Looks like that free air you breath in your area is not so free
after all. The price here dropped to $1.849 today


mike hunt



George Graves wrote:
>
> In article <rI9xc.6271$uX2.2706@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink. net>,
> Mike <pactrail@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> > You don't live on the west coast then, its still over $2.15 a gal.
>
> In the SF Bay Area it's over $2.50/gal for REGULAR. It will be at $3.00
> before the summer peaks.
>
> --
> George Graves
> ------------------
>
> "This election is shaping up great. Our choices
> are a guy who has a lot of second thoughts, or
> a guy who has never had a first thought."
> -- Jay Leno

 

Sot of ironic that Leno keep making jokes about what he things of
the Presidents intelligence? Bush has a degree from Yale and an
MBA from Harvard. From what I hear,
Leno never graduated from high school.


mike hunt



George Graves wrote:
>
>

>
> --
> George Graves
> ------------------
>
> "This election is shaping up great. Our choices
> are a guy who has a lot of second thoughts, or
> a guy who has never had a first thought."
> -- Jay Leno

 

You must lead a dull life.



mike hunt



Hairy wrote:
>
> <BigJohnson@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> news:40C5118A.43B7DC08@mailcity.com...
> > Gas is down to $1,899.
> >
>
> That would be for 1000 gallons, I assume.
> H

 

If you can afford an expensive Alfie you can afford
the gas.


mike hunt



Meatball Turbo wrote:
>
> In article <rqbbc05msusovtkpml9r7o6lu4tr1tc5p4@4ax.com>, bmuse1
> @no.spam.comcast.net says...
> > I visited England (at least as liberal as California) about 3 years
> > ago and was astonished to find that the "subjects" there felt noble
> > about paying about $4.50 a gallon in fuel because they felt the high
> > prices encouraged conservation. I got blank stares of disbelief when
> > I asked them if they felt raped by the government due to the $3 per
> > gallon tax they were assessed.
> >
>
> you visited a different england to the one I live in then.
>
> We currently have threats of a fuel protest due to fuel being too
> expensive at about 85p(about $1.55USD) per litre. About $5.89 per US
> gallon, or about $6.98 for an imperial/UK gallon.
>
> Scary thing is I'm looking at at Alfa (either a 33, a 75 2litre TS, or a
> 155 narrowbody) for fuel economy purposes. Not usually most people
> thoughts when they look at Alfas, I admit, but far better than my
> current car, and probably as much fun to drive with better handling
> thrown in.
>
> --
> The poster formerly known as Skodapilot.
> http://www.bouncing-czechs.com

 

To run the car I guess.


mike hunt



Pete wrote:
>
> "dreas" <dreas@shaw.ca>, wrote:
>
> >87 octane is $98.5 a litre in BC

> Please excuse my ignorance but What do you use 87 octane for?
>
> Pete
> --

 

<BigJohnson@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:40C65547.8663F7B3@mailcity.com...
> You must lead a dull life.
>
>

No, You have saved me from that. ;~)

H


>
> mike hunt
>
>
>
> Hairy wrote:
> >
> > <BigJohnson@mailcity.com> wrote in message
> > news:40C5118A.43B7DC08@mailcity.com...
> > > Gas is down to $1,899.
> > >
> >
> > That would be for 1000 gallons, I assume.
> > H

 

On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 17:19:33 +0100, Tom Boltwood <tom@boltwood.nospam>
wrote:

>
>
>> From: Bob Muse <bmuse1@no.spam.comcast.net>
>> Reply-To: bmuse1@no.spam.comcast.net
>> Newsgroups:
>> alt.autos.4x4.chevy-trucks,alt.autos.acura,alt.autos.alfa-romeo,alt.autos.anti
>> que,alt.autos.audi
>> Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2004 08:27:57 -0400
>> Subject: Re: Fuel prices are dropping
>>
>> I visited England (at least as liberal as California) about 3 years
>> ago and was astonished to find that the "subjects" there felt noble
>> about paying about $4.50 a gallon in fuel because they felt the high
>> prices encouraged conservation. I got blank stares of disbelief when
>> I asked them if they felt raped by the government due to the $3 per
>> gallon tax they were assessed.
>
>I can't believe you meant England in the UK, we're not happy about it at
>all, believe me. I think we're prepared to pay more in general terms because
>it does encourage us to drive less wasteful cars and Europe in general seems
>to be more resource conscious than the states. The taxes are *supposed* to
>go towards better things, let's face it, a welfare state is not cheap to
>run, but the current prices are ludicrous and the tax revenue seems to be
>being wasted.
There is that term "wasteful cars" again. I noticed that attitude
when I visited England. Who decided that it was ok for the government
to dip their hands into your pockets to make you "responsible". It
isn't wasteful if you make use of it and can afford it. Let the
market decide if I really need a suburban V8 or not. I use it to pull
my ski boat, yes it has a 315 hp V8 as well. I use about 5-6 gallons
on an afternoon lake trip with the family. That used to cost about
$7. Now it costs about $12. Not enough for a lifestyle change. When
the true price increases enough it will enable other technologies
which will drive their costs down.

 

On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 17:49:20 +0100, Pete<iowna156@alfa.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 17:19:33 +0100, Tom Boltwood <tom@boltwood.nospam>,
>wrote:
>
>>I can't believe you meant England in the UK
>Ah but this an American's perception of what Brits think. <LMAO>
>
>As with most of these perceived views of life outside
>the actual USA, the reality is rather different.
>
>I would hate to post anything that smacked of politics,
>but fuel taxation is politics, and so is the American perception of the
>UK. Just because President B Liar and Prime Minister Bush are
>interchangeable doesn't mean US fantasy swops with Real Life . <LOL>
>
>Pete
My perceptions of the UK were turned upside down when I visited there.
They aren't from my armchair here in the states, they were formulated
through dinner conversations with more than 40-50 people. Their
opinions and attitudes varied of course, but they usually felt like
the gas taxes were the right thing to do even if it created a hardship
for them or at least guided their lifestyle where fuel was concerned..

 

On 8 Jun 2004 22:05:08 GMT, Marshall Banana <dan@angband.org> wrote:

>In alt.autos.4x4.chevy-trucks Pete <iowna156@alfa.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 13:28:04 -0400, Mike Smith
>> <mike_UNDERSCORE_smith@acm.DOT.org>, wrote:
>
>>>Most North American cars are designed to run on 87.
>>>
>>>--
>>>Mike Smith
>
>> Thanks Mike. Never seen one, so didn't know.
>
>More to the point, "Octane" in N. America is not the same as "Octane" in
>the UK. Here in the states, the octane number posted on the pump is the
>average of the Motor Octane Number as determined by a variable-compression
>test engine, and the Research Octane Number as determined by chemical
>analysis. If you look at the fine print on the octane sticker on a US
>pump, you'll see the nomenclature "(R+M)/2" In the UK, pumps just list
>the Research Octane Number. So basically, gas that is sold as 91 Octane
>in the UK is the same as gas that is sold as 87 Octane in the US. Two
>countries divided by a common language, eh? Anyone want to explain why it
>would be very peculiar for a lady to keep her wallet in a fanny pack in
>the UK?
>
>Dan
Not to mention ****, boots, biscuits, cookies, toilets, fortnights and
on and on and on.

 

Corey Scheich wrote:

> $1.74-$2.15 in the Twin Cities. Quite the range I would hate to be the sap
> who paid 2.15 and got ripped for $0.40/gal

Yeah, gee, a whole whopping $6 or so on a full tank. That guy must be
*so embarrassed*.

--
Mike Smith