From all this typing. I could have written the great American novel by now, be rich and own THREE SCrews.

Mike, I suggest we settle it this way. If we were dealing with gasoline that contained exactly one or two components (like heptane and iso octane), then the discussion would be relatively straightforward... these compounds burn at a certain rate... period... put them in a calorimeter, specify pressures and all other variables, and you will discover than octane burns at the same rate as heptane.

However, when you add more species of hydrocarbons, things get more complicated. And, when you add octane boosters, the question of semantics get in the way. For example, from the FAQ it says that MTBE retards the formation of mid temperature breakdown products, while tetra ethyl lead inhibits the formation of low temperature breakdown products. So, does "inhibiting formation" mean that the gas burns slower (apparently your interpretation), or does it mean that it takes a higher temperature before the breakdown occurs (my interpretation).

Quite frankly, at this point I don't give a rat's ****... the posts have been educational, both from what others have said, and by forcing me to closely check facts.

I will say this. As a vendor on this board, it is natural (and reasonable) to assume bias on your part... hell, you wanna know how good MY product is?. Thus, you will be held to a higher standard of proof, and while you cited "experts", you posted no data to support your claims. I'll take what you say at face value, simply because the topic isn't important enough to devote the research hours that would be required to really understand the situation.

On to the next debate!!!

 

I reread your post and my response. I was too hasty on jumping on your case. Too much C2H5OH in the circulatory system. My apologies... much better to keep the level of debate at the fact and opinion level.

 

Well this thread will remain as a point of referance. It's all pretty interesting to me. I just can't read so much on this computer screen. Is there a printable version. Just kidding.
This was a good one!
Tom

 

Wittom,

I was considering distribution of a printed version, but the postage would have been costly. A CD rom version would be much more cost effective to distribute.


As I've said before, I'm not seeing apples to apples. At this point I'm seeing referenced data compared to verbal data. Having enough knowledge to understand that many of the cited points can be altered by things other than burn rate of the gas, I still don't really see any solid evidence that either side has taken a clear lead....

Bottom of the ninth, score is tied, Beast Rider has data references warming up...............

 

Damned, I love a great discussion like this.

OK, now can somebody explain to me if the color of the gasoline makes any difference? LOL. j/k.

 

People;
I hope this is the end to this DEBATE!!!!
Things are getting out of hand here.

IMUD- I don't think there was a reason for you to say what you said to Mike T. {my .02 cents worth} Like you said you aren't a chemical engineer. Mike has been working with people that do this kind of stuff everyday. Not saying that he is right 100% of the time but still. And BeastRider working in the petroleum field like he did.

This has been going on for 3 pages now enough is enough. I think people are just about overloaded with this thread.
I think I need to take two asprin and call my doctor in the morning!!!!!


C-ya all in the morning...

 

My response to Mike wasn't to his explanation. It was to the "(yawn)" post. Perhaps it was an attempt at humor which I just didn't get. However, it just seemed to me to not be simply good natured humor. THerein lies the source of my response.

No one has to agree with everyone or like everyone or their persona on this board. However, if we were all a little less sarcastic and caustic then there would be fewer issues. Whether sarcasm or caustic response, that is what I was replying to.

BTW, I bought a Superchip from Mike and have had nothing bad to say about either. That's another reason that the "(yawn)" surprised me. It isn't like I am one of the "Mike bashers" whose posts I have seen.

Ah well, to each his own.

Chuck

 

IMUD, I'm giving Mike the benefit of believing that his yawn was not directed at you. I believe he is just bored of the whole topic. What he and beastrider are saying is basically the same thing just from different standpoints.

 

I-Mud, No hard feelings then. The way it came across, that you were bashing pretty heavy for no reason.
Hopefully one of these days when I get enough money saved up I can get a superchip.

I've kept up reading every post on this thread and I have to agree with NORM {and what i said in my last post} both Mike T. and BeastRider are right. Just diffrenet points of views. I hope they see it that way. Catch you all around the message boards.

 

I can tell ya that when I was a boy up in Canada, if the Mounties caught you with purple gas in your car, there was hell to pay. That was farm gas and not subject to road taxes.

 

I think my eyes are bleeding!!! I think Mike and BeastRider should get together and write a book!

By the way the post was very informative, and you guys should have another one - only this time over something bigger like cams or headers or something along those lines!!!

P.S. - Your both wrong!!! Hehehehehe!

 

The only thing I know is if you take warm water and add ice to it then it becomes colder henice ( ice water) am I right or did that change!!***

 

Don't answer that!

This has been a great thread! I think it should condensed and put into a FAQ here for future reference!

Great information presented on both sides, even if they are generally saying the same thing.

 

From a scientific viewpoint, this is way off base. The fact that the water is still in a liquid point brings to light the fact that it is still a liquid and not a solid. It is either cold water, or it is ice. The term "ice water" has been thrown around for years by those that simply don't understand the severity, or reality, of the situation.

 

I'm sorry, but this is REALLY severe! :o

The fact is that the water and the ice are at the same temperature when in equilibrium. The only difference is the phase change energy between the two states.

Oh, and ice burns slower than water.