Go Back   EcoModder Forum > Introductions
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 09-19-2012, 08:43 PM   #61 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
JRMichler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Phillips, WI
Posts: 1,013

Nameless - '06 GMC Canyon
90 day: 37.45 mpg (US)

22 Maverick - '22 Ford Maverick XL
90 day: 41.9 mpg (US)
Thanks: 188
Thanked 466 Times in 287 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by mustang dave View Post
i think most of us could get 20 with that truck. Without even trying all that hard.
ftfy

__________________
06 Canyon: The vacuum gauge plus wheel covers helped increase summer 2015 mileage to 38.5 MPG, while summer 2016 mileage was 38.6 MPG without the wheel covers. Drove 33,021 miles 2016-2018 at 35.00 MPG.

22 Maverick: Summer 2022 burned 62.74 gallons in 3145.1 miles for 50.1 MPG. Winter 2023-2024 - 2416.7 miles, 58.66 gallons for 41 MPG.
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to JRMichler For This Useful Post:
Mustang Dave (09-20-2012)
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 09-19-2012, 09:44 PM   #62 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: United States
Posts: 39
Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltArc View Post
One can quote multiple people in one post by using the multiple quote button with the post button.

Bigger capacity engine wastes more fuel idling, and moving slowly. Also, reving up. from personal experience, that is.

My engine is smaller, but my mileage sucks until I get going. I can get 40 mpg because I can roll in 6th gear from 25 mph and up, but if I stop, my mileage just plummits. Accelerating, though, I get terrible fuel economy. In the city I can get 30+ from shifting at 1200 rpms, to 650 rpms, and never stopping.

If I just accelerate, then the fuel consumption is terrible. Hence why one can get a hybrid and get great mileage without altering driving style. Electric motor does start up, and then fuel motor does higher speeds, recharging, so on. And a smaller engine pulling is more efficient in down time.

If you do NOT want to change your driving style, then instrumentation showing true rpm and real life mpg/fuel use will help as much as you let it (instead of the factory stuff which doesn't compare), aero mods will help- visible or not, and although there is no well tested info here, I continue to see claims of mpg gains by cold air induction. Now that is very subjective, but the Mustang forum I have been visiting has a lot of people who strictly want performance. An after thought was increased mpg, per tank. Most people say 2mpg, a couple said only one. So, now this isn't very technical, if you don't want to change your driving style, that might also give you a boost, and then you have the performance option, too.
Thanks. Your reply makes sense.

I've only had this new vehicle about two weeks now. And I've just started asking questions and searching for answers. I'm only on my second gas tank, and mileage has improved to 13.5 mpg according to the on-board computer. It seems to be pretty accurate overall. I do keep track of my fuel usage on all but my motorcycle, and keep a running log every time I fuel up. That's only been once so far for this vehicle.

I actually drive pretty conservatively already, and mileage still sucks. Its not my goal to get 100 mpg out of a vehicle. My goal is (to the extent I can) undue all the mandates the government puts on the manufacturers that adversely affects the vehicle's efficiency.

Back in the '60's, I had '55 Lincoln that had an enormous V8 engine (368 cu in (6.0 L) displacement) -- back in an era where gasoline was cheap and efficiency wasn't a big concern for manufacturers. And I would punch it sometimes. That old Lincoln (and it was ten years old when I got it), still got as good or better better gas mileage than this 2012 Nissan (4.0 L).

I already mentioned the '92 Nissan of twenty years ago. And I have the 2001 Mazda Tribute that I keep a meticulous log on. So I have some relatively reliable points along the last 50 years that tells me something is drastically wrong with this current mileage picture. Yes there are differences in engine size that account for some of it, but not all of it. An awful lot of technical improvements have been made that allow vehicle engines to be much more efficient than they were decades ago.

I appreciate all this advice on making the best of it. And I will be looking at all your efficiency tips and trying them out. But I want to do more than just go with the flow -- I want to go back to pure efficiency and undue some of these EPA mandates.

That's why I have asked questions on things that I have read, such as ethanol removal, acetone, diesel in the fuel. They weren't presented by me as answers. I just heard about them, and was seeking some more information.

What did i get on this site from some of the members? Derision for asking the questions.

