Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > The Unicorn Corral
Register Now
 Register Now
 


Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 11-26-2012, 01:16 PM   #31 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Sven7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Warren, MI
Posts: 2,456

Boo Radley - '65 Ford F100
90 day: 13.28 mpg (US)
Thanks: 782
Thanked 665 Times in 408 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Susanne View Post
Just, take into consideration not one of these naysayers has touched or tried GasPods.
I'm as skeptical as anyone, but I will say this. If you send me a trial pack of GasPods I WILL do unbiased, thorough coastdown testing with my Civic and report back with data and graphs. Then you could end this debate once and for all. PM me and we can work out shipping.

I know there are several members who would volunteer to do the same. The problem is dropping $100 on something we have no real-world results on (and that's the company's responsibility- not the consumer's). We have tons of real-world testing on boat tails and wheel skirts and everything. MetroMPG even reported that front wheel skirts didn't seem to do much for his car! (And they cost him a scrap of cardboard and some tape)

That's the kind of expectation and integrity we offer here at EcoModder- if something doesn't work, we'll admit that and warn others. However we do not waste three pages belittling others without posting any empirical data. I asked very nicely on the first page for some test data and your response to that and similar questions in this thread shines a light on the integrity of the company you represent.

I would be willing to test your product, but based on your words here I would not like to give you my money. If you product works as claimed, you'll get free advertising. If not, we can throw it in the unicorn corral.

Thanks, Tyler

__________________
He gave me a dollar. A blood-soaked dollar.
I cannot get the spot out but it's okay; It still works in the store

Last edited by Sven7; 11-26-2012 at 01:23 PM..
  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 11-26-2012, 02:04 PM   #32 (permalink)
Rat Racer
 
Fat Charlie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Route 16
Posts: 4,111

Al the Third, year four - '13 Honda Fit Base
Team Honda
90 day: 42.9 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,744
Thanked 1,892 Times in 1,226 Posts
Unless you can develop a testing profile that compares apples with oranges and definitively proves that $100 oranges are better, I don't think she's interested.
__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by sheepdog44 View Post
Transmission type Efficiency
Manual neutral engine off.100% @MPG <----- Fun Fact.
Manual 1:1 gear ratio .......98%
CVT belt ............................88%
Automatic .........................86%

  Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 02:55 PM   #33 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Sven7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Warren, MI
Posts: 2,456

Boo Radley - '65 Ford F100
90 day: 13.28 mpg (US)
Thanks: 782
Thanked 665 Times in 408 Posts
Coast-down 5 times, add VG's, coast-down 5 times, remove VG's, coast-down 5 times. It'd be better than nothing.

One thing's for sure. Sitting here typing at the computer accomplishes nothing to prove or disprove this product's worth.
__________________
He gave me a dollar. A blood-soaked dollar.
I cannot get the spot out but it's okay; It still works in the store
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2012, 07:08 PM   #34 (permalink)
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,747

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,579
Thanked 3,518 Times in 2,202 Posts
Gas pods are almost identical in size and shape to clearance lights! I think I will pepper my car with clearance lights- for much less cost- and they will also LIGHT UP!!! Match that bling Suzy!
__________________


  Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2013, 05:27 PM   #35 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Carson City, Nevada
Posts: 612

Jimmy - '00 GMC Jimmy SLT
90 day: 21.18 mpg (US)

The White Gnat - '99 Suzuki Swift
Team Suzuki
90 day: 51.87 mpg (US)
Thanks: 240
Thanked 109 Times in 87 Posts
You know, what I'm curious about in reading both this thread and the other one about these things is how many and where on the car do you put them? I highly suspect that any type of aerodynamic device like this would be pretty intolerant of incorrect placement. Do the "instructions" address this? Usually a product will have disclaimers about no guarantee if "not used correctly".

I could buy a dozen of them, slap them on the car above the rear window, and test them very carefully, but if they didn't work, I know I'd be wondering if it was because I didn't use the right number or place them in the right position. (of course, I'm not inclined to pay for them since 1> I'm broke, and they seem pretty expensive, and 2> I suspect I'd be wasting my time just to prove something we already suspect anyway)

Like Sven7 said, send them to me with INSTRUCTIONS on where to place them, and how many, and I'd be happy to test them very carefully and fairly, then 1) pay for them & keep them if they work, or 2) return them if they don't. I would actually love it if they would REALLY help.

If you do that with Sven7, me, and maybe MetroMPG, you'd potentially have 3 more testimonials that carry a lot more weight (on this site) than the other "2000 mile people" who's opinions will certainly be influenced by wishful thinking. (wishing they are getting their money's worth)

Of course, if we prove they DON'T work, that would have a negative impact (on this site). So if you're pretty confident we WON'T find gains, that would explain not taking us up on the offer.

