So how come car industries are not using Hydrogen motors? They

>>737403233

Maybe it has something to do with the current multi-trillion dollar oil monopoly.

Rub 2 brain cells together dude, its pretty obvious.

Maybe because producing wast amounts of hydrogen requires buttloads of electrickery?

File: 1498052782742.gif (2MB, 351x348px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 351x348px

>fress wate cahs

>>737403320
Well anybody can do that with a home made wind electro plant. You can have almost infinite amount of hydrogen for a few bucks you'd need to build that plant.

>>737403233
Slavery bro. The wealthiest families want to maintain power at any cost cost and care not for humanity at all really. They call us goy, they study the talmud, and they rape babies.

They fucking killed Stan Meyers, Ted Gunderson, and many more great men out of lust and greed.

>Just do it yourself and tell nobody who would not die to protect the secret.

- Power
- Technology
- Cost

>>737403404
>Using air power for electicity
>Infinite amounts
It's not viable yet. We're not producing shit fast enough with green energy, not yet.
We're all waiting for the fusion revolution here, but until then, it's like buying bread for children with the money they earned trough sex trade.

>>737403489

This

/thread

If it was cost effective it would already be widespread.

>>737403585
Shit nigger, even with a Sun power you could have just enough energy to create yourself a nice amount of hydrogen. Combined with a power of wind it would be free and easy to make it.

>>737403658
Sure, a few pounds of metal to make a cell battery and some wire is reaaaaally expensive.

>>737403762

Then do it

>>737403485
No matter how cynical I try to be about the Stan Meyer story, it still creeps me out. During an investing meeting he screamed that he had been poisoned and died and police ruled it as a cerebral aneurysm. Who the fuck dies of an aneurysm weeks after being visted by the Pentagon?

>>737404248
>Stan Meyer
The water fuel cell is a technical design of a "perpetual motion machine" created by American Stanley Allen Meyer (August 24, 1940 – March 20, 1998), around which a case of controversy developed. He claimed that an automobile retrofitted with the device could use water as fuel instead of gasoline. Meyer's claims about his "Water Fuel Cell" and the car that it powered were found to be fraudulent by an Ohio court in 1996.

>>737403762
Cost ---- Effective. A ratio.

If to match the power output of internal combustion engines you need a much greater cost, it is not cost effective in comparison.

If you have the technology to make hydrogen engines anywhere near as cost effective as internal combustion motors (even including the emission controls), you would have an almost guaranteed entrepreneurial success.

>>737403317
This.
/thread

>>737404597
Would you rather pay 30 000$ for a internal combustion engine car and then pay for a fuel every time you run out of gas or would you rather pay 60 000$ for a hydrogen driven car and then never pay for a fuel again?

>>737404597
What about indirect gears that produces the electricity for the car?

File: 1493456137827.jpg (140KB, 640x591px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 640x591px

>>737403233
>extremely cheap
If we forget about the platinum electrodes we need for a long lasting fuel cell you're right.
>almost 100% efficiency
hydrogen doesn't just appear at your door step.
The way op probably suggested is electrolysis where you can expect an energy yield of 30%, maybe less (assuming a highly efficient fuel cell). That means you CAN use renewable engery to do that, but there's a simple reason why this isn't done on a large scale - it's not profitable (yet) and the energy yield is simply too low. There are also problems about storing Hyrdogen at home: a) makes a beautyful bomb, b) it slowly gasses out through metal containers, that poses a security threat, just as a monetary problem.
>easy to build
LoL
>almost non breakable
All parts that move break at some point. All parts that don't move break later anyways, that goes double for things where chemical processes take place (for instance but not limited to the fuel cell itself)
>strong (enough)
Whatever that's supposed to mean.
>safe
In the end more dangerous than usual combustion motors, but nothing that can't be handled, well except cars might actually start to explode hollywood style when they crash.

