On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 16:37:52 -0500, Reverend AlGore
<globalwarming@church.com> wrote:

>In article <486e04bc$0$4029$bbae4d71@news.suddenlink.net>,
> Moe <BubbleleLand@Fat.City> wrote:
>
>> I'd rather see some kind of if you can drive this fast and still get 30
>> MPG and traffic permitting, you can drive 65 or 70.
>> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080703/...er_speed_limit
>
>Jimmie Carter, bless his soul, set the speed limits at 55 nationwide.
>It was not popular and most ignored it. It is a new day, a new era with
>more enlightened voters. I hope Obama sets the speed limits at 55
>again, does away with noisy motorcycles, boats, cars and taxes to the
>max large SUV's, leaf blowers, lawn mowers, snowblowers, pickup trucks,
>boats with motors and all the other motorized recreational toys people
>have today. Also I would hope Obama, in order to cause healthcare to be
>cheaper, makes people diet in order to weigh less and therefore put less
>burden on the national healthcare plan that Obama has in mind for us. I
>would also hope that he makes physical activity such as walking two or
>three miles a day mandatary, monitored by the federal government, which
>will be created under the new mandatary healthcare plan which Barrack
>will create for us, such as homeland healthcare services, for example,
>this will create jobs BTW, union jobs.
>
>I have high hopes for Obama in 08, he will lead us out of Iraq,
>eventually, when the time is right. Barack said he will give us
>national healthcare and raise taxes on the rich, yippy, lower taxes on
>the poor, bring big oil to it's knees, woooo-hoooo!! I hope you all
>vote for Barack Obama, the next president of the U.S.

ROFLMAO

Your reasons to vote 'for' Barry are the reason he won't be elected.

Thanks for reminding us why we won't vote for that fool.

--

Scott in Florida

In article <ki6t6457g08hhtn9eur6k13unhnf28eaf3@4ax.com>,
Scott in Florida <MoveOn@outa.here> wrote:

> On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 16:37:52 -0500, Reverend AlGore
> <globalwarming@church.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <486e04bc$0$4029$bbae4d71@news.suddenlink.net>,
> > Moe <BubbleleLand@Fat.City> wrote:
> >
> >> I'd rather see some kind of if you can drive this fast and still get 30
> >> MPG and traffic permitting, you can drive 65 or 70.
> >> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080703/...er_speed_limit
> >
> >Jimmie Carter, bless his soul, set the speed limits at 55 nationwide.
> >It was not popular and most ignored it. It is a new day, a new era with
> >more enlightened voters. I hope Obama sets the speed limits at 55
> >again, does away with noisy motorcycles, boats, cars and taxes to the
> >max large SUV's, leaf blowers, lawn mowers, snowblowers, pickup trucks,
> >boats with motors and all the other motorized recreational toys people
> >have today. Also I would hope Obama, in order to cause healthcare to be
> >cheaper, makes people diet in order to weigh less and therefore put less
> >burden on the national healthcare plan that Obama has in mind for us. I
> >would also hope that he makes physical activity such as walking two or
> >three miles a day mandatary, monitored by the federal government, which
> >will be created under the new mandatary healthcare plan which Barrack
> >will create for us, such as homeland healthcare services, for example,
> >this will create jobs BTW, union jobs.
> >
> >I have high hopes for Obama in 08, he will lead us out of Iraq,
> >eventually, when the time is right. Barack said he will give us
> >national healthcare and raise taxes on the rich, yippy, lower taxes on
> >the poor, bring big oil to it's knees, woooo-hoooo!! I hope you all
> >vote for Barack Obama, the next president of the U.S.
>
> ROFLMAO
>
> Your reasons to vote 'for' Barry are the reason he won't be elected.
>
> Thanks for reminding us why we won't vote for that fool.

jsb will be hiding his boat and pu truck, in hopes the feds won't find
it, LOL.
--

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 17:47:54 -0400, Scott in Florida
<MoveOn@outa.here> wrote:

