|
Originally Posted by RC45
|
Originally Posted by Nocturn
|
Originally Posted by nthfinity
well, if the gas guzzler tax is 1000$ usd, and 20,000 vehicles are sold per year, that is a ripe 2,000,000 $ spent on gas guzzling....
however, the money spent in developing and researching such an engine would far exceed this cost, which in the end would come down to the costomer paying for it anyway, weather much more, or a little more. i would tend to assume much more as even slightly modifying an exisiting platform costs in the multi-millions.
just thought id point that out :roll:
|
It's not a drastic change, just a clever addition to some computer work and the spark and fuel don't go to 1/2 the cylinders. Not like their adding on 2 more doors or something like that. |
I think you are dramatically under-estimating the complexity of succesfully and graciously killing 2 or more cylinders under load - and then firing them right back up like nothing happened...  |
its more then a drastic underestimation; its a very very different process required to perform this seemingly simple task? its so complex, im sure i dont know half of what would go into it separte from a normal motor, i could name easily 9 or 10 severely different items
id hope GM, as well as the rest of the auto manufacturers shy away from this awful technology