Cars!

[madman]

lol I've been fighting my LeBaron tooth and nail to get the 14.9 mpg I'm getting right now. That's city driving, mind you. The brakes were holding, so I did pads, calipers, and hoses all the way around, and that got it up from 13 mpg. Now when I'm stopped at a light, and let go of the brakes, the car will roll freely. Also did spark plugs, wires, air and fuel filters, oxygen sensor, replaced the leaking gas tank (which I thought would've helped, but didn't!!), and cleaned the throttle body and IAC valve. Also sealed up a couple of minor vacuum leaks.

It's got the digital mpg readout on it. It does this stupid thing where if I don't let up off the gas pedal ever so slightly, and press the clutch to get it out of gear, the mpg drops to 1 and SLOWLY climbs back up even though I'm coasting. So I drive really carefully to keep the number up. I think that thing screws with the numbers, but I don't really know if it's actually dumping extra fuel in the engine during that time.

 

[kirbyklekter]

Ethanol

I've heard and read horror stories about how ethanol that was more than a couple months old in a cars fuel tank or in garden equipment whatever, that it gummed up fuel injectors or ate gaskets in carbs, on and on. I haven't had any problems yet so I don't know how true this is but the complaints are many.One guy wrote that he drives almost two hours to another county to get gas with less or no ethanol just for his lawn mower! Said he's tired of rebuilding the carb on his Troy mower!

 

[weltron]

A Couple Points

@human

When you reference your 98 Aurora as being certified for California Emissions, the only thing I could think of was the catalytic converters were CARB certified. Otherwise the car had no additional changes that I am aware of. I know for 2000, the big thing was the Northstar V8 in California became CARB certified as a "low emissions vehicle".

You're right in saying that back in the 70s there was different ratings for California cars. Back then depending on model, it could be something simple as just a different carburetor to the addition of a smog pump, tuning or California exclusive drivetrains (anyone remember the 1980 Corvette with a 305 and 3 speed auto?). Or you could just be like Honda with CVCC and run none of that garbage.

I had a neighbor who had a 1998 Cadillac Deville d'Elegance. They would take that car to trips to Key West and would swear up and down that the car would pull 30 mpg all the way down and back. I find that actually believable. I've talked to a couple of Deville and Aurora owners who say the same thing. The Northstar was rather ahead of its time in that regard.

 

[human]

RE: Ethanol...

I remember back in the late '70s when gas stations would proudly advertise they sold "gasohol" and then after the initial novelty faded, the euphemism became "ethanol enhanced," which to me seemed like a contradiction in terms since ethanol in gasoline is more of an adulteration than an enhancement. In concentrations greater than 10 percent (E10), ethanol is bad news for most cars unless they're Flex-Fuel vehicles, which have Teflon coatings on most of the fuel system parts to prevent ethanol damage. Although my 2011 Impala was a flex fuel vehicle, I never tried running E85 in it, mainly because gas stations around here that even sell the stuff are very few and far between.

Most stations around here sell only E10 gasohol but there are a few that offer non-ethanol gasoline, usually for anywhere from 80 cents to a dollar more a gallon. When gasohol was first becoming prevalent about ten years ago, the difference in fuel economy and performance was quite noticeable in the Cadillac I had at the time. Gas mileage would drop about 20 percent from about 16 around town to about 13. Likewise, performance was also reduced. My anecdotal evidence seems consistent with guidance in the owner's manual for my flex-fuel Impala, which recommended against high ethanol fuels, even though the car was designed to accommodate them since they would reduce both fuel economy and performance. The explanation the manual gave is that ethanol stores less potential energy by volume than gasoline, which makes perfect sense to me.

Aside from that, the main problem with gasohol is a relatively short 'shelf life'. When it is stored for more than a very few months, it attracts moisture, which contaminates the fuel, and the ethanol will eventually separate out of the gasoline. I'm not sure whether it sinks to the bottom of the tank or floats on top, but it's a good idea when a vehicle hasn't been driven in a while to add fresh fuel to the tank before driving it much so the turbulence of new fuel coming in will mix everything back together and any moisture contamination will be diluted. Similarly, I always give the gas can for my lawnmower a little shake before filling the mower and when mowing season's over, I pour whatever remains in the can back into one of my cars so I can start off with fresh fuel in the spring.

