Drove a Hybrid. Impressed?

Taxi operators are such idiots. They are switching from LPG Fords to Prius in droves.

They are switching to ex Govt expensive toys. Hybrid Camrys for the most part.  Built with Kevs subsidys for fleet use. They are cheap to buy currently. I have seen a hybrid Camry with LPG stickers on the plates. Not sure what that is about,,, a hybrid on LPG with the electic motor?  Or the electrics have died and the engie was converted to gas.

The operators I am talking too are regretting buying them. but their is a lack of LPG Fords and Commys to be bought currently.

Remember 3/4 of the cabs in use are ex fleet, generally govt cars. The hybrid Camrys were subsidised for fleet use. New Camrys as cabs are still fleet use.

Well having lived "this close" to the arctic circle for half my life, I can tell you without reservation, you have no idea what you're talking about with respect to summer sun. The further north you go, the more sun you have in the summer. You pay dearly in the winter mind you, but even at the 63rd parallel, the sun only bounces off the horizon before heading back up in summer.

There is a price premium on hybrid because it's still being sorted, and people are willing to pay to appear green. I bought a hybrid because my deep pockets and short arms saw a Lexus that my better half liked at a (used) price I found hard to argue. It was less than same-year local BMW X3 units and bigger inside.

I saw a fleet of hire cars (almost Taxis) near here that has switched from Commodores and Falcons to hybrid Camrys. Morons.

Lotsa hybrid Camrys as NYC cabs. Can't fit two big bags in the trunk. Peachy.

Tomrrow hitting another Avis for a full size. Will decline the Fusion this time.

They are switching to ex Govt expensive toys. Hybrid Camrys for the most part.  Built with Kevs subsidys for fleet use. They are cheap to buy currently. I have seen a hybrid Camry with LPG stickers on the plates. Not sure what that is about,,, a hybrid on LPG with the electic motor?  Or the electrics have died and the engie was converted to gas.

The operators I am talking too are regretting buying them. but their is a lack of LPG Fords and Commys to be bought currently.

Remember 3/4 of the cabs in use are ex fleet, generally govt cars. The hybrid Camrys were subsidised for fleet use. New Camrys as cabs are still fleet use.

 

Kev's subsidies were the same subsidies that existed in car manufacturing in Australia for aeons. What he did was attach a condition that the fuel efficiency of locally built cars was to improve.

 

Toyota built to Camry hybrid.

Holden built the Cruze.

Ford was going to build the Focus, but changed their minds and did the 2l turbo Falcon (why didn't they do a Diesel Falcon?).

Read my post re solar panels. On a commercial scale they seem to be a good thing. But 10000 tiny power stations generating with big subsidies is a rip off for the people who dont or cant play the game. A LOT of buildings are unsuitable with orientation to the sun, or being shadowed by other development. And many people dont want butt ugly panels on the front of their premises. Again an orientation problem.

 

The subsides weren't that big and only affected the purchase price - they are not on-going.

 

Depending on where you are, power companies offered very good feed-in tariffs - on a temporary basis. After a certain period of time these feed-in tariffs will drop back down to a fraction of the retail power price.

 

I do not believe that the solar panel subsidies affects other power users in any way. The subsidies came from governments (Federal and State) and not the electricity wholesalers or retailers. 

 

The solar panels may affect the price for other users by reducing demand for electricity, the retialer or wholesaler recovering income by increasing price.

 

The effect of the RET on electricity prices is due to large scale renewables - like wind power and large scale solar.

 

As for the longevity of solar panels, a local retailer is advertising their solar panels with a 30 year guarantee.

Remember 3/4 of the cabs in use are ex fleet, generally govt cars.

That might be the case in that small backwards town where you live but it is not the case in the rest of the world or even the rest of Australia.
For a bloke with 40+ years of experience in the motor industry you don't seem to know much.

I am practical and think! I keep my eyes and ears open. Any purported saving from a hybrid car is offset by a far higher purchase price and maintenance costs. That is simple math by talking to Toyota workshop people.  I have worked in the motortrade for over 40 years. So have more idea than most experts who read an internet spiel!

 

Read my post re solar panels. On a commercial scale they seem to be a good thing. But 10000 tiny power stations generating with big subsidies is a rip off for the people who dont or cant play the game. A LOT of buildings are unsuitable with orientation to the sun, or being shadowed by other development. And many people dont want butt ugly panels on the front of their premises. Again an orientation problem.