>>737404572
The car doesn't need to work, you just need a swarthy Texan from the Pentagon with a big hat to come along with his thumbs in his suspenders "Whatcha got there boy? Water as fuel? I say, I say, that'll harm my oil business."

>>737404859
Fuck off Mr. NSA.

>>737404764
Pfft. Yeah, never pay for /petroleum/ fuel again. Hydrogen gas isn't free just because water is everywhere and a (tiny) percentage exists in air.

>>737404800
How do you even car

>>737403320
>wast
Fuck are you? Elmer Fudd?

>>737403233
>safe
Yeah because the smallest crash totally won't have the thing blow up at all...

>>737404764
Rather pay £300 for a banger and run it ragged

File: Hindenburg_disaster.jpg (18KB, 310x253px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 310x253px

Most people are still shocked by the stigma that this event left.

File: not my thing.png (86KB, 480x562px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 480x562px

>>737406000
Nigga that hydrogen in the hindenburg was barely compressed, think for a moment what happens when a car with a canister on 300 bars rips because of a crash.

>>737405865
hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are safer than cars with internal combustion engines, according to industry experts.

The hydrogen fuel cell tanks in the Toyota Mirai are pressurized up to 10,000 psi, and hydrogen is 16 times lighter than air. So, if a tank were punctured or otherwise compromised, the hydrogen gas would instantaneously dissipate into the atmosphere.

Today's hydrogen fuel tanks are also made from highly durable carbon fiber whose strength is assessed not only in crash tests but also in trials in which bullets are fired at it.

Don't listen to NSA-CIA fags. They are a well paid liars.

>>737406129
Well you dont have to convince me, you have to convince everyone else.

>>737403233
If you're going to throw safety out the window, then you might as well go with flywheel engines which would be easier to keep supplied (all you need is electricity to spin them up) and would be much cheaper to install.

File: .45 ACP.jpg (16KB, 240x335px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 240x335px

>>737406197
>hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are safer than cars with internal combustion engines, according to industry experts.
Citication motherfucking needed.
>Today's hydrogen fuel tanks are also made from highly durable carbon fiber whose strength is assessed not only in crash tests but also in trials in which bullets are fired at it.
Because an inconvenient crash totally cannot punctually create more force than "a bullet" (which also greatly differ in power).
>pic related

>>737406535
You are a nigger, aren't you?
Do you really think that any crash could make more force in a single point on a tank (few squared millimeters) than a bullet?

>>737403667
you sound like you're in a bad children's television show. or a sunny d commercial; "unleash the power of the sun!"

listen up you little shit sipper, you would not be "creating" hydrogen (that can only be done through fission or fusion), you would be separating it from the oxygen in water molecules. This requires an enormous amount of energy. A 100W solar panel isn't going to do it. you would need an array in the 10kw range which will run you $20,000; a 10kw wind turbine will cost $40,000. Neither of these will be able to power your home as they will just be for electroylsis.

1 gallon of gasoline has about 30kw of power, it will take your wind/solar system 3 hours to produce the equivalent power. High temperature electrolysis operates between a 25%-50% efficiency (you lose 1/2 to 3/4 of the energy input). this means it will take between 6-9 hours to produce the equivalent of 1 gallon of gasoline. If you plan on driving more than 30 miles in a day you're fucked.

We lack the infrastructure, and it's really just electric vehicles with one extra step of complexity. I don't see any big advantages over battery electric vehicles, at least in the future when battery prices come down even more.

>>737407004
Refiling of a hydrogen tank lasts for few minutes. Recharging a battery takes a LOT more than few minutes. Few hours at least.

>>737406903
this assumes that the turbines/solar panels are operating at peak, which doesn't happen. With wind you'll be lucky to get 25% of peak, and with solar you'll rarely see over 50% if it's even a little overcast

>>737406903
You can separate a hydrogen from a water with a AAA 1,5V battery.

