New ICE Vehicles Banned in California by 2035

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Wally86

Good lord, I've never looked into norway's taxes but they're number 2 in the world for the highest???

https://www.nationmaster.com/country.../Tax/Tax-rates

Half of my taxes are going to our military. I wonder what Norwegians get from their taxes.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Stonehorsw

The world drove decades catless, withou abs, seatbelt, airbag, crash testing, eletronic controls on powertrain to reduce emissions and so on. So, your point makes no sense.

My point was demonstrated by the article. AWD doesn’t improve braking performance or handling. It improves forward acceleration. That has nothing to do with safety. Getting stuck in the snow might not be such a big problem that it requires everyone to have AWD or 4WD, let alone a truck with those features. Regardless, EVs can have AWD and 4WD, so we are still good

[phm14]

There's a big problem with the climate panic mongering. It's called "Ice Core Data". Our polar ice caps have maintained a indisputable record of our atmospheric conditions, for 100s of thousands of years. CO2, temps, all of it. What it shows is normal, fluctuating patterns of ebb and flow, in temps, CO2, etc., since before humans existed. Placed in graph form, the pattern closely resembles a heartbeat on an EKG-rising, then failing, over and over. What the pseudo scientists and leftist power mongers do is take a small time sample, where the graph is temporarily rising, and falsely claim the sky is falling. It's getting harder to find credible ice core data reports, with all the neo-marxist censorship, but they exist, and they are irrefutable. I studied scientific method and design for my degree, and the amount of garbage "studies" claiming credibility out there is impressive, but volume does not equal truth. The climate change lies are political, and with all things political, hot air is cheap, and action/results are all that matter. With the Left, everything is rooted in increasing the power, wealth, and control of a few at the top. Their goal is to convert US citizens into a commodity, as there progress in other countries offers examples of what the US will become if folks don't stop swallowing bad pills. If the goal were pollution reduction, we'd be looking at something with more upside potential, like hydrogen, instead of swapping one energy source for another with different but substantially similar negative environments effects (petroleum vs. battery). Can you imagine the government tax losses if hydrogen fueled vehicles ran on H2O? NOT. GONNA. HAPPEN.

[Wally86]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

Half of my taxes are going to our military. I wonder what Norwegians get from their taxes.

Hyperbole is but not necessary to get a solid point across?

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Wally86

Hyperbole is but not necessary to get a solid point across?

Social Security is basically an investment fund for my future. Also, it caps out above $142k, so as a percentage of our income, it is lower. Regardless, out military budget is greater than 50% of discretionary spending.

[Wally86]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

Social Security is basically an investment fund for my future. Also, it caps out above $142k, so as a percentage of our income, it is lower. Regardless, out military budget is greater than 50% of discretionary spending.

Interesting.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/10/why-...etirement.html


"-Discretionary Spending
Discretionary Spending is the portion of the budget that the president requests and Congress appropriates every year. It represents less than one-third of the total federal budget, while mandatory spending accounts for around two-thirds."



Emphasis and underline added. You sound like you want to make the number more alarming than reality for the sake of hyperbole, again.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by phm14

There's a big problem with the climate panic mongering. It's called "Ice Core Data". Our polar ice caps have maintained a indisputable record of our atmospheric conditions, for 100s of thousands of years. CO2, temps, all of it. What it shows is normal, fluctuating patterns of ebb and flow, in temps, CO2, etc., since before humans existed. Placed in graph form, the pattern closely resembles a heartbeat on an EKG-rising, then failing, over and over. What the pseudo scientists and leftist power mongers do is take a small time sample, where the graph is temporarily rising, and falsely claim the sky is falling. It's getting harder to find credible ice core data reports, with all the neo-marxist censorship, but they exist, and they are irrefutable. I studied scientific method and design for my degree, and the amount of garbage "studies" claiming credibility out there is impressive, but volume does not equal truth. The climate change lies are political, and with all things political, hot air is cheap, and action/results are all that matter. With the Left, everything is rooted in increasing the power, wealth, and control of a few at the top. Their goal is to convert US citizens into a commodity, as there progress in other countries offers examples of what the US will become if folks don't stop swallowing bad pills. If the goal were pollution reduction, we'd be looking at something with more upside potential, like hydrogen, instead of swapping one energy source for another with different but substantially similar negative environments effects (petroleum vs. battery). Can you imagine the government tax losses if hydrogen fueled vehicles ran on H2O? NOT. GONNA. HAPPEN.

Get your tin foil hat on. This is from NASA.




Hydrogen is produced from carbon sources like natural gas, and it is far less efficient than EVs, so we just aren’t there yet. Once we have an abundance of green energy then hydrogen will make sense. Not yet.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Wally86

Interesting.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/10/why-...etirement.html


"-Discretionary Spending
Discretionary Spending is the portion of the budget that the president requests and Congress appropriates every year. It represents less than one-third of the total federal budget, while mandatory spending accounts for around two-thirds."



