...GM were to offer a line of performance vehicles as dedicated CNG/propane fueled entries?

Cleaner, domestically produced, and exclusive.

I think it could be marketable.

Discuss.

I'd also like to see some incentive for this offered by the government - maybe in the form of relief from CAFE.

I think a real win-win could be constructed here.

More choices are good, though the obvious issues would be availability of fuel and range. I like the idea of CNG because we're not dependent on foreign countries for it. CNG vehicles have been around for a while and haven't taken off. They're mostly for fleets and taxis. In California CNG vehicles can get an HOV lane sticker for solo drivers. I think targeting the performance market would be a little challenging.

I'd trade a little difficulty in finding fuel for being able to buy what I want. I call that a fair trade, and that's why I think this would be a good way to market CNG vehicles.

Consider this also, much of the necessary infrastructure for CNG and propane already exists. You would not be starting from scratch as with other alt fuels.

We could do this in short order.

And don't forget that pipelines make this far more efficient to deliver than even conventional fuels.

The added bonus is that gaseous fuels greatly extend engine life.

I sure would like to be able to fill-up with CNG at home - somethng that is very do-able for much of the population.

I think the idea has merit, and I wish we would have discussed this back in the day.

Well, looking at the carboned-up mess inside my Tahoe's engine tonight sure makes me wish I could run everything on a gaseous fuel. That black sludge simply doesn't form in engines run on propane or CNG.

CNG is a pain in the butt. Less efficient more expensive per comparabe energy output. Also the tanks that hold the CNG have to be replaced every ten years. Plus to have a decent range forget about a trunk.

CNG is a pain in the butt. Less efficient more expensive per comparabe energy output. Also the tanks that hold the CNG have to be replaced every ten years. Plus to have a decent range forget about a trunk.

Its my understanding that only certain tanks have to be replaced every ten years.

As for more expensive per comparable energy rate, I have to disagree. Its being sold near me for 2.35 GGE, gasoline gallon equivalent. Even if I do lose 10% on top of that, I'm still ahead compared to 3.50 for a gallon of gas. Plus the reduced maintenance costs. In Utah, its 0.85 GGE, due to massive subsidies.

I'm betting Camino's yard is sitting on top of some marcellus shale.

I'm betting Camino's yard is sitting on top of some marcellus shale.

I wish!

CNG is a pain in the butt. Less efficient more expensive per comparabe energy output. Also the tanks that hold the CNG have to be replaced every ten years. Plus to have a decent range forget about a trunk.

Its my understanding that only certain tanks have to be replaced every ten years.

As for more expensive per comparable energy rate, I have to disagree. Its being sold near me for 2.35 GGE, gasoline gallon equivalent. Even if I do lose 10% on top of that, I'm still ahead compared to 3.50 for a gallon of gas. Plus the reduced maintenance costs. In Utah, its 0.85 GGE, due to massive subsidies.

This idea is definitely doable...and would work much better I think with modern motors with very close tolerances.

I'm betting Camino's yard is sitting on top of some marcellus shale.

I wish!

...until someone claimed mineral rights and started blasting to get the stuff. You would have to turn Arkus loose on them.