How to beat the petrol companies

[flappist]

I am quite confused by the "too heavy" and can't make suspension work comments.

The fuel mass is max 250kg. A 7 seat Territory or wagon holds up to about 900kg of people. A ute can have 1000kg of crap in the back. They also work ok empty with a 50kg driver.
I suspect that there is a lot of narrow thinking going on i.e. take a car and modify it rather than design it to do this from the start.
Remember back in the '70s (before most of you were born) muscle cars like the GTHO had over 160 litres capacity with the E49 even larger. These cars ACTUALLY RACED so I suspect any suspension issues were under control.

[schnoods]

The only way to hurt the petrol companies is for everyone to not buy fuel on one particular day. The fuel would stockpile, it would have a "over flowing funnel effect" where there would be more fuel than they can distribute. Our thirst for fossil fuels is pretty high but at the same token , constant.


Not that I have a problem with it, Just a pie in the sky idea. Still It'd be good to travel from Perth to Darwin in 2 tanks.

[Outbackjack]

Originally Posted by flappist

I am quite confused by the "too heavy" and can't make suspension work comments.

The fuel mass is max 250kg. A 7 seat Territory or wagon holds up to about 900kg of people. A ute can have 1000kg of crap in the back. They also work ok empty with a 50kg driver.
I suspect that there is a lot of narrow thinking going on i.e. take a car and modify it rather than design it to do this from the start.
Remember back in the '70s (before most of you were born) muscle cars like the GTHO had over 160 litres capacity with the E49 even larger. These cars ACTUALLY RACED so I suspect any suspension issues were under control.

Spot on Flappy, I think that everyone should also take into account the huge amounts of torque that a well deigned desiel can generate. This would help overtake the weight issues that large fuel capacities cause. I have mates with 6 cylinder troopies that have almost 300 litre fuel tanks. They say that full tanks make little difference to over all fuel capacities.

[Full Noise]

Originally Posted by schnoods

The only way to hurt the petrol companies is for everyone to not buy fuel on one particular day. The fuel would stockpile, it would have a "over flowing funnel effect" where there would be more fuel than they can distribute.

You don’t really believe this, do you?

[jonk]

Originally Posted by flappist

I am quite confused by the "too heavy" and can't make suspension work comments.

The fuel mass is max 250kg. A 7 seat Territory or wagon holds up to about 900kg of people. A ute can have 1000kg of crap in the back. They also work ok empty with a 50kg driver.
I suspect that there is a lot of narrow thinking going on i.e. take a car and modify it rather than design it to do this from the start.
Remember back in the '70s (before most of you were born) muscle cars like the GTHO had over 160 litres capacity with the E49 even larger. These cars ACTUALLY RACED so I suspect any suspension issues were under control.

The fact no-one has succesfully put a large extended range tank in a terri so far speaks for itself, plus rear wheel axle weight limits really do put a stop to large tanks. Even though a vehicle can carry a certain payload, each axle has different load limits. If you change the constant weight of a car, then you have to change the suspension.

And the older car's you mentioned were realistically very light in weight compared to today's cars. I applaud the scenario your putting out, but my point still stands.

If everyone bought diesel in bulk that would do more harm for fuel sellers than larger internal tanks.

Can I suggest that the proponents of large tanks go to their vehicles and actually look at the stated load limit on the rear axle, you'd be quite surprised how low it is in passenger cars.

What we really need is more efficient engines. Plasma spark plugs, finer micron injection nozzles, more gear's in the transmissions...

[flappist]

Originally Posted by jonk

The fact no-one has succesfully put a large extended range tank in a terri so far speaks for itself, plus rear wheel axle weight limits really do put a stop to large tanks. Even though a vehicle can carry a certain payload, each axle has different load limits. If you change the constant weight of a car, then you have to change the suspension.

There is no diesel Terri, no LPG Terri, no hybrid Terri, no manual Terri, no DSC Terri, no V8 Terri, no V6 Terri, no brembo equipped Terri, no pink Terri with purple and orange spots.........YET, doesn't mean it can't happen.

You really do have a fixation on this weight issue. It is 200kg not 200 Tonnes.
If the rear axel in a Ute can handle 1000kg why can it not handle 200kg of fuel? Why does the fuel have to be over the rear axel? I asked a person who used to actually design and build motor vehicles (as in the head of design and manufacture for a multi-national that had an Australian factory) and he reckons there was not problem at all in doing it for diesel. Petrol was another matter though for other reasons.

