Quote:
Originally Posted by tasdrouille
That's 1.012. It's not cost effective.
|
LOL. I still do that once in awhile. That's probably why I'm not an engineer. Can you imagine missing a 0 in the tens place on a blueprint for... say... a building?
Anyway, if you add in another 3% for the fuel economy that you're no longer losing compared to the gasoline/ethanol blend, it brings it up to 1.04, which is close enough that it probably will at least break even in most cases.
Although, I may have that backwards... do you subtract another 3% from the cost because you're getting 3% better FE?
__________________
"¿ʞɐǝɹɟ ɐ ǝɹ,noʎ uǝɥʍ 'ʇı ʇ,usı 'ʎlǝuol s,ʇı"
