Hey Craig:
Please dont flee from the boards in disgust. We need as many reasonable people here as possible. I could learn a lot from you, and you can help me remember stuff that I haven't seen in years.
Rick & Connie: You are, of course, entitled to your opinions as we all are, but for goodness sake please don't misquote science and make it out to be fact. You don't know physics (Craig has a very healthy recollection of PHYS 101....I had forgotten half of the stuff he summarized but he is dead on correct about the thermodynamics of engine efficiency) and you definitely don't know chemistry or really much about how an engine works for that matter. You're saying that you don't dispute thermodynamic limitations when in reality you have absolutely no clue about thermodynamics. How the heck can you make your arguments when you literally have no idea what the science of thermodynamics actually is?
I'm not going to even attempt to try and explain how stuff works to you, Rick & Connie, cuz I'll bet that you won't even consider it to be possible. I'm part of the establishment (ie people who actually understand the science and accept thermodynamic barriers as reality). 70% efficient engine? Absolutely! Achieved through carbueration and gearing? NFW! Add in some ceramic cylinder sleeces, and throw a crock pot in the back seat....still NFW! It's going to take quite some time and a [B]hell[/B] of a lot of money and many, many breakthroughs in engine technology to get close to 70% and I have no doubt that it will eventually happen. Call me crazy!!
Sorry everyone. This is going to be the catalyst for another 2000 word essay on conspiracies, but I couldn't help it.
BOTH of you need to get some sleep and stop internet surfing so darn late!
Brian

__________________
Brian
1995 E320 wagon