Bad news......... - Miata Turbo Forum - Boost cars, acquire cats.

Welcome to Miataturbo.net   Members
 


General Miata Chat A place to talk about anything Miata

Reply
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 10-14-2010, 02:41 PM   #1
I'm Miserable!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 370
Total Cats: -13
Thumbs down Bad news.........

http://www.usatoday.com/money/indust...ol14_ST2_N.htm

Ethanol has only 65.8% as much energy as gasoline. A car that gets 25 miles per gallon on gasoline would get 24.1 mpg on E10 and 23.7 on E15.
spd579 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2010, 02:46 PM   #2
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,813
Total Cats: 1,780
Default

welcome to 1910. it's also more expensive and has a bigger "carbon footprint"
Braineack is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2010, 02:58 PM   #3
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Batavia, IL
Posts: 604
Total Cats: 0
Default

So that's 1 mpg less. Say you have a 10gal gas tank, you fill about every week. That's 10 miles you lose per week. 10 miles from a 25mpg car is 2/5ths of a gallon of gas you lose per week. Multiply .4gal and 52weeks and that's 20 gallons of extra gas you have to buy per year. Big deal.

Plus, I assume it will bring gas prices down a little bit, so it probably evens out.
Cococarbine3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2010, 03:00 PM   #4
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,813
Total Cats: 1,780
Default

no, it increases costs. there's zero benefit to this gov't forced intervention. the cost of corn went up. the cost of gas went up. the gov't forced food to be used for gas production and not food. the CO benefits are negated.
Braineack is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2010, 03:01 PM   #5
Tour de Franzia
iTrader: (6)
 
hustler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Republic of Dallas
Posts: 29,114
Total Cats: 351
Default

A+ thread.
hustler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2010, 03:03 PM   #6
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Batavia, IL
Posts: 604
Total Cats: 0
Default

lame.
Cococarbine3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2010, 03:08 PM   #7
Elite Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Kingston, Ontario
Posts: 2,791
Total Cats: 71
Default

So, what your telling me OP is that you finally can explain why you need 30-40% more fuel?

Thanks, you cleared it up! Energy potential of gas /= energy potential of E85
shlammed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2010, 03:09 PM   #8
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,454
Total Cats: 80
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
no, it increases costs. there's zero benefit to this gov't forced intervention.
Everything the gov't does benefits a special interest group. In this case, supposedly "the family farm", which in reality, are the likes of ADM and Cargill, behemoth Corn corporations. The first step was Bush's Ethanol bill. This is the next step.

Every time the gov't passes an economic interventionist law, they are redistributing wealth from the majority to a small group. Because it reduces overall productivity, it's a net negative. A negative-sum game.

The majority of the public do not know the word "CORPORATISM". It is when Big Biz and Gov't get in bed together. "Regulations" are passed, sold as "good for energy independence" or what-have-you, which in reality are written by the Big Players, often at the expense of the smaller players - because the big boyz have the big budgets for lobbying.

Corporatism is against the basic principles of Free Market Capitalism. Corporatism distorts the free market. Because the word Corporatism is not in the Newspeak Dictionary, many are misled to believe that lobbying is part of the "free market" and thus more gov't is needed to control the "evil corporations" who want "more free market". This plays into the hands of Big Biz. The solution is not more gov't - the solution is to neuter the gov'ts ability to write economic interventionist laws. The power to write economic interventionist laws is the power to dole out economic favors. This it NOT to say that the gov't should not prosecute fraud or violation of other basic laws, those are proper roles for gov't.

