Author |
Message |
usedcarr Samba Member
Joined: May 04, 2006 Posts: 67 Location: Calabasas CA
|
Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 11:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Has CARB approved the warp engine for Cali yet? Is it good for this dimension only, or can you explore others. Sounds like an intriguing conversion. _________________ 10'0" Lance Carson
6'3" Hamisch Fish
Schwinn Beach Cruiser
Sold the westy, never even drove it |
|
Back to top |
|
|
J Charlton Samba Member
Joined: August 24, 2007 Posts: 1546 Location: The True North Strong and Free
|
Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 8:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
It is with great trepidation that I contradict 10centlife on this forum. I have great respect for his knowledge and willingness to share it. However, I feel that the full picture of the merits of using propane as a westy fuel has not been painted. I don't have all of the answere either, yet here are a couple of links to articles that will flesh out the discussion.
First af all, there is a significant price diffeential between propane vs gasoline. Propane is between 30 to 40% cheaper than gasoline (even after the lower BTU rating is taken into consideration) . Check it out at
http://www.mjervin.com/WPPS_Public.htm
Depending on which way you choose to express the math, at a 30% differential, propane is 30% cheaper than gasoline or expressed otherwise, gasoline is about 43% more expensive than propane (relative to propane).
Beyond that, propane is a byproduct of the refining process, some of it is even flamed off in some cases - i.e. wasted. It is clasified as a clean burning fuel .
See the article at
http://www.canadafreepress.com/car-reviews/car-accessories/propane.htm
for more details re this - of particular interest should be where the propane is coming from.
Beyond that, allowing vehicles to run off of a compressed hydrocarbon gas, propane, compressed natural gas, even compressed methane (that's what the guy with the algae trailer must be doing - using methane) has to be a positive step in breaking the dependancy that we have on Mid-East oil.
Be forewarned however, if the use of compressed hydrocarbon gases that is domestically produced begins to become widespread, OPEC will surely (as it has in the past) drop the price of crude to make the emergent technology "uneconomical" and maintain their position of supplying fuel for our addiction to fossil fuels.
OK - so this is a long post - check out the articles, especially the Canadian Free Press one.
JC |
|
Back to top |
|
|
wavanagon Samba Member
Joined: September 17, 2007 Posts: 400 Location: Everett, WA
|
Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 9:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
all this talk about propane vs. gasoline doesn't do it for me. If I were to go for a 'conversion', it would be electric. Get the combustion out of the picture. Not sure how green it is though, as you still have to produce the batteries in a factory, then eventually dispose of them. There was a post recently about an electric vanagon that blew my socks off. It's been floating around my brain ever since I saw it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yif6sPbbAR8
Here is the latest blog entry:
http://e-vanagon.blogspot.com/2008/01/sixty-six-miles-per-day_28.html
Looks like he is logging 60 miles per day! Wow.
My neighbor has a GEM car, and they have been driving it daily for almost 3 years now. Granted, it's only 2 miles a day, with trips to Safeway on the weekends. But, it has been very reliable. This is the future, I hope. _________________ 1988 Vanagon GL - For Sale
1987 Westfalia
2008 Audi A4 2.0T
http://wavanagon.googlepages.com
Dirty from working on your Vanagon? Buy soap from my wife!
http://www.teatreesoap.com |
|
Back to top |
|
|
allsierra123 Samba Member
Joined: August 19, 2006 Posts: 1462 Location: Tecate, Baja California MX
|
Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 10:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
they are reliable. But for the type vehicle a vanagon is its not preactical. Its usually a long haul vehicle. road trips and camping and what not. most on the board probably have a smaller more economical car for those short trips.I mean If he could get it up to 300-400 miles in a day that would be better. But its still not ideal for travel. I get about 275 miles on a tank of gas its a little low but I know as soon as I put fuel in I can for sure travel another 275 miles that day. I would have trouble on a trip if that would be all I could do for the day. _________________ 95 GMC Yukon 6.5 TD 2 Door Tow pig/ Daily driver.