>>737407088
This is a case where a Thorium-powered slow breeder reactor would be a ideal. You get a slow trickle of power 24/7, constantly creating and compressing hydrogen.

>>737407074
I imagine that you almost never need to fill up the entire tank at once. With normal driving to and from work and stores etc you can get through the entire day without any charging and then just leave it charging during the night no problem. And if you actually drive cross country or something where you deplete the entire battery, quick chargers don't take more than like 30 minutes, perfect time to have a meal and stretch your legs like you probably would have done anyway.

File: 22short22lr.jpg (103KB, 572x500px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 572x500px

>>737406777
For the sake of the argument: We'll just assume the weakest conventionally available kind of ammunition which is available on a broad scale (and i'd make the wild guess that those people used just that): 22.short
http://gundata.org/cartridge/169/.22-short/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbEKKXU4bLo
So this guy concludes that this round can penetrate something like 5 pieces of plywood. I'm sure a quarter of an inch of regular metal does a better job, so yes, cars can punctually create more force - i mean did you ever even consider that such a tank can be crushed by another car?

>>737403317
A monopoly not held by any countries that are major car manufacturers

File: 1489961062268.jpg (23KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 480x480px

>>737407121

>>737407240
Yeah, or you can have two batteries. While one is charging you use the other. But hydrogen by me is a way better solution. It creates energy in contact with oxygen from air. Simple and cheap.

>>737403585

>fusion revolution

Not happening. The idiots think that's how the Sun works, but it doesn't. Our models for how the Sun work are literally the only reason why we think fusion is possible. It will always take more energy to sustain a fusion reaction than what we get out of it.

Hydrogen is not being used because of distrubution issues. Our infrastructure is set up to distribute petroleum, and transforming it to nitrogen would be a huge project. Also, hydrogen is volatile and explosive.

>>737403233
Where does the hydrogen come from?

>>737407371
You still have to create the hydrogen fuel which uses a lot of electricity, and then you have to distribute that hydrogen around to fuel stations which is wasteful. IMO battery electric cars are better because they just use the electricity directly rather than going the long way around by converting it to fuel and then back again. Electricity distribution infrastructure is already in place, and it would clear up real estate from fuel stations that can be used for something else.

>>737403233
>because blood and oil is still profitable
Pro tip: you can't prove me wrong

>>737407252
The force distributed on a surface of a tank by any crash is nowhere near the force that can be made by a bullet. If a piece of metal in a crash could travel the speed of a bullet (~330m/sec) and exceed it, then yeah, it could make bigger damage. But that would mean that two cars should travel the speed ~330m / 2 at least.

>>737404764
>then never pay for a fuel again

Hydrogen is free? Link?

>>737407484
>Our infrastructure is set up to distribute petroleum, and transforming it to nitrogen would be a huge project.
>Nitrogen

Found the Hillary voter

File: Electrolysis.svg.png (83KB, 1200x1152px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 1200x1152px

>>737407121
This is the true /sci/ poster.
Or maybe hes /diy/

>>737407506
Water.

File: 6577940-3x2-940x627.jpg (150KB, 940x627px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 940x627px

>>737407626
Again, you fail to recognize that blunt force is a thing.

>>737403667
>it would be free

There are no free lunches in physics.

>>737403233
refueling and fuel storage is a pain in the ass and expensive as fuck, also Hydrogen creation needs energy too

>>737407703
How much energy required to release it?

>>737407813
See this
>>737407673

>>737407843
That doesn't answer his question

>>737407188
agreed! And because it produces it's own fuel it's technically a renewable energy source

Most idiots think that Tesla is the next coming of christ, they still havent turned a penny in profit and lose a bit over $10k per vehicle sold. Their battery tech isnt proprietary, so anybody can copy it and they will. Elon Musk has been adamant about hydrogen fuel cell technology being garbage, but thats only because he doesnt do it. Meanwhile most of the other auto companies have re-invested into 40 year old hydrogen fuel cell technology because it is better and cleaner than what Tesla does. Nobody on wall street or in the media has addressed the elephant in the room of what happens when the batteries in all these vehicles die? Their life span is 7-12 years and what cant be recycled goes into the ground. Its is about 10x more toxic than and emmissions from a gasoline powered car. Couple that with there isnt enough materials in the world to make every car electric or hybrid. Gasoline is still extremely abundant. In turn combustion motors are becoming more and more efficient and will always have the ability to travel further and refuel easier. Electric cars in any form are a bust just like they were in 1925.

