Article about Texas goaltenders

[Jeff Hopkins '82]

"Dying is easy.  Comedy is hard"

[billhoward]

[Q]jeh25 Wrote:

 [Q2]billhoward Wrote:

 writing isn't all that hard. Not rocket science. It's five W's and an H. It's finding stuff to write about, digging, and making it interesting, that's hard. ... remember: If journalism was really hard, it wouldn't be journalists doing it. ...
(Ask me how I know.) [/Q]
How about simple math skills? Is that too much to ask for?

I found a glaring math error in a WSJ article from this weekend.

They claimed the break even point for the added cost on the MB E320 CDI is 40k miles.  They're just a bit off; the correct number is 28350.  That's not exactly a rounding error...[/q]

Didn't see the article yet but if it's time to get back your investment on a diesel motor, it could vary depending on projected gas vs. diesel cost per driving mile and if the reporter was really sharp he'd include in a time value of the money not spent for the diesel (that calculation never happens). The Journal's auto writers, the main ones, especially Joe Healey, are bright guys, and they are like pit bulls when they sense a weakness in GM or Chrysler earnings and they're getting BS'd by the executives, which happens -- well, all the time. They're fine on math. Don't know about some others. BTW, the Journal's auto writers don't seem to (all) hate cars, which is not something you can say about other "transportation" writers at big papers and magazines.

As a reporter way back, I carried an HP35C to do math and the nice thing was, no one ever asked to borrow it a second time. Word got around: "What good is it? No "equals" key." I tried to help a reporter from Smith or Holyoke (she was cute, I was hopeful) with some city budget figures. It was like $88 million up from $82 million. We devided 88/82 and I showed her the display: 1.07something. "So the budget will go up 1.07%? That's not so bad when you do it as a percentage," she said.

[billhoward]

[Q]Jeff Hopkins '82 Wrote:

 "Dying is easy.  Comedy is hard"[/q]

You mean, like:

"What's the secret of " -- "Timing!" -- "great comedy?"

[jeh25]

[Q]Bill said:
Didn't see the article yet but if it's time to get back your investment on a diesel motor, it could vary depending on projected gas vs. diesel cost per driving mile and if the reporter was really sharp he'd include in a time value of the money not spent for the diesel (that calculation never happens). The Journal's auto writers, the main ones, especially Joe Healey, are bright guys, and...They're fine on math
[/q]

[q]Marty said:
OK, I'll bite the added cost of what? The fancy trunk insignia? For those of us who can barely guess that you're talking about a Mercedes please shed a little light.

Also no short cuts, I want to see all your calculations or I'm only giving you partial credit!
[/q]

Sorry. Yes, I was talking about the payback time on the new common rail direction diesel engine in the  Mercedes Benz E-class. I really wasn't looking to beat the fuel economy horse anymore, but since you asked...

For the gearheads in the room, this ain't your fathers oldsmobile (ie loud and slow). The E320 CDI does 0-60 in 6.8s, 0.3s *faster* than the gasoline version. The CDI is 2 decibels louder at idle (44 v. 42 dB) and 4 decibles quieter at  full-throttle (72 vs 76 dB). Can you tell I want one?

Anyway, as per the article, the CDI costs $575 more than the gasoline version. They assumed that both diesel and gasoline were both $2/gallon. This is not a bad assumption averaged over a year as diesel is more in winter but cheaper in summer. I then used EPA combined numbers from www.fueleconomy.gov. The CDI gets 30 (27/37) while the gas V6 gets 23 (20/28). So where does that leave us?

Gas  28339 miles / 23 mpg = 1232.13 gallons x $2/gallon = $2464.26
CDI  28339 miles / 30 mpg =  944.63 gallons x $2/gallon = $1889.27
                                                        -------------
                                                          $574.99 saved on fuel

Thus, at 28339 miles, the CDI owner has made up the extra cost on the engine.

