P plate training ...not
in [Aussie Motorcycles]
|
Prev: new tv project
Next: Honda VTR coolant boiling ?
From: Toosmoky on 15 Feb 2007 15:24 Knobdoodle wrote: >> In my circumstances, could I really claim that any fuel was being wasted >> by riding with a light on? >> > Well yes; obviously. > If you weren't gaining any advantage from the lights then the fuel used to > generate them was wasted, no matter how infinitessimal it may have been. >> Do I waste fuel nowadays on the Pig when I flash my passing light >> momentarily at cars that may potentially turn in front of me? >> > That depends on whether you are gaining anything from the flashing. > If not then "yes" too (obviously). How do I *know* that fuel is actually being consumed to feed the lights? I can't measure it, so can't say for sure whether fuel is actually used or by some factor I haven't thought of, saved. I changed my gearing from 18/43 to 17/45 expecting to use more fuel but the economy improved significantly, to my surprise. > Only you have the power to look deep within yourself Pooo! Don't go there... -- Toosmoky Work to ride, Ride to Work... http://toosmoky.d2.net.au
From: Dale Porter on 15 Feb 2007 16:14 "Hammo" <hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au> wrote in message news:C1FA9726.26FCE%hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au... > > On 15/2/07 10:41 PM, in article er1gtv$2r93$1(a)otis.netspace.net.au, "Dale > Porter" <daleaporter(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> "Hammo" <hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au> wrote >>> >>> ? As I pointed out before, I do enough advocating at work, I don't need to >>> here. I keep the playing of devil's advocate for when the conversation can >>> flow. >>> >>> >> >> Some here may argue that you're keeping it for when you know what you're >> talking about. > > Feel free to engage, though I have never really had anything to talk to you > about. > > Yes, we're from two very different worlds. And that fact doesn't upset me in the slightest. -- Dale Porter GPX250 -> CBR600 -> VTR1000 + VT250F-J
From: Peter Cremasco on 15 Feb 2007 16:45 On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 00:10:51 +1100, Hammo <hbaj2006(a)aapt.net.au> wrote: > >That was the point I have been making (as well as Nev and a few others). If >the amount is negligible, and/or not repeatable it is then immeasurable >(based on the variables). Why the need for the accusations of all sorts of >lifestyle choices, I don't quite follow. Just because something is immeasurable, doesn't mean it isn't there. Variation in cosmic background radiation wasn't measurable until the 1960s, yet I'm prepared to wager that it has been there for - oh let's see - the last 10 billion odd years. To suggest that the production of electricity uses no energy, is to run counter to current laws of physics (notice I say 'current' - cause theories have a historical habit of being superseded). --- Cheers PeterC [aka MildThing] '01 Yamaha FJR1300 www.dmcsc.org.au http://eladesom.com.au/ulysses/ # 37181
From: Theo Bekkers on 15 Feb 2007 17:52 Toosmoky wrote: > How do I *know* that fuel is actually being consumed to feed the > lights? I can't measure it, so can't say for sure whether fuel is > actually used or by some factor I haven't thought of, saved. You probably have a 60 watt globe in your bathroom. You know it uses fuel because it's use is measured and you are sent a bill for it. The globe uses 1Kwh every 16 hours 40 minutes so it costs you about $0.01 per hour to run. You know all this because it is a measurable and measured thing. Do you think the headlight on your motorcycle does not use any power just because it doesn't have a fuel consumption gauge on it? Only you can decide when your headlight, or your bathroom light, will be on, and whether that usage is waste or not. Theo
From: Theo Bekkers on 15 Feb 2007 17:53
Knobdoodle wrote: > Hang on a tick; it's a bloody Volvo. The headlights are ALWAYS on!! No they're not. Theo |