Being pro free market is NOT the same as being pro Big Biz. The reason Big Biz loves regulation, is because they have the budget for it, and can influence it to smother their smaller competitors, by writing regulations which are disproportionately more expensive for the little players. Here is the phenomenon of "Regulatory Capture":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture
Quote:
Regulatory capture occurs when a state regulatory agency created to act in the public interest instead acts in favor of the commercial or special interests that dominate in the industry or sector it is charged with regulating. Regulatory capture is a form of government failure, as it can act as an encouragement for large firms to produce negative externalities. The agencies are called Captured Agencies.
For public choice theorists, regulatory capture occurs because groups or individuals with a high-stakes interest in the outcome of policy or regulatory decisions can be expected to focus their resources and energies in attempting to gain the policy outcomes they prefer, while members of the public, each with only a tiny individual stake in the outcome, will ignore it altogether. Regulatory capture refers to when this imbalance of focused resources devoted to a particular policy outcome is successful at "capturing" influence with the staff or commission members of the regulatory agency, so that the preferred policy outcomes of the special interest are implemented.
Regulatory capture theory is a core focus of the branch of public choice referred to as the economics of regulation; economists in this specialty are critical of conceptualizations of governmental regulatory intervention as being motivated to protect public good. Often cited articles include Bernstein (1955), Huntington (1952), Laffont & Tirole (1991), and Levine & Forrence (1990). The theory of regulatory capture is associated with Nobel laureate economist George Stigler, one of its main developers.
The risk of regulatory capture suggests that regulatory agencies should be protected from outside influence as much as possible, or else not created at all. A captured regulatory agency that serves the interests of its invested patrons with the power of the government behind it is often worse than no regulation whatsoever.
If the free market were left alone, there wouldn't be tariffs on Brazilian sugar cane Ethanol, which has a better chance of being competitive against gasoline (and would have less net CO2 output, for the AGW acolytes), than corn, which is atrocious.
JasonC SBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2010, 03:11 PM   #9
Elite Member
iTrader: (12)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 6,868
Total Cats: 66
Default

Ethanol blended gas is horseshit and I wish I had the choice to NOT put that **** in my gas tank. You can think the asshats with shitty cars and the truck/useless SUV fagamuffins for helping push that 10% ethanol garbage.
Doppelgänger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2010, 03:14 PM   #10
I'm Miserable!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 370
Total Cats: -13
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cococarbine3 View Post
So that's 1 mpg less. Say you have a 10gal gas tank, you fill about every week. That's 10 miles you lose per week. 10 miles from a 25mpg car is 2/5ths of a gallon of gas you lose per week. Multiply .4gal and 52weeks and that's 20 gallons of extra gas you have to buy per year. Big deal.

Plus, I assume it will bring gas prices down a little bit, so it probably evens out.
Point I'm making is gas miliage(efficiency) is directly related to power/engine output. The less efficient the gas the less power we make and the slower we go and possibily the more likely we are to blow engines. ALL BAD

do some math...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brake_s...el_consumption
spd579 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2010, 03:15 PM   #11
Elite Member
iTrader: (12)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 6,868
Total Cats: 66
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JasonC SBB View Post
Everything the gov't does benefits a special interest group. In this case, supposedly "the family farm", which in reality, are the likes of ADM and Cargill, behemoth Corn corporations. The first step was Bush's Ethanol bill. This is the next step.

Every time the gov't passes an economic interventionist law, they are redistributing wealth from the majority to a small group. Because it reduces overall productivity, it's a net negative. A negative-sum game.
In this case it's ménage ā trois between the gov't, big oil and the corn corp. of their choice.
Doppelgänger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2010, 03:17 PM   #12
Elite Member
iTrader: (12)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 6,868
Total Cats: 66
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by spd579 View Post
Point I'm making is gas miliage(efficiency) is directly related to power/engine output. The less efficient the gas the less power we make and the slower we go and possibily the more likely we are to blow engines. ALL BAD

do some math...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brake_s...el_consumption
Do some logic. The less energy in a given volume, the more volume is needed to make up for the loss. This is why you see guys running E85 with much larger injectors. You don't just use the same amount of volume when efficienty is decreased.
Doppelgänger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2010, 03:17 PM   #13
Elite Member
iTrader: (11)
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,982
Total Cats: 10
Default

I believe only the forced induction vehicles benefit because they can run more aggressive timing and more boost to compensate for the lower energy per unit volume of ethanol vs gasoline.
miatauser884 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2010, 03:17 PM   #14
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,813
Total Cats: 1,780
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JasonC SBB View Post
Every time the gov't passes an economic interventionist law, they are redistributing wealth from the majority to a small group. Because it reduces overall productivity, it's a net negative. A negative-sum game.

