Sign In Join 



Report Your Local Gas Prices Here

8805 messages,  Last post on Nov 27, 2009 at 11:25 AM

You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires

What is this discussion about? Fuel System


Messages Page 333 of 882
1
...
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
...
882
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#3312 of 8805
Re: lemko [fintail] by rockylee
Apr 08, 2006 (9:06 am)
Reply

Replying to: fintail (Apr 08, 2006 8:19 am)

LOL, Exactly.
 
I like Michael Savage's idea. For every 1 illegal alien we have here in the U.S. we get 1 barrel of oil per month for Mexico.
 
Rocky
#3313 of 8805
fintail by bottgers
Apr 08, 2006 (11:34 am)
Reply
I forgot, all you have available in Canada is the liberal media. To you, liberal probably seems normal.
#3314 of 8805
Re: fintail [bottgers] by rockylee
Apr 08, 2006 (11:48 am)
Reply

Replying to: bottgers (Apr 08, 2006 11:34 am)

Well I'm sure fintail, could say you are in lockstep with the minority of your party. If you've paid attention lately the "Right Wing" doesn't think this president is very Right !!!!
 
OTOH-His poll approval ratings across the board also reflect falling support, which isn't just a liberal media conspiracy.
 
Back to cars/gas......
 
Rocky
#3315 of 8805
$2.60 for 86 octane in Amarillo by rockylee
Apr 08, 2006 (11:49 am)
Reply

 
Has it reached $3.10 anywhere yet ?
 
Rocky
#3316 of 8805
Re: fintail [bottgers] by fintail
Apr 08, 2006 (12:22 pm)
Reply

Replying to: bottgers (Apr 08, 2006 11:34 am)

I'm not in Canada, but nice try.
 
The idea of the "liberal media" is a sham in itself, a distraction. Who controls the media, pray tell? There's no conspiracy or anything else the neandercons try to fool the masses with.
 
What do you want, everything to be like FOX News? Fair and balanced! ROFL
 
But yeah, everything is on the up and up, it's all hunky-dory. Be positive!
#3317 of 8805
rocky... by iluvmysephia1
Apr 08, 2006 (12:35 pm)
Reply
the one barrel of oil for every illegal here from down south would only start to make up for the Uncle Sam deficit in that deal.
 
That is forward thinking, though.
#3318 of 8805
Re: rocky... [iluvmysephia1] by rockylee
Apr 08, 2006 (1:14 pm)
Reply

Replying to: iluvmysephia1 (Apr 08, 2006 12:35 pm)

Thanxs....It wasn't my idea, but Michael Savages
 
Rocky
#3319 of 8805
While I don't buy the conservative blather... by 210delray
Apr 08, 2006 (1:58 pm)
Reply
... that some espouse in this forum, I also don't think fat-cat oil company execs sit around smoking big cigars and figuring out ways to jack up the price of gas just enough to stay beneath the "outrage" threshold. If this were the case, how did they "let" prices get as low as 80 cents a gallon as recently as 1999?
 
Similarly, I don't think it's time for a rerun of the French Revolution, bringing out the guillotines and slaughtering the ruling elite. However, it does appear some kind of comeuppance will occur in the November elections.
 
The problem is in the mirror. We sat on our hands for over 30 years, hoping the looming oil shortfall would fade away like a bad dream. Now world demand is rising rapidly, what with the Chinese rapidly moving to the automobile -- and why shouldn't they? After all, we Americans been driving cars for a hundred years. (It's like us sitting on thousands of nuclear weapons and telling other countries they can't build them also -- not that I think Iran or North Korea should.)
 
We passed the CAFE law way back in 1975, setting the average fuel economy rating for cars at 27.5 mpg, which was achieved in 1985, bounced around for a few years between that figure and 26 mpg, and finally back to 27.5 in 1990, where it's been ever since.
 
Meanwhile light trucks (including pickups, vans, and SUVs) had their own much lower standard, and until very recently, little serious attempt was made to improve their required efficiency. During these 30 years, pickups have ballooned up from a typical 3500 pounds for a C/K 10, F-100, or D/W-100 work truck to around 5000 pounds for your garden variety Silverado, F-150, and Ram 1500 (V8 extended cab, with 2WD).
 
SUVs have mushroomed from a small segment dedicated to sportsmen, farmers, ranchers, miners, forest service workers, etc. to as fintail so aptly puts it, "vacuous trophy wives" who drive(?) their leather-lined cocoons for their "look at me" factor.
 
While large comfy sedans can now get an honest 26, 28, or even 30+ mpg when driven at sensible speeds on the highway, the big pickups and midsize and larger SUVs can't realistically get out of the teens; that is, no better than the mastodon cars we were driving in the 70s.
 
