Add group to favorites
Back to post list
Send new message to group Search:
Post Subject:
Getting 110 miles to the gallon (News 8 Austin)
Re: Getting 110 miles to the gallon (News 8 Austin)
I remember that... I think Smokey called it "stratified charge" or similar?
I remember he was using a turbocharger to homogenize the "working fluid "
(not only was the man a genius, but he had a way with words, too).
I remember that... I think Smokey called it "stratified charge" or similar?
I remember he was using a turbocharger to homogenize the "working fluid "
(not only was the man a genius, but he had a way with words, too).
Re: Getting 110 miles to the gallon (News 8 Austin)
Jim Warman wrote:
> I remember that... I think Smokey called it "stratified charge" or similar?
> I remember he was using a turbocharger to homogenize the "working fluid "
> (not only was the man a genius, but he had a way with words, too).
He called it the "Hot Vapor Cycle" engine. It would be interesting to
see where his concepts could go with today's technology. Heck,
twenty-five years ago he was getting 50 mpg from a carbureted engine
with no computer controls! Here's a clip from an article discussing his
accomplishments with it:
"Now comes the really interesting part of this article that raises all
the questions. Twenty years ago, the late, great racing mechanic and
inventor Henry "Smokey" Yunick left the automotive engineers shaking
their heads when he invented and patented his hot vapor engine. Based on
the familiar four-cycle piston engine concept, instead of cooling the
intake air to improve efficiency, he used coolant heat and exhaust waste
heat to significantly warm the intake air. The purpose was to fully
vaporize the fuel and to make the intake air expand in the intake system
to generate positive pressure, like a supercharger. A small turbocharger
was used as a "mixer" and as a check valve to prevent the expanding
intake air from backflowing out of the intake system. With the heated,
pressurized, homogenous mixture, the engine ran at air/fuel ratios
considered impossibly lean, such as 22:1, on pump gasoline. The hot
vapor engine made incredible power and was highly efficient, responsive,
surprisingly emissions clean, and delivered fuel economy of 45-50 MPG in
a compact car, and it did it all without computers, smog pumps or
catalytic converters. Although initially denounced by the automotive
world as a hoax, several prominent SAE engineers later published papers
validating Smokey's theories and design. It was no hoax to Smokey. He
considered it his greatest achievement. However, the automotive giants
had their own designs for increasing fuel economy and controlling
emissions, and Smokey's simple and cost-efficient engine package was
ignored. Today, Smokey's designs are buried somewhere in the U.S. Patent
Office (www .uspto.gov, patent numbers: 4,503,833; 4,592,329; 4,637,365;
4,862,859) awaiting someone to take this technology to the next level.
So just when you think you know the rules of how things work, somebody
comes along and breaks the rules. It's only fitting that it was Smokey
Yunick."
Jim Warman wrote:
> I remember that... I think Smokey called it "stratified charge" or similar?
> I remember he was using a turbocharger to homogenize the "working fluid "
> (not only was the man a genius, but he had a way with words, too).
He called it the "Hot Vapor Cycle" engine. It would be interesting to
see where his concepts could go with today's technology. Heck,
twenty-five years ago he was getting 50 mpg from a carbureted engine
with no computer controls! Here's a clip from an article discussing his
accomplishments with it:
"Now comes the really interesting part of this article that raises all
the questions. Twenty years ago, the late, great racing mechanic and
inventor Henry "Smokey" Yunick left the automotive engineers shaking
their heads when he invented and patented his hot vapor engine. Based on
the familiar four-cycle piston engine concept, instead of cooling the
intake air to improve efficiency, he used coolant heat and exhaust waste
heat to significantly warm the intake air. The purpose was to fully
vaporize the fuel and to make the intake air expand in the intake system
to generate positive pressure, like a supercharger. A small turbocharger
was used as a "mixer" and as a check valve to prevent the expanding
intake air from backflowing out of the intake system. With the heated,
pressurized, homogenous mixture, the engine ran at air/fuel ratios
considered impossibly lean, such as 22:1, on pump gasoline. The hot
vapor engine made incredible power and was highly efficient, responsive,
surprisingly emissions clean, and delivered fuel economy of 45-50 MPG in
a compact car, and it did it all without computers, smog pumps or
catalytic converters. Although initially denounced by the automotive
world as a hoax, several prominent SAE engineers later published papers
validating Smokey's theories and design. It was no hoax to Smokey. He
considered it his greatest achievement. However, the automotive giants
had their own designs for increasing fuel economy and controlling
emissions, and Smokey's simple and cost-efficient engine package was
ignored. Today, Smokey's designs are buried somewhere in the U.S. Patent
Office (www .uspto.gov, patent numbers: 4,503,833; 4,592,329; 4,637,365;
4,862,859) awaiting someone to take this technology to the next level.
So just when you think you know the rules of how things work, somebody
comes along and breaks the rules. It's only fitting that it was Smokey
Yunick."
Re: Getting 110 miles to the gallon (News 8 Austin)
To me, Smokey is a "God"... That man forgot more than most people ever hope
to know....
Back to the point... I'll bet that you and I could cook up an old car
(sorry, you can't look under the hood), concoct some wonderful scenarios and
claim some astonishing numbers (sorry, I have no empirical data... trust
me).... With the right investors (and a 10 megabuck prize in the offing - a
prize that does NOT need to be won) you and I could cook the books and
likely walk away with 10 or 15 megabucks each.
With gas at 5 bux a gallon, now is the time to strike... the suckers will
never know what hit them....
Damn... if I wasn't so honest, I could make something like that work...
"Michael Johnson" <cds@erols,com > wrote in message
news:t4Gdnf_Ac_KWLPPVnZ2dnUVZ_hadnZ2d@comcast,com ...
> Jim Warman wrote:
>> I remember that... I think Smokey called it "stratified charge" or
>> similar? I remember he was using a turbocharger to homogenize the
>> "working fluid " (not only was the man a genius, but he had a way with
>> words, too).
