Slant Six Forum
https://www.slantsix.org/forum/

Toluene
https://www.slantsix.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=22304		 Page 4 of 6
Author:  slantvaliant [ Wed Apr 04, 2007 9:09 am ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
I'm surprised nobody has mention the option of E-85 if its available in your area.
That's a big "if", especially if you take your car on the road. I'm reluctant to set my car up for a fuel I can't count on getting in, say, Notrees, Texas or Loco Hills, New Mexico.
Quote:
It has an octane rating of 105 and its cheaper than 87.
Cheaper per gallon or per mile? There are lots of artificial factors in pricing of any fuel. We'll see how the prices go as use increases.

The fuel mileage is important to most of us, but not just from an economic standpoint. While I prefer to run on the top half of the tank, I occasionally need the full range of the vehicle. A couple of miles per gallon can mean the difference between driving and walking.

I think I'll wait and see about E85 in my Valiant. In a dedicated performance car, in an area where you have a reliable supply, go right ahead. It might help Brent's situation.
Author:  dakight [ Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:39 am ]
Post subject: 
While E85 has a higher octane rating it has significantly lower energy content. I don't recall the exact numbers but it will take about 20% more E85 to provide the same energy as conventional gasoline. That translates to somewhere around 20% fewer miles per gallon. On top of that it's scaece as hens teeth in some areas. There is none to be found in the Phoenix area and only one or two stations in Tucson. Flex-Fuel is a scam that provides a way for the car makers to do an end run around the CAFE fuel economy standards. It provides little or no real benefit to car owners.
Author:  slantvaliant [ Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:41 am ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
It provides little or no real benefit to car owners.
... unless those car owners also own stock in ADM! :lol:
Author:  dakight [ Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:46 am ]
Post subject: 
Well, I have to give you that one!
Author:  Ron Parker [ Wed Apr 04, 2007 6:25 pm ]
Post subject: 
The carbon footprint of a black helicopter is less than the carbon footprint of a coal burning railroad steam engine. I know you like that answer. Thanks Ron Parker :D










Bagels Juiced Im Bamboozled
Author:  dakight [ Wed Apr 04, 2007 6:37 pm ]
Post subject: 
Well, maybe. If you divide the value of the goods and services provided by each by the carbon emissions per mile you might see a very different picture. Hrumph, coff, coff. Now, where did Iput that bottle of Jack Daniels?
Author:  Ron Parker [ Wed Apr 04, 2007 7:22 pm ]
Post subject: 
Damn your good but let me ask you this question talking about carbon.
If a coal train leaves California going East at 35 mph and has no stops. And a coal train leaves Virgina going west at 35 mph and no stops and when they meet somewhere between the USA. What is the name of the Engineer on the West bound train and the East bound train. PS It ain Rosco P Coaltrain. This was a 5th grade math question for me. Thanks Ron Parker :D






Bagels Juiced Im Bamboozled
Author:  dakight [ Wed Apr 04, 2007 8:14 pm ]
Post subject: 
Well, you got me there... how about a hint?
Author:  Charrlie_S [ Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:48 am ]
Post subject: 
Hey, no fair. That's a trick question. There is no coal in California, so there would be no coal train leaving Calf.
Author:  slantvaliant [ Thu Apr 05, 2007 6:17 am ]
Post subject: 
Having spent part of my college Thermodynamics II class crawling around, diagramming, and analyzing a coal-fired locomotive, I can appreciate that!
Author:  CARS [ Thu Apr 05, 2007 7:17 am ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
While E85 has a higher octane rating it has significantly lower energy content. I don't recall the exact numbers but it will take about 20% more E85 to provide the same energy as conventional gasoline. That translates to somewhere around 20% fewer miles per gallon. On top of that it's scaece as hens teeth in some areas. There is none to be found in the Phoenix area and only one or two stations in Tucson. Flex-Fuel is a scam that provides a way for the car makers to do an end run around the CAFE fuel economy standards. It provides little or no real benefit to car owners.
The first statement is only true if you don't alter the engine for E85. Many have gotten more power or more economy by building a purpose built ethanol engine. (rarely if ever can you get more power and economy, but that probably has to do with the right foot :lol: )

I am luck in the second part of your reply. If i go to a high hill I can see the water vapor from 3 ethanol plants and there is atleast one pump in every surrounding town. I can even have the COOP deliver it to my bulk tank!

"Farmers give me gas!!!"
Author:  slantvaliant [ Thu Apr 05, 2007 7:37 am ]
Post subject: 
Octane rating and energy content are properties of the fuel itself, independent of the setup of your engine.

Assuming comparable states of tune in compared engines, if a fuel is less energetic, it will take more of it to do the same work.
Author:  NewLancerMan [ Thu Apr 05, 2007 11:23 am ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
Damn your good but let me ask you this question talking about carbon.
If a coal train leaves California going East at 35 mph and has no stops. And a coal train leaves Virgina going west at 35 mph and no stops and when they meet somewhere between the USA. <snip>
Do they keep going 35 mph up the hills? Those dern rockies get in the way
Author:  dakight [ Thu Apr 05, 2007 11:42 am ]
Post subject: 
I'll stand by my statement until I see convincing evidnce otherwise. There's this little quirk about the laws of physics... they are inviolable.
Author:  Ron Parker [ Thu Apr 05, 2007 7:40 pm ]
Post subject: 
Yep 35 mph and there is coal in California Florida boy. This is steam engines . But for the question lets say it is a wine train same deal same weight same what is the answer. The Answer is easy . Thanks Ron Parker :D









Bagels Juiced Im Bamboozled
Page 4 of 6 All times are UTC-08:00
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
https://www.phpbb.com/