why your moped saves our environment.

No matter what sort of moped you drive 4-cycle or 2-cycle, no matter if it runs clean or smokes profusely it is saving our enviroment. Why? Because no matter how much smoke the dirtiest 50cc engine exhales it doesn't come even close to being near close to the amount of emissions a car engine gives off. Overall emissions are over 50 times less than the average car. While a 2-cycle engine emits considerabley larger amounts of hydrocarbons into the air than a four-cycle engine the size of a moped engine means that this really can't do as much harm as all of the emissions a car puts out in one day. So next time a nieghbor or fellow driver tells you what he or she thinks your small displacement engine is doing to our atmosphere, you might want to inform them about what their "clean" smokeless engine is doing to are environment not to mention how much gas it is wasting.

PS: if you moped does smoke profusely you might want to lay off using so much oil or you're going to have a seized engine, a fouled plug and large amounts of carbon to clean out of your exhaust system.

Where is your proof ?????

50 times less ??...

Who says ???

Thats kind of a ridiculous statement since you obviously have no data to back it up with.

If you had any... you would have quoted it.

There are about 4 categories of emissions to be evaluated.

Now you go search for some data... And bring it back here.

Re: Where is your proof ?????

I dare you to go outside and say that.

It's common sense, a 50cc engine cannot possibly pollute as much as a 1800cc engine. For some true facts try visiting: http://mysolution.com/MyCar/Subaru360/Emissions

This is a page for the Subaru 360 a small car which used a two-cycle engine.

Please note that Carbon monoxide is well below the legal limit whereas hydrocarbons is far higher that what is allowed legally (in Indiana) because 2-cycle engines burn oil.

Furthermore mopeds use less gas and oil than any automobile which can also help save the environment.

Or were you talking about siezing an engine by using too much oil in the gas- thats a completely different story.


simple math

Actually it's not so easy to find a car in the U.S. with a displacement of less than 2000cc. Which means that it would take you some 40 mopeds with 50cc 4-cycle engine turning at the same rpms as the auto to produce the same VOLUME of exhaust, but only 20 mopeds with 50cc 2-cycle engines. (because 2-cycle engines fire twice as often at the same rpm as a 4 stroke) However 40 mopeds ARE going to pollute far more in the hydrocarbons per million than the automobile is, BUT they can carry eight times as many people as the single car.

So there you have it, not only are the streets less congested but the air is cleaner.

Fred's Right.

Simple math? More like "fuzzy math"

Fred's right--

Re: Fred's Right.

I'll Fred you in the righty.

Moped=Eco friendly?


Your response cracked me up. actually, I'll admit, I sort of agree with both of you. Here's some detail, about my opinion on the matter(s), it's more complex than you indicated in your initial post.



Less parts, easily repairable with simple, somewhat inexpensive parts. The less "manufacturing" that needs to happen, "Pre-consumer" in less energy consumption.

for Example, my TOMOS has less 'manufacturing' than a new Lexus. Before you've even bought it, it has consumed a TON of resources.


riding a machine with pedals is good for the environment. This is my 'philosophical' point of view. Even if you never actually pedal your moped anywhere, the fact that it has pedals will make some people think "Alternate" which may have a "trickle-down" effect and make people look at solar or wind, even if they don't actually get a moped.


Mopeds do not have, consume, or use up batteries, generally speaking. Lead acid batteries are a huge environmental issue. cars go through several in their life span.


Mopeds use less gas, and take up less parking--this reduces the area which needs to be ruined with paving, cement and asphalt. Something like 10% of our country is 'paved'. It costs money and miles of 'blacktop' must contribute to global warming (which is happening with or without human help anyway)


volume of fluid. Most people think of comparing a "perfectly tuned" brand new vehicle vs. a brand new "perfectly tuned" moped. I also like to consider older vehicles. An SUV that has fallen into disrepair and is leaking coolant, transmission fluid, or oil, or brake fluid. Let's assume this vehicle has a "real bad day" It blows a brake line and overheats (because all your oil and transmission fluid has leaked out...) worst case scenario, this crappy SUV has just dumped several gallons of toxic chemicals where they will probably flow into a storm drain.

