Climate science is crooked.

[Old Rocks]

wouldn't the first order of business be to address the problem of archaic carburation

One man’s archaic is another man’s awesome.

Absolutely. I wish I had my 1965 Mustang convertible, teal green with black interior. It was an automatic with a t-handle stick shift. Man, what a chick magnet. I used to put it in neutral and rev the rpm's up to about 5,000 and jam it into 1st gear to race GTO's at stoplights. I dropped the driveshaft in the middle of the street in 1971. I sold it to my brother and his girlfriend got it stuck between two trees at 50 mph. I want to go back in time and get that car.

I'm never going to suggest for a moment anyone not buy an effeminate hybrid or emasculating electric car if that's what their milquetoast heart desires. So I don't expect anyone to suggest for a second I give up my choice of vehicle because of their desires.

The price of freedom is allowing other people to make their own choices, even if you don't agree with it.

LOL

The 0–100–0-mph test has a long history, most famously dating back to Carroll Shelby’s 1965 427 Cobra setting a time of 13.8 seconds with driver Ken Miles at what would later become Los Angeles International Airport. To be honest, I’ve always thought that number was pure propaganda from the wily old chicken farmer. In fact, many years ago I tried to replicate it in a 427 owned by Shelby at the Pomona dragstrip. With the great man himself exhorting me to try shifting at ever-higher revs (and his mechanic behind him waving “no-no!”), I finally blew the engine up trying.

With the Tesla P100D, we’re looking at the math: addition of the car’s 0–100-mph time and its 100–0-mph stopping seconds, captured during our routine testing. Partially, it’s an expediency because we didn’t have time to perform the whole 0–100–0 circus, which requires added equipment and lots of runs to get a representative example. But it also boils the matter down to what’s really the car’s essential performance. (Foot transition time from gas to brake pedal can vary a lot—from 0.2 to maybe 0.5 second.) OK, I agree. I’m a romantic, too, and I love the idea of actually doing the complete test. But this certainly makes for a clearer, more empirical picture of performance.

The result? The P100D captures a combined time of 10.2 seconds—that’s 6.0 seconds to 100 mph and 4.2 more to stop again. What’s that mean? Here it is below, listed in the context of cars we’ve similarly tested during the past few years:

http://www.motortrend.com/news/the-2017-tesla-model-s-p100d-0-100-0-test/

That old Charger is a slug. Both in performance and handling compared to a P100D Tesla.

 

[Old Rocks]

Tesla Model 3 hits 60 MPH in 4.66 seconds, passes quarter mile in 13.3

Tesla Model 3 hits 60 MPH in 4.66 seconds, passes quarter mile in 13.3

Even the little Tesla would beat that old Charger.

 

[skookerasbil]

Tesla Model 3 hits 60 MPH in 4.66 seconds, passes quarter mile in 13.3

Tesla Model 3 hits 60 MPH in 4.66 seconds, passes quarter mile in 13.3

Even the little Tesla would beat that old Charger.

LOL......my little Focus is only about 0.4 slower on E85........but for 25K less!! And around a road course, the Tesla would see my taillights the entire time as I drove off........."seeeee ya!!"

2014 Focus ST Mountune MP275+ Road Course at The Optima Ultimate Street Car Challenge

 

[Old Rocks]

If all you’re looking to do is go quick in a straight line, the mud-and-snow tires don’t hinder acceleration from the 252-hp turbo four, as the ST returned a zero-to-60 time of 6.3 seconds, as well as a quarter-mile time of 14.9 seconds. Although we’ve had 6.3-second STs in the past, 14.9 makes this ST ever so slightly pokier in that measure of the four we’ve evaluated. It’s doubtful the tires are to blame—a tenth of a second is well within the tolerance for production variance. The Volkswagen GTI, with either its manual or dual-clutch automatic transmission, will walk away from the ST, however.

