Clubhouse Grille (*** NO LIV DISCUSSIONS ***) (*** NO POLITICS/RELIGION ***)

[Soloman1]

i don't have any heartburn with ev's per se. we all know it's bmw drivers who are ruining our driving experience. 😉

 

i hope to play well today, but i don't have an unrealistic expectation of shooting 56.

 

i think that's about the same as 30%+ ev's in 6 years. 🙂

 

 

[bladehunter]

1 hour ago, Soloman1 said:

 

1/6th energy of an equivalent volume of gasoline. gonna need a cooled tank 6 times as big as your gas tank. maybe a trailer pulled behind your car?

 

long way off.

Yep. I know compared to popular culture and media I seem very very obtuse on this. But I ask anyone to explain it to me. No explanation comes.  
 

  I actually know how the sausage is made.  And the idea that gas cars require more engineering time /expense yearly is a flat lie.  They spend more. But it’s not required.  We could settle into a “ 300 horsepower , 32mpg , 2800lb automobile model at any point in time and just build them like toasters.  Almost totally recyclable , and plenty efficient. they’d be cheap , efficient and good enough.  But nobody wants that.  Which proves nobody really cares about clean or efficient …you could drop that to 220 horsepower and probably get the mileage over 40mpg.  I’ve gotten carbureted ( read - controlled fuel leak) 2600lb cars to 33mpg before on 6 cylinders. They don’t spend much money on this , the engineering money is spent on how to cram all that wiring , and gizmos into a car and keep it safe and ergonomically desirable. Horsepower is so easy now , they aren’t working money on that. A blind man with no arms can make 800hp live 150k miles these days with almost no maintenance outside fluid changes.  Thats silly compared to 1970.  

 

Seriously do away with the 30 miles of wiring inside. Just make airbags , a very passive efi system ,  stereo and lighting the only  electrical  In the car.   Do away with drive by wire , electric power steering and brakes ,touchscreens  any other gizmo.  Make the $25k car regular people need. 
 

You just can’t do this with an EV.  The more you do to to try to up mileage or efficiency-. The heavier it gets.  The heavier it is , the less efficient it is. It’s polar opposite of a gas engine car as far as efficiency.  

Edited April 3 by bladehunter

[Soloman1]

5 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

Yep. I know compared to popular culture and media I seem very very obtuse on this. But I ask anyone to explain it to me. No explanation comes.  
 

  I actually know how the sausage is made.  And the idea that gas cars require more engineering time /expense yearly is a flat lie.  They spend more. But it’s not required.  We could settle into a “ 300 horsepower , 32mpg , 2800lb automobile model at any point in time and just build them like toasters.  Almost totally recyclable , and plenty efficient. they’d be cheap , efficient and good enough.  But nobody wants that.  Which proves nobody really cares about clean or efficient …you could drop that to 220 horsepower and probably get the mileage over 40mpg.  I’ve gotten carbureted ( read - controlled fuel leak) 2600lb cars to 33mpg before on 6 cylinders. They don’t spend much money on this , the engineering money is spent on how to cram all that wiring , and gizmos into a car and keep it safe and ergonomically desirable. Horsepower is so easy now , they aren’t working money on that. A blind man with no arms can make 800hp live 150k miles these days with almost no maintenance outside fluid changes.  Thats silly compared to 1970.  

 

Seriously do away with the 30 miles of wiring inside. Just make airbags , a very passive efi system ,  stereo and lighting the only  electrical  In the car.   Do away with drive by wire , electric power steering and brakes ,touchscreens  any other gizmo.  Make the $25k car regular people need. 
 

You just can’t do this with an EV.  The more you do toot to try to up mileage or efficiency-. The heavier it gets.  The heavier it is , the less efficient it is. It’s polar opposite of a gas engine car as far as efficiency.  

