Plus corrosion is a big problem with gasoline engines, alcohol will
literally pour water into the crankcase. Aluminum cases will vaporize.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Bret Ludwig wrote:
>
> If you have a carburetor car you can convert to E85 but you will be
> stuck with it unless you convert back. You will need a reworked
> carburetor. We have a local expatriate Brit that runs his Land Rover
> with its two SUs on E85 in summer, and carries two spares in his parts
> box should he run out. He has all replacement fuel lines and pump and
> had the tank sloshed with alcoholproof compound, A lot of our local old
> motorcycle guys run it too, especially in old single and twin cylinder
> imported bikes. The Japanese fours are too much work to convert.
>
> The two carb approach works pretty well.
>
> The other way is to go over to a throttle body injection with an
> aftermarket ECU like MegaSquirt that supports a sensor for the alcohol.

 

L.W. ------ III (ßill) wrote:
> Plus corrosion is a big problem with gasoline engines, alcohol will
> literally pour water into the crankcase. Aluminum cases will vaporize.


Considering that a good proportion of the alcohol burning cars in
Brazil are VWs with almag cases and they are not "vaporizing", and
considering the insides of the AEIO-540 Lycs operated on E100 by a US
aerobatic team that I saw myself were as clean inside as the day they
came out of Williamsport.....I can assuredly state you are on powerful
drugs as is so often the case. No pun intended.

What led you to this imaginary idea?

 

L.W. ------ III (ßill) wrote:
> Plus corrosion is a big problem with gasoline engines, alcohol will
> literally pour water into the crankcase. Aluminum cases will vaporize.


Considering that a good proportion of the alcohol burning cars in
Brazil are VWs with almag cases and they are not "vaporizing", and
considering the insides of the AEIO-540 Lycs operated on E100 by a US
aerobatic team that I saw myself were as clean inside as the day they
came out of Williamsport.....I can assuredly state you are on powerful
drugs as is so often the case. No pun intended.

What led you to this imaginary idea?

 

L.W. ------ III (ßill) wrote:
> Plus corrosion is a big problem with gasoline engines, alcohol will
> literally pour water into the crankcase. Aluminum cases will vaporize.


Considering that a good proportion of the alcohol burning cars in
Brazil are VWs with almag cases and they are not "vaporizing", and
considering the insides of the AEIO-540 Lycs operated on E100 by a US
aerobatic team that I saw myself were as clean inside as the day they
came out of Williamsport.....I can assuredly state you are on powerful
drugs as is so often the case. No pun intended.

What led you to this imaginary idea?

 

L.W. ------ III (ßill) wrote:
> Plus corrosion is a big problem with gasoline engines, alcohol will
> literally pour water into the crankcase. Aluminum cases will vaporize.


Considering that a good proportion of the alcohol burning cars in
Brazil are VWs with almag cases and they are not "vaporizing", and
considering the insides of the AEIO-540 Lycs operated on E100 by a US
aerobatic team that I saw myself were as clean inside as the day they
came out of Williamsport.....I can assuredly state you are on powerful
drugs as is so often the case. No pun intended.

What led you to this imaginary idea?

 

Bret Ludwig wrote:
>
> L.W. ------ III (ßill) wrote:
> > Plus corrosion is a big problem with gasoline engines, alcohol will
> > literally pour water into the crankcase. Aluminum cases will vaporize.
>
> Considering that a good proportion of the alcohol burning cars in
> Brazil are VWs with almag cases and they are not "vaporizing", and
> considering the insides of the AEIO-540 Lycs operated on E100 by a US
> aerobatic team that I saw myself were as clean inside as the day they
> came out of Williamsport.....I can assuredly state you are on powerful
> drugs as is so often the case. No pun intended.
>
> What led you to this imaginary idea?

My owners manual says to only use alcohol mix in an emergency to get to
real gas no matter how many drying agents they say they put in.....

I also lose 100 miles per tank with the crap.

Have you read the owners manual of your Jeep?

Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...?id=2115147590
(More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)

 

Bret Ludwig wrote:
>
> L.W. ------ III (ßill) wrote:
> > Plus corrosion is a big problem with gasoline engines, alcohol will
> > literally pour water into the crankcase. Aluminum cases will vaporize.
>
> Considering that a good proportion of the alcohol burning cars in
> Brazil are VWs with almag cases and they are not "vaporizing", and
> considering the insides of the AEIO-540 Lycs operated on E100 by a US
> aerobatic team that I saw myself were as clean inside as the day they
> came out of Williamsport.....I can assuredly state you are on powerful
> drugs as is so often the case. No pun intended.
>
> What led you to this imaginary idea?

My owners manual says to only use alcohol mix in an emergency to get to
real gas no matter how many drying agents they say they put in.....