EDIT: Oops, I'm sorry - just went to their website and there ARE instructions... place 4 to 5 inches apart and 7 to 10 inches from the back edge of the roof or trunk. And also to put the bulbous portion facing forward in the customary streamline fashion. I would feel more comfortable that I was "doing it right" if I did it now.

Last edited by wmjinman; 02-01-2013 at 05:52 PM.. Reason: To add a correction
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2013, 10:01 PM   #36 (permalink)
Grrr :-)
 
Nerys's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Levittown PA
Posts: 800

Cherokee - '88 Jeep Cherokee
90 day: 19.44 mpg (US)

Ryo-Ohki - '94 Geo Metro Xfi
90 day: 50.15 mpg (US)

Vger 2 - '00 Plymouth Grand Voyager SE

Ninja - '89 Geo Tracker
90 day: 30.27 mpg (US)
Thanks: 12
Thanked 31 Times in 25 Posts
these could work. sizing number and placement would be critical and the gains would be small but should be measurable DEPENDING on your car's shape !!

I used vortex cuts in my Co2 cars to shave several hundreths of a second off my time trials they worked measurable (in co2 cars hundreths of a second are HUGE!!! cause me to jump 17 places !!) by helping to fill in the base drag vortex behind the vehicle once the co2 was expended.

if we can get them cheap enough it makes a "why not" scenario. :-)

what we really need is someone to get ONE of them and make an STL file of it then we can just 3D print more at a fraction of the price.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2013, 11:35 AM   #37 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Santa Barbara, California
Posts: 14
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nerys View Post
these could work. sizing number and placement would be critical and the gains would be small but should be measurable DEPENDING on your car's shape !!

I used vortex cuts in my Co2 cars to shave several hundreths of a second off my time trials they worked measurable (in co2 cars hundreths of a second are HUGE!!! cause me to jump 17 places !!) by helping to fill in the base drag vortex behind the vehicle once the co2 was expended.

if we can get them cheap enough it makes a "why not" scenario. :-)

what we really need is someone to get ONE of them and make an STL file of it then we can just 3D print more at a fraction of the price.
First articles made in our new mold were approved last week. GasPods will be available at a lower price in the next 30 days.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2013, 05:13 PM   #38 (permalink)
EcoPlotting
 
night9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 101

Sliver - '12 Hyundai Elantra limited
Team Hyundai
90 day: 35.1 mpg (US)

t-ruck - '06 chevy Colorado Lt
90 day: 21.88 mpg (US)

Bob - '09 Harley Sportster Nightster
90 day: 38.88 mpg (US)

Pearl - '14 Toyota Prius C 3
90 day: 48.1 mpg (US)
Thanks: 18
Thanked 13 Times in 12 Posts
I purchased the $12 gas pods from Pepboys (they are virtually identical to the gas pods mentioned here) and put them on the car mostly for looks and there has been absolutely no noticeable change in my mpg. Not as accurate as a coast down test but the assumption is that the increase in mpg would be significant enough to notice a decrease in fuel consumption over the course of several fills. Not that this was an unexpected result.
__________________

  Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2013, 06:13 PM   #39 (permalink)
The PRC.
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Elsewhere.
Posts: 5,304
Thanks: 285
Thanked 535 Times in 384 Posts
OK - a challenge. A volunteer here will take the pods. They will be installed as per the instructions - a photo to be taken and approved for the install by the makers.

The volunteer should then do ABA tests - preferably in the same day (to reduce variances), coastdown tests being the best to prove Aero changes.

These tests should be filmed and documented as much as possible.

If the tabs prove to be an improvement the volunteer pays shipping (maybe we could contribute ?) and a link to the test can be included from their website. If not the volunteer and EM pays nothing, but we also link to the test maybe in our SIGs.

I would do it but as I'm 6K miles from the maker it might be spendy.

Otherwise they don't work.
__________________
[I]So long and thanks for all the fish.[/I]
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2013, 02:21 PM   #40 (permalink)
Rat Racer
 
Fat Charlie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Route 16
Posts: 4,111

Al the Third, year four - '13 Honda Fit Base
Team Honda
90 day: 42.9 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,744
Thanked 1,892 Times in 1,226 Posts
I don't know, A. The results wouldn't be anecdotal enough for them to use.

__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by sheepdog44 View Post
Transmission type Efficiency
Manual neutral engine off.100% @MPG <----- Fun Fact.
Manual 1:1 gear ratio .......98%
CVT belt ............................88%
Automatic .........................86%

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com