[94SilverCab]

http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2015/12/0...ntcmp=hpff

 

Do you think they will ever build a "replica" 968?

 

Jay

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

So typical ( government idiocy ) ; no need for safety features, but heavens forbid the emissions from those few cars would violate current standards. Perfectly ok if the drivers and / or passengers get killed but at least the car ran super clean :-) :-) .


However, one positive aspect of the safety issue is that doors will not have to be as tall as manufacturers make them now, cars look ridiculous ( IMHO ) with those - sports cars who have a low, sleek profile in particular .

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[az968]

So they would have to be V-8 powered 968? I could live with that, could skip the SC.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[94SilverCab]

My favorite replica of all time...

 

http://fastlanecars.com/vehicles/262/196...er-replica

 

Jay

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

My favorite of all time : about as similar to Jay's favorite as it gets, lol.    

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

I also wonder if , due to the extremely limited production numbers allowed, the demand for these updated cars will be so great that it'll cause the price to be twice or three times or more of what their original counterparts might sell for at an auction. So if you want your newly split-window Stingray you might have to shell out half mil. dollars for it, as opposed to waiting for a restored original going up on the block for $ 150 k ..? ( don't get picky with my numbers, I may be way off on the original stingray auction pricing, I had to pull a number out of the blue just for the example ..)


And one more comment regarding the idiotic emissions requirements for these " handful " of cars ; I'll try to find the article and post it ( I think it was from the WSJ ) but scientists have asserted that ALL the vehicles on the U.S. roads, in one year , produce less than 1/1000 ( no typo, that is one thousandth ) of the pollution China produces in...one month. So when it comes to contributing to environmental damage, I think 325 replicas of any given manufacturer can certainly get a waiver...

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Rap]

So you don't believe global warming is the greatest issue facing the world? Hmmm!

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

I don't believe it's THE greatest issue , but I do believe it's probably in the top three greatest issues - however, my point was that a petty amount of car emissions are not going to even " move the needle " vis-a-vis the exponentially greater damage caused by so many other offenders . That was with a global scale perspective, but at an individual level go head and just try to drive behind some 70s POS clunker with toxic smoke coming out of the tailpipe ..at a minimum that causes other people to have breathing problems, can trigger severe allergic reactions, and who knows what other long term medical problems it may cause.. I was just addressing the emissions of a few cars in the overall scheme of environmental impact, that's all.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Bulti]

What's more environmentally sound? Driving an old gas guzzler for about 10 or 15 thousand miles per year for 30 years or buying a new (hybrid) car every 10 years?

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[az968]

I would bet the old clunker kept out of landfills will be better than the energy expenditure and material supply chain impact of building a new hybrid and dealing with the battery replacement. Except, of course, for the new Porsche Mission E which will cause unicorns to sing and dance.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[94SilverCab]

I work in Architecture/Engineering and we have a lot of initiatives on Net Zero (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-energy_building) Energy.

 

By far, the best way to get to Net Zero is by using existing structures (or, what my A-E friends call "Embodied Energy", meaning the energy was already spent at an earlier date). I'm certain that the same would hold true for automobiles.

 

JMO,

 

Jay

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[az968]

Embodied Energy? Jay, is that a techical way of agreeing with me??

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[94SilverCab]

Embodied Energy? Jay, is that a techical way of agreeing with me?

In a nutshell, yes. The best course to create a net zero structure would be caves, since no energy would be needed to create or heat/cool the space. The second best way is to use an existing structure and then convert it to current use (embodied energy), using as little energy as possible in the process.

 

The math gets very fuzzy when you need to recapture the energy used on the designers computer as part of the energy offset plan of the building.

 

Fundamentally, I like the exercise, but the real world solution is not very practical, so far. I have seen truly net zero structures, such as greeting centers for national parks, etc.When we can build a data center that is Net Zero that will truly be an accomplishment.  

 

Here is the largest NetZero office building (http://cleantechnica.com/2014/04/05/open...san-diego/) I think you can see what I mean by fuzzy math.

 

Jay

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.