That's all good and well for right now, regardless of how right or wrong you may be. But it definitely doesn't tell you anything about the future of these technologies as you purported to know in your earlier post. It suggests your views are based on assessments made one time and held forever, rather than re-examining them every once in a while. So that 40 years of experience kind of works against you, the way you make absolute statements about the future.

LN - you are probably wasting your time - arguing with fervent Greenie/Leftie/Warmists is about as much use as arguing with a Creationist. You will never change their precious ridiculous beliefs.

That might be the case in that small backwards town where you live but it is not the case in the rest of the world or even the rest of Australia.
For a bloke with 40+ years of experience in the motor industry you don't seem to know much.

Dont know about elsewhere. SA cabs have always been ex fleet cars for the 'private' owners. Yellow for instance buy new, with a subsidy. Though some of their cars are still subcontracters who buy used.

AFAIK the same happens in other cities too. Different states different rules both for vehicle age, color etc. The similarity though is tired rattle trap vehicles driven by these days mostly Eastern types. Last year with 4 cabs in one day I had a variety,, an absolutely buggered and dangerous 380 Mitsi, A Commodore, a Hyundia van and an XR6 Ford which was by far the nicest. It was clean, drove nice and the driver could drive! Pity about the yellow paint!

As Saudoso said, Camrys, worse Prius have bugger all boot space and with a Prius very little rear legroom either.

People I know out for an evening have sent away a Prius as they do not fit! Two middle aged couples.

That's all good and well for right now, regardless of how right or wrong you may be. But it definitely doesn't tell you anything about the future of these technologies as you purported to know in your earlier post. It suggests your views are based on assessments made one time and held forever, rather than re-examining them every once in a while. So that 40 years of experience kind of works against you, the way you make absolute statements about the future.

WTF. I am talking about now. Where we live. I doubt a hybrid vehicle will get cheaper to maintain in the next decade. And that is still without the enviro concerns recycling the batteries and electric components. Or the added safety risk in an accident which is very real. Hybrid may be an acceptable city car,, but how many people can afford to maintain, yet alone purchase a city car, and one to go away on holidays in? I live in Australia where many travel long distances for work or pleasure. And there is not a repairer in every town to fix your toy city car. Unfortunatly there is often no repairers at all now.So you have a wait for a tilt tray and the expense of accomodation and trying to get home.

This too does apply to many Euro  cars too. Talking too an ex late larger VW owner today. It was a lovely car until it broke down half way to Sydney and had to be carried to Sydney for repairs. Only cost half the cars value in towing and repairs, extra travel costs and an air fare to Sydney to pick it up again. He now has a Commodore,,, it has been recalled twice but has yet to break down on two subsequent trips to Sydney. And does not use any more fuel.

 

And I am bloody certain the sun will still shine the same next century! And it will still be more economical to generate power with economies of scale. Wether they burn something, use nuclear to heat water or use big solar arrays. The ONLY reason these silly solar panels everywhere is the government will not, cannot spend the money to do it properly. And 'Green' initiaves that X amount of power has to be generated green. Wind, while viable is unreliable and too expensive. They operate all of those windfarms [scale of economy] with large subsidies. The said solar panels are subsidised. That is the reason South Australia, closely followed by the rest of the country now has the worlds most expensive electricity. And getting dearer.

And to build windfarms, manufacture solar panels has large envirmental concerns. As does burning coal ofcourse though that is FAR cheaper. Nuclear is by far the cleanest, until something goes wrong.. And all those waste issues! 

WTF. I am talking about now. 

 

 

Electric/ hybrid vehicles will never make economic sense anywhere. 

And 'Green' initiaves that X amount of power has to be generated green.

That is large scale power generation. It has nothing to do with rooftop solar.

 

Wind, while viable is unreliable and too expensive. They operate all of those windfarms [scale of economy] with large subsidies.

The wholesale price of wind power is cheaper than coal-fired power stations.

 

It may surprise you to know that fossil-fuel power stations are also subsidised. This government denies it, but it is set to be a topic at the G20 summit.

 

I have seen estimates of between $12b and $17b per year in subsidies for fossill fuel generators. From the federal government alone. Queensland is said to be tipping in around $8b per year.

