On Wednesday, August 2, 2017 at 10:53:18 PM UTC-5, email@example.com wrote
Including the Bollinger, no?
EC has cast his line and caught another bait bucket FULL of guppies.
Reading page after page on this vehicle, the only reference I saw to it bei
ng a work truck is by EC and some here debating that fact.
Because it can carry wood doesn't make it a work truck. Where would you pu
t a tool box? A headache rack? Service bins?
So the prototype can carry something 4x8, or certain sizes of 2x4. So what
? They could have said it could carry ice chests and some here would have
called it an ice delivery truck or even an ice cream truck. Maybe even an
ice chest delivery truck.
A wheelbarrow can carry a person (in some cases, 2)in it, so does that make
it suitable for use as a taxi?
NO WHERE was I able to find any reference to this being a work truck from i
ts designers. So I am guessing that I am the only one that took interest i
n this rich person's off road toy enough to read anything about it, and as
much as he is derided here, you guys took EC's premise as truth.
It is an off road recreation vehicle, stated over and over in the press rel
eases and statements from the company and quoted in many, many interviews.
Worse, the stupidity of considering this little teeny runabout a work truc
k could have been easily avoided if they had simply looked at the page EC p
osted and followed any of the dozen or so links to different publications.
It's all there.
From a Q and A of Bollinger's Jeff Hollander:
Who’s the target buyer?
“Because it will have class-leading off-roading credentials, we thi
nk that the vehicle will be well suited for outdoor enthusiasts as well as
various government agencies with clean-fleet initiatives,” said chi
ef marketer and spokesman Jeff Holland."
Now it has turned into slug fest over battery powered vehicles and the poli
tics behind them.
If there was only this much interest in woodworking here.
Come on guys. Now is the time to bring up the evil of the government consp
iracy against electric cars, the government conspiracy for electric cars an
d of course, Al Gore. Work in the American Military/Industrial complex and
their agenda, as well as the fact that people that disagree with your "fin
dings" (Hello, Google!!) are idiots and shouldn't be breathing your air. Y
ou guys need to get with it. There are a lot more facets you can bring to a
thread that was started <<<on a completely false premise>>>. I want to se
e some real ass ripping over this... don't let this thread run out of bile.
Nicely done, EC!
On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 01:05:35 -0700 (PDT), " firstname.lastname@example.org"
So far the Bollinger does not exist as a product, and as a company is
just a way of raising funds. As a vehicle it is no more commercially
available than the Energex R&D ElectrMobile coupe built in Waterloo
Region back in 1978 - and it was totally privately funded.
Plug in hybrid? I don't think they are as bad as the pure electrics.
Smaller battery and capturing power from braking.
The biggest joke foisted off on the public was the Chevy Volt with a 24
mile range. You pay a premium for the car and it is only useful for
I'm curious how well the climate control works in both 0 degrees and 100
degrees. My car will be a comfy 72 degrees but to do that with battery
power is going to suck a lot of miles from the total range. Typical car
AC is 30,000 BTU and that sucks a lot of power. So does electric heat.
The acceleration of the electrics looks like fun though.
What, you think that pure electrics don't have regen braking?
That's Ford's models, the Volt has more like 50 mile range. My Ford has 21
mile range. It's 13 miles to work and my employer provides preferred
parking with company-paid chargers to people who drive electrics and
hybrids. So it works fine for me. Most of my driving is the daily commute
and it's usually all-electric.
The person two up the chain of command from me drives a Volt. She's an
actuary, I'm pretty sure she knows how to crunch the numbers on
practicality. She also lives farther from work than I do. Of course the
CEO drives a Tesla.
The AC seems to use less power than the heat. In the winter I typically
run out of battery just as I'm pulling into the parking lot in the morning.
In the summer I typically have about 6 miles left when I get home.
Seems that some electric drivers thing they are special and should get
free fuel. Pay a premium for your car and you can join our elitist club
and get special parking. I'd be afraid the masses of gas drivers would
throw stones at my car parked there.
