Ethanol ?

Hello,

What is your guys' opinion of the engine development at Saab (GM) that runs on ethanol-based gasoline? Please, keep all GM-bashing to other threads; here I am just curious to see the technical merits/demerits that people are aware of.

I have not been able to locate a single gas station here in Portland, OR, that carries ethanol-based gas (E85).

-Dima

Reply to
Dima
Loading thread data ...

Dima,

Wow, you are in Portland, OR. How do you like it?

I am surprised by Portland not have any E85, given that it seems to be the Nation's leader in progressive environmentalism.

SG

Reply to
SG

Well, it's a hydrocarbon. It burns well, and cleanly. And I'd rather pay someone in this country to grow corn, than pay someone elsewhere; some of the folks we buy oil from are downright unfriendly if you think about it.

Yeah, I went through that song&dance about 6 months ago in Milwaukee, nothing here either. The co-ops in rural areas are probably the best bet, but the one here is just building the equipment and won't be online until harvest time this year they hope.

It's promising. It can use our existing infrastructure and is an actual fuel, as opposed to hydrogen which has to be made and is effectively just a chemical battery, and doesn't work in existing infrastructure. Biodiesel is another promising technology - I'd rather see biodiesel and ethanol, than hydrogen.

Dave Hinz

Reply to
Dave Hinz

I think it's a great development, should have been started years ago, to make us independent of middle east oil. Alternative fuels, or engines even, are a necesity because some day (maybe not not in our lifetime) we'll run out of oil anyway and I would like my (grand)children to be able to use Saab vehicles.

Reply to
MH

in article snipped-for-privacy@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com, Dima at snipped-for-privacy@tdasystems.com wrote on 28/03/2006 02:29:

I think it's superb! Way of the future, IMO. For all intents and purposes, it acts like a petrol car without the emissions ... Oh, and it performs better. Can't be bad, eh? Now if the car itself was not sooooo fugly, I could be tempted. I think I'll wait for the technology to drop into the 9-3 range, since that design seems to be "it" for the 9-5 :(

I wonder if the upcoming Carlsson 9-3 will run E85? The proposed spec is 185 BHP, up from 150 BHP which sounds like the kind of power hike ethanol made for the Biopower 9-5.

One of our supermarket chains in the UK has started to stock it now under the name Harvest Bioethanol.

Paul

1989 900 Turbo S
formatting link
Reply to
Paul Halliday

Well it would help if the US government didn't illegally invade some of those countries because it doesn't want to financially and militarily support the particular country's leader anymore. 8-) That doesn't generate much 'cred'. Then again our stupid country went along for the ride too...

I haven't seen any cars here that are designed to work with the equivalent of E85 fuel yet, but I'm sure they're on the way.

Craig.

Reply to
Craig's Saab C900 Site

Yep can't agree more. Australia used to be mostly self-sufficient with oil, but now that local production can't keep up with demand, we seem to be following the global trend of sucking up the gloop that Haliburton (oh sorry

- Iraq Inc.) pulls out of the ground in places like Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi, etc.

Craig.

Reply to
Craig's Saab C900 Site

Saab 9-5 Biopower. the aero model makes more power on E85 than on straight petrol

Reply to
NeedforSwede2

Yeah, maybe we should have allowed him to keep shredding people and stuff. I mean, why should the US be the world's police force? When's the last time someone thanked us? I mean, seriously, it's been 60 years since we bailed someone out and they were openly grateful for it, correct me if I'm wrong.

My opinion on that was and is, we should've taken the guy out because he _was_ a credible threat based on the best available information, and then turned it over to them..."Here ya go, we fixed your problem. Make sure the next guy behaves or we'll have to come back and do it again if he starts threatening us and our interests again. Have a nice day."

There's probably a reason I've never been called "diplomatic".

What about the ecopower engine of a few years ago from Saab? I thought the whole point was it could burn whateverthehell you put in it? Further, do the boost, timing, and other parameters change dramatically with a different fuel, that you couldn't just add that part of the map to the ECU? Does Trionic need to know, or does it care, that it's burning something other than gasoline (or petrol even?)

Dave Hinz

Reply to
Dave Hinz

70's? In Wisconsin (corn-belt USA, baby...) nearly all the pumps are for E10 (10% ethanol, 90% gasoline). The "regular" grade is still non-alcoholic (heh) so you can still use that for 2-stroke engines and others which don't like the alcohol. Not sure if that's intentional but it's good to have the option for the older stuff.
Reply to
Dave Hinz

You mean WW-II? OK, the US helped eventually, but they only joined after their own interest i.c. Pearl Harbor was attacked in December 1941 and because Germany declared war on the US. PH was more than 2 years after the start of the war (invasion of Poland in September 1939).

Speculation, but if Japan had not attacked PH, the US might never have joined the war because of Roosevelts 'non belligerency' stance (and I would be typing this in German...).

So, openly grateful? Yes, but maybe for the Japanese attacking Pearl Harbor and drawing the US into the war.

SAAB content? None, but you asked to be corrected...

