Note: forwarded message attached.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Get your email and see which of your friends are online - Right on the New
Yahoo.com
(http://www.yahoo.com/preview)
--- Begin Message ---
very simple...wouldn't sell enough to be profitable.
They did away with the camaro and trans am because the
suv's were more profitable and they needed the rear
wheel assembly plants to make those. All about $. My
78'chevro;et cheyenne with the 307 smogger I own still
gets 22 mpg. Not bad for a 30 year old truck with
195000 miles and going strong. The little Escort I
just picked up gets 33 all around mpg, nothing special
about it and if they put their diesel in it it would
get an easy 50 mpg. The key here is that people love
their suv's and don't care about the mpg's or the $
they spend. That is why the little jap and Korean
cars are getting heftier and have worse mileage than
they did when they entered the American market. It's
us the consumer, they are just providing the buying
public with what it is they want. Don't blame the oil
companies.........but that is a whole nother
conversation!!! Is "nother" real word? Anyway I've
always thought that a Sterling engine run on a small
flame turning 1000 rpms or so hooked to an alternator
and bumped up to run 4 ac motors at each wheel would
yield a car that would run at hundreds of miles per
gallan. Only I don't know anything about electricity
and how to bump it up. The Sterling engine is a
fascinating little engine, I still think my idea is
sound but there a re alot of great minds and it hasn't
been applied so their must be something wrong with my
idea. Any thoughts Milton, Fred?............Steven
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- End Message ---
