how many mile to a tank of fuel?

"Matt B." > wrote in message
news0TQg.140$BC6.58@fed1read01...
> "Jonny" > wrote in message
> nk.net...
>> And being a U.S. citizen, am aware of how people and corporations fudge
>> the truth to death. This I can easily see particularly true of the
>> "tankful" connotation.
>
> And the original poster has a hidden agenda behind his question right up
> there on par with big corporations that spread lies, so therefore his
> question was just as suspicious.
>
> seriously...if he was only going to 1/4 tank instead of near empty,
> dontcha think he would have said "I get 260 miles to 3/4 of a tank"?
> C'mon dude...really.
>

And you apparently think that I think people are out to dupe ya. Nope. Gas
gauges tend to lie sometimes. This can lend to a disparity of 25% easily
between the gauge itself, appropriateness of the sending unit signal in
referrence to actual fuel level, downhill or uphill, left or right hand
turns as will be different depending where the sending unit and float is
inside the tank. Happens all the time. This can lead one down a path of
inappropriate conclusions. There's no reason not to be exact as possible.
I provided the method to overcome this possibility. And why would one want
this possibility in the equation if easily overcome to excricate an answer
appropriate to the original question posed by the OP? Maybe the "joy" of
posing insufficient information to determine the emmotional and decision
making makeup of a person(s) making an answer (typical in vocal conversation
with strangers, not newsgroups). That is, illiciting an inappropriate
answer or emmotional response. Even a perfect stranger as is typical in a
newsgroup.
Again, we don't need that in this newsgroup. Thanks. Just the facts,
ma'am.
--
Jonny

"Brian Running" > wrote in message
.. .
>> And being a U.S. citizen, am aware of how people and corporations fudge
>> the truth to death. This I can easily see particularly true of the
>> "tankful" connotation. This can easily form a very big "ballpark" where
>> assumptions and their consequential conclusions may be widely different
>> as a result. It makes for lots of conversation about mushy figures and
>> conclusions. In the end, means absolutely nothing with a very foggy
>> basis as its foundation. There's plenty of other newsgroups for guessing
>> games on mushy info. Please don't introduce that here. Thanks.
>
> Boy, real life is sure a bitch, ain't it, Jonny?

No problem. I know the difference between vocal conversations with people
(and those nuances and potential assumptions) and people seeking information
in a newsgroups via text written messages. Too bad you apparently do not.
Just the facts, ma'am (Joe Friday). My life does not exist or reflect on my
newsgroup posts. Hopefully, not yours either. HaND
--
Jonny

"Jonny" > wrote in message
nk.net...
> And you apparently think that I think people are out to dupe ya.

I don't think that. You said that.

You are the one that said:
"And being a U.S. citizen, am aware of how people and corporations fudge the
truth to death."

So no I don't think it. You admitted that you are suspicious about people
trying to dupe ya.

Come on, guy, don't be so serious. I think we all have a pretty good idea
now about what to expect in the way of fuel consumption for this vehicle and
engine. It's not rocket science.

"Papa" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> Come on, guy, don't be so serious. I think we all have a pretty good idea
> now about what to expect in the way of fuel consumption for this vehicle
> and engine. It's not rocket science.
>

Tracking mpg isn't difficult. Yes, I know what mpg to expect from a good
running VW Golf. Its been my experience that a small few people
intentionally fudge stuff in newsgroups begging for exacting information.
Then, never return; or purposely avoid providing any more information in any
reply asking for same in their replies. Not a real problem in this group.
Guess its bothering me in general way. Not trying to be the group policeman
or anything like that. I read the original post again, and that fogginess
of info is still there regarding an answer that can't really be provided on
the basis of that information. I can't determine actual mpg of the vehicle,
therefore, no answer is correct based on that information to the question
posed.
--
Jonny

"Matt B." > wrote in message
news:t22Rg.184$BC6.73@fed1read01...
> "Jonny" > wrote in message
> nk.net...
>> And you apparently think that I think people are out to dupe ya.
>
> I don't think that. You said that.
>
> You are the one that said:
> "And being a U.S. citizen, am aware of how people and corporations fudge
> the truth to death."
>
> So no I don't think it. You admitted that you are suspicious about people
> trying to dupe ya.
>

Am suspicious of a few people, not people in general. People are generally
honest and forthright. Irregardless of what I wrote. Non-persons
(corporations) are scum regarding to truth.
--
Jonny

have found the problem to my fuel problem,........ the carb is burnin to much
fuel. its a weber carb, has anybody got any expirence of them or had this
problem? can i sort it or is it a mechanis job?


Jonny wrote:
>>> And you apparently think that I think people are out to dupe ya.
>>
>[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>> So no I don't think it. You admitted that you are suspicious about people
>> trying to dupe ya.
>
>Am suspicious of a few people, not people in general. People are generally
>honest and forthright. Irregardless of what I wrote. Non-persons
>(corporations) are scum regarding to truth.

--
Message posted via CarKB.com
http://www.carkb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx...ooled/200609/1

A mechanic will have to fix it. In the US that was a rare carb. You
could not get a rebuild kit for it I would guess.

On Sat, 23 Sep 2006 18:10:32 GMT, "drunknmunky via CarKB.com"
<u26877@uwe> wrote:

>have found the problem to my fuel problem,........ the carb is burnin to much
>fuel. its a weber carb, has anybody got any expirence of them or had this
>problem? can i sort it or is it a mechanis job?
>
>
>Jonny wrote:
>>>> And you apparently think that I think people are out to dupe ya.
>>>
>>[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>>> So no I don't think it. You admitted that you are suspicious about people
>>> trying to dupe ya.
>>
>>Am suspicious of a few people, not people in general. People are generally
>>honest and forthright. Irregardless of what I wrote. Non-persons
>>(corporations) are scum regarding to truth.

> I read the original post again, and that fogginess
> of info is still there regarding an answer that can't really be provided on
> the basis of that information. I can't determine actual mpg of the vehicle,
> therefore, no answer is correct based on that information to the question
> posed.

He didn't ask for miles per gallon, Jonny. He asked how many miles on a
tankful. There is an answer to that question. You don't know it, but
you just couldn't resist responding anyway, because you like to argue --
good for you. But if you have no useful information, it'd be better not
to respond to the question.

If, after driving a certain vehicle for, say, one year, you don't have
some idea of how many miles you generally get per tank of fuel, then you
are so unobservant and unaware of your surrounding world that you should
not even be allowed to drive on public roads.

Simple as that, Jonny!