rob_es350 Posted April 4, 2011 Share Posted April 4, 2011 speeding tickets for 10mph over the limit are silly if you are otherwise driving safely these tickets are likely encouraged to increase revenues very frustrating!!! With that logic, if the limit was 60, you would drive 70. If he limit was 70, you would drive 80. If the limit was 80 you would drive 90..and on until you red lined I guess. So what speed do you propose is "driving safely"? o stop, there is no speed limit on earth where driving 10mph over is not safe as long as traffic permits it...speed limits are always set conservatively, and, of course, the limit will never get you close to the red line Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_es350 Posted April 4, 2011 Share Posted April 4, 2011 To me its all about the flow of traffic, which in this area is rarely anywhere near the speed limit. If traffic is flowing at 75, driving 55 is far more dangerous than driving along with the flow of traffic at 75. ....and I understand that, I really do. When your in freeway traffic and your not the lead dog, you'd better keep up. What I don't understand is the mentality that speed limits are only for generating revenue,and if I run a red light and hit someone, I shouldn't be punished because it was just turning red. I don't know if speed cameras and red light cameras are good or bad but lord, it begs the obvious that if you don't run the red light you've got no worries. Pretty simple. Paul Paul, here's the thing. Camera enforced traffic signals are a very, very slippery slop. The argument that you have no worries if you don't run red lights misses the point. What is next, I am sure you have your breaking point. Would it be camera enforced speed limits? No speeding, no worries, eh? How bout having your car searched. Nothing illegal in car, no worries, eh? How bout having you phone tapped, or your house search, same question. Sometimes we have to give up some of our freedoms for the better good, perhaps being harassed a bit at airports is a justified example, but even question the value of that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pj8708 Posted April 4, 2011 Share Posted April 4, 2011 To me its all about the flow of traffic, which in this area is rarely anywhere near the speed limit. If traffic is flowing at 75, driving 55 is far more dangerous than driving along with the flow of traffic at 75. ....and I understand that, I really do. When your in freeway traffic and your not the lead dog, you'd better keep up. What I don't understand is the mentality that speed limits are only for generating revenue,and if I run a red light and hit someone, I shouldn't be punished because it was just turning red. I don't know if speed cameras and red light cameras are good or bad but lord, it begs the obvious that if you don't run the red light you've got no worries. Pretty simple. Paul Paul, here's the thing. Camera enforced traffic signals are a very, very slippery slop. The argument that you have no worries if you don't run red lights misses the point. What is next, I am sure you have your breaking point. Would it be camera enforced speed limits? No speeding, no worries, eh? How bout having your car searched. Nothing illegal in car, no worries, eh? How bout having you phone tapped, or your house search, same question. Sometimes we have to give up some of our freedoms for the better good, perhaps being harassed a bit at airports is a justified example, but even question the value of that. For me, the point is about civility and respect for the guy next to you. There isn't enough bandwidth on this forum for everyone to voice their opinion about the red light camera debate. The real question is why do so many of us try to beat that red light when it would only take another 90-120 seconds off our trip to wait for a green light. Do we think about anyone else in that intersection besides our own sense of entitlement. If you always drive 10 mph over the limit should you get a ticket at 11mph How do I know your driving safely. What are the criteria. How do you know I am driving safely. The limits are there to establish standards that can meet almost all drivers needs. Certainly an exception would be WV that SW wrote about. Maybe on Interstates we need an "Autobahn" lane. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SW03ES Posted April 4, 2011 Share Posted April 4, 2011 Can't read the top one, but the bottom photo is impressive!! I'm glad to see you using those instuments as I have always wondered if they were accurate or not. Also, I can see your point re: the speed limits in West Virginia. Click on the photo and enlarge it. I was too lazy to resize the photos...so they are friggen huge! If you can't see that once its enlarged, I think your driving days are over my friend ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_es350 Posted April 4, 2011 Share Posted April 4, 2011 To me its all about the flow of traffic, which in this area is rarely anywhere near the speed limit. If traffic is flowing at 75, driving 55 is far more dangerous than driving along