Posted by News on May 11, 2012, 12:37 pm
On 5/11/2012 8:18 AM, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
Hence the need for fuel chemistry compensation.
Posted by Elmo P. Shagnasty on May 11, 2012, 3:20 pm
not at all.
All we're looking at is the miles per gallon calculation.
Lower energy fuel will deliver fewer miles per gallon. Calculate it any
way you like, at the pump or at the injector, it's all the same
calculation. Energy per volume unit of fuel is irrelevant to the
calculation of how many miles will that volume of fuel take you.
I keep reading on Jalopnik all the bias against hybrids and for diesels,
but all they can spew is "miles per gallon". That in and of itself is
meaningless when diesel fuel is always more expensive, sometimes
significantly so, than gasoline.
Me, let me plug into the computer the unit price I just paid for that
fuel--now the computer can tell me the REAL fact I want, which is my
fuel price per mile.
And nowhere in this is any need to know or compensate for the fuel
Posted by News on May 11, 2012, 3:38 pm
On 5/11/2012 11:20 AM, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
Posted by Elmo P. Shagnasty on May 11, 2012, 8:05 pm
yeah, keep telling yourself that.
In the meantime, I will continue to buy specific volumes of fuel at
specific prices and have that fuel propel me a specific number of miles
down the road, and will be able to calculate (a) my number of miles per
gallon, and (b) my fuel price per mile--
--all without knowing OR CARING about the fuel chemistry.
Again, the numbers I calculate will *reflect* the fuel chemistry, but no
one needs to know the fuel chemistry in order to calculate those numbers.
Your insistence on calling that "wrong" tells me you're not paying
Posted by News on May 11, 2012, 8:20 pm
On 5/11/2012 4:05 PM, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
Read your own drivel and you'll conclude you've impeached yourself.