tigers
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Tigers] Tigers and lack of discussion (Mustang II'S)

To: "'William Lau'" <mrlau@charter.net>, <tigers@autox.team.net>
Subject: Re: [Tigers] Tigers and lack of discussion (Mustang II'S)
From: "Frank P. Marrone" <itswonderful@comcast.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 18:46:02 -0700
Hey, didn't say it made sense.  Just stating the facts Jack.  I for one
totally agree with you.  

On the other hand, and I can't believe I'm going to admit this, the EPA
regulations that started out here on the left coast in the mid-sixties
actually resulted in an irrefutable benefit for mankind.  The air got
cleaner and ultimately the cost increase became low and the fun reduction
factor negligible. I'm using new car performance and emissions as my proof
of this.

Not saying I agree with the means to this ends.  20 years (1967 thru 1987)
of seemingly and actually silly regulations, 10 years (1974 thru 1984) of
cars that sucked with respect to performance and hobby-appeal, and arguably
the beginning of the end for US automotive dominance.  All this because
technology had to catch up to legislation.

Frank

    


> -----Original Message-----
> From: tigers-bounces+itswonderful=comcast.net@autox.team.net
> [mailto:tigers-bounces+itswonderful=comcast.net@autox.team.net] On Behalf
> Of William Lau
> Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 6:28 PM
> To: tigers@autox.team.net
> Subject: Re: [Tigers] Tigers and lack of discussion (Mustang II'S)
> 
> It is great for someone to have an idea but you can't double the fuel
> usage
> and expect to make less pollution because you will cause some other
> problem
> like maybe not enough gasoline to go around and that is if the NOX went
> down, which I doubt. Every few years we hear new buzz words that are going
> to kill us all unless our government acts immediately.  This way we are
> coerced into thinking that they are necessary so we will vote for them,
> and
> against big anything. -- Bill --
> 
> 
> I think the idea was to reduce a target component of emissions.  NOx I
> think
> but I'm not looking it up.  For a few years in California you had to
> install
> a NOx 'kit" in certain vehicles.  These all reduced ignition timing under
> various conditions.  The cheapest one I ever saw consisted of plugs for
> the
> vacuum advance hose and a sticker for the speedometer that cautioned
> against
> driving over 55 MPH (or something like that).  Back then the HC limits
> were
> pretty loose.  There was definitely a trade off made to reduce certain
> pollutants while allowing some others to increase.
> 
> Frank
> _______________________________________________
> Support Team.Net  http://www.team.net/donate.html
> 
> You are subscribed as itswonderful@comcast.net
> 
> Tigers@autox.team.net
> http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/tigers
> 
> http://www.team.net/archive
_______________________________________________
Support Team.Net  http://www.team.net/donate.html


Tigers@autox.team.net
http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/tigers

http://www.team.net/archive

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>