Indy Rice League??? ;)

Discussion in 'General Motoring' started by Hachiroku, Oct 17, 2005.

  1. Hachiroku

    Hachiroku Guest

    After today's race, Chevrolet dropped out as a supplier of engines to the
    Indy Racing League (IRL)

    Interesting. Although previous Indianapolis 500's have had their share of
    British engines as well as American iron, the 2006 Indy 500 will most
    likely be a fight between the best from Honda and Toyota. There may be a
    stray entry of an older car with a Chevy, but IRL is now All Japanese when
    it comes to engines!
     
    Hachiroku, Oct 17, 2005
    #1
  2. Hachiroku

    jim beam Guest

    do you find it ironic?
     
    jim beam, Oct 17, 2005
    #2
  3. Hachiroku

    Hachiroku Guest

    Not really. The Japanese have been creeping into the world racing scenes,
    and their engines have been getting better and better. I am curious as to
    why Cevy dropped the ball, though.
     
    Hachiroku, Oct 17, 2005
    #3
  4. Still, it seems an odd digression from a quest for more economical
    engines, doesn't it? As the public becomes sensitised to squandering
    our grandchildren's energy supplies, will corporations benefit by being
    associated with the waste?

    Brent
     
    Brent Secombe, Oct 17, 2005
    #4
  5. I don't see a "digression" at all, in the sense that I think you intend.
    Seems to me that pushing the technology to its limits has direct benefits to
    building more efficient and cleaner burning, reliable engines. Does anyone
    come close to Honda in this regard?

    Leonard
     
    Leonard Caillouet, Oct 17, 2005
    #5
  6. Hachiroku

    jim beam Guest

    yes, toyota. both honda & toyotoa are neck & neck - have been for some
    time.
     
    jim beam, Oct 17, 2005
    #6
  7. Hachiroku

    jim beam Guest

    paradoxically, it's not. to get every watt out of a racing engine, you
    have to design to get that energy out of the fuel. in terms of energy
    output per liter burned, F1 engines are some of the most efficient in
    the world. and it's no coincidence that F1 racing is also fuel limited.
    that technology is directly usable in the world of domestic economy
    engine design. whether detroit /chooses/ to use it is another matter
    entirely. look at the specific output [watts per liter] of honda &
    toyota engines and compare them with detroit hunkojunks.
     
    jim beam, Oct 17, 2005
    #7
  8. Hachiroku

    Hachiroku Guest


    Hmmmm....interesting take on the problem.

    Except, you DO know these engines run on Methanol, right? And that
    methanol is made from Corn (methanol is actually a form of grain alchohol,
    or "White Lightening" or "Moonshine")

    If anything, the means to ectract 700+ HP from an engine running Grain
    Alchohol should be commended. Add to that the fact they've been doing it
    for almost 20 years now, and the real question SHOULD be, why aren't we
    developing this technology for street cars.

    Now, at the current time, methanol is VERY expensive, mush more than
    gasoline. IIRC, the current price for methanol racing fuel is about $6 per
    gallon, but this is a purely refined form.

    If the technology came into use more, there is no reason why the car
    you're driving couldn't un on 25-30% methanol. And if the government had
    taken note, instead of playing ball with the fuel companies for the last
    20 years, there would have been plenty of oil if there had been more
    widespread ethanol replacement. I have been running a 10% mixture of
    gasoline and ethanol in one of my cars for almost 20 years now (I seek the
    stuff out!) and it still seems to be running just fine. Now the IRL has
    announced it will be running an Ethanol/Methanol mix beginning for the
    year 2006.

    ALL CART/Champ Cars/IRL cars have been running on Methanol since 1979 or
    1980.

    Actually, I'm wrong. From the IRL page:
    "Methanol has been the fuel of choice in cars running in the Indianapolis
    500 since 1965. A fatal accident involving drivers Eddie Sachs and Dave
    MacDonald on the second lap of the 1964 Indianapolis 500 prompted the
    switch."


    http://www.hawaii.gov/dbedt/ert/activitybook/fs-alcohol.html

    http://www.mocorn.org/news/2005/News%20Release3-03-05.htm

    http://www.g-forse.com/archive/news356_e.html
     
    Hachiroku, Oct 17, 2005
    #8
  9. Hachiroku

    Hachiroku Guest

    Here's an even better article.

    Seems I was a little wrong here. Methanol isn't grain alchohol, it is WOOD
    grain alchohol.

    And just think: if they used rice to make ethamol (Sake??) It really WOULD
    be a "Ricing" league...


    http://www.methanol.org/altfuel/press/pr970521.html
     
    Hachiroku, Oct 17, 2005
    #9
  10. Hachiroku

    Hachiroku Guest


    Interesting you call yourself "Jim Beam"! See my other responses to the
    OP. Did YOU know these cars run on Methanol? (Most people don't...)

    About 14 years ago I was listening to Deborah Norville's radio program
    where she had a folk singer who was going to protest the Indy 500 for that
    year because he wanted to point out what a waste of gasoline it was. Oh
    BOY! I jumped right on the phone and called in, and told them that the
    cars run on Methanol, and if ANYTHING he should be PRAISING the engine
    builders and engineers for being able to squeeze 600+ HP out of an engine
    running a Renewable Resource...

    They didn't have much to talk about after that! ;P
     
    Hachiroku, Oct 17, 2005
    #10
  11. Hachiroku

    tomb Guest

    Uhm, no. Methanol ("wood alcohol") is the simplest alcohol, ethanol ("grain
    alcohol") is the second simplest. They are distinct substances, and methanol
    is quite toxic. Don't be giving people ideas that they should drink methanol
    to get drunk... they'll loose their eyesight or worse.