Then there's the insane horsepower race -- gains in engine efficiency were squandered on ever increasing amounts of power instead of better fuel economy. Why do we need 300 horsepower Calibers, for example (SRT4 version)? The most fuel-efficient vehicle fleet was produced for the 1987 model year -- it's been downhill since.
 
Finally, people are driving at speeds on the highway that would have been considered suicidal twenty or so years ago. I had a tour bus (a stupid tour bus, of all things) ride up on my rear and flash its brights at me for having the audacity to go 65 mph (the speed limit) in the far right lane of an interstate. Even the SLOW lane isn't slow anymore.
 
I'm old enough to remember when I could get into the left lane of the PA Turnpike at 65 mph and pass a whole line of vehicles without having someone bear down on my rear. I also remember that cars routinely passed trucks -- and tour buses -- not the other way around.
 
We were warned -- many times, but we did nothing. Now the outrage.
 
What to do? Short term, if you can, drive less and carpool. I never thought it would happen, but 3 guys at my workplace started carpooling back in the Katrina panic days, and have stuck with it.
 
Hybrids and clean diesels will help in the short term also. I think ethanol from corn is a joke for cost and efficiency reasons, and hydrogen and fuel cells are a pipe dream. Does anyone know if ethanol made from switchgrass or plant stalks would be less energy-intensive (although it'd still be less efficient -- we'd need bigger fuel tanks to get the same range.)
 
Ok, enough for now, flame away!
#3320 of 8805
Re: While I don't buy the conservative blather... [210delray] by kernick
Apr 08, 2006 (3:18 pm)
Reply

Replying to: 210delray (Apr 08, 2006 1:58 pm)

you: Ok, enough for now, flame away!
 
me: au contraire; I agree with most of what you say. I also have been around long enough to experience the last 30 years of gasoline supply/price fluctuations.
 
you: The problem is in the mirror.
 
me: Exactly. And while higher gasoline prices are a problem for those living check-to-check, because of the wealth and relatively high income of the middle and upper classes, gasoline has not really affected the people who buy new cars. A typical person buying a $20K - $30K vehicle may not care whether it costs $150/month or $200/month for gas. The difference is probably less than 1% of their household income.
 
you: "vacuous trophy wives" who drive(?) their leather-lined cocoons for their "look at me" factor.
 
me: pickups and SUV's became popular when the interior comfort features became equal (or near) to cars. Many people said why buy a car when I can have a truck that does more. And many people have the $ to pay for it and the gas.
 
you: Why do we need 300 horsepower Calibers, for example (SRT4 version)?
 
me: In that case the SRT4 will get about the same mpg as the R/T model. But your point is taken about people choosing lower mpg/high hp cars over high mpg models.
 
I do have to disagree with your thought that we shouldn't advance speed limits as cars have increased power, handling, brakes, and safer designs. Speed limits were 15 mph at one time and roads were dirt. As we have advanced, I don't see any reason to stop.
 
you: We were warned -- many times, but we did nothing. Now the outrage.
 
me: I suggest instead of outrage, we improve ourselves, becoming more productive, earning more. If we increase our economic power then we will have money to purchase autos and gas. If we want to buy goods from China and such, we send money to those countries to buy autos and gas that we'd otherwise use; and secondly we take better paying jobs from here, have people in low-paying jobs, and then we have a whole bunch of people who can't afford gas (or health care).
 
It's very simple: If you want something you better make some money, and be willing to pay more for it than the other guy.
#3321 of 8805
Re: fintail [bottgers] by fintail by elgrande
Apr 08, 2006 (3:42 pm)
Reply
fintail - OK, so you're not in Canada but you fly the Canadian flag.
 
Funny how there can't be a conspiracy to control the liberal media (I don't think there's a conspiracy it's just who they are) but the "neandercons" can be a conspiracy? And somehow the oil companies can collude to drive up prices even though they're the most watched industry in the world?
 
210delray - You're right on with a lot of your thoughts. Ethanol is going to be very expensive and less efficient to develop. We need to keep doing the R&D to find alternative energies but there's a long way to go. ANWR anyone?

Messages Page 333 of 882
1
...
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
...
882
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion
To POST a message, please Sign In.

New? Join Now!

Forum Tools

Please sign in.
Email Address:

Password:

Forgot Password?

Search Forums

Enter Keyword(s)

Advanced Search

Browse by Vehicle



View All Vehicles
Advertisement
Ask the Community
See What People Are Asking

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic


View All Topics

Today's Chats

Advertisement