

| Subject: | Re: The fuel of choice of the world? |
| From: | Robert Keezer |
| Date: | Thu, 8 Sep 2005 13:55:47 -0700 |
Maybe making emissions testing mandatory nationwide will help save fuel. Where I live you don't drive unless your car passes the testing every 2 years. A properly operating fuel injection system is good for both pocket book and air quality. We in this county have to pay these fees - why not make that nationwide? ( that's ain't fair! We like unburnt fuel!) This will save fuel, as the country folks don't have to bother and as a motorcycle rider I can say that I notice the unburnt fuel as soon as I go into counties where there is no testing. You get behind a delivery truck and you choke from the fumes. It has to be universal if it's going to save fuel. I have a 2.0 Golf engine in my Westfalia and it gets up to 24 mpg at speeds under 60. But around here 60 makes you feel like you are standing still- drivers here go much more than that- the trucks are all going 65- 70. As Unca Joel pointed out, higher speeds increases wind resistance which uses more fuel. Racing is the ultimate fuel wasting, isn't it? Especially in a Vanagon, SUV's, Trucks on I-40, etc. Robert 1982 Westfalia --- Marc Sayer <marcsayer@COMCAST.NET> wrote: > Robert Keezer wrote: > > >--- Tom Sinclair <neeemo@YAHOO.COM> wrote: > > > > > > > >>This sort of bottom line thinking is a > disease > >>in this > >>country. We've been conditioned from birth to > >>put > >>everything into dollars and no sense. > >> > >> > > > >So now we should abandon our budgets and > accept > >any cost we can't afford because it's the > "moral" > >thing to do. > >Conditioned? By whom? Big-Price Brother? > > > > > No, but we should stop looking only at the > initial costs. We should shop > the best value, not the cheapest price. As a > former engine builder I can > attest to how this bottom line mentality drives > consumers to purchase > the cheapest rebuilt engine available, even > though they may only last > 30,000 miles. They may end up buying 5 of these > $1500 turkeys to get > 150k more out of their car, instead of buying > one decent $5000 engine > that will get them at least 150k. They'll spend > more money in the long > run on the rebuilts themselves, and more money > and/or time on the swaps. > A friend of mine who builds the best race > engines I have ever seen, > charges between $10k and $15k for his 4 > cylinder motors. I have never > known one of his motors to not last at least a > full season (unless the > owner did something stupid, I am talking about > normal race use) and many > will last several full seasons. But folks hear > that cost and balk. So > they go one of his main competitors who sells > supposedly similar engines > for $4500. Thing is their engines seldom last > more than one or two > races. The average racer will buy 3 or 4 of > these engines in a season. > So who is actually paying less? On a per race > basis my friend's engines > will average about $1500, whereas the > competition's engines on a per > race basis will average out to around $3300. > And my friend's engines > will make more power to start with, and a lot > more power near the end of > a race. Price does not indicate value, a lesson > Americans have seemingly > forgotten. > > Environmental costs are as much a part of > operating expenses for a > vehicle as anything. Just ask the folks who > have had to pay for > pollution clean up through their taxes. And > just because others aren't > being responsible, does not excuse us for our > actions. This used to be a > concept most kids had mastered by 1st or 2nd > grade. > > -- > Marc Sayer __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Have something to add on this topic today? Revive this thread in the forum »