>On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 16:37:52 -0500, Reverend AlGore
><globalwarming@church.com> wrote:
>
>>In article <486e04bc$0$4029$bbae4d71@news.suddenlink.net>,
>> Moe <BubbleleLand@Fat.City> wrote:
>>
>>> I'd rather see some kind of if you can drive this fast and still get 30
>>> MPG and traffic permitting, you can drive 65 or 70.
>>> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080703/...er_speed_limit
>>
>>Jimmie Carter, bless his soul, set the speed limits at 55 nationwide.
>>It was not popular and most ignored it. It is a new day, a new era with
>>more enlightened voters. I hope Obama sets the speed limits at 55
>>again, does away with noisy motorcycles, boats, cars and taxes to the
>>max large SUV's, leaf blowers, lawn mowers, snowblowers, pickup trucks,
>>boats with motors and all the other motorized recreational toys people
>>have today. Also I would hope Obama, in order to cause healthcare to be
>>cheaper, makes people diet in order to weigh less and therefore put less
>>burden on the national healthcare plan that Obama has in mind for us. I
>>would also hope that he makes physical activity such as walking two or
>>three miles a day mandatary, monitored by the federal government, which
>>will be created under the new mandatary healthcare plan which Barrack
>>will create for us, such as homeland healthcare services, for example,
>>this will create jobs BTW, union jobs.
>>
>>I have high hopes for Obama in 08, he will lead us out of Iraq,
>>eventually, when the time is right. Barack said he will give us
>>national healthcare and raise taxes on the rich, yippy, lower taxes on
>>the poor, bring big oil to it's knees, woooo-hoooo!! I hope you all
>>vote for Barack Obama, the next president of the U.S.
>
>ROFLMAO
>
>Your reasons to vote 'for' Barry are the reason he won't be elected.

Excepting, of course that Obama will beat Toilet McSame and you'll be
whining for at least four years. More likely 8.

--
gburnore at DataBasix dot Com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
How you look depends on where you go.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary L. Burnore | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
| ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
Official .sig, Accept no substitutes. | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
| ÝÛ 0 1 7 2 3 / Ý³Þ 3 7 4 9 3 0 Û³
Black Helicopter Repair Services, Ltd.| Official Proof of Purchase
================================================== =========================

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 13:09:47 -0700, larry moe 'n curly wrote:

> Hachiroku ãƒ�ãƒ�ãƒ*ク wrote:
>
>> My Japanese cars all get their best fuel economy at 70MPH.
>
> No, they don't. Like all cars, they'll probably do best at the slowest
> RPM you can get by with in top gear, according to Pat Bedard, a former
> Chrysler engineer and current columnist for Car & Driver.

Pat's a good guy, but look where he worked. Chrysler isn't exactly known
for building the most fuel efficient cars in the world.

And he isn't a very good driver, if you go by the one Indy 500 he was in.

That's OK, I love him anyway.


However, back to the topic at hand: I have owned the Hachiroku for 23
years now. When I bought it the speed limit was 55 MPH. At 55 it got
about 27 MPG. At 60 it got about 28. At 65 it got 28. At 70 it got 36.
Actually the 36 was a combination of driving 15 miles in a congested
city, and 40 miles at 70 on the Interstate. So my guess is I was actually
doing better than 36 on the highway...

And I have the book in the glovebox to prove it.




>
> When the national 55 MPH speed limit was imposed in the 1970s, many
> truckers claimed that fuel economy was better at higher speeds, so the
> feds let some of them prove it while a government employee rode along.
> Only one trucker succeeded, and he won a bet with the other truckers
> because even they didn't believe that 55 MPH used more fuel.

On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 11:49:44 -0400, tak wrote:

> "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno@ae86.GTS> wrote in message
> news:486e4089$0$23841$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.c om...
>> On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 06:09:29 -0500, Moe wrote:
>>
>>> I'd rather see some kind of if you can drive this fast and still get
>>> 30 MPG and traffic permitting, you can drive 65 or 70.
>>> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080703/...er_speed_limit
>>
>> My Japanese cars all get their best fuel economy at 70MPH.
>>
> Hey, Hachi, you have Japanese cars? At what speed do they get their best
> fuel economy?????????????????