 

 

 

That is large scale power generation. It has nothing to do with rooftop solar.

 

The wholesale price of wind power is cheaper than coal-fired power stations.

 

It may surprise you to know that fossil-fuel power stations are also subsidised. This government denies it, but it is set to be a topic at the G20 summit.

 

I have seen estimates of between $12b and $17b per year in subsidies for fossill fuel generators. From the federal government alone. Queensland is said to be tipping in around $8b per year.

 

 

 

 

Coal is worse on so many levels. It is bad for the environment and has an affect on people's health. The rates of asthma, for example, are significantly higher in areas around power stations.

 

The other thing is that the windfarms and solar panels the environmental concerns are largely gone once they are installed. 

 

Coal powered stations, on the other hand, continue poluting their whole life.

 

Wind power is far more expensive than base load. That has been in the media often. And official Government releases too.Crowing how green they are, we are saving the earth by paying more for electricity!

The NEM means unless the rates are high the sails are not turning.  As for Green,, all that concrete? And not so quiet either. I have visited a few of the sites, woosh woosh woosh. And the ones at Editburg too had the occasional big CLUNK that you could feel through the ground. This at the one with all the info written up about the windfarm. Evidently the service life of these units is not great either,, so more big cranes replacing wind sails and those big generators. They are viable, BUT never at base load pricing. Again, we have lots, one of the reasons we have the WORLDS most expensive electricity. Oh and they only work when the wind is blowing. They do need a fair breeze to operate. If the wind is not there they do not produce!

http://theconversati...will-work-13210

http://cleantechnica...wer-myth-video/

http://www.skeptical...eload-power.htm

Wind power is far more expensive than base load. That has been in the media often. And official Government releases too.Crowing how green they are, we are saving the earth by paying more for electricity!

The NEM means unless the rates are high the sails are not turning.  As for Green,, all that concrete? And not so quiet either. I have visited a few of the sites, woosh woosh woosh. And the ones at Editburg too had the occasional big CLUNK that you could feel through the ground. This at the one with all the info written up about the windfarm. Evidently the service life of these units is not great either,, so more big cranes replacing wind sails and those big generators. They are viable, BUT never at base load pricing. Again, we have lots, one of the reasons we have the WORLDS most expensive electricity. Oh and they only work when the wind is blowing. They do need a fair breeze to operate. If the wind is not there they do not produce!

 

A study commissioned by the review into the Renewable Energy Target (a review which, predictably given the hand picked fossil fuel industry panel, recommended winding back or closing the RET) found that the RET cost the average household $50 extra per year.

 

Other studies have shown that the cost is about 4%. In the short term. In the longer term, those studies show that the RET will reduce power prices in 6-7 years.

 

Yes, there is lots of concrete in wind farm towers. But there is also plenty of concrete and steel in coal-fired power stations. And then you have to feed the coal-fired power stations coal for the rest of its life.

 

The service life of a wind turbine is ~20 years. After which its life may be extended by an overhaul.

Edited by Wuzak, 23 September 2014 - 02:20.

Just got home yesterday from a 3 month trip through Europe and a couple of things that particularly impressed me were a) the obvious commitment to sustainable energy in some countries - particularly Denmark and Germany, and b) really, really impressed after a drive in a Teslar S.
In Germany, as you drive along, there is an obvious dramatic influx of solar installations on houses, barns, factories etc, and in some places you see hectares of solar panels, some fixed, some self-aiming, but it is not uncommon to see paddocks of a couple of hectares of just solar panels, or a huge factory with a similar footprint of solar panels alongside.
Hundreds/thousands? of wind-turbines as well, particularly in Denmark, which doesn't surprise me since most days it would blow a brown dog off a chain...
In Norway I was offered a drive of a Teslar S and, as an admitted sceptic, I have to say that I was impressed....ok, I was really blown away!
After almost 30 years in the car-business, I have driven or owned far more cars than most except those with similar background, and I have to say that I was very, very impressed with the Teslar.
I found it somewhat un-nerving in that there was zero aural feed-back, eerily silent, but that apart, it went like buggery, (try 0-100kph in 4.6sec!) loved the handling, I loved the style, and with some reservations about range (supposedly 300-550km) and enough accessible re-charge stations, I was really surprised and impressed. Really impressed!
In Norway, they are apparently the country's biggest selling car - which I find amazing, but aided enormously by huge government incentives, which range from ( so I am informed, so please don't jump on me if I err in detail) completely tax-free ( and in Norway this is huge!) free tolls, free parking, free ferries (again a huge issue in rural Norway) use of taxi-lanes, and the list goes on....
But, having driven one, I am almost embarrassed to admit, I have gone from a complete sceptic to a very reluctant, but none-the-less, resigned enthusiast.
To all my fellow sceptics, I say - Go and drive one!
As an old dinosaur, I can sniff the scent of an ice-age on the horizon....

