RE: F/S: Fast V6 Dakota w/ huge tailpipes (they make it go faster!)

From: Pindell, Timothy (TPindell@otterbein.edu)
Date: Thu Jun 16 2005 - 12:02:36 EDT


>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-dakota-truck@bent.twistedbits.net [mailto:owner-dakota-
>truck@bent.twistedbits.net] On Behalf Of jon@dakota-truck.net
>Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 11:08 AM
>To: dakota-truck-moderator@bent.twistedbits.net
>Subject: Re: DML: F/S: Fast V6 Dakota w/ huge tailpipes (they make it
go
>faster!)
>
>
>Walt@walt-n-ingrid.com wrote:
>: drchallenger@hotmail.com ("DR CHALLENGER") writes:
>:>
>:>
>:> Huh?? My 2002 3.9L is alot worse on gas than my 2005 4.7 L
>:>
>:> >From>On 6/16/05, Walt@walt-n-ingrid.com <Walt@walt-n-ingrid.com>
wrote:
>:> > >
>:> > > V6 = Good on Gas.
>:> >
>:>
>:>
>
>: Well, good on gas when compared to a pair of J-69-29 Turbines which
>someone on
>: another list estimated burns about 450 pph each or about 134 gallons
per
>hour
>: with Jet-A costing about $2.75 a gallon.
>
>
> Just for fun, assuming those figures are right, cruising down the
>interstate at 65mph, that equates to just under 1/2 mile per gallon.
>Factoring in the cost of Jet-A, and adjusting the MPG figure to assume
>$2.00/gallon gas, that effectively means it would be getting 0.35 MPG.
>So just over 1/3 mile per gallon. That one hour jaunt down the highway
>would cost $368.50. ($5.68/mile)
>
> Today's "fun with math" lesson has been brought to you by the
>letter C and the all new Dodge Charger - "unleash" yourself from
>the burden of continuity and rationality; drive a Charger today!
>
>
>--
> -Jon-
>
> .-- Jon Steiger ---- jon@dakota-truck.net or jon@jonsteiger.com --.
> | 1970 Barracuda - 1990 Dakota 'vert - 1992 Ram 4x4 - 1996 Dakota |
> | 1996 Intruder 1400 - 1996 Kolb FireFly - 2001 Ram QC 3500 CTD |
> `------------------------------------ http://www.jonsteiger.com --'

Hmmm... I wonder what the Brake Specific Fuel Consumption numbers would
be. We could look at the cost per mile per ton of payload, too. When
you look at it that way, even a container ship at 15kts gets good fuel
economy.

That looks like it might be a Pratt&Whitney engine designation, but I
can't find any info on it after a cursory google search.
I...must...know...



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jul 01 2005 - 09:48:06 EDT