If you don't think things like that happen, you've never tried to keep a 400$ car running for four or five years.

Now, on the other hand, your moped has TOTAL TERMINAL SYSTEM FAILURE---You might leave a mess, but nowhere near the pollution potential of a larger vehicle that is breaking down.

But, there is no question that moped exhaust contains lots of bad things, and it's a FACT that moped exhaust is worse than a tuned up car. That seems to have been Ryans main point, and I think he's missing the larger picture. We've talked a lot about this here before, and I think we (all the regulars) agree that moped exhaust is nasty stuff.

Re: Moped=Eco friendly?

Moped exhaust is definately nasty. When I work on my moped in my garage, which is connected to my house, I can smell the two cycle exhaust for days. Just having it running for 20 seconds, with the garage door open, it still pollutes my air, like a mother. I don't know how scientific my find is, but I can definately agree that moped exhaust is some nasty stuff! :) Happy Hollidays!


Re: Moped=Eco friendly?

Smells better than a rose to me.

Re: Moped=Eco friendly?

Tom, how many brain cells do you have left? :)

Re: Where is your proof ?????

Ron Brown /


I think the pollution angle has been well covered here. How about

>Or were you talking about siezing an engine by using too much oil in the gas- >thats a completely different story.

How dors this sieze the engine?


too much oil = seizure?


I've always been sort of puzzled about this myself. Here is the paragraph from the Haynes manual for Vespa which troubles me:

"Do not on any account add extra oil to the petroil under the mistaken belief that a little extra oil will improve the engine lubrication. Apart from creating excess smoke, the addition of oil will make the mixture much weaker, with the consequent risk of overheating and engine seizure." (p. 26)

I don't know if it is correct or not, so I pretty much stick to the 50-to-1 ratio and mix 4 ozs. to 1.5 gallons of gas.

Chris S.

Re: too much oil = seizure?

Ron Brown /


I have never heard that. I guess it makes some sense, but it seems that you would have to significantly increase the oil to lean out the mixture enough to cause a problem. If you had a finely tuned racing 2 stroke, "lean it out until it siezes, then go up one jet size", then this could be a significant problem. I don't believe the average street machine is anywhere near this state of tune. Most of them seem to jetted a little rich anyway.

Haynes manuals have a tendency to use "boiler plate" to fill out their manuals and I suspect that this may have originally been said in a different context.

Maybe Fred will chime in here with some words of wisdom.



More oil means leaner air to gas ratio...believe i

Well... what it does... that many many people can not get through their heads... is that more OIL... makes the gas to air ratio LEANER. (because there is less GAS to go with the existing air)... the space that would be occupied by more gas is now occupied by more oil.

Like that guy above with the pinging.. he is running 4 oz of synthetic oil per gallon.

Synthetic provides about as much lubrication as you can get.

So in my opinion... he should cut back to 2.5 or 3 oz of oil per gallon of gas.

His pinging MIGHT go away... but it is a little odd that his pinging is ocurring in the mid-range (from the description).

I knew the 'too much oil" argument years and years ago... but I didn't know that some manufacturers actually made warnings about it..

I had an argument here with some kid who said the claims I was making sounded like "the kooky claims made on some late night wacky miracle motor oil commercial".... heheheh... not quite !!

Now.... you can compensate for the 'more oil leaning out the mixture' by running richer jetting (which is EXACTLY what full race engines do)... but that runs towards more problems with plug fouling and a lotta smoke (AND POLLUTION.... HOOOWEEEE !!!)..... : )

More oil means leaner air/gas ratio..believe it

I want to agree with Ron that most engines are not running that close to trouble to have a little more oil significantly lean the gas/oil ratio much.

Thats why I was kind of surprised to hear a manufacturer make that claim.

Re: More oil means leaner air to gas ratio...belie

Ron Brown /

Thanks Fred. I wasn't disagreeing with the theory, just the significance in the average street engine with stock jetting. As usual, the final solution is to do a plug chop and select the jet size that works.


Stop it!

Ron Brown /


Stop doing that!

Here I am defending myself against your coments and just because I get sidetracked for a few minutes, you sneak in and fix it, making my post look dumb and unnecessary!

