Welcome to the IHoP v.2

[Penguin4x4 1,761]

Which are, ironically, guilty of the same transgressions.

[dem beats 1,223]

That dude stage diving railed that chick bad.

Ouch.

[///M5 2,833]

I am in bed on my tablet and the Medina realty site is sucjing dick. Search for sub320's houses in the city of minnetonka and you will get an idea. Further from Hopkins the better. I would avoid shit on 5 or 7 as they are nearly highways

[dem beats 1,223]

That shit makes me wanna rage Peng. I hate waste in the name of efficiency to hide profit. Mostly because I hate the hippies who buy into it.

#punchatreehugginghippy

Hippies don't buy HD pickups. They buy Priuses. (Prii?)

Yes. Correct. My point exactly. The Prii are worse for the world, they are dumb and buy them, then get mad when the HD truck passes them getting better MPG and pulling a barn. So they get all bitchy, have a sit in or some shit and then the people who are producing end up being worse to the environment for more money because some pachulli smelling zeitguist loving baby wolf sweater wearing shit for brains does actually have shit for brains.

[///M5 2,833]

Edina realty

[stevemead08 752]

Will do, thanks

[sandt38 448]

I had to write the dumbest lab report ever. Something that could be described in one sentence dragged out to a page, so what do I do? Write about meth.

[ssh 924]

Ahh yeah!!!

[sandt38 448]

So, instead of spending R&D to figure out a way for their engines to run efficiently, they instead slap on some cheap & quick fixes.

 

 

Other people can answer this better than I, but you'd probably be surprised how much $$$ they are spending on research to get these things to pass the emissions.  

 

 

Correct. Engine design is advancing very quickly. There are currently small diesel engines on the road that are collaborations between US, Asian, and European engineering and design. The dollar amounts and sheer number or engineers involved in the R&D were massive.

 

The new guidelines set forth by the liberal agenda is forcing manufacturers to enhance efficiency, which in turn reduces overall emissions in gasoline engines. However, improved efficiency in a diesel engine has a tendency to boost emissions, primarily NOx emissions as combustion temperatures must rise to complete combustion which obviously enhances performance and efficiency.

 

Improving diesel engine efficiency while reducing emissions is going to be an extremely difficult task. It is not something that is going to occur overnight, which is what the liberal agenda has forced on the manufacturers. Gasoline engines are a great example of design technology taking years to "perfect" in a financially feasible manner. R&D gets passed on to the consumer, and blowing up the price of the vehicle is not a realistic option. Gasoline engine emissions controls have evolved over nearly 50 years now, since the advent of the PCV system.  So they need to find a way to meet these standards, which become far more stringent so quickly that they must weigh their options. If they can utilize technology that has proven effective in gasoline engines, they can minimize the cost or R&D and therefore the cost passed on to the consumer. They will improve efficiency at the cost of internal combustion design emissions control, and implement these effective gasoline "add ons".

 

Forcing manufacturers to improve fuel economy on their entire fleet as well as reduce emissions in an exceptionally quick fashion is leading to a ton of questionable designs. The implementation of these systems, and their frightening real world pattern failures is going to cost this country a fucking fortune... and by staying at the top of my field, it is going to make me a ton of money again.

[ssh 924]

 

So, instead of spending R&D to figure out a way for their engines to run efficiently, they instead slap on some cheap & quick fixes.

 

 

Other people can answer this better than I, but you'd probably be surprised how much $$$ they are spending on research to get these things to pass the emissions.  

 

 

Correct. Engine design is advancing very quickly. There are currently small diesel engines on the road that are collaborations between US, Asian, and European engineering and design. The dollar amounts and sheer number or engineers involved in the R&D were massive.

 

The new guidelines set forth by the liberal agenda is forcing manufacturers to enhance efficiency, which in turn reduces overall emissions in gasoline engines. However, improved efficiency in a diesel engine has a tendency to boost emissions, primarily NOx emissions as combustion temperatures must rise to complete combustion which obviously enhances performance and efficiency.

 

Improving diesel engine efficiency while reducing emissions is going to be an extremely difficult task. It is not something that is going to occur overnight, which is what the liberal agenda has forced on the manufacturers. Gasoline engines are a great example of design technology taking years to "perfect" in a financially feasible manner. R&D gets passed on to the consumer, and blowing up the price of the vehicle is not a realistic option. Gasoline engine emissions controls have evolved over nearly 50 years now, since the advent of the PCV system.  So they need to find a way to meet these standards, which become far more stringent so quickly that they must weigh their options. If they can utilize technology that has proven effective in gasoline engines, they can minimize the cost or R&D and therefore the cost passed on to the consumer. They will improve efficiency at the cost of internal combustion design emissions control, and implement these effective gasoline "add ons".

 

Forcing manufacturers to improve fuel economy on their entire fleet as well as reduce emissions in an exceptionally quick fashion is leading to a ton of questionable designs. The implementation of these systems, and their frightening real world pattern failures is going to cost this country a fucking fortune... and by staying at the top of my field, it is going to make me a ton of money again.