 

[madman]

Ethanol

All the bad crap you hear about it are old wives' tales. Some of it has some loose basis in reality, but the short story is that it's actually better than gasoline in every conceivable way with the exception of energy density. And on that point it's only a 10% difference, so not a big deal.

There is no such thing as 'ethanol damage.' Ethanol is just vodka, it's a solvent, yes, however gasoline is 10 times as harsh of a solvent. So all the fuel system components can easily handle it. Again, you're hearing old wives' tales. The notion that it could cause damage is from lingering bad memories of Methanol with an 'M.' Another type of alcohol sold as a gasoline alternative in the 1970s, which is actually an even harsher solvent than gasoline and does cause damage. Hence where the old wives' tales originate from.

As for lawn equipment, well, it's all still carbureted. I've heard some people say that small engines don't run so well on 10% ethanol. Maybe. I've never had a problem. Maybe the carbs simply need to be adjusted?

As for gas sitting around... that's never a good thing, period. It's not meant to sit around. Also, gas is formulated differently nowadays. It's meant to evaporate easily, which it does when left around, so you're left with bad gas. Apparently this used to not be the case decades ago, when it was formulated to NOT evaporate easily.

TLDR: don't fear ethanol. It's actually good, 10% is fine. Some cars may not agree with E85, but it won't harm anything.

 

[suckolux]

Out west here in California, we even have winter and summer blends of fuel!Ethanol percentage blends, I think, I know the mileage drops

 

[kirbyklekter]

That's true

Also the summer blend is higher in price. A rep from Chevron says it costs more to formulate the summer blend. He said it has nothing to do with demand. That's funny, because it always takes a hike upwards just before most holidays and that IS related to demand.

My sister was selling her Chrysler Town & Country van. The interested buyer would be here the next day. The van had been sitting for two years not driven. I was concerned about trying to use two year old gas, but there was no time to drain the tank and all that goes with that so I poured a pt. of Barryman's Chemtool for fuel injection equipped engines into the tank.

We waited until morning to attempt starting the van. Kicked right over and we've got ignition Houston! I don't know if that helped but I didn't think it would hurt anything. Who knows what lurked in the bottom the the fuel tank, 238K miles driven, and three owners. Anyway...Sold!

 

[human]

We have summer and winter blends here in N.C. as well. I think its nationwide. The summer blend usually comes to the stations sometime around April. The price generally starts trending upward in march when supplies tighten as Gulf Coast refineries shut down for maintenance and to switch over to summer formulations. There are predictable demand spikes just ahead of the extended Memorial Day, Independence Day and Labor Day weekends.

I'm not sure when winter formulation generally returns, October maybe?, but I usually get better gas mileage in cooler weather. I filled up yesterday and noticed an immediate improvement in mileage over what I'd been getting the past few months so maybe it's already here.

 

[fan-of-fans]

Impala

We had 2006 Impalas when I was in driver's ed (summer 2006). They were still on the old W-body platform which I think went back to '88, but all new sheet metal and interior for '06. Ours were base models, cloth split bench seat up front with a column shifter.

I loved that car for some reason. I remember reviews at the time said it was "dated", and it did to me remind of an older car, but that's what I liked about it. I thought the front end looked a bit like a '94-'01 Lumina.

And it did turn out they made that body style Impala for quite a long time. It was in production through the 2016 model year alongside the all new 2014+ model, I think mostly for fleets and rentals. One thing I didn't like was in later years they "deleted" the Impala emblems that were behind the rear wing windows. Although they were always there on the new '14+ body style.

