CR, I'm sure that is funny, but we can't see the post since we are not cool enough to own Beamers/Beemers so we can't get into the MOA site. Soon to be the real bad guy with a supercharged E30 and a turbo 535is cranking out 500rwtq (so sayeth my brother.) Oh, and an illegal OBD1 325ti.
Thanks. Sorry about the Prius insult! I don't know much about the Honda CR-Z, but I feel there is some soul in Hondas unlike Toyota. Honda makes some great engines.
Yes. I have been told it is not legal to install the engine from any earlier model car into any newer car. They must be the same year or newer regardless of whether or not any changes have been made to the design (like you can't use a 97 M3 engine to replace a 99 M3 engine.) Of course that is not enforced even a little, but the little green monster will not pass in any state that plugs in to check OBD2 functionality. I figure by the time it comes up, I can get an S52 stuck in pretty cheaply, or the car will be an antique and exempt. What can I say? I'm an outlaw.
Hmm... at least I don't have to worry about that. I've got an OBD-I S50 nearly paid off. But... I will drive economically most of the time, I swear! So don't get out your eco-pitchforks just yet...
You know, the reason it is legal to go to a newer motor is because they meet newer and more strigent emissions standards. Your S50, driven wisely, may even give you better mileage than the 325e. I wouldn't hold my breath, but it is possible. At the very least, the NOx, HC, and CO2 are more tightly controlled than with the M20 with the early injection.
Sorry we're so damned exclusive. Basically, it was a post pointing out that the average Airhead (like my '78 R100) puts out about 30 times the pollution/mile of the average CARB-compliant car.
Don't worry about your emissions we must all become vegans because of the methane gas cattle, sheep etc produce. Poultry isn't much better. Yeah right. I love lamb and baby veal kept in little cages so they can't move and just fed milk. Wait I need to add some methane gas to earth's atmosphere. If all the vehicles in the world magically became hybrids or hydrogen powered or even electric powered it would have no effect on global warming from R&T Winter of 07 I believe. Sorry I don't care about future generations and I wont go vegan. I want to be warm not cold! Would love to build a nice 02 with a 16v and dual Webers tuned for max performance and not for emissions blowing out 3%+ CO! Kermit can be Green. George Will is my hero. Dave Apker
Well that's certainly an auspicious first post on the forum Dave. Guess you can only go up from here. Funny you should get such a kick out of being a blind ostrich on a day when this story hit the news: http://www.boston.com/news/science/articles/2009/04/09/us_considering_climate_engineering/ http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25190538-30417,00.html http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/apr/08/geo-engineering-john-holdren You may not care about your grandkids but some of us do. I realize that improving car emissions may be a small piece of the pie, but at this point every piece counts. Every player in this game can come up with a reason why they shouldn't do their part, including power companies, oil companies, and consumers. It's time to grow up folks. We don't live in the same world we were born in. Just because the unthinkable is unthinkable doesn't mean it won't happen.
He has the right to express his opinion, no need to send him off elsewhere, Paul. Climate engineering? Give me a break. When humans mess with nature/"the force" there are always consequences.
There is most certainly as much literature/as many links out there bearing information to the contrary. My point is, to state as an absolute certainty that "the sky is falling" directly due to man-made global warming is a bit irresponsible IMO; it hasn't been proven yet and like I said...there are just as many naysayers out there as there are disaster theorists. I find it interesting how easy it is to sway relatively intelligent folks to zip around like chickens without heads, worrying if they are "green enough" or not. GMAB! Now, that being said...does that mean we should NOT be responsible and do what we can to make this a "cleaner, more energy efficient" existance? Not at all...everyone should do their part to make the Earth a better place, for EVERYONE's benefit. I just have a supreme issue with being forced to drastically change my lifestyle based on a largely unproven theorem, simply because it's in vogue or politically correct. Remember how in the '70s we were all going to vanish due to global cooling?? Remember how the hole in the ozone layer was going to swallow us whole? Remember the whole acid rain alarmisms? Bottom line - there's not enough data to state beyond a doubt that man is drastically destroying the environment...how do we know it's not the natural cyclical nature of climate?? Hasn't the overall temperature of the Earth gone DOWN over the past 10 years? Lest we forget - Al Gore and his minions are not as altrustic as you would think or hope. They have something large to gain (mainly, all of OUR MONEY) from this whole Global Warming and Green movement. Sorry - no sale here...I like the freedom to drive my E39 whenever/however I wish, guilt free, thank you very much.
I agree that making rash, untested changes based on potentially faulty science is a bad idea. Cats and the majority of emissions controls have really helped clean up cars and smog. Nickel batteries are not good for the environment. You know what is best? Conservation. I try to conserve what I can so that when I want, I can have fun. If everyone wastes all the time, then prices go up, supplies go down, etc. I only waste in small bursts if possible. Politically speaking, I am all over the board, as most sentient people are, so I have no problem calling BS when it is apt. Carbon offsets? BS! Anyhow, going back to the thread, you will use less energy keeping your car running as long as possible, vs. throwing it out and buying a new one.
