Home » Public Forums » GMCnet » [GMCnet] North to Alaska!
| [GMCnet] North to Alaska! [message #189140] |
Sun, 04 November 2012 01:35  |
 |
USAussie
Messages: 15912
Registered: July 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Karma: 6
|
Senior Member |
|
|
G'day,
On next year's tour in the USA we will point Double Trouble towards Arizona and then turn north to Idaho where we will hang a left
and cross into Washington.
From there we'll turn south to catch the Coos Bay Rally OR head North to Alaska.
There was some chatter here about a group heading to Alaska and I'd like to know if I'm correct, what the schedule and route is.
In order to get the best deals on flights and upgrades we need to plan WAY in advance.
Regards,
Rob M.
USAussie - Downunder
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Regards,
Rob M. (USAussie)
The Pedantic Mechanic
Sydney, Australia
'75 Avion - AUS - The Blue Streak TZE365V100428
'75 Avion - USA - Double Trouble TZE365V100426
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] North to Alaska! [message #189143 is a reply to message #189140] |
Sun, 04 November 2012 06:50  |
Steven Ferguson
Messages: 3447
Registered: May 2006
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Rob,
If the GMCWS Coos Bay rally is a target destination after leaving AZ,
we'll tag along with you.
On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 12:36 AM, Rob Mueller <robmueller@iinet.net.au>wrote:
> G'day,
>
> On next year's tour in the USA we will point Double Trouble towards
> Arizona and then turn north to Idaho where we will hang a left
> and cross into Washington.
>
> From there we'll turn south to catch the Coos Bay Rally OR head North to
> Alaska.
>
> There was some chatter here about a group heading to Alaska and I'd like
> to know if I'm correct, what the schedule and route is.
>
> In order to get the best deals on flights and upgrades we need to plan WAY
> in advance.
>
> Regards,
> Rob M.
> USAussie - Downunder
>
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
--
Fathom the hypocrisy of a nation where every citizen must prove they have
health insurance......but not everyone has to prove they're a citizen.
Steve Ferguson
Sierra Vista, AZ
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] North to Alaska! [message #189157 is a reply to message #189140] |
Sun, 04 November 2012 10:45 |
Dwayne
Messages: 418
Registered: October 2007
Location: White Rock BC
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Greetings Rob;
Sure was great getting together at Bob and Sandra's. Yes they and
ourselves talked about "North to Alaska" in 2013. No dates set. They
indicated they would like to do it early (possibly April - May) however to
match this up with the October Coos Bay Rally means a long wait between
both. Doing Alaska in September would work. I have been there a few times
in September and had more than acceptable weather. We are registered for
Coos Bay and would do the Alaska Run in September if there are others set
to go.
We arrived home Friday night after clocking over 14,000 miles in the coach
and still happily married.
Also stay tuned for ROUTE 66 in 2014. Jim Hupy and I are working on
setting this up.
Jim installed the rear disc's and reaction arms on our coach.
Best regards
Dwayne and Sharon Jacobson
White Rock, BC
77 Kingsley
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Dwayne & Sharon Jacobson
White Rock, BC
77 Eleganza II
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] North to Alaska! [message #189188 is a reply to message #189155] |
Sun, 04 November 2012 15:50 |
|
USAussie
Messages: 15912
Registered: July 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Karma: 6
|
Senior Member |
|
|
David,
Janet and Ken Frey made a presentation at Amana of the tour they took to Alaska and it sure looked great. I have sent them an email
asking what route they took.
I agree it probably would be hard on the GMC but I intend to have it painted AFTER the trip to Alaska as that would be a one time
tour.
Regards,
Rob M.
-----Original Message-----
From: David H. Jarvis
After you pass through Prince George, Dawson Creek and Fort St. John, in British Columbia, there isn't much to see or do.
There are two routes you could take to break up the trip, but I wouldn't do it in a GMC.