At 40k, the CDI owner is ahead by $236 and has used 406 less gallons of fuel.
At 60k, the CDI owner is up $642 and has used 609 less gallons of fuel.

For comparison, break even on the Passat TDI occurs even sooner.  VW only charges $205 more for the TDI over the 1.8T so you break even at just 13239 miles. ::burnout::

In short, Japanese hybrids are very cool, but modern German turbodiesels get the job done much cheaper and you don't need to wait a year to get one. Meanwhile, Detroit just doesn't get it. Jeep charges an extra $1,635 for the CRD Liberty. Better yet, Ford charges an extra $5100 on the F250. ::screwy::  

(And for the record, Micaela is working the 6pm to 9am Labor and Delivery shift at the hospital, so no, I don't have anything better to do.)

jh
--

[KeithK]

Just to be nit-picky, did the WSJ include any of the details of their 40k calculation?  You have a number of variable parameters in there that effect the result.  If they used different numbers their results may be different but it wouldn't be a "math error".  (Yes, the difference is very significant so you'd need very different input, but I'm just saying...)

[billhoward]

A straight MPG comparison would be off, say, if you commuted in LA/Orange County. Diesels use virtually no fuel idling or moving slowly, which is why Europeans love them as taxicabs.

I drove the BMW turbodiesel in Europe this summer and it *hauls*. And it's being superceded by a twin-sequential turbodiesel that is a tick or two faster than Mercedes, in the range of 6 seconds 0-60 in a 5 Series. The two turbos are in line, a tiny one that spools up in a hurry off the line and a bigger one for oomph once you're, say, passing somebody else. No matter what decibel figures you're quoted, inside the cockpit there is essentially no difference vs. gasoline-fueled, and outside you do hear a bit more clatter than a gasoline engine, enough to be noticeable to American ears but not to Europeans used to noisier diesels.

Prius and so forth are the poster children for fuel economy and clean air, but diesels may have a greater impact, especially now that we've go low-sulfur fuel coming in 2006. Europeans love diesels because they are concerned about global as much or more so than emissions, whereas American rules pretty much focus on fuel economy.

Americans will pay thousands not hundreds more for diesels - when you put them in crew cab pickups that haul 7500-pound boats and need lots of torque.

[dss28]

[Q]billhoward Wrote:

 [Q2]Jeff Hopkins '82 Wrote:

 "Dying is easy.  Comedy is hard"[/Q]
You mean, like:

"What's the secret of " -- "Timing!" -- "great comedy?" [/q]

 ::laugh::

Tragedy is what happens to me.  Comedy is what happens to you.

[jeh25]

[Q]KeithK Wrote:

 Just to be nit-picky, did the WSJ include any of the details of their 40k calculation?  You have a number of variable parameters in there that effect the result.  
[/q]

Valid question. They did not.

[q]
If they used different numbers their results may be different but it wouldn't be a "math error".  (Yes, the difference is very significant so you'd need very different input, but I'm just saying...)[/q]

Absolutely.  

However, as a reality check, I recalculated the break even point assuming 100% city and 100% highway miles as the 2 extremes.  100% city gets you a break even point of 22179 miles  while 100% highway is 33095 miles. (This seemed backwards to me until I realized that greater highway efficiency for both means a lower cost per mile, meaning you need more miles to make up the $575 difference.)

Anyway, unless they made some really wierd ass assumptions, I just don't see how they arrived at 40k miles. You can't drive more than 100% highway. And if they made wierd ass nonintuitive assumptions, they should have told us so.

[Al DeFlorio]

[Q]jeh25 Wrote:
Anyway, unless they made some really wierd ass assumptions, I just don't see how they arrived at 40k miles. You can't drive more than 100% highway. And if they made wierd ass nonintuitive assumptions, they should have told us so.[/q]
If maintenance costs were higher with the diesel, it would push out the breakeven point.