with the flow of traffic at 75. ....and I understand that, I really do. When your in freeway traffic and your not the lead dog, you'd better keep up. What I don't understand is the mentality that speed limits are only for generating revenue,and if I run a red light and hit someone, I shouldn't be punished because it was just turning red. I don't know if speed cameras and red light cameras are good or bad but lord, it begs the obvious that if you don't run the red light you've got no worries. Pretty simple. Paul Paul, here's the thing. Camera enforced traffic signals are a very, very slippery slop. The argument that you have no worries if you don't run red lights misses the point. What is next, I am sure you have your breaking point. Would it be camera enforced speed limits? No speeding, no worries, eh? How bout having your car searched. Nothing illegal in car, no worries, eh? How bout having you phone tapped, or your house search, same question. Sometimes we have to give up some of our freedoms for the better good, perhaps being harassed a bit at airports is a justified example, but even question the value of that. For me, the point is about civility and respect for the guy next to you. There isn't enough bandwidth on this forum for everyone to voice their opinion about the red light camera debate. The real question is why do so many of us try to beat that red light when it would only take another 90-120 seconds off our trip to wait for a green light. Do we think about anyone else in that intersection besides our own sense of entitlement. If you always drive 10 mph over the limit should you get a ticket at 11mph How do I know your driving safely. What are the criteria. How do you know I am driving safely. The limits are there to establish standards that can meet almost all drivers needs. Certainly an exception would be WV that SW wrote about. Maybe on Interstates we need an "Autobahn" lane. You missed my point Paul. I am not advocating running red lights. And of course I am on the side of safety and civility. Just don't want to see an expansion of big brother tactics. If we are honest with ourselves, I think we all know when we are driving safely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SW03ES Posted April 4, 2011 Share Posted April 4, 2011 Lets be honest...the whole point of photo enforcement is not really safety...its revenue. My business partner is active in local politics, he ran for local representative in the state legislature last fall (he lost), he chaired a debate between some people running for that same office in a different district a couple years ago. He made all of us come to be warm bodies in the audience. There were 8 candidates...and someone in the audience asked how they all felt about adding additional speed cameras in Montgomery County (we have a bunch of them). EVERY candidates response talked about revenue...not one person mentioned safety. One candidate said he did not favor adding more because "people slow down on roads they are installed on, so the revenue isn't there to get enough return on the investment of installing the cameras...so its not worth it". I raised my hand and asked him if the point of speed cameras is to reduce speed...then according to what he's saying...that speeds go down on roads they are installed on...isn't that a wonderful thing and shouldn't they be installed on every road? He didn't have a response LOL. If you need revenue...grow a pair and raise taxes IMHO, or cut spending. Don't slide in what is really a tax under a veil of "public safety". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pj8708 Posted April 4, 2011 Share Posted April 4, 2011 To bring it back on to what we were talking about: This is a shot of fuel economy with cruise set at 80: and the final average for the trip: Can't read the top one, but the bottom photo is impressive!! I'm glad to see you using those instuments as I have always wondered if they were accurate or not. Also, I can see your point re: the speed limits in West Virginia. OK, I read 30mpg and 48'degrees, a balmy Maryland day. Nice results. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_es350 Posted April 4, 2011 Share Posted April 4, 2011 Lets be honest...the whole point of photo enforcement is not really safety...its revenue. My business partner is active in local politics, he ran for local representative in the state legislature last fall (he lost), he chaired a debate between some people running for that same office in a different district a couple years ago. He made all of us come to be warm bodies in the audience. There were 8 candidates...and someone in the audience asked how they all felt about adding additional speed cameras in Montgomery County (we have a bunch of them). EVERY candidates response talked about revenue...not one person mentioned safety. One candidate said he did not favor adding more because "people slow down on roads they are installed on, so the revenue isn't there to get enough return on the investment of installing the cameras...so its not worth it". I raised my hand and asked him