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Regards,
Rob M. (USAussie)
The Pedantic Mechanic
Sydney, Australia
'75 Avion - AUS - The Blue Streak TZE365V100428
'75 Avion - USA - Double Trouble TZE365V100426
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] North to Alaska! [message #189200 is a reply to message #189195] |
Sun, 04 November 2012 18:05 |
Dwayne
Messages: 418
Registered: October 2007
Location: White Rock BC
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I just started a spead sheet on all the gas we bought on our 14,000 mile
trip. I do know the most expensive in Canada
was $1.75 per litre which equals $6.61 a US gallon. (I burned premium all
the way)
Average price in Vancouver, BC right now is $1.20 per litre = $4.54 per
gallon for Regular
In Whitehorse Yukon, regular gas is $1.36 per litre - $5.15 per gallon
In Anchorage, Alaska regular is approx $4.00 per gallon
Regards
Dwayne Jacobson
White Rock
77 Kingsley
On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 2:56 PM, Mickey Space Ship Shuttle
<mickeysss@me.com>wrote:
>
> just curious how much is gas up there?
> f
>
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Dwayne & Sharon Jacobson
White Rock, BC
77 Eleganza II
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] North to Alaska! [message #189214 is a reply to message #189206] |
Mon, 05 November 2012 00:23 |
Dwayne
Messages: 418
Registered: October 2007
Location: White Rock BC
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Across Canada and return thru the States.
Just Figured out our Gas Mileage and costs:
Total Mileage 14.545 miles
Total consumption of Gas (Supreme) in US Gal. 1620.6 - averaged 8.98 mpg
(US Gal)
Canadian
Gal. 1349.5 - averaged 10.78 mpg (Cdn Gal.)
Average Cost of Premium Gas purchased in the US = $4.04 per US gal
Average Cost of Premium Gas purchased in Canada = $5.45 per US gal.
There are 3.7854 liters in 1 US Gal.
1 US Gal. = .8327 Canadian Gal.
I used approx 1 liter (pint) of oil every 1200 miles. Using Mobile 1
Synthetic 5-40 with a Zinc additive.
Spent approx. $7,700 on Gas.
The coach performed very well across Canada - NO ethanol - and in the
States I added an Ethanol treatment
Had problems on hills in southern Arizona then again from Salem Oregon to
home. I figure it to a dirty fuel filter.
We are adjusting to Home life again and will get into the coach to check
out the filters next weekend.
The trip was REALLY WORTH the Time and Expense.
Dwayne and Sharon Jacobson
White Rock, BC
77 Kingsley
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Dwayne & Sharon Jacobson
White Rock, BC
77 Eleganza II
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] North to Alaska! [message #189244 is a reply to message #189243] |
Mon, 05 November 2012 12:47 |
Dwayne
Messages: 418
Registered: October 2007
Location: White Rock BC
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
This was a personal decision since I knew the premiums did not contain
Ethanol in Canada. In the maritime provinces there is a major Gas provider
"Irving" where all grades are Ethanol free.
I figure I got better performance from the Premium. The only way I can now
judge that is to do the same trip again using regular grade and when
another trip arises I will do that.
Regards
Dwayne
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 9:22 AM, Hal Kading <halkading@fastwave.biz> wrote:
>
>
> Dwayne,
>
> I can understand (and agree with) using premium where only premium is
> available without ethanol, but do not understand you using it full time.
> Reasons?
>
> Hal Kading 78 Buskirk Las Cruces NM
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
--
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Dwayne & Sharon Jacobson
White Rock, BC
77 Eleganza II
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] North to Alaska! [message #189246 is a reply to message #189244] |
Mon, 05 November 2012 12:58 |
emerystora
Messages: 4442
Registered: January 2004
Karma: 13
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I thank that Hal's point is that one would not expect better mileage or better performance with using premium over regular unless the timing on the engine were to be set so far forward that it would ping using regular gas.
The only difference in the gasoline is the Octane number which slows down the burning rate (or flame front) to prevent pinging. The energy content of the gasoline should be the same.
Emery Stora
77 Kingsley
Frederick, CO
On Nov 5, 2012, at 11:47 AM, Dwayne Jacobson wrote:
> This was a personal decision since I knew the premiums did not contain
> Ethanol in Canada. In the maritime provinces there is a major Gas provider
> "Irving" where all grades are Ethanol free.
