Article View: triangle.general
Article #204Re: Nearest source of non-oxygenated gas ...
From: Krzysztof Kozminski
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1992 15:15
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1992 15:15
46 lines
2644 bytes
2644 bytes
In <Bx7JLF.C2J@unx.sas.com> saselm@bronco.unx.sas.com (Edward McGee) writes: >> >>In Krzysztof Kozminski writes: >>|[looking for non-oxygenated gas] >>|> as opposed to the oxygenated gasohol inflicted on us here in Durham/RTP? >> >Please check with a dealer for your make of car first before you start >"bypassing" something that is being done for the good of our environment. The manual of my Mazda 626 warns that using gasohol may damage the *emission control* systems. "Good of our environment", indeed. IMHO, just another example of a misguided miracle cure, force-fed to us by pseudo-environmentalist politicians. I have a strong suspicion that having a properly tuned engine is likely to both increase the mileage and have more effect on the polluting components in the exhaust than just the publicized 17% reduction in CO emissions from the oxygenated fuel. And it would lower the gas expenses, too. Convincing people to carpool just one day a week would reduce *all* emissions by 20%, reduce the operating cost, and cause less inconvenience than having to rebuild the engine (OK, not all, fuel distribution only). Finally, the implementation of this "good of our environment" thing, whereby everybody is forced to use the same stuff, is pure communism. I'd be much more sympathetic to a solution using a higher tax on more polluting fuels - provided, of course, that it could be trusted that the proceedings will be used for environment improvement. Hmm, this kinda disqualifies the tax idea :-) >What year is your car? Anything made in the past 5 years should be safe >(regardless of manufacturer). A lot of manufacturer's warnings (in owner's >manual) were not "justified". The manual says that any resulting damage may not be covered by the warranty. Sounds like a good enough justification. I'd rather spend my $$ on planting some trees to take care of the CO I produce ... KK PS: another poster mentioned that I might have been using the stuff without noticing - I doubt it. As I noticed upon refueling my other car (which is OK to use gasohol, except it get lower mileage), oxygenated gas STINKS quite distinctively... -- "Legalize freedom. Vote libertarian"
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1992Nov5.151501.19657@mcnc.org>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!concert!theo!kkReferences:
<1992Nov4.180757.3498@mcnc.org> <Bx7JLF.C2J@unx.sas.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: triangle.general Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!concert!theo!kk From: kk@mcnc.org (Krzysztof Kozminski) Subject: Re: Nearest source of non-oxygenated gas ... Message-ID: <1992Nov5.151501.19657@mcnc.org> Organization: MCNC Center for Microelectronics, RTP, NC References: <1992Nov4.180757.3498@mcnc.org> <Bx7JLF.C2J@unx.sas.com> Distribution: triangle Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 15:15:01 GMT Lines: 46