 

🙂

 

[Soloman1]

58 minutes ago, BIG STU said:

In my practical way of thinking I do not understand why the big oil companies are not raising holy hell over all this EV stuff

 

never get in the way when your enemy is making a mistake?

[Soloman1]

25 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

Yep. I know compared to popular culture and media I seem very very obtuse on this. But I ask anyone to explain it to me. No explanation comes.  

 

toyota’s engine is real and interesting.

 

i would say the problem is no infrastructure to create and distribute hydrogen anywhere. that’s a generational problem.

[nitram]

1 hour ago, BIG STU said:

In my practical way of thinking I do not understand why the big oil companies are not raising holy hell over all this EV stuff

Because some of them are the largest investors in the electrical generation and distribution market. "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em."

[bscinstnct]

3 minutes ago, nitram said:

Because some of them are the largest investors in the electrical generation and distribution market. "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em."

 

Absolutely

 

It’s like the tobacco companies buying all the e-cigarette companies lol

 

Its like Manny told Tony

 

 

 

[mshills]

Here is something I’ve noticed, for the record, not on here. 
 

100% get being skeptical about EVs. Look, you ask me to part with fifty large or more for any reason, maybe close to double that sum, and I’m going to be informed and educated before I stroke that check.
 

What I don’t get at all is the often overt desire expressed for EVs to fail. I don’t understand that. When technology advances and businesses succeed, that is a good thing. The only thing I can point to is the large EV maker with at best a lightning rod CEO. I can understand rooting against that guy, and his continued leadership of that company was part of the reason I didn’t buy one. But the firm also employs something like 150,000 people directly plus who knows how many direct and indirect suppliers, plus shareholders either directly or through a fund. So I do hope they succeed long term, the same way I want Rivian, GM, Ford, Microsoft, Apple, Nike, UPS, Caterpillar, Cummins, and the biotech firm making my insulin pump to succeed. 

[bladehunter]

11 minutes ago, mshills said:

Here is something I’ve noticed, for the record, not on here. 
 

100% get being skeptical about EVs. Look, you ask me to part with fifty large or more for any reason, maybe close to double that sum, and I’m going to be informed and educated before I stroke that check.
 

What I don’t get at all is the often overt desire expressed for EVs to fail. I don’t understand that. When technology advances and businesses succeed, that is a good thing. The only thing I can point to is the large EV maker with at best a lightning rod CEO. I can understand rooting against that guy, and his continued leadership of that company was part of the reason I didn’t buy one. But the firm also employs something like 150,000 people directly plus who knows how many direct and indirect suppliers, plus shareholders either directly or through a fund. So I do hope they succeed long term, the same way I want Rivian, GM, Ford, Microsoft, Apple, Nike, UPS, Caterpillar, Cummins, and the biotech firm making my insulin pump to succeed. 

I think it has nothing to do with musk.  And  everything to do with reality. I’d buy a Tesla before I’d buy ford just for resale.  Coincidentally, he says it’s not a long term solution for all either.   It’s a make money now solution.  

 

It’s an are we wishing for “ reality “ or “ fantasy “ conundrum.  If fantasy , where there’s no unintended consequences -sure.  I hope everything goes electric. We can collect free energy from the unicorn methane , . And all ride for free.  With zero emissions.  
 

but in reality , it’s a non starter if clean is the goal.  If clean isn’t the goal , what is ? It’s dirtier than the decision that was made to package everything in plastic some 75-80 years ago.  
 

this isn’t comparable to folks who said man couldn’t fly.  This is like if we said we could give everyone a personal  mars shuttle for $50k each inside 10 years time.  It’s that impossible .  And by that I mean - have most people in an EV, that isn’t fired by coal,( meaning solar or wind powered only )  and is recyclable - plus have a grid that can charge 200-300 million at once. By 2040.  We can’t pave the roads and fix the bridges by 2040.  
 