I'd like to see the numbers if she is justifying it on fuel cost
savings. Many greenies don't care about money as much as saving a tree.
The Tesla is a cool car and yes, if I had an extra 100k I'd get one. No
justification needed other than I want one. I'd still need a second car
for longer trips though, the range is good but not so easy for a 600
mile day. Or staying at hotels with no chargers.
I don't see how Clarke's statement supports your assertion.
A company may actually disagree with your position on energy and climate
and choose to offer their employees a benefit that supports their
position on energy and climate. Is that illegal or immoral in your
Really? Why would you be afraid of that?
Ah, pejorative noted.
As time passes, range anxiety will become less of an issue. However,
one can always rent a car for the weekend/long trips - for much less cost
than keeping a second one around.
And clearly, there are differences for folks that live in rural settings
vs. those who live in dense urban environments - there's no one-size-fits
all solution to transportation, energy supplies or the environment.
Nor did I say that. It is what I've heard in conversation about
electric cars and subsidies. Just a comment from my observations over
time. Want names?
Did not say that did I? Any time a corporation gives privileges to some
and not others there is potential for bad blood.
The haves versus the have nots. Human instincts can kick in. M company
paid for all of my gas. I never told anyone else as it was none of
Good. I would not want you to miss it. A lot of people are willing to
pay a premium to be green. That is their decision. Ask Al Gore.
IMO, electrics are just an interim anyway. It will be 10, 25, maybe 40
years before an alternate is invented and made practical. Meantime, I
don't think taxpayer dollars should subsidize the purchase of a new car.
I also wonder where all those batteries will be 40 years from now.
o The past year, Gore's home energy use averaged 19,241 kilowatt hours (kWh)
every month, compared to the U.S. household average of 901 kWh per month.
o Gore guzzles more electricity in one year than the average American family
uses in 21 years.
o In September of 2016, Gore's home consumed 30,993 kWh in just one month - as
much energy as a typical American family burns in 34 months.
o During the last 12 months, Gore devoured 66,159 kWh of electricity just heating
his pool. That is enough energy to power six average U.S. households for a year.
o From August 2016 through July 2017, Gore spent almost $22,000 on electricity bills.
o Gore paid an estimated $60,000 to install 33 solar panels. Those solar panels produce
an average of 1,092 kWh per month, only 5.7% of Gore's typical monthly energy consumption.
That's because Gore isn't anything close to being green (with anything
but envy) and is a typical politician. (I won't label him either left
or right, conservative or liberal, democrat or republican, because he
is most likely neither, in either case.
On Thu, 03 Aug 2017 15:49:41 GMT, email@example.com (Scott Lurndal)
Possibly because that's what he would do???
About 90% of my driving needs could be met with current all-electric
vehicles. The other 10% would be satisfied by a plug-in hybryd, or
even a simple hybrid, or a car like the Volt with the range extender
SWince I've virtually always had 2 vehicles (or more) my gasoline
truck could handle anything the electric couldn't - and renting short
term when I want something more comfortable than the truck or need to
take passengers is very affordable.
Unloke MOST of those complaining about electric cars, I have actually
owned and driven (and built) one.
Anybody who throws stones has to get over a ten foot high fence and past
the security patrols. And if they're an employee they won't be one much
longer--there is full video surveillance and the company does not tolerate
vandalism by its employees.
It's not just fuel cost. Plug-in hybrids are very low maintenance. When I
got mine, used, I changed all the fluids and filters on the general
principle that I didn't know with certainty what maintenance had been
performed by the previous owner. That done, the next maintenance item is
going to be an oil change some time in 2019.
There's also a comfort factor. In a hybrid the loudest noise you hear is
typically tires on the road. And in the winter heat is instant--no waiting
for the engine to warm up.
And then there's coming out to the car on a hot or cold day and finding
that it has run the heater or air conditioner for the past half hour and
was nicely comfortable.
I don't think that's an issue for the CEO. We have two big Sikorskis
hangared on the property and a jet at the airport.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.