> I figure I got better performance from the Premium. The only way I can now
> judge that is to do the same trip again using regular grade and when
> another trip arises I will do that.
> Regards
> Dwayne
>
> On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 9:22 AM, Hal Kading <halkading@fastwave.biz> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Dwayne,
>>
>> I can understand (and agree with) using premium where only premium is
>> available without ethanol, but do not understand you using it full time.
>> Reasons?
>>
>> Hal Kading 78 Buskirk Las Cruces NM
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] North to Alaska! [message #189247 is a reply to message #189246] |
Mon, 05 November 2012 13:03 |
Dwayne
Messages: 418
Registered: October 2007
Location: White Rock BC
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
HI Emery;
Due to my lack of knowledge on what each level of gas provides and a bit of
knowledge on the addition of Ethanol in the lower grades of gas in Canada I
decided to stick with Premium. I just received an email with information
that I would deem valuable to all of us.
I just watched an hour long program on gasoline. There is ZERO benefit
from using premium in a carbureted vehicle with less than 9:1 compression
ratio and ZERO benefit with any EFI vehicle (low compression) that
specifies regular fuel. Actually, using premium produces higher levels of
NO than regular, and produces MORE pollutants which clog catalytic
convertors. In the US the fuel companies have been convicted of false
advertising for claiming Premium burns cleaner and cleans your engine
better than regular. The "cleaning additives" are identical (by law) with
identical amounts in all grades of gas. In both the US and Canada the fuel
companies have been forced by the government to take out full page
newspaper and TV adds advising people to use only the gasoline specified in
their owners manual. Using regular in a Corvette, which specifies premium,
gives identical mileage with nothing other than less horsepower on the
dyno. Using premium in an engine designed for regular, does not provide
any benefit. The ECM adjusts to regular/premium in milliseconds. Costs
per mile burning premium are significantly higher.
Dwayne Jacobson
White Rock, BC
77 Kingsley
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Dwayne & Sharon Jacobson
White Rock, BC
77 Eleganza II
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] North to Alaska! [message #189249 is a reply to message #189247] |
Mon, 05 November 2012 13:09 |
Ronald Pottol
Messages: 505
Registered: September 2012
Location: Redwood City, California
Karma: -2
|
Senior Member |
|
|
The energy content of gas goes down slightly as octane goes up.
On Nov 5, 2012 11:03 AM, "Dwayne Jacobson" <dwayne@havenproperties.ca>
wrote:
> HI Emery;
>
> Due to my lack of knowledge on what each level of gas provides and a bit of
> knowledge on the addition of Ethanol in the lower grades of gas in Canada I
> decided to stick with Premium. I just received an email with information
> that I would deem valuable to all of us.
>
> I just watched an hour long program on gasoline. There is ZERO benefit
> from using premium in a carbureted vehicle with less than 9:1 compression
> ratio and ZERO benefit with any EFI vehicle (low compression) that
> specifies regular fuel. Actually, using premium produces higher levels of
> NO than regular, and produces MORE pollutants which clog catalytic
> convertors. In the US the fuel companies have been convicted of false
> advertising for claiming Premium burns cleaner and cleans your engine
> better than regular. The "cleaning additives" are identical (by law) with
> identical amounts in all grades of gas. In both the US and Canada the fuel
> companies have been forced by the government to take out full page
> newspaper and TV adds advising people to use only the gasoline specified in
> their owners manual. Using regular in a Corvette, which specifies premium,
> gives identical mileage with nothing other than less horsepower on the
> dyno. Using premium in an engine designed for regular, does not provide
> any benefit. The ECM adjusts to regular/premium in milliseconds. Costs
> per mile burning premium are significantly higher.
