LAC Pollution Musings...
ssgacc at yahoo.com
Tue Dec 17 19:08:35 EST 2002
That's definitely posible. Mileage, wear, state of
tune all play a part. Just because it's newer,
doesn't mean it's better or cleaner. As a general
rule this is true. BUT, a well tuned older car with
an efficient engine design can beat the crap out of a
"new" (1 or 2 yr. old) car that hasn't been maintained
in emmisions testing. I've personnally seen 1-2 yr.
old cars whose emmisions were WAY out of whack. One
hadn't had the original oil changed at 65k miles.
Just drive em into the dirt. This POS smoked more
than some 1940's vehicles. It was a Nissan Altima
2.5L 4 banger. The owner did NOTHING in 65k miles.
NO oil change, nothing. The tailpipe emmisions made a
diesel bus look clean.
You can't mandate morality
--- Bill Phelps <wphelps at rizzo.com> wrote:
> Message: 7
> From: Lines Peter <Peterl at Warn.com>
> To: "'rob3 at hod3.fsnet.co.uk'"
> <rob3 at hod3.fsnet.co.uk>,
> "'quattro at audifans.com'" <quattro at audifans.com>
> Subject: RE: LAC Pollution Musings, was
> Massachusetts 4KTQ owner question
> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 13:12:56 -0800
> Thanks for the interesting post, Rob. I don't have
> any knowledge of the
> amount of pollution created during manufacture, but
> I personally like
> keeping old cars running. It's a fact that newer
> cars are cleaner out the
> tailpipe, but like Rob points out, there is some
> cost to the environment in
> building new and discarding the old <snip>
> Interesting bit of personal history, a few years ago
> my I had emissions
> testing on my 87 4KQ and 97 Jetta GLX. While both
> cars were well maintained
> and passed easily, the Audi had lower hydrocarbon
> and NOX levels. They were
> even tested at the same station..
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
More information about the quattro