Emphasis and underline added. You sound like you want to make the number more alarming than reality for the sake of hyperbole, again.

You think spending more than the next ten other countries on military and accounting for almost a trillion dollars a year isn’t excessive? Have you considered what we could do with that money? Could we save social security, since you brought it up.

The point is that many countries get more for their tax dollar like getting tuition paid for, healthcare paid for, childcare paid for, etc. so if someone is only looking at the taxes other countries pay without looking at the whole picture then it looks bad, but we have it worse. We pay far more for healthcare with worse outcomes, and that goes the same with many topics. Norway is investing in green infrastructure. We are building our military.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.the...ending-3306308

[Stonehorsw]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

My point was demonstrated by the article. AWD doesn’t improve braking performance or handling. It improves forward acceleration. That has nothing to do with safety. Getting stuck in the snow might not be such a big problem that it requires everyone to have AWD or 4WD, let alone a truck with those features. Regardless, EVs can have AWD and 4WD, so we are still good

The article is correct when talking about the braking distance, it is mostly dependent on the tire to road friction coefficient. But the handling characteristics are incorrect, you can have controls that can improve specific situations (drive a Volvo in sketch situations). The article kind of admits that in the middle, but then push back.

AWD + Winter tires is the best, but it does not mean that AWD/4WD are similar to FWD in winter conditions.

If you have a chance, go ro any testing track in Sweeden, Winconsin or MI UP area during winter, you will have lots of fun.
Drive a 2wd PU, then compare to a 4wd PU. You can do some manouvers (slalom, figure 8, lane changes, 90 curve, crowned areas, and so on).

A V-box unit may help you to collect the data and see for yourself.

Edit: Just realized that you used a testing done on a BIW FWD based vehicle to talk about a necessity on driving dynamics for a BOF RWD based vehicle.

[Arthur-A]

FWD sucks. Quintessence of dullness.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Stonehorsw

The article is correct when talking about the braking distance, it is mostly dependent on the tire to road friction coefficient. But the handling characteristics are incorrect, you can have controls that can improve specific situations (drive a Volvo in sketch situations). The article kind of admits that in the middle, but then push back.

AWD + Winter tires is the best, but it does not mean that AWD/4WD are similar to FWD in winter conditions.

If you have a chance, go ro any testing track in Sweeden, Winconsin or MI UP area during winter, you will have lots of fun.
Drive a 2wd PU, then compare to a 4wd PU. You can do some manouvers (slalom, figure 8, lane changes, 90 curve, crowned areas, and so on).

A V-box unit may help you to collect the data and see for yourself.

Yeah, forward performance will improve with AWD. VSC and traction control will be equal between 2WD and AWD/4WD, so there is probably not much need for AWD/4WD in terms of movement or safety, as much as, it is an improvement in acceleration. Regardless, it is a moot point (more of a ‘I wonder if’) because EVs can do AWD/4WD.

[Stonehorsw]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

Yeah, forward performance will improve with AWD. VSC and traction control will be equal between 2WD and AWD/4WD, so there is probably not much need for AWD/4WD in terms of movement or safety, as much as, it is an improvement in acceleration. Regardless, it is a moot point (more of a ‘I wonder if’) because EVs can do AWD/4WD.

You can use torque vectoring technology, you can better distribute traction during curves, you can rebalance also if there is any friction difference between the tires and so on. I won’t duel more with you because you don’t wanna learn.

I am on this area for 16 years, so I have developed, tested, compared, validated and homologated several vehicles on safety systems.

As you normally ask for references, Thomas Gillespe, Milliken and Rudolph Limpert books are good for starters.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Stonehorsw

You can use torque vectoring technology, you can better distribute traction during curves, you can rebalance also if there is any friction difference between the tires and so on. I won’t duel more with you because you don’t wanna learn.

I am on this area for 16 years, so I have developed, tested, compared, validated and homologated several vehicles on safety systems.

As you normally ask for references, Thomas Gillespe, Milliken and Rudolph Limpert books are good for starters.

How many cars have active torque vectoring? What can be done in the name of performance isn’t necessarily needed for a commute to work in snow country. Regardless, this tangent seems to be getting off topic. Even if I conceded that AWD is mandatory in snow areas, this doesn’t mean trucks are needed, nor does it mean that ICE trucks are needed.

Most AWDs or 4WDs don’t have active diffs or active torque vectoring (not brake vectoring), but even RWD can have active diffs or vector. Most AWD systems use open diffs with VSC on the brakes. Torque vectoring is actually more likely to occur with dual motor EVs. Also, the extra weight and motors over the wheels can aid EVs in traction. What can’t be done with an EV that could only be done with an ICE as it pertains to traction or AWD/4WD systems because that is the point?

[soundman98]

um...