A hot night in Budapest…

I’ve always loved this song, as it is so evocative lyrically. A few moments in time and something pleasing to the eye stretched into a 10 minute masterpiece that lives on and on.

…and her legs went on forever, like staring up at infinity…

I know I have this album on vinyl, at least I did when it first came out. Now I can’t find it. Oh well, nice to stumble upon this cut on YouTube though.

Steelworks: Do the right thing…

via Steelworks: Do the right thing…

“I mean, who wants to see a D-type Jag with mirrors underneath it? That gives me the same awful feeling as seeing a polar bear in a zoo laying on a fiberglass rock in 90 degree summer heat. Gives me a strong sense that someone somewhere needs to be reprimanded in a big way for going against nature.”

I read this and had to link. It is saying something I often say, and honestly I’ll go beyond David’s application of it to Vintage Racing and say just get out and DRIVE any old car. Even if it is your mom’s 1979 Buick Le Sabre. There is something about an old car that drops social barriers and serves as an invitation into people’s lives. I LOVE to drive my dad’s old Jaguar places. People smile. People wave. People come up and talk to you at gas stations. They stop and offer to help when you have problems. No matter if you are driving something as ubiquitous as a ’65 Mustang or as rare as that D-type Jaguar, old cars need to get out and drive.

Take them to your local car show and let people (especially kids!) sit inside. Drive them on trips. Take them on vintage rallies and tours. Make up your own vintage rally or tour! The last place these machines should be is under glass at some museum, languishing like David’s metaphorical polar bear. Going against nature indeed.

GET OUT AND DRIVE!

A look back in time, 104 years.

This is a movie, taken in 1905, and I found it via a mention on the Jag-Lovers.org E-type mailing list. I’m not a huge follower of brass-era cars, but this movie is fascinating in so many ways. First of all, it is a moving record of pre-1906 Earthquake/Fire that destroyed much of San Francisco. Second it shows that boys will be boys, no matter what the era! Additionally it allows us a glimpse back 100+ years to see that:

  • Most cars, and the horse-drawn vehicles, are Right Hand Drive, despite the drive-on-right convention
  • The variety of vehicles, and motive power is amazing! Horse-drawn carts, wagons, buggies, trolleys, etc. Cable cars. Steam, electric, and petroleum powered cars.
  • There seems to be no effort at traffic control. Given that just about everything is moving at a walking pace though, I can see the reasons why. Other than mass, all objects are equal.
  • As a result of the above, this could be Dehli, or Sao Paulo today!
  • Market Street hasn’t changed that much. 😉

Found via Archive.org.

Prices at the Pump, Biases in their Minds

I snapped this shot yesterday on my way into work. I had stopped to get gas at my freeway exit. Yes, I said get gasoline. I drove the pickup truck to work since I was planning to buy a barrel of Methanol for my home-brew BioDiesel, and ironically the pickup has a gasoline engine. I only drive it once a in a blue moon… dump runs, lumber, hay, whatnot. Driving it to Seattle is a rare (and expensive) event. I noted the price of Diesel was on-par with unleaded gasoline the last time I put pump-fuel into my Diesel car, and yesterday I noted as you can see above, that Diesel fuel is now less expensive than all grades of gasoline. This is how it should be, since Diesel is a less complex product to manufacture than gasoline. This is how it has normally been historically. In fact I can recall when Diesel was less than half the price of gasoline. This situation only changed after the mandate for Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel (ULSD) and US-based refineries had to reconfigure to produce it. This coincided with Hurricane Katrina and the overall run up in petroleum prices across the board. As a result for the past 4 years Diesel fuel has been, on-average more costly at the pump than gasoline.

Oddly the false “Diesel is always more expensive” meme has spread throughout the Internet. When I visit websites where normally thoughtful people discuss things automotive, such as The Truth About Cars, any time Diesel as motive power comes up people always bring up this fallacy: “Diesel is XX% more expensive than gasoline, so the math doesn’t work out for cost savings to see ROI on the purchase of a Diesel over a gasoline car.” Endless variations on this patently wrong argument. This is in reality Confirmation Bias. Automotive enthusiasts just don’t like Diesel. It isn’t sexy. It has engine noise but no exhaust note. But instead of just plainly stating their bias, they come up with mathematical, so theoretically logical, reasons why it is not a viable choice.

I have no problems with people not liking it, I really don’t. Just admit it, that’s all I ask. Don’t try to obscure your dislike behind logic or mathematics, or attribute it to market forces… because those are not valid reasons to dismiss Diesel. They are also not the source for the lack of Diesel car options in America.