>
> He called it the "Hot Vapor Cycle" engine. It would be interesting to see
> where his concepts could go with today's technology. Heck, twenty-five
> years ago he was getting 50 mpg from a carbureted engine with no computer
> controls! Here's a clip from an article discussing his accomplishments
> with it:
>
> "Now comes the really interesting part of this article that raises all the
> questions. Twenty years ago, the late, great racing mechanic and inventor
> Henry "Smokey" Yunick left the automotive engineers shaking their heads
> when he invented and patented his hot vapor engine. Based on the familiar
> four-cycle piston engine concept, instead of cooling the intake air to
> improve efficiency, he used coolant heat and exhaust waste heat to
> significantly warm the intake air. The purpose was to fully vaporize the
> fuel and to make the intake air expand in the intake system to generate
> positive pressure, like a supercharger. A small turbocharger was used as a
> "mixer" and as a check valve to prevent the expanding intake air from
> backflowing out of the intake system. With the heated, pressurized,
> homogenous mixture, the engine ran at air/fuel ratios considered
> impossibly lean, such as 22:1, on pump gasoline. The hot vapor engine made
> incredible power and was highly efficient, responsive, surprisingly
> emissions clean, and delivered fuel economy of 45-50 MPG in a compact car,
> and it did it all without computers, smog pumps or catalytic converters.
> Although initially denounced by the automotive world as a hoax, several
> prominent SAE engineers later published papers validating Smokey's
> theories and design. It was no hoax to Smokey. He considered it his
> greatest achievement. However, the automotive giants had their own designs
> for increasing fuel economy and controlling emissions, and Smokey's simple
> and cost-efficient engine package was ignored. Today, Smokey's designs are
> buried somewhere in the U.S. Patent Office (www .uspto.gov, patent numbers:
> 4,503,833; 4,592,329; 4,637,365; 4,862,859) awaiting someone to take this
> technology to the next level. So just when you think you know the rules of
> how things work, somebody comes along and breaks the rules. It's only
> fitting that it was Smokey Yunick."
To me, Smokey is a "God"... That man forgot more than most people ever hope
to know....
Back to the point... I'll bet that you and I could cook up an old car
(sorry, you can't look under the hood), concoct some wonderful scenarios and
claim some astonishing numbers (sorry, I have no empirical data... trust
me).... With the right investors (and a 10 megabuck prize in the offing - a
prize that does NOT need to be won) you and I could cook the books and
likely walk away with 10 or 15 megabucks each.
With gas at 5 bux a gallon, now is the time to strike... the suckers will
never know what hit them....
Damn... if I wasn't so honest, I could make something like that work...
"Michael Johnson" <cds@erols,com > wrote in message
news:t4Gdnf_Ac_KWLPPVnZ2dnUVZ_hadnZ2d@comcast,com ...
> Jim Warman wrote:
>> I remember that... I think Smokey called it "stratified charge" or
>> similar? I remember he was using a turbocharger to homogenize the
>> "working fluid " (not only was the man a genius, but he had a way with
>> words, too).
>
> He called it the "Hot Vapor Cycle" engine. It would be interesting to see
> where his concepts could go with today's technology. Heck, twenty-five
> years ago he was getting 50 mpg from a carbureted engine with no computer
> controls! Here's a clip from an article discussing his accomplishments
> with it:
>
> "Now comes the really interesting part of this article that raises all the
> questions. Twenty years ago, the late, great racing mechanic and inventor
> Henry "Smokey" Yunick left the automotive engineers shaking their heads
> when he invented and patented his hot vapor engine. Based on the familiar
> four-cycle piston engine concept, instead of cooling the intake air to
> improve efficiency, he used coolant heat and exhaust waste heat to
> significantly warm the intake air. The purpose was to fully vaporize the
> fuel and to make the intake air expand in the intake system to generate
> positive pressure, like a supercharger. A small turbocharger was used as a
> "mixer" and as a check valve to prevent the expanding intake air from
> backflowing out of the intake system. With the heated, pressurized,
> homogenous mixture, the engine ran at air/fuel ratios considered
> impossibly lean, such as 22:1, on pump gasoline. The hot vapor engine made
> incredible power and was highly efficient, responsive, surprisingly
> emissions clean, and delivered fuel economy of 45-50 MPG in a compact car,
> and it did it all without computers, smog pumps or catalytic converters.
> Although initially denounced by the automotive world as a hoax, several
> prominent SAE engineers later published papers validating Smokey's
> theories and design. It was no hoax to Smokey. He considered it his
> greatest achievement. However, the automotive giants had their own designs
> for increasing fuel economy and controlling emissions, and Smokey's simple
> and cost-efficient engine package was ignored. Today, Smokey's designs are
> buried somewhere in the U.S. Patent Office (www .uspto.gov, patent numbers:
> 4,503,833; 4,592,329; 4,637,365; 4,862,859) awaiting someone to take this
> technology to the next level. So just when you think you know the rules of
> how things work, somebody comes along and breaks the rules. It's only
> fitting that it was Smokey Yunick."
Re: Getting 110 miles to the gallon (News 8 Austin)
On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 16:27:30 -0400, "C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring,com >
wrote:
:>
:>"Sarah Czepiel" <ninety7gt@cox,net > wrote in message
:>news:un5q649neo2pggpa7ksot45qqk9no9itmj@4ax,com ...
:>> On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 07:52:04 -0400, "C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring,com >
:>> wrote:
:>>
:>> :>
:>> :>"Bob Willard" <BobwBSGS@TrashThis,com cast,net > wrote in message
:>> :>news:XdqdnXHXpNVHY_bVnZ2dnUVZ_ofinZ2d@comcast,com ...
:>> :>> admin@ng2000,com wrote:
:>> :>>> http :// www .ng2000,com /fw.php?tp=ford-mustang
:>> :>>>
:>> :>>> 07/02/2008: An auto mechanic from Ohio claims he has revolutionized
:>> the
:>> :>>> modern engine and says his 1987 Ford Mustang will get 110 miles to
:>> the
:>> :>>> gallon.
:>> :>>>
:>> :>>>
:>> :>>
:>> :>> But wait! There's more!
:>> :>>
:>> :>> It goes well over 100-miles per hour.
:>> :>>
:>> :>> "It's 400 horsepower and has 500-foot pounds of torque. Off the
:>> line,
:>> :>> it goes from zero to 60 in three seconds," he said.
:>> :>>
:>> :>> Pelmear won't show what's under the hood. Some of his gizmos are
:>> :>> still awaiting patents.
:>> :>>
:>> :>> But the secret lies in making engines more efficient.
:>> :>>
:>> :>> The only part I do believe is "secret lies"; the rest is B.S.
:>> :>> --
:>> :>> Cheers, Bob
:>> :>
:>> :>I am sure these claims are total BS. What I don't understand is the
:>> :>motivation for making them. Is he looking for investors? Or does he just
:>> :>want his 15 minutes of fame (infamy)?
:>> :>
:>> :>Ed
:>>
:>>
:>> You're sure? See the last paragraph. I guess we'll see soon enough.
:>
:>Yes I am sure.
:>
:>> http :// www .wgal,com /automotive/16768626/detail.html?rss=lan&psp=irresistible
:>> Engineer Gets 110 MPG Out Of '87 Mustang
:>> Ohio Man Competing For $10M Prize
:>>
:>> POSTED: 10:21 am EDT July 2, 2008
:>> UPDATED: 11:07 am EDT July 2, 2008
:>>
:>>
:>> Doug Pelmear said he isn't toying with the engine of 1987 Ford Mustang for
:>> the money.
:>>
:>> [...]
:>>
:>> The engineer's tinkering, however, could earn him $10 million and save him
:>> plenty more in gas money.
:>>
:>> [...]
:>>
:>> Pelmear entered his car to win the the $10 million Progressive Automotive
:>> X
:>> Prize: a race to find an affordable, marketable automobile that gets at
:>> least 100 miles per gallon.
:>
:>I figure this is just part of the scam.
:>
:>Ed
Again, we'll see soon enough. Although I'm curious why you think
Progressive Ins. Co. would be part and parcel to a scam.
On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 16:27:30 -0400, "C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring,com >
wrote:
:>
:>"Sarah Czepiel" <ninety7gt@cox,net > wrote in message
:>news:un5q649neo2pggpa7ksot45qqk9no9itmj@4ax,com ...
:>> On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 07:52:04 -0400, "C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring,com >
:>> wrote:
:>>
:>> :>
:>> :>"Bob Willard" <BobwBSGS@TrashThis,com cast,net > wrote in message
:>> :>news:XdqdnXHXpNVHY_bVnZ2dnUVZ_ofinZ2d@comcast,com ...
:>> :>> admin@ng2000,com wrote:
:>> :>>> http :// www .ng2000,com /fw.php?tp=ford-mustang
:>> :>>>
:>> :>>> 07/02/2008: An auto mechanic from Ohio claims he has revolutionized
:>> the
:>> :>>> modern engine and says his 1987 Ford Mustang will get 110 miles to
:>> the
:>> :>>> gallon.
:>> :>>>
:>> :>>>
:>> :>>
:>> :>> But wait! There's more!
:>> :>>
:>> :>> It goes well over 100-miles per hour.
:>> :>>
:>> :>> "It's 400 horsepower and has 500-foot pounds of torque. Off the
:>> line,
:>> :>> it goes from zero to 60 in three seconds," he said.
:>> :>>
:>> :>> Pelmear won't show what's under the hood. Some of his gizmos are
:>> :>> still awaiting patents.
:>> :>>
:>> :>> But the secret lies in making engines more efficient.
:>> :>>
:>> :>> The only part I do believe is "secret lies"; the rest is B.S.
:>> :>> --
:>> :>> Cheers, Bob
:>> :>
:>> :>I am sure these claims are total BS. What I don't understand is the
:>> :>motivation for making them. Is he looking for investors? Or does he just
:>> :>want his 15 minutes of fame (infamy)?
:>> :>
:>> :>Ed
:>>
:>>
:>> You're sure? See the last paragraph. I guess we'll see soon enough.
:>
:>Yes I am sure.
:>
:>> http :// www .wgal,com /automotive/16768626/detail.html?rss=lan&psp=irresistible
:>> Engineer Gets 110 MPG Out Of '87 Mustang
:>> Ohio Man Competing For $10M Prize
:>>
:>> POSTED: 10:21 am EDT July 2, 2008
:>> UPDATED: 11:07 am EDT July 2, 2008
:>>
:>>
:>> Doug Pelmear said he isn't toying with the engine of 1987 Ford Mustang for
:>> the money.
:>>
:>> [...]
:>>
:>> The engineer's tinkering, however, could earn him $10 million and save him
:>> plenty more in gas money.
:>>
:>> [...]
:>>
:>> Pelmear entered his car to win the the $10 million Progressive Automotive
:>> X
:>> Prize: a race to find an affordable, marketable automobile that gets at
:>> least 100 miles per gallon.
:>
:>I figure this is just part of the scam.
:>
:>Ed
Again, we'll see soon enough. Although I'm curious why you think
Progressive Ins. Co. would be part and parcel to a scam.
Re: Getting 110 miles to the gallon (News 8 Austin)
Where did anyone say the insurance company was "part and parcel"...
The insurance company probably has all the best intentions with this contest
(not to mention the advertising it can bring) ... unfortunately, this is a
prime venue for anyone with less scruples than the insurance company...
Where did anyone say the insurance company was "part and parcel"...
The insurance company probably has all the best intentions with this contest
(not to mention the advertising it can bring) ... unfortunately, this is a
prime venue for anyone with less scruples than the insurance company...
Re: Getting 110 miles to the gallon (News 8 Austin)
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:56:44 GMT, "Jim Warman" <mechanic@telusplanet,net >
wrote:
:>Where did anyone say the insurance company was "part and parcel"...
:>
:>The insurance company probably has all the best intentions with this contest
:>(not to mention the advertising it can bring) ... unfortunately, this is a
:>prime venue for anyone with less scruples than the insurance company...
:>
So you think Progressive Insurance Co. is filled with gullible fools? I
don't see the less scrupled folks getting through the evaluation process
and testing.
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:56:44 GMT, "Jim Warman" <mechanic@telusplanet,net >
wrote:
:>Where did anyone say the insurance company was "part and parcel"...
:>
:>The insurance company probably has all the best intentions with this contest
:>(not to mention the advertising it can bring) ... unfortunately, this is a
:>prime venue for anyone with less scruples than the insurance company...
:>
So you think Progressive Insurance Co. is filled with gullible fools? I
don't see the less scrupled folks getting through the evaluation process
and testing.
Re: Getting 110 miles to the gallon (News 8 Austin)
If I open the dictionary to the word "naive", I imagine I would see your
picture there....
Where did I say I think this company is filled with gullible fools????? You
seem to be quite adept at trying to put words in peoples mouths without ever
really learning anything.
Progressive doesn't have to do anything - not even open the hood.... They
have supplied the impetus but not the deed... All that is needed is for some
enterprizing soul with a clapped out old Mustang to ask for "seed" money..
The insurance company will be innocent of any wrong doing (you can now get
the knot out of your knickers). I finbd it hard to believe that someone can
be this naive...
I think Sara is a gullible fool.... and it would be nice if he/she would
read what is written without inserting bullshit...
Take a look at the video.... we are looking at several different cars... The
green one has a Holley carb... the black one has an "official contender"
badge....
The car supposedly gets 110 MPG... the insurance company spec'd a car that
can do 100 MPG (yes, there is other criteria) and this one apparently beats
that hands down - so we are told... What is keeping him from claiming the
prize?
We are told that the 0 to 60 time is three seconds.... The Bugatti
Veyron.... 8.0 litres, 16 cylinders, 4 turbochargers... can only muster 2.8
seconds... The Z06 Corvette comes in at 3.7 seconds and the Dodge Viper
SRT10 comes in at 3.5 seconds....
Can I please have some of what you are smoking????
"Sarah Czepiel" <ninety7gt@cox,net > wrote in message
news:uqht6458c0uf2eduvkhhilcjavilakvs36@4ax,com ...
> On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:56:44 GMT, "Jim Warman" <mechanic@telusplanet,net >
> wrote:
>
> :>Where did anyone say the insurance company was "part and parcel"...
> :>
> :>The insurance company probably has all the best intentions with this
> contest
> :>(not to mention the advertising it can bring) ... unfortunately, this is
> a
> :>prime venue for anyone with less scruples than the insurance company...
> :>
>
> So you think Progressive Insurance Co. is filled with gullible fools? I
> don't see the less scrupled folks getting through the evaluation process
> and testing.
>
If I open the dictionary to the word "naive", I imagine I would see your
picture there....
Where did I say I think this company is filled with gullible fools????? You
seem to be quite adept at trying to put words in peoples mouths without ever
really learning anything.
Progressive doesn't have to do anything - not even open the hood.... They
have supplied the impetus but not the deed... All that is needed is for some
enterprizing soul with a clapped out old Mustang to ask for "seed" money..
The insurance company will be innocent of any wrong doing (you can now get
the knot out of your knickers). I finbd it hard to believe that someone can
be this naive...
I think Sara is a gullible fool.... and it would be nice if he/she would
read what is written without inserting bullshit...
Take a look at the video.... we are looking at several different cars... The
green one has a Holley carb... the black one has an "official contender"
badge....
The car supposedly gets 110 MPG... the insurance company spec'd a car that
can do 100 MPG (yes, there is other criteria) and this one apparently beats
that hands down - so we are told... What is keeping him from claiming the
prize?
We are told that the 0 to 60 time is three seconds.... The Bugatti
Veyron.... 8.0 litres, 16 cylinders, 4 turbochargers... can only muster 2.8
seconds... The Z06 Corvette comes in at 3.7 seconds and the Dodge Viper
SRT10 comes in at 3.5 seconds....
Can I please have some of what you are smoking????
"Sarah Czepiel" <ninety7gt@cox,net > wrote in message
news:uqht6458c0uf2eduvkhhilcjavilakvs36@4ax,com ...
> On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:56:44 GMT, "Jim Warman" <mechanic@telusplanet,net >
> wrote:
>
> :>Where did anyone say the insurance company was "part and parcel"...
> :>
> :>The insurance company probably has all the best intentions with this
> contest
> :>(not to mention the advertising it can bring) ... unfortunately, this is
> a
> :>prime venue for anyone with less scruples than the insurance company...
> :>
>
> So you think Progressive Insurance Co. is filled with gullible fools? I
> don't see the less scrupled folks getting through the evaluation process
> and testing.
>
Re: Getting 110 miles to the gallon (News 8 Austin)
On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 03:51:42 GMT, "Jim Warman" <mechanic@telusplanet,net >
wrote:
:>If I open the dictionary to the word "naive", I imagine I would see your
:>picture there....
:>
:>Where did I say I think this company is filled with gullible fools????? You
:>seem to be quite adept at trying to put words in peoples mouths without ever
:>really learning anything.
:>
:>Progressive doesn't have to do anything - not even open the hood.... They
:>have supplied the impetus but not the deed... All that is needed is for some
:>enterprizing soul with a clapped out old Mustang to ask for "seed" money..
:>The insurance company will be innocent of any wrong doing (you can now get
:>the knot out of your knickers). I finbd it hard to believe that someone can
:>be this naive...
:>
:>I think Sara is a gullible fool.... and it would be nice if he/she would
:>read what is written without inserting bullshit...
If you look at what I've said Jim, instead of putting words in my mouth,
you'll find that all I've done is take a few pokes at you nay sayers,
" I'll guess we'll have to wait and see " while providing a link to the
contest information.
Since when does posting a link and saying," let's wait and see," make one
gullible, naive, or a fool?
I'll forgive your accusation that I'm a drug user.
:>Take a look at the video.... we are looking at several different cars... The
:>green one has a Holley carb... the black one has an "official contender"
:>badge....
:>
:>The car supposedly gets 110 MPG... the insurance company spec'd a car that
:>can do 100 MPG (yes, there is other criteria) and this one apparently beats
:>that hands down - so we are told... What is keeping him from claiming the
:>prize?
:>We are told that the 0 to 60 time is three seconds.... The Bugatti
:>Veyron.... 8.0 litres, 16 cylinders, 4 turbochargers... can only muster 2.8
:>seconds... The Z06 Corvette comes in at 3.7 seconds and the Dodge Viper
:>SRT10 comes in at 3.5 seconds....
:>
:>Can I please have some of what you are smoking????
:>"Sarah Czepiel" <ninety7gt@cox,net > wrote in message
:>news:uqht6458c0uf2eduvkhhilcjavilakvs36@4ax,com ...
:>> On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:56:44 GMT, "Jim Warman" <mechanic@telusplanet,net >
:>> wrote:
:>>
:>> :>Where did anyone say the insurance company was "part and parcel"...
:>> :>
:>> :>The insurance company probably has all the best intentions with this
:>> contest
:>> :>(not to mention the advertising it can bring) ... unfortunately, this is
:>> a
:>> :>prime venue for anyone with less scruples than the insurance company...
:>> :>
:>>
:>> So you think Progressive Insurance Co. is filled with gullible fools? I
:>> don't see the less scrupled folks getting through the evaluation process
:>> and testing.