Anyway, the whole thing is just a hypothetical excercise anyway......

[|||]

what about one of those space age looking roof rack boxes. fill that full of juice and run a hose hown the side of the car to the petrol tank

[BeStRaFe]

i can see that idea being turned into a terrorists dream!

[flappist]

Originally Posted by BeStRaFe

i can see that idea being turned into a terrorists dream!

How so?

[Full Noise]

Originally Posted by |||

what about one of those space age looking roof rack boxes. fill that full of juice and run a hose hown the side of the car to the petrol tank

They used to have overhead LPG tanks on some vehicles when it was introduced here. The government put a stop to it. You wouldn’t get away with overhead tanks and exposed fuel lines on a car these days, even if it’s only Diesel in them.

[flappist]

For those who came in late and are too lazy to read the whole thread before making clever replies.

The idea was for a normal sized car to be optimized to run on biodiesel not petrol, LPG, depleted uranium or naquada to get away from the petrol companies.

The reason for the giant tank is, and despite many not being able to actually comprehend this fact, Australia is REALLY REALLY BIG and not everyone lives in suburban Brisydmeladelper so like ULP, PULP and LPG any new fuel will take quite a while to become available in regional areas. In 1986 I bought a new ULP Ford and had to take a jerry can with me for the first few months as there was still super and standard in the bush, in 2000 I was given a LPG only car for a few weeks and had to plan fuel stops so as to not run out, in 2003 I bought a new GT-P and carried a jerry can which I had to use three times because 95/98ron was not available (Mundubbera, Jabiru & Cammoweel).
When the fuel becomes common then the giant tank would be less important although I do find that the 68L tank in the FPVs is a pain as I cannot do more than 500km (on a good day) without stopping which means usually 2 or 3 stops a day when I am working remotely.

[GTP-814]

Originally Posted by flappist

During a long converstaion last night I came up with this cunning plan.
Many on here are ****ed off with petrol companies but can not do much about it.
With the advent of small turbo diesel cars e.g. Focus & Golf it has been demonstrated that these have performance above the equivelent petrol models with far better economy.
They also will run on Biodiesel which is much cheaper and NONE of its profit goes to oil companies.
Biodiesel is much safe than petrol as it is difficult to ignite and produces less pollution.
The problem is that is is not available everywhere.

So here is the plan.

Falcon sized RWD turbo diesel 400Nm engine fitted with 300 litre fuel tanks. At 7l/100km this will give a range of over 4000km per fill and at 50c/litre will cost $150 to fill from empty. The performance should be on par with the current petrol vehicles and with the 4000km range you could fill up in Sydney, drive to Melbourne and back (twice) before filling up again. You dont need petrol stations every 300km. 300l of fuel weighs about 220kg (2 fat FPV owners) so this car fully fuelled will still weigh less than the majority of 4WD shoeboxes that abound in the urban jungle.....

Any comments?

I concur with your thoughts. I hope that the Orion will have a Turbo diesel option with over 400NM in v8 form. The best of both woprlds, power & distance

[Scott]

Originally Posted by flappist

I am quite confused by the "too heavy" and can't make suspension work comments.

The fuel mass is max 250kg. A 7 seat Territory or wagon holds up to about 900kg of people. A ute can have 1000kg of crap in the back. They also work ok empty with a 50kg driver.
I suspect that there is a lot of narrow thinking going on i.e. take a car and modify it rather than design it to do this from the start.
Remember back in the '70s (before most of you were born) muscle cars like the GTHO had over 160 litres capacity with the E49 even larger. These cars ACTUALLY RACED so I suspect any suspension issues were under control.

Suspect your heart out.

Yes, some Ute's can carry a ton in the back, but they also ride like they can carry a ton in the back.
Yes a Territory can carry a lot of weight but it's not quite a family sedan is it?
Yes the GT carried 163L of juice - the Pinto was released in '71 and also raced - kind of tells of what times were like doesn't it.

The suggestion that a family sedan could carry one and a half 44 gallon drums of fuel, plus 500kgs of passengers, plus luggage to go with them, plus meet 7l/100km, plus meet a price tag of sub $35k is far fetched to say the least. Not to mention those that want to tow something.