Say it: "Thanks Obama."

 

[sandt38 448]

 

 

So, instead of spending R&D to figure out a way for their engines to run efficiently, they instead slap on some cheap & quick fixes.

 

 

Other people can answer this better than I, but you'd probably be surprised how much $$$ they are spending on research to get these things to pass the emissions.  

 

 

Correct. Engine design is advancing very quickly. There are currently small diesel engines on the road that are collaborations between US, Asian, and European engineering and design. The dollar amounts and sheer number or engineers involved in the R&D were massive.

 

The new guidelines set forth by the liberal agenda is forcing manufacturers to enhance efficiency, which in turn reduces overall emissions in gasoline engines. However, improved efficiency in a diesel engine has a tendency to boost emissions, primarily NOx emissions as combustion temperatures must rise to complete combustion which obviously enhances performance and efficiency.

 

Improving diesel engine efficiency while reducing emissions is going to be an extremely difficult task. It is not something that is going to occur overnight, which is what the liberal agenda has forced on the manufacturers. Gasoline engines are a great example of design technology taking years to "perfect" in a financially feasible manner. R&D gets passed on to the consumer, and blowing up the price of the vehicle is not a realistic option. Gasoline engine emissions controls have evolved over nearly 50 years now, since the advent of the PCV system.  So they need to find a way to meet these standards, which become far more stringent so quickly that they must weigh their options. If they can utilize technology that has proven effective in gasoline engines, they can minimize the cost or R&D and therefore the cost passed on to the consumer. They will improve efficiency at the cost of internal combustion design emissions control, and implement these effective gasoline "add ons".

 

Forcing manufacturers to improve fuel economy on their entire fleet as well as reduce emissions in an exceptionally quick fashion is leading to a ton of questionable designs. The implementation of these systems, and their frightening real world pattern failures is going to cost this country a fucking fortune... and by staying at the top of my field, it is going to make me a ton of money again.

Say it: "Thanks Obama."

 

 

 

I just did, didn't I?

[ssh 924]

 

 

 

So, instead of spending R&D to figure out a way for their engines to run efficiently, they instead slap on some cheap & quick fixes.

 

 

Other people can answer this better than I, but you'd probably be surprised how much $$$ they are spending on research to get these things to pass the emissions.  

 

 

Correct. Engine design is advancing very quickly. There are currently small diesel engines on the road that are collaborations between US, Asian, and European engineering and design. The dollar amounts and sheer number or engineers involved in the R&D were massive.

 

The new guidelines set forth by the liberal agenda is forcing manufacturers to enhance efficiency, which in turn reduces overall emissions in gasoline engines. However, improved efficiency in a diesel engine has a tendency to boost emissions, primarily NOx emissions as combustion temperatures must rise to complete combustion which obviously enhances performance and efficiency.

 

Improving diesel engine efficiency while reducing emissions is going to be an extremely difficult task. It is not something that is going to occur overnight, which is what the liberal agenda has forced on the manufacturers. Gasoline engines are a great example of design technology taking years to "perfect" in a financially feasible manner. R&D gets passed on to the consumer, and blowing up the price of the vehicle is not a realistic option. Gasoline engine emissions controls have evolved over nearly 50 years now, since the advent of the PCV system.  So they need to find a way to meet these standards, which become far more stringent so quickly that they must weigh their options. If they can utilize technology that has proven effective in gasoline engines, they can minimize the cost or R&D and therefore the cost passed on to the consumer. They will improve efficiency at the cost of internal combustion design emissions control, and implement these effective gasoline "add ons".

 

Forcing manufacturers to improve fuel economy on their entire fleet as well as reduce emissions in an exceptionally quick fashion is leading to a ton of questionable designs. The implementation of these systems, and their frightening real world pattern failures is going to cost this country a fucking fortune... and by staying at the top of my field, it is going to make me a ton of money again.

Say it: "Thanks Obama."

 

 

 

I just did, didn't I?

Yeah you did, I just wanted to see the catch all phrase from you haha.

[dem beats 1,223]

You combined the words fuck off and thank you.

A skill honed through years of marriage bliss.

[sandt38 448]

 

 

So, instead of spending R&D to figure out a way for their engines to run efficiently, they instead slap on some cheap & quick fixes.

 

 

Other people can answer this better than I, but you'd probably be surprised how much $$$ they are spending on research to get these things to pass the emissions.  

 

 

Correct. Engine design is advancing very quickly. There are currently small diesel engines on the road that are collaborations between US, Asian, and European engineering and design. The dollar amounts and sheer number or engineers involved in the R&D were massive.

 

The new guidelines set forth by the liberal agenda is forcing manufacturers to enhance efficiency, which in turn reduces overall emissions in gasoline engines. However, improved efficiency in a diesel engine has a tendency to boost emissions, primarily NOx emissions as combustion temperatures must rise to complete combustion which obviously enhances performance and efficiency.

