|
What Will GE Force Its People To Drive Now
|
Told you the Volt was dead...
On Mon, 5 Mar 2012 21:36:09 -0600, Boating All Out
wrote: What's your point? That's also well known. To be clear, my point in posting is to refute your suggestion that oil futures - and oil prices - are determined by producers and consumers and classical supply/demand fundamentals. Oil prices are determined by Wall Street speculators. Nothing to do with market fundamentals. === Nothing at all? Interesting world you live in. |
What Will GE Force Its People To Drive Now
On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 14:18:13 -0500, JustWait wrote:
On 3/5/2012 1:58 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 13:33:35 -0500, wrote: On 3/5/2012 11:03 AM, Happy John wrote: On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 09:51:10 -0500, wrote: On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 09:19:14 -0500, X ` Man wrote: On 3/5/12 9:12 AM, Happy John wrote: On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 08:33:12 -0500, wrote: On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 08:20:52 -0500, Happy wrote: On Sun, 04 Mar 2012 21:57:19 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Sun, 04 Mar 2012 18:48:21 -0500, wrote: They said they were gonna' do it. I know most of you here aren't bothered by the price of gas, but that nearly 75 extra dollars a week we are spending is killing us.... === I think everyone is affected by the price of gas to one extent or another. My suggestion to people who do a lot of driving is to get a more fuel efficient vehicle if at all possible. My truck is getting expensive at $80+ per fill up. I find it very strange that we don't have the large variety of small, fuel efficient diesels like they do in Europe. My gut feel is that it is yet another head-in-the-sand Detroit issue. Last year we drove a full size Volkswagon diesel van through the mountains of France, Switzerland and northern Italy. It had plenty of power, seating for 6 adults, and a huge amount of luggage space. Average fuel economy was better than 20 mpg. Good point. If the VW diesel van had not been withdrawn from the US market, that's probably what we'd have been doing our camping in. Of course, the Mercedes Sprinter is available, but they ain't cheap. What you just bought is way more beterer :-) Well, it's definitely roomierer! Lots of room to store a spare 500-gallon fuel tank? :) Seriously, what sort of mileage do you anticipate? I hope you get at least 10 mpg. I'd be tickled pink if my barge got even close to 10 MPG. I expect to get about 12-14 with the trailer. I'm considering one of these, but don't know if they're worthwhile: http://www.bullydog.com/product.php?ID=2 I think I'll start a separate thread to see if anyone knows anything about them. And, BTW, I don't think Harry can ask something serious, which is why I responded to you. If that thing can get your engine to open it's mouth wider it might be worth the 600 bucks. Otherwise dunno what you can do. A few of the camping forum guys recommend getting the smog crap off the engine. But, they don't get specific enough. You'll void any warranty you have doing that. IIRC, it's a federal rap too.... Maybe that's just if a garage does it... Kevin's warranty comment lead me to get out the warranty book again. I'd thought the warranty was for three years or 36000. But, the Duramax is for five years or 100,000 miles. Now all thoughts of any engine mods are out the window for a couple years! |
What Will GE Force Its People To Drive Now
In article , dump-on-
says... On 3/5/12 2:18 PM, JustWait wrote: On 3/5/2012 1:58 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 13:33:35 -0500, wrote: On 3/5/2012 11:03 AM, Happy John wrote: On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 09:51:10 -0500, wrote: On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 09:19:14 -0500, X ` Man wrote: On 3/5/12 9:12 AM, Happy John wrote: On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 08:33:12 -0500, wrote: On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 08:20:52 -0500, Happy wrote: On Sun, 04 Mar 2012 21:57:19 -0500, Wayne.B wrote: On Sun, 04 Mar 2012 18:48:21 -0500, wrote: They said they were gonna' do it. I know most of you here aren't bothered by the price of gas, but that nearly 75 extra dollars a week we are spending is killing us.... === I think everyone is affected by the price of gas to one extent or another. My suggestion to people who do a lot of driving is to get a more fuel efficient vehicle if at all possible. My truck is getting expensive at $80+ per fill up. I find it very strange that we don't have the large variety of small, fuel efficient diesels like they do in Europe. My gut feel is that it is yet another head-in-the-sand Detroit issue. Last year we drove a full size Volkswagon diesel van through the mountains of France, Switzerland and northern Italy. It had plenty of power, seating for 6 adults, and a huge amount of luggage space. Average fuel economy was better than 20 mpg. Good point. If the VW diesel van had not been withdrawn from the US market, that's probably what we'd have been doing our camping in. Of course, the Mercedes Sprinter is available, but they ain't cheap. What you just bought is way more beterer :-) Well, it's definitely roomierer! Lots of room to store a spare 500-gallon fuel tank? :) Seriously, what sort of mileage do you anticipate? I hope you get at least 10 mpg. I'd be tickled pink if my barge got even close to 10 MPG. I expect to get about 12-14 with the trailer. I'm considering one of these, but don't know if they're worthwhile: http://www.bullydog.com/product.php?ID=2 I think I'll start a separate thread to see if anyone knows anything about them. And, BTW, I don't think Harry can ask something serious, which is why I responded to you. If that thing can get your engine to open it's mouth wider it might be worth the 600 bucks. Otherwise dunno what you can do. A few of the camping forum guys recommend getting the smog crap off the engine. But, they don't get specific enough. You'll void any warranty you have doing that. IIRC, it's a federal rap too.... Maybe that's just if a garage does it... What would Rush do? Call it foul names, of course. Oh, then when sponsers and such start dropping like flies, profusely apologize. |
Told you the Volt was dead...
