Mother Of All Whore Threads Non-VIP Edition v.1

Got the blue lawn mower working. Just had old gas in it. Drained it into my other lawn mower, hopefully it mixes and doesn't cause that one to have issues. So I now have 4 working lawn mowers. Just need to get belts for 2 and figure out which one I keep.
 
Got another project done….although this one took 2 weekends since I ordered some wrong stuff.

Made a diy lift/storage for the jeep top. Now one person can remove and store the top all in one go and barely break a sweat.

Mounted some hardware on the garage ceiling joist(way over kill but I wanted it that way) and hung a uni-track off that hardware. Then put some rollers on a hoist that I purchased and got some ropes/slings that would wrap around the Jeep top to lift it directly off the Jeep.

Once the top is off the Jeep, lift it high enough to where it clear my cabinets and I push the Jeep top back a few feet where it will hang until it goes back on the Jeep in the fall.

So now we just back up the Jeep to where it is below the track and run the straps under the top. Hook it up to the hoist and lift it up. Move the Jeep out of the way. The. Push the top/hoist down the track to where it sits in the corner.

IMG_1489.jpegIMG_1490.jpegIMG_1461.jpegIMG_1462.jpegIMG_1455.jpegIMG_1456.jpeg
 
Table turned out nice! View is awesome!

I think I spent $210 or less for everything. I didn’t want it to take up floor space, don’t have access to put it in the crawl space and would not want to carry it down there. The major reason for doing this is that I can swap out the tops all on my own with low effort.

Is it way over the top….yes. But accomplishes what I wanted.
 
Anyone have tire recommendations for a daily driver Civic Si Sedan? Poking around online, I've come across a few I'm interested in but they get mixed reviews (I don't tend to rely solely on reviews but they do provide good insight sometimes). Anyhow, I saw on the Honda website that the factory tire is a 215/45/17 Michelin Premier A/S so I'm thinking the equivalent tire is the Michelin Pilot Sport All Season 4. However, I'm just curious if there was another recommendation out there.

For context, I'm in central Florida so snow/ice traction is not a concern; however, wet braking distance is a factor.
 
I've been running Firehawk indy for a few years. Always good in the rain, only used in the summer. That's the only summer tire I've ever used so my opinion is super bias.
Going to be drag racing may 26th and I'm expecting the tires to not due well due to their age.
Can't go wrong with Michelin though.
 
No posts in here today.. I'm disappointed in y'all. I go on vacation and people don't post lol
 
Been working a bunch, trying to get the guys to wrap up remodel work, and preparing to be on vacation later this week. Plenty of excuses.
 
I can't even. This must be how the boomers felt when muscle cars went up in price.
1000006271.png1000006272.png
 
https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/350382/gas-mileage-fuel-economy-mpg-gphm-gas-guzzlers

So…flip the numerator and denominator and multiply by 100. This normalizes the equation and lets you calculate percentages better.

Because taking the number of miles you drive and divide by actual fuel consumption is a damn lie. Damn dirty lie concocted by bad orange man or some bull like that. After all - Europe does it the new way, so it must be good.
 
“They do it that way because fuel consumed per mile is directly related to energy use and directly related to emissions, whereas our MPG is not,” said Kate Whitefoot, an associate professor of engineering and public policy at Carnegie Mellon.

======

1716354865892.gif


So if a car is stated to get 25 mpg, …that “doesn’t tell me its energy use or emissions”….?… But telling me how many gallons it uses per 100 miles does? Reading that article made me question my mind.

So 4 gallons per 100 is 25mpg
2 gallons per 100 is 50mpg
10 gallons per 100 is 10mpg

Am I just not getting it? I feel stupid even asking how this is “better” at understanding emissions and energy use
 
webby said:
“They do it that way because fuel consumed per mile is directly related to energy use and directly related to emissions, whereas our MPG is not,” said Kate Whitefoot, an associate professor of engineering and public policy at Carnegie Mellon.