>
> Dwayne Jacobson
> White Rock, BC
> 77 Kingsley
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
1973 26' GM outfitted
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] North to Alaska! [message #189250 is a reply to message #189246] |
Mon, 05 November 2012 13:26 |
jhbridges
Messages: 8412
Registered: May 2011
Location: Braselton ga
Karma: -74
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I suspect you could advance the timing a bit and take advantage of that advance by using premium. In a modern engine, the ECC will do it for you. I was advised, increase grades of gas till there is no increase in mileage. My last Mazda improved with mid and again with premium. MyRanger improves but only marginally from regular to mid grade. My Grand Caravan doesn't seem to care. Around here, you'd need to see about an 8% increase in mileage to make premium worthwhile. I wonder, would a five or six degree advance - or whatever the engine would tolerate - produce an 8% or better gain?
--johnny
'76 23' transmode norris
'76 palm beach
From: Emery Stora <emerystora@mac.com>
To: gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org
Sent: Monday, November 5, 2012 1:58 PM
Subject: Re: [GMCnet] North to Alaska!
I thank that Hal's point is that one would not expect better mileage or better performance with using premium over regular unless the timing on the engine were to be set so far forward that it would ping using regular gas.
The only difference in the gasoline is the Octane number which slows down the burning rate (or flame front) to prevent pinging. The energy content of the gasoline should be the same.
Emery Stora
77 Kingsley
Frederick, CO
On Nov 5, 2012, at 11:47 AM, Dwayne Jacobson wrote:
> This was a personal decision since I knew the premiums did not contain
> Ethanol in Canada. In the maritime provinces there is a major Gas provider
> "Irving" where all grades are Ethanol free.
> I figure I got better performance from the Premium. The only way I can now
> judge that is to do the same trip again using regular grade and when
> another trip arises I will do that.
> Regards
> Dwayne
>
> On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 9:22 AM, Hal Kading <halkading@fastwave.biz> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Dwayne,
>>
>> I can understand (and agree with) using premium where only premium is
>> available without ethanol, but do not understand you using it full time.
>> Reasons?
>>
>> Hal Kading 78 Buskirk Las Cruces NM
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Foolish Carriage, 76 26' Eleganza(?) with beaucoup mods and add - ons.
Braselton, Ga.
I forgive them all, save those who hurt the dogs. They must answer to me in hell
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] North to Alaska! [message #189254 is a reply to message #189250] |
Mon, 05 November 2012 13:54 |
Ronald Pottol
Messages: 505
Registered: September 2012
Location: Redwood City, California
Karma: -2
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I'd expect the best way to do that would be at build time, with a
compression ratio bump, also, perhaps get the exhaust ported and a low back
pressure exhaust.
On Nov 5, 2012 11:26 AM, "Johnny Bridges" <jhbridges@ymail.com> wrote:
> I suspect you could advance the timing a bit and take advantage of that
> advance by using premium. In a modern engine, the ECC will do it for you.
> I was advised, increase grades of gas till there is no increase in
> mileage. My last Mazda improved with mid and again with premium. MyRanger
> improves but only marginally from regular to mid grade. My Grand Caravan
> doesn't seem to care. Around here, you'd need to see about an 8% increase
> in mileage to make premium worthwhile. I wonder, would a five or six
> degree advance - or whatever the engine would tolerate - produce an 8% or
> better gain?
>
> --johnny
> '76 23' transmode norris
> '76 palm beach
>
> From: Emery Stora <emerystora@mac.com>
> To: gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org
> Sent: Monday, November 5, 2012 1:58 PM
> Subject: Re: [GMCnet] North to Alaska!
>
> I thank that Hal's point is that one would not expect better mileage or
> better performance with using premium over regular unless the timing on the
> engine were to be set so far forward that it would ping using regular gas.
>
> The only difference in the gasoline is the Octane number which slows down
> the burning rate (or flame front) to prevent pinging. The energy content
> of the gasoline should be the same.
>
> Emery Stora
> 77 Kingsley
> Frederick, CO
>
>
> On Nov 5, 2012, at 11:47 AM, Dwayne Jacobson wrote:
>
> > This was a personal decision since I knew the premiums did not contain
> > Ethanol in Canada. In the maritime provinces there is a major Gas
> provider
> > "Irving" where all grades are Ethanol free.
> > I figure I got better performance from the Premium. The only way I can
> now
> > judge that is to do the same trip again using regular grade and when
> > another trip arises I will do that.
> > Regards
> > Dwayne
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 9:22 AM, Hal Kading <halkading@fastwave.biz>
> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Dwayne,
> >>
> >> I can understand (and agree with) using premium where only premium is
> >> available without ethanol, but do not understand you using it full time.
> >> Reasons?
> >>
> >> Hal Kading 78 Buskirk Las Cruces NM
>
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
1973 26' GM outfitted
|
|
|
|
| Re: [GMCnet] North to Alaska! [message #189255 is a reply to message #189254] |
Mon, 05 November 2012 13:59 |
jhbridges
Messages: 8412
Registered: May 2011
Location: Braselton ga
Karma: -74
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Best, perrhaps. Can be done with minimu hassle - read below :) :). At the speeds these things turn, you probably won't gain a lot messing with the heads. If mwemory serves, the gain from the headers I gto is marginal at best... someone posted the dyno curves. The improvement, in my estimation, is the thing runs cooler underneath. The 3 inch exhaust and single muffler also keeo heat out from uder the engine box. Which areound here (Georgia) in the summer is worthwhile.
--johnny
'76 23' transmode norris
'76 palm beach
From: Ronald Pottol <ronaldpottol@gmail.com>
To: gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org
Sent: Monday, November 5, 2012 2:54 PM
Subject: Re: [GMCnet] North to Alaska!
I'd expect the best way to do that would be at build time, with a
compression ratio bump, also, perhaps get the exhaust ported and a low back
pressure exhaust.
On Nov 5, 2012 11:26 AM, "Johnny Bridges" <jhbridges@ymail.com> wrote:
> I suspect you could advance the timing a bit and take advantage of that
> advance by using premium. In a modern engine, the ECC will do it for you.
> I was advised, increase grades of gas till there is no increase in
> mileage. My last Mazda improved with mid and again with premium. MyRanger
> improves but only marginally from regular to mid grade. My Grand Caravan
> doesn't seem to care. Around here, you'd need to see about an 8% increase
> in mileage to make premium worthwhile. I wonder, would a five or six
> degree advance - or whatever the engine would tolerate - produce an 8% or
> better gain?
>
> --johnny
> '76 23' transmode norris
> '76 palm beach
>
> From: Emery Stora <emerystora@mac.com>
> To: gmclist@temp.gmcnet.org
> Sent: Monday, November 5, 2012 1:58 PM
> Subject: Re: [GMCnet] North to Alaska!
>
> I thank that Hal's point is that one would not expect better mileage or
> better performance with using premium over regular unless the timing on the
> engine were to be set so far forward that it would ping using regular gas.
>
> The only difference in the gasoline is the Octane number which slows down
> the burning rate (or flame front) to prevent pinging. The energy content
> of the gasoline should be the same.
>
> Emery Stora
> 77 Kingsley
> Frederick, CO
>
>
> On Nov 5, 2012, at 11:47 AM, Dwayne Jacobson wrote:
>
> > This was a personal decision since I knew the premiums did not contain
> > Ethanol in Canada. In the maritime provinces there is a major Gas
> provider
> > "Irving" where all grades are Ethanol free.
> > I figure I got better performance from the Premium. The only way I can
> now
> > judge that is to do the same trip again using regular grade and when
> > another trip arises I will do that.
> > Regards
> > Dwayne
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 9:22 AM, Hal Kading <halkading@fastwave.biz>
> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Dwayne,
> >>
> >> I can understand (and agree with) using premium where only premium is
> >> available without ethanol, but do not understand you using it full time.
> >> Reasons?
> >>
> >> Hal Kading 78 Buskirk Las Cruces NM
>
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
> _______________________________________________
> GMCnet mailing list
> Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
> http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
>
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
_______________________________________________
GMCnet mailing list
Unsubscribe or Change List Options:
http://temp.gmcnet.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gmclist
Foolish Carriage, 76 26' Eleganza(?) with beaucoup mods and add - ons.
Braselton, Ga.
I forgive them all, save those who hurt the dogs. They must answer to me in hell
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sun Oct 06 09:19:26 CDT 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01597 seconds
|
GMCforum
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
