If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
like my boat, gallons per minute!
Actually, I had a car pass under GPM but fails when they go to PPM. Go figure. |
Ads |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 10 May 2005 11:33:51 -0400, "ed" >
wrote: >like my boat, gallons per minute! Out of curiosity, what size is your boat? Most of them don't reach the gallons-per-minute mark. The biggest containerships do about 28 gallons per minute. http://www.bath.ac.uk/~ccsshb/12cyl/ Jasper |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
John S. wrote: > "Emissons tests are mostly bull**** as cars are already pretty clean if > they are in tune." > > I disagree. If you don't have some sort of policing of pollution > standards then there is no incentive for drivers to keep their cars in > tune and sensors and converters working. Sure there is: better gas mileage and longer life of the vehicle. What's ridiculous is when we had emissions testing in Michigan, the most pollution producing vehicles, those which were 10 years or older, were exempt. Of course, it's only ridiculous if you believe that the purpose of emission testing is for pollution control and not to line the pockets of certain people. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
> wrote in message oups.com... > > > John S. wrote: > > "Emissons tests are mostly bull**** as cars are already pretty clean if > > they are in tune." > > > > I disagree. If you don't have some sort of policing of pollution > > standards then there is no incentive for drivers to keep their cars in > > tune and sensors and converters working. > > Sure there is: better gas mileage and longer life of the vehicle. > Not for everyone. I keep my vehicle in tune but I still am a strong supporter of emissions testing, even though it costs me. Why - because although the majority of people would keep their cars clean, a fairly sizeable minority of people do not. I see them all the time, these are the young kids, college students, Mexicans doing migrant working, you name it, tooling down the road belching smoke, oil and you name it. The very bottom feeders of this group are hopeless - these are the people who buy cars that are in the $300 pricerange and they don't use them - they consume them. They just keep putting gas in the thing until it stops on the side of the road, whereupon they leave it for the city to come pick up, and go buy another $300 beater and repeat the process. Those people are going to keep doing what they do as long as people with old cars sell them through private sale rather than driving them to the wrecking yard. But, the next tier up are the people who buy $1000 cars hoping to get a couple years use out of them. What invariably happens is the thing runs for 6 months then something goes wrong - maybe it's mistuned and runs too lean and burns up the catcon which plugs up - and these people are the ones that take the tailpipe off and pound a long rod up into the catcon to smash apart everything in it to remove the blockage. Why - because they have enough of a cash stream to pay $25 a week in gas to fill the car up - but they don't have the savings to drop into a proper vehicle repair. And if they get that money they are going to dump the car to the Mexicans and go buy another $1000 vehicle. Now, you can argue all you want but the fact of the matter is both these groups of car owners are a drag on society. The bottom feeders spend our tax dollars to haul away their cars. And the next tier up dump tons of pollutants into the air the rest of us breathe. Emissions testing has the effect of reducing the time that the next tier holds onto their vehicles, and gets those vehicles into the wreckers faster. > What's ridiculous is when we had emissions testing in Michigan, the > most pollution producing vehicles, those which were 10 years or older, > were exempt. > That is dumb. In Oregon, even 25 year old vehicles aren't exempt. Ted |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
"Ted Mittelstaedt" ) writes: > > wrote in message > oups.com... >> >> >> John S. wrote: >> > "Emissons tests are mostly bull**** as cars are already pretty clean if >> > they are in tune." sorry, that's not true. I baby my car but had to remove, clean, and lubricate the EGR valve to lower NOx emissions anyway. Well, not exactly, it barely passed one year but I cleaned it anyway to make sure it passed the next test which it did easily. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm warning: non-FreeNet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
