Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 17:01:17 -0700
Reply-To: Stephen Grisanti <bike2vcu@YAHOO.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Stephen Grisanti <bike2vcu@YAHOO.COM>
Subject: Re: Cleaning up your Vanagon
In-Reply-To: <32553662.2549.1254265937351.JavaMail.mcneely4@127.0.0.1>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
" I do wonder about the heavy oil we are recommended to use (15W50 or 20W50)
increasing fuel demand. "
As I understand multigrade oils, they work at low temps like the lighter (lower of the two numbers) grade and at high temps like the heavier grade, thereby providing uniform performance over a wide operating temperature range.
As for improved economy, lower with skinny tires and full belly pan may be the way to go. You first.
Stephen
--- On Tue, 9/29/09, Dave Mcneely <mcneely4@COX.NET> wrote:
From: Dave Mcneely <mcneely4@COX.NET>
Subject: Re: Cleaning up your Vanagon
To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
Date: Tuesday, September 29, 2009, 7:12 PM
Al, you make important points. One quibble. Is the Zetec cleaner?
I've heard that it cannot pass California emissions test. Waterboxers
properly maintained pass, don't they? Or am I completely off on this
one? Where I live, the politicians and citizenry are insufficiently
enlightened to require emissions tests. Oklahomans generally think
pollution is a good thing, it smells like money (27% of the state's
economy is directly due to the oil industry).
I do try to keep my vanagon up to snuff, properly tuned and so on. I do
wonder about the heavy oil we are recommended to use (15W50 or 20W50)
increasing fuel demand. Or is that a myth, too?
Dave Mc
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 5:44 PM, Al Knoll wrote:
> With all the talk over bad polluters, and the half truth that some not
> all
> of our beloved road divas are among them, perhaps we need to consider
> making
> our vanagons better citizens.
>
> As a start, to reduce total pollutants measured in pollutants per
> mile, just
> drive it fewer miles. This is the simplest solution.
>
> Keep it tuned, and aligned, and the tires (o no Mr. Bill) inflated so
> you
> maximize your miles per gallon thus minimizing your pollutants per
> mile.
>
> Change the oil often. Change the air filter often. Change the fuel
> filter
> often. Might help, can't hurt.
>
> Drive 55, proven to enhance MPG, after all it is a touring car, so
> tour.
>
> Road rage is what happens when you have a 130mph 50K$ 15MPG
> 'investment' and
> you spend most of your time with your teeth clenched surrounded by
> your
> fellow man on the superslab at 20MPH stop and go.
>
> More expensive options include upgrading gearing, tires and wheels and
> brakes, and the pollution device, the legendary wasserp*sser engine,
> with
> its 1980s engine management technology.
>
> What if you could improve your fuel economy by 30%? You get 24mpg
> instead
> of 18mpg or so. A motor with a modern engine management system emits
> far
> less pollutants on a bad day than the WP does on it's best day. If
> your
> fool consumption drops by 30% so does the pollutants per mile. er ah
> 'fuel
> consumption' it should be.
>
> The options are out there. Zetec, Subaru and others to be sure. All
> a
> cleaner solution than you can ever have with the WP. Not inexpensive
> and
> you'll never get all the expense back but it will make you feel better
> and
> run cleaner. AND your impact on the state of global affairs didn't
> involve
> making a new car with all the inherent unspoken environmental impact
> that
> that entails.
>
> You could move to NYC and ride public transit or walk and just pass
> the diva
> on to some appreciative soul who promises not to sacrifice her in her
> dotage
> as a 'clunker' to a future 'discount' on a brand new fluffmobile in
> which
> you cannot sleep.
>
> What else does the group.wisdom think would improve our sorry lot?
>
> Pensionerd.
| 
