[QUOTE=henk4;820188]do I spot a nice location for a sticker in your 5th pic?
Why is power higher with E85?[/QUOTE]
I think Ethanol has is higher octane at 105?
Printable View
[QUOTE=henk4;820188]do I spot a nice location for a sticker in your 5th pic?
Why is power higher with E85?[/QUOTE]
I think Ethanol has is higher octane at 105?
Yeah the E85 has higher octane.
And since we have Hp-tax it benefits to be taxed under the 150hp stated on the regular gas. I guess that's the main reason that deliver the car with a difference in the setup.
It has the Vector package with Active options, which gives part leather seats, fog lights in the grill, sport chassis, 17 in alu-wheels, upgraded stereo, electric adjustment of the driver seat and some more i can't remember right now.
Great buy, congrats! It's a nice looking car no doubt :)
[QUOTE=LotusLocost;820545]we have Hp-tax it benefits to be taxed under the 150hp stated on the regular gas[/QUOTE]
You have a hp-tax? What if one car produces less power and is inefficient but another has a bit more power and is more efficient? Seems like it would make more sense to tax on consumption of fuel or based on CO2 emissions not power.
Trying to use logic with government decisions on tax never works, MRR :(
The UK uses CO2 to determine it's annual road tax costs. So I will pay max (£455) for a 4x4 used to tow daughter's horse to competions even though I only do 2000 miles per year. My neighbour may pay ZERO for his Smart Diesel and do 10,000 miles per year. A Prius is £35 per year adn he/she might do 20,000 miles per year ... so who is ACTUALLY polluting mroe ?
ALL road usage charges should be on the fuel as low polluting cars also do higher mpg and so it achieves the same. Howevr, in the UK at least no government woudl suggest increasing the current tax rate on fuel any higher --
[img]http://news.bbc.co.uk/furniture/in_depth/world/2000/cost_of_fuel/tax.gif[/img]
and if it wasn't harmonised across Europe then UK haulage companies would suffer even more ( European haulage copmanies fill up their tanks with cheaper diesel and then drive into the UK to deliver goods, local haulage firms cannot compete on costs buying UK fuel )
[QUOTE=Matra et Alpine;821265]Trying to use logic with government decisions on tax never works, MRR :(
The UK uses CO2 to determine it's annual road tax costs. So I will pay max (£455) for a 4x4 used to tow daughter's horse to competions even though I only do 2000 miles per year. My neighbour may pay ZERO for his Smart Diesel and do 10,000 miles per year. A Prius is £35 per year adn he/she might do 20,000 miles per year ... so who is ACTUALLY polluting mroe ?
ALL road usage charges should be on the fuel as low polluting cars also do higher mpg and so it achieves the same. Howevr, in the UK at least no government woudl suggest increasing the current tax rate on fuel any higher --
[img]http://news.bbc.co.uk/furniture/in_depth/world/2000/cost_of_fuel/tax.gif[/img]
and if it wasn't harmonised across Europe then UK haulage companies would suffer even more ( European haulage copmanies fill up their tanks with cheaper diesel and then drive into the UK to deliver goods, local haulage firms cannot compete on costs buying UK fuel )[/QUOTE]
agreed. The person who drives their S65 AMG 2 miles to the metro station each morning pollutes less than the self-righteous idiot who drives his Prius, Mini D, etc 40 miles to work each day . The US is one of the few remaining countries that NEEDS and increased fuel tax. Even at $4 a gallon (so around $1.03-1.05 a liter) its way cheaper than any country in Western Europe that I can think of. The chart you presented is a bit outdated but car and truck drivers in the UK undoubtedly get shafted. I feel for the motorists in the UK since they pay exorbitant prices for fuel, registration, the cars themselves, driving into their own capitol, etc (they don't need any more taxes on cars as far as I can see).
[QUOTE=MRR;821357]agreed. The person who drives their S65 AMG 2 miles to the metro station each morning pollutes less than the self-righteous idiot who drives his Prius, Mini D, etc 40 miles to work each day .
[/QUOTE]
This should be the basis of a system for road pricing, whereby the emissions are directly linked up to the distances covered by the vehicle and its "officially established" mileage. You can even differentiate such a system by time and place, by adding a GPS system that exactly records where the car was at which time...I am sure this system will greatly violate the conservative US approach of "freedom" but it is the most honest way of attributing the society's cost of road infrastructure to the user. We are very close to introducing the beginnings of such a system.
( it is currently sort of dishonest when a pay about 2300 US dollar annual roadtax for a 2.2 liter diesel car doing about 40 mpg an average, while for 3.0 V6 petrol sister car I would have to pay about half of that, despite the fact that I would get about 22 mpg on average)
[QUOTE=henk4;821397]
( it is currently sort of dishonest when a pay about 2300 US dollar annual roadtax for a 2.2 liter diesel car doing about 40 mpg an average, while for 3.0 V6 petrol sister car I would have to pay about half of that, despite the fact that I would get about 22 mpg on average)[/QUOTE]
The EPA hates diesels with a passion :(
Which is why I can't get any Audi's with TDi, only a few VW's. And only one model of Mercedes is available with a diesel, the E320 (which looks pretty slick BTW).
I did see a Smart forTwo diesel a while back...
[QUOTE=henk4;821397]by adding a GPS system that exactly records where the car was at which time...[/QUOTE]
That just won't work in this country. Why not just avoid all that bureaucratic mess and increase the fuel tax so people are taxed on what they burn. I can see all kinds of government abuse of a system like that and it clearly violates the 4th amendment's protections against unwarranted searches.
What if the manufacturers put GPS in their cars as standard?
There's a problem though. If they put a GPS not only will they know where do you go but how fast do you get there. It'd be like having a speed camera in your car. Constantly.
So, no thanks.
[QUOTE=Ferrer;821559]There's a problem though. If they put a GPS not only will they know where do you go but how fast do you get there. It'd be like having a speed camera in your car. Constantly.
So, no thanks.[/QUOTE]
it is so difficult to stay within the law? You may compare it to air traffic control. If that was left to individual pilots, I would reconsider air travel.
[QUOTE=henk4;821563]it is so difficult to stay within the law? You may compare it to air traffic control. If that was left to individual pilots, I would reconsider air travel.[/QUOTE]
So what if I accidently do 133km/h in the motorway? Do I deserve to be fined?
And anyway a dangerous behaviour under the speed limit still is dangerous. I've seen plenty of people drive (very) badly and they were below the speed limit.
[QUOTE=Ferrer;821608]So what if I accidently do 133km/h in the motorway? Do I deserve to be fined?
And anyway a dangerous behaviour under the speed limit still is dangerous. I've seen plenty of people drive (very) badly and they were below the speed limit.[/QUOTE]
well,I would not be surprised at all if I will still live to witness the overall governing of all motorcars on sale to the general public.
and the GPS system is no solution for dangerous behaviour. We need other measures for that.
[QUOTE=henk4;821610]well,I would not be surprised at all if I will still live to witness the overall governing of all motorcars on sale to the general public.[/QUOTE]
Unfortunately I agree with you.