91 Vanagon GL. 1.9TD Conversion Sold
81 Vw rabbit 1.6 Diesel. Sold |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tencentlife Samba Member
Joined: May 02, 2006 Posts: 10078 Location: Abiquiu, NM, USA
|
Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 10:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: |
It is with great trepidation that I contradict 10centlife on this forum. |
Don't be ridiculous. I may be a bright and even at times clever fellow, but I'm no demigod or even a bargain-basement Titan offering pronouncements from some low-altitude perch. I'm a poorly-educated bum who manages to muddle through.
But I call 'em like I see 'em, and you should too. The mark of an intelligent person is that he changes his opinions when he acquires new knowledge. My opinion on this subject in particular is not well-founded, so show me evidence and if it's solid I'll be overnight the champion of your assertions.
I haven't time at the moment to make the comparisons, but when I do I'll be looking at price per BTU in my area, as a example of a US market for LP, to be able to compare economy of use. Possible extension of oil drain intervals will also come into consideration, as the main reason we must drain our ICE oil frequently has nothing to do with the oil, only the loss of additive protections and corruption with combustion byproducts.
The other considerations involve safety and convenience, both of which are hard to quantify and come down ultimately to pretty subjective assumptions.
So for the moment bear in mind that I haven't read your links, and they may refute some of the points I'm about to make.
I do understand that LP produces fewer noxious combustion byproducts compared to gasoline. When burned in free air, it is very clean indeed; a bare minimum of CO, tiny tiny amounts of NOx, the balance being loads of water vapor and CO2. But beware facile comparisons, because when you combust the same gas under pressure, the balance of byproducts changes dramatically. For instance, the bulk of NOx coming out of ICE's is due to combustion being non-optimal for most of the combustion cycle. The same fuel when burned in free air with a correct and constant air-fuel ratio produces little to no NOx and very little CO. I suspect that NOx production from LP-fueled ICE's is probably lower than gasoline, but there is going to be some nonetheless. The balance of carbon content that ends up as CO vs. CO2 is also altered between free air and ICE usage.
But the big issue in my mind is carbon-neutrality, and so long as it's a fossil fuel you're burning, long-sequestered geologic carbon is being mined and released again into the atmosphere from which it was extracted all those millennia ago, when that process created the modern climate system that has nurtured our species to our present prosperity. We mine the carbon so we can use the hydrogen it carries; the carbon is thereafter useless to us but its buildup in the atmosphere threatens our delicately-balanced global civilisation, and so anymore I judge my energy investments firstly on their actual carbon-neutrality, but can't escape the other considerations of cost, convenience, and safety. LP and natural gas (dominantly methane), may have lower ratios of carbon to hydrogen in their molecules (methane, CH4, has a very favorable ratio), and less is better so long as we're mining the carbon for what it carries, but it is still mining carbon.
Also, what we experienced here in the US market for natural gas over the last fifteen years or so was the shift of much central electrical generation to NG, on the premise that our domestic supplies were abundant and cheap. That resulted in the price of NG going thru the roof in a very short time. I don't know enough about the market in LP to hazard a guess as to what increased demand as a transport fuel would do to price and availability.
Anyway, those are some of the things I'm thinking about when considering the "green-ness" of switching to LP here in the US. This discussion will surely continue. _________________ Shop for unique Vanagon accessories at the Vanistan shop:
https://intrepidoverland.com/vanistan/
Please don't PM here, I will not reply.
Experience is kryptonite to doctrine. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
J Charlton Samba Member
Joined: August 24, 2007 Posts: 1546 Location: The True North Strong and Free
|
Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 3:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It is with great trepidation that I contradict 10centlife on this forum.
Don't be ridiculous. I may be a bright and even at times clever fellow, but I'm no demigod or even a bargain-basement Titan offering pronouncements from some low-altitude perch. I'm a poorly-educated bum who manages to muddle through.