I think the average consumer would likely buy more Diesel cars if they had the option to do so. Diesels provide a lot of what people want: They are reliable. They last longer. They deliver lots of torque (people buy horsepower, but drive torque.) But most of all they provide amazing fuel economy, especially under highway usage. My roomy, comfortable 5-passenger VW Jetta regularly achieves 50 MPG under usage as my commuter car, meaning a mixture of highway cruising and bumper-to-bumper traffic. It does so with simple, proven technology. No need for complex hybrid drivetrains. Best of all, I can make my own fuel for about $1 a gallon! Mind you your average consumer won’t ever do that, but at least with a Diesel, it is an option.

In Europe, where consumers actually have a choice of motive power when they buy their cars, around half of them choose a Diesel engine. Ironically here in America, supposed “home of the free”, we are not allowed that choice. People often blame General Motors, and their disastrous Diesel engine products of the late 1970s & early 1980s. They say that soured the reputation of Diesel for cars in the minds of consumers here in America. I don’t buy that argument. The car buyers of that era are now all retired. Not all Diesels from that time were bad either. The Mercedes Diesels from that same period were highly regarded and most are still on the road! (And demanding amazing prices. Twelve grand for a car with over 200,000 miles? Only a Diesel.) Search for “TDI” on Craigslist or eBay and be astonished at the strong resale market value of the few Diesel cars sold in the US in the past 20 years.

So what has created this odd market?

The California Air Resources Board. They have been trying to kill Diesel as a motive power option in cars for almost 30 years, and they’ve been largely successful. Their issue with Diesel is particulates. Soot. They began their anti-Diesel crusade in the midst of a near continuous drought that lasted from 1976 until 1992. In a rainy climate such as we have here in the Pacific Northwest (the rains have returned by the way… ahhhhh) particulates are somewhat irrelevant. Soot is moot.

Historically, California has moved the goalposts on Diesel emissions whenever the technology matches the CARB regulations. From Trap Oxidizers in the late 80s to Urea Injection today, whenever the engineers build a Diesel capable of meeting the standard, CARB tightens the standard to keep Diesel out of cars. Cars mind you, not trucks, or trains, or ships, or power generation, just cars.

But many states adhere to California’s mandates and since California is the lowest common denominator and largest market in the USA, the automobile manufacturers build to suit the California specifications for cars. So unlike the consumer in Europe, we have no choices of motive power when we purchase a car. Here, if you want to buy a Diesel you buy a truck… exempt from tighter emissions regulations… or you can buy maybe one or two models of car. Prior to the ULSD mandate just about every VW was available with the 1.9L TDI powerplant; the New Beetle, Jetta, and Passat. Now it is just the Jetta, when they are available. Mercedes occasionally makes one model of E-class available with a Diesel power plant. This year we have 3 choices, with the addition of the BMW 335d. If you are like me and prefer to swap your own cogs though, you’re back to a single choice, as both the Merc and the Beemer are equipped with automatic transmissions.

What I really want is a commuter car. Something small, lightweight, and economical. I’d buy a MINI-D in a heartbeat. Equipped with a 1.6L Turbo-Diesel it attains over 60 MPG. Or how about an Alfa Romeo Spider JTDm? (seen here in America, but sadly not for sale here. 🙁 ) How about VW’s “BlueSport Roadster?” Ship VW, I’ll buy it. But some bureaucrats in Sacramento have decided that I shouldn’t be able to buy any of these. Oh well.

Meanwhile people remain unaware of how frugal their options could be. How mid-sized cars could be getting 40+ MPG, and small cars getting up to 70 MPG. They’ve been brainwashed into thinking that Diesel is bad. Diesel is loud. Diesel is smoky. And of course, Diesel is always more expensive than gasoline.

Look at the photo above again.

Car Photo of the Day: This is not a car…

…but it is just as evocative. This is a spot near the highest point on this particular road. This photo was taken in the late summer of 2006, when the western US was literally consumed by large forest fires. That is why it is so hazy.

There is something about that sweep of asphalt, tight switchback, and the promise of more of the same that make me want to just… go.

The Bank of Cisco | Nyquist Capital

One of the industry blogs I’ve been reading for a long time is Nyquist Capital. I like it because Andrew Schmitt provides excellent analysis that is independent of the herd mentality you find in both the investment and industry press worlds. Both of those tend to be echo-chambers.

His latest brilliant update isThe Bank of Cisco. In it he goes against what everyone is saying about Cisco’s big (and about to grow bigger) pile of money. Most analysts, looking at Cisco’s past decade of behavior believe it is for acquisitions. Schmitt thinks they are looking to make sure Cisco can still sell by becoming the bank. That is providing capital where banks will not, or can not when it comes time for Cisco’s customers to buy equipment. His logic is backed up not by Cisco’s history, but history itself.

I love thinking like that.