Date:         Thu, 8 Sep 2005 13:55:47 -0700
Reply-To:     Robert Keezer <warmerwagen@YAHOO.COM>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         Robert Keezer <warmerwagen@YAHOO.COM>
Subject:      Re: The fuel of choice of the world?
In-Reply-To:  <43209667.1050905@comcast.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1

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