I was just kidding ten - no one who shares and cares about the crazy vans that we love could ever be considered a "demigod or even a bargain-basement Titan".
Another link that I literally stumbled upon :
http://www.motherearthnews.com/Green-Transportation/1972-05-01/Convert-Your-Car-To-Propane.aspx
Hey, I agree with you re carbon neutrality. For that reason in the last 6 months I've installed a 48 tube solar hot water collector on my roof - it produces about 80% of our domestic hot water needs - the rest is supplied by a tankless water (on demand) - 97% efficiency with natural gas- therefore no storage tank. Same at our family cottage, replaced the old oil furnace with a propane fired system that is essentially a jeezly big on demand tankless HWH that feeds a hydronic (Clean Air) HRV furnace. The whole system operates at about 95% eficiency. Long term I'll be adding a TARM wood boiler and (about) 600 gal heat sump to supply most of the heating needs at the cottage. Wood is plentiful and cheap and best of all, is carbon neutral.
I pm'd Gary Lee re his installation and his tank is under the rear seat and gives him about 200km range - I figure that there's room under the van where the current propane tank is, and again on the other side of the van for two tanks to be mounted to give one a total range of about 350km - that's on top of the range provided by the regular gasoline function. No reason why the stove, outside BBQ etc couldn't all be fed off the tanks as well.
I don't particularly like buying into the whole petro-chemical fossil fuel dependancy cycle any more than I have to either, but I see down the line that the capture of methane (from a whole variety of sources) and the marketting of it in compressed form will provide a renewable carbon neutral source of fuel. Methane is one of the worst enemies of the ozone layer as well, so look for initiatives ahead to capture and use it. (c'mon guys - spare us all of the bean jokes - we've all seen Blazing Saddles)
jc |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Corwyn Samba Member
Joined: December 29, 2009 Posts: 2239 Location: Olympia, Washington
|
Posted: Thu Apr 07, 2011 1:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have all the respect in the world for going "green"; but at the moment, my eyes are on the gas pumps and the prices thereon.
Tencent - build a kit or an engine for burning Propane and you will be RICH! I'll buy the first one of either (even though I just replaced my engine). _________________ '90 White Westy ("The Longship")
FAS Gen V 2.0
The Annual Baja Rally
https://www.thesamba.com/vw/forum/viewtopic.php?t=604813&highlight=baja
"If anything's" gonna happen, it's gonna happen out there"
~ Captain Ron ~ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kjurkic Samba Member
Joined: January 20, 2011 Posts: 14 Location: Vancouver Island
|
Posted: Thu Apr 07, 2011 9:32 pm Post subject: LPG |
|
|
For what its worth, while the BTU density of LPG is lower than gasoline, the Octane rating is exceptionally higher, and many folks are not making the best use of this property.
In the 80's, I visited a speedshop that had built a Chevelle with a 427ci, with 11.5:1 pistons, and twin turbos running 10psi. No detonation issues whatsover. The owner was planning to explore building a small-block with 16:1 compression to see if he could get diesel levels of thermal efficiency.
Talk amongst yourselves.........
Ken |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tencentlife Samba Member
Joined: May 02, 2006 Posts: 10078 Location: Abiquiu, NM, USA
|
Posted: Thu Apr 07, 2011 10:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
LP is still rotted ferns, but 16:1 happens to be the target CR I would aim for to adapt the engine to ethanol. Easy enough to do when the time comes, and programmable FI takes care of the rest.
Gross calorific values:
Gasoline 47,300 kJ/kg
LP 50,350 kJ/kg
CH4 55,530 kJ/kg
ETOH 29,700 kJ/kg _________________ Shop for unique Vanagon accessories at the Vanistan shop:
https://intrepidoverland.com/vanistan/
Please don't PM here, I will not reply.
Experience is kryptonite to doctrine.
Last edited by tencentlife on Fri Apr 08, 2011 7:52 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
vanis13 Samba Member
Joined: August 15, 2010 Posts: 3100 Location: ABQ NM USA.... Except when not
|
Posted: Thu Apr 07, 2011 11:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
it is the fuel storage that is the issue with LP (and CNG) Big heavy tanks.
