New car emission pact to cost drivers $5000-$10000 more for cars

You mean Obama who is continuing the bush wars and looking to start additional ones?

Welfare and Warfare are tied together politically. You want one, you get the other. The US two wing one party system has one wing that puts welfare first and gets warfare along for the ride and other wing that puts warfare first and gets welfare along with it.

PS: almost all the warfare money is not spent to protect us. War is a Racket.

You left out the part about the 100 MPG carburetor that EXXON bought the patent for and has locked away in Area 51 with the UFO.

credits

ROTFLMAO.... pulling all those numbers and bullshit conclusions out of your ass must have given your constipation problem some welcome relief.... ;-)

They don't have to pretend anything. Is there something fundamentally wrong with mandating fewer emissions?

Global warming, sure. Politics (Canadian or otherwise), sure. But why did you pick the Mustang group out of so many similar groups available?

I'm betting that you don't come anywhere near the troll results you wanted, but here's one more post to help. I like to do my part.

dwight

messagenews:bc4f9b48-6bcd-4be8-81ca-2b9b1027b706 @w17g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...

I had a 1974 Mustang. It was God awful. A horrible 4 cyl. tantamount to the Pinto or the Chevy Vega of the day.

Well, at least the Vega had silicone cylinder tech. I still dream about owning a Cosworth Vega.

Then again, my '69 Mustang had a 302. That was nice. Better than nice. A lot of fun.

"Jim Warman" wrote in news:ALntn.688$z%6.424@edtnps83:

Yes, once we starve the Third World because of ethanol production and you end up with a big windmill on your car!

there are many sources for ethanol production which have zero impact on food production....

klunk wrote

And if you think that ethanol is 80% the power of gasoline, and a rip-off. It's not true. Proper tuning, increased engine compression. Read up on what Octane ratings are about. High compression engines demand high octane, that doesn't imply that the fuel has got more power. It's about the temperature of combustion.

Airplane fuel is less combustibal than gasoline. But that's what the guys who race high compression drag racing cars use.

You can't tell me that the 900 hp Indy cars, racing on ethanol did it for the boost.

But 1 litre of gasoline in an F1 race car, versus 1 litre of ethanol in an Indy car?

The absolute energy of gasoline is far more potent. I thik that one gallon of gasoline is equal to 10 sticks of TNT.

Both cars race at 900 hp.

I spent a few years as a track worker and have seen people on fire. You can dilute ethanol with water, but you cannot see it burn.

If somone is burning in gasoline? You can see it, and it's not pretty.

Water makes it worse. So you use a fire bottle. C02.

It's really cool that racing cars are designed so well these days. Fires are rare. Very.

Rex B wrote

I had a 1967 Ford Galaxie with a 396 V8 in it, and it was probably about 290 horsepower.

By 1999, my car had a 146 cubic inch V6 in it, and it was 160 horses.

When fuel efficiency came about, we didn't drop gas mileage. We had V6 and V8 turbos. So, we didn't drop fuel consumption, the auto makers made more powerful vehicles!

I had a Ford Escort in Canada 23 years-ago. It was 115 hp, with a 4 cyl.

The same in the UK was 140 hp. But they didn't know an SUV at all.

The makers here took the fuel efficiency and threw it against more horsepower.

So, gas mileage never dropped, though fuel efficiency grew.

Ford never built a 396.

The engines available for the '67 Galaxy 500:

But, if th Democrats increase taxes to the top 5% income, and also reduce the 800 billion dollars military budget by 70%, they could give some money back to those families with an anual income of 50K or less.

There is no free lunch. It does very littel good to raise taxes, if you are still going to spend more than you receive. When you do that, you have to borrow money. When you borrow money, jus tlike when you or I borrow money, you have to pay interest on that loan. Money spent on paying interest is money you cannot spend on anything else you may want or need. And when that interest is consuming a larger and larger percentage of federal spending, which is happening, that is money you don't have to spend on your pet proejcts.

Dude, Explain the evolve/republican crack then. Explain it. What's the true meaning? Oh wait, you're just going to name call instead because like your buddy you're incapable of civil discussion. Everything is political. You boys got what you flung back in your face and now you whine. Whine and cry. Do you either of you address anything? Explain yourselves? No. You cry that I was 'mean' and call me an asshole. You're the ones arguing for mother government, yet get offended when I call that out. You're a couple of cry babies as far as I can tell.

And yet you wine and cry and call names. If you don't like my posts use your kill file.

dude... I have no interest in explaining anything other than letting you know that you behaved like an asshole... and your drama-queen histrionics about the "republican crack" constitute nothing more than hypocritical whining... as I've said a couple times now.... grow the f*ck up.... k....?....

I could grow up to the standard of name calling like you? Laff. you're arguing on a second grade level if that. You call names and cry 'mommy mommy, he asked a loaded question in response to assinine statement' WHINE *CRY*.... 'he's an asshole/idiot/moron'. WHINE... call names... whine... That's what your interest is in. It's apparently all you do.

Wow. You really do live in a fantasy world. I told you right above. Instead of being civil and discussing fuel economy requirements you decided to be insulting. You're incapable of a civil discussion. You want to trade name calling and rather low level insults as you do again above.

If you 'chastise' children by calling them names, especially names like 'asshole', 'idiot', etc and so forth I suggest that you not have any.

And in what world is saying that if you won't discuss the topic at hand I won't be bothered with an exchange any further 'declaring myself the winner'? Winner of what? There has been no debate. You're incapable of it as you've demonstrated time and time again. You've been given three chances to respond to the material below and have failed to respond each time. There's no 'victory' to declare when the other team won't even take the field. It's just a forfeit.

Buh-bye.

lol... and yet... you still haven't explained why my analogy was uncivil....

ahhhhh.... so... you haven't quite yet regained your composure enough to pick your balls up off the floor and run away to cry.... understood.... ;-)

ISTR that the 352, 390, and 428 engines were all called big blocks. So, did the FE code stand for F'ing Enormous? ;-)