I understand why the layperson wishes it so.  Backs it , and even pays up to get it.  I get that. If I were outside the loop AND affluent enough to invest in a $75k small car , I could see stepping into the fad too.  But it’s just math.  Set it up as a math question…. Most of the inputs are known values. And you can extrapolate that as far into the future as you’d like based on population decline , and then ( hopefully) growth if it starts growing after 2035.  
 

last thought I have is “ fossil fuel ban”.  I don’t believe there’s any chance of this happening.  But if it were to.  It would immediately sentence more folks in underdeveloped countries to death , than any plague could.  Cheap energy is the only thing keeping many alive.  Making energy more expensive is not a goal anyone should have.  
 

 

sorry , I know it’s blunt.  Nothing personal.  But you asked. That’s why.  

[bscinstnct]

19 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

I think it has nothing to do with musk.  And  everything to do with reality. I’d buy a Tesla before I’d buy ford just for resale.  Coincidentally, he says it’s not a long term solution for all either.   It’s a make money now solution.  

 

It’s an are we wishing for “ reality “ or “ fantasy “ conundrum.  If fantasy , where there’s no unintended consequences -sure.  I hope everything goes electric. We can collect free energy from the unicorn methane , . And all ride for free.  With zero emissions.  
 

but in reality , it’s a non starter if clean is the goal.  If clean isn’t the goal , what is ? It’s dirtier than the decision that was made to package everything in plastic some 75-80 years ago.  
 

this isn’t comparable to folks who said man couldn’t fly.  This is like if we said we could give everyone a personal  mars shuttle for $50k each inside 10 years time.  It’s that impossible .  And by that I mean - have most people in an EV, that isn’t fired by coal,( meaning solar or wind powered only )  and is recyclable - plus have a grid that can charge 200-300 million at once. By 2040.  We can’t pave the roads and fix the bridges by 2040.  
 

I understand why the layperson wishes it so.  Backs it , and even pays up to get it.  I get that. If I were outside the loop AND affluent enough to invest in a $75k small car , I could see stepping into the fad too.  But it’s just math.  Set it up as a math question…. Most of the inputs are known values. And you can extrapolate that as far into the future as you’d like based on population decline , and then ( hopefully) growth if it starts growing after 2035.  
 

last thought I have is “ fossil fuel ban”.  I don’t believe there’s any chance of this happening.  But if it were to.  It would immediately sentence more folks in underdeveloped countries to death , than any plague could.  Cheap energy is the only thing keeping many alive.  Making energy more expensive is not a goal anyone should have.  
 

 

sorry , I know it’s blunt.  Nothing personal.  But you asked. That’s why.  

 

I think the idea is there’s a concern fossil fuels will be in danger of being depleted 100 years from now. Theres a reason the ME OPEC countries are diversifying their GDP streams 

 

We will need to stockpile as much as possible and use it sparingly say starting 50-60 years from now for its most urgent purposes

 

So, it becomes more important to transition to EVs if the notion that every person  needs a personal vehicle is to continue 

 

The earlier the tech is developed and scaled, the faster and faster it becomes more efficient 

Edited April 3 by bscinstnct

[dashanks]

I just had a horrifying thought.  I think I get most of my news from Soloman.

[mshills]

22 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

sorry , I know it’s blunt.  Nothing personal.  But you asked. That’s why.  

No need to apologize. Maybe I am being thick, but I still do not follow the line of thinking of actively wanting a business to fail.

 

I also don’t recall any claims being made that there are no unintended consequences and energy would be free. Nothing is free, ever, for any reason, under any circumstances. 

 

There is a possible detour here that will get into a political discussion and that is not my intent so I’m not touching that. If it’s best to change the topic now that is cool too, I get it. 

[dashanks]

8 hours ago, Jim53 said:

I just got the small bottle 

That stuff is just delicious, isn't it?  My problem is I like it all.  Except maybe gin.  Woof!   

[bscinstnct]

7 minutes ago, dashanks said:

I just had a horrifying thought.  I think I get most of my news from Soloman.