if the point of speed cameras is to reduce speed...then according to what he's saying...that speeds go down on roads they are installed on...isn't that a wonderful thing and shouldn't they be installed on every road? He didn't have a response LOL. If you need revenue...grow a pair and raise taxes IMHO, or cut spending. Don't slide in what is really a tax under a veil of "public safety". It's completely out of control. We are going to have a casino somewhere in my area soon which will absolutely create unbearable traffic conditions in an already way congested area. Everyone knows it is a horrible idea. The most avid gamblers are also completely against it. Only the politicians, seeing big revenues, are for it. And they are pushing it forward. So sickening. The masses are hoping that as it gets closer, the ground swell of opposition will kill it, but it is hard to fight these guys. Red light camera tickets have increased in price from $50 to $65. Pure greed!! They figured if $50 was good, $65 is better. Chance is 0.0 that the $15 increase will increase the deterrent, but it is a lot more in their coffers. Absolute proof they are not interested in safety. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pj8708 Posted April 4, 2011 Share Posted April 4, 2011 After reading Steve's post re; the public forum at which candidates touched on red light/speed cameras, and reading rob's comments, I think I've come to a conclusion that works for me. We have had the same arguments in our city and other cities around the state. The systems are popping up like Dandelions in June. It has to have some deterrent effect, but it looks like it's better at printing money based upon what you folks have said. When it comes to the Slippery Slope and Big Brother watching, I just don't share that feeling. We fly several times a year, and each time I'm pulled aside because my replacement knee sets off the alarm. It takes but a few minutes for the screening, I don't feel "strip searched", and we've met some pretty funny TSA agents. Our rights are important and need to be revered, but I believe you get what you give. If you think the government is constantly out to get you, like some of the far right radical groups do, they probably are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SW03ES Posted April 4, 2011 Share Posted April 4, 2011 I don't think Government is out to get us, the money that is generated goes back into funding programs and services that benefit us. Government's not run for profit. The issue really is that at this time, these local Governments NEED money, they are starving for it. Politicians don't want to put their necks on the line and talk about what needs to happen in order to fix the problem. If you run a business and your revenues aren't enough to cover your expenditures, what do you do? Raise your prices or cut your expenditures. I mean...those are the only options... Government needs to do the same thing...we either need more revenue (Taxes) or less spending. Speed enforcement and these cameras are a way of levying what really is a tax on the citizenry under this cloak of doing something for safety. Its mopre about politicians protecting their own rumps than it is anybody being out to get us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pj8708 Posted April 4, 2011 Share Posted April 4, 2011 I agree. While we're in this mode of thinking we can solve everything by cutting all social programs but no military spending, the elephant in the room is the need to gain more revenue, But I have yet to hear one politician or citizen say we need to raise taxes as well during this recession. The P&L statement is pretty obvious. (This will bring in the postings from the far corners) It is a privilege to live in a country like this and I am glad to pay my full share. And just in case your wondering, we do...believe me. The highest bracket. Paul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LEXIRX330 Posted April 4, 2011 Share Posted April 4, 2011 Here this is how you beat a speed camera! I went to a state insurance training class and they went over all of the myths of beating a speed camera. I thought it was interesting... http://kwc.org/mythbusters/2007/03/episode_73_beating_the_speed_camera_exploding_patches.html I don't want to get going on about the speed cameras...but I agree with SW they are in it for the money! The red light cameras don't bother me that much... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_es350 Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 I don't think Government is out to get us, the money that is generated goes back into funding programs and services that benefit us. Government's not run for profit. The issue really is that at this time, these local Governments NEED money, they are starving for it. Politicians don't want to put their necks on the line and talk about what needs to happen in order to fix the problem. If you run a business and your revenues aren't enough to cover your expenditures, what do you do? Raise your prices or cut your expenditures. I mean...those are the only options... Government needs to do the same thing...we either need more revenue (Taxes) or less spending. Speed enforcement and these cameras are a way of levying what really is a tax on the citizenry under this cloak of doing something for safety. Its mopre about politicians protecting their own rumps than it is anybody being out to get us. Indeed. This crowd has built themselves a system that they are addicted to, and that system requires more and more money to feed. So they are always looking for new ways to feed their addiction..camera tickets, casinos, etc....they will become more and more inventive The worst thing about it is that it can't be stopped, cause guess who is watching the hen house, correct my Lexus friends, it is the fox of course ============================= hey, anyone know what after market parts I need to install to match the performance of the car in the video that literally and figuratively can beat the camera Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pj8708 Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 I don't think Government is out to get us, the money that is generated goes back into funding programs and services that benefit us. Government's not run for profit. The issue really is that at this time, these local Governments NEED money, they are starving for it. Politicians don't want to put their necks on the line and talk about what needs to happen in order to fix the problem. If you run a business and your revenues aren't enough to cover your expenditures, what do you do? Raise your prices or cut your expenditures. I mean...those are the only options... Government needs to do the same thing...we either need more revenue (Taxes) or less spending. Speed enforcement and these cameras are a way of levying what really is a tax on the citizenry under this cloak of doing something for safety. Its mopre about politicians protecting their own rumps than it is anybody being out to get us. Indeed. This crowd has built themselves a system that they are addicted to, and that system requires more and more money to feed. So they are always looking for new ways to feed their addiction..camera tickets, casinos, etc....they will become more and more inventive The worst thing about it is that it can't be stopped, cause guess who is watching the hen house, correct my Lexus friends, it is the fox of course ============================= hey, anyone know what after market parts I need to install to match the performance of the car in the video that literally and figuratively can beat the camera But Rob, YOU and I, and all citizens are the Fox. We have the government we voted in. We are the ones who lack the backbone to do with a little less or pay a little more so someone who has none can at least eat once a day. We get what we give. Our locale is no different from yours. We too have multiple casinos. They are packed all hours of the day and night. The state, we tax payers, make a fortune off of them in tax revenues. At the same time, the state, again read that "we tax payers", also sponsor a 1-800-BETS-OFF line for problem gamblers. Call me crazy, but isn't there a problem with cause and effect here? Everybody thinks governments are rich, city, county, state, federal; Because they collect other peoples money and deal in sums that average citizens usually can't grasp. The taxpayers think the government has to be lieing and just wasting money. The cities DO need the money as do many of the states. The question is how do the chickens get over that "trust" thing with the Fox, and how do you satisfy the Fox's taste for more and more chicken? Yeah, I know. I do go on. Sorry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_es350 Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 I don't think Government is out to get us, the money that is generated goes back into funding programs and services that benefit us. Government's not run for profit. The issue really is that at this time, these local Governments NEED money, they are starving for it. Politicians don't want to put their necks on the line and talk about what needs to happen in order to fix the problem. If you run a business and your revenues aren't enough to cover your expenditures, what do you do? Raise your prices or cut your expenditures. I mean...those are the only options... Government needs to do the same thing...we either need more revenue (Taxes) or less spending. Speed enforcement and these cameras are a way of levying what really is a tax on the citizenry under this cloak of doing something for safety. Its mopre about politicians protecting their own rumps than it is anybody being out to get us. Indeed. This crowd has built themselves a system that they are addicted to, and that system requires more and more money to feed. So they are always looking for new ways to feed their addiction..camera tickets, casinos, etc....they will become more and more inventive The worst thing about it is that it can't be stopped, cause guess who is watching the hen house, correct my Lexus friends, it is the fox of course ============================= hey, anyone know what after market parts I need to install to match the performance of the car in the video that literally and figuratively can beat the camera But Rob, YOU and I, and all citizens are the Fox. We have the government we voted in. We are the ones who lack the backbone to do with a little less or pay a little more so someone who has none can at least eat once a day. We get what we give. Our locale is no different from yours. We too have multiple casinos. They are packed all hours of the day and night. The state, we tax payers, make a fortune off of them in tax revenues. At the same time, the state, again read that "we tax payers", also sponsor a 1-800-BETS-OFF line for problem gamblers. Call me crazy, but isn't there a problem with cause and effect here? Everybody thinks governments are rich, city, county, state, federal; Because they collect other peoples money and deal in sums that average citizens usually can't grasp. The taxpayers think the government has to be lieing and just wasting money. The cities DO need the money as do many of the states. The question is how do the chickens get over that "trust" thing with the Fox, and how do you satisfy the Fox's taste for more and more chicken? Yeah, I know. I do go on. Sorry. "We are the ones who lack the backbone to do with a little less or pay a little more so someone who has none can at least eat once a day." I am a little taken back by your words I quoted here. You have really drank the Kool-Aid! Do you really believe we do not pay enough tax to feed the poor. Enough tax is collected to feed the poor in this country for multiple lifetimes. It can be done with the money wasted, money stolen, or by cutting just one insanely expensive useless program or undertaking. Yes, we get to vote, and agree that there is too much apathy, but the problem is that nobody with good intentions can break into the system to even run for office. To do it, you need enormous personal wealth, and the organization to move the many obstacles that have been constructed. I think we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one since we are so diametrically opposed in our thinking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babyduke Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 Back to the subject on the octane, I just bought a 2009 ES350 and the sales guy said the required octane is 90. So say I put in half 87 and half 93, what is the guarantee that it'd be mixed properly to produce that exact 90? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spgull Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 I just got back from a round trip to WV, about 340 miles each way, 80MPH average speeds and for the last 100 miles or so some steep highway upgrades and downgrades. My average was 30.2MPG. I am beyond delighted with that... Steve, What octane gas did you use? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pj8708 Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 I don't think Government is out to get us, the money that is generated goes back into funding programs and services that benefit us. Government's not run for profit. The issue really is that at this time, these local Governments NEED money, they are starving for it. Politicians don't want to put their necks on the line and talk about what needs to happen in order to fix the problem. If you run a business and your revenues aren't enough to cover your expenditures, what do you do? Raise your prices or cut your expenditures. I mean...those are the only options... Government needs to do the same thing...we either need more revenue (Taxes) or less spending. Speed enforcement and these cameras are a way of levying what really is a tax on the citizenry under this cloak of doing something for safety. Its mopre about politicians protecting their own rumps than it is anybody being out to get us. Indeed. This crowd has built themselves a system that they are addicted to, and that system requires more and more money to feed. So they are always looking for new ways to feed their addiction..camera tickets, casinos, etc....they will become more and more inventive The worst thing about it is that it can't be stopped, cause guess who is watching the hen house, correct my Lexus friends, it is the fox of course ============================= hey, anyone know what after market parts I need to install to match the performance of the car in the video that literally and figuratively can beat the camera But Rob, YOU and I, and all citizens are the Fox. We have the government we voted in. We are the ones who lack the backbone to do with a little less or pay a little more so someone who has none can at least eat once a day. We get what we give. Our locale is no different from yours. We too have multiple casinos. They are packed all hours of the day and night. The state, we tax payers, make a fortune off of them in tax revenues. At the same time, the state, again read that "we tax payers", also sponsor a 1-800-BETS-OFF line for problem gamblers. Call me crazy, but isn't there a problem