Edited by seldo, 02 October 2014 - 13:08.

I think you can pretty reliably judge the collective IQs of a country's energy planners based on the proportion of renewable capacities they are bringing online. Even notwithstanding climate change, relying on imported hydrocarbons to fuel one's energy needs is short sighted and likely to drive bad policies that extend beyond energy policy and right into foreign relations and long term economic viability. That Norway, the petrostate of the north, is obviously moving towards renewable infrastructures speaks quite well of their policy makers.

Nah, the thing about Norway and electric cars is it was mostly a case of politicians trying to boost domestic business: http://en.wikipedia....ki/Think_Global The current very pro-EV rules have a deadline and it remains to be seen what happens afterwards.

Basically tax free is correct for the tesla in Norway. There has been some noise about it going free on ferries so that has been stopped some places probably by now. Its dirt cheap compared to piston engined cars of similar quality/class. about half or more is safe to say without actually checking prices. Cars in Norway got ridiculus taxes. So we drive some old shitboxes often. I was in Germany for the Innotrans fair and i noticed alot of new cars. Only saw old cars that where classics or entusiast cars.

 

I really do hope solar power keeps improving. It is a low maintenance, no noice installation that blends with roofs++ and does not kill bird of prey like windmills do. There is alot of noice about windmills on the mountain tops etc.. in Norway.

Edited by MatsNorway, 02 October 2014 - 19:54.

Germany of course is building new brown coal powered power stations, because the renewables are intermittent and require 100% backup from conventional sources.

But, having driven one, I am almost embarrassed to admit, I have gone from a complete sceptic to a very reluctant, but none-the-less, resigned enthusiast.
To all my fellow sceptics, I say - Go and drive one!

Elon Musk's strategy has been impeccable so far. High end sports car (if a little "prototypish") in the Roadster followed by a high end sports/luxury vehicle in the Model S (in a market where retail prices are high enough to absorb the high cost of the long range battery and a network of fast-charging stations).

 

The Model S has established Tesla's credibility with investors and the next generation of EV buyers. Who can doubt that Tesla's mass-market EV will be a huge success when it is launched?

Edited by gruntguru, 03 October 2014 - 07:46.

Teslas have become pretty common to see hereabouts since the 'S' was introduced. Seems like a nice, well thought out car from all I hear. Not perfect by any means, but what car is?

The Model S has established Tesla's credibility with investors and the next generation of EV buyers. Who can doubt that Tesla's mass-market EV will be a huge success when it is launched?

Moi.

Niche is one thing, high volume manufacturing, not to mention marketing, quite another. Not saying he can't pull it off, but it is not a foregone conclusion.

Germany of course is building new brown coal powered power stations, because the renewables are intermittent and require 100% backup from conventional sources.

 

Renewables don't require anything like 100% backup from conventional sources. 

 

Whilst I'm bullish on the long-term prospects for renewables, it's worth noting that the abundance of solar power in Germany came at the cost of cripplingly-expensive government subsidies which have had to be wound back.

Aren't Germany's new coal power stations to replace decomissioned nuclear plants?

Yes, that too.  Another brilliant idea!  So much of what they've done recently almost seems designed to increase carbon emissions.  I know there are more criteria to deciding energy policy than just carbon emissions, but still...

Nuclear power is just the worst imo. Nuclear waste is no joke. Id rather have global warming than that crap. US, USSR, japan++ has shown that we are not capable to handle it safe enough.

Edited by MatsNorway, 04 October 2014 - 20:16.

Nuclear power is just the worst imo. Nuclear waste is no joke. Id rather have global warming than that crap. US, USSR, japan++ has shown that we are not capable to handle it safe enough.

 

Well, that's one of the $64 trillion questions - do we prefer a (possibly / eventually / etc) ruined world with no nukes, or nukes but a less-polluted world?