Anyway, I appreciate getting a straight answer from you. Thanks.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2012, 11:04 PM   #63 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: United States
Posts: 39
Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Mechanic View Post
I'll bet I could get 20 in that truck on pump E10.

regards
mech
I'm listening. Keep talking.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2012, 12:01 AM   #64 (permalink)
ron
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: slo county ca.
Posts: 277

double eagles - '99 Dodge ram slt
Team Cummins
90 day: 19.48 mpg (US)
Thanks: 24
Thanked 17 Times in 16 Posts
Well I think everyone remaining are waiting for test results, keep us posted
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2012, 03:43 AM   #65 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: United States
Posts: 39
Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ron View Post
Well I think everyone remaining are waiting for test results, keep us posted
Don't hold your breath waiting for me. I'm pretty reluctant to use my new vehicle as the test vehicle. I was really hoping someone in this forum had already tested these possibilities. But I guess not.

I don't have a shop to set up a test properly. My garage is full, and I have to park the truck outside as it is.

Proof of concept should be done on a simple engine hooked up to a dynamometer so every variable can be controlled. Maybe an automotive trade school, or a shop with a dynamometer, might be interested.

Or someone on this forum with an automotive shop might decide to do some testing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2012, 09:36 PM   #66 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
JRMichler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Phillips, WI
Posts: 1,013

Nameless - '06 GMC Canyon
90 day: 37.45 mpg (US)

22 Maverick - '22 Ford Maverick XL
90 day: 41.9 mpg (US)
Thanks: 188
Thanked 466 Times in 287 Posts
Here's what other people are getting for mileage from their Nissan Frontiers with the V6 engine.

Out 284 similar trucks, DoctorM is getting about 2nd or 3rd worst MPG. Since most or all of those other trucks are also running on E10, I think we can safely rule out ethanol as the cause of his poor mileage.
__________________
06 Canyon: The vacuum gauge plus wheel covers helped increase summer 2015 mileage to 38.5 MPG, while summer 2016 mileage was 38.6 MPG without the wheel covers. Drove 33,021 miles 2016-2018 at 35.00 MPG.

22 Maverick: Summer 2022 burned 62.74 gallons in 3145.1 miles for 50.1 MPG. Winter 2023-2024 - 2416.7 miles, 58.66 gallons for 41 MPG.
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to JRMichler For This Useful Post:
DoctorM (09-21-2012)
Old 09-21-2012, 10:24 PM   #67 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: United States
Posts: 39
Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMichler View Post
Here's what other people are getting for mileage from their Nissan Frontiers with the V6 engine.

Out 284 similar trucks, DoctorM is getting about 2nd or 3rd worst MPG. Since most or all of those other trucks are also running on E10, I think we can safely rule out ethanol as the cause of his poor mileage.
Do you have a source for that graph?
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2012, 10:33 PM   #68 (permalink)
Drive less save more
 
ecomodded's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Vancouver Island, Canada
Posts: 1,189

Dusty - '98 VOLKSWAGEN Beetle TDI
TEAM VW AUDI Group
90 day: 60.42 mpg (US)
Thanks: 134
Thanked 162 Times in 135 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ron View Post
Well I think everyone remaining are waiting for test results, keep us posted
Ron this is a fraud mod, it does not work, people add it to their tanks then stop abusing the gas pedal, then claim the acetone did it. A common problem with the amateurs that set out to prove their pet theories.
__________________
Save gas
Ride a Mtn bike for errands exercise entertainment and outright fun
__________________



  Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2012, 10:44 PM   #69 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
JRMichler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Phillips, WI
Posts: 1,013

Nameless - '06 GMC Canyon
90 day: 37.45 mpg (US)

22 Maverick - '22 Ford Maverick XL
90 day: 41.9 mpg (US)
Thanks: 188
Thanked 466 Times in 287 Posts
I got that graph from Fuelly | Share and Compare Your MPG
__________________
06 Canyon: The vacuum gauge plus wheel covers helped increase summer 2015 mileage to 38.5 MPG, while summer 2016 mileage was 38.6 MPG without the wheel covers. Drove 33,021 miles 2016-2018 at 35.00 MPG.

22 Maverick: Summer 2022 burned 62.74 gallons in 3145.1 miles for 50.1 MPG. Winter 2023-2024 - 2416.7 miles, 58.66 gallons for 41 MPG.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-21-2012, 11:01 PM   #70 (permalink)
ron
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: slo county ca.
Posts: 277

double eagles - '99 Dodge ram slt
Team Cummins
90 day: 19.48 mpg (US)
Thanks: 24
Thanked 17 Times in 16 Posts
thanks ecomodded, I kinda figured that one out, but if someone believes it may help mileage and wants to test it , no since in beating him down. who knows he may stumble onto something along the way,

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Tags
add acetone, add diesel, removing ethanol

Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com