General Diesel Discussion Talk about general diesel engines (theory, etc.) If it's about diesel, and it doesn't fit anywhere else, then put it right in here.
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: CARiD

MTV's pimp my ride, Impala with a 800hp Duramax Diesel...lol

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Apr 13, 2007 | 05:08 AM
  #31  
74dart's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 583
Likes: 0
From: Shelby NC
Originally Posted by wcbcruzer
It would actually be more environmentally damaging if biodiesel ever did replace diesel.
How? Just wondering.
Reply
Old Apr 13, 2007 | 09:39 AM
  #32  
zulusafari's Avatar
Registered User
20 Year Member
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 768
Likes: 1
From: Texas
Originally Posted by woodrat
the point of biodiesel isn't so much about lower emissions, it is more about staying inside the annual carbon cylce and not pulling ancient carbon out of the ground and putting it into the atmosphere. Texas seems to be the only state complaining about biodiesel not being clean enough.

reading this just about made me gag. i am into biodiesel and fuel economy and the fact that these mtv idiots are promoting an 800hp impala as being "earth friendly" just because it can burn biodiesel is more damaging to the alternative fuels movement than helpful. The stupidity and hypocrisy are so obvious that most even partly intelligent people are going to just roll their eyes and stop paying attention altogether.

We're supposed to celebrate "break the addicition" by powering a heavy full size american car with a giant over-powered V8? We are soo doomed!

While I agree with part of this post, I also have to say, "C'mon: it's MTV. How serious could this really be taken?" They hardly show music anymore, much less anything remotely considered true substance by anyone I know.

Biodiesel has lower net carbon emissions, as previously stated, and zero sulphur issues. It does discharge higher nitrogen oxides, so some smog issues are slightly worse. Lubricity is also better than dinodiesel, while power equivalence is sort of case by case basis. Some seedstock has better energy content that others for diesel, usually offset by higher cloud points and wax. Soot and particulates are reportedly lower, hence less smoke, and I have never heard if the biodiesel soot has ever been tested for carcinogenic properties.
Reply
Old Apr 13, 2007 | 09:46 AM
  #33  
mcoleman's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,346
Likes: 0
From: Backwoods of Missouri CSA
Found a website dicussing the car and they said it ran 0-60 mph in 3.5 seconds.
Reply
Old Apr 13, 2007 | 10:45 AM
  #34  
woodrat's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 770
Likes: 4
From: Skamokawa, Washington
well, I don't really take it that seriously... and I haven't had TV in my home since 1989, so I wouldn't even know what MTV is up to if I hadn't read it here...

I did like the VW "umpimp your ride" GTI ads, but I watched those on youtube.
Reply
Old Apr 13, 2007 | 01:17 PM
  #35  
wcbcruzer's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,615
Likes: 0
From: Nevada
Originally Posted by 74dart
How? Just wondering.
Well, for one it is more expensive to extract. Vegetable oil comes from the seed of the plant. Even with today's genetic modifications, the seeds make up a very small portion of the plant. I want to say 5% or so of the plant, but I kinda forgot. So anyway, if you take into account the amount of water, fertilizer, man power, machinery, refining, etc. that would go into making one gallon of biodiesel, it would cost a lot more than a gallon of #2. Imagine how much of this we would need to grow in order to completely replace #2.

Now the second part to this is the environmental part. In order to meet the demands of today's diesel consumption, we would have to clear more natural land for agriculture. Agriculture (and grazing) is one of the most environmentally damaging things that could be done (according to environmentalists). Remember that "conserving the environment" doesn't only consider air pollution. However, deforestation (as a result of agriculture or other things) is the worst air pollutant, because trees suck up a lot of CO2.

So in conclusion, to use biodiesel in place of diesel would not only cost a lot, it would actually lead to more pollution as a result of deforestation (plus inflict the other side effects of agriculture).

Reply
Old Apr 13, 2007 | 02:23 PM
  #36  
74dart's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 583
Likes: 0
From: Shelby NC
Originally Posted by wcbcruzer
Well, for one it is more expensive to extract. Vegetable oil comes from the seed of the plant. Even with today's genetic modifications, the seeds make up a very small portion of the plant. I want to say 5% or so of the plant, but I kinda forgot. So anyway, if you take into account the amount of water, fertilizer, man power, machinery, refining, etc. that would go into making one gallon of biodiesel, it would cost a lot more than a gallon of #2. Imagine how much of this we would need to grow in order to completely replace #2.

Now the second part to this is the environmental part. In order to meet the demands of today's diesel consumption, we would have to clear more natural land for agriculture. Agriculture (and grazing) is one of the most environmentally damaging things that could be done (according to environmentalists). Remember that "conserving the environment" doesn't only consider air pollution. However, deforestation (as a result of agriculture or other things) is the worst air pollutant, because trees suck up a lot of CO2.

So in conclusion, to use biodiesel in place of diesel would not only cost a lot, it would actually lead to more pollution as a result of deforestation (plus inflict the other side effects of agriculture).