[bladehunter]

9 minutes ago, bscinstnct said:

 

I think the idea is there’s a concern fossil fuels will be in danger of being depleted 100 years from now. Theres a reason the ME OPEC countries are diversifying their GDP streams 

 

We will need to stockpile as much as possible and use it sparingly say starting 50-60 years from now for its most urgent purposes

 

So, it becomes more important to transition to EVs if the notion that every person  needs a personal vehicle is to continue 

 

The earlier the tech is developed and scaled, the faster and faster it becomes more efficient 

We’ve been running out now since 1890.  If we do.  It’s our  3x great grandchildren who it will hit.  So then it becomes “ how many do we impoverish now in order to potentially save 300 years from now “?  And I get that hard questions have to be asked. 
 

bit I see EV tech like the Hindenburg.  A lot of people knew that was a bad idea then.  And were called names for thinking that. It’s like the flight analogy I made before.  It’s not saying new tech and innovation is bad. It’s recognizing when an idea is bad , or won’t be a good stop gap , and curtailing waste and stopping the push , before  it burns down.  In favor of focusing on something that would work.  Or has at least a known possible  path to working.  
 

EV-s can remain an option.  No problem  by me.  But we have to recognize now that they aren’t the solution to energy issues.  And also call out automakers for their design features that are shortcomings on purpose to draw out sales over a long period.  
 

I see something like a hydrogen powered hybrid as a much better option.  Something that charges while it drives. And even that is still dirty on the back end. Battery tech has to become safe AND recyclable for me to see it as a win.  We’re not close to that. Phones still explode in pockets for Pete’s sake. And when you upgrade.  It’s nearly 100 % landfill waste , unless it’s resold as “ refurbished “. Which means used.  In 20 years you’ll read “ billions of junk car batteries leaching toxic materials into the ground water “ on the news alerts.  

[dashanks]

They should be able to figure out the ultimate effect of the EV on carbon footprint.  Plus or Minus.   Then, if they are not preventing any pollution, what's the point?

[bladehunter]

12 minutes ago, mshills said:

No need to apologize. Maybe I am being thick, but I still do not follow the line of thinking of actively wanting a business to fail.

 

I also don’t recall any claims being made that there are no unintended consequences and energy would be free. Nothing is free, ever, for any reason, under any circumstances. 

 

There is a possible detour here that will get into a political discussion and that is not my intent so I’m not touching that. If it’s best to change the topic now that is cool too, I get it. 

No , no politics meant. It’s absolutely  an everyone issue.   You are just fine. I’d never think anyone here thick , because I’m the king of misunderstanding, or being misunderstood.  There are no such things as dumb questions.  
 

it’s not wanting a business to fail.  I think they’ll all succeed as far as profitability.  Im calling fail on the front of providing a clean alternative.  Or a long term viable alternative to gasoline.  They’ll be profitable because of lack of choice.  But that’s like calling your little brother the winner of the beauty contest because he’s the only one who entered. 🤣.  He didn’t win. Everybody lost ! But he will get the prize in the end.  
 

What has to be considered is fossil fuel burnt to produce the electricity and the infrastructure.  It’s going to be much more than  just using the gas for fuel.  Nuclear energy plus a recyclable battery design could  tip the scale. Or like I said above. A hybrid that charges its own battery’s as it drives.   Problem here is this will kill most automakers , and service stations and supply chain employees. More money on the line here than probably any topic in human history.  
 

 

[bscinstnct]

9 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

We’ve been running out now since 1890.  If we do.  It’s our  3x great grandchildren who it will hit.  So then it becomes “ how many do we impoverish now in order to potentially save 300 years from now “?  And I get that hard questions have to be asked. 
 

bit I see EV tech like the Hindenburg.  A lot of people knew that was a bad idea then.  And were called names for thinking that. It’s like the flight analogy I made before.  It’s not saying new tech and innovation is bad. It’s recognizing when an idea is bad , or won’t be a good stop gap , and curtailing waste and stopping the push , before  it burns down.  In favor of focusing on something that would work.  Or has at least a known possible  path to working.  
 

