Fuel Mileage mods simplicity
 

Hello all,
Someone had mentioned that ecomodders are a skeptical bunch and any new and improved mind blowing mod is not the point of this website. Severely awesome "devices" for hypermiling I think are counterproductive. I sell an Amsoil product called "P.I." fuel system treatment. It claims up to 5.7% fuel savings and works for 4000 miles. Everyone I have talked to has said they have seen an improvement. The guy that got me into Amsoil says he gets 30 more miles per tank using the product. On a 2002 Honda Odyssey v6 I would say that's worth the $12.00 a bottle. But on the other hand I think several small modifications that may or may not equate to 2-5% mileage increase would be substantial if you did up to 10 or so small mods. I switched to a better gasoline and saw a noticeable improvement. I added some fuel additive in addition to that and saw a little more, got rid of all of the extra junk in the back of the car to reduce weight, and saw more improvement. I believe that one "huge" mind blowing fuel saving device that reminds me of an infomercial is just plain the wrong way to think. If I tell someone that I get 30 more miles per tank by doing nothing but driving a little slower, 65 vs. 75 I think that is substantial. Arent small mods like this, and doing several small mods like this going to matter more when your goal is to double your mileage? So right now ecomodder says my car is getting 44% above EPA mileage, And I havent really done anything yet, small mods seem to make more sense. Not everyone is able to afford electric conversions, and small habit changes show enough mpg improvement to mention, when hypermiling is inconvenient, thats when people scoff at new ideas. One of my customers has a Dodge van witha v-6 and i told him he could save $300 a year minimum by driving 55. He screamed at me totally refusing that idea. I said" I just handed you $300 and you throw it back at me" since he visits Oklahoma alot because thats where his family is, he refused to add an hour of driving to his trip because he did not want to be in the car any longer with his wife and kids than he absolutely had to. I was astounded, but looked at it like that mod would have inconvenienced him personally so it was not worth it.
We must concentrate on simple basic steps to achieve mind blowing MPG's. Maybe we can use this principle with the mods you have already done to possibly increase the mpg's only 1% with no effort..

Taken from War_Wagon's signature:

Paragraphs, please.

Yes, it's usually more productive to modify your car and drive conservatively than it is to pour mystery chemicals into your gas tank.

Not so much skeptical as data driven. We really like test results when the tests are done as described here: http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...ery-11445.html.

Usually the benefits of fuel additives disappear when tested correctly.

I'm not skeptical. I just don't believe that getting 30 more miles out of a 20 gallon tank is a relevant measurement. Deciding which gas station I'm going to fill up at gives me bigger variations in tank distance than that. If your vendor were seeing an improvement then it would show up in mpg no matter how long he ran his tank and his mileage would creep down until his next treatment- then bam! that one and a half mpg gain would reappear.

Sorry guys I guess I did not give enough information about the product. I am the type that tries every new fuel additive on the market based on the claims on the can. Since I am a mechanic and have been for 10+ years, I see what happens to today's fuels and what it does to engines when folks just go to the most convenient cheapest gas station. I have been on the phone with every supplier in my area, and not one gas station can tell me what the chemical difference between 87 octane fuel and 91 octane fuel is. I know the answer but the persons selling it do not, that makes me uneasy.
I came to this website a couple of days ago, and I see there is alot of resistance to new ideas. I am here to share my knowledge with everyone, show all of you what works and what does not. I did not expect terms like "30 more miles per tank is not significant" type responses. The product I was speaking of is $12 a bottle, works for 4000 miles, cleans intakes and fuel injectors. I have enough documentation to support the claim. I could not do the same thing this product does unless I take the engine apart and clean it manually.

The concept is that if your using cheap gas, the residue sticks to aluminum surfaces like glue. The last intake manifold gasket I did required the aluminum intake to be soaked in degreaser for 3 days! It was a 1/4 inch of crap stuck to it! Almost every car has that. The motor oil viscosity is relevant, tires, wind, etc.

