Top 10 fuel efficiency myths - MSN

[fnkngrv]

Some interesting claims made here. Thoughts?

Top 10 fuel efficiency myths (http://editorial.autos.msn.com/top-10-fuel-efficiency-myths)

[CTScott]

I have seen data on all of those proving that article correct.

The interesting one though is the link to the consumer protection site. I have been doing some consulting work for the past year for a company that has developed a product that installs in-line with the fuel system and pounds the fuel with high power electro-magentic pulses to break the long hydrocarbon chains into smaller, more combustible, sections. This product produces gains of 12-15% on diesel (and fuel oil based) systems and 8-12% on gasoline engines.

I have been testing one of their gasoline units on my completely stock 08 red Yaris for four months now and have been averaging a 10.5% increase in fuel economy. I have also done dyno testing on my Yaris with it, as many people claim (via the old butt dyno) that they notice a power increase with the device. My testing showed negligible gains with the device, but at the same time did not result in any loss of power with the gain in economy, which is good in its own right.

[nookandcrannycar]

I have seen data on all of those proving that article correct.

The interesting one though is the link to the consumer protection site. I have been doing some consulting work for the past year for a company that has developed a product that installs in-line with the fuel system and pounds the fuel with high power electro-magentic pulses to break the long hydrocarbon chains into smaller, more combustible, sections. This product produces gains of 12-15% on diesel (and fuel oil based) systems and 8-12% on gasoline engines.

I have been testing one of their gasoline units on my completely stock 08 red Yaris for four months now and have been averaging a 10.5% increase in fuel economy. I have also done dyno testing on my Yaris with it, as many people claim (via the old butt dyno) that they notice a power increase with the device. My testing showed negligible gains with the device, but at the same time did not result in any loss of power with the gain in economy, which is good in its own right.

Some assumptions, though, re behavior are being made by the 'authors'. Page '10 of 12' makes sense if the person pumping the gas hasn't pulled the nozzle part of the way out to 'break the seal'. However, if (as I do) a person fills the tank beyond the click (to where he or she can barely see the gas in the neck ), I know that that gas is going into the tank/neck and not into the gas stations tank (at least some percentage of it) because I look at the neck after the click and don't see any gas.....and then put more gas in and begin to see the gas in the bottom of the neck. Yes, I know this is frowned upon (a euphemism, I know :smile:) but people (not just me) do it regularly. Also...aren't they assuming (for the article) a 'tight seal' (so to speak) as in California and similar states? Unless a national standard has been adopted very recently, I've seen pumps in some states that don't have any seal at all.

When you did your test to determine the 'absolute capacity' re the Yaris and calculated 12.8 gallons, that made perfect sense to me because going from an empty tank (running out of gas as I was pulling into a station to get gas) to just barely being able to see gas in the neck = 12.777 gallons on the pump.

[fnkngrv]

I have seen data on all of those proving that article correct.

The interesting one though is the link to the consumer protection site. I have been doing some consulting work for the past year for a company that has developed a product that installs in-line with the fuel system and pounds the fuel with high power electro-magentic pulses to break the long hydrocarbon chains into smaller, more combustible, sections. This product produces gains of 12-15% on diesel (and fuel oil based) systems and 8-12% on gasoline engines.

I have been testing one of their gasoline units on my completely stock 08 red Yaris for four months now and have been averaging a 10.5% increase in fuel economy. I have also done dyno testing on my Yaris with it, as many people claim (via the old butt dyno) that they notice a power increase with the device. My testing showed negligible gains with the device, but at the same time did not result in any loss of power with the gain in economy, which is good in its own right.


With the cost of the device kit taken into account even with say a 4mpg gain it will take a long time to pay that bad boy off with the efficient designs of today's vehicles. I would think when it comes to automotive applications of the device for the most part trucks and SUVs would benefit the most, no?

[CTScott]

With the cost of the device kit taken into account even with say a 4mpg gain it will take a long time to pay that bad boy off with the efficient designs of today's vehicles. I would think when it comes to automotive applications of the device for the most part trucks and SUVs would benefit the most, no?

Very true. At about $500 retail for the gasoline engine version, one must drive quite a few miles with a car like the Yaris for a 10% improvement to pay itself back.

On the flip side, the diesel units can reach the payback point in two the three months with an over the road truck.

[Neurotic Hapi Snak]

3 of them are wrong.
Shifting into neutral while stopped with an automatic does save gas, since the torque converter cannot be disengaged from the engine, it still transmits power to the transmission. It the trans is in gear with the brake applied, the trans side of the torque converter cannot turn, causing parasitic loss. In neutral, the torque converter can turn freely, reducing parasitic loss.
Manual transmissions doe save gas, because they have less power loss. Modern autos do have torque converter lockups, but they only engage at 40 MPH+. So at speeds under 40 MPH, autos have parasitic loss from the torque converter, while manuals have a solid lock up when the clutch is engaged. Autos also have hydraulic pumps to provide pressure to shift the gears, with a manual, the power to shift the gears comes from the driver. Plus, a manual gives you better control over gear selection for the situation, and it's easier to shift to neutral to coast or to engage DFCO. The author claims that since most people do not know how to drive stick efficiently or correctly, that's an inherent flaw of the manual transmission, rather than an issue with the driver.
A dirty air filter does waste gas. It restricts intake airflow, leading to higher pumping losses, especially with higher throttle position and higher RPMs.

