Failed Califoria smog test.
#71
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: It Passed
That's the difference, it's a slower, more consistent, clean burn.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Lee Ayrton wrote:
>
> In my `62 Econoline? Hahahahoooo. That thing would slow down from 60MPH
> downhill, with the clutch in.
>
> Seriously, why should a higher octane fuel have any positive effect on
> tailpipe emissions?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Lee Ayrton wrote:
>
> In my `62 Econoline? Hahahahoooo. That thing would slow down from 60MPH
> downhill, with the clutch in.
>
> Seriously, why should a higher octane fuel have any positive effect on
> tailpipe emissions?
#72
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: It Passed
That's the difference, it's a slower, more consistent, clean burn.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Lee Ayrton wrote:
>
> In my `62 Econoline? Hahahahoooo. That thing would slow down from 60MPH
> downhill, with the clutch in.
>
> Seriously, why should a higher octane fuel have any positive effect on
> tailpipe emissions?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Lee Ayrton wrote:
>
> In my `62 Econoline? Hahahahoooo. That thing would slow down from 60MPH
> downhill, with the clutch in.
>
> Seriously, why should a higher octane fuel have any positive effect on
> tailpipe emissions?
#73
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: It Passed
That's the difference, it's a slower, more consistent, clean burn.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Lee Ayrton wrote:
>
> In my `62 Econoline? Hahahahoooo. That thing would slow down from 60MPH
> downhill, with the clutch in.
>
> Seriously, why should a higher octane fuel have any positive effect on
> tailpipe emissions?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Lee Ayrton wrote:
>
> In my `62 Econoline? Hahahahoooo. That thing would slow down from 60MPH
> downhill, with the clutch in.
>
> Seriously, why should a higher octane fuel have any positive effect on
> tailpipe emissions?
#74
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: It Passed
From Bill's response to your below answer Jeff, it's apparent he is
still believing an Old Wive's Tale on what octane really does. From him
having owned a gas station, I would have thought he would have had a
good understanding of what octane does... apparently not.
Jerry
Jeff Strickland wrote:
> But Bill, if one _needs_ high octane gas, they have a high performance
> engine. They need the octane to boost performance in a motor that can
> actually produce said performance.
>
> High octane in a motor that does not need it is wasteful. Mostly, it wastes
> money. Indeed, there is a strong argument that high octane gas might
> actually boost the emissions because it hasn't been burned completely. I am
> not sure I buy into that particular argument, but it's out there. The bottom
> line, boosting octane is of little value when the motor does not demand the
> higher octane.
>
>
>
>
>
> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> news:41F53FCE.1E0187DD@***.net...
>
>> As a teenager, you never won any street races, did you?
>> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>>
>>Lee Ayrton wrote:
>>
>>>The "half a tank of premium gas" caught my eye. Disregarding for the
>>>moment the differences in additive formulations between manufacturers,
>>>(the gasoline "slug" in the pipeline is the same if it goes to the
>>>Exxon/Mobil plant or the Shell plant or the BP plant, the only
>
> difference
>
>>>is in what they add to it before it goes out in the tanker truck)
>>>would/should higher octane gas make any positive difference in
>
> emissions?
>
>
--
Jerry Bransford
PP-ASEL N6TAY
See the Geezer Jeep at
http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
still believing an Old Wive's Tale on what octane really does. From him
having owned a gas station, I would have thought he would have had a
good understanding of what octane does... apparently not.
Jerry
Jeff Strickland wrote:
> But Bill, if one _needs_ high octane gas, they have a high performance
> engine. They need the octane to boost performance in a motor that can
> actually produce said performance.
>
> High octane in a motor that does not need it is wasteful. Mostly, it wastes
> money. Indeed, there is a strong argument that high octane gas might
> actually boost the emissions because it hasn't been burned completely. I am
> not sure I buy into that particular argument, but it's out there. The bottom
> line, boosting octane is of little value when the motor does not demand the
> higher octane.
>
>
>
>
>
> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> news:41F53FCE.1E0187DD@***.net...
>
>> As a teenager, you never won any street races, did you?
>> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>>
>>Lee Ayrton wrote:
>>
>>>The "half a tank of premium gas" caught my eye. Disregarding for the
>>>moment the differences in additive formulations between manufacturers,
>>>(the gasoline "slug" in the pipeline is the same if it goes to the
>>>Exxon/Mobil plant or the Shell plant or the BP plant, the only
>
> difference
>
>>>is in what they add to it before it goes out in the tanker truck)
>>>would/should higher octane gas make any positive difference in
>
> emissions?
>
>
--
Jerry Bransford
PP-ASEL N6TAY
See the Geezer Jeep at
http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
#75
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: It Passed
From Bill's response to your below answer Jeff, it's apparent he is
still believing an Old Wive's Tale on what octane really does. From him
having owned a gas station, I would have thought he would have had a
good understanding of what octane does... apparently not.
Jerry
Jeff Strickland wrote:
> But Bill, if one _needs_ high octane gas, they have a high performance
> engine. They need the octane to boost performance in a motor that can
> actually produce said performance.
>
> High octane in a motor that does not need it is wasteful. Mostly, it wastes
> money. Indeed, there is a strong argument that high octane gas might
> actually boost the emissions because it hasn't been burned completely. I am
> not sure I buy into that particular argument, but it's out there. The bottom
> line, boosting octane is of little value when the motor does not demand the
> higher octane.
>
>
>
>
>
> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> news:41F53FCE.1E0187DD@***.net...
>
>> As a teenager, you never won any street races, did you?
>> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>>
>>Lee Ayrton wrote:
>>
>>>The "half a tank of premium gas" caught my eye. Disregarding for the
>>>moment the differences in additive formulations between manufacturers,
>>>(the gasoline "slug" in the pipeline is the same if it goes to the
>>>Exxon/Mobil plant or the Shell plant or the BP plant, the only
>
> difference
>
>>>is in what they add to it before it goes out in the tanker truck)
>>>would/should higher octane gas make any positive difference in
>
> emissions?
>
>
--
Jerry Bransford
PP-ASEL N6TAY
See the Geezer Jeep at
http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
still believing an Old Wive's Tale on what octane really does. From him
having owned a gas station, I would have thought he would have had a
good understanding of what octane does... apparently not.
Jerry
Jeff Strickland wrote:
> But Bill, if one _needs_ high octane gas, they have a high performance
> engine. They need the octane to boost performance in a motor that can
> actually produce said performance.
>
> High octane in a motor that does not need it is wasteful. Mostly, it wastes
> money. Indeed, there is a strong argument that high octane gas might
> actually boost the emissions because it hasn't been burned completely. I am
> not sure I buy into that particular argument, but it's out there. The bottom
> line, boosting octane is of little value when the motor does not demand the
> higher octane.
>
>
>
>
>
> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> news:41F53FCE.1E0187DD@***.net...
>
>> As a teenager, you never won any street races, did you?
>> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>>
>>Lee Ayrton wrote:
>>
>>>The "half a tank of premium gas" caught my eye. Disregarding for the
>>>moment the differences in additive formulations between manufacturers,
>>>(the gasoline "slug" in the pipeline is the same if it goes to the
>>>Exxon/Mobil plant or the Shell plant or the BP plant, the only
>
> difference
>
>>>is in what they add to it before it goes out in the tanker truck)
>>>would/should higher octane gas make any positive difference in
>
> emissions?
>
>
--
Jerry Bransford
PP-ASEL N6TAY
See the Geezer Jeep at
http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
#76
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: It Passed
From Bill's response to your below answer Jeff, it's apparent he is
still believing an Old Wive's Tale on what octane really does. From him
having owned a gas station, I would have thought he would have had a
good understanding of what octane does... apparently not.
Jerry
Jeff Strickland wrote:
> But Bill, if one _needs_ high octane gas, they have a high performance
> engine. They need the octane to boost performance in a motor that can
> actually produce said performance.
