|
Hi;
I think that you may be getting Alcohol mixed up
with propane. Propane delivers about 25% less fuel economy on average then
gasoline, but there are variables depending on how the engine is set up. Alcohol
fuel is somewhere inbetween the two for power and fuel economy. Back in the
twenties, was a serious candidate as an octane booster for gasoline but
tetraethol lead won out likely because Standard Oil was pushing it.
Best Regards
Arran Foster
1954 Imperial Newport
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2005 2:06
PM
Subject: Re: IML: Unleaded gas
effects
You would probably have to re-jet the carb to use this.
Also, I have heard that E-85 has a very low energy content. Read
somewhere that mileage drops to 50-75% of that which you get with
gasoline so it is not such a bargain.
-----
Original Message -----
From: "Jan Harmonson"
To: mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: IML: Unleaded gas effects
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005
13:09:33 -0600
Hi
I have ben following the Unleaded
story and wondered about E-85 in old cars.
I work in a Ford dealership
and Ford has been making E-85 compatible cars
for some time and Bill
Ford, in his ads about "innovation", says he wants
to have 250,000
ethanol ready cars on the road next year. In AutoWeek
magazine I saw
where E-85 is available in 35 states, has 105 octane and is
less than
$2.00 a gallon. Thoughts or comments?
Jan in Ojai, CA
1955
Imperial sedan
1952 Plymouth Suburban (arriving soon)
----- Original
Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2005 1:25 PM
Subject: RE: IML: Unleaded gas effects
> Ever since this
first posted, I have been wondering about D^2's valves. I
was trying to
remember if he had rebuilt the cylinder heads on his car to
take what he
has proclaimed to do with that '68 Imperial. Maybe he will sign
in here
and tell us.
>
> I am still thinking that I wouldn't bother
rebuilding the heads unless
they showed the need for other work in the
first place. I should admit that
some of my Imperials have gone way past
100,000 without a valve job.
>
> Paul W.
>
> In
an email dated Thu, 17 11 2005 4:55:36 pm GMT, "Dick Benjamin"
writes:
>
> >Yes, it was only 16,000
miles, but remember our conditions out here are
> >really tough,
and this car was driven almost totally on long (1600 to
2800
>
>mile trips) and always in the hottest months, usually with 5 or 6 adults
and
> >a packed solid trunk. I know some of these trips went
through temps
pushing
> >120, and the car asked for no special
treatment at all, so I just kept
> >blasting down the Interstate.
Our speed limits are posted at 70, but the
> >usual speed is 80-85
once you get out of town, and very few passed me!
> >
>
> If you have been following the exploits of D^2, you know what I mean
when
> >I say I'd love to get a look at his valves!
>
>
> >Dick Benjamin
> >
> >-----Original
Message-----
> >From: mailing-list-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>[mailto:mailing-list-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
RandalPark@xxxxxxx
> >Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 8:00
PM
> >To: mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >Subject: Re:
IML: Unleaded gas effects
> >
> >Sorry that this
happened to you Dick, but it is a good lesson for all of
us.
>
>I am an advocate for "going the whole nine yards" when doing a valve
job,
> >hardened valve seats and all, but only when it is already
going to be
done.
> >So far, I have not recommended that the
heads be reconditioned in this
way
> >until the apparent need
for work arises, or the process was going to be
done
>
>anyway. It is interesting that this car was only run 16,000 miles before
> >requiring more work. I may have to rethink my philosophy on
this.
> >
> >Paul W.
> >
> >In an
email dated Thu, 17 11 2005 2:30:54 am GMT, "Dick Benjamin"
>
> writes:
> >
> >>I have been an
advocate of ignoring the supposed bad consequences of
using
>
>>unleaded gas in our older cars - as most of you probably know, those
cars
> >>built before 1974 were not designed to be run on
unleaded gas.
> >
> >REST OF MESSAGE
TRIMMED..................
> >
> >
> >
>
>----------------- http://www.imperialclub.com -----------------
>
>This message was sent to you by the Imperial Mailing List. Please
> >reply to mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and your response will
be
> >shared with everyone. Private messages (and attachments) for
the
> >Administrators should be sent to webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >To UN-SUBSCRIBE, go to http://imperialclub.com/unsubscribe.htm
> >
> >
>
>
> -----------------
http://www.imperialclub.com -----------------
> This message was sent
to you by the Imperial Mailing List. Please
> reply to
mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and your response will be
> shared with
everyone. Private messages (and attachments) for the
> Administrators
should be sent to webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To UN-SUBSCRIBE, go to
http://imperialclub.com/unsubscribe.htm
>
>
----------------- http://www.imperialclub.com
-----------------
This message was sent to you by the Imperial Mailing
List. Please
reply to mailing-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and your response
will be
shared with everyone. Private messages (and attachments) for the
Administrators should be sent to webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To
UN-SUBSCRIBE, go to http://imperialclub.com/unsubscribe.htm
Fred Joslin
|