[Gabe Heafitz 98 04]

[Q]RichH wrote:
4) LF outfield seats, Oakland (with the drum guys and flags)
[/Q]
Continuing off-topic discussion...

Rich, let's just say that I heartily disagree with you.  The Oakland Athletics' fan base is downright pathetic, and a great deal of those who do show up for games show no class whatsoever.  The Coliseum wasn't even half full for the deciding game of the playoff series against the Yanks in 2001.  Even espn.com included a note after that game about how the A's fans were characteristically absent.

I don't hate the Red Sox, but I thoroughly detest the Mets and the A's.

(whew...  Okay, deep breath...)

[Josh '99]

[Q]Gabe Heafitz 98 04 Wrote:
Rich, let's just say that I heartily disagree with you.  The Oakland Athletics' fan base is downright pathetic, and a great deal of those who do show up for games show no class whatsoever.  The Coliseum wasn't even half full for the deciding game of the playoff series against the Yanks in 2001.  Even espn.com included a note after that game about how the A's fans were characteristically absent.

I don't hate the Red Sox, but I thoroughly detest the Mets and the A's.[/q]Wow, that part about the Mets certainly seemed to be a non sequitur...   ::uhoh::

[KeithK]

[q]Rich, let's just say that I heartily disagree with you. The Oakland Athletics' fan base is downright pathetic, and a great deal of those who do show up for games show no class whatsoever. The Coliseum wasn't even half full for the deciding game of the playoff series against the Yanks in 2001. Even espn.com included a note after that game about how the A's fans were characteristically absent. [/q]My feeling is that the Atheltics fans base is pretty good - such as the guys with the drums.  It's just very small.

[KeithK]

[q]Anyway, unless they made some really wierd ass assumptions, I just don't see how they arrived at 40k miles. You can't drive more than 100% highway. And if they made wierd ass nonintuitive assumptions, they should have told us so. [/q]There's also the price of fuel.  A quick web search (http://www.eia.doe.gov/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/wrgp/mogas_home_page.html) shows that the average US gas price is about $1.80 right now.  $1.90 is probably a good yearly average for 2004, but  $1.60 is better for 2003 (and lower before that).  Using your all highway numbers you'd need a fuel price of around $1.65 to get a 40k breakeven point.  (Diesel fuel prices show similar trends.)  So the figure cited in the article imay not be far off using 2003 or earlier prices for fuel.  Obviously as the price of fuel increases the value of fuel efficiencies increases as well.

If the discrepency is due to using out of date data then it's bad reporting (and lack of understanding of how to use data), not bad math.

[RichH]

[Q]Gabe Heafitz 98 04 Wrote:

 [Q2]RichH wrote:
4) LF outfield seats, Oakland (with the drum guys and flags)
[/Q]
Continuing off-topic discussion...

Rich, let's just say that I heartily disagree with you.  The Oakland Athletics' fan base is downright pathetic, and a great deal of those who do show up for games show no class whatsoever.  [/q]
Fair enough, but I was speaking specifically of that one section with the drum guys and flags, not the entire fan base.  Just like the RF bleachers at Yankee Stadium have a completely different fan experience than sitting anywhere else in that building, same goes for the other places I mentioned.  In another section of the Oakland Coliseum, I saw a fan throw a battery at Shawon Dunston, and I have my own opinion of the Oakland fans, in general.  If I were talking about overall fan-bases, then obviously Boston, Philly, et al. would be on the list.

I stand corrected on the Japanese games, as I've never been to a game.  I just judge by what I see/hear on TV.  All the others, I have had first-hand experiences.

[Steve M]

Well for as good as a fan base as we have at Cornell, no one seems to have much to say, either here or on USCHO, about this weekend's big games against Dartmouth and Vermont.  I haven't seen Ari's column either.  Isn't anyone pumped up for the first games at Lynah in over a month, against two very good teams no less?  Are the students back from winter break yet?  I sure wish I could be there this weekend.