I wanted an LTZ Impala when I got my first car a few years after driver's ed, but even the '06es were too expensive. So I got an '01 Malibu which was a great car, but at the end it needed a transmission rebuild and I didn't feel like fixing it. I actually drove it that way for a while. I felt bad dumping it but I wanted to move on to something more modern.

Still wanted an Impala of the '06-16 gen when I replaced it as I thought that would be a logical upgrade and familiar, but I couldn't find any. I should have test drove one of the new models, but ended up at the Ford dealer instead.

Another car I really wanted to try was a Kia Optima or Hyundai Sonata. They only sell Kias here though and I couldn't find a used Optima equipped the way I wanted. But they are both beautiful cars.

 

[fan-of-fans]

My grandfather used to be a car salesman, and though he had gotten out of that business when I was growing up he always was getting a different car or truck.

He had a '96 Century, a Chrysler LeBaron at some point, then a '99 Taurus, all bought new at the time. I think he liked the Taurus because he kept it for about 5 years which was a rarity.

Around 2004 he got a new style at the time Chevy Malibu but for some reason he didn't like it. Traded that on a Chevy Aveo and he REALLY didn't like that. I still don't know why he thought it would be an improvement over the Malibu. No idea! LOL Eventually he got a Buick LaCrosse in 2005 which reminded me a lot of the 2006 Impala and it was a pretty good car, and like the Taurus he kept it about 4 or 5 years, but after that only got Honda SUVs.

Usually along with the "new" car he would have an older car as well, or a new truck. When he had the '04 Malibu he got a used '94 Buick Regal. It was a beautiful aqua green with a tan interior. I get the impression he really loved that car as he would drive it when he'd come to visit more than that new Malibu and I remember riding in it a lot.

He also had at one point a '92 Buick Skylark. It was very basic and had manual windows and locks, which I thought was odd for a Buick. That one was supposed to become my first car, but it didn't end up happening and I didn't get my first car until about 5 years after. Not sure what happened to it but I guess he sold it on.

 

[kirbyklekter]

Interesting about Impala's first year

The 1958 Impala as we know it, was supposed to debut in 1957, as a totally different trimline. BelAir was flagship model from '53-57. It was to yield to the new nameplate Impala in 57. The Impala was so different in almost every way and the re-tooling of the plants to make this car were not in place ,far behind where they should be.

So GM had to run the 57 BelAir in place of the '58. The Impala had rounded fins in the back. It had coil springs suspension front and rear. A bigger 348 turbo jet V8. was in addition to the 283 engine. Like the '57i/2 model you could get fuel injection. Not sure if the 409 was offered as it was in '59.

I do think it was a good thing they ran the 57 Bel Air as the flagship trim, it was extremely popular, had the most understated fins of the model year.The half year model 57 had metallic paint options,fuel injection,twin antennas for the tube radio and custom seat covers from the factory.My family bought an aqua blue 2 dr. hardtop with a white top and the power pack 283 4bbl carb and a little higher rise on the intake 4bbl carb. Years ago I bought one the same as our family car was and fixed it up, drove for 5 years and sold it to my brothers best bud.

He had it for a week, went honky tonkin with friends. Lost control of the car in his neighborhood, flew through the fence at the neighbors and put the car down in the deep end of their pool after snapping their diving board in two and dragging the pool slide in with them. I get a visit from police at 4am asking if I owned the car, then gave me the bad news. What a waste of a beautiful car!

I do like the engines in the newer cars, so much more refined. They start up faster, run smoother and will last longer than the old school machinery,just a little pricier. A German mechanic who worked at Mercedes Benz in the 50's said they all had respect for American car manufacturers back then.They were really impressed with Olds,Buick and Cadillac,and all the inovation going forward with these cars.

 

[suckolux]

Cole, guessing he took the 94 Regal on trips because it was comfortable! Buicks make great road cars.

 

[kirbyklekter]

@ suckolux

Are you liking your present car so far?

 

[suckolux]

I actually am, but still adjusting. Mileage is good, but the insurance and license is double, hopefully less maintenance and repair it will even out or better. Thanks for asking.