with cause and effect here? Everybody thinks governments are rich, city, county, state, federal; Because they collect other peoples money and deal in sums that average citizens usually can't grasp. The taxpayers think the government has to be lieing and just wasting money. The cities DO need the money as do many of the states. The question is how do the chickens get over that "trust" thing with the Fox, and how do you satisfy the Fox's taste for more and more chicken? Yeah, I know. I do go on. Sorry. "We are the ones who lack the backbone to do with a little less or pay a little more so someone who has none can at least eat once a day." I am a little taken back by your words I quoted here. You have really drank the Kool-Aid! Do you really believe we do not pay enough tax to feed the poor. Enough tax is collected to feed the poor in this country for multiple lifetimes. It can be done with the money wasted, money stolen, or by cutting just one insanely expensive useless program or undertaking. Yes, we get to vote, and agree that there is too much apathy, but the problem is that nobody with good intentions can break into the system to even run for office. To do it, you need enormous personal wealth, and the organization to move the many obstacles that have been constructed. I think we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one since we are so diametrically opposed in our thinking. If your bringing Kool-Aid, make mine Cheery!!LOL The Tea Party already did what you just said can't be done. And they put a bunch of people in congress who are really shaking up things. They started out with just being fed up!! I didn't say I agree with them, but you gotta respect them. I agree. Lets move on to making a gas pump that can customize a blend of 93 & 87 octane. Paul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_es350 Posted April 5, 2011 Share Posted April 5, 2011 I don't think Government is out to get us, the money that is generated goes back into funding programs and services that benefit us. Government's not run for profit. The issue really is that at this time, these local Governments NEED money, they are starving for it. Politicians don't want to put their necks on the line and talk about what needs to happen in order to fix the problem. If you run a business and your revenues aren't enough to cover your expenditures, what do you do? Raise your prices or cut your expenditures. I mean...those are the only options... Government needs to do the same thing...we either need more revenue (Taxes) or less spending. Speed enforcement and these cameras are a way of levying what really is a tax on the citizenry under this cloak of doing something for safety. Its mopre about politicians protecting their own rumps than it is anybody being out to get us. Indeed. This crowd has built themselves a system that they are addicted to, and that system requires more and more money to feed. So they are always looking for new ways to feed their addiction..camera tickets, casinos, etc....they will become more and more inventive The worst thing about it is that it can't be stopped, cause guess who is watching the hen house, correct my Lexus friends, it is the fox of course ============================= hey, anyone know what after market parts I need to install to match the performance of the car in the video that literally and figuratively can beat the camera But Rob, YOU and I, and all citizens are the Fox. We have the government we voted in. We are the ones who lack the backbone to do with a little less or pay a little more so someone who has none can at least eat once a day. We get what we give. Our locale is no different from yours. We too have multiple casinos. They are packed all hours of the day and night. The state, we tax payers, make a fortune off of them in tax revenues. At the same time, the state, again read that "we tax payers", also sponsor a 1-800-BETS-OFF line for problem gamblers. Call me crazy, but isn't there a problem with cause and effect here? Everybody thinks governments are rich, city, county, state, federal; Because they collect other peoples money and deal in sums that average citizens usually can't grasp. The taxpayers think the government has to be lieing and just wasting money. The cities DO need the money as do many of the states. The question is how do the chickens get over that "trust" thing with the Fox, and how do you satisfy the Fox's taste for more and more chicken? Yeah, I know. I do go on. Sorry. "We are the ones who lack the backbone to do with a little less or pay a little more so someone who has none can at least eat once a day." I am a little taken back by your words I quoted here. You have really drank the Kool-Aid! Do you really believe we do not pay enough tax to feed the poor. Enough tax is collected to feed the poor in this country for multiple lifetimes. It can be done with the money wasted, money stolen, or by cutting just one insanely expensive useless program or undertaking. Yes, we get to vote, and agree that there is too much apathy, but the problem is that nobody with good