The closest match to your concept that I can think of is a $40k Holden Crewman S with a full 44 Gallon Drum strapped to the roof. At 5.3m long and a turning circle about 1.5m wider than a Falcon, she's a big girl for mum to park at the shops.

A Landcruiser is also pretty close to the mark re size/weight etc but again, you'd need to add a 44 Gallon drum to achieve that fuel capacity.

A 70L tank that offered 1000km would be reasonable..... and feasible, even through the time it takes to become mainstream at the local servo.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by GTP006

Suspect your heart out.

Yes, some Ute's can carry a ton in the back, but they also ride like they can carry a ton in the back.
Yes a Territory can carry a lot of weight but it's not quite a family sedan is it?
Yes the GT carried 163L of juice - the Pinto was released in '71 and also raced - kind of tells of what times were like doesn't it.

The suggestion that a family sedan could carry one and a half 44 gallon drums of fuel, plus 500kgs of passengers, plus luggage to go with them, plus meet 7l/100km, plus meet a price tag of sub $35k is far fetched to say the least. Not to mention those that want to tow something.

The closest match to your concept that I can think of is a $40k Holden Crewman S with a full 44 Gallon Drum strapped to the roof. At 5.3m long and a turning circle about 1.5m wider than a Falcon, she's a big girl for mum to park at the shops.

A Landcruiser is also pretty close to the mark re size/weight etc but again, you'd need to add a 44 Gallon drum to achieve that fuel capacity.

A 70L tank that offered 1000km would be reasonable..... and feasible, even through the time it takes to become mainstream at the local servo.

The difference in weight between 70l and 300l is about 200kg.
A BA Fairlane/LTD is about 200kg heavier than a BA XT sedan.

$35k is a Hyundai/Waydoo, Falcons cost $40-50k in the real world......

Sort of stuffs up that theory doesn't it?

P.S. Please dont come back with some sooper dooper model runout povvo no-option price. People who buy el-cheapos/fleet rockets will not look at this sort of thing anyway.

[Scott]

Originally Posted by flappist

The difference in weight between 70l and 300l is about 200kg.
A BA Fairlane/LTD is about 200kg heavier than a BA XT sedan.

$35k is a Hyundai/Waydoo, Falcons cost $40-50k in the real world......

Sort of stuffs up that theory doesn't it?

P.S. Please dont come back with some sooper dooper model runout povvo no-option price. People who buy el-cheapos/fleet rockets will not look at this sort of thing anyway.

Falcon's are permanently on runout. Have a look around, you might get a little shock.

Fairlanes & LTD's won't help your argument.

Weight is one of the factors, space is another, cost is another.

The space you're talking about is 1.5 44 Gallon drums - where would you put it??

How much would this super fish & chip machine cost?

How big would it be to manage all that space & weight?

How many people will want to own this family ocean liner?

[Rev28K]

I was reading somewhere about crops that were GM modified crops that would give higher efficiencies than current biodiesel. This could give you either smaller packaging or a longer range.

What is the gradient like on these super long distance runs that you are talking about Flappist? Hilly? I was thinking about an extra overdrive gear for economy on the flat and maybe some sort of cylinder deactivation) to really eke out economy.

[outback_ute]

I think it is not so much the distance as the time the fuel lasts you that is the key, although the two are of course related. If you can have enough fuel for two weeks' driving that gives you a lot of flexibility to take advantage of cheap fuel when you see it, and ride out high fuel prices. Of course there will be exceptions, my ute would last close to 2 weeks of short to-work-and-back trips, yet I have also had to fill it twice in a day on a trip. I think the most I have put in it is ~110L (theoretical capacity is 125) and it will easily do 1000km of highway travel.

I knew a bloke who used to have a Dodge truck with enough fuel tankage to drive from Melb to Cairns non-stop. God knows why! I can't remember the total capacity, it might have been 250 gallons. Although many have been set up for Melb-Qld border. His last vehicle had 600L gas capacity to do inter-capital runs for overdimensional escort work, he had to have more range than the trucks he was escorting.

Another example I can think of is I have heard about motorhomes (bus conversions) being set up to run on CNG. Because this is (or was at least) available only in capital cities with bus depots using it these buses had literally thousands of litres capacity, to run from Brisbane to Perth if necessary. Of course a 40 foot bus has a bit more space for this!

[flappist]

Well there are cup half full people and there are cup half empty people aren't there.

