Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > General Efficiency Discussion
Register Now
 Register Now

Now available from EcoModder: ScanGauge II fuel economy gauge.  Click for details.  

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 12-12-2012, 09:49 AM   #31 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Corpus Christi, Texas
Posts: 1,396

2004 CTD - '04 DODGE RAM 2500 SLT
Team Cummins
90 day: 19.36 mpg (US)
Thanks: 541
Thanked 263 Times in 210 Posts
I tried it in one tank in my truck. MPG immediately dropped. Gave the gallon to friend who works on power equipment.

__________________
2004.0 DODGE Ram QC/LB 2500 2WD/NV-5600 305/555 ISB. 7,940-lb. Stock. 192,000 miles/4,900-hrs @ 39-mph average. 35' 9k GVWR TT. 14.6-cpm solo & 25-cpm towing; 21-mpg average past 44k-miles

Fuel Log
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to slowmover For This Useful Post:
tjts1 (12-13-2012)
Old 12-12-2012, 11:12 AM   #32 (permalink)
Busting Knuckles Often
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 135

Blue Maxx - '04 Chevrolet Malibu Maxx LT
Team Chevy
90 day: 26.96 mpg (US)

Tink's Van - '08 Chrysler Town & Country Touring
90 day: 19.09 mpg (US)

2004 5 Speed Goldrolla - '04 Toyota Corolla CE
Team Toyota
90 day: 36.3 mpg (US)
Thanks: 313
Thanked 26 Times in 18 Posts
I am a skeptic as well, here was our starting point...

Quote:
Originally Posted by UFO View Post
I'm not sure how the results of using 2 stroke oil in gasoline engines is going to be quantified. Use in diesel fuel is well tested, and TC-W3 is so-so as a lubricity additive, but what on earth would the benefit be in gasoline engines? It will likely reduce octane, and at the low levels being tested, the very low lubricity of gasoline is likely not affected (not that extra lubricity is necessary).

Post results. I am curious to read more than anecdotes about smoother idling, you know to save fuel you should not be idling much anyway, right?
This first post here lists the info you are asking about, in terms of the 'why':

TC-W3 Testing on the LS-1 Forums

The good thing is that this LS1 forum has a long track record of approx. 2% to 5% MPG increase. And that was basically side effect for this particular LS1 forum. But, that gets into the margin of error for home testing for sure.

The good thing that this EM thread is that we use an off the self product that is inexpensive and is not being hawked by a member with only sales motives. So it is cheap and easy to test for us, or at least try it instead of the other more expensive things like Lucas UCL or MMO that we may be purchasing every so often anyway.

I am using my unsuspecting wife's van as test vehicle, to discount any mods or hypermiling. It burns oil, and maybe it will help seal it better.

I hope to see an MPG increase, but if I see her van running nice and not burning as much oil, that is also a positive for me. So I plan on being as scientific as I can.

But, this is why it is an open discussion, vs. a very specific test; so people can try it out for our own reasons, and report experiences, anecdotal, scientific, or otherwise, and others can make of it what they want from our experiences

Hope that helps explain this thread. No one has skin in this game, like some other threads, pushing expensive fuel additives. So it seems to encourage more honest dialouge I have found.

Thanks for your interest!
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2012, 11:53 AM   #33 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: california
Posts: 1,329
Thanks: 24
Thanked 156 Times in 106 Posts
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2012, 12:14 PM   #34 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
mcrews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,953

The Q Sold - '02 Infiniti Q45 Sport
90 day: 23.08 mpg (US)

Kia - '06 Kia Sportage EX
90 day: 23.63 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,140
Thanked 467 Times in 351 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by WesternStarSCR View Post
This first post here lists the info you are asking about, in terms of the 'why':

TC-W3 Testing on the LS-1 Forums

The good thing is that this LS1 forum has a long track record of approx. 2% to 5% MPG increase. And that was basically side effect for this particular LS1 forum. But, that gets into the margin of error for home testing for sure.

The good thing that this EM thread is that we use an off the self product that is inexpensive and is not being hawked by a member with only sales motives. So it is cheap and easy to test for us, or at least try it instead of the other more expensive things like Lucas UCL or MMO that we may be purchasing every so often anyway.

I am using my unsuspecting wife's van as test vehicle, to discount any mods or hypermiling. It burns oil, and maybe it will help seal it better.

I hope to see an MPG increase, but if I see her van running nice and not burning as much oil, that is also a positive for me. So I plan on being as scientific as I can.