    (Probably more than you wanted to know at
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol)
     
    tomb, Oct 17, 2005
    #11
  12. Hachiroku

    Hachiroku Guest


    Yeah, I realized that after I posted it!

    But after a few bouts withj Everclear, I'll try anything once!
     
    Hachiroku, Oct 17, 2005
    #12
  13. Jim, that's a cogent and articulate reply. Thank you.

    Brent
     
    Brent Secombe, Oct 18, 2005
    #13
  14. Thank you. No, I didn't know about the methanol. I don't follow racing.
    I'm pleased to learn that the fuel is from a renewable resource.

    I was born completely ignorant, and I'm still playing catch-up. :)

    Brent
     
    Brent Secombe, Oct 18, 2005
    #14
  15. Hachiroku

    Hachiroku Guest

    Gee, I think I was too...I can't remember back that far!

    Yes, it is a renewable resource, and I wish they would take what they have
    learned and apply it to our street cars!

    But the oil companies are powerful, and you'd THINK they would be at the
    leading edge of research (actually, they probably ARE but are milking the
    Dino sources for all they are worth!) and set themselves up as the
    'saviours' with the new renewable energy! "You saw it here first!"

    Surprising they aren't...
     
    Hachiroku, Oct 18, 2005
    #15
  16. Hachiroku

    jim beam Guest

    i wouldn't be too happy if they did. lower calorific value of
    enthanol/methanol means lower output and lower mpg's. unadulterated
    gasoline is the way to go. cheaper too.
     
    jim beam, Oct 18, 2005
    #16
  17. Hachiroku

    Enrico Fermi Guest

    I was in the petro research business for 26 years. Company purchased a fleet
    of electric cars in ~1980 and one was mine (and what a POS). We had solar
    powered gas stations, had a system for making ethanol from oil with high
    rates of conversion and we had an automobile test facility with a wind
    tunnel (and no, no secret carburetor). The dirty secret to energy is that
    the oil co's sell what customers want to buy. Selling gasoline is better
    than dealing drugs; market is bigger and it's legal. The plan was in '75 to
    move drivers out of their Eldorados with 472 ci motors into Vegas and Pintos
    (to help Ford and GM increase their market. Imagine us being in cahoots with
    Ford and GM ). Those pesky drivers purchased Hondas and Toyotas instead!
    Many of our customers told us the Government should make big cars illegal
    and manged to convince their legislators to adopt a 55mph limit. That wasn't
    good for Big Oil. The SUV's were a Godsend for the refining dept. We could't
    make money in the early 90's from the refining operations. The Explorer
    changed all that. As long as an F350 dually with a huge engine is considerd
    a high-status grocery-getter, we are all doomed. I wish Honda sold a Civic
    with a 200 hp tdi diesel in the USA. Fast around town and great mpg on the
    road (plus being a Honda). 2 things an individual can do to make the world
    a better place: Live close to your job and don't drive an RV on vacation.
     
    Enrico Fermi, Oct 18, 2005
    #17
  18. Hachiroku

    Hachiroku Guest

    I dunno...those guys are able to squeeze 700 HP out of a 10 cylinder
    engine running the stuff...

    I think a couple hundred HP shouldn't be too hard.

    The only problem with ethanol? Think of the demands put on the growers of
    corn, wheat and soybeans, the major sources of ethanol. There have been
    some BAD years for growers, and if we were completely dependant on
    ethanol, that could be a problem. Some years there would be less corn on
    the table because we'd be putting all of it in our tanks.

    But, then again, perhaps we could end the subsidies where we pay growers
    NOT to grow crops! And I don't think the farmers would be having all the
    tough times they have now, because ALL their output would be in demand
    instead of overproduction. Any crop thet can produce ethanol would
    probably not go to waste in silos (probably be a GOOD thing, storing it
    for a year!)

    If they can get the engines to run with a 20-40% ethanol mix, and get the
    production of ethanol to where it doesn't take MORE energy to produce than
    you get, then I see a win-win situation here.
     
    Hachiroku, Oct 18, 2005
    #18
  19. I guess it comes down to miles per gallon-of-what. We postponed
    breeding new dinosaurs, so eventually we'll be stuck with energy from
    non-petro sources. I bet you're right about lower mpg's; but if it
    comes down to a choice between 30 mpg on a fuel we've exhausted or 10
    mpg on distilled dandelions, we'll have to go with the dandelions...

    .... in which case Scott's will come out with a lawn product that gets
    rid of all that ugly grass among the dandelions. :)

    Brent
     
    Brent Secombe, Oct 18, 2005
    #19
  20. Hachiroku

    Hachiroku Guest


    Unfortunately, most of my jobs have been at least 20 miles away, and a
    long time I was driving over 50 one way! Wife didn't want to move, see?

    But then I buy cars I like, and like to drive, so it's a 50/50 deal.

    But with the price of gas now...

    But, what's the deal with Gasoline? I would buy ethanol if it were
    available. And I appreciate the info on the conversion! We're told by the
    media it takes more energy to make ethanol, which returns less energy
    back! So, this is bunk, eh?

    And, we started buying Toyotas before the Energy Crisis; my Mom wante a
    small car similar to her Chevy II Nova (THERE was a car, GM should have
    never stopped making them!) That was it for us; we have pretty much been a
    Toyota family ever since!

    But I digress...and i also agree with your Grocery Getter comment; some
    people NEED a big truck, while others could get by with a Tacoma; it's the
    Image thing. And I hope the popularity of the SUV comes to and end in
    short order...these things SUCK! Buy a Station Wagon! (Subaru makes a
    bunch of AWD models if you don't like the Matrix! ;)
     
    Hachiroku, Oct 18, 2005
    #20
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.