I also lose 100 miles per tank with the crap.

Have you read the owners manual of your Jeep?

Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...?id=2115147590
(More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)

 

Bret Ludwig wrote:
>
> L.W. ------ III (ßill) wrote:
> > Plus corrosion is a big problem with gasoline engines, alcohol will
> > literally pour water into the crankcase. Aluminum cases will vaporize.
>
> Considering that a good proportion of the alcohol burning cars in
> Brazil are VWs with almag cases and they are not "vaporizing", and
> considering the insides of the AEIO-540 Lycs operated on E100 by a US
> aerobatic team that I saw myself were as clean inside as the day they
> came out of Williamsport.....I can assuredly state you are on powerful
> drugs as is so often the case. No pun intended.
>
> What led you to this imaginary idea?

My owners manual says to only use alcohol mix in an emergency to get to
real gas no matter how many drying agents they say they put in.....

I also lose 100 miles per tank with the crap.

Have you read the owners manual of your Jeep?

Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...?id=2115147590
(More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)

 

Bret Ludwig wrote:
>
> L.W. ------ III (ßill) wrote:
> > Plus corrosion is a big problem with gasoline engines, alcohol will
> > literally pour water into the crankcase. Aluminum cases will vaporize.
>
> Considering that a good proportion of the alcohol burning cars in
> Brazil are VWs with almag cases and they are not "vaporizing", and
> considering the insides of the AEIO-540 Lycs operated on E100 by a US
> aerobatic team that I saw myself were as clean inside as the day they
> came out of Williamsport.....I can assuredly state you are on powerful
> drugs as is so often the case. No pun intended.
>
> What led you to this imaginary idea?

My owners manual says to only use alcohol mix in an emergency to get to
real gas no matter how many drying agents they say they put in.....

I also lose 100 miles per tank with the crap.

Have you read the owners manual of your Jeep?

Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...?id=2115147590
(More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)

 

Lee Ayrton wrote:
> Again, we're paddling rapidly away from Jeeps but...
>
>
> Lowering at-the-pump taxes has a couple of unpleasant side effects:
>
> 1) You've got to make up the revenue someplace (roads have to repaired,
> snow plowed, buildings heated, police paid, National Guard benefits,
> etc.), meaning a higher tax on something else.
>
> 2) If your registration were that someplace else, it would have to go up
> about $230/year to make up the revenue lost if you eliminated the state
> gas tax. (Assuming 15K miles/year at 20 MPG.) That's one painful lump
> every time you renew instead of an invisible $4 and change at every fill-up.
>
> 3) Shifting from a fuel tax to higher registration fees shifts the tax
> burden from a use tax to a property tax, meaning that someone who drives
> a little is paying the same as someone who drives a lot, and if your
> Jeep is a second-car toy that sees occasional use you'll be paying
> twice. There's a loose correlation between fuel consumption and weight,
> and weight is a major factor in road wear. Worse, by moving away from a
> use tax you reduce the amount of money those out-of-state vehicles on
> their way to the their million-dollar log "cabins" pay into your state
> and move it onto in-state taxpayers. You'll be subsidizing the stinkin'
> touristas.
>
> 4) You reduce whatever incentive there is for some drivers to drive
> vehicles that don't guzzle fuel. It's a weak effect that really only
> affects those with the means to buy another vehicle, but it's there.
>
> 5) Generally speaking, you cannot add toll stations to existing
> federally-funded highways without losing federal money. So, again
> you'll be digging deeper into your pocket just to keep up. The federal
> money you lose will go to another state, so your federal taxes won't
> decrease either.
>
> 6) Tolls waste time and fuel for drivers, they cause accidents
> (Connecticut removed theirs from I-95 after a tractor-trailer drove into
> a queue of cars and killed 6). Yes, there are transponder technologies
> but you still need toll stations, a contractor to support the technology
> and staff to collect tolls from vehicles without transponders, so you
> are spending a lot more taxpayer money than you would by having fuel
> stations send in a check for taxes once a month.


The fact is taxing gasoline and diesel fuel is the single most
efficient and fair way to finance roads there is. Not taxing
alternatives until a certain percentage of people convert is the
fairest way to incentivize it.

The other problem is that vehicles wear roads disproportionately as to
weight. A 1974 Cadillac Eldorado doesn't wear roads any more than a
Toyota Tercel, but a tractor trailer at 80,000 lbs wears them at
something like thirty times the rate of the Cadillac. The speed of the
truck and the distance between the driver and trailer tandems puts a
ripple on the road at a certain pitch or length. If trucks paid their
proportional share of road wear and services trucking would be much
more expensive. Efficient regional railroads, not the highways, are
the cheapest and most efficient way to move heavy freight.