I hate when that happens! : )

Merry Christmas to all.


Re: Moped=Eco friendly?

It's nice to know that you can at least smell the two cycle exhaust. Because an automobile dumps far larger amounts of smokeless odorless exhaust into the air.

And if you want to get really scientific about moped exhaust...

Today the amount of pollutants in exhaust gasses are measured in parts per million. And because a 50cc engine is so small it doesn't have that many millions to pass around anyway, so it's exhaust looks concentrated (and is greatly) compared to a cars engine which passes of millions and millions and millions of particles. And in those particles is a lower amount of pollutants per million than in the mopeds exhaust, but by the end of the day the car has still put more pollutants in the air than the moped because (hmmmm I wonder) it is a far larger engine than 50cc! And that smoke really isn't all that harmfull, in fact it helps people to. Why if you live around a lake or river you help keep the mosqito population under control. So go and inform your nieghbors (who also happen to be members of the sierra club) that should do there part by riding to work a machine that's not quite a bicycle and not quite a motorcycle, but not an automobile. Unless of course they drive a really small car, which is better for the environment than both large cars and mopeds.

Re: Where is your proof ?????

I believe that I saw on the news a year back or two that lawn mowers were a major source of pollution so that means mopeds are no better

Re: Where is your proof ?????

The same thing aplies to lawnmowers. the media is polluting your mind with stories on just how horrible lawnmowers and small engines are for our environment. And since these people are so terrified of small engines they probably drive school buses. (which are far worse contributors to air pollution than any normal lawnmower- even a smoky two stroke one)

You're still blowin smoke (get it? bahaha!)

You still haven't offered one shred of actual evidence from a 70's or 80's era 2 stroke moped engine's actual output of pollution vs the output of a typical car found on the road.

In ppm... or anything else.

Or versus its gas mileage.

Or versus its miles traveled.

Or on a per person basis.. (considering 2 people or more per car)

Or considered that very few people own ONLY a moped (most own cars/trucks also)

And you still haven't named the 3 or 4 categories of pollutants put out by the 2 types of engines.

By the way... I have not disagreed with you yet.

But I will now.

You said a cars can carry 8 times as many people as a moped.

What car carries 8 people ?

And I want to start my real disagreement with this fact.

Most mopeds get no better than 80mpg.

Any economy car gets 40 mpg.

So... 2 people in an economy car are effectively getting IDENTICAL gas mileage to a moped.

Understand that?... they are both using gasoline at the same rate per person.

Annnnnnd... the cars higher average speed pays off with the benefit of half the time spent in transit.

The whole "efficiency" situation is not as simple as you seem to think.

Re: You're still blowin smoke (get it? bahaha!)

ok ...here's my 2 cents worth ...

yep, mopeds pollute a lot since they burn oil directly and that makes for bad fumes. but ... they are somewhat more efficient and pollute less overall. i don't remember where all the evidence is to cite, but i know i've read it here and there.

fred's right about cars carrying 8 people. cars aren't really designed to do that ... but they could. also, vans and buses carry well over eight people.

now ... for a single person (e.g. me) a moped is way more efficient. if i had to drive a mile to work, a moped is better for me than a car. now, of course, if i had to take a passanger, perhaps then it evens out (as fred suggests). and i can't really try to carry three people ... so there you need cars.

let's say i have to buy many things. then a car is more efficient, since otherwise i might have to make more than one trip on a moped, which consumes time and pollutants.

if you really want to preserve the environment, you would only walk. not even a bicycle ... since bicycles also are manufactured (plastic, fiberglass, metal, rubber) and that pollutes. walking only requires shoes (though you could do it naked and barefoot) and you can carry just as much on your back walking as you could on a moped (sometimes i walk w/ my backpack of groceries instead of riding my moped, mostly when the weather is bad or my moped broke down).

ok ... i guess that's all i have to say. i just ride my moped because i fell in love w/ her (and mopeds in general). for years i only walked or rode a bicycle ... then i thought a moped/scooter would be convenient and still environmentally conscious ... so i did that. now i'm hooked.