"Ted Mittelstaedt" > wrote in message ... > > > wrote in message > oups.com... > > > > > > John S. wrote: > > > "Emissons tests are mostly bull**** as cars are already pretty clean if > > > they are in tune." > > > > > > I disagree. If you don't have some sort of policing of pollution > > > standards then there is no incentive for drivers to keep their cars in > > > tune and sensors and converters working. > > > > Sure there is: better gas mileage and longer life of the vehicle. > > > > Not for everyone. > > I keep my vehicle in tune but I still am a strong supporter of emissions > testing, even though it costs me. Why - because although the majority of > people would keep their cars clean, a fairly sizeable minority of people > do not. > > I see them all the time, these are the young kids, college students, > Mexicans > doing migrant working, you name it, tooling down the road belching smoke, > oil and you name it. The very bottom feeders of this group are hopeless - > these are the people who buy cars that are in the $300 > pricerange and they don't use them - they consume them. They just keep > putting gas in the thing until it stops on the side of the road, whereupon > they > leave it for the city to come pick up, and go buy another $300 beater and > repeat the process. Those people are going to keep doing what they do > as long as people with old cars sell them through private sale rather than > driving them to the wrecking yard. > > But, the next tier up are the people who buy $1000 cars hoping to get a > couple years use out of them. What invariably happens is the thing runs > for 6 months then something goes wrong - maybe it's mistuned and runs > too lean and burns up the catcon which plugs up - and these people > are the ones that take the tailpipe off and pound a long rod up into the > catcon to smash apart everything in it to remove the blockage. Why - > because they have enough of a cash stream to pay $25 a week in gas > to fill the car up - but they don't have the savings to drop into a proper > vehicle repair. And if they get that money they are going to dump the car > to the Mexicans and go buy another $1000 vehicle. > > Now, you can argue all you want but the fact of the matter is both these > groups of car owners are a drag on society. The bottom feeders > spend our tax dollars to haul away their cars. And the next tier up > dump tons of pollutants into the air the rest of us breathe. Emissions > testing has the effect of reducing the time that the next tier holds onto > their vehicles, and gets those vehicles into the wreckers faster. > Well, what the hell, why don't we just kill off all those "bottom feeders" who are too poor to afford a decent car? There you go, problem solved. After all, they're just the dregs of society, right? Too stupid or too lacking in ambition to make the kind of money and be able to by the kinds of things that the "good folk" do, might as well just get rid of them. Hey, they're probably using up a lot of other resources that should be reserved for the "good folk" too, and they probably don't bathe as often or dress as well as the "good folk" so they're just stinking up the place and creating an eyesore. Yeah, get rid of them. Of course, you'll have to fetch your own pizza, Mickey Ds and Burger King will go out of business because they can't find any employees, you'll have to clean your own toilets and office, pick your own vegetables, etc. etc. But, that's OK, right? What's that? You make your money from BK franchises? So sorry, go stand in line with the other "bottom feeders", you'll be broke soon and the rest of the "good folk" shouldn't have to wait for you to go completely down the tubes before putting an end to your wasting of their resources. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
I got a better idea - instead of bending everyone over at the inspection
station every year, why not go clean up a few coal burning power plants? NY state's cleaning one up, they claim the emissions gains are equal to removing *every* diesel vehicle registered in state from the road. That's why E checks are bull**** today - cars aren't the big polluters, stationary sources are. You can't buy a car without feedback fuel controls or one that's not garrunteed to be clean for 100,000 miles or so, yet even home heating systems don't have to meet much (if any) standards, and have no such controls. Heck, even lawnmowers don't, and you'd think EFI would be a BIG PLUS there, given how crappy the average mower runs (imagine real starting on the first pull, every time, and better economy, not to mention a boatload cleaner, AND better performance) |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
actually I made a tongue-in-cheek comment on the boat. Its more like 7
gallons /hr cruising |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Update on Arizona Emissions Bill! | Laurie S. | Ford Mustang | 3 | March 11th 05 06:32 PM |
California Emissions for 2000 Ford(49state) HELP! | TheSmogTech | Technology | 0 | January 31st 05 11:23 PM |
Arizona Emissions Alert - Important!!! | Laurie S. | Ford Mustang | 0 | January 18th 05 09:38 PM |
Drive Clean, old A2s, and NOx emissions | Garry Tarr | VW water cooled | 1 | November 9th 04 12:18 PM |