Reply to
MH

Well, to be fair, we had our military gutted by short-sighted leftists, and had quite a bit of buildup to take care of before we'd be effective.

Dunno. But I'm of the impression that the attack on Pearl Harbor was one of those "we forced 'em to do it" moves.

Fair enough. Oh, did I mention that I did find that other ring & pinion for the Sonett, but that they're not in what I'd call usable condition? Big chips on the pinion tooth, no clue how that could happen.

Reply to
Dave Hinz

Ah... too bad... Let me know if you find a usable set.

Reply to
MH

in article snipped-for-privacy@individual.net, Dave Hinz at snipped-for-privacy@spamcop.net wrote on 29/03/2006 14:06:

Absolutely right! So why does the US keep sticking its nose in? No-one has asked the US to do so! Keeping to the point, a lot of it is for energy interests and as you rightly say, the US would do better to use less oil from nations that don't like you (like Venezuela?). I don't think the US should have got involved in either of the wars with Iraq and I don't think anyone else should have got involved. The first time, well, it was like another Falklands* for our leading party with our mates from across the water out on manoeuvres, but the second time, I just hung my head in shame. It was unwarranted, morally wrong and downright illegal.

  • "The Falklands" (yes, go Google, or Wikipede) was when the Conservative Party were having a little crisis of confidence in the UK. Hey, start a war with someone we've never heard of in a far away land ... Oh, a few square miles at the other side of the world. Remove all our nationals first and send a load of ships to go and get back what was it? Ten square miles and a couple of score of sheep .. And some penguins :)

Furthermore, I don't think we should have raised the guy to power and aided him for the years that we did; Hussein or Bush :) At the time, "the mad Ayatollah" proved to be something that needed dealing with and Hussein's politics seemed to be right. Well, guess what ... We got rid of Hussein and we have another "mad Ayatollah" in Iran. Oh, like Afghanistan when the Russians were our (well, your) enemy. You think we'd learn by now. I mean, we've (the British) have had the Irish problem for the last 150 years, so you'd think we'd be used to playing both sides. Western foreign policy does not work. Perhaps the best foreign policy is to keep the (whatever) away from foreigners :)

So, there's no WMD! If Hussein does manage to get off war crimes charges as well, which in all fairness, he might ... Does he get his country back? Maybe he could come here and live out his life in the English countryside like other great dictators, such as General Pinochet?

Apart from the current situation with tribal warfare and rioting is much worse than before and there does not seem to be any kind of exit strategy that does not constitute our soldiers simply walking away. I really can't think what the credible threat was at the time. Long range missiles? Well, you've got them, we've got them, France have got them, Russia have, India do ... So what? Do you really think someone who has been a President of a very volatile country in a very volatile region since the '70s would be dumb enough to shake them at the US? That's so much more for the fanatic than seasoned dictator.

:)

Nope - that's the beauty of Trionic! Personally, I'm amazed it took so long for SAAB to publicise this technology and formalise it into a retail car. Volvo beat them with their Bi-Fuel cars, but I think the SAAB product is better; certainly a very viable technology for the future and a good reason for someone to buy SAAB from GM when the going gets tough(er).

Paul

1989 900 Turbo S
formatting link
Reply to
Paul Halliday

Well, there's one, but it's in my Sonett, so...

Reply to
Dave Hinz

Let's see. Which of those countries have used WMD against their _own citizens_?

I think we're done with this topic, I can't see it going anywhere useful.

Yes, we're definately done.

Reply to
Dave Hinz

Hussein gassed the Kurds in 1988.

Going "all the way" and removing Hussein during Desert Storm would have been easy, justified.

Now going on a never-ending drawn out insurgency conflict like in Iraq, and doing it NOW?

Reply to
SmaartAasSaabr

in article snipped-for-privacy@t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com, SmaartAasSaabr at snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote on 30/03/2006 17:52:

Gee! That's all right, then ...

Woo! Yay! Of course Israel do not oppress Muslim ethnics on a near daily basis, either ...

I really don't understand this "justification" thing. The moment someone points the finger at the US and criticises them of the same errors and injustices that they do to others, everyone gets uptight. You'd think the US had never made a mistake. Well, they have and we joined in. For shame!

Paul

1989 900 Turbo S
formatting link
Reply to
Paul Halliday

in article snipped-for-privacy@individual.net, Dave Hinz at snipped-for-privacy@spamcop.net wrote on 30/03/2006 13:40:

Wow! Just wow! That really is a naïve statement. Since you obviously don't want an answer (and this stream is largely a you and me discussion), I won't bother pointing out what's wrong with that statement.

A pertinent point, nevertheless ...

So when I criticise the US and its leadership of the same errors and injustices that the US does of others, there can be no conversation? I thought you were more resolute than that.

I am in no way having a go at you. I consider open debate to be good and the thrust of this thread moved towards that. I do hope to continue enjoying SAAB talk with you, since we do have that in common. Opinions of western corporate imperialism, we do not!

Paul

1989 900 Turbo S
formatting link
Reply to
Paul Halliday

So how does categorizing 2 US presidents as arrogant dictators add anything to the debate?

Reply to
Fred W

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.