But as you have asked.

Originally Posted by GTP006

Falcon's are permanently on runout. Have a look around, you might get a little shock.

Yes I haven't bought a new car since, oh, the friday before last. The one before that was about a week before. I did price Falcon ES among all the others. I bought two toyotas.

Originally Posted by GTP006

Fairlanes & LTD's won't help your argument.

Why, because they showed your weight argument to be totally invalid? They may not have sold a lot but the DID sell and I could just as easily used the Statesman/Commodore comparrison and the Statesman DOES sell well.

Originally Posted by GTP006

Weight is one of the factors, space is another, cost is another.

The space you're talking about is 1.5 44 Gallon drums - where would you put it??

300l is a box 1m x 1m x 30cm, it is also 3 boxes 1m x 33cm x 30cm etc

44gal drums and made to roll not to be space efficient.

If I were to base this on the current BA chassis, which it would not of course as it would be a new design, I would have a main fuel tank of 150l where the current one is in front of the axle. It would be shaped to fill more of the empty space under the rear seat.
I would have another 150l above the rear axle in the space under the rear parcel tray where taxis put their LPG tanks. It would reduve the boot but then if you need a giant boot buy a Leyland P76.

N.B. I cheated on the design, I asked my retired car maker how he would do it. Oh and he is used to being told things can't be done, he is the guy who put the falcon engine in the Willys Jeep in the '60s.

Originally Posted by GTP006

How much would this super fish & chip machine cost?

Probably about the same as the diesel falcon that will be coming soon.

Originally Posted by GTP006

How big would it be to manage all that space & weight?

Same size as the current one.

Originally Posted by GTPOO6

How many people will want to own this family ocean liner?

No idea. Marketing is a very broad thing and if you only made what YOU personally wanted you would go broke real quickly.

Who would buy a giant 4WD if they lived in the middle of the city and never left the suburbs?
Who would buy a 290kw, 250km/h FPV and never drive it over 120km/h?
Who would buy a 300kw, $70k Ute and never carry anything in the back because it might scratch it?
Who would buy a $60k Prius to save fuel and only do 3000km/year because they take the train to work?
Who would buy a 300km/h++ capable motorcycle?

All these things sell........

Actually I just thought of at least one person who would buy it.... Me.

[BeStRaFe]

the CNG bus's have their tanks on the roof, but a big tank on the roof , ain't guna happen.

i have had a boot full of pavers and a full tank of lpg and the *** of my car was not touching...

the pavers alone would have been close to a tonn... so i dont see why with some mods u could not fit atlease a coupe of hundred gallons of fuel in there.

[Scott]

Originally Posted by flappist

Well there are cup half full people and there are cup half empty people aren't there.

And those who prefer their pies only half baked.

Originally Posted by flappist

Why, because they showed your weight argument to be totally invalid? They may not have sold a lot but the DID sell and I could just as easily used the Statesman/Commodore comparrison and the Statesman DOES sell well.

No, they are relevant. Relevant to the size of car you will need to put all that fuel into. And no, compared to family sized sedans, Stato's don't sell well.

Originally Posted by flappist

300l is a box 1m x 1m x 30cm, it is also 3 boxes 1m x 33cm x 30cm etc.

A box 1m x 1m x 30cm is a big box. So are 3 boxes 1m x 33cm x 30cm etc. Whatever they cost to build and setup, just add it onto the price.

Originally Posted by flappist

44gal drums and made to roll not to be space efficient.

Alas, you really stumped me there. Last time I checked though, 44 Gallon drums hold exactly 44 Gallons of whatever you put in them.

Originally Posted by flappist

I would have a main fuel tank of 150l where the current one is in front of the axle. It would be shaped to fill more of the empty space under the rear seat.
I would have another 150l above the rear axle in the space under the rear parcel tray where taxis put their LPG tanks. It would reduve the boot but then if you need a giant boot buy a Leyland P76.

OMG, who would have thought that a family sized sedan would need luggage capacity for..... wait for it....... a family!! So with that in mind, find somewhere else for the fuel tank or make the car bigger...... like the great selling Fairlane. Perhaps you could use the better selling Statesmen but really, they just don't compare in price, size, driveability or lust appeal do they.

Originally Posted by flappist

N.B. I cheated on the design, I asked my retired car maker how he would do it. Oh and he is used to being told things can't be done, he is the guy who put the falcon engine in the Willys Jeep in the '60s.

