Atlas,

I live in Omaha and my brother lives in Des Moines. The 2 hour drive to his place is speckled with more wind turbines that you can imagine. Easily over 100...probably a LOT more. It's amazing how forward thinking these "redneck" parts can be. It's just a shame not everyone is so civilized.

I was under the assumption that the reason the FCC is stepping in to regulate the big ISPs is that they're sitting back and racking up the $$$s, not improving on their networks, not lowering prices, and bottlenecking anyone who actually uses their bandwidth. They're effecting all the bad parts of a monopoly, basically. I should also mention that the very types of applications/websites that the ISPs are "gating" are in direct competition with the very ISPs that hamstringing these services. Obviously something has to be done when Comcast/Cox/TWC can cripple Hulu/BT/etc. because they're losing subscribers. These types of practices are the reason we're paying more than the rest of the world for a slower connection and worse performance.

I just streamed in my pants.

I take it from the oblong steering wheel that this is a widescreen video that's been crammed in to a 4:3 ratio window? That's why the car looks really short from the side and really narrow from the front or rear.

I was right on the money before we knew 230 was the Volts mpg. Comment #116. Nobody listens. That's fine.

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/08/07/what-is-230-gm-knows-but-isnt-say/

Last week, before they announced that 230 was indeed the Volts mpgs, I calculated a pretty likely method that GM used to come up with the # on the initial autoblog post.

They drove the car for 50 miles and then checked the tank. If they did that, the actual mpg they get after they are out of battery juice(10 miles) is 46 mpg right on the dot, which is very realistically in line with the Prius and Insight. The problem with measuring the Volt is that your mileage will vary widely depending on whether you drive short bursts at a time, or long hauls every day.

I personally think the EPA should leave the electric portion out of the final #, then just include that info on the sticker. Is there anything misleading or wrong with saying...

"46 mpg city(with 40 mile pure-electric mode)"

People will then understand that they've got 40 "free" miles, and after that..it's 46 mpgs. Simple.

That's my guess as well. mpgs.

Although, they also started selling cars on ebay today, so maybe the 230 is the reserve price? or shipping cost?

...or their feedback rating.

I'm not trying to be funny, but here's the wiki entry for the # 230 for those that would like to rack their brain a lil longer on any significance of the # that is not related to cars or GM, Apple, or anything else. Just #s.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/230_(number)

My guesses (via left field)
1. 230 minutes to recharge a volt?
2. 230 mile range?
3. 230 mpgs?
4. 230v (I know nothing of this, just passing on info from previous posters)?
5. 23k price tag?
6. 230 mpg VW? http://www.ecogeek.org/content/view/1617/69/


I'm personally gonna go with the Volts mpg rating. If it were anything else, it wouldn't be quite as big of a deal. It could make sense, simply because of some minor detail in the way that the EPA tests fuel economy. Think about it. Hypothetically, if their standard test is set up to run a car for 50 miles, and the Volt goes 40 miles without gas, then gets 46 mpg for that last 10 miles... That'd be 50 miles on .217 gallons of gas, or 230 mpgs right on the dot.

If many more cars come out with similar systems as the Volt, I would imagine that the EPA will change the way they do their tests, but for now, this makes the most sense to me.

Cosmetic surgery is probably playing a larger role than we'd like to think. We should also remember that whether or not someone is "attractive" is completely subjective and relative. In 100 years, if everyone looks like a supermodel, we'll still want to be with the most attractive of the supermodels. Plus, two attractive people can still get together and spit out an ugly kid, and vice versa. You also have to take into account the fact that a beautiful child can grow up and get into meth and/or eat themselves into a size 44 or just be unlucky and suffer a horribly disfiguring accident.

The more I think about it, the more I think this is probably the dumbest research ever done.


I do think that people are aging more slowly(both naturally and not). Take a look at pictures of your parents when they were your age. They probably look 10-20 years older than they actually were, and that was normal.

I agree with Throwback way up above. The Fit is stealing sales from the Insight. The Fit gets great mileage without the expensive hybrid setup, it's got lots of room, those magic seats are flipping sweet(pun intended), and everyone from motortrend to car and driver are claiming it to be a peppy and fun car to drive. The insight is getting not-so-great reviews, the body styling makes me barf blood, it's more expensive that the Fit, and I've read that the drive isn't so lively.

So unless you're a single issue buyer, interested in mpgs and mpgs only...the Fit is easily the better car. If you are indeed interested in mpgs only, then of course you'll go for the Prius. The Insight is in no mans land.

What's gonna happen when the Fit hybrid comes out in two years? The only way Honda will be able to get rid of Insights is to give 'em away with the Fit hybrid.