[redpoint5]

Yeah, I misread 40 MPG instead of 43. Probably my mind was trying to keep the math simple.

160F to 230F isn't a 44% increase in temperature. It doesn't work that way because F doesn't start at 0, but instead -460. That's more like 11% hotter. I don't have the time to figure out the theoretical maximum efficiency gain by going hotter, but it's obviously not that drastic or you'd see auto manufacturers figuring out how to do just that.

I'm not saying it isn't worthwhile to run a hotter thermostat, I'm simply disagreeing with the notion that the MPG gains are primarily attributable to running hotter. I need to see how the variables were controlled so that the tests stand the least chance of having confounding factors.

I could say I used turn signals and got 30 MPG, and then stopped using turn signals and got 40 MPG. It's meaningless unless I can show how the variables were controlled.