But, this is why it is an open discussion, vs. a very specific test; so people can try it out for our own reasons, and report experiences, anecdotal, scientific, or otherwise, and others can make of it what they want from our experiences

Hope that helps explain this thread. No one has skin in this game, like some other threads, pushing expensive fuel additives. So it seems to encourage more honest dialouge I have found.

Thanks for your interest!
nicely put.
I think we all realize that ABA testing is VERY difficult(unless your a lab) with this type of product.
SO we are hoping to try to document as much as possible and let the chips fall.
__________________
MetroMPG: "Get the MPG gauge - it turns driving into a fuel & money saving game."

ECO MODS PERFORMED:
First: ScangaugeII
http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...eii-23306.html

Second: Grille Block
http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...e-10912-2.html

Third: Full underbelly pan
http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...q45-11402.html

Fourth: rear skirts and 30.4mpg on trip!
http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...tml#post247938
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2012, 04:27 AM   #35 (permalink)
Depends on the Day
 
RH77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Kansas City Area
Posts: 1,761

Teggy - '98 Acura Integra LS
Sports Cars
90 day: 32.74 mpg (US)

IMA - '10 Honda Insight EX
Team Honda
90 day: 34.76 mpg (US)

Tessie - '06 Acura TSX Base
90 day: 28.2 mpg (US)
Thanks: 31
Thanked 37 Times in 32 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by UFO View Post
Post results. I am curious to read more than anecdotes about smoother idling, you know to save fuel you should not be idling much anyway, right?
True for us, but (in my pending plan), the use of a blinded "Subject", with non-Ecodriving habits, could help with statisical power. In addition, could a rough idle be a sign of an engine's overall operating efficiency (incluing non-idle)? Only a hypothesis. There is a lot of uncharted territory here in which to explore.

Quote:
Originally Posted by WesternStarSCR View Post
But, this is why it is an open discussion, vs. a very specific test; so people can try it out for our own reasons, and report experiences, anecdotal, scientific, or otherwise, and others can make of it what they want from our experiences

Hope that helps explain this thread. No one has skin in this game, like some other threads, pushing expensive fuel additives. So it seems to encourage more honest dialouge I have found.
Very well said. We seem to be using different manufacturers, retail/wholesale outlets, and really trying to keep a clear, Scientific mind about it. None of us seem to have a financial stake in it's sales/usage. Whatever is reported can be judged by the reader.

Product and Implementation:

I found Pennzoil Marine Synthetic Blend at Bass Pro for $8/quart (gallons are also availalbe). If this is the same Pennzoil product as mentioned, check with stores that sell watercraft if you're having trouble finding a variant.

As for mixing, I have an old squirt bottle with measured lines -- so I add 3oz, seal the opening, put it in a ziploc bag with a paper shop towel, and squirt it down the filler tube at the pump -- then re-close the lid, zip up the empty bottle/towel and toss it in the back for later. I went with 0.7oz more than planned due to the approximate amount left as viscous residue that did not completely empty from the bottle.

52 miles is too early to tell anything regarding results.

tjts1 -- Yes, it looks humorous, but perhaps humor us? I appplaud skepticism -- but in this care there is plenty of discussion with possible benefits, some ad-lib testing, and a prime situation for proper experimentation here (especially additives, which are constantly debunked, well before they get here). Any supporting documentation for the causual pic's implications? I personally think it's fun to test mods -- this caught my eye since it doesn't take significant time to implement/document and presents with low risk based on background info. It's been a while since I contributed to a good test of anything FE-related, so I decided, "why not?"

Unless there is documented, repeatable, un-biased testing showing either good/bad or solid commentary (from Chemical Engineers / experts, high-level powertrain experts, and the like), then it seems cheap and easy-enough to try. The diesel fuel additive test shows an above-average lubricity example for this compound (and relatively inexpensive), which provides another citation of reference.

If it does nothing at all for us (or worse) at least we'll have some supporting documentation and hopefully rationale for further testing of this and similar products. Continuing the ability to add options to the list of EcoMods is why a lot of us do this. Trust me, I only get "paid" in fuel savings (and hopefully a better enviroment). As far as time: it's volunteer work for a good cause (for whatever the reason people come here).