Actually, I think the world has shown that we are very capable of handling nukes safely.  Take away the utter incompetence of the Japanese in siting, designing and managing Fukushima, and the record for nuclear power has been pretty bloody good over the last quarter-century.

Nuclear power is just the worst imo. Nuclear waste is no joke. Id rather have global warming than that crap. US, USSR, japan++ has shown that we are not capable to handle it safe enough.

 

What about France?

We'll probably need to react at least the existing mountains of nuke waste just to make them less dangerous in any case, but current reactor technologies were designed almost as much to create bomb fuel as power. Newer designs are likely to be much cleaner but nobody seemingly wants to develop and build them.

I think you can pretty reliably judge the collective IQs of a country's energy planners based on the proportion of renewable capacities they are bringing online. Even notwithstanding climate change, relying on imported hydrocarbons to fuel one's energy needs is short sighted and likely to drive bad policies that extend beyond energy policy and right into foreign relations and long term economic viability. That Norway, the petrostate of the north, is obviously moving towards renewable infrastructures speaks quite well of their policy makers.

 

I quite like the scenery in france... Huge 2 block NE stations with 2 wind turbines in front, to promote green energy..

Nuclear power is just the worst imo. Nuclear waste is no joke. Id rather have global warming than that crap. US, USSR, japan++ has shown that we are not capable to handle it safe enough.

 

Sorry to say but this is just plain wrong.. Nuclear waste (from energy producing stations) is a non issue.. Not even accounting for breeder reactors and fuel reprocessing, the sheer energy density of the thing means that even if you leave it cooled in the pools within reactor buildings they occupy so little space that you can just lock up the whole thing after 30-40-50 year lifespan of the reactor, throw away the key... and build a new one right next to it..

Your wasting your time. Birth defects due to radiation is just horrible. And im never gonna think nuclear power is ok just so we can have our streetlights on when there is no one there.

Care to quote a relevant study on that?

Nuclear worries me too. Both safety [largely adressed] and the waste. Which is probably not quite the problem it is made out to be. BUT is very poorly managed by too many countries.

But it is a lot cleaner than anything else. And produces large volumes of power compared with anything except coal.

But nuclear still scares me!

Fusion will, I'm convinced, become practical before long. Lockheed and the University of Washington have recently announced significant progress towards a practical fusion reactor design and considering its potential very little has been spent researching and developing the technology.

Yeah, all those casualties from 3 mile island.

Fusion will, I'm convinced, become practical before long. Lockheed and the University of Washington have recently announced significant progress towards a practical fusion reactor design and considering its potential very little has been spent researching and developing the technology.

 

 

There is also the ITER reactor being built.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITER

 

http://www.iter.org/mach

 

This is supposed to be commissioned and operating about 2020.

 

 

Then there is this:

http://www.extremete...-density-of-gas

 

Not too sure about that one.

Is this the old anti-hybrid?

Hyper-mile Jag XJS  http://www.theregist...ficient/?page=1

Is this the old anti-hybrid?

Hyper-mile Jag XJS  http://www.theregist...ficient/?page=1

World wide many have solved the Jaguar fuel consumption, oil consumption and leaks. They fitted a V8. Most common is a Chev but many have fitted Holden V8s Fords, even a Leyland V8.

Is this the old anti-hybrid?

Hyper-mile Jag XJS  http://www.theregist...ficient/?page=1

Basically, all he has done is the same thing that all the manufacturers have done with their current cars. The modern day equivalents of a XJS now show respectable economy figures whilst still being very fast.

 

Of course, back in the day, the XJS was often extremely economic on fuel.  It didn't use any during its frequent breakdown periods.....

That might be the case in that small backwards town where you live but it is not the case in the rest of the world or even the rest of Australia.
For a bloke with 40+ years of experience in the motor industry you don't seem to know much.

 

 

Dont know about elsewhere. SA cabs have always been ex fleet cars for the 'private' owners. Yellow for instance buy new, with a subsidy. Though some of their cars are still subcontracters who buy used.

AFAIK the same happens in other cities too. Different states different rules both for vehicle age, color etc. The similarity though is tired rattle trap vehicles driven by these days mostly Eastern types. Last year with 4 cabs in one day I had a variety,, an absolutely buggered and dangerous 380 Mitsi, A Commodore, a Hyundia van and an XR6 Ford which was by far the nicest. It was clean, drove nice and the driver could drive! Pity about the yellow paint!