What a great guy to know, I'd love to spend a night on the turps chatting about what he did/saw/didn't see through his career.

Originally Posted by flappist

Probably about the same as the diesel falcon that will be coming soon.

So it will be the same size and cost of the standard diesel but will have a range of 4000km's. Yeah, nice try.

Originally Posted by flappist

Same size as the current one.

But with half the boot space. So, when I go away with my mates, I have to tow a trailer to carry the extra stuff that won't fit in the boot. Perhaps I culd just grab some roofracks and head off National Lampoon style.

Originally Posted by flappist

Actually I just thought of at least one person who would buy it.... Me.

Good for you, no, really good for you. My personal choice would be to put the (very, very, very conservative) $5k in my pocket and buy the cheaper, diesel or petrol car with a 70L tank that I can use just as I would a today.

The Biodiesel Association tip that biodiesel will be priced anywhere from 100% to 150% of normal diesel. Diesel is already about 5cpl dearer than petrol in Brisbane.

So (using Brisbane pricing):

Over 100km - biodiesel at 7L/100km = $ 9.23 (based on todays diesel price)
Over 100km - biodiesel at 7L/100km = $13.85 (based on the expected max price)
Over 100km - biodiesel at 7L/100km = $11.54 (based on middle of the road price)

Over 100km - Petrol at 10.2L/100km = $12.94 (based on Ford claimed consumption)

Middle of the road sounds like a good place to go from for the next calc which shows I would save $280 per year based on the average of 20,000k's.

How many years do I need to drive this stretched out, underpowered, 2.2 ton, chip burning machine before I see the benefit of $280 per year?

Even at 5 years of driving the super barge I would only save $1400 in fuel - would that cover the cost of buying the car that I struggle to find fuel for? No, it wouldn't. AND I'd be driving something I wouldn't want to drive.

Well, after typing all that, I just realised I typed too much. Details aside, your concept will be the future - perhaps with a more realistic tank size.

Have fun, I'll stop raving on for the night lol.

[flappist]

20,000km/year and cheap petrol, yep you are a city boy. Not everyone else is you know. I did 20k every 5 months in my GT-P. I have done a further 83k in the F6s so if I had saved 3l /100km (and it would have been 6 on FPVs) then I would have over $5500 more in my pocket. (or $11,000 based on FPV usage)

Just to explain a few things, 200l drums are ROUND this is not a good shape to fit in a car. Look at the shape of the fuel tank in your GT-P.

You are so negative on all these things, like a family car needs a boot. Who says it is a family car and why are there so many cars that have little boot space? Lots of families have no kids. Think outside the square.....

What if i made my own bio diesel from, say, cane trash on my farm. Cost basicly not much then would it? Or a mixture of AVTUR and bio.

The thread was started as a discussion on the idea of using another fuel to break the grip of the petrol companies. The only reason the giant tanks were even mentioned was that new fuels take longer to reach the bush. You have gotten fixated on this.

So in the end, if there is a car that has a normal sized tank and runs on diesel but can also run on bio efficiently then it will do the job won't it?

Right now in YOUR car you have 2 choices, 1) buy petrol from the petrol companies. 2) walk. Do you not think a third alternative would be a good idea.

Oh and I have had the odd beer with the car maker, he is my father.

[monkeydog]

I found this prototype


Wouldn't want to be queued behind these at the petrol station.

[Scott]

Originally Posted by flappist

20,000km/year and cheap petrol, yep you are a city boy.

Another nice try, whip out a map and look for West Wyalong. You might be suprised at where I spend my time, I have a solid comprehension of "remote". Re the numbers used, perhaps you could look at what the average km/year are in Australia (I'll save you the trouble, it's ~15,000), then look at where the overwhelming majority live (I'll save you more trouble, ~85% live in Metro areas) and what they pay for fuel (I used Brisbane average, but the maths apply regardless). Using anything but metro numbers would give an un-realistic result wouldn't it.

Originally Posted by flappist

......yep you are a city boy. Not everyone else is you know. I did 20k every 5 months in my GT-P. I have done a further 83k in the F6s so if I had saved 3l /100km (and it would have been 6 on FPVs) then I would have over $5500 more in my pocket. (or $11,000 based on FPV usage).

