belair6162
Well Known Member
took this on my home from work today, happy Memorial weekend 
New 409 piture
- Thread starter belair6162
- Start date
took this on my home from work today, happy Memorial weekend
New 409 Picture
Tom,
Saw that price yesterday at another Mobil station on 14 mile between Woodward & Southfield. They also sell E-85 so I filled-up with E-85 at $3.29 per/Gal. With my daily driving habits now changed, easy with the pedal off the lights. (No fun any more):evil. I just brake even on that fuel cost per mile. The Tahoe was geting 10.3 miles/gal ($.397 per mile)
: on reg, now 8.3 miles/gal ($.395 per mile) with E-85:.
Dave
Tom,
Saw that price yesterday at another Mobil station on 14 mile between Woodward & Southfield. They also sell E-85 so I filled-up with E-85 at $3.29 per/Gal. With my daily driving habits now changed, easy with the pedal off the lights. (No fun any more):evil. I just brake even on that fuel cost per mile. The Tahoe was geting 10.3 miles/gal ($.397 per mile)
: on reg, now 8.3 miles/gal ($.395 per mile) with E-85:.Dave
Can't have it both ways
Ive been following the E-85 thing for a little while now...
A flex-fuel vehicle is a compromised solution to begin with. The engine should be optimized to burn one or the other. Anything else, like one built to burn both, is a compromise that yields alot of inefficiency on the E-85 side.
Want to burn E-85 and use alot less of it???
Get the cubic inches down !!!!!!
Chevrolet engineers concluded in 1957 that 283 cubic inches of displacement for its size, weight, and output fulfills almost all US passenger vehicle requirements, except for trucks, of course. Now, consider that this is at a time when the typical passenger car was 17+ feet long and weighed 2-tons.
That was 51 years ago, so what sparked the displacement (horsepower) wars of the 60's???
CHEAP GAS!!!!!!!!! If gasoline was "expensive" for American consumers to buy in 1960. The MK-IV would never have seen the light of day, NEVER!
Those days of abundant and cheap fuel are long, long, gone and are never coming back, no matter how fondly we like to look back on that time.
And, since we all know that an engine is little more than an efficient air pump, more displacement, means moves more air per revolution, means the more fuel it needs to run.
Still think that over 400 cubes is sexy??? I dont, not anymore. Not when I have listen to it idle along burning through gallons of fuel crawling up and down the freeway everyday.
Get the CR up where where it needs to be, get a carb, intake, head, cam combo optimized to burn alcohol, and change gears.
EGR, catalytic converter, and restrictive exhaust??? Helps with emmisions on an engine burning gasoline, useless for engines burning E-85. Efficient intake, efficient exhaust is the real answer.
You're lucky in as much as you can buy that fuel where you are. Not available to the public where I am.
I would convert my Stingray over to E-85 only in a second , if I could only buy the fuel. Even with a 283, a Mustang wouldn't be able to keep up with it.
Rock :eek:
Ive been following the E-85 thing for a little while now...
A flex-fuel vehicle is a compromised solution to begin with. The engine should be optimized to burn one or the other. Anything else, like one built to burn both, is a compromise that yields alot of inefficiency on the E-85 side.
Want to burn E-85 and use alot less of it???
Get the cubic inches down !!!!!!
Chevrolet engineers concluded in 1957 that 283 cubic inches of displacement for its size, weight, and output fulfills almost all US passenger vehicle requirements, except for trucks, of course. Now, consider that this is at a time when the typical passenger car was 17+ feet long and weighed 2-tons.
That was 51 years ago, so what sparked the displacement (horsepower) wars of the 60's???
CHEAP GAS!!!!!!!!! If gasoline was "expensive" for American consumers to buy in 1960. The MK-IV would never have seen the light of day, NEVER!
Those days of abundant and cheap fuel are long, long, gone and are never coming back, no matter how fondly we like to look back on that time.
And, since we all know that an engine is little more than an efficient air pump, more displacement, means moves more air per revolution, means the more fuel it needs to run.
Still think that over 400 cubes is sexy??? I dont, not anymore. Not when I have listen to it idle along burning through gallons of fuel crawling up and down the freeway everyday.
Get the CR up where where it needs to be, get a carb, intake, head, cam combo optimized to burn alcohol, and change gears.
EGR, catalytic converter, and restrictive exhaust??? Helps with emmisions on an engine burning gasoline, useless for engines burning E-85. Efficient intake, efficient exhaust is the real answer.
You're lucky in as much as you can buy that fuel where you are. Not available to the public where I am.
I would convert my Stingray over to E-85 only in a second , if I could only buy the fuel. Even with a 283, a Mustang wouldn't be able to keep up with it.
Rock :eek:
In yesterdays paper the congress got some interesting answers from the CEO`s of the big oil companies.
The interesting answers?
They all stated that the price of a barrel of crude should be in the range of $50 to $60 a barrel !!
Now those of you that believe that the commodity market should be able to dictate the price of oil are out to lunch !!
The problem lies with the wrong people being in the market to begin with.
Speculators should not be allowed to puchase futures in oil !! PERIOD !!
Only the oil companies should be able to purchase futures in oil.
On the ethanol side of the game ,,, it is a joke !!
Include all the costs and energy to produce a gallon of ethanol and you would see that it cost way more to produce than the benifits it has.
Remember that your tax dollars are used to subsidize it`s cost to keep the prices low.
So in reality ethanol is the BIG joke !!!
Lets start using the shale oil in the mountain states, build new refineries and watch the price of fuel go way down.
We all know we are getting screwed at every turn and right now only the greedy are smiling,,,,
The interesting answers?
They all stated that the price of a barrel of crude should be in the range of $50 to $60 a barrel !!
Now those of you that believe that the commodity market should be able to dictate the price of oil are out to lunch !!
The problem lies with the wrong people being in the market to begin with.
Speculators should not be allowed to puchase futures in oil !! PERIOD !!
Only the oil companies should be able to purchase futures in oil.
On the ethanol side of the game ,,, it is a joke !!
Include all the costs and energy to produce a gallon of ethanol and you would see that it cost way more to produce than the benifits it has.
Remember that your tax dollars are used to subsidize it`s cost to keep the prices low.
So in reality ethanol is the BIG joke !!!
Lets start using the shale oil in the mountain states, build new refineries and watch the price of fuel go way down.
We all know we are getting screwed at every turn and right now only the greedy are smiling,,,,
New 409 picture
I'm not jumping up on my soapbox and saying E-85 is a better fuel to use. But if I can use something everyday thats on the market, in my area, that lowers my cash flow ($3.29 E-85 vs $4.29 reg today) I will do so in a flash.
I purchased the 2007 Tahoe (that can use E-85) because I've become to large in the BUTT:
for most of the small cars and trucks on todays market.
Checked almost every one of them out at the 2007 Detroit auto show.
Also if the need arises to tow something this Tahoe should handle just about everthing I will or can throw (tow) it's way. Be it my 62 Impala conv or my sons 62 Impala wagon he's just started on.
Dave
I'm not jumping up on my soapbox and saying E-85 is a better fuel to use. But if I can use something everyday thats on the market, in my area, that lowers my cash flow ($3.29 E-85 vs $4.29 reg today) I will do so in a flash.
I purchased the 2007 Tahoe (that can use E-85) because I've become to large in the BUTT
: for most of the small cars and trucks on todays market. Checked almost every one of them out at the 2007 Detroit auto show.
Also if the need arises to tow something this Tahoe should handle just about everthing I will or can throw (tow) it's way. Be it my 62 Impala conv or my sons 62 Impala wagon he's just started on.
Dave