As Saudoso said, Camrys, worse Prius have bugger all boot space and with a Prius very little rear legroom either.

People I know out for an evening have sent away a Prius as they do not fit! Two middle aged couples.

Chatting to the (middle aged Anglo-Saxon) driver of a Prius taxi in Brisbane recently. They are all changing to Prius - fuel costs are 1/2 compared to LPG Falcon. They only buy new. Queensland law dictates taxis be less than six years old and the economics of 2 y.o. ex Govt vehicles doesn't  stack up.

Lotsa hybrid Camrys as NYC cabs. Can't fit two big bags in the trunk. Peachy.

Tomrrow hitting another Avis for a full size. Will decline the Fusion this time.

I am just catching up on this thread and just saw this.

 

The practical side of these vehicles is interesting. After my last visit to NYC I was moving on to Montreal. I (wife really!) had quite a lot of luggage. It could not get into a Crown Vic cab (classic fuel). When we got to Montreal the cab in line was a Camry. I expressed my doubts that it could take our luggage and suggested a minivan. The cabbie laughed as I had explained about the NYC Crown Vic and showed me how his Camry swallowed all our gear. It sounds as though a Hybrid Camry is a pointless vehicle to use as a cab.

 

My point is that, whatever the technology used, the vehicles need to be useful.

Mercedes rules in Norway. of the mercs it is E class 90% of the time. ofc there is toyotas too. Not that much priuses mind you.

Lots of Prius cabs in the UK these days.  It used to be all Skoda Octavias and Superbs*, but now the Prius has made a lot of inroads.  Don;t know why, but cab drivers usually figure out the best option for them, so they must give some advantage.

 

* outside London, that is. The Smoke is still in thrall to the wretched black cab.  Which is great if you want to wear a top hat.

Chatting to the (middle aged Anglo-Saxon) driver of a Prius taxi in Brisbane recently. They are all changing to Prius - fuel costs are 1/2 compared to LPG Falcon. They only buy new. Queensland law dictates taxis be less than six years old and the economics of 2 y.o. ex Govt vehicles doesn't  stack up.

The Prius is an imported 4 seat car. The hybrid Camry is an Australian built 5 seat. Why would you ever use a Prius?  The only reason is they are cheap ex govt!

And last Sat night  a young bloke I know who works in the biggest Toyota dealership in town says they cannot afford their costs,,twice plus what the cabs pay normally,  but they are the only ones that can diagnose and or repair numerous faults. All hybrid owners know about loan cars! but you cannot use them as a cab!

The hybrid Camrys are sold very cheap to the big companies, so as to sell the things. Remember they are a well subsidised car under Kevs plan a few years back. But only the big operators can get the depreciaiton to make them viable, the rest are still buying used ex govt fleet for less than half new price. Though the govt fleets are hanging on to the cars longer, it was as little as 20000km and 12 months, now it is sometimes 100k and 3 years. Making the resale very little.

Since government did not pay stamp duty nor sales tax on their fleet they made money selling the things off in 12 months. But it seems they have to pay GST and in some cases stamp duty. So not really good for stimulating the economy or selling new locally made cars. Though Govt fleets with fully imported models gets up a lot of people noses. And remember hybrids are as green as a nuke dump!

Yes, I'd forgotten that lurk that the government awarded itself. This depresses the resale price of off-lease cars, so it affects the price fleets will pay for new cars, so the manufacturers were being bitten by the government! Personally I've always thought fleet sales were a dud move.

Remember they are a well subsidised car under Kevs plan a few years back.

 

Every car made today has some form of government subsidy.

 

Falcons, Camrys and Commonwhores were subsidised before Kev, and have been after Kev, The deal Kev made was that for continuing subsidies the manufacturers would need to make more efficient models. Hence the Cruze, Hybrid Camry and Ecoboost Falcon.

Chatting to the (middle aged Anglo-Saxon) driver of a Prius taxi in Brisbane recently. They are all changing to Prius - fuel costs are 1/2 compared to LPG Falcon. They only buy new. Queensland law dictates taxis be less than six years old and the economics of 2 y.o. ex Govt vehicles doesn't  stack up.

 

 

The only reason is they are cheap ex govt!

 

So you're calling my cabbie a liar?