Does that mean that, predominantly, people who live in remote areas would buy it? Wow, that'll really bolster the business case. Or was the "city boy" comment just put in to fill space?

Originally Posted by flappist

Just to explain a few things, 200l drums are ROUND this is not a good shape to fit in a car. Look at the shape of the fuel tank in your GT-P..

Yes it's round, 10/10 and a for you! The shape of a 44 is not the point, though it seems you can't grasp that. The point of a 44 (or rather, one and a half 44's) is for plain demonstration of just how much space 300L of fuel takes up.... and a hint to what it weighs.

Originally Posted by flappist

You are so negative on all these things, like a family car needs a boot.

Hmmm, a family car with no boot.....

Originally Posted by flappist

Who says it is a family car....

Well, you did. You said it would be the same size as a Falcon. You compared it to a Falcon. You compared it to a XR6. You compared it to a XR8. You compared it to a Territory. If it looks like a family car, smells like a family car, and tastes like a family car..... guess what? If, through this thread, you have changed it away from a family car, then whack up the potential sales again.

Originally Posted by flappist

and why are there so many cars that have little boot space? Lots of families have no kids....

Which examples of a "Falcon sized car" have little boot space? My wifes Bora has a little boot, but what do you know?? It's a little car!

Originally Posted by flappist

What if i made my own bio diesel from, say, cane trash on my farm. Cost basicly not much then would it? Or a mixture of AVTUR and bio.

That'd be awesome.

Originally Posted by flappist

The thread was started as a discussion on the idea of using another fuel to break the grip of the petrol companies. The only reason the giant tanks were even mentioned was that new fuels take longer to reach the bush. You have gotten fixated on this.

The thread is valid, the concept is valid, and in my opinion, the enormous fuel tank/s are crazy. Why couldn't the car have a 70L tank and run on normal diesel too so that they can be filled anywhere until biodiesel gains traction?

Originally Posted by flappist

So in the end, if there is a car that has a normal sized tank and runs on diesel but can also run on bio efficiently then it will do the job won't it?

Yes, refer to my previous posts where I asked why a normal sized tank couldn't be used.

Originally Posted by flappist

Right now in YOUR car you have 2 choices, 1) buy petrol from the petrol companies. 2) walk. Do you not think a third alternative would be a good idea.

Yes, which is why I took an interest in this thread about a hypothetical car in the first place.

Originally Posted by flappist

Oh and I have had the odd beer with the car maker, he is my father.

Well there's a Star Wars moment (where's the Darth Vader smiley when you need it?)

My opinion isn't a wrong opinion, it's just not your opinion. Funnily enough, I buy cars too. For close to a decade, I averaged between 120-140k k's a year and managed fleets throughout.

It's a good idea and, as refined as I'm sure it would be, I would seriously look at buying one too. All healthy debate

[flappist]

Family car without a boot.... station wagon maybe?

If Falcons are "family cars" then why are FPVs based on Falcons and not smaller lighter vehicles.
Phase 3 GTHO or FPV Typhoon, ideal for that caravan holiday with you, your wife and 3 kids......
And why do Hyundai Excels have 5 seats? To make room for the doof doofs? The Falcon is a large car not a family car. A family car is one bought by families and that makes almost all cars from Daewoo up to Range Rover family cars....

Yes you have an opinion but you don't seem to put any reasioning or logic behind most of your points they are just "your opinion" and the ones you do put reasioning behind seem to be debunked fairly easily.

Still it is all hypothetical and everything we say here will have 0.0% bearing on what happens in the real world........

[Scott]

Originally Posted by flappist

Family car without a boot.... station wagon maybe?

*sighs* ok, luggage compartment then.

Originally Posted by flappist

If Falcons are "family cars" then why are FPVs based on Falcons and not smaller lighter vehicles.

FPV sedans are family cars. The people who own them, typically, have families to cart around and are chasing something with a little more prestige or sportiness than the norm. No, before you bring it, FPV Utes don't have a back seat, they are a Sport Utility after all.

If FPV can't justify making a special coupe, then what hope has your suggestion got of creating a Fairlane sized, chip burning, more expensive, Landcruiser weighing, brake burning, tyre destroying, *maybe cheaper to run, maybe dearer to run*, can't fill up anywhere, only bought by people in remote locations monster got of getting a green light. NONE.

