more about *that* bike..

David Martin ([email hidden]) wrote:
: A response from Ford about the bike in their S-Max advert.

: http://www.guardian.co.uk/letters/story/0,,1790245,00.html

Here is the link to the article the letter is reffering to (if it was
posted here, I missed it)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,1786299,00.html

And wow, cycle races on a Ford test track (one fewer cycle race annoying
car drivers on the road?), and "Dunton itself boasts the highest number
of cyclists among employees compared with other Ford locations". Truly
impressive.

m.

David Martin said:

A response from Ford about the bike in their S-Max advert.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/letters/story/0,,1790245,00.html

Let's see: "it would take up to 200 modern Ford Fiestas to
produce the same emissions as the first Fiesta produced 30
years ago."

30 years ago is 1976, which is after the 1973 crisis when
people started to notice miles-per-gallon. A small car like
the fiesta would've done something in the ballpark of 40mpg.
At least, versions not jazzed up boy-racer style.

So, is he claiming modern fiestas do in the ballpark of
8000mpg? Or is he being disingenuous?

Oh look, it's their marketing director. Yeah, right.

--
not me guv

Nick Kew said:

So, is he claiming modern fiestas do in the ballpark of
8000mpg? Or is he being disingenuous?

"FSVO emissions" is, I would expect, the key point. There are more to
emissions than MPG, but I would have my doubts about the current model
being 200 times better in /all/ respects.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Peter Clinch said:

Nick Kew said:

So, is he claiming modern fiestas do in the ballpark of
8000mpg? Or is he being disingenuous?

"FSVO emissions" is, I would expect, the key point. There are more to
emissions than MPG, but I would have my doubts about the current model
being 200 times better in /all/ respects.

Oh, right. What I quoted didn't say he was talking specifically
about CO2, but ISTR the context made that clear. That's one of
the two emissions[1] that simply *cannot* be reduced by a factor
greater than the increase in mpg.

[1] The other being dihydrogen monoxide, of course.

--
not me guv

"Nick Kew" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Oh, right. What I quoted didn't say he was talking specifically
about CO2, but ISTR the context made that clear. That's one of
the two emissions[1] that simply *cannot* be reduced by a factor
greater than the increase in mpg.

There's more to emissions than carbon dioxide and water. There's the
nitrous oxides, carbon monoxide and unburnt hydrocarbons from the petrol and
engine oils not to mention particulate matter. There has been a massive
decrease in the noxious emissions of car engines though I do not know if it
is by a factor of 200. The context of his comments made it very clear that
he was talking about total emissions.

in message <[email hidden]>, Nick Kew

(') said:

David Martin said:

A response from Ford about the bike in their S-Max advert.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/letters/story/0,,1790245,00.html

Let's see: "it would take up to 200 modern Ford Fiestas to
produce the same emissions as the first Fiesta produced 30
years ago."

'Up to', Nick, 'up to'. One is 'up to 200', after all. So is 199, of
course, but I bet he was thinking of some number closer to one than to
199.

Quoted message said:

So, is he claiming modern fiestas do in the ballpark of
8000mpg? Or is he being disingenuous?

Oh look, it's their marketing director. Yeah, right.

Uh-huh. Up to, of course, a point.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

'Victories are not solutions.'
;; John Hume, Northern Irish politician, on Radio Scotland 1/2/95
;; Nobel Peace Prize laureate 1998; few have deserved it so much

vernon levy said:

Quoted message said:

Oh, right. What I quoted didn't say he was talking specifically
about CO2, but ISTR the context made that clear.

There's more to emissions than carbon dioxide and water.

Yes, but only in trace amounts.

Of course, those trace amounts are also far more immediately harmful
than the main emissions. Conveniently, these trace pollutants (unlike
the main emissions) can be massively reduced by improved technology.
So the manufacturers have (rightly) put effort into reducing them.
But they have also used this effort to make deeply misleading
claims about the main emissions.

Quoted message said:

The context of his comments made it very clear that
he was talking about total emissions.

.... as evidenced by our differing recollections of context.
Unfortunately the website is now denying me access, so I can't
re-check. But I'm sure he mentioned CO2 specifically,
and it was only a short letter in total.

--
not me guv

"David Martin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

A response from Ford about the bike in their S-Max advert.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/letters/story/0,,1790245,00.html

It *is* a lifestyle thing they are trying to convey. There is another poster
with somebody windsurfing with the car's headlights merged into the sail.
The bike has car wheels:

http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/zford.htm

As for hydrogen, where do they get it from? If it's from electrolysis of
water, then all they are doing is shifting the pollution to the power
station.

--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net