cpubugs

Gas that is 10% ethanol should be cheaper. But it's not... I say brew your own Ethanol. It is legal to set up your own stills as long as you are using it for fuel..

As long as consumption stays the same prices will continue to go up.

Also, i thought I saw some one here that has an alcohol run RX7.

I personally have a flux capacitor so I don't have these problems...

DerangedHermit

Nah, you're just pretty much the only person who's actually getting outside sources and real numbers. Just trying to help everyone else out and even up the playing field down to the pre-school level. So... stop making decent argumentative points that are backed up by fact. What do you think this is, a technical car forum?

JSmith0101

iTrader: (6)

It's 3 cents cheaper...

cpubugs

I hate oil companies! Bastids.

Dom_C

+1 for the flux capacitor. . someone needs to get to work on those bad boys for future energy source . .I'll put it on the to do list

Needa13b

This website seems relevant to this thread, concerning gas prices. Page two has info on ethanol.
http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/
http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/SecondPage.html

J-Rat

iTrader: (2)

Ive read that article extensively, but the author is all doom and gloom. Instead of providing any solutions to the impending oil crisis, he just pisses on every possible solution advanced by others.

If you are going to be a critic of others solutions, be prepared to propose one of your own.

Needa13b

I think it is good that the article is out there. It is doom and gloom, and it may be critical, but if the right person reads it, maybe that person will come up with a solution.

I'd rather the information be out there, whether the writer has a solution or not.

deadRX7Conv

Ethanol is a waste. Another lobbied welfare grant for farmers.

http://healthandenergy.com/ethanol.htm
http://zfacts.com/p/60.html

'Gloom and doom' is no worse or better then the 'gleeful design plan' that the the ethanol lobby pushes.

Any mathematician can create guestimates(sometimes assumed as facts) for any side of the argument. Anyone can site sources. But have valid are those sources?? Biased a little, maybe. Estimates aren't facts. Nothing in any pro-ethanol source means a thing.

Ethanol doesn't solve any problem without creating problems.

Please don't compare SUV to standard vehicles. Compare them to your Rx7. Any new SUV is cleaner then my Rx7. And, most get the similar MPG even though they weigh more. This is a rotary Rx7 forum. My point of view is as an owner of the least efficient most polluting engine out there, not about the general masses. And, I won't attack SUV/truck owners. Freedom lets them drive whatever they want. If they couldn't afford the fuel, they wouldn't buy them. But, I do laugh when they bitch about the fuel prices.

If you want to do something, start with yourself. Don't try to wean me off of anything. I want my gasoline to be gasoline without fillers.
The problem with enivronmental 'pushers' is that they want to mandate and legislate it for everyone. It stills a free country. I don't want ethanol in my fuel.

Wean YOURSELF and go 100% ethanol everywhere. See how quickly you jump back to 'big oil'!

Here's a FACT for you:
I average 300 miles on a full tank of fuel regardless of ethanol or MTBE. Hint, the switch from MTBE to ethanol did NOT affect me in anyway.
BUT, I average'd 320 miles per tank on NON-fluffed fuel. The switch to MTBE was noticed.

FACT: I drove 7800 miles last year consuming 440 gallons of "fluffed" fuel. Thats 400 gallons of gasoline and 40 gallons of ethanol/methanol/mtbe or whatever oxygenate used.

NOW, do your own math on how much normal gasoline I would of consumed using the above numbers. Then, calculate how much foreign oil was wasted in the production of those 40 gallons of ethanol and tell me how we are better off.

I rather have ONE LESS MIDDLEMAN(the farmer) and my petroleum straight up.

And, if I wanted cleaner emissions, I would've left the catalytics where they belong! So, don't preach about cleaner air BS.

Ethanol, another costly farmers welfare check subsidized by YOU, the taxpayer.

cluosborne

I think the idea of running a rotary on an alternative fuel is a good idea. We need to start thinking outside the box--that box being petrochemicals. Besides cost, petrochemicals are a non-renewable resource. Eventually, it will be depleted.

Ethanol, Hydrogen, biodiesel (which I think is terrific and I'd make if I had a diesel) are renewable. I'm not going to explain how each is made though. For those who mention how it takes more energy to produce than you get out of a fuel, bear in mind that this is true of any fuel (including gasoline). However, we can refine the production processes to maximize energy efficiency.

Ethanol and hydrogen aren't the only alternative fuels. There's also natural gas and methane (also renewable).

Personally, in a few years, I plan to switch the factory ECU over to a MegaSquirt, and I'm definitely thinking about alternative fuels in the long run. It's foolish to rely on any one source (source of anything, be it information, energy, or anything else). If the rubber fuel lines and filters can't handle the new fuel, change them (18 years is a pretty long time to go without a change eh?). If the engine needs to be retuned, retune it. If it breaks, fix it.

I guess my point is this: change isn't easy. Gasoline has been around for more than a century, and we've all grown up with it. It symbolizes many things.

Granted, it won't be as easy to convert a rotary to another fuel as easily as filling the tank, but it can be done. Who knows, you might have fun doing it too.

Isn't that what it's really all about in the end with an RX7?

J-Rat

iTrader: (2)

Actually, my FC is quite efficent, clean burning, and gets over 24 miles to the gallon, so how is it the least efficient, most polluting engine out there? Got any statistics to back this claim up?

Here are some stats for you, the 2005 worst polluting cars:

Meanest vehicles MPG:
city MPG:
hwy. Green1
score
1. Dodge Ram SRT10 9 12 11
2. Ford Excursion 13 17 13
3. Hummer H2 13 17 13
4. Mercedes-Benz G55 AMG 12 14 13
5. Lamborghini Murciélago 9 13 14
6. GMC Yukon XL K2500 13 17 14
7. Chevrolet Suburban K2500 14 17 14
8. Land Rover Range Rover 12 16 14
9. Bentley Arnage 10 14 14
10. Mercedes-Benz G500 13 14 15
11. Lamborghini Gallardo 9 15 15
12. Dodge Ram 1500 Pickup 12 16 15

Source:http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0922086.html

Thats right, 9 MPG in some cases. Name one FC owner that wouldnt have a freakin COW if he got 9 MPG.

My rotary has been burning ethanol for over a year now, in the form of a secondary injection system. So I guess I already started.

Read the thread smart guy, I never preached emissions. I preached dependence on foreign oil. YOU introduced emissions into this discussion, not me.

Guess you wont be converting, until the government forces it down your throat, which they will. Until then, people like you wont be happy unless more of my brothers and sisters die so you can have your big oil.

Enjoy it, because its all coming to an end...

J-Rat

iTrader: (2)

Here are some interesting facts from the year 1988, when my RX-7 was built, concerning emissions:

The FC had a rating of 9.5, the 300Z had a rating of 9.3, the Vette shared 9.5 with the FC, and for comparison, the Lambo had a rating of 24. That was just for the 2 seaters.

Compact cars: BMWs were hovering around 14.0, Porsches were in the 10s.

And if you went and bought a Chevy Truck, you were looking at 11-13.

SIZZOURCE!!!: http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bycla...AclassNF.shtml

So how is it that the rotary is the most polluting car on the road? Again, you make statements with no proof to back it up. HAILERS can provide more proof against Ethanol then you can.

I think this thread has about run its course. Fact is, rotaries can be run on alcohol, and it has been done for some time. Whatever reasons you have for making the switch (or not doing it at all), are up to you.

Rat

Aaron Cake

iTrader: (1)

We're done here. The original question has been answered and we've gone off topic enough.