Have you guys seen this yet?
 

not yet, but it sounds legit! unlike some other fuel saving scams out there

It would be nice to see this come into fruition

Haven't read about it yet, but seems like a good idea. My car already has a waterjacket in the header to decrease warmup time, oil seems the next logical step.

Eight percent? :)

Quote:

OVER7 is so simple and saves so much that once installed in a car it pays for itself in less than a month.

They link 2012 Invention Awards: A Higher-Efficiency, Lower-Emission Engine System | Popular Science, which states:

and later:

Okay guys, how do I make this for my car now? :)

Say $300 for the kit. "Over 7%," I will use 7.01%. "Less than a month:" 99%. According to AAA's Daily Fuel Gauge Report, $3.01 averaged nationwide. Also, it looks like the EPA estimates around 22.5 MPG for a national average ($2,000 yearly in fuel to drive 15,000 miles)

$3.01 * .0701 * 15,000 / 12 / .99 / 22.5 = $11.61

If you drive 15,000 miles yearly, that is 1,250 miles each month.
$167.22 per month in gas. $165.55 for "less than a month" at 22.5 MPG
Over 7.01% of that is $11.61

300 / 11.61 = 22.85--It would take nearly two years to pay off that investment for the average American!

How do you increase the oil 100˚ without heating up the engine further?

This is new to me. But hot oil's pros and cons aren't.

Usually oil COOLERS are fitted.

You don't, but the cooling systems in most vehicles have a lot of extra capacity, such that this could probably be done safely. Us ecomodders would need to open up our grille blocks some.

I can attest to the effectiveness of even a header waterjacket though. Autostop supposedly doesn't work until the engine is up to temperature, and I often get it before I'm a quarter of a mile from home with my tiny 1.0 3-banger. The radiator is about the same size in a Civic, probably to cover the extra cooling needs.

Comments:
Someone asked if they knew what the cheap oil that most people put in their engine does at 300˚.

A later comment stated:
[Ecky pointed out Over7 is supposed to raise the temperature to 250˚F, which is only 121˚C]

I wouldn't mind heating my oil to 300 degrees if it meant I could make Buffalo wings on the fly!

@Xist, there are hot points in the engine that are already well above 200f. Cylinder walls? Around the valves in the head?

Notice mixing of units. 300f != 300c. 300c is almost 600f.

I imagine 250-300f shouldn't be too much of a problem if you're running a decent oil that doesn't start to burn until 450+.

Sounds sketchy to me, like its the hard way to use lighter oil, and decrease its life at the same time.

As oil is heated, it's viscosity decreases. Manufacturers pick engine oil based on it's properties at it's normal operating temps.

Heating your oil past this temperature would be similar to choosing a lower viscosity oil. I would have some significant reservations about running oil that is less viscous at operating temps than the manufacturer's recommended oil (either through heating or choosing a less viscous oil).

I do see a lot of value in something like this for warming up oil quickly in a cold engine. I just wouldn't be comfortable pushing oil temps up to 250-300°F

^^^
Ditto.

Wish someone would explain exactly how this differs from switching to say 0W20 oil? (Assuming of course that your engine doesn't already use it for increased economy.) Except that you don't have to pay for the modifications, or worry about pipes cracking and draining all your oil.

Two year old information with seemingly contradictory claims. 7% improvement in fuel economy, 30% reduction in emissions and 96% reduction in wear.

Let's assume 7% is a real number. Let's use easy math and say the propulsive efficiency jumps from 20% to 27%. That's a huge change, which draws the 7% claim into question, and it's nearly 30%, which is where I suspect the 30% emissions number comes from, but we're still only only utilizing 27% of the heat energy burned vs. 80% with regular oil.

So, if the 7% claim is true, the 30% claim is false. If the 7% claim is true and the 30% is revised to indicate "increase in overall efficiency," we can say those numbers are consistent; however, emissions are directly proportional to fuel burned, so if we're burning 7% less fuel, we're producing 7% less emissions.

Lastly... 96% reduction in wear. Actually, given the massive increase in overall efficiency, this would almost have to be true... a near elimination of mechanical friction within the engine's moving parts... however...

Increased temp lowers the viscosity of the oil, which does indeed make it flow easier; however, it decreases the oil's ability to adhere to components, which generally decreases lubricity and increases friction of moving parts... contrary to the 96% wear claim.

Given the age of the information and the lack of follow-up testing or reporting, I am very dubious of these claims.

Subsequent googleage shows these claims are as old as late 2011 with little newer than 2012. However, there was a presentation to SAE of Japan in 2013, and the summary links efficiency and emissions at 7-12% improvement. If it weren't for this and some seemingly significant recognition by legitimate organizations, I would dismiss this as snake oil.

I imagine reduction in wear and emissions are due to vastly improved warmup times, and not the increase in oil temperature itself. Heck, fuel economy would improve, on average, just from faster warmups too. No need to run the oil hotter.

"Easy math" often means you are doing it wrong. :)

You need to pay attention when working with percentages. A 7% increase of 20% is not 27% but 21.4% (Multiply by 1.07 not add 7%).

If the claims are close to accurate for emissions and wear, it's because of improved warm-up times as Ecky stated. However, just one high RPM romp with 300°F oil could easily negate all reduction in wear...

My easy math was way harder than the math used for those numbers :)

I understand the percentages, easy math was used for illustrative purposes to try and explain those numbers. I took it a bit far.

I don't understand how those claims could be made if they only apply to the warm-up phase. Is it safe to say that a car is fully warmed-up in the first couple miles? After the first couple miles, wouldn't the benefit be negated?