:>>
:>
On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 03:51:42 GMT, "Jim Warman" <mechanic@telusplanet,net >
wrote:
:>If I open the dictionary to the word "naive", I imagine I would see your
:>picture there....
:>
:>Where did I say I think this company is filled with gullible fools????? You
:>seem to be quite adept at trying to put words in peoples mouths without ever
:>really learning anything.
:>
:>Progressive doesn't have to do anything - not even open the hood.... They
:>have supplied the impetus but not the deed... All that is needed is for some
:>enterprizing soul with a clapped out old Mustang to ask for "seed" money..
:>The insurance company will be innocent of any wrong doing (you can now get
:>the knot out of your knickers). I finbd it hard to believe that someone can
:>be this naive...
:>
:>I think Sara is a gullible fool.... and it would be nice if he/she would
:>read what is written without inserting bullshit...
If you look at what I've said Jim, instead of putting words in my mouth,
you'll find that all I've done is take a few pokes at you nay sayers,
" I'll guess we'll have to wait and see " while providing a link to the
contest information.
Since when does posting a link and saying," let's wait and see," make one
gullible, naive, or a fool?
I'll forgive your accusation that I'm a drug user.
:>Take a look at the video.... we are looking at several different cars... The
:>green one has a Holley carb... the black one has an "official contender"
:>badge....
:>
:>The car supposedly gets 110 MPG... the insurance company spec'd a car that
:>can do 100 MPG (yes, there is other criteria) and this one apparently beats
:>that hands down - so we are told... What is keeping him from claiming the
:>prize?
:>We are told that the 0 to 60 time is three seconds.... The Bugatti
:>Veyron.... 8.0 litres, 16 cylinders, 4 turbochargers... can only muster 2.8
:>seconds... The Z06 Corvette comes in at 3.7 seconds and the Dodge Viper
:>SRT10 comes in at 3.5 seconds....
:>
:>Can I please have some of what you are smoking????
:>"Sarah Czepiel" <ninety7gt@cox,net > wrote in message
:>news:uqht6458c0uf2eduvkhhilcjavilakvs36@4ax,com ...
:>> On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:56:44 GMT, "Jim Warman" <mechanic@telusplanet,net >
:>> wrote:
:>>
:>> :>Where did anyone say the insurance company was "part and parcel"...
:>> :>
:>> :>The insurance company probably has all the best intentions with this
:>> contest
:>> :>(not to mention the advertising it can bring) ... unfortunately, this is
:>> a
:>> :>prime venue for anyone with less scruples than the insurance company...
:>> :>
:>>
:>> So you think Progressive Insurance Co. is filled with gullible fools? I
:>> don't see the less scrupled folks getting through the evaluation process
:>> and testing.
:>>
:>
Re: Getting 110 miles to the gallon (News 8 Austin)
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 14:32:54 -0400, Sarah Czepiel <ninety7gt@cox,net >
wrote:
>On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 16:27:30 -0400, "C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring,com >
>wrote:
>
>:>
>:>"Sarah Czepiel" <ninety7gt@cox,net > wrote in message
>:>news:un5q649neo2pggpa7ksot45qqk9no9itmj@4ax,com ...
>:>> On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 07:52:04 -0400, "C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring,com >
>:>> wrote:
<SNIP>
>
>Again, we'll see soon enough. Although I'm curious why you think
>Progressive Ins. Co. would be part and parcel to a scam.
Perhaps, in discussions with Progressive, it was mention the safety
improvement of carrying less fuel, or a fuel hybrid that was
non-explosive, and Progressive bought into it as a way to improve
income while reducing outlay. Why, they might even give a 10% discount
to anyone who would buy and use such a vehicle.
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 14:32:54 -0400, Sarah Czepiel <ninety7gt@cox,net >
wrote:
>On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 16:27:30 -0400, "C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring,com >
>wrote:
>
>:>
>:>"Sarah Czepiel" <ninety7gt@cox,net > wrote in message
>:>news:un5q649neo2pggpa7ksot45qqk9no9itmj@4ax,com ...
>:>> On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 07:52:04 -0400, "C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring,com >
>:>> wrote:
<SNIP>
>
>Again, we'll see soon enough. Although I'm curious why you think
>Progressive Ins. Co. would be part and parcel to a scam.
Perhaps, in discussions with Progressive, it was mention the safety
improvement of carrying less fuel, or a fuel hybrid that was
non-explosive, and Progressive bought into it as a way to improve
income while reducing outlay. Why, they might even give a 10% discount
to anyone who would buy and use such a vehicle.
Re: Getting 110 miles to the gallon (News 8 Austin)
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 16:44:47 -0700, Spike <veeger@snowcrest,net > wrote:
:>On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 14:32:54 -0400, Sarah Czepiel <ninety7gt@cox,net >
:>wrote:
:>
:>>On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 16:27:30 -0400, "C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring,com >
:>>wrote:
:>>
:>>:>
:>>:>"Sarah Czepiel" <ninety7gt@cox,net > wrote in message
:>>:>news:un5q649neo2pggpa7ksot45qqk9no9itmj@4ax,com ...
:>>:>> On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 07:52:04 -0400, "C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring,com >
:>>:>> wrote:
:><SNIP>
:>>
:>>Again, we'll see soon enough. Although I'm curious why you think
:>>Progressive Ins. Co. would be part and parcel to a scam.
:>
:>Perhaps, in discussions with Progressive, it was mention the safety
:>improvement of carrying less fuel, or a fuel hybrid that was
:>non-explosive, and Progressive bought into it as a way to improve
:>income while reducing outlay. Why, they might even give a 10% discount
:>to anyone who would buy and use such a vehicle.
Is that a scam? My point is how are people going to be scammed, including
Progressive if the car and it's supposed claims are tested? Is Progressive
going to hand out 10 million $ and never open the hood of the car?
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 16:44:47 -0700, Spike <veeger@snowcrest,net > wrote:
:>On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 14:32:54 -0400, Sarah Czepiel <ninety7gt@cox,net >
:>wrote:
:>
:>>On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 16:27:30 -0400, "C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring,com >
:>>wrote:
:>>
:>>:>
:>>:>"Sarah Czepiel" <ninety7gt@cox,net > wrote in message
:>>:>news:un5q649neo2pggpa7ksot45qqk9no9itmj@4ax,com ...
:>>:>> On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 07:52:04 -0400, "C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring,com >
:>>:>> wrote:
:><SNIP>
:>>
:>>Again, we'll see soon enough. Although I'm curious why you think
:>>Progressive Ins. Co. would be part and parcel to a scam.
:>
:>Perhaps, in discussions with Progressive, it was mention the safety
:>improvement of carrying less fuel, or a fuel hybrid that was
:>non-explosive, and Progressive bought into it as a way to improve
:>income while reducing outlay. Why, they might even give a 10% discount
:>to anyone who would buy and use such a vehicle.
Is that a scam? My point is how are people going to be scammed, including
Progressive if the car and it's supposed claims are tested? Is Progressive
going to hand out 10 million $ and never open the hood of the car?
Re: Getting 110 miles to the gallon (News 8 Austin)
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:02:44 -0400, Sarah Czepiel <ninety7gt@cox,net >
wrote:
>On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 16:44:47 -0700, Spike <veeger@snowcrest,net > wrote:
>
>:>On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 14:32:54 -0400, Sarah Czepiel <ninety7gt@cox,net >
>:>wrote:
>:>
>:>>On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 16:27:30 -0400, "C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring,com >
>:>>wrote:
>:>>
>:>>:>
>:>>:>"Sarah Czepiel" <ninety7gt@cox,net > wrote in message
>:>>:>news:un5q649neo2pggpa7ksot45qqk9no9itmj@4ax,com ...
>:>>:>> On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 07:52:04 -0400, "C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring,com >
>:>>:>> wrote:
>:><SNIP>
>:>>
>:>>Again, we'll see soon enough. Although I'm curious why you think
>:>>Progressive Ins. Co. would be part and parcel to a scam.
>:>
>:>Perhaps, in discussions with Progressive, it was mention the safety
>:>improvement of carrying less fuel, or a fuel hybrid that was
>:>non-explosive, and Progressive bought into it as a way to improve
>:>income while reducing outlay. Why, they might even give a 10% discount
>:>to anyone who would buy and use such a vehicle.
>
>Is that a scam? My point is how are people going to be scammed, including
>Progressive if the car and it's supposed claims are tested? Is Progressive
>going to hand out 10 million $ and never open the hood of the car?
Ten Million is nothing to Progressive. Pocket change. Change they can
write off their gross income as "advertising", thus reducing their tax
liability.
Wouldn't you invest $10M if it wasn't actually "out of your pocket",
if you thought you could get a couple of Billion in return?
The heads of corporations get BIG incomes to make money for investors.
It's not their money they are playing with. Look how many corps have
lost billions and the CEO is still the CEO. The corporations don't
actually pay taxes.... the clients pay the taxes but don't realize it.
Corporations don't pay for higher wages and benefits; the clients pay
the increases. Corporations don't pay fines. The clients pay for
those, too.
Progressive may never have seen the car. They may base their decision
on "documents", white papers, etc, submitted to them.
If they get scammed, they can write it off, not say anything about
what the loss was for to the investors, and go on about their
business.
In the government it would be just another "Black Project";
so secret that they get the funding without disclosing what the
project is except to a small handfull. At some point, while the agency
heads are out playing golf on the new course, they can decide to tell
the select group of people that the project didn't work and has been
scrapped. Then they invite those on the committee to drop by the
clubhouse for drinks and a round of golf.
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 21:02:44 -0400, Sarah Czepiel <ninety7gt@cox,net >
wrote:
>On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 16:44:47 -0700, Spike <veeger@snowcrest,net > wrote:
>
>:>On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 14:32:54 -0400, Sarah Czepiel <ninety7gt@cox,net >
>:>wrote:
>:>
>:>>On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 16:27:30 -0400, "C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring,com >
>:>>wrote:
>:>>
>:>>:>
>:>>:>"Sarah Czepiel" <ninety7gt@cox,net > wrote in message
>:>>:>news:un5q649neo2pggpa7ksot45qqk9no9itmj@4ax,com ...
>:>>:>> On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 07:52:04 -0400, "C. E. White" <cewhite3@mindspring,com >
>:>>:>> wrote:
>:><SNIP>
>:>>
>:>>Again, we'll see soon enough. Although I'm curious why you think
>:>>Progressive Ins. Co. would be part and parcel to a scam.
>:>
>:>Perhaps, in discussions with Progressive, it was mention the safety
>:>improvement of carrying less fuel, or a fuel hybrid that was
>:>non-explosive, and Progressive bought into it as a way to improve
>:>income while reducing outlay. Why, they might even give a 10% discount
>:>to anyone who would buy and use such a vehicle.
>
>Is that a scam? My point is how are people going to be scammed, including
>Progressive if the car and it's supposed claims are tested? Is Progressive
>going to hand out 10 million $ and never open the hood of the car?
Ten Million is nothing to Progressive. Pocket change. Change they can
write off their gross income as "advertising", thus reducing their tax
liability.
Wouldn't you invest $10M if it wasn't actually "out of your pocket",
if you thought you could get a couple of Billion in return?
The heads of corporations get BIG incomes to make money for investors.
It's not their money they are playing with. Look how many corps have
lost billions and the CEO is still the CEO. The corporations don't
actually pay taxes.... the clients pay the taxes but don't realize it.
Corporations don't pay for higher wages and benefits; the clients pay
the increases. Corporations don't pay fines. The clients pay for
those, too.
Progressive may never have seen the car. They may base their decision
on "documents", white papers, etc, submitted to them.
If they get scammed, they can write it off, not say anything about
what the loss was for to the investors, and go on about their
business.
In the government it would be just another "Black Project";
so secret that they get the funding without disclosing what the
project is except to a small handfull. At some point, while the agency
heads are out playing golf on the new course, they can decide to tell
the select group of people that the project didn't work and has been
scrapped. Then they invite those on the committee to drop by the
clubhouse for drinks and a round of golf.
Re: Getting 110 miles to the gallon (News 8 Austin)
Sarah Czepiel wrote:
> Again, we'll see soon enough. Although I'm curious why you think
> Progressive Ins. Co. would be part and parcel to a scam.
>
They aren't. Assuming the prize offer is real and not an Internet
story, they are merely offering a prize for the first car to get 100MPG
the same as the company(s) that offered "The X Prize" for the first team
to build a vehicle and go into outer space and back to a safe landing.
They don't necessarily have anything to do with the participants and he
will only get the prize when he satisfies their criteria.
