Re: Towing with low tanks Reply #25 – January 18, 2005, 03:58:26 pm Yahoo Message Number: 49563Our portable macerator pump has been wonderful. Upon our return from a trip and before I drive it to its nearby storage facility, I empty and flush our LD's black tank into our house cleanout. Pieceof vcake. A 3/4 inch garden hose works faster and the pump stays cooler than using a 5/8 inch hose, by the way.We try to travel with a third of a tank of gas
Re: Towing with low tanks Reply #26 – January 18, 2005, 06:41:58 pm Yahoo Message Number: 49577Jonna,That's a super service that the datastorm provides with the map locations. It makes me wish we could all have datastorm so we could easly follow the LD travels.Barry 2001 RRB
Re: Towing with low tanks Reply #27 – January 18, 2005, 09:09:43 pm Yahoo Message Number: 49583Don't miss that the mapping application at www. DatastormUsers.com is NOT limited only to those who already have satellite Internet. It's open to ANYONE. So if you have a GPS device and Internet access you can let friends know where you are on a very nice map. Just sign up and do it!best, paulSee where we are: http://map.datastormusers.com/user2.cfm?user=332> - we're number 332, more at www. LazyDazers.comPS> BTW, this website is not organized or supported by Datastorm, Direcway, or any other company like Hughes, etc.
Re: Towing with low tanks Reply #28 – January 19, 2005, 12:22:32 am Yahoo Message Number: 49598Yes, it is a great service. As Paul said, it is not offered by Datastorm, DirectWay or any other company but is the child of Don Bradner, a long time internet guy (I have been reading his posts on Usenet for at least 10 or more years) and VSM (Very Smart Man) who is also friendly and generous. The forum was originally only for Datastorm users but he has opened it up to tripod users and really anyone with an interest
Re: Towing with low tanks Reply #29 – January 19, 2005, 08:47:06 am Yahoo Message Number: 49608What Jonna said.best, paul
Re: Towing with low tanks Reply #30 – January 19, 2005, 08:48:51 am Yahoo Message Number: 49610Thanks Paul. I hadn't realized that anyone registered could use the map feature.Barry 2001 RRB TX
Re: V10 engine adopted Reply #31 – January 19, 2005, 10:40:38 am Yahoo Message Number: 49613Quote Seems to me you two did exactly the right thing installing the Banks- plus system, based on your needs. It sounds like a great improvement. We would love to go with Banks but cannot cost-justify it because our needs are different.(edit) QuoteOn the other hand, we are happy about the money we spent on safe-t- plus steering and heavy-duty front and rear sway bars. They paid off in much-improved handling and control and significantly reduced driver fatigue. We also would not be without our Big Foot automatic leveling system and our LD-installed dual solar panels, electric steps and a few other goodies.As always, YMMV. We read about our fellow LD owners' experiences -- then act based on our own perceived needs. I'm sure you do the same. Bobsiegel, I am new to this group, but I've been reading the posts for quite some time, lurker I guess you call it. You always seem to buy everything available for your machine, but not this time,(Banks). Why not this item? AA
Re: V10 engine adopted Reply #32 – January 19, 2005, 10:53:52 am Yahoo Message Number: 49616See my previous answer for why we do not need Banks. I am not really a buy-everything nut. ;-)I also decided NOT to buy Alcoa aluminum wheels. Nice but not necessary and on inspection I concluded they do not make it that much easier to check and add air to tires. The Tireman's valves do make it very easy. I also removed the stainless vanity covers from the wheels because they obstruct checking air and torquing lug nuts. lifewithalazydazerv@yahoogroups.com, "agreeral" wrote:
Re: V10 engine adopted Reply #33 – January 19, 2005, 11:01:42 am Yahoo Message Number: 49617Quote See my previous answer for why we do not need Banks. I am not really a buy-everything nut. ;-) bobsiegel thank you for the prompt answer. Though you may not buy everything, it seems you buy way more than most Lazy owners. I bet your machine is worth more than a new one with all of those features you have built into it. Do you want to sell it? AA
Re: V10 engine adopted Reply #34 – January 19, 2005, 02:13:23 pm Yahoo Message Number: 49624The "plan" from day one was to sell it after about 3 years of RVing to all or most of all the places we want to see. That would be the by Fall of 2007. Never know, though, we might just say with it for additional year ... or two ... or three.It's pretty darn nice. ;-)
Re: V10 engine adopted Reply #35 – January 20, 2005, 08:59:48 am Yahoo Message Number: 49645Quotedangerous. In Mexico, it can be dangerous. The height of the pass is of course not the real indicator, the grade and the length are more important. On a 2 lane road with no passing lane it can be quite When altitude is above 4000' or so, it can make a big difference. Grade will affect the power needed to tame a pass, but altitude affects how much power is available in a big way! Power depends on the oxygen flow rate through the intake, which is lower as the air density decreases. When gobs of power are available, a 20% hit might not be noticeable; The story is different when you are using most of the available power.For those of us with older, carburetted models, the lack of an altitude sensor or lambda correction is an even bigger problem. The fuel mixture can become so rich it refuses to burn at all! I suspect our power is reduced closer to 50% at 10,000', compared to sea level.Steve p.s., the way to circumvent the issue is turbo- or supercharging. This will boost the oxygen flow rate back up to the maximum the engine can use.
Re: V10 engine adopted Reply #36 – January 20, 2005, 10:22:59 am Yahoo Message Number: 49653.Quote"Grade will affect the power needed to tame a pass, but altitude affects how much power is available in a big way!... Power depends on the Quoteoxygen flow rate through the intake, which is lower as the air density decreases..... >....I suspect our power is reduced closer to 50% at 10,000', compared to sea level.....Quote Steve: A standard recent Ford V10 will have it's power of 305HP reduced to 207HP at 9.000 feet. That's really a lot!Eudoro "very high, today" Lemos, Jr.
Re: V10 engine adopted Reply #37 – January 20, 2005, 04:13:57 pm Yahoo Message Number: 49687This is really interesting, and it makes our perception of it seem more accurate. We've always thought that if you don't have a carburated engine, altitude isn't a big factor. Against that, our perception is that we lose power
Re: V10 engine adopted - Jonna Reply #38 – January 21, 2005, 08:57:05 am Yahoo Message Number: 49722QuoteIn the old days of carburators (and on our current generator), I know you can adjust the engine for high altitudes. On the V10 you have to add a turbo charger for the same effect? Just curious, it's not Jonna, the altitude adjustment of carburetted engines involves 'rejetting', which changes the fuel/air ratio. This is what the altitude compensator tells your fuel injection computer to do on a modern engine. The rejetted carburettor will run better at altitude, but there is still a lower oxygen flow rate, and thus less power than at sea level.Turbocharging pushes air into the intake at a higher pressure than atmospheric, and this can more than compensate for the altitude pressure loss.Steve
Re: V10 engine adopted - Jonna Reply #39 – January 21, 2005, 03:54:02 pm Yahoo Message Number: 49751Thanks Steve, I learn the best stuff on this forum. 'Turbo Charged' is one of those phrases that you hear a lot and that I, at least, never thought about what it was. I had it filed under "teen age car guy thing"
Topic: V10 engine adopted (Read 22 times)
previous topic - next topic
Topic: V10 engine adopted (Read 22 times)
previous topic - next topic