 

Improving diesel engine efficiency while reducing emissions is going to be an extremely difficult task. It is not something that is going to occur overnight, which is what the liberal agenda has forced on the manufacturers. Gasoline engines are a great example of design technology taking years to "perfect" in a financially feasible manner. R&D gets passed on to the consumer, and blowing up the price of the vehicle is not a realistic option. Gasoline engine emissions controls have evolved over nearly 50 years now, since the advent of the PCV system.  So they need to find a way to meet these standards, which become far more stringent so quickly that they must weigh their options. If they can utilize technology that has proven effective in gasoline engines, they can minimize the cost or R&D and therefore the cost passed on to the consumer. They will improve efficiency at the cost of internal combustion design emissions control, and implement these effective gasoline "add ons".

 

Forcing manufacturers to improve fuel economy on their entire fleet as well as reduce emissions in an exceptionally quick fashion is leading to a ton of questionable designs. The implementation of these systems, and their frightening real world pattern failures is going to cost this country a fucking fortune... and by staying at the top of my field, it is going to make me a ton of money again.

Say it: "Thanks Obama."

 

 I clarified that for you...

[sandt38 448]

You combined the words fuck off and thank you.

A skill honed through years of marriage bliss.

 

Indeed, my good man.

[dem beats 1,223]

It's like the davinci code for conservatives.

[dem beats 1,223]

You combined the words fuck off and thank you.

A skill honed through years of marriage bliss.

Indeed, my good man.

You can make your life awesome or you can have it your way.

But pros know you can make her think that what is happening is her way.

[dem beats 1,223]

Pro tip, your wife is correct.

[ssh 924]

Well some good news for me. Met with an advisor and it looks like I don't have to take as many classes as I thought to double major.

[dem beats 1,223]

Nice brochacho!

[Tirefryr 1,742]

It's like the davinci code for conservatives.

I can't tell you how much these stupid labels piss me off.  Conservatives are NOT conservative, and Liberals are NOT liberal.  It's the epitome of the hypocrisy that is our entire governmental society.

[MKader17 332]

I guess if you guys put it that way it doesn't sound so bad. Its just all the bs I've been reading it made diesels sound like complete pieces of shit unless your hauling or driving long distances.

Oh no, far from it. I simply don't care for the stupid ass penny pinching measures the OEM's are using.

The EGR system recirculates a portion of an engine's exhaust gas back to the engine cylinders to reduce NOx emissions. Adding the exhaust gases in a diesel enigne reduces the specific heat ratio of the combustion gases in the power stroke, which reduces the amount of power that can be extracted by the piston. It also tends to reduce the amount of fuel burned in the power stroke, resulting in incomplete combustion, which increases soot.

Soot, the black smoke coming out of the tailpipe, is that partially burnt fuel. That's literally money shooting out the damn tailpipe; you're burning money!

Now what?!

That's where the DPF comes in. All it does is filter the soot so it doesn't shoot out the tailpipe. Over time it clogs up, restricting exhaust flow, robbing more power. Then it uses yet again more fuel to burn the built up partially burned fuel (soot) in the DPF during the regen cycle.

BRILLIANT!

My professor works on the exact same issues. There is an option of multiple pulse injection and yes there are ALWAYS trade offs. There is a NOx/CO curve with particular regimes that result in high soot based on combustion temperature.

I'll try to pull up their papers. You can Google Timothy Jacobs, Bryan Knight and Josh Bittle and probably find some of their papers.

All that to really say that their "band-aid" is true, but not from a lack of effort. Its also true that it hurts efficiency and power in most cases but again, trade offs. It is either from any alternative being way too expensive or the technology is not available.

[dem beats 1,223]

It's like the davinci code for conservatives.

I can't tell you how much these stupid labels piss me off. Conservatives are NOT conservative, and Liberals are NOT liberal. It's the epitome of the hypocrisy that is our entire governmental society.

While I do agree with you, I was making a joke. But fuck yeah dude.

[Tirefryr 1,742]

 

It's like the davinci code for conservatives.

I can't tell you how much these stupid labels piss me off. Conservatives are NOT conservative, and Liberals are NOT liberal. It's the epitome of the hypocrisy that is our entire governmental society.

While I do agree with you, I was making a joke. But fuck yeah dude.

 

 

It's like the davinci code for conservatives.

I can't tell you how much these stupid labels piss me off. Conservatives are NOT conservative, and Liberals are NOT liberal. It's the epitome of the hypocrisy that is our entire governmental society.

While I do agree with you, I was making a joke. But fuck yeah dude.

Sorry, it struck a nerve.  There's a guy at work who is a hardcore conspiracy theorist, bigot. etc. . . .  He calls himself a conservative and well, he does not fit the bill at all.  He listens to Rush all day, another proclaimed Conservative, and well, you get the picture.

[Penguin4x4 1,761]

I am neither a conservative nor liberal. I am merely the man who banged your wife like a screen door in a hurricane last night.