--
"I imagine Lamie sitting at a stop sign,
waiting for it to change" - Burgess Krell
"You send email. You're abusive. It's appropriate
to this newsgroup. Neener neener. - Marc Bissonnette
"there certainly does seem to be an internet predator here,
but anyone who posts publicly 'attn police officer'
is most likely a very large part of the problem. - Bob
Sarah Czepiel wrote:
> Again, we'll see soon enough. Although I'm curious why you think
> Progressive Ins. Co. would be part and parcel to a scam.
>
They aren't. Assuming the prize offer is real and not an Internet
story, they are merely offering a prize for the first car to get 100MPG
the same as the company(s) that offered "The X Prize" for the first team
to build a vehicle and go into outer space and back to a safe landing.
They don't necessarily have anything to do with the participants and he
will only get the prize when he satisfies their criteria.
--
"I imagine Lamie sitting at a stop sign,
waiting for it to change" - Burgess Krell
"You send email. You're abusive. It's appropriate
to this newsgroup. Neener neener. - Marc Bissonnette
"there certainly does seem to be an internet predator here,
but anyone who posts publicly 'attn police officer'
is most likely a very large part of the problem. - Bob
Re: Getting 110 miles to the gallon (News 8 Austin)
On Jul 4, 9:19 pm, "WindsorFox<SS>" <darkshado...@gmail,com > wrote:
> Sarah Czepiel wrote:
> > Again, we'll see soon enough. Although I'm curious why you think
> > Progressive Ins. Co. would be part and parcel to a scam.
>
> They aren't. Assuming the prize offer is real and not an Internet
> story, they are merely offering a prize for the first car to get 100MPG
> the same as the company(s) that offered "The X Prize" for the first team
> to build a vehicle and go into outer space and back to a safe landing.
> They don't necessarily have anything to do with the participants and he
> will only get the prize when he satisfies their criteria.
>
The X Prize Foundation is completely legit. Progressive Insurance
mearly bought the right to put their name on it (like stadiums :) ).
The Automitive X Prize is also endorsed by the US Department of
Energy. www .xprize.org.
The entrants are competing for a prize and if they qualify for entry,
then they qualify. But nobody simply steps up and gets an entry into
this race. It is not enough to simply claim your vehicle can perform
the way it should. The entrants must provide designs, drawings, and
other data to the X Prize evaluation committee to establish that the
entrant stands a chance of competing and, more importantly, can
actually produce the vehicle when the race is over. This includes a
business plan for the production of the systems down the road (heh).
Note also, there's an emissions standard that all entrants must
acheive to qualify.
So, unless Palmear is a really exceptional con man (and I'm not saying
he couldn' be :) ), then he'll disappear shortly as the folks at X
Prize review his documentation and discover whatever he's done. If he
actually makes it into the qualifying race at the end of this year,
then that's a really, really, really interesting result ;).
I'm a show-me engineer as well, so until I get more data I'm going to
lean on the skeptical side. I'll be pleasantly surprised if the
Mustang gets to the qualifying round. However, even if it should I
don't see it winning the race. There are teams in this already passing
150 mpg and I've seen nothing at all about the Mustang's emissions,
and those count too. While there will be a couple of events that the
Mustang's power will be probably be superior, there are far more
events that significantly limit how effective the extra specific
output will be.
Smokey Yunick would love this guy :). Mr. Yunick was a high school
drop-out who got engineers scratching their heads with his ideas. And
if Palmear is working the rules somehow to win a race, well, Smokey
would see that as a thing of beauty, imho :D.
On Jul 4, 9:19 pm, "WindsorFox<SS>" <darkshado...@gmail,com > wrote:
> Sarah Czepiel wrote:
> > Again, we'll see soon enough. Although I'm curious why you think
> > Progressive Ins. Co. would be part and parcel to a scam.
>
> They aren't. Assuming the prize offer is real and not an Internet
> story, they are merely offering a prize for the first car to get 100MPG
> the same as the company(s) that offered "The X Prize" for the first team
> to build a vehicle and go into outer space and back to a safe landing.
> They don't necessarily have anything to do with the participants and he
> will only get the prize when he satisfies their criteria.
>
The X Prize Foundation is completely legit. Progressive Insurance
mearly bought the right to put their name on it (like stadiums :) ).
The Automitive X Prize is also endorsed by the US Department of
Energy. www .xprize.org.
The entrants are competing for a prize and if they qualify for entry,
then they qualify. But nobody simply steps up and gets an entry into
this race. It is not enough to simply claim your vehicle can perform
the way it should. The entrants must provide designs, drawings, and
other data to the X Prize evaluation committee to establish that the
entrant stands a chance of competing and, more importantly, can
actually produce the vehicle when the race is over. This includes a
business plan for the production of the systems down the road (heh).
Note also, there's an emissions standard that all entrants must
acheive to qualify.
So, unless Palmear is a really exceptional con man (and I'm not saying
he couldn' be :) ), then he'll disappear shortly as the folks at X
Prize review his documentation and discover whatever he's done. If he
actually makes it into the qualifying race at the end of this year,
then that's a really, really, really interesting result ;).
I'm a show-me engineer as well, so until I get more data I'm going to
lean on the skeptical side. I'll be pleasantly surprised if the
Mustang gets to the qualifying round. However, even if it should I
don't see it winning the race. There are teams in this already passing
150 mpg and I've seen nothing at all about the Mustang's emissions,
and those count too. While there will be a couple of events that the
Mustang's power will be probably be superior, there are far more
events that significantly limit how effective the extra specific
output will be.
Smokey Yunick would love this guy :). Mr. Yunick was a high school
drop-out who got engineers scratching their heads with his ideas. And
if Palmear is working the rules somehow to win a race, well, Smokey
would see that as a thing of beauty, imho :D.
Re: Getting 110 miles to the gallon (News 8 Austin)
On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 22:52:56 -0700 (PDT), Dan <dwtalso@nuail,com > wrote:
:>On Jul 4, 9:19 pm, "WindsorFox<SS>" <darkshado...@gmail,com > wrote:
:>> Sarah Czepiel wrote:
:>> > Again, we'll see soon enough. Although I'm curious why you think
:>> > Progressive Ins. Co. would be part and parcel to a scam.
:>>
:>> They aren't. Assuming the prize offer is real and not an Internet
:>> story, they are merely offering a prize for the first car to get 100MPG
:>> the same as the company(s) that offered "The X Prize" for the first team
:>> to build a vehicle and go into outer space and back to a safe landing.
