Post a link to your Blog Entries

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Mark Boise on July 8, 2009 at 6:54am

You're right Mark, we could add CNG stations as they come on line using geo-photography and certified LAT/LONG..Stacey

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Rick Jackson on July 8, 2009 at 7:08am

I wonder if existing stations couldn't put a 5000 gallon tank on the property and have it available as a filling point. I see a lot of the Cenex stations having a lot of property around them which could easily accommodate this.
More importantly I was wondering what it would cost to retrofit a vehicle now. We have hundreds of millions of vehicles on the road now that could benefit from CNG conversion. Do you have any estimates on what it would take to get a kit and educate a core of mechanics or train new people to install something of this nature? It seems that this could be a lot faster than waiting to get the trucks out of Detroit set up for a dual fuel setup

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by KENN DRESCHER on August 15, 2009 at 11:11am

I had a St Louis, Laclede Gas Co. man fixing the line over last week. He said the LGC is phasing out use of NG in their Conversion, dual NG + Unleaded Regular service trucks because of low milage range, and LACK of power complaints from drivers while running on NG. Stated they were to run on NG until gone, 80 < 100 miles. Than switch to Unleaded. While on NG he stated their heavy trucks had no acceleration, nor passing power.

I wonder if the straight NG only have a different way to inject the gas which gives them better performance?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by willard on August 15, 2009 at 7:43pm

Well,I jest had to tell you all this.If you ant got none.gas,fuel,you dont move,or burn no rubber,One man word is worth checking out..If it is true,then he should punch a hole in the gas tank,stick a match to it he should have plenty of acceleration,and burn a lot of rubber.If you use a new type of any thing you have to make adjustments up and down,with the pickens plan we want to have ready on hand for the big day.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by KENN DRESCHER on August 16, 2009 at 6:56am

dis kuld bee true...

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by neil cox on August 16, 2009 at 4:24am

Yes, there are likely several less than optimum ways to get the CNG into the cylinders. Hopefully some new car company will do the research, if it wasn't done a decade ago.
Since we can get significant propulsion from air at 3500 psi, we should be able to get almost as much from CNG, before we burn any of it as fuel. Admittedly, doing both complicates the vehicle. We should consider cooling the cab, and/or engine compartment with the uncompressing of the CNG, but that is a third complication, with possible safety hazards.
Please do not follow the match advice by willard. Neil

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by KENN DRESCHER on August 16, 2009 at 7:00am

I wasn't aware that the rapid refueling stations cost so much. I like the home refueling stations, apparently they're slow, and at this time aprox = $4,500.oo.
I should think that if the vehicle is specifically designed to run on the NG, they could find a way to optimize the power output?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by KENN DRESCHER on July 8, 2009 at 7:32am

ReformAutos.org

DEMANDING: Limit Top Speed to = 75 m.p.h. at Point of Manufacture! Law Mandating Vehicles designed for the safe, & efficent transportation of: People, their Pets, & Property from point of orgin < to < destination. Alerting Lawmakers to pass a: Federal Top Speed Limit of = 75 m.p.h. Our Highways ARE NOT RACETRACKS!!! They ARE NOT DRAGSTRIPS!!! Vehicles designed for High Speed should be barred from them! SPEED KILLS!!! Enforce a ban to use of all Federal Highways on all vehicles which intentionally are designed to exceed that limit by a reasonable = 5 m.p.h. Encourage Product Liability suits against manufactures whom, with full knowledge, are aware that the highest National Speed Limit = 75 m.p.h. But continue to produce vehicles which are intentionally designed to exceed that limit and be operated at dangerously high, illegal speed. Knowingly producing hazardous equipment, without any warning labels, than through multi media advertising encouraging high speed, illegal operation of these abtruse machines. They, automotive designers, manufactures, advertisers, TV Stations as well as all media venues which promote hazardous machinery are directly responsible for the horrendous driving accidents, many involving the high speed capabilities built into the vehicles, allowing reckless driving far above legal limits, & the wrongful deaths which they cause! These manufactures bear much of the guilt of these excessive speed accidents through sales promotion glamorizing high Horse Power, & the High Speed features of their products! Safe, Electric, and Hybrid Solar Vehicles, will be smaller,lighter, less powerful, and will only need to attain Legal Top Speed. DEMANDING: The FCC do it's job and remove all automotive ads depicting, & demonstrating vehicles conducting dangerous & illegal driving techniques in TV commercials. We are a Political Action Group seeking sane, & safe transportation!

ReformAutos.org:

http://reformautos.org/default.aspx

Visit / Join:
Reform-Autos Yahoo Group:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/reform-autos/

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by KENN DRESCHER on July 8, 2009 at 7:36am

Saw Boone on ABC this A.M. Feel we need to Keep on Truckin' on-

Am contacting MO State's Dem Congressman, + Senator. Am seeking interested parties to join, and/or assist my efforts.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by neil cox on August 1, 2009 at 11:51am

If nearly all vehicles are traveling close to 75 mph, I believe changing lanes, will sometimes be impossible to do safely, including "lane ends 500 feet". Often the highway signs give you little notice or even wrong information about when you need to change lanes I have some sympathy with your goal to reduce high speed and dangerous driving, but limiting the top speed of vehicles to 75 mph will increase the cost of the vehicle and open the door for more government in our face on many other products and services including TV advertising, which I agree is a public disservice with rare exceptions. We need to appeal to good citizenship, not legislate more laws and mandates. Neil

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by KENN DRESCHER on August 1, 2009 at 3:19pm

Wouldn't cost any more per vehicle. Would actually Lessen costs.

I'm not talking about a variable speed controler; stops a vehicle which has higher speed capability at 75 m.p.h., Like a Smart Key (Actually best named, "A Stupid Key").Setting top speed at 75 m.p.h.

Rental vehicles have had governors installed on them for 20 + years. They limit top speed at exactly the top speed limit of the State. They work fine.

Bear in mind that not all Drivers are going to be traveling at Top Speed. I realize there's the natural resistance for change, but it's absolutely necessary.

*NOTE: There is no rational, for auto manufactures to continue the status quo. No argument, nor rhyme, nor reason to build vehicles designed to exceed the top national speed limit. None.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by neil cox on August 1, 2009 at 3:55pm

What would it cost to install a governor on my 1996 Ford Ranger pickup truck? I don]t consider $99 plus tax trivial. If the governor peaked at 79 mph, I suppose the performance at 75 mph would still be robust. Would I need to re certify annually to be sure the tire size had not been increased or the governor illegally modified? Your preaching to the choir, My pickup hasn't gone 75 mph in all it's 13 years. Neil

▶ Reply to This

• First
• Previous
• Next
• Last