Ford Focus ST - Car and Driver

• Home
  /
• Ford
  /
• Ford Focus RS

Ford Focus RS

VIEW PHOTOS

2018 Ford Focus RS shown
Car and Driver
Car Buying Service
$41,995
Listed MSRP is for a 2018 Focus RS Hatch base trim with no options. Includes destination fee. Does not include sales tax.

Find Local Cars for SaleBuild Your Own
Rally-driver wannabes and hot-hatch hooligans, your wait is over: The Focus RS is here. With a turbocharged 2.3-liter four-cylinder that sends 350 hp and 350 lb-ft of torque to all four wheels, the RS comes standard with a six-speed manual and a unique torque-vectoring system. Michelin Pilot Super Sports wrap nineteen-inch wheels; we recorded a 0-60 time of 4.6 seconds in our testing. Developed with input from Ken Block, we judge the RS to be better than the Subaru WRX, WRX STI, and VW Golf R.Jump to Instrumented Test – 2016 Ford Focus RS with Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2 Tires
19/25 mpg
EPA
4.6 sec
0-60
350 hp
HP

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Why is this not happening?

Are you kidding? One of the most impactful measures in the carbon emissions in developed countries has been emissions standards on vehicles. What in the world....how could you say something so bizarre...

 

[Old Rocks]

Ray9 simply does not know automobiles, or engines. No knowledge of science or mechanics, then tries to talk as if he were conversant with both. And makes a silly ass fool of himself.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Ray9 simply does not know automobiles, or engines. No knowledge of science or mechanics, then tries to talk as if he were conversant with both. And makes a silly ass fool of himself.

He says bizarre things....

 

[Ray9]

Ray9 simply does not know automobiles, or engines. No knowledge of science or mechanics, then tries to talk as if he were conversant with both. And makes a silly ass fool of himself.

Your poor reading comprehension notwithstanding, the stated postulation is that no resources are being expended to improve efficiency of carbureted, internal combustion engines while vast resources are in play to distract the attention of the population with expensive and unworkable alternative energy sources.

Engineering expertise is not being employed to solve the main problem. It is being sidetracked to solve futuristic problems that may or may not materialize. The reason is to protect the wealth and power of those who run the fossil fuel empire.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

the stated postulation is that no resources are being expended to improve efficiency of carbureted, internal combustion engines

Uh....except for fuel injection being required on every car produced and sold in any developed nation on Earth...

Dude....are you high? What in the world....

 

[Ridgerunner]

And why do we need to fool with the internal combustion engine any further?

Because we don’t have sufficient quantities of dilithium crystals for our antimatter engines.

But we do have;

And they all beat the pants off of the ICE's in their class.

Yea if you don't use the heater or A/C

And you don’t mind charging it up for hours before you can drive to the grocery store.

Do you go to the gas station every time you go to the grocery store? Most Tesla's have a range of about 300 miles. Even the low range EV's are about 80 miles. More than enough to handle go to the grocery store, and back and forth to work for most of us. Plug it in every night, and you are ready to go in the morning. And drive for pennies on the dollar compared to ICE cars.

and they don't even have cigarette lighters...

 

[Ray9]

the stated postulation is that no resources are being expended to improve efficiency of carbureted, internal combustion engines

Uh....except for fuel injection being required on every car produced and sold in any developed nation on Earth...

Dude....are you high? What in the world....

Go back to the first page of the thread:

The only innovation to vehicle carburation was fuel injection in the 1980’s and that did nothing to increase gas mileage or significantly increase the efficiency of gasoline engines with respect to converting explosive energy to kinetic energy without most of it being wasted through useless heat.

 

[skookerasbil]

If all you’re looking to do is go quick in a straight line, the mud-and-snow tires don’t hinder acceleration from the 252-hp turbo four, as the ST returned a zero-to-60 time of 6.3 seconds, as well as a quarter-mile time of 14.9 seconds. Although we’ve had 6.3-second STs in the past, 14.9 makes this ST ever so slightly pokier in that measure of the four we’ve evaluated. It’s doubtful the tires are to blame—a tenth of a second is well within the tolerance for production variance. The Volkswagen GTI, with either its manual or dual-clutch automatic transmission, will walk away from the ST, however.

