I think 2025 is too soon of a guess. I've heard some sources estimate that petrol supplies will deplete around 2100, so I'd guess that maybe around 2100 - 2300 is when diesels and other types of Internal combustion engines might go extinct, unless we either find another type of fuel, like hydrogen as an example, or we happen to stumble across plentiful oil supplies on Mars or some other celestial body.
Don't forget about Ethanol. Since we should hopefully never run out of food(as in wheat, corn, barley, potatoes, etc) we should be able to have a good/constant supply of Ethanol which could put that date of 2100-2300 out even further.
We will stop using gas a loooooong time before we run out. I also meant diesel cars will be out by 2025, not semis. Diesels need to be replaced based on how horrifically terrible they are. A total diesel ban will probably be around 2050, when we have a good replacement for the gas engine. The government needs (and already is) to push a stop to using these horrible ways of power, so we wont screw up mars like we did with this planet.
Tell that to all the people starving worldwide, as well as the huge land mass required to produce it, which generally results in deforestation. --- Post updated --- Diesels cars will still be around in 2025. If you were to buy a diesel Kia today, you would only just be on the brink of running out of warranty in 2025. And in fairness, some diesels are not *that* bad. However some others are very bad. You can view real world testing data here: http://equaindex.com/ However you don't get access to the actual numbers unless you are willing to pay up large sums, cause someone has to foot the bills of independent testing. The BBC did get access to them though and did a really good article on it.
How is that out of context? Those are legitimate issues with plant based vehicle fuels. I mean, you could legally mandate being vegan if you like? Forget the animals, that would free up an actual fuckton of farmland for producing more efficient forms of food*. Potentially enough to feed everyone and many cars. But the reality is there is only so much farm land, and using it to fuel cars instead of feeding people isn't ideal. Especially when it leads to the depletion of tree's which are C02 sinks. And even if you didn't mandate it, the price of meat would rocket any way. So either way, similar outcome. *Producing food to feed livestock, then eating the livestock is incredibly inefficient. Since you need to feed a cow far more food than the amount of food it produces, hence a lot of wasted food.
Diesel cars may be road legal, but I honestly dont think diesel consumer cars will still be produced. I'm also talking from a point of view of the American auto industry, it will probably faze out later over there.
Considering that Diesel was never that big of a thing in the US, you are probably right. In countries where it is closer to 50% (or more) of cars though, could possibly be a while. But many European countries and cities are putting measures in place to dis-incentivise diesel or ban it altogether. Will certainly be interesting to watch. In the UK the government has stated that they don't want to seem as if they are being harsh on Diesel drivers, so are doing more or less nothing about it and letting markets figure themselves out.
I get why diesels are so practical in the UK, but I feel like the government will slowly step in, bit by bit, to try to switch over to alternative fuel sources. The reality of it all, progress towards less environmentally damaging means of travel is where transport will head too.
Has Chevrolet lost its freaking mind? Corvette fans are going to hate it. People who want a mid-engine supercar aren't even going to give the Corvette the time of day. They even managed to make the previous front-engine Corvette back-heavy. Just more proof positive that GM is still run by bean counters who couldn't care less about the art of cars. I just don't like being talked down to by the British. Also, I'm not incapable of handling change, as long as it's good change. When "change" means "all the joy and color being drained out of the car world so the only difference between manufacturers is whose distracting infotainment system is least awful", then I'm just going to say some traditions shouldn't change.
I like Corvettes, but I don't hate the idea of a mid-engine Corvette. I honestly think the mid-engine Corvette has potential if Chevrolet does it right. It could easily compete with the Ford GT and maybe even some supercars. Hasn't the Corvette always been about performance? A mid-engine car to me screams performance, unless its a Toyota Previa. I also saw that some people in the comment section of that article said that being mid-engine could benefit the Corvette, with one saying "there's a reason that some of the best race cars are mid-engine." What does being British got to do with it?
That's why I mentioned the weight distribution of the previous model - they'd already achieved a theoretically perfect 48/52 weight distribution with the engine in front of the cabin. And I know the new one will likely be objectively faster around a track, but they're throwing away the soul of the car to get it. It won't really be a Corvette anymore, just another me-too supercar, but at a lower price point. If they're ditching the transverse leaf spring, or if the rumors I've heard of the front end being package-protected for hybrid gear are true, then that's even more the case. In any case, I still have to assume that the Corvette faithful will shun this car and the people who are looking for a mid-engine supercar will still shun it because it's still a Chevy. It just always ticks me off when I hear a Brit mocking America, like they think they're better than us. Also, 6677 in particular has previously drug irrelevant gun violence statistics into a discussion of car culture.