>>737403320
Not when the "gas pump" itself is the collector and distributor. Total cost is pennies on the dollar compared to petroleum costs of, extraction rights, process, transport, transport rights, refinery, distribution etc.

Hydrogen is the least energy consumptive, and cleanest option, right next to nuclear, which would have the advantage if we didn't have to mine for fissile materials.

>>737407121
you can also power a tesla with a 9V battery. it just won't get you far

>>737407945
did you not drink enough water today anon?

>>737404597
>autismo 3000
>businesses are started on their engineering merit
>thinks businesses are created in a vacuum
>and not in a frothing shitstorm of human chaos and interest

You are why product people are rarely ever good businesspeople.

File: 1496683627856.gif (2MB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 250x250px

>>737407121

File: ANGER.png (105KB, 249x248px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 249x248px

>>737403838
>wanting to be murdered in your sleep
>obvi gooberment poster is obvious

>>737407252
Holy fuck, I have never read such hostile ignorance.

Read a fuckin book, harambe.

>>737408183
So much misinformation here.

For one, learn basic startup economy. It's entirely normal that companies lose money in the beginning, because they invest in things that are expected to take many years to pay themselves off. Like Tesla's gigafactory. Their finances are in perfect order, everything is going as planned for them economically.

Battery life is more than 7-12 years. Tesla's batteries have a warranty of 10 years and it's not like they expect it to suddenly die a minute after that. Most cells in a battery will probably work fine even after 20 years. Only a minority will fail, and their elements CAN be recycled just fine. And also battery tech is progressing all the time. Within a decade or two it's very likely that EV batteries will no longer contain any especially harmful chemicals. But gasoline cars aren't really progressing. In the end they still rely on burning fossil fuels, which cannot be made into an eco-friendly process no matter what.

Most car companies isn't investing in hydrogen. Battery EVs are way ahead when it comes to interest among car manufacturers. Most companies have said they will have EVs in their lineup within a few years, and many already has. Only a few have any plans around hydrogen ones.

>>737408465
The current wall street model creates businesses in a vacuum. They have since the 80's thanks to Reagan. Apple is the most profitable company on wall street and creates nothing. They engineer and manufacture nothing. All of their engineers are software and aesthetic design. Google is worth less money than Apple based solely on the fact that they design and manufacture goods. For 30 years in this country ideas and buzz has been more valuable than engineered design. This is the wall street model and the reason why the USA is such shit now

File: 1468668004516.jpg (12KB, 326x255px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 326x255px

>>737408789
>misinformation
>posted in a thread on /b/
>2017
why havn't you became an hero

>>737408789
Sure kid

Toyotas partnership with Tesla is over. They have blatently stated that there is no future there and arent interested in making solar shingles, the only potentially profitable product they have.

Toyota, Hyundai, Honda, GM, Daimler, VW and Ford have all announced plans and are moving back to the Hydrogen fuel cells. Commiting massive amounts of money back into it.

The current recycling for the batteries used is about 30% of the material. Teslas current Li-ion batteries are expensive and there are massive Lithium shortages. The newer sodium technology hasnt moved forward and is proving to be about 100x more volatile and potentially dangerous. Same with their superconducter tech. They would be bombs on wheels.

I've been a powertrain engineer in detroit and for honda for about 15 years. This is what I do all day. If you think Tesla motors losing and bleeding money in their 14th year of being a company is a good business model, please put your money there.

