Toggle sidebar

Electric "Muscle" Cars

Status
Not open for further replies.
motorheadmike said:
Christian Bale GIF by PeacockTV
Click to expand...
Knock it off. It's okay when he does it.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 08Malibu, ck80 and Rktpwrd
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 69hurstolds and motorheadmike
Supercharged111 said:
Some cursory googling and Youtubing puts a DIY solar system somewhere more in the 20-30k range. Assuming they last 30 or so years like they say, and given the cost of electricity back in MI, the payback would probably be in the 10 years or less mark. Also consider that electricity probably isn't going to get any cheaper if/when they roll out the carbon tax. Geothermal heating/cooling is definitely on my radar, I've seen them dig the tube, but I need to do more research into the exchanging of that heat (air/radiant?) and how many BTUs to expect. Standing alone, I doubt it'll heat a house to 80 when it's 0 outside and conversely it probably won't get the house down to 60 in the summer when it's 90+ out. The question then becomes, if it's there to augment regular utilities, will there be an actual savings? Or did I just carry out an expensive time consuming science project? I have a few years yet to run the numbers. For now, I'm just trying to get my hands on a few undeveloped acres.
Click to expand...
Geothermal is a great option for someone who plans on being in their house long enough to see the return. Seniors doing it are just increasing the resale value on their home.

Definitely talk to someone reputable in your area about it. It doesn't work for everyone, but it could be an option for you.
 
Supercharged111 said:
Some cursory googling and Youtubing puts a DIY solar system somewhere more in the 20-30k range. Assuming they last 30 or so years like they say, and given the cost of electricity back in MI, the payback would probably be in the 10 years or less mark. Also consider that electricity probably isn't going to get any cheaper if/when they roll out the carbon tax. Geothermal heating/cooling is definitely on my radar, I've seen them dig the tube, but I need to do more research into the exchanging of that heat (air/radiant?) and how many BTUs to expect. Standing alone, I doubt it'll heat a house to 80 when it's 0 outside and conversely it probably won't get the house down to 60 in the summer when it's 90+ out. The question then becomes, if it's there to augment regular utilities, will there be an actual savings? Or did I just carry out an expensive time consuming science project? I have a few years yet to run the numbers. For now, I'm just trying to get my hands on a few undeveloped acres.
Click to expand...
agree here. I'm in the process of going solar right now... looking right @ the $32-35k mark, and spread out over 25 years, but with current tax credits, we should be looking at about $12k of it back . the sooner the bulk of it goes back to the loan, the lower the payback a month it is, and any surplus left over after a calendar year, comes back in the form of a check. so a 10 year payoff is actually doable. in my area, and usage cost, the first couple years will be a wash, but longer term will payoff greatly. (not to mention extra value on the house)

69hurstolds said:
JMO. While some will blather on about how the governments aren't actually forcing anything on us, yadda, yadda, yadda, in a certain vein, that is a true statement in the slimmest of meaning. But what is happening is the private companies that make the kinds of things we like are being strong-armed (by that government that isn't forcing anything on us) to take away the choices we used to have, or only have alternatives that certain someones deem acceptable. This is CDC-Covid19 stuff all over again. The science says whatever you want it to, depending on which scientists you ask. When the "global warming" think tanks actually admitted placing temperature monitors on the sunny side of buildings to skew the numbers to make it look worse than what it really was, they all lost me as far as credibility. So junk science is just that. I really don't know what to believe. But I do believe that even if things continue as they are with no more chaning anything, I will eventually die and things will virtually be the same when I do. Changing the name to "climate change" (a nebulous and utterly useless moniker) still doesn't sway me. You say Sierra, I say Silverado. Same thing, different name. I'll still bet dime to donuts that even though money is thrown down the climate change hole, it won't do anything to change stuff. Meanwhile, other countries are starting up their coal plants again. Derp. It's really not considered leading the way if you're the only one in the parade, Dumbazz.

If Pizza Hut has their Pizza lunch bar suddenly serve sushi and takes away the pepperoni and cheese selections and then raises their lunch price by 35%, it's de facto forcing sushi on customers that didn't ask for it, didn't really want it, and won't be too happy about a sudden change and having to pay more for something they didn't know was coming. Same thing here. All these
companies cave under pressure and effectively limit your choice to EV A or EV B. What, no ICE? Nope. Or they will be severely limited. Sure, a few people might like it, but far more won't. Simple math.

Most new-age folks probably wouldn't know a 14mm wrench from a hammer anyway, so maybe it's good for them to have cars that have to have "sounds" programmed into them to pretend they're something they can never be. Who run the world? Idiots.
Click to expand...
never said it was the gub'ment forcing it on us... seems most of the manufacturers are jumping on the electric powered bandwagon, and I'm not a follower, but realize that the trend is growing... I do believe that "global warming" exists, but not at the levels all the alarmists want us to believe, but I'm not jumping into all that argument... just not that blind of a sheep...
 
GP403 said:
Are we still debating whether or not greenhouse gas induced climate change is real?
Click to expand...
A dwindling number of weaker voices seem to, still.

My answer has always been another question: Which side of this can we afford to be wrong on?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 64nailhead
Right now, IMO the best way to address vehicles would be to start setting government standards for how much tailpipe greenhouse gas can be a one-way trip (from a non-renewable source), and leave it up to industry and the market how to meet the standards. And all this BS about EVs is just a round-about ruse to avoid doing that.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

GBodyForum is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com. Amazon, the Amazon logo, AmazonSupply, and the AmazonSupply logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.

Please support GBodyForum Sponsors

Classic Truck Consoles Dixie Restoration Depot UMI Performance

Contact [email protected] for info on becoming a sponsor

Top Bottom