Yeah like we don't mock the French and the rest of Europe And acting like a baby when someone you don't like brings up a point you don't like really weakens your arguments.
Granted, when it's a point that's completely irrelevant to the conversation and is used primarily for bait, it's completely okay to have a problem with it. On the topic of a mid-engined Corvette: I seriously don't understand why GM is doing what they're doing. They've already proved that they can make a fantastic handling car with the C7 chassis, so I don't know why they feel the need to completely destroy the Corvette formula in pursuit of speed when they already have what is arguably the fastest American car around a track (the Ford GT is Canadian, feel free to fight me). I've even heard rumors of them ditching a V8 in lieu of a turbo 4-pot. Good Lord above you have no idea how much I want that rumor to be false. GM will lose one of their only cars worth buying in my eyes if they do.
That one I will give you. The France-bashing really got going during the war in Iraq since they wouldn't join us, but, well... looking at it a few years on, it's become highly apparent to me that that war, and the Bush 43 administration in general, are possibly the biggest embarrassments American conservatism, and America in general, have ever suffered. I would absolutely say that France came out of that one looking like the smart ones. Not that I don't partake of the occasional France joke, but at least in my case it's not motivated by a seething hatred of them. True. It's just, this ain't my first ball game as far as that goes, and I'm getting very tired of dealing with comments like 6677's. There's a certain type of person out there who has some interest in cars but at the same time welcomes an electrically-propelled future, holds center-leftist positions on issues like guns, abortion, and the environment, takes Top Gear's "coolness rules" for gospel truth, and maybe even thinks the US should go over to the metric system, among other things. I spent years, on and off, fighting a whole nest of them elsewhere, and it wasn't much fun. It still isn't. I guess that's the difference between people who are into cars, and people who are into car-oriented video games.
Well, was the C2 Corvette anything like the C1? Though to be truthful, I don't know all that much about the C1. It seems like I know more about the C2 on up to the C7 and eventually the C8. And here's another opinion of mine, making the C8 Corvette a mid-engine is to me, a far better decision than the one Dodge made in the mid to late 70's with the Charger and Challenger, effectively turning them into a luxury boat and Japanese import respectively. At least the mid-engine Corvette will have some semblance of a Corvette, and it will remain a performance vehicle. Chevrolet could've made worse decisions, like doing to the Corvette what Dodge did to their two muscle cars back then. This is not related to this topic, but if you're talking about what SixSixSevenSeven said about traditions changing, I don't see that as a Brit mocking America. And I think North Korea has said worse things about America.
This. This is the reason why I fight for my Mustang so much. Yes, it's a V6 car. Yes, it's pastel green. Yes, it has a live axle. But I seriously don't car one single bit. I love that car. I love every single creaky, rattly, recall-y, bad handling bit of it. Why? Because I'm a true car guy. I'll look at everyone's build and everyone's take of what a car should be and analyze it, and then and only then form an opinion. Sure, my tastes are a bit "generic". Ricers are cancer and stancers deserve to bottom out permanently on every single speed bump in the land, but they're still into cars the same way I am, and I respect it. My car is how I think a car should be. Torquey engine, "enough" power, RWD, manual transmission. Easy to have fun with, easy to work on, even easier to mod. And that taste has chenged from when I was a kid, and will change as I mature into a more grown and older adult.
The main issue I have with your whole view honestly is that you're equating car culture to being exclusive to the right-wing. Wanting gun control and thinking metric is better doesn't mean you're not a car guy. Wanting less polluting and even electric cars isn't exclusive to enjoying them. You don't need to hate the future to appreciate the past, and taking a hardline regressive stance is one of the worst things you can do for a culture or hobby. Also it comes off as kinda elitist/hipster. I'd even say that by taking these stances you're falling into a borderline ad-hominem attack which doesn't get anyone anywhere. If you're right that he and others are in the wrong let your arguments stand on their own.
What the hell does it have to do with cars? At least the rest is understandable. Stupid, but understandable.