I'll leave that for you to guess! The winner gets an American-made Subaru
Legacy Wagon. (Small handling fee required)

"Hachiroku ????" <Trueno@e86.GTS> wrote in message
news:486eb7ef$0$23888$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.c om...
> On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 11:49:44 -0400, tak wrote:
>
>> "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno@ae86.GTS> wrote in message
>> news:486e4089$0$23841$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.c om...
>>> On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 06:09:29 -0500, Moe wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'd rather see some kind of if you can drive this fast and still get
>>>> 30 MPG and traffic permitting, you can drive 65 or 70.
>>>> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080703/...er_speed_limit
>>>
>>> My Japanese cars all get their best fuel economy at 70MPH.
>>>
>> Hey, Hachi, you have Japanese cars? At what speed do they get their best
>> fuel economy?????????????????
>
> I'll leave that for you to guess! The winner gets an American-made Subaru
> Legacy Wagon. (Small handling fee required)
>
Wow, Handle this,
you and Scott--what a combo

"Hachiroku ????" <Trueno@e86.GTS> wrote in message
newsan.2008.07.05.13.44.45.159505@e86.GTS...
> On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 20:56:21 -0400, tak wrote:
>
>>
>> "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno@e86.GTS> wrote in message
>> news:486eb7ef$0$23888$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.c om...
>>> On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 11:49:44 -0400, tak wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Hachiroku ????" <Trueno@ae86.GTS> wrote in message
>>>> news:486e4089$0$23841$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.c om...
>>>>> On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 06:09:29 -0500, Moe wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd rather see some kind of if you can drive this fast and still get
>>>>>> 30 MPG and traffic permitting, you can drive 65 or 70.
>>>>>> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080703/...er_speed_limit
>>>>>
>>>>> My Japanese cars all get their best fuel economy at 70MPH.
>>>>>
>>>> Hey, Hachi, you have Japanese cars? At what speed do they get their
>>>> best
>>>> fuel economy?????????????????
>>>
>>> I'll leave that for you to guess! The winner gets an American-made
>>> Subaru
>>> Legacy Wagon. (Small handling fee required)
>>>
>> Wow, Handle this,
>> you and Scott--what a combo
>
> Could be.
>
> Why would I want to see a slow down when I can prove my cars get better
> mileage at faster speeds?

Yeah, but 80 mph? Accident & ticket & higher car insur. rates avoidance,
maybe??

Cathy


>
>

"Hachiroku ãƒ�ãƒ�ãƒ*ク"...
> But my cars get better economy at 70 than at 55. Except the Scion. It
> gets it's best at 80.
>
OK, your cars. How about on average for all the cars on the road in the USA
today? That would be what would peg this as a good possibility for an idea
or not I am thinking. What do you think in regards to _all_ cars?
Tomes

On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 23:44:05 -0400, "Tomes" <ask.me@here.net> wrote:

>"Hachiroku ????"...
>> But my cars get better economy at 70 than at 55. Except the Scion. It
>> gets it's best at 80.
>>
>OK, your cars. How about on average for all the cars on the road in the USA
>today?

Add mine to the same list as his. Look at it this way:

When you drive 70mph, it takes you 5.4 hours to go from SF to LA.
When you drive 55mph, it takes you 6.9 hours to go from SF to LA.

Can you honestly say that you think you'd lose LESS gas by running
your car's engine for an additional ONE AND A HALF hours?



--
gburnore at DataBasix dot Com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
How you look depends on where you go.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary L. Burnore | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
| ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
Official .sig, Accept no substitutes. | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
| ÝÛ 0 1 7 2 3 / Ý³Þ 3 7 4 9 3 0 Û³
Black Helicopter Repair Services, Ltd.| Official Proof of Purchase
================================================== =========================

Hachiroku ãƒ�ãƒ�ãƒ*ク wrote:
> On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 22:21:22 -0400, Cathy F. wrote:
>
>>> Could be.
>>>
>>> Why would I want to see a slow down when I can prove my cars get better
>>> mileage at faster speeds?
>> Yeah, but 80 mph? Accident & ticket & higher car insur. rates avoidance,
>> maybe??
>
> I've only driven the car 80 maybe 4 times, once from Hartford to
> Springfield. On that trip I drove 75 MPH down and 80 MPH back, after
> filling the tank, and when I filled it when I got back it came up 31 MPG.
> Usual economy is 27. Mostly highway driving (70 MPH) gets me 29-30. I can
> live with that.
>
>
For maximum miles per gallon a vehicle would be made to go 35 mph.
That isn't feasible and it's all a compromise. If a car actually gets
better mileage at 70 than 55 (which I doubt) then it could be made to
get better mileage at 55 then it would ever get at 70. Aerodynamics stuff.
Pushing harder against air. Time is money, and there were studies to
determine if the 55 mph was over all efficient. Sitting in a traffic
jam with the car idling and the AC running isn't very efficient. A lot
of things are just to hard to measure, quality of life is one.
I know that 55 mph speed limit thing was hell on long trips.