Re: More oil means leaner air/gas ratio..believe i


I was also surprised, which is why I posted the text from the Haynes manual. Needless to say, it was food for thought and brought out some of your typically intelligent commentary. Thanks as usual and Merry Christmas.

Chris S

Re: You're still blowin smoke (get it? bahaha!)

Ron Brown /


Pay attention. Ryan or someone else pointed out in an earlier post that an actual comparison required doubling the carrying capacity of 4 stroke vehicles when comparing to 2 strokes because they only fire half as often and thus have a 2:1 advantage in polution generation.

Jeez, how could you have missed that?


Re: More oil means leaner air/gas ratio..believe i

Ford Excursion=8 persons

I am assigning you extra homework

The Moped Gawd /

Boeing freakin 767.... 564 persons

Ti freaking tanic.... 2243 persons

...neither one is a CAR...and neither is a Ford Extravagursion.

...now...pay attention... or your moped license will be revoked.

Re: You're still blowin smoke (get it? bahaha!)

No I stated that 40 mopeds will carry 8 times as many people as one car.

And it is true that the larger an IC engine is the more efficeint it operates.

But where is your proof of anything you have stated?

...If you had any you'd of quoted it.


I want to disagree with you on bicycles...because they are a tremendously efficient form of travel... and use the tiniest amount of natural resources... if you want to take your argument down that far... then we all have to live in lean-to's outdoors on the ground to be equal in our endeavors.

Notice I said I WANT to disagree with you...because the factor that everybody leaves out of the 'bicycle efficiency'option... is the roads they have to operate on to get that efficiency... and all the manufacturing and resourses needed to make the paved roads.. Can't leave that out.

My real feelings on ALL these 'pollution and resources" issues ???

It is this.... None of it makes ANY difference.

Why?...because no matter what... the human race is going to consume ALL the fossil fuels on this planet... ALL of it.

We are all too selfish and want our creature comforts and games and entertainment... and status symbols... why should I cut back when the neighbor is living large?

If one country makes efforts to cut back... the price simply goes down for others... and they will be happy to gain a competitive advantage from that.

If one country attempts to persuade others to do it... they will say... "what are you doing as your fair share?"


The only difference is how fast we use it up.

And that just benefits people 200 years from now... the people 500 years from now will be out of luck no matter what (relatively speaking).

And in the greater scheme of things... what is 300 years?... nothing..an instant in time

The fossil fuels will be burnt one way or other.

At some time there will be a mad plan of planting and harvesting and planting and harvesting.. biomass that can be converted into fuel as fast as possible.

Technology might help some here and there... but remember ... energy can not be created... it just changes form.

And it is going to change to harder and harder to use forms (for us).

Merry Christmas......................... Bahahahaha!.... : )



. .......................... <IMG src="http://www.animatedgif.net/devilish/coolskul.gif">;

And another thing...

I've already mentioned particles per million and overall volume as well as hydrocarbon out put and carbon monoxide output. If you were hopin I'd mention particles per mile- then forget about it, the government does not test engines in this way for routine emissions inspections- but it is in this category that a moped would beat all other motorized transport (that is powered by IC engines). And if you still think that a 50cc engine can emit the same volume of exhaust as a 2000cc engine in the same amount of time- then you are using your brain as much I use my personal home elevator. Anybody knows that in total emissions volume a 50cc moped emits less than a 2000cc car.

Re: bicycles

Isn't water mostly high-energy hydrogen? Lots of energy there.

from what I understand, scientists are working to extract energy from a vacuume, as well as from the spin state of atoms. See, each particle has an infinite amount of inertia, resulting from the spin of its atoms and the force form the big bang.

So, there is energy everywhere, just waiting to be tapped.

A bunch of warlike primates--Not suprised our power all comes from 'fire' .

I'm certain that if the 'powers that be' wanted something besides oil and gas, they could make it happen.

Controlling the flow of gas controls the country. You can throttle the economy, inducing inflation or recession--old news.

New forms of power would enable and empower the individual, reducing their dependence on the larger government-- I'm not sure I think there are any governments out there that want this. Historically, empowered people don't bode well for the government

About corrupt, self concerned governments, what's up in Argentina?

Want to post in this forum? We'd love to have you join the discussion, but first:

Login or Create Account