RH77
__________________
“If we knew what we were doing, it wouldn't be called research” ― Albert Einstein

_
_
  Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to RH77 For This Useful Post:
2000neon (12-13-2012), mcrews (12-13-2012), WesternStarSCR (12-13-2012)
Old 12-13-2012, 11:14 AM   #36 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: california
Posts: 1,329
Thanks: 24
Thanked 156 Times in 106 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by RH77 View Post
tjts1 -- Yes, it looks humorous, but perhaps humor us? I appplaud skepticism -- but in this care there is plenty of discussion with possible benefits, some ad-lib testing, and a prime situation for proper experimentation here (especially additives, which are constantly debunked, well before they get here). Any supporting documentation for the causual pic's implications? I personally think it's fun to test mods -- this caught my eye since it doesn't take significant time to implement/document and presents with low risk based on background info. It's been a while since I contributed to a good test of anything FE-related, so I decided, "why not?"

Unless there is documented, repeatable, un-biased testing showing either good/bad or solid commentary (from Chemical Engineers / experts, high-level powertrain experts, and the like), then it seems cheap and easy-enough to try. The diesel fuel additive test shows an above-average lubricity example for this compound (and relatively inexpensive), which provides another citation of reference.

If it does nothing at all for us (or worse) at least we'll have some supporting documentation and hopefully rationale for further testing of this and similar products. Continuing the ability to add options to the list of EcoMods is why a lot of us do this. Trust me, I only get "paid" in fuel savings (and hopefully a better enviroment). As far as time: it's volunteer work for a good cause (for whatever the reason people come here).

RH77
See #31. FE will drop.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2012, 11:28 AM   #37 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Anaheim, CA
Posts: 105
Thanks: 3
Thanked 33 Times in 19 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjts1 View Post
See #31. FE will drop.
That is presumptuous. After over 5 months of continued use and very close monitoring, not only has my FE not dropped, it has increased.

YMMV
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2012, 11:36 AM   #38 (permalink)
UFO
Master EcoModder
 
UFO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,090

Beetle - '01 Volkswagen Beetle GLS
90 day: 44.41 mpg (US)

4x4 - '89 Toyota Pickup DLX
90 day: 31.56 mpg (US)
Thanks: 218
Thanked 109 Times in 85 Posts
I looked at the LS1 thread, but with 50+ pages I didn't get very far. But right out of the gate the OP states 2%-5% better mileage without any data or methodology. That's a fairly substantial claim given the oil added is merely 0.15% of the fuel.

Mileage data tank to tank varies more than that for me, and even more given seasonal changes, so I think proof of that sort of claim is going to require very rigorous documentation, at least to get any credibility here.

What is the rationale for the fuel efficiency increase? Do gasoline fuel injectors spray more effectively with a little bit of lubrication? Or is there some sort of chemical effect that shunts this thread into unicorn territory?
__________________

"We think B20 is for suckers" N. Cowell, Denver B100
I love the smell of biodiesel in the morning.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2012, 11:37 AM   #39 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
mcrews's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,953

The Q Sold - '02 Infiniti Q45 Sport
90 day: 23.08 mpg (US)

Kia - '06 Kia Sportage EX
90 day: 23.63 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,140
Thanked 467 Times in 351 Posts
tj,
we have clearly stated what we are doing.
you have not. twice.

that makes you the (uni-corn)butt.
the one thing on ecomodder that we all agree on, is that the person who dosent listen but continues to spew out crap is the loser.

cheers!

We have noted your feelings.....please refrain from crapping on the thread.
__________________
MetroMPG: "Get the MPG gauge - it turns driving into a fuel & money saving game."

ECO MODS PERFORMED:
First: ScangaugeII
http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...eii-23306.html

Second: Grille Block
http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...e-10912-2.html

Third: Full underbelly pan
http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...q45-11402.html

Fourth: rear skirts and 30.4mpg on trip!
http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...tml#post247938
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2012, 11:39 AM   #40 (permalink)
UFO
Master EcoModder
 
UFO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,090

Beetle - '01 Volkswagen Beetle GLS
90 day: 44.41 mpg (US)

4x4 - '89 Toyota Pickup DLX
90 day: 31.56 mpg (US)
Thanks: 218
Thanked 109 Times in 85 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by WesternStarSCR View Post

I am using my unsuspecting wife's van as test vehicle, to discount any mods or hypermiling. It burns oil, and maybe it will help seal it better.

I hope to see an MPG increase, but if I see her van running nice and not burning as much oil, that is also a positive for me. So I plan on being as scientific as I can.
With such slight claimed increases you are going to need better control over your subject. How will you control fuel brand/octane? Ambient temperature variations? Vehicle condition?

__________________

"We think B20 is for suckers" N. Cowell, Denver B100
I love the smell of biodiesel in the morning.
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to UFO For This Useful Post:
WesternStarSCR (12-13-2012)
Reply  Post New Thread

Thread Tools





Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com