But it would be a good way to use the waste oil from all the restrants/slaughter houses in the country to supply a little for the consumer.
I hadn't heard the disadvantges to bio-diesel but I did hear one time how much ethonal an acer could be proudced and it is not econicmal either.
Reply
Old Apr 13, 2007 | 04:03 PM
  #37  
Hdmax's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
From: South Central Ohio
Bio-Diesel can also be produced from waste, so please explain all that would be a bad thing! From what I have been reading, just the slauter houses alone could supply enough waste to produce 10-15% of todays need for diesel fuel. And the way I look at it, every little bit helps. And by doing this, it would not hurt the enviroment, in fact it would help.

Originally Posted by wcbcruzer
Well, for one it is more expensive to extract. Vegetable oil comes from the seed of the plant. Even with today's genetic modifications, the seeds make up a very small portion of the plant. I want to say 5% or so of the plant, but I kinda forgot. So anyway, if you take into account the amount of water, fertilizer, man power, machinery, refining, etc. that would go into making one gallon of biodiesel, it would cost a lot more than a gallon of #2. Imagine how much of this we would need to grow in order to completely replace #2.

Now the second part to this is the environmental part. In order to meet the demands of today's diesel consumption, we would have to clear more natural land for agriculture. Agriculture (and grazing) is one of the most environmentally damaging things that could be done (according to environmentalists). Remember that "conserving the environment" doesn't only consider air pollution. However, deforestation (as a result of agriculture or other things) is the worst air pollutant, because trees suck up a lot of CO2.

So in conclusion, to use biodiesel in place of diesel would not only cost a lot, it would actually lead to more pollution as a result of deforestation (plus inflict the other side effects of agriculture).

Reply
Old Apr 13, 2007 | 07:33 PM
  #38  
wcbcruzer's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,615
Likes: 0
From: Nevada
Waste vegetable oil is ok. But it's not going to be enough if everyone were to use it.
Reply
Old Apr 13, 2007 | 08:22 PM
  #39  
dieselrob's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 915
Likes: 0
From: eastern pa
There was just an article in our local paper about ethanol. They said the plant they are building will use 500 million bushels of corn to make 100 million gallons of fuel a year. Im not shure if thats good or bad. But to me it looks like a low ratio.
Reply
Old Apr 13, 2007 | 08:55 PM
  #40  
keithplacervill's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
From: placerville
i am lost i thought this post was about a maxi pad motor in a car
Reply
Old Apr 13, 2007 | 09:14 PM
  #41  
wcbcruzer's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,615
Likes: 0
From: Nevada
Originally Posted by dieselrob
There was just an article in our local paper about ethanol. They said the plant they are building will use 500 million bushels of corn to make 100 million gallons of fuel a year. Im not shure if thats good or bad. But to me it looks like a low ratio.
In 2005, the US alone used an average of 4.1 million barrels of diesel per day. Each barrel is approx. 42 gallons. So that's a total of 172.2 million gallons of diesel fuel used per day (that's just in the US and excluding unleaded).

It's actually quite depressing when I think about it. So I try not to.

Source (google):

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2006...roleum_co.html


Sorry for the off-topic. Anyway, yes I still wanna see that Impala!
Reply
Old Apr 14, 2007 | 10:04 AM
  #42  
duratothemax's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
From: CT
Originally Posted by mcoleman
What does a Duramax engine weigh compared to a 760 pound 454.

837 pounds.

am I wrong to say that at least some of you are only calling it stupid because there isnt a C under the hood.....?
Reply
Old Apr 14, 2007 | 11:38 AM
  #43  
TxDiesel007's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 3,411
Likes: 2
From: Laredo
Originally Posted by Box5
lol, and aronald doing the promotion with 5 hummers sitting in his garage....
My thoughts exactly

lol! but an 800 horse Dmax in an impala? Lemme guess, its banks built? who on pimp my ride knows diesels?

i have a hunch its the same one that they used on the suburban gorilla on Xtreme 4x4

Rick
Reply
Old Apr 14, 2007 | 04:07 PM
  #44  
BigBlue's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by duratothemax
837 pounds.

am I wrong to say that at least some of you are only calling it stupid because there isnt a C under the hood.....?
Probably a fair assumption but ya gotta remember, this is a dodge site.

And while I think it's kinda retarded that they are doing this (as a matter of fact I think the show should be canned and all of the people on it beaten for being retarded) it will be kinda neat to see.
Reply
Old Apr 15, 2007 | 09:41 AM
  #45  
Jfaulkner's Avatar
Muted User
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 713
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by duratothemax
837 pounds.

am I wrong to say that at least some of you are only calling it stupid because there isnt a C under the hood.....?
You've got that right. There are alot of people that when they open this website they close their minds. When anyone mentions any other brand other than cummins they stick their fingers in their ears and go "la la la la la I can't hear you la la la" Personally I'd think it would be hard living with your head in the sand.
Reply



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:57 PM.