If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
35.97 mpg...
On 10/23/2010 1:01 AM, Lanny Chambers wrote:
> In article > >, > "Tim > wrote: > >> Furthermore, a 90/10 gasoline/ethanol mixture does not reduce fuel >> economy by 10% > > Back when I could still buy real gasoline in neighboring counties, I > watched my mileage bounce between 27 and 30 depending on where I filled > up. This was consistent over years. Looks a lot like 10% to me. I don't > care what Big Agriculture tells you, I have personal experience. 10% > ethanol = 10% power loss/mileage reduction...looks pretty inert from > where I stand. A total crock. > I always wondered what kind of fuel mileage a car designed to run on ethanol can get. Seems there is a south american country or two that uses domestic ethanol/alcohol? instead of gas. Supposedly, there was also a flexfuel ULEV version of the Miata that was sold in limited quantities in a few US locations. California maybe? All I remember about using alcohol in gas was that it collected moisture, and also lowered the combustion temperature. In the early 1960's, an Olds F-85 "sport" model with a V6 had an alcohol/water injection system to do just that. |
Ads |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
35.97 mpg...
On 2010-10-23 01:01:46 -0400, Lanny Chambers > said:
> In article > >, > "Tim M." > wrote: > >> Furthermore, a 90/10 gasoline/ethanol mixture does not reduce fuel >> economy by 10% > > Back when I could still buy real gasoline in neighboring counties, I > watched my mileage bounce between 27 and 30 depending on where I filled > up. This was consistent over years. Looks a lot like 10% to me. I don't > care what Big Agriculture tells you, I have personal experience. 10% > ethanol = 10% power loss/mileage reduction...looks pretty inert from > where I stand. A total crock. I believe the scientific term is either "energy density" or "specifi energy" I forget which and I'm too tired to go look it up. In a nutshell, a gallon of alcohol has about 30% less energy content than a gallon of gasoline. E10 being 10% alcohol, a full fuel tank of E10 will contain 3% less energy than 100% gasoline. (If Big Agro has ever claimed improved mileage I'd like to see that ad.) On the other hand alcohol has lower emissions, absorbs the moisture in your tank, and cleans the lines. In many cases people can make up that 3% by being meticulous with their tire pressures. cheers Don |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
35.97 mpg...
In article m>, Don Q
wrote: > On the other hand alcohol has lower emissions Not when you include all the diesel fuel burned to produce and transport it. It's a net loss for both emissions and energy efficiency. It's a gigantic boondoggle, nothing more. -- Lanny Chambers St. Louis, MO '94C |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
35.97 mpg...
On 2010-10-25 11:21:24 -0400, Lanny Chambers > said:
> In article m>, Don Q > wrote: > >> On the other hand alcohol has lower emissions > > Not when you include all the diesel fuel burned to produce and transport > it. It's a net loss for both emissions and energy efficiency. It's a > gigantic boondoggle, nothing more. And gasoline is produced and transported at zero cost and emissions? C'mon! You should check out the emission figures for those huge oil tankers plying the oceans. Seriously. I agree about the boondoggle but let's not blame alcohol itself, it's the subsidies, the greed, the politicians that can be bought... I like E10, I don't think food crops should be diverted to ethanol production. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
35.97 mpg...
Don Q wrote:
> I don't think food crops should be diverted to ethanol production. I'll sacrifice my brussels sprouts... -- XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups The Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/ |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
35.97 mpg...
On Oct 23, 1:01*am, Lanny Chambers > wrote:
> In article > >, > *"Tim M." > wrote: > > > Furthermore, a 90/10 gasoline/ethanol mixture does not reduce fuel > > economy by 10% > > Back when I could still buy real gasoline in neighboring counties, I > watched my mileage bounce between 27 and 30 depending on where I filled > up. This was consistent over years. Looks a lot like 10% to me. I don't > care what Big Agriculture tells you, I have personal experience. 10% > ethanol = 10% power loss/mileage reduction...looks pretty inert from > where I stand. A total crock. Actually, it has nothing to do with what "Big Agriculture" says or does, my comments were simply based on published scientific facts, tests, research, documented results, notwithstanding your personal, anecdotal observations (which, btw, do not even begin to resemble my personal, anecdotal observations, which are no more germane to the conversation than are yours.) Nor did I make any comments wrt the political merits or marketplace efficacy of such fuels. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
35.97 mpg...
On 10/25/2010 5:59 PM, Tim M. wrote:
> On Oct 23, 1:01 am, Lanny > wrote: >> In article >> >, >> "Tim > wrote: >> >>> Furthermore, a 90/10 gasoline/ethanol mixture does not reduce fuel >>> economy by 10% >> >> Back when I could still buy real gasoline in neighboring counties, I >> watched my mileage bounce between 27 and 30 depending on where I filled >> up. This was consistent over years. Looks a lot like 10% to me. I don't >> care what Big Agriculture tells you, I have personal experience. 10% >> ethanol = 10% power loss/mileage reduction...looks pretty inert from >> where I stand. A total crock. > > Actually, it has nothing to do with what "Big Agriculture" says or > does, my comments were simply based on published scientific facts, > tests, research, documented results, notwithstanding your personal, > anecdotal observations (which, btw, do not even begin to resemble my > personal, anecdotal observations, which are no more germane to the > conversation than are yours.) > > Nor did I make any comments wrt the political merits or marketplace > efficacy of such fuels. i have certainly heard arguments that defy the assertions of corn ethanol being green. and a quick google search coughs up lots of reputable articles that say the same. here's just one from t a well known source... http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...nol-gas_2.html |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
35.97 mpg...
Christopher Muto > wrote:
> i have certainly heard arguments that defy the assertions of corn > ethanol being green. Corn is best used for moonshine! -- XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups The Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/ |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
35.97 mpg...
In article >,
XS11E > wrote: > Corn is best used for moonshine! Well, that and tortillas. -- Lanny Chambers St. Louis, MO '94C |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
35.97 mpg...
Lanny Chambers > wrote:
> In article >, > XS11E > wrote: > >> Corn is best used for moonshine! > > Well, that and tortillas. Tortilla chips go well with moonshine. -- XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups The Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
41 MPG city Fusion Hybrid more efficient than Camry Hybrid's 33 MPG | [email protected] | Technology | 118 | February 11th 09 02:51 PM |
MPG | GT[_1_] | Alfa Romeo | 0 | July 2nd 07 01:52 PM |
MPG? | William Warren | Chrysler | 4 | October 4th 05 07:19 PM |
AT has better MPG than MT? | Bucky | Honda | 17 | June 10th 05 09:13 PM |