>>737407710
Think about a can of soda for a moment. Its contents is, of course the soda, and an extra compressed gas that comes out when it's opened, that's meant to give it more even distribution of force among the aluminum can.

Now if you imagine a highly pressurized tank of hydrogen, which has the thickness of metal from an engine block as well as the high pressure contents strengthening the inside, it'll basically be a wrecking ball among a crash of two cars.

The worst case scenario I can think of then is having the metal structurally fail due to deterioration/decay.

>>737409822
>>737407710
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUhisi2FBuw&t=7m5s

>>737403233
You are aware there are some that run on hydrogen you can only get them in Cali

Hydrogen is explosive it's hard to store safely
That's the main reason
Also money

File: image.jpg (645KB, 2048x1360px) Image search: [Google]

645KB, 2048x1360px

>>737410069
It's called a Toyota Mirai

>>737407329
True, but car manufacturing countries are held by the balls by countries that do have a trillion dollar oil monopoly.

>>737409661
So that's 7 companies with interest in hydrogen... wow. Here's some of the ones with current EVs or plans for EVs:

Tesla, GM, Audi, Porsche, Aston Martin, Faraday Future, VW, Hyundai, Mercedes-Benz, Ford, Volvo, Nissan, Jaguar, Subaru, BMW, Renault, Opel, Citroen, Mitsubishi, Citroen, Peugeot, BYD, Toyota, Kia, Smart, Fiat, BAIC

>>737410069
>>737410231
There was also the Honda FCX clarity made something like 10 years ago. Shell stations had hydrogen refuelling stations only in northern CA.

Its a better alternative to all electric cars because while it uses a lot of electricity to make the hydrogen, you can refuell just like a gasoline powered car. Drive 400 miles, fuel, and keep driving without the limitations of batteries ever.

Also have you heard about the Nikolai 1 truck it's runs on hydrogen

>>737408880
>vacuum

Aaand what planet do you think you're living on? At any one time Apple is involved in thousands of lawsuits preventing them and their competition from bringing product to market. And a computer is nowhere near as complex a product to sell as an automobile, which, integrated into it, are the massive, and very old, and very wealthy, fuel and infrastructure industries.

Which is what we're talking about here, not, computers that run on hydrogen engines, though Apple famously did try to patent those some years back. Turns out computers that dribble water out as exhaust weren't a real popular idea.

>>737403233
the energy density of hydrogen is a problem meaning you need more of it. this makes storage a huge problem both in the vehicle and at refueling stations.

>>737411934
Yeah... Not really.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfBeJbXf4w4&t=91s

>>737403233
Cost

imagine how much it would to install one hydrogen fuel tank and fill station at everyone gas station in one town, now imagine the entire nation

>>737412542
Imagine how much it would cost to drill a fucking Earth, miles into ground and to make gasoline out of oil and to distribute it across the state with thousands of miles of large pipes. Oh wait..

>>737412669
drilling a new spot for oil is completely different from asking every gas station to install a hydrogen holding tank and a way to fuel hydrogen cars.

>>737403762
>a few pounds of metal to make a cell battery

And a nuclear reactor is just a box with a few rocks in it. That's why I have three of them in my back yard. I built one just last Tuesday.

>>737412542
can you imagine how those gas stations got there in the first place

>>737404859

Disinfo, pls go.