EV-s can remain an option.  No problem  by me.  But we have to recognize now that they aren’t the solution to energy issues.  And also call out automakers for their design features that are shortcomings on purpose to draw out sales over a long period.  
 

I see something like a hydrogen powered hybrid as a much better option.  Something that charges while it drives. And even that is still dirty on the back end. Battery tech has to become safe AND recyclable for me to see it as a win.  We’re not close to that. Phones still explode in pockets for Pete’s sake. And when you upgrade.  It’s nearly 100 % landfill waste , unless it’s resold as “ refurbished “. Which means used.  In 20 years you’ll read “ billions of junk car batteries leaching toxic materials into the ground water “ on the news alerts.  

 

Its taken 40 years for cell phones to go from being the size of a suitcase to that marvel that you carry around in your pocket

 

Same thing with EVs. We can’t imagine what the tech will look like in 40 years.
 

but it takes multiple iterations and generations of product, scaled out into the hands of consumers in order for them to develop properly

[braincramp52]

I've actually been thinking about selling my car and buying something from the 60's that I can fix myself. 

[dashanks]

10 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

No , no politics meant. It’s absolutely  an everyone issue.   You are just fine. I’d never think anyone here thick , because I’m the king of misunderstanding, or being misunderstood.  There are no such things as dumb questions.  
 

it’s not wanting a business to fail.  I think they’ll all succeed as far as profitability.  Im calling fail on the front of providing a clean alternative.  Or a long term viable alternative to gasoline.  They’ll be profitable because of lack of choice.  But that’s like calling your little brother the winner of the beauty contest because he’s the only one who entered. 🤣.  He didn’t win. Everybody lost ! But he will get the prize in the end.  
 

What has to be considered is fossil fuel burnt to produce the electricity and the infrastructure.  It’s going to be much more than  just using the gas for fuel.  Nuclear energy plus a recyclable battery design could  tip the scale. Or like I said above. A hybrid that charges its own battery’s as it drives.   Problem here is this will kill most automakers , and service stations and supply chain employees. More money on the line here than probably any topic in human history.  
 

 

"A hybrid that charges its own battery’s as it drives."   I've wondered about that a lot.  Technically, I guess I'm an idiot but I would think that an EV should be able to recharge its batteries to some degree.  Maybe they do.  I don't know.

[dashanks]

31 minutes ago, braincramp52 said:

I've actually been thinking about selling my car and buying something from the 60's that I can fix myself. 

The guy across the street from me has a '78 Firebird in his driveway and it looks like he's just letting it go to sh!t.  Nothing special but it looks pretty clean.   I would like to mess around with something like that myself.  

[bladehunter]

1 hour ago, bscinstnct said:

 

Its taken 40 years for cell phones to go from being the size of a suitcase to that marvel that you carry around in your pocket

 

Same thing with EVs. We can’t imagine what the tech will look like in 40 years.
 

but it takes multiple iterations and generations of product, scaled out into the hands of consumers in order for them to develop properly

Sure. But that’s my point. I guess. Scale that to a vehicle and an infrastructure overhaul and it’s 140-200  years to wait.  IF…..  the tech jumps from bag phone to iPhone. 

[bscinstnct]

12 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

Sure. But that’s my point. I guess. Scale that to a vehicle and an infrastructure overhaul and it’s 140-200  years to wait.  IF…..  the tech jumps from bag phone to iPhone. 

blade! 
 

In 1945 we still flying airplanes with propellers

 

24 years later we had a man walking on the moon 🌕 ; )

 

Tech can move fast. 