>
> High octane in a motor that does not need it is wasteful. Mostly, it wastes
> money. Indeed, there is a strong argument that high octane gas might
> actually boost the emissions because it hasn't been burned completely. I am
> not sure I buy into that particular argument, but it's out there. The bottom
> line, boosting octane is of little value when the motor does not demand the
> higher octane.
>
>
>
>
>
> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> news:41F53FCE.1E0187DD@***.net...
>
>> As a teenager, you never won any street races, did you?
>> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>>
>>Lee Ayrton wrote:
>>
>>>The "half a tank of premium gas" caught my eye. Disregarding for the
>>>moment the differences in additive formulations between manufacturers,
>>>(the gasoline "slug" in the pipeline is the same if it goes to the
>>>Exxon/Mobil plant or the Shell plant or the BP plant, the only
>
> difference
>
>>>is in what they add to it before it goes out in the tanker truck)
>>>would/should higher octane gas make any positive difference in
>
> emissions?
>
>
--
Jerry Bransford
PP-ASEL N6TAY
See the Geezer Jeep at
http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
still believing an Old Wive's Tale on what octane really does. From him
having owned a gas station, I would have thought he would have had a
good understanding of what octane does... apparently not.
Jerry
Jeff Strickland wrote:
> But Bill, if one _needs_ high octane gas, they have a high performance
> engine. They need the octane to boost performance in a motor that can
> actually produce said performance.
>
> High octane in a motor that does not need it is wasteful. Mostly, it wastes
> money. Indeed, there is a strong argument that high octane gas might
> actually boost the emissions because it hasn't been burned completely. I am
> not sure I buy into that particular argument, but it's out there. The bottom
> line, boosting octane is of little value when the motor does not demand the
> higher octane.
>
>
>
>
>
> "L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
> news:41F53FCE.1E0187DD@***.net...
>
>> As a teenager, you never won any street races, did you?
>> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
>>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>>
>>Lee Ayrton wrote:
>>
>>>The "half a tank of premium gas" caught my eye. Disregarding for the
>>>moment the differences in additive formulations between manufacturers,
>>>(the gasoline "slug" in the pipeline is the same if it goes to the
>>>Exxon/Mobil plant or the Shell plant or the BP plant, the only
>
> difference
>
>>>is in what they add to it before it goes out in the tanker truck)
>>>would/should higher octane gas make any positive difference in
>
> emissions?
>
>
--
Jerry Bransford
PP-ASEL N6TAY
See the Geezer Jeep at
http://members.***.net/jerrypb/
#77
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: It Passed
http://www.cs.uu.nl/wais/html/na-dir...line-faq/.html
"L.W.(ßill) ------ III" wrote:
>
> We're not going to change each others minds. But, you should know
> octane is not the only difference between premium and your cheap
> regular.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
"L.W.(ßill) ------ III" wrote:
>
> We're not going to change each others minds. But, you should know
> octane is not the only difference between premium and your cheap
> regular.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
#78
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: It Passed
http://www.cs.uu.nl/wais/html/na-dir...line-faq/.html
"L.W.(ßill) ------ III" wrote:
>
> We're not going to change each others minds. But, you should know
> octane is not the only difference between premium and your cheap
> regular.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
"L.W.(ßill) ------ III" wrote:
>
> We're not going to change each others minds. But, you should know
> octane is not the only difference between premium and your cheap
> regular.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
#79
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: It Passed
http://www.cs.uu.nl/wais/html/na-dir...line-faq/.html
"L.W.(ßill) ------ III" wrote:
>
> We're not going to change each others minds. But, you should know
> octane is not the only difference between premium and your cheap
> regular.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
"L.W.(ßill) ------ III" wrote:
>
> We're not going to change each others minds. But, you should know
> octane is not the only difference between premium and your cheap
> regular.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
#80
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: It Passed
In article <41F589E7.533DE6FF@***.net>, ----------@***.net says...
LW> That's the difference, it's a slower, more consistent, clean
burn.
Thats always been my thinking as well.
--
"Trust me, I do this all the time"
Mike M
LW> That's the difference, it's a slower, more consistent, clean
burn.
Thats always been my thinking as well.
--
"Trust me, I do this all the time"
Mike M