|
I have not looked into the surface tension specs. Where did you get those? Are they for pure gasoline or are they from a specific oil companies MSDS on the gasoline they sell in the pump with all the additives? The surface tension claim comes from the sources that i listed in my original post. Also, I have seen many chemistry experiments yeild physical property changes that were not in any way averages of the properties of the components of the formula.
Also, where did you get this most cars burn 98% of their fuel idea from. Is this including the large percentage that gets burned off in the catalytic converter?
If it does cause the fuel to burn quicker then the ecu will see any knock and retard the timing which doesnt really mean anything by itself about fuel economy. Timing is all about making the flame front hit the piston approximately 15degrees after TDC. If the flame front moves faster, this would be a good thing as long as it still reaches the piston at that point.
The car may immediately start adjusting, but it takes about 200 miles for fuel trims to stabilize and even when they do, any little change will cause it to adapt more. Thats at least a half a tank no matter what you drive before the ecu actually knows what its doing.
trikkonceptz's procedure definitely could have been improved by using 4 consecutive fill ups with each step and averaging the results ignoring the tank of gas that the ecu is in transition mode. I am conducting my own experiment right now using this method. Ill post the results as they come it.
Also, try comparing a 80s economy car... say a 1986 honda civic with say... a 2006 Honda Civic. Or how about a 1986 Toyota Corolla with a 2006 Toyota. Of course with a high end luxury car your not going to see great gas mileage in the 80s.
|