You are partially correct with the first paragraph. I CAN right now put a 2000 LS1 in a 68 Camaro and not have to worry about smog or emissions, which is essentially the same. BUT when they (Congress) passes the law making emmissions tested mandatory, I will NOT be able to have that engine in the car unless it can pass emmissions for the 2000 engine.

I know there are "ways" arround it, but that defeats the point of fighting the law. I don't plan on being passive about it untill it passes then decide the right thing to do is to break the law. That is not the way the situation should be handled.

What "proper" channels are you talking about? So far the only way you can legally install the NonCARB part on a car in an Emmissions state is to declare the car for race use only and not drive it on the street, that is legally.

I am not going to get use to laws that are not in effect or ones that I can fight to not get passed. That is being LAZY!! And it isn't because I don't understand the law, I have a good understanding of them. Do you?

Don't get me wrong, I love the enviroment. I just don't think Congress should be able to tell me what I can put on MY car. Then tell me if I don't comply, they we take my car and not give it back. (granted that is a extremely simplified example)

 

I like the "idea" behind E85. Yes it is true that E85 should be 105 octane, BUT like I posted earlier, E85 draws in the contaminates out of the containers it is stored it (inground tanks, tanker trucks) with REDUCES the octane level drastically. If you were able to get E85 right from the plant, in a brand new container, that would be wonderful. But it won't happen. Also, today's current vehicles (unless otherwise stated from the manufacture) can not saftly run E85 through the fuel system, why? It desolves the fuel lines, fuel tank, injectors, and anything else that isn't made to withstand it.

E85 is essentially wonderful, but not now. In a few years maybe. You talk about the money savings in using it. $2.30 verses $3.00 Than is only $0.70 Getting less mileage out of E85 to save $0.70 isn't worth it. You will have to buy more fuel to get the same mileage as reg fuel, there goes the money savings.

 

Manbearpig...Im super cereal guys...

Nope no Gore supporters but I do love south park

 

Manufacturers will find ways around it (Tesla motors has already started) and in the end, less pollution is better than more pollution and it's hilarious that people are against higher emissions standards.

 

does this mean that everyone wil be on 91?

 

Sorry, I gotta call newbie on you on this.

As I said, tuners aren't jumping on it. If you look at it from a combustible potential, it doesn't have as much power as gasoline. Hence the drop in gas mileage. It does bring up some interesting tuning ability due to the knock avoidance, but it isn't a silver bullet.

Here's a straight quote from a pro E85 website'''The energy content of E85 is 29% less than regular gasoline."
http://www.cleanfuelsohio.org/ethanol.php?pid=3&m=88

As for your "plus its clean for the environment"...where are you facts behind that statement? When you look at the total environmental impact...including manufacture, transport and final burn, it isn't that great on the environment. Yes, it is better than gas in final burn, but total impact is the number to consider. Many studies have shown the impact is worse. About 3 months ago Car and Driver had an excellent article that was well foot noted about the over hype of E85. You should search out a little further information before making you declaration about E85.

One statement from one tuner, who has no degree in chemical engineering or any related field and a couple of Amoco commercials is probably not a suitable basis for you make you decisions about E85.

 

^ are you stupid?

who cares if it has less energy if you can make more power from it?

so you fill up more often... oh no! O.O

 

ahahahhahahahahahhah

 

Let the world end. I don't care. I would end it myself if I can, just for kicks.

 

I posted this in the off-topic section, I think many of you will find it interesting.
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...d.php?t=264427
And, in short, I think the creator of this post is delusional if he thinks that we can continue to consume resources at the rate that we are consuming them, and, on top of that, have the rest of the world catch up to our consumption rate.

 

I agree that our consumption rate is too great. But is E85 the answer to our problems?! NO. Does it help? It hasnt been proven too yet. If everyone switched to E85, will it make a huge impact to help the enviroment? Seriously doubt it. Taken from http://www.solidwaste.com/content/ne...&VNETCOOKIE=NO Is this break down of greenhouse gases.
private autos 28%
homes 29%
transit 3%
industry 9%
other business 31%

As you can see, just focusing on the automotive industry alone will not make enough of an impact. If we as a country are truely adimet about reducing greenhouse gases, we would be focusing on the other groups that cause them, not just on automobiles!

 

This thread sucks.

 

Then don't post in it please.

 

haha. unfortunately.

but fortunately also.

 

do you expect a revolution in ONE industry to solve the entire problem? that's naive. if you don't do anything about private autos which as you have cited take up MORE THAN a quarter of the emissions... then what other less significant things are you willing to ignore? i haven't ever seen a politician ignore 25% of ANYTHING. solar panels are less than 25% efficient... we should ignore those too huh?

what proof are you looking for? are you another politician wishing to DEBATE facts... i ****in' HATE that.

how would e85 help? simple... deferral in partnership with alternatives. e85 takes energy to make. growing the plant life etc etc.

IT'S RENEWABLE (deferral)

the energy going INTO making it doesn't have to come from oil. (alternative)

if we had lots of fission reactors all over the united states we could damn well use e85 and not tax the oil supply as we do now.