Steve

I'd rather use a plug-in electric pan heater. Get the benefit from the first crank.

Given how many of my neighbors drive their trash to the dumpster (or in the past, to the ends of their driveways), I imagine saving on warmup times would help tremendously with national gas mileage averages. I had a coworker who would drive across a parking lot to get a sandwich from the American Deli - about 100ft. She's thin and healthy (pays for a gym membership and actually uses it) and in her late 20's.

In over 20 years I've seen the neighbor lady actually walk that 100' to the mailbox twice; the rest of the time she snags it while in the car. No, she's not disabled.

I was just sharing comments, but I will update that post. Unfortunately, comments are closed for Business Insider. I just wanted to show that it could not return the investment in less than a month. Someone on Popular Mechanics did the math for his Accord and came up with similar numbers to mine.

Other comments from PM:

Someone commented that oil coolers are for the transmission.

Neighborhoods in Arizona usually have apartment-style mailboxes, where each block will have one or two clusters. It seems like absolutely everyone leaves their engine running and door open while they get their mail and they live an average of a quarter-block from the mailbox.

A passive system built into the car is more likely to be used.

Even those of us on this site trying to modify our cars to improve fuel economy rarely use oil pan heaters. I'd bet less than 10% of the active members here use an oil pan heater or even a block heater.

Sounds like hes bring something NASCAR has known and practices for years to the consumer. Ever see a cart behind the car before a race starts? Its warmming the oil, coolant and keeping the battery topped off.

I am leaning towards that.
Thinner oil has been proven to give a 2% to 3% boost at the expense of engine wear.

So these guys want to use exhaust heat to increase engine efficiency by reusing waste heat to run the engine more efficiently. Sounds familiar.

http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...ler-29085.html

I recommend using exhaust heat to heat the engine coolant via a diesel EGR cooler then use the coolant to warm the desired system. I would be concerned that a exhaust to oil heat exchanger would scorch the oil.

Yeah my suburban pretty much has that built into it.
Battery stays topped off with solar, the oil goes through a oil/coolant heat exchanger and the coolant can be preheated with a two 120volt, 600watt OEM style block heaters and/or a 240volt hot water heater element.

http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/63-...tml?highlight=

I'm one of them; no aux heaters for me. Just doesn't seem worth it to me, but then again I park on the street and don't want the hassle of extension cords running all over the lawn and driveway.

Still not sure why this oil warmer is so fantastic, as others have said, switching to 0-20 oil seems cheaper and less prone to failure.

The best French fries are cooked in horse fat. What do we cook in unicorn oil?

Seriously, $300 would be better spent chasing MUCH bigger improvements from aero mods, which wouldn't put your engine at risk of burnishing and galling itself to a big ugly lump of hard lessons learned.

Guys, I hardly use my heater! My friend is still using her air conditioning! :D

Ive started to use my heater, but Ive slacked off on the ac. I drive to work in the early morning where its cool and work 3 stories underground in a 65 degree room full of computers. Ironically after 9 hours of that it feels good to drive with the windows cracked an inch in almost 100 degree weather. :thumbup:

I might be wrong but oil thickness also shows its ability to handle "squashing" or somehow hold its clearance filling potential.

The thinner the oil, the worst it holds clearance between mechanical parts.
That's where you lose on reliability.

That's why it is advised not to use thin oils in older engines : oil pressure will suffer.

So putting specificated oils for your particular engine in optimum temperature viscosity wise is kind of the only reasonable way to lower its viscosity while retaining the "strength" of oil the engine has been designed with.

The main issue with playing with the limits is the ability to handle peaks.

Ever stopped your boiler as soon as water boils ?
Yes, it continues boiling despite you're not putting any more energy into it, the process has inertia.
It is the same in your engine and you can't even stop energy input at the flick of a buttton, the whole engine has heat inertia.

Basically we can play with temperature but if we get it wrong just once, the price is very high compared to the savings.

Lastly, your vehicule cooling potential is designed to handle a certain amount of kW. Bringing back some will strain and reduce that cooling potential, so you have to add some cooling potential back, adding weight and money or drastically reduce car 's flexibility.
"Can't use my car today, they forecast 70°F this afternoon ..."

I'm not, but I get pretty sweaty on the way home from work! :)

.

Original story date - Aug. 20, 2012

Latest date I could find info on - June 09, 2014

Deakin inventor’s gadget helps cut fuel consumption | Geelong Advertiser

According to the article.

"He is under contract to a big European carmaker to test the earlier version of the system in one of its models."

It would be interesting to know, "who".


>

If I'm adding heat to the oil, what's supposed to cool my engine?

The stuff that runs through your radiator.

Oil works best at a certain temp. Too low it gets inefficient, too high the oil breaks down.

If I don't use my air conditioning, my windows fog up...

High humidity and 40°F degree temps make A/C nearly mandatory this time of year. Visibility and safety trump economy.

I agree, but for most people, it's "out of sight, out of mind," and most aero mods are definitely not out of sight. :thumbup:

Hot Rod Magazine article on oil temperatures.
What Is The Optimum Engine Oil Temperature? - Hot Rod Magazine
"A quality conventional motor oil will tolerate oil sump temperatures of up to 250 degrees, but starts breaking down over 275 degrees." [...] "A full-synthetic oil will withstand sump temperatures in excess of 300 degrees, and for hard-core professional racing, some oval-track race teams are experimenting with ultra-thin, specially formulated, race-only synthetics operating at 350 degrees or even higher."

That's the joke. My radiator is full of oil.

So obviously, synthetic oils are better. I'd like to see this put into practice.

It is. Check any new car, they all require 0w20. :eek: