[AT] Re[2]: [Farmall] running a Farmall H on ethanol

Mon Sep 5 10:19:51 PDT 2005

Data Source  GM.com/EPA Fuel Economy figures

2005 Chevy Silverado 5.3 L 2 WD

Ethanol  12 city 16 hwy 14 avg

Gasoline 16 city 20 hwy 18 avg

Hybrid Electric

18 city

21 hwy

19.5 Avg


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Larry D. Goss" <rlgoss at evansville.net>
To: "'Antique tractor email discussion group'" 
<at at lists.antique-tractor.com>
Sent: Monday, September 05, 2005 1:04 PM
Subject: RE: Re[2]: [AT] Re[2]: [Farmall] running a Farmall H on ethanol


>I don't know what the percentage is that has been mandated in Iowa.  I
> suspect it's considerably lower than the 10% limit.  For all I know,
> it's no more potent than dumping a jug of Heet or Dri-Gas in every
> tankful of regular.  Back in the early 80's I bought gasohol all the
> time for a Mazda GLC that we ran at that time.  It ran for better than
> 120,000 miles with no major engine work.  The body and other items
> finally fell apart on it so we traded it in on a Nissan in 1988.  I'm
> sorry folks, but I have had nothing but good experience with the alcohol
> blends and don't find any problems with them.
>
> Larry
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: at-bounces at lists.antique-tractor.com
> [mailto:at-bounces at lists.antique-tractor.com] On Behalf Of Steve W.
> Sent: Monday, September 05, 2005 11:33 AM
> To: Antique tractor email discussion group
> Subject: Re: Re[2]: [AT] Re[2]: [Farmall] running a Farmall H on ethanol
>
> Larry, keep in mind that any blend of alcohol over 10% voids the
> warrantee on most vehicles built in the US. That is one thing the folks
> who are mandating the higher level blends haven't figured out the answer
> to yet. The officials don't seem to care about it.
>
> Steve Williams
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Larry D. Goss" <rlgoss at evansville.net>
> To: "'Antique tractor email discussion group'"
> <at at lists.antique-tractor.com>
> Sent: Sunday, September 04, 2005 9:55 PM
> Subject: RE: Re[2]: [AT] Re[2]: [Farmall] running a Farmall H on ethanol
>
>
>> Thanks for speaking out, Spencer.  I appreciate it.  My wife and I
> just
>> returned from spending nearly a month on the road touring across the
>> country everywhere from western Pennsylvania to central Colorado and
>> back.  Of course the octane rating of the available gas blend changes
>> considerably across the country depending on the elevation etc.
> Typical
>> low grade gas in the low elevations is 87, but along the eastern slope
>> of the Rockies, it's 85.  All across Nebraska and Iowa, they're
> blending
>> the low grade gas with ethanol to get the mid-grade fuel but are
> selling
>> it for less than the low grade because of subsidies.  I used the
> ethanol
>> blend (89) in the Jeep for better than 1000 miles and had better
> mileage
>> with it than with the regular blend.  If I have the story right, the
>> ethanol blend is now mandated in Iowa.
>>
>> Casey's convenience stores typically sell two grades of gasoline --
>> unleaded regular and the ethanol blend. Their pricing varies, but most
>> of the time they sell both octanes at the same price and every once in
> a
>> while the ethanol blend is a nickel per gallon cheaper.  But of course
>> I'm talking about what conditions were like before Katrina.
>>
>> As we are accustomed to saying on this list -- YMMV.  :-)
>>
>> Larry
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: at-bounces at lists.antique-tractor.com
>> [mailto:at-bounces at lists.antique-tractor.com] On Behalf Of Spencer
> Yost
>> Sent: Sunday, September 04, 2005 3:15 PM
>> To: at at lists.antique-tractor.com
>> Subject: Re[2]: [AT] Re[2]: [Farmall] running a Farmall H on ethanol
>>
>> The purpose of my original post was simply correct a very common
>> misconception and hopefully instill some semblance of academic rigor
> to
>> the
>> debate and not let people get away with saying whatever they want to
> say
>> without justification, verification, supporting data and the like.
> The
>> purpose was NOT to advocate ethanol as a viable alternative to
> gasoline.
>>
>> Also, I could not corroborate your data.   All the sources I checked
>> (fueleconomyone.com, the EPA, etc), all listed about a 20% drop in
>> economy,
>> not the 66%+ you indicated.  Must have been some other problems with
>> your
>> vehicle(ie tuning, etc).
>>
>> Spencer Yost
>> Owner, ATIS
>> Plow the Net!
>> http://www.atis.net
>>
>> *********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********
>>
>> On 9/4/2005 at 3:20 PM DAVIESW739 at aol.com wrote:
>>
>> >Spencer after being involved in one the  government studies using 85
>> >percent
>> >ethanol and 15 percent gasoline I can tell  you that those figures
> had
>> to
>> >be
>> >made up or just plain biased because in the  actual test we burned as
>> much
>> >gas
>> >as we would have before the change over. also  we had to burn all
> that
>> >ethanol.
>> >I wonder where some people get there test  figures from. We sure
>> couldn't
>> >do
>> >any better 5 to 6 MPG in a Chevy S 10 4  banger. Had to put a 40
> gallon
>> >fuel
>> >tank on them to get back home from a town  trip.
>> >
>> >Of course we may have just been bad drivers or something thing like
>> that
>> >but
>> >I still say its not going to work and if it did them why don't we see
>> >more
>> >of it. I would like to use ethanol if it was practical but its not.
>> >
>> >Walt Davies
>> >Cooper Hollow Farm
>> >Monmouth, OR 97361
>> >503 623-0460
>> >
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >AT mailing list
>> >http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> AT mailing list
>> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> AT mailing list
>> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AT mailing list
> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>
> _______________________________________________
> AT mailing list
> http://www.antique-tractor.com/mailman/listinfo/at
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/89 - Release Date: 9/2/2005
>