Originally Posted by flappist

Phase 3 GTHO or FPV Typhoon, ideal for that caravan holiday with you, your wife and 3 kids......

Yes, if a family can afford it, why not? Most FPV sedans live with owners who have either a family or the need to cart people. The premise of these cars is that they have the flexibility to offer more than one function. Amazingly, we have the choice to by coupe's and supercars if we don't plan on taking the family anywhere. If FPV thought no-one would use a backseat, do you think they would create a whole extra product line or just use what they have...... a Falcon.

Originally Posted by flappist

The Falcon is a large car not a family car. A family car is one bought by families and that makes almost all cars from Daewoo up to Range Rover family cars....

Hyundai make family cars. Daewoo make family cars. Range Rover make family 4x4's. They all make cars suitable for carrying 5 people, what is your point? Fleets buy family cars as the very people they buy them for have..... wait for it........ families. I'm sure every rep in the country would clamber over each other to get a job that supplied a 3 seater ute. Typically, those who drive "large or family fleet" cars very, very rarely use the spare 4 seats for work. Those seats get used after work where they realise the added benefit of having a company car. There's a reason companies spend more than they have to on fleet cars - if they thought supplying cheap cars to their staff would attract the good fish, then buying cheap cars is what they'd do.

Originally Posted by flappist

Yes you have an opinion but you don't seem to put any reasioning or logic behind most of your points they are just "your opinion" and the ones you do put reasioning behind seem to be debunked fairly easily.

There's a difference between saying you've debunked something and actually doing it. Let me know when you "debunk" something. You haven't yet, you've been clutching at straws to try and substantiate your odd claim that 300L is a great idea in a family car. Have another read, my issue is, and has always been with the weight and more so, the space. You've agreed that the need for 300L is over the top by offering a more suitable solution with a plan to use diesel & biodiesel and a normal sized tank.

Originally Posted by flappist

Still it is all hypothetical and everything we say here will have 0.0% bearing on what happens in the real world........

Unfortunately, 'tis true. I've had enough of this one, knock yourself out with the last word ;)

[gz1]

I like the idea of this.
And as a general rule I really really would like to have at least the option of a bigger tank in ANY car. In my opinion the fuel tanks in todays cars are way too small. Why can't we at least have an option to have a larger tank that gives a reasonable range, and again in my opinion any range short of 1000 to 1200 k's is too short. Yes filling this right *may* increase your fuel consumption, although I doubt it will make much difference, but you always get the choice of how much fuel to put in. there is no law (yet) that says you must fill up to capacity. And if a car had dual or tripple tanks, then the "sloshing" problem would not be there.

[nugget378]

Great idea.
I'd buy one with a 300lt tank,hell Id even option a 500lt tank.
The charge that it would stuff up the handling of a vehicle is baseless in my mind,how often do you drive this type of car as if you were on a track,anyway you only drive to the capability of the vehicle and the conditions.
The idea of a bigger fuel tank in general is great even as a seperate issue to biodiesel (which is a good idea on its own)
I can only get 400km odd out of either of my hilux's,and always have to carry a couple of jerry cans when out off the beaten track.

[Martyvan]

If you want Economy just buy a Mondeo, decent sized family car with long range, and almost all the specs you suggested.. except for RWD. Thats what im looking at as a next family vehicle.... Shame its not coming as a wagon, my decision would be made for me.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by GTP006

The thread is valid, the concept is valid, and in my opinion, the enormous fuel tank/s are crazy. Why couldn't the car have a 70L tank and run on normal diesel too so that they can be filled anywhere until bio diesel gains traction?

This is what I was thinking, if car companies can produce cars that can run on regular petrol, E85 and Hydrogen then one that will run on diesel and bio diesel should be possible.

While 300ltrs would be possible the cons of doing this will make it difficult to sell. And no car company is gonna build a car they think it is not gonna sell.

And I understand Flappist that your idea is to beat the fuel companies, but unfortunately they have the world by the balls.

Originally Posted by Martyvan

If you want Economy just buy a Mondeo, decent sized family car with long range, and almost all the specs you suggested.. except for RWD. That's what I'm looking at as a next family vehicle.... Shame its not coming as a wagon, my decision would be made for me.

And if its like the focus expensive to ensure and repair.

[Dark Horse]

Hopefully there is an additive so that your biodiesel Falcon doesn't smell like a fish 'n chip shop...