In article m,
says... On 3/5/2012 2:00 PM, iBoaterer wrote: In raweb.com, 5@ 5.com says... On 3/4/2012 10:56 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In b.com, says... On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 10:36:10 -0500, wrote: In , says... http://deathby1000papercuts.com/2012...g-the-plug-on- a-government-funded-electric-lemon/ Told you, and you laughed...snerk Sometimes it pays to look at the world with an open mind... Has nothing to do with the technology and everything to do with the sales. Snake oil doesn't sell well in The good old USA By the way, you sound a teensy bit more masculine than you did when you posted as plume. Which leads to the question. Are you male, female, or something else? Hint for the misinformed: I never posted as "plume". If you stop using phrases that, plume exclusively, uses, you might be believed. Cite? Yup. That's one. Too bad you have no idea what in hell you're talking about! |
What Will GE Force Its People To Drive Now
In article , says...
On 3/5/2012 5:12 PM, wrote: On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 14:14:47 -0500, X ` Man wrote: A few of the camping forum guys recommend getting the smog crap off the engine. But, they don't get specific enough. You mean, break the law? "Take the smog crap off" worked in the 70s when emission control was a clumsy add on to a conventional engine. These days the computer is your smog control. You can certainly tune the computer for more power and less for economy but the most efficient burn will usually also give you the least emissions. I bet a new NASCAR racer would pass the 1975 emission controls at anything but idle speed. Fuel consumption is important to them too. Well, as to the emissions crap, if you take it off any new gas engine, it won't run... Period. Correct, everything is computer driven. Start unhooking things, and it won't run. |
What Will GE Force Its People To Drive Now
On 3/6/2012 7:53 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 20:06:14 -0500, X ` Man wrote: On 3/5/12 7:43 PM, JustWait wrote: On 3/5/2012 7:26 PM, BAR wrote: In , says... In , says... On 3/4/2012 5:20 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Sun, 4 Mar 2012 13:35:14 -0500, wrote: The jury is in on electric cars. They are the future. The problem is that there hasn't been enough R&D to make them feasible yet. The hybrid, gas-electric, is just a diesel-electric locomotive downsized with the added benefit of pulling the electricity generated from breaking and coasting to charge the batteries. The all electric needs needs work with storing enough power to be useful over a longer period of time and distance. === I think we both agree on most of those points. Where we seem to disagree is whether or not it makes sense to roll out half a loaf. Knowing full well the limitations of half a loaf, I still say yes. The reason being that getting some electric cars on the road starts to get people thinking about the infrastucture issues (like charging stations and better batteries). Same thing with alternative energy like wind and solar. If you don't start rolling some of this out to the public you end up with a perpetual chicken and egg syndrome where you can't have the chicken because you don't yet have an egg and vice versa. There are also a lot of people whose transportation needs would be well served right now by a car like the Volt. The problem is price of course, and prices will not come down until there is economy of scale, with the engineering and tooling costs amortized across a wider base. I could use a Volt right now if the price was right. It would be great for running short errands and the like, running on gas for the occasional longer trip. The problem Wayne, is the administration is trying to make these cars feasible by raising the cost of the alternatives so they have talking points... Right now it takes almost ten years to recover the price of the car, when they get the gas up to 8 dollars a gallon, they can say "look, you recover your investment in three years!"... They said they were gonna' do it. I know most of you here aren't bothered by the price of gas, but that nearly 75 extra dollars a week we are spending is killing us.... New technology bad.... FOX tell me. Never install version 1.0 software. Never purchase the first versions of anything. Let someone else work out the bugs. What is Plum talking about with the "Fox tell me" crap.. The desperate whining of someone with no platform.. "The difference between Engineers and Technicians is, Engineers can draw it on paper, it takes a technician to actually make it work... :) More of the undereducated trashing those with educations. Apparently, you've never worked with an engineer that has no practical experience (or common sense). Note to Universe: Being Highly Qualified (which, in today's PC world means having papers) does NOT make one competent. cite= YKW -- O M G |
What Will GE Force Its People To Drive Now
In article , says...
On 3/5/2012 5:12 PM, wrote: On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 14:14:47 -0500, X ` Man wrote: A few of the camping forum guys recommend getting the smog crap off the engine. But, they don't get specific enough. You mean, break the law? "Take the smog crap off" worked in the 70s when emission control was a clumsy add on to a conventional engine. These days the computer is your smog control. You can certainly tune the computer for more power and less for economy but the most efficient burn will usually also give you the least emissions. I bet a new NASCAR racer would pass the 1975 emission controls at anything but idle speed. Fuel consumption is important to them too. No way... It's important but there is no way they get that good of a burn without a catalytic converter... They sure will! They've been completely engineered to operate as efficiently as possible from conception on up, without a need for a catalytic converter. |
What Will GE Force Its People To Drive Now
In article , says...
On 3/5/2012 9:33 PM, wrote: On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 17:33:50 -0500, wrote: On 3/5/2012 5:12 PM, wrote: On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 14:14:47 -0500, X ` Man wrote: A few of the camping forum guys recommend getting the smog crap off the engine. But, they don't get specific enough. You mean, break the law? "Take the smog crap off" worked in the 70s when emission control was a clumsy add on to a conventional engine. These days the computer is your smog control. You can certainly tune the computer for more power and less for economy but the most efficient burn will usually also give you the least emissions. I bet a new NASCAR racer would pass the 1975 emission controls at anything but idle speed. Fuel consumption is important to them too. No way... It's important but there is no way they get that good of a burn without a catalytic converter... If the engine was designed with a catalytic converter, you will have problems if you take it off. I'm pretty sure NASCAR doesn't run Cats, and he said NASCAR.. I wasn't trying to be an ass, but I don't see NASCAR passing Emissions here in CT anyway. Too much unburned gasoline at any RPM. And yes, I actually posted this knowing it was Greg and if I am wrong, I will see a cite fairly quickly;) The OP said 1975 emissions. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:34 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com