 

Plus, assuming there is still some variant of the human race alive in 140 years 😳 we will have fusion and unlimited energy ; )

 

Chasing the sun now, amazing…

 

Nuclear fusion reactor in South Korea runs at 100 million degrees C for a record-breaking 48 seconds

 

https://www.livescience.com/physics-mathematics/nuclear-fusion-reactor-in-south-korea-runs-at-100-million-degrees-c-for-a-record-breaking-48-seconds

 

 

[bladehunter]

2 minutes ago, bscinstnct said:

blade! 
 

In 1945 we still flying airplanes with propellers

 

24 years later we had a man walking on the moon 🌕 ; )

 

Tech can move fast. 

 

Plus, assuming there is still some variant of the human race alive in 140 years 😳 we will have fusion and unlimited energy ; )

 

Chasing the sun now, amazing…

 

Nuclear fusion reactor in South Korea runs at 100 million degrees C for a record-breaking 48 seconds

 

https://www.livescience.com/physics-mathematics/nuclear-fusion-reactor-in-south-korea-runs-at-100-million-degrees-c-for-a-record-breaking-48-seconds

 

 

Preface this with saying “ I kid I kid.   Mostly “.  And a smiley face 😊…… but. I think we’re going to need to catch a few more aliens to make another jump.  I don’t personally think there will ever be another 100 year jump like the last century.  We aren’t getting smarter.  And I include myself in that.   Skills we value today , for the most part don’t produce much of anything.  They’re social skills and entertainment.  Real problem solvers/producers  don’t get funded.  It’s almost always  more profitable to make a treatment for the problem vs a solution.  

[braincramp52]

39 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

Preface this with saying “ I kid I kid.   Mostly “.  And a smiley face 😊…… but. I think we’re going to need to catch a few more aliens to make another jump.  I don’t personally think there will ever be another 100 year jump like the last century.  We aren’t getting smarter.  And I include myself in that.   Skills we value today , for the most part don’t produce much of anything.  They’re social skills and entertainment.  Real problem solvers/producers  don’t get funded.  It’s almost always  more profitable to make a treatment for the problem vs a solution 

 

I'm like, stop the world. I want to get off. 🤪

[scotee]

[scotee]

My new EV.  Christmas present to myself. LI ion. Sold my old 1993 Club Car gas cart for more than I paid for it in 1995. Told my daughters I was spending their inheritance cause I'm worth it. 😁  Played today at 50 deg and a little rain. Nice rain cover and very comfy with the propane heater when needed. Don't know if it will outlast my old one or me.

 

 

[Conrad1953]

45 minutes ago, braincramp52 said:

I'm like, stop the world. I want to get off. 🤪

 

Feels like I pretty much have. My life is simple. I live in my own little world.

 

Tee time 9:30 tomorrow morning.

 

I hope to be back home in time to catch the @Soloman1 news report. 

 

I also have a tee time for Monday....................which means I will be on the golf course

during the eclipse. That should be interesting. I won't be watching it, of course, but

it may get interesting if it gets dark during our round.

 

 

[Double Mocha Man]

6 minutes ago, scotee said:

My new EV.  Christmas present to myself. LI ion. Sold my old 1993 Club Car gas cart for more than I paid for it in 1995. Told my daughters I was spending their inheritance cause I'm worth it. 😁  Played today at 50 deg and a little rain. Nice rain cover and very comfy with the propane heater when needed. Don't know if it will outlast my old one or me.

 

 

 

How fast can she go?

[Conrad1953]

3 minutes ago, scotee said:

My new EV.  Christmas present to myself. LI ion. Sold my old 1993 Club Car gas cart for more than I paid for it in 1995. Told my daughters I was spending their inheritance cause I'm worth it. 😁  Played today at 50 deg and a little rain. Nice rain cover and very comfy with the propane heater when needed. Don't know if it will outlast my old one or me.

 

 

 

Nice ride! 

 

Looks cushy. Cruisin' the course in comfort. Buttery soft going over bumps, roots and rocks.