[tooter]

I have seen data on all of those proving that article correct.

The interesting one though is the link to the consumer protection site. I have been doing some consulting work for the past year for a company that has developed a product that installs in-line with the fuel system and pounds the fuel with high power electro-magentic pulses to break the long hydrocarbon chains into smaller, more combustible, sections. This product produces gains of 12-15% on diesel (and fuel oil based) systems and 8-12% on gasoline engines.

I have been testing one of their gasoline units on my completely stock 08 red Yaris for four months now and have been averaging a 10.5% increase in fuel economy. I have also done dyno testing on my Yaris with it, as many people claim (via the old butt dyno) that they notice a power increase with the device. My testing showed negligible gains with the device, but at the same time did not result in any loss of power with the gain in economy, which is good in its own right.

Hey Scott, :smile:

When I first read about magnetic gas savers I thought you were joking! :laugh:

Since car manufacturers need to meet increasingly stringent CAFE standards, do you think this concept will eventually become standard equipment?

Greg

[CTScott]

Hey Scott, :smile:

When I first read about magnetic gas savers I thought you were joking! :laugh:

Since car manufacturers need to meet increasingly stringent CAFE standards, do you think this concept will eventually become standard equipment?

Greg

I thought it was a joke at first as well (especially since there have been hundreds if not thousands of snake oil magnetic fuel saving devices around since probably the 1950's). The company I am working with loves the fact that I gave them so much grief initially and then became a believer after my analysis.

I think it is possible that it will eventually become standard equipment, particularly for diesel vehicles.

By the way, this is the company: http://gogreentechcorp.com/

[fnkngrv]

Very true. At about $500 retail for the gasoline engine version, one must drive quite a few miles with a car like the Yaris for a 10% improvement to pay itself back.

On the flip side, the diesel units can reach the payback point in two the three months with an over the road truck.


I am wondering how much of a plus it would be to purchase and install their unit on Mick's Silverado and even my Bronco

[CTScott]

I am wondering how much of a plus it would be to purchase and install their unit on Mick's Silverado and even my Bronco

The big gasoline trucks typically see about a 12% reduction in fuel consumption.

I am about to install one on my V6 Tacoma (along with a precision fuel flow measurement system) and we will be running it on a Dyno through a 60 mile simulated course to do an emulation of the testing that the EPA charges $26,000 to do to get their stamp of approval.

[fnkngrv]

^ very nice!

[#87]

What is the point of "topping off". You will maybe save a trip to the gas station every couple of years, but probably spend equal or more time than that by click click click until you can see gas.

For me it clicks once, maybe I hold it until it clicks again, then I take it out and on my way. My new car, if I hold it again after it clicks it only puts in like 25 cents worth of fuel until another click.

Not worth the time IMO.

[nookandcrannycar]

What is the point of "topping off". You will maybe save a trip to the gas station every couple of years, but probably spend equal or more time than that by click click click until you can see gas.

For me it clicks once, maybe I hold it until it clicks again, then I take it out and on my way. My new car, if I hold it again after it clicks it only puts in like 25 cents worth of fuel until another click.

Not worth the time IMO.

The point has nothing to do with saving time. The point is that if you always fill to the exact same reference point, then you always know that you are getting consistent, correct MPG figures (without the use of an aftermarket device). I keep a log book that includes repairs, maintenance, and gas in chronological order. My Yaris takes quite a bit of gas after the click. One of the great things about our country is that we can have different opinions and, generally :rolleyes: (poking fun at the NSA), enjoy sharing them

[SchrodingersCatSK]

The point has nothing to do with saving time. The point is that if you always fill to the exact same reference point, then you always know that you are getting consistent, correct MPG figures (without the use of an aftermarket device).

Why doesn't the click give you a consistent reference point? Does it vary station-to-station?

[nookandcrannycar]

Why doesn't the click give you a consistent reference point? Does it vary station-to-station?

I'm a glass half full kind of person, but I'm also quite skeptical. If I fill past the click to the point where I can just see gas in the neck, I can SEE that the point is the same each time. I've done this with every car I've ever had, and I've never had to have any repairs done as a result of doing this.

[why?]

Why doesn't the click give you a consistent reference point? Does it vary station-to-station?

yes, it can change station to station, pump to pump, or anything else. However if you keep a constant log over a long period of time the difference is not enough to have any real influence on the numbers you get.


Okay, 10% is still 10%. People buy the Prius to get better gas mileage, and that is $20k. I know many eco weenies that would buy a $500 device if they knew it would get them 10%. Hell I might just for fun.

One question though CTScott, wouldn't the supercharger on your Yaris make any power gains hard to feel ie would it be easier to feel more power on the stock Yaris.