I owned a bi-Fuel F-150 Gas/CNG. ran great on both but the CNG tank was 5 ft long 1.5 ft in diameter and had to be recertified every 15 years. Weighed a couple hundred pounds empty, help the BTU equivalent of 12 gasoline gallons which at the 15 mpg rate lasted about 160 miles.
LP is easier to find that CNG but more expensive per BTU and it is a price unregulated gas so it can be all over the place on price. _________________ 83.5 Westy with Subaru 2.5, 4 spd manual, center seat, COLD A/C on 134a!, Winter camp heated with an Espar B4 gasoline furnace
www.SuperVanagon.com - some stuff I make |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ThorAlex Samba Member
Joined: August 31, 2006 Posts: 620 Location: Norway
|
Posted: Fri Apr 08, 2011 6:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Have a look at the alternative fuels forum over at club8090.co.uk, the brits onvert vanagons (called transporter or caravelle over there) to LPG all the time. The DJ WBX seem to like it a lot. _________________ 1990 syncro 1.6TD "Smily"
Ex-vans:
1990 Caravelle coach 1.6TD
1986 Transporter Double cab syncro 2.1 112hp
"I'm wrong so often... It's great!" - Adam Savage |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Blueconundrum Samba Member
Joined: September 07, 2010 Posts: 148 Location: Bozeman, MT
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
daryleWB Samba Member
Joined: May 10, 2010 Posts: 8 Location: Washington, D.C.
|
Posted: Sat Apr 09, 2011 2:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I've been running my Van on E85 for the last 2000 miles or so. It is said that our national ethanol program needs some work, but I won't get into that here. I'm paying about 60 cents less per gallon and getting about 2 MPG less than with petrol so it works out well.
This is with a 'Whitelightning' conversion. Don't try to run E85 in a stock Vanagon.
If I had my own still and a few acres to grow sugar beets then life would truly be grand. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
wolfsburg4x4 Samba Member
Joined: December 20, 2004 Posts: 102
|
Posted: Sat Apr 09, 2011 8:04 pm Post subject: Re: dual fuel |
|
|
pushkick wrote: |
i lived in orange county california and there all the cabs run on propane big tank in trunk. there is a company in southern cal that will do the conversion for any engine. cant remember the name but im sure they have a web site. |
This one ?
http://greenlinefuelcorp.com/GasolineConversion.aspx
Expect a substantial drop in perfromance, which a 2.1 probably can't afford...
The biggest obstacle to CNG conversions is the cost of the tanks, very expensive , especially for lighter weight ones.
CNG is arguably the best transition fuel out there because it allows existing vehicles with existing motors to run on it, and we have plenty of natural gas here.
Recovery of natural gas needs to be cleaned up however..
But getting Joe america to sacrifice the convenience of gasoline ....well I think he would sooner give up his second amendment rights.. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kevtherev Samba Member
Joined: December 23, 2007 Posts: 897 Location: the 51st state
|
Posted: Sun Apr 10, 2011 2:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have converted my camper to run on duel fuel.
I did it five years ago... and my flat four loves the propane/butane mix as we get here.
more propane than butane in the winter as propane has a lower freezing point.
I haven't used petrol for three years now.
I run mine through a carburettor but multipoint delivery and single point delivery systems for injected engines have been available for several years.
It would cost me £450 to collect all the parts to use propane, and all of it is by mail order.
Even air-cooled engines can benefit from Propane fuel... though heating the vaporiser did create some problems for some systems.
some pictures of the system fitted
the vaporiser in the vent well, supplied with coolant from the cylinders
The gas tank (black) under the bed/seat
this is a 72 litre tank giving me 240 imperial miles at 24 mpg
coupled with the fuel tank my range is over 500 miles
here's an interesting site ..these fellas did my conversion http://www.gasure.co.uk/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|