======

View attachment 66902


So if a car is stated to get 25 mpg, …that “doesn’t tell me its energy use or emissions”….?… But telling me how many gallons it uses per 100 miles does? Reading that article made me question my mind.

So 4 gallons per 100 is 25mpg
2 gallons per 100 is 50mpg
10 gallons per 100 is 10mpg

Am I just not getting it? I feel stupid even asking how this is “better” at understanding emissions and energy use
Click to expand...
The only thing I can think of on the inverse is where the number gets smaller as your economy gets better. That way it’s “easier” to see that a lower gpc (gals/100 miles) is better gas mileage and you can calculate x carbon emissions per gallon, so you straight multiply that relationship? And as you get down to lower values, it’ll asymptotically approach the zero, whereas mpg is a linear relationship and presumably can be infinite. I’m stretching here because it’s so inane.

10- 10 gpc
25- 4 gpc
50- 2 gpc
100- 1 gpc
1000- 0.1 gpc
 
Well, unfortunately, regardless of how we calculate it, US policy (which is generally in response to CA's ridiculous 'leading the way' CARB laws) drive automakers to meet a 'miles per gallon' target which is outlined in the article. And, one thing we all know for certain is that US regulations do not change quickly.

And, in response to the article, while I get what they're driving at, it's still an apples to oranges comparison for me. Even in the first argument, while scenario A had a 50% improvement and scenario B had a 65% improvement; the net change for consumers is that 15mpg is not as cost effective and/or efficient as 50mpg to our routine and pocketbooks. True, the net gain of the scenario B cars was greater in comparison; the reality for us at the pump is not quite there.
 
AlmosN8kd said:
Well, unfortunately, regardless of how we calculate it, US policy (which is generally in response to CA's ridiculous 'leading the way' CARB laws) drive automakers to meet a 'miles per gallon' target which is outlined in the article. And, one thing we all know for certain is that US regulations do not change quickly.

And, in response to the article, while I get what they're driving at, it's still an apples to oranges comparison for me. Even in the first argument, while scenario A had a 50% improvement and scenario B had a 65% improvement; the net change for consumers is that 15mpg is not as cost effective and/or efficient as 50mpg to our routine and pocketbooks. True, the net gain of the scenario B cars was greater in comparison; the reality for us at the pump is not quite there.
Click to expand...
FooBird said:
The only thing I can think of on the inverse is where the number gets smaller as your economy gets better. That way it’s “easier” to see that a lower gpc (gals/100 miles) is better gas mileage and you can calculate x carbon emissions per gallon, so you straight multiply that relationship? And as you get down to lower values, it’ll asymptotically approach the zero, whereas mpg is a linear relationship and presumably can be infinite. I’m stretching here because it’s so inane.

10- 10 gpc
25- 4 gpc
50- 2 gpc
100- 1 gpc
1000- 0.1 gpc
Click to expand...
webby said:
“They do it that way because fuel consumed per mile is directly related to energy use and directly related to emissions, whereas our MPG is not,” said Kate Whitefoot, an associate professor of engineering and public policy at Carnegie Mellon.

======

View attachment 66902


So if a car is stated to get 25 mpg, …that “doesn’t tell me its energy use or emissions”….?… But telling me how many gallons it uses per 100 miles does? Reading that article made me question my mind.

So 4 gallons per 100 is 25mpg
2 gallons per 100 is 50mpg
10 gallons per 100 is 10mpg

Am I just not getting it? I feel stupid even asking how this is “better” at understanding emissions and energy use
Click to expand...

I wake up to you guys doing big brain gas math?

I'm going back to bed my head hurts

giphy.gif
 
Just thinking about this. They could use the new gallons/100 miles metric to compare to electric cars. That’d work…

Call it 34kWh per gallons of gas. They rate car batteries that way.

So a car that gets 30 mpg would use about 100 kWh/100 miles. Then you can compare to the EV, like the Hummer - 65 kWh/100 miles. A true apples to apples comparison of gas power vs battery power consumption.

Now that’d be a smart metric.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top