“Slick, constantly moving surface” has nothing to do with wave action. It can be a stationary, gravel lot and the wave would lift the car regardless of the parking brake.

What they’re talking about is the bucking of the ferry. Not waves on the ramp, but rough water in general will cause cars to slide back and forth if the parking brake isn’t set, especially the dipshits who park 18" behind the bumper of the car in front of them instead of leaving a large enough gap to walk through like…

He was parked on an egress ramp, with front wheels a minimum of three feet above the ramp height. If a big enough wave came along to break that SUV loose, there would be total carnage in the first 4-5 rows of cars on the main deck. The captain asked everyone to remain seated and not move around the ship. This is not a…

Neither, really. The ferries on these routes are 330-460 ft in length and draft at 16-18 ft, with the double-ended deck plenty above the waterline. The ends of the car ramps are sloped and they have to meet the dock ramps at varying heights throughout the day—Puget Sound has a tidal swing of over 16ft.

This was just…

I’d be trying to get moles into BMW and MB, or try to reverse-engineer their diesel emissions to ID how they’re supposedly able to do what VW can’t- produce competitive diesels meeting current emissions standards.

No, 1 out of every 6 cars or so should be going faster than the speed limit, by design. Cars preventing the normal flow of traffic are a greater safety risk, a inefficient use of the roadway causing increased congestion, and an economic drag on the community.

Just because you’re going 3mph over and the car behind you…

No, it isn’t. It’s completely normal.

Except that the report and Blackstone both disagree with the hyperbolic claims. Even though he blew the normal interval and clearly didn’t take good care of the car, Blackstone specifically says that the long oil run doesn’t explain the metal, and instead signals some other maintenance neglect or engine problem.

That’s…

Yeah, no. Post your UOA. Unless you’re tracking the car, all of those synthetics should be fine for 7-12K miles.

It doesn’t diminish anything about the study. It’s simply that you are misstating its conclusion. The study found overall averages that were uniformly higher in the VW. That is not coterminous with your statement of “every circumstance”. Higher average != always higher. That’s all.

The actual NOx production curves of…

Right, but did you look at the standard deviation between runs (and I believe that it was only 2 runs per car)? Very little deviation, so being averaged doesn’t really diminish the point that I was making.

These are real world emissions. That means that the other “legal” vehicle also did not meet the US standard in real world operation, but it beat the VW in every circumstance by up to 12 times.

Not even remotely. NOx is less than 0.5% of tailpipe emissions, and its overproduction means nothing unless you also calculate all the components where a given VW outperforms the emissions standards to arrive at a total net number. There is no evidence—none, whatsoever—that the average VW pollutes more than the…

Yes and cars in the 1890s were routinely electric. Nevertheless, after decades have passed and other engineering concerns have taken the industry in a different direction, it’s no longer relevant. Cars like the EV1 and Tesla’s lineup have still introduced new technology to the market. Cylinder deactivation is also a…

Why would they do that? Apples and oranges.

So it’s actually harder for light trucks to meet the standards since they burn more fuel to travel the same distance.

Actually, the best place to sit if you’re terrified of turbulence is directly over the wings, and in the center segment of the plane if it’s a two-aisle widebody.

For me, the issue is that I paid a premium for a car that was highly rated in the emissions category. If I’d known the car was polluting well over the legal limit, I wouldn’t have bought it.

Sad to see the buying model (No Haggle, No Hassle) is going away, too.

Did you read that piece? It confirms that adverse effects aren’t even a rounding error on ambient NOx exposure. More people are affected by the increased use of electrical generation to power cars than by these diesel emissions.

The handwringing has been old from day one. Just like the “40x” number has been bandied…