The factories dont port the saws because ...............

I have been reading your posts for a bit now and I just have to ask: what country do you live in? If Germany (and I doubt that), skip on over to Volkswagen 'cause they need a suggestion to fix up a little emission problem they are having at the moment and your idea certainly does sound easy....

Brian

 

I already asked awhile back if he was Mike. Hes not!! Ha! I thought there was a chance. Maybe still? But the lack of ms362 jokes is telltale to me that they are not the same person.

 

This is how the big names solve the problems ... using big ideas.

 

Yes you are right

 

Actually ethanol has less btu's than gasoline. Gasoline has less BTUs than diesel.
A btu is a measure of energy, the standard for rating fuel energy.
Race cars with methanol or ethanol fuel have a different compression ratio engine than your car does. For racing there is an edge that is worth the extra expense. Something to do with valve timing and high rpm.
For your car at normal rpm and a normal compression ratio it is a huge waste. Diluting your good gas with 10% of a lower btu fuel. A fuel that causes preignition (knock or ping) that your car computer senses and has to adjust to a lower efficiency fuel burn for.
It is all a big hoax foisted on the tax payers by algore, so he could win the Iowa caucuses. (and "end" glo-bull warming)
Brazil converted to ethanol made from sugar cane a much better source than the feed corn we use to make it in the US. Cane has a much higher percentage of the sugar used to make ethanol (similar to brewing beer) and requires much less water fertilizer fuel and land for the same fuel produced.
It takes over a gallon of diesel to grow/make a gallon of ethanol from corn

 

While it's true there's less btu's in ethanol, you still can make more power from a motor designed to use ethanol.

Cars that are e85 capable, perform better on e85 versus gasoline, performance wise at least. They do get a little less mpg though on e85, but it's less expensive than regular gasoline, so that more than makes up for the loss of mpg. Plus the performance is pretty sizeable decrease for 0-60 and quarter mile numbers.

The recent gm flex fuel 5.3 v8 full size pickup long term wrap up showed about a half second improvement in the quarter mile on e85 vs 87 octane e10. GM shows 380 hp on e85, and 355 hp on e10, so the performance gain makes sense.


Here's a great chart.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...TEus1RwXaluA5MHBA&sig2=DN1dy3CpdE2aON7i9mNIfg

 

It has to do with the speed of the flame front inside the cylinder as the spark plug fires. Great for racing, useless for just about everything else.