, they demonstrate just how expensive imported oil really is. When added to the most recent nominal price for a barrel of imported oil, they raise its "real" price to between $101.40 per barrel and $103.24 per barrel. This translates into a pump price for gasoline of between $5.01 and $5.19, or from $90.18 to $93.42 to fill an average gas tank.
The economic toll that oil imports take on the U.S. economy can only be eliminated if the need to import oil itself disappears. The time to get serious about achieving this goal is now. Otherwise, all the future holds is greater peril in both economic and military terms and a further drain on the U.S. economy.

Milton R. Copulos is president of the National Defense Council Foundation. "

LegendC

Excellent reads Eric!

proaudio22

WHAT THE FUCK!?? That has NOTHING to do with ANYTHING I'm saying. Would you like me to make it clearer to you boneheads?

1. I think this car is fugly and weeny. I don't care what it turns into in the future, this is what we have now - and I don't like it. I'd rather drive a 6mpg GASOLINE vehicle. I have the money for the gas, big deal. If they have a nice performing hybrid or w/e vehicle inthe future, that's great I'll be the first to buy one. But I don't see it happening for a while so I'm not concerned with it.
3. We have enough reserves to support our own uses WITHOUT even pumping our own oil for at least 20 years, if the reserves are really down per the above posts. There are at least EIGHT MILLION gallons of oil here in Chattanooga ALONE.
2. OPEC, etc is RAPING us for gas prices. The Robin Williams jest was an interesting idea to get them to lower prices. I suggested we TEMPORARILY use our reserves while we are "convincing" them.

1SICKLEX

Proaudio also like the SRT Ram thingie with no towing capacity, 500hp etc. Go figure.

I am actually considering a Prius. It is an amazing car. Only 20k. Built like a Lexus. Hybrids are the future and OPEC can kiss our hybrid arses in 15 years.

LegendC

1. Wasn't aruging your opinion.....
2. We "temporarily" opened the reserves a couple years ago to bring gas prices down, that's not what they are indended for and it did not really work.
3. You are assuming the US will not grow in the next 20 years. Demand will continue to spike as the country grows both in population and economically.

So don't quote me and act like I don't know what I am talking about. Oil will be as expensive as perfume by the time I retire in 40+ years. $40 for 4 fluid oz

And those 8,000,000 gallons of oil are a proverbial drop in the bucket compared to what we use.

proaudio22

So? The truck looks nice and performs well. If the shoe fits... It's not made for towing, again - so what? If I wanted to tow or haul things I have access to a 24ft box truck and if need be a nice Peterbuilt.

1SICKLEX

We are fortunate enough to be able to make choices by the wide selection of cars sold here. Whereas you love this truck, I think it's quite stupid. Cool. I may like the Porsche Cayenne TT(I do) and you may think it's stupid. COol.

gto2050

C'mon guys, play nice!

CLSter

So, what would your "car of the year" be?

proaudio22

Porsche Carrera GT

Shawn S

YUP……The Prius has 295 foot pounds of torque available at ZERO RPM.
I’m impressed.

I think that in a few short years this technology will be available in a good looking sports car like the CL/TL.
Imagine having 300HP and 4WD available when you want to put your foot to the floor.
Then take it easy and get 60MPG on your way home from the track.

Believe me…we will see this in a few years.

Chaptorial

If it is the wave of the future then it is a well deserved award.

darrinb

if motor trend has any say in what car you buy u got problems

03TL_PlaTinUM

WILL YOU STOP NODDING!

N.O. Accorderz

hahahah