Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : BAAT - world records for electric vehicles with zinc-air -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: S.C. Barnard who wrote (1402)	2/12/1998 12:42:00 AM
From: (Bob) Zumbrunnen	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 6464

It's my opinion that if you tune an engine specifically for the purpose of efficiently going 40 mph, acceleration be damned, and make appropriate adjustments to the rest of the car, you're going to get far in excess of 60 mpg anyway. I used to commute from Kansas City to Topeka (about 100 miles each way) on I-70 in my 91 Mustang and when I put the effort into it, was able to consistently get 31 mpg out of it. Mostly that involved advancing heck out of the timing (which necessitated premium fuel), removing the air silencer, overinflating the tires, zero toe-in, max negative camber (makes the tires ride more on the edge to reduce the contact patch in straight-line driving) and a 2.73 rear-end. Combine this with a driving style that coaxed maximum economy on the hilly drive. 31 mpg isn't bad for a 4-cylinder car, but this car isn't one. It's a 225 hp V8! I could get high economy, or peel the paint off almost anything out there, with the only change being the amount of throttle. BTW, I still have that car and you can check out the rather interesting new use that car sees at sound.net <g> The point I'm getting at is that 93 mpg is, IMO, indicative of some kind of technology that actually works, but it's not earth-shattering by a long shot. Now if they were more thorough, they might've done exactly the same mods to a control car, except for the engine, down to the same tires and same gearing. Then they could've also done comparative 0-60 times in both cars. If they could beat such a control car by 50% in economy, and not give up too much in 0-60, that'd be earth-shattering. I would think this would've been possible, and with even higher economy figures. I take it there's no electric motor assist. Too bad, as I thought that's one of this company's specialties. And an electrically-assisted 23-horse diesel-powered Metro should be able to blow the doors off a stocker. Electric motors are much more torquey off the line than comparably-powered gas engines. I'm in this stock right now for the following reasons: 1. European connection. 2. Possibility of dyno figures soon being published? (hope so!) 3. Possibility of other news from company soon (or so some say) Aside from that, I don't think this whole thing is being managed very well.