Locate an Auto Repair Shop in Glasgow, Kentucky

my '10 MZ3s GT navigation system makes a stupid error that most people will never discover, but which is highly irritating once you discover it. This is -- gross over-estimation of the time required for trips using 2-lane roads with 70mph speed limits, prevalent in such states as Nevada and Montana. For example, pretend my car is currently in Kalispell MT, and enter a destination of Glasgow MT. This is a trip of about 400 miles which, no contest, is best driven all the way on US2 which is a regular 2-lane highway, with 70mph limit all the way, and very little traffic congestion. Yet, the ETA the car tells you will be more than 10 hours later, implying an absurdly low average speed of <40mph. My car was built in the 2nd quarter of 2009, so there is a map update SD card available from Mazda for $200. But does this update fix the problem? I tried asking Mazda customer assistance, and they seem to think I have to have a dealer examine my GPS system. There seems to me to be about a 100.000% chance that the problem is in the map database, which there's about a 0.000% chance that a dealer will know anything about. Any bright ideas out there, or knowledge/experience better than mine?

6. Cellulosic Ethanol: Cellulosic ethanol, whose large-scale commercial production is probably at least five years away, will dominate ethanol in the future. There is a Canadian company already producing 260,000 gallons per year of cellulosic ethanol. Several companies working to perfect enzymes for cellulosic ethanol production claim to be close to perfection. Cellulosic ethanol can be produced from straw, switch-grass, short maturity super trees, and biowaste. Curiously, cellulosic ethanol has been unfairly criticized recently as requiring more energy to produce than it yields. Only one process, acid hydrolysis, requires more energy. Current research is concentrated on several other processes which are expected to be the least energy consuming of all kinds of ethanol production. (Corn ethanol has also been criticized as requiring more energy than it yields, but a majority of studies dispute this claim.) The Department of Energy’s Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) office claims that “in terms of key energy and environmental benefits, … cornstarch ethanol clearly outpaces petroleum-based fuels, and that tomorrow’s cellulose-based ethanol would do even better.” They also say that while “corn ethanol reduces (greenhouse gas) emissions by 18% to 29%; cellulosic ethanol offers an even greater benefit, with an 85% reduction in GHG emissions.” A Natural Resources Defense Council-commissioned paper in “Environmental Science and Technology” claims that 1 unit of fossil fuel energy produces 1.3 units of ethanol energy, while 1 unit of fossil fuel may create 6 units of cellulosic ethanol energy, meaning that cellulosic ethanol might be almost six times more efficient. Nathan Glasgow and Lena Hansen of Rocky Mountain Institute report that “while corn-based ethanol reduces carbon emissions by about 20 percent below gasoline, cellulosic ethanol is predicted to be carbon-neutral, or possibly even net-carbon-negative.” In his Congressional testimony Greenspan claimed that cellulosic ethanol held more promise than corn ethanol. It has also been claimed that the byproducts of the process of creating cellulosic ethanol can be burned to power the process, making it more oil-independent than corn ethanol. The previously mentioned Canadian company is seeking loan guarantees from the Department of Energy to help build a cellulosic ethanol production facility in the United States, specifically in Idaho. Still, for the time being the vast majority of American ethanol producers are making corn-based ethanol, which will not compete favorably with cellulosic ethanol in the long term. The ability of U.S. producers to make the switch from corn to cellulose in the future is hard to predict. For the rest of the article: http://www.altenews.com/researchreports.htm

I recently bought a used V Reg 2000 CRV ES which has a factory fitted Thatcham Category 1 Alarm/Immobiliser installed. Unfortunately there have been 2 occasions when I have had a problem with locking the car using the remote.On both occasions I have been parked in a multi storey car park in Glasgow, Scotland. The first occasion I could not get the car to lock with the remote I tried for ages and eventually had to lock the car with the key and when I came back the car would not start and I had to get someone bring me the spare remote for the car which still had no effect. So I just kept trying for about 1 hour, eventually the car started with the original remote. The second occasion was much the same. The remotes for the car are fine and have new batteries installed, although I have found that you have to point these directly at the sensor or the don't work, neither work from a distance, though I don't believe this is related to the starting/locking problem, but who knows? I had it suggested to me that there are a lot of stray signals flying around in multi story car parks which may be affecting the immobiliser (makes it think that it is being interfered with) My wife and kids use the car regularly and park in multi story car parks on a regular basis so I would appreciate any help or advice. Has anyone had a similar experience?

I think what people here do is, sign up for a 6-month policy to get their registration, put it on the monthly payment plan, then cancel it once they've shown the DMV the proof of insurance card. If you ask me, a few mandatory weeks in the clink would really cut down on this problem... While I'm grinding axes, how come no one ever posts the names of the dealerships where they have problems? Autoweek did this on their Jaguar XJ8 recently, and people on the boards do it all the time. Here's my list of dealerships which are complete write-offs in my book of personal experience: 1) Don Jacobs BMW, Lexington, KY - pathetic and inexcusable sales experience 2) Montgomery Imports, Elizabethtown, KY - horrible service experiences 3) Bachman Volkswagen, Louisville, KY - horrible sales experience 4) Goodman Nissan, Glasgow, KY - crummy body shop repairs If you're going to kick butt, you might as well take names.

I've got a 2004 tahoe with less then 250 miles and there's a rapid, almost numbing vibration coming through the steering wheel at idle. Step on the brake and it changes pitch. Turn the wheel and it changes pitch again. It's more pronounced at higher speeds but at a lower frequency. Almost as severe as an unbalanced tire. It seems to idle too low anyway. About 400-500 RPM. A couple of hundred RPM lower than my 2003 Silverado. You can visibly see the engine stumbling at idle. Took it to the service department and they say there's nothing wrong with it. Are these things supposed to vibrate and miss? What's up with this! I see a lot of other people complaning about vibrations in the Tahoe's but are they the same thing as I'm experiencing...I sure hope not!