Want to be green and still drive a 64?

Screw being green...i put premium in my tank and my main car is a 69 gmc with a 350 with over 300Hp that drinks gas, it has dual blownout glasspacks that are louder then crap, dont like me? go hug a tree.

So the answer would be no, then? I didn't say I didn't like loud mufflers. Straight pipes on harleys are sweet.

You trying to pick a fight or something? About half the people on this newsgroup act like you.

This is messing with my head. I always thought electric cars were slow.

Top Speed: 45 mph Acceleration: Untested Range: 10 miles (6 miles with 2 adults and 2 Beagles)

Hmmm.... No.

I believe that if somebody wants to be driving a bug in 30 years from now, that´s one of the directions to go.

Ant

I don't see why they don't add a generator turned by a very efficient motor.... maybe a turbine. That way they could have a VERY long range. The environmental impact of the electrical generation and losses associated with transporting it to the ALL electric cars isn't some huge improvement over a modern gasoline car.

Maybe if they make carbon fibre fendres, decklids, replacement doors, and we can take out the engine and tranny to replace that weight with a big electric motor, a CNG turbine generator setup(computer controlled to run at max efficiency), some good batteries, and a well thought out distribution of weight... sure, that would be cool. Only I would have to fight the temptation to up the motor selected from 40 to, say, 240...... ;)

That's useless. 10 mile range? 45 mph? Just ride a dammn bike. This is far worse than what Shaggie did to his rust free 64 ;-)

................I like it........seriously.

.........Of course, the speed and range needs some improvement. If I could get at least thirty miles between recharging and also be able to drive at 65 mph for fifteen of those thirty miles, it could easily be a daily driver for me at maybe 8,000 miles/year. There could always be another gasoline powered bug for fun and out of town trips...............hmmm.

......Electricity here in upstate NY is a combination of natural gas, hydro-electric and nuclear so it would definitely be a positive contribution to the environment here to be able to rack up 8,000 miles a year without using refined petroleum.

Even the mid-seventies electric Bradly had a range of 60 miles and a top speed of near seventy.

It was a '63. ;-)

GM did have a prototype turbine car in the fifties. It's one of the cars they have in their museum. It was a big flop as took about 10 minutes to start. It was just as complicated as a helicopter.

On Sun, 09 May 2004 11:29:33 -0400, Shaggie ran around screaming and yelling:

and not exactly "rust free".... JT

The engine compartment is too empty in that bug. 4, maybe 6 more batteries could fit around the electric motor. There's more bugs there

And beauty of a split window from florida.

I wonder if battery technology can better a lead-acid by now? I know nothing about this stuff. DC motors, like a VW generator, needs brushes, but the phase motors are the most efficient (with least parts), but require a complicated signal drive amp.

There was a turbine prototype in the sixties. They chose some citizens to be test cases and drive it for a year or so. I saw it on the University of Wisconsin campus in 1965. Adventurous effort.

I don't mean a turbine motor for the car, though, but rather an electric car with a turbine-driven generator that would kick in when the batteries got low. A turbine is inefficient if it has to varry in speed like one's auto engine does. It "finds its legs" when turning at a specific, higher rpm with a steady load.

And It ran on Anything liquid that would burn..................Many people put perfume in them to give them a nice smell, as they didn't smell too good normally. Also, the Turbine engined car was easy to start, contrary to other post, but took a long time to reach normal operating speeds.................not much in the low end torque range. They were VERY fast if they were taken on the open road. Just a way impractical vehicle. a quote "At one point or another, Turbine Cars were run, without adjustments, on unleaded gas, kerosene, jet fuel, home heating oil, peanut oil, tequila and even Chanel No. 5." form the website below.

I found another website that listed makes of Chrysler turbine engines from the fifties too.

They were way cool looking cars too.Bodies built in italy.

Keep in mind this was in the sixties

Lookk at the weird Cutaway on the lower portion of this page

that last page also has a 1977 model of a turbine engined Chrysler based on a Le Baron body,..................Very futuristic back then.

Remove "YOURPANTIES" to reply MUADIB®

It's is not, it isn't ain't, and it's it's, not its, if you mean it is. If you don't, it's its. Then too, it's hers. It isn't her's. It isn't our's either. It's ours, and likewise yours and theirs. -- Oxford University Press, Edpress News

Yep, that's the car I saw. The rear view was impressive, too - two huge tailights in a turbine design. Nice sound, too.

That exactly what I mean. You have to wait for them to get ready.