"Moses Lim" <hyspeed@spamtrap_stoneycreek.net.au.spamtrap> wrote in message
news:yRVsk.31512$IK1.27966@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> Hm,so no current excise on LPG, it seems.
Not as far as I'm aware.
> Which makes me wonder why some "experts" I have spoken to in the past
> maintain that CNG offer pretty good "bang for bucks". The comparison which
> is usually made is that the best petrol available at the bowser is 100
> octane, whilst LPG is usually around 134 octane (assuming one gets "good"
> LPG, ie high propane content). CNG, OTOH, I am told is at least 148
> octane.
>
> Now for a layman like me, 148 octane sounds quite impressive. Am I being
> confused with all this octane comparison?
I'd say so.
Natural gas as a motor fuel has a very distinct disadvantage in that it
offers *less* bangs-per-buck per litre than just about any other fuel
available. It works perfectly fine for industrial applications that run at
fixed throttle settings and constant rpm in things like generator engines
that have been converted from Diesel power, but for your average car engine
where the rpm and load changes constantly it's *very* average indeed.
Cheap, but you get what you pay for.
> Turbo diesel is supposedly the ant's pant but having said that, I don't
> wanna get caught in the crossfire here and end up hijacking my own
> thread 
Down dawg, down!!!
"Turbo diesel" is one of those modern terms that can mean anything from
appalling to average depedning on what kind you're talking about. A lot of
them are *very* bad in terms of power and drivability (think Japanese
commercial), while others are quite good (think modern Euro car). However,
even the very best of them only manages to rival their petrol equivalent,
and only excells compared to it in terms of fuel economy.
LPG remains the best alternative vehicle fuel, and by a very long way, and
will do for quite some time to come. Even with the proposed excise increase.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Linear Mode
