I really wish there was a Survival Party
who revoked all this safety nonsense about May Contain Nuts and Crumple Zones and hand rails on stairs and stuff.

That'd weed out the thickos.
( Grrrmachine the indifference engine, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 18:41, archived)

I reckon the roads would be so much safer on average
if cars didn't have so many safety features. They'd be a good few kilos lighter, for one thing, and they'd get better mpg into the bargain.
( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 18:43, archived)

exactly
and if people still had to have Exercise Handles rather than electric windows (which add 60kg, or another adult female, to the weight of the car) there's savings there too.
( Grrrmachine the indifference engine, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 18:44, archived)

60kg just for electric windows?
Crikey.
If I ever buy a car, I'm stripping everything out that isn't required to make it go.
( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 18:45, archived)

Someone on a car forum I frequent
took out close to half a ton of shit to make his touring car. 1400kg reduced to 900.
( Grrrmachine the indifference engine, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 18:48, archived)

Did he leave in the air conditioning?
Or did he just open the windows?
( Rev. Cleo still alive, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 18:51, archived)

I've yet to own a car with AC
it sucks 15% of the engine power, massively increases the fuel usage, adds weight, complicated plumbing, and for what? So that your hair doesn't get ruffled when you drive too fast? Grow up, you pampered piss-weak pussy excuses for people.
( Grrrmachine the indifference engine, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 18:54, archived)

Except when you're driving at high speed, it's more fuel efficient
to use air conditioning than creating extra drag by opening the windows.
( Druid, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 18:55, archived)

You have to get to illegal speeds to make that happen

( Grrrmachine the indifference engine, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 18:56, archived)

I heard that it was about 40mph.
Which is illegal if you're driving in a 30mph limit.
( Druid, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 18:58, archived)

Grrrmachine is stuck in the 20th century.
He only knows about cars that backfire.
( Dave Trouser ; the people's choice - 75% agree, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:00, archived)

Given that the 2006 Subaru Forrester was prone to overfueling
pre-ignition and detonating its own throttle body clean off the manifold, that seems a bit harsh.
( Grrrmachine the indifference engine, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:02, archived)

In Soviet Russia, YOU backfire.

( Dave Trouser ; the people's choice - 75% agree, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:03, archived)

In a massively slippery sports car or similar where drag is a big issue, maybe
in your common or garden Octavia, you'd have to be talking about motorway speeds, and if was anything boxy like a van, it wouldn't make a difference at all.
( Grrrmachine the indifference engine, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:00, archived)

So not illegal speeds at all, then.

( Druid, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:02, archived)

next time you're on a motorway
I DARE you to stick to 69mph.
( Grrrmachine the indifference engine, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:09, archived)

What's wrong with 70?

( Dave Trouser ; the people's choice - 75% agree, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:09, archived)

It would depend on a lot of things, I'd imagine.
If it was one of these stupid SUV things that are shaped like bricks, it would probably make very little difference.
( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:01, archived)

My experience differs. It certainly doesn't drain fuel "massively".
15% engine power is nonsense too. I suggest you try using facts next time.
( Dave Trouser ; the people's choice - 75% agree, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 18:57, archived)

A car at cruising speed requires approximately 25-30hp to maintain speed
a modern aircon unit will drain minimum 5hp to maintain charge and 7-8hp on a hot day to maintain chill. Even conservatively, 16% more power is required to run the aircon than would be if it wasn't on.
Or you could stick to your anecdotal evidence and ignore years and years of independant data on the subject.
( Grrrmachine the indifference engine, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:06, archived)

To maintain charge? You're talking nonsense there.
It's a sealed system, you do not need to maintain charge.
( Dave Trouser ; the people's choice - 75% agree, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:08, archived)

I'm not quite sure what this means either.

( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:11, archived)

A refrigeration system is "charged" with a certain amount of refrigerant.
You might need to top it up every 2 years due to unavoidable leaking, but other than that, it doesn't take any power to maintain that charge.

Also, Grrrmachine is very confused. He claims it uses "15% of the engine power" - regardless of the engine power? What a silly nonsense commy bastard he is! Bigger engine? Your aircon will sap 15%!!!111!
( Dave Trouser ; the people's choice - 75% agree, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:14, archived)

it saps 15% at cruising speeds,
I think is what he's saying there. That means 25-30hp to go at about 70mph. Which is about right. That mostly only depends on vehicle aerodynamics, not the weight of the vehicle or the peak output of the engine.
( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:15, archived)

He likes to change his position when he realises his terrible errors!

( Dave Trouser ; the people's choice - 75% agree, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:16, archived)

that might have been what he meant to begin with,
even if he wasn't clear about it.
( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:17, archived)

None of this is relevant.
The goal here is an angry Grrrmachine, not a resolution of any technical argument.
( Dave Trouser ; the people's choice - 75% agree, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:18, archived)

oh right

( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:20, archived)

that's a rather pointless goal
I'm angry enough that you're all breathing as it is.
( Grrrmachine the indifference engine, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:21, archived)

*breathes twice as much, just to spite you*
ooh, dizzy.
( Dave Trouser ; the people's choice - 75% agree, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:23, archived)

I didn't realise I had changed my position in the slightest.
15% will always be relative to the size of the engine; Im fairly sure a Bugatti Veyron would hardly notice the effect of aircon on its fuel economy, what with it being a massively pointless thirsty beast anyway.