:>> They don't necessarily have anything to do with the participants and he
:>> will only get the prize when he satisfies their criteria.
:>>
:>
:>The X Prize Foundation is completely legit. Progressive Insurance
:>mearly bought the right to put their name on it (like stadiums :) ).
:>The Automitive X Prize is also endorsed by the US Department of
:>Energy. www .xprize.org.
:>
:>The entrants are competing for a prize and if they qualify for entry,
:>then they qualify. But nobody simply steps up and gets an entry into
:>this race. It is not enough to simply claim your vehicle can perform
:>the way it should. The entrants must provide designs, drawings, and
:>other data to the X Prize evaluation committee to establish that the
:>entrant stands a chance of competing and, more importantly, can
:>actually produce the vehicle when the race is over. This includes a
:>business plan for the production of the systems down the road (heh).
:>
:>Note also, there's an emissions standard that all entrants must
:>acheive to qualify.
:>
:>So, unless Palmear is a really exceptional con man (and I'm not saying
:>he couldn' be :) ), then he'll disappear shortly as the folks at X
:>Prize review his documentation and discover whatever he's done. If he
:>actually makes it into the qualifying race at the end of this year,
:>then that's a really, really, really interesting result ;).
:>
:>I'm a show-me engineer as well, so until I get more data I'm going to
:>lean on the skeptical side.
Careful. When I said, " I guess we'll have to see" , I was called
gullible, naive, and a fool.
<eye roll > :)
I'll be pleasantly surprised if the
:>Mustang gets to the qualifying round. However, even if it should I
:>don't see it winning the race. There are teams in this already passing
:>150 mpg and I've seen nothing at all about the Mustang's emissions,
:>and those count too. While there will be a couple of events that the
:>Mustang's power will be probably be superior, there are far more
:>events that significantly limit how effective the extra specific
:>output will be.
:>
:>Smokey Yunick would love this guy :). Mr. Yunick was a high school
:>drop-out who got engineers scratching their heads with his ideas. And
:>if Palmear is working the rules somehow to win a race, well, Smokey
:>would see that as a thing of beauty, imho :D.
LMAO. Great post Dan, thanks for your valuable input.
On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 22:52:56 -0700 (PDT), Dan <dwtalso@nuail,com > wrote:
:>On Jul 4, 9:19 pm, "WindsorFox<SS>" <darkshado...@gmail,com > wrote:
:>> Sarah Czepiel wrote:
:>> > Again, we'll see soon enough. Although I'm curious why you think
:>> > Progressive Ins. Co. would be part and parcel to a scam.
:>>
:>> They aren't. Assuming the prize offer is real and not an Internet
:>> story, they are merely offering a prize for the first car to get 100MPG
:>> the same as the company(s) that offered "The X Prize" for the first team
:>> to build a vehicle and go into outer space and back to a safe landing.
:>> They don't necessarily have anything to do with the participants and he
:>> will only get the prize when he satisfies their criteria.
:>>
:>
:>The X Prize Foundation is completely legit. Progressive Insurance
:>mearly bought the right to put their name on it (like stadiums :) ).
:>The Automitive X Prize is also endorsed by the US Department of
:>Energy. www .xprize.org.
:>
:>The entrants are competing for a prize and if they qualify for entry,
:>then they qualify. But nobody simply steps up and gets an entry into
:>this race. It is not enough to simply claim your vehicle can perform
:>the way it should. The entrants must provide designs, drawings, and
:>other data to the X Prize evaluation committee to establish that the
:>entrant stands a chance of competing and, more importantly, can
:>actually produce the vehicle when the race is over. This includes a
:>business plan for the production of the systems down the road (heh).
:>
:>Note also, there's an emissions standard that all entrants must
:>acheive to qualify.
:>
:>So, unless Palmear is a really exceptional con man (and I'm not saying
:>he couldn' be :) ), then he'll disappear shortly as the folks at X
:>Prize review his documentation and discover whatever he's done. If he
:>actually makes it into the qualifying race at the end of this year,
:>then that's a really, really, really interesting result ;).
:>
:>I'm a show-me engineer as well, so until I get more data I'm going to
:>lean on the skeptical side.
Careful. When I said, " I guess we'll have to see" , I was called
gullible, naive, and a fool.
<eye roll > :)
I'll be pleasantly surprised if the
:>Mustang gets to the qualifying round. However, even if it should I
:>don't see it winning the race. There are teams in this already passing
:>150 mpg and I've seen nothing at all about the Mustang's emissions,
:>and those count too. While there will be a couple of events that the
:>Mustang's power will be probably be superior, there are far more
:>events that significantly limit how effective the extra specific
:>output will be.
:>
:>Smokey Yunick would love this guy :). Mr. Yunick was a high school
:>drop-out who got engineers scratching their heads with his ideas. And
:>if Palmear is working the rules somehow to win a race, well, Smokey
:>would see that as a thing of beauty, imho :D.
LMAO. Great post Dan, thanks for your valuable input.
Re: Getting 110 miles to the gallon (News 8 Austin)
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 22:19:10 -0500, "WindsorFox<SS>"
<darkshado666@gmail,com > wrote:
:>Sarah Czepiel wrote:
:>
:>> Again, we'll see soon enough. Although I'm curious why you think
:>> Progressive Ins. Co. would be part and parcel to a scam.
:>>
:>
:> They aren't. Assuming the prize offer is real and not an Internet
:>story, they are merely offering a prize for the first car to get 100MPG
:>the same as the company(s) that offered "The X Prize" for the first team
:>to build a vehicle and go into outer space and back to a safe landing.
:>They don't necessarily have anything to do with the participants and he
:>will only get the prize when he satisfies their criteria.
Common sense at last. :)
On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 22:19:10 -0500, "WindsorFox<SS>"
<darkshado666@gmail,com > wrote:
:>Sarah Czepiel wrote:
:>
:>> Again, we'll see soon enough. Although I'm curious why you think
:>> Progressive Ins. Co. would be part and parcel to a scam.
:>>
:>
:> They aren't. Assuming the prize offer is real and not an Internet
:>story, they are merely offering a prize for the first car to get 100MPG
:>the same as the company(s) that offered "The X Prize" for the first team
:>to build a vehicle and go into outer space and back to a safe landing.
:>They don't necessarily have anything to do with the participants and he
:>will only get the prize when he satisfies their criteria.
Common sense at last. :)
