Re: What do YOU use kerosene for?

[Robatoy]

I stand (sit) corrected. The hydrogen was for the J-2's. My mistake.

[Bob]

It's good for taking rust off of your TS when used with steel wool.

[Charlie Self]

Robert Bonomi remarks:

known *NOT* to be fatal, or even temporarily disabling. Proof is in the man, _MANY_, *thousands* of people who have ingested such over the years, from 'suck starting" a fuel syphon.

[George]

Oklahoma Credit Card....

[Charlie Self]

George responds:

Oklahoma Credit Card....

[Larry Jaques]

On 12 Mar 2005 06:05:28 -0800, the inscrutable "Charlie Self" spake:

After watching other people do it all the time (and having done it once myself) I designed a foolproof siphon system which guaranteed that I ended up with no gas in the mouth. I took a rubber toilet float and punched two holes in the top. Into the smaller hole I placed a piece of 3/8" aquarium hose. Into the larger hole I placed the 7' piece of stiff garden hose. Place the hose in the tank, slide the "stopper" to the filler, and blow. You can put enough pressure differential into the larger hose to get it to flow instantly without risk of "fume mouth". I used it to fill my lawnmower gas cans.

As a teenager, my buddy with the super hot '67 GTO used an RV water pump and a 50' hose to fill his tank from unsuspecting RVs. That Goat with the 6-packed 389 V-8 really sucked gas. He'd put the outlet into his tank, switch the pump on, and stick the hose in the RV tank. 5 minutes later, he was full. He was really lucky he was never caught at that during Carter's Gas Rationing Days.

-- Life's a Frisbee: When you die, your soul goes up on the roof. ----

Comprehensive Website Development

[George]

The make 'em with pump and valve nowadays, but that's for sissies. The excitement of ripping a quick five gallons in a poorly-lit parking lot would be much less if you couldn't get a mouthful from hyperventilation....

The Oklahoma reference I learned from Texans. Here they're also referred to as Finnish credit cards.

[John DeBoo]

I thought Okies soaked their socks in kerosene to keep the ants from crawling up their legs and eating their candy asses?

[Badger]

Typical Americans, late again, Rover had a jet engined car in 1950.....

Niel ;-)

[Andy Dingley]

No Finn with a mouthful of petrol is going to spit it back in the tank.

[J. Clarke]

That mothers were using to drive their kids to school? The Chrysler wasn't a prototype, it was a production car.

[Mark & Juanita]

Yeah, but ours actually ran more than 50 miles between mechanic's sessions. :-)

[As a former owner of a Sterling, I can say that] +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ The absence of accidents does not mean the presence of safety Army General Richard Cody +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

[Rick Cook]

--Actually the turbo-Rover did quite well at Le Mans, IIRC, before retiring with mechanical failure.

--RC

[Rick Cook]

Since they only built about 50 of them and never sold any, I don't think the term 'production' applies.

[Mark & Juanita]

Umm, yep, my point exactly. My Sterling was a dream to drive, too. Great pickup, smooth ride, nice amenities -- problem was I spent most of my time enjoying all that on the trips to the repair shop. Rover mechanicals with Lucas electronics -- there's a combination made in [not] heaven.

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ The absence of accidents does not mean the presence of safety Army General Richard Cody +--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

[J. Clarke]

They were in the hands of ordinary citizens and driven daily for several years and there are in fact still several of them in private hands. They were as much "production cars" as some models of Ferrari.

So how may Rovers were in private hands, ever?

[Rick Cook]

How did they end up in private hands? GM didn't sell them and I thought they destroyed them all after the program ended. If any of them still exist I'd love to see one again.

BTW: I think you're wrong about the Ferrari. IIRC they had to produce a minimum number, something like a hundred, to qualify for GT racing. The Formula Ones and such were a different matter, of course.

None, of course. Those were purely experimental, like some of the 'turbine cars' a few people built in the 60s using military surplus turbines.

--RC

[Andy Dingley]

It never retired due to "failure". They drove it at Le Man three times, although it was never officially entered as the rules couldn't classify its "cylinder capacity". In '63 it finished 8th, in '65 10th and '64 was the year when they damaged it getting there and couldn't run it.

The Rover T4 (the third road car ?) was about as close to reaching a public market as the Chrysler Ghia was. When launched it was claimed to be within two or three years of production (which if you know the car industry, is very close indeed). It was in fact even closer than that - the thing holding it back was the chassis, that of the new P6 Rover (the shark) which went successfully on sale around two years later. The reason they didn't sell it was quite simple - it cost around twice what any other Rover did.

[J. Clarke]

No, GM didn't sell them. GM didn't make them either. They were _CHRYSLER_ products, not General Motors.

Forty were destroyed--apparently it was some kind of tax thing--remember that the bodywork was limited production from Ghia and the taxes might have been substantial. That left ten--two belong to Chrysler, the remainder were all sent to various museums, some of which subsequently sold them. According to four of them are currently in driveable condition including one of ones at Chrysler and one that is privately held. And I'm annoyed with myself--I grew up in a small town in Florida and moved out as soon as I could. According to one site I visited there was a concours held in that town a while back and by golly somebody drove up in a Chrysler turbine.

Don't know the current rule but at one time it was 25. Ford had to do the same with the Ford GT--I used to have a brochure for the homologation version, which had power steering and air conditioning. But they wanted something like $35K for it, which in the early '60s was a Hell of a lot of money.

Seems to me then that Chrysler has done a better job all around--they've managed to get at least one guy on the road with a privately owned Chrysler-built turbine car.

[Badger]

I'm a LAND-rover man and brit biker, I KNOW about the prince of darkness!

Niel.