Still, if you'd like to be ridiculously argumentative rather than rational, carry on by all means.
( Grrrmachine the indifference engine, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:20, archived)

"I've yet to own a car with AC - it sucks 15% of the engine power, massively increases the fuel usage"

You are the one making outrageous exaggerated claims. Go back to your backward cars in your backward country.
( Dave Trouser ; the people's choice - 75% agree, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:23, archived)

Neither of those are outrageous or exaggerated
The average horsepower of a European car still remains less than 100hp. In that situation, with the other figures I've quoted, 15% is a fair figure.
( Grrrmachine the indifference engine, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:25, archived)

You're making it all up.

( Dave Trouser ; the people's choice - 75% agree, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:26, archived)

oh right
in that case, close your eyes, breathe deep, count to 7, then punch yourself in the face.
( Grrrmachine the indifference engine, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:27, archived)

You've failed to quote any sources. You might as well be making it all up.
But posting sources NOW means you fail even more, for being an idiot.
( Dave Trouser ; the people's choice - 75% agree, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:31, archived)

I wonder if you could do it with heatpipes instead.

( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:27, archived)

That'd only work in flowing traffic
not the immense traffic jams you get in Sinai Peninsula (a BIG target market for cars with Air-con)
( Grrrmachine the indifference engine, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:30, archived)

No, not to any effective degree.
They'll carry excessive heat away, but they won't chill anything.

Some manufacturers use peltier coolers. Grossly inefficient though.
( Dave Trouser ; the people's choice - 75% agree, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:30, archived)

ack
no, never use peltier coolers for A/C.

Might not be much use in the Southern US and the like, but for your average UK summer ambient temperature is bearable enough. The problem is all the windows a car has makes it into a mini greenhouse.
( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:32, archived)

Bearable by who's standards?
I will decide what temperature I want the inside of my car at, thank you. Especially when it's been sat in the sun, and the inside temperature is in excess of 40C, with a black dashboard blasting it at my face.
( Dave Trouser ; the people's choice - 75% agree, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:35, archived)

I'm not telling you what to do,
I'm only proposing a compromise solution that will cool better than no cooling, but without draining engine power or significantly increasing the weight of the vehicle.
It would also work while your car was sat with the engine off.
( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:36, archived)

Oh that was the other thing - 60KG for electric windows? I think not.
Maybe in some shitheap old commy car, just maybe.
( Dave Trouser ; the people's choice - 75% agree, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:38, archived)

it does seem a bit much,
that's what I weigh! Still unnecessary, though. I'm perfectly capable of using a handle.

How about your car's windows make from infra-red transmitting glass? It wouldn't trap the heat so much, then. And use a heat-conductive roof lining.
( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:42, archived)

I'd rather press a button once when driving, than have to wind a handle. It's the same as using a mobile.
Also, your latest suggestion would make the car an icebox in winter.

The solution is, air con. As proven by the millions of cars with it installed.
( Dave Trouser ; the people's choice - 75% agree, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:44, archived)

it's a crap solution because it drains engine power and increases your mpg,
especially in this day and age when mpg is more important than ever. The popularity of the idea isn't proof of how good it is. It's a luxury feature, and luxuries sell, because people like luxuries.
( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:47, archived)

Heatpipes don't chill.
You could only hope to get to ambient, and even then, very slowly. They'd be even less effective with the car stationary.
( Dave Trouser ; the people's choice - 75% agree, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:40, archived)

yes, that's the idea,
ambient temperature is better than greenhouse temperature.
( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:42, archived)

Not if you want it less than ambient.
If it's 30C, I want it down to 20C, like most normal human beings living in temperate climates. I would argue that people in HOTTER climates could do without it, as they'd be used to the heat.
( Dave Trouser ; the people's choice - 75% agree, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:46, archived)

Food time!
#EOF
( Dave Trouser ; the people's choice - 75% agree, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:46, archived)

The gases are sealed in, but they're certainly not compressed to operating temp
especially now we've banned all those delicious CFCs. You still have to compress the system up to a certain charge before it will have any noticeable effect, hence "to charge."

Anything else you want to argue with?
( Grrrmachine the indifference engine, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:18, archived)

Yes, pick a topic.
I'm a world leading expert.
( Dave Trouser ; the people's choice - 75% agree, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:19, archived)

this
although I can forgive anyone who lives in the likes of Texas.
( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:02, archived)

Yeah, how dare people be comfortable, just because they can.
It's always the same. Either, people who don't drive, or old fuddy-duddys, whinging about modern things.
( Dave Trouser ; the people's choice - 75% agree, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:05, archived)

comfort is for gays

( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:05, archived)

Brilliant.

( Dave Trouser ; the people's choice - 75% agree, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 19:06, archived)

Also, my neighbour refused to believe I could get
my BMW estate, two bikes and a full fitted kitchen into my garage, when he can only just get a Skoda Fabia into his. Ho ho.
( Grrrmachine the indifference engine, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 18:43, archived)

my dad's garage would fit three cars,
if it wasn't full of old settees, kitchen cupboards, rolls of carpet and pianos.
( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 18:44, archived)

Bear in mind this is a Communist (e)state
there's 600 apartments here, and only 20 garages. And these were built when the best car you could own was a Maluch
( Grrrmachine the indifference engine, Thu 11 Jun 2009, 18:45, archived)