Are you trying to suggest that the nature of the individual is to be sovereign within the bounds of the natural law and that Socialistic law (or any posited law for that matter) violates individual sovereignty, no matter its promised or realized benefits, which never advantage one individual without disadvantaging another through some degree of violence?
Braineack is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2010, 03:23 PM   #15
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Warrington/Birmingham
Posts: 2,658
Total Cats: 39
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doppelgänger View Post
Do some logic. The less energy in a given volume, the more volume is needed to make up for the loss. This is why you see guys running E85 with much larger injectors. You don't just use the same amount of volume when efficienty is decreased.
OP has a point though, sure what you say is true 100% but what about the poor saps with OEM cars who have EXXX forced upon them and their dumb ECU's can't tell the difference between that and EXXX they may end up in a heap of trouble.

A few 'if's' and 'maybes' granted, but I do see the OP's point.
richyvrlimited is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2010, 03:24 PM   #16
Elite Member
iTrader: (12)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 6,868
Total Cats: 66
Default

I think he is suggesting that the government always wants to what is best for the normal citizen of it's country and that and buisness with corporations for the selfish benefit of one group of individuals is frowned upon.
Doppelgänger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2010, 03:28 PM   #17
Elite Member
iTrader: (12)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 6,868
Total Cats: 66
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by richyvrlimited View Post
OP has a point though, sure what you say is true 100% but what about the poor saps with OEM cars who have EXXX forced upon them and their dumb ECU's can't tell the difference between that and EXXX they may end up in a heap of trouble.

A few 'if's' and 'maybes' granted, but I do see the OP's point.
If we are talking about a pure gasoline vs. a +/- 10% ethanol blend...the difference is little. Between gasoline/gas blend and E85, then yes, it is a large difference...large enough that you'll see "flex fuel compatable" or something on the lines of on the car/gas cap. In such cases, the ECUs are mapped to run different trims for different fuels. It's much like how Porsches PCM can tell the difference between 87 and 93 gasoline and adjust the maps accordingly. Sure there is a loss in power (spark timing) but it's perfectly capable of getting the car around with little (15rwhp) side-effect.
Doppelgänger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2010, 03:28 PM   #18
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,813
Total Cats: 1,780
Default

I forgot businesses with corporations only employee people making 250K plus.

I also forgot what part of the Constitution that was in...
Braineack is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2010, 03:59 PM   #19
I'm Miserable!
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 370
Total Cats: -13
Default

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know the stability if e85? like on a scale for gas is the octane rating, what would e85 be equivilant to? I can see where dopelgagnger make sense by just adding volumes of it to make more power but it also has to be stable for timing advance and low detonation.....to make power.
spd579 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2010, 04:02 PM   #20
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,813
Total Cats: 1,780
Default

google?
Braineack is online now   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Walbro 255lph Fuel Pump $50 lsc224 Miata parts for sale/trade 2 10-01-2015 10:17 AM
Bad head gasket or ? shooterschmidty Engine Performance 8 09-30-2015 11:28 PM
Missing/knock at idle, can someone point me in the right direction? Mikel MEGAsquirt 4 09-28-2015 05:46 PM
Got bad Crank Angle Sensor and Random Misfire codes, but runs fine. Greasyman General Miata Chat 2 09-28-2015 11:44 AM
Squiblez 1996 Montego blue Squiblez Build Threads 2 09-22-2015 11:17 AM


Tags
e85 fml, vd thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:30 AM.