Ford Focus ST - Car and Driver

• Home
  /
• Ford
  /
• Ford Focus RS

Ford Focus RS

VIEW PHOTOS

2018 Ford Focus RS shown
Car and Driver
Car Buying Service
$41,995
Listed MSRP is for a 2018 Focus RS Hatch base trim with no options. Includes destination fee. Does not include sales tax.

Find Local Cars for SaleBuild Your Own
Rally-driver wannabes and hot-hatch hooligans, your wait is over: The Focus RS is here. With a turbocharged 2.3-liter four-cylinder that sends 350 hp and 350 lb-ft of torque to all four wheels, the RS comes standard with a six-speed manual and a unique torque-vectoring system. Michelin Pilot Super Sports wrap nineteen-inch wheels; we recorded a 0-60 time of 4.6 seconds in our testing. Developed with input from Ken Block, we judge the RS to be better than the Subaru WRX, WRX STI, and VW Golf R.Jump to Instrumented Test – 2016 Ford Focus RS with Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2 Tires
19/25 mpg
EPA
4.6 sec
0-60
350 hp
HP

lol........nobody drives a Focus ST stock!!

People just have no idea out in radioland.........about the magic of water/met injection + and E30 tune!!

But here's a little hint s0ns >>>

focus st vs camaro ss - Bing video


PS......power #s for a '14 Camaro SS >> 415hp @ 5,900


C'mon now........in 2018, who drives stock?

 

[skookerasbil]

Bah.....Bah....Booey

 

[skookerasbil]

If all you’re looking to do is go quick in a straight line, the mud-and-snow tires don’t hinder acceleration from the 252-hp turbo four, as the ST returned a zero-to-60 time of 6.3 seconds, as well as a quarter-mile time of 14.9 seconds. Although we’ve had 6.3-second STs in the past, 14.9 makes this ST ever so slightly pokier in that measure of the four we’ve evaluated. It’s doubtful the tires are to blame—a tenth of a second is well within the tolerance for production variance. The Volkswagen GTI, with either its manual or dual-clutch automatic transmission, will walk away from the ST, however.

Ford Focus ST - Car and Driver

• Home
  /
• Ford
  /
• Ford Focus RS

Ford Focus RS

VIEW PHOTOS

2018 Ford Focus RS shown
Car and Driver
Car Buying Service
$41,995
Listed MSRP is for a 2018 Focus RS Hatch base trim with no options. Includes destination fee. Does not include sales tax.

Find Local Cars for SaleBuild Your Own
Rally-driver wannabes and hot-hatch hooligans, your wait is over: The Focus RS is here. With a turbocharged 2.3-liter four-cylinder that sends 350 hp and 350 lb-ft of torque to all four wheels, the RS comes standard with a six-speed manual and a unique torque-vectoring system. Michelin Pilot Super Sports wrap nineteen-inch wheels; we recorded a 0-60 time of 4.6 seconds in our testing. Developed with input from Ken Block, we judge the RS to be better than the Subaru WRX, WRX STI, and VW Golf R.Jump to Instrumented Test – 2016 Ford Focus RS with Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2 Tires
19/25 mpg
EPA
4.6 sec
0-60
350 hp
HP

lol........nobody drives a Focus ST stock!!

People just have no idea out in radioland.........about the magic of water/met injection + and E30 tune!!

But here's a little hint s0ns >>>

focus st vs camaro ss - Bing video


PS......power #s for a '14 Camaro SS >> 415hp @ 5,900


2014 Chevrolet SS Performance Review @ Top Speed


C'mon now........in 2018, who drives stock?

 

[skookerasbil]

I love this forum!!!!