.

Difference between revisions of "Talk:Reasons Not to Buy a Hybrid Car (yet)"

Wikicars, a place to share your automotive knowledge
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 11: Line 11:
  
 
Uh.... whaaaaaat!  I guess you are right, if nobody needs internal combustion engines in the future, they will lose resale value.  Just like the steam engine and the horse and buggy.  I think #7 should be removed.
 
Uh.... whaaaaaat!  I guess you are right, if nobody needs internal combustion engines in the future, they will lose resale value.  Just like the steam engine and the horse and buggy.  I think #7 should be removed.
 +
 +
8. You will be seen as a miserable liberal, completely against any form of business, promoting socialism.
 +
 +
Sarcasm is better served on the discussion tab where it can stimulate community feedback.

Revision as of 06:53, 9 August 2006

4. The car battery is worse for the environment when the car eventually is disposed.

Worse than what? Worse than gas emissions during the lifetime of a gas car, or worse than no car at all? If it's worse than gas emissions, do you have a reference supporting this?

The batteries in a hybrid are HIGHLY toxic and can use more energy to recycle than a gas car uses over a significant portion of ITS LIFETIME. Hybrids are flawed technology.

5. Performance: Honda's Accord Hybrid is faster than the gasoline only car. Lexus is looking at car hybrids where performance is increased over mere gas cars too.


7. Hybrids are sustaining technology. If electric cars disrupt transportation, internal combustion based products may lose resale value.

Uh.... whaaaaaat! I guess you are right, if nobody needs internal combustion engines in the future, they will lose resale value. Just like the steam engine and the horse and buggy. I think #7 should be removed.

8. You will be seen as a miserable liberal, completely against any form of business, promoting socialism.

Sarcasm is better served on the discussion tab where it can stimulate community feedback.