I want to apologize now for me not explaining my stance enough, it would seem that my 10 GB of text on data about all fuel additives since the 1960's needs to be adressed. I will be more clear in further posts, I am used to being asked questions daily but people who do not understand half of what I am talking about, I am now amongst people of higher knowledge about fuel efficiency, and look forward to debates.

For the record for me to thoroughly explain my position, when challenged my responses are lengthy the reason being I feel I should thoroughly explain my position, I apologize if it is too long to read that's why it was posted in a new thread to get some ideas from other members.

In closing I wanted to explain one more thing. Why do we mod our cars for fuel economy? Is it a game? Are we tired of paying high gas prices? If gas was $1.00 a gallon would we still mod? I ask myself these questions, I want to get the highest gas mileage possible. My individual testing involves 3 cylinders, 4 cylinders, 6 cylinders, v8's, v10's and diesels. If my goal is to make improvements to any vehicle for fuel economy, reach the ultimate peak I can, i mean as much as Physics and engineering go, then I have to reverse engineer to make these mods work at higher speeds, and make wind, rain, and temperature irrelevant. I look at it like "world changing" rather than something I can do in my spare time. I have mechanical engineering knowledge, chemistry, organic chemistry, welding, fiberglass, bodywork, aerodynamic studies, and physics knowledge in my corner. I should have explained that. Sorry guys.

One final note, if a vehicle gets 300 miles on a tank of gas, 15 mpg, I introduce a product that works for 4000 miles, and I have a 20 gallon tank, thats 13.33 tanks of gas. The product claims up to 5.7% better fuel economy in that duration. But let's figure you get a 2% increase in that 4000 miles for spending $12.00 on said product. We multiply a 20 gallon tank by 13.33 tanks which equates to 266.6 gallons. At $3.00 per gallon that is $799.80. If I get 30 more miles per tank, 266.6*2%=5.332 gallons saved. 5.332*3.00 per gallon is 15.996, justifies the purchase. It may seem insignificant but over the course of 4000 miles 30 more miles per tank on a v6 is substantial. I estimated at 2% because that counters wind, traffic, etc. 30 more miles per tank consistently, is 399 more miles out of the car in 4000 miles. I think it matters, of course in conjunction with other mods like driving slower this number would increase. I think it warrants mention. Thanks for listening.

I use Lucas oil fuel system treatment every tank. The car has over 200k miles and a bit of an issue with fuel pressure and a leaky injector sometimes.

If you have never cleaned your intake or combustion chamber before, there is a noticeable difference between clean and dirty.

Keeping the innards clean is good- I throw a bottle of fuel system whatnot in a few times a year. I don't think of it as gaining a percentage of efficiency, though. Cleaning the fuel system recovers performance that the car had when it was built but has lost over time by not being kept clean. I expect I'd see an improvement if I used a cleaner without ever having done it before, but I'd still have to call that moving back to stock performance.

I'll stand by my position that 30 more miles a tankful is irrelevant, though. Tank distance is based on things unrelated to the car's actual performance. Personally, I don't notice even a 1 mpg jump when I add a bottle because I've been doing it and for mileage purposes I count the 4 ounces as an additional 0.031 gallons of gas. I don't factor in the price difference in my log, though. I'm buying it for cleaning, not propulsion.

I added a bottle of Chevron "Techron Concentrate Fuel System Cleaner" to my Mustang's tank a few fuel-ups ago. (and counted it as fuel) No noticeable difference in MPG, but at over $85 per gallon:eek: ($7.99/12 oz. bottle), I won't make a habit of using it when nothing's wrong.:p

That sounds like EGR soot.
How do you expect the fuel injectior cleaner to clean the upper intake when the fuel and fuel injectors are in the bottem of the intake next to the cylinder head. I have seen gas engines with everything south of the fuel injector almost perfectly clean, anything the gas touches gets very clean, so on almost every fuel injected engine the cylinder head intake port is nice and clean and on older TBI engines the entire intake track is clean.
My camaros carbureted intake is also very clean.
I don't see how any cleaner would work in a diesel since the fuel is directly injected into the combustion chamber and instantly incinerated.

The best engine cleaner I have ever found at least for a diesel is to run water injection.