>i only said that ironically
>we donut fucking care

>>737413252
can you imagine how much easier it is to build a whole new gas station than it is to retrofit a hydrogen fuel storage tank and fill up station in a gas station...especially lets say in a city where space is extremely limited. I wonder why every gas station doesnt have a charge station for electric cars either, hmmmmmmmmmm

>>737403233
Hydrogen is a pain in the ass to store and highly cryogenic, hydrogen burns HOT as fuck and thus produce a LOT of NoX even at a rich/unstoichmetric AFR

>>737410413
I think you naming every sub group under a parent head and not knowing what companies belong to whom, show your relative amount of knowledge of the auto industry. Again nice try kid. Also hydrogen fuel cell cars fall under the blanket EV. Look where all those companies investments are. Not in Li-ion or sodium but in hydrogen cells. All of which are EV's. Nice try Elon, now get back to bleeding cash

>>737405039

>implying the oil wouldn't still be used to create tar for asphalt
>cheaper to fuel cars mean more cars
>more cars mean more roads
>more roads mean more asphalt
>more asphalt means more tar
>more tar means more oil sales
>happy texan would invest, not murder

Do you even Lone Gunmen?

>>737403233
>-extremely cheap


WRONG hydrogen is expensive to produce

>>737406129


hydrogen unlike gasoline will NOT explode. The flames rise up in a non-explosive way

>>737406000

To play doubles advocate, the Hindenburg was painted with a formula that was practically rocket fuel. The hydrogen itself might not have been what ignited.

Irregardless, we are no wear near where we half to be for hydrogen fuel cells to be sustainable.

>>737413225
Please tell us more about this

>>737413670
im not sure you understand how explosions work.

>flammable fuel in sealed container
>ignite
>compression
>boom

>>737413779
>doubles advocate

>>737406903

I read this in thunderf00t's voice.

>>737413225
Is that legal, do you need a special licence to do something like that? Can you just buy that sort of stuff?

>>737413920
read his last line as well, see if you notice anything...

>>737413953
Fuck you. Now I cant get that voice out my head.

They just simple don't give a fuck about us.

>>737403233
Havent figured how to tax it quite yet

>>737408789
You provided no facts, only conjecture.

>>737405729
Kek

File: IMG_0526.gif (1023KB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

1023KB, 480x270px

>>737403658

>>737403233
My father works in the automobile industry. In the strategy department/ ling term planning.

Here are the reasons why hydrogen is not at all viable:
>Hydrogen
Fuel tank and tankers/ whatever carries the fuel has to be highly pressurised.
Takes up a huge amount of space in the car and is way too complicated to handle.
Transporting the fluid is a nightmare. Its really hard, almost impossible to do it on the scale we're doing right now.

>Efficiency.
It's only half as efficient as you described.
You can't harvest hydrogen, you have to make it by separating it from something else.
The amount of energy that you input into making it is way superior to the output of hydrogen fuel you obtain.
So to make hydrogen fuel, you have to sacrifice a lot of energy which defeats the whole point of "efficiency".

Hope this helps

>>737407670

>seize on a typo or autocorrect

Found the Bernie-supporting antifa anarchist who hasn't seen a bar of soap since 2013.

>>737411447
The only thing making cars more difficult and legacy are the materials they use. Many of which are the same as Apple uses, steel, glass, plastics etc. The major difference is where the labor is and in sub contracting. The Legacy or "traditional" as wall street calls them are rarely ever affected by much. The auto industry in general is very cyclical 7 years of growth 5 years of downturn, but in a 10 year span always moving forward slow and steady. Even in its worst times the auto industry has grown. Apple on the otherhand completely relies on subcontractors. If Foxconn bellies up or the labor force in Taiwan starts a movement Apple is out of the market almost overnight. Which is what happened in china. Alot of companies competeing solely based on cost of chinas wages lost their companies in the course of about 2 years due to the labor movement there. Apple's saving grace is that their cash reserve is over 250 billion. The largest of any company. Which means they could probably weather a storm or two before losing money.

>>737414839
precombustion catalytic conversion. Systems for this were briefly on the market a few years ago. All gone now. Very viable option actually. Big oil didn't like it. But by all means your daddy knows best.