intentions can break into the system to even run for office. To do it, you need enormous personal wealth, and the organization to move the many obstacles that have been constructed. I think we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one since we are so diametrically opposed in our thinking. If your bringing Kool-Aid, make mine Cheery!!LOL The Tea Party already did what you just said can't be done. And they put a bunch of people in congress who are really shaking up things. They started out with just being fed up!! I didn't say I agree with them, but you gotta respect them. I agree. Lets move on to making a gas pump that can customize a blend of 93 & 87 octane. Paul Kool-Aid is on me my friend, any flavor, any time always enjoy the banter here with you, Steve, and the others Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pj8708 Posted April 6, 2011 Share Posted April 6, 2011 Back to the subject on the octane, I just bought a 2009 ES350 and the sales guy said the required octane is 90. So say I put in half 87 and half 93, what is the guarantee that it'd be mixed properly to produce that exact 90? I'm not sure if your pulling our leg or not, but this is a bad idea and no, it won't work. First of all, your sales person is wrong. The upper octane rating is 91. I suppose it may vary by region, but in my travels I have never come across a pump with 90 octane unleaded. Usually there are the standard three grades; 87-89-91 octane. Secondly, many of us use 89 or in the case of a 2010 ES, even 87 octane without engine knock or other problems. Trying to mix two grades of gas to end up with a totally different grade is insane. Paul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LEXIRX330 Posted April 6, 2011 Share Posted April 6, 2011 We have 93 around here everywhere...some places have 91. I always run 91 or 93 in my cars but it's starting to hurt my pocket a little more! :( I knew you drank the Kool-Aid Paul...Cherry huh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pj8708 Posted April 6, 2011 Share Posted April 6, 2011 We have 93 around here everywhere...some places have 91. I always run 91 or 93 in my cars but it's starting to hurt my pocket a little more! :( I knew you drank the Kool-Aid Paul...Cherry huh? With extra sugar.....!!! So I see your up too. I'm having trouble getting to sleep this week, so what better place to spend some quality time but on the LOC. I uaually run 89 octane/ethanol blend. In Iowa you support the corn industry. Today the price was $3.57. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LEXIRX330 Posted April 6, 2011 Share Posted April 6, 2011 :) sleep! I have little ones... I am always up... Am I wrong to assume that the 91 and 93 octane still uses ethanol? All the pumps around here say that 10% ethanol? So i just assumed that all grades contained ethanol...Besides one place that advertises ethanol free...and they are .50 higher than anyone else per gallon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pj8708 Posted April 6, 2011 Share Posted April 6, 2011 :) sleep! I have little ones... I am always up... Am I wrong to assume that the 91 and 93 octane still uses ethanol? All the pumps around here say that 10% ethanol? So i just assumed that all grades contained ethanol...Besides one place that advertises ethanol free...and they are .50 higher than anyone else per gallon. Iowa provides a subsidy for ethanol production to boost the ethanol industry. Consequently, our ethanol blend (89 octane) is the cheapest gas at the pump. As I mentioned earlier, the price currently is $3.57; all other grades are higher in price. If it wasn't for the government subsidy, the market price would be much different. I know that around the "Space Coast" area of Florida, ethanol blend seems hard to find and is much more expensive. I would be interested in others comments because to me, it seems that outside of the Midwest, ethanol isn't that popular. Paul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K.C. Dia Posted April 6, 2011 Share Posted April 6, 2011 :) sleep! I have little ones... I am always up... Am I wrong to assume that the 91 and 93 octane still uses ethanol? All the pumps around here say that 10% ethanol? So i just assumed that all grades contained ethanol...Besides one place that advertises ethanol free...and they are .50 higher than anyone else per gallon. Iowa provides a subsidy for ethanol production to boost the ethanol industry. Consequently, our ethanol blend (89 octane) is the cheapest gas at the pump. As I mentioned earlier, the price currently is $3.57; all other grades are higher in price. If it wasn't for the government subsidy, the market price would be much different. I know that around the "Space Coast" area of Florida, ethanol blend seems hard to find and is much more expensive. I would be interested in others comments because to me, it seems that outside of the Midwest, ethanol isn't that popular. Paul Here in Mississippi, it is almost impossible to find gas that is not blended with 10% ethanol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.