>>737403233
>extremely cheap
no

>>737414839
Kind of my point earlier. We know the Hydrogen fuel cells arent efficient or viable right now. So where does that put the tesla model of Li-ion and sodium. All the major auto manufacturers are putting the bulk back into hydrogen. That would tell me they all believe that the Tesla EV is even less viable or cost effective. In the grand scheme internal combustion is still cheaper and more viable. Petroleum is abundant and cheap, refining it yields almost no final waste anymore. Sure its dirty, but we can utilize about 99% of the product.

- Too high system costs, around ~45k € just for the components (which leads to total prices of minimum 75k)
- need of platinum (30-40g per vehicle) (If someone doesn't know what 30-40g are in amerifag units, I won't even care.)
- lack of infrastructure (talking about germany)
- hydrogen dissipates after a single number of days (as happened in bmw 7 series)
- cell efficiency is about 60-70%, paired with the non regenerative production of hydrogen, it's much lower.

solutions:
- regenerative energy to get hydrogen instead of electrolysis or natural gas
- infrastructure building

Trust me, I'm a german engineer.

File: WP_20170609_003.jpg (1MB, 2592x1456px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2592x1456px

>>737413501
Spot on m8, I'm surprised how many people don't understand this shit. Out of the four Tesla owners I've spoken to, none of them have a fucking clue about what they bought. All of them are rich douche bags that know fuck all about cars, but they think they are saving the environment. These people just want to look cool with the newest fad in cars. It's hilarious when I talk shit on their cars and they come back with "muh 0-60 times" like I can't build a car for half the price that will do close to the same 0-60 and will def beat a Tesla in 1/4 mile.

Tl;dr: Teslas are for rich hipster faggots that don't know dick about cars.

I feel sorry for children of the future that won't know the joy of the sounds and smells of an ICE. I'm glad I'll be dead by then.

>>737403233
requires too much energy to compress into a canister in order to store any quantity that could be used move the car anywhere

>>737415116
"A catalytic converter is an emissions control device that converts toxic gases [...] into less toxic pollutants..."

I don't know what the fuck you're on about about "precombustion catalytic converter"
But of course a few words thrown around that are actually meaningless to the debate, will win you the whole thread.
Continue living in your little fantasy dream, faggot.

Unless you clearly explain (or provide reference) the processes that change the whole situation, you can sit down and shut your faggot hole.

>>737415844
yeah i hear you man. Jeep Wrangler owner. I'm not into fast cars, but I'll be damned if I let a computer drive me around in quiet little bitch car. I love cars, love learning how to work on my own, and enjoy driving.

>>737413920
It's not rocket surgery brah, you know what he means.

>>737414839
Your dad lives in the eighties with his arguments.

All obsolete.

>>737414980
Spoken like a true product guy.
Utterly oblivious to the realities of the political-economic market.
Good luck kid.

>>737415844
I can't wait til that day.

Cause they take out the block you are in when you crash. Also, they need platinum.

>>737418464
Catalytic converters need platinum but no one gives a shit there

>>737419118
>He has a catalytic converter in his car
I'll be enjoying your tears as you drive behind my smog machine

File: laughing_elf_man.jpg (57KB, 600x829px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 600x829px

>>737416278
>I'll be damned if I let a computer drive me around in quiet little bitch car
How ironic

>>737413779
I hole hardedly agree

>>737418135
Here is the bottom line reality in the your political-economic market. Products leave to be manufactured cheaper, we make nothing, people dont work and cant afford anything, businesses in america belly up, welcome to the third world. Thats the current reality we ate living in. We wont even be able to fight the wars to move the economy forward, we cant fight in tanks we dont build. Good luck in your future oligarchy with zero middle class, its worked great historically in Russia, Cuba, Germany and currently in China. All hail the cult of trickle down economics, sooner or later it has to work....amirite?

File: C__Data_Users_DefApps_AppData_INTERNETEXPLORER_Temp_Saved Images_1492108200900.jpg (30KB, 321x320px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 321x320px

>>737419823
Not him, but how is that ironic? Are you sure you know what irony even means?

>>737409146
You're proving his point, chucklefuck.